We have been celebrating with gusto, rightly so, the Diamond Jubilee of our Independence. By most measures, our country has achieved a lot. Real per capita incomes have increased four-five times, illiteracy has dwindled, life expectancy has shot up. Although few people will believe it, caste differences too have come down dramatically. The country’s prestige has never been higher. In many respects, the past sixty years will be reckoned as a Golden Age in our history .

Professor Gregory Clark of the University of California recently proposed a much-admired new theory why Britain had its industrial revolution in the eighteenth century. He postulates that Britain took off because the population share of the middle-class grew rapidly. That burgeoning middle-class with its culture of high literacy, zest for hard work, savings and non-violence transformed the nation’s economy. Currently, India too has a burgeoning middle-class. Will it, too, grow as rapidly as Britain did two hundred years ago?

Professor Clark’s theory needs some amendment. The British middle-class did not only save; it also invested in innovative enterprises. It did so because it had already enjoyed nearly two centuries of ‘mercantilism’ — a policy by which merchants and producers were provided security and protection in the conduct of their business (too much of it, according to Adam Smith). That security was the hidden foundation on which the nineteenth century British middle-class built its commerce-driven empire.

Even after the reforms of the 1990s, India’s commercial class cannot as yet boast of that level of security. In fact, the most marked failure of Independent India is the way it destroyed the feeling of security all round. If the administrators, engineers, vice-chancellors and businessmen of Independence Day in 1947 were to return to earth, what will alarm them most is the collapse of security.

In truth, the topmost officials in the country are little better than daily wage labourers: their salaries may be secure but their job assignments are not. They can be, and often are, reassigned humiliatingly at the whim and will of their political masters.

Senior officials are not alone in their insecurity; their ministers are no better. Politics in the country is now controlled by a few powerful families. They decide, quite arbitrarily, who will contest in elections and who will not. Legislators, even ministers, have to genuflect before their bosses (and their family members) all the time. Woe betide any politician who shows the slightest signs of independence.

The country got Independence on August 15, 1947, but its legislators, senior civil servants (and businessmen too) lost whatever independence they used to have under the British.

In his stories, Jim Corbett repeatedly stressed how wounded tigers turn man-eaters. When they are wounded — for instance, by getting porcupine quills in their paws — tigers can no longer capture their normal prey; therefore, they go after human beings. Something similar is happening in our political and administrative jungle: As family-controlled politics has destroyed their security, politicians and ministers prey on hapless civil servants. In response, top administrators turn defensive: for our administrators, the glass is ever half-full; all doors are half-closed.

Our economists are agog that, over the next couple of decades, we have a window when we will enjoy the “demographic dividend”.

It is true we will have the largest numbers of youth among all countries of the world; we do have an opportunity to provide much-needed labour to other countries. However, exploiting the demographic dividend requires that our youth be well-educated, well-trained. On that score, the prognosis is not good: like man-eaters, our politicians and ministers have taken to consuming education institutions.

The Prime Minister announced on Independence Day that he will start eight new IITs, seven IIMs and five national institutions of science. He has promised tens of thousands of crores of rupees for this ambitious mission. That is promising. However, the good economist he is, he should know that the production function is not composed of capital only; it includes also labour, technology and management. Even if all the money materialises (a pittance by world standards), where are the teachers? Will the present policy of political control of higher education attract requisite quality of faculty? His proposal is like that of a milkman to sell more milk by watering it.

There are fewer teachers in IIT Delhi today than there were five-six years ago; the staff-student ratio is barely half of what it used to be. If even existing IITs cannot replace retiring teachers where will the new ones go? In a different vein, the Health Ministry has issued orders to the All India Institute of Medical Sciences that the Institute can only hold tests for selection of Resident Doctors. The results should be sent to the Ministry who will then decide who should be appointed and who should not be.

That is again like the tiger turning man-eater. Apparently, the Prime Minister is helpless and cannot any more protect even our national institutions. The horror stories we hear about state universities are worse. At the other end, primary education too is in dire straits. After four years, most children cannot read; cannot divide a two-digit number by a single digit.

Yet, several State governments have a rule that no private school can have evening shifts even if the education is absolutely free. That is like the proverbial dog in the manger. In this milieu, what chances are there that we will reap the demographic dividend?

Professor Clark mentions literacy as the attribute of the middle class. It is more accurate to call it “zest for learning”. Definitely, our middle class has that zest. The long lines of children who go staggering under a load of books cheerfully to school early in the morning is proof enough that a “learning class” has arrived. On the other hand, do our politicians and administrators share that trait? Are they learning, or, have they become aristocrats who see no need to learn?

India is at the crossroads. On the one side, there is the road of hope and prosperity our middle-class parents and children are eager to tread. They are the ones who save. They are the ones who dare to risk their savings in innovative ventures. They work hard; they are peaceful; they observe the Rule of Law. Our politicians and administrators pursue a different path. Professor Clark postulates non-violence is essential for rapid growth. Our politicians practise the opposite. Even inside legislatures, our politicians are violent. They do not cultivate good practices; instead, they prey on successful institutions. Our administrative class has become a handicap in a different way. Like our cricket captain in the recent test match against England, they are wedded to abundant caution; they will not venture. They will not let others venture either but tie themselves and everyone else with outdated rules.

Let us still remain hopeful. Not all injured tigers turn man-eaters. Not all insecure politicians become sadists and destroy institutions. Likewise, not all frustrated administrators become killjoys. Let us hope mature politicians and capable administrators will come out on top. Let us hope our first-generation learners and new entrepreneurs will get opportunities to grow and freedom to venture. Let us hope that the country will become psychologically secure for everyone.

© Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu Business Line