Then, we observe an
economic phenomenon. After a decade or two, when the economy reaches a level of
growth, the growth rate will decline, while productivity, production and
consumption as well as trade might continue to increase. Then the prices remain
stable as speculation would be less; inflation and corruption, would be less.
But, the growth rates would begin to be in the single digit. Even some
countries not endowed with a reasonable amount of natural resources have
achieved this due to their efficient management. Even in countries with
single-party regimes with ideological fervour or religious fervour or simply in
countries, where military dictators paraded, the initial growth rates are promising.
But, in the case of a vast majority of African and Latin American countries,
and some Asian countries, despite rich natural resources, the initial growth
did not last longer than five years. Either it stopped brutally, or in some
cases, economic growth slowed down to the extent of stagnation. This is what
has happened in the case of Indonesia, Ghana, Egypt, Ivory Coast, Kenya,
Argentina, Venezuela, Congo, Ethiopia, Vietnam, Algeria, Iran, etc. What is the
factor that makes this brutal difference? It is nothing but politico-
bureaucratic Corruption that degrades the country!
I. Betrayal of Trust by the Operators of the State
In the case of India, the situation for the past 75 years has been
more complicated and demands a closer analysis. The economic phenomenon is
described as the Hindu rate of growth, because of its ‘work culture’, which has
an umbilical link with inefficiency due to low levels of skills and corruption.
In general, political corruption and administrative corruption are common and
inevitable in the initial stages of any emerging democracy in developing
countries. The operators of the state, the bureaucrats, the ministers and the
peoples’ Representatives involve themselves without restraint in the selfish
use of their powers and opportunities. Together, they have now evolved it into
a silent nexus, so that they can make corruption sustainable. It results in
inefficiency in performance, which the authorities try to hide by wasting more
human and natural resources of the country. Low productivity and low level of
skills, without mentioning low level of self-empowerment are an indication of
low levels of Human Development (HD). Low human development is due to low
Social Development (S.D.). Social development is slow in India, since in its
history, there had never been any radical transformations and churning in
different societies in India, unlike in European societies which were
constantly mobilized, traumatized and transformed entirely, and particularly
since the two world wars in which they were totally involved. Even if we take a
comparable example of China, the Chinese society, which is more homogenous than
Indian societies, has been subjected to several violent upheavals due to
ideological shifts in social policies by its Communist Party. Further, the
second most important reason for slow social development in India is due to too
many politico-bureaucratic interventions in social affairs. Though this has
initially the merit of avoiding bloody social conflicts, has nevertheless
prevented the citizens from feeling enough of the much-needed social concern,
social responsibility, social ethics and social consciousness.
1. At
the outset, we have to admit that we are being ruled by the political parties
and their nominees, rather than by the people’s representatives. Political
corruption in India is grand corruption since it affects national development,
with its unstoppable logic of money power. The politicians and their parties,
in order to grab power, spend money on voters; once in power, they make money
to retain power. To win a majority of voters, they create divisions and civil
conflicts or provoke border disputes in cooperation with either religious or
military circles. Most of the tax money and other resources collected are spent
upon the operators of the state and for its prestige and glory as a great power
among other states. The rest of the tax money is often given away to the voters
as ‘freebies’ in the name of some welfare scheme. Whatever may be the reasons,
a majority of the people are voting only in favour of those who are offering
specific freebies to them or distributing directly money, gifts and liqueur at
the time of elections. Political parties and their candidates collect and
accumulate huge amounts of cash from individuals, contractors and companies and
force the officers to act against the financial interests of the state.
Consequently, precious little is left to be spent on H.D. and S.D. For them,
the ideal state is the Republic of North Korea, where the people are as happy
as children, and where the Great and Dear Leader Kim Il Un takes care of
everything.
A third proof or
the reason for slow social development is the absence of a universal
social security system, which answers all kinds of insecurities, such as
the eventuality of unemployment, sickness and lack of income after retirement
and other risks. Mutual assurance can be formed collectively by the people who
produce wealth and cover all kinds of risks as a matter of right. A comprehensive
system is adopted by all the liberal democracies, and if there are any
financial deficits, they are filled from the tax money by governments. Instead
of doing this, in India the Representatives of the people continue to promise
some specific and selective welfare schemes before elections and implement them
if they come to power. They also give grants in gratuity, out of generosity to
those whom they consider most deserving in case of any unhappy incident. Thus,
people remain permanently dependent upon the generosity of the political power
and the political fortunes of their leaders.
2. The
entire state machinery of officers enjoys so much power over the citizens that
the officers are called bureaucrats, like the former aristocrats. Not only that
they help rampant political corruption to happen, as they themselves have some
self-interest, and, further, they themselves indulge in petty corruption, which
hurts the common man the most. They are quite loyal to the hierarchy of the
state and honest to the ‘files’, but are not trained to be democratic and to
fulfill their social responsibility, first.
If we look into the history of our bureaucracy, we find that it was
devised and installed by our colonial masters, and that it had never shown any
signs of sympathy towards the freedom fighters during the independence
movement, as it was a part of the ruling class. During the freedom movement,
the army shot at the pretesting Indians, and the Police lathi-charged the Satyagrahis,
as a matter of duty. All of them were not the Britishers. After serving those
who sat on the throne, the Administration, after independence, continued to
serve loyally those who later sat in the red cushioned and gilded chairs.
Jawaharlal Nehru's concept of a ‘welfare state’ has resulted in the
bureaucratisation of entire political governance. Administrative reforms for
‘ease of doing business with the governments’ and simply for the ‘ease of
living’ for the common man or the concern for ‘less government and more governance’
have never been sincerely attempted by any people’s representative. The
ministers have never been neither competent nor morally strong enough to resist
the bureaucracy and reform it. The expensive External Affairs department is a
closely guarded domain of the career-diplomats. Complaints of the citizens
against the bureaucracy do not go far. The mechanisms like Anti-Corruption
bureaus, Vigilance Commissions, and Administrative Tribunals are filled by the
same officers. It is again they who are to enquire, to correct, to try and to
judge other officers. This is a matter of common knowledge and experience for
anybody living in India. If India is still progressing in general and tax
recoveries are increasing, it is because of the dynamism of other economic
actors in the society and the entrepreneurs. Whereas, in countries where there
has been more growth, there is less corruption internally. Yet, as a kind of
business dharma, the foreign entrepreneurs are yielding to the
temptation of corrupting Indians in commercial affairs, such as defence deals.
A citizen is rendered helpless and is frustrated in dealing with governments.
It is a matter of day-to-day experience for anybody that needs no further
proof.
Thus public
governance in India today is in the grip of entrenched corruption. In
aggravated situations, in other developing countries, the state becomes a
‘failed’ or ‘bankrupt’ state, as we see in the case of Afghanistan, Sri Lanka
and Pakistan right now, in our neighbourhood. Adding Venezuela, there is a list
of about 53 states in the world which are in such a situation of economic
stagnation and inflation, making life miserable for the people, except for the
politicians and religious and military circles.
Given the above observations,
we can derive an economic law that when corruption is high, then the economic
growth rate would be low. On the contrary, small and petty corruption declines
when there is some level of economic development for all, as we see in liberal
democracies in Western Europe. The theoretical explanation of this phenomenon
of retarding the growth of the society by the state was well done a long time
ago by a political philosopher, Karl R. Popper in his book: The Open
Society and Its Enemies.
II. The Psychology of the Governed Citizens:
Thus, the
bureaucratisation of entire governance is further delaying the inevitable
process of democratisation of modern society. But, as the above analysis
reveals no politician or no officer can be expected to reduce the present level
of corruption, except the citizen himself. The operators of the state are
trying to make the citizens believe that a good citizen should be obedient,
loyal and dependent. They are trying to inculcate out of date neo-nationalism,
which never existed politically in India and that too in the present-day
globalised world.
A citizen is
hesitant to approach a Police station, a Revenue office, a municipal employee,
or for that matter, any government office from the village Panchayat office to
the Central Secretariat in New Delhi, if s/he has nothing to offer in return
for the favour s/he is expecting. The favour might be simply not withholding
the file on the officer’s desk any more. Can any active person in India raise
his hand to say that he, so far has not paid any bribe to some public employee
to get things done in time?
Yet,
in all fairness, we should admit that in our country, more people offer bribes
to get things done or to obtain favours, irrespective of the fact whether they
deserve it or not, than those who demand a bribe. On the other hand, when the
officer or the politician is flexible enough to accept to facilitate or
accommodate even the undue demands of anybody who is a voter or a supporter, then,
people would continue to persist in their traditional way of thinking and
behaviour.
We seem to have a traditional age-old propensity to lure each other to serve our individual purposes, without any reference to any common values. The individual interest or logic or dharma seems to prevail over other things, and one considers himself individually answerable only to God, ultimately, and not to any other group in the society. Common people found it normal to give a gift in appreciation for a favour obtained, as it happened in the past. Gifts are presented to the elite adorning the ‘durbars’ of the Maharajahs, Sultanates and the Mughals, and later, to the ‘Dubashis’ and the officers of the East India Company. Whatever the Power gives is given as a matter of magnanimity, and not as an obligation. Many people go to persons in positions of power ready to offer some quid pro quo. In reverse, confirming this unethical ethos or anti-democratic traditional practice, the politicians corrupt the citizen during the elections.
 |
| Citizens are not handicapped |
0 Comments