The vote in Jharkhand has thrown up a four way split: Cong, BJP, JMM and Others – all having significant weightage (seats) in the assembly.
To think that Jharkhand is a new state carved out for a more ‘homogeneous’ population and therefore having a more homogeneous view of its own development has been shattered. For the second time, political instability is expected.
So does that not mean smaller states will be no less inefficient than larger states? Some would argue that in fact it is no solution to have a smaller states and cite Jharkhand as a good example. And it would seem pretty convincing too.
Except that political alignment is not the same as geographical or linguistic homogeneity and definitely not the same as efficiency in administration. I’m sure I’ll find little or no opposition to the idea that every Jharkhandi wants progress, as he wants his state to go forward with a better quality of life for every Jharkhandi.
I’m equally sure every political party in Jharkhand also stands for progress of the state and its people. Just read some of those manifestos (maybe it’s no longer fashionable!) and they would all say that they want only progress of their new state.
Then where is the problem? The voter wants progress; so do the parties. Then why such a MASSIVE divide in such a small state?
On the surface, this can be explained by religious, sub-castes devided and so on. But that, I think, is the red herring. Religion and Castes come into play when one very basic phenomenon is present: distrust.
Think. Don’t you have friends who are from other religions and communities? Or even from other nationalities? Was your whole life spent only amongst your own creed? Did you have no pleasurable moments with “the other” people? Ofcourse you had.
Distrust is a way of being and not an acquired asset or liability. And since everyone of us is engaged in a I-Me-Mine lifestyle, how can you trust anyone else to support you-yours-yours-lone at their own cost? Would YOU?
The change has to be in I-Mine-Ours and that’s all. I should take care of myself, as should you. Mine is the larger community I belong to. And I’m NOT defining it as my religious community but the community I live in. And Ours is the state & country we belong to. When its I-Me-Mine, how can you belong to anything? Then why should anyone stand for you?
If this sounds utopian, then you are just confirming its beyond the realm of your I-Me-Mine syndrome. That’s why it sounds simplistic and utopian. The pity is the change has to come only at the individual level. Soon enough, it will turn a whole ship of state.
The parties have taught us that once an election is over, it is not okay for them not to form a government. Even if it means horse trading or supporting a convict to become a CHIEF MINISTER !!! And guess what, you and I say: Yeah, what’s the point of voting again? What a waste of money and peoples’ time!
Think again. If thousands of crores can be spent on statutes and millions of dollars can be siphoned out to Swiss banks, then does a few hundred crores for a re-vote sound so bad? Especially if it brings people to a higher level of the-common-good realisation?
The cynic will say that a re-vote will only bring the same results. Really? How come the Irish vote to accept the EU constitution changed in nine months? Or do you think that people of Jharkhand won’t close ranks ever? How come the people of Kerala change parties like clockwork every election? Are they not Indians like you and me?
No, a re-vote would spoil it for the parties. They have spent their money and need to get a return on investment, fast. A re-vote will help make the people mature enough to close ranks and a repeated re-vote will accelerate this process. But that is bad news for the politician, not the common man.
The horse trading (means earnings!) of politicians will now go on for one-two-three years. Then a stint of Governor’s rule (read: Central party money making) and then another early election. Suddenly, a re-vote after 12-18-24-36 months (which costs more because the election machinery has been disbanded and inflation has increased), is “justified”. And the people? They’re now even less interested in going out and voting. The ‘masses’ go out since it’s a paid holiday and they get paid to stand in queue for a vote. Who cares? The politician. They have tuned the business of elections into a fine art.
So its all so huge; how can a few, let alone one person, change anything? We need everyone to change. . Change the constitution. Bereft of the cover, accountability will seep in, albeit slowly. That’s why I say, it may turn the rot around in 50 years. The other magic pill history tells us is absolute anarchy. You choose.
The Argumentative Indian. I didn’t say it; Amartya Sen wrote a whole book on it. Did you read it? I tried and failed to get past the first 50 pagesin my first attempt! Only persistent attempts at taking it in small doses at a time helped me get through it. We can argue, or we can act. We’ve argued enough. What option do you choose?
If I’d titled this blog as “Be the change you want to see” I’m not sure anyone would have read it. The point is, we are very good at “taking other’s inventories”, never our own. Time to get real about the real dangers we face: our I-Me-Mine syndrome learnt from mindlessly aping the west.
Back to Jharkhand. Isn’t it clear that as many re-votes as is necessary is a better option to horse trading and convicts becoming CMs?
You be the judge of that!