Paretos' Indian Split

Vilfredo Federico Damaso Pareto was an Italian Engineer and later Economist and Philosopher. He is more famous for the '80-20' principle and the Pareto's Index - though with very significant contributions to Economics, Sociology, and with definite views on Political Philosophy. He grew up in middle-class though relatively comfortable surroundings, with good education. Like his father, he started his career as a Civil Engineer in a State Owned Italian Railways company. However, with time, there were shifts in his interest, more than once.

Of his several contributions, one of his more memorable ones had emerged out of his studies of distribution of wealth. A fairly similar pattern of income distribution in several geographies - and it so emerged, that a marginal section of the society owned a major chunk of the wealth while the majority of the population were poor. As a specific example, (per wikipedia) in the 1906, his studies suggested that 80% of the lands in Italy were owned by 20% of the people, and what was left of the land was owned by the huge 80% population.

Then on emerged the 80-20 principle - 80% of all have 20% importance, while the rest 20% have 80% importance. It actually looks (and _is_) quite convincing. It is a fantastic rule of thumb and comes to great rescue, generally. A guide during my study years used the closest example - the hand! you got a thumb, and four fingers. In whatever we do, the thumb plays a critical role. You lose a thumb - imagine the handicap. Little wonder it was the thumb Guru Drona asked of Eklavya! And with a bit of maths - a thumb of the five fingers; 80-20?

Pareto was dismissive of democracy, rejecting it as an illusion. There are several other of his thoughts, and theories -- however, a significant observation may be drawn in our situation of India, today. It is tempting to try to apply the classic 'thumb-rule' to our democracy.

There have been too many disturbing events of corruption over the past sometime. While the trend is disturbing, and while there is always is an accusing finger pointing back at the electorate (of a franchise poorly exercised), there is a helplessness that India inherits with its democracy. While there is a possibility of choice, the options to choose from are diminutive. And recent trends do make horrifying suggestions a five year term is too long for a government to commit mistakes that cannot be undone.

While there is definitely a question of corrections needed in our democracy but, there are also associated concerns on quality of the population that makes up this country. It has an uncanny resemblence to the 80-20 principle. A country with majority (much more than 80% of the populace) that actually not in a position to make a positive impact on this nation's journey into the future (of which they are a co-travellers); And with a minority (much much less that 20%) that are capable of making an 80% impact: But, unfortunately have chosen to give heed to their needs more than those of the country. Funnily enough, the 80% dont care much. Somewhere in the picture also fit a few people who can and do try to make a positive impact - but, institutionalized degradation is difficult to prevent.

The situation is grim but, action is paramount. It is now also incumbent on the 80 percent to do their bit with the utmost sense of urgency. Of these there are of course those who are cursed with such social and economic situations that the nation is not the first, the second or the last concern of theirs. But of the rest, those who do have the means - it is on them that progress can be made. It is for them to be aware, to build awareness, to help their fellow citizens, and to come out and get participative in such precarious circumstances.