Retributions  

Transforming a society is the hardest challenge for Nitish Kumar

In many ways, Tehelka’s cover story on Bihar breaks no fresh ground. It reiterates the usual talking points: improvement in security, investment in basic infrastructure, and a better business climate while pointing out that many pitfalls lie ahead and there is a long way to go  before Bihar can be considered developed even by Indian standards.

However, the most important story emerging out of Bihar is one of spirit. A society which lost its confidence—it’s ability to dream big—is finally emerging from the shadows and sees hope where it once saw only desperation. Roads can be rebuilt; infrastructure created; and policing improved; but a society’s self–belief—once shattered—is extremely difficult to resurrect. And without that can-do spirit, no society can progress or indeed, even see the need to progress. As Retributions has previously argued, the most discouraging thing about Hindi heartland is people’s acceptance of their state of poverty and utter destitute. Nitish Kumar’s primary challenge is to battle that sense of despondence so that his people can dream, and demand. That he may be succeeding is the biggest marker of change. Or the fact that his principal political adversary, Laloo Yadav, who routinely dismissed the need for development when in power, now accuses Nitish Kumar government of failing on development. A region ravaged by identity politics may be moving, slowly but surely, to politics of development.

But  Tehelka makes an important point,

Nitish Kumar is too canny to miss the signs. He senses that the mood could be in his favour and it is beginning to show in his walk and talk. He is Mr Bihar now and he loves it. He calls a cabinet meeting on board a ship in the Ganga, and the local media laps it up. He holds camps in various parts of the state, during which time he also chairs a cabinet meeting on site, and the people applaud. He believes he is heading the biggest reconstruction story in India. He also believes he is right. He is beginning to acquire the same self-righteousness that Lalu Prasad Yadav once had. It led Lalu into a world of his own where he did no wrong. Bihar went into the dark ages but Lalu saw the reverse in his mind. (emphasis added)

There are two dangers Nitish faces. One, revolutions have a habit of consuming their leaders. Nitish Kumar has hitherto benefited from low expectations of the people of the state and of the larger civil society. In a society which has seen virtually no development or for that matter governance for decades, even a dysfunctional state may appear as blessing from the heaven. But if the Nitish revolution rolls on, people’s expectations would increase dramatically and Nitish would be required to provide much more than minimal governance.

Second, Laloo Yadav’s takeover in Bihar was an important step in empowerment of OBC’s and dalits in the state’s complex polity—as Laloo liked to put it, he offered them Izzat which a caste-ridden feudal society had denied them for centuries. Laloo unfortunately never moved beyond mere words and left the people who voted for him in a much worse condition than he had found them. As Tehelka points out, Nitish Kumar is beginning to be driven by the same sense of self-righteousness. It is important that he keeps his feet firmly to the ground and understands that his job has just begun. And that merely doing something is not good enough. In fact, offering hope and then not delivering is the worst a politician can do.

But perhaps, his first challenge is to win the state elections in November 2010.