In country’s company

It’s early days for presidential polls. But, still, take note of Abdul Kalam exclaiming approvingly at the prospect of Narayana Murthy succeeding him as president. The point is not Murthy or any other business leader and their plans or non-plans for high public office. The point is an attitudinal change that has been under way for some years but is only now becoming visible. That we can even consider a CEO for president, that a name from that ‘class’ can even be placed on the high table, speaks of a vast social and cultural shift. Long years after they pitched in to turn around India’s economic story, India’s entrepreneurs are beginning to be deemed respectable enough.

During the decades of the licence-permit raj, the reigning common sense affected a kind of noble disdain vis-a-vis the business class. They were men and women whose profit pursuit was to be curbed by the state. They were banished to the margins of intellectual and cultural acceptability by the more high-minded. And if some people persisted with their job of making money, the least they owed society was a modicum of guilt and defensiveness. Fortunately that story has changed in post-reform India. Now, the entrepreneur is rechristened ‘wealth creator’ and is applauded for his her fierce ambition and risk-taking. But sometimes we overcorrect. The applause can degenerate into mawkish theses on CEO as oracular celebrity, driven by more hype than substance.

In looking at the CEO as president issue, we welcome the dropping of the affected disdain towards the entrepreneur in public discourse. We believe that in principle, in a liberal democracy, individuals of the entrepreneurial class should have as much opportunity of attaining high office as members of any other class. Yes, it is necessary that the president of India must act, and must be seen to act, in national interest and that he or she must remain above narrow interests. Objectivity, neutrality, a certain skill in dealing with complicated issues, these are qualities we look for. But that is a standard that must be applied to all individuals who aspire to be president. It cannot be the reason to prejudge the suitability of any one class of aspirants.