6

THE STRUGGLE FOR SELF-RELIANCE IN ASIA TODAY

(The keynote address and the only major paper for the Assembly was prepared by Dr. Mathew Kurien, former M.P. of India, who was prevented from leaving the country at the last moment. Bishop Leo Nanayakkara from Sri Lanka presented the paper; Fely Carino and Priyanthi Perera gave reactions to the address before the general open forum. The edited paper is reproduced in the Appendix section).

NANAYAKKARA

Kurien's stand is clear as all Marxists' are. In the first page he presents the reality that is Asia. First point, he says that there is increasing poverty for the mass majority of the people, along with affluence of the few, and the concentration of wealth and power on the hands of a small number of industrial monetary houses and landlords. In my own country today, statistically, 65% to 70% of the people are poor earning less than 100 rupees per month. This, in spite of the fact that there has been a certain kind of development. We have tremendous big factories, sugar factories, textile mills and now we have a small radio station, a satellite station.

Another point he dwells on is the mounting unemployment despite massive doses of investment outlays under the present development plans. This is because, Kurien says, that the model for the developing countries is the GNP. This kind of system has not paid dividends for the developing countries. It has, on the other hand, contributed to inflationary rising prices which transfer value from working people to owners of big property by reducing the purchasing power of the working people and assuring super profits for big property owners. The thesis of central periphery explains this phenomenon. After the colonial masters left our countries, the native elites whom we call "the brown sahibs" in Ceylon, took over the trade and the most important places in the government, and controlled the farmers and the workers. But these "brown sahibs" work hand in hand, with, if not, for the colonial masters, so control centres of the country's economy are still in London or Holland or Belgium or France or New York. Prices are rising , because the people are not interested in the basic needs of the people but in luxury goods. The result is also an increased dependence on foreign capital and foreign collaboration agreements.

7

Dr Kurien declares a need for involving working people in development activities at the grassroot level; the contrary is obtaining in many if not all Asian countries as the character of state power and politics remains authoritarian and militarist, leading to suppression of freedom and basic human rights. This again is true in Ceylon. Ceylon today is supposed to be socialist. We have development councils, we have participation for workers in tea estates. But, today, anyone of us can be taken away overnight from the streets without questioning and can be detained without giving any reason. Today there is only one trade union — the government trade union and even this is being played down. So you can see the erosion of trade unionism, of human rights of individuals, in spite of the fact that there is an increasing involvement of the working people in all spheres of activity.

The situation can never be changed — a situation which is neo-colonial in nature — unless, according to Kurien, there shall be "fighting against anti-colonial, anti-imperialist heritage of the peoples of Asia in terms of their present struggle for social justice and radical self-acclamation." There must be a revolution, he concludes. A struggle by the peasants and workers to see that the land be given to them.

Other sub-topics touched by Kurien are the different development strategies and liberating education. The present system of education instills into our people values that work for the status quo of society. There is no place for creativity, for critical attitude. If the present educational system does not give the values needed by society, another system should be resorted to. Non-formal education where a lot of discussion and creative thinking can happen is surfacing more and more.

Dr. Kurien finally tackles the role of the Church in Asia today. I agree with his view that the Church has not taken up its role according to her teachings. I personally think that we of the Church are very clever. We

8

speak of revolution but we don't want to join it because we might soil our hands. But after the revolution is finished, we get in and we benefit. So, let us not fall in that category — where we speak only of the struggle but not want to get in. Like Christ on the cross, we have to sacrifice ourselves, work with the people and bring about change. As Kurien says, if the Church is really authentic in its meetings — it should join the revolution.

CARIÑO

Some bits of gaps in Kurien's presentation:

1. A major historical observation regarding self-reliance. Self-reliance as a law of social and political existence has always been there — from the earliest forms of political and social organisations. It has always been a basic urge of corporate existence. It is not a creation of Mao nor of Marx. Due to various historical reasons, this very essential and fundamental law of human existence has been lost. Therefore when we are affirming the struggle for self-reliance in Asia today, we are not affirming a foreign ideology.

One of the current impacts of this concept within the contemporary context comes from the historical experiences of some countries, to name two: the Tanzania experience and the China model. The latter provides one of the most provocative, one of the most enlightening conceptions. The basic principle asserts that people and the people alone are the motive force in history. The subject of social transformation did not come out of study sessions on self-reliance or on reading volumes of books. It emerged from the very basic experience of political struggle. From that experience a number of lessons were learnt out of which the definition of self-reliance emerged.

Lesson One: That foreign Models, whether they come from the enemies or from allies are ultimately unreliable. The Chinese tested all kinds of models — from Mr. Science, Mr. Democracy, the Socialist model of USSR, from all kinds of philosophical movements to social Utopias. All would not be depended upon when it comes to the future path and social destiny of the people. In a way this conviction of trusting or relying on your own people was borne out of the un-reliability of other things. If you do not trust your own people, on whom should you rely?

So the principle of refusal of any dependency models of any kind emerged. This should not be taken as rejection of any exchange. There should be a distinction between solidarity and aid.

Lesson Two: The emphasis upon basic needs and primary goals in any social transformation as over against luxury goods. There was tremendous focus on basic human needs as over against technological, intellectual or philosophical chocolates that can be passed around to appease the appetite for the time being.

Lesson Three: The immediate participation of the people both in the decisions that affect their lives and in the benefits of the production. I say immediately and not 20 or 30 years from now. This is against the classic

9

capitalist concept of development — that if you increase production now it will eventually trickle down to the people in the future.

2. Another aspect not strongly pointed out by Dr. Kurien is that self-reliance is primarily a political decision rather than a mechanism of economic growth. And because it is first of all a political decision, it is perfectly possible as experienced by China and Tanzania, that one might experience economic setbacks. At all levels, political values must be allowed to decide economic decisions because even within a self-reliance model if you let economics to rely on market laws you eventually evolve into a dependency model. This is exactly what is behind the Cultural Revolution. And all the economic experts in Harvard, Berkeley and Princeton said this was the work of a mad man. Because he was trying to put politics ahead of economics. Julius of Tanzania also made the same decision. In other words, self-reliance is not a smooth take-off from economic under-development to economic development. It could take all kinds of zigzag but it is important that the political goal should be in front of the economic goal.

3. Still one point which could have been given more time in Kurien's paper is that the struggle for self-reliance, as borne out of the experience of those who have opted for it, involves Cultural Revolution. It involves the transformation of values and the ethos of the people. Self-reliance must be accompanied by the cultural dimensions of social and political change. It is perhaps in this aspect that the role of the Christian community might become the most important.

Sukarno lamented at the height of his popularity that years after the Dutch left, the Indonesians still think like Dutch, act like Dutch and dress like Dutch, which is one way of saying that colonialism and imperialism are not mere social and political facts but total social and cultural facts. They. control both the external manifestations and internal and even mental structures of the social and political life of a people. The way of self-reliance must be accompanied by cultural self-reliance. This often is more difficult to bring about than the political and economic one. The cultural commitment to self-reliance implies a creation of certain forms of a new man and of

10

a new humanity. It implies repentance — a form of "metanoia". It implies a turning around from oneself to the needs of other people. A turning around from all kinds of reliances to the inner strength of one's community. It seems to me that in this cultural dimension the Christian community by the kinds of attachments, the kinds of communications it has which will in the long run influence the social and political order, will be able to help more than in other aspects.

P. PERERA

Kurien has done a good job on the economic presentation. I found that his paper, however, is lop-sided in that he missed one aspect of liberation and self-reliance which is important to us Asians. This is the liberation of the mind — an essential aspect of self-reliance. I think that there is a greater difficulty in liberating the Asian mind from foreign cultural domination.

I think this is a point that should have been given more emphasis because it is in this realm where students can find their role. I, for one, do not think that we can do much in the political and economic areas but we can definitely work in the struggle by liberating ourselves and helping others to free themselves from a mentality that prefers the foreign from the native or indigenous. This touches also the educational system of which we are a part.

I would also have liked a longer discussion on the role of faith in the struggle for self-reliance in Asia today. For if we examine Christianity or Buddhism, we will note that what has been taught us is the passive side of the faith not the radical one which touches on the social dimension of life. So in Sri Lanka, many of our Buddhist countrymen say that they are oppressed or poor, because of "karma". This means that they have sinned in their past life; so, they have to accept their present situation and condition. The Catholic schools in the same manner keep on preaching on turning the other cheek if somebody slaps you on one cheek. Such deterring influence of religion should be exposed; liberating education then should also happen within the Church and other religious communities.

ABRAHAM

I know of a fishing village which was in the clutches of moneylenders. They managed to organise co-operatives and eventually they became self-reliant and rich. The question is, in what way are they responsible for others. In a self-reliant society, there is a danger of its becoming too enclosed.

11

PELEGRI

Self-reliance must be combined with solidarity with others. This is a very hard thing to do. In developing self-reliance we are reaching a kind of balance situation wherein everybody must respect each other. It is very hard \ for social groups or countries which are weak. This is why solidarity from , other countries must come in.

SAMANA

I have just come back from China. We all know that China is one excellent example of self-reliance community in Asia — self-reliant not on a national level but more on a community level.

One thing I gathered which appears to be quite different from what we are doing here is that after 30 minutes of talk, the Chinese would then take us out to the field and show us exactly what they mean as examples of their struggle for self-reliance. And this is not only true in economics but on the total way of life.

Another impressing thing I saw in China is their process of socialisation, their education system — the process of educating their youngsters, how they promulgate a new man who is not only for himself but for his community. To realise this kind of struggle for self-reliance, the Chinese use the massline approach which means everything depends and evolves out of the common people. In other words, the working class and the peasantry are the centre of government operations, planning and the implementation of these plans.

To pursue this line of thinking and action, the education of the youngsters at elementary level through the university, including that of the teachers and professors, is based both on theory and practice. They do not only plant rice on the blackboard but they must be ready to grow grain themselves. So, at one moment they are teaching or studying, the next moment they are out in the fields. Moreover, there is a give-and-take relationship between students and teachers; the same relationship exists between the workers, the peasantry and the educated elite or technicians.

Some of us mentioned that politics takes command in Chinese political system. In other words, technocrats do not put technology as commanding over the political and social structure. It is the other way around. The feelings of the people, the aspirations of the people, the struggle of the people, the experiences of the peasantry from the beginning of Chinese history must be reflected in order to be of service. And that is China.

Speaking of my own area, the Pacific, I feel that there is a need to have decolonisation of the political structure, also a decolonisation of the

12

mentality of the people, a decolonisation beginning with ourselves. And one question which has always haunted me after this short visit to China is:

"How can I be effective in my own situation? Am I committed enough to take the words of self-reliance and reduce it to some practical and concrete expression?

FOO

But looking at historical realities, first in the experience of China and then Indochina, we can see that before the economic change could be effected, there had to be political victory first. Now, if they had tried to change the economic system and then the political system, I wonder where China would be today.

In the experience of Vietnam, we all know that the West had vested interests in Indochina. They came in with all the so-called aid and development and investments to tap the resources. The Indo-Chinese, particularly the Vietnamese, could not control their economy because political power backed by military might was behind the economic interests. So the Vietnamese had to wage a very protracted war to win political independence. Now they have started on a reconstruction stage of away of life-economic, social and political organisation and form — which is of their own choice, suited to their own needs and purpose.

MWANITU

One of the striking things about self-reliance is the whole idea of disengagement, i.e. the country trying to disengage itself from the capitalist economy, which is an International System. The decision to disengage from the capitalist system is a political decision. And that is why China, for example, had to cut itself off from the rest of the world. The political decision had to come and say, "Now we have to stop importing certain goods which are not relevant to the basic needs of the people".

We should also look into the connection between domination and exploitation and aid. Most of the aid that is coming, whether it is bilateral aid or multi-lateral aid, is negotiated by the governments. When governments accept aid, they also accept certain dependency models.

Now this is different from the case of, say, China, accepting technical

13

know-how and technology from the outside. Chairman Mao has always yielded on that point and he would always says, "Well, we need it". They have been able to solve this contradiction because they have a process of machinery by which a political decision is made in a manner which will serve the interest of the people. So, I think this Assembly should study this \ whole question of aid vis-à-vis self-reliance.

TUMIWA

I would like to refer to what is happening in the recently liberated zones of Asia. Liberation as well as the struggle for self-reliance is decisive. In my several talks with them, they always chide us with comments like:

"You people live an artificial life, a sophisticated approach which you cannot really afford. We were born simple and we shall maintain it that way. For example, why do you have to buy 10 shirts when you can live on 3 or 4 shirts. Why do we have to spend money on gasoline when an old bicycle can bring us to the place where we want to go. You are greatly influenced in creating your own needs". They continue to say: "We are proud of our politics. For now while you sponsor all kinds of beauty pageant contest, we have our beauty peasant contest".

Self-reliance could not be separated from the self - from one's identity. You have to know who you are and where you are living. Based on this then you can do something within the reality of your own situation.

LOVELOCK

I want to comment on a point in Dr. Kurien's paper. This is about so many people losing their land and becoming tenants instead of landowners. Just speaking about Australia - about approximately 3 or 4,000 years ago my ancestors and Bob's (Robert James Randall) migrated from Asia somewhere and sort of planted their seeds in Australia. They lived there, they had a culture of their own, religion and a form of ethics.

Around about 1790's Captain Cook was travelling around and stumbled upon us. After that colonization came and slowly we were pushed back. And slowly our land, our forms of life was carved up by the Whites, the English at this time. And this went on until we got pushed further back into the hills and interior. And over a period of years, it got up to the point where we are now — we're not even tenants!

14

NAKINCH

This idea of self-reliance might have to be learned from the people themselves, as they apply it in their own society or group. This is where the role of students comes in. I think what the students are trying to do in the rural areas ... in order to liberate the people ... is to educate them in the right manner towards the future ... to liberate them on the way they tackle a problem — in the direction that suits them. This is one thing that I realised from this trip to China. J

In Papua New Guinea, people have been oriented towards the capitalist system. It is very hard for students, the younger generation to go back and really re-educate them. They have the sort of orientation which we received from colonialism which is not very suitable for our future. This goes for the other Asian countries as well.

The students, the leaders of the country themselves need to get down to the grassroots level and really show what they are willing to preach and do. In most Asian countries, I believe the people do not know where to go or what to do. They do not know where the resources are available, they do not know the know-how of how to get to these resources. And here is where the students and other educated people would come in.

WINITANA

I would ally myself with my sister and brother from Australia, to just point out the difficulty that we have as a minority in our country. We are culturally dominated by another ethnic group. The emptiness brought about by the onslaught on us as an indigenous people from the Church and the economic and political forces have rid us of our cultural framework of life. By that I mean a feeling of communal way of life, a feeling of relationship to one another and also a feeling of an essence, i.e., the spiritual side of an indigenous person.

We feel alienated from you, in that the struggle you people are facing is perhaps a stage further than what we face. We feel that we do not even have the prospect of fighting such things as class oppression, the multinationals, etc.

The other thing that I would like to stress is the role of the Christian Church in our country. We have a saying that when the missionaries came to our country and also to Australia (from what I can understand), they said:

"Look at the sky and bow your heads and you will receive the benefits and fruits of that". At the same token, they started taking our lands away from us to the point where the Church is one of the biggest owners of land. I am not so sure that Christianity has a part to play among the indigenous

15

people. We have our own way of life, our own spiritual values, our own spiritual view, a cosmic view of the universe. What I am saying is — when you go back to your own country, look and see how has the Church harmed the indigenous people of your own land, see whether or not the Christian religion can work side by side with them or, in fact, totally destroy them as indigenous people.

SAIDI

In Indonesia, we have the type of student organizations which is based on all religions, for example Christian Student Movement, Catholic Student Movement and Muslim Student Association. We get together and we have already established our group which is called "Cipayung group". Cipayung is the name of the place where we discuss together the problems of the future of our country.

So, we have our own faith. I, myself am motivated by Islamic tenet. My friend, Shirato Syafei, President of Christian Student Movement, is motivated by Christian tenet. So we can get along. Why can't we get together to solve our problems because the problem to improve our economic life is not the problem of the Muslims of Indonesia, or of the Christians but the problems of all the people in Indonesia.