For decades, in the Indian elections, the liberals and the activists have called for developmental politics, but in reality, it seems to me, that no one really needs it. It is like the Ram Mandir, as pointed out by comedian Kunal Kamra; everybody is ready to sell it but no one wants to really buy it.
Widely regarded as the festival of democracy, the Indian Parliamentary elections are more like a practice of festival, than of democracy. Quite often, like other ethnic festivals, the elections are practiced by tradition and not by their relevance.
For instance, traditionally, it is believed that the party which wins the state of Uttar Pradesh ends up ruling the country. This has become a tradition. The parties and their analysts in U.P. go bonkers without understanding the relevance of the pattern. Ironically, tradition tends to die and lose its significance. The Indian elections might be on the verge of losing their relevance, courtesy lack of developmental politics.
There are quite a few trademarks of the traditional Indian election build up. The opposition, irrespective of its ideology, only speaks about developmental politics, whereas the ruling party distances itself from the same. The ruling party keeps asking its voters to not vote for the opposition and lists out reasons for the same. It has to just retain its position, but the opposition has to reclaim or claim the office. If history is anything to go by, the ones ‘claiming’ always come across as the ones with a noble intent. History also tells us not to trust the intent but the work, which makes a lot of sense when you compare the glittery manifestos. The opposition always comes up with a better manifesto than the ruling party.
The one thing common between the two is their lack of intent and work towards building a true developmental politics as demanded by the activists and the liberals.
Liberals and activists who are supposed to be the thinkers of the society, are the ones who have been relentlessly asking for a developmental nature of politics through generations.
The country has seen over seven decades of activism and liberalism, yet the conscience of the people remains outdated, despite various efforts. The collective failure of activism and liberalism, in this country, is because, like most things, activism and liberalism is a privilege. It has been a battle fought by the privileged for the under-privileged.
As a result, the privileged kept getting empowered and the under-privileged only got to stare at the moon. It has also taken away one of the most important rights away from them; the right to protest. While one may think of examples of activism of the under-privileged, we can’t escape from fate, the recent example being that of Rohith Vemula.
Yet another reason for the failure of establishing the developmental setup is the escapism of the Indian middle class. The middle class has always found a way to escape rational politics. What appeals to them is the politics of emotion. As the most hardworking class, it is unlikely that this section should even have any time for rationalism. There are times when the middle class showed signs of being rational voters, but those were the times when they were the target of direct atrocities. This group never votes for a leader, it finds and votes for the savior.
‘Developmental politics’ seems an attractive watchword when uttered by the opposition, which makes it the better option in hindsight. Any party, when in opposition, washes away all its sins and vies for the next term. It appears so clean as if it had taken a dip in the holy-yet-to-be-cleaned Ganges.
The truth is, among citizens, the fight for the right kind of politics is messed up. The ones who want to fight are leading and the ones who need to fight are following them. The political parties also want development- just the right amount of development required to fill in the manifesto pages.
India votes on emotions. Our political parties have understood that. They use the tool of development to evoke emotions for the sake of votes. India has never voted directly for developmental politics and it is highly unlikely that it ever will.