Please applaud Mani Shankar Aiyar for his honesty, a scarce virtue in politics. He ties himself up in inextricable knots in the article but that’s entertainment value.

I was always something of a leftist. But I became a complete Marxist only after the economic reforms. Because I see the extent to which the most important conception of Marx — that the relationship of any given class with the means of production determines the superstructure — holds.

Nostalgia drips in liberal doses, once for Marx, for Nehru, and then Indira Gandhi.

Why is it that Nehru became successful with his Hindu rate of growth? The reason is that the Hindu rate of growth was five times what our pre-Hindu rate of growth was. From 1914 to 1947, the figures of which are available, the rate of growth of the Indian economy was 0.72 per cent. And we got the Hindu rate of growth which was five times that and it made a difference to the people. The minute you had solid land reforms, the people had their ‘zameen’. That is what Mother India was all about. People felt that they were involved in the process. All the political talk was: gareeb ke liye ham kya kar sakte hain. Indira Gandhi matched it beautifully when the entire political spectrum joined hands against her by saying, “Woh kehte hain Indira hatao, hum kehte hain Garibi hatao.”

Those who want to analyze/deconstruct this are welcome.

Technorati Tags: Communism, Congress Party, Indian Politics, Indira Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Mani Shankar Aiyar, Marx, Marxism, Nehru, Socialism