While there is lot of truth in what the author postulates, one must remember that politics as an institution in India is far from evolved, even though we have had 60 years of trouble-free democracy, stable government transitions etc. We have had good governments and ministers (who are good individually), but we haven’t had any good governance, especially at state and village levels, which matter the most.

If middle class in India has to participate in politics, and by extrapolation, I mean, in governance, there has to be decentralisation of governance, not in theory but in practice. Even this (panchayati raj, which former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi began) is a total failure.

If, for example, something as basic as road has to be repaired, a citizen (middleclass usually) doesn’t know whom to call up, if at all he or she is able to call up, there is no proper response, if at all someone responds, there is no clear guarantee that the problem is set right; and at the end of the whole process, the road is just not repaired, for days and months together. There is no accountability. This is because, development is linked to politics.

In the south Indian state of Kerala, the public works department minister is on his way out, and as a result the tarring of roads has come to standstill. Can one believe that! Look at how the state of road is linked to state minister. This is not the way it should be.

Glitzy malls are fine, but where is the road to get to the mall? Lots of colleges are fine, but where is the electricity to run them, and for children to sit and study. Malls are good to look at, and shop in them, but they themselves are no indicator of the citizens’ standard of living. It’s a huge myth. More malls don’t mean the society is more developed. The development indices are still the same: the basic amenities for citizens like food, shelter, clothing, transportation and other necessities that make one’s daily life comfortable.

Middleclass can involve themselves in societal development only if basic development activities are depoliticised. We need good road irrespective of the party in power. There can’t be politics in development issues.

What is needed is not more political involvement by middleclass, but more involvement in social reconstruction in a depoliticised environment. For that, first politicians will have to let go of their monopoly on development.

PS: This reply, has been cross posted on my blog.

The September 2007 issue of Prospect magazine has an interesting cover story on India’s middle class failure. As Tom Nuttall explains in the magazine’s weblog, First Draft:the September issue ..marks the 60th anniversary of Indian independence by ask…

Things have changed for me and for my family - we have been key beneficiaries of the economic boom in the 90’s. I (and a lot of my colleagues) are VERY socially aware of the social and economic situation of a majority of Indians. Most people I know donate to various charities and a substantial number go beyond that to actually participate directly in various organizations. I know of many colleagues who have quite just to work full time in social organiations - they can do that having achived a certain level of financial security. And we are still “middle class”, though what is more often called “upper middle class”. And yes, many of us, including ourselves, do indulge in “conspicuous consumption” - does one exclude the other? Would the poor be better off if this class did not spend? Do people in western countries not have parties when there are homeless next door? I have spent 7 years outside India mostly in Europe and US - I have no doubt that the average Indian has no less social awareness than people anywhere else.

But the vast majority of the “Indian Middle Class” is still largely composed of people at the stage we were 20 years ago, middle class as per someone’s definition of the term, but just barely keeping their heads above water. Do not think these are all working for IT companies! Do not picture an all-american middle class family with a house, two cars and a dog here! Think more of a rented one room kitchen hovel in Mumbai, just about making ends meet, and you will get a better picture. I find it hard to condemn them for focusing on their day-to-day problems.

Articles like this, with sweeping statements about 200 m people, do no favors to anyone.

Why is it that it is so acceptable regurgitate the formula state=bad entrepreneurs=good?

The empirical history of development across nations simply does not bear this out. India, China, Korea, Japan, the USA, the UK, the list goes on, all these countries saw a huge level of state intervention. That is before they gained enough economic strength to be able to remove their protective mechanisms for their developing industries.

At the same time countries that liberalize too much too soon, like Mexico, Argentina and swathes of Sub-Saharan Africa, tend to fall flat economically. Entrepreneurs on their own do not a global corporation make.

Point being that those who think that entrepreneurs are what develop a country are falling into one of the huge myths of our age, that of the free market solving all ills. The picture is far more complex than that, and the state is heavily involved whenever countries manage sustained growth.

Which is why the developments described in the article are so disturbing. India faces enormous challenges ahead. It has huge environmental problems in terms of food and water supply, and a massive impoverished population that cannot sustain the food price increases that are already setting in.

If there is little trust of the state, and a low rate of tax paying, what chance is there of addressing these problems? I believe in social activism, but mostly in terms of pressuring politicians to do the right thing. I have worked in development, and can vouch that the “social entrepreneurs” i.e. NGOs are no replacement for a functioning state structure. Local government in developing countries provides far more than NGOs, something which is abundantly clear on the ground in India.

What is shocking about the Indian middle classes is that they reflect our own irresponsible hegemony, the same hegemony that neglected flood defences in New Orleans, the same one that is leading us into chaos through refusing to rule, and the same one that ignores the importance of collective action via the state. Climate change is the issue that will show that this Emperor has no clothes on.

PS:The smartest of them all you guessed it right are the real rich, the industrialists and so on, they know how to make any system deliver including this one,so both the political class as well as the poor eat out of their hands and the middle class looks at them with what else but awe!