:: P.C. Alexander

Political leadership has lost moral dimension

P.C. Alexander

Augest.26 : One of the significant results of the general elections 2009 is that it has exposed the weaknesses of the political leadership in various parties, both national and regional. For most political parties, this is the season for introspection and many parties have been engaged in exercises like chintan baithak, reviews by the high commands or core groups of the parties. While self-analysis is useful, it will be a great mistake if it does not cover some basic factors which have contributed to the election debacle of some of these parties. Political parties are relatively new in India and frankness in self analysis and readiness to correct the mistakes of the past are indispensable for building a healthy party system in any country. Before I identify some of the basic factors which should engage the priority attention of political leaders, a brief reference to the evolution of political leadership in the country will be necessary in order to assess the extent of the decline which political leadership has undergone in recent years.

The founding of the Indian National Congress in 1885 can be said to be the first step in the development of political leadership in India. However, political leadership had its real origin only with the advent of Mahatma Gandhi on the political scene in 1915. Gandhiji, besides transforming the Congress into a party of the common people of the country, had brought about radical changes in the concept of political leadership. The greatest change introduced by Mahatma Gandhi was to give political leadership a moral dimension. While the liberation of India from the colonial yoke of the British became the main agenda of the Congress Party, he insisted that the means for achieving the end should always be as clean as the end itself. Gandhiji's other important contribution to redefining of the concept of political leadership was that power was to be used for the service of the people by the leaders and not for personal benefits or for favouring those close to them.

Gandhiji did not stop with inspiring the rise of a new class of eminent national leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, Rajendra Prasad, Maulana Azad, Rajagopalachari and others at the top, but he had created a network of political leadership in every province, district and even at village levels. Unfortunately, the strict moral dimension insisted upon by Gandhiji for leadership in politics did not last very long. A new class of political leaders started emerging both at the Centre and the states for whom power was the "be all" and "end all" of political activities. In this process, corruption started creeping into politics, bringing great discredit to the political class as a whole.

While wrong selection of candidates, alliances with wrong parties and leaders or malpractice in elections like massive use of money and muscle power would have contributed to the defeat of some candidates at the polls, it would be a great folly on the part of the political leaders if they fail to understand the true impact of certain developments which have been taking place during the last few years in India. I will identify a few which I consider as very important.

The first is that the people of India whether literate or illiterate have been rejecting extremism either of the Left or of the Right in political ideologies. This is not a new lesson. The failure of the Hindu Mahasabha, one of the oldest political parties in India and of the various Left parties which have adopted Communism as their ideology, in their attempts to get a substantial share of the votes polled in the elections had clearly established this fact. The Bharatiya Janata Party's alliance with extremist political groups like the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Bajrang Dal and the people's reaction at Varun Gandhi's warning about cutting the hands of the enemies of Hinduism have reinforced the truth that the average Indian doesn't like the politics of extremism. The humiliating defeat of the Left parties in 2009 elections has again served to prove that there is very little interest in this country for any extremist ideology.

The second lesson is that there is no substitute for good governance for winning the trust of the people. Some political parties have tried to explain their poor performance in the elections by claiming that the anti-incumbency factor has been responsible for their election reverse. They conveniently forget that anti-incumbency did not stand against the re-election of their governments in states where the people were satisfied with the governance they had received after the earlier elections.

Thirdly, a political party can hope to get the votes of the people only if there is an active unit of that party led by political leaders elected by the party members in the constituency. Many political parties are active at the headquarters of the party, but a vacuum of leadership exists at the constituency level. Top leaders of the party may descend on the constituency by helicopters and special planes and address vast gatherings who shout slogans in their support, but such slogans can be converted into votes for the party candidate only if there is a democratically-elected and active party leadership in the constituency. In many states the party units in the constituency go into action, if they exist at all, only at the time of the election campaign. People may attend such gatherings in large numbers and demonstrate their enthusiasm for a party, but often such demonstrations are "command performances" where money and not loyalty to the party is the driving force.

Fourthly, no political party can survive in any democracy unless all members of the party are willing to observe the discipline of the party. Nothing can cause more demoralisation in the rank and file of the party than when they see indiscipline at the top levels. Many party leaders seem to be forgetting the truth of the dictum that those who do not learn to obey cannot learn to command either.

P.C. Alexander is a former governor of Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra