|
That in politics one has to buy support and reward
one's benefactors has been well-known and this indeed compromises a
basic moral position that one would like to take. You have to soft-peddle
some issues and sweep under the carpet unpleasant things. This is the
very stuff of politics which makes it not to everyone's taste. Some
have preferred to keep away from this. But if one has to get involved
one comes to terms with politics but tries to keep things under some
control.
It is to the credit of our country that many have managed to emerge
out of the arena of politics with a fairly clean image _ Chaudhary Charan
Singh, Kamaraj, Balwantrai Mehta, Gulzarilal Nanda, S. Nijalingappa
_ to give names at random. But that this is becoming something increasingly
difficult is something on which almost all will agree. But what is striking
is the rapidity with which public values have collapsed.
Collapse of Values
This decelaration of values worldwide has to be accounted
for and one explanation is the depletion of the stock of religion and
a sense of individual responsibility to the Almighty that it entailed.
While religiosity has gained ground, a genuine religious attitude is
totally absent all around. The accumulated religious-moral capital has
grad-ually been nibbled away for two centuries and the gods have been
relegated into the world of the celluloid to arouse children and offer
entertainment to the older. The deep moral commitments that traditional
religions embodied have been forgotten. Secular ideological values like
socialism and its attendant sense of personal integrity and probity
briefly did service and this explains the politics of the Scandinavian
countries and the comparatie cleaner personal record of some socialist
and even commu-nist leaders.
Not only politicians but the public too as a whole have been gradually
immune to common moral values. Traditionally, in our country, the kings
and zamindars were a law unto themselves and were not supposed to be
within ordinary decencies. However, in the independence movement, rectitude
in matters political was the prevailing dominant philosophy of govern-ance.
Gandhian idealism had seeped deep into the consciousness of the political
elite and a sense of dedication was widely spread not because the public
expected this but this was the done thing.
But it did not take long for these ideals to be denuded. The fruits
of office, the enormous temptations in the way were so attractive that
he would have been a man of irreproachable moral fibre who could resist
the fleshpots. Also the public did not expect the rulers to abide by
standards. Their erst-while rulers, it will be recalled, were not accountable
to anyone.
Also, the newly recruited members of the ruling class had not been educated
for long or had served in public life to have imbibed the ideals that
came so naturally to an older generation. They totally were unaware
of the sense of direction that political leaders are expected to provide,
they were far from concerned about the future of the country and their
people. Above all, they were unaware of the unborn generations to whom
they owed some obligations. After all, politicians come and go, but
a statesman worth his salt is concerned with the immediate and distant
future.
A Gladiatorial Sport
A facile philosophy of winner takes all threw overboard
all restraints and continuing impor-tuning of members of the caste,
of the neighbourhood, could not be resisted. Since all politics was
seen essentially as casteist, it was natural that benefits should percolate
to one’s caste – the larger sights were lost sight of.
To the public, elections have become a gladiatorial sport and the casting
of one’s vote is but a minute part of the happenings. The tamasha
lasts for almost a month and it is seen as a free spectacle where adversaries
battle against one another with fair means and foul, where the tricks
or the moves resorted to in buying support, the theatricals all tickle
the viewer and it gives a needed relief from the tedium of everyday
life.
That voting can change the political set up, that it is an assertion
of one’s deep sense of commitment to the larger stage of politics,
that it is a matter of individual choice and as an assertion or rejection
of a particular party and all that it stands for – all these important
dimensions of our electoral exercise are forgotten, the serious dimensions
taking a back seat. Above all, among the persons who stand for elections,
there are not many with whom one would want to be seen hobnobbing, many
of them are disgusting characters and of questionable probity. The average
person has indeed a low expectation of any electoral outcome, he says
a curse on both your houses and is resigned to get along irrespective
of the results.
An Invalid Assumption
One of the unexamined myths of modern politics is that
in elections, people cast their votes rationally and that there is a
finality about them which is unques-tionable. The assumption that people
know what is best for them and that this must be respected is one of
the fundamentals. What happens if the findings go contrary to commonsense?
We have seen free elections with no exercise of any overt coercion or
foul play yet returning with an unbelievable majority the present Chief
Minister of Tamilnadu when there was almost a near unanimous opinion
that she had indulged in unparalle-led corrupt practices and encouraged
political cronies to play ducks and drakes with public responsibility
and that she had a cynicism about politics that was unheard of from
any aspirant chief minister.
Global Phenomenon
Unfortunately, this is not confined only to our unhappy land. A recent
news item reports that the French President Jacques Chirac “will
go on television to tell the people ... to explain who paid for the
expensive trips he made with family and friends to a range of places
from Mauritius to the Alps.” Between 1992 and 1995, he spent £240,000
on holidays with family and friends. (The Hindu, July 8, 2001, p.12).
A few weeks earlier, the son of the late President Mitterand, Jean-Christopher,
had to answer queries in the court relating to financial misconduct.
The last decade has seen an incredible decline in the conduct of politicians,
from China to Peru, all involving financial scandals or inappropriate
conduct. Relatives of the elder President Bush, of Mrs. Margaret Thatcher
and of course Clinton’s family have all been put on the carpet,
not to mention the happenings in South Korea, Japan and Peru. Since
this is a global phenomenon, we in India should not be unduly harsh
on our public figures! There is no doubt that from the very highest
to the lowest, everyone is tainted with the mask of Cain!
Dr. R. Srinivasan, professor of political science
(retd.) Bombay University, is associate editor of Freedom First and
a member of the Indian Liberal Group.
|
