Changing the System

Shivam Shankar Singh’s book, How to Win an Indian Election, looks at attempts to change the political system. He cites the experience of Irom Sharmila, the human rights activist from Manipur who had fasted for 16 years against army atrocities:

“Seeing that her fast had failed to achieve anything other than international awards and media coverage, she decided to… contest the state elections.”

She got just 90 votes. Yes, just 90. Not a typo:

“It was disheartening to realize that people who had dedicated their lives to serving others did not even get votes from the people whom they directly helped.”

Ouch!

Perhaps it was Sharmila’s political inexperience that was the problem? Singh next looks at Prodyut Bora from Assam. He was a part of the BJP, but quit it to form a new party, LDP. He had been on the inside of how elections work, and tried to factor for it. How did he fare? The lack of money led to a crushing defeat:

“(It) was a case study in why new idealistic parties don’t work, even when politically experienced and capable individuals head them.”

Others, like Dr. JP in Andhra in 2006, had a depressing experience when they tried to turn popular movements into political parties:

“Some of the party’s supporters have expressed the belief that they achieved more in terms of actual reform… when they operated as a movement than… they operated as a political party.”

Why? Because as a party, they had so few seats that they were inconsequential. Whereas a popular movement that caught public attention can sometimes have disproportional impact on policy!

The exception to all this is, of course, Arvind Kejriwal and AAP. A party formed on top of the Anna Hazare led movement, the party got enough seats to form the government in Delhi. Initially, there were lots of missteps in figuring how to govern within the constraints of the system. There were power struggle upon winning leading to the ouster of leaders like Yogendar Yadav and Prashant Bhushan. Bit by bit though, AAP seems to have learnt things:

“Since 2015, the Delhi government has been able to enact reforms in health, education and service delivery to citizens.”

That’s why they got re-elected recently.

So yes, it will be an uphill struggle:

‘There will be parties who base their electoral strategies on pitting communities against one other… some would use religion, some would use caste, some would use language.”

And no, the nexus between parties and companies won’t go away. Those who benefit from the current system of often deliberate inefficiencies and favours are firmly entrenched. And yet, it is key to fight the good fight:

“It is extremely important for the nation that educated people who want to do something positive for the country enter politics, but it is also extremely important that they know what they are getting into.”

And one will need patience. Lots and lots of it:

“The conclusion that I’ve come to is that anyone who wants to do anything positive in politics has to be willing to stick with it for a long time without expecting results… It is only when the number of people who want widespread systemic change builds to a critical mass that positive change will happen.”

Because when that moment arrives, we need enough of “qualified, well-meaning people” to be in positions of influence.