Analysis of Politico-Economic Situation of India - Where Did It Go Offtrack

In the previous post on this blog, a synoptic view of the politico-economic situation of contemporary India was presented. The prevailing situation in respect of morality in politics as practiced in India, corruption in public life, social unrest and insurgency in the country and poverty and economic disparity was discussed and was shown that, taking the situation prevailing in India at the time of its independence in 1947 as a reference point, these problems have progressively gotten worse over the six decades since then. There is also a general perception that the rate of decline in the situation in all these aspects has been rather on the increase over the period in spite of efforts having been made to arrest the decline. If this is so and there is no real ground to suppose otherwise, all concerned with and for India should really be worried about its future. There is lurking danger that many persons may be beguiled into complacency or even optimism based on the statistics of its economic growth, of its increased job opportunities in certain sectors of economy, or of increasing penetration of modern technology of mobiles and internet. But the stark facts of the Indian situation cannot, and must not, be glossed over by this flickering tokenism. If even these tokens are considered in perspective, they will reveal rather disturbing situation below their thin veneer. High rate of economic growth must be considered vis-a-vis increasing impoverishment in the country. According to one estimate, 77% of people of India live on an income of Rs. 20.00($0.5) a day. The so called economic reforms comprising liberalization, privatization and globalization have opened the vast Indian market to multinational companies, which resulted in creation of jobs and led to introduction of electronic and other goods manufactured by these companies in this ready-made market. These manifestations of ‘ positive changes’ in India are really the results of growth of related science and technology outside India as well as of ‘ liberalized , privatized and globalized economy’. These are indicative of neither development of science, technology and industry in India nor of corresponding or consequential changes in life and living of people .While India is the fourth largest user of internet i.e., consumers of related technology and industry in the world , this use is confined to only 7% of its people as compared to the next higher users Japan (75%) , U.S.A (74%) , and China (27%) . These positive changes are rather characteristic features of neo-colonialism, i.e., supplier of raw materials and resources including human resources and consumer of finished goods. The colonial British government too had introduced railways in India as far back as in 1857 and it did create jobs in India, in implementation as well as for its operation and maintenance. It, however, was meant to serve, and did serve, the ultimate purpose of economic exploitation of a colony.

The systematic decline since independence in the above mentioned four politico-economic aspects which broadly encompass the entire Indian situation is, however, too apparent to be denied or ignored. When India had been struggling under the inspiring leadership of Mahatma Gandhi for its freedom from exploitation and degradation that its people had been suffering from under the colonial dispensation , the freedom fighters would have hardly envisaged that the free India would evolve like the way it has done. And since the decline in the situation of free India has been evolutionary, it is obvious that free India has not been on the right tracks from day one. As the rate of decline has been increasing over the years, one may conclude that free India had positioned itself on rather a downward slope where descent naturally goes on with acceleration.

The moot point is to deliberate and determine where India went wrong right in the beginning of its journey as a free nation. If this is not done thoughtfully ,it is quite likely that we may misdiagnose the various ills that afflict the nation as it moved along , prescribe wrong remedies, get frustrated when the affliction does not go away or become more complex and serious and then declare in desperation that ‘India is not fit for democracy ’ , ‘politicians are to blame for the nation’s plight’, ‘corruption is too deep rooted and pervasive to be eliminated’, ‘administration is unresponsive and inefficient’, or similar such sweeping statements which lead nowhere.

In order to discover and determine where and how India went off-track since it became free, one must step back a little and look broadly at its struggle for freedom. It is widely agreed that Mahatma Gandhi gave a new direction, imparted a great momentum and introduced a novel weapon of non-violent non- cooperation in the freedom struggle. Moved by the plight of the people under the colonial rule, he drew the oppressed masses to this struggle and made it a real mass movement, which earlier was confined only to the intelligentsia. His guiding spirit and common refrain in the freedom movement was that he was fighting against the unjust and immoral system of governance through which India was systematically exploited and degraded and not necessarily against the British people who were merely operating it. This system was defined and elaborated in the Government of India Acts passed by the British Parliament. These Acts were amended from time to time to accommodate some of the demands of the freedom fighters under the overall objective of economic exploitation of India with consequent deprivation and degradation of its people. Under the Government of India Act 1935, a provision was made for governments to be formed in the provinces of British India by popularly elected representatives. However, the provincial governments so formed found various provisions in this Act abhorrent and constraining under which they were hardly able to act in order to satisfy the legitimate aspirations of the people and consequently they resigned in frustration after only a year or so. Henceforward, abolition of this Act itself became one of the important objectives of their independence struggle. When India was granted independence through the Indian Independence Act 1947, two provisions in this Act may be pointed out; one that until India framed its own constitution the Govt. of India Act 1935 would remain in force, and secondly the rights and privileges of members of the Indian Civil Service, who were under the control of British Secretary of State for India, would continue unchanged. The Constitution of India framed by the Constituent Assembly whose members were elected not directly by the people based on adult suffrage but indirectly by the members or the Legislative Assemblies of the provinces of British India as well as were nominated as representatives of the native Indian states, adopted the same system of governance as was operative in the 1935 Act and against which the freedom struggle was waged. The draft Constitution was criticized on two main counts in the Constituent Assembly. One that it was hardly indigenous to India having a rich heritage of culture and civilization and secondly, while it rejected the British rule, it adopted the institutions developed for and under this rule. These criticisms were recognized by Dr. Rajendra Prasad in his concluding speech but were glossed over in the hope that the country would throw up men of character, vision, integrity and national commitment , who would be able to make the best even of a defective Constitution. And the Constitution was thus passed by consensus on 26 November 1949 in the Constituent Assembly when the people of India were said to have “adopted, enacted and given to themselves” a Constitution. Unfortunately for India, Dr. Rajendra Prasad’s hope which seemed understandably justified in the political milieu of that time proved to be utterly naïve in contemporary India. It must also be recognized that Mahatma Gandhi, the architect of India’s freedom, was conspicuous by his total non-involvement in the constitution making process even while he was alive. The Constitution of India, which became operative with effect from 26 January 1950 known as Republic Day of India almost two years after Gandhi’s death, not only doesn’t bear any real imprint of Gandhi’s thoughts (not speaking of Gandhian thoughts) about free India but in vital aspects is rather an anti-thesis of his entire motivation and rationale of waging and guiding a novel struggle for freedom , which has inspired a large part of the world.

Is this then the point of off-track journey of the Republic of India? This will be examined and analyzed in some detail in the further posts on this Blog.