Everyone is naked in the bathroom. That shouldn’t shock us. We cannot judge people for being naked in their bathrooms. Politics is also the very same bathroom. To survive in the game, all the politicians have to put off their nicely starched clean khadi, hang it on the wall and go naked. Now the question arises should we judge them. Yes, as prospective voters we ought to. But we have to accept that political bathing means going naked. If you don’t do it the dirt of honesty, integrity, conscience, fairness, morality will leave you politically stinking and no party would find you sustainable. So if you intend to be a voter in any type of election, drop your expectations of a perfect politician. Expectations breed sufferings. And the expectation of an ideal politician burns the heart with incalculable suffering. Accept that the poor guys have to go naked in the bathroom to wash them of the weakening stuff like morality, honesty, integrity and fair play. If at all you judge, judge it on the basis of relative nakedness. My ideal politician is the one who shakes his bum before the bathroom mirror in shorts and banyan. That is, not shamelessly naked and in love with his natural instincts and empowered endowments. So we have to settle with the ‘relativities’ only.
Bollywood movies have tried their best to enlighten us about the extent of nakedness under the cleanest khadi. They have shown time after time that the biggest goonda, indirectly pulling the puppet chords of the puny outlaws on the surface, is our very dear politician. So why hold expectations, as Buddha said.
But we need to have politicians because ours is a democratic system. They at least wear khadi outside to look smart and clean. The autocrats, on the other hand, go stark naked all time, within and without. They don’t have to care about image. They don’t require bathing as well. They are comfortable with the dirt of their desires, conceit and lies.
Our next parliamentary election is perhaps nine months away. So the question naturally arises who is most suitable to lead the country. Well, we ought not to talk in terms of a ‘best’ leader because that will again leave us in the grip of over-expectations. I think we should be thinking in terms of the most ‘effective’ leader. So my concern as a voter is: who is the most effective leader?
Most of us think that we vote on the basis of our likes and dislikes. But it’s hardly the fact. What we view as our strictly personal likes and dislikes are nothing but our reactions—not responses—to the narratives spinning a web around us, the so called hawa doing the rounds. In 2014 national elections I voted for Narender Modi. Strictly. Solely. The reason was deeply personal. A reaction. The Haryana Congress had chucked up my chances of being a civil servant for which I had worked hard for almost a decade. We have grown up watching movies where one ought to take revenge. So I took my revenge. Voted against them. In 2019 national elections I again voted for Modi. But this time it was a response, a calculated response to his leadership qualities on the basis of his branding India as an effective, strong, well-meaning nation. Of course India’s stature has risen by several notches under his strong, effective leadership.
A lot of waters have flown under Ram Jhoola over Ma Ganga between 2019 and 2023. Whom should I vote for in 2024 national elections? My feeling of victimhood at the hands of the state Congress government in Haryana is too old now, eighteen years old in fact, to turn me impulsive, become politically vindictive and cast my vote merely as a petty revenge. Acceptance and forgiveness take roots in your conscience with the passage of decades just like mother nature reclaims an empty plot of land. On the other hand, the initial euphoria over Modi’s statesmanship is also dented due to the happenings, ups and downs of the last four years.
Frankly speaking on the basis of issues such as corruption, cronyism, misuse of power, autocratic egotism and the rest of the maladies that had allowed the BJP to come to power against the Congress, the BJP stands merely a version of Congress at the moment. How will you put someone into the dock over corruption if you set up a political washing machine with open invitation to walk in for an instant cleaning and get registered as a pure, nationalistic BJP politician? It’s happening with such rampancy that one cannot even debate about it. It’s so much evident. There are unmistakable signs of autocracy, misuse of powerful by the central agencies against opposition leaders, unethical break-ups of regional parties by giving lollipops of power and pelf, division of society on communal basis through hate rhetoric, crony capitalism and many more.
If the agenda turns solely centered around sticking to power at any cost then you turn a recognizable version of the opposition you have been fighting against. There are many who tell me that today’s BJP looks too similar to Indira’s Congress. Why be just like your rival in your fight? Isn’t a way out?
The RSS has done wonders for its political wing. But there is a thing called overdoing something. They raised a blizzard of nationalistic rhetoric that propelled the BJP into power. But this is the time to reflect. Is communal rhetoric and divisive agenda sufficient to come to power in an India that is rapidly changing? Slogans, shoutings, inflamed passions about past atrocities, lynchings, patriotic hooliganism appeal basically to semi-literate, unskilled, almost quarter-criminalized (if not more) youths who take to the streets and social media at pin-drops and trifles. Your popularity among them is no guarantee of your success in future. The simple reason is that this section will lose its numbers as India develops further. We will have more educated, skilled, urbanized, cosmopolitan youth. Educated, skilled, well-meaning people are the future. Their numbers will increase. And such people don’t go on rampage, impulsively yelling communal vendetta. They need workable issues. So a lot of rethinking for the RSS to do. To tone down the communal rhetoric. To blunt the edges of too sharp religious points in its machinery. To be inclusive. To be integrative. To be a nationalist is it necessary to be always howling against the real and supposed enemies? I’m proud of being a Hindu. But my love and strength of my faith is not dependent upon hate for some other religion.
Now the question arises who should I vote for in 2024 national elections? A major part of me prompts me to abstain from vote, to reject the call of election altogether. But that sounds too impulsive, a reaction over the happenings around. Pushing the NTA (none of the above) button seems a bit more deliberative choice. My local parliamentarian is a former Congressman who got smartly shifted to the BJP and won on Modi wave. Primarily my concern should be with him only because he is the representative of our aspirations. But he had failed us as a Congressman. How can he pass with a different tag? And again voting for him just on the spur of Modi wave would be impulsive and getting caught in the stampede. Whom should I vote than? I cannot see any answer on the basis of the above facts.
It leaves me with a bit more objective question: who should lead India? Beyond my deeply personal impulses, likes and dislikes. And I feel the name is Modi—with a bit of sadness though because we hardly seem to have an alternative.
I’m happy for Rahul Gandhi. At least he has come out of the sycophant group and is waking around to have a feel of real India. He is a far more effective leader now than earlier. The WhatsApp university that systematically prepares syllabus to lampoonize him should rethink now. People have come to know about it. With the passage of each year he will turn a more effective leader and I expect him to lead India some day.
Modi is a big international brand—a result of his own charismatic oratory, personal integrity and superhuman memory as well as the huge resources spent in polishing brand Modi. It’s a more globalized world than ever and the international image of a leader will have a big role in shaping national destinies. The ten years of brand Modi will indisputably keep fetching us international benefits for the next five years. He has the experience of leading the country through the toughest phases of pandemics, international wars and geostrategic shifts. He is the best shield for India outside the borders.
That leaves us with the internal situation which primarily niggles me much these days. The extremist itching of cultural and nationalist organizations—which fetch immediate political dividends at the cost of long-term social hazards—manifest too much under the rule of their political wing led by very strong leaders. The past is raked up to freshen up communal animosities. It gives votes but retards the development of a country. It works as shackles in the legs. Far too much time, resources and energies are spent in keeping the flames alive, countering and counter-attacking round the clock. There can be more affirmative, positive strategies. Why use the same, age-old divide and rule kind of strategy. Innovate and come out of it. Aren’t you the biggest political party in the world? Aren’t you expected to catch the fancy of the masses on the basis of 21st century issues instead of constantly holding us by the ears and made to learn my lessons from the past? Sanatan dharma accepts change, don’t worry. It will accept the modernist changes in your ideological books also, rest assured. That’s where you are different from those who still stick to the centuries old lines.
A political compulsion can tame the extremist talons of cultural and nationalistic organization. A coalition government is the answer. A government surviving on the support of its coalition partners. A government pushed and checked and balanced by a very strong opposition. I think Modi leading a coalition government enjoying just a thin majority is most suitable for the external and internal benefits of the country. I know they will keep trying to break away parliamentarians from opposition parties. It’s a well-established habit by now. The onus is on the rivals to keep their brood intact.
Stretched out of comfort, autocracy and egotism, a rainbow coalition led by Modi is best suitable for India in my humble opinion. The opposition won’t be a puny pushover. The media will have guts to represent facts and engage in healthy political debates. The minorities will regain some confidence that their parties have some numbers to raise their issues in parliament with effect. The sangh parivar will sulk a bit and stay toned down instead of getting hyperactive and yelling the same old slogans that have drilled holes in our ears. The government agencies will be led by the government but not manipulated to an extent of appearing a circus show.
Freed from the overloaded nationalistic chauvinism and unrealistic expectations of his patron organizations, Mr. Modi’s finest leadership qualities will shine nationally and internationally. All of us can feel the momentum that has been built and want it to be continued minus the super chauvinism that is naturally bred by an unshakable majority. I know it feels idealistic but why I shouldn’t hope for such a scenario if it helps me retain my faith in democracy and elections?
So dear readers, I come very near to decide my political choice for the 2024 national elections. Not everything should be laid bare. These are hard times, so playing a little cunning fox I would still keep my choice for the Haryana state assembly elections secret. I know I have expressed deeply personal political choices. But why get into secrecy if you have the responsibility of choosing the most effective leader for the country? And always remember, the most effective for the country has to be above personal impulses, likes and dislikes.
The meaning of democracy for me is to choose the most ‘effective’ leader for the country It’s never about the ‘best’ neta as per our likes, dislikes, expectations, security, insecurity. In national elections, I think we choose for the country not for ourselves. My individual likes and dislikes are more suitable for local elections. I have every right, at the cost of police action and the ire of his followers, to throw a lump of buffalo dung at a sarpanch election candidate who has worked against my interests. There it’s direct. Let it be an impulsive fight between two people who have a direct equation. You can draw courage for such action from slokas in Bhagwat Gita.
But for national elections we choose for the nation. Because the PM hasn’t stolen my buffalo, nor is he likely to do so in his tenure. So why should I turn his enemy when he doesn’t even know me? The only factor that is applicable in the equation between an individual and the PM is the constitutionality of a country head and a citizen. There is absolutely nothing else. So choose for the country because you are that country. Just like a drop is ocean itself.
From this yardstick I find myself a far bigger nationalist than any paper tiger, internet patriot yelling hate slogans on impulses, whims and fancies. Just because I don’t hate other religions doesn’t mean I’m a lesser sanatana dharmi than the executive chair holders of the so-called religious-cultural-nationalistic organizations. I’m proud to be what I am. And I’m confident of my political choice.
