I was on a television programme the other day where all the panellists were going on and on about how the United Progressive Alliance government has failed, how it has no leadership — and how, as a result, the economy is twisting ever more painfully in the chill wind coming out of Europe. After about 15 minutes, I walked off the programme since it was just so boring listening to people repeating ad nauseam what was so obvious to an even casual observer.
What really concerns me, though, is that, as I look even modestly into the future, it is difficult to see how this fundamental malaise can be cured. Indeed, policy paralysis – where government is more and more about acting decisively only as a last resort – seems to have become a defining element of democracy in the 21st century.
In America, for example, the US Congress is in apparently terminal deadlock, the loudest recent expression of which was Standard & Poor’s downgrading US debt. While markets didn’t respond to this – largely because this was old news – the fact remains that it is a critical problem with very deep roots.
I would trace it back to 1973, when the landmark US Supreme Court ruling in Roe v Wade legalising abortion dramatically sharpened the divide between liberal Americans, fresh from their victories in ending the Vietnam War and getting Nixon kicked out, on the one hand; and socially conservative Americans, who were genuinely horrified by the sexual revolution, on the other. This deep-rooted schism intensified during the Reagan years – the birth of the Moral Majority, abortion-clinic bombings and the like – till, by the early 1990s, America became a land divided. From Clinton through Bush and, now, Obama, there are actually a sizable number of Americans who hate (or hated) their president. This could never have happened pre-1990.
I remember one time, back in the early 1980s, I was in a bar on Canal Street in New York late at night. It was a real dive, and the only other person at the bar was a big, black guy, who looked pretty down on his luck. The TV was on and Reagan was babbling on about something. I must have had a few drinks and, for some reason, growled to nobody in particular, “Boy, he’s a real _______.” The black guy, who had been drinking quietly in the corner, suddenly looked up, and started abusing and threatening me for insulting his president. I was amazed. This guy was probably one of the worst off under Reagan’s famous “trickle-down” policies, but this was his president, and who the hell was I to insult him.
Fortunately, the bartender intervened and I got off without a scratch.
Today, instead, the divide is visceral — indeed, it has worsened, with the Tea Party and the Occupy movement. In fact, the US Congress is (operationally, at least) beginning to resemble our own Parliament and it is difficult to see how – failing another and even more serious crisis – the US government will be able to get the intrinsically dynamic US economy up to speed.
All of this, of course, applies in spades to India — the term “policy paralysis” was invented here. The point of the digression to the US was to highlight the lesson that whenever there are strong emotional/visceral forces at play in the political arena, it is extremely difficult – indeed, for a much weaker economy like ours, well nigh impossible – to get things moving at an acceptable pace.
We all know that the only time (in recent history) that the Indian government took any significantly meaningful steps was in 1991, when the chips were down way further than they are today. It was a Congress-led government at the time, but, while it benefited hugely from the shock of Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination, there was no one from the Indira Gandhi dynasty heading it.
The “family” is, even today, the key emotional/visceral force in Indian politics. While its intensity under Sonia Gandhi is somewhat dimmed – relative to either Rajiv or Indira – it will likely remain a live force for a few more years, despite the fact that “Soniaji” is ailing and the next generation has shown itself to be largely non-performing. This will continue to constrain the evolution of a more practical, even if corrupt and wheeling-dealing, government.
On the other side of the fence, Narendra Modi is a lightning rod for love/hate, indicating that as long as he is in the equation, no BJP-led coalition will be able to make a meaningful go of things either.
When, oh, when will we find the next Narasimha Rao?
