In the past two years we have seen protest against retails expansion in India. This protest has been quite synonymous with the protest against Reliance foray into retail.
What I am trying to explain here is that despite being initiated in various states across India viz. Maharashtra, Keala, Jharkhand, U.P, why not it took the shape of a nationwide movement. In the mobilization phase of this ‘movement’ ideology was quite in place i.e. issue of deprivation and there was of course a stress on collective participation of those who face deprivation. The strategy they adopted was fitting in the mobilisation phase i.e. gherao, strikes, bandh etc. What is seriously missing is a charismatic leader, a demagogue who can take this sporadic protests into the institutionalize stage. Every state union body were fighting independently and could not come together at the national level. Again a characteristic feature of this protest against retail majors is that it is broadly a class based 'movement' against those sitting at the top level owning the means of production. Now the people sittng at the top of hierarchy would not have simply allowed so far, the movement to take shape at national level. This they achieved through media, control over legislative bodies and other such measures.
I am looking forward for your comments on the above viewpoint so as to broaden the analysis…
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Retail business houses are initially giving fair prices to the primary producers as well as the end users so both sides are having a feel good factor. But if the present scenario will continue then there is a possibility that these retail houses will have monopoly in the market and that may shift the balance. But I hope that Adam smith's invisible hand will take care of the situation as there are large number of business houses that are foraying into this sector. If this does not happen then it will become necessary for the primary producers to form the marketing cooperatives to compete in the market.
Another good thing about retail revolution is that the middlemen, who use to earn very high profits, are vanishing.
Retail protest are against the business principals like in the sense in this competitetive world question is survival of the fittest. Consumer wants quality products at cheapest possible rates and irrespective of who provides that product. In no circumstance they will purchase same quality product at higher price from Mom and Pop store just because they have some sympathy towards them. So these protests lack the support of masses.
Corporates cutting middlemen and farmer getting ultimate benefit is a common argument used by supporters of organized retail. But ultimately the beneficiaries would be big farmers who can supply them with quality produce. Even if we say that they may collaborate with small farmers how many of them would eventually benefit and what about those who would be left out. Ultimately it would lead to widening of income gap between small and big farmers which would have its own set of repercussions which has so far been ignored by everyone.
Post a Comment