THE ECONOMIC WEEKLY
January 25, 1964
Economic Implications of Democratic Socialism
Some Reflections on the Indian Economic Conference
Vaikunth
L
Mehta
Planning is not necessarily identical with
socialism.
At the
same
thought all over the world have held the view that for
developing
countries,
order
is
incapable of achievement without fundamental
social change.
In most developing countries
so great that to reduce, if not to
control of the economy by the State
trial or
nated.
societies
methods
today,
however, the disparities
between
certain sections of society are
eliminate, these disparities — essential for averting resort to
violence-—
becomes
more or
less inevitable.
Statism
is repugnant to economic
other business undertakings.
The
It
of
of
time many
leaders of economic
economic
growth of a
large
democracy,
because it makes the State the employer in
conflict
between the employer and the employed is thus
is time
that
we appreciated that the decentralization
of
productive
workers
in cottage industries
producing
consumer goods can
become
establishing a socialist society of
the democratic
variety.
alt indusnot elimi-
effort
through
cooperative
one of the most suitable
The Planning
Commission
has stated in
the Third
Five
Year Plan that "the
basic
objective
of
Indians development must necessarily be to provide the
masses of the Indian people the opportunity
to lead
a good life".
Therefore, that form of democratic senilism will be acceptable which best subserves this purpose and is most in consonance with the fundamental
principles
enshrined
in
the
Constitution
of
India.
AT
the
recent
session o f
the
Indian
Economic
Conference,
the c u r r e n t t o p i c t h a t was selected
f o r discussion was the v e r y t o p i c a l
one o f the " E c o n o m i c I m p l i c a t i o n s
of Democratic Socialism",
Initiati n g the discussion, Professor C N
V a k i l asserted t h a t the p r e a m b l e
t o the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f I n d i a r e a d
together w i t h the
articles setting
f o r t h the D i r e c t i v e s o f State P o l i c y
— especially a r t i c l e s 38 a n d 39 —
p r o v i d e d the
basis of the social
o r d e r as conceived of by the f r a m e r s
of the C o n s t i t u t i o n a n d
accepted
b y the people o f I n d i a .
The main
features of the o r d e r , as v i s u a l i z e d
b y the C o n s t i t u t i o n ,
according to
Professor V a k i l , are ( 1 ) adequate
means o f
livelihood for a l l , and
( 2 ) such f o r m o f e c o n o m i c o r g a n i zation as w o u l d
f u n c t i o n f o r the
common
good and avoid
things
w h i c h l e a d t o the c o m m o n d e t r i ment.
What
democratic socialism
s h o u l d represent and
comprehend
would
be
determined,
Professor
V a k i l u r e e d . i n the l i g h t o f these
two principal criteria.
No G r o w t h W i t h o u t Social Change
I t i s p e r t i n e n t t o note here t h a t
i t i s i n o r d e r t o give effect t o the
p r i n c i p l e s e n u n c i a t e d i n the Constit u t i o n t h a t the g o v e r n m e n t o f the
country, w i t h the approval of the
p e o p l e as r e c o r d e d at the g e n e r a l
election of 1952,
embarked upon
planning for social and
economic
development
by
inaugurating
a
series of five-year p l a n s . P l a n n i n g
means the conscious a n d deliberate
choice of e c o n o m i c p r i o r i t i e s by a
p r o p e r l y constituted p u b l i c
authority.
Planning
is
not
necessarily
identical with socialism.
A t the
same t i m e , m a n y leaders of econom i c t h o u g h t a l l over the
world
have h e l d the v i e w t h a t f o r developi n g countries,
economic growth of
a l a r g e o r d e r is i n c a p a b l e of achievement w i t h o u t f u n d a m e n t a l social
change.
U n d e r the pressure of ext e r n a l d a n g e r such as w a r it m a y
be t h a t p l a n n i n g has been achieved
w i t h o u t resort t o s o c i a l i s m . I n norm a l t i m e s , however, i t o f t e n happens, as B a r b a r a W o o t o n says in
"Freedom
Under
P l a n n i n g " , that
government plans
w h i c h are not
also
government-executed
founder on the rocks of vested interest
o r are
wrecked by
exploitation.
While
a c c e p t i n g the l e t t e r
of a
government
programme,
a l l att e m p t s are made to defeat the substance, a n d an e n t i r e l y new apparatus of c o n t r o l s has to be devised
to t h w a r t such a t t e m p t s , the operat i o n o f w h i c h c o n t r o l s presents f o r m i d a b l e difficulties.
T h e recent experience o f r a p i d
economic d e v e l o p m e n t a n d resurgence i n W e s t G e r m a n y a n d J a p a n
is c i t e d as d e m o n s t r a t i n g that q u i c k
transformation
of the economy is
possible w i t h o u t a d o p t i n g socialist
m e t h o d s . B o t h the countries, before
t h e i r l i f e was l e f t ravaged at the
close o f W o r l d W a r I I , were, however, at its commencement t w o of
the i n d u s t r i a l l y a n d
scientifically
most
advanced
countries i n the
world.
F o r t h e m , the
programme
was one of recovery. T h e same was
the experience of Czechoslovakia,
i n the r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f the economy
o f w h i c h the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f c o m munism
m i g h t not have been the
determining factor.
Control of Economy Inevitable
I n m o s t d e v e l o p i n g countries today, however, the
disparities between c e r t a i n sections of society are
so great, t h a t to reduce, if not to
e l i m i n a t e these disparities — essent i a l f o r a v e r t i n g resort t o violence
— c o n t r o l of the e c o n o m y on the
p a r t of the State becomes m o r e or
less i n e v i t a b l e .
Hence, those w h o
aspire to establish a h e a l t h y s o c i a l ,
e g a l i t a r i a n social
o r d e r have
to
accept the
proposition — implicit
in a n y concept of d e m o c r a t i c social i s m — t h a t in m a t t e r s that cone e n the e c o n o m i c l i f e o f the c o m m u n i t y what is required m a y be
m o r e p u b l i c c o n t r o l a n d not less.
It is f o r this reason that no d e f i n i t i o n of s o c i a l i s m is complete unless
it has a reference to social owners h i p or r e g u l a t i o n of the means of
production,
d i s t r i b u t i o n , a n d exchange.
Since the socialistic order
121
January 25, 1964
THE
ECONOMIC
WEEKLY
T H E
E C O N O M I C
W E E K L Y
of o u r
conception is to be democ r a t i c , i t i s i n c u m b e n t o n those i n
charge o f t h e a f f a i r s o f the State t o
s a t i s f y t h e people o f t h e
country
that it is in
consonance w i t h the
Concepts of justice, e q u a l i t y , l i b e r t y
a n d f r a t e r n i t y a s e n s h r i n e d i n the
C o n s t i t u t i o n . T h e e c o n o m i c system
s h o u l d , besides, guarantee the livel i h o o d of the people a n d be so designed as to subserve the c o m m o n
g o o d a n d to a v o i d o p e r a t i n g to the
common detriment.
T h e r e are some amongst us w h o
equate s o c i a l i s m w i t h
nationalization and statism.
For an authorit a r i a n State, this m a y b e the f o r m
of o r g a n i z a t i o n t h a t has the greatest a p p e a l , b u t not to a d e m o c r a t i c
State.
B u t just a s i n the p o l i t i c a l
field, social t h i n k e r s consider that
d e m o c r a c y has
i m p l i c a t i o n s other
t h a n the setting up of a p a r l i a m e n t a r y f o r m o f g o v e r n m e n t , s o also i n
the economic f i e l d democracy is i n adequate
unless
a c c o m p a n i e d by
d e v o l u t i o n . I t i s o n l y then t h a t i t
is possible to prevent the concentration of power, whether p o l i t i c a l
o r economic.
Statism i s r e p u g n a n t
to economic democracy, because it
m a k e s t h e State the e m p l o y e r i n a l l
i n d u s t r i a l or other business undertakings.
T h e conflict b e t w e e n the
e m p l o y e r a n d the e m p l o y e d is thus
not
eliminated.
In a sense, the
employed
may
find
themselves
p l a c e d in a worse
p o s i t i o n than
vis-a-vis p r i v a t e e m p l o y e r s , because
the State can no longer f u n c t i o n as
a n independent i m p a r t i a l a u t h o r i t y ,
competent t o a r b i t r a t e o n m a t t e r s i n
dispute.
Decentralisation of Production
U n d e r a democratic system, there
s h o u l d be scope f o r effective p a r t i c i p a t i o n b y the w o r k e r s i n the u n d e r t a k i n g i n w h i c h t h e y w o r k . One
o f the most
a p p r o p r i a t e ways o f
e n s u r i n g such p a r t i c i p a t i o n is by
the a d o p t i o n o f the
principle of
d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of
production
to
t h e largest extent possible.
It is
o n l y then that w o r k e r s can exercise
c o n t r o l over the e n t e r p r i s e i n w h i c h
t h e y are engaged.
A share in the
c o n t r o l o f s m a l l e r bodies, B e r t r a n d
Russell
observes in h i s
recently
p u b l i s h e d ' P o l i t i c a l I d e a l s ' , enables
a m a n to develop a sense of personal o p p o r t u n i t y a n d responsibility.
Such c o n t r o l s h o u l d compreh e n d the a c c r u i n g ,
principally, to
t h e m , a n d n o t t o the c a p i t a l investe d , o f the f r u i t s o f t h e enterprise,
s u b j e c t to financial a l l o c a t i o n s be-
i n g m a d e t o reserves a n d f o r deprec i a t i o n o n the standards g e n e r a l l y
accepted. T h i s f o r m o f o r g a n i z a t i o n
p r o v i d e s j u s t the economic incentive
that i s
required to stimulate i n creased p r o d u c t i v i t y .
In our planned
e c o n o m y , the
decentralized f o r m of organization
has been f a v o u r e d f o r c e r t a i n sect o r s , m a i n l y because of its e m p l o y ment potential.
It is time that we
appreciated the fact that the decentralization
of
productive
effort
through
cooperative
societies
of
w o r k e r s i n cottage industries prod u c i n g consumer goods can b e c o m e ,
one of the most s u i t a b l e methods of
e s t a b l i s h i n g a socialist society of
the d e m o c r a t i c v a r i e t y . T h e v o l u n t a r y cooperative system of i n d u s t r y ,
as a w r i t e r has said, s h o u l d be
j e a l o u s l y preserved a n d encouraged,
f o r it is nearer the socialist ideal
t h a n a semi-corporated state
industry.
Cooperatives Nearer Socialist Ideal
S i m i l a r l y , i n the f i e l d o f r e t a i l
t r a d e , the interest of the consumer
can be aroused a n d his p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n r e g u l a t i n g the economy f o r
the c o m m o n g o o d secured b y organizing a well-knit
consumers cooperative m o v e m e n t . T h i s is a f o r m
of social c o n t r o l w h i c h m a y be as
effective as that under State t r a d i n g in consumer's goods, as several
E u r o p e a n countries w h i c h c l a i m t o
have i n t r o d u c e d d e m o c r a t i c social i s m have c l a i m e d .
I n the f i e l d o f
b a n k i n g also,
there is a d i s t i n c t
place f o r m o b i l i z i n g the savings of
the c o m m u n i t y
through
people's
banks over w h i c h , subject to social
r e g u l a t i o n , the
groups o f p a r t i c i pants concerned,
organized functionally or territorially,
exercise
control.
State
r e g u l a t i o n o r cont r o l can b e enforced t h r o u g h t h e i r
representative federal o r g a n i z a t i o n s .
For the
a g r i c u l t u r a l sector, the
e m i n e n t s u i t a b i l i t y of the cooperative f o r m of o r g a n i z a t i o n has been
g e n e r a l l y accepted by the b u l k of
public
o p i n i o n a n d the
planning
authorities in our
country.
Some
a m o n g us, however, do not adequa t e l y appreciate the need f o r agrar i a n r e f o r m as the sine qua non
of the economic change
essential
f o r the development of t h i s sector
of o u r . e c o n o m y .
As a c o r o l l a r y to
the f i x a t i o n o f c e i l i n g s o n
land
h o l d i n g s a n d the r e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f
l a n d , encouragement has to be given
a n d incentives p r o v i d e d f o r coope-
January 25, 1964
rative f a r m i n g .
This is
already
p a r t o f the f i v e - y e a r p l a n s , b u t i t
has yet to become a n a t i o n a l effort,
as m u c h f o r the
social change it
spells as f o r the influence it has on
increased p r o d u c t i o n a n d p r o d u c t i vity.
W h e n we consider the economic
i m p l i c a t i o n s of
democratic social i s m this l a t t e r . aspect has m u c h
.significance.
It is
argued sometimes t h a t it is o n l y under what is
t e r m e d free enterprise in the sense
of a f f o r d i n g the freest p l a y for the
p r o f i t m o t i v e to
operate that an
economy w i l l have the best opportunity of expanding.
The p r i m a r y
objective of the cooperative m e t h o d
of o r g a n i z a t i o n is to p r o m o t e s i m u l taneously b e t t e r
business,
belter
methods of
p r o d u c t i o n and better
living.
T h e r e arc m a n y countries
spread a l l over the w o r l d where this
objective has been b r o a d l y achieved
i n c e r t a i n sections.
In
I n d i a , the
success t h a t has
attended the estab l i s h m e n t of cooperative sugar factories for the p r o m o t i o n of the economic
interests
of
sugar
canegrowers has led the p l a n n i n g author i t i e s to treat such
cooperatively
o r g a n i z e d factories as the p r i n c i p a l
agency f o r e x p a n d i n g sugar product i o n . T h e r e c o r d of achievement of
some of these factories in M a h a r a shtra is better than that of factories
r u n t h r o u g h j o i n t stock companies.
A g a i n i n b r i n g i n g a b o u t a n increase in the p r o d u c t i o n of m i l k and
its s u p p l y on efficient lines to u r b a n
consumers, cooperative s u p p l y societies a n d t h e i r unions — p a r t i c u l a r l y e x e m p l i f i e d b y the U n i o n a t
A n a n d in G u j a r a t — have had an
important role to fill. The organization o f the supply o f m i l k t h r o u g h
cooperative societies of cattle owners has p r o v i d e d the needed i n centive f o r securing an increase in
production.
Such
instances,
for
e x a m p l e , in the field of fisheries or
o f m i d d l e class housing i n A h m e dabad can be m u l t i p l i e d . In these
fields, state ownership or capitalist
ownership w i l l
scarcely y i e l d results in the shape of increased p r o d u c t i o n t h a t are obtainable t h r o u g h
the o p e r a t i o n of the incentive p r o vided by the active w o r k e r s ' p a r t i cipation a n d p a r t n e r s h i p .
Diffusion of Authority
Decentralization
of
production
or
management is, however, not feasible, f o r obvious reasons, i n certain
business u n d e r t a k i n g s or f o r some
123
January 2 5 , 1964
THE
ECONOMIC
WEEKLY
THE
ECONOMIC
January 25, 1964
WEEKLY
establishments w h e r e c e n t r a l i s a t i o n
is ineluctable.
I n one o f h i s l a t e r
p u b l i c a t i o n s , e n t i t l e d " T h e case f o r
Industrial
Partnership", G D H
Cole has p r o p o u n d e d v a r i o u s p r o posals f o r i n t r o d u c i n g the democratic process in such
e n t e r p r i s e or
enterprises
owned
either b y the
State o r b y the p r i v a t e c a p i t a l i s t .
In nationalised
i n d u s t r i e s , h e observes, the c e n t r a l c o n c e n t r a t i o n of
p o w e r i n respect o f actual management
of
productive
operations
s h o u l d be k e p t d o w n to a m i n i m u m .
As a m a t t e r of d e l i b e r a t e p o l i c y ,
steps s h o u l d be
taken to achieve
the greatest p r a c t i c a b l e d i f f u s i o n of
responsible
a u t h o r i t y i n the m o s t
democratic
f o r m s that can be reconciled w i t h t e c h n i c a l c o n d i t i o n s .
Although
there m a y b e
central
control o f p o l i c y , the m a c h i n e r y has
t o b e p r o v i d e d f o r p r e v e n t i n g concentration of managerial authority.
I f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i s vested i n g r o u p s
o f w o r k e r s , they w i l l feel a n i m a t e d
b y the t e a m s p i r i t , i n d u c i n g t h e m
t o m a k e themselves j o i n t l y respons i b l e f o r g e t t i n g the j o b done w e l l .
T h e seme of w o r k i n g f o r a c o m m o n
purpose can be aroused o n l y w h e n
the r e l a t i o n s h i p o f
employer and
e m p l o y e d gets replaced by t r e a t i n g
the w o r k e r s as p a r t n e r s .
Reduction of Disparity Essential
D u r i n g the discussion on the subj e c t w h i c h ensued
at the Conference, Dr V K R V Rao p u t f o r w a r d the v i e w that since d e m o c r a tic s o c i a l i s m was i n t e n d e d to usher
in an e g a l i t a r i a n system as d i s t i n g u ished f r o m the
present a c q u i s i t i v e
society, as a means of a c h i e v i n g that
goal there s h o u l d be a c e i l i n g imposed o n incomes f r o m a l l sources
c o r r e s p o n d i n g to the c e i l i n g s imposed on the l a n d h o l d i n g s . T h e r e is
no such c e i l i n g , a p p a r e n t l y , in all
c o m m u n i s t countries n o r i n developed countries. But the disparities are
n o t as w i d e as they are w i t h us.
M o r e o v e r , sometimes those w h o are
opposed to
s o c i a l i s m allege
that
c o m m u n i s m has not e l i m i n a t e d disparities i n i n c o m e a n d w e a l t h . T h e
reduction of d i s p a r i t i e s is, however,
one of the d e f i n i t e objectives of o u r
n a t i o n a l plans a n d ,
therefore, a
move in that
direction w o u l d be
deemed as an essential feature of
progress t o w a r d s a socialist society.
W h i l e u r s i n e the
imposition of
a c e i l i n g , Dr Rao was e q u a l l y insistent on the f i x a t i o n of a floor.
T h e r e s h o u l d be, a c c o r d i n g t o h i m ,
a national m i n i m u m which should
be guaranteed to a l l . A d e m a n d f o r
such a m i n i m u m m a y b e deemed t o
be a measure of social s e c u r i t y such
as is accepted as essential in a w e l f a r e State o r
under a n y m o d e r n ,
let alone progressive, G o v e r n m e n t
in developed c o u n t r i e s . In a devel o p i n g e c o n o m y , this f o r m o f social
s e c u r i t y i s a l l the m o r e c a l l e d f o r ,
because of the large n u m b e r s — f i v e
per cent at least of the p o p u l a t i o n
— w h o l i v e on the m a r g i n of subsistence.
T h e assurance of
livelih o o d , t o w h i c h Professor V a k i l a l l u d e d i n his o p e n i n g r e m a r k s , can
be made effective o n l y if a n a t i o n a l
m i n i m u m is recognized as an o b l i g a t i o n of the State in a socialist
society.
Right to Livelihood
T h e r e is one aspect of the r i g h t
to an adequate means of l i v e l i h o o d
as e m b o d i e d
in the directives
of
State p o l i c y w h i c h needs e x a m i n a t i o n . T h e destitute m a y b e d i v i d e d
into two groups. The m a i m e d ,
the
p h y s i c a l l y h a n d i c a p p e d , the i n f i r m
a n d the aged w h o are u n f i t o r u n able t o w o r k f o r m one g r o u p . T h e i r
m a i n t e n a n c e s h o u l d , n a t u r a l l y , be
the first concern of the State. B u t ,
besides, t h e r e are m i l l i o n s w h o are
w i l l i n g to do
a f u l l day's
work
whose f a m i l i e s have to r e m a i n in a
p e r p e t u a l state of d e s t i t u t i o n because there is no w o r k t h a t can be
provided for them. Livelihood should
be ensured to t h e m a l o n g w i t h the
p r o v i s i o n o f w o r k . T h e c o u n t r y cann o t a f f o r d to d e f r a y the cost of doles
or
gratuitous
r e l i e f t o the
mill i o n s now g o i n g w i t h o u t a f u l l day's
w o r k or work for
days and days
together.
T h e w o r k s h o u l d be such as is
directly or indirectly productive and
can p r o v i d e continuous e m p l o y m e n t .
It has to be organized a l l over the
country for vast n u m b e r s .
If it
meets the essential,
g r o w i n g cons u m p t i o n needs of the c o m m u n i t y ,
such as is the ease w i t h the m a n u f a c t u r e of k h a d i that is handspun.
h a n d w o v e n c l o t h , it exercises an
a n t i - i n f l a t i o n a r y influence a n d s h o u l d
hence be accorded
preference in
p l a n n i n g f o r increased e m p l o y m e n t .
In the sense in w h i c h such product i o n is organized as a measure of
social security, it f o l l o w s t h a t the
p r o d u c t i o n s h o u l d be subsidized in
a m a n n e r w h i c h w i l l raise the level
of earnings f o r the w o r k e r s or offset p a r t i a l l y or w h o l l y the differ-
ence in the prices of h a n d m a d e a n d
c o r r e s p o n d i n g m a c h i n e m a d e goods.
Real Economic Freedom
M a n y who are opposed either to
s o c i a l i s m or to p l a n n i n g do so on
the g r o u n d that it deprives the people of the freedom to organize their
economic l i f e .
T o this a r g u m e n t ,
R
H T a w n e y gave an effective
reply
in a p u b l i c a t i o n e n t i t l e d :
" W h a t L a b o u r Can D o " . U u d e r the
present day c o n d i t i o n s t h i s doctrine
constitutes not a c t i o n to extend opp o r t u n i t i e s and to raise i n d i v i d u a l
f a c u l t y to the highest possible l e v e l ,
but
the c o n t i n u e d e n j o y m e n t b y
individuals
and
groups of
such
powers, advantages a n d opportunities
as past h i s t o r y and social arrangements m a y happen to have conferred on t h e m . It is not, moreover,
easy to specify, as T a w n e y p o i n t e d
out, what if any economic freedoms
w o u l d disappear as a result of the
s u b s t i t u t i o n of a p u b l i c a u t h o r i t y
pursuing a
deliberate production
and investment p o l i c y for a g r o u p
of l a r g e p r i v a t e combines or a w e l ter of s m a l l firms.
In so f a r as economic f r e e d o m
depends on the r e m o v a l of the fear
o f u n e m p l o y m e n t , f a i r standards o f
remuneration, opportunities of prom o t i o n uninfluenced b y p u l l a n d
f a v o u r i t i s m , the a b o l i t i o n of private
m o n o p o l y a n d the c o n t r a c t i o n of
the area of l i f e where the b a t t l e is
to the s t r o n g one w o u l d agree it
w o u l d be s u b s t a n t i a l l y increased by
the extension of social ownership or
control.
The
democratic
socialism
we
aspire f o r w o u l d
ensure such freed o m , p r o v i d e d the social order is so
designed as to be democratic in
s m a l l t h i n g s and to give the s m a l l
groups of w h i c h the great society is
made up real o p p o r t u n i t i e s for demo c r a t i c a c t i o n , f o r , otherwise, a State
or society cannot, as G D H Cole
urged, be effectively
democratic in
large a f f a i r s , p o l i t i c a l o r economic.
T h e conception
of socialism at the
t i m e of
its genesis was
that there
s h o u l d be self-government in i n d u stry a n d that the status of the
workers s h o u l d be changed to that of
conscious p a r t n e r s . It is o n l y under
such a dispensation that the worker
p l i e s a tool not f o r p r i v a t e p r o f i t but
for public
ends that, according t o
J i m Griffiths, h e w i l l have the person a i satisfaction t h a t the meanest
125
THE
January 25, 1964
task he attends to hag a social p u r pose.
There s h o u l d hence b e f u l l p l a y
in any h e a l t h y stable
social order
f o r the u n f o l d i n g o f the h u m a n
p e r s o n a l i t y , the u p h o l d i n g o f h u m a n
d i g n i t y a n d the h a r m o n i z i n g of the
g o o d o f the i n d i v i d u a l w i t h the
good o f the c o m m u n i t y . T h e values
t h a t we cherish are happiness, free-
d o m , s e c u r i t y a n d the f u l f i l m e n t o f
personalities i n h a r m o n y , n o t i n
conflict, w i t h one another.
T h e objectives o f n a t i o n a l p l a n n i n g m a y b e d e f i n e d m o r e categoric a l l y a n d it is to achieve these t h a t
we need d e m o c r a t i c socialism. B u t
as the P l a n n i n g
C o m m i s s i o n has
defined at the v e r y outset of the
Third
F i v e year P l a n ,
" t h e basic
ECONOMIC
WEEKLY
objective
of
India's
development
m u s t necessarily
b e t o p r o v i d e the
masses of the I n d i a n p e o p l e the
opportunity
to lead a g o o d
life".
T h e r e f o r e , t h a t f o r m o f democratic
s o c i a l i s m w i l l b e acceptable w h i c h
best subserves t h i s p u r p o s e a n d is
most i n consonance w i t h the f u n d a m e n t a l p r i n c i p l e s e n s h r i n e d i n the
Constitution of India.