URBAN PSYCHE AND SYMBOLISM IN INDIA

After all the noise that has been made by a myriad of organizations about the importance of voting particularly in relation to the urban educated middle class, after all the awareness campaigns run by organizations like Jaago Re and all the media buzz around the ongoing elections and media campaigns on the importance of voting by the Times Group and other organizations, after all the drama surrounding outrage over terror and the rise of the “independents” one obviously expected that the urban, educated, middle-class voter will finally be “awakened” and will realize that voting is not just his right but also his responsibility, that the least he can do for the nation is to get out and vote. But hey, when have we ever carried out any of our social responsibilities effectively and why should this one be any different. The recently concluded second phase of elections have revealed that Bangalore and Pune, the constituencies with the maximum number of urban, educated, middle-class voters, have registered a voter turnout of 46% compared to the average second phase voter turnout of close to 70%.

All the elusive mirages and glass houses that one built around the “conscience of the educated, urban voter” have been shattered. With the voter turnout, were also shattered the dreams and aspirations of all those high profile independent candidates we talked about earlier because of their over reliance on the urban educated middle class vote. Dr. Narayana Murthy rightly pointed out that we are a nation which considers articulation as accomplishment. This is most true particularly for the urban educated population, which is why most independent candidates despite having done little to prove their mettle by way of social or public service expected to garner a sizeable chunk of the votes from this section of society merely by articulating their views and opinions in a fancy manner. We are a nation which has consistently indulged in preaching what we never practice barring a few exceptional individuals who have led by example like Mahatma Gandhi and Babasaheb Ambedkar.

We as a nation and as a people are incapable of relating to the difficulties of another human being. Perhaps this is not actually restricted to Indians alone. While pondering about a rather unrelated political issue I contrived of an unusual relationship between the psyche of the educated elite of India and “symbolism” or “preaching what we never practice” or “placing articulation over accomplishment” or hypocrisy. The issue I was thinking about was that of reservation for women in parliament, which is an issue that has consumed considerable bandwidth of the political class and the media. I was wondering why India with nearly 50% women population must have only 33% reservation for women in politics and why not 50%. Perhaps, we should have 2 members of parliament from each constituency, one a man and the other a woman. In the midst of all this I asked myself how this would help the women of India.

The only answer I could find is that even if we provide 100% reservation for women in parliament, only 500 odd women would actually be empowered and uplifted in a nation of over 500 million women. This is utter symbolism and hypocrisy. Strangely it is only in urban educated circles that such debates are given importance. The rural poor voter could not care less about issues such as this as they do not in any way affect their lives and livelihood. Also, despite these debates doing the rounds for many years now, no steps what so ever have been taken in regard to this issue which points to the nature of placing articulation over accomplishment. One defense sought in favor of this policy is usually that women parliamentarians would relate to the problems of their less fortunate counterparts and work for their upliftment. Facts, however, do not substantiate this argument.

We have had many constituencies in India which have consistently elected a “backward caste” representative and yet, the situation of these “backward castes” in those constituencies is in no way better than in any other neighboring constituency. Many constituencies have also had many women representatives and yet, the women in those constituencies are in no way better off than other women. Many constituencies have had representatives from humble backgrounds and yet none of them have witnessed any significant poverty eradication, barring of course the economic upliftment of their “representative”. It seems obvious; therefore, that reservation for women in parliament would empower and uplift 500 women but do nothing for the remaining 500 million women. This is precisely why this issue is never a poll issue in rural constituencies. It is only debated among urban elite, who in any case do not vote and merely indulge in rhetoric.

But perhaps there is a larger “human nature” at work here behind the indifference exhibited by urban educated middle class individuals towards real socio-economic and political issues. Even a person who has himself experienced the sufferings caused by poverty, after becoming rich, does not care much about the apathy of those who continue to survive in poverty. He is more concerned with reveling in his new found exclusivity. “Rich” and “poor” are relative terms and the existence of the poor is imperative for the existence of the rich. Hence, in all likelihood, the poor person who has been uplifted from poverty would tend to work to maintain the status quo rather than to uplift others in order to retain that exclusivity which gives him superiority over others. If everybody in the world possessed diamonds then diamonds would cease to be precious, wouldn’t they. This is perhaps what makes the people sitting in air conditioned rooms watching IPL on a plasma TV indifferent to the sufferings of the poor and deprived. We watch the sufferings on TV and we say “oh my god!” and we get back to eating our dinner and go to bed.

A similar example of hypocrisy and symbolism can be witnessed in events surrounding the latest on-campus deaths of students in schools and colleges due to various reasons. The only people seen actively and publicly voicing dissent are the near and dear of those who are directly involved in the tragedies and perhaps a few social activists. The same individuals never took to the streets when a similar thing happened in someone else’s family. Also, when such incidents occur, the only thing we are interested in doing is playing the “blame game”. No one is actually interested in addressing the larger concerns of systemic failure, review and reform. All they seek is “closure” without understanding that there can be no closure in life. So perhaps the only way to make a majority of the population relate to the sufferings of others is to subject them to similar suffering. Actually, even then, perhaps, instead of fighting it out they will blame and curse everyone else except themselves for the situation they are in and thus seek “closure”.