Barack Obama's appeal for unity to solve problems resonates here-

26 Jan, 2012, 06.10AM IST, T K Arun,ET Bureau

Barack Obama's appeal for unity to solve problems resonates here


Obama's State of the Union address, calling upon Americans to unite to solve urgent common problems, transcending political divisions, left his Republican opponents unmoved, his fellow Democrats unenthused and a great many Americans unimpressed as to either his sincerity or his capability.

One place where such a call to unity needs to make an impact is India's own Parliament, where the ruling party is effectively a minority and the Opposition is determined to let nothing work. In India, three parts of the address that contain potential for confrontation are likely to draw more attention.

One is the assertion that all options to stop Iran going nuclear are on the table. Another is the repeated reference to China as an unfair trader, whose manipulative policies tilt the playing ground against hardworking Americans. And the reference to outsourcing as a practice that deserves to be penalised with taxes, rather than rewarded with tax breaks as at present, would have many sounding the alarm on US protectionism. But the resounding theme of Obama's speech was the gap between the people and politics as practised by their representatives.

Swamped by illgotten campaign finance, pursuing special interests and determined to deny their opponents success, even if it means making their country and countrymen fail, these representatives make a mess of governance. They undo the doable, spit at fruit within reach and blame one another as prosperity passes the nation by, letting misery stalk where progress and development could have walked.

The gap between the aspirations of the people and of their representatives seems to be the only thing common to rich and poor nations, apart from growing inequality within their societies.

The initial surge of mass support for the Anna agitation was a reflection of public anger against this gap. For now, politicians seem to have managed to divert attention away from their own failings, staging a fight amongst themselves on how best to make politicians accountable.

They have been aided, in the process, by Team Anna's own partisan politicking and the urgency of conducting assembly elections, whose hurly-burly leaves little space for reasoned discussion on political reform , just as the urgency of assuaging hunger will not wait for a debate to be settled on what foods are good for you. But if politicians believe they have succeeded in overcoming popular disgust for their breed, they are mistaken.

Politics has to reform itself. Politicians will have to get back to the agenda of political reform on their own, if they do not want to see a bigger surge of anti-politician protests than what 2011 had witnessed. Politics has to change both its process and its purpose. The two, of course, are inter-related.

If you see the purpose of politics as being the right to grant and receive patronage, the process of such politics would necessarily be corrupt, transactional. If, on the other hand, you see the purpose of politics as empowerment, the process would be mobilisation of the people to enforce their rights and for demands that flow from their rights.

Buying votes with liquor and money is obviously transactional politics. To raise the finances to be able to offer these bribes, the politician must either have amassed wealth during his tenure in office via corruption or commit himself to future corruption. Misuse of elected office to raise money through theft from the exchequer , sale of patronage or plain extortion is the hallmark of patronage politics. People see any relief from the government or any sign of normal working of the government machinery as patronage they are privileged to receive, rather than as their right.

So, getting a ration card made becomes a privilege, rather than an entitlement, and the politician who enables this, a patron and protector, rather than your representative. Ending patronage politics and ending corrupt politics have a common meeting point: politics as empowerment. People have to be politically mobilised to hold parties and politicians to account, as to the amounts they spend on whatever political activity at any level and as to how they have raised the resources to make that expenditure; as to what their leaders are supposed to do and what they actually do.

When politicians rally people in the run-up to polling against the misdeeds of incumbent governments, it is, indeed, one form of mobilisation. This is welcome, but not enough. Sustained mobilisation is possible only when the political party works as an institution, articulating popular concerns, questioning authority and summoning it to the people's cause - in short, mediating power for the collective good. Fine speeches and charisma are good for crystallising action, not a substitute for it. Our own would-be reformers would do well to take this fully on board.