*Crux is this: "Corporate capitalism and religious extremism ain't strange bedfellows. As they copulate, they produce a mutated class that deludes itself into believing that observing cellular silence for a day would be just enough sacrifice."..
* On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Ranjit Ranjit <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > *Misleading Gandhigiri* > > *Switching off mobile phones for a day will not stop India Inc from > endorsing Narendra Modi as PM* > > Tehelka, 31 Jan 2009 > > http://www.tehelka.com/story_main41.asp?filename=Op310109misleading_gandhigiri.asp > > S ANAND > Publisher, Navayana > > AN ONLINE petition to observe 30 January 2009 as Cellular Silence Day has > been doing the rounds. Drafted by Ranjan Kamath, a filmmaker, it is > addressed to Messrs Ratan Tata, Sunil Bharti Mittal and Anil Ambani — > prominent Indian industrialists with a global presence who need no > introduction. The petition seeks to give voice to the billion-plus Indian > Davids who are dismayed by the endorsement of Narendra Modi as future prime > minister by the three 'corporate Goliaths'. That Modi — who inspired and > abetted the massacre of over 2,000 Muslims in the 2002 pogrom — is the > darling of the unscrupulous corporate world, is not surprising. > > Gujarat is a state where Kalinganagar-style shootings do not happen (12 > dalits and adivasis were killed in police firing on 2 January, 2006 in > Orissa while protesting a Tata Steel project); where Singur-style protests > won't be witnessed even when 1,100 acres are given away for a song. Before > expressing "revulsion" at their "endorsement of Narendra Modi", the petition > of the Davids humours the Goliaths: "I am proud of the brands you represent > that have made India proud. I am one of the burgeoning Indian middle-class > that share your aspirations of mutating India from indolent elephant to > thundering tiger." > > The petition has over 3,000 signatures featuring several prominent Indian > public intellectuals, academics, publishers, artists, writers, lawyers and > many who would call themselves 'secular' in that quaintly Indian, holdall > way. The petition is being promoted on Facebook pages, email lists, and > other social networking sites. To be counted as a 'progressive' person, one > had to sign up. On one page of the petition, ICICI Lombard solicits for > insurance. On another page, a Tata housing ad featuring Kapil Dev pops up. > Befitting. > > There are two reasons why we should not sign the petition and join this > fellowship of the selectively righteous. > > First, it assumes that the model of corporate growth that the Tatas, > Ambanis (the heirs of the Polyester Prince Dhirubhai) and Mittals stand for > and their brands make most Indians proud. The petition, despite being > drafted after the Satyam fraud unspooled, willingly overlooks corporate > irresponsibility on several counts. If Ratan Tata, Anil Ambani, > Kumaramangalam Birla and Sunil Mittal had not endorsed Narendra Modi, would > their style of corporate capitalism be any less culpable? What do we do with > Ratan Tata who was recently batting for Dow Chemicals — Dow, that had > purchased Union Carbide for $9.3 billion as a wholly-owned subsidiary; Union > Carbide that was responsible for the 1984 Bhopal gas leak that left more > than 15,000 dead and 1,50,000 disabled? When Dow refused legal or moral > liability for the Bhopal disaster, Ratan Tata, as chairman of the > Industrialist and Investment Commission, wanted the $46- billion chemical > giant to be absolved of all liabilities. He even wrote letters to the then > Union Finance Minister P Chidambaram, the PMO, and Planning Commission > Deputy Chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia pleading Dow's case. Protestors in > Bhopal sought to boycott all Tata products. This was not a > switch-off-yourmobiles- for-a-day kind of boycott. > > If Ratan Tata could seek to absolve Dow of any culpability in the killing > of 15,000 and the 'legacy issue' of the 1984 disaster, why would he remember > Gujarat 2002? > > In the 1990s, conscientious consumers sought to boycott Eveready batteries > produced by Union Carbide. Eveready's retort was the 'Gimme Red' ad campaign > — celebrated for being ahead of its time. The brand has thrived, and Amitabh > Bachchan was roped in as brand ambassador in 2006. Eveready is said to hold > a 47 percent marketshare of the Rs 1,500 crore dry cell battery market. > > Let's look at the material reasons for Ratan Tata's love for Narendra Modi. > Tata Motors gets a soft loan of Rs 9,570 crore at a negligible interest of > 0.1 per cent to shift the Nano project to Gujarat. Repayment is deferred for > 20 years. In all, the Modi Government has offered over Rs 30,000 crore in > sops to Tata Motors. So Ratan Tata says, "You are stupid if you are not in > Gujarat." Martin Macwan, a human rights campaigner in Gujarat, compares this > with the compensation offered to Dalits who have been forced to do manual > scavenging. To quit the profession and seek an alternative livelihood, the > state offers them a rehabilitation package — a bank loan of Rs 80,000 at 11 > percent interest. Stigmatised Dalits, forced into a subhuman occupation for > generations, are asked to pay hundred times more interest for a pittance of > a loan. With which they sometimes open a tea stall. From which no one would > drink tea. India officially has 7,70,338 manual scavengers and the state is > the biggest employer. > > The Ambanis have always loved Modi. Since Dhirubhai's days, they have > actively colluded with right-wing Hindu religious leaders in Gujarat such as > Ramesh Oza and Murari Bapu. Meera Nanda notes in her forthcoming book that > while Modi granted 85 acres of land close to the Porbandar airport to Oza's > Sandipani Vidyaniketan — a temple-'rishikul' complex, a school for rishis — > Dhirubhai Ambani provided the financial resources for raising the building. > > The second reason to oppose this rather unintelligent petition endorsed by > the 'secular' intelligentsia owes to its poor understanding of ethics and > politics. The petition concludes with the plea that "India Inc adopt an > ethical, compassionate path to wealth creation rather than the single-minded > pursuit of the bottom-line." If only these industrialists had not endorsed > Modi as prime ministerial material, it appears the rest of their pursuits of > wealth are justifiable, for they "make Indians proud". Crucially, the > petition seeks inspiration from Mohandas Gandhi. The underlying assumption, > rather received knowledge, is that Gandhi stood for an ethical, > compassionate approach to wealth making. This erroneous perception owes to > mythmaking about Gandhi, the saint. > > Celebrated today as an anti-imperialist icon owing to his role in the > anti-colonial struggle in India, and also for his critique of > industrialisation propounded in his Hind Swaraj (1908), Gandhi was > essentially a social conservative. This was BR Ambedkar's main charge > against Gandhi for his endorsement of caste and varnashrama dharma. But let > us focus here on Gandhi's swarajist economic policies and his collusion with > the conservative industrialists of his time. Gandhi's friendship with > Ghanshyam Das Birla (1894-1983) was a mutually beneficial affair. Birla was > a source of limitless finance for Gandhi. In a letter to Birla on 10 January > 1927, Gandhi wrote, "My thirst for money is simply unquenchable. I need at > least Rs 2,00,000 — for khadi, untouchability and education. The dairy work > makes another Rs 50,000. Then there is the Ashram expenditure. No work > remains unfinished for want of funds, but God gives after severe trials. > This also satisfies me. You can give as you like for whatever work you have > faith in." As Sarojini Naidu sardonically noted, it cost a lot to keep > Gandhi poor. > > IF THE local Congress office today arranges quilts when Rahul Gandhi and UK > Foreign Secretary David Milliband decide on some poverty tourism in a Dalit > ghetto, such window-dressing was the task of the Birlas when Mohandas Gandhi > decided to occasionally spend time in 'bhangi' bastis. Margaret > Bourke-White, the Life photojournalist who chronicled Gandhi, notes that > half the residents of the ghettos were moved out, and the huts prettified > before Gandhi's visit. Dinanath Tiang of the Birla Group rationalises the > improvements in the Dalit colony to White thus, "We have cared for > Gandhiji's comfort for the last 20 years." Cooked food for Gandhi would also > be sourced by the Birlas. Gandhi believed it was "the Brahmin's duty to look > after the sanitation of the soul, the Bhangi's that of the body of society." > It was such reasoning that made him describe scavenging as the "most > honourable occupation" and the bhangi "while deriving his livelihood from > his occupation, would approach it only as a sacred duty. In other words, he > would not dream of amassing wealth out of it." It was this patronising > attitude and hypocrisy that made Ambedkar fume, "The special feature of > Gandhism is to delude people into accepting their misfortunes by presenting > them as the best of good fortunes." > > Since the petition calls for a token one-day boycott of telephone and > Internet services provided by Tata, Mittal and Ambani, we need to recall > Gandhi's call for the boycott of British products, especially the use of > cloth made in Britain's mills. While he propagated the use of hand-spun > cloth, he beat a retreat when this advocacy conflicted with Birla's > interests as an owner of mills. > > In 1928, when Gandhi complained that people were buying mill-produced khadi > mistaking it for homespun, Birla read this as a veiled criticism of his > mills and riposted, "Do you not think that you are unnecessarily > exaggerating the results of the khadi propaganda? You could find this out > yourself if you send hawkers with mill-made as well as shuddha khadi who may > ask some villagers to select their choice after explaining the latter > properly about the quality as well as the price of the cloth, I have not the > least doubt that if you made the experiment you will find that 90 per cent > of the consumers will pick up the cheaper and more lasting of the two > stuffs. Mill khadi is popular because people find it cheap, durable besides > it being swadeshi make." > > Leah Renold, an American scholar who has examined Gandhi's relationship > with GD Birla, says Gandhi did not wish to precipitate the issue for he was > financially dependent on Birla, his patron, in whose palatial Delhi home > Gandhi stayed for over 25 years. She says, "Gandhi never allowed the khadi > issue to become an object of contention between himself and Birla. Instead > he found a place for mills in the khadi movement." In 1930, Gandhi wrote to > Birla, "I am convinced that the boycott will be successful only through > khadi. This does not mean that the mills have no place in the scheme at all. > The mills can have their deserved place by recognising the worth of khadi. > The conception of God envelopes all Gods." > > The swadeshi industrialists whom Gandhi blessed would conveniently betray > the 'nationalist' cause of the Congress when it suited them. Following the > Quit India movement of 1942, Indian business leaders, including JRD Tata and > GD Birla, submitted a memorandum to the Viceroy saying, "We are all > businessmen and therefore we need hardly point out that our interest lies in > peace, harmony, goodwill and order throughout the country." > > Ambedkar's indictment of Gandhism was severe. Drawing our attention to > "Gandhian attitude to strikes, the Gandhian reverence for Caste and the > Gandhian doctrine of Trusteeship by the rich for the benefit of the poor," > he characterises Gandhism as "the philosophy of the well-to-do and the > leisure class." It is not surprising that Gandhi, whose poverty was a costly > act sponsored by Birla, is someone the > > conservative classes in India look up to time and again. Bourke-White's > investigations revealed that workers in Birla's mills had genuine grievances > — their demand for a cost of living bonus to meet rising prices was met with > gunfire and rifle butts. When the workers petitioned Gandhi in December > 1947, he merely forwarded their letter to Birla. Bourke-White, on visiting > Birla's mills, found the conditions to be appalling and wonders in her book > Halfway to Freedom (1949) why Gandhi would not visit the mills and verify > for himself. The mightiest of Davids was sitting in the comfort of cushy > bolsters in the palace of a Goliath — Birla House. Thinking of which, the > petition insults our intelligence even with the myths it evokes, forcing us > to use the dangerous David (Israeli) versus Goliath (Palestinian) similie at > a time when Palestine has witnessed a brazen terror attack by Israel. > > IN THIS SENSE, the online petition is a genuine tribute to Gandhi and his > endorsement of gestural politics — a guiltexpiation exercise that is > essentially Gandhian. The drafter of the petition says, "It is not an easy > task for us to keep our cell phones and Blackberries switched off for an > entire day on January 30, the 61st anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi's > assassination. However, it ought to be sufficient to get the message across > to corporate India that we will not tolerate the endorsement of fascists as > future prime ministers." > > This is a post-Munnabhai tokenism, no different from SMS polls or > candlelight vigils sponsored by television channels. Would this consumerist > class, proud of its Blackberries and broadbands, attempt a complete boycott > of Reliance/Tata/Mittal products? A true boycott is what the > African-Americans led by Martin Luther King effected for over a year, from > December 1955 to December 1956, known as the Montgomery Bus Boycott against > segregation in buses. This boycott seriously affected the profits of not > just the public transport system but the entire economy. In India, the > Dalits can barely dream of a similar boycott, for they are themselves > subjected to social and economic boycott by caste Hindus if they assert > their humanity. > > Only a class that has some economic clout can effect a serious boycott. > Would the signatories to the petition be willing to create a Montgomery-like > crisis for our homegrown capitalists? How many would not buy a Nano since > its low price-tag is going to be heavily over-subsidised by Modi and perhaps > cross-subsidised by the 11 percent rate of interest that rehabilitated > manual scavengers are forced to pay? Corporate capitalism and religious > extremism ain't strange bedfellows. As they copulate, they produce a mutated > class that deludes itself into believing that observing cellular silence for > a day would be just enough sacrifice. > > From Tehelka Magazine, Vol 6, Issue 4, Dated Jan 31, 2009 > > > > -- > Ranjit > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
