Raghuram Rajan I Do What I Do Review

Raghuram Rajan is, politically, an important figure because he managed the RBI in two unlike regimes

Raghuram Chiliad Rajan created more news as governor of the Reserve Depository financial institution of India than his predecessors. His international standing as an academic (as Professor of Finance at the Academy of Chicago) also as his personal flamboyance (partly his option of suits and neckties) may have contributed — since he followed the aforementioned prudent path charted past previous governors like YV Reddy and D Subba Rao, focusing largely on containing inflation.

However, he also differed from them in being uncommonly articulate. In 2017, he came out with a pop book on various economic problems (including the acts of the RBI under him) with the championship 'I Do What I Do' (suggesting a caste of personal vanity, which its introduction and then tries to make light of). Rajan is, politically, an important figure because he managed the RBI in ii different regimes, sympathy for which practically demarcates the political space. 'Left' and 'right' are terms loosely used in political debates today and Rajan has become a darling of the 'left' although he is a follower of Milton Friedman, the hard-line free marketplace economist. But he had some visible differences with the NDA regime, and being perceived as 'opposed to Modi' is tantamount to being 'leftist' to a large portion of the liberal intelligentsia.

Raghuram Rajan. File Photo

In I Do What I Exercise, Rajan explains conspicuously his logic for non lowering the policy involvement rate despite the clamour of the industry. The general belief is that lower involvement rates increase demand since people are tempted to borrow to consume which leads to college growth, although if inflation is high the same spending fetches less. Inflation leads people to buy appurtenances because of the expectation that prices will go fifty-fifty higher and this leads to an clan made between aggrandizement and growth. Just Rajan points out that when people get used to higher inflation rates, trusting in inflation for growth could lead to an up spiralling of prices which could be hazardous. He therefore favours depression and steady inflation rates to proceed demand stable instead of focusing overly on growth. The daze treatment to lower aggrandizement used in the US in 1981 would probable do enormous damage and the process of keeping aggrandizement in check over the long term is the best.

Rajan states his position clearly and one could presume that although it was not publicly articulated, the before governors used the aforementioned logic of not lowering involvement rates; one recollects that in 2012 there was an open rift between P Chidambaram the UPA finance government minister and RBI governor D Subba Rao — the finance minister pressurizing the RBI to reduce rates but the RBI governor refusing to budge. Raghuram Rajan was main economic advisor at that time and may have been taken to exist with the government, just he acted differently when he became governor of the Reserve Bank of Republic of india himself.

I Practise What I Practice is essentially a collection of speeches knit together by a narrative and it is the sections dealing with political ideas that are most interesting in that we get a sense of Rajan'due south political standpoint and allows us to inquire into what they mean specifically, i.eastward: their relevance to the Indian context. Every bit a beginning Rajan cites Francis Fukuyama on the three pillars needed to foster political freedoms and economical success: a strong regime, rule of law and democratic accountability. Rajan then goes on to add another pillar to Fukuyama'due south above three which is a 'free market place'.

Beginning with 'strong government' I gather that Rajan really means a 'strong state' from this statement: "a potent government is also i that provides an constructive and off-white administration through clean, motivated, and competent administrators who tin evangelize good governance."

To elaborate on the difference, a government is the political administration of a state or land. A country is the geographically demarcated entity that has a distinct financial organisation, constitution, and is sovereign and independent from other states, every bit recognised past them. It is the space where a government can exercise its powers through policy changes/formulations. A government composed of a coalition of parties — as in Federal republic of germany today — could exist weak since a coalition usually has political disagreements but that in no way impinges upon the strength of the state. India has had a succession of stiff governments (Indira Gandhi's, AB Vajpayee'due south and UPA No 2) but the land has progressively weakened, every bit evidenced in the administrative lacunae and failure to implement the law impartially. People with power have found it easy to circumvent the law though, nominally, all are equal before it.

Fukuyama'south second pillar, 'dominion of law' is culturally spring and provides a basic stable lawmaking of bear that should non be violated by either government or the citizenry.  The state's deportment are constrained by a widely understood code of moral and righteous behaviour, enforced past religious, cultural, or judicial authority and largely bound by religious beliefs and social conventions; the notion of dharma, for instance, could broadly exist regarded as the traditional code by with righteous behaviour is judged in Republic of india. The third pillar, 'democratic accountability', means that the government has to exist popularly accepted, the people having the right to throw out unpopular, corrupt or incompetent leaders.

Earlier going on to look at how Fukuyama's three pillars translate in the Indian context it is pertinent to look at the fourth pillar erected by Rajan which pertains to the free market place. In elaborating upon it Rajan asks why, since different democracy which treats individuals every bit, each one having a vote, and the free market (contrarily) empowers consumers based on how much money they take and their wherewithal, the average voter in a democracy does non  vote to dispossess the rich and powerful. The answer offered is that the voter sees the rich as having come up out of a transparent market and their wealth as owing to they beingness better managers; if (sometimes) the property rights of the rich do not become widespread back up in emerging markets information technology is considering they are seen as having acquired their wealth dishonestly.

The overall effectiveness of the 4 pillars in Bharat rests on India being a democracy — Rajan affirms that India took to commonwealth every bit a 'duck takes to water' and compares the state to others where democracy has not been every bit successful. Only hither is what he says well-nigh the significant of republic: "A vibrant, accountable democracy does not simply imply that people bandage their vote freely every v years. It requires the full mix of a raucous investigative printing, public debate uninhibited by political correctness, many political parties representing varied constituencies, and a variety of non-governmental organisations organising and representing interests."

Since and then much of Rajan's argument depends on Republic of india beingness a truthful democracy, the question to be put hither is this: while all people have votes and in that location is an unfettered printing, is there public debate in India in which representatives of all classes participate? Where in that location is lack of a free debate, the tendency is to expect at the state and blame information technology for inhibiting debate. But India is dissimilar; the level playing field unsaid past 'public debate' is inhibited by the aboriginal social structures corresponding to hierarchy. Only a small educated class participates in public debates, fifty-fifty every bit it pretends to correspond 'opinion'.

In one case doubt is admitted over Bharat being a true democracy in which public argue happens we find many of Rajan'south other suppositions collapsing too. Since 'rule of police force' is equated with dharma and dharma is itself a relativistic organisation in which correct/incorrect are related in some manner to vocation/nascency information technology may not exist compatible with a truly democratic system in which all people are equal before the constabulary. ('All people are equal before God', on the other hand, translates very well into democratic values.)

Further, Rajan relies on Fukuyama and offers this argument: "The caste system led to division of labour, which ensured that entire populations could never be devoted totally to the war endeavor. And so through much of history, state of war was never as harsh, or military machine contest between states every bit fierce, as in Cathay. Every bit a result, the historical pressure for Indian states to develop strong governments that intruded into every facet of society was muted. At the same time, withal, the codes of just behaviour for rulers emanating from ancient Indian scriptures served to constrain whatever arbitrary do of ability by Indian rulers. Republic of india, therefore, had weaker government, constrained further past rule of law."

This may be true but 'rule of police force' that functions well in hierarchical society may be incompatible with democratic values.  If this argument is extended, the growing weakness of the state in the by few decades could be attributed to the 'small-scale force per unit area upon the Indian land to intrude into every facet of society.'

The more one reads Rajan the more does one feel that his political diagnosis does not take Republic of india's specificities into account. Fifty-fifty his explanation for why voters do non dispossess the rich and powerful seems out of place. Information technology could only be that dharma or 'rule of police' in India promotes a tendency not to intrude. Dharma appeals more than to inner conviction than to external manifestations, which might have led to more 'intrusions'.

Raghuram Rajan as governor of RBI followed a path not very unlike from that of his predecessors but 1 yet wonders if someone with his kind of credentials (and association with an international agency like the Imf) is the correct pick to head India'due south cardinal bank since it is imperative that India'due south financial autonomy should not exist compromised. Rajan had earlier authored a paper arguing that failed states should invite outsiders/foreigners who have been belongings positions in multilateral agencies (Un, IMF, assist agencies etc.) to dominion, indicating that the autonomy of a nation is less fundamental to him than its direction.

Whatever the truth in the thing, someone like Rajan with an bookish groundwork in the West but with a small understanding of Republic of india would tend to advocate 'universalist' economic principles without taking local problems into account. As an instance, he (like Montek Singh Ahluwalia, likewise formerly of the Imf) advocates cash transfers instead of strengthening public services. Rajan dismisses the refrain that the poor will drink away the money transferred into their accounts and argues that they could build capabilities through educational activity and healthcare. 'Drink' could exist an overestimated bogey just one wonders if a written report has been made to define if the poor are not paying for unnecessary medical treatment or low quality private teaching, with no possibility of their exploitation coming to lite. The poor are socially lower placed than doctors and teachers, which ways that they may not be able to make the demands that a eye-class consumer would. These are bug a local might understand only perhaps not someone from Chicago or Harvard. If public services are not delivered, the poor could get to a political representative — but non if private enterprise is the culprit.

MK Raghavendra is a film scholar and author of seven books including The Oxford India Brusque Introduction to Bollywood (2016). He is deeply interested in social, political and cultural issues in India, an interest that informs his books on film.

harriswaintly.blogspot.com

Source: http://www.firstpost.com/living/i-do-what-i-do-a-critical-reading-of-raghuram-rajans-book-on-his-time-as-rbi-governor-4282295.html

Share this post