A.K.A. Unko paise kaun diya??
I'm wide awake. This is what a caffeine-induced alertness feels like, except all I've had is a lot of water, a pot full of dip and an overdose of Dexter. It seems Anna Hazare is ending his hunger strike tomorrow. Pratap Bhanu Mehta makes a good point about the campiagn here and so does Manu Joseph. Going through the reader comments is very instructive: it would seem that to 'the masses' any criticism of the good gentleman's techniques and agenda is only slightly less vulgar than not supporting India in an India-Pak World Cup encounter. It really upsets people to hear that there might be something instrinsically wrong with what Mr. Hazare is proposing. Corruption is a black and white word, Anna Hazare is white and the politicians are black. Ergo simple logic: you and your candles swear allegiance to your old man.
To begin with, I wasn't sure what I thought about the campaign but now I know I am highly, highly sceptical about it. It seemed to me suspicious on many levels. For starters, it has Kiran Bedi in it. The ex-cop leaves nothing to your imagination in her opportunism. By the way, say hello to Kiran 'No Marks' Bedi.
I'm sure for many of the players in this game, the intent was good. But good intent does not a responsible campaign make.
What was the big demand? That the Government eschew it's diluted draft of the anti-corruption bill in favour of the Jan LokPal Bill. Even a layman who reads the Jan Lokpal bill (know it here, good reader) will see how it ridiculously concentrates power into one institution. We're reeling as it is from power that has been dispersed across institutions; we should be trying to address the concentration of power within institutions, not creating a Frankenstitian institution populated by 'recent Magsaysay award winners' that will turn around and bite us on our behinds as soon as we unleash it. Is it naivette/ blind passion/ wishful thinking that makes the supporters of this campaign believe that an institution will be squeaky clean just because it is bereft of politicians?
The kind of corruption these people seem to be referencing their campaign against are the big ticket ones: CWG, 2G, etc. These are middle class concerns. The money that was siphoned off in CWG and 2G hurts them because it goes from their taxes: they aren't directly affected-and so didn't give a shit- about the system in which the CWG takes birth, a system which needs to and does literally eliminate the existence of a certain kind of people deemed less valuable to national prestige. In my opinion, 'corruption' appears somewhere in the middle of the book; the story is about the bigger problem of thinking that it is okay to exclude the wellbeing of a fraction from the whole. As long as we participate in this fractioning, the 'me' above the 'whole' we will see scams, we will see corruption. It is a by-product of greedy consumption, a product of capitalism though not restricted to capitalism.
Our system of governance, the model of representative democracy we follow invites corruption. The parties are many. It doesn't matter which party is in power: their policies are the same, their methods are the same, and as long as there isn't a deep change in our parliamentary democracy, I dont think we'll be tackiling this issue at all.
I'm wide awake. This is what a caffeine-induced alertness feels like, except all I've had is a lot of water, a pot full of dip and an overdose of Dexter. It seems Anna Hazare is ending his hunger strike tomorrow. Pratap Bhanu Mehta makes a good point about the campiagn here and so does Manu Joseph. Going through the reader comments is very instructive: it would seem that to 'the masses' any criticism of the good gentleman's techniques and agenda is only slightly less vulgar than not supporting India in an India-Pak World Cup encounter. It really upsets people to hear that there might be something instrinsically wrong with what Mr. Hazare is proposing. Corruption is a black and white word, Anna Hazare is white and the politicians are black. Ergo simple logic: you and your candles swear allegiance to your old man.
To begin with, I wasn't sure what I thought about the campaign but now I know I am highly, highly sceptical about it. It seemed to me suspicious on many levels. For starters, it has Kiran Bedi in it. The ex-cop leaves nothing to your imagination in her opportunism. By the way, say hello to Kiran 'No Marks' Bedi.
I'm sure for many of the players in this game, the intent was good. But good intent does not a responsible campaign make.
What was the big demand? That the Government eschew it's diluted draft of the anti-corruption bill in favour of the Jan LokPal Bill. Even a layman who reads the Jan Lokpal bill (know it here, good reader) will see how it ridiculously concentrates power into one institution. We're reeling as it is from power that has been dispersed across institutions; we should be trying to address the concentration of power within institutions, not creating a Frankenstitian institution populated by 'recent Magsaysay award winners' that will turn around and bite us on our behinds as soon as we unleash it. Is it naivette/ blind passion/ wishful thinking that makes the supporters of this campaign believe that an institution will be squeaky clean just because it is bereft of politicians?
The kind of corruption these people seem to be referencing their campaign against are the big ticket ones: CWG, 2G, etc. These are middle class concerns. The money that was siphoned off in CWG and 2G hurts them because it goes from their taxes: they aren't directly affected-and so didn't give a shit- about the system in which the CWG takes birth, a system which needs to and does literally eliminate the existence of a certain kind of people deemed less valuable to national prestige. In my opinion, 'corruption' appears somewhere in the middle of the book; the story is about the bigger problem of thinking that it is okay to exclude the wellbeing of a fraction from the whole. As long as we participate in this fractioning, the 'me' above the 'whole' we will see scams, we will see corruption. It is a by-product of greedy consumption, a product of capitalism though not restricted to capitalism.
Our system of governance, the model of representative democracy we follow invites corruption. The parties are many. It doesn't matter which party is in power: their policies are the same, their methods are the same, and as long as there isn't a deep change in our parliamentary democracy, I dont think we'll be tackiling this issue at all.
At the same time, there are some people whose opinions I generally respect, like Medha Patkar, who are also a part of this campaign. I guess that could also be like the uneasy friendship between her and Mamatadi during Singur: everyone is an opportunist. Cause ke liye sab kuch chalega. Lack of principles or strategy?
I'm curious about the campiagn buildup: how did it get to be so big? Is an obvious kind of corruption generally something the average person understands really quickly and sympathises with? Or, is there someone like Ramdev pumping shitloads of money into this campaign, with his eye on his party and future political career?
