As a student of political science, I have always
wondered why communist parties like CPI and CPI-M have not fared well in Tamil
Nadu elections, in spite of having a clear ideological inclination towards uplifting
the life of the poor and oppressed. Communist parties are the pioneers of
so-called ‘populist mobilisations’ which has become the way of political
mobilisation in Tamil Nadu today. Starting from the way of including more than
three fourth of people as oppressed to projecting themselves as the sole
saviour of those oppressed, communist parties did set the tone of today’s
politics even before the entry of Dravidian parties in Tamil Nadu’s electoral
scene. But today these parties are nothing more than any newly formed fringe
parties with respect to electoral results in Tamil Nadu. Many reasons are
attributed for this pathetic situation like lack of charismatic leadership at Tamil
Nadu level, lack of elite political clienteles etc. But as we know, the
so-called ‘Charisma’ is not entirely ‘ascribed’ attribute, but to a larger
extent is an ‘achieved’ attribute in politics. It is an ever-going process by
which a leader develops a ‘politically acceptable image’. Similarly, political
clienteles are not eternally given to any political party as such. The
electoral victories and perceived personal advantage to rent-seeking elites
will distribute and re-distribute political clienteles from time to time. Hence,
these reasons are not independent reasons but dependent reasons ‘or’ in Marxist
terms, these reasons do not form the base but are part of superstructure with
base still being elusive. My recent visit to CPI-M office in T-nagar, Chennai
regarding my PhD research, and my half day stint with communist party cadres
gave some interesting yet probable answers to the above question, which I
thought worth sharing.
I reached the office by 3 PM and I already got the
appointment from a veteran communist leader. As I reached the office well
before the appointment time, I started interacting with the few party cadres
available there while waiting in the lobby. The interaction was casual and all
the people present there were very cordial and informative. But the striking
point was, all the cadres present there addressed me with a distinct word
‘Thozhare’, a typical communist greeting meaning friend or fellow comrade. Even
though I addressed them with words such ‘sir’, ‘boss’, ‘anna’, ‘thambi’, all of
them preferred to address me as “thozhare”. Despite being used to this greeting
from my childhood, the sincerity and casualness with which they uttered that
word numerous times confounded me. Even forgetfully they didn’t address me with
any other word other than ‘thozhare’. As I was interacting with the cadres, the
veteran leader came and cordially welcomed me and answered all my research
questions with utmost sincerity and humility. Since he looked like a
septuagenarian leader, I preferred to address him with term ‘Ayya’ during the
entire course of discussion. When we finished and as we got up, I thanked him
uttering ‘nandri ayya’, meaning thankyou sir. He accepted my gratitude with a
smile but immediately corrected my choice of words! He said “thozhare, always
call me ‘thozhare’ as we always prefer to be a thozhar to all the cadres,
common people and there should be equality in all relationship”! I smiled and
thanked him again with his choice of words and departed. Even though I
physically left the office, I couldn’t stop thinking about their greeting of
‘thozhare’ for the rest of the day. ‘Thozhare’ is definitely a great word and
treating all as equals is an even greater political ideal to have. But is it
suitable in a country like India and for region like Tamil Nadu? Tamil Nadu is
a place where people love to worship their leaders. Here, the leadership status
is solidified not on the basis of the quality of work done but based on the
kind of continuous deference people show on you. Whether it is a cinema star or
a cricketer, people love to worship their heroes. People innovate new ways of
worshipping from time to time to create and recreate the ‘leadership image’ of
their heroes. In fact, leaders are born in India not because of their innate
qualities but are ‘made’ by their avid, ardent, diehard “bhakts’ and their
innovative ways to show deference. The sorry state of affairs in Tamil Nadu is
that, any person either a cinema star or a politician, who does not understand
this dynamic can never become a leader in public eyes.
It is not the problem of the people of
Tamil Nadu, but the point is, they don't see this as a problem at all. The act
of worshipping their heroes has its roots in the culture of Tamil Nadu which in
turn is dialectically bound with the social psyche of its people. A child which
encounters the act of worshipping like raising cut-outs, performing milk
abhishekams, justifying every act of their heroes without logical thinking,
belittling the perceived enemy of their heroes without any guilt etc, by their
much-adored parents, leaders and elders in their locality from its childhood
accepts these as universal truths and the way of leading life. These acts get
emotionally connected and imprinted in the child's psyche in such a way that it
seldom deems it necessary to use the rational mind before performing such acts
from then on. When the child grows, their heroes change, but the feeling of
showing unconditional deference to their heroes continues and is reproduced by
them whenever required which socialize the new children they encounter, and the
process continues. As a famous saying goes, ‘the mob don't think and then act;
but they act and then think’, people generally act based on the psychological
imprints they gained through their voluntary and involuntary socialisations
from their childhood and for actions which they deem emotional and hinders their
self-esteem they react based on a predetermined pattern set on their social psyche
without applying the rational mind. When it comes to their heroes, the people
of Tamil Nadu have always learnt to be emotional from their childhood!
The problem does not lie with the communist parties either.
Communist parties all over the world are known for the strategies and policies
which tend to break the pre-existing power relations which control the world. They
try to create a society which is more egalitarian in every aspect known, and hence
they are always cautious in coining every term they use that it does not entail
domination but faster equality. They tend to create ‘leaders’ in ‘everyone’
true to their ideal which Che Guevara beautifully phrased- “liberators don't
exist; people liberate themselves”.
Then where is the real problem? The problem neither lies
with the people nor with the communist parties but lies in the fact that these
methods of communist parties are not suitable for the people like that of Tamil
Nadu. The people of Tamil Nadu either do not want it or not confident in
liberating themselves. They need liberators, demigods and messiahs to save them
from their misfortune. They are not ready to attach themselves to the ongoing hard-fought
struggle which the communist parties project as the road to liberation. They don’t
have both time and energy and at the same time they are also not convinced yet,
that struggle for liberation would uplift their life. They simply need a messiah,
demigod to become their leader and change their lives.
The leaders that communist parties project in Tamil Nadu are
undoubtedly leaders with good qualities and great passion for people’s
politics. But the fact that they are not allowing themselves to be worshipped
is not helping the cause. In the eyes of the common man of Tamil Nadu, a true leader
is the one who is worshipped by his followers publicly, thanks to the
socialisation they received from their childhood. They seldom try to understand the true
attributes of their leader, rather try to imagine and attribute all non-worldly
powers to their leaders and enjoy their omnipotence. Either of the two must
change if communist parties wish to lay a solid foundation to change their
electoral fortunes in this state; the people’s nature or communist parties’
unpragmatic politics.
