The haters of the lalus, mulayams and mayawatis

These are all the big names on the horizon of the Indian political sky. The reason is not hard to find, for these people have mastered the art of winning elections in the hindi heartland and thus created a niche for themselves in the Indian politics. Although their success have been marred upon by charges of corruption, scandals, ill-governance , still they remain a rallying point for people in the rural India.In fact, it won't be an exagerration to say that they have been ruling the hearts of masses in these parts of the country for quite some time.
But the very mentioning of these names in urban India changes the colour of many a faces. You take these names and can see red faces, and u can easily read lines of hatred which perhaps provides the redness.Now just expand the discussion by involving some other names like Bofors case of Rajiv Gandhi, Babri case of Advani, tehleka case of Geroge Fernandes. The color changes from red to pale, and u can notice the u-turn that people take. They suddenly go on defensive mode from being offensive, and start to defend these leaders. Finally befor concluding the discussion, ask about the Bofors case of Amitabh Bachchan and TADA case of Sanjay Dutt. No facial expressions, but u can see eyes wide opened in disbelief. It is worth noting that all of these people have been accused of some wrongdoings, which might be true or might end up as one of political vendetta. However in the eyes of the people certain category of people are more defendable than others irrespective of their acts.If these were reactions of some rural people ,then it could have been attributed to their illiteracy or ignornace or some other biases. But the fact that it comes from the so called intelligensia and educated sections, it shows up their mental bankruptancy.


When we analyse the situation, it is clear that the hate and opposition these people face is not based on any principle, rather it is on some demographic factors which have caused the urban and rural divide. The urbans in this country have always considered themselves superior to the rural people and when this supremacy is challenged by likes of lalus, mulayams and mayawatis they retatliate by showing their hatred against them.Their background plays very heavily in the minds of people..They are not media savvy, didn't went to any elite colleges, have no fluency over english, don't dress well, don't attend page 3 parties and the worst part is their origins, they are from the lowermost sections of the society. Naturally this does not augurs well for people of the big cities. A laloo rising from nowhere to the power center raises some suspision,but a Rajeev Gandhi seated to the topmost post overnight is accepted without a single question. A lecture by laloo at IIMs is termed as a gimmick while a rath yatra by Advani is considered as a historical movement. A Mayawati fighting for the dalits and downtroddens is termed as casteist by those sections who have been responsible for opressing them!! A mulayam son getting ticket to lok sabha is termed as dynasty politics while the sons of Gandhis, pilots, scindias and deoras is promotion of youth in politics!!But when it comes to people like Sanjay dutt, who is convicted by the courts for some serious crimes, still urbanites are able to identify with them. Their elite background, their media image, their reputation takes precedence over their acts of omission and commission. and hence people show sympathies for them and others who fit into this category.

The hate is, in fact, not at these leaders, the hate is against the poor people from where they come from. The elites in this country give a damn to the poor and in fact derive pride from it. This explains the treatment we give to the sweepers and cleaners, they are denied the basic right of dignity. This is the legacy of feudalism from the British times, which has created mental barriers dificult to cross for elites. But the rural masses are crossing this barrier through the rise of their leaders and which makes them more hated than before.These leaders might not be the most qualified, but we are living in a democracy where quantity matters more than quality.Initially these leaders might have seemed to sound like rabble-rousers, but certainly they are much more than it. Their social engineering formula has benefited them a lot, but yes it has helped the society also in terms of creating social equality among different sections. and by hating people like them, who represnt the aspirations of rural masses, doesn't solve the problems. But a society which is deeply biased in favour of elites, this feeling of hatred is here to stay. and it doesn't surprises me to see what lage raho munna bhai did for sanju baba , the railways failed to do for Lalu.

Economic policies of Inequality.

The globalisation and liberalisation is the buzzword these days. With the demise of communism and subsequent rise of capitalism in stature, they are here to stay and no country can remain untouched by their mighty hands. The face of Indian economy too has undergone a vast change to suit it to the taste of globalisation. and currently everything seems to be working in our favour(even monsoons too). All the efforts of government are aimed at achieving the GDP growth rate, towards getting more FDIs to keep its economy in good shape. and of course it is upbeat about its achievement of meeting the desired growth rates as projected by international monetary agencies like world bank and IMF. The government is satisfied by getting full marks in its report cards from the reputed international agencies and is aggressively pushing forward its agenda of economic development as dictated by them.

But statistics are often misleading, this can be seen in the case of Indian economy. More than the rate of GDP growth, the suicide rate of farmers is increasing which was not happening even when there used to be droughts in the country. The most alarming is the increase in the economic ineqalities between different sections of society. No doubt, the economic growth is quite essential for the nation and to cope up with the problems like unemployment and inflation. but if this growth does not penentrtes to the bottom level of society, then it becomes useless and in fact it given rise to other problems which have ever-lasting effects. The benefits of this growth has not been reaped by everyone, in fact a vast section of population has remain untouched by it.These section includes people like farmers, labourers, daily wage workers, street vendors who constitute the majority of workforce of our country. They have remained unaffected by the wind of globalisation and in some cases they have paid the price of it also.

The current model of economic growth is flawed in many respects. Clearly the government policies policies are not only negligent, but also discriminatory. The creation of SEZs and entry of MNCs inretail industry are a point in the case. The promptness shown in creating SEZs is lacking when it comes to providing adequate compensations to the farmers whose land has been forcibly taken away for it. And any voice raised against it is oppressed using brtual force or money power. Similarly government has no concrete palns for millions of small retailers who will lose their livelihood as a result of entry of MNCs in this sector. Also the current model has failed to address the regional imbalances, it is lop sided in favour of metropolitans leaving the small towns in lurch.

The economic policies followed by successive governments have been responsible for this situaton. The euphoria behind the economic growth has already started to diminish. If these kind of economic policies are pursued then things will soon be out of control of anybody.In this model the rich becomes richer and poor becomes poorer and ultimately the society is divided into two classes- haves and haven'ts . This leads to birth of class struggles as stated by Marx. It will ultimately lead to social unrest will is highly detrimental to the proper functioning of democracy. As we know the kind of influence that money brings with itself will be a tough challenge to cope up with for the various establishments, especially in the current political set up where money plays an important role in decison making. In a democratic set up like ours, the economic equality is of paramount importance. otherwise world's largest democracy might end up as an oligacracy.