[Reader-list] statement on Anna hazare mobilisation

[asit das]

please  endorse

A Great Opportunity, A Serious Danger*The Anna Hazare situation invites two
common reactions: many dismiss it as a middle class driven "urban picnic";
and others, notably the mainstream media, describe it as just short of a
revolutionary movement to establish "people's power."* The same divide
exists among progressives and those concerned with social change. Strategies
differ on the basis of where one stands on this divide. *The problem,
however, is that neither of these reactions fully reflects the reality of
what is happening.*

We note that our position below is focused on what can be done in this
situation, and is not meant to excuse or defend the government. We condemn
the brutal, corrupt and anti-democratic actions of the UPA; we also, it must
be noted, condemn the actions of the BJP and its State governments in trying
to portray themselves as crusaders against corruption. The dangerous Lokpal
Bill that has been presented must be withdrawn, and, as said below, a
process initiated for effective institutions of people's control that can be
used to defeat corruption. We issue this statement precisely to caution
against erroneous tactics that are strengthening the very state that we must
fight against.

The OpportunityIt is true that the protests so far have been dominated by
middle classes, and that they have been exaggerated by the media. But this
does not mean that this process becomes meaningless. *Precisely because
there is no strong organised movement among the working class at the
national level, no alternative media, and no consciously projected
alternative to the existing system, a hyped up middle class movement can
easily grow into something much larger.* We can already see that happening,
as protests are spreading and diversifying in terms of their mass base.
People's anger at this system and at the corrupt nature of the Indian state
is hardly a middle class phenomenon alone.

For that reason, we cannot and should not dismiss this situation. The more
people are willing to see this system for what it is, and to express their
anger and disgust with it, the more there is an opportunity to expose it and
fight for something new. A crisis is an opportunity for those who are
fighting for change.

*Therefore we cannot agree with those who look at these protests and hunger
strikes and see in them a "blackmailing" of Parliament. Parliamentary
democracy in this country has never been more than a very limited space.
Even this space has been rendered meaningless in recent decades, by
precisely the forces who today are shouting about its virtues.*

For instance, the SEZ Act was passed after barely a day's debate in
Parliament. Economic reforms were introduced through stealth, FDI in retail
is on the verge of being approved, and the UID project is going ahead - all
without a whisper of Parliamentary approval. It is correct to be cynical of
neoliberal pro-corporate leaders when they suddenly discover that Parliament
is a sacrosanct institution. *When people feel that the system is rotten to
the core, we should not attempt to dilute that reality by saying that
Parliament will deal with the problem.*

The danger is not to Parliament; it lies elsewhere.

The DangerThe fact that people are angry is an opportunity. But it is also a
risk, because that anger can be channeled in ways that actually strengthen
the existing power structure. In this case, consider:

   - The message being conveyed about these protests - the tactics of the
   leadership notwithstanding - is that of support to Anna Hazare and his "Team
   Anna." Beyond the concept of "transparency", the public campaign does not
   engage at all with the idea of a democratic organisation of the people (as
   opposed to one "*supported*" by the people). As such, this raises the
   question of whether those participating are being asked to fight to build
   people's power, or whether they are fighting to increase the power of the
   "good leader."
   - The demand of the campaign too is not about, even in a minimal sense,
   democratising the Indian state or society. The Jan Lokpal being sought may
   address some types of corruption, or it may not do so; but it is not
   intended to give people any greater control over the state. It is projected
   as effective not because it will be democratic, but because it will be
   powerful, because it will stand "above" democracy and politics itself. Just
   as Anna is a good person who deserves support, so the Jan Lokpal will
   consist of good people who deserve power, and who will use it to "cleanse"
   the state.
   - Most of those joining these protests are doing so on the basis of media
   coverage. In practically all areas (with one or two exceptions) the
   mobilisation lacks any core organisation. At most there are ad hoc groups of
   urban elites; but in large measure, the place of the organisation has been
   filled by the mainstream media itself. All the ideas sought to be
   communicated are therefore seen through the lenses that the media applies to
   them. *As a result, even where elements in the leadership try to talk of
   popular struggle and democratic principles, they are overridden by an
   overwhelming focus on attacking the current power holders and replacing them
   with an even more powerful, more "clean" institution.*


The net result of all this is that "corruption" becomes defined very
narrowly, as the taking of benefit in violation of the law. *The ultimate
message of this movement is: trust the rules, trust the state, trust the
Lokpal; what matters is finding the right leaders and having faith in them.
This is the message that is sent by the mobilising instrument, the media,
regardless of what the leaders may actually say.*

This is not only not a democratic message, it is an anti-democratic one. At
this moment, in India, it is also dangerous. *Brutality, injustice and
oppression in this country is not a result of violation of the law alone.
Indeed, much of it happens because of the law in the first place. We have a
state machinery which has brazenly shown itself to be the servant of
predatory private capital.* This is the biggest reason for the current boom
in corruption: the enormous money generated through superprofits that is
then used to purchase the state and generate more superprofits. Sometimes
this is exposed as violating some law and gets called a "scam"; but at other
times, as in most economic reforms, it simply changes the law. The SEZ Act
is again a good example. It triggered a wave of land grabbing across the
country, which was only slowed by the global economic crisis; but there was
nothing "corrupt" in the Lokpal sense about most SEZ-related actions. Our
people are being crushed by a cycle of intensifying capitalist exploitation
and repression. Can this be stopped by good leaders with the right powers?

Many would answer "Obviously not; a Jan Lokpal cannot address everything."
This may be true, but that is not the message actually being sent out.
Rather the message is that Lokpal-style solutions and Anna Hazare-style
"good leaders" are the answers to people's anger at injustice. When the
leadership, Ramdev-style, starts adding on a laundry list of additional
issues to its demands - as land acquisition has recently been added - it
reinforces this dangerous message. *Thus this movement not only does not
weaken the state; implicitly, through the message it sends, it builds
people's support for making the state and its leadership more
powerful.*This of course the reason that it attracts support from
everyone from Jindal
Aluminium to the RSS.

What Can Be DoneThe mere fact that people are protesting against the
government does not mean that they are fighting the state. The Indian state
certainly has little to fear - as a state - from a mobilisation whose prime
message is that change happens through good leaders. The current power
holders are resisting the threat to their position, but the system itself is
not under threat. Indeed, the danger is not to the state or its
institutions, but to efforts at deeper social change in this society.

*The dilemma of the current situation cannot be answered by simply joining
wholeheartedly, or by withdrawing in silence.*

Some have declared support for the current movement, while seeking to push
it to take up other issues. The sympathies of some in the leadership for
left and progressive positions is often cited. But the main engines of these
protests - the media and urban elite circles - are actively opposed to any
such positions. *One has simply to imagine what will happen if this
mobilisation does begin to turn towards a more radical stance: the media
will instantly change its position from "Anna is India" to "Anna is a power
crazed megalomaniac", confusion, slanders and disinformation will start, and
the movement will collapse.* Given this reality, simply joining at this
stage will be counterproductive. People will no longer be able to
distinguish between forces who fight for social transformation and those who
are upholding the current system; and when the latter fail, they will take
down the former with them.

But to remain silent is to be irrelevant at an important time. It is also
important not to fall into the trap of those who, in their criticism of the
anti-democratic tendencies of this movement, start defending the existing
state. In our view parliamentary supremacy is not and cannot be the slogan
of those who seek social change.

*What is required therefore is an approach built on two realities.* The
first is that the current explosion of scams is a direct result of
neoliberal policies that have converted the state into the arm of a
particularly predatory, criminal form of big capital. Today the real face of
the state is more apparent then ever before, and corruption is one glaring
sign of it. *Therefore, to try to fight corruption without fighting for true
people's power over the economy and society is impossible.* Therefore, our
demands must focus on building such people's power over the institutions of
the state.

The second reality is that the current atmosphere of anger and suspicion of
the state offers a chance to raise precisely these issues and to make the
link between corruption and the system under which we live. *The more
political forces, mass organisations and people's struggles do this, while
keeping their identity separate from 'India Against Corruption', the more it
will be possible to use this opportunity to build and expand radical
struggles.* If people can see the system is rotten, that can be developed
that into an awareness that this rottenness goes far deeper than mere
corruption and dishonest leaders. That is the challenge of this moment.

Abhay Shukla, Pune
Arvind Ghosh, Nagpur
Asit Das, POSCO Pratirodh Solidarity, Delhi
Bijay-bhai, Adivasi Mukti Sanghatan
Biju Mathew, Mining Zone People's Solidarity Group
C.R. Bijoy, Coimbatore
Kiran Shaheen, Journalist
Pothik Ghosh, Radical Notes
Pratyush Chandra, Radical Notes
Ravi Kumar, Dept of Sociology, South Asian University
Shankar Gopalakrishnan, Campaign for Survival and Dignity
Shiraz Bulsara, Kasthakari Sanghatna
Nayanjyoti, navayana delhi


please send your endorsement to

shankar (shankargopal at myfastmail.com) or CR Bijoy (cr.bijoy at gmail.com).