The Prime Minister, of course, framed the issue, as he always does, as driven by his own “pure” motives. More worryingly, it is worth speculating on what the government might do next to burnish its image of toughness, now that it has lost face. If this is a triumph of sorts for social movements, it will be a one-off one. But its calculation will be that there is something so particular and unique about the nature of this protest that it will not be easy to replicate on other issues.
Pure farming 2018 controls missing free#
This government has pretty much had a free run in containing or suppressing social movements.
The second risk is that it emboldens civil society and social movements. But this may not be of much consequence since the kind of voter who votes for the BJP for its supposed toughness will have nowhere to go, even if they feel betrayed. It shatters its own professed self-image. In purely political terms, the government is also taking a risk by repealing the laws. But this dynamic has been around for a while and would have been factored into the government’s calculations. Coming on the heels of rising input costs and fuel inflation, there is a potential for discontent. The government may fear that discontent in Western UP might have reinforced the idea that farmers there need their own political representation through parties like the RLD and not rely on the BJP. But the logic of the decision appears to be more complicated. And, of course, the government has again demonstrated its ability to surprise and constantly think politically. It is tempting to explain the decision in a purely instrumental logic: The timing of the UP elections. But what the government seems to have recognised is that suppressing or managing a protest can, paradoxically, create a deeper simmering discontent that might be harder to manage. The timing of the announcement is not driven by the momentum or power of the movement, which is why it is a bit of a surprise. To a great extent it did, and could have continued to do so. In short, the government had the staying power to stare down and repress the protest. The visible modalities of protest had, through various means, been cleared out, even though BJP politicians at the local level were facing resistance. The farmers’ movement did not have overwhelming resonance outside Punjab and Western UP. But one of the interesting things about this moment is that the concession has come at a time when the movement itself was dissipating. There is a great deal of truth in this narrative. The government was clearly getting nervous about the implications of the farmers’ discontent and possibly feared electoral reversals. In some senses, the climbdown will be seen by the Prime Minister’s supporters as a betrayal of his own tough image. It has, for the moment, dented the self-image the government sought to project of being able to undertake what it thinks are reforms even in the face of concerted opposition. The movement has forced the government to, uncharacteristically, eat humble pie.
Pure farming 2018 controls missing crack#
It shows that old-fashioned organisation and mobilisation is the only way to crack the façade of total control that the government likes to project. It is a triumph of the staying power, solidarity and indomitable will of the farmers’ movement. Both the farmers’ movement and the government will have to show new creativity to move beyond the current impasse.Īt first glance, this repeal reflects a simple story. A version of the current status quo will endure for the foreseeable future, and that prospect is not a very comforting one either. But, at the same time, there is also the risk that, chastened by this experience, no government will seriously think of agricultural reform. The rebuilding of trust is going to be a necessary condition for reforms that really matter. The repeal at least allows for the possibility of revisiting the real challenges agriculture faces, based on first principles and creating a new consensus. The deep distrust this legislation created would have, in the long run, made it harder to move Indian agriculture to a new sustainable and productive equilibrium. Agriculture needs serious reform, but this legislation was not the reform it urgently needed.
The decision to repeal is the correct one even if it comes months late.
But quite what it signifies is very much an open question. The Modi government’s decision to repeal the controversial farm laws is a landmark moment.