India 3.0: The Rise of a Billion People

Introduction

WHILE FORECASTING national change, one generally considers the history of a nation and its major turning points. In history, a series of events occur that could have had varied outcomes. Depending on how things turn out, the future development of countries and their people are changed for the better or for the worse. Nothing in history is predetermined and that extends to national political trajectories too. What would have happened if the British had never come to India, or say, by 1810 or so, a loose confederacy of Sikh, Maratha and the Deccan rulers managed to kick out the British, the French and the Portuguese? Or had Mir Jafar, the commander-in-chief of the Siraj-ud-Daulah’s army, refused to betray his nawab? Or Cyril John Radcliffe had applied mind and method over a period of time and not divided Bengal and Punjab in five weeks that included ‘a bout of dysentery that kept him constantly on the trot’?

The European Union is already crumbling, in spite of having a great vision, resources and people, with economic crises in Greece, Cyprus, Spain and Portugal. Five million Syrians have been rooted out of their homeland as refugees and an equal number displaced within their own country; but no superpower or international organization can do anything to resolve the situation. A country can walk out of an international treaty because of a change in its leadership. Socialism has failed, capitalism has failed, and globalization has failed. It is a fact that even China’s future development is uncertain, regardless of the power and wealth it has created for its people.

In India, while one prime minister suspended elections and civil liberties in 1975, another had to order the pawning of sixty-seven tonnes of gold to tide over a balance-of-payments crisis in 1991. Yet another prime minister helplessly presided over scam after scam by his government. A sense of superiority, rooted in our ancient history and some emotionally charged description of Indian people in literature, does generate a patriotic fervour but does not match with the present condition of Indian nation – still struggling with a national vision of a developed country and a harmonious society. The yardstick to measure these are numerous: gross domestic product (GDP), inflation, unemployment, freedom, fuel prices, human rights and more.

In its current manifestation in India, democracy has become a theatre of rhetoric wherein some 100 ‘actors’ appear on television every day and discourse with clichéd arguments and responses. Anti-incumbency has become the order, testament to the widening chasm between the people and their governments. This book presents to its readers a thought process that history is made every day, and that the challenge is getting everyone to pay attention to it.

India 3.0 is a book of hope for the future of a great civilization. The book sees a tea-seller boy rising to become the prime minister of India, not through political machinations but through the natural outcome of a political process. It was written during a major watershed in Indian history, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi demonetized high-denomination currency notes which accounted for about 86 per cent of the nation’s currency. But in a country where 78 per cent of financial transactions are done in cash, Indians have exhibited remarkable patience with the currency ban. No leader had dared it earlier, even if he knew well that unaccounted cash, or black money, is indeed a huge problem for the country.

Is this a new India in the making? If so, what next? India is a large country with uneven development and generally low levels of economic and technological progress. We should proceed in all cases from India’s basic conditions. It is these conditions that determine the trajectory of India’s massive and diversified economy, the important position of rural areas in the economy, and perhaps the world’s most robust trading system and commodity supply chain. Can we safeguard our traditional business while prioritizing efficiency?

To be able to understand the future, we must know the past. What has brought us where we are today and what has changed along the way? We need to think about what kind of future we would like for ourselves and for the next generation, and what decisions we should make today for that desired future. This book deliberately sets aside relevant historical writings, which are very subjective and differ markedly from one another. It presents an anecdotal account of how India built itself as an independent nation, and is based on a stream of consciousness that runs through generations of folklore and stories, and which now moves at lightning speed on the Internet. India 3.0 construes the strengths and weaknesses of this stream and presents what India will look like in the next twenty-five to thirty years, not through a scientific or philosophical analysis but a crystal-ball type of gaze.

Organized in three parts, the book starts with the event of demonetization on 8 November 2016. The five chapters in the first part set the tone of the book. Starting with establishing the need for demonetization, it explains how markets and governments collude, what dangers a global financial system poses to the sovereignty of nations, how India was colonized through trade and technology, and how innovation is the only way out of the poverty pit in which millions of our people have been trapped for generations.

In the second part, the first three chapters take a long view of the past for readers to understand how India reached its present, giving a brief overview of its history, from ancient to colonized India, and presenting India 1.0 (from Independence to the crisis of 1991) and India 2.0 (from thereafter to the general elections of 2014). The last two chapters in this part map contemporary Indian people and the state of the nation. For the first time, India is functioning as a true federal republic. Indians have grown beyond vote banks. Young Indians want to have what everyone else has in the developed world. Older Indians want financial security in their golden years. However, India remains what it has always been – the greatest and most far-reaching political experiment in human history. A billion-and-a-quarter people are living, by and large, in peace and are bettering their lives year after year not because of their leaders but in spite of them.

The third and concluding part presents a hopeful view of a developed India. The eight chapters in this part trace the outline of a possible future India, starting with the India of 2020 envisioned by Dr A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, and then dwells in detail on the seven steps he proposed in 2013 for a possible Indian renaissance. What makes a country great? A great country needs a government that doesn’t just care about itself but also its people. Instead of seeking power and money, the government promotes progress – physical, psychological and intellectual – not only of the treasury, leadership and officialdom but also of the people. Governance must be strict but fair. Its policies must be liberal but compassionate. It must work effectively at the grass roots, where it can touch the lives of the marginalized.

The book calls the future nation India 3.0.

Closely related to economic development are the relationships between reform, development and stability, between the transformation of governmental functions and the way private business operates, and the reform of science, education, culture and public health, and the invigoration of our police and legal system. India 3.0 does not envision a developed nation caught in the misery of individualism and societal strife but a model of a happy society, with people living in peace and just affluence. India’s greatness has to do with the way it is organized. Self-correction is woven into the Indian DNA. Our freedoms reside within us. That is the message of India.

I

REBOOTING INDIA

‘First, they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.’

—Mahatma Gandhi

1

For whom the bells toll

IT WAS 8 November 2016, a little after 7.30 p.m., when all TV channels started informing the public about Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s address to the nation at 8 p.m. The media also aired clips of Modi’s meeting with President Pranab Mukherjee and with the service chiefs of India’s army, navy and air force earlier in the day. This created a buzz about an imminent announcement of going to war with Pakistan, as relations with the neighbouring country were at an all-time low. TV channels also reported a cabinet meeting earlier in the evening that the prime minister had attended.

Modi appeared live on TV screens at 8 p.m. and started by greeting the people in his now well-known style:

I hope you ended the festive season of Diwali with joy and new hope. Today, I will be speaking to you about some critical issues and important decisions. Today I want to make a special request to all of you. You may recall the economic situation in May 2014 when you entrusted us with an onerous responsibility. In the context of BRICS, it was being said that the ‘I’ in BRICS was shaky. Since then, we had two years of severe drought. Yet, in the last two-and-a-half years, with the support of 125 crore Indians, India has become the ‘bright spot’ in the global economy. It is not just we who are saying this; it is being stated by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.¹

There was no mention of a war, but people wondered what the matter was – why had the prime minister chosen to address the nation in such an unusually urgent manner? The prime minister then brought up the issue of corruption, saying that the spectre of corruption and black money had grown. He said,

It has weakened the effort to remove poverty. On the one hand, we are now number one in the rate of economic growth. But on the other hand, we were ranked close to [one] hundred in the global corruption perceptions ranking two years back. In spite of many steps, we have only been able to reach a ranking of seventy-six now. Of course, there is improvement. This shows the extent to which corruption and black money have spread their tentacles.

Yes, these were harsh words, but was he unjustified in saying so? He further stated that

… the evil of corruption has been spread by certain sections of society for their selfish interests. They have ignored the poor and cornered benefits. Some people have misused their office for personal gain. On the other hand, honest people have fought against this evil. Crores of common men and women have lived lives of integrity. We hear about poor auto-rickshaw [sic] drivers returning gold ornaments left in vehicles to their rightful owners. We hear about taxi drivers who take pains to locate the owners of cell phones left behind. We hear of vegetable vendors who return excess money given by customers.

The first hint had come. Would the prime minister demonetize large currency notes? This was something that people talked about as a possible way to defeat the monster of ill-gotten wealth in India. The answer came just a few minutes later with a thumping yes!

There comes a time in the history of a country’s development when a need is felt for a strong and decisive step. For years, this country has felt that corruption, black money and terrorism are festering sores, holding us back in the race towards development. Terrorism is a frightening threat. So many have lost their lives because of it. But have you ever thought about how these terrorists get their money? Enemies from across the border run their operations using fake currency notes.

…The magnitude of cash in circulation is directly linked to the level of corruption. Inflation becomes worse through the deployment of cash earned in corrupt ways. The poor have to bear the brunt of this. It has a direct effect on the purchasing power of the poor and the middle class. You may yourself have experienced this when buying land or a house – that apart from the amount paid by cheque, a large amount is demanded in cash. This creates problems for an honest person when buying property. The misuse of cash has led to artificial increase in the cost of goods and services like houses, land, higher education, healthcare and so on.

…Brothers and sisters, to break the grip of corruption and black money, we have decided that the five hundred and thousand [rupee]currency notes presently in use will no longer be legal tender from midnight tonight, that is 8 November 2016. The five hundred-and thousand-[rupee] notes hoarded by anti-national and anti-social elements will become just worthless pieces of paper. The rights and the interests of honest, hard-working people will be fully protected. Let me assure you that notes of hundred, fifty, twenty, ten, five, two and one [rupee] and all coins will remain legal tender and will not be affected.²

Modi then went on to explain details of how the whole process would be taken forward. He emphasized that citizens could deposit their money or exchange their old notes at banks or post offices until 30 December 2016. However, amounts larger than a certain threshold, disproportionate to one’s income, would require an explanation. But then not many were probably listening any more. It would be an understatement to say that India was in a state of shock and disbelief. However, the question remained – could the government really pull it off?

Nobody expected Modi to act so decisively or as fast. As he announced his government’s plan to demonetize, his famed organizational skills were certainly on display. As decided by his cabinet and himself, the governor of the Reserve Bank of India followed Prime Minister Modi on TV with a message of calm, and spelt out the rules and regulations to be followed for the next few days. It is phenomenal that all this happened without even a hint of the plan being leaked.

After Modi concluded his speech in Hindi, he repeated the same in English, and by the time he finished it was close to 9 p.m. While the ordinary people, or the common man as we call them, went into a huddle with their family members on how many hundreds and thousands of their money would require to be ‘changed’, there were others who went into a frenzy. It is estimated that gold worth 5,000 crore rupees, or around fifteen tonnes, was sold that night. By the next morning, demonetization became hot topic, and everywhere people referred to it as the ‘surgical strike’ on black money, drawing a parallel with the ‘surgical strike’ by Indian soldiers on terror camps operating out of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.³

The political class of India, however, was most unhappy with demonetization and was quick to call the decision draconian, demanding a rollback. Foremost among them was the West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee who called it a ‘heartless and an ill-conceived blow to the common people and the middle class’. She demanded an immediate ‘withdrawal of this draconian decision’.⁴ The Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) supremo Mayawati called demonetization ‘a huge hoax’ being played on ordinary Indians.⁵ Post demonetization, the situation in the country, she claimed, had become explosive. The veteran leader Lalu Prasad Yadav said, ‘Utter chaos is being witnessed across the country for cash that has made the situation on the ground alarming.’⁶

However, all these reactions had a very interesting but an opposite response from the general public. The average Indian who till then was accepting corruption as part of his or her daily life now supported demonetization wholeheartedly and was game for a few days of inconvenience if it meant that the country would benefit in the long run. On 10 November 2016, when the banks reopened, massive queues ensued as millions lined up to deposit or exchange their old currency notes.

It was heartening to see the response of the public who suffered in long queues in front of ATMs and banks but persevered with a smile. The question to be asked here would be: Why did the public embrace the inconveniences so readily? Were they fed up of corruption? Were they fed up of terrorism? Were those living below the poverty line for decades finally fed up of their situation? Why and how did Prime Minister Modi get this unquestionable support from the public? The common man in India was no longer someone who could be fooled with false promises and slogans. They wanted action and clear-cut decisions to tackle the menace of ill-gotten money and the arrogance of the rich and powerful who were answerable to no one.

Fast forward to 2018. The demonetized currency has found its way back into the banking system and the new currency into the business system. The wealthy has turned to their middle-class relatives, friends, well-wishers and even employees to help them ‘handle’ their cash and introduce it into the banking system. Many companies have paid their employees’ salaries in advance. The cash squeezed out by demonetization has been miraculously regenerated. The cash deals are back, real estate is booming with part-cash transactions, and no real action is seen on the large-scale use of poor people’s bank accounts to convert demonetized notes into new ones. What was believed as a great exercise in purgatory is now being called an unmatched sin. The black economy needs to be tackled, but demonetization is not the way to go about it. The brunt of this move has been borne by those who never had any black money.⁷

The gullible believed prime-ministerial candidate Narendra Modi, who promised to bring back money allegedly stashed in various Swiss banks and distribute it among the poor. The lure of Rs 15 lakhs being credited to the bank account of every Indian also enticed their fanciful minds. When, in June 2018, the Swiss National Bank’s annual report reported a 50 per cent increase in deposits over the previous year, the finance minister had called it unfair to term all this as black money. BJP Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy tweeted, ‘Secret Swiss Bank account deposits from global sources rose by 3% in last 12 months. Indians’ deposits, however, grew 50%.’⁸ Going by the ongoing debate over ‘black’ and ‘white’ money, the Indian currency, the poor rupee, which crashed to a lifetime low of 74 against the US dollar in September 2018, has definitely turned grey.⁹

Indian politicians have perfected the art of bending the truth. The saga of the goods and services tax (GST) exemplifies this. The concept of GST was first introduced in India by the then prime minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, in 2000. It was taken forward by successive UPA governments, in their own way, but was opposed most vehemently by the state of Gujarat, led by Narendra Modi. After marathon debates that saw the Congress contradicting its own arguments, the GST finally came to pass in May 2015, but without covering petroleum products. Launched on 1 July 2017, the GST weaved twenty-nine states into a single market with one tax rate, but traders and small businesses complained of an increased compliance burden, while voices of dissent rose on the high tax rate on some common-use goods.¹⁰ India became one of the first countries in the world to implement a nationwide sin tax on sweetened carbonated beverages, a category reserved primarily for harmful products such as tobacco.¹¹

In March 2018, thousands of farmers in Maharashtra marched 180km, from Nashik to Mumbai. The peaceful yet resolute protest reminded one of the Dandi March that Mahatma Gandhi undertook in 1930. A lot has changed since then; yet, certain things remain unchanged in India. Successive governments have failed to safeguard the interests of farmers. The economic growth that saw cities spreading and rising, the number of billionaires increasing and a billion mobile phone users making India the world’s largest mobile data consuming country have failed to create jobs for its educated youth and improve the conditions of farmers. There is definitely something seriously flawed with the Indian economy, which is responsible for this muddle. It is not a failure of intelligence on the part of those who run the system, but a malady that inflicts the psyche of the Indian nation, with hypocrisy as its axis.

Elections in India have become an all-season festival. Elections consume lots of money, which is sucked out of the economy by the political system, and has turned itself into a robust and flourishing industry. This system is cloaked itself in different colours, but its moral nakedness remains uncovered. The money that is spent on electioneering is never accounted for or questioned. Former chief election commissioner S.Y. Qureshi once observed, ‘The elections have become the biggest source of corruption because the money that you spend at the time of election is much beyond the legally prescribed limit. Now, obviously, the candidates who win are in a hurry to get that money back, with an interest probably, and that is how corruption begins … it has become a competitive phenomenon. If one party spends a lot of money, then the other person also has to spend a lot of money.’¹²

It is, indeed, important for the present and coming generations to know that the great Indian civilization of lore is on the verge of degeneration, as best stated by Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan:

Those who look upon our political slavery as the external violence of a band of robbers preying on innocent people have a very narrow conception of history. The historic destinies of people cannot be dismissed so lightly. The British are not brigands who have fallen on India in the highway of her history and bound her hand and foot. British rule is a much deeper phenomenon, reflecting the serious organic defects of Indian society. It is the outward symptom of an inward crisis, of loss of faith, of hideous weakening of our moral life, our indiscipline and disunion, our violence and vulgarity. To use Robert Bridges’ phrase, it is our ‘crowed uncleanness of soul’ that is responsible for our backward condition. This requires to be overcome. We cannot build a new India unless we first rebuild ourselves. The immediate task confronting us is moral purgation, spiritual regeneration.¹³

It was the renaissances started by Ram Mohan Roy, sustained by Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar and articulated by Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay in his song ‘Vande Mataram’ that resurrected a fatally ‘wounded civilization’, as V.S. Naipaul aptly observed in the title of his 1976 book, ‘India: A Wounded Civilization’. Swami Vivekananda presented the new face of India to the world at the Parliament of the World’s Religions in Chicago in 1893.

I see these four thoughts as the four nucleotides of the DNA of modern India: ‘Swarajya is my birthright and I shall have it!’, the assertion of Bal Gangadhar Tilak; ‘where the mind is without fear and the head is held high’, the imagination of Rabindranath Tagore; ‘every village a republic’, the ideal of Mahatma Gandhi; and ‘Integral Humanism’, the philosophy of Deendayal Upadhyay. The two-nation theory of Muhammad Ali Jinnah and the ‘Discovery of India’ perspective of Jawaharlal Nehru based on the imaginary Aryan Invasion are the two great mutations of the Indian DNA that define present India.

Dr Radhakrishnan was perhaps the first person to have a critical look at the mutated Indian civilization. He famously said, ‘The challenge of Christian critics impelled me to make a study of Hinduism and find out what is living and what is dead in it.’¹⁴ The Constituent Assembly of India, elected to write the Constitution of India in 1946, represented the best of minds of those times. It is important to know that India governs itself under a constitutional supremacy and not a parliamentary supremacy. The Parliament cannot override the Constitution, only amend it through an elaborately drawn procedure. As of October 2018, there have been 123 Amendment Bills and 102 Amendment Acts.

I must mention here the 24th Amendment made in November 1971 to enable the Parliament to dilute fundamental rights; the 42nd Amendment, which significantly tempered the Constitution, but much of which was restored by the 43rd and 44th amendments in 1978; and the 61th Amendment, made in March 1988, to reduce the age for voting rights from twenty-one to eighteen years. There have been many fierce debates in the Parliament to modify the Constitution and many cases have been fought in the Supreme Court to question the validity of the amendments made by the Parliament. It has been largely established by now that the Parliament