AB Bardhan, a respected leader of the Communist Party of India passed
away last week. A rare leader, Bardhan is different from the icons the
mainline polity is familiar with today. He was simple and therefore
honest. Leaders like him are only remembered for their simplicity in
personal life and probity in public life. Many political leaders had
lived and died, some of them most powerful and popular. Yet, only a few
are remembered for probity. Whether it is Sardar Patel or Jawaharlal
Nehru, Lal Bahadur Shastri or Kamaraj, Ram Manohar Lohia or Deendayal
Upadhyaya, Jayaprakash Narayan or Achyut Patwardhan, AK Gopalan or
Acharya Kripalani, Morarji Desai or Nanaji Deshmukh, Kushabhau Thakre or
Inderjit Gupta, Namboodiripad or Madhu Dandavate — to mention only a
few names cutting across all political parties — they are all recalled
for their probity first. Many of them stood equally for truth. I recall
with gratitude that when the Indian Express was raided and I was
arrested in March 1987 on false charges, it was the CPI leader Inderjit
Gupta who defended me in Parliament against the powerful Ambanis and
government!
But whenever such honest leaders pass away, they seem
to leave an enlarging vacuum behind with steadily declining number of
people like them — committed and honest. The malady, which began in
politics, gradually extended to media barons and journalists, academics
and professionals and even bureaucrats and judges — particularly in
Delhi where from the nation is governed. And there are no courageous
media owners like Ramnath Goenka or Cushroo Irani now. No Mulgaonkar or
George Verghese in journalism today. Many successful journalists own
properties and farms which will be businessmen’s envy. The despicable
practices of some media owners, which includes laundering bribes into
their coffers, will dwarf the adventures of the most seasoned buccaneers
in business. Yet, these perfidious media men claim the sacred
constitutional rights for which men like Goenka fought at the cost of
the viability of their own papers.
How did a nation which won
freedom by the sacrifices of hundreds of thousands of nationalists, who
cast aside their life and even destroyed their families in nation’s
cause, so quickly descend to such low, post-independence? Where did the
rot begin? It all began after the advent of Indira Gandhi in the late
1960s. She changed the paradigm of politics based on ethics and probity
to the paradigm of power and success. She asserted her raw power first
by defeating her own party candidate whose nomination she had signed
just weeks earlier, demonstrating the importance of success and
irrelevance of ethics. She is remembered for the power she wielded for
16 long years.
In contrast, her predecessor Lal Bahadur Shastri,
who ruled the country for a mere tenth of her tenure, is recalled for
his simplicity and probity. Though both won wars with Pakistan, they
symbolised two divergent paradigms. Indira was powerful. Shastri was
simple. She did not respect honesty greatly. Shastri was a symbol of
probity. Known as the ‘homeless home minister’ of India, Shastri lived
in a rented house in Lucknow in his home state UP, and in a government
accommodation in Delhi.
Shastri did not even need all of his Delhi
accommodation. He occupied just two small rooms. His sons got married
in simple ceremonies under the mango tree in the backyard of the two
rooms. When Shastri resigned as union railway minister owning ‘moral
responsibility’ for an accident, he forthwith surrendered his official
car and stood in queue in bus stand to catch a bus to home.
Later,
after he had resigned under the Kamaraj Plan, Ramnath Goenka saw him
waiting in bus stand and picked him to home. As he repeatedly bemoaned
the moral decline after Shastri, Goenka used to recall him tearfully.
Shastri was born in a poor family, led a simple personal life, austere
family life, ethical public life & finally died a poor man. When he
died, all that Shastri had had was an old car which he had purchased on
monthly instalment. Instead of celebrating such a great man, after he
died, the Congress party turned so ungrateful that it humiliated him and
refused state honours for his funeral and wanted his body to be taken
to Allahabad for cremation. It was only after his wife, Lalita Devi,
fought with the party, the great leaders relented to cremate him with
national honours at the spot which is now the Vijay Ghat.
Advent
of Indira shifted the core of Indian polity from celebrating honesty and
ethics to worshipping success and power. For the first time in the
history of free India, corruption charges were made against the Prime
Minister which, of course, she couldn’t care less, turning a hitherto
shy polity turned into a shameless one.
This shift in polity
manifested in the character of the Lutyens of Delhi. With power
naturally concentrated in the national capital Delhi, the different
government offices, tribunals, and courts generate opportunities —
genuine and dishonest — for the Lutyens to amass income and wealth which
no other geography in India could provide. Austerity ceased to be a
virtue, even became a burden in public life. Ostentation became
acceptable, even venerated among the Delhi elites. With globalisation
and liberalisation bringing in an avalanche of easy money into Delhi,
whatever little respect virtues and the virtuous commanded declined
rapidly. Wealth and power became the exclusive indices of success. Delhi
changed forever, for the worse. The Lutyens of Delhi began revelling in
ostentation. It is at the elite parties in Delhi, the English-speaking
Lutyens meet, gossip, build and destroy others’ name and goodwill and
decide the ecosystem of governance of India. The powerful elite club
includes politicians, media barons and editors, bureaucrats and touts
some of who masquerade as journalists.
This elite, secular, modern
and powerful club, which has no connect with the Indian people,
influence all governments, parties, bureaucrats and the policies they
formulate. No party or government has been free from their pernicious
sway. They constitute the biggest distortion of government, public life
and polity. They virtually control the national media discourse which is
echoed all over the country. They cannot and will not allow honest
media or pubic discourse. Posing as heavyweight liberals, seculars and
intellectuals, they justify dishonest politics. Political survival of
non-Lutyens in Delhi is difficult unless this elite Lutyens club
endorses them.
The situation appeared hopeless a couple of years
back. But an unprecedented change was thrown up in the 2014 elections
when the people elected Narendra Modi — a rank outsider and unknown to
the Lutyens of Delhi. The Lutyens and Modi are a poles apart. The Lutyen
Delhi is comfortable only in English and Modi is not. It loves elite
parties which Modi keeps away from. Lutyens love to gossip and Modi
wouldn’t listen even to them. For the Lutyens, he is a stranger. Modi
faces their challenge which is also an opportunity. He can keep away
from the Lutyens, which he does, and thus keep his government away from
perfidy and corruption. But he does pay the huge cost — their intense
hostility — for keeping away from them.
Not only Modi, but many of
his colleagues and bureaucrats too avoid the Delhi Lutyens. In the
process, the Lutyens have lost their power over the powers. The Lutyens
cannot allow Modi government to succeed which will mean their defeat and
irrelevance — something which they cannot accept. Modi is still the
last and the best chance to break the Delhi Lutyens circuit’s strangle
hold over national polity.
If he succeeds, there is scope for
honest leaders like AB Bardhan, who emerge only outside Delhi Lutyens
circuit, to regain respect and relevance. Otherwise they will, of
course, exist, but as marginalised and endangered species in national
polity and at the mercy of Lutyen mafia of Delhi.
The rest of Modi’s term is crucial not only for him and his government but also for probity in public life.
The author is a well-known commentator on economic, political and cultural affairs. Email: guru@gurumurthy.net
No comments:
Post a Comment