Skip to main content

More on Indian Yuppies: Fiscally conservative, Socially liberal

I was really surprised the other day when I heard one of these self-described Indian yuppie friends describe her political views as "fiscally conservative, socially liberal." Now at least this is a step forward from the typical Indian opportunism that you see among middle class children of trade liberalization (serving one of these global banks, hedge funds, or knowledge production houses), who usually describe themselves as "apolitical." But, what really is this "fiscally conservative, social liberal" label and what purposes does it serve?

So let's begin with the classification "fiscally conservative." In simple words, a fiscally conervative worldview is one that favors privatization, trade liberalization, minimization of subsidies for the poor, and removal of social securities. Its proponents ranging from Ayn Rand to Milton Friedman, fiscal conservatism is rooted in the worldview that offering social securities to the poor makes them lazy, and instead, the emphasis should be on supporting private industry, which in turn, can generate enough employment to move the economy forward and to tricke down the benefits to the poor. So coming back to these simple Indian yuppies, with an IIT and an IIM education, with a cushy job in a hedge fund and a superficial introduction into political-economic theory through pop culture readings of Ayn Rand, being fiscally conservative works out as an advantage to justify economic opportunism, narcissitic accumulation of wealth, and the expenditure of this wealth in the form of the LV, the Burberry, and the Merck (which of course she rightly deserves). Essential to this fiscal conservatism then, is a worldview that "I am better than those who are poor, and hence I have earned the wealth." The poor emerge in the mindscape of the yuppie as a lazy and uncultured homogene, lacking in agency and the willpower to do anything. Even more, the poor are responsible for the fate they have to face. I remember, after the financial crisis hit the roofs, one of these yuppies telling me that the crisis had all to do with people who didn't deserve to buy homes ending up buying homes (what amazed me at that point was the fact that he conveniently forgot to mention his bonuses and salary raises, i.e. the stolen money, that got us here). As I read the concept of fiscal conservatism envisioned by Indian yuppies, it really boils down to a worldview that is intrinsically personal, a worldview that justifies the personal accumulation of wealth, accompanied by a deeply-felt derision for the poor (what is amazing to me is that some of these yuppies themselves grew up lower middle class and now blame the lower and poorer classes for all the major problems).

Now what is this socially liberal thing all about? Once again, to understand the social liberalism of the yuppies, we have to take a look into the personal lifestyles they live and the social choices that accompany these lifestyles. So for the yuppies, social liberalism is about alcohol consumption at unhealthy levels, watching an occassional arty movie at an indy art house (so one could appear intellectual), clubbing in Manhattan pubs (the Indian yuppie has arrived!), and mimicking many of the aspects of Western culture that appear to be "cool" or "in." Being socially liberal for the yuppie is about appearing to be intellectually engaged. Like their Idol Bill Gates, being socially liberal is also about supporting the next micro-credit program in say some village of Bihar. Being socially liberal is about working on the "thick" Indian accent so that one can do away with it and sound "American" (at the same time, making fun of others about their "thick" Indian accents). Social liberalism then is once again a brand identity that communicates finesse, sophistication and marketability in the "free market."

When you combine the two different identifiers, we now have a label that is pretty attractive in the story it tells. The combination "fiscally conservative, socially liberal" then is ultimately about a specific brand identity that is fairly vacuous in its ethical foundations, and simultaneously packages the "intellectually engaged yuppy" for the global free market. It is ultimately about justifying the economic narcissism of an entire class of Indians whose very packaging is based on the erasure and denigration of the poor.
Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

The Haka, the Hurt, and the Work We Owe

  The Haka, the Hurt, and the Work We Owe An Indian in Aotearoa reflects on resistance, complicity, and the solidarities we have yet to build Mohan Jyoti Dutta I watched the haka. I watched it several times, in fact. Each time, I tried to sit with what I was feeling before reaching for what I was supposed to think. Let me be honest about who I am in this conversation, because that matters. I am an upper caste, upwardly mobile Indian man. I am a professor at a university in Aotearoa. I carry the accumulated privileges of Brahminical socialisation, of English-medium education, of institutional access that was never designed for the communities I now write about and alongside. I say this not as confession but as orientation — because where you stand shapes what you see, and I have learned, through years of working with communities at the margins, that the refusal to name your own location is itself a colonial habit. The haka directed at Parmjeet Parmar did not offend me. It ...
Read more

The Suit Walks the Corridor

  The Suit Walks the Corridor At ten past nine on a Monday the corridor on the top floor of the administration building fills with the sound of expensive shoes. The carpet up here was laid in the last refurbishment and still gives slightly underfoot, the way a good hotel lobby does, and the doors along it close with the soft, well-engineered thud of a German car. Along this carpet, in the direction of the lift marked Executive, comes the suit. It comes in navy and in charcoal, in the odd daring pinstripe, in the female version too, a tailored jacket over a silk shell, and heels that announce themselves on the tile of the lift lobby a full three seconds before the person arrives. The suit carries a flat white from the good cafe, the one that closed the student cafe to open, and a lanyard that swings with the confidence of a thing that opens doors. The suit passes the framed founding professors, who were photographed in gowns and look, at this distance, like a row of disapproving pe...
Read more

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 with w...
Read more