Tags:
Journalism of Courage
For Mahatma Gandhi, fasting was sometimes a means of atonement for the sins of others and sometimes a moral protest. In this age of cynicism there cannot be too much hope of Gandhian methods having the kind of impact they had more than half a century ago.
The idea of individual responsibility for collective wrongdoing no longer has the resonance it once had. The credibility of political leaders has never sunk so low. And yet, it seems proper somehow to try to make the Gandhian connection as Atal Behari Vajpayee has done by going on a fast and choosing for it the day observed as the day of Gandhi8217;s martyrdom. In any case, how else can one convey to the country that the ideals of religious and social tolerance, and non-violence are worth pursuing? So will the fast be taken as an expression of remorse, mere tokenism or a political stunt? The answer must be yes to all three. The Indian political species being what it is will ignore the underlying moral purpose and see only empty symbolism. For those in theSangh Parivar whose enterprise it is to topple old national icons and replace them with their own, the fast on such a day will very likely be an embarrassment. But for some of the people perhaps it delivers the intended message that Vajpayee is appalled at the culture of intolerance spreading through the country.
The messages from the political stage contradict the messages from the Prime Minister. One correct step is followed by two false ones. The announcement of a judicial inquiry is followed by statements about political conspiracies and others exonerating the suspects. Leave alone the BJP8217;s rambunctious allies, the Sangh Parivar still pulls in different directions and this is doing the greater damage to the government8217;s image. It was thought family quarrels had been resolved amicably at the Bangalore conclave. Or at least, that a truce was called. Now it appears it was an agreement over demarcation of territory: responsibility for government business being left to Vajpayee as long as other members of the Parivar can carry on their ideological mobilisation unfettered. If so, Vajpayee made a Faustian bargain. Small wonder that he has had to turn to Gandhi to speak to the country or that a contrite Madanlal Khurana quits the government to counter the messages from many of their colleagues. No government canfunction at two separate levels like this, one official and one unofficial, and still hope to be credible or do its job effectively.
