Medium Term: The Anna Hazare movement has proved that the middle class does matter

“When you consider any generalisation about India, always remember that for any generalisation that is

accurate, the exact opposite is equally true.” That is one of those aphorisms about India and its contradictions that is frequently quoted though I believe

that its origins lie in a statement by the Cambridge economist Joan Robinson.

 

   And of course, like all generalisations – with the possible exception of this one – it is not necessarily right. But it does capture the sense of what happens in India. For everything that is above ground, there is something else happening underground. For everything that is out in the open there is something happening behind closed doors. And for every road taken, there is always a parallel road that could also be taken.

 

   The clearest example of this is the Indian economy. In many sectors, every price has two components, one above the ground and the other, underneath. Try and buy a flat in Bombay or Delhi and you will find that no matter what price you are quoted for a cheque payment, an equal amount of money will be demanded as a cash payment; the classic combination of cheque and cash, of black and white, and of legal and illegal.

 

   Economists admit that India now has a parallel economy, one that is every bit as vibrant as the official economy but which runs far away from the eyes of the finance ministry or the tax inspectors.

 

   In recent years, we have also seen the emergence of a parallel politics. This is the sort of politics which results when the political system, as reflected in Parliament, is not seen as being sensitive to public interest.

 

   The JP movement, which nearly brought down Indira Gandhi, was one example of parallel politics. The Rath Yatra was another example. At the time that L.K. Advani first set out on his rath, the BJP had only two seats in the Lok Sabha. But by the time the rath had traversed the country, the BJP had become one of India’s two leading power centres.

 

   While political scientists readily acknowledge the importance of parallel politics – just as economists concede that the parallel economy dominates many sectors – the term is usually applied to mass movements with strong political undertones. Usually, these movements start out as lonely ventures but eventually they go on to garner political credibility. The JP movement led to the creation of the Janata Party and the fall of Indira Gandhi. The Rath Yatra led eventually to a situation few people had imagined: a BJP government in Delhi.

 

   By most definitions, the Anna Hazare movement is a good example of parallel politics. It exists outside of the electoral framework. It is led by people with few electoral or populist credentials. (Anna Hazare himself famously declared that he would lose his deposit if he stood for election.) And yet, it has brought an elected government to its knees.

 

   If it follows the pattern of previous parallel politics movements then its ideas and leaders should gravitate towards the electoral mainstream and eventually take power for themselves.

 

   But here’s the thing: I think this is the one movement that breaks the rules.

 

   Most movements that are part of parallel politics are mass movements which touch a chord with the average voter. So, it is easy for the parallel politics to become transformed into mainstream politics.

 

   But what makes this movement different is that its leaders and its followers have virtually no respect for electoral politics. Many of them are cynical about the institutions of parliamentary democracy. And the vast majority of the movement’s followers have a deep and abiding contempt for conventional politics and the average politician.

 

   Moreover, this is not your typical Indian political movement hoping to garner votes from the illiterate or the uneducated. Instead, this is a movement of the educated. While Anna Hazare may boast about his lack of formal education, all of the people around him are well educated and highly qualified. They are lawyers, former judges, former civil servants, police officers and academics. The language they speak is very different from the language of the average politician.

 

   As I have often pointed out, this is a movement that gains its strength from the frustrations of the educated middle class. As the middle class has grown in size, strength and influence, it has tired of the failures of conventional politics and it has nearly given up on traditional politicians. The educated middle class believes that India is a potential first world country run by third world politicians with a fourth rate sense of integrity.

 

"No country can progress if the middle class is frustrated or disenchanted. In all successful societies it is the middle class that is the engine of growth and the fountainhead of prosperity."

   Over the last few months, we have seen this kind of parallel politics develop outside of the parliamentary system. Anna Hazare’s followers are not people who put their faith in the organised electorate. For them, the crowd at Ramlila Maiden is representative of the views of India. Nor do they have much faith in parliamentary debates. They think that more sense is spoken in discussions in television studios than is ever spoken at political rallies or even, in Parliament.

 

   I can understand their frustrations. And all of us must applaud Anna Hazare’s sincerity.

 

   But the truth is that if India is to progress, we must end this system of parallel everything. We cannot afford a parallel economy in which there is one price in white and another in black. We cannot have a parallel politics of mob rule – such as the Shiv Sena often tries to impose in Bombay – when we have a parliamentary system.

 

   Similarly, India cannot afford to let the middle class abdicate from the parliamentary system and set up its own parallel politics based on discussions in TV studios, editorials in newspapers, blogs on the Internet and comments on Twitter. We need to integrate the middle class with the Indian political system – because the middle class represents India at its best and no country’s political system can flourish if its best people desert it and set up a parallel establishment.

 

   Usually, this problem is phrased in terms of middle-class obligations. Politicians tell us that we are out of touch with the real India. They tell us that the views of a million people count for very little in a nation that has a population of over a billion. And they act as though middle-class concerns are selfish and self-indulgent.

 

   Big mistake.

 

   The problem with India is not that the middle class believes in parallel politics. It is that mainstream politicians have done too little to live up to middle-class standards of integrity and ethics. It is that the traditional Indian middle-class values of honesty and hard work are laughed at by a cynical political class.

 

   Ultimately, India will never take its rightful place as a superpower of the 21st century if mainstream politicians alienate the middle class. No country can progress if the middle class is frustrated or disenchanted. In all successful societies it is the middle class that is the engine of growth and the fountainhead of prosperity.

 

   Over the last fortnight, politicians have attacked the media for its middle-class obsessions. We have been accused of playing to middle-class sensibilities to increase circulation and to win TRPs. Our views have been regarded as elitist and irrelevant.

 

   That attitude reflects the political mind-set: go for the big numbers; in a democracy you need to win the votes of the masses. Almost by definition, politicians ignore the concerns of the middle class because they are not electorally significant.

 

   But as the events of the last fortnight demonstrate you don’t need big numbers to make a difference. What the middle class lacks in size it makes up for in intelligence, strategy and reach.

 

   Yes, India is the world’s largest democracy. And yes, it is the teeming masses whose opinions count. But as is always the case in India, the opposite is also true.

 

   When it comes to the crunch, it is often the smaller numbers that make the difference.