‘Be the change you want to see’ is perhaps the most worn out phrase in English, rendered all the more tiresome thanks to Obamania. But it reveals an elementary reality: Change lies more in the person and less in what he does. If that be so, the very presence of Obama in the White House is change personified. For better or worse, Obama is the change! It is a change of colour, change of ethnicity, change of a middle-name but most of all a change of character, for the familiar snobbish, self-assured bully of a US President with his pervasive air of superiority would be conspicuously absent at least for four years.
The debate over change and continuity is an eternal one. But it shall never be resolved for the simple reason that the same person will advocate either depending on his locus in life at a particular point. Again the two could be matters of conviction or handy tools of hypocrisy. In politics, for instance, while incumbents prefer contiunuity, the opposition clamours for change. But once the political-outs turn political-ins, the batons of change and continuity, well, change hands. Trust Obama to pitch for continuity in 2012. In organisation, change is the unchanging ladder to climb hierarchy but once atop, continuity is the self-serving sacred mantra. In society, the debate plays out mostly in the cultural arena as a perennial conflict between tradition and modernity; And as clocks and calendars only move forward, it will not be long before the modern becomes traditional. But since clocks and calendars also go around in circles, tradition too makes a comeback as modern. At the family level, the C and C divide is reflected in age and relationships. And to an individual, the courtship to change is a continuous compulsion to survive in a world ever in flux. Indeed, change is the critical catalyst through which the world continues to churn. And change invariably plays out through personalities.
It would be inappropriate to superimpose the American experience on India. But none can deny the pangs: The United States of America does draw attention to the Unchanging State of Bharat just on the personalities front alone. The change that has come to USA in the form of Obama has been eluding our USB for decades. Sample this: In 2004, the year of the last US Presidential elections, hardly anyone beyond Obama’s immediate political neighbourhood would have even heard of him. Today, his name is on the lips of virtually everyone on the globe. In just four years, a man there could rise from near total obscurity to unwavering world attention. And Bush, who pervaded global consciousness for eight years has already been pushed out of public memory. But in Bharat’s TN for instance, a man who ruled it forty years back is again at the helm defying well-deserved oblivion. Change? How irrational it sounds!
If change should manifest itself in human form, at the least, TN is far from it. The cast of characters on this rational stage has been around for too long and with too little to boast of in terms of their avowed purpose, namely, welfare and development of the people … blood relatives and adopted sisters excluded! But let’s go beyond our five times CM of 40-years vintage. The likes of Anbalagan, Arcot Veerasamy and Veerapandi Arumugam were part of K’s 1971 cabinet. Apart from this trio, Ko Si Mani, Duraimurugan etc were ministers in the 1989 and 1996 DMK governments too. And decades later, they are all still ministers. Their longevity, personal and political, may do them and their kin proud, but can this self-respecting State rejoice at this geriatric grip on its fate for more than a generation? Stagnation and inertia, not change, are the rational leit motif here. Indeed, if there is change at all it is in the portfolios or their fast faltering gait.
Of course, TN people have a choice, come 2011 or even before, if providence proposes . They are allowed to elect J for the third time, making it the sixth stint for the AIADMK. Indeed, such ex-‘changes’ are familiar history and will likely repeat. But if these changes are so predictable, are they really ‘change’? Experience proves that nothing changes whoever rules. Flatulent egos, flowery rhetoric, fraudulent posturing, flawed priorities, flattery, fasts, flash bandhs, fund collection, family politics, filial wranglings, friendly fire with fraternal allies et al are familiar and unchanging facets of TN political life. And the root of the rot is in the personas of the two chief protagonists, CMs, past, present, and prospective and even permanent, if their fans are to be believed! Now, will the third factor, V-kanth be any change? Or will politics be just a change of stage for the ageing star with a new cast but the same script?
Somehow, change is quite often associated with youth. The election of 47-year-old Obama strengthens this thought. Would America have elected a black of Mc Cain’s age? A moot question. Still, I do not think age and change are directly proportional. A PVN at seventy-one brought about momentous changes in this country; but a Rahul at just about forty signifies perpetuation. Again, will Advani at 80 plus act as an agent of change? Unlikely! But with many dreaming on her behalf, will Maya be the Change? Well, any such hopes of change is actually maya! The only change likely: What’s now UP show will become a national spectacle! From TN to the nation, the faces of the future are all just ghosts from painful flashbacks.
The fatigue is not just on account of the familiar facade. The rhetoric too has not changed much barring being expressed in different lingo. Law always takes its own course, secular forces are always fighting communal forces, in politics there are neither permanant friends nor permanant foes, India will never be cowed down by terror — you can take your pick from the truckloads of such pearls of political wisdom. The nation is already bored sick by the political monotony. Really, one dreads the Lok Sabha elections slated next year. With all the usual suspects in full form and flow, trust the pre and post poll scenarios to be deja vu for the n th time! But, yes, one massive change needs to be acknowledged. Impoverished India’s rise as an economic superpower was reflected in Parliament as crores of rupees were displayed like loose change!
The politics cannot be changed unless the players are changed. It took the US just four years to overhaul its political landscape. But given India’s political gene pool it would take generations even if it were to start now. But start it must. Let’s do it, just to kill boredom, if not for a better Bharat!
e-mail the writer at [email protected]