Imagining India

The Third Front certainly can’t complain about a lack of press. The other parties have commented on it - there’s Sonia Gandhi poking fun, Sheila Dikshit calling it non-serious. And yet some editorials have acknowledged that it poses some threat to the chances of the BJP and the Congress.

I’m not going to take guesses on how many seats such a third option would end up with, IF it becomes a reality. Making political predictions is a dangerous game in India, one likely to end with egg on the face (I remember all too well how most of the media predicted victory for the NDA in 2004).

But its disappointing that this so-called new alternative is not really one. Its filled with old faces, consisting of various existing regional political parties and breakaway allies of the UPA.  And can we depend on the old guard - in the Congress, BJP, the TF - for better policy? We are running out of time. Too many reforms are pending, and too many issues of inequality, education, and access are losing ground.

Today is the day of the ‘people’s car’ launch, and its no exaggeration to say that this car is likely to transform the face of India’s traffic, both for better and for worse. The good: If creating widespread access to better services and products is the aim of free markets, then the Nano car is a triumph. It has made the dream of owning an automobile attainable for millions in India. The bad: The car will probably increase overcrowding on roads and pollution. But as long as our cities lack viable mass transit systems, people have no choice but to resort to private vehicles, and poorer Indians should not be denied a choice that the middle and upper classes have had for so long. 

For Indian companies, the Nano is only the most recent success when it comes to making products and services suited to the Indian market.  C. K. Prahalad has written about these low-cost approaches many Indian companies have adopted in his book The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid  - of companies targeting the poorest citizens and turning them into consumers, by selling them two rupee sachets of detergent and shampoo, bringing them internet access through community kiosks, providing loans through Self Help Groups and even providing low-cost health care, such as Arvind Eye Hospital. 

And as we weather the global recession, I think this approach is only going to gain steam - India’s countryside has not been as affected by the recession, and rural India is even showing signs of above-average growth. Hopefully, this will draw our markets into the villages,  help address our long-lamented ‘urban rural divide,’ and do its bit in empowering our rural poor.  

Photo credit: Balaji Shankar

Universal appeal is a tricky thing. India’s central governments, up until the late 1970s, had one thing they shared (besides of course, the fact that they were all Congress Party governments): they viewed themselves as a father and mother figure rolled into one, the mai-baap, and also as an authority that didn’t discriminate or favour any one group of citizens over another. 

Since the 1980s, as regional parties have gained power, governments have become far more focused on their particular ethnic identities and groups, and this has sometimes come with open hostility to groups that they don’t represent. So we saw Mayawati in UP call the Brahmin and Bania castes ‘chor’ in her early campaigns, and the Shiv Sena in Maharashtra throw vitriol at non-Marathi residents in the state. And let’s not forget Gujarat’s Chief Minister Narendra Modi - the BJP since the NDA government has been a much more moderate religious force compared to its past, but its most promising young leader is by no means a uniter. (Here is an excellent piece on Modi in the Atlantic Monthly). 

These leaders arouse high emotion, both among their followers and their dissenters. They do not feel accessible outside the caste/religious groups they represent. I find their lack of broader appeal worrying. Political leaders with limited reach, and those who inspire fear in some citizens and passion in others cannot effectively lead a country as diverse as India.

And while we have so far managed reasonably well with coalition governments that cobble together a variety of religious and regional views, the Prime Ministers that headed them were always determinedly moderate figures.  If this changes in the coming years, it will mean an unfortunate turn in our politics.

Photo credit: Carol Mitchell

The smell of elections is in the air. Both our newspapers and TV are inundated with extravagant promises from our politicians, and accusations and counter-accusations are flying over which party is the most corrupt, who is the most unconcerned about terrorism, who the most callous about poverty, and interestingly, who is allowed to play the current catchy movie tune.  

My area’s polling station is walking distance from my house, so casting my vote means just a short stroll in the morning. The queue is not very long, and I don’t find it a hassle. Many people I know however feel differently about voting, especially in the younger age-group. They tell me that they don’t bother to vote - ‘It doesn’t make a difference’, ‘I don’t support any among the field of candidates,’ are the usual answers I get. 

I had written earlier on this blog about Jaago re, and whether shifts in voting make a difference in the governance we get. Many of our problems are deeply rooted, especially in terms of corruption and interest groups, and it will take much more than small voting shifts to change that. But what can change to some extent with the literacy of the average voter is the transparency people demand from governance, and better answers on policy (more educated voters for example, demand to know where the money for government handouts and loan waivers is coming from). 

And only more informed voters can force political parties to shift to a higher standards in the quality and qualifications of their candidates. We are not in a pleasant place with regard to this. However much we boast about how educated our present Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is, its telling that he has never won a popular election.

How much of such reform is possible right now, if for instance, more of the middle class participate? The conventional wisdom has long been that this group lacks the numbers to make an impact. But these last few years tell us otherwise. The numbers in our middle class have ballooned in the last half-decade, even though we still feel like our effect on politics is that of a tiny minority. The Delimitation Commission’s recent reforms have also given the urban vote more power: for instance in Karnataka, Bangalore’s share of seats has now gone up from 11 to 28 - that is one tenth of the strength of the Assembly, which means that Bangalore (and Mumbai, Chennai, Calcutta, Hyderabad) now matters a great deal as a swing vote. With urbanisation only speeding up, and voters in urban areas skewing educated and informed, this is not good news for the unvarnished populists among our politicians. 

Is a tipping point emerging? And is a 300 million strong middle class enough to trigger a change in our standards?