When I learned electronics, I dealt with ones and zeroes. Something in that concept deeply disturbed me and this was the absolute lack of middle ground. Of course, in technology this greatly simplifies our working and has lead to the information and computer revolution. We represent everything in ones and zeroes and with larger number of ones and zeroes for greater clarity which takes less space and effort than a continuous analog signal.
We do the same in life. We define everything as white or black and then pick one over the other. We do not think of a middle ground, the grey area which usually signifies doubt and uncertainty is left unexplored. This is because we prefer simpler choices and it is easier to gain followers if the choices and alternates are simple, clear and easily distinguishable. Whether it be in politics, economics or environment we choose between left or rightist policies, socialism or capitalism, industries or forests.
This sort of polarisation is unfair and even evil because-
1) It makes us adamant and adhere to one side strictly without any scope for compromise
2) It blinds us to alternates that are somewhere in between
3) The result is a decision that could be disastrous since it is not the best choice
But to me, the worst result is when those who advocate the middle ground- the saner and yet more complex but infinitely better and logical solutions- are thrashed by both sides. The only way to be heard is to take extreme positions, it becomes a shouting match and the original message is lost. Pragmatism and solutions that can work are rarely considered and so we are reduced to "either with us or against us" type of situation.
It is this polarisation that has depressingly afflicted our debate, thinking and decision on almost every issue- environment versus industries, one religion against another, socialism versus capitalism and activists against politicians. It has to be either fully good or fully bad and this was most felt in the opinions expressed over the functioning of the Aam Admi Party.
It was a refreshing change to see an outsider earn the trust of the people, form a government, consult the people on significant issues and work for the people with a clear local level agenda. But it definitely has its own drawbacks- public protests by the government, signs of populism and theatricality etc. However, the discussion is never about what the AAP should do or what it can do to improve itself but only about how it is doomed to fail and how unfair and undemocratic its functioning is. No one mentions the fact that they have been in government for less than a month and all those who blame this party are willing to turn a blind eye to graver sins of all other political outfits. The new kid on the block is being thrashed by everyone and the media has been unforgiving in its attempts to discredit this young outfit.
But AAP should do well to realise a few things. Their strengths lie in their idealism, transparency, citizen engagement and local level manifestos. But a general election could stretch their resources thin, their message and attempts could get drowned out, manipulated or completely destroyed by the politics of an election campaign which involves slander, unfair criticism and relentless scrutiny along with the advantages that big parties have.
People's desire for change and urban support, several social movements and prominent individuals from industry and academia joining them provides an opportunity for AAP to provide a good government to the people. But they must be aware of the threat posed by populism, opportunists and getting carried away with the trappings, perks and power of position and do their best to counter these. Media visibility is both a strength as well as a threat and so they must be very careful in their public statements, public programs and image.
Such an analysis has not appeared and it has broad and generalised sweeping statements putting them in either the good or bad basket. We do not know what course the AAP experiment will take let alone its final result. But its novelty, challenge to established political realities and methods make it difficult for us to understand it properly since it has not fully taken shape. This irritates us, especially in a hyper-charged environment fed by the media, since we need an answer now.
Is the AAP then good or bad? Where electronics fails, let us use quantum theory and the famous Schroedinger's cat which provides us a middle ground. We do not know whether the cat is alive or dead. There is equal probability and so the cat is both alive and dead at the same time. This is the middle ground as far as AAP is concerned- we simply do not know where it will go, what it will do and what its priorities and policies are. We should give them time, give the new political idea time to develop and allow them to develop a national agenda before fully judging them.
We do the same in life. We define everything as white or black and then pick one over the other. We do not think of a middle ground, the grey area which usually signifies doubt and uncertainty is left unexplored. This is because we prefer simpler choices and it is easier to gain followers if the choices and alternates are simple, clear and easily distinguishable. Whether it be in politics, economics or environment we choose between left or rightist policies, socialism or capitalism, industries or forests.
This sort of polarisation is unfair and even evil because-
1) It makes us adamant and adhere to one side strictly without any scope for compromise
2) It blinds us to alternates that are somewhere in between
3) The result is a decision that could be disastrous since it is not the best choice
But to me, the worst result is when those who advocate the middle ground- the saner and yet more complex but infinitely better and logical solutions- are thrashed by both sides. The only way to be heard is to take extreme positions, it becomes a shouting match and the original message is lost. Pragmatism and solutions that can work are rarely considered and so we are reduced to "either with us or against us" type of situation.
It is this polarisation that has depressingly afflicted our debate, thinking and decision on almost every issue- environment versus industries, one religion against another, socialism versus capitalism and activists against politicians. It has to be either fully good or fully bad and this was most felt in the opinions expressed over the functioning of the Aam Admi Party.
It was a refreshing change to see an outsider earn the trust of the people, form a government, consult the people on significant issues and work for the people with a clear local level agenda. But it definitely has its own drawbacks- public protests by the government, signs of populism and theatricality etc. However, the discussion is never about what the AAP should do or what it can do to improve itself but only about how it is doomed to fail and how unfair and undemocratic its functioning is. No one mentions the fact that they have been in government for less than a month and all those who blame this party are willing to turn a blind eye to graver sins of all other political outfits. The new kid on the block is being thrashed by everyone and the media has been unforgiving in its attempts to discredit this young outfit.
But AAP should do well to realise a few things. Their strengths lie in their idealism, transparency, citizen engagement and local level manifestos. But a general election could stretch their resources thin, their message and attempts could get drowned out, manipulated or completely destroyed by the politics of an election campaign which involves slander, unfair criticism and relentless scrutiny along with the advantages that big parties have.
People's desire for change and urban support, several social movements and prominent individuals from industry and academia joining them provides an opportunity for AAP to provide a good government to the people. But they must be aware of the threat posed by populism, opportunists and getting carried away with the trappings, perks and power of position and do their best to counter these. Media visibility is both a strength as well as a threat and so they must be very careful in their public statements, public programs and image.
Such an analysis has not appeared and it has broad and generalised sweeping statements putting them in either the good or bad basket. We do not know what course the AAP experiment will take let alone its final result. But its novelty, challenge to established political realities and methods make it difficult for us to understand it properly since it has not fully taken shape. This irritates us, especially in a hyper-charged environment fed by the media, since we need an answer now.
Is the AAP then good or bad? Where electronics fails, let us use quantum theory and the famous Schroedinger's cat which provides us a middle ground. We do not know whether the cat is alive or dead. There is equal probability and so the cat is both alive and dead at the same time. This is the middle ground as far as AAP is concerned- we simply do not know where it will go, what it will do and what its priorities and policies are. We should give them time, give the new political idea time to develop and allow them to develop a national agenda before fully judging them.
No comments:
Post a Comment