Will India become a superpower?

I happened to read Ramachandra Guha's essay on "Will India become a super power?".(For those who would like to read this essay on paper, get hold of the latest edition of Outlook. The essay is a compliment with the last edition). There are already so many reviews on the net about the essay, but I thought I'll have my own take on the same.

I found the essay very neutral. I must admit, that I'm not an extremely well read person to comment on the neutrality of the subject: yet, the reading was lucid and informative.

The author offers seven reasons why India will not become a super power (click here for a synopsis)

According to the author, “The challenge of the naxalites; the insidious presence of the Hindutvawadis; the degradation of the once liberal and upright centre; the increasing gap between the rich and the power; the trivialization of the media; the unsustainability, in an environmental sense of present patterns of resource consumption; the instability and policy incoherence caused by multi-party coalition Governments – these are the seven reasons why India will not become a superpower.”

However there were three points in it which really made me sit up and think. As city dwellers, working in top IT firms, we are not aware, or at least do not face the threats of the naxalite insurgency. We do not have any qualms about the atrocities committed by the right wing religious fundamentalists who cry hoarse for a "hindu rashtra". Of course we are sometimes, victims of the "degradation of the once liberal and upright centre" but mostly our buying capacity helps us overcome the inefficiency of the governement. Can't get a landline, buy a mobile phone. Can't trust the postal service? use a courier service.

But there are three points which should affect the conscience of every Indian who reaps the benefits of the economic growth in our country.

1) The increasing gap between the rich and the poor.

As the saying goes, "the rich becomes richer and the poor poorer".

The essay says that "A certain kind of Indian, with a certain kind of social or caste background, living in a certain kind of concentrated settlement, and in certain states of India, is likely to be better off than Indians of other social backgrounds and other residential locations in other states. "if one is poor in India...one is more likely to live in rural areas, more likely to be a member of the Scheduled Caste or Tribe or other discriminated group, more likely to be malnourished, sick and in poor health, more likely to be illiterate or poorly educated and with low skills, more likely to live in certain states (such as...Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, and also Orissa) than in others..."

I find this very true. The reason for me being what I am is because of where I was born and to whom I was born. And the very reason why the tribals and the adivaasis are poor is because they are born where they are born. When you put it that way it sounds very unfair, doesn't it?

"One consequence of market-led economic growth shall be to accentuate these differences. Since upper castes tend to have higher levels of education and greater mobility across India, they are likely to garner the most profitable jobs. Since well developed regions have a reputation for being rich in skills and open to innovation, the bigger investors will flock to them. Since cities have more resources and better infrastructure as compared to small towns and villages, they will continue to get the bulk of new investment. In this manner, the already substantial gap between Bangalore and rural Karnataka, South India and eastern India, city-dwellers and country-folk will grow even larger."

2) The trivialization of the media.

"These inequalities of income and status are made more striking by their magnification by the media, with its breathless worship of wealth and success. A leading newspaper routinely speaks of the India that wants to march ahead allegedly being kept back by the other India that refuses to come with them. There is a kind of Social Darwinism abroad, where the new rich promiscuously parade their wealth, while insinuating that the poor are poor because they deserve to be poor. The exhibitionism of the rich has reached its apogee in the construction of a 27-storey building in downtown Bombay. Costing two billion dollars, and covering 4,00,000 square feet of interior space, this structure is meant for the exclusive use of a single nuclear family."

Aren't we all victims of this social Darwinism that the author talks about. We use cars to commute to our offices, when the distance in km's to our offices isn't even double digit. We don't give a hoot about the carbon emissions, the pollution we cause, the noise we make.. nothing. All we seem to care about is our convenience and luxury.

"However, in the eyes of the new, excessively market-friendly media, the environment is only about pretty trees and tigers. They wish their readers to have their cake and eat it too; to live resource-intensive lifestyles and yet be able to glory in the beauties of the wild. They cannot, or will not, see that the one imperils the other. Nor will they acknowledge the persistence and significance of more local, less glamorous environmental issues—such as the state of the air and the water, the conservation of energy, the provision of safe and affordable housing."

3) The unsustainability, in an environmental sense of present patterns of resource consumption

"Eighty years ago, Mahatma Gandhi had pointed to the unsustainability, at the global level, of the Western model of economic development. "God forbid," he wrote, "that India should ever take to industrialisation after the manner of the West. The economic imperialism of a single tiny island kingdom (England) is today keeping the world in chains. If an entire nation of 300 million took to similar economic exploitation, it would strip the world bare like locusts."

"The environmental challenges posed by the economic rise of China and India are of three kinds. First, at the global level, is the threat of rapid and irreversible climate change due to the accumulation of greenhouse gases.

..Second, at the regional or continental level, are the environmental (and social) costs of the ecological footprint of China and India outside their own national borders. The West has for some time worked to relocate its dirty industries to the Third World, passing on the costs to the poor and the powerless. In the same manner, the externalities of Indian and Chinese consumers will be increasingly borne by the people of other lands..

The third challenge is that posed to the environments of these countries themselves. Chinese cities have the highest rates of air pollution in the world. Rivers such as the Ganga and the Jamuna are effectively, dead. India and China both have unacceptably high levels of air and water pollution."

Reading the essay made me feel like a cuprit accused of so many crimes.

We live our lives, ignorant of the consequences of our actions. We don't care about our carbon footprint. We don't care if some adivaasis in a distant forest are relocated due to political ambitions. We don't care if the air is getting polluted or the water resources are getting depleted. All we care about is our daily existence. What else should we worry about? Right?

It seems futile to protest..to resist.

But as the historian says, the problem may partially be attributed to our mindsets.

"For the task of reform, of incremental and evolutionary change, is as unglamorous as it is necessary. It is far easier to speak of a wholesale, structural transformation to identify one single variable that, if acted upon, will take India up and into the straight high road to superstardom.Among the one-size-fits-all solutions on offer are those promoted by the Naxalites, whose project is to make India into a purer, that is to say more regimented, version of Communist China; by the Sangh parivar, which assures the Hindus that if they rediscover their religion they will (again) rule the world; and by the free-market ideologues, who seek to make India into an even more hedonistic version of the United States of America.

Rather than nurture or act upon these utopian fantasies, the Indian patriot must focus instead on the tasks of gradual and piecemeal reform. We need to repair, one by one, the institutions that have safeguarded our unity amidst diversity, and to forge, also one by one, the new institutions that can help us meet the fresh challenges of the 21st century. It will be hard, patient, slow work—that is to say, the only kind of work that is ever worth it."

We CAN make a difference.

As they say, the first step to solving a problem is understanding the problem. Let's be strong enough to speak out. It may not make a difference, but it will certainly inspire many others who are looking for support. Let's be strong enough to act, when the situation demands it. It will certainly make a difference. Let us be part of our nation's march towards glory.

And in time, history will give us our due.