THE LANCET--CLIMARE CHANGE AND HEALTH

SAVE INDIAN AGRICULTURE

Save Indian Agriculture

Reorder Agriculture S&T

Strengthen Rural Extension

Promote Practices of Ecological Farming

AIPSN

Sources of growth of agriculture and allied sectors have been changing right from the independence. In the years after independence, India was in a difficult situation to meet the domestic food needs. Much of the food was imported. A concerted approach of technology, institutions and policy support made India food self-sufficient and also brought in prosperity in some rural areas. The focus on improving food production by improving productivity by intensive use of chemicals, water and responsive cultivars proved successful for some time. But now for several years it has been evident that by persisting with the same approach to technology of crop production the policymakers are imposing a great amount of economic burden on the peasantry and rural labour. In agriculture, in the absence of appropriate correctives being made in the practice of science and technology, there is the challenge of ecological crisis growing at a rapid pace in certain parts of the country in the form of soil deterioration, falling groundwater levels, increased chemical use in agriculture impacting on environment and human health.

The economics of agriculture has become unfavourable for the farmer. Particularly the risks for the poor and middle peasants are becoming greater. The contribution of agriculture to GDP gradually decreased and today we stand at about 14%.  While many of the sectors have grown faster, agriculture has not grown sufficiently and real incomes to farmers are coming down leading to indebtedness and poverty. Area cultivated both in term of net sown are and gross sown area has shown a decline in the post reform period due to urbanisation, industrialisation and marginalization of land holdings which had an impact on growth on agricultural production. Yield which played a significant role in the growth of agriculture during 80’s due to spread effects of green revolution has come down during 90’s with the advent of neo liberal policies due to reduction in public investment on irrigation and seeds, technology and extension has greatly affected yield. The engine of agricultural output during post reform period is cropping pattern. It is observed that, there is a shift in cropping pattern towards from food grains to commercial crops due to favourable prices and terms of trade but these factors turned negative which had significant effect on growth of agriculture.

There are number factors contributed for the slowdown in growth of agriculture in addition to reduction in public investment. Volatile output prices, reduction of subsidies on inputs, dependency on high cost inputs increased cost of cultivation which was not backed by adequate credit supply on the one hand and on the other hand crop failures and faulty remunerative prices affected whole peasant community and pushed them into debts. The NSS 59th round Survey on Indebtedness of Farmer Households conducted in 2003 reported that48.6% of farmer households were indebted. The poorer sections among the peasantry, especially the small and marginal farmers and the agricultural labourers, who constitute the vast majority of the Indian population, are the worst sufferers. As per the National Commission for Enterprises in Unorganized Sector report (NCEUS, 2007), real incomes of farmers have stagnated, with the average being Rs.1650 per family per month. This study also made evident that the average family expense in the villages is Rs.2150 per month; even at such below-poverty-level consumption, the average family still spends more than it earns, thus getting into debt.

Finally, all sectors in agriculture and sections among the peasantry are affected by the deepening agrarian crisis. The severe crisis in agriculture is pushing farmers to move out of farming.  The 2011 census data show People depending on agriculture has come down from 69.43% to 54.6% in last 60yrs.  During 2001-11 about 86.10 lakh people have left farming in India which is about 2358/day.  While farmers or children of farmer leaving farming for better opportunities is always welcome, the worrisome issue is the most of them are ending up as casual agriculture workers.  For the first time 2011 census have recorded agriculture labour numbers have surpassed the numbers of cultivator both in absolute numbers and in proportion.  Among the 54.6% of people depending on agriculture 29.9% (144.3 m) are agriculture labour and 24.64% (118.7 m) are cultivators.  The farmer suicides are another extreme symptom of such crisis. As per the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB, 2012) 2, 84,694 farmers have committed suicide in the last eighteen years. 

While we need to expand the non-farm sector in the rural areas to provide employment to more people from agriculture, but this cannot be done without putting agriculture in good health. Non-farm employment has not been growing at the required pace to absorb people from agriculture at a significant level. The figures show that the net new jobs created in the economy during 2004-05 to 2009-10 is only 2 million while the working age population has increased by 55 million. Therefore, while we make efforts to expand other sectors of the economy, we also need to ensure sufficient incomes from farm and off-farm activities, in order to prevent major distress in the farming community.

During the last three Five Year plans, recognizing the importance of the Agriculture sector, much effort has been made by the Government to boost the growth in agriculture. We have seen the improvement from 2.5% growth rate during the 9^th Plan (1997-02) and 10^th Plan (2002-07) to 3.2% in the 11^th Plan period (2007-12) and the target of 4% growth in Agricultural GDP has not been met. The Approach Paper to the coming 12th Five Year Plan (2012-17) recognizes that a one per cent growth emanating from the agriculture sector would be at least two to three times more effective in reducing poverty than the same growth coming from non-agriculture sectors.

Therefore, firstly, we should recognize that a boost to the agriculture sector is very important to the entire economy. Secondly, the problem is not just production but the income levels of the farmers. If the income levels improve, it will directly reduce the levels of rural poverty. Furthermore, the increased purchasing power will also boost the entire economy.The very first chapter of the National Policy for Farmers which was adopted by the Government in 2007 is titled “Need for Policy Reorientation.” It says, “There is a need to focus more on the economic well-being of the farmers, rather than just on production... The aim of the Policy is, therefore, to stimulate attitudes and actions which should result in assessing agricultural progress in terms of improvement in the income of farm families, not only to meet their consumption requirements but also to enhance their capacity to invest in farm related activities.”

About 83 per cent of holdings are less than two hectares in size and together they account for a little more than 40 per cent of the cultivated area, contributing roughly half of the value of agricultural output. Where they lose out is in marketing, as the top end of the value chain (organized retailing and processing) is consolidating and scaling up, while farm holdings are still fragmenting.This can be addressed by getting small farmers organized in clusters as cooperatives or farmer producer organizations (FPOs), get into value addition and link up with processors and organized retailers. This was achieved under the AMUL model in case of milk and needs to be replicated for most other high value perishable commodities such as fruits and vegetables, poultry and meat products.  This will bring plenty of rural off-farm and non-farm employment opportunities which in turn will improve the incomes and livelihood opportunities for the rural poor.

Remunerative prices are a major issue for farmers – to get sufficient incomes, there should be sufficient margins above the cost of cultivation. Many issues remain with regard to the system of fixing and delivering of the Minimum Support Prices (MSPs). In many cases, the CACP data itself shows, the Farm Harvest Prices are higher than the Minimum Support Prices for many of the crops.  Though the MSPs are being now announced in nearly 25 crops, the procurement operations happen only in a few. Therefore, for many of the major crops, the MSPs do not always deliver.   The situation of crops which are left to markets is much worse. Currently the input subsidies are embedded in certain products purchased from the market like chemical fertilizers.  With the frequent increases in petroleum prices, the costs of fertilizers are also going up making them unaffordable by farmers. With declining petroleum reserves and potassium reserves, it is high time we look for more sustainable methods in agriculture and create newer support systems around them.

Although there are certain limitations on the front of increasing the prices of agricultural commodities, particularly on food items considering the needs of the consumers and industry, but the government can look at the option of farmer income support policy to take care of the issue of incentives to peasantry for technology adoption, higher production and environmental corrections. Developments in WTO on the subsidy front do also suggest that in order to protect the concern of food security and farmer income protection the country needs to shift away from complete dependence in respect of the input subsidies and output support on the subsidy side and the policy of pricing of farm produce on the income side.

Major policy changes are needed in order to improve the quality of life of farmers. The new policy should focus on bringing economic sustainability in farming ensuring secure incomes. The policy should address the question of distress among farmers and generate a positive dynamic by enabling farmers to make positive investments into agriculture, by increasing their purchasing power, and by retaining more youth in the rural areas.

Ensuring Income Security to Farmers

The goal of all policies supporting agriculture should be to create an environment where farmers can economically and ecologically sustain farming.

Farmers Income Commission: A Farmers Income Commission should be established a statutory body which periodically (once in three to five years) assess the real incomes of the farmers taking into account the costs of cultivation, prices, subsidies and other support systems to farmers and their costs of living and suggest measures to governments to ensure at least minimum living incomes to all farming households – including tenants, sharecroppers and agricultural workers. The main function of the Farmers Income Commission should be to recommend and ensure that the policy measures be implemented to assure income security to farming households. The minimum living incomes can be arrived at using the same guiding principles which Pay Commissions’ use while assessing and recommending salary structure to employees. AIPSN supports the demands for the introduction of:

a.     Minimum income: to cover the living costs taking the average consumption units (three in case of urban areas which can be five in case of rural areas. The minimum living income recommended by the Farmers Income Commission should be indexed to inflation and be corrected every year taking into account any changes in costs of cultivation, prices, support to farmers etc. which impact on farmers’ incomes.

b.     Attachment benefit: The package should provide enough incentive to retain the (brightest) people and also attract the best to join the profession of agriculturist in future. 

c.      Ecological premium: The global food crisis has shown that the food security lies in viability of the small farms and not in the industrial farming by corporations. Provide income support based rewards for practicing sustainable, eco-friendly agriculture. 

d.     Remunerative Pricing Policy: The prices for agricultural commodities should be based on the real cost of production and linked positively with inflation.

                          I.          Agriculture being a State subject establishes a State level Agricultural Costs and Prices Commission which takes into account real costs of cultivation and recommends the price to the central government. The real cost estimations should take into account all the costs including the family labour. For food crops, the national CACP has to take into account and fix the price taking into account the recommendations by the Swaminathan Commission.  The prices could be from 10-50% over the C2 depending on the crop. A Price Stabilization Fund has to be established to deal with the price fluctuations in the commercial crops. The State Commission should take into account the declared price by the Centre and any variation compared to the recommended price should be compensated. The payments of crop compensation should be made directly to the farmers, through a local delivery mechanism such as post office, bank account deposit, panchayat or self-help groups. Timely payment should be made for each season.

                        II.          It is important that this system should benefit the real cultivators including tenant farmers and sharecroppers rather than non-cultivating land-owners. There should be system in place to identify and record tenants and sharecroppers. For example, the AP government is introducing a Bill to provide Loan Eligibility Card to tenants and sharecroppers so that they can access loans, crop insurance, crop compensation and so on. For the same purposes, it is imperative for governments to introduce such mechanisms in other states also. The same mechanism can be used to record the cultivator data for the Price Compensation system.

                      III.          Labour wage support for all agricultural operations: Today we are in an ironic situation where agriculture workers are unable get employment (and government is running a program like MGNREGA) and farmers are unable to afford agriculture workers due to increasing wages. The government should provide input subsidy in the form of labour wages (up to 100 days in a calendar year) to the farmers to monetize the use of family labour or to pay external labour engaged on the farm. This should include all agricultural operations from sowing to harvesting. The subsidy component can be equivalent to the wage rate in MGNREGS and the balance can be paid by the farmer.  For e.g., if the wage rate in a village for sowing operation is Rs. 250.00/day and the MGNREGS wage rate is Rs. 120/day, the farmer will get a subsidy of Rs. 120.00 per day of labour.  This can be operationalized on similar lines as MGNREGS, or by suitably increasing the number of days covered under MGNREGS and extending it to agricultural work.  This will also provide additional employment to the agriculture workers in the villages.

                      IV.          Direct Income Support: Direct Income Support to make up the shortfall to minimum living income to the needy section.  To begin with, the Direct Income Support will be implemented for all small & marginal farmers and agricultural labour.  The job of the Farmers Income Commission would be to identify such needy class of people during its periodic assessment (3-5 yrs) and fix the amount of Direct Income Support for the next period.  This can be paid directly to the people as direct benefit transfer[1]. The Indian Government has already acts for conferring the Right to Information, Rural Employment Guarantee and Education. Also we have an Act providing Lands Rights to scheduled tribes and forest dwellers.  Parliament has just passed an Act which will confer the Right to Food on all the needy citizens of the nation.  In a similar fashion Farmers Income Security can be shaped.

Policies for S&T to promote sustainable farming

Unfortunately, growth and structural change are being achieved by encouraging the global integration of Indian agriculture, promoted through the system of contract farming and corporate input supply. These are the distinctive features of the new strategy in agricultural development. The latest Indo-American Agreement on Agricultural education and research in which Wallmart and Monsanto are on the governing board is its new research arm. Through this new instrument of agricultural technology development the Indian policymakers are now trying to move the system rapidly towards the new priorities of “corporate agricultural biotechnology” and food processing. Just with a paltry 9 percent of the total investment in agricultural research this new instrument of agricultural technology development poses a grave threat.

It is trying to take the system completely in the direction of control of priorities of the system in the hands of agribusiness.  It is taking the system away from the priorities of location-specific soil and water management, crop rotation and biological agriculture that thanks to the efforts of some of the members of scientific community the leadership had chosen to work towards only recently in the Tenth Five year Plan. Since in the proposed new agri-biotechnology based socio-technical transition the corporate sector is increasingly going to be itself in driver seat and is in search of those technologies that can be widely applied through the agri-business friendly pathways, it can be taken as a given fact that in this new strategy too there is apparently very little space for the cultivation of an integrated approach for the realization of values of ecological and social justice.

This is becoming the case not only for the development of agri-biotechnologies and genetically engineered food crops but also for the development of organic agriculture. In fact, for the agro-food innovation system to be radically transformed to tackle the problems of diversity, it would be of course necessary to get out of the current socio-technical regime of green revolution. We will have to work more vigorously to facilitate the socio-technical transition to a new type of socio-technical regime and a new kind of system of STI.

Policies for rural industrialization

As already suggested, it is also becoming clear that the sector of agriculture is also not able to absorb all the additional labour available in rural areas. So far by following the industrialization framework chosen for the support of green revolution agriculture the government has promoted the practice of externalizing the production of industrial inputs to the metropolis and making the system of supporting industries import dependent. This has been hollowing out the rural economy of its potential for rural industrialization based on agriculture. Agriculture is no more an important driver of sustainable growth for the rural industries. This is now being aggravated much further through the new corporate strategy of diversification into agriculture, aquaculture, animal husbandry, horticulture and floriculture using even more of external inputs than before.

In order to realize the true potential of agriculture as a driver for rural industrialization the strategy of development of agriculture itself must be changed. In the long run, the framework of rural industrialization needs to be realigned with the proposed strategy of agricultural development using agro-ecological approaches involving the use of resource conserving technologies and integrated bio-farming systems involving multi-storied agriculture. Then only the country would be able to get the desired results in respect of the productive absorption of labour in agriculture and rural economy in India. Fifty percent of the Indian population would be still living in the near future, if not forever, in areas dependent on rural economy based production systems. Therefore, agriculture and rural industries need to be upgraded even for the reasons of limitations of both infrastructure and employability of rural migrants in the metropolis and cities. They are working not very thoughtfully when they are forcing the people to quit farming through even the regular operations of capitalist agriculture.

Climate change may also trigger thinking in this direction. Full implications of climate change are yet to be realized by the policymakers. In the context of agriculture, it is even necessary to realize that in many agro-ecological regions the problems of ecological sustainability have become today the biggest barrier to the enhancement of agricultural productivity[2]. The pathway being followed for agriculture has been creating the metabolic rift; agriculture has ceased to be self-sustaining in the sense that it can no longer find the natural conditions of its own production within itself. In this pathway, nutrients have to be acquired through long distance trade and separate industries outside of the agriculture sphere. This creates a rift in the natural cycles of soil fertility and waste accumulation. Today there are many more loops resulting in new imbalances introduced, thanks to the perusal of external input intensive agriculture and the additional of capitalist food chain based production of processed foods in the world system of agriculture.

At the wider social level, a rift has also been widening between humanity and the natural world due to the relation of wage labour and capital[3]. Private property in the earth’s resources, the division between manual/mental labour, and the antagonistic split between the town and country illustrate the metabolic rift on a social level. Today the rift at social level is manifest in many ways in the pathway that the country is following, such as the primacy of corporate speculation in real estate, the loss of autonomy of subsistence farmers to the knowledge of “expert technicians”, the tenants / landless labourers becoming alienated from the land and ceasing to be the custodians of land and water resources, and the demographic transition from rural farms to urban centres.   

For the restoration of this rift, it is clear that today the humanity needs to move away from the system of capitalist production and enter into a paradigm of development to solve the metabolic problem of not only agriculture but also of the economy as a whole.  India cannot afford to follow the well-treaded path which is already producing one disaster after another in the developed capitalist countries. Although to what extent these societies would continue or be able to afford the above said limitations is not the most relevant thing to discuss in India, the challenge of transition is quite different in our case due to the large percentage of population being still dependent on agriculture.  The kind of transition that the western world experienced is not repeatable. Only a small percentage of population is dependent on agricultures in these countries. India colonizing others is neither desirable nor feasible. If the transition of western kind is more or less out of question for India, it is necessary that we look for those pathways of rural and urban development that do not aggravate and can solve our problems in a better and sustainable way.

The road ahead for sustainability

It is also important that we recognize broadly the complexity of socio-technical challenge facing the people of India. Take for example the radical popular view that the neighborhood communities of users and providers of various services such as water, energy, and infrastructure and health education would have to come together and how they can be provided for from local sources. While it is true that there exists much potential in the local human and natural resources based systems to provide for the basic needs of the people as a whole even today, but the challenge of building a system that works efficiently is not as simple as getting together the neighborhoods. The institutions needed to build, operate and manage are required to be crafted in the midst of unequal power as associations of producers of new services and products using technologies that are new and need power relations to be altered completely in the sphere of use of resources.

This challenge is quite different from being members of the community or associations of users of water and energy to be provided from the large systems as ready- made final products. Even the proponents of radical view now recognize that in order to provide the marginalized people of their basic rights or entitlements in respect of water and biomass we would need at this stage the leverage of the external inputs which the state can offer in the form of the conditions of programme sanction and facilitate through the subsidized provision labour. Even this solution would effectively apply to the projects of infrastructure. But how we would realize the sustainability of production of goods and services in respect of projects that do not constitute to be part of the infrastructure and where the conditions of competition in production and commercial considerations are going to play a critical role.

Peoples’ centric innovation systems

As far as the pertinent issues of knowledge intensive innovation and diffusion are concerned, we cannot forget about the significance of multiple scales in production for achieving efficiency and sustainability. We should also recognize the importance of adequate capacity to produce within the regions and supply the needed input at a large scale within the regions. Emulation of the successful practices is also going to be dependent on the performance of training and capacity building for which the support will have to come from the public sector based S&T system. Vocational training, basic education, supply of finance and credit and incubation infrastructure would be needed. And the state will have to play a major role in the management of transition. Both, the state system and society, would be regenerating themselves in the process.

However, to get going on this front, again needless to say, we need to have a good set of supporting policies at the centre and state level. As these policies are still lacking, there are not sufficient efforts taking place on the ground for the creation of a set of appropriate social carriers. These social carriers would need the moral and material support of the social movements. Such pioneering organizations are still small in number; this means the experience is only beginning to be gained within the country. Although for quite some time the country has had a cooperative movement of the petty producers, but the cooperative institutions needed for cooperation in production have been far and few (Dinesh Beedi, Indian Coffee House, etc.).

At the moment there exists only many credit and input supply or marketing cooperatives and loose SHG federations in the states. The challenge is also therefore one of building the institutions of cooperation in production. We urgently need to build a large number of associations of producers. Social movements will have to experiment and practice the art of creation of production systems based on an appropriate heuristics. They will have to learn by doing and learning before doing to understand the political economy of production and technology. Those who are able to internally develop among themselves the relations of planned cooperation, democratic participation and camaraderie would only succeed.

To compete in the market economy and with the aim to change the power relations surrounding the production systems, it is quite clear that they will have to depend on the systems of technologies which are able to function as the new forms of productive forces. If we are planning to implement a new techno-economic paradigm, as is the case with the proposed strategy of banking on biomass for the development of rural economy in particular, the challenge is one of developing the local economies as the multi-sectoral systems of networked planning of production units that bank on biomass for food, energy and materials.

Lessons from PSM experience

There has been some effort within the PSM organizations to work in this direction. But this effort is also yet to achieve its critical threshold. It needs the cooperation of class organizations to move rapidly. At the level of action research it is already going on at a few places in the country. It has produced a set of viable technology systems in the sectors of production of vegetable tanned leather, processing of fruits and vegetables, processing of oilseeds and pulses and bio-farming. In other areas, the stage is still one of development of the systems of technologies. But what is important about this effort is that it is based on the heuristics of development of local economies as systems in themselves for the purpose of making an ecologically and socially sustainable just transition at the level of the rural economy.

This heuristics suggest that local economies are not just a village level economy but a system of network of smaller villages carrying out largely primary production (S level), medium size villages having a higher level of concentration of agricultural laborers (M level), bazaar villages having a higher level of artisans and secondary production (B level) and nodal taluk level town where the level of secondary and tertiary production is high (N level). These economies are capable of being networked for the creation of large-scale networked production systems.

Experience indicates that the democratically formed associations of producers can certainly become the social carriers of viable economic units of production. This demands that the initiatives for decentralized planning should also be shaped in the manner suggested for the organization of production linked S&T based efforts for the promotion of sustainable local economies. This perspective also demands going beyond the involvement of panchayati raj institutions (PRIs). We will have to build the class organizations of rural labour to play a role of the social carriers of appropriate socio-technical change. This demands that we also organize the processes of learning and innovation as an integral part of our mobilization of the people in rural and urban areas to support such a strategy. It demands a regeneration of the politics capable of combining constructive action and non-cooperation that the people used to defeat the colonial pathway only some sixty years ago.     

Experiments and going beyond

There is a need to examine the specific experiences of select experimental interventions underway in the country to develop the required technological innovation system to achieve a more desirable socio-technical transition in the case of agro-food system in India. PSMs also need to take a stock of the efforts being put in by the network of innovators active in the field of developing appropriate / alternate technologies for the sustainable development of rural industries to contribute to the stability, resilience, durability, robustness and sustainability of the socio-technical transition that India needs to pursue for upgrading the local economies as systems in themselves in the process of building a self-reliant multi-level economy. 

Since the marginalized rural people suffering from the current agrarian crisis would have to be mobilized with the aim to create a pathway for the desirable socio-technical transition to achieve both, ecological as well as social justice, efforts for should be for the building of adaptive capacity on the ground with a view to develop a set of social carriers of techniques for sustainable development of the agro-food system to act as a countervailing power which would be capable of pressing the STI system to work towards the development of techniques for agro-ecological approaches combinable with endogenous multi-sectoral rural network systems of industrial development.

The challenge is therefore one of not just how the social movements can press the state to solve the agrarian crisis but also of how they can help build and support the newly emerging social carriers of techniques. The social movements can also now start participating in meeting a totally new challenge of conscious social construction of technology (Socialism cannot depend on the technology systems organized by the dominant forces). PSMs will have to participate themselves as co-evolving actors in the process of transition and learn to steer the emergence of a desirable socio-technical regime. Participation in the process of steering for sustainable development would require from the social movements to develop the capacity for regulation, providing vision, learning to learn and help the social carriers to build their competencies for production and innovation and developing countervailing power structures to participate in the task of coordinating actors and networks.

Engagement with the system of STI

The challenge of development of a science, technology and innovation (STI) system suitable for the development of rural economies in India is required to be made an issue of public engagement. We need to seek the inclusion of the rural institutes, community polytechnics and other related institutions into the building of a people centric system of innovation for agriculture in the system of STI existing in the country. To grapple with the issue of scale and scope of planning required for making an ecologically and socially sustainable just transition possible at the level of the rural economies under the currently prevailing conditions in India, PSMs will have to recommend an integrated approach to the development of the agro-food system in conjunction with the pace being created for rural industrialization and agro-ecological approaches to crop production, animal husbandry, forestry and aquaculture.

Concluding remark

Already many of the successful experiments have brought out forcefully the point that the regenerative economy would have to be built on the basis of the principle of minimum use of external inputs of electricity, water, energy and materials. To maximize the well-being local economies would have to be shaped to become major providers of water, energy and infrastructure services. It seems that by taking up the development of rural industries as an integral part of the strategy of development of agro-food system that has its root in the agro-ecological approaches the new social carriers of techniques for sustainable development have a better chance to embed the new socio-technical transition in the agency and power of the rural labour and the peasant-artisan networks.

In such a pathway, it is clear that the strategy of development is to bank on biomass and solar energy (in various forms i.e., thermal, hydro, wind and small hydro) and the exploitation of electronics, telecommunications and information technology. Needless to say, for the upgrading of local economies the above outlined integrated strategy of technological change and economic development must be social justice achieving and environmental friendly. If the strategy of agricultural development and rural industrialization is not able to achieve the benefit of reducing CO2 emissions, pollution control and arresting land degradation, then it is not consistent with the achievement of the long term goals of the humanity.

The same can be said of the dimension of social justice. The people (peasants as well as rural labour) living on this earth are not only the ultimate owners of land and water but also the custodian of resources in whom the humanity is putting trust, and they have to use and care for these resources in an environmental friendly and socially just manner for the benefit of their progeny and succeeding generations.   

                                                                                          ………………

---

[1]Farmers Income Security across the world

Across the world governments have adopted basket of measures to ensure income security to farmers with twin objectives

a.      To ensure parity of incomes between agriculture sector/ farmers and other sectors/ non-farmers, and thereby ensure equality and justice in the society

b.      To ensure food production and food self sufficiency

[2] Land, the earth (and the ecological cycles that define it), and labour, which is the metabolic relation between human beings and nature, constitute the two original sources of all wealth. If we want to heal the metabolic rift and achieve metabolic restoration, we are required to treat land and water as treasure, ones that must not be exploited for short term gain, but rather replenished through rational and planned application of ecological principles to agriculture (agro-ecology). And labour, being the physical embodiment of a key, can access the land’s rich qualities to provide healthy food and many other means of livelihood. 

[3]Marx explored the ecological contradictions of capitalist society as they were revealed in the nineteenth century with the help of the two concepts of metabolic rift and metabolic restoration. The metabolic rift describes how the logic of accumulation severs basic processes of natural reproduction leading to the deterioration of ecological sustainability. Marx’s concept of metabolism is rooted in his understanding of the labour process.

Universalization of Scientific Temper

Universalization of Scientific Temper

Vivek Monteiro

Dr. Narendra Dabholkar gave up his career as a medical doctor to devote his life to promote the scientific outlook among the common public and fight superstitions. On August 20^th this year he was murdered by hired killers at Pune, Maharashtra. The AIPSN adopted the following resolution on his martyrdom:

The AIPSN strongly condemns the dastardly murder of Dr. Narendra Dabholkar by terrorists today at Pune. It is known that Dr. Dabholkar had received constant threats to his life by terrorist organizations acting in the name of religion. He continued his work courageously, unmindful of these threats, spreading the scientific approach and exposing the fraudulent methods of babas, tantric and self styled godmen. He was the founder and leader of the Andhashraddha Nirmulan Samiti and was the editor of the progressive magazine “Sadhana”.

We take inspiration from the life of Dr. NarendraDabholkar and pledge to carry forward his work and ideals of spreading the scientific temper, and opposing all forms of superstition and religious obscurantism. We pledge to combat the forces of communal fascism and terrorism acting in the name of religion which are active in different parts of our country today. We affirm the values of the Indian Constitution- of scientific temper, secularism, equality and democracy and will work to carry their message to every school, to every town and village of our country.

 Just as those who perpetrated the murder of Gandhiji could not stop his values and message, the values and message of Dr. Narendra Dabholkar will also not be stopped by this cowardly murder. All of us working in the people’s science movement will work with greater determination and vigor to promote science and scientific thinking in the broadest sections of the public to win the battle of ideas and defeat the forces of obscurantism and communal fascism in our country.

The murder of Dr. Dabholkar has shaken the nation out of its complacency and highlighted the importance and urgency of promoting scientific temper in India today.

The resolution that the AIPSN has adopted commits us to take up the task of nurturing the scientific outlook in every citizen, in every school, in every village and town of our country. Is this a possible task?

More than thirty years back, in 1981, a group of prominent intellectuals came out with a “Statement on Scientific Temper” which adopted a far reaching perspective.  We are still very far from achieving those objectives. Superstitions, Astrology, a wide spectrum of irrational beliefs, fraudulent babas, and self styled godmen still command huge following. Clearly ‘business as usual’ is not enough. We need a better and deeper understanding of what needs to be done.

Can we now take up the task of building scientific temper on a mass scale as a scientific problem? What does it mean to take it up as a scientific endeavor?

Humankind has many great achievements of universalization to its credit when tasks were taken up scientifically. Deadly diseases like small pox and polio have been eradicated from most parts of this planet by scientific mass campaigns. The achievement of universal literacy in many countries is another example. One hundred and fifty years back it was our national tradition to deny women and dalits education. Today it is an undoubted achievement that almost every child in India is in school regardless of sex, or caste. The seeds for this achievement of universal enrollment were sown by social reformers like Jotibai Phule and Savitribai Phule working through the “Satyashodak Samaj”.  Scientific Temper is a definite type of “Satyashodhan”. All the above examples give us the confidence that universalizing scientific temper (UST) may be possible and feasible, though it may take many years.

Scientific validity is established by practical achievement. Universalization means achievement at a mass level. To take up UST as a scientific endeavor means that we must show practical achievement at a mass level. We must have measurable and verifiable ways to assess progress or stagnation, success or failure. In the following pages we analyze some aspects of universalization of scientific temper as a scientific endeavor.

Part 2.

What is Scientific Temper?

In our effort to build scientific temper at a mass level we have a very important foundation- our Constitution. Our country is perhaps the only nation in the world where building scientific temper is provided for in its Constitution. Article 51 A of the Constitution of India states:

51A. Fundamental duties.—it shall be the duty of every citizen of India—

(h) To develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform;

In 1981, at a meeting convened by Nehru Centre, a group of intellectuals formulated a “Statement on Scientific temper” in which “Scientific Temper” was defined as follows, in terms of method of science:

a) That the method of science provides a viable method of acquiring knowledge;

(b) That the human problems can be understood and solved in terms of knowledge gained through the application of the method of science;

(c) Thatthe fullest use of the method of science in everyday life and in every aspect of human endeavor from ethics to politics and economics is essential for ensuring human survival and progress and

(d) That one should accept knowledge gained through the application of the method of science as the closest approximation of truth at thatthe and question what is incompatible with such knowledge; and that one should from time to time reexamine the basic foundations of contemporary knowledge.

Let us discuss the above in some more detail:

What do we mean by the method of science? Basically it means that before accepting something as scientifically valid, or true, we should put it to rigorous test.   There are tests of experience and experiment. There are tests of reason, consistency and logic. Before something can be accepted as true it should be put to practical tests and moreover, it should not be internally contradictory, and should be consistent with other things which we accept as true- because they too have been put to the tests.

Willingness to face the test

Anything that claims to be scientifically true must be open to being tested rigorously. Any system of knowledge that is not willing to take the rigorous tests of science cannot claim to be scientifically true.

For example, astrology cannot claim to be scientifically true, for the simple reason that no astrologer is willing to take the simple tests posed by the Andhashraddha Nirmoolan Samiti (ANIS). Those astrologers who came forward to take a test posed by Dr. Jayant Narlikar, Dr. Dabholkar and others failed.

Critical Questioning

What we today know as the method of science is the result of a long historyof learning by humankind in all parts of the world.

Critical questioning is the core of the method of science. Everyone has the right to question. The highest authority in science is liable to be questioned by the youngest student, by every thinking person. There are no sacred texts in science, which cannot be questioned and there are no high priests in science. Anything claiming to be scientifically true must be put to proof, must be open to be tested.

The well known physicist Richard Feynman gave an apt description of science:

"Science is a long history of learning how not to fool ourselves".

The method of science is always skeptical and critical. It is always in a state of trying to question and refute. It accepts no "truth" as final. As Einstein put it:"In the most favorable cases it says 'Maybe', and in the great majority of cases simply "No”. If an experiment agrees with a theory it means for the latter "Maybe", and if it does not agree it means "No". Probably every theory will someday experience its "No"- most theories, soon after conception."

The method of science is therefore a definite way of approaching questions of validity. In science, there is never certainty.  At best, there are only increasing levels of confidence. Or putting it in another way, decreasing levels of uncertainty and disbelief.

Fundamentally Opposed to Fundamentalism

Since science is based on systematic disbelief, it is inherently opposed to all varieties of fundamentalism- which may be described as unquestioning belief in some type of ‘infallible’ and ‘unquestionable’ scripture, or dogma. In our country many varieties of religious fundamentalism influence both the common people and even some intellectuals. And fundamentalism of a non religious variety is also quite common. Science is inevitably in conflict with these fundamentalist tendencies whenever there is an overlap of subject of attention.

Democratic Religion

On the other hand, we also have a long tradition of social reform and non fundamentalist, inclusive, humanist religious movements in various parts of our country- such as the Buddhism of Gautam Buddha, or the Sufi-Bhakti cults of the Middle Ages, or the work of Raja Ram Mohan Roy or Sree Narayan Guru. These movements of religious reform, which encouraged questioning of the prevailing system of caste discrimination and inequality, though religious in form, had more in common with scientific temper than with religious fundamentalism. It is not accidental that ‘scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform” are all mentioned together in our Constitution. The four attributes have been integrally related throughout our history.

Part 3

Critical Questioning - Universal or Western?

After the “Statement of Scientific Temper” (SST) was released it came under fierce criticism from various quarters. One strain of criticism came from a tendency calling itself “Patriotic and People Oriented Science and Technology” (PPST). According to PPST, the SST was seeking to impose a “Western Science” concept on India.  Evidently PPST sought to negate a concept of scientific method which is universal by terming the method of science as a ‘western’ concept.

 It is our contention that by doing so the PPST critique denies the long and diverse traditions of questioning criticism, materialism and efforts to combat superstition and obscurantism in our history from ancient times to the present. These traditions are from both the secular streams of the natural sciences, mathematics and politics such as Lokayata, Charaka, Sushruta, Aryabhata, PC Ray, Phule, Periyar, Ambedkar, Nehru and Bhagat Singh as well as in the stream of democratic religious reform from Gautam Buddha through the Bhakti and Sufi traditions to Ram Mohan Roy, Vivekananda, Sree Narayana Guru and Gandhiji. The appeal to think critically for oneself and fight superstitious belief, a strong commitment to equality is present in not only the materialist schools of thought like Lokayata but also in idealist thinkers like Swami Vivekananda. We give below only a few examples from these traditions:

Gautama Buddha

“Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.”

Vivekananda

Astrology and all these mystical things are generally signs of a weak mind; therefore as soon as they are becoming prominent in our minds, we should see a physician, take good food, and rest.

Superstition is our great enemy, but bigotry is worse.

If superstition enters, the brain is gone.

To believe blindly is to degenerate the human soul. Be an atheist if you want, but do not believe in anything unquestioningly.

Bhagat Singh

Any man who stands for progress has to criticize, disbelieve and challenge every item of the old faith. Item by item he has to reason out every nook and corner of the prevailing faith. If after considerable reasoning one is led to believe in any theory or philosophy, his faith is welcomed. His reasoning can be mistaken, wrong, misled and sometimes fallacious. But he is liable to correction because reason is the guiding star of his life. But mere faith and blind faith is dangerous: it dulls the brain, and makes a man reactionary. A man who claims to be a realist has to challenge the whole of the ancient faith. If it does not stand the onslaught of reason it crumbles down. Then the first thing for him is to shatter the whole down and clear a space for the erection of a new philosophy. This is the negative side. After it begins the positive work in which sometimes some material of the old faith may be used for the purpose of reconstruction.

Gandhi

Nothing in the Shastras which is capable of being reasoned can stand if it is in conflict with reason.Faith becomes lame when it ventures into matters pertaining to reason.

Part 4

A Rational Understanding of Irrationality

How to explain and understand the widespread prevalence of irrational beliefs among all sections of society? Without understanding the roots of irrationality, how can we uproot it to grow a rational outlook? Scientific practice must be realistic. If we are realistic we have to acknowledge that one of the strongest reasons why people believe in something is convenience. In a contest between inconvenient truth and convenient fantasy, very often it is convenience that wins. Since a scientific view is often inconvenient does this mean that universalizing scientific temper is a hopeless task which is doomed to failure from the outset?

The vast majority of Indians lives and work in the unorganized sector in conditions that are difficult, uncertain and insecure. It is a well known phenomenon that such conditions breed belief in luck, supernatural assistance, charms and other such irrational morale boosters. The reality of their lives is bleak and hopeless. Why should they accept rationality if it gives them nothing to hope for? Marx recognized this problem when he wrote about religion:

Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusions about its condition is the demand to give up a condition that needs illusions.

Marx makes a crucial point here that if one wants to remove irrational beliefs we must work to remove the conditions which breed irrational beliefs. Building scientific temper therefore requires us to build a credible movement to change society, to abolish conditions of insecurity and fear, conditions which engender illusions. Changing society requires politics.

Two Questions

What is the relation of the method of science to politics?

What is the relation of scientific temper to religion?

Let us begin with the second question. Religion plays many roles at many levels and has many forms in a society like India today. It has already been stated that ST is fundamentally opposed to fundamentalism. It is also irreconcilably opposed to the use of religion to spread hatred between communities. In a society based on exploitation of masses of people by a few, religion is shaped by the exploiting classes into an instrument of domination of the few and acceptance of that domination by the masses. The caste system played and is playing such a role in our history. In monarchic dictatorships in the middle eastern countries use laws enacted in the name of Islam for the same purpose. Right wing politics in the Western countries has a close ties with Christian fundamentalist organizations. Sectarian ideology is a mainstay of right wing politics everywhere in the world, including India. The experience of many countries across the continents shows that theocratic states are dictatorial and authoritarian, just as democracy requires secularism. In modern India also there is a close nexus between corporate capitalism, organized-commercialized religion, and politics to perpetuate the systems of exploitation. Let us term all the above manifestations as sectarian-exploitative religion.

Scientific Temper is in an antagonistic position against sectarian- exploitative religion, just as it fundamentally opposes fundamentalism.

But in a scientific view of our own history we have to appreciate the important role played by democratic religious movements. Just as science is not western science, liberation theology is also not a western construct. There are many organizations in India which, though religious in their constitution, support secularism oppose sectarianism and communalism, and work for social and religious reform, promoting humanism, pluralism and a spirit of open enquiry. Such organizations, many of which are working in the field of education, do not have antagonism to the promotion scientific temper. These are allies of and participants in the movement for universalizing scientific temper.

Though scientific outlook is distinct from religious outlook, Section 51 A of our constitution provides the basis for joint platforms and active work together to promote the four attributes mentioned therein. Indeed such joint work is essential for politically isolating sectarian-exploitative religion and exorcising it from the mass consciousness of the common people.

Part 5

Method of Science and politics

Coming now to the first question of the relation of ST to politics, we note that in the definition of scientific temper, politics and ethics are both included in its scope:

(c) that the fullest use of the method of science in everyday life and in every aspect of human endeavor from ethics to politics and economics is essential for ensuring human survival and progress;

However, there is often an attempt made to avoid and evade the continuity between science and politics.  A good example is from the writings of the same Prof. Richard Feynman whose apt definition of science we had quoted earlier.

In the late sixties and early seventies, during the height of the Vietnam War there were a number of American scientists who were active in the antiwar movement. But an even larger number of physicists and scientists of repute, Feynman included, preferred to take no position on the Vietnam War. Most of them, when asked about this would say that they were scientists, and war was politics. The underlying presumption was that politics had nothing to do with science. They preferred to remain neutral or ambivalent on this issue.

In 1967 Feynman was asked to sign a petition against the war in Vietnam, which would be published as a paid advertisement. Feynman declined to sign the petition with the words: “I feel unhappy that I am not sure enough of my position to be able to sign your letter.” He also sent a cheque, writing “As next best alternative I am enclosing a small check to help make sure your advertisement is published”.

In another place he is more assertive, in fact almost bragging about his apolitical world view. Writing about his association with the brilliant mathematician John von Neumann at Los Alamos during the Manhattan project, he writes: “We used to go for walks on Sunday. We’d walk in the canyon, often with Bethe and Bob Bacher. It was a great pleasure, and Von Neumann gave me an interesting idea: that you don’t have to be responsible for the world that you’re in. So I have developed a very powerful sense of social irresponsibility as a result of Von Neumann’s advice. It’s made me a very happy man ever since. But it was Von Neumann who put the seed in that grew into my active irresponsibility.”

What can explain the question of how a person like Feynman, with intellectual capacities of the highest ability, can remain permanently unsure of his position vis-à-vis a war that his country was involved in for more than a decade?  On the other hand why does he accept so readily the advice of a half baked moral authority like Von Neumann on an issue as important as personal responsibility? There can be only one answer-Von Neumann was saying something that Feynman wanted to believe.  And in this willingness to believe, to accept a certain foregone conclusion, without questioning it critically, we see the sure symptom of a retreat from the method of science.

The inconvenience of scientific thinking

Science has given the world many conveniences, but scientific thinking is not one of these. It is not always convenient to be scientific. There is a natural tendency to believe what is convenient, so it is not easy to be scientific.  Natural scientists like Feynman, who are unwilling, for their own reasons, to be consistently and constantly scientific in all areas of life ,  deal with this problem of inconvenience with opportunistic intellectual jugglery which is clearly manifested in the following excerpt from another of Feynman’s essays titled “The Value of Science”. 

“From time to time people suggest to me that scientists ought to give more consideration to social problems -- especially that they should be more responsible in considering the impact of science on society. It seems to be generally believed that if the scientists would only look at these very difficult social problems and not spend so much time fooling with less vital scientific ones, great success would come of it.

It seems to me that we do think about these problems from time to time, but we don't put a full-time effort into them -- the reasons being that we know we don't have any magic formula for solving social problems, that social problems are very much harder than scientific ones, and that we usually don't get anywhere when we do think about them.

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy -- and when he talks about a nonscientific matter, he sounds as naive as anyone untrained in the matter.

From Feynman’s language, it is clear that in his view social problems are not ‘scientific ones’. Social problems are ‘non-scientific’ problems, ‘non scientific matters’. In his view, which is quite common among natural scientists, there are two kinds of problems- scientific problems, which one can think about seriously, and ‘non scientific problems’ about which it is not possible to think seriously.

Feynman abandons his own powerful definition of science as a method for arriving at valid conclusions about reality.  He retreats from the power of that world view by dividing reality into two parts, one scientific and the other ‘non scientific’, nature and society. Having earlier defined science as a method, he retreats to viewing it only as a subject area, in order to be able to avoid looking at the inconvenient areas and escape inconvenient implications.

The above examples are chosen deliberately to show how easily a brilliant scientist like Feynman, slips casually and repeatedly into intellectual opportunism in order to avoid having to take a political position. To put it in his own terms, in any area where ‘not fooling ourselves’ becomes inconvenient, change the definition of science, from being an all encompassing method to something else, so that one can escape the responsibility of being thoroughly and consistently scientific.

Modern Superstition

The resistance to comprehensive science today comes not only from traditional quarters like reactionary religion, but also from modern sectors including the scientific establishment.  The modern superstition that science must be apolitical or anti-political and that politics has no place in science is widespread among professional scientists. Many scientists take pride in professing their political illiteracy as if this were a necessary consequence of their being scientists. Commitment to ST requires us to demolish the opportunistic obfuscation that is at the root of this retreat from science by many stalwarts within the ‘science establishment’ itself. 

Another serious abdication of scientific temper by the science establishment is the absence of critical scientific scrutiny of economic theory and economic policy. Calculations of economic cost, notions of economic efficiency which have been adopted uncritically over the years may be said to be directly responsible for natural resource depletion, environmental degradation, climate change and distorted concepts and patterns of development on a global scale. Illusions of efficiency of energy intensive fossil fuel based technology under capitalism, which for lack of criticism, are being adopted by some socialist countries, and are rapidly leading to a crisis of unsustainability on a global scale. For essentially the same reasons that the science establishment avoided a consideration of politics, it has similarly quarantined economics from critical scientific scrutiny. It may be said that there has been a comprehensive avoidance of point c. of the definition of scientific temper by the mainstream science establishment in all countries.

Some modern superstitions about the efficiency of high-tech ‘solutions’ to problems like providing electricity are no less irrational than astrology. The Enron/ Dabhol /RGPPL project is a contemporary example, where a 2000 MW project is lying shut because it is unaffordable. The absence of critical scrutiny which is so basic to scientific temper is again manifest in the phenomenon of major projects like the Jaitapur Nuclear Power Project ands other similar projects being taken forward without any techno-economic cost benefit analysis in the public domain. Moreover there has been no demand from the mainstream science establishment for scrutiny by the science community of these projects before they are taken forward. This abdication of scientific temper by the mainstream science establishment has seriously eroded the credibility of science.

The continuity of science and politics

What does it mean to include subjects like politics and ethics within the purview of the method of science ?Why is ‘the fullest use of the method of science in every aspect of human endeavor, from politics to ethics and economics, essential for ensuring human survival and progress ?’

A thorough discussion of the above question is beyond the scope of this essay. What we will briefly discuss in the following is the limited question of why politics, ethics and economics must necessarily and unavoidably come within the purview of the method of science. The scientific temper does not recognize any disjoint compartments in reality, in the real world.

Science, as we have seen, is a method of attempting to arrive at reliable conclusions about reality. Are there areas of reality which are scientific and others which are not? Is physics and chemistry scientific, while politics, economics and culture nonscientific?

Science, in our schools, is still taught as a number of disparate `subjects', which are in separate compartments. This is no longer consistent with a modern understanding of science. Perhaps the single most important scientific achievement of the twentieth century is the discovery that all these different subjects are only bits and pieces of a single story. The name of that story is “The History of the Real World".

The discoveries regarding the structure of matter and its universal character, which were made during the nineteenth and twentieth century have far reaching implications. Atomic physics has made a major contribution to the study of history.  The tools that it has provided have effectively established that everything that exists in nature: plant, animal, earth, planet, sun and star, have come into being, and are made of the same atoms and sub atomic matter. Everything has had a birth and will have a death. Everything in the real world has its history. Life and living species also have their history, including the human species. Studying anything in the real world scientifically means trying to understand the history of that thing without, as far as is possible, fooling ourselves.

That there may be only one story is not an easy concept to digest. What about religion, culture and ethics? Are they also part of this story called “The History of the real world”?

The answer to this question becomes clearer if we ask a few more questions. Is there ethics on the moon? Is there religion on Mars? What happened to our ancient cultures and eternal truths in those millions of years when there was no life on earth?

There is a growing school of researchers who are trying to understand culture and values as aspects of the real world, as aspects of human history. In this view ethics and values are the rules that societies and communities make up for themselves in order to survive. The so called `eternal' values, like truth, honesty, compassion etc. are the common rules that many different societies have found necessary for their well being, survival and growth.

History is not indifferent to values. Societies that adopt the wrong values don't survive. They destroy themselves, and with them their unsuitable values. So with the economic and political systems that society adopt from time to time. Societies with wrong rules have short histories.

Like we study the history of the atoms, the elements, the stars and the planets, the cells and the animals, the apes and the humans, we can also try to study the history of social reality. We can try to learn how not to fool ourselves while understanding what societies and communities need to survive. Reality does not divide into two parts- areas where we can learn how not to fool ourselves, and areas where we can' t. Social reality and social questions do not lie outside the domain of what can be studied scientifically, outside the scope of science. Why then do so many scientists sincerely believe that areas of reality like politics, economics, ethics and values lie outside science?

One reason is that many contemporary societies have a vested interest in people continuing to fool themselves on questions of social reality. One important such fool's notion is the belief that things can never be different. Poverty and inequality has no history. It has always been there and will always be there. It is a matter of ‘human nature’.

No religion talks about changing society. Science, in its rigorous modern version, does.  So it is not surprising that the ruling class of many contemporary societies attach considerable importance to keeping the methods of science strictly out of areas such as politics, economics and ethics.

An important reason why many professional scientists try to restrict the scope of science to strictly ‘nature’, excluding 'society', is that the rules of nature are not rules which can be changed. However, the moment we begin to look at things historically with the eyes of science, we discover that the rules of societies and communities have changed in the past and are changing today. This means that they can be changed for the future. We can look critically at all the existing social and economic rules and ask whether they need to be changed. As already stated  the ruling class of many contemporary societies has a vested interest in people fooling themselves into believing that social rules  'are a result of human nature, and can never be changed'. Changing the rules of society, or even asserting that the rules can be different, is never convenient, and can be dangerous, requiring courage to assert.

Scientific temper and Basic needs

But one consequence of modern science is hard to deny, even for those who shun inconvenience. Enough food is, and can be produced in our country to give everybody two square meals a day. The resources and knowledge exist to provide everybody with enough clean water for drinking and washing. The technology and resources for basic needs for all
exists.

Yet, in our country, basic needs are denied to most. Why? This is a social question, and as we have seen, also a question for science.

In 1991 and thereafter, as part of the new economic policy, many rules were changed, and it was vehemently argued that the new rules were necessary 'to speed up development’; Speeding up development through Liberalization, Privatization and Globalization would result in basic needs for all.  Twenty four years down, the results of the experiment say "No" to that
hypothesis.

What rules (laws, rights, and economic policies) really need to be adopted to universalize basic needs is probably the most important scientific question before our country today.

The Directive principles of the Indian Constitution provide for basic needs .They direct the state to promote the welfare of all its citizens based on economic, social and political justice. They provide specifically for employment, health, nutrition, education, living wages, and social security in old age, decent conditions of living and full enjoyment of leisure for all as rights. Directive principles are not legally enforceable, but they define the direction in which laws are to be made through democratic politics in order to strengthen these provisions into legally enforceable rights. Education of a good quality became a legally enforceable right in 2010 in this manner.

If the economic policies being implemented are not delivering basic needs for all, Scientific temper demands that we examine alternatives and address the problems of universalization of basic needs in a scientific manner.

If this scientific exercise points to radical restructuring of society , of economic policy and laws, as being necessary for universalization of basic needs, scientific temper  demands political activity to achieve this restructuring, because science is not just a theoretical exercise, but always has to prove its validity in practice. As Marx put it succinctly “The philosophers only interpret the world in various ways, the point however is to change it.”

Defense of Scientific Temper against reactionary politics

We have examined a number of reasons for the engagement of scientific temper with politics. But there is a far more immediate reason for this engagement. The coming period may see systematic attack against scientific temper, emanating from politics, and government itself, which will have to defend against.

It is not only the fringe extremist organizations like the Santana Sanstha from the self styled Hindutva brigade who were opposed to Dr. Narendra Dabholkar’s work. A Google search performed on the website archive of the RSS mouthpiece ‘Organizer’ on ‘Dr. Narendra Dabholkar’ turns up only two entries- one from 2007, the other dated 20^th July 2013 titled “Its Warkari Vs Government over Anti Superstition Bill”.

After 20^th August 2013, the date of the murder of Dr. Narendra Dabholkar, till today (early December 2013) there is not a single mention of his name in Organizer. There is of course, no condemnation of the murder. The silence of ‘Organizer’ and also ‘Panchjanya’ (both organs of RSS) on the murder of Dr. Narendra Dabholkar is eloquent.

The RSS is the core of the Sangh Parivar combine of Hindutva communal organizations, who are expected to become increasingly active and aggressive in the coming months. The BJP Prime Ministerial candidate Shri Narendra Modi is himself a former RSS pracharak whose partisan role as Chief Minister of Gujarat in the 2002 worst communal pogrom of this century in our country is well documented. The gains made by the BJP in the recent assembly elections may or may not translate into gains in the 2014 parliamentary elections. If they do result in a BJP led government in the next Lok Sabha, we are likely to see attacks on many fronts on the programme of universalization of scientific temper. Astrology was introduced as a UGC course during the last NDA government by the HRD Minister Dr. Murali Manohar Joshi, also an RSS leader, with a PhD in physics!  The AIPSN will have to build self reliant activities promoting scientific temper on many fronts in a comprehensive manner, without depending on government funding in such changed circumstances.

Part 6

Building Scientific Temper Scientifically

We have taken up universalizing the scientific temper on our agenda. Scientific mass work means conscious, consistent, systematic and sustained effort at all levels from micro to macro. Scientific temper can only be built by sustained work over a long period of time. Initially the focus will be on systematically expanding the space for scientific temper, spirit of enquiry, humanism and social reform and trying to restrict and isolate the irrational/ obscurantist /sectarian combine in every state. The following programme is a long term programme for universalization of scientific temper.

·       Universalization of Good quality Science Education under the RTE Act 2009. : Though universalization of scientific temper is provided for in the constitution, it is not yet specifically a legally enforceable right. However, with the enactment of the Right to Education Act 2009, education of good quality has become a legally enforceable right of every citizen. Universalization of scientific temper can and must be taken up as an integral part of universalizing good science education. The universe around us is a wonderful science laboratory that no nation could ever afford to build. Yet it is available free of cost in every part of the world. The sun, moon, planets and stars, the natural world in and around every school, are powerful learning resources for universalization of quality science education. “Universalizing the universe” can and must become an effective tool for promoting scientific temper by encouraging every child to learn  good science by  making, doing, experimenting and questioning. Good science will definitely promote scientific temper. Even fundamentalists want their children to learn good science

·       Scientific Temper in Science Teacher Training: The teacher community can become a cadre force for this effort. Education for scientific temper can and must become an integral part of their science teaching training courses at the diploma and degree level.

·       Universalizing the Universe mass science campaigns: AIPSN has gained valuable experience in mass science communication campaigns around Astronomy - both Daytime and Nighttime astronomy- for the general public. This work can be expanded. A seed organizational network for this is already in place.

·       Dr. Narendra Dabholkar’s lucid and eloquent lectures on scientific temper are recorded on video. They must reach every school and every child through the electronic media including websites, school computers, Akash tablets and internet e mail. For this purpose AIPSN should take up the task of dubbing these lectures in Hindi, English and every regional language. This must be done on a priority basis in 2014.

·       Scientific Temper and basic needs: As we have seen earlier, it is important for the campaign to link up with the common citizen’s struggle for basic needs. The close connect between scientific temper and building alternative economics and politics for meeting the constitutional mandate for meeting every citizen’s basic needs and reducing inequality has to be worked out specifically in each area such as food, housing, energy and electricity, water, education, health etc. Scientific temper and the scientific  understanding of our struggles for  universal provision of basic needs  can and must be linked together both theoretically, as well as practically through joint programmes with mass organizations of workers, farmers, youth, women and students .

·       Scientific Temper and the Directive principles : Putting back on the national agenda  and building popular mass consciousness in the public about the directive principles of our constitution particularly Articles 38,39, 41,42,43 and 47 is an important basis for building scientific temper

·       Scientific Debate in the mainstream science establishment: Forcing scientific debate in the mainstream science establishment on important S&T issues like energy, power, nuclear power, economic policy, natural resource policy, food security etc. is important for science to recover its credibility as a representative of public interest.

·       Joint campaigns with progressive anti-communal organizations (including organizations with religious affiliation) on issues of defending secularism, and religious and social reform in the spirit of article 51 A of the constitutions.

·       Establishing self reliant alternatives in the areas of health, science education, energy, etc. for providing quality services to people without becoming dependent on funding.

·       Expansion of space for good science in public media in a sustained and systematic manner.