Should Shri Anna Hajare form a Political Party ?

Dear friends,

As Anna puts forth his agenda,other than Lokpal bill, It will be imperative for team anna to get publiac mandate. Even govt. is putting forward this angle of arguement in case of Janlokpal bill, and it carries weight, but congressmen putting forth arguement lacks the courage of conviction,coz they are aware of there bunglings and people have lost faith in govt.(But this can only be conclusively proved after elections). Now people's support to Anna's movement clearly indicates total failure of existing political system. Now that's a dangerous situation and can lead to anarchy.
Now it is the responsibility of Anna firstly then team Anna to take this fight to its logical end, as they have raised the hopes of millions of people,so much so that they come out in large numbers and expressed their solidarity with Anna. Now Anna and team Anna (treat them as two seperate entities, else you can never understand thingsthe way they are) should never beleive that people came with them to get JanLokpal bill passed,in fact few were taught at Ramlila grounds about the bill. Now people came beleiving the govt.(political parties in general) to be absolutely corrupt,breaking all records of scams, leading to the price rise and all the hardships that common man was made to suffer, this realisation made all political parties to tremble in fear. Definitely Team Anna was never prepared to handle that much public support or willingly it was let to be highly disorganized by the agencies behind it.
In spirituality there often one generates the power, but it is more important to control it. Now Anna has challenged and belittled the supreme power(actual) in democracy. And janlokpal bill is not the only issue, there are other issues as well, logically for that Anna has to install his govt then get the job done the way he wants, if he has that moral authority to dictate terms to government, he must have the power to sway people's support in favour of his outfit. For that only issue Anna should fight with government before elections should be Poll Reforms(not right to recall -at the simplest it will be quite complicated for our countrymen). But it is easier said than done for even the GOD, leave alone Shri Anna Hazare ji. Now that Anna has inspired generations, can he be able to form the outfit which delivers? Remember JP,s movement,it's failure.
Let's hope for the best, and stand up and contribute wherever we are and in whatever way we can.
regards
Prakash Tiwari

Dear Prakash,

If there was a way to give you a HUNDRED LIKES on that above Post, I'd have done it.

Given the scope, I've done the maximum.

You have just spoken the word....BRILLIANT...!!!

Yes it is Time that the Spiritual Power that Anna has raised is now Materialised into a More Concrete form....the Best of Which will be a GOVERNMENT BEREFT OF ALL THESE CORRUPT POLITICAL PARTIES. That will allow us to Harness this Energy for the Benefit of Not Only this Generation, but for Many More to Come. One Entry of Honest Anna Supporters as a Majority in the Parliament, the Future of this Country will Take An Entirely Different Course.

To add to your contention of Anna swaying People's support in favour of his Outfit, HE JUST HAS TO GIVE ONE CALL - AND INDIA WILL DO IT FOR HIM.

Thanks for you valuable additions. You've really said what people need to know - and know NOW. And so do Team Anna; I'd ask someone who has a way to get it across to them.

Best Wishes,

Summit.

Jai Barat

Dear Summit, in your reply to shambhuji's views,
I have found that you are spending lot of time to understand the views and trying to pour your analysis in a best available way. Therefore, I feel that in this reply instead of word "YOU" if you have used "WE", it would be more appropriate (for ex. You've (we have thought enough - for 65 years. Now Act.).

Please try to understand that here every writer is just dying for Bharat Mahan and also sick of present corrupt system as much as we all.
Of course there may be somewhat differences of views exist. But this provides all of us an opportunity to analyse the topic into its depth to avoid any lacuna at the best possible level.

I hope that all friends have got my viewpoint and take care of the same.

I will contine with topic related views shortly.

Jai Bharat

This is a very important question you have all raised, and I feel that it should be considered seriously.

A lot of people have attempted to find a solution to the Indian political maladies before... like suggesting a Presidential form of elections at one extreme to indirect forms of elections starting with local self government, state funding of elections, prescribing qualifications for candidates, and the like. Each has its merits, but we have not so far met with much success primarily because all of these involve reforming our electoral processes, which can only be done by the very politicians who would see a threat from such reforms.

That should not stop us from keeping on attempting till we find a lasting solution. Because I believe we are a great nation suffering from some very bad politics and political leadership. We certainly deserve better.

So, the question arises as to why Anna and his team should not consider fighting the elections and set things right. There are some serious pitfalls in this. At this point in time, all those who are opposed to corruption (which is a large majority of aam aadmi) are united behind Anna.

If Anna were to form a political party and contest elections or field candidates, we need to understand how he or Team Anna will face the following tricky issues:

1. What will be the party's stand on divisive issues like reservations (in general, and in every sphere, including Lokpal Drafting Committee), splitting large states into smaller ones (like Telengana), Armed Forces Special Powers Act (in sensitive states where there's insurgency & infiltration of terrorists), Prohibition, pricing of agricultural commodities (free market pricing will help agriculturists, but will increase food prices several fold), Environment Vs Industry, FDI Policy, etc.? As a political party, Anna will be forced to take a position. Once Anna takes a position, the people behind Anna will start getting divided; for example, if Anna favours or opposes reservations, either way, this forum will become a war field. Politicians will fan these differences multi-fold, and soon Anna will be a spent force.

2. With a corrupt system, individuals can't make a big difference. Even before any changes can be brought about, which will surely take some time, at least some elected representatives will try to make a quick buck, or there will be reasons for people to suspect so. How will Anna handle them? If he sends them out, Anna's support will come down, and people will start getting disenchanted, saying he can't even keep his flock together. If suspicions can come about a person as high as Swami Agnivesh, who will Anna be able to trust for the 100s and 1000s of responsibilities?

3. Anna will be forced to ally with at least some individuals and political parties. Will he, for instance, ally with the Congress? BJP? CPM? CPI? JDS? JDU? FB? BJD? RJD? TMC? DMK? AIADMK? NCP? NC? Damned he will be if he allies with any of them, and damned he will be if he doesn't.

4. Anna will be forced to name a successor, or heads for various tasks, and this may divide the civil society again.

Even aside from all these, I feel a person of Anna's stature should not be forced to take positions on subjective issues. He's been against Corruption, and there can be no two objective opinions on whether we want corruption or not. Not so on subjective issues.

Soon enough, Anna will be strongly criticized; the more he gets criticized, the less powerful leader he'll be seen as. Remember the Janata 1977 experiment?

I outline below a simple way by which Team Anna can stand in elections, and we could transform our political system, overcoming the above pitfalls.

A Suggestion To Solve Indian Political Maladies.
===================================

First, let's see the problems of Indian politics today, and what we'd want to see happen.

1. People vote for the parties or candidates in elections not because they like them, but of the TINA factor ('There Is No Alternative). Even if people know of a good candidate standing in the elections in their constituency, they are forced not to vote for that person on most occasions because such a candidate is unlikely to win, and so they vote for a second or third 'worst' candidate to avoid electing the 'worst' candidate. The yo-yo effect of electing 2 (or 3) parties/ candidates alternatively is due to this. This will never do any good to the people in the long run. We need make it possible for good people to win the elections.

2. Politics has become a 'high stakes' game. At stake is lakhs of crores of money. "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely". No wonder political parties invest part of their ill-gotten money and muscle power to capture political power perpetually. Even honest and competent persons of eminence have been found to tolerate and preside over corrupt, inefficient and atrocious governments because their only alternative is to leave the entire field to the unscrupulous. We need to make it impossible for leaders who are corrupt, inefficient and bad in any respect from hijacking power.

3. Politics breeds corruption which feeds politics, and the vicious circle appears unbreakable. Most of the black money is either generated by politicians, or with their blessings, or with their acquiescence. We need to break the vicious cycle.

4. Politics has become a dirty game, politicians freely indulging in looting and murders. We need to remove the dirt from our politics.

5. Instead of politicians and political parties focusing on what's good for the people, they focus on what will get them votes, by hook or crook. And the few good individuals who attempt to correct it cannot succeed, because the political mafia system won't permit it. But, somehow, we need to make good governance alone matter.

6. While honest people typically shun politics, people with no scruples find it just their kind of game. They stoop to any levels to conquer. In today's political system, it is extremely difficult for well meaning people to stop this rot, as they have to either be outsider critics or insiders who tolerate the ills just to survive. We need to make it possible for honest leaders to operate and assert their positions in this milieu.

I can go on and on, but we all know what all need to be corrected, and how good politics should be.

How do we bring about such a change in Indian politics without changing the constitution, without the help of the powers that be, and without Team Anna having to take a position on divisive issues?

Let me present a scenario. Please reflect on it and react.

Let's imagine Anna forms a new political party, at the national level, whose name is suggestive of 'watchdog'. It would be lead by a group of very eminent non-political leaders (say, 12-25 eminent personalities drawn from different States and different fields, and with fair representations of all sections of the society), who won't contest any elections, nor hold any posts, but they will generally be acceptable to most of the people across all cross-sections in India. They won't become CM, PM or whatever. They would all be not only people's favourite leaders, but also people with impeccable credentials, with no criminal track record. All the decisions in the party would be taken by this team.

This Party would have no ideology except facilitating good governance. It would have no stated position on any subjective issue, whether it is economics, culture, caste, religion, or whatever. The constitution of the party would be simple. It won't permit its members to hold any position in or related to the Government, nor express their views in public. Only the party's appointed spokespersons would speak in public. There would, of course, be inner party democracy giving an opportunity for the members to speak within its internal forums.

This party will be unlike all other political parties. The goal of the party will be NOT to come to power, but to reform politics from within, acting as a watchdog.

A good candidate with excellent credentials within the constituency (should not be from any of the existing political parties) would be selected by the party leadership to contest from each constituency. The party would appeal to the people to elect a 'really good candidate' or the candidate of a party in whom they have total faith. If they don't find such a party or candidate, this party would request the people to vote for its candidate. This is the equivalent of the 'NONE OF THEM' vote, which many people have been talking about. Except that, in this model, we don't need a constitutional reform to make this possible.

Let's see what will happen if this were to happen.

When people are dissatisfied with all the candidates and/or parties (which is often the case), they now have the good option of electing a 'WATCHDOG', without letting their vote go to waste. They don't have to fear that if they don't vote for the second or third worst candidate/ party, the worst candidate/ party would win, because the 'WATCHDOG' could well win. If more people prefer the 'WATCHDOG', the constituency would have successfully prevented most or all the bad candidates/ parties from winning. The number of independent candidates who stand just because they are opposed to all the parties/ candidates would come down, as there will no longer be any need for it. The votes of all those who don't like any party/ candidate would get consolidated. This will even, very likely, increase the % of votes cast. With media available to popularize it, this party won't have to spend much money in getting itself popularized.

Over time, by properly focusing on good governance, it is possible for this party to gain the popular support.

What if a problem arises if the WATCHDOG party's candidates win a majority in Parliament/ any Assembly, or if there's a hung parliament/ assembly where it is not possible for anyone to form a Government without the support of the WATCHDOG party? Isn't there the possibility of division within the ranks of the elected representatives? Since the party has no interest in coming to power, and its members are committed to vote 'en bloc' as per the decision of the Party Presidium, its members would have no publicly stated differences of opinion. And even if the other political parties try to influence some of its members, it won't help them much, as the options of its members are extremely limited.

So, soon enough, hopefully in the very first elections, a lot of the candidates of this 'WATCHDOG' party could get elected. And this Party leadership will be able to dictate to the other parties about what it expects from them if they need the support of this Party. This Party is not obliged to support any political party only based on their numerical strength in the Parliament; it would support parties only based on promised good policies and good governance, and delivery of the same.

On subjective/ divisive issues, like whether a State has to be divided or not, whether reservations should be extended or not, etc., the WATCHDOG party could ideally remain neutral, or take a stand based on the majority view of the Party Presidium.

On objective issues, like corruption, maintenance of law and order, upholding the constitution, etc., the Party could take a firm view, and bring down Governments, if need be. If it becomes necessary, it may even support smaller parties to come to power, but on the promise of good governance. It should wield the very same kind of hold that members of smaller political parties are able to wield in an alliance, except that this hold will be of a positive nature.

When this happens, it's possible that the % of votes cast in the elections could go up significantly, as people would have a 'real choice'.

Incidentally, it may even obviate the need for 'the right to recall' which Anna has raised (but may not gain political or even popular backing easily).

I'm of the opinion that this can completely transform the Indian polity.

The goal of this party is to make its presence felt, and make political parties so accountable to the people that, otherwise, people have an option of not electing any of the major 'political' parties.

Ganesan. :~)

I apologise for that...the You was probably written with the meaning of We in fast oversight...Or should I say...It was actually written with the meaning of We...trying to create focus in the article...and I didn't quite notice that it could be interpreted otherwise...

Why in the world would I want to insinuate Shambhuji isolatedly...?

But Taken Note....will be more careful in future...Thanks....

Summit.

Sorry, Came Back to Edit this Message after taking a Good Read of the Entire Thread Once Again :
================================================== =================

sgaserv,

I need to make a correction.

I WAS NOT WRONG.

I TAKE BACK MY APOLOGY. OR MAYBE IN THE FIRST PLACE, I DON'T OFFER IT AT ALL.

No - that 'You' that you pointed out was Not an Oversight...and it was Not with the meaning of We.

I had put it with the meaning of 'You' - and for a reason I strongly felt very bad about.

If you would notice, by the time Shambhuji commented, the discussion was already taking a shape...it had already gone to a level where a transition had been made from a general level of debate to more specific points.

And then he comes in, makes a comment that makes no head or tail at that point of the thread, and attempts to draw the discussion to Point Zero.

What does that mean - ONLY THAT HE HAS NOT READ, PONDERED AND ANALYSED THE PREVIOUS POSTS CAREFULLY - ONLY THAT HE HAS NO RESPECT FOR THE CONTRIBUTORS BEFORE HIM - HE JUST WANTS TO POST SOMETHING, AND WITHOUT CARING WHERE HE IS, DOES IT AND RUNS OFF.

DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT KIND OF A THING IS CALLED ? IT'S CALLED - SPAM.

AND IF YOU'VE BEEN WITH THE INTERNET FOR SOMETIME, YOU ALREADY KNOW WHAT THE PULSE OF SPAM CARRIES - DISRESPECT.

AND WHY DISRESPECT - BECAUSE HE DOESN'T CARE WHETHER HE'S IN BED OR IN THE BATH - HE JUST "DOES IT".

I FELT SHARP THAT STING OF DISRESPECT. WHEN I WAS SO PAINSTAKINGLY GOING THROUGH EVERY READER'S POST THOROUGHLY, HERE COMES ONE, DOESN'T EVEN BOTHER TO FIGURE OUT WHERE HE IS, RINGS THE BELL, AND RUNS AWAY, LIKE SOME KID DEVILISHLY ENJOYING A DEVIOUS PRANK.

SO YES, I USED THE WORD 'YOU' ON PURPOSE - IT WAS INTENDED TO BE A REPRIMAND.

IT IS NOT ME WHO IS DISRESPECTING HIM, BUT RATHER HE THE OTHER CONTRIBUTORS.

AND THEREFORE THE 'YOU' STAYS AS 'YOU', WITH THE MEANING OF 'YOU'.

AND I HAVE A REQUEST FOR YOU - A HUMBLE REQUEST, IF YOU DON'T MIND - STOP BEING THE MOMMY OF THIS THREAD.

THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW TIMES IN MY LIFE THAT I'VE BEEN ACCUSED OF SPAMMING. BUT ON EVERY ONE OF THOSE, I HAVE TAKEN CARE TO REDRESS CONCERNS PERSONALLY, AND NOT STAY MUM, OR ASK SOMEONE ELSE TO INTERVENE.

BUT WHERE IS OUR DEAR "CONTRIBUTOR" ? THERE IS NO SIGHT OR SOUND OF HIM AFTER THAT POST. HE SIMPLY HAS RUN AWAY. IF HE FEELS SO BAD ABOUT THIS, WHY DOESN'T HE RESPOND BACK ? WHY ARE YOU TALKING ON HIS BEHALF ?

LET HIM SHOOT THE SAME CORK AT ME. I PROMISE, I'LL HANDLE IT (HIM) MYSELF.

AND THAT IS WHY I SAID - STOP BEING THE MOMMY OF THIS THREAD. WE'RE BIG BOYS HERE, AND WE KNOW HOW TO FIGHT IT OUT AMONGST OURSELVES. WE DON'T NEED "MOMMIES". ONLY TOUCHY "KIDS" DO.

IF WE ARE SO TOUCHY, WE SHOULDN'T BLAME OUR POLITICIANS FOR BEING SO THIN-SKINNED.

I FEEL ANYBODY WHO CAN'T STAND UP FOR HIMSELF IN A DEBATE IS IN A WRONG PLACE AT THE WRONG TIME - WHAT DO YOU ?

I CAN UNDERSTAND YOUR EMOTIONS OF FELLOW-FEELING FOR ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY. AND I COMPLETELY RESPECT THEM. I TRULY FEEL THAT IS A GREAT GESTURE.

BUT IN THE SAME VEIN, I FEEL THAT NO INDIVIDUAL MEMBER SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DISPLAY SUCH CRASS DISRESPECT TOWARDS THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY BY FREELY INDULGING IN SPAMMING. IF THE COMMUNITY RESPECTS THE INDIVIDUAL, THE INDIVIDUAL MUST ALSO KNOW TO RECIPROCATE.

HOPE THAT MAKES MY POSITION CLEAR.

AND SO, I TAKE BACK MY APOLOGY. IN FACT, I DON'T OFFER ONE AT ALL.

THANKS,

SUMMIT.

We will try to get healthy result after our conversation. The System of Voting to the corrupted politician must be change. But in present situation we have no option as because we will be can’t think above the sky.
My Opinion is as below:-

• Should there is only way to fight election to change the dirty system?
• Should there is no way to change present election system without fight the election?
• Differences of Ideology among the political parties should not be participating in election jointly. They must be ether they fight alone or to be merge there ideology with other parties. And once they merge there ideology. The merged parties can not be again switch on their identity for next 3 elections.
• No political parties is allow outsider parties MP / MLA in the cabinets to get majority vote in parliament/ assembly. But at the Same Time Individual MP/MLA can be join the parties after election is treated as member of parties and can join cabinets.
• Rajshabha must be dissolved permanently. No one allow nominating MP in Parliament. This route must be stop. – Shambhu Choudhary

__________________

@*@....This is with Regard to Ganesan's Post above...

For the First Part of his Post, i.e. where he asks those 5 questions, I've attempted to place a Response on another thread on this forum (the questions had been raised there too). Please find my reply at -

High time.....anna supporters should contest next elections and we should make them win

For the Second Part of this Article, wherein he enumerates his "Suggestions to Remove Indian Political Maladies", I think I have a reason to be elated.

Because for the first time, I see us heading towards an agreement. Though it's still somewhat sketchy, the first shoots seem to be sprouting. We've been into heavy debating on that thread above, and some pretty long notes were exchanged; and maybe the first instance "emerges in history" that we meet.

I've always enjoyed reading his posts. His writings carry a radical style and forceful content. His ideas are arranged in a logical and compelling structure, and appear arisen of intense cogitation.

And therefore, the rapture of confluence.

Wish him all the Best,

Thanks,

Summit.

Dear Summit,

Thanks for your positive response, and kind words.

I was not exactly critical of your idea that Anna should form a political party, though I deliberately sounded so, because I wanted us to think about the consequences of the act, and come up with some answers. You may notice that I had ended my post (where I didn't apparently agree that Anna should fight elections) with the following statement:

"I had, in fact, suggested some time back, a variant of this idea addressing these issues, which I'll explain after hearing the views of folks on my questions."

I was waiting to present my views at the right time, after listening to the views of those who have some views on this.

In fact, I'd expressed these views already in this forum, and even elsewhere. I even wrote to a few people like Dr. Abdul Kalam, much before Anna's movement had started; not sure if it caught Dr. Kalam's attention.

Thanks again, Summit.

Ganesan. :~)

Dear Ganesan,

You're welcome.

And I need to Thank you at the same time for raising those questions, for they gave me the opportunity to come up with the extremely important clarifications.

"I was not exactly critical of your idea that Anna should form a political party, though I deliberately sounded so..." - From the very first moment that I chanced upon your notes, I felt that there was more about you than appeared. I had this kind of loose premonition, that you were writing with two pens. And Voila ! Time to give myself a pat on the back - whaddya say ?

"I even wrote to a few people like Dr. Abdul Kalam..." - You've done something that I, and probably a lot of us others, haven't. I feel Proud and Privileged to be talking to you.

Thanks,

All the Best,

Summit.

magistreat kabhi govern nahi kar sakta aur governer kabhi magistreat nahi ban sakta, dono ka do rol hai.