O ne of the longest persisting surprises among the intelligentsia has been the relative political stability in Bihar inspite of what appears day after day in all forms of media that Bihar is increasingly slipping in the morass of non-development, poverty and lawlessness. A Chief Minister of one of the neighbouring states who faced electoral rout in the last assembly elections in his own state despite his enviable record on the developmental front was at a loss of words to explain his defeat nevertheless he was completely at ease in paying his tongue in cheek tributes to the politics of 'social engineering'-by which he actually meant caste based mobilisations-of Laloo Prasad Yadav. Though his comments about what he perceived to be the strengths of Laloo Prasad was needless in the context of his interview, which was to discuss what failed him in his own state, nevertheless the concerned Chief Minister in many ways was reiterating the commonly held view about Bihar-that everything in Bihar is to be attributed to the politics of caste equation. A deeper probe in the history and politics of stereotyping Bihar in this mode would reveal that most of the clichés emerging as a result are themselves a product of excessive indulgence with middle class concerns whose hold over all forms of knowledge dissemination mechanism is so unmistakable. This view, while celebrates the triumph of middle class and elite groups politics elsewhere in India and assesses the strength or weakness of governance in a region on the basis of its preparedness to integrate with the growing tentacles of the market system; it deprecates all dominating political forms in areas where it has been unable to make successful forays, a la Bihar. This view would have us believe that Bihar (maybe UP also) is an exceptional state in India where the primordial loyalties like caste ties still holds sway in the political domain. This if anything is no less than an exceptional instance of deliberate ignorance. Forget about the whole of India, where caste, religion and ethnic ties are used to a lesser or greater degree, for mobilisation in electoral battles, even in a place like Delhi it would be only at the peril of overlooking facts to believe that the decision to nominate Sahib Singh Verma and Sajjan Kumar the two Jat politicians by the BJP and the Congress respectively, in the Jat dominated outer Delhi constituency, is not an instance of acceding to the politics based on primordial ties. For that matter one of the most brazen displays of the triumph of primordial loyalties took place not in any backward state but in one of the economically most developed state of Gujarat. But since the basic thrust of governance in these areas appears committed to upholding the middle class interests, these 'minor' issues are swept under the carpet.

But saying about middle class concerns making Bihar an exceptional case is not to assert that everything in Bihar is otherwise perfectly in place. To begin with the often-repeated statement about the state having collapsed in Bihar is a process that is still unfolding and can hardly be contested. But what is debatable is that this process of gradual withering of the state in Bihar has uniformly affected the broader social spectrum. While the gradual weakening of the state has definitely put the perpetuation of middle class and elite groups' interests on fragile grounds, but whether this process has also adversely affected the lower classes as compared to the period when the state was 'functioning' is something, which is yet to be quantified. But a more contemporary comparison of Bihar with the other states across India reveals a pattern. No state in India, barring perhaps the states that have a tradition of being governed by the left front governments, can boast of achieving anything significant for their lower class population. Possibly this argument holds valid even for the state of the Indian union. The wholesale negligence of this group by the well-oiled functioning states was perhaps at the heart of outright rejection of 'feel-good' NDA government at the centre and the 'good-governing' states of Andhra and MP by the underprivileged groups. The moral of the mandate given by the poor people in the last parliamentary election and in the states of AP and MP was clear, strong state or no state the economic plight of the poor people was going to be the same. Given the class background of different states of India in general and of the Indian state in particular, it is now becoming more and more obvious that the numerically superior groups of the underprivileged classes have reconciled to the realities of power structures and have taken a more pragmatic approach towards it than perhaps its theorists. Confronting the stark reality of Indian political life on its face, this group does not seem to be greatly perturbed by the relative merits or demerits of a strong or weak state, for them any political coalition that would make even a token gesture of enhancing their social standing in opposition to the erstwhile dominant groups appears more appealing. In Bihar, for the last one and half decade, Laloo Prasad has perfected in this art more genuinely than all his opponents. A journey through the whispers of the poor people in Bihar reveal that they hardly cared for what many scams Laloo was involved and whether he was further corroding the already brittle foundations of Bihar economy, as long as he was paying back their long time tormenters in the same coin. Laloo or no Laloo, the underprivileged groups were going to be in the same economic plight, but atleast here was someone who gave them an opportunity to socially rear their head.

Political competition in Bihar, as Laloo has succeeded in setting its agenda over the years, is not only about controlling the formal space of the state-since its superseding authority has been successfully undermined not only by design but also because of its failure to cater to the larger needs-it is more about forging of a dominant political-social coalition, who in the absence of a strong state, can effectively raise the bogey of abstract values of 'rights' and 'dignity' instead of the more tangible issues of material gains. Experience has shown the tangible gains seldom leads to the betterment of the poor people, so why not yearn for the abstract values. The indifferent and at times even anti-middle class politics of Laloo, perfectly suits the social and hence political aspirations of the underprivileged classes. The near one to one correspondence between caste and class in Bihar makes this competition appear as caste conflicts and caste-based mobilisation, and Laloo does not seem to mind this as long as he is reaping the political benefits of this competition.

The political economy of non-development in Bihar and the perseverance of Laloo Prasad since the nineties, therefore, actually indicate two things. First, it is a sad commentary on the nature of Indian state itself that has failed to make even a token gesture of bringing its underprivileged classes within the purview of development that in turn could raise their expectations. Secondly, and the one which emerges from the first that despite the unprecedented social background of the power structure that has emerged in Bihar it has shied away from taking up the agenda of economic development. The more pertinent issue here, however, seen from the perspective of the social constituency that Laloo represents is whether such an economic development is at all necessary, since such developments have failed to percolate down to their level. For Laloo it is convenient to mobilise this class and choose not to perform because of the bare minimum expectations of the underprivileged classes.

* Fellow, Asian Development Research Institute (ADRI), Patna, E-mail : chaubeyrakesh@yahoo.com