Who Can Unite the Nation?
Terrorist attacks in our bazaars, the violence against Biharis in Mumbai, the Naxalite uprisings, religious strife in Orissa, the list goes on: India is being torn apart. We need strong leadership to bring Indians together to protect our collective national interests. But our political system is dysfunctional and our most important institutions are failing. Our best hope is that a great political leader emerges to build trust across various interest groups and knits our country together.
India is a deeply fractured country today. We are divided by state, religion, caste, community, language, forwards vs. backwards, left vs. right, secular vs. communal, promoters vs. workers, and on and on. Tossed about among all these divisive interest groups, the Indian state is floundering. Each interest group seeks to capture the state apparatus to serve its narrow demands ranging from getting hundreds of SEZs approved to reserving seats at higher educational institutions to resisting national identity cards that will restrict illegal immigration. In aggregate, these demands are imperiling our physical security and bankrupting the state.
India’s great divides have always been our weakness. Chandragupta Maurya overwhelmed the Nanda Empire by enlisting the kings of the Punjab, who were supposedly loyal to the Nandas. Once Chandragupta defeated the Nandas, he turned on his erstwhile allies. Mohammed Ghori gained the support of several Rajput kings who were at war with Prithvi Raj Chauhan, making it easy to defeat the isolated Chauhan kingdom. Akbar allied with the Rajputs of Amber, Gwalior, and Malwa to destroy the kingdom of Mewar. Robert Clive conspired with Mir Jafar and various Calcutta merchants to vanquish Siraj ud Daulah at the Battle of Plassey. Subsequent British rule in India was based on its infamous “divide-and-rule” strategy.
Indian history is thus replete with examples of bickering rulers unable to deliver peace and prosperity to their citizens. Game theory provides a profound insight to understand this dynamic. It is called the Prisoner’s Dilemma, a stylized non-zero-sum game where two prisoners (who do not know each other and cannot communicate with each other) can either stay silent or betray each other. If they both stay silent, they each get a 6 month sentence. If one stays silent and the other one betrays, then the silent one goes to prison for 10 years and the betrayer is set free. If both betray each other, then they both go to jail for 5 years. Unfortunately, given the various payoffs, the betrayal strategy dominates the silent strategy in every case. Acting in their rational self-interest, the prisoners choose to betray each other; as a result, they both go to jail for 5 years. In such types of situations, playing cooperative win-win strategies is very difficult because it requires both prisoners to trust each other totally.
India’s rulers have mostly chosen to fight each other for a share of the proverbial pie, rather than cooperating to grow the pie through win-win strategies. Robert Wright in his excellent book NonZero shows how successful societies have evolved various strategies to build trust and achieve win-win outcomes. Most successful societies have become progressively more complex through mechanisms such as a constitution-based political system, the army, the civil services, financial markets, workers unions, guilds, and companies. These integrative structures build trust by getting people to work together and tangibly deliver the benefits of grow-the-pie cooperative strategies. Thus a bicameral legislature, with representation from all parts of the country, can efficiently formulate laws; a very valuable public good.
Apart from various religious organizations, India did not evolve any integrative structures prior to the British Raj. Yes, most rulers had armies and tax collectors. But their goal was principally rent-extraction. British rule led to the creation of many integrative structures in India. Most of these structures, such as the civil services, a professional army, and the judiciary were transplanted directly from Britain, where they had organically developed over hundreds of years.
After Independence, the stalwarts of the Freedom Movement (steeped as they were in British traditions and values) trusted that these institutions coupled with a democratic political system would result in a modern, progressive society. However, over the last 60 years, we have subsided back to Indian-style governance; namely, using the powers of the state to run a cynical rent-extraction system for the ruling group. In modern-day India, the ruling group emerges primarily through elections, which pit one group against another. The goal is no different from our pre-British past: capture the state so as to capture rents. Voters recognize that our political system is dysfunctional; hence anti-incumbency rates are high to prevent permanent capture. Under these circumstances, our political system will not succeed in getting various interest groups to work together.
Our rent-seeking political system is also corroding our most important institutions. We cannot rely on the civil services, the police, judiciary, or any other institution to get various interest groups to work together cooperatively. Each of these institutions has been debased and is barely serving the national interest. Corrupt bureaucrats wanting money to pass a file, bomb blasts in Mumbai’s trains, farmers dying of drought, Naxalites in our forests — how many more proof points do we need?
We need a prophet of unity who can rise above these narrow interests, kindle the national themes that can unify us, inspire us to rebuild the country, and revitalize our key institutions. Note that Barack Obama’s historic victory speech included the following lines: “We are one nation. We are one people. Our time for change has come.”
Independent India has been rescued before by an inspiring political leader. JP’s sterling leadership brought together many different parties to contest against the Congress after the Emergency and saved Indian democracy. JP was able to break the Prisoner’s Dilemma and convince all the anti-Congress parties to put up a united front. As long as he was alive, the Janata Party stayed together. Tragically, the Janata Party experiment collapsed soon after his death in October 1979.
The last few years have been deeply divisive. Dependent on external support, the UPA government has been unable to push through any reforms, its fiscal policies have been highly populist, corruption has been rampant, and domestic security has deteriorated. Regional parties have become increasingly powerful and small parties with even a few seats in Parliament can topple a government. The coming General Elections may throw-up another fractured Parliament at a time of grave national and global crises. Now is the time we truly need a great leader who can unite the nation.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
I agree on most of the points raised by you but I would also like to add that at the time of crisis every Indian stand tall and raise their voice. We still have “unity in diversity” within ourselves though it just comes up at certain occasions. We need to harness this strength. One Nation. One Interest.
All points taken. If the solution is that we need a great leader, and the reality is that we do not have a great leader, we are back to square ONE.
I am looking at Indiabanao as a forum which engages with the estbalishment and provides suggestions. We need to be practical. There is no wishing away the current set of politicians but the need is to engage them so that they atleast get a sense of public view through people like you and me. Some 200 urban bloggers chatting amongst themselves is no solution
We are trying to engage senior leaders through India Banao. We had Advaniji for two hours with us in Delhi answering questions from students. Hopefully, through these interactions, we will be able to nudge one of the current set of politicians to articulate a national message that resonates with all Indians. JP showed that this can be done.
200 urban bloggers can make a difference if their blogs are read by 2 million people, who then go to vote. So we have to get the word out.
Jayant:
Nice piece. Leadership and organization (i.e., the ability to come together in a common cause) have been notorious weaknesses of our civilization. We have occasionally had great leaders in our history, but they have inevitably failed to leave behind succession mechanisms (or effective successors) that could perpetuate the benefits bestowed by their leadership. These problems continue to afflict us to this day.
Thinking back in history: Ashoka’s empire barely survived him (as far as we know), although his proselytization spread Buddhism and Indian culture throughout Asia; Samudragupta’s seems to have survived another three generations, but Harshavardhan’s didn’t outlast him, and Krishnadeva Raya’s lasted only another generation; Akbar’s system survived for two generations before being usurped by a younger great-grandson committed to overthrowing it (which he did by executing his syncretist brother Dara Shikoh).
My point is that Institution-building should be one of the things that IndiaBanao should focus on like a laser-beam. The gradual destruction and politicization of our institutions is eating into the vitals of our democracy.
I was a great admirer of JP as a boy, when I first became politically-conscious as a 10-year-old during the early phase of the JP movement in 1974 (especially in Bihar, with an even more effective move in Gujarat where Morarji Desai’s fast unto death brought down a corrupt Congress government, and installed a Janata Front government after an election in June 1975). The JP movement was a tremendous inspiration to that generation, and it helped end a period of tyrannical rule by a woman who had systematically destroyed our instituions in the 1970-77 period. But in retrospect, Jayaprakashji was probably wrong to have called for “Sampurna Kranti” in 1974, including a call to the police and army to rebel (against a duly-elected government); and sadly, he was too physically frail (partly from his mistreatment during the Emergency) to really build (ie, Institutionalize) an effective political party. To my mind, the saddest political aspect of the Janata Party’s coming to power in 1977 was its inability to create a robust and credible process to select the Prime Minister — which sowed the seeds of the party’s eventual destruction (because Charan Singh, particularly, and Jagjivan Ram were not convinced that Morarjibhai would have defeated them in a proper secret ballot). This fundamental inability to create institutionalized processes for leadership selection (which then permeates to every layer of each political party’s recruitment/selection process) weakens all our parties, and stands in the path of strengthening our democratic institutions. (VP Singh was similarly selected in a backroom in 1989 rather than openly elected by the National Front, sowing the seeds of Chandrasekhar’s resentment…).
You are 100% right that we must focus on building our institutions. Foremost in that task have to be our political parties. The US has a super transparent primary system that throws up 2 nominees. Similarly, our political parties should have elections for their leaders.
But again, we come back to mindset: how many leaders actually want to serve the nation and its people vs. how many are in politics to enrich themselves? We cannot expect debased institutions to rescue us; our only hope is that a great leader, a prophet of unity emerges. Who will rise to that challenge? I am hopeful that someone will surface. This reminds me of the Simon-Garfunkel song: “Our nation turns its longing eyes to you”
Suraj Prasad’s comment has been removed by the administrator as it was against a particular community. We do not appreciate such things and will never allow anyone to use India Banao! for spreading hatred and dividing the citizens of the country.
Accountability and Integrity, let us practice it and propagate it to create a critical mass and a society with value system. A society that will seek and reform the system i.e. the executive, legislative, administrative and Judiciary bodies will be transparent, efficeint and effective. A society and a system that is transparent in its actions and provide equal opportunity to everybody can only ensure Leaders succeed leaders and the laity doesn’t hope for a leadership miracle to happen.
Come join us at http://home.valuefoundation.in/index.php?option=com_chronocontact&Itemid=76
Dear Jayant ji
You are right that we require a leader. The only person i can say can be leader of the masses who is trusted by many in and outside India is Baba Ramdev. i am also writing to him and others should also write to him so that he come forward and join active politics. There may be many more better persons than him but because of mmy lack of knowledge i do not know them.
most of our leaders and officers first want to satisfy their and their nears and dears’s greed before serving the nation. Everyone knows greed can not be satisfied throught our life. so it is useless to select a person who first want to serve him.
regards.
Jayant and Sanjeev, here is my combined response to your respective pieces ‘Who can unite the Nation?’ and ‘India’s Security Failure- who is responsible’.
What has gone wrong with our security…..The terrorists come from Pakistan, but could terrorist attacks be perpetrated repeatedly if there weren’t sympathizers within our own country. So why are there sympathizers among our own, enough of them to embolden actors from across the border?
Indian Muslims have allowed themselves to be led by those, whose formula for leadership is to appeal to the insecurities of a minority community. Rather than envision a modern Muslim, rooted in the Indian sub-continent, ready to engage with the 21st century, they have reinforced the identity of a besieged inwardly-oriented set, with an increasing Arab tilt that is not rooted in our soil. The dominant mainstream leaders of our polity i.e. Congress-I have found electoral convenience in making common cause with these regressive Muslim leaders ; claiming to be their protectors & champions, they allow them to continue in their unenlightened direction. Congress-I has been the bad mother who panders to the fussier child’s poor eating habits instead of weaning it on to healthier food.
It is natural in a group where 80%+ belong to one religion, that also has the deepest historical roots in the land, to be dominant in the texture of the country. It would be so in most societies around the world. But that 80% cannot expect to live peacefully if they threaten the existence of the 13%. They cannot expect harmony, if justice is denied in an equal (in India’s context equally imperfect) way to the 13%. The Hindu Right has to mature to understand this. It has to stop strengthening, in an unintended perverse way, the hands of the unenlightened Muslim leaders.
We must acknowledge the painful reality that Nehruvian secularism was the convenient pushing-under-the-carpet of communal tensions surrounding the Partition. In a country where the vast majority’s life is bedeviled by deprivation of all kinds and where tradition makes religion central to life, religion has the potential for both great good and great evil. Our inability to face up honestly to our religious divides, is the hallmark of most of our history in the last 61 years. It has got us to this sorry identity crisis (and consequently various other crises). The Government has to engage with religious forces constructively – encouraging those that are in sync with a modern India that wants a better life for its people in the context of the 21st century and de-legitimising those that lead in other directions, whatever their religious sanction.
It seems appropriate that just as we have discarded the economic policies of our early national history (they were appropriate for the time when they were originally conceived but outlived their usefulness), we shake off the ossified way of approaching the communal divide. At the time of the 1991 balance-of-payments crisis, we did not know that a new economic era would ensue as a result of the actions then taken. It is my fervent hope that the Mumbai attacks are the BoP crisis of our socio-political problems. I wonder which political force in our country will be able to reinvent itself and seize this moment.
The facts are great, the solution that a leader is required is right. The answer does not lie in finding a leader, the answer lies within. We need to change, we need to stop corruption at an individual level. It needs to start from me. There is no magic wand that will change things. It will take time, we need to believe in a better India. the change will be slow, painfully slow. does not matter if we do not see the change during our lifetime, it is our duty to give a better india for the generations to come. But there is one magic that can happen, I change and the world changes with me.
Only we people can unite India.We young blood have to come forward and need to take part in active politics.
Jai Hind
Democracy the Rule of the people, for the people, by the people.
Universal suffrage allowing everyone to vote regardless of distinction and discrimination on any basis.
The two lines written above would excite people who think these are answers to Nation building, social empowerment and all the good things desired.
I beg to differ.
Successful democracies (which are miniscule in number) have taken years and years to thrive. They did not allow the two fancy lines written at the beginning of this article implemented in their democracies until the time was ripe.
So when India is celebrated for being the harbinger of democracy, the pallbearer of universal suffrage, I think fireworks are not well deserved.
The country with the most malnutritioned children in the world, high infant mortality rates, rampant corruption should much rather introspect than celebrate the so called “Miss Biggest Democracy of the world title”
What an irony that our country’s most celebrated and revered institutions of Election Commission and The Honourable Supreme courts have their members selected undemocratically.
If I am being read as anti democracy, I clearly state Democracy is a beautiful governing system which is allowing me this article without fear. What I am arguing for is “democracy upon maturity”.
The selection process of Election Commissioners and Judges of the Honorable Supreme Court show us the way to go in the elections to those who govern us in the Government at both Centre and State level.
Democracy would be able to achieve its charter only when those who govern us are best suited for the job. This would be possible if those who vote know who is the best suited for this job.
Alas this is not the case in a country like India where not the best of people are elected. With a constant crop of criminals getting elected with impunity, this does not augur well for the future of democracy.
This makes me think, yes, the political parties must not give tickets to the people with questionable background, but who actually makes sure they get elected? THE UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE ENABLED JANTA!
Which brings me to question the concept of universal suffrage.
Should people who don’t know whats best for them, for their society, for those who thinks on narrow lines of caste and religion, are they doing justice to “MISS WORLD’s BIGGEST DEMOCRACY TITLE” which we hold.
Should we not actually create awareness amongst these very people among who is the best suited to govern them?
These very people are gullible to false promises, lucre of some easy money, intimidation and influence, the liquor that flows and decides results of elections!
How can we let such a democracy go scot free? There has to be introspection and there must be.
Electoral reforms must also take into account that if not every person is eligible to contest, not every person is eligible to vote either.
The countries with successful and thriving democracies have high rates of literacy, don’t have problems of hunger, mortality rates and instead have a social security net.
Unless we guarantee these, we can not expect democracy to be a success in India as well. Universal suffrage should be enabled only after the social security systems have been put in place.
Democracy delivers the quality that is sent by the electorate. If the quality of electorate is not good the leaders shall be likewise.
What I am prescribing is a bitter pill but we should stop blaming politicians for the malaise that affects this country. This is a sacrifice that will pay us in the long run. We could return to universal suffrage once systems likewise in successful democracies have been put in place.
Until then any celebration of “MISS BIGGEST DEMOCRACY” is shameful.
hi
good luck