Odisha has been getting ranked as a State that has a majority of its population having an income substantially lower than the national average. It is expected that a majority share of income of the majority of persons should, under such circumstances, be getting spent on basic necessities of life. The surplus, if any, available in the hands of some, will not be very substantial. Small and thrift-based savings will be the normal expected form of overall savings. Several economic models have been based on these premises. They envisage different modes of income generation leading to demand generation, leading to production and, in turn, further leading to increased income generation.
This has been approached from the time of lord Keynes in different ways. There have been interesting innovative ideas thrown up by welfare economists led by Kenneth Arrow and Amartya Sen, the noble laureate. All the models, hitherto conceived of, do not encompass a situation of demonstrative conspicuous consumption and indulgence in luxury. According to available reports, the transactions of gold, etc., in Bhubaneswar on Dhanteras are expected to be in the range of Rs.74 crore or above. Brahmapur, Rourkela and Cuttack would show up similarly high figures. The origin of the religious belief may have been founded on thrift-based savings in the good old days, but the present high-value heavy consumption is an indicator on certain inherent structural unusualities in the economic structure. The scenario obviously establishes that a dominant majority of the people of Odisha may still be “poor”, but there is an over-affluent section of the community, which by no means, can be considered other than “superrich”. There is, therefore, a likelihood of a widening gap between the over-rich and debilitating poor. The power structure, as reflected through the given democratic process, appears to be controlled by the representatives of the richest of the community. In the case of a few, it is through acquisition of power that wealth becomes accessible. But, by and large, it is wealth trying to control political power.
With a large section of the population of Odisha not being literate and the general level of awareness being stunted by the struggle for survival, this section remains indifferent towards any social change or tends to be captured through propaganda and allurements. A very undesirable social equilibrium emerges and permits the perpetuation of enrichment of a smaller section of the community while keeping a major section of community feudally subjugated but suitably utilised for procurement of their votes. This kind of a money and power nexus and consequential sociopolitical structure tend to perpetuate the tyranny of status quo. Structural changes will be internally opposed and sabotaged. Governmental policies, though facially pro-poor, will never lead to any basic structural changes. The socioeconomic model of the democratic pattern that we have adopted would permit perpetuation of the hegemony of the affluent class. There may be occasional aberrations through social frictions when in a cluster of cases the socioeconomic power equilibrium tends to change. In this, the victim is the future generation, that is, the youth. They get allured and enchanted by the different focal points of politico-economic power and get sucked into the system to compulsively blend with it. This vicious circle perpetuates bad governance and continued decline of the already poor.
In a democracy, it is not an easy task to delink money from politics. But the goal should at least be a minimisation of money power over political clout. This would be feasible provided there are committed ideals inspiring a catalyst generation to be motivated towards spearheading a sociopolitical movement that could have far-reaching economic impact. Few elements in the existing leadership could contribute to the aspirations of the youth, through providing their inputs as a social obligation. In other words, a movement from within is an essential requirement and cannot be deferred any further. India needs a leader amongst the youth with demonstrated and demonstrative variance from what has hitherto been seen. Distribution of free gifts and state largesse as part of the electoral process must necessarily be curbed. The test of efficacy has to be in terms of implementation of beneficial projects; and parties have to be called upon to announce constituency-wise and even panchayat-wise programmatic action that they would ensure implementation of programmes in large numbers without adequate translation thereof into real action does not harbinger structural changes.
A famous thinker long ago said, “Charity is a price that the rich must pay to maintain their position in relation to the poor.” Governance is not charity and the resources belong to the society. Any transition of power from the hands of the rich to the economically poorer section is fraught with a risk of the new blood being contaminated by the stranglehold of the preexisting socio-economic-political power structure. Odisha needs a basic structural change. That change cannot wait any further. The present leadership in the youth must, therefore, attend to this vital aspect relating to their future. With the panchayat elections coming, opportunity knocks at their doors. let the youth clubs, or by whatever other names they are called, interject new talent into a think-tank for eradicating poverty within their panchayats. Agriculture and the related industrial activities, pisciculture, horticulture, etc., village-based craft and other related industries, basic infrastructure like roads, electricity, etc., are to receive utmost priority and each capable person ought to be productively engaged leading to an upward shift of his economic status. Over the last generation, the lower middleclass has stepped into the shoes of the upper middleclass, and a section of the richer class has become superrich at a very fast pace. This could not have been achieved by adopting means exclusively fair. We, therefore, suffer an interlocking of wealth and power resisting any change-oriented catalystic move. But social struggles throw up leadership. Such leadership should be sensitive and sympathetic enough to the cause of uplift of a larger number. That would fit in with the notion of democracy being for the benefit of the majority. Democracy cannot be an exercise of a minority controlling the majority and perpetuating its influence and affluence of power. This leads to tensions and frictions in the social fabric which could be ameliorated by the altered measures of implementation so as to make the benefits flow to the majority and enhance their economic status. let there be a beginning of a structural change in Odisha, but for which future welfare-oriented progress would remain a distant dream, and poverty would continue as a curse.
There has been no feasible attempt at energising the youth force to tune their activities in this direction. As the panchayat elections are on the horizon, this is an appropriate time for a youth movement in this direction. This could come from a group of young leaders who aspire for a change without necessarily hankering after power. The change is not merely in terms of control of power, but it has to be a change in the attitude, orientation and value pattern. let there be a youth brigade to protect such purposive activities of the suggested projects from each panchayat, which could then be consolidated and studied for causing a fundamental change in the sociopolitical structure of our society, which is perpetuating poverty as a systemic necessity. This intervention has to involve each one of us in some way or the other. And surely, this concerns us all!
The writer, a Senior Advocate, is a former All India Service officer, a former diplomat, a former editor, a former President of Orissa High Court Bar Association and a former Advocate General of Odisha.
(jayantdas@hotmail.com)