My Socio-political Identity and Position (as of now)

Going through the socio-politically opinionated articles on the internet and such posts on social media has become a harrowing experience for me these days. While I cannot ignore these because I am seriously interested in these matters (particularly if they concern Indian affairs), I am also unsatisfied by much of what I read (even leaving out the ones that are visibly  junk, and concentrating only on the more thoughtful ones). I feel that most people are greatly prone to taking sides about various issues, and sticking to their guns ignoring the other side's opinions. Such people are prone to "validating" their "arguments" with partial information, and conveniently leaving out other information that does not conform to their "arguments". In such cases, arguments get reduced to rhetoric, and the situation becomes like that of six blind men (from Hindostan, coincidentally), each of whom touched one random part of an elephant's body, and drew ridiculous (and contradictory) conclusions about the elephant's appearance. Holistic analyses, that tries to understand the thoughts, viewpoints, prejudices, limitations etc of all the concerned parties are pitifully scarce. Moreover, accurate news on various issues are hard to obtain. While sources of news are plentiful (perhaps excessive), not a single one is known to be fully reliable. Some of them have vested interests and others suffer from the same one-sided-ness discussed above. Amusingly, people from all ideologies across the multidimensional political spectrum are united in criticizing the Indian media, often for contradictory reasons. In such a situation, taking stands on socio-political issues is impossible for a rational person who refuses to marry him/herself to any fixed ideology/viewpoint or constrain him/herself by any identity/bias/prejudice. But even if I cannot take a stand on every micro-issue, or declare myself as a firm follower of any "ism" at a macro level, I can attempt to locate my positions on various broad matters of debate in India, and try to see what patterns emerge. I can also answer the question of "identity"- a question often asked in India. This is what I will attempt to do in this essay.

1) Social identity: This is about the question "Which persons do I relate to more strongly than others?". It is usually answered in terms of attributes like language, religion, nationality, race etc. I do not like to identify myself this way, since these are attributes which I obtained by accident of birth, and have no conscious control on them. First and foremost I am myself, an individual. I can relate to other people on the basis of the values mentioned below, or tastes, personality etc. Regarding the above-mentioned attributes, I give importance to my nationality- I am an Indian. This does NOT mean I am a strong nationalist- see below. My linguistic or religious identities have absolutely no importance to myself- I do not want myself to be classified as a "Bengali" or as a "Hindu". I cannot say why it is this way- but this is the way I have always felt.

2) Position on economic policy: I am an egalitarian, I believe in equality in terms of income, access to basic amenities and social status. I generally favor state socialism, and believe this is the most practical way of achieving the society I want. I cannot relate to the notions of capitalism, big business, wealth building etc. That does not mean I am a staunch socialist. If in any particular case a capitalistic approach is found to be a better way to my goal, I will endorse it.

3) Position on religion: I am supposed to be a Hindu by birth, but I am agnostic by faith. I am sceptic towards religion, but not overtly critical. I do not worship, but participate in some rituals (like pushpanjali in Saraswati Puja, lighting candles in Diwali) as a social practice rather than religious. I have no problem with any religion as long as it does not 1) Attack people of other beliefs (including no belief) 2) Does not involve environmentally wasteful rituals 3) Does not place restrictions on the natural behavior of its followers.

4) Position on nationalism: I regard myself as an Indian, and I love to see people rising above their regional boundaries, and identifying themselves as Indian. I love the idea of an unified India, but that does not mean that I am a staunch nationalist. I am not in favour of forcibly imposing Indian citizenship on unwilling people, like in Kashmir valley, and parts of Manipur and Nagaland. I do not support their demand of secession from India, but nor do I support militarily repressing them. I realize that "nation", "nation-state" and "country" are all different things, and want governments to understand and respect these differences. I have no hatred towards any other nation- not even Pakistan, China or USA. I am ambivalent towards the Indian armed forces. I feel happy about their heroic exploits during wars and natural disasters, but cannot ignore the atrocities committed by them (sometimes in the name of nationalism, sometimes for the sake of promotions and medals, or sometimes from sheer arrogance of power). I do not like India building weapons like ICBM, nuclear submarine etc, which are irrelevant to national defence.

5) Position on nature and environment: I feel that nature and environment should have higher priority than "development" and industrialization. I love the idea of Radical Ecological Democracy (RED) proposed by Ashish Kothari.

6) Position on marriage, sexuality etc: I am in favour of leaving these as matters of individual choice. Indeed I think our society should be more permissive about sexuality. I am in favour of revising marital norms to remove the deeply-entrenched patriarchial overtones.

Festivals and Environmentalism

The festivals of Diwali, Holi, Durga Puja, Ganesha Puja etc are celebrated with a lot of pomp in India. Durga Puja and Ganesha Puja celebrations include construction of huge pandals on roads that house larger-than-life idols made of clay. Diwali celebrations involve firecrackers, and Holi celebrations are around spraying of coloured water and “abir”. These festivals are celebrated by great many Indians, of all social statures, often by religious minorities also. However, these celebrations involve massive utilization of natural resources. Burning of Diwali crackers also causes sound and air pollution, huge pandals for Durga Puja and Ganesha Puja often cause tremendous civic inconvenience, especially for people whose priority is different from celebration. That is why, in recent years we hear environmentalists appeal to people before these festivals to avoid usage of firecrackers, coloured water etc., on the grounds of pollution, wastage of resources, civic inconvenience etc. Another ground is that, the firecracker production industry is a notorious employer of child-labour, where children have to work in unhealthy conditions with toxic matter.

I am generally environment-conscious. Nor do I have any great passion for celebrating the above-mentioned festivals, not any more. I find the sound of crackers very irritating, though I do enjoy fireworks. I agree with all that environmentalists have to say in this matter. They are definitely correct. But somehow it appears strange to me that specific festivals, which occur over only a few days of the year, are targeted, though in our day-to-day life throughout the year we harm the environment in a multitude of ways. Be it usage of use-and-throw paper cups and glasses (sometimes justified for hygene), establishment heavy industries/dams in ecologically sensitive areas, unnecessary usage of electricity to decorate shops, malls etc, use of personal vehicles instead of walking/public transport even for short, solo drives- the list is endless. Diwali crackers do come with unnecessary packing which is not eco-friendly, but so does Dominos Pizza. The current neo-liberal growth pattern in India encourages consumerism and materialism shamelessly, trying to convince people that greater consumption stands for “economic development”. Similarly, our society stands on child labour and exploitation of the poor, probably in every aspect of life. The environmentalist activism before festivals indicates that there are people in the country who are aware of these issues. That is no doubt a positive sign, but I don’t see why these thoughts are attached to the festivals only. I doubt whether it even makes any difference to the environment if we only change the way to celebrate a few festivals, while our day-to-day lifestyle becomes more and more profligate. Indeed, I would rather suggest that if we can live an austere, eco-friendly life daily, and build an inclusive society with dignity of labour and free from exploitation, then it is probably not harmful to celebrate a few days of festival with some amount of pomp!

Jay Ganesh Baba??

Taking up the “pen” today, after a long time to write about one of my favourite themes- regionalism/racism within India. In the recent past I was particularly disturbed to read a series of Facebook posts by “progressive, liberal Bengali-s”. Many of them took exception to the fact that Bengali youngsters are posting “Ganapati Bappa Moriya” on their Facebook walls during Ganesha Puja in Mumbai, or celebrating “Dhanteras”, but they do not celebrate traditional Bengali festivals like “Sindur Khela” after Durga Puja, Haalkhata on Bengali New Years’ Day (Nababarsho) etc. Many of these devout Bengali-s were distressed to see Bengali-s forgetting their own culture, and blindly copying others’. Some saw racism in it- that non-Bengali-s (whatever that means) are working overtime with their grand conspiracy to systematically wipe out Bengali culture by propaganda through television, movies etc.

Racism, really? I wondered who are being racist. In a democracy, which India is supposed to be, isn’t every person free to choose which festival (s)he wants to celebrate? Even if we assume that modern Bengali-s have scant regard for their Bengali tradition (my own experience suggests otherwise), isn’t it totally a matter of individual choice? If a particular person is born in a Bengali-speaking family, but finds Ganesha Puja more attractive than Durga Puja, what exactly is wrong with it? The community into which (s)he was born was chosen just by chance, isn’t it? By expecting a person to follow the tradition of the community into which (s)he was born, one puts communal identity above individual identity. Isn’t  that itself racism???

And then regarding the issue of blindly copying others, isn’t that what everone does anyway? A child born in a Bengali family does not know either Durga Puja or Ganesha Puja to begin with, it is not a genetic thing. (S)he learns what others around her do, and copies them. If others around her celebrate Durga Puja, she may learn to celebrate it. If some people around her are celebrating Ganesha Puja also, then she may celebrate whichever she finds attractive, or maybe both! In any case she is copying others. To say that it is correct to copy some (those in her community), but wrong/bad to copy others (those outside her community)- is complete bigotry.

Moving away from the philosophical premise that individual preference is above racial/regional stereotyping, I would like to make a few observations. Some Bengali-s are upset that in all-India institutions like corporate offices, “non-Bengali” festivals like Dandiya etc are celebrated but never the Bengali festivals. Again, they find racism in this. My own experience suggests that most (not all, say myself) Bengali people, on coming to any new place, seek out other Bengali-s, and form a closed sub-community among themselves, considering others as different or outsiders, by labelling them all with that one attribute: "non-Bengali". That’s the reason they get isolated from the rest, and their festivals do not  get known to the others! And somewhat anomalously, many people who shout “racism against Bengali-s”, identify themselves as “liberals”, and consider nationalism as vile. They hate it when right-wing parties or organizations denounce “westernization” or “foreign influence in India”. I do not approve of such parties/organizations/jingoist sentiments either, but isn’t these liberals’ way of thought at the regional level equivalent to the militant nationalism of the right-wing parties?

What next for the Common Man's Party?

The 16th Lok Sabha elections are just over. This was, according to a large section of the media, the most fiercely contested parliamentary election in the history of India. While the main fight for power was between two established political parties, with mostly familiar post-poll promises like "economic growth and development" (whatever that means), this election became more interesting due to the advent of a brand new party- the Common Man's Party (CMP) under AK, and activist-politician. This party's main plank was to rid the Indian political system of corruption, and they went about exposing various wrongdoings of the existing parties. At the same time, they had another agenda- to bring real "Swaraj" or self-rule to the common man, by allowing him/her a greater say in governance of the country. Alongside, there were promises to drastically bring down charges of electricity, gas and other essentials, which, according to them, had been hugely overpriced by the existing governments mostly to allow more profit to certain big corporate houses. 

The ideas of CMP, especially their declaration of crusade against corruption, was well-received in Delhi and parts of North UP, Punjab and Haryana, and they made a stunning political debut in the Delhi Assembly polls. Though AK had a rather controversial stint in CM's office for only 49 days, the CMP was expected by many to continue their good show in the Lok Sabha elections also, and they put up candidates in nearly 80% of the seats all over the country. AK himself challenged the IPP (Indian People's Party) prime ministerial candidate to a virtual duel in a IPP stronghold constituency. Unfortunately, a massive wave seemed to have gripped the electorate, and the IPP stormed to power, and the CMP, though not entirely disgraced, could not manage even a fraction of what their leaders had claimed.

Now the elections are over, the CMP has only 4 relatively unknown members in the parliament, and they are out of power in Delhi, with another assembly elections coming up there. The question is, where to now for this fledgling party?

In the past, lots of new parties have been launched by well-meaning, idealist politicians, but most have failed the test of time, and either faded into oblivion, or stayed on, maybe in only one or two states, as "yet another political party".  It will be a great loss if CMP also courts this fate, because it is unique in several ways. First of all, it has a great manifesto, ranging on a variety of issues neglected by mainstream politics, for obvious reasons. These issues include decentralization of power, electoral reforms, transparency in party funding, environmental issues, freeing national policy-making from influence of major corporate houses, and of course their main plank so far- anti-corruption crusade. Another reason for its uniqueness is that it has been able to mobilize the urban youth to levels barely imaginable. To avoid losing its way very early, and instead sustain, grow and ultimately seize political power, it needs a clear vision, which seems to be lacking at the moment.

One of the biggest criticisms of the political analysts and intelligentsia against the CMP is that, its position in the political spectrum is not clear. AK himself has indicated that the party would be flexible in its policies, and need not be rigidly "leftist" or "rightist". Personally, I believe that this apparent weakness or identity crisis can also be a great strength. It is quite clear that in politics, it is never a good idea to paint every issue with the same brush, which is what the political intellectuals have usually tended to do. 

The next big criticism against CMP and AK is that, it depends too much on stunts and theatrics, which may have been successful initially, but have gradually turned people off. Personally I agree to this point fully. The memories of the Delhi CM declaring himself "an anarchist" (probably a misuse of the word, as far as I understand), or of spending nights on the pavement in front of the lieutenant-governor's house to press for a demand, are very much unsavoury to me.  Some other top leaders of the party also have been guilty of over-dramatic behaviour, that does not suit responsible leaders. I feel it is important for them to stop this immediately.

Another related criticism is that AK and other leaders are self-righteous, and always trying to project every established political leader as corrupt. Now for election purposes rhetoric is important, and exposing powerful corrupt people is an important part of CMP's main plank. However, they may not have been able to do this in a way that appeals to people. In fact their later campaigns may have appeared to many people as "fear-mongering", trying to find conspiracy and corruption everywhere on earth. Over-the-top statements against established, popular (perhaps for wrong reasons) leaders, like "there is not an atom of development in Gujarat", have not gone down well with many. Also, a Delhi minister leading a vigilante mob against a settlement of foreigners, and pressurizing the police to arrest them illegally, also reinforce the perception of self-righteousness of the CMP leaders. Another attitude to change quickly.

AK's campaign against many corrupt political leaders and  powerful corporate houses that manipulate national policies for profit, are very relevant. Indeed, so far it has been their main selling point. However, criticising others can take you only so far, unless you have some positive to offer. Looking at CMP's manifesto, it appears that they do have plenty of fresh, appealing ideas which no party has ever explored in India. In my opinion, it is high time CMP identifies a well-defined political philosophy which the party will stand for, until it is achieved.  I don't think anti-corruption movement qualifies as a political philosophy. So what can that philosophy be?

The idea in the CMP manifesto that greatly appeals to me is that of political decentralization. It is the policy of allowing countrymen a greater say in the governance, something that isn't there right now. On this front, the CMP  manifesto promises implementing the Right to Recall elected representatives. It has also suggested conducting local "Mohalla Sabha"-s at locality level, where the local residents can assemble and discuss the needs of the locality, which will then be relayed to a higher policy-making authority. These are fine ideas, but the CMP campaign somehow did not focus on them prominently. They can consider doing so from now on.

There is another aspect of decentralization, which has been considered by CMP, but discussed and communicated very little in their campaigns. This is the issue of supporting various people's movements, in different parts of the country. These include protests against dams and nuclear power-plants, acquisition of agricultural and forest lands for industrial projects, movements against draconian laws and infringement on personal liberties in disturbed/insurgency-affected areas, and so on. In fact, National Alliance of People's Movements (NAPM) had already aimed to unite such protesting groups, and now NAPM has merged with CMP. This is a very significant phenomena, unheard of in the history of India. These are the voices of dissent, protesting against the government, and the most common response of previous governments has been to repress them by force and defame their leaders as selfish, anti-development and/or having vested interests. But any democracy worth its name must heed voices of dissent, particularly if they are coming from already unprivileged people. The merger of NAPM with CMP provides a scope to arm these marginalized and alienated people with political power, with which their representatives can bring up their issues in the highest echelons of power. 

I just found out that a whopping 1687 parties had contested in the elections, most of which contested in only a handful of seats and got about a few thousand votes. Many of these are actually small interest groups, campaigning for unusual caused neglected (or opposed) by the big parties. Some of these causes have strong parochial/communal overtones, and hence cannot be promoted. But the CMP may want to identify the ones with worthy causes, and acquire them or forge alliances with them.

The discussed idea of political decentralization appears a very appealing philosophy to me, and I feel CMP should make it their main aim, and main theme in future elections. That should also justify the name of the party. It is especially important at a time when the country is going through a major churning in the pursuit of development, which has not been inclusive and has resulted in millions of people displaced from their rural homes and traditional professions, lakhs of farmer suicides, and a bloody, fierce civil war in the forested heartland of India. By attending to the alienated people and trying to include them in India's development plans, CMP can prevent further social imbalance, and the resulting violent backlash. It is true that the current mindset of the electorate may not endorse this ideology, as most people seem keen on having a strong center which will hurtle India towards being an "economic superpower", repressing and liquidating all the rural naysayers. Still, this is an ideology which seems worthy enough to fight for.

India needs a party like CMP, that will avoid the beaten path of Indian poltics, and infuse fresh air, fresh issues and fresh ideas into the political system. Only then can we move towards achieving Swaraj- self-rule, for every Indian citizen.