| Published on 19-11-2007 In National |
| Viewed 4165 times |
| Will Rahul Gandhi be able to walk the talk? |
|
|
Written by
Girish Nikam |
So finally the young man has decided to take centre stage! And finally his own mom also admitted that he is her heir apparent! Reluctancy to enter politics runs in his family. It was a reluctant Rajiv Gandhi who entered politics after his brother's untimely death. His wife Sonia, too not only resisted her husband entering politics, but also kept out of it for seven years after her husband's death. And now son Rahul after dilly-dallying for years has finally succumbed to the temptation.
The heir apparent got endorsement from Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh and numerous others, much to the excitement of the 2,000 AICC delegates on Saturday. Sycophancy? Well, that's what politics is all about, and especially so in India, and mind you in all political parties, though other democracies even in the west, are also not immune to it.
The young man, in his new job as the AICC General Secretary in-charge of the Youth Congress and National Students Union of India (NSUI), was very much the apple of the eye of all the youngsters wanting a piece of the pie. His all of eight-minute speech though could not be compared very favourably to that of his father, at the AICC session in Bombay in 1985. The late lamented leader had brought a freshness to the proceedings, by talking frankly about the brokers and dalals who allow only 10 percent of the money government spends on the common man reach the beneficiaries.
Rahul however did display an idealism of a greenhorn, when he exhorted the party to create a meritocracy, which would allow party workers to grow in the hierarchy based on their performance. Like in all professions it is good to be an idealist at the beginning of a career, and to that extent it is good to see the young man displaying it. It did sound like music to all the young ears in the party as well as probably the aspiring young men who want to enter politics.
But is there room for meritocracy in politics? Ideally there should be, we all agree. But in reality does it exist? The question the cynical will obviously ask here is, did the young man himself make it to the post of General Secretary on the basis of sheer merit and performance? Keeping such rhetoric aside, if one looks at this suggestion of Rahul, what does it mean?
First of all what is the barometer to measure performance in a political party? The biggest problem a political worker faces in India, in any political party is, how to prove himself worthy. One has witnessed thousands of workers, totally dedicated, honest, sincere and committed to the party they are in, languishing in anonymity for years, even as their lesser co-workers prosper through sycophancy, caste or money power or all three.
None of the political parties in India, except to certain extent the left parties, can claim to have a barometer or a programme to assess the performance of workers.
Though much is said about internal democracy, it is one of the biggest casualties in the Indian political parties.
Even the biggest parties like Congress and BJP, hardly provide for real democratic functioning. It is common knowledge that every time internal elections are announced, all political parties avoid real elections and settle for "consensus", which essentially means a few powerful leaders deciding who should be what.
Naturally the workers then decide that it is not real work but proximity to such powerful leaders, which will take them up the power ladder and adopt sycophancy as their main tool. Caste is openly flaunted and powerful and dominant castes rule the roost in all political parties. The really oppressed and suppressed are brought in as a token gesture, however talented they might be. Vested interests take control, and make every effort to deny the really talented and sincere from posing a threat. In the bargain internal elections are resisted and "consensus" become the tool to perpetuate the interests of a few. As long as this allergy for internal elections continues in the parties, real democracy will continue to be a mirage.
Look at United States, even a powerful leader like Hillary Clinton has to go through the intense process of getting selected as the Presidential candidate from within her own party. And she can't just take it for granted. And in the process the democrats put her through tough questioning on all issues facing the country and they assess how she performs.
Can we expect such a transparent system in our political parties? Can we hope that some day, Rahul Gandhi will subject himself through such a process on his way to the AICC Presidentship or as the Prime Ministerial candidate? Can we hope to witness a public debate in the BJP between say a Narendra Modi, who is already being hailed as the future President of the Party and say Arun Jaitley or a Sushma Swaraj? Can we ever hope that Deve Gowda will ask his son, Kumaraswamy to debate publicly with say an M.P.Prakash or some other leader, before being anointed the Chief Ministerial candidate? Will Laloo Yadav or Mulayam Singh Yadav or a Chandrababu Naidu or a Karunanidhi allow such internal democracy in their parties?
Internal democracy is the key and not really meritocracy as in the fastest wins the race. In such a case what will happen to the oppressed and suppressed? What will happen to those who still suffer from social, economic and cultural deprivations? Can a young party worker from a dalit family in a remote part of the country, however talented he is, really take on Rahul Gandhi and compete with him on an equal level? Only when that day comes will Rahul's meritocracy argument work and allow real democracy to strike roots in our political system.
It is then that we can expect better quality of people to enter politics. Till then we have to do with only the next best or the worst. Will Rahul really try to walk the talk? Lets wait and watch. |
|
|
|
|
| Social Web |  |
| |
|
|
| |
Processing please wait ...
Top Stories
