Slow Growth in Employment

 

1.     Slow Growth in Employment

 

2.       First is the extraordinarily slow growth in regular employment. Regular employment in the organised sector over the last decade or so grew at only about 1%, while the rest of the average 6 to 7% growth in GDP came from the growth in output per worker or labour productivity. In contrast, during the earlier decades, when GDP grew on an average at less than 4%, regular employment grew at the annual rate of 2%. The recent drive to increase labour productivity is related to globalisation. International trade means increasing the importance of the external compared to the internal market, while corporations compete in the export market mostly by cutting costs to increase their international competitiveness. This usually means shedding labour force through mechanisation. For instance, if the labour force in a corporation is downsized to half at the same wage, labour cost per unit of output would also be halved. Let one example suffice to illustrate how this process is working in practice. Tata Motors in Pune reduced the number of workers from 35,000 to 21,000 but increased the production of vehicles from 1,29,000 to 3,12,000 between 1999 and 2004, implying labour productivity increase by a factor of four. The aggregate picture broadly conforms to this. According to the Economic Survey of the government of India (2006-07), total employment in the organised sector declined from 28.2 million in 1977 to 26.4 million in 2004, because the much talked about growth of the private organised sector under the reform policies of the government hardly compensated for the decline in employment by the public sector. Another telling piece of evidence against the belief that corporate-led industrialisation and greater direct foreign investment would promote more employment came from the headlines of The Times of India (7 July 2008). Long hailed as most dynamic in these respects, a recent comparison of the various states of India suggested Gujarat and Maharashtra have been among the slowest growing states in terms of creating either nonagricultural or manufacturing jobs.

 

3.       With regular employment opportunities growing far too slowly compared to the number of job seekers, more and more people are being pushed into the unorganized sector. Agriculture, in particular, has become even more overcrowded. According to the National Sample Survey (61st round), approximately 110 million agricultural workers (out of a total workforce of 400 million) found employment for 209 days in 2004-05 compared to 220 days in 1999-2000. People desperate for a livelihood join the ranks of the so-called self-employed in the unorganised sector, the fastest growing category, marked by long hours of work with negligible earnings, lack of any social security or labour protection and extensive use of child labour. More than half the hawkers of Kolkata, and more than one-third of the hawkers of Ahmedabad belonging to this category of the self-employed are retrenched industrial workers, now threatened once more with the corporatization of retail trade in this era of globalisation in the name of economic efficiency. This vast informal sector is increasingly becoming a refuge for people devoid of all hopes, and reminds one of the hell imagined by the great Italian poet Dante. On its gate is written, "You enter this land after abandoning all hopes".

 

4.       The second reason for growing inequality lies in the style of economic management pursued by the government. While opportunity for regular work is growing at a grossly insufficient pace despite a high growth rate of output, the government has become increasingly weary of spending more for social welfare like health, education, public distribution and social security for the poor. Government expenditure remained more or less steady around 22% of GDP throughout 2000-07, with health receiving 1.4% and education receiving 2.9% of GDP, on the average. The apparent reasons given are lack of "money" and poor public delivery system for social services. However, these are superficial justifications, and there is a more compelling reason which has come out into the open due to the financial crisis. Globalisation of finance made the government highly sensitive to the moods of the stock market and the financial sentiments of major players in that market. Even after the recent dwindling, India still has a relatively large foreign exchange reserves ($250 billion), but unlike China which has been enjoying export surplus for several years, our reserves come mostly from capital inflows exceeding balance of payments deficits, like deposits from non-resident Indians and portfolio investments by various international financial institutions. These are far more fickle in nature and can be withdrawn at a relatively short notice if the mood of the financial market turns sour. A main thrust of the pro-market government policy has been to keep the financial market happy by being on the right side of the international Monetary Fund and the World Bank insofar as they have a central role in shaping international financial opinion for banks, credit-rating agencies, and other financial institutions. This means following their economic guidelines in formulating policies. As a result, the government minimised its welfare spending by letting it stagnate as percentage of GDP even during the years of high growth. The cost of this squeeze of expenditure on social security, education and health falls mainly on the poor who cannot turn to the market due to lack of purchasing power and job opportunities.

 

India’s struggle for the Idea of India

 

India’s struggle for the Idea of India

Our defense minister, Mr. Rajnath Singh had courted a controversy.  He made a statement that Vinayak Damodar Savarkar was advised by Mahatma Gandhiji to file a mercy petition to the British government. Vinayak Damodhar Savarkar had filed his first mercy petition in 1911.  By this the defense minister wanted to white wash Vinayak D. Savarkar of all his dubious role in the freedom struggle.

In 1911 Gandhiji was in South Africa.  Our defense minister Rajnath Singh was not only peddling falsehood but he also got history wrong.  His statement was far from the truth.  Mahatma Gandhi would have been glad to support the release of Savarkar from the Cellular jail but he would not have suggested Savarkar to ask mercy from the British government.  Savarkar assured that he would not do anything against the British empire and that he would cooperate with the British Empire.  This assurance by Savarkar would go dead against the conviction of Mahatma Gandhi.

The significance of the statement of our defense minister is very clear.  There is an attempt on the part of the present ruling dispensation to re write the history of India.  This is similar to none other than the British Empire’s policy who divided the Indian society along with the lines of religion to ensure that the Indians do not unite and fight against the British Empire.  “Teaching of Indian history in schools and colleges from a basically communal point of view made a major contribution to the rise and growth of communalism.  For generations, almost from the beginning of modern school system, communal interpretation of history of various degree of virulence were propagated, first by the imperialist writers and then by others.  So deep and widespread was the penetration of the communal view of history that even sturdy nationalists unconsciously accepted some of its basic tenets.”  Bhipan Chandra and Mukharjees, Indian Struggle for Independence.

It was a struggle before adopting the constitution. There were two ideas of India put forward by two opposing political persuasion.  One was the idea of “One Nation” and another was “Two Nation Theory”.  The idea of two nation theory was promoted by Mohamad Jinnah and By Vinayak Damodar, Golwalkar, Hedge War, the leaders of Hindu Mahasabha.  Both Mohamad Jinnah and the leaders of the Hindu Mahasabha held that in India there were two nations, one the Hindus and the other, Muslims.  Their idea of India was based on religion, Hindu Rashtra and Islamic state.  The idea of Nation was identified with the religion of the majority of the people (majoritarianism). 

From 1906 Jinnah propagated the theme of National Unity.  Sarojini Naidu gave him the title ‘Ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity’. But Mohamad Jinnah   went away from the Indian National Congress to the Muslim league and formed the Islamic republic.  One must remember that Mohamad Jinnah was not a devout Muslim.  In his life style he was the most secular persons.  He did not believe in the Muslim customs and religious practices.  He even smoked and ate pork.  His Islamic State was a political move to become the prime minister of Pakistan.

 

The idea of India of the Hindu Mahasabha will become clear to us if we read the instruction Golwalkar gave to the Muslims and to other religious minorities.  He said, “The non-Hindu people in Hindusthan must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence Hindu religion, must entertain no idea but those of glorification of the Hindu race and culture, i.e., they must not only give up their attitude of intolerance and ungratefulness towards this land and its age long traditions but must also cultivate the positive attitude of love and devotion instead – in one word, they must cease to be foreigners , or may stay in the country, wholly subordinated to the Hindu nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment, not even citizen’s right.” Golwalkar, We or Our Nationhood Defined, Nagpur 1947.

But the Indian National Congress held that India is ‘One Nation’, one secular nation.  The identity of India is not defined by the religion but by secularism.  The idea of Secularism holds that all religions and all people are equal before the constitution of India.  People can follow what ever religion they want.  The religion should be a private practice of the citizens.

India’ struggle for the idea of India has been completed by drafting and adopting the “Constitution of India”. 

 

Generally, we would like to point fingers at the rightwing political parties and Politicians.   As Mahatma Gandhi had pointed out the malaise of communalism has penetrated deep in the minds of people, but worst in the minds of politicians. We have seen how many politicians have changed their coats from red to white to saffron.  The Congress party that stood for the idea of India as a secular, democratic and socialist country has only handful leaders so are really committed to the secular, democratic idea of India.  Host of Congress legislators in Karnataka left the congress party and went over to the BJP.  Similar and even worse cross over from Congress to BJP happened in Madhya Pradesh.  Jyotiraditya Shinde was known to be a staunch Congressman. He had inherited his political conviction from his father, Madhav Rao Shinde, who was a staunch secular person of the Congress party. But since he did not get power in the congress government formed under Kamal Nath, he left Congress along with his supporters and went over to BJP. 

Tom Vaddakan was a Congress spokesperson.  But he crossed over to the BJP and appears on and off on TV as a spokesperson of the BJP.  What is worst is that the Bishop of Pala peddled the jihad concept of the right-wing political persuasion.

The spirit of Golwalkar is expressed in the attempt of the Government of Karnataka which is conducting a survey of Christian churches in Karnataka to keep in check the activities of the Christians.  There have been attacks on the Christian prayer gatherings.  The basic Christian community and their gatherings for prayer has been a common practice. The RSS and Bajrang Dal have been attacking these gatherings in the name of prevention of conversion.  Christians have been accused of converting by allurement.  Conversion by allurement has become a catch phrase for the Bajrang Dal and RSS.  But there is no talk of converting MLAs and MPs by offering allurements amounting to crores of rupees.  Converting the members of the opposition parties to pulled down the democratically elected governments is seen as Chanakya’s intelligence.   Christians have been peace loving people and their contribution to education and health care is unparallel.  But now they are suspect in the eyes of the rulers.

Therefore, Gandhiji wrote, “Communal harmony could not be permanently established in our country so long as highly distorted versions of history were being taught in her schools and colleges through the history text books.”  A. N. Vidyalakar “National Integration and Teaching of History. 

Even today, we have innumerable attempts to distort the historical facts and undermine the role of the freedom fighters like Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Vallabh Bai Patel and even Mahatma Gandhi.  The Indian Council of Historical research published a poster on freedom fighters.  But this poster did not include the Jawaharlal Nehru though it was Nehru along with Vallabhai Patel Mahatma Gandhi and many other fought for 30 years for freedom.  Nehru spent ten years in jail during the freedom struggle.  Mahatma Gandhi called Nehru the jewel of India.  The present dispensation blames Nehru for all the ills of the society.  The people who believed in two nation theory like Mohamed Jinnah blame Nehru for the partition of India.  Nathuram Godse, who killed Mahatma Gandhi is portrayed by some as a hero and his statues are being installed.  Vinayak Savarkar was one of the accused in plotting to kill Mahatma Gandhi.  Now he has been portrayed very differently.

We have moved away from the past to the 21^st century.  Imperial rulers who divided us to rule for their benefit have gone.  We have no need of the mischief played by our rulers from abroad. We have come of age.  We must recognize that the most serious challenge our country is facing is that of communalism.  It has assumed menacing proportion, threatening the very unity of the country and the basic character of Indian culture and civilization.  When our constitution declares our republic as secular, we need to separate religion from politics, economics and large areas of culture.  We need to treat religion as a private and personal affair of the citizens.  In a multi-religious society, like ours, secularism means the state being equidistant from or showing equal respect for all religions, including atheism.  Political parties have used religion to gain political power.  There should be all out effort to prevent communalization of politics and abuse of religious symbols by politicians.

We have a huge task to extricate our youth from this climate of communalism and hate campaign.  All the school and particularly the families have a task of placing before our youth the facts of history of freedom struggle and the greatness of a democratic, secular and socialist idea of India. Democracy means equality of all before the constitution.  It is important that we familiarize our youth with the tenets of our constitution.  Studying the Constitution of India should be part of the curriculum of the high school education.