History replete with instances of sensible movements led by brilliant minds, great strategists going out of their hands - leading to violence, anarchy or something as intangible as a deepening perception of "Sab chor hain" - the damage of which is invisible but in my opinion, more damaging than what a diluted Lokpal bill might be and erosion of trust in democratic principles which is the touchstone of this country.Slippery Slope generalizations - Taking this model of public coercion by say, 10,000 or even 100,000 people to an extreme- goes against democratic principles. And then how different would it be from 10,000 jats agitating for reservation.
Another development of a mass agitation is that its efficacy and success is disproportionately dependent not just on the personality , resolve and moral strength of the one who leads but also his "political" skills. (Aside: For those who flinched and felt repulsed at the use of this "dirty" word, "politics is the process by which a group comes to a collective decision"). For he must not only rally his following in constructive channels, prevent them from resorting to unethical practices(performed under illusions of the "Greater Good") and excercise control so as not to lose the leadership to vested interests(e.g the opposition) who have a different ace to grind . Besides all that, he must also be ready to compromise(nelson mandela, Nehru(more than Gandhi, I believe), martin luther) even at the risk of the collective outrage of all his followers as well as detractors. Is Mr hazare up to it? I dearly hope he is but past history tells me - a mass upsurge of popular sentiment causes leaders to take up more and more uncompromising positions rather than working behind the scenes for an amicable solution
If however the idea is to gain a majority in the drafting committee at the exclusion of the political executive, the bureaucrats and the agencies who will be affected, that can hardly be called a flexible attitude.
R: What do you suggest?
S: I wont even try to say what the best lokpal bill would be. There is a general consensus among all concerned that the bill is incredibly dilute and if legislated, is certain to have minimal impact. And I am certainly not qualified to understand the institutional linkages and repercussions of the Jan lokpal bill if enacted in its present form. however my main concern is with the process of policy making and there is a general agreement to the principle of greated CS role in the situation. RTI showed why public demonstrations are important but holding a gun to the centre's head and a possibility of a repeat of Potti Sriramulu is quite inimical to the country's social fabric.
Also, CS needs to figure out the manner of its involvement. Ambedkar's warnings in the Constituent assembly were quite portentuous dealing with the contradiction of satyagrahas, civil disobedience etc in a democratic polity.Speaking from a citizen's point of view, I personally would like to see a return to the Moderate era of national movement wherein the CS worked for reforms through petitions, memorandums ,political education of the people through speeches and edits in the press, peaceful demonstrations that do not border on threats of self starvation. Extremist modes and the gandhian mode should be the last resort.
R: Aha! The last resort. But this is a last resort! If this passes , all is doomed. Politicians will always remain corrupt.
S: That is quite an overstatement. The Indian polity, warts and all, is much more strong than it is given credit for. It has withstood stronger pressures, bigger crises and immense fissparous tendencies. it is important not to be so naive as to believe the Jan Lokpal bill will remove all corruption from the society nor be so naive as to believe that enacting a diluted form will preclude all reforms in the future.
In the end , there is no substitute for the political education of the electorate , for which AHA's stand is making an incomparable contribution but its crucial that it tone down its tenor so as to work more contructively towards a consensual bill rather than let the energy of the frustrated facebookers dissipate while pounding there heads against an increasingly obdurate political executive.
Meanwhile, repose some faith, like Nehru did in the judgment of the masses- who, if you recall correctly, punished Indira gandhi for subverting democracy even if it meant political instability and risked depriving them of the newly infused discipline and the paltry amounts of food on their table
Main concerns :
1. Selection of CS representatives
2.Unity and Diversity of opinion- the right to "beg to differ" not CS's sole preserve
3.Civil Society overreach
4. Dysfunctionalities and unforeseen outcomes
I can see the main objections to my arguments - the unjustified "babudom" complex kicking in, even if I am just preparing for civil services : ) , the "what right do you have? Hazare has impeccable credentials" (I am sure he does, but even if I watch porn 12 hours a day, pay off land barons for illegal acquisitions and kill cuddly rabbits for fun, I still have a right to comment - a part of judging the validity of arguments is certainly as to who is making them, but it should not be made overwhelmingly so, let rationality and logic take first place in evaluation, IMO) and the third - the question of judgment (Subjective)
Wish I could write more. Sadly, I have stuff to do. however always interested to hear your comments, reviews. Trolls are welcome too.
