Nationalism takes away from poverty issues
He not only expressed his concern about poverty but also opined that it is very important to have a space in which there can be disagreement on the fundamental ideas of what India constitutes, what is nationalism and what is economic progress.Apart from sharing his views on poverty, He also spoke about how his years at JNU helped him attain a much better sense of Indian politics.I think it is very important - even when I do not agree with people's views - to have a space in which there can be disagreement on the fundamental ideas of what India constitutes, what is nationalism.
By India Today Web Desk: Abhijit Vinayak Banerjee, the Indian-origin economist who jointly won the 2019 Nobel Prize with Esther Duflo and Michael Kremer, said strident nationalism diverts attention from pressing issues like poverty, especially in a country like India.

In an exclusive interview to India Today TV Consulting Editor Rajdeep Sardesai, Banerjee also said that some sort of minimum income guarantee scheme is absolutely necessary for the country.

advertisement

Banerjee not only expressed his concern about poverty but also opined that it is very important to have a space in which there can be disagreement on the fundamental ideas of what India constitutes, what is nationalism and what is economic progress.

Apart from sharing his views on poverty, Banerjee also spoke about how his years at JNU helped him attain a much better sense of Indian politics. The Nobel laureate also opened up on his relationship with his colleague and wife Esther, his love for Indian cuisine, and on the Bengali-Nobel connection.

Here is the full transcript of the interview:

Rajdeep Sardesai: Give us a sense of how you are feeling at the moment with that title now before you as a Nobel laureate?



Abhijit Banerjee: I am elated. I mean, how would one feel? It's just one of those things which happen to very few people if they are lucky once in their lives, so I am elated.



RS: The tributes are flowing in from Indian political leaders and intellectuals. Do you feel a sense of pride in being an Indian? As an Indian, is it a particularly special moment for you?



AB: Yes, I think so. For me, psychologically, I am very much an Indian. I think when I say my county, it is always India. So, for me, there is no choice there, it's essentially programmed into me. I see myself through the eyes of Indians.



RS: You come through the root of a family of academics. Presidency College, then Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) and interestingly, you spent a few days in Tihar Jail for agitation. Who do you owe this great success to--your parents, your years in JNU and Presidency College or that stint in Tihar which may have put you face-to-face with poverty?



AB: My parents were not poor, I mean we were a very average middle-class family of academics, but my grandfather happened to have built house literally next to one of Kolkata's largest slum. So, in our previous book, we actually write about the fact that I grew up playing with the slum kids. I had a first-hand experience of poverty. I was very jealous of them as they (slum kids) did not have to go to school.



RS: In a sense, are you saying that those early years in Kolkata shaped a lot of your beliefs and eventually led you into this detailed research on poverty?

AB: Early years in Kolkata, surely. I mean, that sort of makes it incumbent on me to at least engage with poverty, but I think my parents were huge influences. We had a discussion of things like poverty at home all the time -- what its consequences are, what its causes are and they would often be based on discussions on the lives of the poor at home and the facts were pretty evident to us.

RS: And the years in JNU...particularly this was a period of agitation in a way in your student life. Did those years in JNU and the Tihar incident play a role in your research?

AB: Yes, so I think, what it did to me was it politicised me. By that, I do not mean politicised me in the sense of becoming a member of the JNU or particular political unit of the institution. But it made me realise how important politics is. I think JNU is something very important for me. I came from Kolkata, there was Left politics which I kind of knew. But I really did not know about the rest of Indian politics. So the Lohiaites were very important for me, I got to know the Gandhians, the RSS--all of these other kinds of facets of Indian politics and it taught me a bit about how to relate to each of them, where they stand, what our conversations were. It gave me a much better sense of politics in India.

advertisement

RS: The reason I am asking you this is because we are in a time where JNU itself seems to be targeted by some as a space for so-called anti-national elements. The nature of the conflict between the outside world and JNU has changed. In a sense, do you believe one must revisit this rather than look at the polarisations that have been embedded into our society or the way in which JNU students tend to be demonised by some?

AB: Yes, I do think that it is important for us to preserve the space for disagreement in our society. I think JNU is seen as a space for "treasonous thoughts" rather than space for legitimate disagreement. I think our entire society is worse off for that. I think it is very important - even when I do not agree with people's views - to have a space in which there can be disagreement on the fundamental ideas of what India constitutes, what is nationalism, what is economic progress. I think we need disagreement on these things because I think that disagreement makes us wiser and more able to deal with a very complex and fast-changing world.

advertisement

RS: Is it also, therefore, a time to look at the entire issue of poverty and how we see it because of the time in which we live? There is so much talk about neo-middle-class and neo-liberalism even in India. So, in a sense, you receiving this recognition--should it also read like you seminal book on revisiting poverty or rethinking on the way we look at poverty?

AB: I think, yes, in a peculiar way. I think we have always wanted to think of it as being described by economic status. I absolutely feel that the psychological damages of poverty are extremely critical. I think the loss of dignity, displacement, living in ugly places and violence - these are critical dimensions of poverty. When I think of poverty, for instance, in the US right now, I think it is hugely associated with disempowerment, not just income-based poverty. People in the US who are classified as poor would be "very middle-class" in India. But they lack dignity, they lack a sense of wellbeing and that transforms into an extremely high mortality rate. The whites in the US are dying much faster now than they were dying five years ago. And that's not accidental, there is something to do with feeling disempowered. So I think the space for dignity, space for being in a comfort zone-these are important ideas related to poverty.

advertisement

RS: One of the ideas you threw up ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha elections was about the minimum income guarantee scheme. You were reportedly advising the Congress party or did contribute to the notion of a minimum income scheme, which Rahul Gandhi then called Nyay. Do you believe that scheme still is an idea whose time has come even though Congress lost the election?

AB: I think some minimum income, whether it was that scheme or not, is certainly something we should consider because there are a bunch of people who are facing enormous risks suddenly. Everything in their life vanishes because there is too much rain or too little rain or suddenly a bank collapses and because of that, the construction of buildings comes to a halt. Therefore a lot of people lose their jobs. All of that risk needs to be mitigated somehow. We are subjecting people to an enormous amount of risk, especially in today's finance-driven, quite fragile economy. I think having a safety net for people at risk is important.

RS: But you know the flipside is people say this is "handout economics" and that sort of puts a strain on resources. Do you believe that there is a general lack of empathy in our system even today?

AB: Our long tradition is that Brahmins got handouts from other people. "Handouts" was not a pejorative term till somehow we in our particular modernity decided that we want these western notions of people doing what they have to for earning. Now given the amount that risks that live in society, I think that it is a bit of a fantasy. It's not that these people are lazy and lying on their backs because they are poor. They are trying very hard but the rain fails or the job vanishes. What do they do then? The brisk brick kiln closes because of an environmental permit--where do they go? I think the idea that this is simply lazy people who need to kick themselves into a state of economic betterment is kind of a fantasy that I really think we in India should know better than to buy into.

RS: So you say that removing inequality should remain a fundamental objective of any government-whether it is the Narendra Modi government or a Congress government? The Modi government also claims to have launched a series of pro-poor schemes. Do you believe that must be particular in a country like India?

AB: I believe, first, that there is no contradiction between having a well-functioning economy and being generous to the people who are worst off. I think the idea that high tax rates create extreme disincentives, there is no evidence for in my view. I think that high tax rates make people want to hide their money, but I think the government is getting better at finding. So I do think that there is a sense in which what I deplore about the recent downturn and its reaction. I think the government had gone the right way in raising taxes on the rich and then it was basically cut back because it is going to save the economy. I actually don't think it going to save the economy. I think the government had the right idea and we should move towards a more generous welfare state funded by higher taxes on the rich. I think that is the first step towards a stable economy where people are not desperate; they are not losing their livelihoods right and left. I think that was the right direction and I was supportive of the government's view in that general concept. I was disappointed when the taxes on rich were rolled back.

RS: So you don't think that the 2019 election in a way was a rejection of the minimum income scheme in the way it was projected by some? Is there dissidence between politics and economic choices that people make?

AB: In my view, people were looking for a leader who projected a view of the nation that spoke to them the most. You can see that the young, well-educated urban people are most likely to have voted for the NDA. Those are people who were not looking for handouts, they were not voting for handouts. I do not think they were voting for or against handouts. They were mostly interested in whose projecting the vision of a strong nation. I think there is a sense in which Mr. Modi constructed the most effective rhetoric and maybe the Balakot incident did not hurt as it sort of reinforced this particular factor. I don't think that the election was fought on whether there should be handouts or not.

RS: But does it worry you that this sort of populist and strident nationalism shifts the focus from real issues that should matter including jobs, slowdown, and the concerns of the poor? Do you believe that strident nationalism actually works against that?

AB: I absolutely believe. I think you are exactly right that this means that the central place in the political discourse is on being a strong nation and focuses on what we said to China or Pakistan, especially at a time when the economy needs a lot of TLC (tender loving care).

RS: You are sharing this recognition with your wife Esther Duflo as well as Michael Kremer. What role has Esther particularly played in your life because this seems to be a match made in heaven?

AB: (Laughs)...To the extent that matches are made in heaven, absolutely. I mean she plays the role of my best friend. She is someone I talk to about ideas all the time. We have very complementary skills, which is fortunate. So we do not actually step on each other's toes very much, we manage to work together with feeling that we are somehow cowing each other out.

RS: What is it also about Bengalis and the Nobels - from Rabindranath Tagore to Amartya Sen and now you? What is this special connection between the Bengalis and the Nobels?

AB: I don't know much about that. But let me put my affiliations more clearly. I am half Bengali and half Marathi.

RS: But Dr. Amartya Sen must have played a special role for you and it must feel great to follow his footsteps.

AB: In a sense, I mean, not particularly more for me but the entire generation of people like me who are in the field of development economics. I identify with him (Amartya Sen) less on ethnic grounds than on intellectual grounds. He has been an intellectual inspiration to the entire field. I think his idea that poverty needs to be fought with is inspiring. And I think he inspired many people of my generation of development economics. Both Bengalis and non-Bengalis.

RS: I have been reading about you in terms of the fact that quite apart from your skills as a development economist, your great love for Bengali cuisine as well as Indian classical music.

AB: That's right. I actually like all cuisines. Bengali cuisine and any other cuisine you throw at me, I am extremely greedy.

RS: So how are you, Esther and Michael are going to celebrate this recognition? What do academics do when they achieve such a feat? Will you go back to the poverty lab and it's just another day or is there a special celebration that you planned?

AB: Well, today we will have a very nerdy celebration. We have already had a small celebration and we will have a party with nerds like us in the evening where we will have nerdy conversations.

RS: What's your message to young students studying economics or development economics?

AB: I think that there is no reason to do that job at Deutsche Bank (forgive me Deutsche Bank) because they are paying you a lot. If you feel passionate about doing something, ignore all those temptations. I do feel that there is enormous excitement in doing interesting and good things.

Read | Indian-origin Abhijit Banerjee wins Nobel Prize for Economics for work on global poverty

Also Read | When Nobel Laureate Abhijit Banerjee spent 10 days in Tihar jail