In a recent editorial for *The Indian Express*, Rahul Gandhi, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and a key Congress figure, voiced strong concerns about what he describes as a “new breed of monopolists” who wield outsized influence over India’s institutions and regulatory frameworks. Gandhi argued that these powerful corporate groups are undermining India's economy, especially impacting small and medium-sized businesses, leading to widespread job losses and an increase in economic inequality. He noted that these oligarchic entities have accumulated vast wealth while leaving the broader population and smaller businesses struggling to compete in a skewed marketplace.
Drawing a historical parallel, Gandhi likened the fear and control exerted by today’s monopolists to the East India Company’s oppressive tactics during colonial times. He argued that although the colonial company ceased to exist over 150 years ago, a similar sense of fear has returned, with domestic monopolies replacing foreign ones. This “monopoly model,” as he termed it, has, according to him, effectively “decimated” the country’s diverse ecosystem of micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs), creating significant economic hurdles and hindering job creation.
Gandhi’s article aligns with his recent critiques of the Narendra Modi-led government, which he accuses of promoting policies that favor a select few business conglomerates while neglecting the needs of other industries. He contended that these monopolistic players benefit not through superior products or innovation but through their influence over government bodies and regulatory institutions. According to Gandhi, this influence enables them to manipulate the system, bypassing fair competition and ensuring their own success at the expense of others.
The Congress MP went further, suggesting that these groups’ influence extends beyond business to the media and cultural spheres, where they shape public perception and limit the diversity of perspectives available to Indians. “These groups decide what Indians read and watch, they influence how Indians think and what they speak,” he wrote, pointing to a consolidation of power that, in his view, erodes the democratic principles of open dialogue and market-driven success. He stressed that this type of power structure effectively marginalizes market forces, replacing them with “power relations” that favor a small elite.
Yet Gandhi acknowledged that not all successful Indian companies fall into this monopolistic pattern. He cited examples like Mahindra, Titan, Lenskart, Manyavar, and Zomato, which he described as homegrown businesses that have achieved success while playing by the rules. These companies, he argued, prove that it is possible to build a thriving business without monopolistic practices, though he admitted that such companies represent only a “tiny sample” in the current landscape.
In his critique, Gandhi urged the government to avoid policies that favor a handful of business houses at the cost of countless others and cautioned against the support of opaque “benami” ownership structures within the business ecosystem. He argued that a balanced approach is essential, where resources and opportunities are accessible to all, rather than being monopolized by a privileged few. Such favoritism, he said, "wounds Bharat Mata," emphasizing that the monopolization of resources harms the nation by alienating and disenfranchising millions who cannot compete fairly.
Looking beyond the individuals involved, Gandhi contended that the monopolistic phenomenon is a product of deeper societal and political flaws. He called for systemic reforms that would create an equitable business environment and prevent such concentrations of power. In his view, only a fair, transparent system can harness India’s potential by allowing small and large enterprises to coexist and flourish without undue interference from powerful entities.
Gandhi’s editorial reflects his ongoing narrative that the Modi administration’s economic policies have exacerbated inequalities, turning India into a society where a select few benefit disproportionately. His stance highlights the importance of rethinking the economic frameworks governing India to ensure that the nation’s wealth is shared more equitably and that opportunity remains accessible to all, irrespective of their connections or influence.
