Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

Lessons of Empire: How to Unravel an Unchecked Superpower

By Pratap Chatterjee and Nick Robins, CorpWatch. Posted August 22, 2007.


India's history provides timeless lessons on how (and how not) to confront corporate power with protest, litigation, regulation, rebellion and, ultimately, corporate redesign.
Advertisement

Two villagers who left their mud and wood huts last month to travel to London -- Kumuti Majhi and Phulme Majhi -- were a stark contrast to the 212,000 wealthy Indians who visited Britain last year on shopping expeditions where they outspent Japanese tourists. The villagers' mission, rather than the acquisition of designer clothing or the latest electronics, was to try to save the livelihoods of their small tribe that grows millet, fruit and spices in the lushly-forested Niyamgiri hills in eastern India.

On August 1, 2007, the Majhis spoke out at the annual general meeting of Vedanta Resources PLC, a British multinational that is poised to dig a new bauxite mine that threatens the village of Jaganathpur. While Vedanta is incorporated in Britain, it is owned by Anil Agarwal, the world's 230th richest man according to the Forbes 2007 list, a former scrap metal merchant who was born in eastern India. (See Vedanta Undermines Indian Communities, by Nityanand Jayaraman.)

The timing of the Mahji's trip to Britain and the protests back in India have a much wider significance. 2007 is marked by a trinity of anniversaries that recall India's conquest, first struggles and eventual liberation from British rule. On August 14th, India celebrates 60 years of independence. Earlier in the year, commemorations took place for the 150th anniversary of the great rebellion against British rule in 1857 -- known in the UK as the 'mutiny' and on the sub-continent as the 'first war of independence.' This trinity of historic milestones is completed with the 250th anniversary of the pivotal battle of Plassey in June 1757, when the private army of Britain's East India Company (which was often referred to simply as the "Company") defeated the forces of the Nawab (ruler) of Bengal (in eastern India), ushering in first corporate and then imperial domination.

It is this legacy of collusion between global corporations and the expansionist state that makes this year so poignant and full of enduring lessons. Its history provides timeless lessons on how (and how not) to confront corporate power with protest, litigation, regulation, rebellion and, ultimately, corporate redesign. Many of today's corporate struggles are prefigured in the resistance to the Company's rise to power. Again and again, "the return of the East India Company" is used as a catch-phrase to describe the recent influx of multinationals into India, whether global mining corporations or foreign business more generally.

And the Mahji's journey follows in the footsteps of others who have travelled to London to seek redress from corporate abuse. In August 1769, for example, two Armenian merchants, Johannes Rafael and Gregore Cojamaul arrived at London's docks. The two were rich men and had made their fortunes in India's most prosperous region, Bengal. However, Rafael, Cojamaul and two others had been summarily arrested by the Company's chief executive in Bengal, Harry Verelst, who then held them for more than five months under guard. When they were released, they found that the Company had pressured its puppet, the Nawab of Bengal, to change the rules of the game and ban all Armenians from the Bengal market. Sailing around the world to where the Company was headquartered, Rafael and Cojamaul appealed to its board of directors, complaining of their "cruel and inhuman" treatment.

The striking continuity of protest over the centuries is largely buried in today's celebration of India's surge to economic prominence. Tata's acquisition of Anglo-Dutch steel group Corus earlier in the year has been seen by many as symbolizing the end of Britain's era of industrial supremacy. Tata had already bagged the UK's iconic tea blend, Tetley, and its automotive arm may be lining up a bid for Land Rover. Writing recently in the Financial Times, Malvinder Hohan Singh, the chief executive of Indian pharmaceutical company Ranbaxy, caught the mood: "500 years ago, a company was formed in London that directly led to British rule in India [and] there appears to be some concern that there is evidence of a reverse trend."

This theme of reversal has also influenced India's popular media, most strikingly in a TV advertisement for Rajnigandha pan masala. Set in London, the ad shows an Indian tycoon stopping his car in front of the East India Company's headquarters and announcing to his secretary that he wants to buy the firm: "They ruled us for 200 years, and now it's our turn."


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: multinationals, india, colonialism, trade

Pratap Chatterjee is managing editor of CorpWatch and the author of 'Iraq Inc.' (Seven Stories Press, September 2004). Nick Robins is author of The Corporation that Changed the World: How the East India Company Shaped the Modern Multinational (Pluto, 2006)



Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Great moments in corporate propaganda
Posted by: eddie torres on Aug 23, 2007 1:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
John Holwell, East India Company employee and temporary Governor of Bengal, wrote an account of the "Black Hole of Calcutta" incident in which 123 captured British and loyalist Indian prisoners suffocated to death in a cramped jail cell in 1756.

The account of the "Black Hole of Calcutta" was published in a journal called "The Annual Register" two years (1758) after the event apparently occurred, and a year after the Battle of Plassey (1757) where 3000 British-controlled soldiers and mercenaries defeated a Bengal army. This led to complete control of Bengal's mercantile wealth by the East India Company.

The exact details of Holwell's version of the story were questioned later by historians. But its direct effect was to line up British subjects and decision makers behind the East India Company's expanding dominance of the subcontinent, and it provided easy-to-digest justification for the Company's power to tax Mughal lands and command Mughal troops.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've Seen the Book by Robins. It is Fantastic and I highly recommend it!!
Posted by: yellow on Aug 28, 2007 10:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One of the things that this book makes clear, as do many books like it, is that Imperialism is not a policy, it is an historic stage of Capitalism's long term development. The legacy of this early rooting of the current patterns of capitalist exploitation of the third world in 17th Century imperialism is the presently seen patterns of uneven developement between the first and third world. The current charactoristics of third world dependant development is lower levels of industrialization mostly confined to low value added producing export platforms like the Mexican Maquilador's with little backward linkage into the local economy, low levels of technology transfer from the first world and technological develoment, extensive foreign control of the local economy, a high proportion of the GDP taken up by primary commodity exports and agriculture, large, low wage urban informal sectors that barely absorb poor rural migrants, high foreign debt service ratios/GDP or export income, poor terms of trade, a primitive or non-existent machine tool industry, weak local currency and foreign loan dependancy for foreign exchange needs making the country vulnerable to IMF imposed stabilization programs as terms for loans.

The above charactoristics show that the overall income gap which has been growing between the first and third world, about three to one in 1820 and nearing twenty to one currently, stem from the extension of capitalist relations of production through exploitative economic relations with the first world. Trade has not brought equality and development but only inequality and growing poverty and dependancy to the third world. Negative terms of trade allow dollars and other hard currencies to pile up in first world central banks to be loaned out to the third world to meet dire foreign exchange needs. This dependancy assures that the third world will always readjust its economic policies to suit first world corporations. The total foreign buyout of much of Latin America's telecommunications systems through financially brokered privatization deals in the 1980s and 90s was closely related to economic crisis and foreign debt. The vulnerability of the third world through its historic linkage to the first world has its formative epoch in the period discussed by the Robins.

The third world didn't naturally emerge in history. It was created by capitalist imperialism as a complimentary, yet subordinate linkage to the first world economies which which monopolize most of the production and draw all the profit out of the total world economy through these unequal inter-relations and patterns of integration. Robins' book shows the origins of this pattern. It began with the early penetration of the third world economies by Europe four hundred years ago.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]