Ruchir Sharma | Aayush Goel
AUTHOR, INVESTOR AND former journalist Ruchir Sharma's latest book, Democracy on the Road: A 25-Year Journey through India (Penguin, 0699), is the outcome of a political quest that made him meet a number of leading politicians in India. Sharma discusses the likes of Narendra Modi and Priyanka Gandhi, and what he thinks would happen in the 2019 polls. Excerpts from an exclusive interview:
After two books on the economy, why the shift to politics?
My first book, Breakout Nations, was an economic travelogue of the world. This (the new book) is a political travelogue of India. I cannot write a political travelogue of any other country—because to know the politics of a country, you have to grow up in it. It almost has to have seeped into your bones. You have to be very focused on it. So I would say that is the issue here. This is the core subject and something you have grown up with. I have tried to bring out in this book how India feels like, what India tastes like.
Is this book written for a western audience?
It is taking the readers to different parts of India, where they have not been to. I was shocked that many of my friends did not know how life was in, say, Betula in Bihar. Like the politics of Tamil Nadu is so different from the politics of Madhya Pradesh. The idea is to catch this tapestry of what India is all about through the political lens and hopefully write it in a way that people enjoy reading it. It is very much for India and not for an American audience. For example, The New York Times carried an extract from my book and they got back to me saying, could you please explain the caste system in a para. My book would be totally out of context there.
Who is the most charismatic chief minister you met during your 25-year poll season journey through India?
Again, this was a learning. Chandrababu Naidu was such a hero for the elite. In 1999-2000, Nitish Kumar was a very different kind of leader. What I would say about Nitish Kumar is, Bihar transformed under him. We went to Bihar five times. What we witnessed was fascinating. Nitish Kumar was probably not as charismatic as Chandrababu Naidu, but he was the self-effacing guy who just kept his head down and got the work done. So, very different leadership styles.
Chandrababu Naidu today is a very different leader. The aura he had between 1999 and 2004 was unbelievable. He was seen as the modern face of India by many people. By the time we met him again in 2009, his credibility had been seriously undermined. As voters say, we do not know what to believe he is. He is still a very powerful leader, but I don't think any chief minister enjoyed the sort of international fame as Naidu did in those years. Modi and the Gujarat model also found some international fame for some time, but not like Naidu, who was the darling of the liberal elites. Modi never had that appeal.
You met Modi in 2007 at a Rajkot hotel. What happened after that?
I have written what happened after that meeting. The idea is that this should be an account for India, for those years. While escorting him out, he told me that what happened here was not nice. We met him afterwards as a group, but I try not to meet politicians one-on-one. This was a group of journalists. Of course, I had organised the group, but I had no control over the questions they ask. In 2009, when we met him for the second time, I tried and said that let us have a more constructive meeting this time. But then someone could not control and again asked the Gujarat question, something related to the whole tension and the riots there, and the person walked out. Modi walked out.
Meeting Amit Shah in Bihar and him throwing his Bihar challenge to your group of journalists. That meeting was not very cordial, was it?
No. At that time he told us that the BJP would win in Bihar. We met him again in 2017 in Varanasi. But it was still very contentious. I think he just has a grudge against many people in the group. He thinks that they are very biased and so he just has that grudge. But I asked him in Varanasi when did he get to know that they were about to lose in Bihar. He told me that even at 10am on result day he was told that they were winning.
What role has WhatsApp been playing in Indian politics since 2014?
The domination of WhatAapp in India is unprecedented. There is no other country where WhatsApp plays such a powerful role. It is the most powerful social media tool. In the US, it is much more Facebook and Twitter compared with WhatsApp. The big change I point out in the book is that there was only one boxer in the ring. In 2014, it was one leader and one WhatsApp that was ruling the show. In 2015, during the Bihar elections, we saw the opposition catching up in this game. I would say that the BJP was the front runner in WhatsApp campaigns in this country and they still have the edge.
After this 25-year travel with your caravan of journalists how would you describe the Indian voter?
Caste runs very deep in India. And this is what a lot of urban India does not understand, as to how deep caste loyalties lie. Like in two-thirds of India. But the general fact is that the book ends with a bullish message, which is on the fact that when democracy seems to be retreating in many parts of the world, it seems to be thriving in India. The democratic impulse of the people here is very strong. A year ago you thought that given the utter domination the BJP had on social media and on their money-spending power, their organisational strength, that they were invincible. And here we are, and they are facing such a competitive election, where every scenario is in play.
So, the same factors will keep playing out in the 2019 elections?
I think the single most important determinant for this elections is going to be state alliances. Because I do think that the support for the BJP is collapsing. This is what we saw happening with the Congress in 2014. But I don't think that the BJP vote share is likely to collapse or fall much from here. The opposition coming together, and how much they come together, is the big story for me. It will happen state by state as I think it is very difficult to come up with a national alliance. So how the alliances shape up in each state will determine this election.
Between GDP and inflation, what reaps more electoral benefits for politicians?
I think the connection between economics and politics in this country is very tenuous. I have no idea how to make that connection even today. But the fact is that our chief ministers delivered growth rate of more than 8 per cent about 27 times and half the time they lost. In most countries if you deliver an 8 per cent growth, you are considered a shoo-in for elections, but not here. So, I think that the connection between these two is very weak. But one thing which I know for sure kills votes is high inflation. That is the one connection between economics and politics here. But India is such a difficult place to please people. Inflation is bad, but now we are learning that very low inflation is also bad. Then the farmers begin to feel very distressed. So it is getting into that sweet spot.
Do you think Priyanka Gandhi can make a big difference for the Congress?
She could, but I think it is a bit too late. I mention in the book how charismatic she was as a campaigner in Rae Bareli, but my feeling is that it is a bit too late to make a big difference in Uttar Pradesh. But, we will see. She will be out on the campaign trail. Will be happy to see her, but I think caste is so entrenched that it would be difficult for her to make any significant difference.