baptistnbootlegger

[baptistnbootlegger]

The Government in our bedrooms

Public policy, I believe, should ideally be a clinical piece of document devoid of any shade of moralistic clout. In practice, however, policy and policy based decisions vacillate from one position to the next depending on the political and moralistic leanings of the individual or a group making these decisions , and , the political and moralistic leanings of the individual or a group interpreting these decisions, thereby setting a precedent for future interpretations; This, is the Gordian knot of policy making.

Sexual activity as a consequence of being a taboo in our society and many societies around the world falls prey to one such Gordian knot. With public policy being lead by the morality of the times, it comes as no surprise to note that Section 377 of the Indian Penal code that attempts to regulate the sexual behavior of consenting adults, among other things, was introduced into the law books during the Victorian era in Indian history, an era that is synonymous with having thick sense of morality in the air and a paradoxical lack of it on the streets.   It also comes as no surprise to note that the Indian lawmakers in all these years of independence have not made many attempts at amending it. This in a society that traces its roots to the past in ancient Indian syncretism of pious and the carnal, is ironic but not surprising as already established policies are lead by the morality of the times and in the times we live in, the public sense of morality is largely apathetic to the cause of snatching of human rights away from individuals in indulging in consensual sexual behavior.

I for one, fall back to my basic premise that public policy and government regulations should ideally be devoid of any moralistic clout. This can be achieved only when the Government relegates itself to governance and regulation of areas of public life that need governmental interference. There are lengthier discussions and passionate debates to be had about the causes that warrant governmental interference but the behaviour of consenting adults within the confines of the four walls of their bedroom is most certainly not one of them. As such, I believe there is should be no laws governing the sexual conduct of adults for as long as they are consenting.   

[baptistnbootlegger]

Internal & external migration in the 21st century

In an article titled ‘Bribes, Borders and Middlemen: Why India’s GST Is a Game Changer’[1] its authors argue that with the implementation of the GST, India would start operating as one country; maximising efficiency by enabling easy transportation of finished goods and raw materials across the state borders. As opposed to acting as a union of states, wherein they effectively act as nation states in and of themselves, encouraging inefficient trade practices by enacting trade barriers by way of a differentiated tax structure.

This differentiated taxation mechanism, they argue, is an impediment to free trade. Individuals willing to perform trade with one another and happen to be living in polar opposite parts of the nation, geographically speaking,  are being forced to jump through hoops laid out by multiple governments of the states their goods happen to be passing through, increasing compliance costs and opening up avenues for being harassed by overzealous tax collection authorities. All these factors create a disincentive for free voluntary trade and as such, we’re all better off with the implementation of the GST.

Despite my reservations against the centralisation of governmental institutions and augmentation of big government, I’m forced to see light in their argument. The benefits or the lack of it presented by the GST might be a while away but one aspect of free trade that we’re reaping the benefits of as I’m typing this in: Open internal immigration.

Life in urban India is shaped by the cultures and languages brought in my internal migrants from various parts of the country. For the migrant, moving into an urban environment away from the rural; a cesspool of cruelty, caste prejudice and communalism, as characterised by B.R Ambedkar acts as a boon. In an urban environment where anonymity is a given and the individual is judged by merit of the services they provide and nothing more.  

The benefits of open migration are intuitive, other than the nebulous concept of ‘culture’, they being labour and skills that may not be readily available in the part of the country they’re moving into. They also help the economy by being innovators and job creators. Thus bringing economic prosperity not only to themselves but to the region as a whole.    

While the benefits of migration are aplenty, the pitfalls are equally abundant. Blue collar economic migrants are inherently a vulnerable group, as a consequence of being non-natives, they lack the political mobilisation needed to address their concerns. Mobilisation that is instinctive for the indigenous masses is a luxury for the blue collar internal migrants.

A series of stories hosted by the Aajeevika Bureau[2] indicates some of the problems faced by the migrants. Ranging from non-payment of dues, lack of a formal identification to overexploitation. The stories are all too familiar. These incidents happen because of the general disregard for life and liberty and also as a consequence of the fact that the migrants aren’t politically mobilised to demand their rights.  

Before I move onto external migration whoever, I feel it is important to dispel a popular myth held by many of us. The myth being: Langue acts as a barrier to internal migration.  The data presented in the Economic Survey 2016-17[3], suggests that, although political barriers of state borders act as an impediment to open immigration, language doesn’t seem to factor into the migration patterns. Thus pointing us to the fact that market lead trading and migration practices can shatter a lot of the barriers we’ve propped up for ourselves.    

The problems flagged for internals migration largely holds true to external migrants as well, although, at this point, it would be prudent to create a distinction between economic migrants moving to another country for better prospects and refugees fleeing social turmoil in their home countries.

Migrants moving into a foreign nation are largely skilled, largely well versed in the languages and the ways of life of the society they are moving into. Refugees, on the other hand, have compulsions of a different kind that forced them to flee their home country, usually war and persecution, without getting into the moralistic aspects of should refugees be allowed into a foreign nation, It’s important to realise that solving the refugee crisis wouldn’t solve the problem that caused them to become refugees in the first place. Alleviating the pain faced by the refugees would require more complex political manoeuvring, possibly on an international scale.    

The one problem all groups of migrants have in common is the trouble of what could be classified as the nativist tendencies of the indigenous population of the society they’re moving into. We as humans, more often than not are overcome by our animalistic instincts to classify ourselves in a dualist paradigm of us vs them. Although there is nothing inherently wrong with this position, it becomes problematic when this judgement clouds our ability to maximise the resources made available to us by choosing not to avail services from an individual or a group that we have classified to be ‘the other’. The only way for us to solve this particular issue is to force ourselves to face empirical evidence that suggests that immigration serves a better utility in a market and merit lead 21st century.  

-Akshay Kumar Baskaran

[1]-https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-20/bribes-borders-and-middlemen-why-india-s-gst-is-a-game-changer

[2]-http://www.aajeevika.org/stories-on-the-move.php

[3]-http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=157799