The author says that in the real sense of the word, the “self-made” entrepreneur has yet to make his appearance
on the Indian scene.
Like many other countries, India has a mixed economy, comprising the efficient private sector, and the (not so efficient) public sector. The author says that an unintended consequence of this public-private partnership was that the bureaucracy came to develop its own agenda, and pursue its own interests. The political class also came to depend on industry for (unaudited) resources to finance the electoral process.
The Tatas believed in the separation of the economy from politics. The model offered by the Tata house of business – philanthropic, and aloof from politics – could not be successfully replicated across the length and breadth of the country. Some of the new capitalists – especially in the Information Technology – did borrow from the Tata model. But, many of the others who emerged owed their new-found wealth and standing to their dealings with the state and the political class. The author dubs these capitalists as “crony” capitalists; and they are to be found not only in India, but in many other parts of East and South-East Asia.
The entrepreneurs that emerged over the past few decades were largely drawn from extant merchant communities such as the Baniyas, the Marwaris and the Sindhis. These are communities traditionally linked to the bazaar (markets). The author says that social mobility – to which the Indian polity stands committed – has not yet found a truly economic dimension. And capitalism has become the preserve of the upper and middle classes alone. In that sense, the “self-made” entrepreneur is only a member of the traditional merchant class who has made good!
As the Indian state gradually withdraws from many spheres of economic activity – in line with worldwide trends – the author seeks a new balance between the private and the public sector; one that is based on enlightened self-interest, and one that is more equitable.