Passion and politicos
Published by Yazad Jal May 4th, 2004 in Political TheatreElection season is on in both India and the US. I find small observations interesting as they sometimes show striking parallels. Here’s an op-ed piece on John Kerry’s campaign in the NYT (free registration required).
The one big problem they (the Democrats) are not addressing — and are actually making worse — is the creepy tone of prudentialism that envelops this campaign. Nobody is passionate about John Kerry. Primary voters embraced him in a calculating frame of mind. Party leaders talk about him ambivalently. Even Kerry seems coolly calculating about himself.He has not communicated a consuming sense of mission that emanates from the soul and transcends political self-interest. You can position a candidate intelligently, and the Democrats are doing that. You cannot fake that sense of historic calling that actually inspires people.
Whether you like agree with his policies or not, Bush has a passionate following. In the same vein, so does Vajpayee (mask and all). On the other hand, even her alliance partners are cool regarding Sonia Gandhi. Her kids might inspire passion, but she doesn’t. Ironically, the only people passionate about her seem to be the BJP / RSS gang, for all the wrong reasons!
I am not sure that Vajpayee inspires much passion. Within the BJP he seems to be just a mask. This is amply illustrated by his own statement that no one listens to him and he can’t reign in Katiyar and Modi, or for that matter Advani. And in the NDA, he is a means to power.
There is no real unifying vision for India, no clear picture of what it is that this whole jamboree is in aid of, there are just small non-issues which are being used to scare people into making choices, nothing to inspire anything.
This is despite the sullen optimism atleast in urban India.
The question I want answered is why Sharad Joshi joined the NDA?
I disagree Gautam, Vajpayee does inspire passion in a lot of people. It is (partly) because of their reverence for him as a leader, as a statesman that the NDA was together. Today, when people have no political idols to look up to, he stands somewhat apart.
I think that there is a general degree of fondness for Vajpayee across the country. He manages to put across this genial grand uncle mask on very well. I am not sure about the passion part. Modi on the other hand is a different story. as is Thackeray. Somehow i find it ok for stars to have passionate followers, but feel wary of politicians that have the same.
The biggest reason I find the ‘Atal Factor’ bogus is because of things like today’s article by Balbir Punj in the Times, which ends by stating the only choice for the indian voter is “Atal or Chaos”. I understand that this is normal political posturing, but there is a thin line between expressing reverence for your leader and sowing the seed of doubt by saying the same thing over and over again.
The passion that leaders instigate in their followers don’t seem to translate into votes, whether it is Thackeray or Vajpayee, neither has enough support to get more than 30% of the vote share for their own parties.
For the BJP this is a major step backward by their own standards, for years they railed against the Congress’ iconocentrism, while extolling the virtues of cadre-based politics. Evidently they have had to change their rajnaitik dharma as an expedient to political office. But the kind of passion of purpose that Indira Gandhi was able to instigate in her party and the masses using bogus slogans like “garibi hatao”, were far more effective than what Atal or more specifically the BJP has been able to do with an equally bogus “india shining”.