SIDHARTH BHATIA - There is a Rising New Contempt for the Poor and the Weak // G. SAMPATH - The morality of binaries // Death by Demonetisation: Satya Sagar
By now it must have
become apparent to the meanest intelligence that India is in turmoil. A running
economy has ground to almost a halt and there is no saying when things will get
back to ‘normal’ again, normal in this case being the ability of the common
citizen to work, earn and then spend that money for her daily needs. To be cut
off from legitimately earned money, lying within arms reach but yet
inaccessible and going through tiresome and humiliating moments to get it, has
understandably frustrated millions of innocent citizens.
Fervid supporters of
the present dispensation and especially of prime minister Narendra Modi, still
persist in hailing this ‘masterstroke’. His political colleagues have now begun
to admit that there is pain, but say it’s all for future gain. Economists are
not so sure that it was a good idea at all, because the costs – economic and
human – far outweigh the benefits. What will social
scientists make of the aftermath of the off-with-his-head kind of firman issued
by the prime minister one weekday night, which has radically changed the lives
of millions of people and will cause serious long term damage? How has India
reacted and what does it tell us, about our political masters, about our
society, about ourselves?
Undoubtedly
sociologists and historians of the future will study this phenomenon but even
observing the unfolding of this human drama, which has seen not just economic
misery but also death, one thing has become starkly clear-the vast class divide
between the well off and also the well connected and the rest of the nation’s
citizens has grown exponentially.
There was always a
chasm in India between the rich and the poor, the haves and the have-nots. The
poor were a blind spot for the other Indians, especially in urban areas. Even
if they were within the eye line, they were mostly ignored. As for the rural
poor, for much of urban middle-class India, they existed only in the abstract
and therefore didn’t matter. But in an earlier India, even the richest and the
wealthiest knew that poverty was a problem and something had to be done for
them.
In the post reforms
era, it was hoped that trickle down economics would eventually reach them, but
as we know, that was a chimera. It was the middle-class that got richer and got
the full benefit of higher salaries and consumer goods; the government was
happy to tailor its policies towards them.
It was during the peak
of India Shining and later, the
India Story that a rising intolerance towards the poor became manifest. One of
the criticisms against Manmohan Singh – and Sonia Gandhi – was their allocation
of funds for schemes such as NREGA or the food subsidies, which were seen as a
drain on resources. Though NREGA has not been done away with, that ‘imbalance’
is being readjusted now. Poverty is no longer part of the conversation.
This disregard for the
invisibles at the bottom of the economic pyramid has created tremendous
antipathy and hatred towards those who do not fall within the idea of what the
modern Indian should be: consumerist, tech savvy and digitally networked. The
poor now are a drag, a nuisance holding us back. In recent days, how
often have we seen voices exhorting the poor to get plastic or mobile wallets
instead of paying the old way? Or wondering why they don’t have bank accounts?
Why don’t they just download WhatsApp on their smart phones? And in any case,
why would demonetisation would matter to them since they don’t have 500 rupee
notes in the first place? Aren’t the poor used to standing in queues? Can’t
they understand it is for the greater good?
On the social media, the tone is
virulent; one asked, “why should every policy be about the poor.” Why indeed?
These questions have not just come from the raucous online warriors but also
from corporate chieftains and politicians who are credulous that such a great
decision by the prime minister is being actually questioned. Their world of
privilege and entitlement, a world in which one can manage with credit cards
for weeks and months, has inured them to all other realities. This divide –
economic, social or indeed digital – has not happened overnight. It was
becoming apparent over the years.
No one from the
government has said sorry for this major mess up – that would be asking for too
much – and there has been no show of empathy either. No minister or MP has
walked among the crowds or the people in their constituencies, offering them
assurances-all the platitudes are being issued from their offices and then
echoed by their publicity machine. Anyone who complains is being asked to think
of the soldier in Siachen. The prime minister says it is the rich who are
sleepless, not the poor-but all around one only sees people queuing up outside
banks from 5 a.m. while the rich are hosting multi-crore weddings; the
incongruity seems to have completely missed our leaders.
There have also been
enough stories about people helping the weak and the indigent (though even that
kindness has been mocked), because there is also no dearth of goodness in this
country. Small traders and vendors have shown compassion and helped their
fellow citizens. That is the least one expects in a civilized society.
The turbulence this
decision has caused will eventually settle down-in 15 days, 50 days or maybe
longer. Farmers, workers and businessmen, especially small ones, will somehow
make do, as Indians are known to, and get back on their feet. Whatever the
outcome, the government and its vocal drum beaters will claim success; if you
say something often enough and loud enough, it starts sounding like the truth,
at least to yourself. But something has deeply changed in India and the long
term consequences of that will not go away.
http://thewire.in/81256/there-is-a-rising-new-contempt-for-the-poor-and-the-weak/G. SAMPATH - The morality of binaries
Narendra Modi’s
political opponents stand no chance against him unless they can script a
powerful counter-narrative that resonates with the masses and isn’t about him
Demonetisation has
been done many times before, without it disrupting the lives of ordinary
Indians. Not this time though. Could it have been done in a less disruptive
manner? Yes. Then why wasn’t it?
While there is no
answer to this question from the government, some have blamed it on lack of
adequate planning, and others on the necessity of secrecy. But the real answer
may lie in the political rather than the economic or logistical realm. One
could debate the merits and demerits of demonetisation as the best strategy to
curb the black economy. One could also debate the merits and demerits of a
‘fast’ demonetisation versus ‘slow’ or gradual demonetisation. One could debate
the manner of execution, in view of the known incompatibility between the newly
printed notes and the ATM machines that could not dispense them without
recalibration. One could debate the impact of this demonetisation — the instant
elimination of Rs.500 and Rs.1,000 notes, which constituted 86 per cent of the
currency in circulation — on ordinary people’s lives.
I, me, myself: All these aspects have
indeed been widely debated. And it was eagerly anticipated that Prime Minister
Narendra Modi, who was away on a visit to Japan, would address these issues on
his return. Some were even hoping that he might roll back the move to ease the pain,
at least until the logistics are in place.
Instead, the
rhetorical turn in his speeches the day after his return took everyone by
surprise. Addressing public functions in Goa, Belgavi and Pune on Sunday, he
sought to turn the entire narrative about demonetisation into one about
himself, his political career, and the unfairness of being persecuted by
powerful enemies. “I know what kind of forces and what kind of people are
against me now… They will not leave me alive. They will destroy me,” he said.
In other words, the one who truly deserves sympathy in the present scenario is
not the mass of daily wagers, street vendors, and farmers whose already
precarious livelihoods have been disrupted, but Mr. Modi.
His rhetoric not only
painted a sinister picture of anyone who dared to question his government’s
moves, in one stroke, it rendered all criticism suspect. Anyone familiar with
the tropes of Mr. Modi’s speeches would recognise his invocation of “those who
looted the country for 70 years”. In this populist narrative that he has
constructed and strengthened through hundreds of speeches over the years, the
Congress equals the corrupt equals the black money hoarders equals the elites
equals the liberals equals the Modi-critics equals the anti-nationals equals the
bad people who want to destroy India. At the same time, the good people equals
the true nationalists equals Modi equals Modi supporters equals the
Congress-haters equals the proud Hindus.
Neither of these
concatenations is fixed — they are liable to be extended to include new
categories or shrunk to focus on a select few. But as encapsulated in Mr.
Modi’s teary-eyed appeal, the significant aspects are three: the moralisation
of politics, the infusion of emotion into policy debates, and the reduction of all
debate into a single question, are you in support of Mr. Modi or not? If yes,
support him. If no, then it’s hardly surprising that you are criticising what
he has done.
Sacrifice for the
nation: While this may be a
crude summary of the dynamic at play, there is no denying that it is working
for Mr. Modi. Anyone who has been out in the past few days queuing up outside
ATMs could not have failed to come across people from every strata, but especially
the lower middle classes, who, while acknowledging the hardship they are going
through, nonetheless believe that Mr. Modi has taken a bold step for the good
of the country.
When he says, “I
promise you I will give you the India which you desired… I am doing what I was
asked to do by the people of this country”, not only do a large number of
Indians believe him, their words supply meaning to their hardship by wrapping
it in a narrative that connects them to a larger cause, and makes them feel
good about themselves. One would have to be really small-minded to complain
about 50 days of hardship if this hardship could help make India a great nation
by cleansing it of black money, no?
But Mr. Modi’s narrative doesn’t stop at
seeking the people’s support for demonetisation or for fighting black money. He
wants them to save the country by saving him — from his enemies. And speaking
of his “enemies”, Mr. Modi said, “They thought if they pull my hair, I will
stop and do nothing. I will not be cowed down. I will not stop doing these
things, even if you burn me alive.” These are the words of a person who holds
the most powerful post in the country, of a person who is supremely in command
of a party that enjoys a brute majority in Parliament.
Cult of the leader: Could there possibly
be an objective basis for such utterances? One may recall his response when cow
vigilantes were on the rampage. “Shoot me if you want, but not Dalits,” he had
said. In a democracy, why must anyone shoot anyone else? Was it not possible
for him to simply condemn the attacks on Dalits? But had he done so, he would
have ended up acknowledging anti-Dalit atrocities as an authentic issue during
his regime. By asking people to shoot him instead of attacking Dalits, he
flipped the narrative of Dalit atrocity into one about Narendra Modi.
His response to the
ongoing currency note crisis follows the same pattern. The demonetisation is
the first bold, decisive step — one with immediate, nationwide impact — that
Mr. Modi has taken since becoming Prime Minister. He did it in the most
dramatic fashion. Days after the move, the nation is reeling under the impact. What used to be
financial arcana has become a televised national spectacle. Above all, it has
underlined in no uncertain terms his power as a leader, as someone
extraordinary, and who towers above every other luminary in the national
political landscape.
This brings us to the
reason why he does not engage in a dialogue on equal terms with anyone — be it
from politics or the media — on any of his moves. It’s because it runs the
danger of diminishing his stature. It also carries the risk of elevating the
status of those he parlays with as an equal — which is another way of
diminishing him in relative terms. Hence the importance of frequent foreign
trips. It is as if the only individuals he can be seen to interact with on
equal terms are leaders of other countries, especially countries that command a
bigger say than India on the international stage. Hence the bear hug of Barack
Obama, Francois Hollande, Tony Abbott, and their ilk, extendable to other
larger-than-life members of the global power elite such as Mark Zuckerberg or
Hugh Jackman. The only modes of interaction open to ordinary interlocutors in
India are supplication, obedience, and unquestioning acceptance.
Dominating the
discourse: For Indian democracy
to remain healthy, it needs political leaders who can challenge the Prime
Minister as an equal. Right now there seem to be none. Hence his manoeuvre —
which has now become standard operating procedure — of addressing his response
from a podium, directly to the people of India, every time he is challenged on
any of his policies.
Ever since he became
the Prime Minister, Mr. Modi has been firmly in control of the national
political narrative, with not a little help from the media. The way his
demonetisation drive has unfolded reveals his willingness to leverage this
control to evacuate all possible alternatives to his helmsmanship of the
country’s destiny. He will continue to do so as long as the narrative that
conflates national interest with Mr. Modi’s interest remains unchallenged.
His political
opponents have been quick to talk about the businessmen who bankrolled his
election campaign and are thus invested in his success. But there doesn’t seem
to be adequate recognition of the fact that a large number of ordinary,
lower-middle-class Indians are emotionally invested in Mr. Modi’s political
fortunes. It is they who appear ready to undergo any hardship if it promises
positive outcomes for their leader — not unlike a battalion of soldiers ready
to sacrifice their lives for their general.
Going forward, we can
expect more from this playbook of turning every issue into one about Mr. Modi.
What should concern those who cherish democratic values is the absolute lack of
imagination or ideas among what passes for the Opposition in the country. His
opponents stand no chance against him in the 2019 elections unless they can
rise to the challenge of scripting a powerful counter-narrative that would
resonate with the masses & also, most critically - would not be about Mr.
Modi.
Death by Demonetisation: Satya Sagar
demonetisation is essentially an an attempt at economic and social engineering – on behalf of corporate banking and financial elites
The abrupt demonetisation of 500 and 1000 rupee notes by the Narendra Modi regime is a drastic move that is staggering in its scale, ambition and repurcussions. The only other figures in modern history one can think of, devious or stupid enough to attempt something similar, are the likes of Marcos, Suharto, Idi Amin and Pol Pot.
The abrupt demonetisation of 500 and 1000 rupee notes by the Narendra Modi regime is a drastic move that is staggering in its scale, ambition and repurcussions. The only other figures in modern history one can think of, devious or stupid enough to attempt something similar, are the likes of Marcos, Suharto, Idi Amin and Pol Pot.
For all its audacity
however, the decision could go down also as the grandest of blunders made by
anyone in Indian political history. Poorly planned and implemented it is likely
to prove disastrous not only for the country’s economy but – ironically
enough,– for the BJP’s own electoral fortunes.
The abolition of the
two currency notes – that make up 86% of all cash in circulation in the Indian
economy – has affected almost every family in the second most populous
nation on the planet. The harassment of the common citizen – particularly
from the ranks of the urban and rural poor- through denial of access to income,
savings and livelihood will not be forgotten anytime soon.
The Modi
government’s supporters have termed demonetisation a ‘surgical strike’
against black money, calling it a ‘bold’ , ‘necessary’ and ‘well intentioned’
step. A more rabid section of his fans see all complaints as coming from those
who benefited from black money, mainly the BJP’s political opponents. The Prime
Minister himself has called upon the nation to ‘make sacrifices’ and put up
with hardship for 50 days in this battle against corruption.
However, growing
consensus among economists both within and outside the country is that
demonetisation is a foolish measure and will hurt the Indian economy badly –
especially farmers, small businesses, labour and anyone part of the country’s
informal sector – and operates on a daily basis through cash transaction. The
informal sector constitutes over 30 % of the Indian economy in value and 92% in
terms of workforce employed.
Since the drastic
policy was announced on November 8, all these have come to a complete
standstill, leaving millions without livelihood or means to buy basic goods. As
one respected economist has pointed out demonetisation may have permanently
damaged India’s informal sector.
A severe deflation is predicted
over the next six months to a year or even longer, as spending power disappears
or goes down for millions of Indians and businesses shut down. There is also
the concern that, with government issued currency losing credibility through
demonetisation, more and more people will keep their money in unproductive but
safe assets like gold and property.
So, why would the
government take such a high risk step ? What was Mr Modi really trying to do
when he announced a measure that directly affects almost every single family in
the second most populous nation on the planet? Who are the real
beneficiaries of this drastic policy? Will it really stop black money from
circulating in the economy and end corruption from the country?
Despite all this
propaganda it is quite clear now that demonetisation has nothing really to do
with black money, that constitutes a sizeable 20 % of the Indian economy, of
which only 6% is hoarded in cash, the rest being stashed away in gold, real
estate and foreign accounts. If the government was serious about hurting the
beneficiaries of black money they would have started by prosecuting those who
keep such ill-gotten wealth in non-cash assets. Also, given the large-scale
collusion of the Indian political class and bureaucracy in corruption the Modi
regime should have first gone after its own ministers and government officials
(particularly from the tax and revenue collection departments) to set a public
example.
At its core,
demonetisation is essentially an an attempt at economic and social engineering
– on behalf of corporate banking and financial elites – the new paymasters Modi
genuflects to after having ditched the small and medium mercantile lobbies the
BJP represented for long. The Indian middle-classes, both real and aspirational,
are rooting for the policy as they see a consolidation of their own power and
future benefits in it.
With one stone, the
policy’s architects have tried to slaughter many birds: recapitalise public
banks burdened with bad loans; lend out new deposits to cronies in the
corporate sector; enrich new entrants into the digital banking business, give
the government extra funds to spend on its pet projects and steal a march over
political rivals.
1.Rebooting
troubled Indian banks: The
bad loans or Non Performing Assets (NPAs) in the Indian banking sector, stood
at nearly 6 lakh crore rupees by end of March 2016. Over 90 per
cent of this is on the books of public-sector banks, with the State Bank of
India accounting for the highest amount. Even this sum, stunning as it may be,
is considered a gross underestimation and if loans that face the risk of being
declared NPAs are also taken into account, the overall stressed advances of
Indian banks will double. A bulk of
the NPAs are in turn due to default on interest payments by the corporate
sector, which has been milking the banking system through its political
patrons.
The increase in
deposits of banks expected due to the crackdown on black money is expected to
help banks get into better health, lower interest rates and enable them to
resume lending to Indian businesses again. In other words, demonetisation is a
way of saving many Indian public sector banks while also providing corporates
with fresh loans, a very dubious strategy given those in power seem to
have no real will to recover money from their defaulter cronies.
2.Increasing the
government’s cash flow: read
more:
http://www.countercurrents.org/2016/11/17/death-by-demonetisation/
see also
