Skip to main content

Healthcare: Total nationalisation can mean 'strengthening' bureaucracy, state power

By KP Sasi*
Nationalisation of healthcare is not a simple idea to be pushed. Even with the existence of the private sector and the public sector in healthcare we are not in a position to deal sufficiently with the healthcare that is required. The non-government sector includes a large number of charities and missions in deep areas in India.
Apart from this, there is a whole range of indigenous healthcare systems also which need not cater to a centralised state or profit-oriented private capital. Therefore, we should be clear about what we are asking for. It is not like nationalisation of banks or any other sector of our economy. We are in a situation where the comparison for healthcare can not be provided neither by the State nor by private capital.
Healthcare in such a context cannot be simplified within the framework of earlier political jargon. If you say nationalisation of pharmaceutical drug industry, I am all for it.
But if you say that a number of charities motivated by the elements of compassion or many small experiments in Ayurvedic hospitals or the hospital initiated by Shankar Guha Neogi for mine workers or the hospital initiated for Bhopal survivors outside the clutches of government and private capital or for that matter many Adivasi healthcare traditional institutions operating without the degrees or stamps of private capital or government -- I would say I am against it.
What should be promoted more is community healthcare where compassion towards patients can be expressed more on personal terms, since both the doctor as well as the patients would be accountable to the community. But even that can not be a formula for India today.
Therefore, this should be treated as a discussion between the concerned sections rather than as a debate between privatisation or nationalisation. Before publicising, I think we should put our minds together collectively, not just within ourselves, but also among the like minded friends.
But that does not restrict us in making concrete demands like demilitarisation and investment of such money on healthcare. We are directly demanding to strengthen life and peace instead of war and destruction of life.
I would like to thank Dr Maya Valecha for initiating this discussion. The scope of the discussion can also go to some kind of evaluation on why a very revolutionary slogan called ‘Health for All by 2000 AD' collapsed after initiating major hopes all over the world. Many countries including India stood by this slogan. Countries where healthcare was nationalised also stood by it. The World Health Organization (WHO) itself had projected some reasons for its failure. But I have not come across any serious critical evaluation after its collapse from the activist circles.
The model of healthcare in Cuba is certainly promising and providing us hopes. However, we must also remember that healthcare was part of the Cuban revolution itself. In Indian context, politics and healthcare stand as two separate entities. Therefore, we must strengthen the discussions on the politics of healthcare and the existing available alternatives to us at this moment.
What should be promoted more is community healthcare where compassion towards patients can be expressed more on personal terms
Our public healthcare system is still within the framework of a western model, where environment is not a part of healthcare. In country like like India where the largest population of hungry people in the world exist today, health, environment and economics must go together.
There are concrete hopes coming from some Scandinavian countries also. Some of them have come from the traditions of social democrats. These hopes are also worth investigating. How many of these countries pushed their governments to take care of the old and disabled (differently abled is the correct word) is something that activists can do even before nationalisation in India.
I do believe that if active mobilisation and campaigns are initiated in India for the government to take up the responsibility of such concrete areas, changes can be made without much delay. Our own activist traditions need to be oriented to understand the political relevance of such campaigns.
I would say such steps are necessary before we reach a stage of demanding a total nationalisation. And a total nationalisation ignoring many of these areas can only mean strengthening of a bureaucracy and strengthening the power of the state over human bodies. In today's situation of the entry of technological growth for surveillance and its power to control human body, it is too important to discuss the implications of control of body by the State.
***
My input here is only as a part of a discussion, more as a search rather than a finalisation of a political stand. From that perspective, I would like to ask Maya Valecha, how should one look at our rivers, lakes, forests and hills. We are dealing mainly with two interests here -- of the state and Capital.
Chief Seattle
If you look at many of the indigenous traditions (Chief Seattle's statement is an example), they cannot be `owned' by anybody. What is required is to provide the rights of the communities where communities will not lose their rights to 'take' care and not 'own'. The Forest Rights Act was drafted in this perspective.
We are in a similar situation when we talk about human health. It is too important at this stage when both state and private capital has been insufficient to deal with our health requirements. There is also a danger of the existing community health practices to be ripped apart, if we provide total control to any of these sectors.
In Bangladesh, Gonosasthaya Kendra under the leadership of Dr Zafarullah Chowdhury has executed some remarkable progress from the perspective of community health. What we really need is such efforts with a strong ethical vision on health. We are yet to talk about health leaders with strong foundations of community.
If people cannot control health, then what makes one think that a nation or capital can control it and take it to a positive direction? Honestly, do you really believe that if healthcare is nationalised a leader like Modi can take it to a positive direction?
Therefore, it is time that we start thinking slightly away from the existing paradigms of state and capital before we offer our bodies for their control. Having said that I would still argue that nationalisation is a good dream which is desirable. But it is just like asking for a revolution when people are in no mood for it.
---
*Film maker, writer, activist. This is in response to Dr Maya Valecha’s article in Counterview “Case for nationalising India's healthcare system amidst 'strong' private control”. Dr Valecha's reply to follow

Comments

Dr Maya Valecha said…
I agree with most of your points on ecology. Will reply in detail.
I am a strong supporter of rights of aadivasis, was part of NBA in a limited way. Propagate widely for stopping climate change and limit the use of even so called renewable energy after stopping fossil fuels, because overuse in long term can have adverse effects. Locally promoting biogas.
I am not against any indigenous treatments, rather their promotion is either hampered by existing commercial allopathic empire or overuse again for creating commercial products.
Nationalization will stop this anomaly. If people take things in their own hands, including political power, the results will be different.
If any demand stirs people, political awareness increases. I am not seeing this as being implemented by Modi.
It's a long way. But we have to start.
All your worries seem to arise from the fact that you see nationalisation superimposed on all systems unchanged. Whereas I see at a time when during the course of the movement for it, with increasing political awareness scenario will be different.

TRENDING

India reaches 8th of 10 stage genocide: US Muslim advocacy group raises 'alert'

By Hena Zuberi* India has reached the 8th stage of genocide with the persecution of the Muslim community. Stating this, Professor Greg Stanton, who heads Genocide Watch, declared a Genocide Emergency Alert for India today at Justice For All online briefing.

Mayawati's 'success' depends on how BSP taps new crop of young Amdekarite leaders

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat*  Whatever be the election results in Uttar Pradesh on March 10, it is extremely important to understand: that the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and its leader Mayawati have the potential to rise like a Phoenix any time.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Anti-poor? 'Cumbersome' to link aadhaar, voter ID for people sans internet access

By Prashant Kumar Chaudhary, Ajit Kumar Jaiswal*  At present, technology plays an increasingly crucial part in modelling human existence by offering a variety of solutions to many of the challenges individuals confront in the real world. As a result, every branch of research works to provides means to solve these difficulties precisely and efficiently. The Central government works along the same lines as well.

India's actual Covid death rate about 2500 per million, third highest in world: Study

By Rajiv Shah  There is now well-researched proof, if it can be called that, indicating that the Government of India may have fudged data to show lower Covid death rate. A new paper, published in “Science”, has said that while officially the Government of India’s Covid-related death estimates as of January 1, 2022 – 345 per million population – are one-seventh of the US death rate, the actual analysis of crude death rate in India suggests, this may be a gross underestimation. 

Democratic leaders silently greeting Modi's 'increasingly autocratic' rule: HRW

Counterview Desk The Human Rights Watch (HRW)’s new “World Report 2022: Events of 2021”, claiming to “investigate abuses, expose facts widely, and pressure those with power to respect rights and secure justice”, has identified India as one of the countries where “autocracy is ascendant and democracy on the decline” because of emergence of leaders with autocratic tendencies.

Barbaric, inhuman attack on Odisha villagers to implement JSW project: NGO networks

Counterview Desk  A “solidarity statement" issued by three top civil society networks, Friends of the Earth India (FoE India), Delhi Solidarity Group (DSG) and the National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM), has asked the Odisha chief minister to ensure that the “inhumane barbaric attack on the villagers of Dhinkia, Odisha” in order to implement a corporate project.

Gender insensitive? Model Gujarat's cyclone relief package ignores 40,000 fisherwomen

CSJ volunteers talking to fisherwomen By Rajiv Shah  A Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) note on the Gujarat government’s compensation package to the victims of the devastating Tauktae cyclone, which hit the coastal belt of Saurashtra's Amerli, Rajula, Una, and Gir-Somnath districts in May 2021, has said, the relief offered was so terribly inadequate that many of the fisherfolk were not able to fish for the rest of the year.

Buddhist shrines were 'massively destroyed' by Brahmanical rulers: Historian DN Jha

Nalanda mahavihara By Our Representative Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book , "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

Haridwar call for genocide direct result of Modi 'tolerating' Islamophobic policies

By Our Representative  A high-level briefing organised in Washington DC, in which as many as 17 human rights and interfaith organizations -- including Amnesty International USA, Genocide Watch and Hindus for Human Rights, apart from several persons in their individual capacity -- participated, has come down heavily on what they called "Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Islamophobic policies and tolerance of open incitement by Hindu extremists for a genocide of Muslims."