It is with great interest that I read the article entitled `The interests of the people versus the interests of global retail corporations' carried in the August 16-31, 2013 issue of your paper. The article is educational, informative and gets to the heart of the matter.
The article has been written after the announcement of the Commerce Minister Anand Sharma that further liberalisation in the foreign direct investment (FDI) sector. The article first and foremost points out that the policy will have a direct impact on the masses of people, as it opens up the Indian market to the biggest global retail giants. As a result of the uneven growth and crises gripping the advanced countries, these giants are looking to India for enormous profits and gains. Of course, the intrinsic lie that has been promoted by the Minister, a member of the Cabinet of what is undoubtedly a lame-duck Government that is facing the propspect of complete electoral rout in the 2014 General Election, is that this is in the interests of the people of India! If at all there had been an obstruction in the past to the penetration of the Indian market in this sector, it was due to the aspirations of the big Indian bourgeoisie, who feared competition. Now the latter is confident that the entry of big players into this sector can benefit them even more as they could have lucrative partnerships and also exchange favours with them overseas.
Nevertheless, there is vast opposition from large sections of the Indian population and also from manufacturers and traders who constitute the majority. The article also explains in some detail the dynamics of the Indian economy and the need for modernization and technological innovation in several sectors. Nevertheless, in his considerations the Minister does not have these interests as the centrepiece.
The article also exposes the lie that the entry of such players will actually benefit the people of India, but rather that there is more likelihood of the market getting throttled by a couple of big players. There are sections of the media that have turned the debate into single-brand retail vs. multi-brand retail. But it is important for the masses and the working people to realize that this is not the issue. The issue is that of the orientation of the economy and of the nature of the decisions that is taken by the Government and who the beneficiaries are.
It may be concluded that as long as the Government is constituted by this or that party of the bourgeoisie, the orientation of the economy will be one that benefits only the money bags, with nothing but immiseration for the masses. It is very principled on the party of the CGPI to call on all those opposed to the monopoly capitalist offensive to unite and for foreign and wholesale internal trade to be nationalized.
Once again I thank you for this informative article.
S. Nair, Kochi