Okay, so the AAP has formed the government and Mr. Arvind
Kejriwal is the seventh Chief Minister of Delhi and the youngest one to be so.
Remarkably, his ascend to this post, is also one of the swiftest and most
covered (by media and public interest) in Indian politics. This phenomenon is
nothing short of a mini-revolution or coo akin to the India’s freedom from the
British. Use of democratic means to achieve the objective of movement, complete
rejection of violence even in the face of provocation and involvement of every
section of the society were hallmarks of this movement which were also that of
the freedom movement; though the duration of freedom struggle, involvement of entire
geography, the complete illegitimacy of British rule lend a different shade to
that great movement.
What started as a movement against corruption, for which Mr.
Kejriwal was acclaimed by the classes (Magsaysay award if you like) and masses
(who were there at Jantar Mantar and Ramlila) alike, became a political
movement out of which was born the AAP. Critics are quick to point out that
this was always the plan and the movement and association with Anna was the façade.
Even if it were true, one dares to ask ‘What’s wrong in that?’ Here are bunch
of people who are well-educated, have no criminal background, have no muscle or
money power to back them up, no surname which gives them a platinum membership
the moment they are born and are not asking for votes because of our caste,
religion or thankfully liquor. If having an experience or the backing of an
already establish party is the only criteria for serious political dialogue, then
political or social movements which essentially want to bring a change by new people
would never have had the impact they have across the world. And, such movements
are not a thing of the past, if one is even cursorily following the events in
the Middle-East or for that matter in many districts of our own country where
people have chosen violence as their only or last measure to get a rightful
share of development. Even if all this
is not true, since when have we become dismissive of experimentation and why
should we. In the words of George Bernard Shaw “We need more insane people in
this world, look where the sane ones have landed us!”
The rise of AAP which was dismissed as ‘a story’ by the
defeated and out-going Chief Minister Shiela Dikshit, needs to be studied for
various reasons. Successful political movements have always had causes that
people relate to at that period of time, and inspired leadership that is able
to use and give momentum to the feelings and thoughts of people. Issues can
rarely be planted or concocted; they can be given wind only if they exist for
real. The issues that AAP championed – corruption, rising prices of utilities
such as water and electricity, transparency in governance, high-handedness and
aloofness of the political class, plagued the common man for a very long time
and were actually party agnostic. The response of the common man was apathy at
worst or finding a corner away from the mainstream to express himself/herself
(as an organisation or activist) at best. The option of addressing these issues
in the mainstream public or political arena was ruled out, despite our chest-thumping
as the largest democracy in the world (even this sounds like such a cliché!).
To make matters worse a certain cynicism had crept in, which
others used to colour the efforts of this movement and treat it with disdain.
History is an easy refuse for the cynic. Comparisons were drawn to previous political
movements that had either lost their sheen due to leadership struggles or
failed abysmally due to governance and administrative reasons. Not surprisingly
some of the biggest critics are also the victims of the same phenomena and are
no longer ‘the party with difference’ as even people among them would admit. The
need to create an alternative space which the youth of today could relate to
and aspire for, was discounted. The entry barrier to politics as an occupation
(one would shy away from using the word profession) is one of the highest and
the youth was dissuaded and discouraged to have anything to do with the ‘dirty
thing’.
This movement among others has certainly ended the cynicism
for many. The ‘Aam Admi’ in India is a cynic and might remain so because of
limited opportunities and practically unlimited competition for resources but
there has been an honest attempt by some ‘aam aadmi (and aurats)’ to take
matters that matter to them in their own hands through rightful means. That
includes not only Mr. Kejriwal and his team of ministers and elected
legislators, but the thousands of party workers and volunteers who worked
tirelessly for their spectacular success. This attempt should be lauded.
This attempt will be under surveillance in the days to come,
its success to be belittled and failures to be magnified. The foundation itself
is shaky and contradictory – issue based support from the party or parties
against the actions of which this movement was born. Whether the AAP is able to
deliver on the causes it has chosen to take up and meet other challenges such
as relevant and quality education, livelihood opportunities, affordable
healthcare and inflation, if it does not compromise on transparency and
corruption, it would remain vindicated. The AAP has to remain true most
importantly to the people whose causes it espouses – the aam aadmi. This might look simple but as the lessons
learnt from past suggest, it is not.
No comments:
Post a Comment