Democracy & Crony Capitalism -- III (The Debate)

Continued from 


Critic – Anonymous ‘M’

To respond to your suggestions/comments, while they sound pretty logical and even achievable, I am afraid in reality it is a lot more complex than what they seem on paper. For instance, 'When the Enforcement Directorate, Income Tax and CBI are run by the right people" is a huge challenge that can take decades although at this point, to me, a century seems like a realistic time! How Shoaib, are the 'right people' to be identified? Is 'efficiency' or 'honesty' going to be the hallmark of the 'right people'? If you say both, is it realistic to expect such people to entangle themselves in the web of bureaucracy? I for one, think I am efficient and sure I am honest, but whatever the incentive I would never get into a government establishment, although my parents and extended family are entrenched in the government!

Now, if bureaucracy is simplified and cleaned up, perhaps. But it is a chicken and egg situation. It is not possible to get rid of the people now manning the government organisations and appoint people with a different mindset and unless there are people with a different mindset, things are not going to change! So, frankly I do not see a way out. And no, I am not willing to blame the politicians for the entire mess. I think the bureaucrats are also responsible for it, and in a major way.

As for the TN politicians, the problem is not one of unity. I do not want them to stick together. I think democracy is all about diversity and that includes diversity in ideas/thoughts as well. But what pains me is their ineptitude and inability to make the right choices. When democracy is about short-term populism, then there is little that can be done. What is required is statesmanship and leaders with foresight which Indian democracy does not allow. 

Now to 'functioning democracy', I disagree with the definition. I think it is too simplistic. Yes, I have the right to vote out Karunanidhi but if all I can do is opt for Jayalalithaa (who won by an incredible margin), then it is not democracy in the true sense. To choose one rogue over another is no choice at all. You are basing the definition on the process and ignoring the many complexities that renders the process superficial. And we are still electing a person rejected by the majority of the electorate. I brought in Kashmir merely as an example of how just because a method is followed we beat our breasts and claim to be a great democracy. Agreed Kashmir is a festering wound and needs a lot more thought. But there are many places in which elections are just that, a mere process that is held to signal democracy. I do not see any merit in this.

My grouse is with the understanding of democracy as the Westminster model and transposing it onto countries like India and expecting it to work. While I would not support the regressive policies of Singapore, what I would like is to adapt the Westminster model taking into account the peculiarities of India and then implementing it. That requires intellectual discussion which I do not think we are capable of now. May be, after my lifetime. But frankly Shoaib, looking at the new generation, I have lost hope. When they are bred on populism and learn to appreciate and come to expect it then intellectual deliberation is never going to happen!

Sorry to end this on such a hopeless note!

-------------------------

I completely agree with the fact that they will not be easy to achieve. The barriers would be numerous.    

The first problem would be to establish who would be the right person; this is next to impossible in daily life. And many times our conclusions are proved wrong in hindsight. Everyone thought Manmohan Singh would be a great Prime Minister but he is highly disappointing, as he has no idea of politics. He is a successful technocrat and a failed politician. 

Before getting to the response, allow me to first explain about my perceptions and things that we will have to agree to irrespective of our liking. My perception is that there are three fold problems that we need to correct. 

1. Problem of not being a citizen 

Unless we do not participate, how can the country be fixed? It is fine that I don’t want to be a politician but then do I try and support the candidates that are good enough for the job? Did I try and help them? 

If we ask ourselves such kind of questions then the answer is usually negative. I hardly get time to meet people but after online search and talking to some people while in Bangalore, I found that Loksatta party is good. And talking with some of my friends who are aware of Telegu politics it seems that the founder of the party JP Narayan is a genuine person. So I make my political donations to his party. Though I agree that there presence is limited, but at least there is a reason to have hope that it can grow. Similarly I find Navin Jindal a decent politician, although the same opinion is not there for the congress party. 

If there are no candidates then we should either get into it or find someone to enter it, again not an easy task nonetheless it is fairly possible.  

Individuals' will need to show that they have a stake in the country. Authority and privileges are derived by fulfilling the responsibilities. 

2. The problem of incentives. The question of efficiency, honesty etc.  

I completely agree with you, that there is no way of finding the right person. 

Recently, Patna had a new SP, Shivdeep Lande. Now this gentleman took a measure that in a short period the crime rate and problem of eve-teasing in the city came down. Therefore, he is being transferred! This is atrocious. There are at least a dozen senior officials about whom I have read, they were transferred because they did the job in the right way. Else, the government created special posts with no powers, no specific work and then transferred these people there. A politician once talking to his friend admitted that many officers are given quick promotions and then placed behind desks so that they can be less harmful to the ‘usual’ business.

Then there was a report that some IAS officer's name was suggested to be on the board of SEBI. Later it came to light that this IAS was a relative of the Finance Secretary that is why other officials who had more experience and precise expertise were not favored by the ministry. 

To stop such transfers and promotions, some sort of check and balances needs to be built in the system. I did think of few things but there could be practical problems there. Besides I have not had the opportunity to see these institutions from close quarters therefore it is extremely difficult to suggest anything as of now. 

I did come across a report few months back that was prepared by some government committee. They had suggested reviewing the achievements and policy making of all IAS and IPS on completion of 20 years of service. Based on which their retirement or further promotion be assessed. I liked this idea. Because 20 years a long time. It’s easy to judge policies that may have been unpopular at the time but did great work over the years. 

Therefore, it is my view that to some extent we can find the right people. Not always, maybe not even most of the times but definitely enough times to make sure that the country manages to do well and not reach the precipice of abyss. 

One interesting article written by an IAS on what to change in the system -- http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-04-17/all-that-matters/29427639_1_ias-officers-civil-service-evaluation

Future saviour or savor finder

Once this is achieved then, miscreants should be dissuaded from joining the system by changing the incentive methodologies. 

Few of my school friends are preparing for Civil Services in Delhi. So, once I met them and they introduced me to other aspirants as well. After listening to them for few hours, the conclusion was some of these people are preparing and intend to join the system to exploit only! 

Why? Because they all know people who exploit it and nothing happens to such officers. This attitude needs to change. 

To clean up bureaucracy, the politics needs to change. Because that is how corruption came. Inefficient and dishonest people were promoted, the people who have the power to make such changes need to change else it is difficult to correct. That is the way it will go. (Rather than Lokpal bill if Anna and team can fix this then it’s worth it else it’s just another bureaucratic layer.)

3.  The problem of Patience 

Looking at history closely reveals that corruption at the state and higher level took roots around late 1960s' and 1970s' in politics and bureaucracy. Then it was in 1980s and 1990s when it became a common phenomenon. After 2000 it has been rampant, very much a part of our lives, and we have all accepted it. It took us approximately 30 years to become blatantly corrupt. That is roughly a time-frame when a new officer would have risen to the very top of the system and perhaps retired or would be nearing retirement. We are now living in an era where people who will be taking over the reins of the country, at top level, were born around the time when corruption at high places started blooming. 

To expect that it will get solved in a year or within a decade is wrong.  I wouldn't say that in such a short time a change so radical is not possible but the stakes will be too high. It requires a major catalyst for results in short period, usually what historians later label as revolution. We will have to wait for a generation to grow with the determination to bring about changes.     

     

Response

Finding the right people: Addressed in "2. The problem of incentives. The question of efficiency, honesty etc"

Getting into government establishment: Participate. I can think of two ways for now -

1. You can also work for the government on a consultation basis. Planning commission regularly has openings regarding consultants across various fields. Perhaps other government organization will also be looking for consultation services. If you have friends and family then through them participate.

2. Also think of a pioneering service like: http://www.prsindia.org/ .

One of the founders of PRS Legislative comes from Bank of America. http://www.livemint.com/2011/12/04201606/Switcheroo.html

Responsibility of bureaucrats or politicians: They are both responsible. But the onus shall lay with the law framer more than the implementer.

Diversity, Democracy and Statesmanship: I agree with you completely. Democracy is diversity. But in the name of diversity it does not mean we become a nuisance instigator. That is something that politicians will need to take care of more than normal people. Statesmanship is a difficult job and looking over a long period is not easy for most people. It is complex. To create statesman will require change of perception by the people, who choose them. And those who are able to see and bring change will have to come forward. 

The problem of choice: Participate or find someone worthy and ask him/her to participate. There is no way around it. Agreed in some places it may not work. Then change places. If Azharuddin can move from Hyderabad to UP, Karan Singh can come down from J&K to Lucknow, then why not move away for the moment and the come back. For the sake of argument I will agree the process is flawed in 60 percent of the places. But 40 per cent is an open and fair ground where changes can be brought about.

What Next?

If you still think none of this will work, then what is the other option? American System is also flawed. The population is too huge to put in place the mandatory participation or the systems followed in most of the Europe. Massive changes are not possible under current circumstances. So we don't have much of a chance to get away from the Westminster model.

But I am not hopeless; sometimes the reaction of my peers does dampen hope. But I have come to understand that the lack of intellectual capacity is because of media and lifestyle (My brother was in US, his narration of interaction with the locals does not show a pretty picture. They are good in their field of choice but a day in a life covers beyond professional hours). It is my understanding that this problem with modern generation is there all over the world. And given time and experience we will grow.

Critic – Anonymous ‘M’

Second, I like your optimism and I wish you all the best, although I do not share it. Shoaib, in my previous avatar (centuries ago) I was an idealist who even wanted to be the President of India in order to set it right! I find it so laughable because that is really what I would repeat to everyone in all seriousness in school and college. But what I am impressed with is that I used to say I will rule the country like Hitler!!!

I think that is really what we need. Not Hitler perhaps, but a benevolent despot. This democracy, people's verdict whatever, does not work for us. I think it was Rajaretnam in Singapore who said that South Asia has been ruled by monarchies for centuries and centuries and that is what people understand and appreciate. This Westminster type of democracy (which incidentally the British have changed and we hold on to its ruins, much like the education system we inherited) is not for us. I think there is something there, although as I said in the earlier mail, I do find Singapore policies too repressive and the people automatons!

I repose faith in a few who are keen on changing the society etc., but I am also anxious that they will be defeated by the system. At times I must own I have been defeated by the system and felt absolutely wretched. 

So for your sake and the sake of your generation I shall hope and pray things change.