Contradictory Policies of Neoliberalizing India

Human Geography: A New Radical Journal. Volume 6, Number 2. pp 85-97, 2013

This paper examines the tensions and contradictions within the Indian state in its production of socio-economic policies. Pressure of global governance institutions, multinational corporations, and neoliberal states of the global North that back such corporations, have been instrumental in the production of -friendly economic policy in India. Additionally, in representing the interest of the national bourgeois, the Indian state has been receptive to ideas that favor marketization of the economy. However, public pressure, where the poor constitute the majority of the Indian population, has compelled the Indian state to also strengthen welfare. In examining this contradiction of the simultaneous production of neoliberal and welfare policy, we analyze the case of the public distribution system (which is being marketized) on the one hand, and the employment guarantee scheme (that demonstrates strengthening of welfare) on the other.

This essay attempts to discern whether the advent of neo-liberalization and globalization in India lead to a disintegration of the welfare state. There is a growing concern whether generous state expenditure and neoliberalism are mutually exclusive and if participation in the international market owing to greater interconnectedness and prioritizing efficiency and national competitiveness would undermine welfare state and democracy. According to Rodrik " economic globalisation, political democracy, and national determination are mutually irreconcilable. We can have at most two at one time. Democracy is compatible with national sovereignty only if we restrict globalisation. If we push for globalisation while retaining the nation state, we must jettison democracy. And if we want democracy along with globalisation, we must shove the nation state aside and strive for greater international governance. " (Rodrik, 2011) Due to increasing fiscal deficits, however, there was a widespread propagation of free markets by neoliberals who advocated limited state intervention. However, in this era of neoliberal globalization, India has defied the established views on limited state intervention by developing economies. On the other hand, India stands out as a case of state intervention as well as redistribution at a time when governments around the world are withdrawing their welfare policies. A few years after the implementation of the New Economic Policy under the aegis of the Bretton Wood's institutions, Jayal reiterated that India is an almost welfare state albeit not in the classical sense as rights have never underpinned the welfare initiatives advanced by the Indian government. (Jayal, 1997) However, in the following two decades the right to education, employment and food have become constitutionally and legally enforceable rights of the Indian citizens. Thus, while India might have departed from its earlier socialist tendencies, it continues to be both welfare oriented and interventionist.

This article intends to explore how neoliberal market economy impacts social democracy in globalising India and examines its implications for the millions of Dalits. It argues that the institution of social democracy, which flourished in India during the Nehruvian era of mixed economy and welfare state, seems to be fast approaching its demise under the ongoing process of neoliberalism. It further argues that the fast-expanding domain of the corporate sector and the free flow of global capital, in conjunction with the gradual withdrawal of the welfare state, will not only widen inequalities, but also stifle the growth of social democracy in the country.

Polarizing Development, eds. Thomas Marois and Lucia Pradella, 2014

Modern India’s relationship with the capitalist world economy has been through three broad phases. First, British colonialism ruined a flourishing textile industry in India and converted the country into a source of raw materials for its own manufacturing industry, forcing India into the position of a colony subordinate to an imperial power. Second, the post-independence Indian National Congress (hereafter Congress) government embarked on a process of industrialisation in an economy that was heavily protected though not completely cut off from global capital. The third period, globalisation and neoliberalism, is usually traced to the economic liberalisation of 1991, when India began a process of re-integration into the world economy. This chapter will sketch an outline for each of these three periods, introducing the social forces and struggles that could constitute the basis for moving forward from neoliberalism to an economy where production is for need, not profit, and working people control their lives and work.

Nrttva-The Anthropology, 2013

The process of subjugation by global capital in the context of North-South interaction regarding development or economic reform of the south is found to be quite smooth. This smooth and easy conquest calls for serious investigation on the development and reform process itself. We need a different discourse to address the synthetic hegemony of the global capital. In this context, the reluctance of neo mainstream economists to ventilate views that are critical of economic reform set in motion by the successive central and state governments from 1991 is quite unfortunate. However, it is also exasperating to see respected radical academicians who appears to be critical of the expansion of global capital, find it so convenient to justify the same in case to case basis, and thereby submit before the false logic of market propagated by the agents of global capital. This paper attempts to be critical of the process of liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation initiated in the name of economic reforms in 1991 altogether in a different perspective.

World Review of Political Economy, 2023

His area of interest includes critical development studies and Marxian political economy. He is the co-editor of Global Political Economy: A Critique of Contemporary Capitalism (2022). He has published widely in reputed international and national academic journals.

Radical Notes / Aakar Books, 2008

"This paper seeks to argue that, for reasons specific to Indian capitalism at this historical moment, what we might call the political projects of Hindutva and neoliberalism share certain socio-political agendas. This shared agenda extends at times to a tactical alliance of the two, where both seek to exploit their "common ground" in order to achieve a restructuring of the Indian polity. Moreover, this alliance has already had a considerable impact on large parts of the discursive and political landscape of India - an impact that has not yet been seriously challenged. The argument here is neither that this shared agenda was inevitable, nor that it precludes alliances between neoliberalism and other political forces in India. The analysis postulates that this is a historically specific development, shaped by political circumstances, the current balance of forces and the choices made by political actors. Yet, this is also not an alliance based purely on expediency. These projects have shared a logic whose validity is not infinite - in the sense that it will eventually break down under the weight of its contradictions - but is also not entirely non-existent."

2018

No part of this dissertation has formed for any award of any degree or fellowship.

2000

This paper examines some critical aspects of labour market reforms in general and that in India in particular. It places them in the context of the changing relationship between State, labour and capital. The first part of the paper looks at the rationale and context of the labour market reforms in general. It traces the evolution of the neo-liberal discourse

Sociology, 2020