For those not in the know, Mr. Kisan Bapat Baburao Hazare, popularly called Anna Hazare, an Indian social activist, is currently "fasting unto death" at Jantar Mantar, a centuries-old complex dedicated to astronomy and now a popular protest site in the heart of the Indian capital of New Delhi. His agenda is to force the Central Government of India to accept and/or examine a bill prepared by Mr. Hazare and his collaborators called the "Jan Lokpal Bill", instead of the similar "Lokpal Bill" that the Government is working with. Both bills concern themselves with tackling corruption in the public sector. The one with the "Jan" (meaning "people") prefix calls for more stringent punishments (e.g., a minimum punishment of five years as against six months) and greater powers to the anti-corruption watchdog, including the authority to issue enter-and-search warrants to police officers.
Everyone in the Indian media and on online social networks seems to be completely on board.
I wonder if his supporters have pondered the point that he is attempting to subvert the democratic process. Remember that the Government of India enjoys the confidence of the lower house of the Parliament of India, directly elected by the people of India. Are we to allow every single person who goes on a "fast unto death" to blackmail the legitimate functioning of our parliamentary democracy? What if someone else now "fasts onto death", demanding the opposite of what Mr. Hazare wants? What if twenty five people, instead of one, make that demand? Will our conscience now take their side?
Is this how we want our laws to be created? How our public institutions to function?
Mr. Hazare's record suggests that he himself truly believes in the good of his fellow-man. But this sort of cheap publicity stunt is deplorable. What about getting people together, forming a political party, building up awareness, standing for elections and introducing the bill in Parliament? Also in that case we shall expect our courts to check that no fundamental rights are violated, and our press to examine the bill, and NGOs and concerned individuals to attempt to channelize public opinion for or against the bill.
Or is the democratic way too long and boring? It is obviously far easier to fast-unto-death than to expend physical and intellectual energy and be part of the democratic process.
The other point is that this hunger fast is taking place in India. Given that many millions of the world's destitute live in India, is it meet and right to use a fast as a political device - given that many fast perforce, because they don't have access to food? Why is Mr. Hazare's fast special? Because he's wearing a Gandhi cap? Because of his past record of doing well in the villages? Both strongly Gandhian qualities, and Gandhi fasted too, didn't he, and we love Gandhi, we must love Gandhi, and let's ban that new book about him, so that no one learns that he was a human being, after all, we've made him a Great Soul and we would all look a little silly if it turns out that he wasn't divine, and let's not ask too many questions about whether Hitler and Stalin too had a role in the independence of India.
Let us further examine this popular movement.
"The dream of India as a strong nation will not be realised without self-reliant, self-sufficient villages....." - Anna Hazare, http://www.annahazare.org
But this is precisely what Gandhi wanted - economically self-sufficient villages. And we long know that that is not a viable economic model. This idyll of a village with almost everyone involved in farming, one ironmonger, a couple of tanners etc. with everyone being nice to each other, children running about in robust health and then smartly reciting to their mothers what they learned in the school today, one run by a single, benevolent teacher - is pleasing to behold, but implies keeping villages out of the benefits and pains of modern society. Higher education, intellectual exchange with people across the world, the perfumes of Paris etc.. Ah, but why would the villages want the perfumes of Paris, you ask? Probably they don't - but shall we take it upon ourselves to make this choice for them? Shall we not tell them that they and succeeding generations are not condemned to be farmers forever, but they can do pathbreaking work in linguistics, if they choose?
And have all the supporters of Mr. Hazare's fast-unto-death read both the bills (actually, only one of them is a bill, http://www.annahazare.org/pdf/Lokpal%20Bill%20by%20Government%20of%20India.pdf)?
Let's look at the document (http://www.annahazare.org/pdf/Jan%20lokpal%20bill%20by%20Expert%20(Eng).pdf) proposed by Mr. Hazare and his collaborators:
"(The composition of the selection committee (6.1):)
...
All Nobel Laureates of Indian Origin
...
Last two Magsaysay Award winners of Indian origin"
Interesting that the award winners don't have to be Indian, but of "Indian origin" (am unsure why the O is capitalized in the first instance). Why "Indian origin"? Because we trust those who have brown skin? Who are racially similar to us? We look for foreign awards, because of independence or foreign superiority, but we want those who look like us? We reject those who too have won such awards but are White, or Black, or Yellow, or Red? Sad to see this sort of adolescent thinking has gone into this document, for which a grown man fasts unto death.
"Public feedback will be invited - by putting these names on the website"
Really? And the feedback will represent the will of the people of India? A majority of whom are literate and have easy access to the Internet? Will this so-called public feedback replace democratic elections, at some point?
The Facebook page, "liked" by 14,759 at the time of writing, states (www.facebook.com/annahazare?sk=info):
"A bachelor, an ascetic, he has no possessions, no bank balance and lives in a temple. He is a living Mahatma Gandhi!"
The implication is that being a bachelor is a good thing. Why? Because one does not have sex? Do we really want this sordid, life-denying morality foisted upon us? No bank balance? Is that to be emulated? Do we not understand the benefits of modern banking, the flexibility to spend at a future date? Does he own the temple he lives in? Does he pay rent? Because if we can all live rent-free, then perhaps we don't need to work so much. A living Mahatma Gandhi - this is the most insidious of the propaganda techniques. How is he a living Gandhi? Why is a living Gandhi a good thing?
"In Maharashtra, Anna has single handedly transformed barren and dry regions into green and food surplus areas."
Really? Single-handedly? Does he have a magic staff? This feat ascribed to Anna is, of course, possible, but scarcely probable.
"He has fasted unto death on several earlier occasions."
Can it be that the writer of this line is unaware of the irony? Not quite unto death, one takes it.
An online petition site (http://www.avaaz.org/en/stand_with_anna_hazare) - and we all love online petitions, all we have to do is put in our email address and click "submit", and voila, we are part of meaningful social change, and completely agree with the text of the petition, and all its clauses, states:
"But dirty politicians are desperately trying to water down or kill the law."Really? Dirty politicians? Is this the level of political debate Indians are used to? Name-calling and hoary old stereotypes of all politicians being dirty? The White Rider comes at dawn and solves all problems with a wave of a magic wand, liberating the Children of India, that they might once again know what it is to drink the pure milk of the loving cow, as we did all those millennia ago, we pure blooded ones. There is no instant fix. For change to be sustainable, it must be part of the democratic process and tolerate discussion, even opinions that are contrary to the dreams of certain individuals. Revolutions appear to be easy solutions, but they tend to be a return to the status quo, with a change of names, and some people lynched or shot in the dark of the night.
"For the first time in forty three years, we have the chance to change the way politics is done."
Forty three years. Let's see, that would mean, since 1968? What happened in or around 1968? Lots of things, one imagines, but what precisely does the writer allude to? In any case, what about the last ten years - there was a functioning parliamentary democracy in India, was there not?
And now the website of the India Against Corruption movement, supported by Mr. Hazare's website.
"Why is it that no one goes to jail in our country despite indulging in corruption?"
No one? Not one single person has ever been convicted in India on charges of corruption? This appears to be hyperbole, or disregard for truth.
"Support Anna's fast! Supported by 5 lakh 70 thousand Indians and growing."
How did they reach this (suspiciously round) figure? In any case, it's nice to have sources next to statistics when employed in a debate. An adult debate, that is. Or may opponents of Mr. Hazare's anti-democratic highjack claim that "11 lakh 83 thousand and growing" Indians against Mr. Hazare?
Their Facebook page (www.facebook.com/IndiACor) goes further:
"India Demands.......Make Anna and not Pranab Mukherjee the chairperson of the joint committee."
Delusions of grandeur. India? Do you pretend to speak for India? How dare you! What about the Government of India, the democratically elected ones? Were they elected by the people of Ukraine?
"Left to themselves, the politicians and bureaucrats will never pass any law which subjects them to any kind of objective scrutiny - Anna"
Yes, but they are not "left to themselves", are they? That's the reason we have checks and balances - periodic elections, an independent judiciary, a free press.
Perhaps urban Indians and the media are bored, now that the engaging ICC Cricket World Cup is over, and that's why they are so passionate about this pseudo-democratic, publicity-seeking, not a little ironic, fast-unto-death. Perhaps we need, as some cynics have opined, only wait till the cricket starts again, or the next circus comes to town.
No comments:
Post a Comment