The Ambani wedding, a symbol of India's wealth disparity, has ignited a heated debate on social media. While its opulence has captivated millions, it also highlights the urgent need to address growing inequalities, writes Vinta Nanda.

In my article dated July 11, 2024, titled  The Grand Ambani Wedding I explored how the Ambani wedding, despite its extravagance, served as a platform to support and showcase India's rich cultural heritage. I highlighted indigenous arts, featured works by Indian fashion designers, and noted how the various events surrounding the wedding promoted local industries to a global audience. However, the overwhelming public and media attention on this lavish celebration is troubling. Many of my readers criticized the article for favouring the wedding, viewing it in contrast to the pressing socio-economic challenges we face as a nation. This feedback has prompted me to dive deeper into these issues and examine the broader implications of such opulent displays in a country grappling with severe inequality.

The grand wedding of Anant Ambani and Radhika Merchant serves as a poignant illustration of the stark contrasts between opulence and poverty, progress and stagnation. Lavish ceremonies attended by politicians, Bollywood stars, international celebrities, and influencers have drawn massive viewership and equally massive criticism. This series of events exhibit the chasm between the affluent and the impoverished in India, provoking widespread debate on social media and beyond.

The statistics are stark: 40% of India's wealth is owned by just 1% of its population. This inequality is glaringly evident in the extravagance of the Ambani wedding, where the opulence displayed stands in contrast to the lives of the 800 million people who rely on government-provided food grains. While the wedding has captivated millions through live broadcasts on social media, it has also sparked anger among those who see it as a symbol of the growing divide between the rich and the poor.

Philosopher John Rawls once said, “The just society is a society that if you knew everything about it, you’d be willing to enter it in a random place.” By this measure, Indian society, with its extreme wealth disparities, fails to meet the criteria of a just society. The Ambani wedding is a reminder of the privileges enjoyed by the few, while the majority struggle to meet basic needs.

Despite the criticism, there is an undeniable fascination with the wealth displayed in this wedding. This obsession is not unique to India but is a global phenomenon. The market for luxury goods thrives because there are buyers, yet far more people live off budget stores and flea markets. The allure of wealth and the aspiration to join the ranks of the affluent drive much of this fascination.

Social media platforms amplify this obsession by providing a constant stream of updates and glimpses into the lives of the rich and famous. The Ambani wedding, with its almost live broadcasts, becomes a spectacle that millions will not ignore. French sociologist Jean Baudrillard's theory of hyperreality explains this phenomenon well. He argued that in a media-saturated society, the distinction between reality and representation becomes blurred, and people start to live in a world of simulations. The Ambani wedding, as presented on social media, has become more than just an event; it has turned into a hyperreal spectacle that captivates and distracts.

The anger expressed by the educated middle and upper-middle classes towards the extravagance of the wedding stems from a sense of injustice and disillusionment. These classes, while not impoverished, are acutely aware of the struggles faced by the majority of the population. They see the lavishness as a betrayal of the social contract, where the rich continue to amass wealth while the rest are left to fend for themselves.

Economist Thomas Piketty, in his seminal work “Capital in the Twenty-First Century,” highlights how wealth concentration can lead to social and economic instability. In the context of India, the Ambani wedding can be seen as a flashpoint for expressing frustrations about systemic inequalities and the collusion between the wealthy elite and the government. The anger is not just about the wedding itself but what it represents—a system that favours the rich at the expense of the poor.

In conversations with my house staff, I realized a big difference in awareness. My housekeeper and cook were unaware of the grand wedding and indifferent when informed. They represent the critical mass in desperate need of proper housing, good education for their children, and true upliftment in this ruthless metropolis—Mumbai, where the big wedding ironically is taking place. My driver, more in tune with social media, forgave the Ambanis because they married off 50 poor couples and provided annadaan (feeding the needy) for many days. He doesn’t question the sustainability of these practices nor understands the irony that the optics represent. When I ask him if the Ambanis will organize weddings for all the poor and feed every hungry person in India, he is silent.

While many among the middle classes, however, aspire to wealth, a significant number practice austerity and are content with a comfortable life. Mahatma Gandhi's philosophy of Sarvodaya (universal upliftment) and Ahimsa (non-violence) emphasizes living simply so that others may simply live. This ethos is still prevalent among many who believe that true progress lies in uplifting the poor and ensuring equitable distribution of resources.

Yet, aspirations to wealth are not inherently negative. They drive innovation and economic growth. The challenge lies in creating a system where wealth creation does not lead to exclusion and where opportunities are available to all. Amartya Sen's capability approach suggests that true development occurs when people have the freedom to achieve well-being. This means not just economic growth but also ensuring that people have access to education, healthcare, and opportunities for upward mobility.

The Ambani wedding should spark the necessary debate about the socio-economic divide and the systemic inequalities that perpetuate it. While the obsession with opulence is fuelled by aspirations and media representation, the anger it provokes is rooted in a deep-seated sense of injustice.

As philosopher John Stuart Mill stated, “The worth of a state, in the long run, is the worth of the individuals composing it.”