Yet, I was not offended when flags were seen everywhere during the anti-corruption drive in India last month. Anna Hazare was its hero and we went through 11 supercharged, back to back, all-nighters with flags festooned, buckled and hoisted on every available space. That still did not manage to upset me: in fact, I rejoiced in their display.
What happened to my political correctness? Was I always a red-necked nationalist?
Who knows, I might well be one; but, flag waving, notwithstanding, the body-to-body crush around me did not a fascist mob make. If anything, the mood was for greater democratic transparency. Nor did those flags express the sentiment “my country, right or wrong”. In fact, the protesters saw more things wrong than right with their country. That well and truly nixes the jingoistic option.
Why then were those flags billowing in the wind?
It took me a while but I soon realized that the flags did not signal bigotry or domination over anybody, but a symbol of independence. Jawaharlal Nehru, our first prime minister, said just that when he introduced the flag to the nation 63 years ago. But independence this time was not from a foreign power, but from the native political class that had overseen misrule and corruption for decades. On occasion, the flags seemed like deities of an ancestral rite calling back citizenship from the world of the dead.
True, the Anna Hazare-led anti-corruption movement attracted people from all classes, but it appealed most to the young, and with good reason. Economic liberalization has raised ambitions in them but many still need patrons to get ahead. So if they should find themselves without a job, the issue of corruption becomes tied directly to their livelihoods.
Perhaps one could live peaceably as an independent farmer, but that is one occupation people are running away from. Already about 45.5 percent of the village economy is non-agricultural and growing. as you read. This explains the huge rise in literacy from a mere 18 percent in 1951 to 74.4 percent today. Private school enrollment has also grown from just 2 percent nationwide in 1980 to approximately 51 percent in urban India and about 20 percent in the villages. Many families drastically tighten their financial belts to pay the tuition fees.
Through all of this, one number has remained static. For the past several decades, employment in the organized sector has remained at a measly 27 million or so. Even the much-discussed information technology services employs just 3 million people. How many more zeroes must we add to these numbers to make them halfway respectable in a country of over 1 billion?
Where, then, will job seekers go to, other than to the informal employment sector? Nearly 93 percent of India’s labor force, some with high school degrees, works in these places. But once inside their grimy walls, stone-hearted contractors and crooked employers take over.
Can higher education help? Other than those who are the very best and get to the few institutions of repute and excellence, for the rest a college education involves bribes and capitation fees. So whether it is getting a job or a university degree, corruption is near at hand, ready to be greased.
This is why Anna Hazare has captured the imagination of the young.
At 74 years of age and a stubborn advocate of a low-maintenance life, Anna is a most unlikely candidate to be the youth icon. But there he is, on top of the charts, simply because he is seen as incorruptible. If he is adored by so many, who are the people opposing him?
First, and most obviously, chartered members of the political class who find the public sympathy behind the anti-corruption movement very threatening. Second, a few kept intellectuals in government committees who are dependent on politicians for their appointments and perks. Together they hope legalese will keep Anna at bay. Third, a small number of people who have a revulsion to crowds.
The last set of Hazare critics are members of the politically correct class, and I was once one of them. They are mad at Mr. Hazare for stealing their thunder. Who is this man, they ask? A village patriarch! A temple-going Hindu! A retired army driver! No proletarian consciousness! No Kant, no Hegel, not even Mill or Bentham?
Accordingly, they have branded this movement fascist, ethnicist, casteist and, worst of all, bred and buttered by the evil World Bank. If they have left out any other low-hitting adjectives, they would gladly bring them on. No wonder they refuse to walk with the flag-frenzied crowds.
Flag-waving Hazare enthusiasts also violated the law. Section 2 of the Flag Act of 2002 allows the national flag to fly on private buildings and offices, but it cannot drape vehicles or be used as a receptacle or a garment. But during this campaign the flag was everywhere and people also wore its colors on their shawls, scarves and sweat bands. The numbers were just too many for the police to prosecute.
If I had not been there to witness how the flag can take on more meanings than what political correctness allows, I would certainly have been the poorer for it. Only the anti-corruption movement could have united a country as fragmented as India is.
And only the national flag could have captured this euphoria.
0 comments:
Post a Comment