A clean fight?

Political science tells us that a basic function of a political party is to come to power. Persons who are not masters of this science inject a rider — do so morally! Our chronicles did not say so, indeed the Panchatantra lauds trickery in achieving the objective. Machiavelli, in his advice to the Prince summed it up correctly: “Society is a system of forces where the loser is always wrong.” The Arthasastra has a similar message.

No wonder that when political parties set out to do their Dharma, the first step is to come to power. They follow our hallowed traditions — the end justifies the means.

So why does the court direct a value-based campaign, a gentlemanly fight of political battles? Isn’t it far too utopian for the weathered politician and cynical voter? Such a directive is more likely to be followed in the elections to the Oxford Union (also fast disappearing in that pristine institution). Meanwhile our politicians ask, “Have we not thrown out the British 57 years ago and cleansed ourselves of their perfidious influence? Then why follow their direction? Why not be ourselves?”

Meanwhile the command to the Election Commission — pre-censor the means adopted by the political parties and ensure that they fight by the Queensberry Rules. But our ancient political traditions always permitted post-justification of the means once the end was achieved. “Use any means to overthrow the other political party since our coming to power is better in the public’s interest.” After all isn’t the public the greatest evaluator of its own interest? So what if media moguls further enrich themselves through sleazy mudslinging political advertisements — alas often revealing concealed truths. The public loves it. Maybe that is not public interest but that is what the public is interested in!