The rich class plays to win but the middle class plays not to lose.
robert kiyosaki
Middle-class people play the money game on defense rather than offense. Their primary concerns are survival and security instead of creating wealth and abundance or opportunity. It boils down to this: If your goal is to be comfortable, chances are you’ll never get rich. But if your goal is to be rich, chances are you’ll end up uncomfortable.
For the middle class, comfort is the ultimate goal. It is nice, too. At least you can go out to a decent restaurant for a change. But pretty much you order based on the prices on the menu rather than the items. That’s a fundamental difference in mindset between the rich and middle class.
The rich look at the menu offerings but middle class people look at the prices. So, if you want to be rich, your priorities should be, first, never belittle your desire; second, believe in yourself as the master of your life; and, third, be responsible for your decisions.
At the core of building one’s future or wealth is the belief that you are in control of your destiny, instead of playing the victim card and blaming external factors for one’s failure. Of course, “Poor me” is the predominant thought process of any “victim.” Victim mentality not only hinders personal growth. It also influence political decisions.
Rather than taking full responsibility for actively participating in functioning democracy and questioning the intent of authority from time to time, members of the middle class across the world want someone else to alleviate the burdens of their political and constitutional commitment to the country.
This creates a great opportunity for the leaders to pitch themselves as saviors or messiahs, who will help them in getting rid of their responsibilities and problems. India is no exception, and it is showing that especially clearly right now.
Modi has turned middle class against its own democracy
The liberalization of the Indian economy in the 1990s was instrumental in creating a 300 million-strong middle class. The Indian middle class inherited democracy without actively participating in revolutionary movements – unlike Western counterparts, who historically played a pivotal role in driving social, political, and economic change.
The French middle class led the French Revolution, which brought a new world in which the rights of man, the rights of citizens, were declared. The British middle class’s struggle paveed the way for parliamentary democracy.
For the Indian middle class, that new system was handed over through the constitution, which contains ideas borrowed from the West’s revolutions. That lack of struggle has made the beneficiaries complacent about the values and democratic heritage they received.
In recent years, the Indian political landscape has witnessed the emergence of the savior complex – the belief that a single charismatic leader holds the key to solving all society’s problems. Narendra Modi’s rise to power has been marked by the cultivation of this belief.
Posing as a savior, Modi has exploited the flaws of Indian democratic systems such as red tape bureaucracy, corruption and the helpless mindset of the Indian middle class.
However, it’s crucial to recognize that Indian democracy, despite its flaws, functions relatively well. Modi, to, is the product of that democracy. Modi’s rise to power from a tea seller to prime minister of the world’s largest democracy is a testimony to it. No democracy in the world comes close to providing such an example.
But today’s Modi wants to destroy the very system which attributes to his rise.
A parallel system to undermine constitutional guarantee
Throughout history, the narrative of revolution has been romanticized as the harbinger of change and progress. Yet, behind the fervor and idealism lies a darker truth: Once revolutions succeed, the first work of the people who come into power is to destroy the very forces that ushered in change, so that their status quo can’t be challenged.
Modi is no exception. In the last ten years, Modi has built a personality cult. The campaign “Modi Ki Guarantee” (Modi’s Guarantee) that’s being propagated by the BJP and Modi in the general elections of 2024 is a reflection of it.
Through shrewd marketing tactics and strategic messaging, Modi now wants to position himself as a replacement for rights guaranteed by the constitution through institutional democracy. There is only one guarantee in the country: Modi’s Guarantee.
This dangerous notion undermines the principles of democracy, accountability and collective responsibility. Democracy is not about placing blind faith in a chosen leader; it is about empowering citizens to participate in governance, hold leaders accountable and shape the direction of their nation.
“Modi Ki Guarantee” symbolizes the growing concentration of power in the hands of a single individual, eclipsing the role of institutional checks and balances. While leaders may come and go, the systemic flaws will always remain, underscoring the immutable truth that no leader can replace the effectiveness of a robust democratic system.
For the past decade, Indian media controlled by vested interests have perpetuated the question, “If not Modi, then who?” – subtly reinforcing the narrative of indispensability.
History has shown us that democracy doesn’t need saviors. The last time Romans appointed a single man to protect their democracy was Julius Caesar and he never gave up his power on his own. More importantly, if this democratic system can produce Modi it also has the potential to produce democracy’s alternative.
Rather than a savior, what India’s middle class truly needs is a vibrant and inclusive democracy that empowers them to shape their own destiny.