15 April 2014, 10:29 PM IST
Can one cleanse one's soul by putting on a Gandhi topi? Or channel the pristine spirit of the American revolution by donning a three-cornered hat? Clothes maketh the man, they say, and we may even stretch that excellent principle to headgear. But perhaps not to this extent.
It's not often that the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and America's Tea Party movement are placed in the same frame, but comparing them can be illuminating. Both began as insurrections against their respective political establishments. Both claim to go back to founding principles of their respective countries. One pits citizen power against fat and bloated government, the other is against what it sees as irredeemable corruption in government and has 'common man' in its name. Both have a freewheeling, decentralised, grassroots, populist character, foregoing structure and formality.
It's claimed that Arvind Kejriwal derived inspiration in his fund-raising methods from Obama campaigns which used the internet, text messages and social media to reach out to small contributors. But teabaggers used the same methods to raise money, combining them with elite funding as AAP does.
In addition AAP is heavily reliant on saturation coverage by mainstream media, recoiling against it when such coverage is not to its liking. In a sense AAP turns Congress strategy inside out: if Congress's communication style appears to be dull, dour and not too forthcoming on most issues, much of AAP's political activism resembles television soap opera running on primetime. Likewise, the Tea Party phenomenon relies on blanket coverage by Fox News channel and right-wing radio stations while nursing a grouse against 'liberal media' (shades of AAP's 'paid media').
There have been allegations of racism and abusive behaviour against teabaggers, just as there have been against AAP. The latter was exemplified by the infamous Khirki Extension midnight raids in which Somnath Bharti, then law minister for Delhi, participated.
As in the case of teabaggers, AAP's backers argue that manifestations of racism amount at most to borderline behaviour by a few fringe adherents rather than an expression of its core beliefs. Even if one accepts this, AAP's core beliefs (like those of teabaggers) remain excessively dependent on political cliche.
One can hardly turn the clock back to 1950 (or to 1783); much water has flown down the Volga, Ganga and Potomac since then. Teabaggers, for example, would like to solve current problems of bloated government and excessive debt by going back to the gold standard and abolishing social security.
Most Americans won't welcome a trip back in time to the decadent Jazz Age, when poverty and unemployment were far more widespread (F Scott Fitzgerald fans excepted, and those really keen only need book a flight to India). The incoherence of the Tea Party's principles is best captured by an oft-quoted placard at one of its rallies, asking to "keep the government's hands off my Medicare" (Medicare is mostly government funded).
If teabaggers stress financial austerity, AAP's USP is personal austerity of a conspicuous kind. The mass enthusiasm that greeted the advent of AAP has been marked by a relative paucity of ideas. What's on tap is a populist mish-mash of Indira Gandhi-style "garibi hatao" with J P Narayan's ideals of "partyless democracy". Both are throwbacks to the 1970s, a peculiarly wasted decade in India's recent history.
We know what AAP's against (roughly speaking), we have far less idea what they're for. They seem more anxious to agitate and less anxious to rule. When AAP won the mandate to rule in Delhi, they withdrew after 49 days (two of which were spent in dharna by its chief minister).
At times AAP frankly concedes its cluelessness about the economy. Their general response, if asked for policy prescriptions, is 'trust us'. They're not sure themselves, but they'll make it up along the way. As Kejriwal put it, the job is not "rocket science". At another point he said "allow us to make mistakes, allow us to learn".
Such insouciance is scary. Given the stagflation, corruption and policy paralysis that have beset the economy, India cannot afford more mistakes. It cannot wait for the economy's drivers to reinvent the wheel.
Just like teabaggers ('don't tread on me'), what AAP really represents is an attitude more than a specific set of ideas. Its motto might well be a quote from Cervantes' Don Quixote: "Virtue is persecuted by the wicked more than it is loved by the good."
While such groups would be disastrous if voted to power, they nevertheless have their value. They shake up a complacent establishment with their pig-headedness. The teabaggers, for example, expressed legitimate anger about bloated government and bailouts for bankers. AAP vents popular angst at widespread corruption.
AAP may have a better chance of success than teabaggers, whose prospects are already fading with US economic recovery. That's because Congress — whose flanks AAP feeds off on — is decaying, mired as it is in dynastic rule. Teabaggers likewise cannibalise the Republican Party, but this is a more dynamic organisation that is capable of accommodating change. However, unless AAP can embrace change itself and exhibit a pretty steep learning curve, its chances of long-term success remain limited.
Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang
Revolution on prime time
Dengan url
http://osteoporosista.blogspot.com/2014/04/revolution-on-prime-time.html
Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya
Revolution on prime time
namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link
sebagai sumbernya
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar