Poll Speak

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...