THE ECONOMIC WEEKLY SPECIAL NUMBER JULY 1964 Economic Ideology of Jawaharlal Nehru M. L. Dantwala If a straight question were asked whether Pandit Nehru had a well-defined economic ideology which could be given one of the known labels, the answer would perhaps be in the negative, While some would consider this as unfortunate, others like this writer would consider it a saving grace. The strategy of accomplishing a rapid enough transition of the economy from the state of underdevelopment to self-sustaining growth is still in the stage of experimentation. Under the circumstances, any rigid doctrinaire approach on the part of the leader of the nation, far from being an asset, would have proved quite hazarduous. This does not mean that the right strategy would be to let the economy take its free and wayward course, tossed by spasmodic national and international, economic and political currents. INDIA'S economic policy, since In- which Nehru and his well-knit Cabinet heavy industries has been variously dependence, has a fairly clear ought to have followed? Assuming presented as tantamount to neglect of vision of the ultimate goal, its social there was, can we name the team- agriculture, death-knell of Khadi and and economic colour and content, and retrospectively since 1947—which Village Industries and callousness to­ the broad path to be followed in reach­ could have been selected or rejected wards the problem of unemployment. ing it, though every street is not nam­ —for doing the job and see whether This is not the place to controvert ed. It is well-known that it was main­ we succeed, where Nehru failed? In this contention. Not only such inter­ ly because of Nehru's insistence that spite of his tolerance of doubtful so­ pretation is not true of Pandit Nehru's the ultimate goal of the Socialist Pat­ cialists and transparent free-enterpri­ concept of economic development, sup­ tern of Society has been adopted. It sers perhaps as a countervailing force port for it cannot be derived even may be contended that this itself is a to disguised fellow-travellers at the from the Planning Commission's docu­ proof of Pandit Nehru's doctrinaire highest level of policy-making, on ments on Five-Year Plans. As is being predilection. Such a view would, how­ certain basic aspect of the policy he increasingly realised, the antithesis ever, be unfair and quite erroneous. It was quite firm. sought to be drawn between the devel­ would be tiresome to hunt out a string opment of industries and that of of apposite quotations to justify this Biggest Contribution — Planning agriculture is totally false. verdict. But there is enough evidence Nehru's biggest contribution to eco­ Flexibility, the Saving Grace in Pandit Nehru's speeches and writings nomic strategy was in commiting the to show that his image of socialism was nation to a policy of planned economic It has been said that Nehru had a anything but doctrinaire. In fact, he development. This was by no means fascination—to which many political has often been chided by petty critics the easiest thing to do. Within the leaders arc prone—for the big and for the vagueness of his ideas. Pandit country, he had to contend with his the grandiose: the steel mills and the Nehru's socialism was born out of a Gandhian colleagues who saw in this giant multi-purpose river-valley pro­ deep attachment to the values of imposition of Centralised Statism, jects. Perhaps he had. It can also be ethics and social justice. He had no while they were emotionally commit­ said that he rarely went beyond the intellectual commitment whatsoever ted to village self-sufficiency. Plann­ broad idea and did not bother to exa­ to its mechanics as prescribed in the ing was equally an anathema to West­ mine its manifold implications. How Marxist text-books. While Pandit ern Democracies whose financial aid much of this blame should attach to Nehru had great respect for many of was a critical factor in the task of de­ him or to his advisers and administra­ tors is perhaps a debatable issue. But the abiding insights of Marxist velopment. (Soviet Russia was yet to then, there was always the saving thought, he did not subscribe uncri­ adopt economic aid as an instrument grace of non-insistence and flexibility. tically to any of its dogmas. The peo­ of foreign policy). Whatever one's ple around Nehru had perhaps a opinion may be on the functioning of A classic example is the Nagpur Re­ stronger attachment to the orthodox the Planning Commission, there is no solution on the future pattern of the Marxist remedy. That their influence doubt that its very constitution, with agrarian structure. The Resolution had was not greater than what was occa­ the Prime Minister as its Chairman, categorically stated that the future ag­ sionally reflected in his thinking, was an important landmark in the rarian pattern should be that of co­ clearly shows that Nehru had an ima­ economic policy and development of operative joint farming, in which land ginative and not an imitative approach the country. will be pooled for joint farming. The to socialism. Another equally important, though reference was presumably to all land Divergence within Cabinet somewhat controversial, element of and not to the land only of the small Nehru has been often accused of our economic policy, which but for uneconomic cultivator. At that mo­ harbouring in his Cabinet men with Nehru's support would not have pass­ ment, and for a considerable time not only divergent but conflicting ed muster, is the launching of the mo­ thereafter, Nehru was convinced that views and also those whose faith in dern type of industrialization with its this was the right stand. Later, partly socialism was at best lukewarm. Was emphasis on heavy industries. This because of the successful misrepresen­ this an evidence of economic indeci­ was interpreted by interested political tation of this policy as confiscatory sion or of political sagacity? Perhaps groups as leading the country on the and anti-peasant and partly because of he was compensating for the lack of Soviet path, and by implication, to­ the practical difficulties in implement­ effective outside opposition by provid­ wards totalitarianism. There was an­ ing it. the Nagpur Resolution was al­ ing for it from within his own party! other section—well-meaning and sin­ lowed to fade away. More seriously, was there. at each cere—in the country which felt that There is another notable example in stage in the course of development, such a pattern of industrialization was which he did not shirk the odium an economic consensus about the one wholly contrary to what Gandhiji and embarrassment of reversing an ac­ and the only right line of action, would have wished. The emphasis on cepted policy. This was in respect of 1209

THE ECONOMIC WEEKLY SPECIAL NUMBER JULY 1964

the policy on the character and com­ is followed by Government officials" out in its details" position of Primary Co-operative So­ Later, when the National Develop­ He has also observed that among cieties. The Committee of Direction of ment Council considered this question, all the Indian groups concerned the Reserve Bank's Rural Credit Sur­ the indiscriminate establishment of with national policy issues, there vey had recommended the formation large-sized societies was stopped and are only two that are fundamentally of State-sponsored, large-sized, viable renewed emphasis was placed on the opposed to the kind of developmental units of Primary Co-operative Credit co-operative element in the formation effort the Government is trying to Societies; and this was accepted by of Primary Societies. Apart from whe­ lead: the neo-Gandhians and the ultra- the Government of India. While, by ther such a sharp reaction was justified laissez faireists. I shall not mention and large, the recommendation was or not, the episode illustrates how his characterisation of these two sound, in its implementation, several averse Pandit Nehru was to unneces­ groups. But unless some sort of Gold- distortions took place. The idea of sary extension of Slate interference in waterian retrogression takes place, the State-partnership led, in some places, economic activities. economic philosophy of neither group to the dominance of Government offi­ is likely to enlist any significant fol­ cials; and in launching large-sized so­ Basic Economic Policies Sound lowing. cieties, the element of mutual co-ope­ The one significant test of the ration was relegated to the back­ soundness of the basic economic poli­ Whether this country is thrust to ground. The Prime Minister reacted cies adopted by the country under the brink of the Most Dangerous De­ rather sharply. While inaugurating the Nehru's leadership is their almost uni­ cade and the Quiet Crisis or gathers Third Indian Co-operative Congress versal acceptance within the country speed on the runaway for a graceful he said: "The Government was quite as "well as outside by all those who 'take-off' will depend not on the adop­ wrong in accepting some of the deci­ have taken an intelligent interest in tion of any brand new economic stra­ sions of the Rural Credit Survey Com­ the question. To quote a fairly recent tegy, but on the success or failure in mittee—not all. There was a tendency and competent testimony, Professor the implementation of the strategy to on the part of that Committee to think John Lewis in his "Quiet Crisis in In­ which Pandit Nehru got the country that they (the people) arc not compet­ dia", states: "As a piece of macro-eco­ committed, and which has come to ent enough, they cannot do a job by nomic calculus, the strategy that is in­ stay. Marginal adjustments will no themselves; therefore, Government of­ corporated in the Second and the doubt be necessary, but the very fact ficials must come in and help. Govern­ Third Five-Year Plans (and presuma­ that these would have to be only mar­ ment money should push them up. If bly will be also in their successors) is ginal, speaks a great deal of Nehru's Government money comes, that money basically sound and fairly well spelled economic statesmanship. SPECIAL NUMBER JULY 1964 THE ECONOMIC WEEKLY