Skip to main content

Neoliberalism, India Shining, Culture Redefined...

The narrative of "Shining India" is a fairly straightforward narrative. It is a story of growth and development, a story of high rises, start ups, call centers, IT hubs, and tremendous development accomplished through trade liberalization.

Development is storied in the form of infrastructures, roads, hopitals for NRIs, and the multiplexes that are continually being targeted at the NRIs living abroad (look for instance at the most recent narratives of development being articulated in the context of Gujarat). India has progressed so much that going back to India is no longer a dream, but rather a reality, where you can combine the lifestyle of neoliberal capitalism with the spices of the local culture, filled with the colors, tastes, and thrills of the spaces NRIs nostalgically think of as home. For the NRI, it is once again an opportunity to re-invent one's home that is now devoid of the problems of poor infrastructure that once plagued India.

It is precisely however in this very India of the seven-eight figure salaries, high rise complexes, and fast-paced progress, that a counter-narrative plays out. The plot of this counter-narrative builds on the stories of inaccess, poverty, and social injustices that are perpetrated at the intersections of classism, casteism, gendered oppression, etc. For example, the shining example of Gujarat is punctuated by the stories of large scale farmer suicides in the same state. The question that these counter-narratives raise then are questions about meanings of terms such as "development" and "progress." Would one of the fastest developing states of India allow for its farmers to fall so deeply into poverty that suicide seems like the only meaningful option in such farming communities? How would the pictures of development portrayed in stories of "Shining Gujarat" engage with the narratives of these farmers and their families, who have been pushed to suicide precisely because of these neoliberal reforms?

In some ways, even as I raise these question, I am deeply aware of what the proponents of neoliberal India would point out: that I am deeply out of touch with reality in India and that there are no basis for arguments about injustices in India today (for them, and perhaps rightly so, things such as farmer suicides don't happen in the India they live in). They would tell me that in India, the poor are better off than they were a decade back. And yet, the stories of the poor, the stories I gather from my fieldwork over the last decade, the conversations with those who have been dispossed precisely because of the neoliberal policies, continue to stare back at this neoliberal narrative.

So, for my friends who are so completely taken aback by the progress their nation state has made: How would neoliberal India respond to the stories of oppressions narrated by its farmers, indigenous communities, and workers?

Popular posts from this blog

Zionist hate mongering, the race/terror trope, and the Free Speech Union: Part 1

March 15, 2019. It was a day of terror. Unleashed by a white supremacist far-right terrorist. Driven by hate for brown people. Driven by Islamophobic hate. Earlier in the day, I had come across a hate-based hit piece targeting me, alongside other academics, the University of Auckland academic Professor Nicholas Rowe , Professor Richard Jackson at Otago University, Professor Kevin P Clements at Otago University, Dr. Rose Martin from University of Auckland and Dr. Nigel Parsons at Massey University.  Titled, "More extremists in New Zealand Universities," the article threw in the labels "terror sympathisers" and "extremist views." Written by one David Cumin and hosted on the website of the Israel Institute of New Zealand, the article sought to create outrage that academics critical of Israeli settler colonialism and apartheid are actually employed by universities in New Zealand. Figure 1: The web post written by David Cumin on the site of Israel Institute

Whiteness, NCA, and Distinguished Scholars

In a post made in response to the changes to how my discipline operates made by the Executive Committee of the largest organization of the discipline, the National Communication Association (NCA), one of the editors of a disciplinary journal Rhetoric and Public Affairs (RPA), Professor Martin J. Medhurst, a Distinguished Scholar of the discipline, calls out what he sees as the threat of identity (see below for his full piece published in the journal that he has edited for 20+ years, with 2019 SJR score of 0.27). In what he notes is a threat to the "scholarly merit" of the discipline, Professor Medhurst sets up a caricature of what he calls "identity." In his rhetorical construction of the struggles the NCA has faced over the years to find Distinguished Scholars of colour, he shares with us the facts. So let's look at the facts presented by this rhetor. It turns out, as a member of the Distinguished Scholar community of the NCA, Mr. Medhurst has problems wit

Disinformation, Zionist propaganda, and free speech: Far right cancel culture

Thursday October 12, 2023. The settler colonial occupation had unleashed its infrastructure of violence over the Palestinian people over a period of five days. Gaza was being indiscriminately bombarded, with mass civilian casualties that Amnesty International noted " must be investigated as war crimes ." At 3:32 p.m., my office phone rang. I was occupied and the call went to the voicemail. "Dutta, you are a murderous, f***ing, racist c***. Go back to where you belong...I will see to your termination in New Zealand." A couple of hours before that, an email had gone out from the Zionist Dane Giraud to the email listserv of the Free Speech Union, performed as a supposed apology for attacking my academic freedom. In the email, Giraud referred to my earlier b log post on the interlinkages between far-right Zionism, attacks on academic freedom, and the free speech union, noting how he had been enraged by the following statement on my blog: "I was therefore not surpri