Familiar flagellation

I have discovered a new rule, which because of my awesomeness should be called Gaurav's law (just like Blaire's law), and which is defined as, "The ongoing process by which the India's multiple idiocies unite to ensure that India remain in the rut".

Case in point, former communist and now swadeshi apparatchik Sudheendra Kulkarni.
Evidently he had the desire to reassert his pro-poor credentials, the result as can be expected is an exercise in breast beating. The article is virtually bleeding of self-righteous, with same old banal rhetoric of crushing poverty, shocking inequality and vulgar display of riches. Added to this is rather disingenuous quasi Marxist rhetoric of rich people, by virtue of being rich, having 'seceded' from 'real' India, which still toils in hopeless misery.

Now Mr Kulkarni, I sincerely hope you clarify what ails you, because you see (or could have seen, if you were not busy being so self-righteous), poverty, inequality and ostentatious display are not really related issues.

To be more clear, poverty is not caused by inequality, rich people are not getting riches at expense of poor people, economics is not a zero sum game.

If you are concerned about poverty, then chronic poverty in India is result of making socialism a cult, and embracing this dogma, in part due to atrophied intellectual discourse, and political expediency.The decades of following disastrous economic policies, not least wealth redistribution, and interventionist state controlled by venal netas and babus, thoroughly stigmatized wealth and activity of wealth creation. Absent wealth generation, any increase in prosperity has come at expense of either unwieldy expansion of bureaucratic machinery or dole out by government.

But pernicious effects of socialism, goes much beyond the tangible losses, of dismal decades or stunted GDP, which Mr Kulkarni will do well to note, a mark of Cain has been impressed upon enterprise, a halo has been placed upon victim hood and entitlement. This is the true extent of Nehruvian Penalty.

Now since we are clear (at least I am) that inequality is not the cause of poverty then what is inequality. I think it is important to make a distinction between inequality as vociferous rhetorics, and inequality in terms of hard data, now I am not sure, but I believe that data doesn't support the shrill lamentation about the extraordinary chasm. Keeping that aside, perhaps a case can be made for lack of dynamism in the sense post independence progress and social mobility has been underwhelming, that can be understood by insincere efforts to develop human resource, which is both a result of criminal scarcity in education and related field as well and siphoning off of any developmental fund by an overly centralized government.

Coming to "ostentatious display of wealth" which outrages Mr Kulkarni's ethos, now I admit even I used to be discomforted by this. However where does one draw the line ? If Mercedes is "affront" to poor, so is Maruti 800. , if having latest Nokia mobile is a sign of callousness of rich, so is having a land line, poor can afford none of these. This "outrage" may be ascribed to good old jealousy that one harbours against one's neighbour, partly to middle class sensibility formalized during the decades of shortages and Mai-baap governance. Considering the changed circumstances perhaps it is time to bring some changes.

Perhaps Mr Kulkarni wants to expiate his guilt, or perhaps he believe that self-righteousness is a viable substitute for a good idea. Whatever his motive, he is conjuring up, no, not the straw man, bogeyman [forgive me I am illiterate] but the wicker man.