For good or bad, India has polarised – not around politics but around the axis of a social cause, corruption.
This polarisation of views – one ‘for’ Team Anna’ and the other ‘not for’ (mind you, not against) Team Anna – has now assumed a disturbing moral proposition.
Apparently, the ‘for’ team are the Messiahs of modern India, the so-called morally outraged crusaders, who are dedicated to clean up the country, and usher in a new era of corruption-free administration and thus, a healthy society that will bring in equality, promote the middle class aspirations of an honest living etc etc.
They are cocksure about the efficacy of their version of the Lokpal Bill (which they conveniently call Jan Lokpal Bill – when it should now ideally be referred to as Team Anna Lokpal Bill – because, what if I have my own version of the Bill, which I believe will make India an even more honest country?)
I have no intention of reducing the protestors to caricatures; nor do I question their right to be indignant about governmental nepotism and inaction. After all, the past two years have exposed the extremely vulgar side of the Indian politician-businessman nexus.
I wouldn’t contend either the fact that the support brigade of Team Anna is predominantly the youth – those, as Nazeem Beegum wrote are “who have only text-book knowledge about freedom struggle and other civil rights movements in the country.” Look at the picture here (reproduced from The Hindu with no copyright violations intended); this is not the dreary ‘freedom struggle’ snapshots that we are familiar with; this is a bunch of young, sprightly Indians, their conviction writ large – almost with a picnic-like zeal, albeit.
Enough has been written by the ‘not for’ team – with the flagbearer mantle now, perhaps unwittingly, falling on the much hated (and loved to be hated) Arundhati Roy, whose ‘I’d Rather Not be Anna’ has generated unprecedented hate mail for the Booker Prize winner. And we have this absolutely brilliant piece by Prabhat Patnaik, ‘Messianism versus democracy.’
It is not coincidental that both articles have been published by The Hindu and not rags such as Times of India that make news a commodity. One purpose of journalism is to stir debate – which The Hindu continues to uphold.
I am not alarmed that Anna will challenge the great Indian democracy and bring it down; we survived Indira Gandhi and we are learning to live through Sonia and Rahul; our democracy is not feeble to be threatened by a frail, 74-year-old man. In fact, it is the sheer strength of our democratic pillars that Team Anna can step up, raise their voice and influence millions to follow their path.
What is disturbing is the stubborn streak that permeates through the campaign, and its ‘we the good’ versus the ‘rest all bad’ moral high ground.
That I do not support Team Anna does not make me anti-Indian or corrupt.
But can I cross my heart and say I have never been corrupt in my life? From bribing Ticket Examiners in our trains to tipping government officials, I have been equally guilty of corruption -where the onus is on the giver and the taker.
The thousands who swamp the protest ground will eventually go back to their grind. But when it comes to the crunch, will they have the power to raise their voice against – not just the bribe-takers but also the givers?
If they do, India can be a less corrupt place. As Neena Sharma writes, corruption is not external.
But more than the threat of corruption, I am concerned about the authoritarianism that comes with Team Anna.
This is a man who invested his savings in building a temple as the first step to correcting a society; apparently, the punishments he meted out include being tied to the trees until repentance dawned.
So what can we expect of a Jan Lokpal Bill from Team Anna that eventually also plans to include our honourable judges and the Prime Minister?
The sight of countless Indians tied to trees, as Team Anna walks the streets, whips flagelatting, beaming smiles of conquest trumpeting the end of corruption?
I can live with corruption.
But do we want an India where we take away the last vestiges of human dignity?
Do we want authoritarinism in the guise of moral policing?
Do we need to live in a state of fear?
