Anna Hazare's movement and relevance of "Civil Society"

When the whole nation was in the celebration mood after the historic World Cup win, famous social activist Anna Hazare started a protest over the Jan Lokpal Bill at Jantar Mantar, New Delhi. His protest was on the Gandhian philosophy which insists on inflicting self pain in order to force the opposition to yield to one’s demand. In his movement he is accompanied by other social activists like Swami Agnivesh and Kiran Bedi. This movement has seen unprecedented support from the people around the country and public have registered similar protests in different cities. At the same time there are few voices which are questioning the legality of such protests and asking for its relevance in a democratic setup. Sharad Pawar has rejected the demand of his resignation from the Agricultural Ministry on the similar ground. The voices of criticism of Anna Hazare’s method though lesser in number and milder in attitude, still have a reasonable point. This brings us to the question of effectiveness of such protests, their validity in a democratic society and its practical relevance.

Are Gandhian protests valid in a democratic setup?
When Gandhi Ji started these protests first in South Africa and then in India, he was facing an autocratic government in which public had no say either in its formation or in its functioning. The administration was neither accountable to people nor was dependent on public for its selection or reelection. Hence in those conditions Satyagrah was the only option available to him to get his voice heard. Recent protests in the Arab World which are said to be inspired by Gandhian methods also happened in the similar conditions. Whether it is Egypt or Tunisia, the public protested against the dictators who came to power through undemocratic means and not against any democratically elected government. Last time when any Gandhian protest was successfully executed in India, it was during the time of emergency, when the government has gone from democracy to quasi dictatorship . These circumstances does not exist in today’s India. Anna Hazare and his supporters are not facing any dictatorship which came to power through undemocratic methods but a democratic government which works through the Members of Parliament duly elected by the public(directly or indirectly). The policy formation is the prerogative of parliament. Parliament comprises of both the members of ruling party and opposition, hence voice of every citizen whether who has voted for the winning candidate or not is heard. These circumstances make the ongoing protest firstly irrelevant, secondly invalid and more importantly technically against the wishes of people.

What is "Civil Society"? One of the important demands of Anna Hazare and his supporters is that members of civil society should be included in the committee. This brings us to a more important question that what exactly is a civil society.

Is it an elected body?

Is it a legal body?

Does it have a proper definition?

Does it have a formal structure?

Answers to all these questions is NO.

Civil society is a loose term for the people who are active on the social front in various but unofficial capacities, for and against various issues. They comprises of both drawing room activists who are active on English and Hindi news channels and grass root activists working in midst of the public. The exact number and names of these activists can never be ascertained and hence the exact constituent of a civil society can never be determined. The civil society will always remain an abstract idea without any physical existence. This makes the demand of including the members of civil society in the committee highly ambiguous and untenable. At present the movement is headed by Anna Hazare whose integrity is beyond doubt. But it can be the case that other members of the so called “Civil Society” may not be of such impeccable integrity and can misuse their position in future. What if any cracks appear in the movement and activists split into two factions? What if there exists another movement parallel to Anna’s movement which has its own set of demands? How will the government decides, what exactly is a “Civil Society” whose members they have to include in the committee?
The term “Civil Society” sounds very promising when it is used in TV studios and at various other public forums but honestly this term cannot be used for any practical purpose and if it is used once there are high chances that it will be misused in future.

But this movement has massive support throughout the country? Yes, it is true that people have supported this movement throughout the country. If I would have been in New Delhi I would also have joined Anna at Jantar Mantar. But it is not the first time when the people have assembled together for a cause. We have seen such protest on previous occasions also. Most recently in the aftermath of 26/11 attacks when people were filled with anger against politicians. But the General Elections which took place after a few months of that attack saw a very poor voter turnout, especially in metro cities like Bombay. This dual behavior has been quite a puzzle for social analysts. It seems that once in a while people get emotional about the state of the affairs and registers their protest in dramatic and sentimental manner, but when the entire hullabaloo dies they also drifts back to their comfort zone. The present situation would not have arrived if the people would have voted for the right candidate in the General Election. Still now, they have a chance to make amend for their past mistakes. If they are not happy with the performance of the government, they should not vote for it in the next election. If they are angry over the recent CWG loot or 2G scam they should not reelect Sheila Dixit or Karunanidhi in their respective states. Public protests that too once in a blue moon can never be a permanent solution to our problems, in long term it will result in anarchy only. Moreover it will give a message to the public that Government can be manipulated through these methods and in future we can see similar protests over various sensitive issues like Jat reservation etc.

What is the way forward? By the time I was writing this blog, the news have arrived that the government has yielded to activist’s demand and have decided to include members of civil society in the committee. As I predicted there has been news of the rift in the activist’s camp. Senior journalist Kanchan Gupta has asked the activists to give a detail account of the donation they and their trust are receiving from past few years. These demands are completely legitimate and as the matter will go further such clamors will increase. The root of all this exists in the quintessential abstract, indefinable structure of "Civil Society".
The agitation of these types is not the long term solution of the present state of affair which India is facing. If the Anna Hazare and the activist of his ilk want to do a real service to the nation, they should jump into active politics. People often complain that they don’t have any worthy option when they go for voting. Here is an opportunity for the social activists to provide them a real reason to participate in the biggest festival of the country. And if they don’t do so or we don’t vote for the right candidate or to any candidate at all then we should not complain later.

Theodore Roosevelt has famously said ,“The bulk of government is not legislation but administration. Men can never escape being governed. Either they must govern themselves or they must submit to being governed by others."