Whither marxism

I believe this is your third visit to Kolkata

Yes. I was here first in 1967, about 40 years ago.

So what are some of the prominent changes that you perceive in the economic situation here?

Things have changed a great deal in the last 40 years. The recent boom in construction and new businesses is very striking.

There is an unusual dichotomy in Bengal at present. On the one hand, the Marxists are trying to attract private capital and talking of setting up SEZs, on the other they are criticising Centre’s policies vis-à-vis economic liberalisation. Therefore, how relevant do you think Marxism is in today’s world?

There are two aspects of Marxism. One is a set of economic theories. One can say that in the past 150 years, economics has progressed and ideas have been built upon and old ideas have been discarded. The particularities of much of Marxian economics are no longer valid. But if you view Marxian thinking as a social critique, which is concerned about social classes and income inequalities, then the problems that Marx was concerned with still exist. In that second sense, the critique is still relevant.

Marxists in India, especially in Bengal, have quoted from your books to point out that globalisation is not auguring well for India. There seems to be a lot in common in their ideology and the crux of your work. Would you like to describe yourself as a Marxist then?

I do not know whether labelling helps understand intellectual positions. I have argued that markets by themselves do not lead to economic efficiency. And even when they do, they do not lead to a distribution of income and economic well being that is socially just. What, you may say, distinguishes me from other Marxists, is that these propositions are now accepted by almost all economists. But, of course, there are many politicians who are still riveted to discredited, simplistic theories like that of Milton Friedman, who ignore the limitations of the market.

From land reforms, our country is now moving towards industrialisation. On many occasions, agricultural land is being used to promote industries. What is your take on the matter?

Problems of land are important political, economic, and social problems, especially in countries like India and China where land is scarce. Market mechanisms do not work well while putting together land for larger enterprises. Land has a social context as well. There are social disturbances involved in rehabilitation somewhere else. If the occupying company guarantees employment and provides a share in the company and proper housing, then the individual would feel protected. Though it does not eliminate the social cost, but it provides appropriate compensation.

There is a lot of concern in India and other developing countries about energy security and environmental concerns. In this context, what are your views on the Indo-US nuclear deal?

I do not know the details of the agreement to comment on whether it is good or bad, but there are broad political concerns from a global perspective. Many Americans are concerned that once you deem one country fit for such an alliance, and neglect another; you are treading a dangerous path. It is very clear that America, under the Bush administration, has taken some very extreme positions, and it is understandable why one would want to be seen closely allied with that kind of extremism. Having the world divided into particular kinds of military alliances may not be the most stable way forward for global peace.

It has been suggested that India should follow the Chinese model of economic growth, though that model has been criticised as well. What do you think?

The characterisation of the Chinese strategy is not completely accurate. Though China has been making goods that have recently faced a lot of difficulty in the international market, China is also moving upscale and making a lot of goods that are earning very good reputation. Chinese textiles are a good example of this. One has to recognise that under-investment in education in India means that not everybody at this juncture has the skill to make high-quality goods. So you need product diversity to reflect the skill mix in the country.

Though India and China are being touted as the next superpowers, there exist a lot of regional inequalities within both the countries. Do you think that they can therefore be called superpowers?

The disparities are getting reduced...in China.

...And in India?

Well, in India too. First Bangalore was the only centre of growth, and now there are several others as well.

The rural areas?