HVK Archives: Who's afraid of the people?
Who's afraid of the people? - The Observer
P P Bala Chandran
()
8 April 1997
Title : Who's afraid of the people?
Author : P P Bala Chandran
Publication : The Observer
Date : April 8, 1997
Dear countrymen, let us thank our respective Lords that the political
phantasmagoria we have been witnessing these past few days will reach its
denouement by this weekend.
We would have, by then, come to know whether Mr Deve Gowda has returned to
the paddy fields of Hardenahalli and Mr Sitaram Kesri has moved into 7 Race
Course Road: whether Jyoti Basu has shifted into Delhi or the communists
have- shifted out of the United Front: whether the Congress has split the
United Front or the United Front has split the Congress, etc.
Whether the BJP has become more secular or others have become less secular.
You would have also come to know by then whether, all these tectonic shifts
notwithstanding India's political animals are still having to trek back to
you for your approval to 'serve' and 'represent' you.
But there is one thing you may not have cared to know in the midst of the
ongoing theatre of the absurd: one thing you ought to know, nevertheless,
before you decide whether to give or not to give these Johnnies another
chance to 'serve' and ,represent' you. That they hate to come back to you
seeking your approval to represent you.
They never want, if they can help it, to have to come back to you, even when
they want to represent you. They will rather join their worst enemies,
betray their best friends, forsake their ideology - which is easier, for
there isn't any to forsake - and mortgage their souls with the devil, all to
achieve one end. And that is, to avoid you: in order not to come back to
you.
Because they are smart enough to know that, if they come back to you, instead
of giving them another chance to loot this country, and loot it in your name,
you will stuff them in the nearest dustbin.
And come to think of it. They claim to do it all for the sake of democracy,
for the good old rule of the people, for the people and by the people.
Thus when the last general elections produced a hung parliament with no party
getting an absolute majority and when the BJP which was asked to form the
government by virtue of being the largest single party, could not survive in
office beyond thirteen days, the normal course for us, if we were a healthy
democracy, would have been to go back to the people and seek a fresh mandate.
We have heard the argument that another round of general elections within a
matter of a few days of the last one would be a colossal drain on the
nation's economy: that it is too expensive for a poor country like ours, that
it is a waste of time and so on and so forth.
But even as an economic argument, it did not sound genuine because it was not
meant to be genuine. The fact of the matter is that even with a poor
economy, we can't make compromises on the quality of our democracy.
Elections are as integral to democracy as a free judiciary or a free press
is. Like clean water and clean environment are to a healthy living.
If the economy were to be the sole criterion in deciding the need for
elections, why hold elections at all and, in any case, why hold them every
five years? What sanctity is there in five? Instead, why not hold them
every 10 years and save so much money?
And if we may stretch the argument a little further: Why have professional
armed forces since they cost so much money? Why keep a bureaucracy which is
a drain on the economy?
And, yes, why have a government at all?
If you think it is a ridiculous argument, then consider a few other factors
such as: The crores we spend on specially trained commandos who are guarding
these politicians, the crores we spend on shopping junkets which these
worthies undertake almost every week under the garb of official visits, the
crores we send down the drain in the name of welfare schemes and, of course,
the crores and crores gobbled up by the legions of scams and scandals.
The Election Commission, we are told, had spent under Rs 60 crore last time
to give us a hung parliament. We are, of course, not taking into account the
unaccounted crores each candidate and party would have spent to buy up votes:
because that money has a different colour and is not part of the exchequer
anyway.
So, the official expenditure for holding a general election is not more than
Rs 75 crore at the outer limit. So how many elections can we hold with the
money we lost on Bofors, urea and hawala? Then why use money as an excuse
for shying away from elections, from going back to the people who send these
self-styled people's representatives where they are?
The answer is simple. They don't trust you, they have no faith in you
whatsoever that you would send them back to Parliament: that, having made the
mistake once, you would have learnt your lesson and will not repeat it.
But he would not admit it. Instead, he would find excuses for avoiding you.
Excuses like the return of the 'communal forces', 'anti-secular' elements,
etc.
In other words, he apprehends that you might repeat what you did last time.
Perhaps, this time with a vengeance.
Talking about secularism, it is time you told them that secularism as
envisaged by our forefathers had died in the hearts of the 'secularists' even
before it could be killed by the 'fundamentalists': that instead of being the
essence of our democracy, secularism has' been reduced to a political slogan,
to be used when it suits them, to be abused when it doesn't.
Also it is time you told your 'representatives' that by holding elections,
even in the middle of a term, they are only robbing you of your wealth which
has never been there, in any case.
But, by not holding elections, by holding on to their seats like limpets, by
not trusting you with your political wisdom, they are robbing you of your
democratic spirit and, in essence, the nation's soul.
Tell them that you can afford to be poor, if holding elections means being
rendered poor: but you cannot survive without your democratic rights, your
free spirit, your right to decide who you want to represent you in
Parliament.
And if nothing works, remind them of the historic words of a man called
Maximmillien De Robespiere, one of the founders of the First French Republic
who, after vanquishing the Bourbons and executing the king Louis XVI only
temporarily as it turned out later, went on to claim his divine democratic
right to hang on to power.
"I am here", he had said, "by the will of the people and I shall leave only
by the will of the people".
If that does not make any sense to your 'representatives' which is likely to
be the case then tell them what happened subsequently to the self-styled
French Republican in 1794.' That he was guillotined - by the will of the
people, of course.
Back
Top
|
