Politics In India Since Independence Chapter 3 Politics Of Planned Development

B.

B.

C.

C.

The debate has been resolved due to a consensus on the point that the development or planning for development should be the responsibility of the government.

(i) Huge allocations were made for large-scale projects like the Bhakhra-Nangal Dam.

(ii)The Plan identified the patterns of land distribution in the country as the principal obstacle in the way of agricultural growth.

(iii)So it focused on land reforms as the key to the country’s development.

The Second Five Year Plan differed from the first plan in the following ways:

(i)The Second Five Year Plan stressed on heavy industries in place of agriculture.

(ii)If First Five Year Plan had preached patience, the Second Plan wanted to bring about quick structural transformation by making changes simultaneously in all possible directions.

(iii) The push for industrialisation marked a turning point in India’s development in the Second Five Year Plan.

The consequences of the Green Revolution were as given below :

Positive :
(a)There was moderate agricultural growth particulary in wheat production.

(b) It raised the availability of food in the country.

Negative :
(a)It had increased polarisation between classes and regions.

(b)The stark contrast between poor peasantry and the landlords produced conditions favourable for the left-wing organisations to organise the poor peasants.

(i) It was argued that without a drastic increase in industrial production these could be no eradication of poverty. They argued that Indian planning did have an agrarian strategy to boost the production of food grains. They stated that the land reforms and distribution of resources among the poor failed due to its non-implentation because the landowning classes had social and political power.

(ii) In favour of agricultural development JC Kumarappa and other Gandhian economists put greater emphasis on rural industrialisation. Chaudhary Charan Singh a Congress leader at that time, favoured the case for keeping agriculture at the centre of planning in India because the planning was leading to creation of prosperity in urban and industrial section at the expense of the farmers and rural population.

The state intervention helped to attain technological capability within the country. The state intervention was also necessary to prevent resources and wealth from getting concentrated in few hands.

The contradiction like this led to differences among the policy makers about the process of development. Ultimately such differences led to the mixing of elements from both the models. 

(b) The Congress was pursuing this policy because it was suitable for the development of the country. It was not related to the nature of the opposition parties.

(c) There was no contradiction between the central leadership of the Congress party and its State level leaders because it was the period of Congress dominance.

The government took plan holiday in 1966 when the Fourth Five Year Plan was due to start. It was taken due to acute economic crisis.

(ii) Interest of present generation against future generations.

(iii)Political decision by people's representatives who are in touch with the feelings of the people.

(iv) Advice from experts on mining.

It has an advisory role and its recommendations become effective only when these are approved by the Union Cabinet.

(ii)The focus in this model of planning has been on education, health, land reform, effective food distribution and poverty alleviation.

(iii) Despite low per capita incomes, and a relatively weak industrial base, Kerala achieved nearly total literacy, long life expectancy, low infant and female mortality, low birth rates and high access to medical care.

The following are its criticism:

(i) The planners did not provide the private sector with enough space and the stimulus to grow.

(ii) The systems of licenses and permits for investment created hurdles for private capital.

(iii) The state control led to inefficiency and corruption.

(iv) The state did not spend sufficient amount on public education and healthcare.

(v) The state intervention did not help the poor but created a new middle class who had no accountability.

(i) Foundations : It laid the foundations of India’s economic growth by undertaking the largest developmental projects such as mega dam like Bhakhra-Nangal and Hirakud for irrigation and power generation. Heavy industries–steel plants and oil refineries– manufaturing unit and defense production were started. Infrastructure for transport and communication improved substantially.

(ii) Land reforms : The system of zamindari was abolished and it reduced the capacity of the landlords to dominate politics. Similarly the tenants were given greater legal security against eviction, but this provision was rarely implemented. 

(iii)Green Revolution :Goverment’s policy to put more resources on areas already having irrigation facilities and on well off farmers, led to green revolution. Some regions like Punjab, Haryana and Western UP became agriculturally prosperous, while others remained backward.

It was because:

(i) Between 1950 and 1980 the Indian economy grew at a sluggish per annum rate of 3 to 3.5%.

(ii) There was inefficiency and corruption in some public sector enterprises.

(iii) The role of the bureaucracy was not so positive in economic development.

(iv) The public opinion in the country lost the faith it initially placed in these institutions.

Difference between the First Five Year Plan and the Second Five year Plan :-

(i) First Five year plan emphasised on agriculture development whereas the Second Five Year Plan had stressed on heavy industries.

(ii) The First Five Year Plan was slower in reforms and Second Five Year Plan wanted to bring about quick structural transformation.

The main objectives:

 (i) The First Five Year plan addressed, mainly, the agrarian sector including investment in dams and irrigation. It focused on land reforms as the key to the country’s development.

 (ii) The Second FYP stressed on heavy industries. It wanted to bring about quick structural transformation by making changes simultaneously in all possible directions.

The two models of development are:

 (i) The Liberal - Capitalist model.

 (ii) Socialist model.

 India adopted the model which is a combination of both the models, in the form of mixed economy. 

The out comes of planned development are-

(a) Foundation:

(i) Some of the largest developmental projects in India’s history were undertaken during this period which included mega –dams like Bhakhra-Nangal and Hirakud.

(ii) Heavy industries in the public sector such as steel plants, oil refineries, defence production and etc were started.

(iii) Infrastructure for transport and communication was improved substantially.

(b) Land reforms:

(i) The most significant and successful of these was the abolition of the colonial system of Zamindari.

(ii) Attempts at consolidation of land - bringing small pieces of land together in one place so that the farm size could become viable for agriculture-were fairly successful.

(iii) The tenants who worked on some one else’s land were given greater legal security against eviction.

OR

The causes of partition were:

(i) Two-nation theory

(ii) Religion

Consequences of Partition:

(i) Most abrupt, unplanned and tragic transfer of population that human history has known. There were killings and atrocities on both sides of the border.

(ii) Cities like Amritsar and Kolkata divided into communal zones. People were forced to abandon their homes and move across borders, they went through immense sufferings.

(iii) Thousands of women were abducted on both sides of the border, they were forced to change the religion and were forced into marriage. Many children were separated from their parents.

(iv) The Partition was a division of properties, liabilities and assets as well as a political division of the country and the administrative apparatus.

Merits:

(i) It raised the availability of food in the country with agricultural growth mainly a rise in wheat and rice production.

(ii) Some regions like Punjab, Haryana and Western Uttar Pradesh became agriculturally prosperous.

Demerits:

(i) It resulted in the rise of middle peasant sections.

(ii) It produced conditions favourable for leftwing organisations to organise the poor peasants.

(i) (D) (Tamil Nadu)

(ii) (E) (Kerala)

(iii) (B) (Uttar Pradesh)

(iv) (A) (Bihar)

(v) (C) (Gujrat)

Outcomes of the Indian model of mixed economy:

i. The state controlled key heavy industries, provided industrial infrastructure, regulated trade and some crucial interventions in agriculture therby providing the base for growth of crucial sector. 

ii. This has led to the growth of both private and public sector simultaneously thus becoming the basis for future development.

Hereditary privileges, the Privy Purses were not consonant with the principles of equality and social and economic justice as laid down in the constitution of India.

(i) The two models of development were the Liberal capitalist model based on free trade, private enterprise and ownership. The other model was the socialist model based on public ownership of enterprise and state-controlled economy.

(ii) India adopted the socialist model as most leaders in India were deeply impressed by the soviet model wanted the state to play a role in the development of the country, rebuild the economy and bring about social justice.

(iii) Indian leaders were clear that the economic concern of free India would have to be different from the narrowly defined commercial functions of the colonial government. It was clear, moreover, that the task of poverty alleviation and social and social and economic redistribution was being seen primarily as the responsibility of the government. All these required a welfare state nor a capitalist state.

To an industrialist who is planning to set up a steel plant in a rural area, and at the same time to the Adivasi who lives in that region development means different because they lose their forest land.

i) Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru

ii) A big tilt towards the public sector has been shown because the state controlled key heavy industries, provided industrial infrastructure, regulated trade and made some crucial interventions in agriculture.
iii) a) The state intervened only in those areas where the private sector was not prepared to go. Thus the state helped the private sector to make profit.
b) Also, instead of helping the poor, the state intervention ended up creating a
new ‘middle class’ that enjoyed the privileges of high salaries without much accountability 
c) The state controlled more things than were necessary and this led to inefficiency and corruption.

Circumstances for the birth to the idea of NIEO :-

(i) The challenge for most of the non-aligned countries — a majority of them were categorised as the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) — was to be more developed economically
(ii) The people of these countries were to be lifted out of the vicious circle of poverty.
(iii)Economic development was also vital for the independence of the new countries. Without sustained development, a country could not be truly free.
(iv)It would remain dependent on the richer countries including the colonial powers from which political freedom had been achieved.

 Factors that weakened this initiative
i) Stiff opposition from the developed countries who acted as a united group
ii) The non-aligned countries struggled to maintain their unity in the face of this opposition.

Yes, we agree with the statement. Suitable arguments for this are:-

(i) The foreign policy of independent India vigorously pursued the dream of a peaceful world by advocating the policy of non-alignment, by reducing the Cold War confederation and by contributing human resources to the UN peacekeeping operations.
(ii) India did not join either of the two camps during the Cold War era. India wanted to keep distance from the military alliances led by US and by the Soviet Union against each other.
(iii)During the Cold War, the US-led North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact came into existence. India advocated Non-alignment as the ideal foreign policy approach. This was a difficult balancing act and sometimes
the balance did not appear perfect.
(iv)In 1956 when Britain attacked Egypt over the Suez Canal issue, India led the world protest against this neo-colonial invasion. In the same year, when the USSR invaded Hungary, India did not join its public condemnation. Despite such situation, by and large India did take an independent stand on various international issues.

There were many international developments at the time India attained
independence.
 Jawaharlal Nehru, the Prime Minister of India was also the Foreign Minister. He played an important role in the formulation and implementation of India’s foreign policy.
 Nehru wished to achieve our national goals through the policy of NAM.  India’s foreign policy favoured the dream of a peaceful world.
 It advocated the policy of NAM to reduce cold war tensions.
 India provided human resources to United Nations Peace Keeping Force.
 India did not join Super Power blocs.
 1956, India protested against British action on the issue of Suez Canal.
 India did not take an independent stand in case of USSR mission on Hungary.
 Pakistan’s alliance with US and India’s leaning towards USSR, were the main points in deciding our foreign relations.
 India has always stood for Non-alignment and world peace.

It was because the US bloc claimed to be pro democracy and promoted

capitalism.

Major outcomes of the Indian model of mixed economy :

i) The state controlled key heavy industries provided infrastructure.

ii) It regulated trade in India.

iii) Although agriculture was in the private sector, the public sector made some intervention in agriculture.

iv) This model laid the foundation of India’s future economic growth.

i) Subsidy is the help usually provided by the government to keep the price of a product or service low as compared to the open market price.

ii) Collective farming was to be replaced by private farming which meant food grains to be purchased from the open market. The government had no control over the prices as well as the stock. This created loss of food security.

iii) (a) This passage is associated with Russia.

(b) The government started importing food due to scaracity of food grains and privatization of agriculture.

Outcomes of early phase of Planned Development in India.

(i) The foundation of India’s future economic growth were laid down.

(ii) Some of the largest projects like Bhakhra were undertaken.

(iii) Infrastructure for transport and communication were developed.

(iv) Land reforms did not take place effectively in most parts of the country.

(v) Political power remained in the hands of land owning classes.

(vi) Big industrialist continued to benefit.

(vii) These who benefited from unequal development soon became

politically powerful.