The Karnataka jobs bill goes against the idea of India

There is something of an island mentality in the act of drawing up a bill that introduces an employment quota for domiciles of Karnataka. To be precise, a bill proposing reservation for Kannadigas in employment was approved by the cabinet of the Siddaramaiah government. The bill received immediate pushback, with some prominent commentators calling it unconstitutional. Whether it is so would be a matter for the courts, but it certainly goes against the idea of India, that this is a land of many peoples representing diverse cultures  who live together peaceably. While the bill is distasteful of itself, it also reflects a lack of understanding of India’s recent history. Before I turn to explain why this is so, as someone who has lived happily in the city in the past, I believe that the bill does not reflect the sentiment of the average Kannadiga, who is mostly welcoming of outsiders, but a reflection of the worst kind appeasement of cultural chauvinist fringe groups by political parties in a bid to hold on to power.

           This attempt to keep outsiders out of employment opportunities in Karnataka fails to acknowledge to their role in contributing to its rise. It had started in the 1950s, when  India launched a plan to industrialise. This was to be led by the central public sector. In the expansion of the public sector, Bangalore, as it was called, had a very special place. A disproportionate number of the nation’s public sector units were located there. One reason was that an English-speaking techno-managerial elite was required to lead this push, and southern India had a relatively large share of this cohort. The climate did not hurt either. It was salubrious, which made the city a sought-after posting. Apart from the public sector commercial entities there was also the defence establishment, already a presence under the British but set to expand as the Indian Air Force grew. From an economic point of view, Bangalore benefited from the central government's spending on all its activities. Funding of course helps but it was the human capital that this created that was to play the larger role in the rise of Bengaluru. The concentration of engineers who arrived to work in public sector units ranging from Hindustan Aeronautics to Bharat Electronics was exactly what the fledgling Indian information technology (IT) industry needed. The IT industry needs humans more than it needs machines and in Bangalore it found exactly what it needed. The rest as they say is history. This story, that of the immense contribution of the Indian government to the rise of the IT industry is completely glossed over. What is on offer is mostly a story of intrepid Indian entrepreneurs who succeeded because they fell under the meddling radar of India’s bureaucracy. Nothing can be further from the truth. While some of the pioneers of the Indian IT industry, of whom a significant section is from Karnataka, were impressive in combining intelligence, diligence and patience, the top bureaucrats of the Government of India were strongly committed to the project of making Bangalore an IT hub. Then there were the software technology parks with their vital communications infrastructure which made possible the unique business model of providing software solutions to firms located in the western hemisphere while the engineer remained in India. Finally, there were the tax breaks. While all Indian firms were eligible for them, the almost hundred percent export orientation of the software firms made it easier for them to take advantage of the tax provisions. To cut a long story short, the IT industry in India did receive significant support in the form of  spending from the Consolidated Fund of India. The allure of Bengaluru today stems mainly from the presence of a worldclass IT industry. It may be said that many other states of India have received central funding, including the farmers of Punjab who receive minimum support prices for their crops, but that precisely is the point. India’s regions have historically been supported by the rest of the country. To be blunt, this support has been paid for by Indians across the country via the central government budget. For the regions to demand, once they have risen, that the jobs will be reserved for locals is to refuse to recognise this.

           Of course, the attempt to exclude non-locals from employment now playing out in Karnataka, is hardly new for India. The Shiv Sena had built its base in the fifties entirely by  fanning resentment against south Indians in Maharashtra. Now we read of efforts to keep muslim traders out of temple festivals, both in Karnataka under the erstwhile Bommai government and in UP under Yogi Adityanath. These attempts to exclude targeted social groups are the single most important danger for an India that is witnessing a slow but steady economic rise. Continuing tension stemming from manufactured animosities imperils the social climate, on which investment depends as much as it does on the economic.

          It is particularly disappointing that the recent move in Karnataka was made by a Congress government. At least the ideology it professes has historically been one of inclusion, and when in governance at the Centre it has mostly stayed away from divisive politics. More recently, its leader Rahul Gandhi has gone out on a limb calling for an end to religious majoritarianism. But the ethnocentricity and linguistic majoritarianism underlying the now withheld, but not yet withdrawn, bill is no less exclusionary. Politicians who represent the states of India seem to be not just unaware of the rights the Constitution bestows upon Indians, allowing them to live wherever they wish to in its territory, but incapable of appreciating the wealth that is the diversity that they have inherited. Through repeated interaction over millennia, Indians have gained immeasurably from each other. There are no islands in this land.