Kisaan Morcha

Explore

Kisaan Morcha

Getting our definitions right

Because too many are getting the basics wrong.

Before solving a problem, you need to be able to accurately define the problem. India is not a free-market in the slightest. Despite what you may have heard from different commentators on the Morcha when it was in full swing, none of this was due to capitalism. In fact, it was precisely due to the lack of free-market capitalism and Nehru’s adoption of socialist methodology after India’s inception in 1947. The Soviet-inspired central planning and government interference in the economy has led to this, and continues to disrupt the Indian economy

[1]⁠

Many of you reading this may be put off by me saying this, but the truth is that the narrative surrounding these terms have been hijacked by the political left (don’t get angry too quick that I may have called out your team, the right is no better either). So let’s define terms and make this really clear

[2]⁠

Capitalism:

an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

Free-market:

an economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses.

And while we are at it, lets also be clear about what the difference between the public and private sectors are too:

Public Sector:

the part of an economy that is controlled by the state.

Private Sector:

the part of the national economy that is not under direct state control.

So when we were hearing about the ‘evils of the private sector’ and the ‘greedy capitalist exploitation’, what we were actually hearing were the ravings of people who had no idea what they were talking about.

⁠

Here is just one example of the misguided rhetoric prevalent at the time. This post garnered over 1,500 likes on Instagram alone!

[3]⁠

⁠

The farmers themselves are classed as the private sector by definition! You know who isn’t the private sector? The state-backed monopolies of Ambani and Adani who absolved any right of being classed as private by colluding with the government.

These state-backed monopolies are not capitalist or free-market entities in the slightest. By establishing a link with the state (public sector) they absolve any private status they had. If it is not private, then it isn’t capitalist or free market — by definition!

If anything, it’s (state) socialist

[4]⁠

or (state) communistic:

Socialism:

a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Communism:

a theory or system of social organization in which all property is owned by the community and each person contributes and receives according to their ability and needs.

Marxist Communism is literally the relinquishing of all private sector ownership of the goods and services to hand over to the state. And before the socialist types come to complain about this; NO, placing the “community” above the rights of each individual and having that political community led by a group of representatives falls under the definition of a state.

Although historically socialism has always been a collectivist, pro-state, pro-central planning ideology, the modern left have co-opted this term and instead claim the “community” would have control rather than the state. But if that community is represented by a government that decides on each individual’s behalf, this is exactly what a state is.

State:

a nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government.

And if you don’t like these definitions, Karl Marx makes his anti-private, pro-state, pro-central planning stance very clear in his ‘Communist Manifesto’, especially his ‘10 Planks’ to achieve communism

[5]⁠

However if you are willing to reject the idea of a state/community run by one government or any body of representatives deciding on the behalf of individuals in their group and taking control of resource management, then you are what I class as a non-state socialist. An often confused and self-contradictory position, however tolerable if the claimant of this stance indeed adheres to this type of socialism.

In this case the ‘community’ in your view would just be made up of private individuals, interacting and exchanging with each other voluntarily. No one person having to give up their rights to appease the collective. And that’s a fundamentally capitalist position so can easily co-exist under a wider free-market framework

[6]⁠

. To distinguish between the two types, ask a self-proclaimed socialist whether they would like to privatise industries or nationalise them.

And whilst we are on the topic, it is also necessary to address the following myths too. Colonialism and the British Raj were not capitalistic either. They were state efforts (public sector), not private sector efforts. The East India Company was a state-backed monopoly

[7]⁠

, similar to how Ambani and Adani are today. Corporatism is not capitalism either, since as soon as large interest groups gain control over the state they are no longer private

[8]⁠

I can’t speak to how well the communists present in the Morcha knew about their own ideology, but the ideology itself they promote, if implemented at a state level, would have been a disaster. It would have solved nothing, as any sort of communist takeover would have just replaced the current state with another form of state. In all likelihood, given the communist/socialist experiments in the past, it would have been even worse than the current government is now.

By demonising terms like private sector, profit, capitalism and free-markets etc. actual effective ideas (if implemented correctly) are being thrown out and replaced with broken ideas disguised in different ways to keep the people subjugated by broken systems of corruption and over-reliance on the state. Our adversity for certain terminology is redirected our trajectory from liberation to further oppression. As a result, we are literally begging the state to solve the problems it itself created through the very mechanism of state intervention that caused these issues in the first place!

This is why getting our definitions clear is so important, since when most people hear words like ‘private sector’, instantly imagery of obese, greedy businessmen come to mind. It’s such a clever tactic politicians use when they blame the private sector (you and I) for the problems they create. And as a solution, they curb our freedoms and create more perverse incentives.

As more libertarian philosophy, Azadism considers the left-right wing dichotomy a nonsensical distraction designed to keep a population bickering amongst itself. Through this, the real battle is obscured — the struggle between liberty and authoritarianism.

Libertarianism:

a political philosophy that advocates only minimal state intervention in the free market and the private lives of citizens.

Both sides of the political spectrum are full of hypocrisy for this reason, since they ignore where freedom is hindered in order to serve the interest of their side.

It’s especially disappointing to see amongst my fellow younger generation Sikhs who have become ‘shills’ of the left. So much so, full-blown communists permeated the Morcha without many people stopping to think about the shear ridiculousness of this. It was the principles of communist ideology in state-intervention, central planning and anti-free-market sentiments that caused this whole situation to arise in the first place!

[9]⁠

⁠

Endnotes

For a more comprehensive breakdown on these concepts, read the essay:

“Battle of the Isms” for Azadism’s navigation of the conflict between Capitalism and Socialism⁠

⁠

[1]⁠

⁠

Link:

Nehru and Socialism - Oxford Scholarship (universitypressscholarship.com)⁠

⁠

Raw: https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195645866.001.0001/acprof-9780195645866-chapter-9

⁠

[2]⁠

⁠

Definitions from the Oxford Dictionary of English Language, as at 2022.

⁠

[3]⁠

⁠

Link:

Sikh Youth UK on Instagram: “INDIAS FARMERS PROTEST ARE A PROTEST AGAINST CAPITALISM!⁠

⁠

Raw :https://www.instagram.com/p/CI6e8c6rJNV/

Reposted by @sikhyouthuk on December 17, 2020. Original post by @roshni.lalchandani.

The actual post itself is actually quite good and informative, as it exposes the monopolists mentioned earlier. However, it does miss some of the crucial details, such as the reason why they can monopolise the industry is precisely because of their collusion with the government. Again, this private-public link proves it isn’t capitalism; instead it’s a lack of it. Since nowhere in the post itself explains why it is capitalism (or even mentions it), the headline title is unnecessary and logically inconsistent. Curiously, the original poster, @roshni.lalchandani, first slide was a different image, however @sikhyouthuk placed the slide with the headline “…protest against capitalism” first in their repost of it. Blaming the farming situation on capitalism and linking these two things in this way just highlights the level of misinformation present on social media.

Lesson: don’t be lazy and rely on social media posts for your information - do your own research!

Note: I don’t really blame SYUK for pushing this out of malice as a conscious attempt to misinform, I genuinely do not believe they know better. But there are people in those circles that do (and whom I have exposed in the past) and should be informing SYUK on the reality rather than filling his head (and subsequently the Sangat) with nonsense takes.

⁠

[4]⁠

⁠

The emphasis must be put on state socialist here since the Oxford definition is ambiguous here. I.e, that ‘community’ referred to in their definition is the state. This is how socialism has always been understood and debunked by economists like FA Hayek, and Ludwig Von Mises. These has provided some of the most comprehensive critique of socialism, completing dismantling the fundamentals of this ideology through the ‘economic calculation problem’ argument. For more a detailed rundown of these arguments, please read “Battle of the Isms” here:

Link:

isms (azadism.co.uk)⁠

⁠

Raw: www.azadism.co.uk/isms

⁠

[5]⁠

⁠

Read the Azadism critique of Marx’s 10 Planks here:

Link:

Communism Vs Azadism: Azadist critique of Marx's 10 Planks⁠

⁠

Raw:

https://coda.io/@bunga-azaadi/theories-ideologies/karl-marxs-10-planks-vs-azadism-5⁠

⁠

[6]⁠

⁠

Must be highlighted that Azadism is against non-voluntary (forced) social organisation, however does not mind voluntary organisation. Therefore if a group of Socialists wanted to privately set up a commune, or worker co-op etc, they are free to do so under Azadism as long as participants are free to leave and are participating voluntarily.

⁠

[7]⁠

The English Crown at the time granted them exclusive rights over trade in India as a state-backed enterprise. The fact that they were able to raise an army, subdue monarchs and forcibly acquire regions and trade deals off of conquered territory (all characteristics of a state) really doesn’t help its case either. Essentially the EIC was merely a branch of the imperialist power of Britain.

Link:

East India Company | Definition, History, & Facts | Britannica⁠

⁠

Raw: https://www.britannica.com/topic/East-India-Company

⁠

[8]⁠

⁠

The level of ignorance around these terms is staggering. It’s almost as if any word that’s not communism beginning with the letter ‘c’ and ending in ‘ism’ is evil to a lot of people.

⁠

[9]⁠

⁠

In fact after partition in 1947, India adopted a central planning approach and mimicked the style of the Soviets through their own set of “5-Year plans”. These went on until 2017 until the Planning Commission was dissolved and replaced by a think tank under Modi.

⁠

⁠

Bunga Azaadi — Institute for Azadist Studies

Instagram⁠

⁠

For email updates,

sign up to our Substack⁠

⁠

Want to support?

Support (azadism.co.uk)⁠

⁠

Questions, suggestions or disagreements? Get in touch!

email: contact@azadism.co.uk

⁠

www.azadism.co.uk⁠

⁠

Gallery

Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.

Try clicking the ⋯ next to your doc name or using a keyboard shortcut (

CtrlP

) instead.