Selective Fairness

As I observe the Congress party’s recent rhetoric, I can’t help but notice a glaring contradiction. On the one hand, the party demands "rights proportionate to population," a stance that naturally favours the populous northern states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. 

On the other hand, it staunchly opposes the redistribution of resources to these very regions, arguing that it would penalise southern states like Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, which have achieved better socio-economic indicators.

This double standard raises some critical questions. If Congress truly believes in proportional representation based on population, shouldn’t the same logic apply to economic resources? Northern states, after all, house a larger share of India’s population and shoulder the challenges that come with it, whether it’s unemployment, infrastructure deficits, or underdeveloped healthcare.

Yet, Congress seems to flip the narrative when it comes to money. Redistribution, in their view, punishes the "performers" in India’s federal structure. Southern states, which contribute disproportionately to the national GDP and have controlled population growth, understandably resist footing the bill for what they see as inefficiencies in the north.

So, why this apparent inconsistency? Perhaps it’s about political calculus. By championing rights proportionate to population, Congress panders to the northern vote bank. But by opposing economic redistribution, it seeks to retain favour in the south, a region where it’s fighting hard to stay relevant.

The result is a precarious balancing act. While Congress tries to straddle the north-south divide, it risks being called out for opportunism. For a party that often claims the mantle of fairness and national unity, these contradictions could undermine its credibility.

As an observer, I find myself asking whether such selective advocacy is sustainable. In a country as diverse and politically charged as India, can any party afford to speak in two voices? Or is this the price of keeping the federal balance intact in a democracy as vast and complex as ours?