As we reach closer to the 2019 general election, more and more people are coming out of their political shells and trying to make sense of the NDA government’s five-year term. Many have already made up their minds while others are sitting on the fence, reviewing the government’s performance subconsciously.  Personally, I belong to the second category and I am yet to make up my mind whether this government deserves a second chance.

Five years ago, I was among the many that got caught up in the frenzy of heightened expectations. I readily bought into the dreams and promises of “acche din” ahead. It was only later that I suffered a bout of buyer’s remorse and realised that I had been sold. The only consoling factor was that it was exceptional salesmanship that got me and I was one person among a large chunk of the populace that got swept by the force of top-notch oratory and charisma.

This time around, I have developed a shield so as to not get sucker punched a second time around. It’s as if a layer of cynicism and scepticism has developed itself around me. The mind is automatically sifting through what it considers sales material and what it considers actual content which is a reflection of true reality. The same level of wordsmanship which had me wide-eyed with hope and expectation the last time around is getting deflected as if I am swatting away an overzealous fly. Yet, I find myself in a conundrum on whether the incumbent party is worthy of a second chance.

On the economic front, there is nothing much to complain about even as the government was dealing with highly crippling legacy issues like the bad loan crisis throughout its five-year term. The government woke up late to the magnitude of the crisis but eventually stitched up decent proposals at the fag end of its term to keep the crisis in check. The government also deserves credit for the effort it put in for many far-reaching schemes like Jan Dhan Yojana, Swacch Bharat Yojana, Ujjwala Yojana, Awas Yojana and many other important schemes. It also undertook the expected level of Infrastructure development while keeping public finances under a tight leash. It was a steady par for the course performance and yet it leaves a bad taste in the mouth for there is a feeling that something is amiss. The expectations from the government were so high that soft incrementalism just does not cut it. Where is the transformation that we were promised? Let’s make a very practical assumption that five years is too less to bring about an economic transformation–but is there any evidence that we are on the path to claim the next level of economic prosperity?

That is the crux of my confusion and conundrum.  Had the performance been a total disaster, there would have been no scope for any doubt. Anyone but the incumbent would have been my choice. But in this case, the cause for disillusionment is the fact that a fancy version of the future was showcased and dreams of a great future for the country were baked in the high octane election pitch. Instead, all we got was more of the same. Just that the same was done more efficiently and vigorously. After more than 30 years, a government had secured a landslide majority. It feels a waste of such an overwhelming mandate if it is not put to good use. The lost opportunity is especially disappointing given how difficult it is in Indian politics to attain a full-blown majority. It is highly likely that the next government will have to content itself with a lot of drama in the name of coalition dharma.

A simple example of a truly path-breaking approach to economic policymaking would have been to envision and create a scenario where the special and innate capabilities of Indians would have been tapped to generate significant economic value. A case in point is the way Indians organically developed skill-sets for software and created a name for itself in the global economy. Our software capabilities have yielded not only substantial economic benefits to millions but have also provided a source of confidence and pride to its practitioners and their family. Currently, we are in danger of losing out in software too as our leadership is under threat due to other countries that have caught up with us. Also, the future of software is in the digital sphere, one that requires higher-level skill sets like design thinking, something that Indian software companies are currently slow in adapting to.

So far, there is no evidence that the current leadership in government understands the importance of such insights in economic decision making. There seems to be apathy towards dealing with complexity and a tendency to focus more on execution and implementation of already existing pre-defined frameworks. Though this trait is not negative in itself, it is not sufficient if India has aspirations to be an economic heavyweight.

This apathy of the government is borne by the way it deals with experts who handle complexity for a living. There has been an exodus of talent who could not fit in with the ways of the current establishment. The list starts from Arvind Panagariya and includes stalwarts like Raghuram Rajan, Arvind Subramanian, Urjit Patel and Surjit Bhalla. A lack of patience with conceptual and high-level thinking is what defines the current government’s approach to economic problem-solving. At the cost of repetition, this does not bode too well if we want to harbour any aspiration for attaining the status of a developed economy in the future.

In a highly competitive and interconnected global economy, simple rules of thumb will not do much to turn the needle in our favour. Attaining sustainable economic advantages in such an environment requires grappling with complexity and coming up with solutions which are the result of deep thinking, application of intricate concepts and actionable insights. A status-quo approach, albeit with a high degree of drive and vigour, is not going to help too much in this regard. Incrementalism is fine, but is it going to help us achieve widespread economic transformation? Most probably not. But then, if the government’s idea of transformation is steps like demonetisation, it would be better they stick to incrementalism. At least, it does no harm.

At the end of the day, a voter has limited choices. As voting day beckons we have to choose the lesser of the two evils. On the one hand, we have the all-brawn action-oriented leader with an exceptional flair for optics and perception management as well as a highly developed repertoire of strongman tactics as an added bonus. On the other hand, we have someone who is just evolving from “I am doing this because my mother told me so” to “I am finally getting the hang of this.” The only good thing about the second option is that expectations are at such a low that even a borderline disastrous performance will constitute as ‘Meeting Expectations’ in an HR report.

Like during any other election, the fate of the country hangs in the balance. Contemplate hard, choose wisely and hope for the best. And yet, such is the beauty of democracy that the show always goes on. The country begets the leaders it deserves and life goes on as it would.