Dynamics of entering electoral politics after trying agitation

09 August, 2012

The way the Anna movement has progressed in India is not new - previously also, such a social movement turned political. In my opinion there is a pattern in these movements which maybe because of a transition phase between subjects to citizens.

TEAM ANNA has announced their entry into politics. Thereafter, Team Anna was disbanded. Then who is into politics now? Is Anna, leftovers of Team Anna or the hidden forces are taking over?

In India, after Independence, it has been a typical life cycle of a non-political movement. They wake up for a cause, arouse the whole nation, and do it desperately on a ‘do or die’ principle. Ask government to ‘go back’ ask people to ‘march to Delhi’. They get exhausted and then realize agitation will not work. They need to agitate ‘from within’ the Parliament. They form a political party, then a political alliance and finally contest elections. Some manage to form a government and other die premature deaths. At the end of the game, the country becomes worse than before, some social leaders become politicians, and people wait for the next leader to emerge.

The JP movement progressed on those lines, VP tried this and now some people, I do not know what I call them when Team Anna is disbanded, and Anna says he is not going to enter into politics, are trying this. Are they bound to fail?

‘Satyagraha’ is a method invented by Gandhiji. Necessity is the mother of invention as they say. At that time the British were too powerful to defeat in the battle ground, and people had no inherent power to chose or replace the government. The only appropriate method was Gandhiji’s invention. It was successful. People who hitherto were subject of an autocratic power are now citizens, the masters of their own destiny in a democratic country.

They had been subjects for ages and the way of life as a subject was deep rooted in them. Though they behave like a citizen, use their democratic powers and enjoy the freedoms of being a citizen, but under the circumstances of perceived threat they doubt their democratic rights. They tend to revert back to a phase when they were successful, that is freedom struggle. Therefore, they resort to agitation and use the look alike of ‘Satyagraha’, which has almost never been successful in India after Independence.

Firstly because that was an altogether different scenario, we were to through away a foreign power. Secondly, they use a look alike, not the actual ‘Satyagraha’. And, lastly, there is no one to practice ‘Satyagraha’ as it should have been.

People while in the transition phase; do understand what is right and what is wrong, but their understanding lack clarity. But sooner or later they understand that it is futile to agitate and one must be in the Parliament to get the work done. And they form a political party. Once in the politics they compete with the established political parties who are better organized, have broader vision for wide range of issue, and of course full of patriotism. In the course of time the movement merges with the democratic process.

During JP movement the response and enthusiasm was much more. People’s behavior was closer to that during the freedom struggle. While during Anna movement there was greater degree of discipline of being a citizen. They have made definite and impressive progress on the path from subject to citizen. Our social scientists and politician must understand this and work to ensure smooth transition from subject to citizen.