VIEWPOINT
AMITABH SHUKLA
I have been a student of Congress
politics for quite some time, observing the grand old party, reporting and
commenting on it.
The party fascinates me as a
journalist as I found it quite remarkable that it had turned into election
winning machinery even though it was bereft of a sound ideological position.
Since the late 1960s, after the euphoria over Independence
waned, I always found it as an umbrella organisation for various castes,
communities, interests and ambitions glued together by the Nehru-Gandhi family.
What interested me over a period
of time was to find reasons why people vote for the Congress even though it is
bereft of a cohesive ideology and fresh ideas. In 1971, it was due to the
victory over Pakistan
and carving out Bangladesh
that won Indira Gandhi the election. In 1980, Congress won simply because of
TINA (There is no alternative) factor. The Janata Party experiment of 1977 had
flopped badly by then. In 1984, people voted for it because of Indira’s assassination
and sympathy for her son Rajiv Gandhi. The massive mandate was squandered
within the first two years. In 1991, it got votes due to two reasons — the flop
Janata Dal experience and sympathy due to Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination.
After eight years of non-Congress
Governments, in 2004, Congress was voted to power and this was repeated in
2009. I am yet to find a logical explanation for two consecutive victories. I
have talked to a lot of politicians, academicians and social scientists over a
period of time, no one convinced my why Congress succeeded twice despite a weak
and timid leadership, lack of ideas and ideology. It is precisely because of
this that I say that for a while, the party had turned into election winning
machinery and got too overconfident for 2014.
While anti-incumbency of Vajpayee
Government was a plausible though not a convincing reason for victory in 2004,
there was none in 2009. Perhaps, people compared the two prime ministerial
candidates in 2009 —
LK Advani and Manmohan Singh and
found the latter more promising. Of course, I am not buying the theory that the
bringing of legislations on “Rights” was a reason for two victories. If that
had been the case, the party would have won even in 2014.
Covering Congress party over a
period of time was quite interesting. It was really amusing to write and report
how its leaders practically stabbed each other but the crime was mitigated as
they raised slogans in favour of the first family. Every act was condoned in
the party as long as you hailed the first family. In the same vein, all good
acts as a Congress leader was washed down the drain if you failed to attribute
it to the family. Non family Prime Ministers PV Narasimha Rao and Manmohan
Singh are prime examples. They will not be even in the footnotes of Congress
history if it continues to be written by a member of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty.
The verdict of 2014 has not only
exploded several myths about the Congress but also exposed it like never
before. It can no longer float in an ideological vacuum without withering away.
It has been reduced to a caricature of sorts following the Lok Sabha polls, but
no one in the Congress is talking about changing the ideological discourse of
the party. BJP is right of the Centre but the space on left of the Centre is
vacant. Congress will have to take that place firmly by a series of changes and
that does not only mean raking up the secular-communal debate every now and
then and invoking what Gandhi did in the 1930s, Nehru in the 50s, Indira and
Rajiv in the 80s. It was hilarious to see Rahul Gandhi seeking votes for what
his father did 25-30 years ago, forgetting that voters had voted his father and
Congress out for precisely those very reasons.
Verdict 2014 showed that it is
the Right that is on upswing. The Right of the Centre is the flavour of the
season, it has appealed to the youth as the idea is fresh and there is hope and
pessimism in the idea. There could be a sub text of polarisation and reverse
polarisation as well but it was more of a desire for change which gave Narendra
Modi the historic verdict.
While Rahul Gandhi represented
pessimism, repetition, lack of idea along with feudal and paternalistic
approach in 2014, Modi represented hope and optimism, full of ideas and all
that the youth expects from a leader in this age and era. Rahul may be two
decades younger to Modi but he fought the electoral
battle with tools which are four
decades old. On the contrary, Modi spoke the language of the youth through the
medium they use.
Rahul practically used the half a
century old Congress slogan of Garibi Hatao when he referred to giving doles to
the poor, conveniently forgetting that if poverty has not been banished all
these years, surely Congress is to blame as it was in power for the longest
tenure. For many it seemed that the supreme leader of the Congress — Rahul —
spoke first and thought later, a sharp contrast to Modi, who did his homework
and gave a separate speech in each of his meetings.
Clearly, Congress needs to
reinvent itself to make the party appealing to the youth and catering to the
aspirations of the neo middle class and those aspiring to get into the middle
class. It can no longer think and talk only about doles, throwing food,
medicines and freebies at the poor. People have rejected that. Now come out
with something which can outsmart the BJP. Watch the Modi Government for a
while and devise fresh strategy for the sections which are left out of the
scheme of things of the new Government.
Despite a drubbing of a lifetime,
I am now bewildered at the way the Congress wants to commit political
hara-kiri. After being demolished and given the knockout punch, the party lies
flat in the wake of the Narendra Modi Tsunami. But still, it is not looking
within for answers. It is looking for scapegoats for defeat and what better
person than Manmohan Singh to blame for it who can neither react nor is
interested after having a decade in sunshine as the Prime Minister. Besides, a
war of self destruction has begun in states like Punjab ,
Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and others where leaders are demanding the
resignation of their rivals within the party to settle political scores rather
than thinking of ways and means to strengthen their party and motivate the
workers.
The first and foremost need for
the Congress is to democratise the organisation. They should hold primaries
within the party the way Rahul did for 15 parliamentary constituencies and
elect a leader. Of course, if Rahul is elected as president through a secret
ballot in a fair election, it would be the internal matter of the party. In
this age and era, dynastic politics of Congress style is not going to work. The
Congress vice president has been preaching what he never practiced. This has
been exposed and the election result showed that Rahul’s popularity is at all
time low and people do not see leadership skills and qualities in him. Even
Priyanka’s jibe aimed at Modi in Amethi was bereft of any substance. It did get
on the
airwaves, consumed newsprint but
proved counterproductive in the end. Of course, she should also contest the
organisational elections of the Congress and if the party members vote for her,
she could get more responsibilities.
In the age of communications,
Congress was found wanting. Whenever Rahul spoke to the media and addressed
them a couple of times, he lost hundreds of votes. So poor is his communication
outreach that more or less he looks like an arrogant brat who is not interested
in the job he is doing, imposed on the people from above — a leader who got
everything without political merit. Moreover, he was more into sermonising than
finding solutions. No one, even the dumbest, wants to be lectured at. More so
by a person who is himself not qualified as he is yet to prove his mettle either
as a mass leader or in an organisation or in the Government. That is the
tragedy of Rahul Gandhi. The sooner he himself and other Congress leaders
realise it, the better for the party. (May 19, 2014)
No comments:
Post a Comment