Oct 9. 2013 Ravi Sinha
Social engineering is
passé as it has fallen flat on the face of those who engineered it successfully
for long, be it Laloo Yadav in Bihar or Mayawati in Uttar Pradesh. It is ‘Out’
and what has come ‘In’ promises to transform the Indian politics in general and
governance in particular. Sadly, this new opium of masses is even more
dangerous as this emerging genre of vote bank politics takes even higher a
moral ground in the name of ‘Votes for Development’. However, beyond this
idealistic façade lies another sort of engineering—‘Developmental Engineering’
which as of now has earned enough curiosity among the media and intellectuals.
Its proponents nevertheless fall way short of not just ideals but also ideas
for any tangible transformation, be it Narendra Modi or Arvind Kejriwal.
Intellectuals argue whether
any other term has been so over-used and abused in the collective consciousness
at the political level than ‘Development’ which, of course, means different
things to different people. For some it is the GDP growth that is indicator of
development, others find holistic development including liveability index and
other social indicator as a benchmark. Populism has also been a development
indicator in this part of the world for quite some time, but social engineering
is increasingly waning and the void that it creates promises to put development
card on the forefront.
With the general
elections 2014 a few months away and five states also going for polls, the
subject of development has yet again gained prominence. While it is convenient
to assume that the young and aspiration driven India is no more ready to be
carried by rhetoric alone, a close scrutiny of India’s socio-political
consciousness reflects development as an agenda is yet to make inroads into politics
and translate into votes. India’s ballot box traction point runs much deeper
than macro level media rhetorics. In the name of development, what is actually
happening is that a sort of developmental engineering is replacing the tried
and tested social engineering that is waning its charm, thanks to its over-use
and abuse by the so-called messiah of social justice.
There are two kinds of
lies that are applied by respective governments to over-project its development
card—plain lies and statistical engineering. The opposition party uses the same
methodology to carry home the point lack of development. In plain lies all
propaganda machinery is put to use to create an aura of ‘feel good’ or ‘fear
psychosis’ which does not have a factual bearing on the ground. Secondly, it is
the statistical engineering which is applied and by selective use of statistics
it is made to believe that the state’s growth on development index is
reflective of its progress. If Narendra Modi symbolises developmental
engineering, Arvind Kejriwal is orchestrating plain lies.
However, GDP growth or
economic prosperity on a macro level does not often give the correct picture.
Unless the state’s growth has been inclusive and growth is at par or parallel
on various social indicators also, such growth is neither sustainable nor tangible
enough to be called ‘Greater Good for Greater Number of People’.
Take for instance the
over-hyped and over-projected development model of Gujarat. Indeed the economic
growth of Gujarat has been better than the national average. However, equally
true is the fact that other states like Delhi, Bihar, Maharashtra, Uttarakhand
and Tamil Nadu have done better than Gujarat in recent times. Gujarat is
neither the best performer in the top ten best performing states, nor is its
growth evaluation on various key indicators any impressive.
Poverty, a key indicator
of development is not reducing significantly in Gujarat and its less than
impressive performance shows it is at number 18th position. As per
Planning Commission figure all India BPL (Below Poverty Line) percentage has
gone down from 37.20 to 29.8 between 2004-05 and 2009-10 whereas Gujarat’s
percentage has gone down by only 8.6 points during the same period. Add to it,
the Chief Minister Narendra Modi’s lofty economic remark that nutrition has
gone down because women are health conscious in the state and eat less. That,
of course, is indicative of state’s seriousness with this key development
metrics.
Even from a purely economic
development standpoint, Gujarat is number nine among the top ten states with
percentage of population having concrete roof over head. Even states like
Kerala, Himachal Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Punjab are ahead of Gujarat; with tiny
places like Puducherry and Lakshadweep having better track record than Gujarat.
In terms of sex ratio,
another indicator of a developed state, Gujarat stands at a patriarchal low
rank of 20th position, with only 918 females per 1000 males. Though
Gujarat often boasts of better literacy rate than the national average, its
standing is at 15th position in the country. In terms of infant mortality
rate, again Gujarat’s statistical projection may boast of better than national
average but it stands at 18th position. Maternal mortality rate also
shows states like Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh are doing
better than Gujarat.
This raises a
fundamental question about the developmental engineering and its relevance
beyond the vote bank politics. The moot point is development for whom and at
what cost? Definitely, a development plank meant for industrialists can not be
an effective development model. When the Congress President Sonia Gandhi
emphasised that “passion for progress must be supplemented with compassion for
poor” during deliberation on Food Security Bill, it was that grand vision of
development model on which Gujarat stands nowhere.
Gujarat is just a case
study here, but the fact of the matter is that many of the states that boast of
development as their USP may not come out with relatively modest score when
judged with all the key indicators of development. Reasons why many of the
governments are shown the door even after creating so much of development
projection, most classic example being the ‘India Shining’ of Atal Behari
Vajpayee Government at centre.
In India the elections
have by and large not been contested on development plank; it is just that the
term development that is symptomatic of the developmental engineering instead
of social engineering which has lived its shelf life. And it is not just the
politicians alone who are to be blamed for this. What are we up to as Indians,
as vote banks? Do we really scrutiny to differentiate the wheat from the chaff?
If so, how come someone like Arvind Kejriwal take a moral high ground with
absolutely no solution to offer for most of the developmental, both social and
economic, problems afflicting the Indians.
So, it is basically one
rhetoric being replaced by another without any tangible focus on development
that still stands as the bane of Indian democracy. The mirage of a better
governance continues; some have channelized it in the name of social justice
while others are orchestrating in the name of development. Some others with no
track record have taken an altogether different route of developmental
engineering in the name of creating an utopian society. India just stands as
the laboratory for all engineering and the Indian voters are at the best guinea
pigs for them.
