|
Online edition of India's National Newspaper Saturday, January 01, 2000 |
|
Front Page |
National |
International |
Regional |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Classified |
Employment |
Features |
Employment |
Index |
Home |
|
Opinion
| Previous
| Next
The wise elephant
By Gurcharan Das
TODAY IS the first day of the 21st Century and a good time to
take stock. The ascent of a country from poverty to prosperity,
from tradition to modernity is a great and fascinating
enterprise. India has recently emerged as a vibrant, free market
democracy after the economic reforms and it has begun to flex its
muscles in the global information economy. The old centralised,
bureaucratic state, which killed our industrial revolution over
the past 50 years, has begun a subtle but definite decline. The
lower castes have gradually risen through the ballot box.
Most Indians instinctively grasp the spirituality and poverty of
India. But the significance of this quiet social and economic
revolution eludes us. The change is partially based on the rise
of social democracy, but more importantly on a sustained 5-7 per
cent annual economic growth that India has experienced for the
past two decades. It has tripled the size of the middle class,
which is expected to become half the Indian population within a
generation. In the end, this ``silent revolution'' is more
significant than the constantly changing fortunes of political
leaders that so absorb us.
In the Fifties, we passionately believed in Nehru's dream of a
modern and just India. But as the years went by, we discovered
that Nehru's economic path was taking us to a dead-end and the
dream soured. Having set out to create socialism, we found that
we had instead created statism. We were caught in a thick jungle
of Kafkaesque bureaucratic controls. Our sense of disillusionment
reached its peak during Indira Gandhi's autocratic rule in the
Seventies. There was a glimmer of hope when Rajiv Gandhi became
Prime Minister in the Eighties, but it quickly died when we
discovered that he did not have what it takes. It was not until
July 1991 that our mood of despair finally lifted with the
announcement of sweeping liberalisation by the minority
Government of Narasimha Rao. It was as though our second
independence had arrived: we were going to be free from a
rapacious and domineering state. Although the reforms have been
slow, hesitant and incomplete, they have set in motion a process
of profound change in Indian society. It is as important a
turning point as Deng's revolution in China in December 1978.
In part, the past 50 years are a story of the betrayal of the
last two generations by India's rulers. In stubbornly persisting
with the wrong model of development (especially after 1970, when
there was clear evidence that this path was doomed), they
suppressed growth and jobs and denied their people an opportunity
to rise above poverty. It is ironic that men and women of
goodwill created this order and they were widely admired. After
all, they had succeeded in institutionalising democracy. The
tragedy is that they pig-headedly refused to change course in the
Seventies in the name of the poor. The worst indictment of Indian
socialism is that in the end it did very little for the poor. All
the countries of East Asia did far better. Our failure in the end
was less from ideology and more from poor management.
To top this tale of India's lost decades members of the Indian
ruling elite are not contrite. They complacently proclaim,
``after all, we have done rather well compared to the 3.5 per
cent Hindu rate of growth''. There is no more defeatist
expression in the dictionary than this fatalistic phrase. They
feel no humiliation that India has lagged behind in a Third
Worldish twilight while its neighbours in East and South East
Asia have gone ahead. There is no feeling of shame that countries
with a fraction of India's natural and human resource potential
have created some of the most prosperous societies in the world.
They have used the recent troubles of East Asia to justify our
incomplete and frustratingly slow reforms. When individuals
blunder, it is unfortunate and their families go down. When
rulers fail, it is a national tragedy.
Indians have not traditionally accorded a high place to making
money. Hence, the merchant or bania is placed third in the four-
caste hierarchy, behind the brahmin and the kshatriya, and only a
step ahead of the labouring shudra. Since the economic reforms,
making money has become increasingly respectable and the sons of
brahmins and kshatriyas are getting MBAs and want to become
entrepreneurs. India is in the midst of a social revolution
rivalled, perhaps, only by the ascent of Japan's merchant class
during the 1968 Meiji Restoration, which helped transform Japan
from an underdeveloped group of islands into a thriving, modern
society and economy.
The beginning of the 21st century is a time of ferment. Two
global trends have converged - both of which work to India's
advantage, and raise the hope that it may finally take-off. One,
is a liberal revolution that has swept the globe in the past
decade, opened economies that were isolated for 50 years and
integrated them spectacularly into one global economy. India's
economic reforms are part of this trend. They are dismantling
controls and releasing the long-suppressed energies of Indian
entrepreneurs. They are changing the national mindset, especially
among the young. Because we are endowed with commercial castes,
we may be in a better position to take advantage of this global
tendency. Banias understand from birth the power of compound
interest; hence, they know how to accumulate capital.
Meanwhile, the information economy is transforming the world -
this is the second global trend. We may not be tinkerers, but we
are a conceptual people. Thus, the knowledge age potentially
plays to our advantage and our success in software and the
Internet is the first emerging evidence. We have wrestled with
the abstract concepts of the Upanishads for 3,000 years. We
invented the zero. Just as spiritual space is invisible, so is
cyberspace. Hence, our core competence is invisible. In
information technology, we may have found the engine that could
drive India's take-off, and eventually transform our country. The
Internet has also levelled the playing fields so that any
passionate Indian entrepreneur can write our country's future.
India embraced democracy first and capitalism afterwards and this
has made all the difference. India became a full-fledged
democracy in 1950, with universal suffrage and extensive human
rights, but it was not until 1991 that it opened up to the free
play of market forces. This curious historic inversion means that
India's future will not be a creation of unbridled capitalism,
but it will evolve through a daily dialogue between the
conservative forces of caste, religion and the village, the
leftist and Nehruvian socialist forces which dominated the
intellectual life of the country for 40 years, and they new
forces of global capitalism. These ``million negotiations of
democracy'', the plurality of interests, the contentious nature
of our people, and the lack of discipline and teamwork imply that
the pace of economic reforms will be slow and incremental. It
means that India will not grow as rapidly as the Asian tigers,
nor wipe out poverty and ignorance as quickly.
The Economisthas been trying, with some frustration, to paint
stripes on India since 1991. It does not realise that India will
never be a tiger. It is an elephant that has begun to lumber and
move ahead. It will never have speed, but it will always have
distance. A Buddhist text says: ``The elephant is the wisest of
all animals/the only one who remembers his former lives/and he
remains motionless for long periods of time/meditating thereon.''
The inversion between capitalism and democracy suggests that
India might have a more stable, peaceful, and negotiated
transition into the future than say China. It will also avoid
some of the deleterious side effects of an unprepared capitalist
society, such as Russia.
Although slower, India is more likely to preserve its way of life
and its civilisation of diversity, tolerance, and spirituality
against the onslaught of the global culture. If it does, then
perhaps it is a wise elephant. The struggle of one sixth of
humanity for dignity and prosperity is a drama of the highest
order and of great consequence to the future of the world. It has
meaning for all of humanity and sheds new light on the future of
liberalism in the world.
(The writer is an author and management consultant).
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
|
|
Section : Opinion Previous : Stop the violence Next : The Seattle chaos | |
|
Front Page |
National |
International |
Regional |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Classified |
Employment |
Features |
Employment |
Index |
Home | |
|
Copyright © 2000 The Hindu Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu |
|