About Jaya Prakash Narayan (JP)
Story so far
Jayaprakash Narayan popularly known as’ JP was a confirmed Marxist in 1929. By the middle of 1940s he was inclined towards the Gandhian ideology.
Till 1952 JP had no faith in non-violence as an instrument of social transformation process. The transformations of the Russian society in the late 1920s had thereafter changed his outlook towards Marxism and the process of dialectical materialism.
Soviet Union was no more an ideal model for him for a socialist society. The bureaucratized dictatorship with the Red Army, secret police and guns produced an inherent disliking for the Soviet Pattern of development.
He was convinced that it did not produce “decent, fraternal and civilised humall beings”.
He said in 1947, “The method of violent revolution and dictatorship might conceivably lead to a socialist democracy; but in only country where it has been tried (i.e. the Soviet Union), it had led to something different, i.e. to a bureaucratic slate in which democracy does not exist. I should like to take a lesson from history”.
JP was convinced that there was inter-relationship between nature of the revolution and its ‘ future impact. He was convinced that any pattern of violent revolution would not lead to the empowerment of people at the grassroots level.
JP was very much critical of dialectical materialism on human development. He was convinced that this methodology would affect the spiritual development of man. His concept of Total Revolution is a holistic one.
He used this term Total Revolution for the first time in a British magazine called The Time in 1969. Underlying the emphasis on the Gandhian concept of non-violence and Satyagraha he said, “Gandhiji’s non-violence was not just a plea for law and order, or a cover for the status quo, but a revolutionary philosophy. It is indeed, a philosophy of total revolution, because it embraces personal and social ethics and values of life as much as economic, political and social institutions and processes
Concept of Total Revolution
The concept of Total Revolution as enunciated by JP is a confluence of his ideas on seven revolutions i.e. social, economic, political, cultural, ideological and intellectual, educational and spiritual.
The concept of total revolution became popular in 1974 in the wake of mass movements in Gujarat and Bihar. He was deeply disturbed by the political process of degeneration in the Indian politics of the time.
During his Convocation Address at the Benaras Hindu University in 1970 he said, “Politics has, however, become the greatest question mark of this decade. Some of the trends are obvious, political disintegration is likely to spread, selfish splitting of parties rather than their ideological polarisation will continue; the devaluation of ideologies may continue; frequent change of party loyalties for persona; or parochial benefits , buying and selling of legislatures, inner party indiscipline, opportunistic alliance among parties and instability of governments, all these are expected to continue.”
JP was deeply moved by the mutilation of democratic process, political corruption and fall of moral standards in our public life. He said that if this pattern of administrative process I continues then there would not be any socialism, welfarism, government, public order, justice, freedom, national unity and in short no nation.
JP was deeply disturbed by the growth of corruption in the Indian political system. He said “I know politics is not for saints. But politics at least under a democracy must know the limits which it may not cross.” This was the focal point of JP’s Peoples Charter which he submitted to the Parliament on 61h March 1975. He said “Corruption is eating into the vitals of our political life. It is disturbing development, undermining the administration and making a mockery of all laws and regulations. It is eroding people’s faith and exhausting their proverbial patience.”
JPs programme of Antyodaya meaning, the upliftment of the last man was an essential aspect of his socialist thought. On 21″ march 1977, in a statement he said, ”Bapu gave us a good yardstick. Whenever you are in doubt in taking a particular decision remember the face of the poorest man and think how it will affect him. May this yardstick guide all their actions.”
Right to work was an integral part of his concept of Total Revolution, he said “Once the state accepts this obligation, means will have to be found for providing employment to all. It is not so difficult to do so.” JP was also particular about social reforms such as elimination of dowry system, development of the conditions of the harijans and abolition of the caste system in India’s political system.
Summary
Total Revolution is a combination of seven revolutions – social, economic, political, cultural, ideological or intellectual, educational and spiritual. This Revolution will always go on and keep on changing both our personal and social lives.
It knows no respite, no halt, certainly not a complete halt. It is a permanent revolution and is expected to move on towards higher and higher goals.
The concept of Total Revolution has had both Marxist and Gandhian origins. It is always expected to be total, touching all aspects of life. JP developed his concept of Total Revolution on the basis of a synthesis not merely of Marxist and Gandhian concepts of social revolution but also of the principles of Western Democracy.
JP failed to achieve his revolution and that political parties continued to rule where the people should have stepped in, is a different story. One shrewd commentator has pointed out that the reason for this is that some economic classes and vested interests that dominated society before continued to do so even after the exit of Mrs. Gandhi from the political scene following her massive electoral defeat in 1977. But, perhaps the real reason why “Lok-niti” as JP visualised it could not substitute “Raj-niti” was because JP’s Lok-niti was basically an unworkable utopia.
Recent Posts
Petrol in India is cheaper than in countries like Hong Kong, Germany and the UK but costlier than in China, Brazil, Japan, the US, Russia, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, a Bank of Baroda Economics Research report showed.
Rising fuel prices in India have led to considerable debate on which government, state or central, should be lowering their taxes to keep prices under control.
The rise in fuel prices is mainly due to the global price of crude oil (raw material for making petrol and diesel) going up. Further, a stronger dollar has added to the cost of crude oil.
Amongst comparable countries (per capita wise), prices in India are higher than those in Vietnam, Kenya, Ukraine, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Venezuela. Countries that are major oil producers have much lower prices.
In the report, the Philippines has a comparable petrol price but has a per capita income higher than India by over 50 per cent.
Countries which have a lower per capita income like Kenya, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and Venezuela have much lower prices of petrol and hence are impacted less than India.
“Therefore there is still a strong case for the government to consider lowering the taxes on fuel to protect the interest of the people,” the report argued.
India is the world’s third-biggest oil consuming and importing nation. It imports 85 per cent of its oil needs and so prices retail fuel at import parity rates.
With the global surge in energy prices, the cost of producing petrol, diesel and other petroleum products also went up for oil companies in India.
They raised petrol and diesel prices by Rs 10 a litre in just over a fortnight beginning March 22 but hit a pause button soon after as the move faced criticism and the opposition parties asked the government to cut taxes instead.
India imports most of its oil from a group of countries called the ‘OPEC +’ (i.e, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Russia, etc), which produces 40% of the world’s crude oil.
As they have the power to dictate fuel supply and prices, their decision of limiting the global supply reduces supply in India, thus raising prices
The government charges about 167% tax (excise) on petrol and 129% on diesel as compared to US (20%), UK (62%), Italy and Germany (65%).
The abominable excise duty is 2/3rd of the cost, and the base price, dealer commission and freight form the rest.
Here is an approximate break-up (in Rs):
a)Base Price | 39 |
b)Freight | 0.34 |
c) Price Charged to Dealers = (a+b) | 39.34 |
d) Excise Duty | 40.17 |
e) Dealer Commission | 4.68 |
f) VAT | 25.35 |
g) Retail Selling Price | 109.54 |
Looked closely, much of the cost of petrol and diesel is due to higher tax rate by govt, specifically excise duty.
So the question is why government is not reducing the prices ?
India, being a developing country, it does require gigantic amount of funding for its infrastructure projects as well as welfare schemes.
However, we as a society is yet to be tax-compliant. Many people evade the direct tax and that’s the reason why govt’s hands are tied. Govt. needs the money to fund various programs and at the same time it is not generating enough revenue from direct taxes.
That’s the reason why, govt is bumping up its revenue through higher indirect taxes such as GST or excise duty as in the case of petrol and diesel.
Direct taxes are progressive as it taxes according to an individuals’ income however indirect tax such as excise duty or GST are regressive in the sense that the poorest of the poor and richest of the rich have to pay the same amount.
Does not matter, if you are an auto-driver or owner of a Mercedes, end of the day both pay the same price for petrol/diesel-that’s why it is regressive in nature.
But unlike direct tax where tax evasion is rampant, indirect tax can not be evaded due to their very nature and as long as huge no of Indians keep evading direct taxes, indirect tax such as excise duty will be difficult for the govt to reduce, because it may reduce the revenue and hamper may programs of the govt.