No house can be set in order or cleaned up from outside and that includes the hallowed Houses that run the country. Team Anna (that-was)’s decision to take the political plunge, therefore, is a natural organic development that should be welcomed. Is it not a good test of the samaritans’ motives and mettle as also of the citizens’ seriousness to shed the baggage of sleaze? But the ‘You too, Anna’ tone of many is quite amusing. One supporter has even filed a cheating case against Kejriwal for breaking the promise of ‘no politics’.
So, have Anna, Baba & Co burnt their moral bridges by betraying their political ambitions? Or have they made a naive, impulsive move without taking into account the compulsions of real politik? A bit of both, may be, depending on who we are talking about. But what’s wrong? Is the recent anti-corruption movement all about a few campaigning individuals and their motives or is it about something larger and deeper — a monster and virus at the same time that is swallowing, as also eating away from the insides, the whole nation?
Now, whose fault is it to have imagined that the corruption crusade is a third party operation while the ubiquitous ‘us’, all the affected prajas, can remain on the sidelines as spectators offering just lip sympathy? Fact is, the fight against corruption cannot be outsourced to a small group, howsoever good its intentions and strong the will. After all corruption is not a distant political issue but a public cause, nay, everyone’s personal matter. So, despite the natural aversion to politics by many and the ‘I told you so’ self-goals by Congmen, it must be understood that the system cannot be sanitised without getting one’s own hands dirty.
Will other issues like terrorism, reservations, secularism and economy dilute the focus on Lokpal and corruption and divide the campaigners? Elementary wisdom suggests that currently all these so-called divisive issues are only surface shadow-shows while graft remains the strong common political denominator. Coalition politics has proved time and again that all ideological chasms can be easily crossed with the bridges of power, pelf and self-aggrandisement. So if the always-warring crooked characters can still unite on looting, why should we assume that the straight ones, who may dissent on, say, Nuclear power or Retail FDI can never come together? In the absence of extraneous influences, national interest can still get them to see common light. Yes, it is possible that honest MPs with an itch for debate may delay or even deadlock decisions. But is that worse than critical consensus getting consummated on the altar of hard cash?
A political foray is surely a far better and braver option than the futile fasts that only make the fighters frail. But there are a few pitfalls that ‘Annaists’ must avoid. Politics need not necessarily be via a political party. Our Constitution does not even recognise the party system and the phrase ‘political party’ scarcely figures in it. The Representation of People’s Act also does not insist on candidates contesting polls only under the banner of a political party. The stress of the laws of the land is on individual contestants and their role as MPs and not the Party as such. That the PM or a CM should enjoy the support of the majority of members present and voting does not give any legal sanctity to a political party. It is only through the practice of issuing whips and subsequent Anti-defection laws that the party has gained precedence, much against the letter and spirit of the Constitution.
The top-down model of the present party system is truly the bane of our polity. Even parties that started off as grassroots movements have ended up as personal possessions of powerful leaders. Dynastic ambitions, lateral entry, mafias masquerading as family and friends and vested commercial interests have all ensured that the party remains disconnected from people’s welfare. Really, the purpose of a party organisation is to serve its pet leader, not the people who sustain it. Reason why a critical remark on a well-heeled leader evokes more indignant bytes from the party underlings than does the pathetic plight of the poor. Even the few conscientious ones will have to submit to the tyranny of the high command. The party format is even more a curse in a country like ours wherein rabble-rousers can cleverly cultivate big chunks of the electorate on the basis of caste, cinema or communal factors.
In a diverse and far-flung nation as ours, only people’s reps free from the overarching commitment to a party or an egoist leader, can serve his or her electorate well. Annaists should therefore steer clear of this party apparatus that diverts and destroys public interest. They must instead contest as independents with their varying manifestoes, if need be, but only after an honesty self-check that can stand subsequent scrutiny. Having created an awareness and a platform for all good ones to gather they must consider their job done, as an organised group. The decentralisation from Jantar Mantar must now happen with the people’s initiative. So everyone is a potential poll candidate and this is a good time for well-meaning aspirants to make their bid by nurturing a constituency! Needless to say, they must know what they are getting into and what to expect.
Our Independence can be salvaged only by independents. It may be a small step in a painful and slow journey. But exorcising our haunted Houses of the long lingering ghosts and their ghoulish legacy is no easy task.
e-mail the writer at [email protected]