The Rise of the Freebies Culture amidst Charitable State

The origins of India’s freebie culture trace back to the socio-political transformations that unfolded after the country gained independence. Confronted with widespread poverty, illiteracy, and economic disparity, political leaders saw welfare measures as a powerful tool to address these pressing issues. Tamil Nadu, in particular, became a beacon of welfare-oriented politics. The Dravidian movement, led by visionaries such as M.G. Ramachandran (MGR) and later J. Jayalalithaa of the AIADMK, popularized initiatives aimed at improving the lives of marginalized communities. Free mid-day meals for school children, subsidized rice, and essential household goods became defining elements of governance, fostering trust and loyalty among voters.

Initially, these welfare schemes had a genuine purpose: to uplift the disadvantaged and meet basic needs like education, healthcare, and food security. However, as political competition intensified, these programs underwent a transformation. They evolved from instruments of social justice into direct populist measures designed more to secure votes than to promote sustainable development. The political battlefield became crowded with promises of ever more extravagant giveaways, from household items to cash transfers, reshaping the dynamics of electoral politics across the country.

In recent years, the discourse surrounding what has come to be known as the "freebie culture" or "rewadi culture" has sparked contrasting interpretations. On one side of the debate, critics view recent statements by political leaders denouncing this practice as contradictory and puzzling. After all, many of these leaders and their parties have historically relied on populist welfare schemes to secure electoral victories. The empirical evidence is clear—such initiatives have proven instrumental in winning over voters.

On the other hand, contrary to contemporary leaders like Arvind Kejriwal and Hemant Soren, leaders like Narendra Modi have earned praise for their critique of the freebie culture. Supporters interpret their comments as serious assessments of the long-term economic consequences of these practices. By drawing a distinction between “rewadi culture” and authentic welfarism, these leaders have added depth to the ongoing debate, suggesting a reimagining of social justice within the framework of a "charitable State."

This vision of the charitable State presents a pro-market government that provides selective support to citizens while maintaining a competitive stance in electoral politics. To understand the broader implications of this emerging paradigm, it is essential to delve into the historical and political context that has shaped this notion. The Indian Constitution envisions welfarism as a fundamental duty of the State, aimed at recognizing citizens as rights-bearing stakeholders. However, this constitutional ideal has been significantly reshaped over the past three decades.

The liberalization of the Indian economy in the 1990s marked a pivotal shift. Political elites across party lines embraced the open market as the ultimate economic framework. This transition created a political consensus that minimized the role of the State in economic affairs, confining its functions primarily to resolving societal conflicts. The State gradually redefined itself as a mediator rather than a direct participant in economic interventions.

Under the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government, this reimagined role of the State paved the way for a sectoral approach to welfare. Social groups such as women, children, Dalits, Adivasis, unorganized labourers, and religious minorities were identified as distinct stakeholders. Welfarism was framed as sectoral empowerment, with targeted schemes designed to address the unique needs of each group.

The Modi-led Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has reinterpreted this model without diverging from the broader political consensus on market-driven economics. The BJP’s approach emphasizes direct engagement with individual beneficiaries, or "labharthis," enabling targeted political transactions. This shift marks a significant departure from previous models of welfare.

Prime Minister Modi’s critique of the freebies culture is rooted in this vision of a charitable State. His doctrine of "New India" champions the idea of "responsive citizens" — individuals who are not merely passive recipients of state benefits but active participants in nation-building. This notion aligns with a broader framework that links a responsive government with duty-bound citizens.

While observing the statement like “There is a difference in the way we work: we have given gas connections, power connections, and it’s up to them to pay their bills. We have made toilets for them, but they have to maintain them... When you take populist measures, you promise to pay electricity bills, free gas, etc. What we did was to provide help to upgrade their lives — this is empowerment.” PMs speeches reinforce this perspective, cautioning against the "dangerous" culture of freebies, which he argues undermines the country’s development. Instead, his government’s "double-engine" approach focuses on long-term improvements, such as infrastructure development and economic reforms, rather than short-term populist measures.

This ideological shift is evident in the BJP’s emphasis on linking welfare schemes to large-scale infrastructure projects. Critics of non-BJP parties often highlight their alleged preference for freebies over investments in expressways, airports, and defense corridors. By contrast, Modi positions the BJP’s approach as one that facilitates market efficiency through robust infrastructure while simultaneously addressing individual needs.

BJP’s emphasis on infrastructure as a vehicle for social justice represents a departure from traditional identity-based notions of exclusion. Their vision extends the concept of social justice to include regional imbalances, particularly in India’s eastern states. For PM, equitable access to modern amenities and balanced development across regions constitute a more comprehensive understanding of social justice. In his view, building roads, railways, and irrigation systems in underserved areas is as much about fairness as addressing caste, gender, or religious disparities.

Another key aspect of the charitable State model is the recalibration of political bargaining. While the BJP criticizes opposition parties for perpetuating the freebies culture, it has not abandoned the practice of political bargaining altogether. Instead, the party has sought to redefine the terms of this engagement, ensuring that welfare schemes introduced by opposition parties are perceived as electorally untenable. By framing its initiatives as tools for empowerment rather than handouts, the BJP has attempted to shift the narrative surrounding social justice and economic development.

This strategic reorientation underscores the BJP’s broader developmental agenda, which seeks to integrate welfare with market facilitation. For instance, initiatives like the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana, which provides pucca houses to the poor, or the Swachh Bharat Mission, which aims to improve sanitation, are framed as empowerment programs rather than mere giveaways. Similarly, the completion of long-pending irrigation projects and the establishment of new electricity plants are presented as measures to enhance the productivity and quality of life for farmers and rural communities.

At its core, the charitable State model reflects a pragmatic approach to governance, balancing market imperatives with the need for social equity. By redefining welfare as a means of fostering self-reliance and community development, Modi’s government seeks to align individual aspirations with national progress. This vision of New India, while not without its critics, represents an attempt to reconcile the demands of a rapidly globalizing economy with the enduring promise of social justice enshrined in the Indian Constitution.

However, this approach also raises important questions about the limits of market-oriented welfarism. While the emphasis on infrastructure and empowerment is commendable, it remains to be seen whether this model can adequately address the structural inequalities that persist in Indian society. Furthermore, the critique of freebies culture, while valid in many respects, risks alienating marginalized communities that rely on such measures for their survival. Striking a balance between empowerment and equity will be crucial for the long-term success of this model.

In conclusion, "the rise of the charitable State in contemporary Indian politics reflects a complex interplay of ideological, economic, and electoral factors. Leaders like Modi, Kejriwal, and Soren have sought to redefine social justice and welfarism in ways that align with their respective visions of governance. By emphasizing responsive citizenship, infrastructure development, and targeted welfare, they have attempted to chart a new path for India’s political and economic future. Yet, the true test of this model will lie in its ability to deliver on its promises while ensuring that no one is left behind in the pursuit of progress".