The greatest handicap faced by the citizens in Bharat today is that the Manifestos of the political parties are non-justiciable in the wake of arguments and counter arguments for/against the financial affordability, economic viability, policy practicality, scheme sustainability etc. It’s also imperative to understand the socio-cultural acceptability of this so called ‘NYAY’ in Bharat, as an income support scheme announced by a political party.
The two key potential anthropological calamities for Bharat that the NYAY could cause:
(i) A basis for economic divide: The diverse culture, language, religion, traditions have always been used as a political tool to divide and further resort to appeasement. Now setting a trend to economically divide the people by pitting ‘the haves’ against ‘the have nots’ is too dangerous. Social media is already flooding with messages like “mera paisa mera marzi” (my money my choice), “I earn not to donate” etc.
Even though Bharatiya samskrithi (culture) has always advocated daana (donation) and sahaaya (assistance) to the poor and needy – it’s not a field to exploit. However, if this is used as a political tool to instil economic discontent amongst the people of Bharat, a “no tax campaign” – the worst possible nightmare of an independently elected government could deliberately be placed on the anvil.
(ii) Creation of a disinterested workforce: The most probable means to fund the ivory tower project would be through tax revenues whereby the government would impose heavy taxes on the haves in order to cross subsidise the have-nots, for the aspiring leaders might soon realise that money-plant doesn’t grow the real money.
The well known theory of Laffers’ curve would soon come into play and the Government would realise that with the hefty rate of tax the middle and higher income group would find it extremely non-remunerative to slog and earn a living just to fill the Consolidated Fund of the State.
In entirety, it would soak the entire labour force of the nation of its motivation to work – as the poor would anyways get Nyay (justice) and non-poor the Annyay (injustice). Thus, successfully pushing the country’s human resources into a downward spiral.
As per the saara (crux) of Bhagavat Geeta, an individual is obligated to discharge the roles and responsibilities assigned to him/her without the expectations of desired results. However, the NYAY scheme seems to propagate not just a lazy government but also a disinterested/ lethargic society – effectively demonstrating “yatha raja thatha praja” (As the king, so his subjects)
With Bharat set to be the world’s youngest country by 2020 with the median age about 29 years (as per the UN HABITAT report), such a scheme has the potential to turn the demographic dividend to a demographic disaster.
It’s solely in the hands of the people to demonstrate their need towards capacity building initiatives, structural reforms, enduring frameworks, targeted missions as the modus operandi to enable good and inclusive governance and reject the impractical offers.
More so, it is important for the aspiring leaders of the day to understand that a nation functions on the principle of ‘going concern’ – for men may come and men may go but the nation should go on forever. If one has to reach the destination of ‘Param Vaibhavam‘ of Bharat, this definitely is the route to avoid. As Aurobindo said regarding a modern politician “Great issues often come to him for decision, but he does not deal with them greatly”.
-by Shri Sarvothaman S
(The author is a Chartered Accountant and Forensic auditor by profession with a keenness to follow and write on socio-political trends, public policy and governance.)
Did you find this article useful? We’re a non-profit. Make a donation and help pay for our journalism.