BOOK REVIEWS 123 system and co-operation was automatically ensured with oiher constituent parts of the system once this was granted. Who Wants Stability? The so-called 'Keynesian Revolution^ placed new policy weapons in the hands of the bourgeoisie to ensure stability of the economy and its smooth functioning free from the vagaries of fluctuations. It did not envisage any change in the pattern of production relations; on the contrary, it desparately wanted to show that the production relations under the capitalist system can withstand the challenge of increasingly severe crises by manipulating the monetary and fiscal policies of the government. The inadequacy of the Keynesian tech^ques to save capitalism from the impact of recurring crises was manifested in the subsequent period and is more clearly evident today when the capitalist system is caught up in the inextricable web of a widening and deepening crisis, generated out of its own inherent contradictions. The impact ofKeynes on the Indian bourgeoisie has been direct though stability has not b^en the principal hallmark of its approach to problems. It wanted to expand and develop the relatively underdeveloped infrastructure to faciliate efficient exploitation of the natural and human resources and to reach an optimum size and level of production for turning the economies of scale into profit maximization. This is quite evident from the following passage quoted by E M S Namboodiripad from the pioneering work, The Planned Economy/or India by Sir M. Visvesvaraya: '•It is safe for this country to proceed along the lines practised in such capitalist countries as France and United States of America. We have yet to build up some measure of moderate industrial prosperity and for the present capitalism is best suited for that purpose." Whereas the main anxiety of the Keynesian system was to ensure stability in the economy involving active governmental co-operation, the Indian bourgeoisie wanted to create a strong and favourable base for further development of capitalism and to utilize the state machinery towards that end without, of course, permit^ng such utilization to interfere with its own class interests. The underlying objective is stated explicitly or implicit^in the Visvesvaraya Plan, the Bombay Plan and the other schemes hatched by the ruling classes. Gainers and Losers It is axiomatic that the dominant class w^ould utilize the entire socio-economic fabric to further its class interests. Professed targets notwithstanding, the results of Indian planning so far have demonstrated beyond any doubt that only the interests of the dominant class have been served to the exclusion of everybody else. E M S Namboodiripad has shown, with facts and figures, how effectively this has been achieved. The widening disparities in income and wealth, the continual reduction in the share of the national wealth for the working people and a corresponding