Editorial:-
Ridicule
and criticism are necessary ingredients of a political speech, but need they
also define the intellectual limits of political engagements? The campaign
juggernaut has not yet rolled out, but the bugles have been sounded and
aggressive posturing is noticeably winning over reasoned debate. It is
important for politics in Sikkim to realise that criticism is only part of a
political campaign, and spite cannot be the only ingredient of public speeches.
Criticism is best deployed to put issues in perspective and highlight failures
and shortcomings of opponents. Once the premise has been established, political
debates should build onwards on how the aspirant in question would have handled
the situation better and how they propose to repair what they see as ‘damaged’
or ‘compromised’. The substance of the public addresses has to be in the
solutions that the respective parties and their speakers have devised, the
vision they have sketched out for Sikkim and its people, and not in how
colourfully they can discredit their opponents. Of course, vicious public
rhetoric will make a leader a popular public speaker, but it is yet to
translate into votes even in Sikkim.
Politics
in Sikkim offers itself to no easy interpretations and parties in Opposition should
not believe that they can ride an anti-incumbency wave and elevate their poll
chances just by scratching away at the incumbent government’s failings. The
current scenario has a new spin in the sense that the perceptibly strongest
Opposition group is made up of former ruling front leaders, members and
supporters. For them, the challenge will be to win over former opponents. As
things stand, the level of public discourse from all sides is working only at
retaining existing support bases. With only a few months left for the
elections, this base needs to be consolidated and then inroads made into other
camps. For that, the brickbats will have to be supplemented with clearer
details on policy commitments. Bullet-point promises will no longer do; not in
a situation where even the Election Commission has announced that political
parties also explain the process by which they plan to deliver and fund
promises made in their manifestos. Superficial commitments might still draw an
applause from the hardcore supporters, but will not win new support because,
accept it, as far as promises and commitments on paper go, there is not much to
tell parties apart in Sikkim, or even at the national level apart. The swing
votes will then go to groups with the most convincing supporting arguments. And
that needs self-appraisals, not name-calling.
After
every low-blow has been delivered, every cheap shot taken, the audience will be
softened, and the knock-out punch of complete conversion will have to come in
the form of a convincing plan for the future. Although politicians, both, in
the ruling as well as the Opposition camps, and their coteries might be
obsessed with settling scores, it is not something that occupies the minds of
the voters. The voters are weighing options for the next five years, and five
years of witch-hunts don’t rank very high in their list of priorities. It will
take more imagination than painting enemies, it will have to be about sharing
visions. The political debate should be about who has a better plan for Sikkim,
not about who has been bad or who could be worse...
No comments:
Post a Comment
Readers are invited to comment on, criticise, run down, even appreciate if they like something in this blog. Comments carrying abusive/ indecorous language and personal attacks, except when against the people working on this blog, will be deleted. It will be exciting for all to enjoy some earnest debates on this blog...