|

| |
Snakes,
Ladders, and Indian Billionaires
Vinay Lal
16 November 2007
Colonial officials and visitors from Britain during the some 200 years when
India was under colonial rule spoke frequently of the immense wealth of
Indian maharajas. Indeed, the ‘inaugural’ moment of British
rule in India, Clive’s triumph at arms at the mango grove of Plassey
in Bengal, has attached to it an extraordinary story about the plunder of
India’s wealth. Clive had connived with Mir Jafar to defeat the Nawab
of Bengal, Siraj-u-daulah, and he is said to have been richly rewarded by
Mir Jafar who succeeded to the throne. In the now forgotten Hollywood film,
“Clive of India”, the English hero is shown wading through a
roomful of valuable rubies, pearls, and diamonds, the riches of the Orient
thrown at his feet. Clive would in time be put on trial on charges of corruption
and bribery, and one of the most brilliant moments in the trial comes when
Clive, accused of having gorged on India’s wealth, defends himself
with an observation that there was a great deal more that could have been
his for the asking: ‘Here I stand, my Lords, astonished at my own
moderation.’
Judging from today’s newspapers, a new breed of maharajas has come
to the fore in India. There is feverish excitement about the billionaires
being spawned by India’s growing economy, and almost nothing appears
to signal the evident pride in the country’s achievements as the
fact, if fact it is, that India has more billionaires than any other country
in Asia, more billionaires than Japan, which only a decade ago was always
held up by Indian middle classes as an example of an Asian country that
worked, and even more billionaires than China which has apparently set
standards for rapid industrialization previously unknown in history. In
all these matters, Indian newspapers turn to the magazine by which the
monied class swears, “Forbes”. Today’s “Hindu”
reports, in a piece entitled “A tide of billionaires: Lakshmi Mittal
is India’s richest, again”, that, in aggregate, the wealth
of the 40 richest Indians “surged to $351 billion, a bit more than
double of last year’s $170 billion, making India’s 40 by far
the wealthiest such group in all of Asia”.
Some weeks ago Indian newspapers were beside themselves with joy at the
information that Mukesh Ambani had become the richest man in the world.
This piece of information was splashed on the front pages of most dailies.
Forbes’s list of the richest Indians pegs him at number 2 with assets
of $49 billion, just behind the $51 billion stashed away by steel-maker
Lakshmi Mittal. ‘Stashed away’ is perhaps not the best phrase,
since, unlike the former Nizam of Hyderabad, who according to popular
legend wrapped up huge bundles of banknotes in newspapers and spent little
on himself or anyone else, Ambani and Mittal are, in some respects, huge
spenders. Ambani has gifted a custom-tailored jet to his wife on her birthday,
and Mittal reportedly spent something in the vicinity of $80 million on
his daughter’s wedding. These indulgences do not raise any eyebrows
among the elites and the climbers in the middle classes, who take heart
in the exceedingly modest beginnings of someone such as Mittal and hold
out the hope that Lakshmi will similarly walk into their lives and homes.
Things have come so far that Azim Premji, who for years held the top spot
among India’s billionaires and was always described as a modest
and self-effacing man, has in less than two years become a somewhat forgotten
figure. It is not merely that he has been eclipsed by the Ambanis and
the real estate developers; to the extent that he might have appeared
as embodying some notion of trusteeship, he has become passé. There
is little time for him among members of the social set today.
The comings and going of these frivolous spenders today passes for news.
We know that social workers, conscientious commentators, and political
activists are likely to respond to news about Indian billionaires with
umbrage at the shocking insensitivity of rich people and insistent reminders
that poverty, disease, illiteracy, malnutrition, and even hunger are endemic
and widespread throughout India. Some states do better than others, but
no state is without its own gory afflictions. Those writers, social reformers
and activists – among them P. Sainath, Aruna Roy, Sandeep Pandey,
and many others -- who alert us to these problems are doubtless right
to do so, and it matters not that their labors may not have, in the aggregate,
always made a difference. But, nevertheless, it is also necessary to add
that their responses do not encompass the spectrum of considerations that
the emergence of Indian billionaires brings to mind. Just what, for example,
is wealth, and what has wealth meant in the Indian tradition? Conversely,
what do we mean by poverty, and are the poor of the same as the poor of
the remote past or even of a generation or two ago? The afflictions of
the poor may be better known, but it is well nigh impossible that the
afflictions of the rich are not similarly serious even if they are largely
unrecognized, apart from such common manifestations as coronary heart
disease, obesity, cancer, and the like.
This narrative of Indian billionaires brings me to the game, most likely
of Indian origin, of snakes and ladders. We have been hearing only about
the ladders – everything in Indian seems to be going up, up, up:
the Sensex (here, again, delirious joy among the elites and climbers),
the growth rate of the economy, the onslaught of cars on the road, and,
of course, the number of billionaires. Where there are ladders, however,
there are also bound to be snakes. Towards the close of the nineteenth
century, when the Union Jack dominated the seas and an imperious people
seemed to have every reason to be brimming with confidence, the English
modified the game and increased the number of ladders. The ancient Indians,
I suspect, knew better, and it is worth recalling that the British Empire
came tumbling down soon thereafter. There is the question, naturally,
of how anyone can acquire a massive fortune without being a snake, but
perhaps this does more discredit to snakes than is necessary. What our
ancestors knew was that snakes begin to proliferate as one goes up the
ladders.
I am tempted to think, apropos the game of snakes and ladders, that the
supreme way to write about poverty is to write about the lives of the
super rich. That may be the only social merit of the advent of a new generation
of billionaires in India.
|