76 SOCIAL SCIENTIST
generated by social reforms and economic hardships which are inevitable, is then utilised to foment a civil war; even if the government succeeds in winning the civil war, unable to rebuild its shattered economy with the meagre resources at its command, it must go abroad for loans, at which point agencies like the IMF and the Bank come in, demanding a reversal of the reforms. While some years ago, there were dreams all over the third world of socialism of all kinds, not just Marxian socialism, but Nehruvian socialism, Nyerere's socialism, Jagan's socialism, and the like, today we find the drab grey of IMF 'conditionalities' painted all over the third world (and even in the erstwhile socialist world). Many of course would say that this is because of the 'follies' of the post-liberation regimes in the third world. This argument, to use our earlier analogy, amounts to saying that if the horse cpuld not clear all the obstacles, then it is the horse's fault. May be; in fact I would personally like to believe that the horse, if it is well-trained and intelligent, can clear all these obstacles. But the point is a different one: we should not, in our enthusiasm for blaming the horse, become blind to the obstacles. And the very fact that imperialism has been so successful in putting up obstacles, has been so adept at 'managing* potential challenges to its hegemony, has made us indifferent to its ubiquitous presence. Imperialism has learned that half a million troops do not have to be despatched everywhere; and unless there are half a million troops despatched somewhere, our moral indignation is not aroused, and we do not recognise the reality of imperialism. It is an irony of history that coercion, which is so effective that it can afford to be silent, is scarcely recognised as such; it is only on occasions when its effectiveness is diminished to a point where it has to come out in the ugliest of colours that its reality begins to strike us. The deafening silence about imperialism in the current Marxist discourse, especially in this country, is thus a reflection of the extraordinary strength and vigour it is displaying at present.
As Louis Althusser once remarked however, apropos the French CP's abandonment of the concept of 'dictatorship of the proletariat', theoretical concepts are not like a pair of old shoes that you can discard when you like; they come back to haunt you. In this case we are talking about a .concept which would come back to haunt us in a particufarly vicious manner. Thanks to the fact of imperialism, the possibility of revolutionary transformation within the metropolitan countries has receded far. If the concept is downplayed, the theoretical blow that this would strike against third world revolutionary movements, cannot but enforce a practical retreat on their part. If there is such a retreat, the reality of imperialism would only mean that the right-wing opposition to it within the third world would get strengthened. In other words, a weakening of the revolutionary opposition to imperialism would only spawn racist, fundamentalist and xenophobic movements in the third world.