Sharad Joshi’s Vision for a Liberal India

Born into a middle-​class bureaucrat family with a master’s degree in economics, Joshi most certainly was an unlikely leader for Maharashtrian farmers. He had multiple prestigious jobs under his belt, including a college lectureship, serving as an Indian Postal Service official, and a stint with the Berne-​based Universal Postal Union. His turn towards activism and politics sprang from his decision in 1975 to leave his comfortable job as an international civil servant to take up farming in India. A failed experiment in buying farmland and cultivating it for a few years helped him identify the root cause of Indian farmers’ misery. Joshi came to the conclusion that Indian farmers’ famed poverty directly stemmed from deliberate government policy. Anti-​statism became the driving philosophy for the popular farm movement he led in the western state of Maharashtra.

Joshi’s initiative in the form of an organization called Shetkari Sanghatana – a Marathi term for farmers’ organization- became the vehicle for mobilizing farmers against the statist policies that hurt farmers. Founded in 1979, Shetkari was part of the large wave of so-​called New Farmers’ Movements in India that emerged in the late 1970s.

Several factors lay behind the rise of these regionally powerful and popular farm movements including the worsening terms of trade for farmers, which made it difficult for them to earn a decent living from farming, and the excessive centralization of power under Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and concomitant weakening of local-​level leaders from the ruling party. The vacuum created by unresponsive local leaders was to be filled by new political entrepreneurs. Both central and state governments yielded to pressure from rural interest groups. Joshi was among the three most prominent farm leaders at the time, along with Mahendra Singh Tikait and Mahantha Devaru Nanjundaswamy, who had launched nationwide agitation for farmers and were courted by all major Indian political parties in those years. However, only the Shetkari Sanghatana, under the direction of Sharad Joshi demanded pro-​market measures in agriculture to improve the peasantry’s living conditions.

In contrast, Tikait mobilized farmers to receive concessions from the state in the form of electricity bill waivers, higher minimum support prices for crops, farm loan waivers, and government pension for elderly farmers. Hailing from the sugarcane belt of Western Uttar Pradesh, he also became the face of the protest against General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade proposals on patenting of seeds in 1993. Nanjundaswamy, likewise, was a vociferous opponent of globalization and liberalization of the farm sector. To this date, large farm protests in India, mobilized by regional leaders or leftist organizations, demand the Indian state provide subsidies, loan waivers, guaranteed prices, etc. Joshi’s idea of building a movement for liberalization stands in stark contrast to his contemporaries.

As a pamphlet published by the Sanghatana pronounces, Sharad Joshi’s organization “is the only farmers’ organization in favor of an uncontrolled market in agriculture produce and international free trade for both inputs and outputs in agriculture.” For Joshi, policy measures under India’s planned economy put farmers at a disadvantage and deprived them of profitable earnings. Indian planners prioritized urban, industrial development supported by cheap grains for consumers and workers. A slew of policy measures were implemented to ensure depressed farm prices, which in effect amounted to negative subsidies for farmers. Even though the Indian government provided subsidies and support to farmers, the cost of government restrictions far surpassed the subsidy benefits for farmers.

These policy measures included bans and restrictions on commodity exports, dumping of cheaply imported products, restrictions on trade, movement and processing of farm produce, and compulsory levy procurement at inadequate price levels. Such blatant statist discrimination did not bode well for India’s agricultural sector, which employed most of India’s workforce.

In response, Joshi’s Shetkari Sanghatana mobilized hundreds of thousands of farmers under the rubric of a single demand, remunerative prices for produce. While the neatness of the single-​point agenda made sense in its utility for mass mobilization campaigns, Joshi was clear that the mechanisms of the free-​market were the only way to realize his objective. Shetkari Sanghatana stood for future commodity markets; WTO rules of multilateral trade; disinvestment of unviable Public Sector Units; generalized entry for FDIs in the agriculture sector; and formation of Special Economic Zones with the caveat that they didn’t imply forcible state acquisition of farmers’ property for industrialization. The Sanghatana also advocated for restoring the right to property as a fundamental right under the Constitution, which had been abolished in 1978.

Sharad Joshi’s organization embodied liberal modernity, not only in policy advocacy but also in its approach towards society. In sharp contrast to the influential oriental tropes and Gandhian valorization of idyllic rural life excoriated savagely by VS Naipaul in his Indian trilogy, the Shetkari Sanghatana did not glorify the rural as a spiritually enhanced domain.

In contrast, Shetkari Sanghatana stood for farmer’s freedom and dignity, which meant making profits from serving consumers in the marketplace, unencumbered by bureaucratic interventions. Farming was not to be seen as a noble profession. Instead, Joshi argued, it ought to be treated as a means to generate prosperity for farmers and as a source of capital formation for industrial ventures. Writing in the January 2014 issue of the Indian liberal magazine Freedom First on the social transformation in rural India, Sharad Joshi credited his organization with instilling a commercial, bourgeois ethics among farmers. In an approach reminiscent of the sociologist Max Weber, the Sanghatana celebrated the ethics of earning money and saw no virtue in glorifying poverty.

Sharad Joshi’s commitment to liberalism was evident in the intellectual lineage that he drew for his political party. The turn from farmers’ movement to political party was the outcome of a contested debate. Joshi, however, came to recognize that mass mobilizations tend to have diminishing returns over time, as the farmers failed to maintain enthusiasm and fatigue inevitably set in. The institutionalization of the movement as a political party would allow Joshi to durably retain his support base. The Swatantra Bharat Paksha drew its inspiration from the defunct Swatantra Party which was active in the 1960s. The Swatantra Party was a conglomeration of motley interest groups, primarily conservatives, united in their opposition to Nehruvian central planning and the ruling Indian National Congress’ electoral dominance. However, the economic agenda of the Swatantra Party was very much pro-​market. Economist B R Shenoy, a member of the prestigious Mont Pelerin Society, was closely associated with Rajagopalachari and Minoo Masani, the stalwart Swatantra leaders.

Tellingly, in his evocation of the Swatantra Party, Joshi focused only on the classical liberal agenda of the party, showing no love to the feudal, princely, and urban-​industrial interests of the Swatantra platform.

In a country where commentators routinely lament the absence of a liberal political party, Sharad Joshi’s dexterity at steering successful mass gatherings of largely illiterate farmers belonging to different classes deserves attention. Beginning as a civil society organization, the Shetkari initiative was later transformed into a political outfit. However, the SBP failed in the elections that it contested in the late 1990s and early 2000s, apart from two seats in the 1995 and 2004 state assembly elections.

Joshi himself managed to get nominated to the Rajya Sabha (the upper house of the Indian parliament), enabling him to make liberal pronouncements on the parliament floor championing Indian liberalism. He also moved a private members’ bill in the Rajya Sabha in 2005 to amend the Representation of the People Act, 1951. His proposed amendment was concerned with removing the word ‘socialist’ from Sub-​section 5 of Section 29 (A) of the act. Brought under the Rajiv Gandhi government, the clause made it mandatory for political parties to swear allegiance to socialist principles. As a leading liberal politician, Joshi refused to pledge allegiance to socialism. Despite Joshi’s impassioned speech, the bill, nonetheless, was defeated on the floor.

Joshi might not have gained much for Indian liberalism in the parliament, but his mobilization techniques did yield results on the street. Withholding the supply of the most exported commodity from a state was an effective strategy to mount pressure against the state government. Further, it announced the farmer’s demands and coupled them with the threat of peaceful, democratic agitation if the government did not meet their demands. Often the public ultimatum was followed by a dialogue with the government, the failure of which warranted actual mobilization on the ground. Mobilization tactics included road blockades, railway stoppages, picketing of government offices, and indefinite fast by leaders. Noticeably, Shetkari’s mass movement had wide support, cutting across both caste and class lines, remaining remarkably non-​violent.

The Shetkari Sanghatana and Sharad Joshi displayed a cynical, dismissive attitude in their early interactions with mainstream political parties. But Sharad Joshi also managed to gain attention from notable politicians across party lines who couldn’t ignore the constituency represented by his organization. At times, the Shetkari strategy of ‘aligning with some top political leaders, but avoiding direct electoral battles’ fetched impressive results. However, the success of mobilizing farmers for protests was not mirrored by building a successful political party. Joshi’s U-​turn from criticizing all political parties only to join politics himself might have left his voter base confused. SBP’s frequent shifts in alliance with partners in India’s messy coalition politics compounded the confusion. The Swatantra Bharat Paksha’s failure should be seen as a monumental setback to the cause of Indian liberalism, because Shetkari’s organizational base provided an unprecedented chance of building a genuine and viable cadre-​based liberal political party.

Today, amidst the economic devastation brought on by the Covid-​19 pandemic, the Bharatiya Janata Party-​led government in India pushed three farm bills through parliament, riding roughshod over the opposition. Pro-​market supporters of the bills have hailed it as India’s second liberalization since 1991. On the other hand, these bills have also provoked an unprecedented wave of farmers’ agitation on the border of Delhi. Led by powerful farmer’s unions, the movement is driven by the fear of a corporate takeover due to decreasing government support of the already precarious sector. Shetkari Sanghatana, though, has stood out as an independent farm organization supporting the bills. Much of the international media coverage has remained focused on the farmers’ protest and the government’s attempt to discredit and suppress the movement. However, Shetkari’s principled support of the farm bills underlines the scope for liberal ideas in India and the promise of plurality that India holds.

The reform measures can be seen as a vindication of Sharad Joshi’s vision. They can also be seen as an outcome won by relentless advocacy by India’s small but influential pro-​market commentariat. A liberal cohort of policy wonks has kept Sharad Joshi’s legacy alive in Indian public discourse. For instance, the preeminent agricultural economist Ashok Gulati, who has provided intellectual ballast to Modi government’s farm liberalization, wrote that he saw Joshi as ‘an extra-​ordinary leader of farmers.’ Economist Ajit Ranade argued that Joshi would have lent support to the spirit of the reforms. Libertarian columnist and podcaster, Amit Varma, often invokes Joshi’s eloquent poem on the plight of Indian farmers in his advocacy of farm sector liberalization. While the Shetkari Sanghatana is a shadow of its former self, it made headlines in 2019 for a civil disobedience protest against the government ban on genetically modified crops.

Joshi’s success in building a popular base for economic liberalism in a country heavily dominated by statist and Gandhian visions should give hope to liberals everywhere. Much like the anti-​Corn Law League founded in Britain to repel Corn Laws, the Shetkari presents a parallel case of mobilizing interest groups on the streets to make a case for an open economy. Even today, it’s not unusual to come across farmers talking about access to open markets and an end to arbitrary state restrictions on trade.

At the same time, the recent turn of events in the farm sector poses two challenges facing Indian liberalism. First, Indian liberals need to make the reforms acceptable to discontent groups, even if the protest is seen as a case of a loser interest group using its bargaining power to pressure the government. The second, and more profound challenge, is dealing with the ethical dilemma posed by an increasingly illiberal and ethno-​nationalist ruling regime which, under the influence of elite policy consensus, happens to liberalize the economy amidst an economic crisis. Indian liberals would do well to avoid the mistake of aligning with electorally ascendant but illiberal right-​wing forces for the sake of economic liberalization.