Why is BJP Against the word "Socialist"? (YouTube Video)

You see this? This is a picture of the Preamble to the Constitution of India shared by a Govt handle recently. Notice something?

Here - check this. This was the Preamble we were all familiar with.

The difference?

Well, the words “Secular” and “Socialist” aren’t there in the first picture. Why?

The govt handle said that they were sharing the original version of the Preamble. These words were added in the 42nd amendment to the Constitution in 1976. But the fact is, that as far as any amendments made to the Constitution are concerned, the latest version is the original version.

Now we all know why the current ruling party is against the word Secular - but what do they have against the word Socialist.

Let's find out.

I can bet that around 80% of the people on social media today won’t know what socialist actually means. Among those who know, many don’t really understand the implication as far as the Indian Constitution is concerned. So here goes nothing.

Socialist refers to a state that practices Socialism. Socialsim means this - a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Now socialism is bang opposite to capitalism.

India was never a socialist state in the true sense of the word. Even before the liberalization of the economy in 1991. Then what does the word socialist in the Preamble mean? Well, the term 'socialist' was meant to indicate democratic socialism, i.e., the achievement of socialistic goals through democratic, evolutionary, and non-violent means. It was meant to highlight the Indian state's aspirations to reduce socio-economic inequalities.

A way to do that was to keep state players in all key sectors of the industry. I mean PSUs or PSEs. Public Service Undertaking - these were companies owned fully or partially by the government. When they were set up, they were done so to establish and strengthen capital goods and basic industry in India.

Even after India opened its economy to foreign investment in 1991, the government retained most PSUs. But with the international money coming in and more private players popping up, it was noticed that several PSUs started making huge losses. Thus started the trend of privatization of PSUs.

But how is any of this related to the bit about the current ruling party being averse to the word socialist in the Preamble?

The Modi Government has raised upwards of 4.07 lakh Cr Rupees through disinvestments of PSUs since FY 2015-16. Disinvestment is nothing new - but what has been noteworthy is the fact that the Modi govt took a stance against PSUs as a whole. Modiji said that the government has no business to be in business in a webinar in 2021, expressing plans to privatize more PSUs. How they have gone about it is also interesting.

As per the new Public Sector Enterprise (PSE) policy, there are only four strategic sectors in which a "bare minimum" number of CPSEs will be retained and the rest will be privatized or merged, or closed down.

The four sectors are:

1. Atomic energy, space, and defence;

2. Transport and telecommunications;

3. Power, petroleum, coal, and other minerals;

4. Banking, insurance, and financial services.

The government has also relaxed regulations and granted key contracts to its crony industrialists, thus allowing monopolies to form. And we have been okay with this because these industrialists have been marketed to us as India’s saviors. Even after major accusations, the govt hasn’t taken any real actions against their friends.

The sad part is that I come across thousands of comments on social media by common people speaking in support of these industrialists too. What’s sadder is that people never believe you when you tell them that industrial monopoly will harm the general public. PSUs work to serve the people instead of making profits. PSUs hire more people than a Private company would, they pay decent wages, they provide job security - and they also have reservations to provide representation to the oppressed castes. And guess what - they also regulate the prices of goods in the market - thus ensuring that the goods are always within the means of the public. A private company that monopolizes a sector will also drive the wages down and drive the prices up, thus affecting the public from both ends of the spectrum. (For example, with the sale of Air India, we have no nationalized air carrier - so today, if all airlines come together and decide to charge 5x the ticket price for all sectors, who will stop them? Earlier, Air India’s crew had job security, even when they got older. But now, while it is too soon to tell how Tata Group does things, chances are that the trend will change.)

I know you’re going to ask me - If privatization is so bad, why is the government doing it? Well, they say that they are putting the money earned from disinvestment into public welfare schemes. Sounds great, right? But don’t be too eager to give the govt a clean chit. Look at the big picture. In 2018, the government passed the Electoral Bond Scheme bill. Now they can get anonymous donations in crores from industralists without disclosing who is paying them. BJP became the wealthiest party in 10 years - amassing 10x more wealth than Congress did in their 54 years in power. A few companies started getting all government contracts and buying stakes in PSUs. Government, happy. Industrialists, happy. Common public - poorer.

Did you think I was going to say Sad? Nobody cares about the happiness of the poor.

Hence the ruling party wants to remove the word Socialist from the Preamble. Because they want India to be Capitalist. Where a select few, are allowed to hold all the money and in return, keep them in power by bankrolling their election campaign.

Watch the Video here: