What Kills A Social Moment? Power Play or Ignorance

Even before the Hazares and the Ramdevs hogged the limelight, there were several others leading silent protests in different parts of the country.

Irom Sharmila is the first name that comes to mind, a lady on a fast-unto-death since 2000 against Armed Forces (Special Forces) Act in Manipur and other Northeastern states. Neither has the Media been too generous in showing her plight to the ignorant minds nor has the Centre sent anyone to talk to “the world’s longest hunger striker”.

Not even a veteran social activist like Medha Patkar of the Narmada Bachao Andolan could get the kind of “political mileage” these modern-day heroes, ranting against corruption, have garnered in recent days.

Are the causes raised by them more important than their contemporaries? How do we differentiate between one movement and the other? Why are we so moved by “highly publicized” media campaigns even as we turn a blind eye on those which fail to appear on social networks like Facebook?  

Media, surely, has a bigger role to play than just being a toy in the hands of wannabe social activists. For the aam aadmi it is virtually impossible to lead a social movement. And for large-scale public support one has to resort to social networks, media and PR (here, I mean Political Relations).

The Baba Ramdev Movement that started as a public outcry for justice apparently turned into a battleground for power. Too much politics at both ends killed the purpose. And that is my intention of writing this piece. What is the “purpose” of any movement? Not only waking up the Government and the masses from their long slumber, but also bringing “substantial changes” in the present social order. For any campaign to be successful it’s important for the leader to tread the political path with care, maintain complete transparency and credibility.

All those self-proclaimed “Gandhians” must not forget that Bapu’s conditions and his intentions for “Satyagraha” were reasonably different. Neither was the then Government our own, nor were we in a democracy.

Even after Independence, several have fasted to death for prominent issues like creating separate linguistic states. The recent death of a Swami fasting against illegal quarrying near Ganga in Haridwar and the lack of “political empathy” towards him has raised grave concerns on the thin line between social and political movements. By latter, I mean movements with political aspirations of an individual or group under camouflage of a social movement. What make a movement successful are the support it generates and also the final outcome.

Most of the movements in recent times have been state-centric, at least to the casual observer. However the anti-graft movements for black money and Lokpal have been of a different nature.

Anna Hazare, a veteran activist himself, may have got 360 degrees support from civil society members, former bureaucrats like Kiran Bedi and the Opposition. But the controversies surrounding other members of his Team and his noticeable differences with Baba Ramdev drifted away the attention from the real goal.

Both the Anna and Ramdev Movement, despite being lead by two distinct personalities, have come down to be counted as one.

“Power play” is the best word I get to explain my stand.

People coming in support of the two men gave more attention to the fact that the movements were essentially “anti-Congress” and failed to quantify the possibilities of some of the claims made. Now that one of the two is left with just “allegations” and no fruitful results, it needs to be seen what way does the Anna Movement takes us to.

With the Govt all set to go ahead with its draft of Lokpal Bill in the Parliament anytime next month, Hazare has announced  a “Second Independence Movement“ to call for a strong Lokpal Bill.

Now, this raises questions about the authenticity of “hunger strikes” itself. Is this theatrical approach to the issue avoidable? Can the Parliament like the politicians in power be “blackmailed” on the pretext of changing the socio-political order?

No doubt the issue is important and is in the benefit of common people. But there are things beyond this and until every individual partakes in chucking out the roots of corruption no movement can actually turn out to be totally social.

The saddest part is that people are least interested in what affects them the most- the politics of the country. Even a strong protest falls silent without proper “political care”. By politics I mean good leadership, accountability and a vision. Not the distorted version we are witnessing in an era of coalition politics.