The recent Maoist attack in Dantewada killing 75 policemen has brought out two opposing arguments. The first argument focuses on a savagely unequal socio-economic reality where state neglect and exploitation have spawned a fearsome response. The other view argues that unless the state forcefully stamps out the lethal Maoist army, all attempts at addressing development are futile. Yet there is a third view, a view distinct from the noblesse oblige of a welfarist argument that places charity at its centre and the Bismarckian blood and iron argument of those who believe in matching militancy with militancy. And that is the argument of reform. The revolution of the poor is calling for reform from the rich. The Naxal challenge, however criminalised and politically motivated, is calling to create a new social contract based on partnership of rich and poor. Instead of the politics of handouts, the government should shed ideological timorousness and move to create widespread productivity and a reformed administration so that every citizen has a chance to answer his aspirations, attend a good school and get richer. Reform must be posited not as beneficial for the corporate sector but as an urgent necessity for the poor.
Farzana Z Khan
Nagpur, Maharashtra