Dissatisfaction is an important component that leads to development. A desire to do better, achieve more and have more leads to actions in the concerned direction. However, the definition of development has varied across different ages in different cultures.

According to the World Bank development, it is a process by which people are provided with better lives- physically, economically, environmentally and socially. According to Amartya Sen’s “capability approach” development is a tool which enables people to reach the highest level of their ability.

However, both may not lead to happiness or contentment.

India is a country where people believe that ‘Karma’ is the central part of human life. True liberation comes from detaching oneself from the compulsive need to please your “indriyas” or sense organs. The culture teaches us that what we get in life is a result of our “Karma” in this life as well as those of our previous lives. “Daan” or giving away of alms can redeem our misfortunes to some extent, and so we must be content with our lot in life.

The world is a place where people come and go. Thus, contentment or “santosha”, an ethical concept central to Indian philosophy means being satisfied and comfortable with one’s circumstances in life. It also means understanding and accepting oneself and one’s environment leading to a joyful spiritual state.

In a culture like this, creating awareness about what people lack or emphasizing dissatisfaction to achieve physical and economic development is a herculean task. The question is: What is a better life?

Attainment of physical and economic wellbeing may not hold a lot of charm for people whose culture has inculcated “santosha” in them.

Economic development has led to an increase in urbanisation and higher standards of living all around the world. When technology and infrastructure improve, rural areas become more accessible and diversified and the living environment further improves. However, in a country like India, the philosophy of contentment or “santosha” creates a major hurdle in the path to development.

In a labour surplus country, we are short of labour: a labourer getting Rs. 200 per day under the National Rural Guarantee Program will work for a few hours and be content to stay where he is. He will make no effort to improve himself, earn more and do better for his family as long as his basic needs are met. In spite of the difficult odds that they face, they make huge compromises and are content with them. This attitude of making do with bare necessities has also added to the problem of population in India – in a recent television interview a man from Dharavi – Asia’s largest slum – proudly proclaimed himself to be the father of twelve children.

The problem has been accentuated by the various schemes of the different governments offering grains and other necessities at highly subsidised rates leading to the attainment of the “santosha” level rapidly. Such schemes have been enacted by all political parties for electoral gains – in fact they have all tried to outsmart each other in the process.

The National Food Security Act enacted in July 2013 by the UPA government under the Prime Minister of Dr Manmohan Singh entitled the beneficiaries of the Public Distribution System to five kgs of cereals – at Rs 3 per kg for rice, Rs 2 per kg for wheat and coarse grains at Re 1 per kg. Pregnant women, lactating mothers and certain categories of children are eligible for daily free cereals also.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has announced a monthly pension of at least Rs 3000 for workers of the unorganised sector after the age of 60. The Direct Cash Transfer Scheme for farmers announced by the Modi government in 2019 aims to transfer Rs 6000 to farmers who have agricultural holding of less than two hectares.

Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal’s free electricity and water (free electricity for people consuming 200 units per month and 20,000 litres of free water per month for every household) has been very rewarding electorally.

The outcome of these policies has led to the creation of unproductive labour which is detrimental for the economy.The need to exert oneself to do better does not arise because the level of contentment has been reached. The supply curve starts bending backwards very early as people start substituting leisure for labour leading to losses in production and degradation of skill. The environment thus created is not conducive either for entrepreneurship or hard work.

At some point, the government and the political parties will have to differentiate between welfare schemes and populist policies. They will at some point have to realise that these schemes make citizens irresponsible and lazy and that it is a never-ending trail. The poor will also at some point realise that the corrupt will wipe away the benefits meant for them and that they will continue to suffer as before.

For welfare schemes, rational debates should happen and experts should be called in to help promote the efficient utilisation of scarce public resources. For the betterment of the economy, however, schemes that promote self help and work culture are needed.

We have in India the shining example of Gujarat, a state ravaged by a massive earthquake on January 26, 2001. Though aid poured in, the industrious people of the state helped build back the economy in record time. The work culture was so strong that a little aid went a long way. This is the need of the nation today. With a population of 138 crores a strong work culture may not only make us a super power, it may make us tremendously happy and contented as well. So, let us look at ways to strengthen and promote a strong work  culture and environment.

Dr Misra is Associate Professor at BSNV(PG) College, Lucknow

The post Development in a Culture that teaches contentment appeared first on The Correspondent.