Strong Medicine For Bal-Raj Syndrome

The medicine to cure the disease called Bal-Raj Syndrome may sound too harsh, immoral and not good for the health of the country. But how will the two Thackerays react if some one from North India adopts tit-for-tat policy. If the duo are hell-bent upon throwing out the human resources from outside their own state do they realize what will happen to Maharashtra if some cynic of Bihar or UP one day launches an agitation calling for the blockade of minerals and foodgrains on way to this western state. After all it has to rely heavily on other states both for minerals and foodgrains.Thackerays, and some of his apologists in the media, film-world and politics, need to be told loud and clear that their state, Maharashtra is a leading industrial power today largely because of the policy enunciated by the politicians of the same North India, against whom they spew venom. They must understand that the freight equalization policy was adopted in 1948 by the Centre to facilitate the equal growth of industry all over the country. At that time we have Jawaharlal Nehru, a man from UP, as the Prime Minister. And then a few years later a Bihari, Rajendra Prasad, became the first President of the country.The worst sufferer of this policy was undoubtedly the undivided Bihar (now Jharkhand hewed out from it) and to some extent Orissa and Madhya Pradesh (now Chhatisgarh carved out from it). Industrialists interested in setting up plants anywhere in the country––Maharashtra, Gujarat, Delhi etc––would get coal, iron ore, aluminium etc at the same price as they used to get in Bihar (now Jharkhand), Chhatisgarh or Orissa. A factory can be set up anywhere in the country and the transportation of minerals would be subsidised by the central government.This resulted in the growth of heavy and middle level industry in the post-independence years outside the mineral-rich regions of the country. The coastal states of Maharashtra and Gujarat were the greatest beneficiaries and so where Delhi and its surrounding districts. Bihar’s huge competitive advantage of holding the minerals got destroyed as now factories were set up everywhere else but in this state. This was not the case in the pre-independence era when Tatas and Dalmias etc had to come and set up industries in Bihar. The freight equalisation policy continued to destroy states like Bihar for about half a century.So if Maharashtra is developed today it is not because of the ‘vision’ of chief ministers like V P Naik, Sharad Pawar or Vilasrao Deshmukh but because of the generosity of the same North Indian politicians. The average Biharis never felt jealous and fully cooperated in the development of other states and cities. So far politicians of today are concerned we all know that whether they are of Maharashtra or Bihar or anywhere else they are of the same hue. To distract the attention from the real issue, some apologists ofThackerays, have started singling out Lalu Yadav and politicians of Bihar. May one ask how honest are the Thackerays and their gangs of extortionists? What about Sharad Pawar and many others having close links with various smugglers and mafia of Mumbai? Are they angels?Biharis were not only generous in giving their own minerals to other states without charging any royalty whatsoever they also provided political platform to politicians of other states. George Fernandes played all his politics in Mumbai but when it was upto fighting and winning election he looked towards Bihar––first time in 1977. Madhu Limaye, Minoo Masani, Acharya Kripalini etc almost all had the link with the then Bombay Province, yet all came to Bihar just to contest election from one constituency or the other as their own state failed to recognize them. But Bihar has not only been open to politicians of Maharashtra, but of other states too. Sharad Yadav, Inder Kumar Gujral, Chandrashekar and several others all looked towards Bihar in the time of trouble. The unique aspect is that these carpetbaggers had absolutely nothing to do with Bihar––they would just contest election here and go. Chandrashekar and Gujral even went on to become the Prime Minister of the country. But none of them who chose Bihar as their launching pad ever did anything worthwhile for this benighted state. As a Bihari nobody ever complained why it used to get lowest central grant––Maharashtra often used to walk away with the highest.The problem is not with the Thackerays, but the so-called apologists of Uncle Bal and Nephew Raj. They need to be explained that in this marine age almost all the big cities of US, UK, Japan, China, Australia etc are port cities as international trade can not be dreamt without them. People of the interior parts of these respective countries get attracted to Shanghai, London, Tokyo, New York, San Francisco, Los Angles, Seattle, Chicago, Sydney, Melbourne etc. If the American, British or Chinese start adopting the policy of dharti-putra (son of the soil) with the people of other states of their own countries their economy will collapse sooner or later.Those who articulate the view of Thackerays in newspaper columns need to understand the location advantage of any place. The per capita income of South England is almost double to that of North England. This notwithstanding the fact that most of the mines and industries are situated in north. Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham etc became famous for coal, iron and steel and textile industries as early as 19th century. Yet it is London, where average people are much more rich. Incidentally all these cities are ports, yet London is richer because it is political capital of England as well. So if the people of north England, notwithstanding industries, mines as well as ports are poorer than that of south England no media expert holds the politicians of that region responsible for it. Even in the US it is the heartland––especially the regions in the vicinity of Mississippi and Missouri rivers which is the food-basket of that country. Yet all the developments have taken place in the coastal belt.Those whosoever try to pull punches from Thackerays’ diatribe either do not understand the geo-sociological realities of the development or are, one way or the other, simply championing the cause of the same fascist forces against whom they should actually stand up.