The price of patriotism
India celebrated its 75th Independence Day last week, a major milestone in the journey of the country, which was marked with pride and excitement all around. It was also an occasion to reflect. Patriotism is less of a feeling, and more of a performance these days. An incident reported from Haryana, of a fair price shop owner forcing poor people to shell out ₹20 to buy a flag before they were given their supplies caused outrage and the government was quick to take action against him. The government also clarified, rightly and thankfully, that nobody can be forced to buy national flags. But still, the incident was a metaphor of the perils of turning patriotism into a spectacle -- it imposes a cost on the population, and the poor suffer more. In a Kashmir town, people were sternly asked by the administration to take part in the flag campaign, leading to protests by former Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti.
The ‘freebie’ debate continues, and the Supreme Court thinks it can make an intervention in regulating government schemes aimed at getting votes. That’s a slippery slope - in a democracy, the state negotiates with the people, and welfare schemes are part of that bargain. To argue that some welfare schemes are legitimate while others are undesirable freebies, is a problematic argument. Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana, who is heading the bench that is hearing the case, said: “I don’t think voters are looking for freebies. Given an opportunity, they (voters) will opt for dignified earning. For example, MNREGA offered dignified earning and also created public assets in rural areas.” The court said its primary concern is about “the right way of spending public money”. Well, that might be a pious concern, but not the mandate of the judiciary. Would the judiciary tomorrow decide on whether buying the S400 missile defence system from Russia is good use of public money?
We have been publishing a lot on the ‘freebie’ debate, and here’s one article I strongly recommend. The author argues that “…unless the notion that ‘incentives’ provided to the elites are ‘affirmative economic measures’ while the same when provided to the poor are ‘freebies’ is corrected in the minds of policymakers, adjudicators and elites (both are economic/social welfare interventions in different forms), this asymmetrical conflict will continue to exist.”
Talking of freebies, one champion of welfare/freebie politics, the AAP, is in trouble. The CBI and the ED are cracking down on its leaders, and the latest one to be in the crosshairs is Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia. The Punjab victory has taken the sheen off AAP; its government in the State is struggling to meet the promises it made. Meanwhile, it is trying to pitch for power in Gujarat. The BJP is trying to break its momentum, and some help from the CBI and the ED is par for the course, as per current norms!
Talking of votes and voters, there is an outcry in Kashmir about a drive by the Election Commission to enrol migrant citizens as voters. Now, special campaigns to enrol voters is nothing special, it happens in other places also. But in Kashmir, people without domicile certificates will become eligible to vote for the first time, which is an outcome of the abrogation of its special status in 2019. The ECI is expecting an addition of 20 to 25 lakh new voters in the final list.
Talking of equal rights for all citizens, Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has said the Hindu community in the country has the same rights as everyone else. She has been asserting that the number of mandaps in Dhaka during the Durga Puja festivities were much higher than in West Bengal. A nice model to follow, right? I had written about Bangladesh’s continuing efforts to instill confidence among its Hindu minority -- often a contrast with the situation of India’s Muslim minority.
Lastly, for this week I invite your attention to two pieces I have written. In this, I analyse the political situation in Bihar following the formation of a new alliance government of the RJD and the JD(U), and its implications for national politics. “It remains to be seen whether the new JD(U)-RJD alliance will be able to fight back the BJP charge that social justice is merely a facade for aggrandisement by its leaders and their families — or merely prove the charge right. At any rate, social justice politics is at a crossroads. Or perhaps even at a dead end.”
In this one, I make a case for reimagining federalism as a multidimensional framework to negotiate India’s existing and emerging fault lines -- going beyond its narrow definition in terms of Centre-State relations. “Captured by dynastic elites, concepts of social justice, secularism and regional autonomy face a massive crisis of legitimacy. Federalism, infused with new meanings, and freed from unhelpful connotations, can be the conceptual framework to negotiate existing and emerging challenges before the country….So, what the Amrit Kaal needs is a new discussion on equitable power-sharing and resource-sharing across regions, castes, linguistic group and genders. That will be essential for India’s progress, anchored in a new federalism compact.”
