Patricia Mukhim
Meghalaya has voted. Social media statuses are updated with inked forefingers. And everyone is happy that they have exercised their franchise and been part of what the Election Commission calls the Dance of Democracy. So this article is actually passé and just a reflection of the “Never say Die,” attitude of Indians, us in Meghalaya included. Hope indeed springs eternal in the human breast. Promises have been made by candidates, including the preposterous one from the Shillong BJP candidate who threatens suicide if the Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAB) is passed. Desperate times call for desperate measures and this is a desperado speaking.
Well, voters in Meghalaya have decided who they want as their MPs depending on their ability to critically assess the candidates and, hopefully, to make selection on the basis of an informed choice. Others have voted for personal reasons. The second category far exceeds the so-called thinking class and conscientious voters. In any case, people’s voting behaviour is most unpredictable. There is no single tested formula yet to measure voter behaviour and what tilts the balance in favour of a Party or candidate. There are different ways in which people decide who to vote for. Some discuss within the family but don’t agree on a common candidate. Others discuss with their peers and social groups about the better candidate. So there are a whole range of emotions involved before actually vote. And no, people don’t usually vote rationally and least of all intellectually as exhorted by the learned panellists in their discussion two days ago. There are plenty of studies out there by scholars and political analysts which assert categorically that people across the world vote on emotions. Drew Westen a psychologist and psycho-analyst in his book, ‘The Political Brain: The Role of Emotions in Deciding the Fate of The Nation’ says, “The political brain is an emotional brain. It is not a dispassionate calculating machine… The participants in Drew Westen’s study included bright, educated, and politically aware people across age groups. And yet, he says, “They thought with their guts”.
Westen challenges sceptical readers who insist on ranking intellect high above emotions. Pointing out to the American election that voted Trump, as a striking example Westen says, “It is puzzling that so many voters elect Republican candidates who then enact laws that truly benefit only a tiny percentage of the country’s wealthiest elite, while bringing about disastrous economic problems for the vast majority of Republican voters. One answer to this enigma seems to be the emotionally determined, irrational attitudes voters have to economic issues.
The only purpose for writing this article is because elections are the current topic of discussion and will be until May 23 when we will know who the best dancer in this Dance of Democracy is. But one thing is for sure. Candidates are definitely not elected because of their virtuosity; their erudition and their ability to deliver development. Increasingly we find that candidates that try to address issues which benefit the larger population nearly always lose the next election. Those that serve the personal needs of their constituents win regularly and are called good constituency managers. Unfortunately the thinking class indulge in the original sin of believing that elections are won or lost on issues. Look at the BJP’s manifesto this time. It’s bland and inspires no confidence. It promises little and will try and ride the waves of nationalism as opposed to a promise – all manifesto of the Congress Party.
Perhaps the BJP has done its homework and is wary of tall promises lest they come to haunt it in the next election. What the BJP promised in 2014 remains vacuous. Perhaps that is what also pushes the BJP on a dogged pursuit of a strident Hindutva agenda and now a nationalistic fervour that threatens to push those that do not subscribe to hardcore masochistic militarism into a corner to be labelled as anti-national and even pro-Pakistani. It does not have to be this way does it? When our choices and our personal and public expressions are posited as binaries much like the favourite Bush junior’s phrase after 9/11 – ‘those who are not with us are against us,’ then the nation stands polarised.
But the BJP knows its constituents. Many of them are parroting the phrase, “Nation First.” National pride is today a platform that the BJP is riding on. Young Indians are made to feel a sense of pride in their nation. And why not? That is a necessary emotion. We cannot be deprecating India at every given platform, but, neither should we be forced to wear our nationalism/ patriotism on our sleeves. Also the BJP has a huge chunk of ideological fans who will continue to bat for the Party come what may. They will deflect all and any criticism against the Party and point to the response of the Modi-led NDA Government to the continued needling by Pakistan and its subversive warfare on India. Many even among the thinking class believe that India is becoming a world power by putting Pakistan in its place through the Balakot strike and the recent anti-satellite (ASAT) launch. Human development and the unemployment crisis seem to have receded to the background. Even the alleged scam in the Rafale aircraft deal seems to have run its course.
Closer home, sitting MP, Vincent Pala has turned the electoral debate into a laundry list of achievements in the past ten years. As alleged by a letter writer in this paper, he even claimed credit for projects that were pursued with singular zeal by the state government. To take up development projects for Meghalaya is what Mr Pala is elected for and also why he is paid a salary, no matter how modest when compared to his private earnings. An MP has obligations to the people and the state and in pursuing that agenda he does no one any favour. Only when an MP goes out of the way to push a Private Member’s Bill or is part of the NE MP’s Forum to take up issues that affect the region as a whole, can he can actually claim credit to have gone beyond the call of duty. I cannot recall any such issue.
The last time when the Ksan Mine incident happened, some of us tweeted that Mr Pala should have raised the issue in Parliament about the perfunctory rescue operations and weak-kneed response from the state government. We expected him to draw national attention to the poorly executed rescue operations by forcing the central government to put together a well co-ordinated team comprising the army, navy and air force as well as companies like Kirloskar Brothers that have the capacity to supply the pumps for dewatering the mines and the National Institute of Hydrology for comprehensive hydrological mapping of the mines. In fact Mr Pala had himself stated that dewatering the mines is a technique well known to the mine owners but he never attempted to put together such an action plan. And Mr Pala did push in a Private Member’s Bill but that was only to appease the mine owners. He pleaded in Parliament that rat-hole mining be regularised and the ban on mining be lifted. This is an utterly selfish agenda, not expected of an MP representing the entire Shillong parliamentary constituency and not just a few hundred mine owners. If voters were to think a little more intensely on these points, they might not be inclined to vote Mr Pala for a third term.
Coming to Mr Pala’s closest adversary Dr Jemino Mawthoh, the feeling among a section of voters is that the stand of the UDP which is a part of the NPP-led MDA Government is ambiguous and misleading. The CAB has exposed the dichotomies among the partners of the ruling MDA government including the NPP. People wonder what seating arrangement will be made for Dr Mawthoh in Parliament, as an Independent MP. Parliament is all about lobbying. Independent MPs will have a tough time lobbying in a House of 543 elected members. In the Tura seat where the NPP and Congress are vying for the seat, the NPP is a constituent of the BJP so Agatha Sangma at least has a lobby group behind her but whether she is able to actually lobby for anything is the question. She was tried and tested and found wanting. Her rival Dr Mukul Sangma has the Congress Party to back him in the House and he can be expected to raise his voice in Parliament should the Congress be in the Opposition and to raise the pitch for the holistic development of the State of Meghalaya.
But if as stated by Drew Westen voters are led by emotions so the virtues of the candidate are of no consequence. The winner will ultimately be a tear jerker – one adept at emotional blackmailing. Other things don’t really matter.
