Analysis
by Dr. Jaipal Singh
This idea of conducting a caste census followed by a financial and institutional survey to ascertain which communities and who all are in possession of the wealth in the country is very akin to a page of the book of communist leftists. What he says and implies seems to be that the Congress, if forms government, will redistribute the wealth to the backward castes, dalits and minorities based on their population and financial status. Every time when he takes a dig on Prime Minister Modi (at times he loses control over his tongue refusing even the basic courtesy that a prime minister deserves or at least his elderly status demands) linking him with the corporate families Adanis and Ambanis, this reminds decades back ideology and approach of the West Bengal CPI(M)’s bashing of the then business tycoon Tatas and Birlas families in the country. Ironically, he and his party do not adopt same criteria or approach about many foreign companies doing business in India. So, when the Gandhi scion repeated same chorus in a Jharkhand rally about finding out the classes who hold the national wealth and that they (Congress) will redistribute to the earmarked classes as per their rights and entitlements, he was not talking about increasing the wealth and resources of the country, instead distributing this wealth among certain classes and people (i.e. OBCs, minorities mainly Muslims).
While the Gandhi scion has been reiterating his chorus about the caste census and redistribution of wealth citing it as a mission of his life, Satyanarayan Gangaram Pitroda aka Sam Pitroda, intimately associated with three generations of the Gandhi family and widely considered as the guru and mentor of the Gandhi scion, stoked yet another controversy about the inheritance tax. Currently, aged about 81 years, he as the Chairman of Indian Overseas Congress, organizes Gandhi scion’s international (speaking) events, among other arrangements and engagements. In an interview with the ANI (Asian News International), citing the inheritance tax up to 55% as an interesting provision along the lines of the United States, Pitroda said, “It says you in your generation made wealth and you are leaving now, you must leave your wealth for the public… not all of it, half of it, which to me sounds fair.” Incidentally, only few states in US have the provision of the inheritance tax in various slabs which Pitroda apparently tried to link and supplement with the Congress Party’s idea of redistribution of wealth. Needless to say, his statement instantly sparked controversy back home and it is not for the first time, in the past many occasions too, Sam Pitroda has created controversies such as the “Jo Hua So Hua” statement in the context of “anti-Sikh riots and massacre in 1984” and “Pulwama Attack in 2019”. Already on back foot with the wealth redistribution issue, the Congress promptly distanced itself from Pitroda’s comments clarifying that the Party has no plan to introduce such a tax.
The Congress spokesperson may have denied the concept of the inheritance tax but the timing of such an issue raised by someone very close to the political family controlling the party is very significant. Therefore, Pitroda’s opinion cannot be summarily dismissed as merely personal, more so when he is not only an important member of the Congress but apparently also the advisor-cum-mentor of Gandhi scion. This policy would in effect involve taxing the properties and assets that a person(s) inherits from their deceased parents/ancestors and may have somewhat similar repercussions either way. In this author’s opinion, it would have been a far better option for the Congress manifesto to highlight good work done by their previous governments and some path-breaking new schemes (promises) for the inclusive growth and development of all communities alike rather than stoking controversies with a focus on a section of population (electorate) with promises of freebies and appeasement policies. Their call for a social X-ray for the redistribution of wealth in undoubtedly divisive risking a grave socio-communal rift and conflict.
While the alleged caste census and financial & institutional survey is aggressively presented as a progressive and revolutionary step for ultimate social justice, this rhetoric already has historical precedents and dangerous implications. This is not merely a question of wealth redistribution; the action also implies reallocation of power along the cast lines overlooking merit and ability of deliverance by the people. Therefore, the idea smacks more of divisiveness leading to conflict and chaos rather than truly guaranteeing a socio-economic transformation, echoing the communist-socialist experiments of the 20th century and its nemesis in the long run. The political developments of late 1980s vindicate how the narrow and selfish politics can spoil the entire social harmony with irreversible damages. The former PM Mr. V. P. Singh was Defence Minister with a clean image when Bofors Scandal flared up rocking former PM Rajeev Gandhi led Congress government in late 1980s. As he was committed in his resolve to act against corruption, he was dismissed from the cabinet, resigned from the Congress and formed a political front Jan Morcha to fight corruption. In 1988, V. P. Singh formed Janta Dal and returned as Prime Minister in a weak coalition government following 1989 general elections, strangely enough with the support of the ideologically opposite BJP and two Communist parties.
The Mandal Commission Report on the subject of the socially or educationally backward classes with recommendations about the quotas and seat reservations in the government jobs and institutions was lying unactioned since 1980. The experts generally believe that former PM V. P. Singh decided to implement the Mandal Commission Report in August 1990 with dual motives of consolidating own political position and doing social justice with the other backward classes, many experts then called “social engineering”. The decision led to massive social unrest and conflict at the national level with the groups pro- and anti-reservation, mostly students, pitted against each other for weeks together. This social unrest and class-conflict involved protests and riots with bandhs (a version of strike), hartals (a version of municipal shutdown), dharnas, large scale incidents of the destruction of public property, looting and physical violence. As for Mr. V. P. Singh with his premiership tenure remaining less than a year, he was never accepted by the OBCs as their leader even after doing reservations for the OBCs, while the general category electorate never trusted him thereafter. On the sidelines, the casteist leaders started flexing their political power with the support of OBCs giving rise to many strong regional parties on the strength of sectional interests challenging the national parties, the BJP and Congress.
The intrusive socio-economic caste census included in the so-called Nyay Patra of the Congress manifesto and the Gandhi scion’s passionate rhetoric to dissect society for the resource redistribution is comparable to Mao Zedong’s doctrines of “struggle and transformation” which historically pushed China into long spells of discontent, violence and armed insurrection with catastrophic outcomes; even China’s Great Leap Forward was to be abandoned with dismal social failure and economic disarray. The socio-economic re-engineering based on petty sectional interests and class considerations have repeatedly failed across the globe. Influential leaders who do not take lessons from the history; instead, try to push own whimsical fancies on masses do great disservice to the society and are indeed proved a drag and liability in the ultimate analysis. Rather than investing and motivating people in acquiring skills and national character, building capacity and aspiring to create value through their industry and entrepreneurial spirit, the current Congress culture of cash transfer (2019 NYAY and Mahalaxmi in 2024) and the mission of redistribution of wealth is fraught with the potential risk of degeneration of the society scarring masses with a false sense of entitlements. Considering the current state of the Party, it appears well-nigh impossible for them to succeed in general elections but if it indeed happens, such policies are likely to push India into social and economic chaos in future.
Endnote
To be frank, a country like India needs stable and long-term policies for its inclusive growth and development based on a mix of robust agriculture, manufacturing industry and allied businesses offering sufficient employment opportunities. For sure, it has no place for those who jeopardize these sectors with the offers of freebies for the sake of poverty alleviation without any productive work and are thus willing to take a leap in the dark to play with its future by creating divisions based on religion, caste, language and region. Like a responsible political party, the Congress should have sincerely worked and succeeded by now in largely removing these barriers owing to their lion’s share in governance during more than seven decades of independence; instead, the Congress party and its de facto leader actually declares it a mission of his life to have a caste census followed by a financial and institutional survey for the redistribution of wealth. Such outdated ideas and largely failed experiments in parts of the world inter alia remind the Bolshevik Revolution of Russia (then USSR) establishing communist order after a great turmoil and bloodbath in the name of socialism. The stalwarts of the grand old party should learn from its nemesis and where the Russia stands today in the world order.
Similarly, when the Indian Constitution provides for a uniform civil code for all citizens, discriminating only the majority community to enforce a civil code was a bad idea in the first place in 1950s. Notwithstanding this, barring one significantly large so-called minority community, no other minority communities in India had any issues in peaceful and harmonious existence with the majority community (Hindus), which itself has become minority in at least seven states in India by now. In such a scenario, constant opposition of the uniform civil code and using the tag of religious and linguistic minorities to grant complete freedom and free hand to the particular community in terms of the choice of food, dress, language and personal (religious) laws itself raises many legal and ethical questions. It’s widely known worldwide that India’s strength actually lies in its “unity in diversity”, and certainly not in its socio-economic and religious division. Every healthy democracy needs good governance as also a good and strong opposition and India is no exception in this case. So as the chief opposition party, it’s better for them to choose policies and strategies that build and harness the potential of people and resources rather than dividing, breaking and redistributing it through ridiculous X-ray surveys and census. (Courtesy: Boloji.com) (Concluded)
(The Author is a retired civil servant and has core areas of specialization in public administration, finance, information technology, human resource development, budget and planning, and legal matters)
