The farmer’s biggest enemy? The Indian state

印度农民最大的敌人是谁?印度政府

The late farmer leader Sharad Joshi used to recite a poem that described the Indian farmer’s plight perfectly. It addresses the non-farmer from the farmer’s point of view, and it goes: “Marte hum bhi hain, marte tum bhi ho./ Marte hum bhi hain, marte tum bhi ho./ Hum sasta bech ke marte hain,/Tum mahanga khareedke marte ho.”

I would translate it thus: “I die, my friend, and so do you./ I die, my friend, and so do you./ I sell my produce cheap, and die./ You pay so much that you die too.”

已故农民领袖沙拉德•乔希曾作过一首诗，很好地描述了印度农民的困境，从农民的角度对非农民群体发声，诗文大致意思如下:“我死了，我的朋友，你也死了。我因廉价出售农产品而死，你因支付过高的价格而死。”

This beautiful shair expresses an old truth that many journalists wrote about anew this week, as protesting farmers congregated on Delhi: the gap between what farmers get for their produce, and what the consumer pays. One report revealed that a farmer sold tomatoes at Rs 2 per kg, and consumers bought them for Rs 20. Too little; and too much. Both the farmers and consumers were getting killed by this, just like in the poem.

这首诗表达了一条亘古真理，在抗议农民聚集在德里之际，很多记者也重新报道了这个真理：农民从农产品中获得的收入与消费者支付的价格之间的存在差价。一份报告显示，一位农民以每公斤2卢比的价格出售西红柿，而消费者却要以20卢比的价格购买。农民获得的收入太低，而消费者支付的价格太高。农民和消费者都因此而丧生，就像诗里写的那样。

Joshi’s insight in the late 1970s was that this was caused not by the greed of middlemen, but the interference of the Indian state. The state had set forth rules that the farmer could not sell his produce in an open market, responding to supply and demand, but only to a government-appointed body called the Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC). Because the farmers are not allowed to sell to anyone else, they are forced to take the price offered to them. And because all produce comes through the APMC, buyers also have no bargaining power.

上世纪70年代末，乔希的观点是，造成这种现象的原因不是中间商的贪婪，而是国家的干预。国家规定，农民不能在公开市场上出售农产品，只能向政府指定的机构-农产品市场委员会(APMC)出售。因为不允许农民卖给其他人，农民被迫接受他们定的价格。所有产品都由农产品市场委员会经销，所以买家也没有讨价还价的能力。

Now imagine what would happen if the free market was allowed to operate. Middlemen would compete to buy goods from farmers, and that competition would ensure that farmers would get a better price. They would also compete for customers, thus ensuring that customers would pay less. Instead of farmers selling for Rs 2 and the consumer buying for Rs 20, you could have the farmer selling for Rs 10 and the consumer buying for Rs 12. Both farmer and consumer would benefit by Rs 8 per kg. But the government does not allow this, and both farmers and consumers get hurt.

现在想象一下，如果允许自由市场运作，会发生什么。中间商将竞相从农民手中购买农产品，这种竞争将确保农民得到更好的价格。中间商还会争夺客户，从而确保客户能得到更优惠的价格。以前是农民以2卢比的价格出售，消费者以20卢比的价格购买，取而代之的将是农民以10卢比的价格出售，消费者以12卢比的价格购买。每出售一公斤，农民将多得8卢比，而消费者也将省下8卢比。但是政府不允许这样做，所以农民和消费者都会受到伤害。

Joshi referred to this notional cost paid by the farmer as a ‘negative subsidy’. He viewed it, correctly, as theft. The state, he asserted, is responsible for the poverty of the farmer. And this is not the only way in which the government is crippling our farmers.

乔希将农民支付的名义成本称为“负补贴”，国家应对农民的贫困负责。然而，这并不是政府重创农民的唯一方式。

The state doesn’t allow free markets in inputs, because of which many of the inputs, from seeds to fertilisers to energy to even credit, are either hard to come by or of a low quality. And when farmers do manage to produce crops, they are not allowed to get the best price for it, as an open market would enable. By denying them freedom, the state effectively imprisons our farmers in what a friend of mine calls PPP: Perpetually Planned Poverty.

国家不允许投入方面的自由市场，正因如此，从种子到化肥，从能源到信贷，要么难以获得，要么质量低下。而且，当农民设法种植农作物时，他们不能像在开放市场一样得到最好的价格。通过剥夺他们的自由，国家实际上把我们的农民囚禁在PPP（Perpetually Planned Poverty.）中：有计划的永久贫困。

This extends not just to produce, but to their property. Farmers are not allowed to sell their land for non-agricultural purposes. This restricts their market to other farmers, and ensures that the price is so low that it becomes pointless to sell. It has been estimated that some farmland would be forty times as valuable if this law did not exst.

这不仅延伸到农业生产，而且还波及到农民的财产。农民不得将土地出售用作非农业用途。这就限制了他们只能出售给其他农民，价格势必非常低，以至于出售土地变得毫无意义。据估计，如果没有这项法律，一些农田的价值将是现在的40倍。

Indeed, a common scam is for a crony of the state to acquire land from farmers, through the state, at low prices, and then get the land-use certificate changed so that they can sell at many multiples of that price. All perfectly legal — and deeply unethical. This is how Robert Vadra was alleged to have made his money, in fact.

事实上，一个常见的骗局是和政府有裙带关系的人以低价从农民手中收购土地，然后获得土地使用权证书，这样他们就可以高出原价很多倍的价格出售这些土地。一切完全合法，但却非常不道德。事实上，罗伯特•瓦德拉（前国大党总理拉吉夫·甘地的女婿）被指控通过这种途径赚钱。

Every political party in our history has let our farmers down, but there is a reason things are coming to a head now. India is already facing a jobs crisis, made worse by the deepening of the agricultural crisis. With every generation, land holdings get smaller — one farmer’s land is split among multiple children — and more and more unsustainable. It is no coincidence that many recent popular uprisings have been around demand for jobs from land-owning castes like Jats, Patidars and Marathas

历史上的每一个政党都让我们的农民失望，但现在事态发展到了紧要关头是有原因的。印度已经面临着一场就业危机，而农业危机的加深使其雪上加霜。每一代人的土地持有量都在减少——一个农民的土地分给了多个孩子——而且越来越不可持续。最近许多民众起义都是围绕着贾特、帕蒂达和马拉地等拥有土地的种姓对工作岗位的需求展开的，这并非巧合。

Indian agriculture has been in crisis for decades. More than 50% of our country is in the agricultural sector, producing 14% of our GDP. In develo countries, less than 10% of the population works in agriculture. Here, we have trapped our farmers in poverty, and also not allowed the industrial revolution that would have provided an escape route. We pay lip service to farmers, but instead of making the necessary structural reforms, we give handouts like farm loan waivers that provide only temporary relief.

It is like handing aspirin to a burning man. “Here,” we say, “take this for the pain.” And everybody claps.

几十年来，印度农业一直处于危机之中。我国50%以上的人口从事农业生产，占国内生产总值的14%。在发展家，只有不到10%的人口从事农业。在印度，我们把农民困在了贫困之中，还不允许工业革命为他们提供一条出路。我们对农民作口头承诺，但没有进行必要的结构性改革，而是提供一些施舍，比如农业贷款减免，而且这些施舍只能带来暂时的缓解。这就像给一个烧着的人阿司匹林：“给，拿这个去止痛。”

印度时报读者评论：

译文来源：三泰虎 http://www.santaihu.com/46657.html  译者：Jessica.Wu

外文：https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Amit - 3 hours ago -Follow

APMC is brain child of Congress to oblige it's people and purposes ,,,, this is called planned looting method ,

农产品市场委员会是国大党的杰作，为了满足他们的目的，这也被称为有计划的搜刮方式。

sr Mohanty - bhubaneshwar - 3 hours ago -Follow

Evry body knows this. Tell how to implement.

using word like indian state the biggest enemy sounds more co unists propaganda

每个人都知道是这么回事，说说如何解决。

True - 3 hours ago -Follow

totally misleading information being spread in this article...Already Maharashtra govt Haryana govt led by bjp removed middleman by removing APMC act. i dont know about other states

这篇文章中传播的完全是误导性的信息……在人民党领导下的马哈拉施特拉邦政府已经通过了废除农产品市场委员会的法案，消除了中间商。但我不清楚其他邦的情况。

Why Support Antiindia - Others - 3 hours ago -Follow

These so called farmer leaders make fool of farmers...they enjoy all the money and power and talk about farmers doing nothing...their only job is to talk and protest about farmers crisis.

这些所谓的农民领袖只会愚弄农民。他们享受所有的金钱和权力，在那谈论农民，除此之外什么也不做。他们唯一的工作就是谈论和抗议农民危机。

Pcp - Haldwani-Kathgodam - 3 hours ago -Follow

This article in my opinion is misleading and half truth. APMCs are there to protect interest of farmers to provide them market to sell their produce as whole sale dealers used to exploit them

在我看来，这篇文章有误导性，半真半假。农产品市场委员会的存在是为了保护农民的利益，为他们提供市场，销售他们的产品，因为批发商过去常常剥削他们。