Did Anna Hazare’s fast strengthen or weaken Indian democracy?
Posted by Gopal on August 26, 2011
Hi friends,
Like many of you I have been very actively supporting Anna Hazare’s movement for a strong and independent Lokpal. There are increasing demands now that he should break his fast. I agree with that also. There are also some voices that are saying that his fast has set a dangerous precedent for Indian democracy. I totally disagree. On the contrary, I think, his fast for a strong Lokpal bill has strengthened our democracy. Below are my reflections on the subtle nuances of this issue:
- Anna’s fast was not an agitation, but rather a movement. Dealing with his fast as an agitation was a big political mistake by UPA government.
- Parliament is definitely a supreme institution, but in a democracy the people are the sovereign. Pushing the parliament through a mass movement had become a moral imperative for Anna Hazare and his supporters after many flip-flops on this issue by the government? Fasting was a bit coercive method; but in this country the system does not move unless pushed to the brink (which is a pity because that violates the common sense “Why do we have to fix things after it breaks down? Why not to avoid the breakdown itself?“) So, if Anna would not have gone to fast, we would have been waiting for Lokpal bill for another 40 years just like we have been waiting since last 40 years.
- He has empowered those who’ve felt lost in a new India where wealth is the sole presiding deity.
- He has become a symbol of change and hope at a time when a scam culture has assaulted the conscience of the nation.
- It is true no fast can be called off till the primary goal has been achieved. If that goal is to have the Jan Lok Pal bill passed exactly as you desire then that is a maximalist position which is never easy to accommodate overnight. But, cannot take a maximalist position on a legislative issue. The fast should be called off at a proper time after key demands are met without calling off the movement.
- Will Anna’s movement set a dangerous precedent or did it undermine Indian democracy? Not all. Because, Anna Hazare was able to move the government into action only because of the mass support. In absence of the mass support, his agitation would have been easily suppressed and fast broken through force-feeding. So, it is not the victory of any coercive technique, but the victory of the people whose aspirations were channelled by Anna Hazare. Thus, it has strengthened our democracy by once again proving people as the sovereign.
- Democratic process is often lengthy and lumbering. But it is so in order to be inclusive and fair.
- 3 movements by civil society went through standing committee and led to below revolutionary bills:
- MNREGA (Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act
- RTI (Right to Information)
- RTE (Right to Education)
Still we cannot say that the same would have happened to Lokpal bill also because Lokpal bill hurts the corrupt politician directly by bringing their corrupt activities into the domain of investigation by an independent watchdog.
Conclusion: Anna Hazare’s movement is the need of hour and he is rightly our national icon and hero for the youths. He should call off the fast now and continue the movement till an effective Lokpal bill is passed by taking an all-India tour and mobilizing public support.
Jai Hind,
Gopal
Kamal said
You are right…his movement does not subvert democracy, atleast not at the moment but there are long term implications:
1. There are many critical issues affecting the larger Indian population – like inflation, drinking water, jobs etc. over which movements could get mass support but are their quickfixes? A Lokpal does not ensure corruption will be wiped out, its is just another institution in a plethora… what such a movement brings in is mass awareness. However since, corruption is something to which almost everybody is a party unwillingly or even willingly (you do decide to pay to take shortcuts to get a job done), it still does not make one feel alienated but other issues over which Government may not have a direct control either affects the common man more and if such agitations become the order of the day, anarchy will prevail.
2. Tokenism is more important, coercion leads to misplaced beliefs in power of fast/immolation etc. Anna could have shown the tokenism on a particular day at multiple places (coordinated through e-platforms)… Check for yourself that at the end of it, result remains that what comes out of the parliament debate on the LP bill will almost be the same if the coercive fast was replaced by a mass token fast.
Regards.
Kamal
purushothaman P said
Anna, does have the tensions, uncertainties like any other person, but what the difference is on the long pending issue, if anyone comes with best solution, why should he continue fasting; people only talk his or theirs won’t fully work, so somewhere we have to start and progress.. so this makes the difference.. on democracy, why it works, Annaji is relieved of the support he gets from us & others, the uncertainty whether he is wrong or correct is now gone, this again might make the difference, many people spoil or mis-use democracy in many ways, this method may not be worser than those..this particular issue requires determination even sacrifice..
nishan tyagi said
well gopal than what do you think about swami ramdev protest i havent recieve your comments on that issue
Gopal said
No time to write posts on every thing
But, Baba did a big mistake by not facing the police directly and rather trying to escape from Ramlila Maidan. One should see through the movement one starts, otherwise it will become impossible to gain public support for any future movement. That’s where Anna Ji has proved himself to be a real hero. So, my conscience stirred him to use my writing to defend him from attacks from “arm-chair intellectuals”