lessons from paramakudi for telangana

does anyone seriously believe that the telangana agitators now pleading/begging/cringing before the congress brass in delhi are liberators? do they seem to be upholding telangani self-respect? or that they care about decentralization?

their actions disprove all three claims.

why do all those valiant 'revolutionaries' from telangana seem like so many unctuous petitioners outside a high powered public official's office? because they are exactly that: petitioners seeking recognition.

this is no revolution. it's something that has happened many times in the past, across many regions.

every major state in india has 100-300 castes. at the top of this pyramid are around 10 castes, on an average, who are always over-represented in the houses of legislature, judiciary, bureaucracy, media, education and academia, industry, trade, cinema etc. their presence in all those fields helps them dominate the field of culture and ideas too. all the rest are under-represented in all fields.

in the north, castes identified with the top three varnas are a natural part of the top layer of the pyramid. other castes like the kayasths, khatris, jats etc had to fight for a place in those top ten. and colonialism helped them, through building more democratic public institutions and providing them employment in the bureaucracy and the army. after independence, a few more upper obc castes joined the empty spots in the top ten, and are still trying to consolidate their position. though they've managed to increase their presence in houses of legislature, they haven't been able to make much strides in other fields. meaning: they're under-represented in all other fields associated with wealth and power and hence still sound very subaltern. the continuing hold of the yadavs and nitish kumar on large sections of people in those states is proof of this.

outside the north, or u.p-bihar specifically, the top three varnas are sparsely distributed, so it's the shudras who form a overwhelming majority of the top ten. the three states where the british had presidency towns, witnessed a quicker spread of education among the shudras which led to the first major non-brahmin assertion movements. the top ten spots were quickly filled in tamil nadu by the time the dmk first assumed power, the marathas, kunbis and other associated peasant castes who form more than one third of the population in maharashtra also managed to fill all spots in that state.

this process was as fast in some princely states like mysore and baroda etc, but much slower in hyderabad state. so slow that it is happening only now in telangana, one century late. almost.

the rise of all those shudra castes-- from jats to gounders to nadars to ezhavas to kammas to vokkaligas to yadavs -- were revolutionary movements too. but they failed to fulfill their promises because the pyramid democratized itself a little at the top, partly in response to their struggles, co-opted them, and managed to retain its character. moreover, it had managed to increase the number of loyal defenders guarding it, more sentries to pour hot oil on those wishing to ascend to the top, or even bring down the pyramid.

now this process of efforts to expand the top layer of the pyramid, to create the top ten spots, is happening in telangana. the elite in telangana, which was only brahmins, reddies and velamas for too long (the muslims having been dislodged by 'independence'), wants to consolidate its own position, expand its influence outside politics, agriculture and government. even in those three fields it feels severely constrained by the stronger position of the much advanced andhra elite. so it's come around to  making a little space for a new set of aspirants among the obcs-- the goudas, munnuru kapus, yadavs especially-- who had risen since the emergence of the telugu desam, so that they could help in its struggle with the andhra elite.

more than a year ago, someone had asked me: why do you oppose this process? if it accommodates a new set of players, even if very few, at the top, doesn't it mean one more progressive step towards democratization of society?

that's the problem with the pyramid. it seems to be expanding its top layer a little, but that's always an illusion. it's only responding to changes in population growth, which has been higher in the last one century than any other time in history.

one reason why i want andhra pradesh to remain united: it'll keep the elites of all regions, and new aspirants,  always engaged in a struggle with each other. that would open up more cracks in the pyramid.

but the major reason is that the assertion movements of ambitious shudra castes until now have only meant the rise of those castes, a strengthening of the elite and the caste order. caste assertion movements have been anti-caste only in initial stages and have inevitably become caste-reinforcing movements.

and the expansion of the elite club has also, inevitably, meant more atrocities on the dalits, adivasis and the religious minorities.

paramakudi has strengthened my convictions.     

politics, divorced from logic

one of the many conflicting arguments of the separatists is that a separate telangana is a 'purely administrative issue' ('paripaalana paramaina ansham'), and its opponents shouldn't make such a fuss about it. another imaginary conversation between a separatist, 'q', and ordinary citizen 'a' (read the first here):

a: if it was only an administrative issue, why did you have to make such a fuss about it in the first place (asking andhraites to 'bhaago')?
q: because the andhraites have been blocking it for the last forty years or sixty years or 2,000 years.
a: why have the andhraites been blocking it for so many years?
q: because they want to continue to steal telangani jobs, resources, funds.
a: but why are you calling this a purely administrative issue then?
q: because the andhraites refuse to accept the fact that they've been stealing anything.
a: it isn't a purely administrative issue, then?
q: it is a purely administrative issue but the andhraites are making a big fuss about it.
a: again, why are the andhraites making a big fuss about it?
q: because they want to protect their properties, investments here.
a: the separatists will harm their properties, interests?
q: of course not. in fact, they will be welcomed with a red carpet in the new telangana state.
a: then why are they blocking the formation of the new state?
q: because they want to continue to steal telangani jobs, resources, funds.
a: not because they're scared about their interests, properties?
q: no, this is a purely administrative issue.
a: it's not about exploitation, then?
q: it is about exploitation because they've been stealing telangani jobs, resources, funds.
a: that doesn't seem to make it a purely administrative issue.
q: it is. telanganis want an administration free of exploitation by andhraites.
a: well, exploitation has to be proven with facts, figures.
q: the andhraites are cooking up all kinds of wrong figures.
a: that has to be proven too.
q: why? this is a purely administrative issue.
a: it isn't about exploitation?
q: it is about self-respect. we want the andhraites to respect our presentation of facts and figures which prove that they're thieves.
a: how can they admit that they're thieves?
q: that's the problem with them. no respect for our culture.
a: so, this is a cultural issue?
q: no, it is about self-rule, about administrative convenience.
a: why aren't the andhraites accepting the fact that it is about administrative convenience?
q: because they're scared about their share of waters from the krishna, godavari.
a: should they be scared?
q: absolutely not. there are tribunals for that, we don't want a drop from their share.
a: why aren't they accepting that?
q: it's only a few among them who are raising all these doubts, fears.
a: who are they?
q: big capitalists. they've interests, properties in hyderabad.
a: should they be scared about their interests, properties?
q: no. our laws offer them all protection.
a: why don't they believe you?
q: it is a cultural issue. they've no respect for our word. not even our language.
a: they don't speak your language?
q: our language is different.
a: you're demanding a separate state on linguistic grounds?
q: no, we're demanding a separate state on administrative grounds.
a: so, what were all the agitations, the rallies, the social boycotts, the dharnas, raids and gheraos about? where was the need to ask the andhraites to 'bhaago'?
q: because they exploit us.
a: why don't you prove it with facts, figures?
q: where is the need to prove it? the centre should realize that this is a political issue.
a: you mean political decisions should not be taken on the basis of facts, figures? on the basis of ground realities?
q: we've proven that the andhraites have been stealing telangani jobs, resources, funds.
a: they're disputing those facts, figures.
q: don't see why they are making such a big fuss about it. this is like a marriage, see? can't a wife get out of one if she feels she is being exploited?
a: yes, sure.
q: so, why can't we part like brothers?
a: you were talking about a marriage. exploitation has to be proved when asking for a divorce.
q: this isn't exactly like a marriage.. it's like a family, you know? don't brothers go their separate ways in a joint family?
a: yes, they do. they don't even need to file for a divorce.
q: that's what i mean.
a: so, this is not a marital issue but an issue between brothers?
q: yeah. like brothers splitting.
a: then why did you need to make a big issue about discrimination, colonization, loot etc?
q: well, we want to split because we've been exploited.
a: that makes it a racial issue. of one race exploiting another. why don't you go to the u.n.,?
q: we didn't talk of all andhraites, only a few among them. it's not a racial conflict, jaati yuddham.
a: let me get this right. it's not a conflict between all telangani brothers and all andhra brothers?
q: no. it's a conflict between all telangani brothers and a few andhra brothers.
a: why did you say: 'andhra waley bhaago' then? why didn't you name the few exploiting andhra brothers instead of asking them all to run?
q: look, this is a purely administrative issue. you're trying to make it racial issue.
a: like creating a new district?
q: yeah.
a: you could've made representations to the central government then.
q: haha.. governments don't respond to simple petitions.
a: you said it's a purely administrative issue, so you've to wait for the administration to react.
q: we waited for nearly 10 years until december 9th, 2009. the central government responded positively but the andhraites lobbied hard and the centre went back on its word.
a: why did the andhraites object if it's only an administrative issue?
q: for the last time: because they want to continue to steal telangani jobs, resources, funds.
a: is that why you had to wait for ten long years? because you had to drive home the point that the andhraites were stealing telangani jobs, resources, funds?
q: yes.
a: that means the central government will have to look into all those issues, right?
q: why? this is a political issue.
a: because you raised concerns about exploitation?
q: yeah.
a: because you explained how the exploitation happened: how telangani jobs, resources, funds were stolen?
q: exactly.
a: and you pointed out how all this amounted to 'discrimination'?
q: and colonization.
a: you've expressed serious cultural, racial, economic, social concerns.
q: and our democratic aspirations.
a: but now you want everyone, including the andhraites, to forget all your efforts to raise those issues, and not probe them or dispute your claims.
q: and help the central government to take a 'political' decision to create a new administrative unit.
a: so, why did you raise all those concerns in the first place?
q: because we wanted to make sure people understood that this is a purely administrative issue.
a: what..or which people?
q: the andhraites.
a: but you've been talking about discrimination, exploitation, neglect etc?
q: that was for telanganis, and other indians. so that pressure on the central government would keep increasing. we didn't want the andhraites to listen in, that wasn't for their consumption.
a: but you asked the andhraites to 'bhaago'. also called them 'colonizers', 'thieves' and lots of other names.
q: would the media listen to us, give us any space if we couldn't raise temperatures everywhere?
a: i keep forgetting what this issue is all about.
q: it is a purely administrative issue.
a: you mean you wish to grab the administration?
q: this is a people's movement, the politicians do not control it.
a: but you depend on the politicians at the centre for a solution.
q: yes, politicians should listen to the people.
a: are the andhra politicians listening to their people?
q: they're misleading their people.
a: about what?
q: the people are being told how separation is not a purely administrative issue.
a: but do the people in telangana believe it's a purely administrative issue?
q: we don't mislead our people. we tell them it's a 'brathuku poraTam', a struggle for survival.
a: for the andhraites, it's a purely administrative issue because they'll lose nothing, and for the telanganis it's not a purely administrative issue. why?
q: because they'll gain a lot from it.
a: like what?
q: jobs, resources, funds for development.
a: jobs, resources, funds which are being stolen by the andhraites now?
q: yes.
a: if the andhraites will lose nothing, neither any jobs nor any resources and funds from separation, then how will the telanganis gain anything from it?

this conversation could go on forever, and the contradictions would keep on piling up. had accidentally posted an unedited version yesterday, but i don't think this updated version will help you understand the separatists' logic, as seen from my point of view, any better.

more trust in delhi than in your own people?

t.g.venkatesh, of the rayalaseema hakkula aikya vedika (roughly, united rayalaseema forum for rights) and a congress mla in the andhra pradesh assembly, writes:

The panel is not meant for just examining the demand of Telangana State but the issue of Samaikhyandhra too. But the Telangana Rashtra Samithi leaders and votaries of Telangana are hellbent on forming Telangana in the format of their choice, notwithstanding any amount of damage caused to other most backward areas like Rayalaseema and North Andhra.

The blind support by K Chandrasekhar Rao for Telangana reminds one of the proverbial evil intention of a cunning man over sharing a milch animal with his brother. The cunning man wanted the portion of the animal that gives milk and manure while offering the head portion that required continuous feeding to his innocent brother.

Mr Chandrasekhar Rao is well aware that 50 percent of the State income comes from Hyderabad, 20 percent from the rest of Telangana and 30 per cent from Andhra-Rayalaseema. Since Hyderabad is the commonwealth of Telugus, the income is utilised to take care of the needs of all 22 districts.

Chandrasekhar Rao wants to grab the creamy part and dump Rayalaseema and North Andhra to their fate. The people of the two most backward regions are frightened at the developments.

Their per capita income, employment potential, industrialisation, irrigation facilities, health and road infrastrucutre indices are among the lowest.The Telangana debate should begin with the fate of two orphans.

Even Mr Chandrasekhar Rao and his troupe should find a solution to the orphan areas before staking a claim to Telangana.

it's quite clear that neither the congress chief sonia gandhi, nor her cabal of shady advisors, had thought about the people of rayalaseema and north andhra on december 9th, 2009, when they announced that the process of formation of telangana state 'will be initiated'. it's also more clear that the political leaders of rayalaseema and north andhra had bothered even less about the people of those two regions.

even though the 'aikya vedika' was formed nearly half a decade ago, its leaders had mostly focussed on engaging in scoring points in televised 'which-region-is-more-backward' debates with the telangana separatists than in meaningful engagement with the people of the region to make them aware about the issue of the division of andhra pradesh and its implications for rayalaseema. they remained mostly a congress managed puppet outfit, whose sole purpose was to ensure that the trs didn't steal all the television time.

now, mr.venkatesh makes a poignant case for rayalaseema, and also north andhra. as he says, in many aspects, both regions are actually more backward than telangana. but what were you thinking mr.venkatesh, all through the last 5-6 years until december, 9, 2009, when you put so much more trust in delhi than in your own people?

time to talk

by adopting the very legalistic line that the merger in 1956 was conditional and hence could be unilaterally revoked, the separatists have until now managed to avoid talking to other, to use a very chidambaramesque term, 'stakeholders' in the state. but they didn't stop talking across, over, around, everywhere about the so-called 'discrimination' they have had to face all through these years. and they didn't stop talking about how the merger itself was 'undemocratic' (a not very legalistic line to take), that the people of telangana had opposed it. who had opposed it? a few reactionary elements who had enjoyed high privileges in the feudal regime. and their cousins, perhaps. they've called the majority decision of the elected legislature in favour of the merger as 'undemocratic', which of course means 15 illegitimate legislatures and governments, in some of which they were a part, have presided over the state until now. some naive observers would sense hypocrisy there, but not the separatists. not their gang of 'ideologues' and 'intellectuals' who have worked or are working in jobs the illegitimate governments entrusted them with.

now, they'll have to talk. because they don't like talking to their fellow citizens, like in any democracy, but would rather prefer talking to delhi, they should like this idea of a committee appointed by delhi. i've called them inveterate courtiers earlier, because their genius lies in gossip, innuendo and rumour. and they've spread the disease across the land. i don't think they'd like to talk now, considering most of their talk until now has been mostly gossip, innuendo and rumour. now, they might have to talk facts, because the committee may rather listen to facts. perhaps, that's what they've been avoiding until now. a discussion of facts which might rip apart most of their claim. and all that they might be left with is the clever logic that it's their culture to talk around facts.

remembering anandpur sahib

shaik ahmed ali thinks a political mafia has taken over hyderabad:

The process of creation of separate Telangana state is going on in reverse direction. Usually, any government first examines a particular demand (Telangana in this case) through an expert panel; based on panel's recommendations, it consults all the concerned parties; builds consensus and then makes a final statement.

But Home Minister P.Chidambaram first made a statement acceding Telangana; then the government tried to build consensus; later, it invited all parties for talks and now it announced the constitution of an expert panel to study the demand. This reverse process has badly hit the lives of common man in the entire Andhra Pradesh.

that's congressism. it could've talked with reasonable people in punjabi civil society about the anandpur sahib resolution, but it talked to bhindranwale. congress, the main hindu party in the country and the chief political vehicle of the brahminized classes, can't believe any reasonable people exist outside the congress: that will go against the principle of caste it upholds. so one can see why the anandpur sahib happened. resolution no.1 of that historic meeting starts like this:

Moved by Sardar Gurcharan Singh Tohra, President, Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, and endorsed by Sardar Parkash Singh Badal, Chief Minister, Punjab.

The Shiromani Akali Dal realizes that India is a federal and republican geographical entity of different languages, religions and cultures. To safeguard the fundamental rights of the religious and linguistic minorities, to fulfill the demands of the democratic traditions and to pave the way for economic progress, it has become imperative that the Indian constitutional infrastructure should be given a real federal shape by redefining the Central and State relation and rights on the lines of the aforesaid principles and objectives.

The concept of total revolution given by Lok Naik Jaya Parkash Narain is also based upon the progressive decentralization of powers. The climax of the process of centralization of powers of the states through repeated amendments of the Constitution during the Congress regime came before the countrymen in the form of the Emergency (1975), when all fundamental rights of all citizens was usurped. It was then that the programme of decentralization of powers ever advocated by Shiromani Akali Dal was openly accepted and adopted by other political parties including Janata Party, C.P.I. (M), D.M.K., etc.

Shiromani Akali Dal has ever stood firm on this principle and that is why after a very careful consideration it unanimously adopted a resolution to this effect first at the All India Akali Conference, Batala, then at Anandpur Sahib which has endorsed the principle of State autonomy in keeping with the concept of federalism.

find anything very unreasonable there? it was just a people standing up for themselves. there is some bluster, some combativeness in the rest of the resolution/s. but it was mainly an impassioned demand for respect. underlying it was a plea: please don't sc$%^ around with us minorities. today, as a telugu, i feel very connected with the sikhs of those times.

a recent article in world sikh news discusses the resolution:

Framers of Indian system of governance took care not to rock the boat too much after the British left and decided to invest the Center with excessive powers to hold the new republic together. The trauma of Partition, the resistance of some princely states to integration with the Indian Union, the secessionist ideologies of some political groups, etc, made the preservation of the integrity of the new-born nation the topmost priority of the rulers after independence and this got reflected in the new constitution.

The Centre's mandarins dictate where the investments for the downstream production facilities would go. They give concessions to poorer or hill states that work against Punjab. The concurrent power of the states meant virtually nothing, since the ultimate power of approval is with Centre. Regional assertiveness is seen as a rebellion. Aspirational movements like the one led by the Sikhs in the 1980s and early 1990s were given bad name and wrongly projected.

while anandpur was about standing up, about refusing to be ruled down from delhi, the political and intellectual leadership of the telangana movement is bringing groveling back into style.

while anandpur was about redefining centre-state relations, the telangana movement has begun the process of pushing everything back to delhi. in a way, it has rendered meaningless all the progress that states have achieved in wresting some reasonable powers from the centre in the last thirty years since anandpur sahib. and the biggest joke is that these pairvikars, these inveterate courtiers leading the movement have chosen to describe themselves as fighting for 'self-rule'.

can't help thinking ahmed ali's observation that a political mafia is ruling hyderabad is true not only about the present, but could also be interpreted as a prophecy of sorts. the telangana movement has questioned the rationale of hyderabad, not delhi, unlike the regional movements of the past. a democratic movement? hardly.

separated

sad that the telugus should allow 'higher' powers to manage their affairs. that they should celebrate their subjugation and call it freedom. that they couldn't share water, jobs and now cities.

i wish all telugus would ponder over the question: if delhi 'gives', and you 'receive', what kind of power do you have over your lives? some democracy.

mamata shall outdo laloo?

Malda, May 24: Expectations are running high in Malda with Mamata Banerjee taking charge of Rail Bhavan.

From newly elected Congress MP Mausam Noor to the merchant chamber of commerce — everybody has drawn up a list of demands for Mamata, especially since the Trinamul Congress chief is known to have shared a rapport with A.B.A. Ghani Khan Chowdhury.

Mausam, Ghani Khan’s niece, will demand a Rajdhani from “Mamatadi”, a pair of superfast trains between Calcutta and Siliguri via Malda, besides introduction of electric trains in the division. “I am very happy that Mamatadi has become the railway minister. The neglected Malda division will definitely get a better deal. We want a Rajdhani and a pair of superfast trains, connecting Siliguri to Calcutta via Malda. We also want electric trains,” she said. In Malda division, trains run on diesel.

in the eighties, when ghani khan chowdhury was the minister for railways, wags in the press used to remark that the name 'indian railways' was a misnomer, because all the action seemed to happen in malda and and bengal. in the nineties, jaffer sharief, ram vilas paswan, nitish kumar and laloo yadav- all tried to follow his outstanding example of never looking beyond one's own family, village, district and state while ruling the railways.

now, it looks like mamata banerjee plans to outdo all of them- flagging off new trains in her home state just a couple of weeks after assuming office, promising relief to supporters and even checking the menus on trains to see that they're bengali enough. does one have to wait for the railway budget to realize that there'd be nothing in it for people living beyond mamata's fiefdom?

the railways is just one large business among many that the central government in delhi owns- i wouldn't say manages, governs etc., because that'd indicate an objective, professional approach to managing the affairs of those businesses. the people who seek and are offered these top posts run, and are allowed to run, these businesses like shopkeepers who are given charge of their rivals' businesses, temporarily. they run down these business in the process of running them for their own special interests- the larger public interest be damned.

one reason, actually two reasons, why no national party wants the government to withdraw from these businesses and get down to the serious business of governance is that these businesses help ruling parties to 1) build and foster patronage networks across states and 2) make a lot of money.

if public sector businesses are one way of achieving those two objectives, ministries that oversee and regulate industries are another, more subtle and unobtrusive way. why do so many contenders for ministerial posts want information technology and communications, chemicals and steel, petroleum and surface transport etc?

and why does no one want women and child welfare etc? or education without higher education? if control over the health ministry didn't mean control over large government hospitals like aiims, or over countless corporate hospitals and colleges- who'd want it?

the badlands

"There's such a big difference between life in New Delhi and life in the Chambal Valley ravines. There are two codes, two sets of mores, customs, and legalities. In New Delhi people are so much more duplicitous: they promise you things, and then behind your back they do precisely the opposite. In Chambal they'll say things openly, they'll shout it from the rooftops, and then they'll follow through. City life is very different; you have law courts. But out in the valley you can do things your way, and by the will of God."

phoolan devi, who escaped the chambal valley to die in delhi. and he survived kargil, only to die in delhi. an old story and a new one, picked randomly at the end of a lousy day and they seem to convey the same ominous message.

and this guy thinks india trusts delhi. just as many senile commentators in the media- if this was a vote against regionalism, why did the two national parties together poll 2% less votes than in 2004?

somebody tell these guys, democracy starts in the states and a fat delhi means more chambals.

democracy at work

He also demanded that Centre-sponsored schemes be pruned, arguing that the state suffered trying to match Centre’s grants.

nitish kumar in bihar complains that he doesn't have money, while over the last couple of weeks, parties in the coalition at the centre were working hard, engaged in serious negotiations over who gets what ministry, so that they could serve bihar better.

they used to say: democracy is about villages managing their own affairs, and districts theirs and so on... what can delhi do if the villages just throw up their hands and return the power in their hands to the districts, which pass them onto the state capitals which in turn push everything back to the centre? so delhi makes democracy work extra hard at the centre, to make up for all the passing-the-buck-ness in the villages and districts etc- no pair of grubby hands in the coalition should remain idle!

all that unused power generates so much money in delhi that it has to spend hard working years thinking up schemes to help the poor in bihar. it definitely helps that there are so many do-gooders around in the coalition, everyone competing to get into the right portfolios, ministerial berths that are seeing a lot of action from an investment perspective, to serve the poor in bihar and elsewhere. it's so heartening to see democracy work! when would the ingrates in the villages understand its power?

the mughals were better

320 years ago, aurangzeb laid siege to golkonda and waited for nine long months to reclaim his divine right to determine everyone's rights in telangana. for the last four days, senior congress leaders from telangana have been camping in delhi, waiting for sonia gandhi, congress president, to grant them an audience. no, not to renegotiate with her and bring back at least some of the sovereignty that aurangzeb had spirited away but to reassure her of their undying loyalty if she grants statehood to telangana. for the people, obviously, it wouldn't mean much- definitely not what abul hasan qutb shah had staked his life for. it wouldn't mean more freedom to decide the course of their own lives. but for the courtiers, of course, it would mean license. an exclusive concession over telangana. in the good old days, most successful politicians were very good at this kind of behind the scenes intrigue, skullduggery...obsequiousness..abul hasan was one of the rare exceptions. so, aurangzeb respected him enough to come knocking at his door to seek his audience. and it also looks like aurangzeb respected people's sovereignty more- he knew he'd have to wage war to grab it.

telangana for idiots, of idiots..

i wish i could've said telangana is the opium of the masses. but nobody knows for sure it is so- the more fortunate, in terms of education etc., are more vocal on it. and so vocal that they have managed to drown genuine debates on development in the state in the last three years or so. i think the congress likes that: the congress has thrived whenever the focus of the public in any region (read punjab, kashmir, northeast etc) got diverted to emotive issues. and the parivar likes emotive issues too. there is another thing that congress and the parivar both like: smaller states. the pseudo-logic that both together have developed runs like this: it is easier to administer smaller states. don't ask 'how many districts in chhattisgarh does the government of chhattisgarh actually administer?'

the truth is that both the congress and the parivar find it increasingly difficult to survive in large states. it's much easier to arrive at 'power sharing' arrangements in states that have around a hundred assembly seats (witness goa). it's ok even if you manage to win only 25 seats or so- you'll always find two three 'regional parties' and enough 'independents' 'like-minded' enough to share power with you. and at the centre: all dissenting voices would have no choice but to cling to one or the other national alliance, headed of course by the congress or the parivar.

and don't mention federalism and other nonsense: what does it matter if to keep all indians together you've to break up linguistic minorities?

the puke that india throws up

ntr used to say: kendramu oka mithya. that was badly translated by the english language press as: the centre is a myth. but the phrase speaks, despite the translation, you'll agree. if imperial london was an ugly idea, an everyday lesson in humiliation, so in many ways is delhi. perhaps, more ways.

he spent most of the last twenty five years in america, but he managed to buy a congress party ticket (for a price of rs.2 crores, the rumour goes) and win (by spending some rs.7 crores, the rumour goes) from the nizamabad lok sabha constituency in 2004. now he is actively engaged in trying to secure the support of sonia gandhi, who (i don't wish to press this point, but it needs to be made) was born and raised in italy, for the dismemberment of the state of andhra pradesh.

i've lived all my life (which is considerably more than twenty five years) in india but i still find it hard to digest some of the puke that it throws up every day.

chosen people - india and the camel (2)

(this is the second part of the post i'd published yesterday.)

there is no place for stupid people in delhi. delhi recorded a literacy rate of 82% in 2001- bihar remained content with 48%, madhya pradesh- 64%, uttar pradesh- 57%, jharkhand-54%, and rajasthan- 61%. the delhi government's website (page 4) displays all those figures..perhaps, to show us how smarter delhi is? but it ended up telling me the people of u.p., bihar, jharkhand etc., are somehow paying the price for delhi's education. all the states are paying for it. i am convinced around one third of the higher education budget (you think it's less? well, i plan to probe this more.. and discuss it in later posts) of the central government goes into maintaining various universities and other institutions of learning and research that dot delhi (how many central universities would you find in madhya pradesh, rajasthan, bihar, jharkhand, chattisgarh?)- this goes to ensure that all stupid people who enter delhi get a decent education. but the overwhelming majority of those who flock to delhi are the smartest people from the neighbouring states, and to a lesser extent from other parts of the country. what'd all these people do? are there enough jobs for all of them? there is enough work for all of them. the million or two million steady job-holders, and their families constitute a huge market (for all kinds of goods and all kinds of services). not only because of their disposable incomes but also (mostly) because of the undisclosable part of their incomes.

a market guaranteed by the government

let's look at the figures: the delhi state government website (page 11) says there were around 6.24 lakh (central government + government of delhi + quasi government + local bodies) employees in the state in 2001. that's the organized public sector. and that's a grossly underestimated figure, in my view. look at what this census of central government employees (page 11) says: the number of central government employees in delhi was 2,67,000 in 2001. that's around 25% more than the figure quoted by the delhi government- who's right? no one, actually. because no one seems to know the actual figure. do you know the actual number of people who work for the central government? i've seen estimates ranging from 31 lakhs to 40 lakhs. the ministry of statistics and programme implementation, which does most of these kind of surveys and censuses, offers a figure of around 37 lakhs. do you get the picture? no one, not even the top most elected government officials like the prime minister at the central level or the chief minister of any given state at any point of time can give you, forget the precise, even a rough estimate (within a 5% margin of acceptable error) of how many people actually work for his/her government!

so we can safely assume the actual figures are around 25% higher. let's settle for a total figure of, say, 8 lakhs. even this figure won't give you the complete story. because it does not account for employment in the public sector banks, financial institutions etc., and also because the number of defence, para-military and other kinds of security personnel stationed in delhi are also not included. and we need to account for the practice of inadequate disclosure that most government and quasi-government organizations often indulge in to avoid problems like providing for reservations etc., the final figure could be close to a million?

it's more than a million

this is not a number that expanded over the years- in fact the number of regular job-holders, paid for by the government (centre or the state), has actually decreased a little over the last fifteen years or so.the delhi government website says 2.17 lakh people were employed in the private organized sector in 2001- so the total size, the number i was working with, of the market has grown to around 1.3 million families. this also means that the formal or organized sector employs more people in delhi than in mumbai. or kolkata. this is not a number fuelled by the expansion of the city- it is the number that has fuelled the expansion of the city. here, i'd like to quote from an india today article that describes the dizzy pace at which delhi's economy is growing and explains, much more succinctly, why delhi has grown so fast over the last three decades:

There is something more basic behind business magnetic charm for Delhi. It's the nation's most affluent market.An average family in the capital earns Rs 21,830 a year against the national average of Rs 9,321. This has much to do with the presence of 6.5 lakh government employees who were granted generous salary revisions.

well, the magazine has got the numbers slightly wrong (6.5 lakhs) but its analysis is right. it's the government that drove/drives the growth in delhi. a community of more than a million families with regular incomes within a small, defined area- that's a fantasy come true for most marketers. especially in a country marked by vast stretches of poverty and low purchasing power like india. measured in terms of government supported regular employment, delhi, is far luckier than hyderabad, bangalore and chennai put together.

the per capita income in delhi is 2.5 times the national average. it scores higher than the national average on all human development indicators. it has the best infrastructure among all cities in the country- an ernst & young report concluded delhi is the 'best place to reside in the country' after evaluating 48 cities in india on 57 parameters. delhi is different from india. the usual explanation for a city's growth anywhere would be- its citizens worked hard, saved a lot and invested a lot more and wisely, and the governance was extraordinarily good, so it grew. does this explain delhi?

does it explain how a city mostly peopled by wage-earning babus has managed to father the largest (or the second largest) brood of rich people in the country?

[more on this later.]

india and the camel

you've heard of the arab and the camel. let's look at india and delhi now. let me quote a short paragraph from this paper to illustrate the point i'm going to make:

...for example, one of our findings is that while the central government spends (in 2005-06) rs.4.07 on hrd-nh per person in orissa, it spends rs.177.12 in delhi, rs.105.42 in uttaranchal, rs.105 in arunachal pradesh, rs.77.7 in assam, rs.33.78 in himachal pradesh, rs.28.10 in west bengal, rs.25.12 in karnataka, rs.17.29 in tamil nadu, rs.17.09 in maharashtra, rs.17.08 in u.p., rs.16.2 in jharkhand, rs.16.05 in andhra, rs.14.5 in j & k....

i haven't quoted the full paragraph because i think you've already got the point. that was the spending on national highways- only one indicator of many barely hidden signs that delhi is steadily pushing india out of the tent. from a capital of a union of states and a municipality it's been fast growing again into an imperial capital and a state-nation on its own. people, and more acutely, politicians, businessmen, mediapersons and the smartest sections of the middle classes in the states in the immediate neighbourhood understand that. who from the neighbouring states doesn't want to be in delhi? from charan singh to bahuguna to v.p.singh to n.d.tiwari to mulayam singh to mayawati- which chief minister from uttar pradesh hasn't expressed his/her desire to be the prime minister (sometimes, even before he/she became the chief minister)? bihar isn't any different and if the chief ministers and other ambitious politicians from the other states around delhi aren't so candid about expressing their 'right' (because that's what it ultimately seems to be: none of them seem to have any doubts about whether they deserve the post) it doesn't mean they don't nurse any such aspirations. and if the rulers do not wish to stay in their respective states a moment longer than necessary why should the ruled want to be in those states? especially, if they're smart?

a large portion of those employed by the central government, through its various ministries, the psus, the banks, the railways and the armed forces have planted themselves in delhi and even the threat of an imminent nuclear attack wouldn't convince them to leave, i think. that wouldn't be less than a million people (i'd agree if you say- two million, but i'll come to these figures later) hanging onto a million of the most prized jobs in the country. a million people who'd get the first chance to help themselves to the billions that the central government supposedly spends on the upkeep (after first paying for its own upkeep) of the country and to 'develop' it and to 'alleviate' poverty. if you were one among those lucky million, would you let the gravy train just roll by, onward to the boondocks- even after you've been paid enough for your needs? without stealing from it, or directing its course or in some way attempting to change its destination? you'd be stupid if you didn't do any of those things.

[this was growing into a very long post so i'm going to stop here and continue later].