Ideologies, anyone?

With all the news media switching base to the more sensational story of an youth snorting coke and the man who was in centre stage taking a breather at the Saudi; perhaps to take a cue or two from the monarchical way to implement policies of convenience, did anyone realize where are those doctors who were shouting their heart-out against the reservation and the media which had been blamed as the propaganda wing of those anti-reservationists. Of course, life goes on and how long can someone lie down on the streets, drinking mineral water, playing games in their mobile phones while the government had literally turned deaf ears to all their salvo. Instead the nation’s supreme legal institution had to step-in and wag the wand of social responsibility to the agitating doctors and came down heavily on the suffering meted-out to the patients who were caught in this tussle between the pro and anti.

In this entire melee I was thinking why dint the renegade medicos get a patient hearing from a single political party or a celebrity. When Medha Patkar went on a hunger strike against increasing the height of the Narmada Dam, there was the stream of Arundati Roys, Aamir Khans and the communists behind her. Why dint a single political party, be it the pro-forward or the pro-backward class, make its stand clear on where they are with this issue. What made the striking medicos such anti-nationals or untouchables; there were support for their cause from various knowledge champions, but not a single political party or a celebrity from the tinsel world came forward. Even the BJP which is supposed to be the most pro-forwrad than any other, seemed caught befuddled in the loose sand of double speak and had to eat its own words trying to explain their position – if at all there was any. Perhaps ambiguity is the hallmark of politics. This raises the question – can any political party dare to be anti-reservation? It is not just the issue of reservation; take the case of the recent TN government’s ruling to allow anyone – of course, qualified - to be a temple priest. Even here the BJP, a party which is still trying to get its feet wet in the southern states, had to toe the government’s line pushing its ideologies to the backstage or changing it to that of convenience. With the all important UP elections in the horizon and while Mayawati is busy conducting a ‘upper-caste mela’, no wonder the congress and the BJP had to resort to the Mandal way. Sure it is the survival of the fittest in the world of politics.

Is this frailty of the opposition that gives credence to the mission the HR minister has taken up, even if it is anti-constitutional? Political unanimity may not necessarily correlate to constitutionality! Or, is it like populism begins where rational thinking ends. Think of the slew of populist measures that were strewn on the people of TN in the recently concluded elections that defied any basic laws of economics. It was over the sheer strength of one freebie versus the other that the elections were won – rather one idiocy over the other. But, if legitimizing a cause for the mere reason of political survival with pitiful disregard of their ideologies and shameful ignorance of rationality, is the way forward, it soon is going to be a tussle between wickedness versus righteousness and the fruits of what we claim to be our forte, democracy, is going to turn very sour!

May be it is the affluent urban society to be blamed, for they are the ones who continue to shun the elections and alienate themselves from the political clan with a fear of getting dirty, for who care a zilch about coming out and voting on an election day rather prefer to stay indoors comfy in their mansions. Contrast that to the villagers who come out in numbers to be part of the democratic process and vote – it is quite irrelevant whether they have a reason to vote one way or another or they have the mandal or the freebies in their mind.

"The people is a very heterogeneous and confused mass of the wealthy and the poor, the wise and the foolish, the good and the bad. Before we confer on a man, who caresses the people, the title of patriot, we must examine to what part of the people he directs his notice. …if his first or principal application be to the indigent, who are always inflammable; to the weak, who are naturally suspicious; to the ignorant, who are easily misled; and to the profligate, who have no hope but from mischief and confusion; let his love of the people be no longer boasted.” -- Samuel Johnson: The Patriot