2 SOCIAL SCIENTIST its pages available for publishing the results. In an earlier number too (104), we had published a paper by C P Ghandrasekhar and Prabir Purkayastha providing an estimate of transfer pricing in this very industry. We are happy to follow it up with Sridhar Krishna's paper in this number, which should be particularly interesting to students of economics. Amal Sanyal's paper as well as Biswajit Dhar's note are both concerned with the recent trend towards "economic liberalisation". While Dhar documents it with reference to the new import-export policy, Sanyal underlines the contradictory nature of the policy shift and attempts an explanation for it. While "liberalisation" and allowing greater scope for private "enterprise" is a fact, the new guidelines on "convertibility" indicate a move in an apparently opposite direction. This contradiction he explains with reference to the nature of the state, which lands it, on the one hand, in a fiscal crisis, from which "liberalisation" is seen as a way out, and which entails, on the other hand, a striving on its part to maintain its vantage position through insistence on "convertibility". Sanyal's particular reading of the nature of the state and its relative autonomy may be controversial, but surely the realm in which he is seeking answers to the apparent riddle of the recent policy shifts is the correct one. Likewise^ the existence of a fiscal crisis and its origin in the fact that in an economy like ours the budget becomes an arena of struggle over distributive shares, are eminently worth drawing attention to, and constitute essential elements of any study of the political economy of Indian development. SanyaPs point about the deprivation and impoverishment of unorganised workers, especially the agricultural labourers, finds a striking confirmation in D P Ghanghas's paper. Even in a so-called "prosperous" state like Haryana, which has been a prime "beneficiary" of the "Green Revolution", the money wage increases obtained by rural workers in general and agricultural labourers in particular, have not kept pace with the increase in the relevant consumer price index. Critics of course would argue that Ghanghas's data do not throw light on "real" earnings; since the number of days of employment may have increased, a decline in "real" wage rates does not necessarily mean a decline in annual "real" earnings. But what is crucial for the rate of exploitation is the "real" wage rate. The Haryana data quoted in the paper testify to a substantial increase in the rate of exploitation in the countryside in a "Green Revolution" area. And finally we publish C Jayaraj's note which seeks to explain the recent U S hostility to the U N system, a hostility no longer confined to diatribes but even involving pulling out from specific organisations, by outlining the evolution of this system from a mere rubber-stamp for the U S policies to an active forum for the articulation of Third World demands on a host of crucial issues.