|
Of late, it has become common for the upper and the rich middle classes in the metropolitan cities to stay away from the polling booths on election day. This has been criticized at length, fears have been expressed that such apathy is a danger signal for democracy, but still the situation has not changed. This became evident when the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation went to the polls last week along with other civic bodies in Maharashtra. Only 46 per cent of Mumbaikars cast their votes, the bulk of them coming from the over seven million slum-dwellers in the nation’s commercial capital. So, once more, rich and fashionable Mumbai made it clear that, for the most part, it sees elections as a pastime of hoi pollloi and it does not want to have anything to do with the exercise. And this even though eminent citizens from the same class urged the need to participate in the process to elect city fathers, who will do what is needed for Mumbai.
And Mumbai is not the only city to witness such lack of interest on the part of the rich and the comfortably off. New Delhi, Chennai, Bangalore and Hyderabad are also in the same boat, with recent figures showing the poll percentage as being far below 50. Calcutta is the sole exception. But then, West Bengal has never fallen in line with the rest of the country, and, despite the famous saying, others have not bothered to follow the state or its capital city.
Why this indifference? Perhaps it has something to do with the relentless campaign against the political class in the media, particularly in the context of the mayhem that marks almost every Parliament session these days. There are also the various financial scandals involving politicians. Of late, Anna Hazare and his team have helped to create this lack of interest even though they were campaigning mainly against the Congress.
Radical change
Hazare’s efforts only helped in tarring all politicians with the same brush — which, perhaps, was not what he wanted. Not only that, the voters did not show any interest in the citizens who contested as independents, taking a cue from Team Anna. Civil society activism still has very few takers even among the class that waxes so eloquent about it in drawing rooms and clubs.
There is another reason as well. A civic election is about better roads, more water per head, and better conservancy and drainage facilities. The urban rich today live in a world which is far less affected by such problems of daily existence that constitute the stark reality of the less fortunate and the slum-dweller. The rich do not have to vote to have a councillor who will work for them — any councillor will be at their beck and call, thanks to their money power and social influence. For the rest, they can only visit the polling booth, press the EVM button and hope for the best.
The scenario in the major urban centres remains the same during the assembly or the Lok Sabha polls; whichever party wins, the privileged know that their class interests will be protected. So why bother to vote? In Calcutta, it is different because of a much more politicized electorate that sees the vote as a means of continuing a political line or of change rather than as an instrument to usher in a mere change of personnel.
And that is where the danger lies. A time may come when, like the rich, the poor in urban areas may also start getting disinterested as the realization dawns that the difference among opposing candidates is merely skin deep, and the aam admi should really not expect anything. The indifference of the rich will never lead to the apple cart getting upset. That of the others may lead to resentment and anger and the call for a radical change may soon be heard. There is already unrest in the air.
|
