Continuous internet ban in Kashmir affecting livelihood of media persons, says Valley-based Journalist body

October 17, 2017

Srinagar: The Jammu and Kashmir Young Journalist Association (JKYJA) on Monday, October 16 strongly condemned the continuous clampdown of 3G and 4G Mobile Internet services in Kashmir.

A photo jounalist covering protest in maisuma area of srinagar photo credits Raqib Hameed Naik

The JKYJA said that the Internet ban not only heightens the state of paranoia amongst the citizens but also affects the work of journalists in Kashmir, adding that the internet ban also attacks the livelihood of dozens of people including professional journalists whose work is dependable on the Internet.

The JKYJA said that the over the past years, the repeated suspension of mobile internet services has become common in Kashmir which reflects the total indifference of government towards the prosperity, development, economic and educational upliftment of Kashmiri people in addition to the promotion of tourism.

Considering the adverse impact on the economic prospects due to the Internet Ban, the JKYJA appealed people from IT sector, tourism, lawyers, traders, entrepreneurs, students and teachers to condemn the Internet ban in Kashmir.

“Depriving people of even basic internet facilities has a significantly disproportionate impact on the fundamental rights of everyone in Kashmir particularly the journalist in the ground,” said JKYJA.

The association has asked the authorities to guarantee freedom of expression in Kashmir and to seek a solution by a democratic process for the issues which lead to the unjustified internet ban. It further said that the association will come with a complete course of action in coming days so as to raise voice against the serious issue of internet ban.

Courtesy: Two Circles

The epidemic of under-nutrition haunts India’s

October 17, 2017

A recently released report on the Nutritional Status of Urban Population by National Nutrition Monitoring Bureau (NNMB), throws light on the chronic undernutrition faced by India’s urban population, particularly the urban poor.

Image Courtesy: healthannotation.com

The report compares the average consumption of different food groups by the urban population, to the scientifically calculated Required Dietary Allowance (RDA). RDA, for any food group, is the amount which a person needs to consume every day to avoid malnutrition. Upon such comparison, it was found that India’s urban population, which constitutes about more than 30% of the country’s population, consumes far lower amounts than what is required to stay healthy, of most food groups.

An average urban household consumes only 69% of the RDA for cereals and millets. This means that they fall short of the RDA by 31%. Similarly, most households consume only 81.3% of the RDA for milk and milk products and only 59.5% of RDA for green leafy vegetables.

In contrast to these shortfalls, the consumption of Roots and tubers was 188% of RDA and the consumption of oils was 159.5% of the RDA. Clearly, it shows that the families’ consumer more of the cheaper food groups.

This pattern of food consumption had a direct impact on the health and well-being of the families, with the population being deficient in most of the vital nutrients.

The average urban family was deficient in the macronutrients – protein and energy, both falling short of the RDA. The average family was also deficient in vital micronutrients. The intake of Calcium, Iron, Vitamin B1 and Vitamin B3 was significantly lower than the RDA, while the intake of Vitamin B2 and Vitamin A were abysmal at 50% and 23% of the RDA.

Families have sufficient intake of only two important nutrients, Vitamin C and Vitamin B9.

The effect of the insufficient nutrient intake has a particularly large impact on the children from urban families, with more than 25% of children below 5 years of age suffering from undernutrition. The report also indicates that children from urban poor and deprived communities are the most affected by undernutrition.

It is generally thought that malnutrition is a problem of rural India. But when we compare the present report with a similar one on rural India, brought by NNMB in 2012, the extent of undernutrition is not significantly different in urban and rural areas. For example, an average rural family, in 2012, was consuming 85% of the RDA for protein as opposed to 89% by an average urban family in 2016.

What is the reason behind the persistently high rates of undernutrition, even though India has grown at very high rates in the past decade and more?

The government claims that poverty rate in India has fallen from 45% to 21.9%, between the 1990s and the 2010s. If that is indeed the case, it is a significant reduction in poverty, by more than half. But the data on undernutrition gives a different and a less optimistic picture. Between the 1990s and 2010s, the percentage of children (under 5) who were underweight fell from 43% to 35%. A modest fall of 7 percent compared to a fall of 25 percent in the official poverty rate.
Could it be that the so-called trickle down of economic growth to the poor urban working class was not substantial enough to compensate for the gradual withdrawal of the government from the provision of affordable food in the form of Public Distribution System (PDS) and other welfare schemes?

It has been widely covered by many researchers, how a shift to a targeted form of PDS, where families were arbitrarily classified as below poverty line (BPL) and Above Poverty Line (APL) deprived many families of affordable rations, thereby negatively affecting the nutritional status of these families. The results are clear to see in the data above. Undernutrition persists despite the decline in official poverty figures.

The poor coverage of ICDS (Integrated Child Development Services) in the urban areas, could also be a significant reason behind the dismal nutritional indicators of children in urban areas. Even though urban population constitutes 31% of India’s total population, only 10% of the ICDS projects are allotted to urban areas and only 8% of all Anganwadi centres are situated in urban areas.

A significant part of urban working families, who live in unregistered slums, by the same reason are denied access to ICDS. Similarly, the poorest of the urban families which tend to migrate to different regions, depending on the availability of work, loose access to ICDS. As a result, children and pregnant women who are most vulnerable to undernutrition in urban areas, are not served by ICDS. These same factors also affect the access of the urban poor to PDS, which has already been diluted through targeting.

One hopes that the NNMB report will open the eyes of the establishment towards the need for a universal public distribution system. Considering the under consumption of a wide variety of essential nutrients government must include a larger range of food groups to be covered under the PDS. It is also the need of the hour to expand ICDS infrastructure in the urban areas, to serve the needs of the most vulnerable of the urban poor.

Courtesy: Newsclick.in

Missing JNU student’s mother dragged away by cops even as court slams CBI for shoddy investigation

October 16, 2017

Fatima Ahmed, mother of missing JNU student Najeeb Ahmed, was dragged away screaming and struggling, from a protest site in Delhi today. Najeeb mysteriously went missing from his hostel room a year ago on Oct 13. His mother and friends had been demanding answers about his whereabouts ever since then. A fresh protest began on the first anniversary of his disappearance and Fatima was seen demanding answers from authorities even as the case was being heard by the Delhi High Court today. “Kahaan hai mera beta? Kaun batayega mujhe,” (Where is my son? Who will tell me?) she was heard asking. Shortly after she started speaking to members of the press, a few police women arrived and dragged her into a police vehicle even as other policemen tried to keep the media and other protesters away from her.

Meanwhile, the Delhi High Court slammed the CBI for ‘complete lack of interest’ in tracing Najeeb Ahmed. The court expressed reservations at the CBI for making “ contradictory statements” in front of the court- against what was submitted in the status report of the case in a sealed cover. The High Court has severely reprimanded the CBI lawyer for not filing the details of Najeeb’s disappearance after the assault on him, for changing its lawyer in every hearing instead of ensuring that the DIG himself attends the court proceedings, and for its very shoddy investigation.”If this is the supervision of the DIG, what will happen when there is no supervision…? We direct the concerned DIG to ensure that status report is filed under his signature or at least he should read them,” the court observed.

The Court has instructed the CBI for looking into the Call data records (CDR) of the ABVP members (including whatsapp and text messages that they sent to each other), and their location on the night of the assault on Najeeb and his disappearance. The Court has also instructed CBI to no longer delay the mode of investigation via polygraph test; the CBI should file for undertaking the test today itself at Patiala House Sessions Court. The next hearing is on Nov 14.

Dalit Rights Activist Detained, Threatened with ‘Encounter’

October 16, 2017

Dalit Rights activist Pradeep Narwal has alleged that he was illegally detained by personnel of the UP police on Sunday who also threatened to conduct an ‘encounter’ against him. Narwal who is the convener of the Defense Committee for the Bhim Army says the incident took place near the Faridabad-Delhi border at about 2pm. “We were stopped by UP police personnel, none of whom were wearing name tags. One of them put a gun to my head and threatened to do an encounter,” he recalls. “I was made to sit in a police vehicle, while a policeman got into my vehicle. I was then driven around and taken to Muradnagar, but not into the police station. I was questioned by these policemen about my links with the Bhim Army,” says Narwal. He was allowed to leave after four and a half hours. Narwal who is a student of JNU has now filed a written complaint (DD No. 22B) that was lodged at the Vasant Kunj police station. Vasant Kunj police confirmed that an entry of the complaint had been made.

We need a new, radical vision of feminist sisterhood

October 16, 2017

The racism of white feminists, whether overt or covert, contributes to the oppression of women of colour, and holds the movement back.

The Black Women’s March in Brasilia, 2015. Photo: Sabriya Simon. Some rights reserved.The feminist movement has a race problem. This is nothing new – in fact, the problem has been there since the movement began. The racism of white women, whether it is overt or covert, actively contributes to oppression experienced by women of colour. That racism also undermines the efforts of feminist struggle by upholding white supremacist capitalist heteropatriarchy.

For some white women, the benefits of white privilege seem to outweigh the gains to be made through dismantling the hierarchies at the root of widespread social inequalities. And those white feminists who have made no conscious effort to unlearn their own racism will find that it manifests itself within their feminism not randomly, but as an organic product of their beliefs.

“The feminist movement has a race problem.”

Writers considered pioneers of feminist thought, including American activists Kate Millett and Betty Friedan, are also responsible for a pattern of universalising white women’s experiences. Positioning whiteness as the ‘standard’ of womanhood obscures the realities lived by women of colour, and the role of hierarchies beyond gender in shaping female experience.

Feminism is a social movement devoted to liberating all women and girls from structural oppression. And yet, within the mainstream of this movement, the liberation of some women is treated as a higher priority than that of others.

When feminism prioritises the interests of white, middle-class women over those of their more marginal sisters, it only replicates the after-the-revolution mentality that has historically been used to sideline women within progressive politics. When gender is positioned as the main hierarchy for all women to overcome, a strange sort of trickle-down liberation logic is applied to justify how racism, classism, ableism, and lesbophobia are overlooked.

Ignoring a form of oppression that shapes the lives of countless women simply because you do not experience it doesn’t resemble sisterhood, not by any stretch of imagination – yet this is a standard excuse given for disregarding the political issues facing women of colour.

We are told that talking about race divides the feminist movement, that it jeopardises solidarity between women. But valuing white women’s comfort over women of colour’s liberation is the antithesis of sisterhood.

“We are told that talking about race divides the feminist movement, that it jeopardises solidarity between women. But valuing white women’s comfort over women of colour’s liberation is the antithesis of sisterhood.”

The expectation that women of colour remain silent about our experiences of racism, for the convenience of white women, removes the possibility of sisterhood. The expectation that women of colour devote our energies to helping white women attain socioeconomic parity with white men – the entitlement behind that assumption! – makes interracial solidarity unlikelier still.

Yet such solidarity can exist. I know this first-hand. I have experienced sisterhood with white women and value those connections. That being said, I will never condemn a woman of colour who says otherwise – the racism of white women means that mixed feminist spaces can be a minefield to navigate.

For this situation to improve, for interracial solidarity between women to become not an exception but the rule within feminist spaces, a great deal must change. Fortunately, there is no greater vehicle for change than the feminist movement.

Altering the dynamic of race within the feminist movement demands critical self-reflection, persistent effort, and white women’s willingness to break with old patterns of behaviour.

Every good liberal is fed the message that nobody should see race – but not seeing race means not seeing racism, and being blind to racism precludes the possibility of identifying or challenging it. White women must acknowledge the differences in experience brought about by race if they are ever to have a meaningful understanding of women of colour’s lives.

“Every good liberal is fed the message that nobody should see race – but not seeing race means not seeing racism.”

It is such a fundamental thing, so obvious it almost doesn’t bear saying, but white women also need to acknowledge women of colour as human beings who have thoughts and – too often neglected in discussions of race – feelings.

Race isn’t an abstract conversation for us. It has very real implications and consequences. Empathy is crucial. We often talk about how misogyny makes women vulnerable, but the reality that women of colour are in an even more vulnerable position – thanks to what Frances Beale described as a ‘double jeopardy’ of racism and sexism – is not always given due consideration.

White women who want to share trust and solidarity with women of colour need to consider how they conceptualise us – are we your sisters, or are we tokens? Are we necessary agents of feminist struggle, or a pat on the back for diversity?

Honest, inward reflection is essential. I invite every white feminist to analyse how she thinks of us, critically evaluate why that might be, and work from there. None of this is easy or comfortable – but nobody ever said the politics of liberation would be.

This article was first published on opendemocracy.net.

What the Harvey Weinstein case tells us about sexual assault disclosure

October 16, 2017

The power disparity between Harvey Weinstein and his alleged victims plays into a range of myths and stereotypes about women. Reuters/Mario Anzuoni

Explosive reports from The New York Times and The New Yorker in recent days have revealed decades of alleged sexual harassment and assault perpetrated by high-profile Hollywood movie executive Harvey Weinstein. In the wake of these reports, a flood of disclosures from celebrities, including Angelina Jolie and Gwyneth Paltrow, has emerged.

The Weinstein case follows an emerging pattern of powerful men being outed for their sexually violent behaviour. In such cases, men have been able to abuse with relative impunity, despite many in the entertainment industry appearing to know or have suspicion of their behaviour.

These instances raise several pertinent questions about sexual violence and harassment. They include:

why it’s so difficult for victim-survivors to come forward
why they aren’t believed when they do
why we tend to see a flood of reporting once the case is broken
how men such as Weinstein are able to offend with impunity for so long
and most importantly, what we can do to prevent such cases from reoccurring.

‘Why didn’t you say anything?’

Victim-survivors face a wide range of barriers to disclosing their experiences, regardless of the context in which the assault occurred. Commonly identified barriers include:

fear of not being believed
fear their experience will be dismissed or trivialised
belief the incident wasn’t “serious” enough to tell anyone about
fear of retaliation from the perpetrator
believing there was nothing that could be done about it
wanting to move on from or forget the incident
confusion about what happened
shock
self-blame.

Many barriers are heavily informed by misconceptions and stereotypes about sexual violence. The narrow framing of “real” rape as involving extreme violence or physical force and penetrative sex, or that the perpetrator is a stranger, can prevent victim-survivors from speaking out or even identifying and labelling their experience as sexual violence in the first place.
Although victim-survivors face substantial barriers to disclosure, most eventually tell somebody about their experience. How that person reacts can be vital in informing what happens next.
Positive responses, such as an expression of belief and validation, can aid in recovery and encourage further disclosure and reporting to authorities. Negative responses, such as blaming the victim or disbelief, can shut down any further discussion or disclosure.

Navigating power and disclosure

All forms of sexual violence feature an imbalance of power. This is heightened in Weinstein’s case. As a high-ranking Hollywood producer, he was often in direct control of the careers of his victims, many of whom were young women.

It is reasonable to assume that many did not disclose for fear of losing their careers, or otherwise facing the wrath of a well-connected, wealthy and powerful man. Weinstein’s position enabled him to reportedly buy the silence of several victims.

However, this is not to say these women did or said nothing in response to Weinstein’s actions. It appears his behaviour was an open secretamong women in Hollywood, who warned each other about him.
Rather than not disclosing, it would seem that Weinstein’s victims were selective about who they told. Their disclosure practices sought to protect other women, rather than openly exposing their perpetrator.
The power disparity between Weinstein and his victims plays into a range of myths and stereotypes about women. Namely, there is a myth that women routinely lie about sexual assault as a form of revenge or – in the case of wealthy perpetrators – as a means of “gold-digging”, attention-seeking, or advancing their own status.

These myths are not borne out in the substantial research evidence on sexual violence. False reporting is rare. Victim-survivors are often blamed for their own experiences, routinely dismissed or disbelieved, and the criminal justice system is commonly encountered as a site of retraumatisation.

It is difficult to conceive what benefit victim-survivors may garner from “false” disclosure in such circumstances. And perpetrators in a position of such cultural and economic power can overtly exploit this to facilitate and enable their offending with relative impunity.

Research has illustrated how perpetrators draw on their position to silence victims, often by reinforcing the notion that no-one will believe them if they do disclose, or by threatening to destroy their reputation or livelihood.

Under these circumstances, it is unsurprising that many of Weinstein’s victims did not disclose widely earlier. It is equally unsurprising that the initial media reports have sparked a flood of disclosures from women who Weinstein targeted.

In taking women’s experiences seriously, this reporting – and the subsequent public outcry – has opened up a space for other women to disclose. It signifies to these women that they will be believed and taken seriously, with the weight of collective disclosure making it more difficult for their experiences to be dismissed or downplayed.

Dismantling cultures of sexual violence

Given that Weinstein’s actions were an open secret for so long, this also raises questions of how he was able to continue offending with impunity.
Weinstein’s position of power played a key role here, and ensured that many of his victims were effectively silenced. However, it is also apparent that others within the industry condoned or at least tolerated his behaviour. It is vital that we imbue bystanders with the confidence and skills to intervene.

Weinstein’s actions were further enabled by a cultural context that normalised abusive behaviour through references to the “casting couch”and stereotypes of the lecherous industry figure who “takes advantage” of young actresses as a matter of course.

Such attitudes normalise and rationalise the occurrence of sexual harassment and assault, reframing it as acceptable. This can prevent potential bystanders from stepping in, and obscures the problematic nature of such behaviour. It is vital that we work to disrupt and challenge cultures that normalise sexual violence.

Finally, we must ensure women are able to disclose their experiences without fear of disbelief, blame or dismissal. Such systematic and widespread abuse might be avoided if only we were willing to believe women, and listen when they do disclose.

This article was first published on theconversation.com.

Gauri in Gandhi’s Light

October 16, 2017

This is a story from my childhood. My mother told me this story. I do not remember the reason why she had told me this story; nevertheless, as I grew up, this story encouraged me to face the real world. This is the story:

Prophet Muhammad had just started to spread his thoughts and ideas in Mecca. He was mostly all by himself. Some called him mad and some even physically attacked him. He was a subject of laughter for everyone. On the other hand was Aboojhal (His real name is Amra Bin Hishaam), a relative of the prophet and the leader (Nayaka) of Mecca. Aboojhal was waiting to teach Muhammad a lesson and had even decided to kill him. The bullies in Mecca never let go of a chance to bully him.

One of the days, few men who were infamous as rowdies of Mecca were discussing Muhammad’s thoughts and struggle, and were laughing at them. A poor worker passing by this group; he complained about a problem he was facing with Aboojhal. The poor worker claimed that the richest of the rich of Mecca, Aboojhal, was refusing to pay him. He was also threatening the poor worker. The poor worker requested this group to help him in recovering his money from Aboojhal.

Everyone in this group was strong and influential. None of them wanted to involve themselves in the problems of this poor worker; they didn’t want to speak against Aboojhal — this poor worker — of all people. They were about to shoo him away, but one of them went up to the poor worker and said: “Look there, do you see a man sitting there alone? Go and speak to him; he would definitely help you in recovering your money from Aboojhal.” The poor worker believed this and started moving towards Prophet Muhammad, who was sitting there alone.

The group was eagerly waiting to make fun of both the poor worker and Muhammad. The poor worker, as was instructed, met Muhammad and explained his problem to him. Upon hearing this poor worker, Muhammad held him by his arm and started moving towards Aboojhal’s house. As soon as they reached Aboojhal’s house, Muhammad knocked the door. Aboojhal was surprised to see both of them standing together: Muhammad, the one whom he was waiting to kill, and the poor worker to whom he owed money. Muhammad just said one thing to Aboojhal: “Give him the money that you are supposed to give him”. On hearing this, Aboojhal went inside his house and returned with the money he owed the poor worker, as if he was struck by some magical words. On getting his money, the poor man, along with Muhammad, returned from Aboojhal’s house.

The disappointed bullies of Mecca went to Aboojhal and questioned him on what had just happened. Aboojhal apparently had told them that, he saw two lions on both the sides of Muhammad’s shoulders roaring at him.

I do not know if there actually were two lions on the shoulders of Muhammad, but Muhammad was illiterate, an orphan, physically weak, and, most importantly, alone. Aboojhal feared Muhammad’s just thoughts. I learnt from this story that the biggest strength that any human possesses is just, moral values. When I started reading Gandhi, the above story unfurled itself in different shades and I learnt the deeper meaning of that story.

The human being who lives a life of discomfort tries to handle his weakness with the help of police, money, physical strength, followers, and Brahmanism. They try to save themselves by using the power of these structures and systems. Sometimes, they try to hide themselves behind their knowledge and wisdom; but they live a life fearing honest people who dedicate their lives struggling for justice. If this was not true, Ghodse wouldn’t have felt it was necessary to assassinate an unarmed, old and saintly Gandhi. Gandhi’s simple personality and fight for justice had made him outwit Nehru’s words, Vallabhai Patel’s strength, and Balagangadhar Tilak’s excellent oratory skills.

In a similar way, it was her ethical and moral stand that helped Gauri outgrow P. Lankesh’s intellectual personality. She was emotionally lonely and physically weak. Neither was she celebrated for her excellent oratory skills, nor was her writing exceptionally intellectual. But Gauri knew one thing: a good speech or excellent writing could not save an innocent person from being attacked on the streets. Knowing this, and believing in this, she had learnt the importance of not being a bystander to any form of oppression or violence. Pushing oneself to say “Stop it right now!” was the most important thing for her.

Gauri was trained to be a journalist in English. She wasn’t very fluent in spoken Kannada, and she would struggle to write in it. Her decision to step out of English language journalism and take over Lankesh Patrike, and to write in Kannada, shocked many. Most of them were not sure about her capabilities. Some even wondered how would a person who found it difficult to speak in Kannada would be able to write in it. Gauri’s simple, and yet straightforward approach, was an answer for all these questions that were floating around her decision. She chose to write and speak in the language that the people she was fighting for understood. She discarded a literary language. She wrote in the same simple, non literary language that the Vachanakaras of the 12th century wrote in. The demands made these days are simple and straightforward, and Gauri’s simple language became her strength. Her simple speech was the need of the times she was fighting in.

Even though she belonged to the Lingayat community, she never adored any of the physical markers of a Lingayat. Her source of inspiration and a guide in her struggle was Basavanna. She had understood the Lingayat religion and followed it more closely than any swamiji. She took the ongoing Lingayat movement in the state of Karnataka very seriously. The way she lived, her fearlessness, struggle, and even her death, is a representation of a lifespan of a true Sharane.

People who read and admired Lankesh Patrike had said, “Lakesh’s tabloid has become as weak as his weak-looking daughter.” She proved them wrong though. The way in which she lived her life, and now her death, have proved them wrong. When the journalists and editors of prominent media organisations in the state moved around with their gun men, Gauri Lankesh fought armless. Even Gandhiji was protected by his title of Mahatma, but this mother called Gauri lacked such protections too. This is probably why the murderers had to shoot seven bullets to kill her. The murderers might have realised that they couldn’t kill Gauri even after shooting seven bullets, because Gauri is no longer limited to Karnataka, as she was when she was alive. She is now in every nook and corner of this country. In her death, she stands as a more difficult question to the forces that aim to destroy peace in this country.

Translated from the original Kannada by Yogesh S

This article was first published on Indianculturalforum.in.

Achche Din? From job-less’ to ‘job-loss’ economy

October 16, 2017

The falling work participation rate shows that the economy is in deep crisis. Various other economic indicators show this as well.

Newsclick Image by Nitesh Kumar

In a stark and chilling confirmation of what the whole country has known for some time, a govt. report shows that Indian workforce (those actually working) declined from about 54% of the working age population in 2011-12 to 51% in 2015-16. While the working age population increased by 2.9% per year during this period, the number of people with jobs increased at less than half the rate, at just 1.2% per year. These estimates emerge from the Labour Bureau’s Employment-Unemployment Survey reports for these years.

The falling work participation rate shows that the economy is in deep crisis. Various other economic indicators show this as well. Growth of credit flow to industry is at an all-time low, the index of industrial production is dipping, and wages in industry are stagnant. It is a crisis which is engulfing even those who own means of production, barring perhaps the big players.

The Labour Bureau’s data reveals a much bigger problem – the piling backlog of unemployed. Although the working age population increased by 4.66 crore between 2011-12 and 2015-16, those who were working increased by about 1.1 crore only. In other words, about 1.2 crore people become ready to work every year but only 0.2 crore actually get jobs.

The difference of about 3.5 crore comprises some who are not looking for jobs at all, like women or students. But the majority is of those who are unable to find jobs. If this backlog of unemployed keeps accumulating every year, a stupendous task confronts the government in coming years.

Rural areas, home to the country’s biggest workforce in agriculture, showed a small annual increase of only 1% in employment while jobs grew at 1.8% in urban areas. This reflects the over saturation of the agriculture sector with working people and its diminishing capacity to absorb new workers. Since jobs in industries and services do not seem to be opening up at a fast enough rate, the jobless are caught in a vicious cycle.

Another aspect, repeatedly brought out in various reports is the disguised unemployment rampant in India. A very large number of people are working at very low wages, or part time, or for a few months in different jobs interspersed with periods of joblessness. The Labour Bureau report for 2015-16 shows that just 61% of workers actually work for all 12 months of the year. The rest work less than that. In rural areas, this proportion is even lower at 52%.

Falling employment is just the big symptom of the crisis. Workers have been affected also by stagnating or falling wages. Take the growth in salaries and wages paid to workers/employees by the corporate sector. According to analysis of RBI data on corporate finances by CMIE, the average annual growth in real wages during the past three years (2014-15 through 2016-17) works out to 3.9%, far lower than the long term annual average of 6% and a median of 5%. It also compares very poorly with the real GDP growth rate of about 6 per cent during the same period.

The prospects for the future are looking dim because all the underlying factors seem to be in a fatal tailspin. Between July 2016 and July 2017, the Index of Industrial Production (IIP) released by the govt’s. Central Statistical Office (CSO) has increased by just 1.2% indicating almost no improvement. This means that industrial production is hardly growing. In which case, there is very little scope for increasing jobs and with an army of unemployed available, industrialists are likely to push down wages even more.

Similarly, between August 2016 and July 2017, bank credit to industry grew by just 0.4% and for the services sector by 4.6%, according to RBI data. Credit is a measure of how much economic activity is going on. A growth of this kind is negligible and is like no growth. This is likely to cast a long shadow in the coming months because Modi sarkar has no clue about how to revive production and growth. India is facing a dark economic crisis and sadly, the reins of power are held by people who are only interested in helping their cronies.

This article was first published on Newsclick.in.

1...1,9761,9771,978...2,697 Page 1,977 of 2,697

Continuous internet ban in Kashmir affecting livelihood of media persons, says Valley-based Journalist body

The epidemic of under-nutrition haunts India’s

Missing JNU student’s mother dragged away by cops even as court slams CBI for shoddy investigation

Dalit Rights Activist Detained, Threatened with ‘Encounter’

We need a new, radical vision of feminist sisterhood

The racism of white feminists, whether overt or covert, contributes to the oppression of women of colour, and holds the movement back.

“The feminist movement has a race problem.”

“We are told that talking about race divides the feminist movement, that it jeopardises solidarity between women. But valuing white women’s comfort over women of colour’s liberation is the antithesis of sisterhood.”

“Every good liberal is fed the message that nobody should see race – but not seeing race means not seeing racism.”

What the Harvey Weinstein case tells us about sexual assault disclosure

The power disparity between Harvey Weinstein and his alleged victims plays into a range of myths and stereotypes about women. Reuters/Mario Anzuoni

‘Why didn’t you say anything?’

Navigating power and disclosure

Dismantling cultures of sexual violence

Gauri in Gandhi’s Light

Achche Din? From job-less’ to ‘job-loss’ economy

The falling work participation rate shows that the economy is in deep crisis. Various other economic indicators show this as well.

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

Important Links

Other Links

CONNECT