Category Archives: Debates

Bad ideas, Debates, Government, Law

Reflections on a Genuflection to the Vox Populi by Subinay Inder Singh Bedi

3 Comments

The republic and the legislature look to the public for gauging the mood of the nation during the process of formulating laws that necessarily must tap into the prevailing moral sentiment and ethos of the day. Thus a law against child marriage might have been moot a half century ago, but a necessary devolution of current social perceptions. On such issues, public sentiment can guide, indeed force the hand of the legislature and judiciary to come down particularly heavily on one side of the fence. However, it is parochial of us to invoke the illegal and hare-brained claim that since democracy is popularly, rule of, for and by the people, a representative democracy is inherently bound to genuflect to populist opinion, a case in point being the recent debate over the Lokpal bill that at the time of writing was still raging and occupied prime placement amongst the media of the day.

Continue reading Reflections on a Genuflection to the Vox Populi by Subinay Inder Singh Bedi →

Debates, Movements, Politics, Theory

On Populism – A response to Partha and Aditya: Gyan Prakash

6 Comments

Guest post by GYAN PRAKASH

In following the discussion on the Anna Hazare phenomenon, I have found the references to populism very interesting.  In response to Partha, Aditya reminds us that populism should not be dismissed as non-political or anti-political. Partha clarified that he does not regard Anna Hazare’s populism as anti-political but as anti party-politics and anti government.  Team Anna narrowly defines politics as the domain of party politics and the government, which it then identifies with corruption. Om Puri’s rant and Kiran Bedi’s vaudeville performance expressed this sentiment.  Politics means netas, who are corrupt.  References to 2G, CWG, Kalmadi, and various land scams refer to politics in this sense.  Such a definition of politics allows the claim that the gathering at Ramlila was non-political or beyond politics.  Anna as a saintly Gandhian figure who does not seek office, and the status of Kiran Bedi and Kejriwal as civil society members, contributed to the representation that the mobilization of the “people” transcended politics.

Continue reading On Populism – A response to Partha and Aditya: Gyan Prakash →

Debates, Movements, Politics, Theory

Populism and the Anna Hazare Event: Swagato Sarkar

8 Comments

Guest post by SWAGATO SARKAR

I have been trying to make sense of the Anna Hazare event. I agree that it was historical, but was it a tragedy, or a farce? The swift exchange between Partha Chatterjee (PC) and Aditya Nigam (AN) and their reference to Ernesto Laclau and ‘populism’ have given me a familiar frame to enter into the debate around the event. Here, I will concentrate on the question of populism and its normative status. However, unlike PC and AN, I have got nothing to offer to ‘the Left’ (Independent or Dependent), because I am not a leftist, rather one who likes sitting on the fence on a nice arm-chair and this piece will perhaps bear an imprint of that position. Also, apologies are due to the readers of Kafila as I have not read, just browsed through, the two pieces written by Shuddhabrata Sengupta, which have been wildly popular – if Facebook is an indicator – and have been referred to by both PC and AN. Therefore, I might be repeating what Sengupta has already said.

Continue reading Populism and the Anna Hazare Event: Swagato Sarkar →

Centre watch, Debates, Government, Law, Mirror Worlds, Movements, Politics

Ten lessons of the fortnight that was: Jay Mazoomdar

15 Comments

Guest post by JAY MAZOOMDAAR

The 13-day blockbuster— peddled as the second freedom struggle, panned as irresponsible blackmailing, and a lot in between — is over. Anna Hazare accepted honeyed coconut water from two little girls, introduced to the crowd as a dalit and a Muslim, and went on to recuperate in one of India’s most expensive hospitals, one branded after Hindu spiritual literature at that.

News TV is still fighting the vacuum by flogging the debate – so much so that seasoned correspondents are chasing a rather dismissive Dr Naresh Trehan to unravel the mystery of Anna’s endurance. Biker gangs have gone into a sulk and roads at India Gate are looking safer for traffic and women (which is not saying much in Delhi). What is more, India has started taking note that too many Indians have meanwhile drowned in floods. Continue reading Ten lessons of the fortnight that was: Jay Mazoomdar →

Capitalism, Debates, Politics, Theory

Our Corruption, Our Selves: Arjun Appadurai

23 Comments

This is a guest post by ARJUN APPADURAI

Partha Chatterjee and Shuddhabrata Sengupta rightly argue that “corruption” is indeed a new Indian label for “the lives of others”. The East German Stasi also surely saw their vigilance as directed against the politics of “the enemies of the people”, except that in their case the state and the party were seen to contain all the good people, with the bad people choosing to remain in the unmobilized parts of civil society. Hence the pro-Hazare gatherings certainly have some of the disturbing echoes of mass rallies under Hitler and Stalin with the working and middle-classes adoring a mediocre and Chaplinesque figure who promises a new wave of moral cleansing. Continue reading Our Corruption, Our Selves: Arjun Appadurai →

Debates, Government, Identities, Mirror Worlds, Movements, Politics

The North-South Question in Punjab: Umair Javed

3 Comments

click to enlarge

‘Sayeen, ham nay toh kabhee 5,000 banday kaa jaloos bhi nahee nikaala. Siyaasat kay liyay aik laash kya, aik zakham bhi nahee hay hamaray paas toh. Aur aaj lag aisay raha hay kay hamaari dheemi dheemi baaton ko sun kar yay Punjab kay tukray karnay lagain hain’  (Sayeen, we’ve never taken out a rally with 5,000 people. Forget martyrs, we don’t even have a bruise to flaunt for political mileage. And today, it seems they’ve heard our whispers and taken them to heart. Today, they’re talking about splitting Punjab.)

While talking to a few last month, I realized that most independent Seraiki activists privately acknowledge that the issue of a new province, or at the very least, a wholesale recognition of Seraiki grievances, was a cause that could only be made actionable when the People’s Party thought it to be worthwhile – and 9 times out of ten, a cause’s worth for a national level party is determined by its weight in the electoral matrix.  Continue reading The North-South Question in Punjab: Umair Javed →

Bad ideas, Debates, Government, Movements, Politics, Theory

In the Ruins of Political Society – A Response to Partha Chatterjee

28 Comments

Partha Chatterjee’s post, following on Shuddha’s Hazare Khwahishein… is something of an eye-opener for me. I will not enter into a debate with him on his reading of Shuddha’s post as Shuddha and I have had our long online and offline exchanges and I have learnt immensely from these exchanges, even if a core of disagreement persists. I do think, however, that Partha is mistaken in thinking that this is the first time the question of corruption has been discussed on Kafila or elsewhere but since I am not interested in discussing that question here, I will leave that matter aside. I think I have said pretty much what I wanted to say on the movement and the myriad issues related to it and so I am no more interested in going over that territory all over again. Interested readers can see the Kafila archives if they so wish.

What has been an eye-opener for me is the way a certain other Partha Chatterjee has emerged, as soon as his theories were brought face to face with the hurly-burly of politics. The imprint of this other Partha is clearly evident in every word and sentence of this post, but most clearly in the concluding sentence where he claims that the indepdent Left has ‘its populist moment in Nandigram’. This sentence encapuslates the gist of our disagreements. It was this assessment that led Partha to write the essay, ‘Democracy and Economic Transformation‘ where, in some elliptical fashion, his own discomfort with popular politics  found expression. That is when he extended the definition of ‘political society’ to say that it was the sphere of ‘management of ‘non-corporate capital’ (of course, by capital and government). That Partha links his discomfort over the Anna Hazare movement to his discomfort over Nandigram, is in my view, a sign of the fact that his idea of ‘political society’ lies in ruins, that it collapsed at the precise moment of its encounter with the popular.

Continue reading In the Ruins of Political Society – A Response to Partha Chatterjee →

Bad ideas, Debates, Government, Law, Mirror Worlds, Technology

A fax about Anna: Dilip D’Souza

19 Comments

Guest post by DILIP D’SOUZA

Of course everyone has their own take on the movement that’s got us all talking. It raises passions, it polarizes, it shakes the powerful, on and on. I have immense admiration for what Anna Hazare has achieved: the outrage against corruption where we had indifference before, the outlet for such outrage, the renewed hope where we had cynicism before, the way his movement has shamed brazen politicians and forced an entire government to listen.

Yet the movement sometimes reminds me, of all things, of fax machines. Continue reading A fax about Anna: Dilip D’Souza →

Debates

Against Corruption = Against Politics: Partha Chatterjee

50 Comments

Guest post by PARTHA CHATTERJEE

Shuddhabrata Sengupta has done a great service by opening up the question of corruption which lies at the heart of the Anna Hazare movement but which has been, surprisingly, accepted quite uncritically as a universally known and universally condemned evil. It is actually quite puzzling how this effect has been achieved. It is a question which, I think, touches the core of the populist mobilization brought about by the Anna Hazare movement.

Think of it. Who are the beneficiaries of corruption? The entire middle class in India (lower, upper, aspirant lower to upper, whatever category one wants to use) seems to think that it is the victim of corruption. “It touches the lives of everybody”, as Nivedita Menon said in her recent piece in Kafila. But then who are the engineers, the accountants, the babus in the offices, the touts who surround the courts and the hospitals and the railway ticket counters? Aren’t they our uncles and nephews and sisters-in-law? The corrupt people of India are blood relations of those who are flocking Ramlila Maidan. But, needless to say, no one you meet there will accept that.

Continue reading Against Corruption = Against Politics: Partha Chatterjee →

Capitalism, Centre watch, Debates, Movements, Politics, Right watch, Scams

Are We Talking to the People Who Are Out on the Streets? – Kavita Krishnan

32 Comments

Guest post by KAVITA KRISHNAN  (Editor, Liberation)

The people saying ‘I am Anna’ or ‘Vande Mataram’ are not all RSS or pro-corporate elites. They’re open to listening to what we have to say to them about corporate corruption or liberalization policies. The question is – are we too lofty and superior (and prejudiced) to speak to them?

Throughout the summer, student activists of All India Students’ Association (AISA) and Revolutionary Youth Association (RYA) engaged in this painstaking exercise for months. They campaigned all over the country, in mohallas, villages, markets where there is no visible Left presence. No, these were not areas of ‘elite’ concentration – mostly middle, lower middle or working class clusters, or students’ residential areas near campuses. In most places, people would begin by assuming they were campaigners of Anna Hazare. When students introduced their call for the 9 August Barricade at Parliament, they would be asked, ‘What’s the need for a separate campaign when Anna’s already leading one?’ They would then explain that they supported the movement for an effective anti-corruption law to ensure that the corrupt don’t enjoy impunity. But passing such a law could not end corruption, which was being bred by the policies that were encouraging corporate plunder of land, water, forests, minerals, spectrum, seeds… They learnt to communicate without jargon, to use examples from the state where the campaign was taking place. They would tell people about the Radia tapes, and the role of the corporates, the ruling Congress, the opposition BJP, and the media in such corruption.

Continue reading Are We Talking to the People Who Are Out on the Streets? – Kavita Krishnan →

Bad ideas, Capitalism, Centre watch, Debates, Government, Left watch, Media politics, Mirror Worlds, Movements

Hazare, Khwahishein Aisi: Desiring a new politics, after Anna Hazare and beyond corruption

43 Comments

Hazare, khwahishein aisi, ke har khwahish pe dam nikle
bahut nikle armaan, lekin, phir bhi kam nikle

Hazare, so many desires, that every desire takes our breath away
so many hopes, and yet so few

(with due apologies, for liberties taken, to Mirza Asadullah Khan Ghalib, sometime poet and native of Delhi)

On the ninth of april, this year,  I wrote a posting on Kafila titled – ‘At the Risk of Heresy : Why I am not Celebrating with Anna Hazare Tonight‘. A little more than four months later, I have to say I have not yet found reasons to celebrate. But I am not in mourning either. What follows is my attempt to think this through, in all its contradictory character. For once, I am not even trying to be consistent. If my argument occasionally faces two directions at once, it is probably because I feel the needs to be double faced in order to understand a double-faced moment. When all the talk is only of the need for honesty, one might want to stake a claim to being double-faced, if only for the sake of breaking the moral monotony.

Continue reading Hazare, Khwahishein Aisi: Desiring a new politics, after Anna Hazare and beyond corruption →

Debates, Identities, Law, Mirror Worlds, Movements, Politics

The Lokpal debate from a Dalit-Bahujan perspective

12 Comments

The video above shows a protest in Delhi demanding a Bahujan Lokpal Bill, and protesting against Anna Hazare. This was hardly given any coverage in the media. The video was made and uploaded by KHALID ANIS ANSARI, who writes at the Round Table India:

A supra-parliamentary Jan Lokpal and a very interventionist and unaccountable judiciary are a horror for the dalit-bahujan masses. All said and done the legislature is most respectful of social diversity as far as the three organs of government are concerned. The executive is bad and the judiciary is the worst in this regard. So I am presently in favor of taking the ‘political’ route than the civil society one which is in any way a club of the chattering classes. [Read the full post]

Given below is a note expressing a Dalit-Bahujan perspective on the Lokpal debate. The note has been put out by DINESH MAURYA: Continue reading The Lokpal debate from a Dalit-Bahujan perspective →

Centre watch, Debates, Frontiers, Language, Mirror Worlds

A Response from the Harud Literature Festival

15 Comments

In response to the open letter expressing a set of concerns about the forthcoming Harud Literature Festival, the festival organisers have responded:

We wish to categorically state that the Harud literature festival is not government sponsored. It has been conceived with the intent of creating a platform for free and open debate, discussion and dialogue through contemporary narratives, literary fiction and poetry.

The festival seeks to showcase writing in urdu, kashmiri, dogri and english from the region and other Indian writers. We seek support for the spirit of the festival which is plural, inclusive and supports freedom of speech and expression. [Link]

Bad ideas, Centre watch, Debates, Left watch, Politics

Response to Gail Omvedt: Nirmalangshu Mukherjee

7 Comments

Guest post by NIRMALANGSHU MUKHERJEE

First of all I strongly object to the various insinuations posted in several comments. However, with due respect to a veteran activist, I think the older generation of left activists are by and large failing to come to terms with an unfamiliar form of protest in the IT-age. For them perhaps, Tahrir square looks full of promise at a distance from where all the finer dark spots get blurred; not so when it is happening in the neighbourhood.

The janlokpal campaign has three broad components: the core group with Anna in front, the bill itself, and the people. The Maoist campaign also has these components. There are serious problems with the first component in either campaign insofar as the condition of “democratic elections” are concerned. In the Maoist case, it is just an upper caste and largely upper class coterie of people thrust on the adivasis. The programme of proctracted war to establish “new democracy,” i.e., the second component, is also deeply flawed. Yet, the Maoist campaign is routinely advertised as a just campaign because it is supposed to be a people’s campaign driven by a people’s army. The current terminology is “bottom-up.” The reality of this proclamation is not the issue here, the structure of justification is. The Maoist campaign with its flawed first two components is justified because “people” have accepted and wanted them, contrary to fact as indicated. But the same commentators are terrified when the same structure is offered for the janlokpal bill. Or is it because Dandakaranya, likeTahrir Square, is safely remote while these “middle-class people” are dangerously close?

Continue reading Response to Gail Omvedt: Nirmalangshu Mukherjee →

Capitalism, Debates, Left watch, Movements, Politics, Right watch

What is right-wing about the anti-corruption movement? – Saroj Giri

7 Comments

Guest post by SAROJ GIRI

 

A draft for discussion

A ruling class contradiction is being played out as anti-corruption movement. It is however politically articulated as ‘a movement of the people’ with possibly a space for the left to intervene. Can the tide be turned against the right-wing upper classes?

“What we are witnessing (the anti-corruption movement) is nothing short of a revolution. Only on two earlier occasions in recent memory such grand scale people’s participation was recorded. The first was under Loknayak Jayaprakash Narayan in mid-seventies. The second was during the Ayodhya movement, in the early nineties, propelled by L K Advani’s historic Rath yatra.” This is the RSS Organiser magazine (August 21-28, 2011).

“The anti-corruption movement must resist repression in every form and align itself with the struggles for democratic transformation in India. Only then can it defeat the UPA Government’s efforts to defend corruption and unleash repression, and expose the BJP’s false claims of championing democracy and resisting corruption.” This is the CPIML Liberation (ML Update, 07-13 June 2011)

Continue reading What is right-wing about the anti-corruption movement? – Saroj Giri →

Bad ideas, Debates, Left watch, Mirror Worlds, Movements, Politics

The People

25 Comments

Not enough people are asking what is motivating people to go to Ramlila Maidan in such large numbers. People like Ghazala Jamil and Anish Ahluwalia are not asking this question because for them the whole thing is an elite, middle-class conspiracy that is anti-Dalit, anti-OBC, anti-Muslim, anti-justice, anti-equality, anti-peace, anti-love and anti-sex.

These saviours of the marginalised, the poor and the vulnerable make the point that Anna Hazare’s means are showing contempt for the people by not letting people’s chosen representatives delay anti-corruption measures. They are making the point that unless Anna Hazare’s movements takes up issues of land reforms and justice for Gujarat’s Muslims, he should not be supported.  Continue reading The People →

Bad ideas, Debates, Left watch, Mirror Worlds, Movements, Politics

Three Questions to Friends

7 Comments

I have been taking my time to reflect on the positions that have emerged in the fairly polarised debate on the on-going anti-corruption struggle in Delhi. I take very seriously the questions raised by critics on the right-wing inclinations evident in the movement’s leadershi, but I think it is both a strategic mistake and a disawoval of responsibility on the part of those of us on the left of the political spectrum to stay out of it. We should engage with the movement from the inside, strategically and persistently, and this means thinking afresh on the means by which we may support the larger binding issue with clear awareness of the risks involved. In this connection, I want to raise three questions:

First, when did we start to be so reluctant to acknowledge the fact that any civil social movement is bound to be contaminated by regressive positions and ideologies and so we cannot avoid thinking of ways of participating in them guided by awareness of the risks? I have recently been trying to collect narratives remembering the fourth national conference of the Indian women’s movement held at Kozhikode, Kerala, in 1990. The participants who spoke to me often pointed to a contrast between the dominant left parties who opposed the conference from the outside, and many, many groups who participated in the conference fully, but raised sharp criticisms which were quite like those of the former. They remarked that these critics were listened to with considerable respect because they were inside, unlike the dominant left.The participant who mentioned this, a well-known radical activist here, still remembers their arguments vividly. Another participant remembered sharp disagreements between urban feminists and rural participants on the question of justice to rape victims. While the former were opposed to the ‘solution’ of marrying the victim off to the rapist, a senior participant from a rural area who spoke up approved of it. This was shocking and unexpected to the urban feminists, but then purity of positions wasn’t, apparently, an overwhelming concern then — and at that place.

Continue reading Three Questions to Friends →

Debates, Movements, Politics

Tired of Democracy? – Gail Omvedt

38 Comments

This guest post comes from  GAIL OMVEDT

Why are such masses of people (apparently: in our village some came out for a morcha organized by the Maharashtra Navnirman Samiti) following Anna Hazre, when it is now clear that his Lokpal is an authoritarian, centralized and undemocratically pushed proposal?

Several articles, including those by Arundhati Roy and Aruna Roy, have made this clear by now.  I can find only one point to disagree with in the otherwise excellent article by Arundhati:  that, like the Maoists, the Jan Lokpal Bill seeks the overthrow of the state.  It does not.  The movement wants to keep the state, in an even more centralized form, but replace its current rulers with a new set.  And Ranjit Hoskote’s comment that “Anna Hazare’s agitation is not a triumph of democracy [but] a triumph of demagoguery” deserves to be remembered.  The increasingly authoritarian, even fascist forms of activities are disturbing even many of its supporters.

Continue reading Tired of Democracy? – Gail Omvedt →

Debates, Government, Law, Movements, Politics

The office of the Jan Lokpal and some thoughts on Nivedita Menon’s post: Anish Ahluwalia

12 Comments

Guest post by ANISH AHLUWALIA

The Jan Lokpal

A problem lies at the very core of Anna Hazare’s anti corruption campaign. This campaign wishes to march ahead by defining ‘corruption’ in the narrowest possible sense. Monies illegally made by politicians, members of judiciary, babus while remaining dreadfully silent on corporations, upper middle classes, middle classes who form the bulk of bribe payers…

Continue reading The office of the Jan Lokpal and some thoughts on Nivedita Menon’s post: Anish Ahluwalia →

Debates, Law, Left watch, Movements, Scams

A Great Opportunity, A Serious Danger: A Statement

24 Comments

A Statement Issued by some individuals and friends in social movements

The Anna Hazare situation invites two common reactions: many dismiss it as a middle class driven “urban picnic”; and others, notably the mainstream media, describe it as just short of a revolutionary movement to establish “people’s power.” The same divide exists among progressives and those concerned with social change. Strategies differ on the basis of where one stands on this divide. The problem, however, is that neither of these reactions fully reflects the reality of what is happening.

Continue reading A Great Opportunity, A Serious Danger: A Statement →

Bad ideas, Culture, Debates, Politics

Anna’s ‘Second Azadi Movement’ via Satyakam and Rang De Basanti

7 Comments

At first Anna reminded me of this very unreasonable, uncompromising, ‘dry honest’ (a delicious Indianism, I guess) character of Satyakam in the eponymous film created by Hrishikesh Mukherjee in the late Sixties. He is so pathologically and pathetically honest that he does not even borrow the chair from the office downstairs when his boss, Sanjeev Kumar visits him. Dharmendra climbs stairs to meet Sanjeev Kumar at his residence only after having finished his work.

Transposed in the current scenario, the equation would be something like this:

Sanjeev Kumar = any one of us; Anna = Dharmendra. Historically of course we know that only Gandhi could be Gandhi, and not even Nehru could ever aspire to that special position in the people’s hearts even while we remind ourselves that a whole mass of little (good, bad, ugly) Gandhis contributed to the making of the one and only, most famous, Gandhi. Continue reading Anna’s ‘Second Azadi Movement’ via Satyakam and Rang De Basanti →