Redistribution is not a dirty word

Redistribution of wealth has emerged as a talking point, albeit in the wrong way, in the campaign for the Lok Sabha elections though it had not figured as a possible theme at the beginning of the campaign. It was picked up on the way by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, dressed up and distorted, and presented to people as a wrong idea advocated by the Congress. Though the Congress manifesto does not make any mention of redistribution of wealth or resources, and certainly no specific proposals, Modi and the BJP have targeted the party, claiming that its manifesto does indeed promise seizure and redistribution of the wealth of Indians. The matter was taken to another level when senior Congress adviser Sam Pitroda made a mention of inheritance tax in the US in an interview. 

The Prime Minister gave an emotional twist to the idea, in an effort to paint the Congress as a monster that would take away people’s money and valuables for redistribution when he said “they will not spare even women’s gold and mangalsutras”. There was a lot of distortion, not just exaggeration, in all this, achieved by misinterpreting remarks made by Rahul Gandhi in Hyderabad on conducting a survey of wealth in India and taking “revolutionary measures” based on that survey to reduce economic inequality in India. The election campaign has been made into a tool to invent, misrepresent or trivialise issues. There is a need for more sense, sanity, decency and respect for scruples in politics and in poll campaigns. 

On the substantial issue of rising inequality and ways and methods to reduce it in order to ensure a stable and peaceful society, whether the Congress mentioned it or not, wealth redistribution is a legitimate goal in any society and should be of concern for the government itself in our highly unequal society. Indeed, Modi himself has spoken and indulged in it, sometimes as election jumla, as when he promised to confiscate all black money that rich Indians held abroad and distribute it among all citizens, even assuring that it would amount to Rs 15 lakh in each person’s bank account, or when he conducted the draconian demonetisation. In his first term, did he not appeal to middle-class citizens to give up the LPG subsidy they had enjoyed until then so that he could distribute subsidised cylinders to the poor who actually needed it? Was that not a way of redistribution? On the other hand, his government is also seen to have conducted a massive ‘reverse redistribution’ -- taking from the poor and the middle-class and giving it to the rich -- by cutting corporate taxes, imposing high taxes and surcharges on fuel prices, and through the Goods and Services Tax (GST), which is paid as much by the poor as by the rich. Governments have a responsibility to reduce inequalities in society, and indeed all taxation is meant to achieve that. We need a sane debate on this issue, not polarising campaign rhetoric.