An open letter from an ordinary citizen

The general elections have been concluded in India. It is a foregone conclusion that her next Prime Minister will be the Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP's) Mr Narendra MODI. Much has been said and there are two broad possibilities that one foresees. The best-case scenario is the 'Making Of Democratic Institutions', an euphemism that I use for development, governance and all that the supporters are enthused about. As against this, the worst-case scenario is that it would 'Mar (nay, M...) Our Democracy Inevitably', an euphemism that I use for crony capitalism and divisiveness among others that many others fear. For both these scenarios, the acronyms match with the last name of our Prime Minister.

In this MODI vs MODI diatribe, the development vis-a-vis crony capitalism discussion will continue to remain a matter of interpretation and ideological moorings and the debate will be difficult to conclude. There will also be differences of opinion from withing the ruling party and its affiliates and one has to see which direction it takes. The so-called Gujarat-model or the trumpeted Kerala-model. Well, one has to take the best of both worlds and make Jagdish Bhagwati and Amartya Sen come to an agreement.

The contentious part will be juxtaposing governance and divisiveness. Ideally speaking, any polarization leading to divisiveness anywhere should be considered as a failure of governance. However, from a practical consideration it is possible that the government reaches out to a larger section while ignoring a smaller section. What is more, the principle of exclusion could be based on caste, class, gender, religion and other such identities. If these fears are addressed they will definitely not exorcise the ghosts of the past, but they will bode well for the country's future. Where will we head to? Only time will tell.

In reality, the actual path will be somewhere in between. Politically, if extreme adversities do not come in the way, the future looks like advantage BJP. It is hear that I am concerned as an ordinary citizen because for an effective democracy we need a credible and responsible opposition, which is missing. True, the drubbing of 2014 will lead to soul-searching by all parties, but it is difficult to know what would emerge.

The Congress still seems to have a proportion of population voting for them. Perhaps they identify them with the freedom movement or because of their loyalty to the family. However, if the party has to come-back then it has to go beyond these loyal voters and for that it needs to get out of dynastic politics and develop its grassroots organisation - a tall order indeed.

This is also true for the multitude of regional parties that have lost. They need to get back to their drawing board and re-invent themselves. Those who have withstood the change will end up supporting the ruling alliance because of the dynamics of centre-state relationships, but also because of their personal vested interests. 

Today, the only party that seems to be articulating against vested interest in word and deed is the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). But then some of their elected representatives from Delhi seem to have developed cold-feet with the prospect of loosing a fresh election and are clamouring for a fresh go at government-formation. If hastily resigning was a sign of immaturity then their trying to get back to power again when they do not have the strength and after the recent drubbing will be identified with opportunism. This is a catch-22 situation for them.

AAP may try their old style referendum to know what people in Delhi want, but even if people want they cannot form a government because either BJP or Congress has to agree to that arrangement. In any case, BJP fresh with a victory may now like to go for a fresh election and this time AAP will have a tough time.

Yes, AAP did increase its vote share in Delhi, but it has also lost some supporters and the BJP has increased its share by a larger proportion. Will AAP be able to get back those votes that moved away from it if there is a fresh election? Will it be able to add votes from those who did not vote for them or BJP? Will it be able to counter the new BJP campaign that will also have their government at the centre? Will it have resources and volunteers to campaign for it if there is a fresh election? 

At the national level, obtaining resources and volunteers will be essential for building up a strong organisational structure. Where are they going to get this from in the next five years? How does it plan to address vested interests within their organisational structure? Does it plan to build alliances or at least seat sharing or not putting up candidates if another party seems to have a reasonable candidate who may have disagreements with them but subscribes to some people-centric principles and is not corrupt?

What are the plans that they have for the four constituencies that they have won in Punjab. In principle they are against use of MP and MLA funds. This will be an ideal set-up if the government is also theirs. However, with the conventional governance structure it would be better if the candidates for these four constituencies use the funds in a meaningful way. 

As an outside lay citizen, the advantage of AAP is that it has taken into its fold people with different views and ideologies. This would give space for internal deliberations and space for multiple views. This itself makes it like the Congress party of yore and it should take advantage of this.

Idealism is good and people respect AAP for that. However, practical considerations are also important. For instance, emphasis need not be on legislation always and that too when one does not have a majority, but rather focusing on governance and achieving many other things that could be possible without legislation.

To sum up, the future seems to be advantage BJP. Congress and the multitude of regional satraps need soul-searching. AAP that once provided hope and aspirations to some will have a lot of questions to answer. It is a churning between the Congress, the regional satraps and AAP that could perhaps give a reasonable opposition. Let us wait and see.

My other recent election related musings are:

A tall order there for pluralism to resurface

ABC of Indian Elections 2014

Rawlsian veil, Smithian impartiality and Indian Elections of 2014

A tall order there for pluralism to resurface

In this moment of all round euphoria,
Hope lies in a honey-toned world-view,
A time for mass jingoistic hysteria,
All your aspirations are going to be true.

Do not question the carefully camouflaged,
Be pragmatic and erase the unpleasant past,
Or else you will be sorrowfully glued,

Missing the development that will come fast.

The other is dissent creating discordant,
An act that lacks sense or substance,
Trash it as an incoherent cynical rant,
Preach them vows of patience for penance.

Logic is given the go by, reason has no space,
A tall order there for pluralism to resurface.

(This poem or poetry is written in the form of a sonnet. It is a reflection following the counter-reactions to concerns raised following the results of the 2014 elections in India while its implication is general and goes beyond the elections. The poem espouses plural concerns and in that sense is philosophical and perhaps both Bayesian and Rawlsian.) 

Poverty as Unfreedom: Is it a State of Mind?

The renowned philosopher J. Krishnamurti in his Freedom from the Known (Chapter 8) said “Freedom is a state of mind - not freedom from something, but a sense of freedom...” From this perspective, an individual’s attachment to either physical or mental aspects would be a hindrance to freedom, or, rather, to a sense of freedom.

From a different perspective, Amartya Sen would suggest that doing away with hindrances that would improve physical or mental well-being will improve freedom. This is more in line with freedom from something and it is in this sense that poverty is an ‘unfreedom’.  We will focus on this latter interpretation and try to understand the notion of poverty, as a state of mind with the help of two stories.

One story is about a landlord who was envious of his peasant neighbour, as the latter was content and never agreed to work for the landlord.  One day the landlord left a bag of 99 gold coins at the peasant's house and when asked also denied that the bag was his. As there were no other neighbours, the peasant was happy to have got this bag of gold coins. But, this happiness was short-lived. Counting the coins led to a search for the 100th coin that was not found and the peasant took a decision to work hard and save so that she could add that 100th coin to the bag. She was now willing to work for the landlord and sacrifice small pleasures of life like spending time with her family. This change of lifestyle in pursuit of that elusive 100th gold coin also did away with her mental state of being content.

The other story is about a ruler who had difficulty in managing the affairs of the state. This left her worried and with many a sleepless nights. A well-meaning adviser suggested that if she were to stay for one day in the house of a person who had no worries then her worries would vanish. A search was initiated and with much difficulty a person who did not have any worries was identified, but to the ruler’s dismay, the person did not have a house. Of course, the person to take another term from Sen, did suffer from ‘physical condition neglect’, but this did not affect the person’s mental state of being worry-free. Over the years, the ruler learnt to be calm and as a consequence gave more time to improve the well-being of the people, which among other things included shelter for the homeless.

It is possible that a person who is homeless or jobless or sick or suffers from some other deprivations is content and happy about her situation. This, according to Sen, is an adaptive preference. However, this will not prevent the homeless person from valuing, and hence, desiring the possession of a house. In fact, a reliance on the mental state alone would lead to this ‘valuational neglect’ along with the earlier mentioned ‘physical condition neglect’. A welfare-state should address these neglects.

An aspect that is increasingly accepted in a discourse on poverty is that it is multidimensional. The multidimensional poverty index (MPI) computed for India by the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) indicates that between 1999 and 2006 the headcount ratio declined from 56.8 per cent to 48.5 per cent. Though the reductions are impressive, yet the levels remain higher than the neighbouring countries of Bangladesh and Nepal that have relatively lower per capita incomes. The Global Hunger Index 2013 ranks India at 66 among 78 countries and considers the situation to be alarming. An estimate for 2010 used in the Human Development Report 2013 shows that less than two-fifths of the 25+ population have completed their secondary education. Thus, the material/physical condition neglects in India are serious.

One of the livelihood interventions in India, to address some of the deprivations, has been through the formation of female self-help groups. At the national level, this is being spearheaded by the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) through Aajeevika - livelihood mission. Similar state level interventions exist in Andhra Pradesh (Indira Kranti Patham), Bihar (Jeevika) and Kerala (Kudumbashree) among others.  There have also been initiatives by non-governmental organizations in different parts of the country. In fact, in August 2013, MoRD entered into an agreement with PRADAN (Professional Assistance for Development Action) that already works in more than 40 of the poorest districts largely located in the Naxal affected areas of the country to facilitate this. A recent impact evaluation of PRADAN that this author was part of indicates that their livelihood intervention enables capabilities of individuals to manage themselves, organises them into producers’ companies/cooperatives and facilitates forward/backward linkages. For instance, they have promoted the tasar silk product now branded as Eco Tasar that is being sold in Fab India and other outlets.

To sum up, being content, worry-free, and happy are essential aspects of mental well-being, but these will not help us identify the poor. It is the civic, economic and other deprivations (being without food or home or job or health care or social dignity or rights among others) that should be the basis for identifying the poor. Organizing the poor and enabling their capabilities, which could include their mental strength and self-confidence, should be important aspects of implementation, but only after the poor are identified and the interventions focus on their deprivations. We end by referring to Mahatma Gandhi’s talisman – “whenever in doubt think of the poorest person and you will find your doubts melt away.”

ABC of Indian Elections 2014

I have already discussed about the elections under a veil. Now, let me open the veil a bit and discuss the ABC of Indian Elections 2014. A is for AAP (Aam Aadmi Party), B is for BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) and C is for the Congress or INC (Indian National Congress).

The Congress has a national following because it is identified with the country's independence movement. It is this identity that made the Congress to be the ruling party for about 50 year's in the nation's 67 years democracy. The Congress party of yore was thought to represent all kinds of views - the left, the right, the centre, the left of centre. the right of centre and so on and so forth. Over the years, the party's leadership got identified with a single family - the Nehru-Gandhi family (they have no relationship with Mahatma Gandhi) and its current President and Vice-President are Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi respectively. They have also been the leading party of an alliance that has been ruling for the last ten years that was marred with corruption. In the current election the Congress faces serious anti-incumbency on account of corruption and dynastic politics.

Taking advantage of this, the BJP and its allies have made a head start. They have announced Narendra Modi to be their Prime Ministerial candidate. This itself charged the adrenalin of many extreme right wing party cadre and supporters while for some others it brought back the memories of divide and misrule aligned with one of the worst communal violence of India that rocked Gujarat in 2002 only a few months after he was sworn in as its Chief Minister.  Today, after being in charge of the state for more than 12 years, he is being championed as a poster boy of development whose report card by Arvind Panagariya drives the punters with one feet in the share-bazaar gong-ho, but independent analysis by Maitreesh Ghatak and Sanchari Roy show that the claims of development do not add up. 

The BJP is not leaving any stones unturned and has set up pre-poll alliances, taken back into its fold people who were recently distanced on account of corruption and given tickets to candidates who are turncoats from the Congress and other parties. Thereby, making it obvious that it is NOT a party with a difference. What is more, BJP's campaigning has made use of Modi's persona to such an extent that many supporters are not keen to know who the party's candidate is from their constituency. This should be an important case study in marketing, but then the basis of representative democracy is made to stand on its head.

To bolster the case for representative democracy, to be a party with a difference, to question dynastic politics and to rake up the case for corruption is a recent entrant in India's democratic polity, the AAP. For many, this party is identified with another poster boy - Arvind Kejriwal who was the Chief Minister of Delhi for 49 days as a minority government. His sudden resignation from this has become a scoring point for the other parties and a sore point that its candidates have to answer the electorate. But then those interested in these answers should keep a watch on Varanasi where Kejriwal has pitted himself against Modi and it is dubbed as the mother of all battles for elections 2014.

While many opinion polls have dismissed AAP in the current elections, my lay guestimate is that they could reach at least 10 to 15 per cent of the popular vote share. Many of my friends and colleagues with whom I discuss may not agree, but let me explain the reasons that I have.

First, AAP is beyond Arvind Kejriwal. It is a conglomerate of views. There are people who are to the left, some other with views to the right and many others that are spread between the two. While this may look like cacophony to someone at one end of the spectrum but then this is what democratic polity is all about - reasonable pluralism.  It gives space to deliberations for a wide spectrum of views. It is like the Congress of yore. Different political entities, including the BJP to a very limited extent, tried to take this space that Congress lost long back, but they have not been successful. This space is being taken over by AAP.

Second, being open to a conglomerate of views has allowed AAP to connect to different kinds of movements that various groups have been independently spearheading - anti-nuclear, crisis in agriculture, displacement, slum housing, and tribal rights among others. This may not lead to an outright increase in votes for AAP by all these disgruntled groups, but it cannot be ignored that there is a consolidation happening.

Third, some people would be interested in a candidate's capability to address issues that matter for the constituency. Many candidates of AAP have done this - they have made attempts to directly engage with their voters and this will be an important motivation for some to vote for these candidates.

Fourth, AAP is contesting in 434 constituencies that is spread across the country. Given the limited resources (time, people and money) they have spread themselves thin and if voters would not like to waste their vote then they may cast it in favour of an winning candidate. While such an impression creation is possible, but this does not cut much ice because most of the winning candidates could get less than half the vote share (say, around 35-40 per cent) indicating that more than half the voters still may not cast their votes for the winning candidate. In short, those who have decided to vote for AAP because of the first three reasons could still vote for them and this would be spread across the country and this will add to their vote share.

Fifth, because of efforts by the Election Commission of India, the Association for Democratic Reforms and Satyamev Jayate there has been an increase in people coming out to vote in this elections. If this increase is by people who did not want to vote because they were disillusioned by the system then it is quite likely that many of these first time voters may cast their preferences in favour of AAP.

It is possible that my guestimates are on the higher side and even it it is correct then it may not transfer into seats. But, if my guestimate is correct then the other parties may better watch out for AAP in the next elections. And, yes the next election could happen very soon if this election gives us a hung parliament, which seems more likely.

To sum up, AAP seems to be a party that gives space to multiple views and also one that makes a difference. The former makes it like the Congress and the latter makes it like what BJP would have  perhaps wanted to be. It is in this sense that AAP is a B team of Congress and a C team of BJP.