Headlines
Who's afraid of Rahul Gandhi?
By
By Amulya GanguliNothing shows the weakness of the Narendra Modi government more than
the fact that it gives the impression of having been spooked by Rahul
Gandhi to strive for a pro-poor image.
Hence, the directive to
ministers to go around the country after the budget session to counter
the perception that the government is anti-farmer.
In line with
the Congress' time-honoured practice of launching various schemes to
help the poor, the BJP, too, is initiating several social security
measures.
But the fact that it is fumbling in the dark is evident
from the decision to invoke the saffron ideologue Deen Dayal
Upadhyaya's "integral humanism" concept to burnish the government's and
the BJP's image although the phrase is as meaningless to people outside
the Hindutva camp as Atal Bihari Vajpayee's espousal of "Gandhian
socialism" when the BJP was formed in 1980.
No less fatuous is
the hope in official and saffron circles that the Prasar Bharati's radio
and television channels will be able to spread the pro-poor message
although it is no secret that the reach of Akashvani and Doordarshan
remains as limited as it was before a saffronite was appointed as the
Prasar Bharati's head.
The point, however, is why should the
government be running scared simply because Rahul Gandhi, with his
batteries recharged in a Myanmar Buddhist monastery, has succeeded in
infusing an element of belligerence into the Congress?
The
government's nervousness is all the more unwarranted because nearly all
of Rahul's allegations, based on unverifiable calumny and half-baked
ideas of the social scene, can be easily refuted.
A simple
rebuttal of his anti-industrial stance is that development itself is a
pro-poor measure as it leads to employment-oriented growth which is
brought about largely by the private sector. The government, therefore,
has nothing to be apologetic about.
If it still gives the
impression of being on the back foot, the reason apparently is that
either the government does not have clear-cut ideas of what it intends
to accomplish, or that there are not enough accomplished spokespersons
in its ranks who can articulate its views with vigour.
Arguably,
this uncertainty about the government's objective - which has made
fellow-traveller Arun Shourie accuse it of being "directionless" - is
due to the transition which the BJP is currently making from being a
party of ultra-orthodox, small town traders to an organization which
sups in the sophisticated company of India Inc.
Given this
dichotomy between the provincialism of the old Jan Sangh-BJP and the
cosmopolitanism of its new avatar, the party is not sure whether it is
on the right path.
Its problem has apparently been compounded by
the dearth of an ideological wherewithal to buttress its case. Although
always a rightwing outfit from its Jan Sangh days, the BJP's outlook has
been a mix of Hindu communalism and the commercialism of dingy shops in
mofussil towns.
Now, however, it is moving into the glittering world of capitalism where the merchants operate on a global scale.
Moreover,
big business shuns sectarianism because of the violence associated with
the spread of divisive messages which hampers consumerism, the essence
of capitalism. This is why Modi has clamped down on the Hindutva
hardliners and has told Time magazine that the government will not
"tolerate" any discrimination based on caste, creed and religion.
On
the economic front, however, he is apparently still unsure about how
far he can push his pro-business line against a political class which
hasn't always hesitated to put partisan interests above those of the
nation.
Needless to say, the BJP itself has been a part of this
cussed "culture" but, now, it is the Congress which is leading the pack
comprising the communists and the caste-based Janata "parivar" to
virtually oppose anything and everything which the government proposes.
It
will be unfortunate, however, if this continuing political badgering
deflects the prime minister from his developmental goal and turn to
populism.
The lesson of the last general election is that welfare
initiatives like sops and subsidies do not work at a time when the
opening up of the economy has not only aroused what has been called the
animal spirits of the entrepreneurs, but has also kindled the hope about
the easy availability of jobs in a buoyant economy.
If populism
was a panacea, then the Congress would have scored a runaway victory
with its rural employment scheme (which do not build durable assets) or
food security act (which puts an enormous strain on procurement, storage
and distribution) or the right to education (where the absence of tests
up to Class VIII has reduced the level of Class V students to that of
Class II).
The average voter saw through the hollowness of such
measures. Instead, it was Modi's promise of 'sabka saath, sabka vikas'
(development for all) which paid political dividends to the BJP.
It
will be a major mistake on the prime minister's part, therefore, to
change his line on being influenced by Rahul Gandhi's anti-corporate
sector tirades which will spell doom for the economic reforms and take
India back to the 2-3 percent Hindu rate of growth of the
licence-permit-control raj.
(09-05-2015- Amulya Ganguli is a
political analyst. The views expressed are personal. He can be reached
at [email protected])