Posts
Post the heinous, inhuman and insane attack of the terrorists, Mumbai, in particular and, I am confident, the rest of the country in general, is seething with rage. The rage is not only directed against the acts committed by the terrorists, but the response and the manner in which it was dealt with by the agencies responsible, was also the cause of the rage. We witnessed that in the reaction of martyr Major Unnikrishnan's father's reaction to the visit of the Chief Minister isn't it? In the programmes after programmes appearing on television channels, everyone is blaming the Government, bureaucrats and of course, the leaders. But, are the politicians really responsible, or to be blamed for the attack, or how it was handled? Could they have behaved or conducted themselves any differently? My answer is, "NO". And, these are my reasons.
To understand the current situation, it would be necessary to look back upon history of India. India was always ruled by monarchies. India was always fragmented and divided. Right from the time Alexander invaded India till the British rule ended, all invaders succeeded not because they employed the policy of "divide and rule" but they found the India "divided", ensured that the divisions continued and "ruled". It would be completely inaccurate to say that it were British who employed the policy of "divide and rule".
I now turn to the period when India became independent. The British gave an option to all the princely states, whether to become part of independent India or to retain their respective kingdoms. As we all know, it was the monumental work of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and a solemn promise given by the Government of India that the Princely states agreed to merge their
kingdoms with India, except Hyderabad, which necessitated military action. The independence itself was achieved after the Indian decision-makers had accepted existence of divisions within India along religious grounds. The leaders, who were essentially dreamers and idealists, then, framed a Constitution giving expression to their dreams, vision and ideals in the hope that the divisions within India would be healed or eradicated. Unfortunately, the time has clearly proved that their dreams were not fulfilled and the internal divisions surfaced once again after influence of most of those leaders remained no more. It is also a matter of shame that the solemn promise given to Princely States by none other than the Govt. of India was broken conveniently because they posed a threat in the search for power without any principles.
When the British left, it left a vacuum in the government machinery appointed to govern India. As the law of nature dictates, the vacuum had to be filled up. Initially the vacuum was filled up by the leaders, who could rise above the internal divisions and attempted to provide governance accordingly. However, once the influence of these leaders waned, the internal divisive forces of culture, language and territorial ambitions raised their heads. The leaders, which emerged thereafter found it very easy and convenient to pursue the "Colonial" style of governance which the British employed. All the systems introduced in India by the British were not meant to imbibe democracy or democratic ideals in the Indian society, but to preserve the democracy in England and enrich it by the wealth of the colonies established by Britain all over the world.
During British time the wealth went to England, whereas post independence, the leaders in India, who used the same systems and same methods, enriched themselves and the wealth went to their personal accounts or Benami accounts or to Switzerland. All that these leaders were required to do was to continue with the systems employed by British, ensure that the divisions continued to exist and continue to rule us. In other words, the British rulers, who ruled with the help and assistance of group of obeisance paying Indians, bureaucrats, and the police force, left the country and, in their place, stepped in the present "democratically" elected politicians, who were not accountable, who functioned behind a "veil" of secrecy and who prided themselves in being above all Laws. Greater was the impunity with which the LAW could be disregarded or immunity from LAW was enjoyed; greater was considered the "status" of the politician. No wonder, disrespect for Law and Order became a symbol of "power" and "status" in India.
Therefore, by the very nature of their elections and the systems set up by British to further and preserve their Colonial acquisitions, we have attracted people in politics, who are not capable, or have any incentive, of providing good governance. There are, by way of exception, good politicians in the present lot, but, because of the systems, these good politicians are also becoming victims of these systems and unable to provide good governance. In other words, British (in Indian Avatars) have perpetrated the systems which "reward" the wrong and mock the "right" and only furthers their own interests and wealth.
The present politicians simply do not have any clue about doing any of the appropriate acts required to handle situations, which call for response from the Government which is truly of the people, by the people and for the people. Today, India has the Government of the privileged, by the privileged and for the privileged. The "privileged" word is employed to designate the elected representatives at all levels, bureaucrats, and the business lobby, who have substituted the obeisance paying Indians and who have mastered the art of taking advantages of the existing system. The police force being treated like private and personal servants, centralization of power, the lack of transparency, and the lack of accountability are only but the tools and manifestations of the governing system set in by the British and continued thereafter by the Indians.
Is it any wonder that we witnessed these kinds of responses and reactions from such politicians? My answer is, "NO". We must remember the inhuman behavior of the British during epidemics in India, the massacre at Jalianwala Baug and other instances. How did the British respond to those catastrophic events? With complete indifference, isn't it? They did it because India was only a colony to enrich the British. The present politicians do it because they too only know how to enrich themselves, and their coterie of friends / people whose participation and inclusion are a must, and have no knowledge and competence of providing good governance simply because it was never required or demanded of them.
Who, then, must take the blame? In light of my above analysis, my answer is that WE, the people of India, must accept the blame. If you employ, in this case, elect, a wrong servant, and he spoils the whole work, blame must first be accepted by the Master. The masses in India must accept the moral responsibility first for the apathy, indifference and aversion to public life and politics. The attitude that "problem" will stop at my neighbor's door must change. Let me take a simple example. How many of us attend solemnly the Annual General Meetings of our housing societies, clubs etc.? If we are unconcerned about matters, which are more close to us than the governance of the country, how can we justify criticizing persons, who have, at least, stepped forward in public life and done well for themselves and minor percentage of population, which votes them to power?
I think that "time" has come when the Indian people must make up their mind on the following issues: -
Ø Do we swear to be less divided?
Ø Do we swear to spread education to an extent that these divisions will disappear?
Ø Are we clear that we want United India or Divided India along parochial lines, cultural lines, and or linguistic lines?
Ø How can India justify more than 100 amendments to the Constitution in a span of 60 years? Does that not mean rejection of the "dreams", and "ideals" of those who framed the Constitution?
Ø Are we committed to ensure, in next 2 years, that there is a "meal" on the table of every family?
Ø Are we prepared, in next 5 years, to "urbanise" India by not attracting everybody to the developed parts of the country but by ensuring that similar infrastructure exists at every inhabited place in India?
Ø Are we prepared to swear that there shall be "justice" for all, which is "quick" and "cheap"?
Ø Are we prepared to swear that there shall be roof over every head or family, which is affordable?
Ø Are we prepared to scrap "electoral system" which provides incentive for "corruption", "criminalization" and "parochial or class dividing" politics?
Ø Are we prepared to devote some portion of our time for "Local Self Governance" to take care of our local issues?
Ø Are we sworn to ensure that good behavior is rewarded and bad, punished?
In other words, ARE WE PREPARED TO MAKE THE SACRIFICES AND TAKE ACTIVE PART IN POLITICS OF THIS COUNTRY? Democracy is not all about Fundamental Rights. It is also about obligations, duties and responsibilities. Unless we are prepared to honestly answer and address ourselves to all the above listed issues, we have no right to, and must stop, this "Politician bashing".
I urge you to do some genuine "introspection" and find answers to the neglected problems of this Country for past 60 years due to our policy of remaining "divided" and allowing wrong persons to "rule".
_____________________________________________________________________________ Lok Satta Aandolan
Base Unit-4, Bycula Service Industries Premises,
Dadoji Konddeo Road, Bycula (East), Mumbai 400027
Tel: 00 91 22 2377 2242
Email: loksatta.maharashtrachapter@gmail.com
Web: www.loksattamovement.org
If India wins, who loses
No comments:
Post a Comment