DOGE lessons for the State capacity debate

The quest for effective State capacity has to guard against the slippery slope of authoritarianism

- Yamini Aiyar

After 130 days of wielding his chainsaw — hacking off 260,000 United States (US) federal workers who accounted for roughly 6% of the country's workforce by one estimate and wiping out entire agencies like USAID — Elon Musk has left Washington, DC. From an Indian perspective, I have observed Musk's Department Of Government Efficiency (DOGE)'s attempt to eviscerate the administrative State with a combination of bewilderment, curiosity, and horror. Waste, Fraud, and Abuse, the DOGE mantra, are adjectives many in India have long reserved for our bureaucracy. But, it turns out that every society is disenchanted with its bureaucracy in its own way (with apologies to Leo Tolstoy).

In America, liberals too are coming to terms with this disenchantment, seeking to replace what they consider an inefficient and unambitious State with one that delivers "abundance". Viewed from India, the contours of the US debate raise new questions about how State capacity gets built. More importantly, the situation in the US offers a cautionary tale on the paths we must not take. That these debates are taking place against the backdrop of creeping authoritarianism adds to the urgency of engaging with these ideas.