Introspection on the Popular Perception of Politics and Governance today

By Somya Barpanda

Introduction:

Politics plays an integral part in any and every society. A nation’s destiny is significantly shaped via its political history. Yet the word ‘politics’ itself irks many. Somehow, almost all societies across the globe have come to believe that ‘politics is dirty’. U.S. President Barack Obama, in the early days of his political career, often used to receive unsolicited advice from acquaintances; they would say that he, being a good man, should not join politics. The sentiment runs the same back home in India where the public generally perceives the political domain, by its very nature, to be a ‘no-good-man’s-land’. Indians’ heavy repulsion for the state authority and politicians was well reflected in the popularity of Anna’s ‘India Against Corruption Movement’. The support was immediately replaced by scepticism though when Arvind Kejriwal sought to address the issue of corruption by instituting a political party himself. Even though Aam Aadmi Party’s (AAP) success in Delhi and its announcement to go national has had a salubrious effect for the Indian democracy, the average Indian still believes in the thumb-rule of distancing himself from pure political activity and impulsively strips anyone, who seeks to enter the political arena, of his clear character and credibility.

The implications of harbouring such rigid abhorrent notions about politics and politicians and of having no faith in the government are worrisome from point of view of larger national interest. It is thus imperative that we make an attempt to understand the reasons for the present public perception. Has the societal attitude always been negative towards the world of power and politics or did negativity regarding the same, creep into people’s minds over time. If the latter is true, how and why did this attitudinal trend come about? This article attempts to introspect and find answers to questions like these with a focus on Indian politics and governance.

Politics and People just after Indian Independence:

There is marked consensus in academic-circles that in the early post independent years, people had a good deal of faith in the Indian political-leaders. Fresh out of the dreary days of the British Raj, all countrymen were well aware of the value of their hard earned freedom. They looked forward to the building up of and functioning of the new Indian democracy which meant the institution of a representative form of government answerable to the needs and demands of the general populace. With that came the hope for riddance from poverty, hunger, illiteracy, economic stagnation and social backwardness. The post independent nationalist government sought to build towards a progressive, industrialised India and prepared the blueprints (read the early Five Year Plans) for the same. Those at the forefront of this nation building process enjoyed widespread public support for their efforts in this regard; the same kind of support that these very political leaders had enjoyed during the long drawn nationalist movement. Prime Minister Nehru’s popularity was unquestioned and so was the immense public faith in his leadership.  Even though there were reports of some high profile cases of political corruption (such as Mundhra scandal involving investments of Life Insurance Company in companies controlled by the Mundhra group), public didn’t believe that acts of corruption were natural to politicians. “Ministers in charge of ministries with high profile corruption cases usually voluntarily resigned from office even before being charge-sheeted and did not seek re-election until their innocence was established.” The absence of any despicable attitude towards politicians and the government continued for a while into the post Nehru era too.  For example the high regard for Lal Bahadur Shastri during his prime-ministership is well reflected in the following words of Sunil Bharti Mittal:

“And I remember during the short period of two years he had appealed, not through the numerous TV channels that we are used to seeing these days, but through regular radio channels appealing to the citizens of this country to start living on one meal a day. Even a young person like me who was not more than eight years old at that time was touched by the speech and for several days I also followed his advice of living on one meal a day.”

Today, such an appeal by a political head could very well be scoffed at and criticised heavily. What could have led to this replacement of reasonable reverence for political figures by repulsion for them on part of the common man? The following section seeks the answer.

The Seeds of Scepticism get sown (1962-1989) and the Era of frustration and disenchantment begins (1989 till date)

The element of Weberian ‘charisma’ in political leadership was quite strong in the early years of post independent India’s political history. The charisma-factor however never stopped diminishing in importance. It ran highest in the prime of the Nehru era (when the First and the Second Plans were implemented) but lost some momentum with the Chinese incursions of 1962 and the waning effectiveness in the implementation of the Third Plan. Following 1962, the weakening balance-of-payments situation, poor economic growth rate, high unemployment rates and the emergence of bureaucratic corruption resulted in the first signs of public discontent with the government since independence. However, none of these dented the belief of the masses in the State and its custodians more than the declaration of Emergency by the Indira Gandhi government in 1975. The hitherto invincible Congress party lost for the first time since 1947. Mrs Gandhi’s return to power occurred with a shift in Congress ideology from purely socialistic to pro business. The shift was aimed at garnering political support from the business class. With this, the public saw the spirit of the garibi hatao slogan (which is known to have been crucial in Congress-victory in 1971 general elections) getting lost. While the start of de licensing efforts was salubrious to the economy, the ground level engagement of the government with basic people-problems and attempts to address them took a relative backseat. Then came to light in 1987, the high profile Bofors scandal relating to the purchase of defence equipment which left the masses majorly sceptical about state credibility.  The Congress debacle to a Coalition of Opposition parties in 1989 paved the way for the most turbulent times of Indian politics. The same period witnessed the actual and full transformation of public perception on politics, politicians and governments from positive (1947-62) to neutral (1962-75) and slightly negative (1975-89) to finally fully negative now (post 1989). While the emergence of coalition politics was celebrated as a move towards plurality and thus better representation of interests at the Centre, it also brought along elements of uncertainty, instability and chaos into Indian politics. The frequency of elections increased requiring new tactics on part of political parties to come to power and then retain it for a reasonably long duration. Between 1989 and now, there have been many coalition governments headed by seven different prime ministers- a marked departure from one party (Congress) domination in the government. This decrease in shelf life of governments’ tenures and the increase in political insecurity have certainly led to misplaced priorities changing the very nature of parties. Their numbers have been on the rise but none seems to offer any clear ideology or roadmap on governance. The strategy in trend is to think and work towards one election to the other. The growing appetite of parties for corrupt members has further let down the public. There has been a clear rise in the number of party tickets issued to election candidates with past or pending criminal records. To top it all, the typical minister in people’s mind has become an arrogant and defiant figure impervious to their grievances. With this and with an increased surfacing of corruption cases there has actually been a replacement of Bay’s “politics (in classical sense)” with “pseudo politics”. And now the average Indian commoner has come to believe that pseudo politics is the only form of politics possible.

Apart from the rising instances of political scandals and continuous failure of the governments to deliver on their promises made to the public, the other possible additional factors that could have enhanced the pace of (and further strengthened) the build up of lack of confidence in the ‘political machinery’ and its ‘drivers’ are the following:

-   Rising Political disconnect with the middle classes- As a part of their political strategy, politicians have increasingly come to focus on wooing the lower income classes through populist schemes. The poor ever hopeful of an improvement in their condition thus participate vociferously in the voting process. The affluent are known to use their money-muscle to lobby for their interests in political circles. The elite class’ indifference to political affairs is well testified by its poor voter turnouts during polling sessions. The middle class, sandwiched between the two sections of the population, is generally left to fend for itself. But it is this educated and aspirational middle class that actually expects the most (in terms of accountability and collective responsibility) from the political process and the government. It votes but almost always meets with disappointment.

-    Stereotypical portrayal of politicians in Indian films: While it is quite true that cinema mirrors the society, the strong influence of the former on the latter is equally true. Politicians and bearers of public offices have almost always been depicted as corrupt, pot bellied, greedy and apathetic characters who exploit the common man. (Nayak, Sivaji the Boss are a few examples). Movies like Sarkar Raj, Rajneeti etc give the impression that there can only be a dark side to politics.

-   The rise of the Electronic Media: Indian electronic media has come a long way from the Radio broadcasting and later I&B Ministry-regulated Doordarshan being the sole forms of mass communication to the present vibrant and independent nature of the TV channels (since the 1991 reforms). The revolutionised news channels in particular have been instrumental in shaping the public perception on politics by swiftly broadcasting corruption cases and conducting debates critical of politicians. The public has actually become used to the media portraying politicians as villains. The more recent phenomenal rise in popularity of the social media has further accelerated the instant transmission of news and more importantly views.

-   The deteriorating quality of Parliamentary sessions (marked by loud mouthing in the name of debates, vandalism, frequent walkouts and boycotts) adversely affects the work-output of the Parliament and in turn harms the public’s faith in the nation’s prime legislative body.

Implications of Rigid Perceptions:

What effect on a nation can a sense of abhorrence for politics, political institutions and politicians have? The direct implication is a further worsening of the quality of the nation’s political system which is already on the decline. Anarchical forces, if unleashed on a massive scale can only spell the eventual breakdown of national order. Thus, it is highly necessary that the confidence be restored by a revision of public perception. Besides, the aforementioned direct effect, there are other subtler effects too. Historian Patrick French, in his book ‘India: A Portrait’, has presented some startling data on the growing hold of family and lineage on Indian politics. His research work reveals that an ever increasing number of young MPs in India have a hereditary connection. About 70% of women MPs have political connections in their families and almost all Lok Sabha MPs under 30 years of age had inherited a seat. This is not a positive trend as nepotism in politics as elsewhere leads to inefficiency. The growing reflection of lineage in new political entrants can be explained by a sense of general withdrawal of the public from any kind of vocation in politics. Younger generation individuals who grow up watching their parents criticise the sarkar and the neta themselves get conditioned into thinking on same lines. The school textbooks (for example the new NCERTPolitical Science Textbooks) do a reasonably good job in giving an unbiased picture of politics and governance but lessons in political science seldom stay for long with the students. No one from a family with no political background ever gives a thought to seriously pursuing a career as a politician because of the strong societal notion of ‘goodness’ and ‘politics’ never going together. They inherit the negative notions on politics and governance from their kin while their counterparts hailing from political clans inherit Lok Sabha seats.

Concluding Remarks: A growing need for revision of perceptions

At a time when some countries are still struggling to establish a stable democratic order, we can only ill afford to take our legacy of democracy for granted. The growing public dissatisfaction with the institutions of democracy and the democratic political process is a troubling sign for the future political stability of the nation which can jeopardise its potential for higher development. The country is currently going through troubled political times and there’s an urgent need for some serious introspection in this season of political scams and shams. What is dangerous is to accept the corruption and the inefficiency inherent in the political system as given and natural. To receive good political service, we as a nation have to deserve and demand it. Our ignorant aversion for politics does not make us ‘spotless saints’ but instead makes us default on our duty as citizens. It is high time that the Indian democracy matured and moved on from petty vote bank politics, political opportunism and so on. The rules of the game have to change. For that change, the educated Indian youth must not only enthusiastically enter politics but also lead it from the front. This in turn can be made possible only if the public at large breaks away from its stereotypical mindset and learns to see ‘politics’ in a new light. Can AAP help India in that regard? Only time will tell. As of now, instead of the clichéd slogan of ‘Power Corrupts’, we need to believe in, adopt and follow the new mantra- “With great power, comes great responsibility.”