It’s really an economic satyagraha
The collective conscience of the Indian masses defeated the anti-demonetisation coalition, which coincided with anti-Narendra Modi rainbow. People bore the pain but remained unfettered in supporting demonetisation...
The debate on Narendra Modi’s demonetisation has been based on a flawed assumption that it is a policy. Unfortu-nately, both vocal supporters as well as its opponents share this hypothesis, shrewdly construed by anti-demonetisation forces. It is a programme, which emanates from a sane vision to create an egalitarian sentiment.
Its impact, generally calculated in terms of GDP, is a gross injustice with the very idea of demonetisation. It has multidimensional effect from democracy to economics. It demolished politico-economic oligarchy, which commanded maximum black money and used them to influence policy, politics and public opinion industry.
Over the years black money has become an integral part of economic activities. The magnitude of black money has not so important than proportionally its manifold dysfunctional impact on our civil life, culture and polity. Therefore, demonetisation is both generative and regulative.
A common man does not need a textbook economist to enlighten him about pitfalls or benefits of demonetisation. They experience it in their dayto-day life. The pain generated by growing inequality multiplies by unethical behavioural patterns penetrating from top to bottom. Therefore, this move can also be seen as a correction in the philosophy of neo-liberalism, which demands the least state intervention and assumes that for faster growth and development society has to bear the pain of both corruption and inequality. The state has been increasingly withered away under the impact of big capital and their insensitive masters. Corruption and black money led the failure of the pink tide (Communist ascendancy to power) in Latin America and it also showing the tendency to unsettle many developed liberal democracies, which have moralised inequality. All these remained incomprehensible for the anti-demonetisation forces, which combined political parties, corporate/business class and their apologists in the West. Convergence of their interests created a coalition of forces. But the collective conscience of the Indian masses defeated the anti-demonetisation coalition, which coincided with anti-Narendra Modi rainbow. People bore the pain but remained unfettered in supporting demonetisation, that’s why I call it an economic satyagraha.
But there is also a sad part of the demonetisation debate. It has been trapped into micro narratives shrewdly construed by the brain trust of black money. The public discourse has been made prisoners of sensational breaking news, how much money deposited, queues in front of banks and ATMs, some exceptional incidents, etc. It is not that they do not deserve attention but they can’t be the centrality of a debate. Unfortunately, agencies of the Indian state, like the Niti Aayog, collectively could not create meta-narrative on demonetisation and left everything from micro to macro to the Prime Minister to explain and interpret. It suited the economic oligarchy of the country, which was most affected by unexpected march of ethics and democracy in neo-liberal economic horizon. It is to be pondered whether what the Planning Commission successfully used to do for Jawaharlal Nehru or Indira Gandhi, could the Niti Aayog do for Mr Modi? Blind anti-Modism in Indian politics privileged these agencies of un criticality.
Last but not least, Mr Modi has also given a powerful message that ethics and the quest for egalitarianism are not in the past tense but very much present in the dictionary of governance. The pink tide may fail due to lack of their conviction in people’s welfare, but the saffron tide can’t fail due to its undiminished commitment for the people’s cause. Rakesh Sinha is associate professor, University of Delhi, and honorary director of India Policy Foundation