This century began well from the perspective of liberty in India. Almost a decade of reforms had opened up the economy galvanising entrepreneurship, boosting wealth creation, releasing creative energies, creating jobs, and reducing poverty. Midway in the 2000s, however, with the rise of Sonia Gandhi, the ancien regime struck back; the socialist order came back with a vengeance. When the first decade ended, there was little hope of revival. The second decade too ends in despair, the mirages of hope notwithstanding.
Ten years ago, economic liberty stood considerably curtailed, for reforms had been stalled. Often, the communist parties giving outside support to the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance are accused of stopping liberalisation, but the fact is that the grand old party didn’t need much prodding from the Reds; it was full of rent-seekers who had always loathed open economy. These folks hated P.V. Narasimha Rao because, by initiating reforms, he had dammed many a hole from which they filled their coffers at the expense of businesspersons. So, when Sonia insulted him even after his death by disallowing his body to enter the party office, she was actually not doing something unpopular.
Such disgruntled leaders from the GOP, and also from other parties, found useful allies in the intellectual class, which too refuses to give up socialism. A veritable politician-intellectual complex (PIC) came into being. The politician wanted excuses to intervene into the economy; the intellectual provided him more than the former wanted.
The rainbow coalition of professional revolutionaries, green nuts, bleeding hearts, and downright Luddites found a platform in the Sonia-headed National Advisory Council. The NAC provided moral and intellectual underpinnings for increasing the size and scope of state; the political class capitalized on that. Both partners of the PIC fattened at the cost of the economy.
The PIC not only strained public finance but also made normal business activity a painful process. Questions about clearances were raised on a regular basis over any major investment. Rules and regulations were framed to chain industrialists. Activists’ cantankerousness and the then government’s pusillanimity ensured that Korean steel major Posco’s $12-billion plant could not be set up in Odisha. It would have been the biggest foreign direct investment in India.
The left turn that India took under the UPA was not restricted to the policies that could never be reversed; big state enthusiasts also made the future bleak by laying down landmines in the domain of economic policy. They peddled the narrative that all ills in the country were the result of the opening up of the economy and the reducing state role in the economy. In their scheme of things, unbridled public spending was good, private enterprise evil, and the 1991 liberalisation the original sin. They always champion the causes of the poor, “the excluded”, the environment. And this is how they lord over public discourse.
The ascendance of leftist theory and practice had deplorable consequences for the public exchequer, the economy, and policy in general. A number of statist and welfarist abominations was conceived and implemented, the biggest of them being Aadhaar, the 12-digit unique identity number.
Since state gets big at the expense of the individual, the latter’s rights got abridged. So, the UPA government introduced the draconian Section 66A to the Information Technology Act, 2009. Thankfully, the Supreme Court invalidated it in 2015.
Another affront to the human dignity by the UPA was making corporate social responsibility or CSR mandatory. The Narendra Modi government went a step farther; it criminalised the violations, though it relented later. It was an affront because mandatory CSR tends to colonise conscience, something even the most brutal and totalitarian regimes have not done in the past.
“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction,” former US President Ronald Reagan said. “We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.” Unfortunately, few in the last decade fought for or protected freedom in India.
There were mirages, though. The corruption and cluelessness of the UPA evoked a confused and clueless movement under Anna Hazare. The more substantive reaction was the ascent of Narendra Modi. Hazare promised a utopia, what we got instead was Arvind Kejriwal; Modi promised achhe din, what we got were demonetisation, gau rakshaks, and recession. Pink perversions have been replaced with saffron abominations.
As we mentioned, the last decade witnessed the invalidation of Section 66A, but this shouldn’t be construed as the resuscitation of freedom of expression. Filmmakers, writers, and other creative people are as viciously attacked today as they were ever.
Other freedoms, too, have been curbed. For instance, Bihar went dry; leaders in other states are also threatening to impose prohibition. And, with the sanskari ethos gaining popularity, prohibition at the national level remains within the realm of possibility. The ascendance of the Sangh Parivar has also imposed dietary restrictions.
Not a day passes when some government department, publicity seeker, or moral guardian doesn’t come up with a proposal that tends to shrink the sphere of liberty. Sadly, there is nothing on the horizon to suggest that the third decade of this century would be any better than the second one in terms of the preservation of liberty. In fact, things are likely to get worse. As one of Murphy’s laws says, “The light at the end of the tunnel is only the light of an oncoming train.”
Ravi Kapoor is a freelance journalist