The Aaam Aaadmi has been made into a national commodity. From a term used to denote the common man if not the impoverished the expression has now gained currency for a connotation of a political party. Everyone has of course the right to choose a name or an expression for their political pary, but this usage is redolent of populism and a method to carry crowds. We are hearing that funds for the party will not be a problem, the Aaam Aaadmi will contribute. Does it, here I mean the masses, have the political or economic force to do so? The masses in the country are an impoverished lot, what do they know of the new political afflatus surrounding some new found leaders, who have in a way dethroned their main leader from the desire to seige power?
The anti corruption rhetoric is very good for the country, provided it serves the purpose of weeding out corruption, including its allies like nepotism, fraudelent means to seige political power, muscle flexing and brow beating.
The antinomies of the country are: the poor who are getting poorer, and the rich who are getting richer. The former wallows in poverty, decrepitude and dust, the latter is besotted in money and its ' natural ' ally, at least in our country; power. There are people who are hungry for food, and those that are hungry for power. The game of politics is muscle power and money power.
By choosing a populist name such as this, by the new political party, there is disrespect to the class that constitutes it. This class is fighting for civil rights, this class is asking for food and drinking water, this class wallows in hovels and slums, this class is asking for good governance, quality of life and civil power. To use this expression which denotes a mass struggle, is to injure it and flummox people into thinking of a social concern and a revolution, which is inapposite at this juncture, to beguile people into wrong thinking, to bequeath the nation of a falsification of legacy. For, after all does this not mean, that we have never shown concern for this class? Does this not mean that in the past none of our leaders have envisioned a class struggle, or were not empathetic to the concerns and dilemma of the poor? Is this the only political party to think of such a construct of and for the poor? Instead of being so eager to give itself an identity, an apparently selfless one this new party, which claims to have members from all over the country are misleading us into the haven of a false and prejudiced promised land. By using the expression of the weak, they are taking us for a ride, and trying to consciously move us into tears, as well as to intervene with middle class morality and sensibility.
Surely there could have been a more relevant and imaginative name for the newly baptized? Before putting on their thinking caps, the party is indulging into populism, and short term fame. By claiming that it has an all India basis, it is befooling us into its showered world of probity, when many of its members have already acquired some disrepute in terms of money deals, false prophecy, mingling spiritualism with chicanery etc.
It's not easy to rule India. You have to rule your organization first, in this complex and double edged game we call politics. Over to our New masters, and the best of luck- to them!