Yogendra Yadav: Wielding power without rules
Would Harsimrat Kaur Badal smile after all? Opening the textbook debate on the floor of Lok Sabha, this young MP from Punjab referred to her interaction with school kids, none of who wanted to become a politician. She inferred, rightly so, that the younger generation has a poor image of politicians and politics, parliamentarians and parliamentary processes. Educated Indians, especially the younger generation, tend to believe that our MPs are uneducated, uncaring, uncouth and self-serving. This is of course a mistaken impression. Our MPs are more educated than people think, they are often more perceptive and certainly better informed about the country than an average middle-class professional. And a surprising proportion of the MPs are above any suspicion of corruption. Similarly, the contempt for politics is also profoundly mistaken. Politics is often driven by self-interest, is seemingly irrational and appears utterly messy. But in democracies this mess usually produces outcomes that reflect greater common good.
The question then is: How did this national debate, on and off the floor of Parliament, affect the image of parliamentarians and the Parliament? How would those students now feel about politics, if they had watched the parliamentary proceedings? Would Harsimrat Kaur have reasons to smile?
This is where the real irony lies. While the textbooks which Harsimrat Kaur attacked explain why seemingly dirty political competition helps promote collective good, why political representatives and ministers must have the final say even if the experts are better qualified, how the apparently dreary proceedings of the Parliament perform crucial functions of res-ponsiveness and accountability in a democracy. The point is not that the parliamentarians failed to appreciate the real spirit of the books. The real irony is that the parliamentary discussion on the textbooks ended up reinforcing precisely the stereotypes middle-class Indians have about politics and politicians.
If those students had watched the parliamentary proceedings they would have noticed that our parliamentarians had not read the slim textbook they wanted banished. Every speaker in the Lok Sabha had a bunch of papers in his/her hand that turned out to be photocopies of select cartoons from the books. It was not clear if they had read even the captions of these cartoons, let alone the text before and after each cartoon. Not one speaker in the Lok Sabha referred even to a single line in the textbook to substantiate their reading. You cannot blame those students from drawing the erroneous conclusion that our parliamentarians lack education.
What would the student learn from the tenor of discussion in both houses of Parliament? They would have seen the honourable members of both the houses, including the House of the wise and the elderly, compete with one another in declaring their loyalty to an iconic figure and in demanding the head of those who had apparently denigrated him. Worse, they would have watched the Lok Sabha shout down Sharifuddin Shariq, the lone dissenting voice that day, and found that neither the Speaker nor any other member stood up to defend the right of a fellow-parliamentarian to voice a difference. You cannot blame these students if they learnt that baying with the mob is what democracies are all about. And if they watched the honourable minister's abject surrender on the floor of the House, this would hardly be a lesson in courage of conviction...
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-06-01/edit-page/31958372_1_parliamentarians-textbook-mps
See also: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/deification-blot-on-our-democracy/1/197914.html
The question then is: How did this national debate, on and off the floor of Parliament, affect the image of parliamentarians and the Parliament? How would those students now feel about politics, if they had watched the parliamentary proceedings? Would Harsimrat Kaur have reasons to smile?
This is where the real irony lies. While the textbooks which Harsimrat Kaur attacked explain why seemingly dirty political competition helps promote collective good, why political representatives and ministers must have the final say even if the experts are better qualified, how the apparently dreary proceedings of the Parliament perform crucial functions of res-ponsiveness and accountability in a democracy. The point is not that the parliamentarians failed to appreciate the real spirit of the books. The real irony is that the parliamentary discussion on the textbooks ended up reinforcing precisely the stereotypes middle-class Indians have about politics and politicians.
If those students had watched the parliamentary proceedings they would have noticed that our parliamentarians had not read the slim textbook they wanted banished. Every speaker in the Lok Sabha had a bunch of papers in his/her hand that turned out to be photocopies of select cartoons from the books. It was not clear if they had read even the captions of these cartoons, let alone the text before and after each cartoon. Not one speaker in the Lok Sabha referred even to a single line in the textbook to substantiate their reading. You cannot blame those students from drawing the erroneous conclusion that our parliamentarians lack education.
What would the student learn from the tenor of discussion in both houses of Parliament? They would have seen the honourable members of both the houses, including the House of the wise and the elderly, compete with one another in declaring their loyalty to an iconic figure and in demanding the head of those who had apparently denigrated him. Worse, they would have watched the Lok Sabha shout down Sharifuddin Shariq, the lone dissenting voice that day, and found that neither the Speaker nor any other member stood up to defend the right of a fellow-parliamentarian to voice a difference. You cannot blame these students if they learnt that baying with the mob is what democracies are all about. And if they watched the honourable minister's abject surrender on the floor of the House, this would hardly be a lesson in courage of conviction...
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-06-01/edit-page/31958372_1_parliamentarians-textbook-mps
See also: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/deification-blot-on-our-democracy/1/197914.html
