As I got my finger inked on April
30th in what was termed as the greatest celebration of democracy, there
was an urge to reflect on the nature of political discourse amidst
mind-boggling campaigning on for months together. As a voter, one is left
completely disillusioned with the kind of discourse that dominated India’s
general elections. Two defining characteristics were – the overdose of a ‘secular vs communal’ frame and the
highly irresponsible and outrageous statements dished by political contenders
across party lines. Is this what people of the world’s largest democracy should
expect from their political class? If this were to continue (and it is more
than likely) where is our democratic discourse headed to?
An analysis of the media
discourse during the elections points towards an over-emphasis on the secular
vs communal debate. Media and political pundits decried the communal nature of
the campaign and even expressed unwarranted fears towards takeover by a
communal political agenda. Media especially indulged in much fear mongering
especially over the ‘Idea of India’
which was supposedly under threat. This has persisted in the post-election
scenario as well with liberal sceptics mourning the thumping majority won by
the Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) expressing doubts over the unprecedented and
clear mandate given by the people of India. It is this ‘secular vs communal’
dichotomy that eventually became the pulse of the election, leaving no space
for a fresh electoral pitch.
Surprising enough that even after
six decades of independence, the election discourse continued to digress from
people’s issues and turned out to be more regressive than ever before. To say
that the nature of the current discourse was rhetorical and vitriolic would not
amount to exaggeration. Unfortunately, aside all the big expectations of “acche din aane wale hain”; our
political class actually reduced elections to a mere verbal duel where all you
do is outwit the other until the next sound byte/TV appearance. With each
passing day as the elections unfolded – a new allegation, a new set of
outlandish statements and a new controversy emerged – enough to deflect
attention from grave issues that the country faces. Certainly no election seems
like one if the basic issues of ‘bijli’ (electricity), ‘sadak’ (roads), ‘paani’
(water) are not addressed. In fact, these promises continue to hang around
every time; leaving the discourse insipid and utterly lacking in fresh ideas. Certainly,
democracy can offer more than the usual promises and mudslinging politics. The
election discourse this time around was not about people’s expectations; it was
what the political class wanted to hear and speak. Although allegations, character
assassination, slander are routinely a part of election debates; but the
denigration of debate that this election witnessed leaves one amazed.
If democracy is about freedom and
rights, then it has to equally embody ‘tolerance’ and ‘responsiveness’. By
these yardsticks candidates have already failed the democratic test. Sample
these statements made by prominent leaders/candidates:
“Critics of BJP’s
prime ministerial candidate Narendra Modi should be sent to Pakistan” – Giriraj Singh, Bhartiya Janta
Party.
"Vote for the
clock (NCP symbol) there (in Satara) and come back to vote for the clock here
as well."
– NCP Chief Sharad Pawar asking his party workers to take advantage of the
multi-phase polling in the state by voting twice.
“Muslims, not
Hindus, won Kargil for India” – Azam Khan of the Samajwadi party.
“BJP engages in
zeher ki kheti” –
Congress President Sonia Gandhi.
"I promise
you in 21st Century Narendra Modi will never become the Prime Minister of the
country.... But if he wants to distribute tea here, we will find a place for
him," –
Mani Shankar Aiyar, Congress leader.
While these and many other such
statements are reflective of an erosion of political debate, they are also
indicative of the hyperbole that Indian politicians indulge in. So we have
rounds of taking a dig at each other resulting into a new vocabulary for Indian
politics – ‘Jijaji model’ (referring
to Robert Vadra), ‘Chai wala’ and ‘Butcher’ (referring to Narendra Modi), ‘Helicopter Democracy’ (as coined by
Arvind Kejriwal) to name a few (India’s
Politicians Trash-Talk Their Rivals, The Wall Street Journal – April 29).
While there have been terms such as ‘khooni
panja’ and ‘maut ka saudagar’
used in earlier electoral references, the ‘tamasha’ was more evident this time
with particular emphasis on “who said what to whom”. Such a jarring campaign did
not allow voters to be reflective about the quality of the democratic discourse
as there was a possibility of getting carried away by the hype and hoopla
generated by political gimmickry and PR machinery at full play.
While there are the positives
about voter awareness campaigns, surge in voter percentages and increased
political participation, where is the articulation on policy matters;
conspicuous by its absence in both political and media discourse? Surely, a
vast country like India is bothered about issues beyond corruption and
communalism. It is worried about unemployment, poverty, education, energy,
health, technology, economy etc. While every political party claimed to talk of
development and kept their policy visions restricted to manifestos, all we saw in
the public domain were personalized attacks and a personality centric election
discourse – quite opposed to being people centric. All this election offered us
were ‘dichotomous choices’ – a discourse seeped into ‘binaries’ which signified
that while “I do not care whether I am
good, but the ‘other’ is bad”. This is an unhealthy trend in a democracy.
While there is no harm in
debating “who will win” and “how” but isn’t it more important to deliberate
what a win would mean for the future course of the country. Should we allow
ourselves to be fooled by petty issues and still believe in the festive spirit
of democracy? Are we out there to enjoy or rather hold our political representatives
responsible for their utter insensitive speak? Since, the discourse stooped to
abysmally low levels, how much faith could the already disillusioned voter keep?
To one’s total amazement the Election Commission (the body responsible for
conducting and monitoring India’s elections) stood mute with power only to
reprimand, ban and the revoke the same ban on candidates who openly flouted every
model code of conduct laid down by the EC. This does not send a serious message
to candidates offending the sensibilities of voters by their irresponsible
conduct.
For once, the illusion that the
present elections were more about people than power has proved to be exactly
that – an illusion, courtesy the election discourse! When candidates reek of
non-accountability and brazenness even before elections, certainly the
post-election scenario does not look hopeful. Whoever says that this was a
watershed election for India (as the results do convey now), should have a look
at the election discourse – for what it conveys is quite the opposite. Seems we
have missed the bus again!
Published on Canary Trap (May 24, 2014) http://www.canarytrap.in/2014/05/24/indias-election-discourse-disappoints-confessions-of-a-voter/
No comments:
Post a Comment