|
International Relations
& THE AGE OF EMPIREs in denial
Why Indians Succeed in countries
Ruled by Whites
Arzan, 16 September 2008
"Today with a GNP per
head of $ 370, India occupies a lowly 177th position
among 209 countries of the world. But poverty is by no
means the only or main problem. India ranks near the
bottom in the UNDP�s Human Development
Index, but high up in Transparency
International�s Corruption Index... At
independence we were justly proud of our politicians.
Today we regard them as scoundrels and criminals. They
have created a jungle of laws in the holy name of
socialism, and used these to line their pockets and
create patronage networks. No influential crook
suffers. The mafia flourish unhindered because they
have political links...The lack of transparent rules,
properly enforced, is a major reason why talented
Indians cannot rise in India . A second reason is the
neta-babu raj, which remains intact despite supposed
liberalisation. But once talented Indians go to
rule-based societies in the west, they take off. In
those societies all people play by the same rules, all
have freedom to innovate without being strangled by
regulations..."
[see also Arundhati Roy in conversation
with Shoma Chaudhury, March 2007 "You
don�t have to be a genius to read
the signs. We have a growing middle class, reared on
a diet of radical consumerism and aggressive greed.
Unlike industrialising Western countries, which had
colonies from which to plunder resources and generate
slave labour to feed this process, we have to
colonise ourselves, our own nether parts.
We�ve begun to eat our own limbs.
The greed that is being generated (and marketed as a
value interchangeable with nationalism) can only be
sated by grabbing land, water and resources from the
vulnerable. What we�re witnessing is
the most successful secessionist struggle ever waged
in independent India � the secession
of the middle and upper classes from the rest of the
country. It�s a vertical secession,
not a lateral one. They�re fighting
for the right to merge with the
world�s elite somewhere up there in
the stratosphere..." ]
In this last Swaminomics of the
millennium, I would like to sum up our performance in the
20th century in one sentence. Indians have succeeded in
countries ruled by whites, but failed in their own.
This outcome would have astonished leaders of our
independence movement. They declared Indians were kept
down by white rule and could flourish only under
self-rule. This seemed self-evident. The harsh reality
today is that Indians are succeeding brilliantly in
countries ruled by whites, but failing in India . They
are flourishing in the USA and Britain .
But those that stay in India are pulled down by an
outrageous system that fails to reward merit or talent
fails to allow people and businesses to grow, and keeps
real power lies with netas, babus, and assorted
manipulators. Once Indians go to white-ruled countries,
they soar and conquer summits once occupied only by
whites.
Rono Dutta has become head of United Airlines, the
biggest airline in the world. Had he stayed in India , he
would have no chance in Indian Airlines. Even if the top
job there was given him by some godfather, a myriad
netas, babus and trade unionists would have ensured that
he could never run it like United Airlines.
Rana Talwar has become head of Standard Ch artered Bank
Plc, one of the biggest multinational banks in Britain,
while still in his 40s. Had he been in India , he would
perhaps be a local manager in the State Bank, taking
orders from babus to give dud loans to politically
favoured clients.
Rajat Gupta is head of Mckinsey, the biggest management
consultancy firm in the world. He now advises the biggest
multinationals on how to run their business. Had he
remained in India he would probably be taking orders from
some sethji with no qualification save that of being born
in a rich family.
Lakhsmi Mittal has become the biggest steel baron in the
world, with steel plants in the US, Kazakhstan, Germany,
Mexico, Trinidad and Indonesia . India
�s socialist policies reserved the
domestic steel industry for the public sector. So Lakhsmi
Mittal went to Indonesia to run his
family�s first steel plant there. Once
freed from the shackles of India , he conquered the
world.
Subhash Chandra of Zee TV has become a global media king,
one of the few to beat Rupert Murdoch. He could never
have risen had he been limited to India , which decreed a
TV monopoly for Doordarshan. But technology came to his
aid: satellite TV made it possible for him to target
India from Hong Kong . Once he escaped Indian rules and
soil, he soared.
You may not have heard of 48-year old Gururaj Deshpande.
His communications company, Sycamore, is currently valued
by the US stock market at over $ 30 billion, making him
perhaps the richest Indian in the world. Had he remained
in India , he would probably a babu in the Department of
Telecommunications.
Arun Netravali has become president of Bell Labs, one of
the biggest research and development centres in the world
with 30,000 inventions and several Nobel Prizes to its
credit.Had he been in India, he would probably be
struggling in the middle cadre of Indian Telephone
Industries Silicon Valley alone contains over one lakh
Indian millionaies.
Sabeer Bhatia invented Hotmail and sold it to Microsoft
for $ 400 million.
Victor Menezes is number two in Citibank. Shailesh Mehta
is CEO of Providian, a top US financial services company.
Also at or near the top are Rakesh Gangwal of US Air,
Jamshd Wadia of Arthur Andersen, and Aman Mehta of Hong
Kong Shanghai Bank.
In Washington DC , the Indian CEO High Tech Council has
no less than 200 members, all high tech-chiefs. While
Indians have soared, India has stagnated. At independence
India was the most advanced of all colonies, with the
best prospects.
Today with a GNP per head of $ 370, it occupies a lowly
177th position among 209 countries of the world. But
poverty is by no means the only or main problem. India
ranks near the bottom in the UNDP�s
Human Development Index, but high up in Transparency
International� s Corruption Index.
The neta-babu raj brought in by socialist policies is
only one reason for India ?s failure. The more sordid
reason is the rule-based society we inherited from the
British Raj is today in tatters. Instead money, muscle
and influence matter most.
At independence we were justly proud of our politicians.
Today we regard them as scoundrels and criminals. They
have created a jungle of laws in the holy name of
socialism, and used these to line their pockets and
create patronage networks. No influential crook suffers.
The mafia flourish unhindered because they have political
links.
The sons of police officers believe they have a licence
to rape and kill (ask the Mattoo family). Talent cannot
take you far amidst such rank misgovernance. We are
reverting to our ancient feudal system where no rules
applied to the powerful. The British Raj brought in
abstract concepts of justice for all, equality before the
law. These were maintained in the early years of
independence. But fifty years later, citizens wail that
India is a lawless land where no rules are obeyed.
I have heard of an IAS probationer at the Mussorie
training academy pointing out that in India before the
British came, making money and distributing favors to
relatives was not considered a perversion of power, it
was the very rationale of power.
A feudal official had a duty to enrich his family and
caste. Then the British came and imposed a new ethical
code on officials. But, he asked, why should we continue
to choose British customs over desi ones now that we were
independent?
The lack of transparent rules, properly enforced, is a
major reason why talented Indians cannot rise in India .
A second reason is the neta-babu raj, which remains
intact despite supposed liberalisation. But once talented
Indians go to rule-based societies in the west, they take
off. In those societies all people play by the same
rules, all have freedom to innovate without being
strangled by regulations.
This, then, is why Indians succeed in countries ruled by
whites, and fail in their own. It is the saddest story of
the century
|
