The 3 new i's of indian politics

The 3 new i's of indian politics

p>Intention, Initiative and Ideas: Netas do not require anything more in a post-truth environment.

We have reached, by now, the last few days of the demonetization period. Every Indian publication and almost all notable publications worldwide have carried their own take on it. Most of those analyses are about doing a cost-benefit analysis of the demonetization move. Many intellectuals and leading economists are calling the move questionable, simply on the basis of cold facts. Most of the old cash has been declared and swapped in banks. This means that either (a) there wasn't that much black money in cash to begin with; and or (b) the black money hoarders managed to swap out efficiently the old black cash for new black cash.

Anecdotal (वास्तविक/उपाख्यानात्मक) reports suggest old cash was being swapped for new cash at rates as low as a mere 10% commission in the past few weeks. Bank officials around the country helped game the system (it really was like a video game, with RBI adding new surprise rules on a daily basis). While some deposited money could be declared in the latest version of the `new' voluntary (स्वैच्छिक/स्वेच्छा से) disclosure scheme, it is now widely accepted among intellectuals and economists that gains from the black money extinguished will be limited. At the same time, many enumerate (गणना करना/गिनना) the costs of the demonetization scheme as the following ¬ a real slowdown in the economy that will reduce tax collections for the government and earnings of many honest taxpayers; chances of a full blown recession along with job losses; millions of lost man hours that were spent in queues; and a loss of credibility for the Reserve Bank of India and the government because of the knee-jerk nature of the exercise as well as the ad hoc (विशेष(परिस्थिति विशेष)) directives that continue to come. Well, they are not wrong. The true economic benefits of this exercise will be limited. Unless followed up by real measures to limit generation of black money (including actually fixing political funding, a hot bed of black money generation), black money in India will continue to flourish (पनपना) as well.

However, none of this really matters in terms of the political impact on BJP and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. For politically, the move is a major hit. Sure, benefits are limited and negative effects are many. However, to realise that requires a proper analysis, an understanding of the economy and using your rational brain more than your emotional heart. All that already sounds tiresome and boring. No, the Indian voter has rarely cared about the economy in exercising his political preferences. What they have loved about the move are the three I's that seem to result in big political gains for any leader who can display them. These are: Intention, Initiative and Ideas.

Modi's intention was good. That alone fetches him high marks. In a country where an average politician is expected to be corrupt and loot the nation, to see a leader really have the right intention towards black money was a huge plus. Nobody in his position of power had tried such a move. The fact that Modi showed initiative and didn't have to be pushed to do this helped his case further. Finally it was a new, relatively novel (नवीन/नया/नव) idea. Even though demonetization has been tried before, nobody ever envisioned (कल्पना करना/आगे की सोचना) it or tried to execute it on this scale.

Indians have long believed that there are `lots' of rich people with `lots' of black money kept under their mattresses, which is the root of India's problems. The exact amount of `lots' in that sentence is unknown. However, the demonetization move played to that belief, and earned near unanimous (एकमत/सर्वसम्मत) support. Never mind that the black money in cash isn't quite as much as people imagined. Or that in India there isn't a specific set of `evil' people who are corrupt, but rather many good people who also become corrupt when given the chance (as when bankers swapped cash illegally). What matters emotionally to people is this: The PM tried something good, on his own and had a fresh idea. That's enough to continue supporting him and the move. Something similar happened with the odd-even move to curb pollution in Delhi. Many experts argued that pollution from cars is only a small fraction of total pollution, and the exemptions would make the exercise futile (व्यर्थ/निरर्थक) . They were right. Odd-even didn't help curb pollution. However, chief minister Arvind Kejriwal enjoyed support as he displayed the three I's. Another example is Amma's canteens, and the entire gamut (सारे पहलू/संपूर्ण विस्तार) of freebie politics in Tamil Nadu. In rational terms, it is unsustainable as the state is burdened with massive debt due to such moves. However, people like it simply for the intention behind it. Perhaps one day, cold facts and details of implementation and execution will matter more to the Indian people. For now, battered (परेशान/तंग) by a political class that never cared, just good intentions, a bit of initiative and fresh ideas seem enough.

After all, if we look around us in India's political class, even these qualities are hard to find.