
The waves of jubilations across the length and breadth of India on Anna’s ‘victory’ is as effusive as it is infectious. There is an overwhelming ‘sense of relief’ after the ‘sense of the House’ resolution was passed by both the Houses of the Parliament. Whether the victory is real or imagined, partial or pyrrhic, it may be too premature to tell. But I have a new warmth in my heart post the hope-igniting debate by our elected representatives on the Lokpal Bill.
The man at the centre of the anti-corruption crusade, the redoubtable, 74-year old Anna Hazare, is being heaped with praise and showered with accolades for not only correctly reading the pulse of the masses, but also for the strength of his resolve and the force of his convictions. The man on the street totally identified himself with this dhoti-clad, Gandhi-cap wielding frail man, who seemed more as an anna-chronism and a misfit in the modern society than a messiah he is being regarded as now. The ‘I am Anna’ slogans on the lips of young and old alike, on T-shirts and caps, as tattoos and badges are a testimony to that.
Nevertheless, he has also been criticized as being too intransigent and unnecessarily obdurate. He is accused of following “it’s my way or the highway” approach, not budging a wee bit from his position and not willing to take the viewpoint of others. Some people are also alarmed that he has set a ‘dangerous precedent’ of blackmail tactics with his indefinite fast and rabble-rousing style of protests. There is a grain of truth in all these allegations.
But I want to put all this in perspective. Let me start by quoting George Bernard Shaw : “The reasonable man adapts himself to the conditions that surround him... The unreasonable man adapts surrounding conditions to himself... Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
Were it not for the unconventional dose of disagreeability of a few, the earth would still be flat, the sun would still revolve around it, we would still be collecting firewood and we would still be making our journeys on horsebacks or bullock-carts. Still.
We all encounter unreasonableness in our daily lives. Hasn’t your wife or husband or child given you a hard time with their onerous demands once in a while ? Isn’t your boss too tough on you at times ? If you’re in sales like me, haven’t you encountered customers who are very exacting ? But for the unreasonableness of the people around us, we wouldn’t know what makes our loved ones happy, we wouldn’t perform better in our jobs and we wouldn’t offer better products and services to our customers. Life would just be status quo.
And then again, reasonableness is both relative and contextual. What seems fair to me would appear to be unfair to you; what looks unacceptable today would be perfectly tolerable tomorrow.
Back to the anagram called Anna. His indefinite fast which began on August 16 had a clear-cut demand to the Government – pass my version of the Jan Lokpal Bill, presumably in toto, latest by August 30th, or else…..To many, this was a ‘maximalist’ position, akin to putting a gun on somebody’s head and threatening to pull the trigger if his orders were not complied with. Was that fair ? Remember that Anna has been fighting for this cause for several years, if not decades, and this measure was a last resort after a series of attempts to push for a strong Bill for the institution of an Ombudsman fell short of their objectives. But who was Anna doing this for, and for what gains ? He has no family, no progeny, ostensibly no political affiliations and he is in the twilight of his life. So all he is trying to do is to make things better for you and me, and for a brighter future of his beloved country. He is willing to put his own life on the line, while always emphasizing non-violence, for the selfless service to the society.
When Mahatma Gandhi started his ‘Quit India’ movement, coincidentally also launched in the month of August, I am sure our British masters, who were embroiled in World War II at the time, would have not only thought of him as being hugely pigheaded and inconsiderate, but also out of his mind. However, Gandhiji only hoped to bring the British to the negotiating table and put pressure on them for the independence of India through his struggle.
Anna had declared war on corruption. And all is fair in war and love. The ground reality was that he was negotiating with an insensitive Government, with whom he had developed a huge trust deficit after a string of empty promises and failed assurances. Anyone who has been on a negotiating table knows that it’s a good strategy to start the parleys with a higher ground than what you want to ultimately settle for, and then give in one little smidgen at a time till you arrive at a mutually agreeable solution. I do not know whether Anna deliberately deployed this strategy, but this is exactly how it panned out. From an extreme position of passing of his version of the Bill within 15 days, all what he got was a ‘resolution’ (not a commitment) to consider three of his main recommendations in the proposed Lokpal Bill, already introduced by the Government in the Parliament. This was a much diluted offer on the table than the original bid, but which Anna ultimately accepted. So Anna, who appeared to be totally unyielding at first, happened to be quite flexible after all.
In this whole unprecedented tug-of-war, I feel there are no losers. Whether there will be an effective Lokpal Bill, which will truly benefit the long-suffering people of the country, remains to be seen. But this 24x7 drama of a little over 12 days has elated me in many ways. Firstly, because I feel the citizens of the country showed a tremendous sense of awakening, maturity and unity through their peaceful, yet persistent support to the Anna Hazare movement. Secondly, the media played a catalyst role, not only through its relentless coverage of the issue, but also by launching their own anti-corruption campaigns. Thirdly, and most hearteningly, the Parliament and our elected representatives finally heard the voice of their people, rose to the occasion and did what was the right thing to do, without compromising on either the Constitution or the ‘supremacy of the Parliament’. The world’s largest Parliamentary democracy is not only alive and kicking, but also very vibrant !
Call Anna an obstinate old man, and it will not be far from the truth, yet it is due to his unremitting ways that today we have a real hope of tackling the menace of corruption in our everyday lives. Don’t get me wrong, I am neither advocating unreasonable behavior at all times, nor subscribing to recourses such as indefinite fasts as a means of protest. I am all for logical, rational and commonsensical dialogues and debates as the preferred way of resolving any thorny issue. But when you feel very strongly about something, you must be uncompromising and unbending in your values and beliefs. The ‘chalta hai’ attitude has to change to ‘nahi chalega’ mindset. This is what the key lesson is, amongst several others, from Anna Hazare’s Jan Lokpal Bill movement.
Thank you Anna for being unreasonable. We need a hazaar Hazares like you.
The man at the centre of the anti-corruption crusade, the redoubtable, 74-year old Anna Hazare, is being heaped with praise and showered with accolades for not only correctly reading the pulse of the masses, but also for the strength of his resolve and the force of his convictions. The man on the street totally identified himself with this dhoti-clad, Gandhi-cap wielding frail man, who seemed more as an anna-chronism and a misfit in the modern society than a messiah he is being regarded as now. The ‘I am Anna’ slogans on the lips of young and old alike, on T-shirts and caps, as tattoos and badges are a testimony to that.
Nevertheless, he has also been criticized as being too intransigent and unnecessarily obdurate. He is accused of following “it’s my way or the highway” approach, not budging a wee bit from his position and not willing to take the viewpoint of others. Some people are also alarmed that he has set a ‘dangerous precedent’ of blackmail tactics with his indefinite fast and rabble-rousing style of protests. There is a grain of truth in all these allegations.
But I want to put all this in perspective. Let me start by quoting George Bernard Shaw : “The reasonable man adapts himself to the conditions that surround him... The unreasonable man adapts surrounding conditions to himself... Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
Were it not for the unconventional dose of disagreeability of a few, the earth would still be flat, the sun would still revolve around it, we would still be collecting firewood and we would still be making our journeys on horsebacks or bullock-carts. Still.
We all encounter unreasonableness in our daily lives. Hasn’t your wife or husband or child given you a hard time with their onerous demands once in a while ? Isn’t your boss too tough on you at times ? If you’re in sales like me, haven’t you encountered customers who are very exacting ? But for the unreasonableness of the people around us, we wouldn’t know what makes our loved ones happy, we wouldn’t perform better in our jobs and we wouldn’t offer better products and services to our customers. Life would just be status quo.
And then again, reasonableness is both relative and contextual. What seems fair to me would appear to be unfair to you; what looks unacceptable today would be perfectly tolerable tomorrow.
Back to the anagram called Anna. His indefinite fast which began on August 16 had a clear-cut demand to the Government – pass my version of the Jan Lokpal Bill, presumably in toto, latest by August 30th, or else…..To many, this was a ‘maximalist’ position, akin to putting a gun on somebody’s head and threatening to pull the trigger if his orders were not complied with. Was that fair ? Remember that Anna has been fighting for this cause for several years, if not decades, and this measure was a last resort after a series of attempts to push for a strong Bill for the institution of an Ombudsman fell short of their objectives. But who was Anna doing this for, and for what gains ? He has no family, no progeny, ostensibly no political affiliations and he is in the twilight of his life. So all he is trying to do is to make things better for you and me, and for a brighter future of his beloved country. He is willing to put his own life on the line, while always emphasizing non-violence, for the selfless service to the society.
When Mahatma Gandhi started his ‘Quit India’ movement, coincidentally also launched in the month of August, I am sure our British masters, who were embroiled in World War II at the time, would have not only thought of him as being hugely pigheaded and inconsiderate, but also out of his mind. However, Gandhiji only hoped to bring the British to the negotiating table and put pressure on them for the independence of India through his struggle.
Anna had declared war on corruption. And all is fair in war and love. The ground reality was that he was negotiating with an insensitive Government, with whom he had developed a huge trust deficit after a string of empty promises and failed assurances. Anyone who has been on a negotiating table knows that it’s a good strategy to start the parleys with a higher ground than what you want to ultimately settle for, and then give in one little smidgen at a time till you arrive at a mutually agreeable solution. I do not know whether Anna deliberately deployed this strategy, but this is exactly how it panned out. From an extreme position of passing of his version of the Bill within 15 days, all what he got was a ‘resolution’ (not a commitment) to consider three of his main recommendations in the proposed Lokpal Bill, already introduced by the Government in the Parliament. This was a much diluted offer on the table than the original bid, but which Anna ultimately accepted. So Anna, who appeared to be totally unyielding at first, happened to be quite flexible after all.
In this whole unprecedented tug-of-war, I feel there are no losers. Whether there will be an effective Lokpal Bill, which will truly benefit the long-suffering people of the country, remains to be seen. But this 24x7 drama of a little over 12 days has elated me in many ways. Firstly, because I feel the citizens of the country showed a tremendous sense of awakening, maturity and unity through their peaceful, yet persistent support to the Anna Hazare movement. Secondly, the media played a catalyst role, not only through its relentless coverage of the issue, but also by launching their own anti-corruption campaigns. Thirdly, and most hearteningly, the Parliament and our elected representatives finally heard the voice of their people, rose to the occasion and did what was the right thing to do, without compromising on either the Constitution or the ‘supremacy of the Parliament’. The world’s largest Parliamentary democracy is not only alive and kicking, but also very vibrant !
Call Anna an obstinate old man, and it will not be far from the truth, yet it is due to his unremitting ways that today we have a real hope of tackling the menace of corruption in our everyday lives. Don’t get me wrong, I am neither advocating unreasonable behavior at all times, nor subscribing to recourses such as indefinite fasts as a means of protest. I am all for logical, rational and commonsensical dialogues and debates as the preferred way of resolving any thorny issue. But when you feel very strongly about something, you must be uncompromising and unbending in your values and beliefs. The ‘chalta hai’ attitude has to change to ‘nahi chalega’ mindset. This is what the key lesson is, amongst several others, from Anna Hazare’s Jan Lokpal Bill movement.
Thank you Anna for being unreasonable. We need a hazaar Hazares like you.
Endpiece : Honest disagreement is often a good sign of progress. - Mohandas Gandhi