Partha Chatterjee- Democracy and Economic Transformation in India

1. Delineates the difference between Political Society and Civil Society:

Civil society is
 Dominated by urban middle class, bureaucratic managerial class
 Congruent w bourgeois and capitalist hegemony
 Moral- Political hegemony over society
 Exercises influence over state , media, judiciary, etc
 Concerned with rapid economic growth as solution (virtual consensus among all
political parties as well as state support over this goal is a sign of their influence)
 Trust in Private over Public sector, for latter filled with corruption
 Demand through framework of stable, constitutionally defined rights and laws
 Political system of India a BOURGEOIS DEMOCRACY enjoying legitimacy w dom
classes and masses too
 Capital is HEGEMONIC (After 90s- corporate class dominated)
 Intolerance towards Informal Sector and Pol Society, establishing CIVIC ORDER

Political Society is
 Rural pop, urban poor
 Formal right as citizens- exercise franchise- makes claims on govt not through
framework of govt but rather temporary, contextual, unstable political
negotiations
 Relate differently to state and state treats them differently too
 Have come under the SWAY of capital class and bourgeois (BG) democracy
 Recent POLTICAL CLOUT of Rich farmers and Agrarian Capitalists
 SPACE OF MANAGEMNT OF NON CORPORATE CAPITAL (informal sector)

2. Dominant Class Coalition Model- Cap, Rich Farmers and Bureaucracy as three dom
classes competing in a pol space supervised by an autonomous state. Their political
strength far greater than their economic importance. No one class had ability to exercise
power on its own, and while one would gain it they’d then lose it. India had never had a
classical BG revolution. But there was Passive revolution of capital-
 Passive Revolution in India Features (Gramsci, Kaviraj, Chatterjee)
 Relative AUTONOMY of state from Bourgeoisie and Landed Elites
 SUPERVISION of state through ELECTORAL MOBILISATION of leadership
 NEGOTIATION of Class Interests through MULTI PARTY ELECTORAL SYSTEM
 PERMANENT BUREAUCRACY and INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY
 PROTECTIONIST regime discouraging entry of foreign capital and imports leading
to dominance of few traditional merchants
 STATE sector’s influence over heavy industry, infrastructure, tech, etc as well as
CONTROL OVER PRIVATE SPHERE through licensing
 Influence of Industrial Capitalists over central govt as well as Landed elites over
state govts
 Different from Classical BG Democracy
 TRANSITIONAL- from precolonial to colonial then modernity

3. Changes in 90s-
Dismantling of License regime + Greater Global entry of foreign goods and capital +
Opening up of Service sectors to Private Companies + Rise of Technology =
 Greater mobility
 Change in Capitalist Composition
 Less power of Traditional and more power to Newer enterprises therefore New
Competition
 Ascendancy of Corp Class over Landed Elites
 Urban Middle Class views State as ridden with POPULIST POLITICS and
CORRUPTION- therefore activities towards state has weakened but hold of
Corporate and BG class has swayed them

4. Informal sector:
 not dominated by profits, but by providing livelihoods to workers, organizing into
associations to deal w govt and claim benefits, does not work on logic of
accumulation or have corporate structures, but doesn’t mean it lacks
organization.
 Subsistence Economy too has come under the sway of Capital, bc of the
integration of the market
 Greater connectedness in trade therefore more organization in Informal Sector
 Better resources provided for Informal Sector for rehabilitation and resettlement
purposes- esp in urban over rural areas
 Greater Migration due to anonymity in cities and less traditional structures
(Dipankar Gupta: village is bloodless and rural economy lifeless, trend is to leave
the village)
 Appealing to State Welfare and Development for rehabilitation and resettlement
therefore learning to negotiate w govt
 Despite call for peasant solidarity, many do not join as they feel they can benefit
from Govt Agency and policies, creating competition among benefit seekers- so
charge against state agencies is not of exploitation now but rather of
discrimination

CONCLUSION:
Therefore, before the subaltern (Ranajit Guha) were characterized by community
solidarity and against exploitation, now any violence or protests are far more
utilitarian- in order to deal w govt and devise tactics for maximization of
benefits. While there is still passion over ending discrimination over caste,
ethnicity, and assertion of marginalized, there is little effort to view these
agitations as directed towards transformation of power structures (compared to
nationalist and socialist mobilizations). Rather, the BG hegemonic civil society
has a narrative of transition- from stagnation to rapid eco growth, backwardness
and poverty to upliftment and prosperity, from third world insignificance to
being a major force to reckon. This is a recall of class formation of Passive Rev-
landed elites became subordinate, bureaucracy- managerial class won. Unity of
state system is now maintained by relating Civil Soc to Pol Soc through logic of
REVERSAL OF EFFECTS OF PRIMITIVE ACCUMULATION. This Hegemony is likely to
continue. Govt Policies are thus devised for reversal of effects of Primitive
Accumulation, to avoid BG from turning too dangerous. Passsive Rev has made it
impossible for govt to leave marginalized w/o any help- under the conditions of
electoral democracy.