Why does prosperity make people less liberal and politics more regressive ?

The paradox of increasing prosperity creating more conservatives in society has always puzzled me.

Intuitively, one associates more liberal attitudes with people who do well. Therefore, the working assumption is that prosperity is good for liberalism. However historical experience is at best mixed. Asian societies like South Korea, Japan, and now India, generally turned more conservative with increasing prosperity, and some embraced virulent nationalism.

The first thing to grasp in the politics of Conservative versus Liberalism is to realise that your attitude towards these conceptual ways of life is shaped by where you are in the economic & social pyramid. And secondly, your politics is defined largely by how you want others to act, rather than by how you approach others.

When you want those above you to be liberal, you support liberalism. It doesn't really mean you are liberal to those below you. The attitude to those above you, and those below you is asymmetric. The defining factor in your politics is more about how you want those above you to share the benefits of growth.

When you have little, you want others to share more; when you are relatively better off, you are willing to put up with less sharing from those above you.

The other factor that defines your politics is about how you see yourself in terms of adding to the society. Most successful people, doing well in life, think of themselves as adding more value to society than they take.

They can afford to be liberal. Conversely, those who are not so successful, are net value seekers, in the sense that, they want more from others, than they are willing or able to give.

On balance, value seekers, are liberals in bad times, and relatively more conservative in good times in the sense of being less demanding of those above them.

The paradox resolves, when you consider the fact that, the proportion of value seekers, in a pyramid shaped income & social order, is three to four times more than value creators. Therefore as property or value creation in a society grows, the process creates more conservatives among value seekers than it creates liberals among value creators. The incremental numbers are vastly skewed in favour of creation of more conservatives among the value seekers in the lower half of the income or social pyramid.

Hence the paradox of people moving away from left and liberal parties like Congress to Right and orthodox parties like the BJP. As prosperity grows, the number of people who begin to be less demanding of sharing in the lower half of the pyramid, is far higher than those more inclined to sharing in the upper half of the pyramid.

Numbers in the lower half of the pyramid, who supported liberalism in politics falls sharply, and so does the vote share of parties that favour more distribution of income, and less liberal parties gain. This helps explain why BJP is winning even among those who "should oppose them" as under-privileged. These sections are doing better, and so now demand less distribution.

Liberals and the Left have to reinvent themselves if they want to remain relevant in politics. Income redistribution in society continues to be important but politically, it has lost its potency as a tool for mobilisation. For the latter you need more sharply focused movements, that are specific to class, caste, geography or circumstances.

A corollary of the above is that there is no gratitude in politics. Those who benefit by your polices, don't necessarily vote for you. They are more likely to attribute their success to their own hard work rather than your policies. Every election begins with a new slate. Politicians must learn to live with this.

( The writer is an independent commentator. Views are personal)