India launches the first biometric census today, reports the BBC.
“India is launching a new census in which every person aged over 15 will be photographed and fingerprinted to create a biometric national database. The government will then use the information to issue identity cards.
Officials will spend a year classifying India’s population of around 1.2 billion people according to gender, religion, occupation and education. The exercise, conducted every 10 years, faces big challenges, not least India’s vast area and diversity of cultures.
Census officials must also contend with high levels of illiteracy and millions of homeless people – as well as insurgencies by Maoists and other rebels which have left large parts of the country unsafe.
President Pratibha Patil was the first person to be listed, and appealed to fellow Indians to follow her example “for the good of the nation”. “Everyone must participate and make it successful,” she said in Delhi.
‘Unstoppable’
This is India’s 15th census and the first time a biometric element has been included.”
If only it were an April Fool’s prank. Unfortunately, it’s the real thing.
The master mind behind it is Nandan Nilekani, the co-founder of IT outsourcing giant Infosys, hero of the Gideon’s Bible of globalization, Thomas Friedman’s “The World Is Flat” (a book I confess I’ve given a small thrashing to), and the man who coined the irritating meme in the first place.
As this Times article points out, less than 7% of the Indian population of over a billion (that is, around 75 million) pays income taxes. There’s also rampant corruption, a thriving black market, endless bureaucracy, and documentation requirements that make cross-state travel a time-consuming burden.
The ID is supposed to end all that. What it will begin, we can only guess.
As we blogged a while back, even the UK, the Anglophone world’s police-state petri dish, crammed to the gills with CCTV and traffic cameras, managed to squash this frightening initiative when it was introduced there.
Unfortunately, Europe has taken to it, with Germany, France, Belgium, Greece, Luxembourg, Portugal, and Spain among the 100 countries that use compulsory national identity cards.
But India, it need hardly be said, is not Europe. Besides the civil liberties dangers, the costs are heavy. In the UK, they were estimated to have been between 10-20 billion pounds. In India, they are said to be around 3 billion pounds (other figures I’ve seen are $6.6 billion and 300 billion rupees), an enormous burden on the public treasury. And the number is only an estimate, which, like all government estimates of future costs, is almost 100% certain to be over optimistic.
The other major mandate that Nilekani claims is that the new ID will help bring services and subsidies to the poor and prevent their theft or loss. This would be more reassuring if Nilekani didn’t count among former clients of Infosys such experts at combining doing good with doing well as Goldman Sachs.
The Times article describes the card thus:
“A computer chip in each card will contain personal data and proof of identity, such as fingerprint or iris scans. Criminal records and credit histories may also be included.
Mr Nilekani, who left Infosys, the outsourcing giant that he co-founded, to take up his new job, wants the cards to be linked to a “ubiquitous online database” accessible from anywhere.”
Nilekani is head of the newly-created Unique Identification Database Authority of India (IDAI) and he has received 19 bids for its first project from vendors including Tata Consultancy Services, Wipro, HCL, IBM, and his own company, Infosys.
For every rupee of IT spending on the project, industry experts estimate, around 60 per cent of this will go to hardware vendors (see Biometrics4You)
Update:
Biometrics4You lists other aspects of the initiative:
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI – the central bank of India) has announced plans to roll out new guidelines to help financial institutions use biometrics at ATMs in rural areas without access to banking. The Orwellian term for this is un-banked or under banked...as though there were some optimal level of banking every square foot of the earth should have.
I came across this article while speaking with you on phone. As it happens I had posted something on this news on my facebook page, and it generated a bit of comments from people. The issue kind of veered off to how this might eventually be used by the state to perhaps disenfranchise the tribal and fringe communities in India.
I was aware of the involvement of Infosys since I had listened to a speech by Mr. Nandan Nilekani on the future of India on, I think, the commonwealth club of California.
Very interesting observation and I hope people will read this through and try to judge it from all sides of the issue and not just from one angle. Nothing is usually black and white without several shades of gray and various other tints in between.
I do like your independent, and might I call it unorthodox thinking. Before I came to live in North America, I had not come across the term Libertarianism. Now that I am face to face with this ‘ism’ I am still not fully sure I understand it. I used to vaguely consider myself aligned with the Democratic party of the US while I lived there, and yet found the most interesting person in the Government to be Mr. Ron Paul of the Republican Party. I did not know if he was a typical libertarian or not, but after speaking with him, I guess he might be.
Hope to be able to speak with you again, and hope to hear you speak on the 8th. I intend to record that speech too, with your permission.
Regards
Tony Mitra
Thanks..
You can find a lot about libertarian economics and political theory at mises.org and lewrockwell.com.
They’ve recently uploaded a number of classic texts to audiotape so they can be disseminated more widely.
Ron Paul’s archives there contain scores of articles that explain his position and that of libertarians in general.
He also has a website of his own.
In my blog roll I’ve linked a number of libertarian sites including foreign Ron Paul sites (Germany and India).
Other libertarians running for office now including Ron Paul’s son, Rand Paul, as well as Peter Schiff.
My guess is that the English left India because it was to chaotic and unworkable, not because Indians were in any way whatsoever freedom fighters.
Like sheep, all Indians will be lining up to get their cards. All of them will even pay bribes to get one of these dog-collars.
There is one consolation though. With or without Nilekani at the helm, this will not work, as nothing of this scale ever works in India.
Hi Jayant –
I think the Salt march and non-cooperation did have a huge effect.
If nothing else, it gave the Indians the moral high ground. Tens of thousands of men and women were lathi charged, just as Af-Ams were hoses and threatened with dogs in the US.
Gandhi had a huge following among working people, as well as European intellectuals like Romain Rolland.
However, that was that generation of Indians….who had far less politically, and so were motivated far more to fight.
Even the politicians of the time had far better motives
However, it’s difficult for me to judge since I don’t live there and don’t follow politics there on a daily basis.
The Eng lang media there follows anything in the Eng land media in the west uncritically, so no wonder they are a prime target for manipulation by the same lot who keep the people in the dark here.
There is a social movement among the “upwardly mobile” middle class in India – where English is not only the language of trade and profession, but also the basic language on which one pins its social activity, and even the language spoken at home with family. And along with that, comes the “copy cat” mentality in most social events. Even Bollywood movies copy western pop dances to charm its viewership. I wonder what the long term effect can be of this invisible movement of blind aping of the west.
On a different level, I notice that a very high percentage of Ministers and Secretaries in the Indian Govt are educated in western Universities. While I do not claim that education should only be acquired in one’s own country, in order to quality for Government service, I again wonder what the collective effect of this might be.
I remember comments of Tabindranath Tagore on the issue of ideal education. He was, in Nehru’s views, India’s internationalist par excellence. And yet, he had wondered how India, once it gains independence, can keep its identity and heritage while assimilating good things from abroad, if all its Government heads were educated in UK, and were basically taught that good civilization was invented in the west, and that India had nothing at all worth preserving. Tagore doubted the wisdom of national leaders growing up without any respect for their own culture, and went so far as to figure out what the proper definition of education should be, for a nation.
Anyhow, I do not have a very strong view on the issue of if people should or should not have any kind of ID card. It is hard to imagine a society in today’s world, where one can go about his business of living, without any artificial identity other than his/her own body. But, once we agree that folks would need some sort of an ID (I do have to have a passport, a driver’s license as a minimum to live, work, and travel), then the details of the ID card is just details.
On another angle, I have no doubt that the tribal people, the fringe people, and the poorest of the poor ecking out a living on the periphery of the great Indian society, might not come forward to get themselves measured, photographed, sampled and converted into an ID. Besides, I wonder if some of them even get to know about the Govt’ plan to prepare an ID card for all. Then there are those that are fighting the local police of the Govt of India for one reason or another, and might refuse to come out of hiding and get themselves be photographed. I am also skeptical of them understanding the need to keep a piece of plastic with them.
So, I wonder if the Govt of India will someday hold it against these people for not coming forward for their ID card, and if in the process use it as a leverage to deny them rights of citizenship.
These are the issues that makes me ponder.
As to the money to be made in this venture – there is money to be made for every little thing that the Govt of India does. In fact, they are learning it from the US, the Canadian, the European Govts. These Governments regularly sell of national wealth to corporations on the cheap, so that a small number of elites get extremely rich at the expense of the nation and its natural resources.
What’s new? The west taught them how to go about it.
I listened to Ron Paul talking about his reason for opposing Obama’s health care. Much as I admire the man, it did not satisfy me as a meaningful answer to the question of healthcare or any entitlement/ right.
And I have still not figured out how a Libertarian can hope to shrink the Govt.
Cheers.
Hi Tony.
Your points are well taken.
I think economics will actually solve a number of these problems.
With all the police state apparatus in the west, fewer Indians are going to feel they want to stay on here.
Many of them see India and Asia as better destinations for their talents than the US, in the long run.
As for not blindly aping the west, that’s upto Indians themselves to act with self-respect and respect for their own culture.
When we know our own history and traditions and respect them, others will too.
Remember that the Bollywood nonsense is a kind of infatuation generated by corporations looking to lubricate their entry into the Indian market.
It’s the result of complete ignorance of more substantial aspects of Indian culture.
Most of the talking heads, native and foreign born, know very little about the foreign countries they talk about and yet get a hearing.
Having lived here over 20 years, with training in American institutions and some expertise in the areas I write on, I still encounter skepticism and the cold shoulder, as a foreigner.
But a western student can write a thesis, after a year in India, without knowing any Indian language and it will be given importance and credibility.
That kind of senseless kowtowing before westerners has to stop.
But we have to initiate it.
Ron Paul’s position on health care is the libertarian one and it’s one I share.
It’s since the government has been in the health care business that costs have risen astronomically.
Ours is a fundamental dissent from the socialist/communist view that goods (like health care or houses)are “rights”. If they are rights, well, why is gasoline also not a right, since people need it to get to their jobs. Why is clothing also not a right?
Once you have conceded that, then you must concede that the state must provide for every want of the citizen as a right.
That is pure communism and actually it’s what most people believe. Thus the state is all powerful, all knowing, benevolent.
The state becomes god.
Of course, we know in reality what that means.
This might be good for Canada or the UK..if they want it..let them have it. But the fact is, those countries are also much more controlled than the US.
Thanks Lila
Your arguments are understood, but yet I do not find it convincing enough as a universal theory applicable to all mankind all across the globe. In fact, I find any theory to be not fully applicable in toto, for all parts of the globe under a single broad brush.
Take India for example. A vast majority do not have any kind of medical insurance at all. And yet, many die from preventable maladies such as malaria or snake bite. According to Mr. Ron Paul, these people should have been in the pink of health and should not be having the kind of health issues that they do. But, these people are often so poor, that they need to beg on the street to make a living, let alone look for affordable private health care.
?Take the case of malaria. We know that it comes from certain kind of mosquitto. We know how this mosquitto reproduces and what are the various methods that can be used to keep this population low in areas where humans live. The measures needed to control mosquitto population in a village can either be done by the Govt, which they often do not do, or by private or community organization, which also is not done right. The thing is – if small communities could do it cheaper and better in eradication of malaria, why is it not being done across rural India ? The Govt certainly has not banned any effort at controlling malaria at the local level ?
At another level, I can imagine an ideal rural community that is concious about these issues, and has created a sort of local community service where funds (even if the funds are simply free labor by the villagers) is made available for community work such as eradication of malaria. Then, in such an ideal situation, the local community service takes on the role of the Govt, and in fact, becomes the de facto Govt as far as this item goes. This could in essence mean small local govts. But, in practice, this is not happening, either in the villages, or in urban neighborhoods, exceptions aside. Why not? it is certainly not illegal for communities to develop local solutions bypassing both the Govt and the Corporations.
I fully appreciate and admire your decision not to have managed healthcare in the hands of an insurance company, or the Government. I find this a fantastic example. I think many Americans should seriously consider trying out your alternative path.
But I still doubt that your methhod can be copied successfully and exactly by every living human on this planet.
Anyhow, if I assume that Mr. Ron Pauls ideas of healthcare is only applicable to those societies that are in a position to benefit from it, and not for all of mankind, even then another question comes to mind – why is it that Mr. Ron Paul remains on the fringes of the American Electoral process ? He has been remarkably consistent in his views over the years. He has also been forthright and eloquent enough to put forward his views succinctly in various books, articles, speeches and blogs. I myself have read many of his books and articles, and heard him speak, and have been impressed by most of what he says since they appear logical to my common sense (though not all of his views).
And yet, he has never made any serious dent in the minds of the American electorate, current college grade younster support notwithstanding. Why has he not succeeded ? Are American adults by and large stupid ?
While I am no expert on American politics, it appears to me that, for Mr. Paul to have greater influence on American society or politics, he would have to find ways to be more inclusive than he is at the present. Without a broad support, he is unikely to be successful in his endeavor. And any step to increase your base appeal means having to compromise your views and allow some of the others views to be assimilated. This is of course a general observation from a person that lived only 7 years in the US and does not claim to understand it well enough.
On the other hand, if Mr. Paul does not wish to gain a broad base support, then he cannot change the system from within the existing mechanisms or the American version of electoral democracy.
What is the way for him then ? Is he likely to end his political career only as an idea that did not work out ?
This is not a rejection of Mr. Ron Paul’s ideas per se. Just my own views on things, and pondering on its applicability across the globe, or on a specific society such as the US.
I also question the very idea of getting fixated on any particular ism, no matter what flavor that ism comes with. There is far too much variation on the parameters of human societies across the world, for a single solution to fit all. This again, is just my views. I would not go to war over it, and will always stand to change my views if better solutions become crystal clear to understand and believe.
And then, having believed in it, I might still change my mind a few years down the line, simply because something better appears to have arrived, within the capacity of my thinking brain to understand.
?So, yes, Big Government may be evil, and along with that, Big Corporations may also be evil, as is big military industrial complexes, unnecesary wars on bogus ideology etc. But along with them all, is an unshakable faith into a single ism also not evil? Isnt ultimate freedom supposed to come from the freedom of the mind from any and all dogma including any and all isms?
Just thinking aloud Lila. No disrespect to your wonderful analysis, nor on Ron Paul, who i still believe is one of the smartest and clearest thinking politicians I have come across in ages, though I retain my right to question every theory that comes my way, agreeing or disagreeing as it appears to the best of my limited capacity to judge things.
?Hope to see more of your wonderful posts and home they attract more vieewership. A few of the Podcast crowd are already aware of this blog from my posts on Facebook. But they will post once they better understand your point of view. Most of them are not at all sure of what a Libertarian is.
Cheers.
EEK – my posts are getting too long. I have to learn to be brief.
Biometrics or any other gizmo will be of no use against political cowardice. Enumerators will still fail to identify the ‘Razakar’s (Pakistani traitors, who were kicked out after Bangladesh’s independence in 1971), who illegally reside & are all comfortably ensconced in India, squatting as street hawkers in central Calcutta. They breed like rats & are the main source of manpower for all kinds of criminal trades & recruits for terrorist training. All political parties have fallen over each other to give them ration cards, citizens rights, even passports to build up their vote banks