Maybe the Wall has some answers.

Friday, January 2, 2009

Looking back

I catch myself wondering, as I have so often, if we aren't putting the cart before the horse in our quest for development. Is there a possibility that we have got the equation all wrong? In a country of over a billion people, wherein the top 2-3% still likes to call itself the "middle class", and academicians, policy makers and MNC market researchers alike comfortably calculate the population above the poverty line with the aid of a definition that compresses standard of living and quality of life into one little figure (in USD, no less), in practice, at least; in a country where categorisation on "social" bases is not only par for the course, but also legalised, where "ownership" of land takes precedence over opportunities for employment, and where sweeping changes are made in the name of development without adequate measures for those who will bear the real cost...a country that is centuries old and has been an independent nation state for over six decades, but must still rely on stopgap measures for its security, and will spend months and millions "saluting" the spirit of her people, but will never actually get around to putting the required infrastructure into place...in a country where the homeless elderly crouch in the nooks and crannies of posh residential areas, how do you define terms like 'growth', 'development' and 'prosperity'? For heaven's sake, these terms have been the focus of decades of research and discussion; isn't it just a tad presumptuous to claim that we've got it right already?

Acres and acres of land may lie wasted in certain parts of the country, but it mustn't be used to set up a plant that could feed hundreds of mouths, create hundreds of jobs, educate hundreds of children, and (finally) put a region on the road to development. We will cling to our assertion that we are a primarily agricultural economy, never mind how (un)productive our land is, and that the land is ours. God forbid that someone should come up with a plan that will actually put a scarce resource to good use. We will cling desperately to our belief in what has always been, and our mistrust of what can be, because we are still busy dwelling in the past - culture, systems, ideology. The old may be crumbling right before our eyes - not that we aren't picking at it ourselves - but we will block the road for any new ideas and systems trying to make their way in.

Expressway after expressway, mall after mall, SEZ after SEZ, we are basking in the glory of a new, developed India. We're as good as anyone, anywhere...but don't tamper with the veneer of GDP-increases and sophisticated reports, please, or the poverty and the misery and the failed policies and persistent social problems will show. We have schemes for rural employment, we do. We have schemes for the girl child, plans and policies for all our social and economic problems. We come out with the regulation 200-page report on each of these every fiscal, and we highlight what we have achieved and brush the rest under "still in progress". There is no doubt that detailed plans are in place; they may or may not be sincerely intended (but we'll give them the benefit of the doubt); but between pious intentions and ambitious plans at one end and implementation at the other, something goes horribly, horribly wrong. Meanwhile, we're busy with the details of the facade that we present to the world. Make no mistake, we are a developing economy.

Except that the order of things is messed up. There's no dearth of money to spend (there shouldn't be, definitely not in these, of all times) on the part of the Government. It isn't only about allocating funds to one Plan or Policy and waking up to the fact that there was a Plan, 52 weeks later. It is about better administrative machinery, about greater transparency, about incentives to keep things above board (of course, the very fact that it needs incentives says it all). I do not know if it is the optimistic economics grad within me that says so, or plain lack of worldly wisdom...but then it does make sense to assume that, in an economy like ours, at least, development should be allowed to work its way up, rather than trickle down. The trickle down effect cannot exist here, in the state that we've allowed our affairs to work themselves into. Maybe it is time we realised that escalation of commitment doesn't do such a great job of covering up for errors - both those of commission and of omission.

One catches oneself wondering what it is, exactly, that the State has been doing, anyway. It was a private business house that took upon itself the onus of turning a luxury into a comfort for the common man, and barren land into an industrial hub in the process. Not for a moment is one saying that the decision was not guided by the profit motive - but if industrial and social development come with the profit, is there really anything to complain about? Again, it is the common man that takes upon himself the onus of guarding himself, his city and his country. One didn't see the State doing much in the face of terror - unless one takes into account the fit of social insensitivity and the sheer lack of humanity that overcame our politicians around that time, that is. As they callously, willingly, made gaffe after gaffe, leaving a bleeding city to its own devices, one stared in disbelief and dismay, which swiftly gave way to anger. Who deserves the misery and the tragedy? Who actually does? Or maybe we do, for having allowed them into power in the first place. Maybe this is the price we must pay for that mistake. Once again, the common man has gone back to rebuilding his life. How much, and how many times, can you rebuild using debris and shrapnel, really? Once, maybe, or twice. And then?

So much has changed between the last general elections and the upcoming. It's a series of half-measures and false starts. There have been good times, positive changes...sadly, they serve, more often than not, as security blankets. We'll remain couched in them and hope that the bad times will go away. That's the misfortune. They don't.

No comments: