Elections 13-14; Youth, Media and Principal Political Parties

By: Amit Bhushan Date: 14th Nov. 2013

Elections fever 13-14 in India is yet to penetrate the villages of India although hype in Telemedia is already reaching the proportion of the level of general elections rather than coverage of some localized elections in 4-5 states. Then there is a rise in ground contact activity of local parties which receive little attention of Mass Tele-Media and this seems to be reaching a high although the national parties are yet to take off in non-election states, in a big way. The national parties seem to be more inclined to stealing winnable candidates on the back of post elections sops rather than making significant ground level intellectual commitments or grass-roots structural build up investments which force upon them an ideological baggage rather than they freedom from commitments that the senior politicians yearn for. This is especially true about doaba region and other major swing states which may have major repercussions at the national level. The small ideological noises being raised at the local level by national parties border more on their national rhetoric rather than explaining to people the connects between national political governance and policies with its local impacts including the leakages mid-way at various control points. This is a clear recipe to engineer a victory of smaller parties with whom the national parties will want to join hands in any post election hung parliament scenario. Such alliances allow them a greater ideological leeway rather than a victory since it yields a handy excuse for corruption, domestic compulsions and errors of judgments, often blamed on allies. And that no one raised questions about the timing when this was realized, the estimated opportunity cost to nation and if beneficiaries being free of electoral leanings and like questions speak volumes about our freedom where social relationship management is much more important to carry forth ones professional responsibilities. Rhetoric therefore remains immensely preferable to political actions even in opposition. One of the principal weakness in Principal Oppositions armour is lack of analysis of Politicoeconomic actions and response which is being exploited to the hilt. For example, the action of West Bengal government on Potatoes has had only rhetorical opposition in media from principal though it robs them of the Onion issue. The creation of an additional bureaucratic rent seeking layer at the time of elections in neighboring states and disrupting normal market mechanism seem to have gone unresponded. Besides, such sudden jerks in election generally go against the incumbents since it highlights them management failure, an issue not very well understood by most of the politicians, but well known

to the topmost hierarchy. A weakness in Bengal at ground level including need for allies has led only rhetorical fight-back rather than initiation of farmers benefit campaign or demand for loan waiver via state kitty in lieu of cheaper potatoes. Then there is this ongoing media slugfest between a prominent state party of a major state with the principal opposition with some orchestrated shows. This is likely to result in benefit to smaller silent parties who are becoming active with their ground contact and connect leaving the game organizers wondering about their failures although the smaller partys allegiance to some principles remains in doubt. The politicians seem to have not realized that there is little substitute for strong ground connect even in this era of media blitzkrieg due to publics passion to direct contacts and direct dialogue to record their woes, even if it means falling at their feet or just a photo-op. Todays youth especially from the deprived classes are at the forefront for such opportunity and this is clearly depicted b their eagerness to pick up the mike and voice their concerns in media, which seems much more than the youth of yesteryears who waited patiently to listen to leaders and clap at their rhetoric as well as gaffes. Tele-media painting itself as the sole arbitrator of peoples voice and champion of their causes (which has been exposed); notwithstanding. The principle weakness of the Principal opposition seems to be a lack of distinction between rhetoric and political action including reading clear politico-economic signals (whether they are consciously orchestrated or mis-fires). It has harped on uprooting the ruling dispensation; however it has done little ground work on the East coast where the ruling dispensation seems to be on its weakest wicket only after the doaba region. True that it has tried to gain allies however it is no substitute of its own presence to help itself fill the political vacuum due to Grand Old Partys vacation of the space. In politics, it is people and the current voters who decide the ruling ideology and issues than History; the growth of the political party therefore has to be married with peoples issues of the region. This may require compromises and changes which the principal opposition does not want to incur to maintain its precious difference with the ruling dispensation which are more on socio-cultural ground than economic issues being hotly debated and which remain a bone of contention leading to divide and violence. That the principal opposition needs to further develop upon such ruling skills is known to most others rather than its own leaders. The politicians in the Principal Opposition party, despite debacles in past have failed to realize that it is mostly the economic issues that swings vote, corruption being one of them as has been the case in past several changes of government; while socio-cultural difference is just one of the areas or tools that provides way to distinguish a party from another. While it is true that the economic highs like

the action of roads and telecom frequently get rebranded and claimed by other parties, however the socio-cultural differences are often over emphasized while other points of distinction do not receive enough focus. Other important areas could have been the stand and action on Legal reforms including treatment of judiciary which has mainly got lip service from most parties due to pulls and pressures from bureaucrats, businesses and political friends and foes. Reforms of the Government Service Delivery mechanism and reforms of the structure could be another important area though the track-record of principal opposition which mainly offered political opposition to proposed reforms of ruling party in this area remains in tremendous doubt. Its piece meal approach is more akin to maintenance of status quo rather than a courageous move to restructure service delivery which failed miserably under current dispensation mainly due to their internal political differences. Political reforms such as an introduction of right to reject could be another important area of reforms and a logical extension of None of the above option by denying the bottom but top 3 in a chance to seek re-election in case of a majority vote for reject in an election. A strong Lokpal like structure as proposed by social service providers could have an important distinguishing point for the principal opposition and allowed it to create structures which would have etched its mark of the governance of the country, however an ambivalent stand has almost robbed it of the opportunity. The principal opposition has limited time to identify and address issues which will catapult it to the government and give enough leeway to etch its mark on the psyche of the people without its socio-cultural highlights which has only served their sidelining to margins earlier; although no one can deny that the then action or inaction was a continuance of the socio-cultural wave which got the party to power in the then prevailing circumstances. The era seem to have changed as has the leaders, though fixation with past issues and lack of embracing/understanding of emerging issues and strategies of the rival parties, represent a lack of progress and an area of concern.