Swarajya, November 4, 1961
Between ourselves, honest voter, these private monopolies created by the pernicious system of permits, licences, quotas and controls (to be extended now even to foreign capital which voluntarily comes into the private sector) make the Congress Party's rich friends richer, and the poor poorer. It is a close conspiracy; we have a battle between money and liberty, between dharma and atheism, between freedom and communism clothed in Congress robes.
It follows from the nature of truth and human intelligence that in seeking the suffrages of the people, all political parties should more or less put forth identical policies although they may give different shapes to the same substance and use different language. If the conditional if’s, but’s and provided-that’s are all added up, it will be seen that most political parties swear by the same objectives, and the difference is, as far as policies are concerned, mostly an illusion. This is because of the fact that the appeal of all parties is to the same electorate and under the same conditions, and, as already stated, the nature of truth and human intelligence leave no scope for real variation.
What each party lays emphasis on may present differences, and the emphasis on points too may vary with the audience to whom they are addressed. Here also there is more of skill and illusion than of reality in the variations.
What then is the issue on which the Congress is opposed by the Swatantra Party? Not the aims, which are general welfare, equal opportunities for all and protection of the weaker elements against exploitation—these being the stated objectives of both parties. The one issue is the big difference in the ways and means employed to achieve these objectives.
The Congress Party’s policy is Statism. The Congress Party being in power suffers from the bias or the illusion that through the State rather than through the free will and voluntary co-operation of the citizens general welfare and prosperity can be secured. So measures curtailing freedom have been devised to attain prosperity. Incidentally, these measures give more and more power to the ruling party
The Swatantra Party stands for freedom, stoutly opposing Statism. Statism along with party government leads to the growth of one-party power to monstrous dimensions ending up in perpetuation of power and extinction of democracy. This is the great and all important issue.
It is gratifying to note that the Praja Socialist Party (whose name may mislead) is also against Statism, as the election mani-festo of that party makes it very clear. Indeed all parties other than the Congress and Communist parties are ranged against Statism. It is recognized by all of them that the Statist policy of the Congress must lead to totalitarianism. The Congress Party would itself object to Statism were it not itself in power.
The question then is, what should be the strategy at the next elections for these parties that do not want Statism. Must parties range themselves against one another although they all present the same stout opposition to the Statism of the Congress and Communist parties? Must they indulge in triangular and multilateral contests to make it easy for Statism to win and perpetuate Congress Party rule?
Had this common ground between them been a minor one, the situation might be otherwise. But this common opposition to the Congress Party’s Statism—to its permit-Iicence-raj, to its unholy alliances with selected rich men, and to its extravagance in expenditure and consequent crushing taxes, deficit financing and inflation—is so important an issue and covers so much of ground that it is high time leaders of these parties consider ways and means to pool their strength and adopt a strategy that would lead to success.
Mr. H. V. Kamath had a discussion with me very recently and he made the suggestion that there should be an all-India conference of leaders of all parties opposed to Statism for devising election strategy on commonsense lines, so as to avoid giving a chance to the Statist party to win through triangular contests. It should not be difficult for leaders of all the political parties ranged against the Congress and communism to settle on a comprehensive plan of dividing up the constituencies among themselves so as to secure a parliamentary majority against Statism.
The time is short and negotiations are always difficult. Negotiations often break down on some trifling but obstinate point. Yet the suggestion deserves a trial, for Statism is the most important of all the charges against Congress policy and is a great enemy to true national progress and democracy; and it is obviously impossible to lead a successful battle against it unless triangular and multilateral contests are avoided and the position properly polarized.
