An agricultural university has made way for the Nano mother plant in Sanad, located on the western fringes of Ahmedabad. The entire land acquisition process for the additional land was completed within six hours, with farmers accepting the package at a substantially lower price. Some of the farmers invoked a grant of 1000 rupees made by Jamshedji Tata during the great famine of 1900 for the cattle of this area. They said that this was their way of repaying a debt. This is indicative of several processes at work in Gujarat. One, there is a large consensus among the farmers of central Gujarat that subsistence farming is not an economically viable proposition. This awareness is not of recent origin. The invocation of the great famine of 1900 was significant. It was during this famine that the Patidar community, the largest land-owning peasant community of central Gujarat took a decision to reduce their dependence on land. The great wave of Gujarati migration was one outcome of this. The gains from Kheda Satyagraha in terms of unifying the community became the basis of the white revolution of the Anand model of dairy cooperatives, which not only enabled the peasant farmers to reduce their dependence on agriculture but also eased them into a monetised economy. These combined processes led to the ascendancy of the Patidar community in the political-economy of Gujarat. Two, since the 1860s Gujarat has been at the forefront of two processes necessary for modern economy — the absorption of technology and creation of speculative financial markets. The iconic figures of Ranchhodlal Chhotalal, who established the first textile mill in Ahmedabad in 1861 and Premchand Raichand, a Jain from Surat who pioneered the share market in the Dalal Street of the 1860s are part of Gujarat’s modern folklore. The mercantile capitalism that developed in Gujarat was deeply influenced by the Mahajan tradition, which emerged during the Mughal period that regulated the functioning of trade and the institution of Panch that organised the artisan community. The Mahajan-Panch system regulated competition, arbitrated disputes and created social institutions. The mercantile ethos that developed as a consequence, laid emphasis on avoidance of conflict within a framework of competition and placed social responsibility on the wealthy. The Ahmedabad mill strike of 1918 led by Gandhi and Anasuya Sarabhai further cemented the way of arbitration as a way of resolving industrial conflict. The industrial peace that Gujarat has witnessed in the post-independence period is in large measure due to this ethos. Three, in the post-independence period there has been large-scale social and political consensus on the idea of development and progress. This consensus is best exemplified by the debates on the dam on the Narmada and the widespread acceptance of genetically modified seeds in cotton cultivation. Gujarat attained a political consensus on the idea of development. The middle-class Gujarat was unwilling and intolerant of any dissenting imagination on not only the question of dam but on the larger notion of development it embodied. It is this broad consensus that has allowed for a massive privatisation of ports, creation of industrial complexes and the new SEZs without sustained and significant opposition. The hearing space for alternative development models in Gujarat has diminished. Four, the small traders and entrepreneurs in Gujarat do not always see the presence of large industrial corporations as a threat to their survival. They are willing to partner with the corporations as ancillary suppliers. Incidentally a third of the spare-parts suppliers of Nano are located in Rajkot. And when such partnership is not possible they do not shy away from competition with giant corporations. This is best illustrated by the fact that small traders in Ahmedabad and Rajkot created innovative strategies to meet the challenge posed by organised retail chains and shopping malls. Their success can be measured by the fact that Ahmedabad is now regarded as a graveyard of organised retail, with major corporations having been forced to downsize their operations and even close their iconic super-stores. A small time supplier of wafers and sandwiches to cinema halls of Rajkot grew in span of two decades in a family owned enterprise with a turn over of 500 crores. These success stories give confidence to small entrepreneurs to contend with corporations. Consequently, Gujarat has created a model of diversified industrialisation which includes petrochemicals, pharmaceuticals, energy, textiles, automobiles, ceramic, machine tools, brass parts, dairy, food processing, cash crop agriculture, salt and the diamond trade. With the exception of the eastern tribal belt of Gujarat the rest of the Gujarat, including the coastline has been converted into a large industrial complex. The political parties and the bureaucracy see themselves as facilitators of these industrial processes. It was for these reasons that Ratan Tata made his often-quoted statement: “If you are not in Gujarat, you are stupid.” But as Gujarat celebrates the relocation of Nano it is necessary to remember that large-scale consensus in one area of our economic and social life can lead to a shrinking of the culture of plurality and dissenting imaginations. A political culture intolerant of dissent finally loses its innovativeness not only in the realm of politics but also in the realm of ideas. A mercantile capitalism that seeks the co-existence of small entrepreneurs with modern corporations is anchored in this multiplicity of competing ideas.Dissent in the democratic realm also translates into innovativeness in business. The strength of Gujarati enterprise lies in this capacity to innovate, which is in no small measure a consequence of a plural culture. The writer is a social scientist based in Ahmedabad
