72 SOCIAL SCIENTIST likely adverse consequences on the level of real wages for other sections of the working class. This conclusion can however be contested on a number of grounds. In the first place, it may be argued that one should not concentrate exclusively on the effect of the rise in farm price on real wages, but also should take into account the overall impact on the conditions of living of the toiling peasantry as a consequence of the enlargement of the scale of production and therefore employment opportunities; after all, an upward adjustment in product prices does offer an incentive to the producers. What do the facts indicate? Between 1964-65 and 1970-71, the rise in farm output in Punjab and Haryana was of the order of roughly 80 percent. This was however mostly the result of the induction of the high-yielding varieties of seeds; net employment of the toiling peasantry hardly went up. The position appears to have been no better in the case of other states. A second caveat that could be entered would be concerning the middle peasantry, at least some of whom do produce for the market and therefore have a stake, other things assuming to be the same, in a rise in farm prices. For advancing the cause of the working class as a whole, it might be considered to be an important ingredient of policy to try to harmonize the interests of the middle peasantry with those of small farmers and agrarian workers. On the issue of farm prices, a clear conflict of interests might emerge between the toiling peasants and sections of the middle peasants who succeed in rising a surplus. How to resolve this conflict? In terms of numerical strength, the middle peasantry constitutes a significant minority compared to farm workers, sharecroppers and small farmers. Confronted with this problem an administration, which is in sympathy with the cause of the toiling masses, should not opt for an increase in farm prices, since the impact of such a measure would be all-pervading and affect adversely the majority of the working class, most of whom, in most parts of our country, have still a long way to go toward acquiring the weaponry necessary to defend against attacks on their standard of living. A Left-leaning administration must thus resist pressures for conceding—or supporting—continuous increases in farm prices. At the same time, the interests of the middle peasantry could be taken care of by a policy of selective subsidies. If adequate incentives need to be offered to the middle peasants, such incentives could assume the form of special dispensations for the purchase of inputs, including fertillizer, seeds and irrigation water, and in the supply of credit. One great advantage of a policy