Is the Indian National Congress Necessary?

An enlightened opposition is one of the foundations of a democracy. To present an alternate point of view, another vision, create a public discourse where complex issues are discussed and ideas exchanged in a constructive manner: this is critical for a nation like ours which stands at the crossroads of history.

So while we discuss the notion of a Congress-mukta bharata with its various significances, we also realize that if we need to strengthen the nation, we should have a party looking at other creative possibilities that our minds could consider. Alas, while we look for such an alternative vision, we see no clear enunciated darshana.

Politics is indeed the art of the possible. Were it too, an art of the potential, this is what I would like to see from an opposition (whether it is Congress or non-Congress is surely a moot point for this consideration).

1)            Bharata-Darshana: What kind of a country do we want India to be? 20 years from now? 50 years from now? 100 years from now? We need what is called nowadays in Growth Management as a Massive Transformative Purpose or Big Hairy Audacious Goals. We have really not seen that from Congress. Often, one should look at this teleologically, as far as possible, and then work backwards. This deep emotional engagement with followers or possible followers for an overarching paradigm is critical. Short-term tactical moves, alliance and compromises only delay the inevitable. A slow deterioration in the caliber of the party members over time since intense sense of ownership is not important.

2)            Values or Principles: Congress cannot really claim to be a party of principles. It is a dynastic entity attempting to be democratic. It tries to manage the complexity of Hindustan with shifting ideologies. In 1991 it veered to the right and then shifted to left-of-center in the second version of Manmohan Singh. It rejected Jagan as contender for Chief Ministership of Andhra because he was the son of previous Chief Minister while allowing Gogoi and countless others to advance their children. It extolled Manmohan’s probity while allowing countless scams on its watch. No wonder there is a crisis of value management in the party. The cadres are not there for principles or values but for convenience or immediate returns.

3)            Organizational Strength: A quiet strength is needed in the entity’s hierarchy or non-hierarchy. The Communists had a well-defined base and depth among the grassroots. Such can be built on a vast scale but requires detailed and granular management. Rajiv Gandhi talked about organizational re-building in 1987 and we are still awaiting it. The Left (whatever is left of it) depends more on goons rather than a sanghathan that can interweave with the complex fabric of the nation.

4)            Leadership: A leader is one with vision, creativity, passion, integrity and skill. He does not have to be raucous like a Kejri. Or a detached one like Rahul Ji. We needs selfless leaders like we saw during our struggle for Independence, where they staked all to reach one goal: Freedom. But we also need leaders who connect and engage the common man. They do not need to be contrarian just for the sake of it. But act or speak only to enhance the polity and the people.

5)            People: Last, but not the least, it is the kind of people who are allowed to run for elections or be office-bearers. This is where the compromise begins. AAP started with an inchoate movement to remove corruption but ending up compromising on the kinds of people it allowed to win on its ticket. The desire to scale rapidly can be a bane of the purest movements or intentions. This is an example of where the party failed its followers. Maintaining the purity of the original impulse is as important as having it in the first place.

Thus, we see a complex emergence of various movements, a national presence trying to contend with regional and local aspirations, the dance of centripetal and centrifugal instincts. There is nothing new in this. We have seen such a conflict since the times of the Mahabharata. We saw this with Chanakya and with Sankara and then, partially, with the Moguls and later even with the Marathas.

Whoever emerges must come out of an intense manthana of vichara and dhyana, out of the deep love for the nation or nations and a vast empathy and connect. If Congress too is to reinvent itself, such a surgery will be needed which would entail removal of significant amounts of cancerous outgrowths and devitalized organs. Sometimes, greater value is created when an entity or individual realizes the futility of its existence and makes way for something higher, purer, greater. Can the present Congress do that at its core? Then, it might have served its purpose and, in complete ending, justify its existence to the country. Then, something else of value might emerge.