By Obadiah Lamshwa Lamare
There is much to be said about the nature of things that influence us when we cast our votes on Election Day. It is sad that franchise has become a ritual for electing people to a job that requires no qualification and that has lost its weight and sanctity but there are a few things that need to be brought to our attention. Numerous articles and letters have discussed ideologies and a series of other things that pop up whenever elections are around the corner but the truth is that the things that really get elections going are swept under the carpet, maybe to remain polite or for other more compelling and dark reasons.
Money and muscle power are monsters but not the only ones. A conscientious society will dispel these. The real problem is much deeper than these. If one votes because one is paid/bribed to do so, it is not a political exercise; you may call it an economic venture. But, when one votes because of the things that one believes in, agrees or disagrees to, then one could be said to be exercising one’s political right. We will not dwell much on muscle and money power, it is the latter of the above that we will attempt to discuss. The fact that elections have a way of stirring raw emotions and even turning grown-ups into hormone raging teens is an amusing, but dangerous thing too, especially in a place which is ethnically divided.
Recordius E Kharbani (S.T, Feb 12, 2013 ) has rightly pointed out that proper and stable ideologies are yet to form in Meghalaya due to strong influences of tribal values and because class consciousness is yet to develop in the State. However, I would greatly disagree to assumptions that liken our situation to an egalitarian one (tribal egalitarianism or otherwise) for the simple reason that though class consciousness is yet to develop, economic inequalities here are becoming as grave as other places and class consciousness will eventually develop and stable ideologies will emerge, perhaps in a different form. But till such time we are left with the situation where ideologies remain fluid. Ideology is a system of beliefs and it need not be always rational. Those who are currently contesting elections represent and pursue interests reflective of ideologies. This should keep those critics that keep criticising them of being ideologically deficient quiet.
The interesting thing about our situation is that it does not seem to matter if the ideologies preached are incompatible with the principles of a liberal democratic state like India. These ideologies can also be publicly preached from the campaigning platform or sometimes even from the pulpit (courtesy liberal democracy which boasts of being tolerant sometimes even towards intolerance)! Therefore, anyone who has the time and luxury to read media trends in the pre-election period or even attend the rallies and meetings of the various parties and contestants, will find that apart from promising the moon, mudslinging and trying to white wash themselves there is a trend among the aspirants to always refer to the Two R’s – Race and Religion; and to vigorously stir up nationalistic sentiments, sometimes even at the cost of sounding fascist. Elements that Marx considered to be nothing more than elements of false consciousness are popular as hot cakes here. Parties do not shy from blatantly using ethnic and communal, even racist speeches crafting those in cordial and polite terms, carefully avoiding crass communalism. These are the most important ideologies as far as the people are concerned. They are rallied behind these two elements. Even when talking of issues that are relevant and important to the entire society like corruption and deceit of the representatives, the two R’s invariably come up. Great alchemists are the parties and contestants for they know when to use what element and in what proportion. Most of the promises are based on the issues of identity and conservatism.
There is nothing irrational about taking pride and treasuring one’s identity or observing one’s right of practicing one’s faith, the Constitution guarantees all these rights. The problem however is that moderate parties which try to reform themselves and become more inclusive are labelled as traitors or ‘ingkhong shyllangmat’. The erosion of traditional values and cultures is worldwide phenomenon, a result of unbridled globalisation; and it has to be pointed out that capitalism needs a disunited front to continue and prosper. However, the issues of identity and community have come up as the most urgent and sadly even the sole reasons that demand serious political participation of the masses in things that can only be termed as exclusivist politics. Anyone who studies natural history or evolution or basic psychology will come to terms with the fact that intelligent organisms exhibit their intelligence best through the process of adaptation to their surroundings. Only then can they survive and even contribute to their environment. Humans should be able to adapt, which means to coexist. Humans will therefore display their developed traits when they are able to not only coexist but also to participate inclusively in the society. Exclusivist politics will greatly retard this development. Then, don’t exclusivist inclinations reflect our own state of development? The other real danger is that the progressive forces are pushed to the corner and made to “volunteer silence”.
The middle class in Meghalaya shapes the politics not because of the numbers, but because it has benefitted from western education and the Indian State. The early political leaders of the state belonged to this class, the bulk of government servants and employees also fall under this category. Therefore, in the absence of a strong bourgeoisie, the Middle Class being educated and connected to a Liberal Democratic State is the progressive class. The parties and the contestants rely greatly on the middle class to sanction their agenda. However, writers like Poulantza have warned of the opportunism of the Middle Class and this is seen in our situation when it decides to remain quiet and not oppose irrational elements but tolerates communal sentiments.
Public opinion and even choice is greatly influenced by religious institutions. The Church (the unofficially dominant religious institution) does not issue diktats but certain incidents, for instance, when a group of pastors from a certain constituency vouched for and accompanied an aspirant so as to ensure that he receives a party ticket from a leading regional party, serve as good example of how the church distances itself from electoral politics. Some of the churches have taken positive steps as responsible associations to contribute in making the elections free and fair by appealing to their members to conduct themselves as responsible voters. However, most of us will be surprised that the pulpits also become platforms from where “Nationalism” is preached. A Nationalism that has much to do with race and exclusivism! The universal message of Christianity seemed to have taken a step back so as to accommodate certain pressing political agenda in some churches. Maybe S. Basumatary was right when reminding of the saying that blood (ethnicity) is thicker than baptismal water. Therefore, taking into account the fact that some of the most powerful churches have opened their pulpits for the preaching of the exclusivist gospel, it will be safe to say that they have in a great way enhanced the implications of both the two R’s.
These are but a few of the many ailments that plague our so called democratic traditions. These seem to have succeeded in making the people more accustomed to exclusivist politics. If the informed voter is one who is motivated to give her/his vote voluntarily on such primordial impulses, well-arranged and presented as ideologies then things do not look too bright. It seems that it is high time to start working towards alternatives which cater to the good and benefit of all, irrespective of the two R’s. There is hope because humans are rational. I would like to remind of the speech that Charlie Chaplin made in the movie ‘The Great Dictator’ (1940). After the movie tickled audiences to laughter, the speech moved them to tears: “You the people have the power… the power to create happiness… to make life free and beautiful, to make this life a wonderful adventure. Then in the name of democracy let’s use that power – let us all unite. Let us fight for a new world, a decent world that will give men a chance to work, that will give you the future and old age and security. By the promise of these things, brutes have risen to power, but they lie. They do not fulfil their promise, they never will. Dictators free themselves but they enslave the people. Now let us fight to fulfil that promise. Let us fight to free the world, to do away with national barriers, do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men’s happiness… in the name of democracy, let us all unite!”
I hope we act…and act responsibly when electing representatives so as to remind them that we are not a dumb, gullible and superfluous electorate.
[Obadiah Lamshwa Lamare is a research student in the Department of Political Science, NEHU]