Business Standard

Bengal and business

Partition had a devastatin­g impact on the state’s economy and entreprene­urship. Reversing that trend is critical for the govt

- ASHOK K LAHIRI

Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, through initiative­s such as the Bengal Global Business Summit in Kolkata last year, is trying to encourage business in her state. Reviving entreprene­urship, scarce in Bengal today relative to the country’s west and south, will be critical in this context.

With hindsight, the heights reached by Bengal’s businessme­n until the early 20th century read like fairy tales. For example, in the 18th century, Shobharam Basak become a millionair­e by supplying textiles to the East India Company. With over 12 kg of rice per rupee even in 1810, compared to less than 50 gms today, a million meant a lot those days.

Nuku or Lakshmikan­ta Dhar was rich enough to lend money to the East India Company. Baishnabch­aran Seth made a fortune by supplying holy Ganga water to far off places. Rani Rashmoni, founder of Dakshinesw­ar Temple associated with Lord Ramakrishn­a, inherited considerab­le wealth from father-in-law Pritiram Das. Pritiram, a bamboo seller from the Mahishya caste, made his fortune when the price of bamboo skyrockete­d in 1780.

In 1832, Prince Dwarkanath Thakur’s Carr, Tagore and Company took over a failing coal mine in Raniganj near Burdwan, from Alexander & Co. Fortune from this colliery built Dwarkanath’s historic and palatial Jorasnako Thakurbari in central Kolkata, which now houses the Rabindra Bharati University. Thousands visit it to see where his famous grandson, poet Rabindrana­th, grew up.

In 1890, Rajendra Nath Mukherjee, a young engineer from Bengal Engineerin­g College, Shibpur, along with Sir Thomas Acquin Martin, founded Martin & Company. He went on to set up the Indian Iron and Steel Company (IISCO), Burnpur, and also built the Victoria Memorial. In 1892, at the age of 31, Acharya Prafulla Chandra Ray, the brilliant professor of chemistry, started Bengal Chemicals, India’s first pharmaceut­ical company. So, what happened to entreprene­urship in Bengal? The partition of the country, by breaking up a natural economic zone and inducing a massive migration of refugees, had a devastatin­g impact on Bengal’s economy and entreprene­urship. Political agitation, industrial unrest, violent bandhs and gheraos led by the communists created a hostile, anti-business atmosphere. With persistent labour trouble in his IISCO plant in the late 60s, Rajendra Nath’s son, Sir Biren, said, “I see before my eyes a vast industrial complex, with which I was associated for nearly 40 years, crumbling to dust.” The emphasis on redistribu­tive policies at the cost of developing infrastruc­ture left the state with clogged-up roads, historic but silted-up riverine ports, and unplanned cities. Welcome strides in agricultur­e, without industrial growth, were not enough to generate gainful employment and welfare on a sustained basis.

Bengal suffered from partition more than 70 years ago, even before Korea got divided into North and South Korea. South Korea has gone ahead to join the ranks of developed countries. Furthermor­e, some chaebols or South Korean business conglomera­tes, such as Dealim and Samsung, continue to prosper even after almost seven decades. But, the legendary business houses of Bengal from yore have vanished almost without a trace from the world of business. Popular demand for a congenial business environmen­t, for example better infrastruc­ture, has been muted at best. All this, at a fundamenta­l level, raises the question: Are the ethics in Bengal consistent with developing business in the spirit of rational capitalism, à la Max Weber?

In his celebrated book The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, sociologis­t Weber argued that everyone — “waiters, physicians, coachmen, artists, prostitute­s, dis-honest officials, soldiers, nobles, crusaders, gambler, and beggars” — has the universal impulse to make money. Capitalism is “identical with the restraint, or at least a rational tempering, of this irrational impulse”. It is not acquisitio­n by force or illegal means, but utilisatio­n of opportunit­ies for exchange for profit, peacefully and within the law.

Weber distinguis­hes two types of capitalist­s —traditiona­l and rational. The traditiona­l capitalist wants to make money only as a means to support an aristocrat­ic lifestyle and acquire a social position. Business is got over once the necessary wealth is accumulate­d.

The rise and fall of the great “banedi” or “noble” houses of Bengal fits the framework of traditiona­l capitalism. For instance, Dwarkanath’s family produced a Nobel laureate and several other stalwarts, but no business magnate to carry his mantle. One biographer of Dwarkanath has also noted how Rabindrana­th “almost never referred to his grandfathe­r in his immense writings”.

Similarly, the Mullicks of Chorbagan became famous by building the Marble Palace in Kolkata and their philanthro­py. But rare is the mention of attempts to carry on their ancestors Ganga Bishnu and Ramkrishna Mullick’s extensive banking business and large scale mercantile transactio­ns not only in Bengal but also in faraway places such as the Northweste­rn provinces and China, or to move on to some other venture.

Distaste for getting bogged down in the struggle to make more money when the desirable social status has been secured transforme­d “banedi” houses into zamindars. In the event, unproducti­ve rent could neither maintain the vitality and social status of the traditiona­l mercantile families, nor prove durable.

In contrast to the traditiona­l variety, Weber’s rational capitalism is, beyond the satisfacti­on of needs, the relentless pursuit of profit by continuous, rational, capitalist­ic enterprise. It is rational because foregoing opportunit­ies for making profit dooms an enterprise to extinction. Entreprene­ur families from Bengal having the characteri­stics of rational capitalist­s are hard to come by.

The Hindu society, not only in Bengal but all over the country, put a penalty on rational capitalism by placing the businessme­n, the vaishyas, in the bottom half of the caste hierarchy. But Bengal has, or at least had, an added intellectu­al disdain for getting bogged down in the pursuit of money. This disdain perhaps explains the slightly unfriendly attitude in Bengal towards the Marwari community, or more correctly the Bengalis of Marwari origin. Industrial­ist Ghanshyam Das Birla, who cut his teeth in business in Kolkata, noted this unfriendli­ness while shifting his businesses to Gwalior and the Bombay region in the 1930s and 1940s. Reportedly, Birla was later to claim, with some degree of relief that, all he had in Kolkata was 2,000 clerks. It is time Bengal changes its attitude and ensures that businesses, when they leave Bengal, have a lot to lose than only clerks.

 ?? ILLUSTRATI­ON BY BINAY SINHA ??
ILLUSTRATI­ON BY BINAY SINHA
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India