Retributions  

A civilizational crisis.
(To understand where I am coming from, I would recommend that readers first read this series on Hindi heartland politics. 1, 2, 3. Or at least the second part)

By almost all accounts Hindi heartland is trailing far behind as the rest of India gets ready to pitchfork into the developed world. In fact, a slightly detailed analysis of statistics (NSSO is a great place to start from) would reveal that much of this talk about two Indias-one in the 21^st century while the other still languishing behind–can be understood in the context of BIMARU states, specifically U.P and Bihar. Why U.P and Bihar are so important is not just because of sheer weight of their numbers (they carry almost 25% of Indian population), but because their crisis, as I attempt to examine and explain in this post, is not merely a governance failure. It is much worse.

One of the frequent explanations offered for the backwardness of U.P and Bihar is rise of venal and corrupt politicians like Laloo Yadav, Mulayam Singh and Mayawati. As Gaurav points out, this is a futile and ultimately a self-delusional exercise. Why?

Because it rests on three premises. One, the quality of leadership in Bihar and U.P was better before the rise of Laloo and Mulayam. Second, the rest of India is blessed with politicians of much higher intellect and personal probity. Third and most importantly, politics can solve all the problems.

All three are wrong.

Before the rise of Mandal politics, U.P and Bihar was (largely) governed by upper caste elite. They were no less corrupt, castiest, and venal than the present generation of heartland politicians. Rather, people like Jagannath Mishra were so castiest that they favored Brahmins openly-but only of the sub-caste he belonged to!

The rise of Mandal politics was inevitable. And inevitable was the fact that it would offer no prospects of economic development; no agenda of governance for which of the predecessors of Laloo and Mulayam had done so? Mandal politics didn’t have to offer an alternative programme but merely a different caste combination. In other words, to blame Laloo and Mulayam is to adopt an ostrich like attitude; it is to ignore the real crisis!

So what has really changed in the post-mandal era? In one word: Brazenness

The Narayan Dutt Tiwaris and Bhagwat Jha Azads still kept the pretense of being incorruptible. They still pretended to be working for the advancement of the state, and attempted to appeal to a larger section of the population. With their ties to Congress, they didn’t have the similar freedom of action their successors have come to enjoy.

A Laloo Yadav or a Mayawati sees no need for such pretensions. When Laloo Yadav marries his daughter he openly organizes a lavish wedding. Mayawati who has taken this brazenness to new heights announces in public meetings that she owns palatial bungalows-of course with donation from ‘’her” people. But rest assured, if she had no fear of the media and higher judiciary, she would have nonchalantly admitted of the real sources of her wealth. And her voters would have still cheered. It might sound paradoxical but the corruption of Laloo and Mulayam is actively condoned and encouraged by their voters.

Here arises a crucial question: If all alternatives are the same save the name, then what explains the acquiescence of the people in this charade? Why even bother changing governments? Without answering this question, I believe, one cannot understand the backwardness of the Hindi heartland.

Many years back, I attended (out of sheer boredom) a political rally by Hari Shankar Tiwari. Tiwari is a notorious Don from Eastern U.P who has won numerous times from his pocket borough of Chillupar. (Thankfully, he was defeated this time.) Chillupar, quite naturally is a Brahmin dominated constituency. Also quite naturally, despite having elected Tiwari multiple times, it remains an extremely backward area with little infrastructure and absolutely no job opportunities. Yet, Tiwari’s speech was cheered wildly by his mainly Brahmin audience. ‘’Can’t you see” I asked one of his supporters ‘’he is taking you all for a ride?” He readily conceded my point; told me five stories of how corrupt Tiwari was, and then promptly informed me that he would still vote for him!

His answer filled me with rage and disgust. I couldn’t fathom why people could continue to vote for someone who was not only a criminal but thoroughly corrupt and inefficient. After all, they paid the price for the choices they had made every single day!

A couple of years later, traveling second class in U.P, I started talking to a Yadavji. He was a security guard in Delhi, made 3000 rs a month, and was traveling to his native village so he could cast his vote for Mulayam Singh. I was amazed. I know many people in Delhi who won’t walk 500 M to cast their vote; and here was someone, extremely poor, who was spending a large part of his own money merely to vote. And yes, he completely agreed that Mulayam was corrupt; had never done anything for the state ‘’or else why would he have to migrate to Delhi?”

This is a story which is repeated across U.P. Move to Azamgarh, a pre-dominantly Muslim dominated district where the likes of Dawood Ibrahim are folk-heroes. It frequently supplies ‘’sharp-shooters” for Mumbai Gang-war so poorly trained and paid (average rate for a kill is 5000) that most of them are easily neutralized. No one mourns them; they are plenty more from where they are coming from. Or move to Kunda where Raghuraj Pratap Singh rules over his empire and is a Rajput hero.

Yes, the continuing hold of caste and religion remains a major problem. But it is not as if India’s more progressive states have managed to move beyond caste. Caste is merely a symptom of the deeper crisis. It is not the crisis it self!

What the Hindi heartland has is a society which is sick to the core. A society which has been drained of all its vitality and exists not to support the individual but merely to limit him. This collective failure operates on two different levels.

First, the Hindi heartland has long lost the ability for self-critical analysis. It has replaced it with certitude, dogma and one is forced to conclude– plain idiocy. Despite the rampant poverty, the veneer of civilization superiority has been retained. Never blame your self-instead, blame others whether the industrious Gujratis or the progressive South. In the peculiar landscape of Hindi heartland, success has no fathers! One amusing albeit deeply disturbing anecdote would be enough to illustrate this point.

Land in the Terai region has been traditionally owned by Thakurs: Rajputs. With labor beneath their dignity, the actually farming is done by hired farmhands. In early nineties, a large number of Sikhs moved to Terai and bought land. This led to social conflict. Why? The Thakurs were piqued that the Sikhs did their own farming and quite naturally their outputs were much higher. Instead of learning from them, the traditional landholders felt that the Sikh industriousness was an assault on their way of life!

But the inability to self-introspect is not a major handicap in the Indian context. That is an Indian trait. (Why else would India be invaded and plundered at the average rate of once every 300 years?)

What is even more important is snuffing of collective ambition. People have long lost the ability to think that their situation can improve. They have been told, and they have accepted that their station in life has been pre-ordained. That their destiny has been fixed and to strive for anything greater is futile.

Despite the boisterous elections, the essentially feudal nature of the heartland society hasn’t changed. While democracy has taken deep roots; democratization of institutions, polity, and the society hasn’t. Only the masters have changed, the nature of serfdom is still the same. . Perhaps, that’s why the collective fascination with power; the ubiquities of the lal batti culture. Where the sarkaar is mai-baap, unsurprisingly, it becomes the sole means of acquiring power, influence and even wealth! I have always been skeptical of the claims that the lack of private sector jobs is the sole motivation for this fascination with government. At best it is a partial expression, at worst; it explains why the private sector is essentially a non-starter!

And that is why the collective hearts of Yadavs soar when Laloo Yadav makes a grand arrival in a helicopter. That is why Dalits celebrate Mayawati’s ill-gotten wealth. That is why Hari Shankar Tiwari can continue to win, and when he is finally defeated, it is another Tiwari who takes his place. At least one of them has achieved success. The rest of ‘’their people ” can draw vicarious pleasure. That is the limit of their ambition. All Maywati needs to do retain her support base is to proclaim herself as the dalit ki beti; the rest shall follow automatically. To cheer is their nirvana; their essential function in scheme of things.

It needs to be emphasized that the constant refrain of bad politicians is merely a smokescreen. After all, Karunanidhi corp. and Deva Gowda and Sons are no less corrupt than any politician of the Hindi heartland. But they have also realized a simple truth: It’s easier to steal from the rich than it is from the poor. So they provide at least a decent level of governance so that people have ample opportunities to make money.

Laloo and Mualyam on the other hand (with due apologies to V.S Naipaul) have been claimed by a ‘’lesser civilization”. They are the products of their own society! Even their corruption is circumscribed by the limits of their ambitions. They see no reason to provide good governance as they are happy enough to steal from the impoverished state exchequers to buy a few large bungalows. Not for them the empire which Karunanidhi has built in Tamil Nadu-even that requires greater effort than merely stealing!

In conclusion, I will repeat what I have said so many times before: A sick society cannot be fixed by state intervention as many of our Left-liberal friends would like to believe. The people of Hindi heartland don’t need a new ruler; they need a new vision. They don’t suffer from a lack of government; but from too much of it. (1) In fact, the state intervention only promotes the status quo. Take the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) as an example. It has been hailed as the panacea for all ills; a solution for the rural crisis. Considering the endemic poverty, it holds special importance for the heartland. For a moment, forget all the externalities: corruption, lack of administrative structure e.t.c. Even if the scheme performed exactly as it is designed to, what would it achieve?

That the poor would be paid minimum wages (60-80rs) for doing menial labor, doing the same kind of backbreaking work they have done for 2000 years, using practically the same instruments! I cannot think of a scheme more expertly designed to keep people in perpetual poverty! I cannot think of another scheme whose sole purpose seems to retard societal advancement. This is the tragedy of India’s poor; schemes which are allegedly designed to help them only ensure that they remain what they always were: poor. (2)

To reiterate, it is not a crisis which can be solved by bureaucrats sitting in New Delhi. It is incumbent upon the people of Hindi heartland that they take their destiny in their own hands. That they see how the world is changing and leaving them far behind. That they realize that world will not wait for them. That they understand that individual happiness cannot be expressed in collectivism.

The crisis exists within the society. So does the solution.

1) This is not discount the importance of good governance.The heartland could certainly do with better roads, schools and reliable electricity. But politicians will only deliver what people expressly want. And more importantly, vote for.
2) Unsurprisingly, one of the prime movers behind the scheme is Aruna Roy. Roy who is a Gandhian thinks that the rural poor would be best served by offering them employment opportunities within villages. I have no doubts about Roy’s good intentions but as they say: The road to hell is paved with good intentions.