Anna’s campaign against corruption: Revisiting the elephant-blind men parable

By
Randeep Wadehra & Amar Nath Wadehra

It’s all a bit confusing actually; confusing enough for us to revisit the parable of blind men and the elephant. Remember the story where six blind men, each of whom tries to describe an elephant by touching its one part? Like, the one who touched its tail thought that the elephant resembled a rope and so on. Similar is the confusion among our intellectuals about Anna Hazare’s movement against corruption. Our intellectuals and socio-political analysts are unable to agree on the movement’s credentials and intentions. Some allude to the movement’s saffron connection while others see Sonia’s hand aimed at discrediting Manmohan Singh and pave the way for Rahul Gandhi. There are still others who feel that Anna is his own man and has no political agenda. And of course there are any number of wise people who aver that it would be dangerous for the civil society to force the government into making of laws – whatever their worth to the nation at large may be. But, things do not end here. Some see Anna as today’s Gandhi, others call him a fascist. Still others call him a product of media hype. Then there are question marks over his intentions, efficacy and legitimacy vis-à-vis anticorruption movement. Does he want to supplant existing democratic institutions with his own version of people’s will? Aren’t his actions amounting to the subversion of due democratic processes? Still others feel that no matter how well intentioned Anna Hazare’s thoughts and actions might be the resultant Anti-Corruption Bill – if at all it becomes an Act – will remain on paper because there is no way it can be implemented – given the state of governance in the country.

But this is not the only ‘elephant’ that has confused our ‘blind’ men and women. The other elephant is corruption that has defied definition too. For some it entails paying petty bribes to petty government functionaries to get some legitimate/illegitimate work done in a government office. For others it has to be something like 2G or CWG scam to become eligible for the ‘honor’. But then corruption manifests itself in so many ways. Like a senior defense officer expecting, and getting, costly gifts from his subordinates on such occasions as marriage of his progeny, his promotion or transfer etc (there are more brazen versions among the civilian counterparts); or a school teacher expecting and getting gifts from students on such occasions as his/her birthday, Teachers’ Day etc or the school authorities asking for donations, and getting them too; or a journalist who takes money to publish or suppress a news report or a media house that hosts paid news; or you can get favorable verdict if you have the right amounts of cash to deliver at the concerned judge’s doorstep. No matter which way you turn you face corruption. Whether you are a true blue Indian citizen or a tourist from abroad – the corrupt system remains evenhandedly exploitative. Unless, of course, you belong to the top echelons of our politico-bureaucratic pyramid because that is where the corruption’s reverse-gangotri is situated. Most of the tainted moolah reaches there from various tributaries at the lower echelons. To call corruption a hydra-headed monster is to grossly underestimate its size, reach and appetite.

From time to time different blind men have tried to identify the shape and size of corruption in order to finish it off. Gandhi wanted the Indian National Congress to be dismantled because he could see the sort of people who had joined its ranks and would be using it for their own vested interests. But what Gandhi could not realize was that it was not the Indian National Congress that personified corruption. It was there in the incipient politico-administrative culture of the newly independent Republic of India. The next blind man of substance was JP or Jai Prakash Narain who thought that by dislodging Indira Gandhi he would be able to slay the monster; but, unfortunately, remained blind to the propensities of all those who were supposedly his followers and supporters but were, in fact, using him as an instrument of advancing their political ambitions. If Gandhi was getting increasingly alienated from the new Government of India and his assassination saved him from an embarrassingly isolated life JP was promptly sidelined by his camp followers once Indira Gandhi was routed in the polls. It was too late

1 2 >>