This is the age of the highly visible public intellectual. They are a nuisance—fundamentally an assault on your intellect—but the proliferation of the media ensures that there's no escaping them. If they are not around, the media would create them. As we enter 2014, let's hope we get respite from certain words and expressions they cannot avoid putting into use.
Aspiration: You are no political pundit if don't use the words 'aspiration' and 'aspirational' enough. Yes, the words have an 'uplifting' quality about them. These make sentences look good, lend them gravitas. These make both the reader and pundit feel more intelligent than the average others. Great, but what the heck do these mean?
Going by the frequency 'aspiration' is being ascribed to every development around us—the anti-graft movement, the Delhi gangrape protests, the participation at Narendra Modi's rallies, the rise of the Aam Aadmi Party and what not—it appears India is suddenly witnessing the emergence of a genetically mutated new generation. This generation is totally different from the pre-1990s youth, who, the experts would imply without being direct, were absolute morons with no sense of self-belief and no ideas for change. They were spineless defeatists who made compromises to survive. Their indifference allowed corruption and other aberrations to flourish in the country.
Protesting crime against women. PTI
The genetic mutation, experts would have us believe, started after the liberalisation of the economy and the subsequent creation of a new middle class. This class aspires for more and is impatient with inefficiency and whatever comes in the way of it aspiration. Well, no contesting this. Such sweeping and apparently profound generalisations always leave you a bit confused - there's no way to either prove or disprove these. But what drives the pundits to the conclusion that 'aspiration' is a recent discovery? Didn't we have student, youth movements in India earlier? Is anti-corruption protest a new phenomenon in the country? Was the JP movement 'desperational'?
We won't get clear answers to those, but would our experts please go slow on 'aspiration'?
Povertarian: You are no experts on politics these days unless you pontificate on economy too. 'Economists' appear to have hijacked the political discourse in the country, mauling numbers and arm-twisting facts to fit these into a pre-determined political conclusion. Good old commentators don't want to be left out. What better way to establish your credentials than joining the chorus and criticising a Joseph Stiglitz and an Amartya Sen? So what if they won the Nobel prize, it does not mean they understand Economics. How silly of them to suggest that public education and health should be an important concern of the government! How stupid are they to suggest that capitalism has to be saved from capitalists!
Coining new words such as 'povertarian' is good for one's ego, but the 'experts' must realize poverty and the poor won't ever disappear from the country's political discourse. Politics will shape the nature of the economy and it won't ever be the other way around. This is for the simple reason that poverty is no creative fiction; it actually exists in the country. India is a democracy which allows universal adult franchise; it would ensure that poor and people would always hold primacy over doctrinaire economics. Here's a piece of unsolicited advice: it's good to think economy, but try to bring in a sense of balance. Politics is much bigger than numbers and economics in its scope and range.
Ah! The stupid past: Historians are a blessed lot. They have the privilege of using the rearview mirror to access the past. They enrich our lives by taking us back and enlightening us with nuggets of knowledge dug out from the debris of time. So far so good. Now the intriguing part: why do they need to look foolish by making judgmental interpretations of the evens of the past?
India would have been an economic power house had Nehru embraced capitalism soon after Independence. Had X been prime minister instead of Y, the country would be free of all troubles. Had India annexed the whole of J&K back then, we would not have the vexatious problem then. Had Indira Gandhi not nationalised banks our growth story would be different. How many times have you heard these arguments from 'experts' in recent times? However, it shocks when historians with sound reputation mouth such lines. They have the domain knowledge, unlike other experts. They know establishing the cause and effect link between one event of the past with another is tenuous. They also know several forces combine to shape history and no development or event is a product of a single stimulus. The chain of events that could follow an action is difficult to predict. History cannot render itself to selective reading, interpretation and loaded extrapolation.
Why are historians bent on giving their profession a bad name? It is possible being celebrity talking heads in the media is driving them nuts. Someone must tell them not to mix history with politics.
Populism: In the current political discourse, this one comes close to being the equivalent of a four-letter cuss word. Listen to the talking heads in every media and you realise how deeply everyone hates the populist. If parties lose elections, the investors shy away from the country or there is a market crash it has to be due to populism. The meaning of the term, one must admit, is steeped in ambiguity, seen at least from the 'expert's' point of view. All parties indulge in it, but victories are, as if as a rule, are ascribed to the development agenda and defeats to pro-people proclivity, read populism, of parties. We still don't know how in a democracy elected governments can delink themselves from basic issues of people. Growth and creation of wealth are an acceptable option, but can governments be in endless wait for percolation of wealth to all economics sections to happen? Would people wait? Of course, not. In case the anti-populism lobby feels it is winning, it should give AAP a careful look. Reaction against the lobby is building up silently. Experts should read the warning signals right.
No comments:
Post a Comment