THE GRASSROOT EVIL: End of all Social Growth
“Jana gana mana, adhinayaka jaya he…” the soft strains of the national anthem wafted through the crooked alleyways of suburban ‘Mumbai’. Yet another merciless summer day. The glimmering façade of the ‘Bombay Stock Exchange’, or the “BSE” as it is fondly known, stared back at me with an almost blinding brilliance. I looked on, oblivious to the sea of people swarming in like ants on a grain of sugar. “I can become a millionaire”, I thought; “why… I was going to invest my hard earned money in the fabled goldmine of our times”. At that precise moment, I felt like the dictator of my own private universe.
Me—the stockbroker with a prophetic clairvoyance; the banker playing with someone else’s money; the executive with an empire to run; the bored housewife; the fresh graduate with dreams unlimited; the potbellied landlord; and finally, the farmer with calloused hands. Not many people, but one. Not a severe case of split personality either- merely your average Indian. I represent your most extreme cross-section of society… the highest and the lowest; from the snow capped tips of the controversial Kashmir valley, to the dangerously south Deccan plains. Holding it all together is wealth; and in most cases, the lack of it. In a nutshell, I here am talking about the startling paradoxes that are so familiar to us—one perpetually developing nation.
Coming back to the crux of the issue, one cannot deny the magnitude of the role economy plays in our lives. We are a nation rich in resources—predominantly human. One billion people and the figure showing no signs of relent yet. So, in essence, we are talking about the provision of basic necessities for all of these people. Food, clothing, and shelter, constitute this category. Unfortunately for our government and its high-maintenance defence sector, nuclear weapons and the missile programme do not fall under this list of essentials. To echo the sentiments of this nation’s “god”father, the goal of every successful state should be to ensure that every one of its citizens are properly fed and sheltered; to a man without bread, liberty and freedom are mere noises with no deeper passions attached to them. “The world has achieved brilliance without conscience,” said general Omar Bradley, “ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.” This is not to undermine the necessity of armed forces or the importance of a defence plan; the counter-argument being that if there are no people to feed, all efforts would indeed be futile. Theoretically it all makes sense, but it applies simply to coffee table discussions. The reality is that more than one-third of this nation lives below the poverty line, and in their lives, Pokharan or the spoils of Kargil is not going to bring their next square meal.
So where does the solution lie; in cutting down on government defence expenditure, and risk the exposure of the Indo-Chinese border, or to reduce the vigilance on the Islamic militant groups in Kashmir? The key to all of it is more calculated government spending. Perhaps the investment of tax money in the doomed Dabhol power project in Maharashtra, entering into an agreement with the now bankrupt Enron Corporation, could have minimised reckless depletion of the treasury. Deciding to pay exorbitant prices for the set-up of the plant, and subsequently the power supply, does not exactly rally India’s case for an effective, forward-thinking economy. The outflow of foreign exchange in the order of $ 500 million per annum, and payment in U.S dollars irrespective of inflation, does not do much for a country where farmers still depend on subsidised power for their most essential needs. On a parallel vein, the Cogentrix project in Mangalore was another expensive failure, due to government delays and public litigation. Inspite of the fact that Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in India has risen considerably after the liberalisation of the economy, India still remains an unattractive destination for broad-based globalisation. The solution- “laissez faire capitalism”, economists would tell you; in other words, corporate activity with little or no government interference. The politicians here would be reduced to supervising status. But then the isolation of sectors, tearing it away from the intrinsically woven bureaucratic machinery, is a task easier said than done. The selling of stakes in exclusive public sector companies is definitely a huge step forward, and takes away the security of a cushy government job for most people. This leads to the fostering of healthy competition, and more effective resource management. The revenue generated in these means could be used to fashion a strong, more feasible infrastructure. As commonsense would tell you, a building built without a foundation is destined for disaster with the laying of the first brick. Skyscrapers, in this context, are distant as the stars we all lust after.
Coming back to the issue of wealth, globalisation does open up far more vistas than ever before. But, the term in itself is highly misleading. As most cynics would tell you, globalisation is a cloak for a localised assimilation of wealth, broadening the rift between the classes. The rich become richer, the poor become poorer, and the bourgeoisie or the middle class strive hard in the direction that leads nowhere, ultimately embracing mediocrity. In the age of the nouveau rich, and ‘broadband’ investment patterns, the new age corporate colonialism is proving to be extremely profitable for the excessively rich nations. But the global economic recession is making more apparent the class distinctions. All this, surprisingly, in an age where electronic addresses assume more significance than ethno-geographic identities. It leads the average Indian to wonder where he stands in all the madness of this particular rat race.
Another significant question that arises here is the social impact of such a phenomenon, and India’s relative stasis when it comes to socio- economic growth. In isolation, none of it would ever make sense; but in view of the larger, more integrated picture, the direct implications of wealth and the lack of it becomes crucial.
On a social perspective, economics leaves deep gashes, triggering off a vicious cycle of recurrences and relative absolutes. The way to start naming these issues is to ask objectively what a poor family would do in hour of dire need. This is the most fundamental question that every global citizen should ask. To answer their most pressing need, they might send a young child to work. In technical terms, what we call, child labour. They call it prevention from dying of starvation. So, what can the government do to step in? Make child labour illegal, and the acquiring of education a fundamental right of every child. Does that solve the problem? On paper, yes. But in reality, no. The desperate families would still send their children to work by the feeble light of the kerosene lamp- sans protection, minus a huge chunk of the due wage. The result—illicit employment of children, and the fact that no one can step in the case of misfortune. The obvious criminal ramifications are huge, sometimes even scary. The inclusion of better labour laws, protecting the interests of the hapless worker, would prove to be more sensible.
Another possible resultant of poverty is the thriving black market in a variety of illegal or exorbitantly priced goods. The local taxes on alcohol drive the poor towards shady outlets manufacturing and selling arrack, which has, in the past, led to a number of deaths. So, does the government step in and start manufacturing its own low-cost alcohol minus the poisonous methanol, as the Tamil Nadu government has now done? Critics say this is a form of encouraging the habit of drinking. That eventually leads to domestic violence, drugs and even the encouragement of the sex trade.
Sex workers in Kolkata demand legally accepted rights to prevent themselves from being abused. In Italy, social workers distribute condoms to protect these women from Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs). So what do we do; follow the example of Bangladesh and make prostitution legal? Or increase the exposure of these women to anti-social elements who exploit their illicit status to a maximum?
As a first step, the cultural taboos have to be blown to the wind. We need to remove the blanket on society, and stop using denial as a defence mechanism. Cloaked politicians who get fat on tax money have to be educated on the perks of a liberal, more progressive set of laws that protect the interests of the people and the state at large. The options here are rather limited- figuratively, to walk on hot coals or to find quick sand to jump in. The only other option here is awareness; but that is more of a long-term goal than an immediate one. But if someone else decides to come and point out the same stasis in action some 20 years down the line, then we can bid adieu to growth, pack up the notion of free thought, embrace conventional taboos, and stay married to our Third World status for good.
Me—the stockbroker with a prophetic clairvoyance; the banker playing with someone else’s money; the executive with an empire to run; the bored housewife; the fresh graduate with dreams unlimited; the potbellied landlord; and finally, the farmer with calloused hands. Not many people, but one. Not a severe case of split personality either- merely your average Indian. I represent your most extreme cross-section of society… the highest and the lowest; from the snow capped tips of the controversial Kashmir valley, to the dangerously south Deccan plains. Holding it all together is wealth; and in most cases, the lack of it. In a nutshell, I here am talking about the startling paradoxes that are so familiar to us—one perpetually developing nation.
Coming back to the crux of the issue, one cannot deny the magnitude of the role economy plays in our lives. We are a nation rich in resources—predominantly human. One billion people and the figure showing no signs of relent yet. So, in essence, we are talking about the provision of basic necessities for all of these people. Food, clothing, and shelter, constitute this category. Unfortunately for our government and its high-maintenance defence sector, nuclear weapons and the missile programme do not fall under this list of essentials. To echo the sentiments of this nation’s “god”father, the goal of every successful state should be to ensure that every one of its citizens are properly fed and sheltered; to a man without bread, liberty and freedom are mere noises with no deeper passions attached to them. “The world has achieved brilliance without conscience,” said general Omar Bradley, “ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.” This is not to undermine the necessity of armed forces or the importance of a defence plan; the counter-argument being that if there are no people to feed, all efforts would indeed be futile. Theoretically it all makes sense, but it applies simply to coffee table discussions. The reality is that more than one-third of this nation lives below the poverty line, and in their lives, Pokharan or the spoils of Kargil is not going to bring their next square meal.
So where does the solution lie; in cutting down on government defence expenditure, and risk the exposure of the Indo-Chinese border, or to reduce the vigilance on the Islamic militant groups in Kashmir? The key to all of it is more calculated government spending. Perhaps the investment of tax money in the doomed Dabhol power project in Maharashtra, entering into an agreement with the now bankrupt Enron Corporation, could have minimised reckless depletion of the treasury. Deciding to pay exorbitant prices for the set-up of the plant, and subsequently the power supply, does not exactly rally India’s case for an effective, forward-thinking economy. The outflow of foreign exchange in the order of $ 500 million per annum, and payment in U.S dollars irrespective of inflation, does not do much for a country where farmers still depend on subsidised power for their most essential needs. On a parallel vein, the Cogentrix project in Mangalore was another expensive failure, due to government delays and public litigation. Inspite of the fact that Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in India has risen considerably after the liberalisation of the economy, India still remains an unattractive destination for broad-based globalisation. The solution- “laissez faire capitalism”, economists would tell you; in other words, corporate activity with little or no government interference. The politicians here would be reduced to supervising status. But then the isolation of sectors, tearing it away from the intrinsically woven bureaucratic machinery, is a task easier said than done. The selling of stakes in exclusive public sector companies is definitely a huge step forward, and takes away the security of a cushy government job for most people. This leads to the fostering of healthy competition, and more effective resource management. The revenue generated in these means could be used to fashion a strong, more feasible infrastructure. As commonsense would tell you, a building built without a foundation is destined for disaster with the laying of the first brick. Skyscrapers, in this context, are distant as the stars we all lust after.
Coming back to the issue of wealth, globalisation does open up far more vistas than ever before. But, the term in itself is highly misleading. As most cynics would tell you, globalisation is a cloak for a localised assimilation of wealth, broadening the rift between the classes. The rich become richer, the poor become poorer, and the bourgeoisie or the middle class strive hard in the direction that leads nowhere, ultimately embracing mediocrity. In the age of the nouveau rich, and ‘broadband’ investment patterns, the new age corporate colonialism is proving to be extremely profitable for the excessively rich nations. But the global economic recession is making more apparent the class distinctions. All this, surprisingly, in an age where electronic addresses assume more significance than ethno-geographic identities. It leads the average Indian to wonder where he stands in all the madness of this particular rat race.
Another significant question that arises here is the social impact of such a phenomenon, and India’s relative stasis when it comes to socio- economic growth. In isolation, none of it would ever make sense; but in view of the larger, more integrated picture, the direct implications of wealth and the lack of it becomes crucial.
On a social perspective, economics leaves deep gashes, triggering off a vicious cycle of recurrences and relative absolutes. The way to start naming these issues is to ask objectively what a poor family would do in hour of dire need. This is the most fundamental question that every global citizen should ask. To answer their most pressing need, they might send a young child to work. In technical terms, what we call, child labour. They call it prevention from dying of starvation. So, what can the government do to step in? Make child labour illegal, and the acquiring of education a fundamental right of every child. Does that solve the problem? On paper, yes. But in reality, no. The desperate families would still send their children to work by the feeble light of the kerosene lamp- sans protection, minus a huge chunk of the due wage. The result—illicit employment of children, and the fact that no one can step in the case of misfortune. The obvious criminal ramifications are huge, sometimes even scary. The inclusion of better labour laws, protecting the interests of the hapless worker, would prove to be more sensible.
Another possible resultant of poverty is the thriving black market in a variety of illegal or exorbitantly priced goods. The local taxes on alcohol drive the poor towards shady outlets manufacturing and selling arrack, which has, in the past, led to a number of deaths. So, does the government step in and start manufacturing its own low-cost alcohol minus the poisonous methanol, as the Tamil Nadu government has now done? Critics say this is a form of encouraging the habit of drinking. That eventually leads to domestic violence, drugs and even the encouragement of the sex trade.
Sex workers in Kolkata demand legally accepted rights to prevent themselves from being abused. In Italy, social workers distribute condoms to protect these women from Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs). So what do we do; follow the example of Bangladesh and make prostitution legal? Or increase the exposure of these women to anti-social elements who exploit their illicit status to a maximum?
As a first step, the cultural taboos have to be blown to the wind. We need to remove the blanket on society, and stop using denial as a defence mechanism. Cloaked politicians who get fat on tax money have to be educated on the perks of a liberal, more progressive set of laws that protect the interests of the people and the state at large. The options here are rather limited- figuratively, to walk on hot coals or to find quick sand to jump in. The only other option here is awareness; but that is more of a long-term goal than an immediate one. But if someone else decides to come and point out the same stasis in action some 20 years down the line, then we can bid adieu to growth, pack up the notion of free thought, embrace conventional taboos, and stay married to our Third World status for good.
posted by Farzana Kader at 11:50 PM
2 Comments:
Good one Farzana...I am a big advocate of legalization too. The sale of soft drugs like weed, if legalized could reduce gang wars and costs of control. Also, making weed illegal is causing hard drugs to get smaller and smaller day by day making any kind of control impossible. I dont want my kids to be meth addicts...
later,
Shumit
gud ......i need a help
i will contact
Post a Comment
<< Home