India at Crossroads | World Leaders Forum - Columbia University | April 2, 2019

Akeel Bigrami: The World Leaders Forum Akeel Bigrami: was created by Lee Ballinger Akeel Bigrami: to bring to our university Akeel Bigrami: women and men, Akeel Bigrami: not just with political authority, Akeel Bigrami: but also intellectual authority, Akeel Bigrami: to present their thoughts to us Akeel Bigrami: without fear Akeel Bigrami: of anything except Akeel Bigrami: public engagement and discussion. Akeel Bigrami: It is in that spirit Akeel Bigrami: that Amartya Sen and Prabhat Patnaik Akeel Bigrami: have been invited Akeel Bigrami: to speak today at this event Akeel Bigrami: for which we've all been keenly waiting. Akeel Bigrami: The theme today is Akeel Bigrami: "India at Crossroads" Akeel Bigrami: -an apt topic, Akeel Bigrami: since one meaning of crossroads is, Akeel Bigrami: in my dictionary, Akeel Bigrami: a crucial point, Akeel Bigrami: especially when a decision is to be made Akeel Bigrami: And as we know, Akeel Bigrami: the General Elections in India Akeel Bigrami: will be underway this month Akeel Bigrami: -an election that will decide Akeel Bigrami: whether India will continue Akeel Bigrami: even more steeply down the path Akeel Bigrami: of right-wing religious nationalism Akeel Bigrami: or return to some of its past ideals Akeel Bigrami: of secularism and economic policies Akeel Bigrami: intended to uplift the lives Akeel Bigrami: of poor and working people. Akeel Bigrami: But, of course, Akeel Bigrami: a proper concern for the decisions Akeel Bigrami: we are about to make for the future Akeel Bigrami: depends, widely, Akeel Bigrami: on how we understand our past Akeel Bigrami: and our present. Akeel Bigrami: And so, it's really to provide Akeel Bigrami: that analysis in depth, Akeel Bigrami: that we've brought our two guests here. Akeel Bigrami: I'm going to introduce our speakers Akeel Bigrami: with much more brevity than they deserve and command. Akeel Bigrami: This gives them as much time to speak themselves. Akeel Bigrami: We really want to hear from them, Akeel Bigrami: not about them. Akeel Bigrami: They are both figures of international renown Akeel Bigrami: with a brace of awards and prizes Akeel Bigrami: and honorary degrees between them. Akeel Bigrami: Amartya Sen is the Lamont professor Akeel Bigrami: at Harvard where he teaches both Akeel Bigrami: economics and philosophy. Akeel Bigrami: He is a Nobel laureate in economics, Akeel Bigrami: has been the Master of Trinity College in Cambridge, Akeel Bigrami: as well as the Drummond Professor Akeel Bigrami: of Political Economy at Oxford. Akeel Bigrami: Before that, he taught at Akeel Bigrami: Jadavpur University, Akeel Bigrami: University of Calcutta, Akeel Bigrami: and the Delhi School of Economics. Akeel Bigrami: His books include Akeel Bigrami: Collective Choice and Social Welfare, Akeel Bigrami: Poverty and Famines, Akeel Bigrami: Development as Freedom, Akeel Bigrami: and, most recently, The Idea of Justice. Akeel Bigrami: Prabhat Patnaik, Akeel Bigrami: who went to Oxford as a Rhodes scholar, Akeel Bigrami: taught economics at Cambridge University Akeel Bigrami: for some years before responding to a call Akeel Bigrami: to join and help set up Akeel Bigrami: the Center for Economic Studies Akeel Bigrami: at the newly-formed Akeel Bigrami: Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi, Akeel Bigrami: nobly forsaking Akeel Bigrami: a most promising international Akeel Bigrami: academic career to serve his own country, Akeel Bigrami: where he has taught ever since Akeel Bigrami: until retiring last year. Akeel Bigrami: His books include Akeel Bigrami: Accumulation and Stability under Capitalism, Akeel Bigrami: The Value of Money, Akeel Bigrami: Retreat to Unfreedom Akeel Bigrami: and most recently, Akeel Bigrami: An Economic Theory of Imperialism. Akeel Bigrami: They are both here Akeel Bigrami: because they are, Akeel Bigrami: as this event's nomenclature has it, Akeel Bigrami: world leaders of human thought Akeel Bigrami: about public life. Akeel Bigrami: By which I mean that, Akeel Bigrami: what makes them stand out Akeel Bigrami: apart from the measurable Akeel Bigrami: productions and achievements that I have just mentioned, Akeel Bigrami: is that they believe something that most leaders Akeel Bigrami: increasingly have ceased to believe: Akeel Bigrami: that ideas make a difference Akeel Bigrami: to politics and public life, Akeel Bigrami: that it makes all the difference to politics and public life, Akeel Bigrami: whether you put truth in the first place Akeel Bigrami: or the second. Akeel Bigrami: I will hand over things now to Ruchira Gupta Akeel Bigrami: who has very kindly agreed to moderate and chair Akeel Bigrami: the proceedings this evening. Akeel Bigrami: Miss Gupta is a very important public figure herself, Akeel Bigrami: a journalist and activist Akeel Bigrami: of deep and consistent commitments Akeel Bigrami: to women's issues. Akeel Bigrami: She has worked over the years with the United Nations, Akeel Bigrami: the BBC and the wide range of international newspapers Akeel Bigrami: before she became the founder and chair Akeel Bigrami: of the remarkable NGO called up Apne Aap, Akeel Bigrami: whose work has been recognized with honors both Akeel Bigrami: by the House of Lords in Britain and Akeel Bigrami: the Clinton Foundation in this country. Akeel Bigrami: Her scholarly writing is focused Akeel Bigrami: mostly on human trafficking Akeel Bigrami: and the legal and moral resources Akeel Bigrami: with which it must be confronted. Akeel Bigrami: Columbia is very privileged Akeel Bigrami: to have the speakers tonight and Akeel Bigrami: I ask you to join me in welcoming them. [applause] Ruchira Gupta: Good evening everyone. Ruchira Gupta: I'm very honored to be chairing this discussion today Ruchira Gupta: at a very critical time in India. Ruchira Gupta: India is going to polls on the 11th of April Ruchira Gupta: and the election results will be declared on 23rd of May. Ruchira Gupta: In an extraordinary exercise of world momentum, there are more than 450 parties Ruchira Gupta: which will be fighting elections this time Ruchira Gupta: and more than 500 million people Ruchira Gupta: who will cast their votes. Ruchira Gupta: The unfortunate part of this great exercise Ruchira Gupta: is that we have found that 21 million women Ruchira Gupta: are missing from the electoral rolls this time Ruchira Gupta: and more than 12% Muslims and Dalits. Ruchira Gupta: These are challenges that the Election Commission Ruchira Gupta: should have and is trying to overcome Ruchira Gupta: but has not been able to in time for this election. Ruchira Gupta: The other challenge that India faces, Ruchira Gupta: as we go to polls this time, Ruchira Gupta: is a creeping fascism, Ruchira Gupta: which seems to have overtaken many of our institutions Ruchira Gupta: and has also challenged the very law and order, Ruchira Gupta: which has provided the stability and Ruchira Gupta: been the bedrock for the growth of India. Ruchira Gupta: It has been replaced by a vigilantism. Ruchira Gupta: This vigilantism is influenced by right-wing Ruchira Gupta: and outright fascist forces. Ruchira Gupta: Its founders initiated a dialogue with Hitler Ruchira Gupta: and then met with Mussolini in 1929. Ruchira Gupta: They formed a group called the RSS, Ruchira Gupta: which spawned a political party, Ruchira Gupta: first called the Jan Sangh and now the BJP. Ruchira Gupta: The BJP government has been in power for the last five years. Ruchira Gupta: Under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Ruchira Gupta: this government has not just eroded our institutions, Ruchira Gupta: but has also made the very life of individual citizens insecure, Ruchira Gupta: especially Muslims, Dalits and women. Ruchira Gupta: There has been rape with impunity. Ruchira Gupta: There has been attacks on Muslims and Dalits, Ruchira Gupta: in village after village, Ruchira Gupta: in the name of Love Jihad and Cow-Vigilantism (e.g.: people murdered on suspicion of eating or transporting beef). Ruchira Gupta: There has been an erosion of our monetary systems. Ruchira Gupta: There has been something called demonetization. Ruchira Gupta: And I have two of the world's greatest experts who will talk about it. Ruchira Gupta: There has been a deep agrarian crisis. Ruchira Gupta: There has been an attack on the university system, Ruchira Gupta: including a university where Prabhat taught-Jawaharlal Nehru University. Ruchira Gupta: Students have been on the run-arrested falsely. Ruchira Gupta: So, for India, there is a lot at stake in this election Ruchira Gupta: -to keep our democracy intact, Ruchira Gupta: to keep our institutions intact and Ruchira Gupta: to keep our democratic norms intact. Ruchira Gupta: This election is going to be very critical Ruchira Gupta: in defining what India does in the coming years and Ruchira Gupta: what India becomes in the coming years. Ruchira Gupta: With the wisdom of Prabhat and Amartya Sen Ruchira Gupta: who I have with us today, Ruchira Gupta: I don't have to say more. Ruchira Gupta: So, I would like to start by asking Professor Patnaik, Ruchira Gupta: Prabhat, as we all call him in India Ruchira Gupta: to speak about what his thoughts are Ruchira Gupta: at this critical moment in our history. Prabhat Patnaik: Thank you, Ruchira, professors and friends. Prabhat Patnaik: It's a real pleasure and privilege for me to be here, Prabhat Patnaik: to be part of this event and to be part of this panel, Prabhat Patnaik: which includes Professor Amartya Sen, Prabhat Patnaik: who apart from everything else, Prabhat Patnaik: also happens to be my teacher in the Delhi School of Economics. Prabhat Patnaik: He was my teacher of economics. Prabhat Patnaik: As Ruchira said, Prabhat Patnaik: India certainly is, currently at the crossroads, Prabhat Patnaik: in a very obvious way. Prabhat Patnaik: The elections, which are coming, Prabhat Patnaik: are going to be extremely crucial. Prabhat Patnaik: We know that, for the last five years, Prabhat Patnaik: we have had a government that has Prabhat Patnaik: used a combination of state terrorism and street terrorism Prabhat Patnaik: to suppress freedom of expression. Prabhat Patnaik: State tourism has been used through Prabhat Patnaik: Acts like the UAPA- Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, Prabhat Patnaik: the sedition laws, Prabhat Patnaik: which are a hangover from the colonial times, Prabhat Patnaik: under which Gandhi was incarcerated, Prabhat Patnaik: the National Security Act and so on. Prabhat Patnaik: Street terrorism has been inflicted through lynch mobs, Prabhat Patnaik: through street thugs who go around Prabhat Patnaik: interfering, terrorizing, intimidating people. Prabhat Patnaik: Muslims and religious minorities, in general, Prabhat Patnaik: have been made to feel that they are second-class citizens. Prabhat Patnaik: You find a concept of jingoistic nationalism, Prabhat Patnaik: which has nothing to do with the kind of inclusive Prabhat Patnaik: anti-colonial nationalism of the earlier period. Prabhat Patnaik: This jingoistic nationalism typically takes Prabhat Patnaik: nationalism to be synonymous, not just with Hindutva, Prabhat Patnaik: but with the leader of the current government. Prabhat Patnaik: In fact, the day before yesterday, on Sunday, Prabhat Patnaik: a speech was made by the Prime Minister Prabhat Patnaik: in which he said- “anyone who abuses me is actually working for Pakistan”. Prabhat Patnaik: So, you have a jingoistic notion of nationalism, Prabhat Patnaik: in which anybody, who is a critical of the government Prabhat Patnaik: is accused of being anti-national. Prabhat Patnaik: It means that people who are critical Prabhat Patnaik: are vilified and demonized. Prabhat Patnaik: We have had periods earlier, for instance, Prabhat Patnaik: during the Emergency of the 1970s Prabhat Patnaik: in which state repression was used against critics of the government, Prabhat Patnaik: but the owner of the critics of the government-media house owners- Prabhat Patnaik: were never questioned. Prabhat Patnaik: They were not portrayed as being Prabhat Patnaik: dishonorable, traitors to the country Prabhat Patnaik: and anti-national and such like. Prabhat Patnaik: The closeness between the government and the corporate sector Prabhat Patnaik: is quite unprecedented in the history of India. Prabhat Patnaik: The current Prime Minister came for his swearing-in, Prabhat Patnaik: on a plane owned by a rich corporate businessman. Prabhat Patnaik: I would just like to draw a contrast here. Prabhat Patnaik: When Jawahar Lal Nehru's wife, Kamala, Prabhat Patnaik: was dying of tuberculosis in the 1930s in a sanatorium in Switzerland, Prabhat Patnaik: he was short of money to visit her. Prabhat Patnaik: G.D. Birla, who was actually a big businessman, Prabhat Patnaik: and had helped and supported and financed the Congress in the past, Prabhat Patnaik: offered to buy him his ticket and to finance his trip. Prabhat Patnaik: Nehru said no. Prabhat Patnaik: That was the distance, Prabhat Patnaik: which the leadership tried to maintain with big business. Prabhat Patnaik: This distance has now been totally obliterated. Prabhat Patnaik: And it is in this context that you find, Prabhat Patnaik: as Ruchira said, the attack on institutions, Prabhat Patnaik: the attack on centers of learning-Jawaharlal Nehru University, Prabhat Patnaik: Hyderabad Central University, Prabhat Patnaik: the Pune Film Institute, Prabhat Patnaik: the MS University Fine Arts school. Prabhat Patnaik: In other words, the finest centers of learning Prabhat Patnaik: and thought in the country are being destroyed. Prabhat Patnaik: There is a general promotion of unreason, Prabhat Patnaik: because if you have to portray for instance, Prabhat Patnaik: past Muslim emperors as villains in some ways, Prabhat Patnaik: in that case you have to rewrite history Prabhat Patnaik: in a manner where evidence should not count against your position. Prabhat Patnaik: Therefore, a certain element of destruction of thought Prabhat Patnaik: is essential to this project. Prabhat Patnaik: All this is, of course, an affront to the Constitution. Prabhat Patnaik: It is a violation of the basic values of our Constitution. Prabhat Patnaik: Consequently, the elections we are going to have now, Prabhat Patnaik: are absolutely crucial. Prabhat Patnaik: You see, they are crucial, not only in the sense that all, that is happening, Prabhat Patnaik: is ethically repugnant, Prabhat Patnaik: I think they are crucial in a deeper sense. Prabhat Patnaik: The values of the Constitution are derived from a certain implicit social compact Prabhat Patnaik: which underlies modern India, and that itself is being undermined. Prabhat Patnaik: This social compact was articulated in the 1931 Karachi Congress Prabhat Patnaik: and gained currency during the anti-colonial struggle. Prabhat Patnaik: The Constitution is derived from it. Prabhat Patnaik: Now anything that challenges that implicit social compact, Prabhat Patnaik: on the basis of which modern India has been formed, Prabhat Patnaik: is something which actually undermines Prabhat Patnaik: the very foundations of the modern Indian nation. Prabhat Patnaik: And if that is the case, Prabhat Patnaik: then unless we get a different verdict in these elections, Prabhat Patnaik: India might as well join the ranks Prabhat Patnaik: of the so-called "failed states" Prabhat Patnaik: where you would continue to have internal strife in a way where, Prabhat Patnaik: the country just does not become an unpleasant place, Prabhat Patnaik: it actually becomes an unviable country altogether. Prabhat Patnaik: These elections are extremely crucial Prabhat Patnaik: and, as Ruchira has said, Prabhat Patnaik: we certainly are at the crossroads Prabhat Patnaik: in that very clear, definite sense. Prabhat Patnaik: But I have a feeling that Prabhat Patnaik: we are also at crossroads in a deeper sense, Prabhat Patnaik: and that is the following: Prabhat Patnaik: Suppose we ask ourselves the question, Prabhat Patnaik: if the current political regime is overthrown in the elections, Prabhat Patnaik: would we actually have overcome the threat of fascism? Prabhat Patnaik: And my fear is no, Prabhat Patnaik: because I think the conjuncture that gives rise Prabhat Patnaik: to the threat of fascism would not have disappeared. Prabhat Patnaik: Basically, during the neoliberal period, Prabhat Patnaik: you have had a situation where not only have Prabhat Patnaik: inequalities increased enormously Prabhat Patnaik: -- income and wealth inequalities -- Prabhat Patnaik: but actually hunger has increased. Prabhat Patnaik: Absolute poverty defined in terms of nutritional intake Prabhat Patnaik: has actually increased. Prabhat Patnaik: Now, if that is the case for quite some time, Prabhat Patnaik: the neoliberal economic regime continued Prabhat Patnaik: because it continued to infuse in people Prabhat Patnaik: the hope that all right, today you are bad, Prabhat Patnaik: today you are not in a good position, Prabhat Patnaik: but tomorrow you are going to get the benefits of this growth, Prabhat Patnaik: this very high rate of GDP growth, Prabhat Patnaik: sooner or later you're going to get the benefits of it. Prabhat Patnaik: What has happened more recently is Prabhat Patnaik: that the neoliberal regime, itself, Prabhat Patnaik: has run into a kind of economic cul de sac. Prabhat Patnaik: Now, to the extent that is the case, Prabhat Patnaik: this promise of good days to come is something Prabhat Patnaik: which no longer can actually persuade people. Prabhat Patnaik: And in a situation like this, Prabhat Patnaik: additional props are needed. Prabhat Patnaik: And what you have in India, in my view, Prabhat Patnaik: is a kind of prop in which there is an alliance Prabhat Patnaik: between big business on the one hand Prabhat Patnaik: and the Hindutva elements on the other hand. Prabhat Patnaik: In my perception, Prabhat Patnaik: Narendra Modi’s political role Prabhat Patnaik: has been to bring about this alliance between big business and the Hindutva elements. Prabhat Patnaik: Now this alliance is something which, Prabhat Patnaik: invariably, underlies all kinds of fascism Prabhat Patnaik: and this is the kind that we are witnessing at this moment. Prabhat Patnaik: Now, one of the things, however, Prabhat Patnaik: is that unless, therefore, we overcome this conjuncture, Prabhat Patnaik: unless, in some sense, we manage to extricate the country Prabhat Patnaik: from the kind of economic travails that it Prabhat Patnaik: currently faces, this kind of fascist threat would continue. Prabhat Patnaik: You may have a new government, Prabhat Patnaik: the new government will do pretty much the same thing Prabhat Patnaik: that previous governments have been doing. Prabhat Patnaik: It will become unpopular and then these people Prabhat Patnaik: will come back to power and, Prabhat Patnaik: through all these ups and downs, Prabhat Patnaik: they will be in and out of power. Prabhat Patnaik: This will lead to the progressive fascisification of society Prabhat Patnaik: and that is something which actually worries me greatly. Prabhat Patnaik: I think the idea, therefore, that something basic needs to be done, Prabhat Patnaik: that in some sense, Prabhat Patnaik: the hitherto drawn boundaries of the neoliberal economic regime, Prabhat Patnaik: have got to be transcended, Prabhat Patnaik: is an issue which many people are feeling. Prabhat Patnaik: And I suspect the Congress’ recent manifesto, Prabhat Patnaik: where they're talking about Nyuntam Yojana- Prabhat Patnaik: providing a basic minimum income to everybody- Prabhat Patnaik: is an appreciation of the fact. Prabhat Patnaik: But it's just not enough. Prabhat Patnaik: I believe this idea of handing out largesse Prabhat Patnaik: within a broadly neoliberal pattern of the economy Prabhat Patnaik: is utterly inadequate. Prabhat Patnaik: What is really required is a set of universal benefits, Prabhat Patnaik: which people must acquire, as a right. Prabhat Patnaik: A set of universal, justiciable, economic rights Prabhat Patnaik: is something, that can actually get us out, Prabhat Patnaik: of this particular conjuncture. Prabhat Patnaik: Now I have made some calculations. Prabhat Patnaik: According to which, Prabhat Patnaik: suppose you take a minimum of five rights: Prabhat Patnaik: right to food, right to employment, Prabhat Patnaik: failing which there are adequate employment and unemployment benefits, Prabhat Patnaik: right to free, quality and publicly-funded healthcare, Prabhat Patnaik: right to free quality and publicly-funded education Prabhat Patnaik: and the right to old age pension and disability benefits. Prabhat Patnaik: Just take these five minimal rights. Prabhat Patnaik: If you want to implement them, Prabhat Patnaik: it would immediately require about 9% of the GDP. Prabhat Patnaik: Professor Sen once said that, in India, Prabhat Patnaik: we can get rid of poverty if we can spend 5% of the GDP. Prabhat Patnaik: I would say that, even introducing these rights Prabhat Patnaik: would require 9% of GDP. Prabhat Patnaik: It is easy to finance, Prabhat Patnaik: because raising finance of that order in a country that Prabhat Patnaik: has no wealth tax, whatsoever, is extremely easy. Prabhat Patnaik: It is by no means difficult. Prabhat Patnaik: It would require is a reordering of the economy, Prabhat Patnaik: reorienting of the economy to produce a whole set of goods and services Prabhat Patnaik: to meet domestic requirements. Prabhat Patnaik: This is not really related to ideas of export-led growth, Prabhat Patnaik: which are so fashionable and current Prabhat Patnaik: under the neo-liberal regime. Prabhat Patnaik: I think underlying the immediate crossroads Prabhat Patnaik: that we face about the election, Prabhat Patnaik: who is going to come to power and so on, Prabhat Patnaik: there are deeper crossroads- Prabhat Patnaik: we either resuscitate the social compact on which modern India is founded Prabhat Patnaik: or we would join the ranks of failed states. Prabhat Patnaik: And I think that is a deeper crossroads Prabhat Patnaik: that we really have to negotiate. Prabhat Patnaik: Thank you. Ruchira Gupta: Thank you, Prabhat. Ruchira Gupta: He's put everything in a nutshell Ruchira Gupta: and now, I would like Professor Sen to speak a few words. Amartya Sen: Very difficult to speak about a subject Amartya Sen: when everything has been put in a nutshell. Amartya Sen: But I accept that. Amartya Sen: Prabhat has made a fantastic presentation. Amartya Sen: I think we have to distinguish between the different things that are going on Amartya Sen: and why the present moment, including the election, is so important. Amartya Sen: The country was not a very happy or just place before the Modi government came. Amartya Sen: There were great inequalities. Amartya Sen: What has happened is Amartya Sen: that these inequalities have been magnified Amartya Sen: and made into a standard part of living. Amartya Sen: There was a certain amount of shame around the inequalities, Amartya Sen: which seem to have somehow been eliminated Amartya Sen: and we have to ask: why has that been so? Amartya Sen: And it can get really dramatic, Amartya Sen: there's no question about that. Amartya Sen: I would take a slight, not an emendation Amartya Sen: but, addition to what Ruchira has said Amartya Sen: when you're talking about Dalits and Muslims. Amartya Sen: There is also a huge category of scheduled tribes. Amartya Sen: And in terms of the category of the deprivation, Amartya Sen: the studies that we have done in the Pratichi Trust, Amartya Sen: brings out that scheduled tribes, Amartya Sen: have the worst of the deal in India, Amartya Sen: in almost every effect, of all the marginalized groups. Amartya Sen: The main thing to recognize is that the underdogs of society Amartya Sen: are being treated in a terrible way. Amartya Sen: There have been agitations and the Dalits have been organizing. Amartya Sen: The impact of it is not very great and we have to ask why. Amartya Sen: This is also where such issues, Amartya Sen: which are not immediately connected with deprivation, Amartya Sen: like freedom of speech, Amartya Sen: use of the right to information, Amartya Sen: et cetera come in. Amartya Sen: It is very important to recognize that Amartya Sen: the redressing of inequalities comes, Amartya Sen: not only, from the actions of the underdogs, Amartya Sen: but it also comes from people, Amartya Sen: who belong to a different part of the society but, Amartya Sen: who are moved by it. Amartya Sen: And there's nothing extraordinary about that. Amartya Sen: This whole idea that people only look after Amartya Sen: their own interests and nothing else, Amartya Sen: which is sometimes attributed to Marxian materialist philosophy Amartya Sen: is neither Marx's idea, nor is it a particularly sustainable position. Amartya Sen: Eric Hobsbawm, wrote a very wonderful article which, Amartya Sen: alas, is not read much these days, Amartya Sen: which came out in Marxist Quarterly in 1955. Amartya Sen: I remember it came out, Amartya Sen: when I was taking my exams in Cambridge. Amartya Sen: This is about material conditions and ideas. Amartya Sen: And it somehow has been associated with Marx Amartya Sen: -the idea that he emphasized was the importance of material condition Amartya Sen: and, you know, dialectical materialism and all that. Amartya Sen: What Hobsbawm is arguing, is that, Amartya Sen: the position here has been in Marxism and, also earlier, interestingly, Amartya Sen: I think you can bring [Adam] Smith into it too, Amartya Sen: is that ideas have an influence on the material conditions Amartya Sen: and material conditions have an influence on ideas. Amartya Sen: Now, it so happened that, Hobsbawm was not in the 19th century Amartya Sen: when Marx was writing. Amartya Sen: The world was full of people who were saying Amartya Sen: that ideas influence material conditions -- Hegel, Amartya Sen: for example, lots of them. Amartya Sen: And, therefore, the workforce placed an importance Amartya Sen: on material conditions and ideas. Amartya Sen: They concentrated on that. Amartya Sen: But Hobsbawm said the world has changed. Amartya Sen: I have to sometimes deal with and even if I don't want to, Amartya Sen: students ask me the rational choice theory, Amartya Sen: that assumes that everyone pursues their own material advantage. Amartya Sen: Now that is a gross materialism- Amartya Sen: what Hobsbawm calls vulgar materialism. Amartya Sen: Given that, it's very important to emphasize Amartya Sen: the neglected part, namely, the ideas of Amartya Sen: dramatic incremental material conditions. Amartya Sen: In many ways, that's as important today, Amartya Sen: in the election time, as any other. Amartya Sen: And, which is why these things about the suppression of freedom of speech, Amartya Sen: the suppression of facts – Amartya Sen: I see from the New York Times that it's conceivable Amartya Sen: that some of the war photos that were distributed about the Indian Army Amartya Sen: driving the hell out of Pakistan, Amartya Sen: actually are pictures which had nothing to do with it. Amartya Sen: Sometimes, there are pictures of people dying Amartya Sen: during drought and of starvation or even, Amartya Sen: I'm amazed to be told, from war games. Amartya Sen: The Pakistani attack, that was shown, was, apparently, taking place, in a little room, Amartya Sen: where a family was playing a war game on a TV screen. Amartya Sen: Now are these important? Amartya Sen: They are important because the ideas that we form, Amartya Sen: those who argue for freedom of speech, Amartya Sen: or for not being restrained by beliefs in religion, and so on, Amartya Sen: are doing something which has a major impact on the way Amartya Sen: the peasants and workers and the disabled class live. Amartya Sen: And I think, that is, the very important thing, Amartya Sen: to recognize in this situation. Amartya Sen: Now what is happening is, Amartya Sen: if you look at Modi, Amartya Sen: there are two elements in the present state of affairs. Amartya Sen: The first one is what I will call bias and sectarianism. Amartya Sen: It can take a religious form, like being anti-Muslim. Amartya Sen: It can take a class form. Amartya Sen: It can also take a caste and gender form. Amartya Sen: Tribalism is a very big thing. Amartya Sen: We didn't have gender in Bengali. Amartya Sen: Not at all. We lost that. Amartya Sen: People who lecture constantly about ancient India, Amartya Sen: but don't like studying it should know that Sanskrit had three genders. Amartya Sen: Around about 2,000 years ago, Amartya Sen: there was a reversal of gender in India, Amartya Sen: particularly the part of the inheritant, Amartya Sen: so that "his" wife, as in English- Amartya Sen: "his" is masculine, not "her" wife. Amartya Sen: But the corresponding term will be "her" wife is dominated. Amartya Sen: What happened is Hindi moved from "his" wife Amartya Sen: to "her" wife in that period. Amartya Sen: A lot of Bengali culture has come from the Bihar region Amartya Sen: even though the Bengalis don't like admitting it. Amartya Sen: Magadhi which is from the Bihar region, Amartya Sen: started dropping gender and Amartya Sen: Ardhamagadhi, which was the next stage, dropped it altogether. Amartya Sen: Oriya Bengali and Assamese came out of Ardhamagadhi Amartya Sen: and you don't have gender there either. Amartya Sen: However, we do have this big difference between effect and diseffect. Amartya Sen: So, you have Aap, Tum and, in Bengali, Tui. Amartya Sen: Now if you talk with Santhals, Amartya Sen: and I grew up with Santhals in Shantiniketan, Amartya Sen: they always referred to you as Tui. Amartya Sen: I wonder how? Amartya Sen: Well, the reason is, that the only way that others talk to them is Tui Amartya Sen: and that's the Bengali they have learned. Amartya Sen: The reflection in their speech is very Chomskyian. Amartya Sen: The reflect in their speech, you can guess, is how they have been addressed. Amartya Sen: So, the complete lack of respect from them, in this, is not worrying. Amartya Sen: Shantiniketan is a great place, where I was born and grew up. Amartya Sen: It's difficult to make people take an interest in them, Amartya Sen: despite the fact, that leaders like Rabindranath [Tagore] Amartya Sen: have talked again and again on that subject. Amartya Sen: So there is always this bias, deep bias. Amartya Sen: And the second is what I will call magic. Amartya Sen: And magic is very important in Modi. Amartya Sen: Demonetization is part of the magic. Amartya Sen: I think anyone with any kind of training in economics Amartya Sen: would find it difficult to believe why Amartya Sen: making it illegal to hold notes of certain kinds Amartya Sen: would improve the performance of the people. Amartya Sen: I mean, there was some idea that, you would catch thieves, Amartya Sen: people who have fake money. Amartya Sen: But if you really look through it, Amartya Sen: you will recognize that people Amartya Sen: don't hold black money in trade notes- Amartya Sen: they convert it into properties like land and housing – Amartya Sen: housing, very much. Amartya Sen: The world we live in believes in magic. Amartya Sen: The magic is also extended in the pictures of war toys Amartya Sen: and the attack on Pakistan. Amartya Sen: We are in this odd position-the country of Gandhi Amartya Sen: is now going around claiming we actually killed many more people, Amartya Sen: as if that would have been a tremendously good thing. Amartya Sen: I have to say, that returning the pilot, Amartya Sen: who fell down, was not a victory of the Indian side. Amartya Sen: It shows, somewhat surprisingly, generosity on the part of the government defendant because, Amartya Sen: usually, it is done at the end of the war. Amartya Sen: That's what happened in the 1971 war between Pakistan and India, Amartya Sen: where India did have a decisive victory Amartya Sen: and people and prisoners were repatriated after the war ended. Amartya Sen: This happened in the middle. Amartya Sen: But to convert that into a victory of India… Amartya Sen: We got a pilot who was shot down. Amartya Sen: We were afraid that he would be tortured and possibly executed, Amartya Sen: instead, he was generously released. Amartya Sen: I dare say there is a kind of magic in saying Amartya Sen: this is to the glory of the present government. Amartya Sen: I'm told that the support of the government Amartya Sen: dramatically increased after that. Amartya Sen: Now that is magic. Amartya Sen: You know, I remember in my college days, Amartya Sen: my school days, really, people would ask who are the great figures? Amartya Sen: Some people said Gandhi ji and Amartya Sen: some would say Tagore. Amartya Sen: And one chap said P.C. Sircar, who was a magician. Amartya Sen: Now, the idea of that, you see here, Amartya Sen: is not Gandhi or Tagore, Amartya Sen: that is P.C. Sircar. Amartya Sen: By the way, I was a great devotee of P.C. Sircar. Amartya Sen: I don't want to blame him, Amartya Sen: but there is magic. Amartya Sen: The love of magic is quite important in the election. Amartya Sen: I think resisting magic is as important as almost anything else that's going on. Amartya Sen: “Look at the form in which inequality takes place”, Amartya Sen: I would say quoting Marx again in his last book written in 1875, Amartya Sen: The Critique of the Gotha Program. Amartya Sen: It's a very interesting book -- I really recommend people read it. Amartya Sen: There were two ideas, Amartya Sen: which are not what I am talking about here (separate from magic and bias), Amartya Sen: but I will mention. Amartya Sen: One of them is, Amartya Sen: he is criticizing the German Workers Party for their Gotha program- Amartya Sen: for which he is writing a critique. Amartya Sen: The German Workers Party said all value is reduced by labor Amartya Sen: and Marx says, what nonsense, there is labor, Amartya Sen: but there is land and natural resources. Amartya Sen: This is almost the first discussion of the importance Amartya Sen: of environmental concerns in human society. Amartya Sen: There's also a subject in which I got very involved later. Amartya Sen: It is about identity. Amartya Sen: And he [Marx], when he is criticizing the Workers Party, Amartya Sen: said that they treat human beings, Amartya Sen: only who are workers, only as workers, Amartya Sen: but the worker is not only a worker, Amartya Sen: he's also a human being with many, many other characteristics. Amartya Sen: And this whole idea of forgetting everything else about the worker, Amartya Sen: excepting the fact that he is a worker or she is a worker, Amartya Sen: is a huge mistake. Amartya Sen: Now that's all from a very big discussion, Amartya Sen: in my judgment, on identity. Amartya Sen: But, the main thrust of the work is Amartya Sen: to make sure that people are not exploited. Amartya Sen: Very important thing. Amartya Sen: And, whatever they produce, Amartya Sen: they should get it in a way that it doesn't go away to others. Amartya Sen: And, it's not defined in the neoclassical way about factor or production, Amartya Sen: but more like as (William) Morris does, who said Marc Bloch's way. Amartya Sen: Marc Bloch says feudal lords lived on the labor of serfs. Amartya Sen: That doesn't mean their feudal lord's land was unproductive. Amartya Sen: But, somehow, labor is not comparable with owning land. Amartya Sen: Working is not the same kind of thing as possessing land. Amartya Sen: That goes back in Marx's writing a lot. Amartya Sen: The Worker's Party is emphasizing that it must stop. Amartya Sen: Now Marx actually says that is not enough. Amartya Sen: It's his idea, or not only his idea, Amartya Sen: but among other people, his idea. Amartya Sen: Because, and this [is when] identities come in-the workers have needs also. Amartya Sen: Say, for somebody who is not very productive, but he has lots of needs. Amartya Sen: Doesn't society owe something to that person? Amartya Sen: So, I think there are two concerns here, work and needs. Amartya Sen: I've been very interested in Marx from my young days. Amartya Sen: What a dedicated, detached intellectual Marx was. Amartya Sen: The book ends with Marx saying, "So what? Amartya Sen: They made a mistake because work is only one thing we looked at, needs is another. Amartya Sen: Can we provide satisfaction on needs?" Amartya Sen: And he said, "We would be able to, Amartya Sen: but that would need a reorientation of mental attitude and, Amartya Sen: also, much greater affluence. Amartya Sen: Can we do it now? No, it can't be done." Amartya Sen: So, what are we talking about, then? Amartya Sen: Since, ultimately, you agree with the German Worker's Party. Amartya Sen: What he is saying is that you mustn't forget that there are needs. Amartya Sen: That's the point, which is a very important point to make. Amartya Sen: It certainly has been used by activists Amartya Sen: when they have this Marxist discussion of freedom. Amartya Sen: It is wonderful discussing that we should be free Amartya Sen: to do what we like. Amartya Sen: We can produce. We can do industrial action Amartya Sen: industrial action in the morning and cultivation in the afternoon. Amartya Sen: Yeah, it is quite wonderful. Amartya Sen: “What we need is to make it possible for me to do one thing today, another tomorrow. Amartya Sen: To hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, Amartya Sen: rear cattle in the evening, criticize after dinner” said Marx. Amartya Sen: Now, I think rearing cattle in the evening brings out what a superb urban creature Marx was. Amartya Sen: I don't think anyone who rears cattle would choose evening as the moment to do it. Amartya Sen: He was in very good shape when it came to criticize after dinner, Amartya Sen: he know that very well. Amartya Sen: What's happening? This is actually part of my memoir. Amartya Sen: I wrote this chapter called, "What to Make of Marx." Amartya Sen: The fact is that in the process of thinking and, Amartya Sen: sometimes, we have exactly the idea of the way things should be solved, Amartya Sen: he was opening up areas which are really important today. Amartya Sen: Now today, if you look at it, it may not be that we can satisfy everyone's needs. Amartya Sen: But we can go somewhat in that direction. Amartya Sen: The deprivation that comes from work Amartya Sen: and deprivation of work-either unemployment or low wages Amartya Sen: or deprivation of needs Amartya Sen: -- not being able to have any healthcare, Amartya Sen: having enough food, going hungry, extraordinary how important this needs picture is. Amartya Sen: I started the Pratichi Trust the year after I got the Nobel. Amartya Sen: It was amazing that I got the opportunity of doing it. Amartya Sen: It was amazing going to the schools [and seeing] how many of the children Amartya Sen: came to the school without having eaten anything. Amartya Sen: It is hard for them to do multiplication tables on a hungry stomach. Amartya Sen: So, we have to look at is both needs and work. Amartya Sen: And if there is any way in which we can say that China has done something dramatically better than India Amartya Sen: not in democracy I'm afraid, Amartya Sen: but when it comes to nature of poverty. Amartya Sen: If the poor in India do not know where to go when their child is ill, Amartya Sen: Ayushman (BJP government’s health insurance for the elderly) Amartya Sen: is not going to help them. Amartya Sen: Ayushman would help you if you have lived a long, long time, Amartya Sen: and then you have an extensive operation, Amartya Sen: which a private hospital will provide for you, Amartya Sen: and then you take the bill and ask the government to pay. Amartya Sen: That does nothing for the girl with the empty stomach. Amartya Sen: So, I think the basic needs issue- Amartya Sen: that the poor in India doesn't know where to go, Amartya Sen: what a decent school is, where you take your child to hospital, Amartya Sen: when you are deprived of basic social security-what to do with it. Amartya Sen: Now, in China with all of its problems, Amartya Sen: and there are many problems indeed, poverty does not take that form. Amartya Sen: So, when people say that China has done better in terms of income, Amartya Sen: yes it has, but that's not the main problem. Amartya Sen: The main issue, and it has not always been like that, Amartya Sen: the main issue has been to deal with the fundamental needs that human beings have, Amartya Sen: in the way that the poor in China do not tend to suffer, except in very rare cases, Amartya Sen: that in India, quite standardly the poor do suffer. Amartya Sen: So, I think we have to turn our fixture to needs and work Amartya Sen: and to the freedom of speech. Amartya Sen: As I was trying to say, freedom of speech is central to all these things. Amartya Sen: We (the BJP government in India) won't talk about works and needs, Amartya Sen: we (the BJP government in India) will only talk about Ayushman Bharat Amartya Sen: and not about what's happening to basic health care and so on. Amartya Sen: If freedom of speech is interrupted and harshly dealt with, Amartya Sen: I repeat again by saying it's not the case that these problems didn't exist earlier, Amartya Sen: but these problems have become dramatically more important recently. Amartya Sen: And I think the freedom of speech and, Amartya Sen: I mean, earlier on there were bans on freedom of speech of various kinds. Amartya Sen: After all, India was the first country to ban Satanic Verses. Amartya Sen: And there are all kinds of ways freedom of speech was affected, Amartya Sen: but it did not have the form, as it does now. Amartya Sen: All universities are now run by RSS people who know exactly what to do. Amartya Sen: Universities of which you will think India had reason to be proud of [that]. Amartya Sen: We also had the oldest university in the world in Nalanda. Amartya Sen: I had the good fortune of being Chancellor Amartya Sen: for a few years of a new university set up there, Amartya Sen: until it became clear that no help from the government would come until I was removed. Amartya Sen: I encouraged George Yeo from Singapore to take it on Amartya Sen: and George Yeo was very reluctant, but I told him, you have to take it on, Amartya Sen: because that's the only way we will get the money. Amartya Sen: I was mistaken. George Yeo was right, Amartya Sen: because the moment I moved away, and George Yeo came in, everything he asked for didn't happen either. Amartya Sen: They have no respect for existing universities or for the oldest university in the world, Amartya Sen: but they glorify the invented airplanes in the Vedas-Pushpakraj and so on. Amartya Sen: Not Garuda-the mythological bird-flying you up and down, Amartya Sen: because that's happened in Indonesia in the form of an airline. Amartya Sen: The universities have been sacrificed and so have been many other things in India. Amartya Sen: I am one of the few persons that has read all the Vedas, Vaidya Vidya and so on... Amartya Sen: The song of creation, Mantra 10, asks the question: Amartya Sen: Does God exist? Amartya Sen: How do we know? Amartya Sen: And if God existed, Amartya Sen: and if he is still alive, Amartya Sen: would he remember all that? Amartya Sen: How does he remember? Amartya Sen: And so on. Amartya Sen: That's in the Vedas. Amartya Sen: There's also the first discussion in Rig Vedas Amartya Sen: about gambling and the dilemma of the gambler, Amartya Sen: who is irresistibly drawn to it, Amartya Sen: what the Greeks would call weakness of the will. Amartya Sen: They discuss a lot of it Amartya Sen: and discuss it in the Vedas quite brilliantly. Amartya Sen: But instead of that, the RSS will say mathematics Amartya Sen: happened dramatically in India from Aryabhatt onward. Amartya Sen: We have to accept, that the impulse that came from Amartya Sen: the influence of Babylon and Greece, made a big difference. Amartya Sen: A dramatic difference. Amartya Sen: And then, of course, the Arabs were the great exponent of Indian mathematics. Amartya Sen: All this was going on. Amartya Sen: To not understand that Amartya Sen: and to think of India as a kind of self-made creature Amartya Sen: germinating like a gram on the ground alone. Amartya Sen: That is magic. Amartya Sen: We have to get rid of, Amartya Sen: not only of the bias, Amartya Sen: but also the magic. Amartya Sen: Thank you. [audience clapping] Ruchira Gupta: Thank you Doctor Sen. Ruchira Gupta: So, what it at stake here? Ruchira Gupta: Both of you have talked about the immediate Ruchira Gupta: and also taken us on a journey through time. Ruchira Gupta: What are we looking forward to and what can happen? Ruchira Gupta: Both professors have spoken about basic needs as human rights Ruchira Gupta: and how we need to concentrate on that. Ruchira Gupta: If India moves more towards fascism, Ruchira Gupta: can a government which is not inclusive essentially, in its thought, can it deliver these basic needs? Ruchira Gupta: Especially based on the track record of the last five years Ruchira Gupta: in which the welfare state was being dismantled very fast. Ruchira Gupta: Professor Sen, you spoke about freedom of speech. Ruchira Gupta: That is based on freedom of thought. Ruchira Gupta: Can a fascist mindset, which is closing down universities Ruchira Gupta: and changing history, rewriting textbooks that we study- Ruchira Gupta: geography, history, everything- Ruchira Gupta: can that change the way we think or stop us from thinking all together? Ruchira Gupta: What does this mean? What does it imply? Ruchira Gupta: What's coming up in this election? Prabhat? Prabhat Patnaik: You know, one of the things I think Professor Sen said Prabhat Patnaik: that, you know, that inequality, of course, existed before. Prabhat Patnaik: Now, the inequality has been increasing. Prabhat Patnaik: As a matter of fact, I think, poverty and hunger, Prabhat Patnaik: poverty defined in terms of hunger and nutritional norms has been increasing. Prabhat Patnaik: But one of the things which has happened in the more recent period is, Prabhat Patnaik: if you make a calculation, you know, I mean, that is an enormous peasant protest at this moment, Prabhat Patnaik: all over the country. Prabhat Patnaik: The peasantry has been a neglected sector, Prabhat Patnaik: a neglected group in the last several years. Prabhat Patnaik: Ever since the neo-liberal policies came, Prabhat Patnaik: the kind of state support the peasantry used to get, has dwindled. Prabhat Patnaik: But if you look particularly at the last few years, Prabhat Patnaik: then I made a calculation, that suppose you take 2013-14 as your starting point, Prabhat Patnaik: and you look at the incomes generated in the entire agricultural sector, Prabhat Patnaik: the total incomes of everybody engaged in it, then, Prabhat Patnaik: in real terms, per capita income in the agricultural sector has not increased at all. Prabhat Patnaik: It has actually marginally decreased. Prabhat Patnaik: If we take the latest year for which we have figures, 2016-17, Prabhat Patnaik: we will see half the country's population is still agriculture dependent. Prabhat Patnaik: So you have a situation where, of course, Prabhat Patnaik: the last few years have been particularly bad and I think, Prabhat Patnaik: which is the reason why we haven't peasantry sides and so on earlier, Prabhat Patnaik: but now you are beginning to have the kind of peasant assertion Prabhat Patnaik: in which I see a lot of hope. Prabhat Patnaik: I mean, I think the more the discourse shifts away Prabhat Patnaik: from Hindutva and Pakistan and so on, Prabhat Patnaik: towards issues of peasant conditions of life towards issues of unemployment and so on, Prabhat Patnaik: the more, in fact, people will begin to assert themselves in the election, Prabhat Patnaik: and thereafter, as citizens. Prabhat Patnaik: But the more they actually start talking about Hindutva and Pakistan, Prabhat Patnaik: the more they become victims of the magic that Professor Sen was talking about. Prabhat Patnaik: On this magic. I want to recollect Prabhat Patnaik: an occasion after demonetization, Prabhat Patnaik: everybody had great difficulties because you had absolutely no cash Prabhat Patnaik: and so you went and queued up at four o'clock in the morning Prabhat Patnaik: to go and queue up outside the banks and so on. Prabhat Patnaik: And it was extremely inconvenient Prabhat Patnaik: and people simply could not believe Prabhat Patnaik: that anything as distressing as this could be inflicted upon them Prabhat Patnaik: without very good reasons. Prabhat Patnaik: As a result, the more you faced hardships, the more you thought, Prabhat Patnaik: what a wonderful government we have, Prabhat Patnaik: they don't actually show any fear in inflicting this hardship on me. Prabhat Patnaik: And that just shows how committed they are to the good of the country. Prabhat Patnaik: So that's the kind of magic, you know, Prabhat Patnaik: that you, you do something, you do something pretty ruthlessly- Prabhat Patnaik: shock and awe. Prabhat Patnaik: And as a result, the more, you know, put shock and awe into people Prabhat Patnaik: for a while obviously because, now, that has worn off, but for a while, Prabhat Patnaik: it actually can have this kind of magical impact Prabhat Patnaik: that Professor Sen and was talking about. Prabhat Patnaik: But I think I see a great deal of hope in the emergence of if you like, secular, Prabhat Patnaik: these worldly protests, you know, on material issues and issues of peasant life. Ruchira Gupta: Professor Sen, you know, also, you spoke about magic Ruchira Gupta: and magic is so essential to fascism. Amartya Sen: Magic is essential to? Ruchira Gupta: Fascism. Ruchira Gupta: Hitler also used notions of mysticism. Ruchira Gupta: The Nazis spoke about the great Nordic person, Ruchira Gupta: who was of a superior race that would rule the world. Ruchira Gupta: He spoke about a past which did not exist Ruchira Gupta: and promised a future which could never be. Ruchira Gupta: He incited people to create the ‘other’ and towards violence. Ruchira Gupta: It was all about exclusion. Ruchira Gupta: So, what's at stake here, really in this election, Ruchira Gupta: is that, what approach do we choose in India? Ruchira Gupta: The politics of inclusion or the politics of exclusion? Ruchira Gupta: What do you feel? Ruchira Gupta: Can this magic that is associated with the present ruling party- Ruchira Gupta: from the kind of clothes the prime minister wears with the turbans and all of that, Ruchira Gupta: the kind of slogans he uses, the kind of campaigns he runs Ruchira Gupta: that are full of the symbolic aesthetics of blood and orange, Ruchira Gupta: how is it going to play out? And what really is at stake then? Ruchira Gupta: And what should India be doing now? Ruchira Gupta: I've asked you four questions in one. Amartya Sen: We have to articulate these concerns. Amartya Sen: There's a kind of old wisdom saying that just speaking about something Amartya Sen: does not make a difference. Amartya Sen: The fact is it does make a difference, Amartya Sen: because you have to appreciate what is going on, Amartya Sen: and not be shy about mentioning it. Amartya Sen: You mentioned about magic being important for fascism. Amartya Sen: You're doing something on fascism, aren't you? Amartya Sen: But you see, when the Fascist party was originally Amartya Sen: expanding in Italy in 1921-22, Amartya Sen: there's a nice story, which my late wife Emma's family told me. Amartya Sen: Her father was in the resistance and he was killed by Mussolini Amartya Sen: two days before the Americans came to Rome. Amartya Sen: So, there was a lot of stories about fascists. Amartya Sen: One of my favorites is about a fascist recruiter Amartya Sen: who tried to recruit a villager to fascism Amartya Sen: and he said, "you know, you should be a fascist, Amartya Sen: because we are doing lots of things. Amartya Sen: This area used to be full of malaria. That's all gone. Amartya Sen: The trains are running on time, the municipality is working beautifully. Amartya Sen: Why shouldn't you want to join?" Amartya Sen: And he says, "Really I can't join the fascists." Amartya Sen: "Why not?" Amartya Sen: He gives this lame reply, Amartya Sen: "Well it is not only that I am a socialist, Amartya Sen: but my father was a socialist. My grandfather was a socialist. Amartya Sen: How could I possibly join the fascist party?" Amartya Sen: To which the fascist recruiter says, Amartya Sen: "What kind of a nonsensical argument is this? Amartya Sen: If your father had been a mother and grandfather had been a mother, Amartya Sen: what would you have done then?" Amartya Sen: To which the villager replies, Amartya Sen: "Well then, of course, I would have joined the fascist party." [audience laughs] Amartya Sen: So that thought was in his mind, but he was not articulating it. Amartya Sen: I think we have to articulate it a bit more. Amartya Sen: I think the suppression of the media is a very important reason. Amartya Sen: The media situation isn't as bad in India as it is in some other countries, Amartya Sen: but it is bad in the sense that there's a lot more that can be done. Amartya Sen: A lot more, fake news comes out with stories which are just not true. Amartya Sen: And I think we have to capture it in the, Amartya Sen: you know, we talk about material conditions and ideas Amartya Sen: in the realm of ideas and speech and exchanges as to what has gone wrong. Amartya Sen: And I think there's a lot of scope they go for that Amartya Sen: even now we have it within two days of election. Amartya Sen: But, well-articulated story could make a big difference Amartya Sen: and we know that controlling the media is not a guarantee. Amartya Sen: I mean, I think Erdogan is learning about it Amartya Sen: in a hard way in Turkey today and we could learn too. Amartya Sen: The fact is that the BJP has 20 times the wealth that Congress has. Amartya Sen: So it can't, not to mention the communist party has, Amartya Sen: but the fact is that's where we are and the issue is what can we do despite that. Amartya Sen: And this has happened again and again, Amartya Sen: whether it's in Vietnam in a big way or in Greece at the loss of all of the military. Amartya Sen: That had happened when they, when people weigh or place importance Amartya Sen: in material possession and have succeeded in winning their way. Amartya Sen: So we have to think of that. Amartya Sen: And, magic is very important. Amartya Sen: You're right. Amartya Sen: And that's why I brought it in. Amartya Sen: And one of the ways to challenge is to challenge the magic that is being presented. Amartya Sen: I think the Ayushman, healthcare being a universal health care Amartya Sen: is an attempt at a rather, extraordinary kind of magical thought Amartya Sen: because it doesn't even touch these people. Amartya Sen: It has got nothing to offer to people who don't have a primary health care. Amartya Sen: If there's something to offer, Amartya Sen: it will need an expensive operation and go to a private hospital and get paid. Amartya Sen: Yeah, I said that in a speech rather like this I think Amartya Sen: and then I think they had the Ayushman say that much of them doesn't understand it. Amartya Sen: He doesn't understand because I'll find is not only to do this, but also to do the other. Amartya Sen: Now here we run into a major thought and I'm afraid it applies even Amartya Sen: to my concern about spending so much money Amartya Sen: on cash rather than healthcare and education. Amartya Sen: The idea that we will do both, Amartya Sen: I mean it's a thought that a non-economist can easily have, Amartya Sen: but for an economist, you have to recognize that you will spend more on something, Amartya Sen: [meaning] you have less to spend on other things. Amartya Sen: So that to say is they're not contradicted. Amartya Sen: We can do both. Amartya Sen: Everything is contradicted with a fixed budget Amartya Sen: and everything is considered, even if it's not a fixed budget, Amartya Sen: but not a very easily relaxable budget. Amartya Sen: So I think we have to argue for the right thing. Amartya Sen: The previous government didn't, has to be said, Amartya Sen: that the Congress government could have spent much more on basic health care than it did, Amartya Sen: on basic education than it did. Amartya Sen: India has become, India has a greater reliance on private health care Amartya Sen: at the lowest level than any other country in the world Amartya Sen: with the exception of Pakistan, not even Bangladesh, by the way, Amartya Sen: but the fact is that they are dependent on private healthcare Amartya Sen: because there isn't public health care Amartya Sen: and you have to depend on private health care [when] you don't have anything else to go by. Amartya Sen: So I think, agitation, I still think that in this election Amartya Sen: we have had far less on the lack of health care and education and social security Amartya Sen: and some of this is a very good thing to spend your time on Amartya Sen: because the one thing that you got the Modi Government in India in your grip Amartya Sen: and that may or may not be the case, Amartya Sen: but they could have been a lot more on other things in the election. Ruchira Gupta: That part is the magic part. Amartya Sen: It is the magic part. Prabhat Patnaik: You know, one of the things which actually surprises me Prabhat Patnaik: is that the kind of support that this kind of magic or this kind of fascism Prabhat Patnaik: commands among the educated middle classes in India. Prabhat Patnaik: That's, that's quite remarkable because, many of them, Prabhat Patnaik: I'm not talking about universities like mine and so on Prabhat Patnaik: where there is a lot of protests, Prabhat Patnaik: but I think large numbers of people are actually taken in by this Prabhat Patnaik: and were great supporters of Modi, particularly the education people, Prabhat Patnaik: you know, it is quite surprising. Ruchira Gupta: Yeah. It's the desire for the strong man, Ruchira Gupta: you know, which is promoting this toxic masculinity. Prabhat Patnaik: Additionally, I suppose it may also derive from the basic caste-based mindset Prabhat Patnaik: where you are a kind of privileged person unless it's very clear that the, Prabhat Patnaik: that the middle class has done remarkably well Prabhat Patnaik: in the recent period of neoliberalism. Prabhat Patnaik: I'll give you an example. Prabhat Patnaik: When I joined Jawaharlal Nehru University ages ago in 1973, Prabhat Patnaik: the income I had, the basic income I had was 700 rupees a month. Prabhat Patnaik: Today if somebody joins at the same level that I had, Prabhat Patnaik: that person would get 50,000 rupees a month, many believe. rabhat Patnaik: So it has increased 70 times. Amartya Sen: At that time I was your teacher, I got 1,200 rupees. Prabhat Patnaik: And then you went to full professor and I joined as reader associate. Prabhat Patnaik: But you look at the peasant, for instance, that time 1973, Prabhat Patnaik: the procurement price of wheat was around 75 rupees per quintile and raise 1500 rupees per quintile. Prabhat Patnaik: So [increased] to 20 [times]. Amartya Sen: Yes. That is adjusted. Amartya Sen: Basically, I think we are a privileged class. Prabhat Patnaik: But not most privileged in India among the middle classes. Prabhat Patnaik: They are at the lower end. Amartya Sen: I agree, but I think I've always saw some grain of truth in that statement Amartya Sen: that they're basically two classes in India: the rich and the poor. Amartya Sen: And I think we fall, as you know, rather lowly rich. Ruchira Gupta: I'd like to open up the floor to questions. Ruchira Gupta: So if anyone has, there are two mics on both sides Ruchira Gupta: and there's somebody standing there already. Ruchira Gupta: So why don't you start? Q&A #1: I would actually like to make a comment and a) I have a question after that. Q&A #1: I'm someone from the educated middle class from India, from Mumbai. Q&A #1: 2014 was largely a reaction to the recurrent corruption of scams in the Congress government Q&A #1: and was not about caste-based superiority or the desire for a strong man. Q&A #1: It was largely because people were fed up with the corrupt regime. Q&A #1: My question is how big a role does this rapid increase Q&A #1: in Indian population play in the overall poverty? Q&A #1: Because in the end the resources are limited and the population keeps on growing, Q&A #1: so there is going to be someone who is left out. Amartya Sen: So, this is a problem of the population growing part. Q&A #1: Pardon? Amartya Sen: It is a population problem. Q&A #1: I mean, how big of a problem is it? Q&A #1: Like I recognize that there is a problem, but how big of a problem is it? Ruchira Gupta: Should we take two or three questions together and then we can ask? Amartya Sen: Actually I don't like that because as I go old, my memory... Amartya Sen: Let's have a brief discussion of each. Ruchira Gupta: There's six people, seven people who want to ask questions. Amartya Sen: Prabhat, do you want to take a shot? Prabhat Patnaik: Well just two comments on each of your remarks. Prabhat Patnaik: Corruption, corrupt regime. Yes, I, I agree with you, Prabhat Patnaik: but the point is in 2014 there were all kinds of issues. Prabhat Patnaik: Certainly one of the issues was that the government was throwing money at the Dalits Prabhat Patnaik: through the NREGS and so on. Prabhat Patnaik: That was a clear factor. Prabhat Patnaik: This business about appealing to kind of upper caste prejudice Prabhat Patnaik: against what is in India, sometimes referred to as populism, Prabhat Patnaik: was certainly one factor. Prabhat Patnaik: I'm not saying it's the only one. Prabhat Patnaik: Resource and population. Prabhat Patnaik: Population growth in India is, let's say, one and a half percent per annum now it has come down Prabhat Patnaik: and the GDP growth that the government has been talking about ad nauseam is 7%, Prabhat Patnaik: so how can population growth be the cause of poverty when Prabhat Patnaik: per capita income is rising at 5.5% percent per annum. Prabhat Patnaik: So obviously it is to do with factors of distribution and so on. Which are social problems. Amartya Sen: I would add, that the studies that we did, including (Catherine) Guio, Mamta Murthi, etc Amartya Sen: brings out that the biggest factor in reducing birth rate Amartya Sen: is women's education and women's health care. Amartya Sen: There isn't a real conflict between these. Amartya Sen: I agree with Prabhat that population isn't the main problem. Amartya Sen: On the other hand, to the extent it is, Amartya Sen: You can deal with it in ways that makes the lives of women much easier and better. Q&A #1: Thank you. Q&A #2: I'm also part of this educated middle class that is deeply supportive Q&A #2: of the current government and I'm happy to go into why Q&A #2: at another point and time. Q&A #2: It's definitely not toxic masculinity. Q&A #2: You talked a lot about these basic economic rights Q&A #2: and drew some parallels to China. Q&A #2: So I'm curious, would you be on board with a government similar to the one in China, Q&A #2: if it were able to provide these basic economic rights? Amartya Sen: Yeah. It's like saying that if you admire the national health service Amartya Sen: which came in Britain in 1948, would you like to be in a state, like a war-devastated economy? Amartya Sen: And trade unions, not yet in a position to emerge at all? Amartya Sen: You know, you have to ask, has China been able to do this Amartya Sen: because of the lack of democratic amendment? Is that your view? Q&A #2: Is that my view? Partially, yes. Amartya Sen: As a member of an educated middle-class family, how would you say that has come about? Q&A #2: So I would say they've been allowed to take decisions based on purely rationality Q&A #2: and not based on, like you spoke about, you know, popular opinion and so. Amartya Sen: Not a popular opinion against education and health care. Q&A #2: Definitely not. Education and healthcare are part of the basic rights that you mentioned. Amartya Sen: But then, why should the absence of popular opinion and democracy help? Q&A #2: Because, as you mentioned, a lot of people seem, most people seem to be motivated by self-interest. Q&A #2: So, if everyone is going to vote based on yes.. Amartya Sen: I said, what a huge mistake that is, that is committed. Amartya Sen: That is a real reversal. Amartya Sen: If I say that, in the part of the literature on nationality, Amartya Sen: the mistake is often cultivated that people are motivated by self-interest. Amartya Sen: And then you say, well you said Amartya Sen: people are motivated by self-interest? Q&A #2: No, I must've misheard you. Q&A #2: I personally believe that there is a large proportion of people who are motivated by self-interest. Q&A #2: And if that is the case, if you were to buy that argument. Amartya Sen: And they are motivated only by self-interest? Q&A #2: Only by self-interest is different from being motivated largely by self-interest. Amartya Sen: That's what I'm asking. Q&A #2: And I do believe that people make a lot of decisions based off the self-interest Q&A #2: part of their thinking, which is not to claim that everybody only acts in self-interest, Q&A #2: but that there is a large part of your decision making Q&A #2: that is influenced by self-interest. Q&A #2: And when you're not as a member of an educated middle-class, Q&A #2: you are not personally experiencing a lot of the downsides Q&A #2: that a large majority of the population in India does. Q&A #2: You tend to start taking more decisions based on self-interest. Q&A #2: And that's where I feel and again, Q&A #2: I'm not trying to draw causality between fascism and a developing economy that's not in any.... Amartya Sen: But there's some link between this and the China argument, right? Q&A #2: So there, I again, difference between causality and correlation. I'm curious. Amartya Sen: No, no. This has nothing to do with causality and correlation. Amartya Sen: This is definitely reflective of the problem. But you are not addressing that. Q&A #2: I'm sorry, can you repeat? Amartya Sen: Causality and correlation is a very big distinction, Amartya Sen: which anyone who is doing either statistics or the social sciences should be aware of. Amartya Sen: I didn't detect anything in your argument where that has turned out to be a critical factor. Q&A #2: Okay. Amartya Sen: Well it's a criticism for you, don't say okay. Q&A #2: No, I understand. Ruchira Gupta: Ok. can we go to another question because I think you've taken up a lot of time, so Ruchira Gupta: we can just go to the next question. Yes. Q&A #3: Hi. Good evening. My question is directed towards Doctor Sen. Q&A #3: Firstly, congratulations on being awarded the Bodley Medal by Oxford recently. Amartya Sen: Thank you. Q&A #3: So one of the big news in India, currently, is about the minimum income guarantee Q&A #3: by the Congress party in the manifesto which it claims is based upon your theory of the poverty index. Q&A #3: My obvious thought towards it goes in the direction that it's more of a populist sop. Q&A #3: It might be a way to sway the lower income people towards voting for the Congress party, Q&A #3: but what do you think, how big an impact will it have in generating Q&A #3: public opinion in favor of the party? Q&A #3: And how is it actually able to facilitate this considering Q&A #3: the current scenario in India? Amartya Sen: I think that's an excellent question. Amartya Sen: Indeed we have to ask again, obviously, Amartya Sen: it will have a positive impact in that, Amartya Sen: for the reason that the earlier gentleman was talking about self-interest and so on. Amartya Sen: You get some money, in a way, the easy way. Amartya Sen: You maybe in favor it for this. Amartya Sen: But its total impact has to be examined. Amartya Sen: Now, I think this is very important. Amartya Sen: I think they either, as I understand your position, Amartya Sen: there are two things. Amartya Sen: One is to ask these critical questions which you are doing excellently. Amartya Sen: And the other is that, by and large, Amartya Sen: I would like Congress, better than BJP in this election. Amartya Sen: But that doesn't mean I have nothing, Amartya Sen: no criticism to offer to the Congress' position. Amartya Sen: So, that's all and we agree. Ruchira Gupta: Thank you. Thank you. All right. Q&A #4: I'm a member of the middle class who is definitely not a supporter of Narendra Modi government. Q&A #4: And there are definitely some of us. Q&A #4: As someone who did his undergraduate in Delhi University, Q&A #4: I witnessed firsthand what happened at Jawaharlal Nehru University and what happened at Ramjas (University) Q&A #4: I can speak a lot about what that did happen at those universities, Q&A #4: but my question is more on the new political power we're seeing Q&A #4: among the peasant class and among the Dalit class, Q&A #4: among the long marches we are seeing as well as the recent incidents Q&A #4: at Bhima Koregaon and the reassertion of Dalit identity. Q&A #4: I just want to see your views on whether you think that the governments, Q&A #4: not just the BJP goverments, [that] fundamentally underestimate Q&A #4: the perception of the rule of order and the idea that they (Peasants and Dalits) Q&A #4: do not have an idea of what's going on or can they (Dalits and marginalized) Q&A #4: actually ever be a legitimate political force? Q&A #4: Do you think that this particular underestimation of Dalit and peasant power Q&A #4: can pay a large part in influencing at least the results of the Q&A #4: rural parts of the country during this particular election? Ruchira Gupta: Do you want to answer first? Prabhat Patnaik: Well, I hope it would have a major impact on the elections. Prabhat Patnaik: But the point is we must realize that the last time Prabhat Patnaik: you had such big peasant mobilizations was when a man called Mahendra Singh Tikait Prabhat Patnaik: used to organize big peasant rallies. Prabhat Patnaik: That was in the '70s, a very long time ago. Prabhat Patnaik: You hear of peasant suicides, but you don't hear of peasant protests. Prabhat Patnaik: The revival of peasant resistance is a very new thing, Prabhat Patnaik: and in a sense, feeds into the kind of revival of politics that you are seeing now. Prabhat Patnaik: I think throughout the last several decades, Prabhat Patnaik: there really was much more of identity politics of various kinds, Prabhat Patnaik: but not really this kind of mass revival of mass protests, Prabhat Patnaik: irrespective of identities. Prabhat Patnaik: I hope it has an impact. Prabhat Patnaik: This is the kind of thing which actually worries the government. Prabhat Patnaik: The moment there is a terrorist action of some kind, they heave a sigh of relief, Prabhat Patnaik: because the discourse shifts to Pakistan etc. Prabhat Patnaik: But the moment you have, once more, talking of these kinds of issues Prabhat Patnaik: they begin to get worried. Prabhat Patnaik: I think peasant protests are a very important issue in this election Prabhat Patnaik: and were a very important reason for the loss, by the BJP, Prabhat Patnaik: of the central Indian states in the last Assembly elections. Prabhat Patnaik: I think if that carries over to the Parliament elections, Prabhat Patnaik: then, of course, there will be a very substantial loss for them. Ruchira Gupta: Thanks. Q&A #5: Good evening panel. My question is more on the tactical side. Q&A #5: Given the talks that we just had, how should a voter decide what to choose? Q&A #5: What decisions should be made when they go to the voting panel? Q&A #5: And, lastly, does it merely boil down to the lesser of the two evils? Amartya Sen: Merely boil down to what? Ruchira Gupta: Choosing the lesser of the two evils. Q&A #5: I mean, both the parties have been accused of various things and that's it. Thank you. Amartya Sen: I think quite often it is, actually, the lesser of the two evils. Amartya Sen: In the sense that, you know, it's really Amartya Sen: how we see these things because, Amartya Sen: when, someone is doing some good, but a lot of bad, Amartya Sen: you could say that evil is too strong a word, Amartya Sen: I think, and it's too deep in religiosity for me to be able to use to easily. Amartya Sen: But lesser of two bad things. Amartya Sen: That's what it is. Amartya Sen: That's what choice is about. Amartya Sen: More of good things, less of bad things. Amartya Sen: So, nothing surprising ends up being lesser of bad things. Amartya Sen: And you won't get a person who is exactly, [what you vote for]. Amartya Sen: You may find someone who you like voting for. Amartya Sen: I mean, for many years, my favorite candidate, Amartya Sen: my representative in Shantiketan was someone Amartya Sen: who was elected as Speaker of the Lok Sabha by the Congress and the Communist party. Amartya Sen: For very different reasons. Amartya Sen: That was the former Speaker of the Indian Assembly. Amartya Sen: He was a communist and stood for the communist party. Ruchira Gupta: Somnath Chatterjee. Amartya Sen: Somnath Chatterjee. Sorry, I didn't mention his name. Amartya Sen: Somnath Chatterjee. Amartya Sen: And that was, of course, disliked from my Congress friends. Amartya Sen: But then the communist expelled Somnath Amartya Sen: on grounds of not being partisan: I have to say, Amartya Sen: I have got somebody here who is more involved in the Communist party than I am- Amartya Sen: its a complete misunderstanding of the role of a speaker. Amartya Sen: Once you are a speaker, you cannot pursue the interests Amartya Sen: and take the (whip) of one of the parties which got you elected. Amartya Sen: On that ground, to chastise him is a mistake. Amartya Sen: You know, there's always scope of misunderstanding. Amartya Sen: I was very pleased that my candidate was attacked by everyone. Amartya Sen: But, I think you're right. I think we have to recognize that good and bad don't mix. Amartya Sen: When this gentleman said he is against Modi, Amartya Sen: I would like him to also count, Amartya Sen: I think the count brings out quite clearly, Amartya Sen: that at this time, Modi's bad influences are much stronger than his good influences. Amartya Sen: Is that as bad as North Korea? Amartya Sen: No, I don't think it is. All right. Ruchira Gupta: I think I would vote along the lines of choosing an approach Ruchira Gupta: and thinking of whose approach is going to help me more. Ruchira Gupta: Do I want freedom of speech? Ruchira Gupta: Do I want freedom of association? Ruchira Gupta: Do I want to be able to go to a university and study freely of all the textbooks, Ruchira Gupta: which are full of facts and not full of mythology? Ruchira Gupta: Do I want to have a love marriage across caste or religion? Ruchira Gupta: Do I want people who are poorer than me to have at least basic food, Ruchira Gupta: a free education and healthcare? Ruchira Gupta: I would choose, whoever, supports this approach Ruchira Gupta: rather than thinking about the lesser of two evils. Ruchira Gupta: I would not think about the leaders that, you know, Ruchira Gupta: is it this leader versus that leader? Ruchira Gupta: Because, ultimately, it's going to be through consensus Ruchira Gupta: and hopefully a parliamentary democracy will prevail. Ruchira Gupta: And, so, people will come to some consensus together. Ruchira Gupta: I would look for the approach and vote for the right approach. [audience clapping] Prabhat Patnaik: I think, of course, one should choose the lesson of the two evils, Prabhat Patnaik: but I think looking at it as simply greater or lesser of two evils, Prabhat Patnaik: underestimates, understates the seriousness that currently the Indian polity is facing. Prabhat Patnaik: Because as Ruchira said, we actually are having a threat of fascism. Prabhat Patnaik: We are having a situation where students in JNUniversity Prabhat Patnaik: are charged with sedition. Prabhat Patnaik: We have people who are civil rights activists who are in jail, Prabhat Patnaik: in solitary confinement at this moment. Prabhat Patnaik: All kinds of trumped up charges. Prabhat Patnaik: This is very serious. Prabhat Patnaik: That being the case, my approach would be to vote for the person Prabhat Patnaik: who you think is the strongest to defeat the BJP. Q&A #5: That was really crystal clear. Thank you. Q&A #6: Professors, thank you so much for your talk. That was very insightful. Q&A #6: I just have a question. When the elections are around the corner, Q&A #6: there's the general sentiment in the government to shy away from Q&A #6: quantitative argumentation and head towards a lot of emotional debate and rhetoric. Q&A #6: Sometimes, honestly, its a pain to watch. Q&A #6: What kind of impact does that have on education for the youth of India? Q&A #6: After all, education is not only what happens in the schools, Q&A #6: but it's also this kind of exposure they have to argumentation in the government. Q&A #6: That has a knock on impact on the country generally. Q&A #6: So what do you think is your message to the youth, first of all. Q&A #6: And do you think that this significantly impacts their education? Amartya Sen: I think this is Prabhat’s question. Prabhat Patnaik: Have you ever heard the Indian Parliament debates or read any of their reports? Prabhat Patnaik: They're pretty good, you know. Q&A #6: The debates, yes. Certainly, I'm not criticizing the debate at all. I'm just saying... Prabhat Patnaik: You see what actually happens. Prabhat Patnaik: If suppose we want to raise an issue, Prabhat Patnaik: unless you stage a walk out or walk into the well, and so on, Prabhat Patnaik: the media doesn't take it seriously. Prabhat Patnaik: As a result, they often do this kind of thing, which is more drama. Prabhat Patnaik: But when you have serious discussions, you have some excellent presentation. Amartya Sen: I agree with that. Prabhat Patnaik: And, likewise, the Parliament reports are wonderful, you know, Prabhat Patnaik: on all kinds of issues, intellectual property rights and so on. Prabhat Patnaik: Very good. You know, genetically modified crops. Prabhat Patnaik: The parliamentary committee reports are absolutely first rate. Prabhat Patnaik: So, I think we must kind of, you know, cherish that. Prabhat Patnaik: I mean, I think I'm not in favor of debunking the Parliament. Prabhat Patnaik: Then, the other thing about the youth of India, Prabhat Patnaik: I mean I think, I think the youth has to be really concerned Prabhat Patnaik: about what is happening to the ordinary people. Prabhat Patnaik: I think the conditions of life of the ordinary people, Prabhat Patnaik: is something which, is not really sufficiently appreciated by the youth, Prabhat Patnaik: particularly in universities and so on. Prabhat Patnaik: I think that should be. Prabhat Patnaik: I mean, for instance, there is an emphasis on career. Prabhat Patnaik: Okay. And if that is the case, then you simply have no time. Prabhat Patnaik: I mean, you know, if you're a student, you simply have no time to look around, Prabhat Patnaik: to know what's happening starting from school days. Prabhat Patnaik: I know people in Delhi who shed tears because their child, Prabhat Patnaik: son or daughter in the school of final exam has got only 99%. Prabhat Patnaik: Now you see that being the case, there is this enormous push towards career Prabhat Patnaik: and I think that doesn't leave the youth enough breathing space Prabhat Patnaik: to look at society and what's happening around you that must be overcome. Ruchira Gupta: One last question. Q&A #7: Hi, good evening. Thank you for being here. Q&A #7: So I'm from West Bengal, I'm still scarred by the way we shooed Tata away. Q&A #7: My question is, the whole lack of emphasis on manufacturing sector overall in the country Q&A #7: is really disappointing and, honestly, scary. Q&A #7: We've been promised labor reforms for years Q&A #7: by the Congresses and the BJP. Q&A #7: We haven't seen the sight of it. Q&A #7: We've been promised privatization of loss-making units for years now. Q&A #7: Again, there is no mention of this in the manifesto as well. Q&A #7: Is it possible to achieve equal economic growth Q&A #7: leaving out manufacturing sector and ignoring it altogether? Ruchira Gupta: Two experts. Amartya Sen: I think the extraordinarily disappointing performance of the manufacturing sector Amartya Sen: is a major drawback for India. Amartya Sen: It is a drawback that is not recognized very clearly Amartya Sen: when you are just going by the money amount generated. Amartya Sen: The financial sector can generate easily huge amounts of money Amartya Sen: in a way that manufacturing cannot. Amartya Sen: And I think there used to be a mistake at an earlier stage in 18-19th century, Amartya Sen: where we will describe the non-manufacturing, nonagricultural sector as unproductive labor. Amartya Sen: That was a mistake because productive work is done Amartya Sen: through services and education and healthcare Amartya Sen: that I was stating come out of the service sector. Amartya Sen: On the other hand, and I'm not going to give any ground Amartya Sen: for switching focus, especially on education and health care Amartya Sen: as a major neglected field in India. Amartya Sen: But along with that, what has happened to the Indian manufacturing Amartya Sen: is a question that has not been, I think adequately addressed at all. Amartya Sen: And this is where I think without us calling magic Amartya Sen: had a part because the numbers look so magically good Amartya Sen: that this generates that much income and so on. Amartya Sen: As one of my colleagues told me that, you know, Amartya Sen: he was filling up his income tax form, which people do in this the season Amartya Sen: and he said he had calculated and it come to the conclusion Amartya Sen: that any time spent on filing your income tax report generates Amartya Sen: much more income than any other way of spending your labor. Amartya Sen: And that may well be correct. Amartya Sen: On the other hand, you're right, Amartya Sen: manufacturing is neglected and very importantly, Amartya Sen: [it is] very important that we change that. Prabhat Patnaik: You know, I mean I agree with that you're absolutely right about manufacturing Prabhat Patnaik: being one of the weak sectors in the (rules) performance. Prabhat Patnaik: Just two comments I want to make. Prabhat Patnaik: There is not an iota of evidence that manufacturing sectors growth Prabhat Patnaik: is held up because of the absence of labor market flexibility. Prabhat Patnaik: Not an iota of evidence. Prabhat Patnaik: That is something which is drummed up Prabhat Patnaik: by all kinds of neoliberal economist, Prabhat Patnaik: but they're really not an iota of evidence. Prabhat Patnaik: The second thing I'd like to see is that when we talk about manufacturing, Prabhat Patnaik: you're talking only about large scale manufacturing. Prabhat Patnaik: As a matter of fact, in India, there is [a] substantial small scale manufacturing sector, Prabhat Patnaik: which is actually getting demolished because of demonetization Prabhat Patnaik: and GST and so on, which is happening. Prabhat Patnaik: So the government [is] actually killing that sector and that needs to be protected. Amartya Sen: I agree with that. Amartya Sen: If I may come back to the China [versus] India contrast, Amartya Sen: the reason China can produce anything, I haven't looked at it. Amartya Sen: I (vetted), made in China- almost anything. Amartya Sen: And Indians can make pharmaceuticals, information technology. Amartya Sen: And for some reason, this was true, about four years ago, it may have changed now, motor parts. Amartya Sen: As opposed to 20,000 things that the Chinese can do. Amartya Sen: Why? Because of literacy, because of the able to read instructions, Amartya Sen: because of being able to follow, to have quality control by following instructions. Amartya Sen: So there is a reason why the manufacturing sector, Amartya Sen: which demands much greater use of school education than, Amartya Sen: say, agriculture does is not getting the attention and the success that they deserve. Amartya Sen: So it's not a mystery and there is a connection between Amartya Sen: these services education, healthcare and manufacturing fallout. Amartya Sen: There is a connection. Amartya Sen: But I also agree with Prabhat that small scale production and also a lot to comment and Amartya Sen: in Bangladesh's success for example, has been made on cotton textile and so on. Amartya Sen: So I think, these are complex pictures to look at. Amartya Sen: But you're drawing attention to something very important. Ruchira Gupta: Thanks. Ruchira Gupta: Do we have time for more questions? Ruchira Gupta: No, we don't have time for one more questions. I'm sorry. Amartya Sen: But this gentlemen had been standing there for a long time. Q&A #8: I have a question, you know. The topic is called "India at crossroads" Q&A #8: The democracy is at crossroads all over the world. Q&A #8: All over the world. U.S. or India. Q&A #8: But this elections will decide because Q&A #8: Baba Ambedkar graduated from Columbia. The constitution is in a crisis in India and second question is... Amartya Sen: Sorry, I didn't get the first question. Ruchira Gupta: Is the constitution in a crisis? Q&A #8: Indian constitution in a crisis. Q&A #8: Second question is: Doctor Manmohan Singh versus Modi. Q&A #8: Manmohan Singh is an economist, he knew the negative impact of demonetization and GST. Q&A #8: This demonetization hurt small business people and small farmers, small households, wives. Q&A #8: This is a worrying situation. All our economists, you should address this. Ruchira Gupta: The demonetization affects small scale industry... Amartya Sen: Demonetization effects negatively small scale industry... Q&A #8: Is it good for India or bad for India? Prabhat Patnaik: Of course, bad for India. Prabhat Patnaik: I mean, by now, everybody says that even the Reserve Bank's own data that, Prabhat Patnaik: you know, the whole idea behind demonetization is that if the currency notes get killed, Prabhat Patnaik: as it were, then you can thereby reduce the liability of the central bank Prabhat Patnaik: And that being the case, that much money is what is available to the government Prabhat Patnaik: and the government can distribute it among the poor. Prabhat Patnaik: But it turns out that 99.3% of the demonetized currency came back to the banking system. Prabhat Patnaik: So it has no impact as far as the black economies concern Prabhat Patnaik: as far as raising the resources for the government is concerned. Prabhat Patnaik: But it simply created massive disruption Prabhat Patnaik: as well as the people were concerned, including small business, as you see Q&A #8: Most of the Indian educators, people are thinking of that Q&A #8: demonetization is good for the country, Q&A #8: but as intellectuals, you should give a good message. Q&A #8: Demonetization has messed up peasants, the common man. Amartya Sen: Where are you reading that demonization is good? Amartya Sen: You're reading it somewhere? You're not or you are? Amartya Sen: I thought there was a lot of jubilant war crimes at one stage, but they have died down. Q&A #8: Because, you know, people in the village. My mom, she lost 5,000 rupees or 10,000 rupees. Prabhat Patnaik: I'm so sorry. Q&A #8: She couldn't even cash it. Q&A #8: My mom is 80 years old. She said, my money is paper. Ruchira Gupta: We have to wrap up. I'm really sorry. Ruchira Gupta: Thank you so much. [audience clapping] Ruchira Gupta: All the questions from the audience. Ruchira Gupta: Professor Bilgrami, Professor Patnaik, and Professor Sen, Ruchira Gupta: for taking out the time at this critical moment in India's history to have this discussion. Ruchira Gupta: There's a lot at stake and I believe, Ruchira Gupta: as someone of my generation, Ruchira Gupta: that literally what is at stake Ruchira Gupta: is the choice between fascism and no fascism.