Midnight Murder of Democracy

Midnight Murder of Democracy

Behind the scenes, political parties have scripted, assigned roles, rehearsed, and successfully enacted their performance in Parliament to prevent the Lokpal Bill from being passed. The failure to grant constitutional status to the bill is an open secret that highlights this fact. They want us to believe that the walkout by certain groups and the absence of some Congress MPs were mere coincidences, not part of a deliberate plan. Despite assurances from Congress leadership to take action against the absent MPs, it’s clear they have acted according to the expectations of the political play. These MPs will likely be rewarded in the long run. It’s unlikely that Congress will expel them or deny them tickets in the next election. The truth is that no politician truly supports this bill. Proposing such a bill would be akin to self-sabotage. While an individual driven by frustration might consider it, politicians will not.

Regarding the criticism of the low turnout at Anna Hazare’s fasting event in Mumbai, it’s important to recognize that without an organized setup, it’s challenging to gather large crowds. Gone are the days when people would rally for a common cause affecting everyone. Nowadays, people are too busy for such events. Most of the crowd that did attend was mobilized by organizations and political parties, rather than coming from personal conviction. The average person understands that a “satyagraha” like Gandhiji’s is no longer effective. Gandhiji himself struggled to inspire conviction among Indians in his fight against the government in South Africa and faced many failures. His struggle was not solely based on the conviction of the people but also on his belief in the justice of the British Empire and Christian values, which he assumed they upheld. Today, people have little faith in such justice from the current Indian government or globally. This government reflects the will of the electorate, and a sense of justice is lacking among the majority. Our worldview often leads us to accept fate and karma, rather than fostering moral accountability and commitment. Comparing recent public agitations in Arab countries to India’s diverse landscape is unreasonable. Critics like Manishankar Iyer, who condemn Anna Hazare and his team, often fail to provide objective criticism.

Fighting against injustice or for the common good requires organized movements and support. Simply appealing to common sense and moral indignation has never been effective in the past and will not be in the future. Even Gandhiji had an organized setup (the British Indian Association) and a magazine (Indian Opinion) to support his cause. If Anna Hazare and his team rely solely on social media and TRP-driven media, they should expect the responses they receive. The success or failure of Anna and his team should not be judged solely on the size of the crowd at their protests. Such judgments reveal more about personal biases than objective analysis. If Anna and his team wish to remain apolitical, they should adapt their strategy based on the political climate and government actions. Their decision to call off the fast and face imprisonment is more strategic than a sign of weakness. Critics who find solace in these decisions will not diminish the spirit of the movement. Every leader faces isolation, and every satyagrahi, as Gandhiji often emphasized, must fight for truth independently, regardless of support or betrayal. As Gandhiji wrote about his experiences in South Africa:

“…If having taken such an oath we violate our pledge we are guilty before God and man. Personally, I hold that a man who deliberately and intelligently takes a pledge and then breaks it forfeits his manhood…. (p.420) …It is possible that a majority of those present here might take the pledge in a fit of enthusiasm or indignation but might weaken under the ordeal, and only a handful might be left to face the final test. Even then there is only one course open to the likes of me, to die but not to submit to the law. It is quite unlikely but even if everyone else flinched leaving me alone to face the music, I am confident that I would never violate my pledge…. [Indian Opinion, 15-9-1906.] — Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, vol. 5, 441. THE MASS MEETING, pp.420-21

In this struggle, it should be noted that every Indian must make decisions independently of others. One need not rely on others for guidance… (p.100) [From Gujarati, Indian Opinion, 27-7-1907.] — ibid. vol. 7, p. 100

Those who understand the true meaning of Satyagraha should have no doubt about what victory entails. A satyagrahi experiences a level of freedom unattainable by others, as they become truly fearless. Once freed from fear, they refuse to be anyone’s slave and will not submit to arbitrary actions. This form of satyagraha should be practiced not only against a government but also against society if necessary. Sometimes, society can be as misguided as a government, and it becomes one’s duty to apply satyagraha against it… (p.152) …Our practice of satyagraha should lead us to freedom and independence, with nothing to fear. Critics who dismiss the movement with statements like, “You cannot restart the campaign; once is enough,” fail to see the larger picture. If it were true that we cannot continue the struggle, then the effort would have been in vain. What we have won must be retained through the same means by which it was achieved. Victory obtained by force can only be preserved by force… Similarly, gains made through satyagraha can only be maintained through continued satyagraha. Abandoning this principle means losing what has been gained. Furthermore, attempting to maintain achievements through physical force alone, after achieving them through satyagraha, is unlikely to succeed… A child can understand that if Indians resort to force, they can be quickly subdued. Similarly, abandoning satyagraha and reverting to previous methods may result in losing what has been gained. These examples illustrate that satyagraha is fundamentally an attitude of mind. Those who have adopted the satyagrahic mindset will remain victorious, regardless of the government or society they oppose, whether strangers, friends, or relatives… For instance, when the whites held an anti-Indian meeting in Pretoria Town Hall, only four whites spoke in our favor, facing a thousand opponents. Despite the abuse from the crowd, these four bravely expressed their views. Their satyagraha diminished the meeting’s significance and turned it into a spectacle… [From Gujarati, Indian Opinion, 22-2-1908.] — Extract from letter to S.A.B.I. Committee, February 15, 1908, vol. 8. ibid. pp.152-54

—

December 29, 2011, 9:00 AM 

Congratulations to the Politicians

I wrote the above yesterday morning, but as per my habit of checking emails and posting on alternate days, I am posting today. The reason I mention this is that, even before the politicians successfully blocked the Lokpal Bill in the Rajya Sabha according to their pre-planned design, I predicted this outcome. Although I don’t wish to join the chorus of TV anchors (like Rajdeep Sardesai of CNN-IBN and Barkha Dutt of NDTV) who claimed, “We said so,” I had a strong instinct during my early morning walk that the politicians would block the bill. More than intuition, understanding the nature and tendencies of the politicians made it clear that this was expected. Of course, I am not alone in this prediction; many others anticipated this outcome. The politicians, as a class, have confirmed our skepticism.

Forget about the technicalities used by the government to delay the bill in the Rajya Sabha, such as prolonging debates to avoid voting, introducing numerous amendments, or provoking the opposition. Minister Narayanasamy’s provocation of the Opposition and his subsequent irrelevant babbling were part of this pre-arranged strategy. Arjun Jaitley and other BJP members claiming they chose to remain quiet despite provocations is also part of this charade. As we say in Tamil, “You pretend to beat, and I will pretend to cry.” Dr. Yogendra Yadav accurately depicted the situation: none of the politicians wanted the bill and they all acted according to a pre-determined script. Whether this is termed a “midnight murder” of democracy or described as a “rape” by Keerthy Azad of BJP (with Bupendar Chowba of CNN-IBN after the Rajya Sabha session), the politicians have shown their true colors and proved that they operate by their own rules, preventing us from transitioning from “subjects” to “citizens” (as Yogendra Yadav put it).

In the politicians’ view, Parliament is their temple, where Power is their deity and people are merely providers to sustain that deity. Democracy is the sacrificial goat, and leaders are the priests who, through loyal subordinates, conduct the ritual slaughter to appease the goddess of power. In this private religion, the people are not participants but silent spectators, kept fattened for electoral purposes every five years.

The media is not innocent either. Driven by TRPs, channels like CNN-IBN and NDTV have shown their biases. CNN-IBN first reported that the protest was a strategy to disrupt the House, while NDTV framed the chaos as part of the strategy.

Finally, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the Vice-President, also bears responsibility for this democratic sabotage. Despite his honesty and integrity, he acted as expected by the politicians and the government, bringing down the curtain at the end of the session. His body language, visible anxiety, and hesitation to follow the script, culminating in the sudden announcement of the National Anthem and the adjournment of the House, were unconvincing.

The year 2011, marked by numerous scandals, will be remembered for this particular betrayal of democracy. It will stand as a year of shame, darkness, and tragedy in our history.

Dayanand 

December 30, 2011