This may sound very bizarre but the analogies are stark & the principles governing are interestingly same.
Congress is ecstatic about its
victory (not literally) in recently held Gujarat Assembly elections (Dec.'2017)
for 182 seats, in which congress under leadership of newly elected (sic.)
president Mr. Rahul Gandhi has cornered 80 seats. This victory is stupendous
looking at the recent rout in UP & sometimes back in a number of states.
Had this Gujarat victory anything to do with the Crownship of Rahul Gandhi,
then there would have been no defeat at the same time in Himachal (Congress
which was in power 36/68 lost to BJP 44/68).
Now, with the aforementioned
facts, we can safely conclude that the election results are not stamp of
approval by the public on any leadership. If we scratch a little, the victory
of Congress (Congis use to claim so) in Gujarat was not on merits of Congress
rather de-merits of BJP's rule (I prefer to say Misrule since last few years). People
of Gujarat have voted congress in the absence of any other viable option to
BJP. We have witnessed this phenomenon playing in full glory in the past in
Delhi when there was a viable option made available to the voters & they
have lapped up the offer & gave the ever landslide mandate (95+%) to a
newly formed, inexperienced party (AAP- Aam Aadmi Party).
I would say; in Gujarat, irrespective
of defeat/victory of any party, it was fundamental defeat of voters. They never
wanted to vote Congress (more so after the epic interview of newly elected
young (sic., 47 years young) president of grand old party, in which he found
wondering when asked about his vision for development of Gujarat.(I guess, the
interviewer must have been speaking Hebrew ;)).(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RqBnwSOhVg,please pay attention from 4:13)
Now compare this situation of
the voters with our farmers, in the absence of customer interface they have to
sell their produce to any of the prevailing trader, who irrespective of caste
or any other association will skin them. We have been failed in creating a
viable & competitive system parallel in its reach & capital base to the
existing trader base & the farmer ultimately has to submit to the system
like the voters are forced to choose between Congress & BJP.
We keep on saying, we shall
root out all middleman in the supply chain of agri produce from farmer to
consumer but the same logic shall address our proposition: “Why in India
despite having so well intentioned, educated & resourceful persons, we have
never been able to forge out a single viable
alternative to congress in the first 49 years (till 1996, when BJP first
time make government which lasted 13 days) of our independence & against
BJP in the last 20 years of its existence”.
The same question could be framed in context of farmers: Why
despite having so resourceful organization (read Govt., NGO, funding agencies,
foundation, CSR activities to name a few) & Persons (qualified, committed
& professional) we have not been able to create a single viable option competing with this trader system of marketing?
It took congress more than 62 years (since founded by Mr. A O Hume on 28th-Dec.-1885) to reach to every nook & corner of this country & there were many unsung heroes, who sacrificed their lives, careers & families to reach congress to this summit. It took BJP 72 years (since inception of RSS on 27-Sept.-1925 to first government under leadership of A B Vajpayee in 1997) to first get a chance to stake claim to form government in centre. AAP’s rise & fall was very steep, it took just a year of its existence to get it chance to form first government & in less than next 5 years, the party has gained sufficient notoriety on renegading their own promises, which disqualifies it to be considered a Pan India viable option.
If we look at evolution of both BJP & Congress, it was not a person’s vision or efforts, the roots of these parties was in the strong
multi stakeholder social uprising. It was collective vision of many visionary individuals who fostered the idea to institutionalize the democratic values in political arena. Though AAP also started on a similar note
when it rode the social movement of Anti-Corruption but it was soon reduced to Pvt.
Ltd. Co. of Mr. Arvind Kejriwal.
If we look closely the evolution of poultry co-ops, they have also been
build on the solid social capital earned by PRADAN, without which there future
might have been in lurch.
The kind of broad based initiatives, we are speaking about to create in farmer produce marketing, are hardly fostered with a mindset of vested interests but rather more guided by the pure collective passion of many well intentioned individuals. Corporates may not find it attractive doing it unless they stand a chance to make windfall profit.
In the current scenario, the onus to make efforts in direction of creatinjg such a system bears heavily on shoulders of social sector organizations. Multi stakeholder, social sector organizations like PRADAN has to not only spearhead the movement of creating a viable option to the current prevailing & dominant model of traders in market but also make sure that it does not become a Pvt. Ltd. Co. like AAP has become at a very early stage & Congress in the first 81 years (from inception till Indira Gandhi took the reins in her hands in 19-Jan.-1966 & a dark phase of a single family rule ensued in the politics of India).
All these social sector uprisings were chucked for some petty personal interests but are not we to be blamed for allowing to happen so? We know, that without farmer no trader will ever exist but vice versa is not true i.e. a farmer has always been existing with or without trader & will continue to exist. This makes farmer core to this whole set of activities. Rest everything is secondary & created to serve the purpose of the farmer & the consumer but we need to find where this pious idea lost & the system become exploitative to both the farmers & consumers, which were the core. We may also choose a way to reform the existing system, reminding the intermediaries why they were brought in at the very first place.
In the current scenario, the onus to make efforts in direction of creatinjg such a system bears heavily on shoulders of social sector organizations. Multi stakeholder, social sector organizations like PRADAN has to not only spearhead the movement of creating a viable option to the current prevailing & dominant model of traders in market but also make sure that it does not become a Pvt. Ltd. Co. like AAP has become at a very early stage & Congress in the first 81 years (from inception till Indira Gandhi took the reins in her hands in 19-Jan.-1966 & a dark phase of a single family rule ensued in the politics of India).
All these social sector uprisings were chucked for some petty personal interests but are not we to be blamed for allowing to happen so? We know, that without farmer no trader will ever exist but vice versa is not true i.e. a farmer has always been existing with or without trader & will continue to exist. This makes farmer core to this whole set of activities. Rest everything is secondary & created to serve the purpose of the farmer & the consumer but we need to find where this pious idea lost & the system become exploitative to both the farmers & consumers, which were the core. We may also choose a way to reform the existing system, reminding the intermediaries why they were brought in at the very first place.
To create such a parallel & competing structure, it demand sheer resilience, patience & continual efforts making in-roads &
broadening learning base with the consolidation of learning not in the hands of
individuals but in the common pool of organization. We may not be able to
create something visible on the ground in short run but inability to produce a visible result
on ground in short run shall not deter us in putting ever demanding hard work to create a
path breaking solution for the farmers.
We (PRADAN) have been instrumental in creating such small waves of
change in the still water of trader dominated market but we have to aggregate
the ripples to shake the water enough to change status quo.
