http://www.thedailystar.net/beta2/news/hype-vs-reality/
SUNDAY, APRIL 14, 2013
PRAFUL BIDWAI COLUMN
Hype vs reality
PRAFUL BIDWAI
MODI moves centre-stage!” “Modi storms in as the BJP’s PM candidate.” “It’s Narendra Modi vs Rahul Gandhi!” “In PM mode, Modi spells out strategy on big issues.”
Thus scream the headlines in leading Indian publications and TV channels — part of a systematic corporate blitzkrieg to build up Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi as a messiah of “development,” who is destined to lead India.
In contrast to this hype, unprecedented in Indian history, Mr. Modi remains a deeply polarising figure internationally, nationally, and even within the Sangh Parivar, which is reluctant to name him as its prime ministerial candidate. Nothing can remove the stigma he carries for Independent India’s worst anti-minority pogrom, in 2002.
Mr. Modi continues to be an abomination to conscientious citizens globally — and to millions of Hindus and non-Hindus in India, who treasure political decency, secularism, tolerance and social inclusion.
This was once again demonstrated by the spirited protest against the invitation extended to him by Wharton Business School at the University of Pennsylvania in the US to speak long-distance. The issue was not the right to free expression, but hate speech and sanctification of his pivotal role in the Gujarat butchery. The protest conforms with the ethos and culture of US universities, evident in their opposition to the Vietnam War and demonstrations against its apologists.
In contrast stands the lionising of Mr. Modi by Indian businessmen and the corporate media. They depict him as a Knight in Shining Armour who will rescue India from economic stagnation, poverty, and missed opportunities towards “progress,” and promote the “Gujarat Model” of development.
Politically, it would be wrong, and morally impermissible, to normalise a perverse, autocratic and crassly communal politician like Mr. Modi — who has covered up the 2002 violence and shielded its perpetrators — even if the “Gujarat Model” were worth emulating.
However, the model is deeply flawed. Gujarat’s rank in per capita GDP has fallen since 1996-97 from 4th to 8th among 19 major Indian states. Haryana, Punjab, Maharashtra, Kerala and Himachal Pradesh are ahead of it. Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka are only a notch below.
True, at 10.1% a year, Gujarat’s GDP growth in 2004-2012 exceeded the 8.3% national average. But growth was even higher in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Bihar (respectively, 10.8, 10.3 and 11.4%). Even Uttarakhand and Madhya Pradesh have recently outperformed Gujarat.
Madhya Pradesh, with 10.1% current growth, is India’s fastest-growing state. It posted impressive agricultural growth of 18.9% and 14.3% over two years. Since 2003-04, MP’s revenue collection has risen fivefold and its capital outlay sixfold.
Unlike Gujarat’s “trickle-down” approach, MP is state-interventionist in providing food and electricity. Its growth is also more balanced and inclusive — unlike Gujarat’s, which has neglected agriculture and the social sector. Gujarat’s industrial growth is unbalanced, dominated by sectors like toxic chemicals production, ship breaking and diamond polishing, and of late, polluting power generation. Gujarat’s agriculture, on which 52% of its people depend, is unstable. Food grain output recently suffered two sharp dips of 22% and 11%.
Gujarat isn’t as great a foreign direct investment (FDI) magnet as made out. Maharashtra, Delhi, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu attracted much more FDI in 2000-2012 — in Maharashtra’s case, 6.78 times more.
Gujarat’s recent growth is largely built on past gains in industry and infrastructure, but is not bad. But its human development index (HDI) story is poor. Its all-India HDI rank has fallen from six to nine. It ranks a poor 18th in literacy among Indian states.
In infant mortality, Gujarat is a low 25th. Its female infant mortality rate (51) is higher than the national average (46). Worse, its sex ratio is an abysmal 918 females per 1,000 males, well below the national ratio (940). The 0-6 sex ratio is a shameful 886, compared to 914 nationally — 27th lowest in India.
In poverty reduction (8.6 percentage-points between 2004 and 2009), Gujarat lags behind Tamil Nadu (13.1), Maharashtra (13.7), Odisha (19.2) or Madhya Pradesh (11.9). Employment has been almost stagnant in Gujarat since 2004-05. Less than 5% of Gujarati households are covered under the National Rural Employment Guarantee. Rural wage rates in Gujarat are among the bottom half of state rankings.
On the hunger index, Gujarat’s rank is an appalling 13 among 17 major Indian states. Even sub-Saharan Africa’s poorer countries do better. Nearly 45% of Gujarati children under five are malnourished. Gujarat’s hunger incidence exceeds that of Punjab, Kerala and Haryana, and even of much poorer Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and Rajasthan. It’s in the “acute hunger” league like Bihar and Orissa.
So much for Gujarat’s growth and “progress”! Gujarat has gaping economic inequalities and unacceptably poor social indices. Yet, Big Business loves the “Gujarat Model” precisely because it likes imbalances biased towards private industry and because Mr. Modi favours it with huge tax write-offs (for instance, over 60% on the Tatas’ Nano project).
Mr. Modi is a “man of action” — an autocratic quick decision-maker personifying single-window industrial approvals. Big Business adores him for his ruthless decisiveness. The Tatas, Ambanis, Adanis and Ruias have rushed to befriend and praise him.
The media reflects businessmen’s admiration for Mr. Modi. Instead of soberly reporting what he says and does, and reflecting on his authoritarian politics, it has joined the pro-Modi bandwagon. It gives him respectability and paints him as the winner in a presidential-style contest, which Indian elections aren’t.
The mediating factor here is the “aspirational” metropolitan upper-caste upper middle class, which is impatient with democracy and wants elitist approaches in economy and society. If that means welcoming a new fuehrer, so be it!
The corporate media’s owners, anchors and editors belong to this class. In promoting Mr. Modi, they are committing the same blunders that Hitler’s and Mussolini’s business backers made in the 1920s and 1930s.
They are only aggravating the grave threat that Indian democracy faces from the communal Extreme-Right.
The writer is an eminent Indian columinst.
SUNDAY, APRIL 14, 2013
PRAFUL BIDWAI COLUMN
Hype vs reality
PRAFUL BIDWAI
MODI moves centre-stage!” “Modi storms in as the BJP’s PM candidate.” “It’s Narendra Modi vs Rahul Gandhi!” “In PM mode, Modi spells out strategy on big issues.”
Thus scream the headlines in leading Indian publications and TV channels — part of a systematic corporate blitzkrieg to build up Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi as a messiah of “development,” who is destined to lead India.
In contrast to this hype, unprecedented in Indian history, Mr. Modi remains a deeply polarising figure internationally, nationally, and even within the Sangh Parivar, which is reluctant to name him as its prime ministerial candidate. Nothing can remove the stigma he carries for Independent India’s worst anti-minority pogrom, in 2002.
Mr. Modi continues to be an abomination to conscientious citizens globally — and to millions of Hindus and non-Hindus in India, who treasure political decency, secularism, tolerance and social inclusion.
This was once again demonstrated by the spirited protest against the invitation extended to him by Wharton Business School at the University of Pennsylvania in the US to speak long-distance. The issue was not the right to free expression, but hate speech and sanctification of his pivotal role in the Gujarat butchery. The protest conforms with the ethos and culture of US universities, evident in their opposition to the Vietnam War and demonstrations against its apologists.
In contrast stands the lionising of Mr. Modi by Indian businessmen and the corporate media. They depict him as a Knight in Shining Armour who will rescue India from economic stagnation, poverty, and missed opportunities towards “progress,” and promote the “Gujarat Model” of development.
Politically, it would be wrong, and morally impermissible, to normalise a perverse, autocratic and crassly communal politician like Mr. Modi — who has covered up the 2002 violence and shielded its perpetrators — even if the “Gujarat Model” were worth emulating.
However, the model is deeply flawed. Gujarat’s rank in per capita GDP has fallen since 1996-97 from 4th to 8th among 19 major Indian states. Haryana, Punjab, Maharashtra, Kerala and Himachal Pradesh are ahead of it. Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka are only a notch below.
True, at 10.1% a year, Gujarat’s GDP growth in 2004-2012 exceeded the 8.3% national average. But growth was even higher in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Bihar (respectively, 10.8, 10.3 and 11.4%). Even Uttarakhand and Madhya Pradesh have recently outperformed Gujarat.
Madhya Pradesh, with 10.1% current growth, is India’s fastest-growing state. It posted impressive agricultural growth of 18.9% and 14.3% over two years. Since 2003-04, MP’s revenue collection has risen fivefold and its capital outlay sixfold.
Unlike Gujarat’s “trickle-down” approach, MP is state-interventionist in providing food and electricity. Its growth is also more balanced and inclusive — unlike Gujarat’s, which has neglected agriculture and the social sector. Gujarat’s industrial growth is unbalanced, dominated by sectors like toxic chemicals production, ship breaking and diamond polishing, and of late, polluting power generation. Gujarat’s agriculture, on which 52% of its people depend, is unstable. Food grain output recently suffered two sharp dips of 22% and 11%.
Gujarat isn’t as great a foreign direct investment (FDI) magnet as made out. Maharashtra, Delhi, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu attracted much more FDI in 2000-2012 — in Maharashtra’s case, 6.78 times more.
Gujarat’s recent growth is largely built on past gains in industry and infrastructure, but is not bad. But its human development index (HDI) story is poor. Its all-India HDI rank has fallen from six to nine. It ranks a poor 18th in literacy among Indian states.
In infant mortality, Gujarat is a low 25th. Its female infant mortality rate (51) is higher than the national average (46). Worse, its sex ratio is an abysmal 918 females per 1,000 males, well below the national ratio (940). The 0-6 sex ratio is a shameful 886, compared to 914 nationally — 27th lowest in India.
In poverty reduction (8.6 percentage-points between 2004 and 2009), Gujarat lags behind Tamil Nadu (13.1), Maharashtra (13.7), Odisha (19.2) or Madhya Pradesh (11.9). Employment has been almost stagnant in Gujarat since 2004-05. Less than 5% of Gujarati households are covered under the National Rural Employment Guarantee. Rural wage rates in Gujarat are among the bottom half of state rankings.
On the hunger index, Gujarat’s rank is an appalling 13 among 17 major Indian states. Even sub-Saharan Africa’s poorer countries do better. Nearly 45% of Gujarati children under five are malnourished. Gujarat’s hunger incidence exceeds that of Punjab, Kerala and Haryana, and even of much poorer Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and Rajasthan. It’s in the “acute hunger” league like Bihar and Orissa.
So much for Gujarat’s growth and “progress”! Gujarat has gaping economic inequalities and unacceptably poor social indices. Yet, Big Business loves the “Gujarat Model” precisely because it likes imbalances biased towards private industry and because Mr. Modi favours it with huge tax write-offs (for instance, over 60% on the Tatas’ Nano project).
Mr. Modi is a “man of action” — an autocratic quick decision-maker personifying single-window industrial approvals. Big Business adores him for his ruthless decisiveness. The Tatas, Ambanis, Adanis and Ruias have rushed to befriend and praise him.
The media reflects businessmen’s admiration for Mr. Modi. Instead of soberly reporting what he says and does, and reflecting on his authoritarian politics, it has joined the pro-Modi bandwagon. It gives him respectability and paints him as the winner in a presidential-style contest, which Indian elections aren’t.
The mediating factor here is the “aspirational” metropolitan upper-caste upper middle class, which is impatient with democracy and wants elitist approaches in economy and society. If that means welcoming a new fuehrer, so be it!
The corporate media’s owners, anchors and editors belong to this class. In promoting Mr. Modi, they are committing the same blunders that Hitler’s and Mussolini’s business backers made in the 1920s and 1930s.
They are only aggravating the grave threat that Indian democracy faces from the communal Extreme-Right.
The writer is an eminent Indian columinst.