Incarnations-A History of India in 50 Lives By Sunil Khilnani

 

One would normally not blog about a book when only halfway through it. Rules, however, are meant to be broken and exceptions are important.       

So here is a post on Incarnations -- A History of India in Fifty Lives by historian Sunil Khilnani.

Khilnani attempts to sketch a picture of 2500 years of Indian history through the lives of fifty significant figures in the history of the subcontinent. Fifty lives from the Buddha to Dhirubhai Ambani via Adi Shankara, Rajaraja Chola, Basava, Iqbal, Jinnah, Subbulakshmi and a host of others give the reader a fascinating, colourful and immensely educative picture of the flow of life and its accompaniments in this part of the world.

It can be argued that less than ten pages, on average, for each such significant life is hardly enough -- libraries have been written about the Buddha and many a tome on the others, but Khilnani’s experiment in history telling is different, intriguing and enormously successful. He is focused not just on the past but, very effectively, on the way that the past has created the present. He makes the connections so clearly and incisively that the book could conceivably have been named The Men and Women Who Made India What It Is -- A Guide to Understanding Who We Are and Why.

One studies the past not just as an interesting curiosity, but as the principal determinant of the present; and the best introduction to India’s past that I have read is Incarnations. Full disclosure demands here that I clarify that I have not studied history as an academic discipline in college. So, for a layperson interested in India’s past, present and future, this book is a must read. It has to be read and   absorbed slowly and is an ideal fixture for one’s bedside table — one life a day to cover 2500 years of Indian history. Also, in these times of short attention spans, this would make a great gift for one’s children -- a serious education in easily digestible bites for the Twitter and Insta generation.

Happy reading.

Why Europe Grew Rich And Asia Did Not – Global Economic Divergence 1600-1850 --------- Prasannan Parthasarathi

 

The focus of the book under consideration is categorically elaborated in the title. The attempt is to understand why Asia got left behind in the economic race and Europe got ahead -- and hugely so. The debate on this ‘divergence’ is not new, but the arguments advanced by Prof. Parthasarathi in this fascinating book are both intriguing and stimulating.

The history that the debate attempts to understand is well known. In summary, from the late 18^th century onwards a series of technological innovations occurred in Britain that transformed certain sectors of the British economy. Productivity increased hugely, and the British economy became the global center of manufacturing by the mid-19^th century. Western Europe followed the British lead and Europe grew rich, while Asia in general and India in particular, did not.

Explanations for this ’divergence’ are manifold. The focus of all explanations is a stark difference between Europe and Asia. Some find the cultural/religious difference significant -- the Protestant ethic and related social orientation towards mastering nature by scientific exploration, hard work and frugal living. Others argue that European institutions were conducive to technical innovation and economic growth -- free(ish)markets, individual property rights and such economically dynamic structures were the major differentiators between a dynamic Europe and a static Asia. Other explanations are also on offer.

The author however, offers an entirely different perspective.

He argues that the economic, political, social and ecological context in any given period of time determines the possibilities open for a society to choose from. Choices are not determined, but certainly constrained by circumstance. In the 18^th century, the context, so defined, differed across geographies and led to different paths being chosen -- and rationally so -- by different ‘agents’.

This general argument needs elaboration and validation.

Trade between Europe and Asia via the Red Sea and The Persian Gulf had existed for centuries, before an all sea route via the Cape of Good Hope was discovered by the Portuguese and Vasco Da Gama reached Kerela in 1498. About a century later the Dutch and the English (the French took a little longer) also came by sea in search of profit. From an initial fixation on pepper and other spices the ‘Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies' (the East India Company, in short) found another hugely profitable commodity for trade -- Indian cotton cloth -- coloured, checked and even coarse white. Cotton was more comfortable to wear than the commonly used wool and linen, was available in a wide variety of colours and patterns, and held colour much better too! Soon a huge and growing demand for Indian cottons was created in Britain and elsewhere. The fancy, coloured stuff was for the English consumer and the coarse for buying slaves with on the West African coast; and also to clothe the slaves so bought, in the Americas—and that includes the Caribbean sugar plantations. The quality of Indian cottons and the volumes that sea transport made possible, created and helped meet a huge and growing demand for Indian cloth. Cotton was king. And kings have enemies!

The boom in Indian cotton called forth two distinct responses. The powerful wool and linen industry pushed very hard for protection, which was given to them; and when duties proved inadequate to stem the tide, they asked for a complete ban on imports for domestic consumption and that too was given to them!   Alongside this, a cotton textile industry took birth! The huge market for cotton coupled with the protection granted by a mercantilist state made the cotton sector very attractive indeed and tech innovation followed the possibility of profit. Innovations in spinning made it possible to produce more cotton yarn much cheaper than the Indian hand spinner could and the British Industrial Revolution, led by cotton textiles, was on its way. Tech breakthroughs in weaving followed in time, but the importer of finished cotton cloth became, in the 19^th century, an importer of raw cotton instead and an exporter to the world of cotton textiles!

Two other sectors were part of the revolution -- coal and iron and steel. The principal driver in this context was ecological change -- extensive deforestation resulting in declining availability and rising prices of wood and charcoal. When wood became unavailable at reasonable prices, coal, available in plenty, boomed. For coal mines to function at depth, water had to be pumped out and for that a source of power was needed. Animal, human and water power were inadequate for the purpose and the steam engine came into being. Once a coal fired source of power was available various possibilities for its application in areas other than coal mines were quickly realized and implemented. Add to this the innovation in smelting iron using coal instead of wood charcoal and we have cheaper iron and steel too. Things are ready for takeoff. The steam powered Iron Horse, iron rails for it to gallop on with wagons and coaches in tow, and of course, steam power for manufacturing on much larger scales than was possible earlier.

The context -- competition from Indian cotton textiles, deforestation and its impact on fuel use and the actions of a proactive state willing and able to look after domestic economic interests -- created the possibilities for the English economy. The responses of the society to this context created a path that led to what was a revolution in manufacturing and transport: the Industrial Revolution of the 19^th century.

The Indian context in the 18^th and 19^th centuries was very different. Fuel use patterns did not begin to change away from wood to coal till the late 19^th century; the colonial state subordinated Indian economic interests to British interests and despite rather sophisticated financial and trade structures in place, there was no movement in directions that could have taken India towards a coal-steel-mechanized cotton textile industry based development paradigm.

It was not culture or institutions or any other huge difference between the India and the England of the times that stood in the way, it was context and the compulsions thereof.

One may find some of Prof Parthasarthi’s arguments, (especially those relating to the potential for technological change in India) a trifle hard to accept, but his core argument -- the significance of context in determining the path of change adopted by a society -- is powerful and thought provoking.

Happy reading.

Liberalism and its Discontents--- Francis Fukuyama

 

 Prof. Fukuyama’s latest little book (less than 200 pages) is, as always, both educative and thought- provoking. Clarity of thought and expression are rarely found together in works about political philosophy/ideology but Fukuyama manages both with consummate ease.

The author works towards defining an ideal by choosing and defining Liberalism, elaborating the justifications for this particular political point of view, its relationship with democracy, its excesses and the course corrections necessary to build a progressive and just society under its aegis.

The author argues that Liberalism is founded on the basic notions of human dignity, equality and autonomy which in turn require rights to be vested primarily in individuals, not in groups and be enforceable under laws in a justice system that is itself autonomous.

 This approach to politics emphasizes individual freedoms-- of speech, transactions, faith amongst many others. A focus on individual autonomy necessarily implies limitations of the powers of the state by law and enforcement of such constraints by institutions that protect that autonomy- courts, bureaucracy and media.

Liberalism so defined is justified on practical , moral and economic grounds. Practically, it is the best way of ensuring peaceful and progressive management of diversity; morally, the dignity of the individual human being is a fundamental human imperative and economically, liberalism has given the human race remarkable returns in terms of technological change, growth and development. At least, so goes the argument.

Liberalism and democracy are related but distinct. Democracy may be defined as ‘rule by the people’ as ‘institutionalized in free and fair multiparty elections’ based on universal adult suffrage. Liberal values and institutions reinforce democracy and an attack on these values is usually followed by one on democracy too-the spirit if not always the letter. Putin’s Russia is just one of several modern examples of this truism.

The ‘discontents’ with Liberalism arise due to unwarranted and undesirable extensions of the Liberal ideology. Particularly delightful, for a one who suffered neoclassical notions of economics being force-fed into one’s ignorant mind a long time ago, is Fukuyama’s critique of the free- market religion built on the foundations of ‘physics envy’( the compulsion to imitate the mathematical elegance of physics) and resulting in wildly unrealistic assumptions about economic behavior and slick models wholly inapplicable to real life.

Another threat to Liberal doctrine arises from Liberalism’s own creation-the technological revolution of the late 20th century- the Internet and all that it brought along with it. Not only does new tech empower authoritarian states but it has also concentrated undue power to control the dissemination of information in the hands of a few giant corporations. Since, in social media, there is no vetting, peer review or democratic deliberation every voice has equal weight and the dissemination of false and weaponized information is a major growth industry. Echo chambers are created and individuals are targeted  with information that feeds their personal predilections as displayed on social media. People thus bask in the reassuring comfort of information that reinforces their personal idiosyncrasies, oblivious of alternative points of view, validated data and the rest of the world around them. Information flows are controlled and manipulated and so are minds.

The problem with information technology giants and their power is real and clearly highlighted, but solutions do not appear to be readily available.

Fukuyama’s book defines an ideal and justifies it but there is no clear path defined to get to it, and their lies the rub. How does a society achieve the ideal from a very suboptimal real? If human beings are as greedy, power hungry, intolerant and violence prone as history has established, just how do we change it?

It is perhaps unfair to expect to find all answers in one slim book but at least the problem and the ideal are clearly defined by Prof Fukuyama. And that makes the book a very interesting read.

Happy reading

 

 

The Scandal Of Empire -- India And The Creation Of Imperial Britain by Nicholas Dirks

 

 Historian Niall Ferguson, in the preface to his book Civilization: The West And The Rest quotes playwright Alan Bennet who in his History Boys wondered whether history should be taught as “...a mode of contrarian argumentation, a communion with past Truth and Beauty or just ‘one fucking thing after another’”.

For most of us, the last option was what was on offer in long gone school days. The inevitable result was an abiding impression that history was an exercise in mind numbing boredom to be abandoned at the very first opportunity.

Nicholas Dirks, however, makes the study of history not only educative but remarkably interesting -- fascinating even. Dirks writes, as is his wont, clearly, forcefully and with a wealth of detail to back up his, often rather aggressive, assertions. The Scandal Of Empire is a delightful read -- both informative and spicy.

Dirks uses the biggest public scandal of 18^th century England-the impeachment and subsequent trial of Warren Hastings, former Governor General of The East India Company’s empire in India, to examine the ‘ignominious origins of empire’ mired in greed and exploitation.

The process, driven by Edmund Burke, lasted about nine years between 1786 and 1795. Although it resulted in the acquittal of Hastings, the whole drama served many other purposes that Dirks excavates and brings to light. As he points out, the whole exercise was a critique of the activities of the Company’s servants in India, not of Empire itself. That a trading company under the protective umbrella of the British Crown and Parliament had mutated into a rogue state that made war, dispensed justice, coined money and levied taxes was not being questioned. The legitimacy of Empire was not in question, merely the conduct of its servants. The need of the hour was a cleansing and establishing of appropriate State control on the greedy and often unjust minions of the Company. After a thorough catharsis -- a sanitization -- the focus would shift to the scandal that was India – a derelict and degraded civilization in urgent need of the civilizing influence of a kind but firm paternal overlord.

Dirks informs us, rather tongue-in-cheek, that Edmund Burke himself had lost much of his fortune in speculation in East India Company shares and that the established aristocracy in England was increasingly disturbed by the return of hugely rich Nabobs -- Company officials with massive, ill-gotten gains -- who bought their way into positions of power and status, threatening the existing structures of privilege and power.

The author also establishes an interesting link between the rise of empire and Capitalism. The English stock market and the Company grew in parallel with EIC shares being the most significant market drivers in the early years; and incidentally both were accompanied by huge public scandals of bribery and corruption.

The chapter on corruption where he details the extractive process whereby huge fortunes were acquired by grasping and ruthless Company officials is downright delicious, verging on the gossipy.

The story of the British in India is both fascinating as story and significant as a primary means of understanding the structures of state and society that characterize modern India. Nicholas Dirks gives us glimpses of a portion of that history and does so in a skillful and hugely entertaining manner.

To entice you, dear reader, to read this book I shall end with a revealing quote from Robert Clive who was also accused of corruption, was also acquitted of the charge and had, among other things, replied as under:

“A great prince was dependent on my pleasure; an opulent city lay at my mercy... I walked through vaults which were thrown open to me alone, piled on either hand with gold and jewels. Mr Chairman, at this moment, I stand astonished at my own moderation.”

Happy reading.

 

Why Nations Fail—The Origins of Power Prosperity and Poverty by Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson

 

When eminent economists assert that the drivers of development have their roots in politics and that history matters a great deal in the process, it can come as a jolt to many modern policy makers and ideologues. This is particularly true of those who consider economic problems to be quasi technical issues solvable a with healthy dose of unregulated markets and free trade and capital flows. The hard science of economics does not -- in this view -- need any support from the conditional, qualified and often muddled propositions of the ‘soft’ disciplines.

Reading Acemoglu and Robinson is both exhilarating and educational, as they carefully and with a wealth of examples ranging from ancient Rome, medieval Japan and Europe to colonial America, take apart the traditional explanations of poverty and inequality and offer a powerfully convincing alternative.

The authors classify extant explanations of poverty and inequality into three broad groups:-

Geography: climate and related disease vectors and poor soil productivity

Culture and religion: other-worldliness if not downright indolence

Sheer ignorance: policy makers unaware of existing straightforward technical solutions

They then proceed to establish the inadequacy of these explanations in the real world.

The authors begin in a slightly dramatic fashion by looking at two identically named towns located close together, but on opposite sides of the US -Mexican border.

 

“The city of Nogales is cut in half by a fence……look north and you will see Nogales Arizona, USA. Life south of the fence, (in Nogales Sonora, Mexico) just a few feet away, is rather different."

 The towns share a common climate and the population has common racial-cultural roots, but one is a developed and prosperous township while the other is far from being so. The difference, the authors contend, lies in the institutions governing the political and economic life of the two towns. A more convincing example is that of the two Koreas—widely different development performance, but identical geographical and racial/cultural characteristics.

Historical contingencies, the authors contend, determine the evolution of political institutions in a society -- the manner in which power is distributed across the population and the constraints, if any, that regulate the exercise of political power. Political institutions in turn condition and support economic institutions -- the rules governing property, contracts and exchange -- the provision of public goods and also other critical institutions like those for dispensing justice and ensuring security and law and order. Institutions together determine economic growth and the distribution of income and wealth -- in effect, the development outcomes for the society.

Societies where inclusive institutions evolve, experience prosperity. Such institutions are characterized by pluralistic distribution of power, effective constraints on its use, secure property rights and the enforcement of economic and other contracts , effective centralized states that ensure availability of public goods, security and law and order.

The critical questions however is, why such institutions evolve in some societies and not in others. Here the authors emphasize the role of critical junctures in history.  The Black Death in 14th century Europe created conditions -- a drastic reduction in the labour force, primarily -- that pushed western Europe towards the gradual elimination of serfdom, but had quite the opposite effect in eastern Europe where ground conditions were different. In the authors words, “The outcome of events during critical junctures are shaped by the weight of history. The outcome, however, is not historically predetermined but contingent.” In effect, history matters! And the accidents of history matter!

More significantly for most of the world, the widespread European colonization of the Americas and much of Asia and Africa conditioned the nature of institutions that evolved in the colonized territories.

The authors go into great and fascinating detail about the colonization of the Americas. The story of Spanish and Portuguese colonization of South America is very different from the British efforts in North America and the different conditions that the colonizers found in the areas they reached, created different outcomes over time. South America saw the establishment of brutally extractive institutions and, because institutions tend to persist, iniquitous extractive institutions have been the norm South of the Rio Grande. Extractive institutions result in the failure of nations and the colonial legacy of South America is visible in the relative failure of both democracy and development in that region. North of the great river however, conditions were very different and all the initial efforts of feudal vested interests to establish a clone of feudal Britain failed.

 The colonial experience of Africa and the consequences thereof for post-colonial Africa, is another interesting area the authors examine.  

The story and accompanying analysis of how a critical juncture –colonialism -- created different trajectories of political, social and economic development in different environments is a fascinating one and for those of us without much exposure to world history, hugely educative.

The basic thesis, that extractive institutions do not enable sustained growth and that inclusive institutions are a necessary condition for development can perhaps be questioned on issues of definition. What is an ideal inclusive society and what an extractive one? Can there not be shades of grey here, and how will that impinge on growth paradigms?

Regardless of academic quibbles, the book is a long, but extremely interesting and informative read. The effort is well worth the reward.

Happy reading.