The Hindu Business Line : Schooling dissent in the world of conformity

The London School of Economics, which combines high scholarship with a deep and lasting concern for human welfare and social justice, enters its second century in a changed international environment.

The late British writer and journalist Malcolm Muggeridge once remarked: "In India LSE is not another great place of learning, but a magnificent obsession". A little bit of that obsession was visible at the London School of Economics' Asia Forum held in New Delhi in the first week of December and which brought together 300 of its alumni in this country along with some from the region and several members of the School's distinguished academic community. In its over a century of existence, the School has combined high scholarship with a deep and lasting concern for human welfare and social justice. Few academic institutions in the 20th century have had a more profound influence than the LSE on the social and economic debate of our times.

Ambedkar, a student of LSE

In these hundred years the LSE also had a very special relationship with India, symbolised by the School's proximity to India House in Aldwych in Central London. One of the early Indian students at the School was Dr B. R. Ambedkar. Since then generations of Indian students have been trained in the School's rigorous academic discipline and returned to the country to occupy important positions in politics, business and society. The relations became even more close when Dr I. G. Patel became the Director of the School in the 1980s.

The LSE's special brand of education combining academic excellence with an interface to contemporary social and economic realities had an interdisciplinary approach and attracted a large number of students from Asia and Africa in the Colonial days. Many of them after spending a few years in London returned to their countries, participated in the freedom struggles and when these countries became independent emerged in positions of power and influence. Among them were Jomo Kenyatta of Kenya, Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, Kenneth Kaunda, of Zambia, and V. K. Krishna Menon, former Defence Minister.

The formidable reputation of Prof Harold Laski and his uncompromising stand against colonialism brought to the School a left of centre image and as a close friend of Third World countries.

Alternative vision

In reality, the LSE was presenting an alternative vision in a world dominated by the overpowering influence of science and technology. Anthony Giddens, the distinguished sociologist and a former Director of the School, once observed in an illuminating lecture at the School: "It amazes me that a rich and resourceful country like America has the technological capability to put a man on the moon, but still not able to wipe out completely poverty and deprivation from its midst."

That paradox is at the heart of today's development debate — a discussion that spans a variety of socio-economic issues such as race, colour, gender, rural-urban divide and the role of affirmative action in a market-driven world. The LSE's major contribution in the post-Colonial years has been towards the evolution of `Development' as a distinct discipline with emphasis more on social justice than on growth, more on people than on technology, and ultimately the creation of a society more inclusive than elitist. There is no doubt that these are some of the hardest choices and challenges that India has to make as it moves forward in the path of globalisation.

The theme at the Asia Forum in New Delhi was appropriately "Challenging globalisation: reforms, governance and society." The debate largely focused on the fact that much of the hype on India emerging as an economic super power was based on the kind of indices used — GDP, foreign exchange flows and sensex. The story could be different if instead the metrics were poverty ratios, nutrition levels, educational standards, school dropouts and women's employment. How disturbing are the implications of this dichotomy can be gauged from the fact that these issues were sharply brought up at the Forum by Mr Kiran Karnik, the key representative of the software industry that glows in the glittering success of India's reform process. Someone from the audience also asked a penetrating question: "The Indian financial press frequently comes out with the names of India's richest 10 people, can anyone tell me the names of 10 or 100 poorest Indians?"

That kind of irreverence is the familiar refrain of the LSE. It is often mentioned that at the LSE, examinations are not about answering questions but about asking even more important questions. The newly created Chair in memory of Dr I. G. Patel should address some of these questions. It augurs well that Dr Nicholas Stern, a distinguished development economist who has spent years in the Indian village of Palanpur, studying its changing dynamics will be the first occupant of the Chair.

Second century

The LSE enters its second century in a changed international environment. Yet these changes have only sharpened the need for more research and investigation and analysis.

The understanding of the society can, the LSE believes, be best carried forward by research and scholarship across the full range of social sciences.

Most obviously, as the pace of change quickens, the need to interact with the real world becomes even more important. The School has always been remarkably active in linking conceptual understanding to the world of policy-making, international order and corporate decision-making. To use Ralf Dahrendorf's colourful phrase, this is the "explosive borderline between theory and practice!" That concern is reflected in the several projects of the School spread across the globe from China to South American countries.

One of the biggest legacies of the School has been in the form of a "report on Social insurance and allied sciences" published in 1942 widely known as Beveridge Report. Its author, Sir William Beveridge had a distinguished career as Director of the School for most of the period between the two World Wars. The Beveridge Report provided the framework for post-War thinking on Social Policy and the Concept of Welfare State.

That said, the feeling persists that the LSE has not leveraged its substantial alumni strength in India. Many of them see the LSE as a different kind of educational institution.

Even the School's physical look — a cluster of non-descript buildings — in the heart of London has an anti-establishment appeal to them. Inside, the LSE represents a voice of dissent in a world of increasing conformity. In a world plunging headlong into a market-driven world, that voice needs to be heard and heard louder.

(The author is Director, Indo-Australian Chamber of Commerce, Chennai.)