A striking paradox looms large in India's public life after the terrorist attacks in Mumbai. Members of the city's elite, including celebrities from Bollywood, advertising executives and socialites, have been ridiculing and rubbishing politicians of all hues with abandon. But even as their outrage, fueled by the media, has gained momentum, voters have turned up in unprecedented numbers to cast their ballots in elections to local assemblies in six states. The disconnect between the elite's anger and the popular faith in the electoral system could not have been more glaring. This disconnect is by no means a new phenomenon. Right from India's independence in 1947, the political class has been at the receiving end of public ire. Its venality and failure to deliver on its promises have inspired films and plays and novels and poems by the scores. Cartoonists and commentators have thrived on exposing its follies and foibles. Indeed, next only to cricket and cinema, chastising the politician has been a national pastime for the country's middle class. In the latest instance, the terrorist attacks may have been the immediate cause for the relentless hostility. But there was a build-up to it. Several sting operations carried out by the media in recent years exposed to broad daylight the rampant corruption in the political class. It eclipsed the career of many a senior politician. More damaging evidence of the role that money plays in the political system was available when members of Parliament from the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party flaunted wads of currency notes they allegedly received as bribes to side with the Congress Party-led government during the vote of confidence in the lower house earlier this year. It tainted the hitherto spotless image of the prime minister himself. Such scenes of gross impropriety served to reinforce the negative image of the political class, which was already quite besmirched. Governments at the center and in the states had failed to prevent communal riots and bomb attacks. Their perpetrators had not been brought to book. The nation wanted them to be hounded, arrested, charged, put on trial and convicted as swiftly as possible. Yet, at every stage, a communal or parochial twist was sought to be given to the due process of law. Political and ideological pressure was brought to bear on the investigations with the result that governments appeared to be lacking in nerve. In the public eye, every party thus stands condemned for engaging in doublespeak and doublethink. The grief and anger against politicians that followed the terrorist attacks in Mumbai are, of course, wholly understandable. And yet, the anger, carried beyond a point, could spell danger. The celebrities, business executives, TV anchors and columnists who railed against the political class do not appear to have paid sufficient heed to the consequences of their comments. To ask citizens not to pay taxes or call for the bombing of Pakistan is, to put it plainly, irresponsible to the extreme. What talk of this sort denotes is a pining for a “muscular” form of governance: one that will be run by “clean” technocrats and, at a pinch, by the efficient, no-nonsense armed forces. Politics, in other words, should not be left to politicians. Enough of their greed and corruption; enough of their caste and communal equations; enough of their lack of vision. That was the refrain of the well-heeled socialites of Mumbai and of the reporters and anchors in the media. Sooner than later, righteous indignation of this kind is bound to translate into a vote of no confidence in the democratic system itself when what is needed are ideas, policies and action to set right the flaws in India's institutions of governance. How do you ensure that candidates with criminal records are kept out of the electoral arena? What should be done to make the police and the intelligence agencies more effective and accountable? How does one guarantee that there is zero tolerance for terrorism? Questions of this sort have rarely been raised, let alone answered, by the social butterflies who have hogged the limelight after the horrendous incidents in Mumbai. As against this indifference to issues that matter most to the future of the terror-ravaged country, one must pit the extraordinary trust in the democratic system expressed by ordinary citizens in the elections to the six state assemblies. The voting percentages leave no room for doubt that for all its flaws, democracy remains a vibrant reality in India. Indeed, the results have defied conventional wisdom. The BJP failed to derive any mileage from its cynical bid to exploit terrorism for electoral ends. In two states that have witnessed terrorist attacks – Delhi and Rajasthan – it was made to bite dust. It succeeded in defying anti-incumbency in Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh because the party in those states stressed in its campaign not the divisive ideology of Hindutva (Hinduness) but development. With general elections due any time before May next year, every political party will be constrained to take these factors into account. Politicians will be judged not on the basis of their promises but on the basis of their performance; not on the basis of their self-serving platitudes but on the basis of their ability and willingness to address issues of security and livelihood in a transparent, no-nonsense and efficient manner. This is the one salutary outcome of the tragedy that struck Mumbai last month. – Global Viewpoint Dileep Padgaonkar, a former editor of The Times of India, now edits the bi-monthly magazine India & Global Affairs. __
