Why they want a saviour

There is no getting away from Baba Ramdev. Even in a Thai island, one is kept informed about the life and times of the fasting and furious yoga guru, a 46-year-old man with a flowing black beard in trademark saffron, who not only has a mass following — some 20 million-plus viewers in India tuning in to his early morning television show

— but also wields control over a yoga and meditation network reportedly worth several billion rupees. The local newspaper carries a six column report, with photograph, about how the Baba is making Indian politicians tremble. The report was written a few hours before the midnight crackdown on the Baba and his supporters at Delhi’s Ramlila Grounds — the “ground zero” of the yoga guru’s mass hunger strike against corruption. With that act, the situation has only become more dramatic and charges of government high-handedness are flying thick and fast on cyberspace.
Sitting one space removed from the breathless saturation coverage of the Baba Ramdev saga in our media, two immediate questions come to mind. One, why are recent anti-corruption movements — first led by Anna Hazare and now by Baba Ramdev — getting so much traction? Two, why is the government seemingly unable to gauge the level of support such movements will get? The second question sprang up when the authorities came up with this gem of a reason for the crackdown on Baba Ramdev’s long-publicised hunger strike and rally against corruption — apparently, the police had permitted a rally of up to 5,000 people, but thousands more turned up, so the rally had to be stopped for “law and order” reasons.
Since Mr Hazare’s hunger strike against corruption earlier this year, many media pundits have spent hours of television time and reams of newsprint telling us why such movements are a bad idea, how the civil society leaders are unrepresentative of the people, how giving in to hunger strike is like giving in to blackmail and so on and so forth. So why is there so much popular resonance the moment a similar agitation is started by the yoga guru? And why can’t the government figure out beforehand the level of support such a movement will get, so that it can take pre-emptive action?
In opinion poll after opinion poll in recent years, corruption has consistently been mentioned as one of the top issues of concern to Indians. So it should not really surprise anyone that any charismatic leader can raise this issue and expect huge support. With rising petrol prices and high inflation, especially in food, the sheen of emerging India is failing to rub off on much of middle India any more, not to speak of the millions below that highly controversial poverty line. On top of that, there are daily reports of huge graft in high places, be it the 2G scam or over the Commonwealth Games 2010 contracts. The impression that some people are having a very good time through unfair means while the rest are suffering is one that is bound to lead to resentment.
That is the feeling coming through in these movements, and there is little point in rationally establishing that some aspects of these movements — or their leaders — are irrational. There is a trust deficit. Growing numbers of people, from middle India to those struggling in the margins, are desperately looking for a messiah. What matters is not how such a person or persons come across to the pundits but how they are able to reach out to the increasing numbers of people who have lost faith in the current crop of leaders. The efforts by the Centre to talk to the Baba, many of whose views send a frisson down liberal spines, before his planned rally showed that the government was at least starting to understand this feeling. But whatever goodwill had been generated by those meetings — and the earlier agreement with Mr Hazare’s supporters to set up an independent panel over the Lokpal Bill — has now largely been dissipated by the midnight swoop on Baba Ramdev and his followers. Who ordered the swoop is unclear, but it is clear that various arms of the government are working at cross purposes.
What suffers in the process is the government’s image — the image of being decisive and more important, of being against corruption. Now there may be protracted negotiations between the Baba and various ministers before some sort of a settlement is declared, but the image that will probably remain uppermost in the popular mind is of a government that acts against corruption only grudgingly and when pushed to the wall. It is an unfair image of a government that is right now prosecuting a former minister and other senior leaders of its own party and coalition partners on various corruption charges. But getting a fairer image will require faster and more visible action not only against corruption but also vis-a-vis movements such as those led by Mr Hazare and Baba Ramdev. It will also require more empathy from the powers that be when people groan about high prices. In politics, EQ (emotional quotient) is usually more important than IQ (intelligence quotient). Someone who has just found out that his favourite food is now beyond his means will not be comforted by being told it is part of a global trend.

The importance of perception is all too obvious in Thailand also. The Thai election campaign is now in full swing for the July 3 national polls. Like India, Thailand is witnessing an unsettling price pressure amid robust economic growth. Prices of food, fuel, electricity and daily consumer goods are up.
There is palpable disenchantment with reigning politicians, and a desperate yearning for change. A group which broke away from the ruling Democratic Party has put up posters carrying images of dogs, monkeys, lizards, with the controversial slogan “Don’t Let Animals Enter Parliament” — a reference to corruption in Thai politics. In these despondent times, there is a crackle and a buzz about a telegenic 43-year-old businesswoman, with almost no previous political experience. No doubt, there is delicious irony in the fact that she is Yingluck Shinawatra, youngest sister of the famously controversial Thaksin Shinawatra, Thailand’s former Premier, accused of corruption, and currently in self-imposed exile. Yingluck, widely believed to be a proxy for her brother, relies not only on her brother’s “pro-poor” credentials, but equally her freshness, charisma, ability to “connect” with ordinary people and energy.
There are lessons here for Indian politicians.

Patralekha Chatterjee writes on development issues in India and emerging economies and can be reached at patralekha.chatterjee@gmail.com