Delhi rape case: Beware of the symbolism and quick-fixes

A few decades ago, futurism looked like an exciting career for a few who could understand technology and social trends, think out of the box and predict the future.

A few of them, such as Alvin Toffler and Nicholas Negroponte became cult figures. But they soon faded out of our excitement, probably because the real future turned out to be far more exciting than what they predicted.

Since 26/11 in Mumbai, we too have been witnessing some sort of futurism in India too — mostly predicting the transformation of the country from a chaotic mess into an accountable modern nation state — all betting on the uprising of our citizenry.

However, candle-light vigils and marches against the Mumbai mayhem died sooner than many expected and the government continued its business as usual until the Rs 70,000 crore irrigation scam raised the heat again. That too died down and the minister, who was allegedly responsible, is back in his office.

Anna Hazare was the next favourite of the social-futurists. The media and social commentators, including some respected sociologists, had no doubt that his anti-corruption movement, that saw thousands pouring out into the streets of Delhi, was the tipping point the country was waiting for. The Indian version of an Arab spring that was going to change things for ever.

Protestors at Jantar Mantar. Naresh Sharma

But, Anna was fooled by wily politicians, his own lack of understanding of modern India and the people’s primary need to sustain their ordinary lives. What was projected as a historic turning point turned out to be a dud. It’s doubtful if he can get even a hundred people to follow him if he chooses to march again.

The latest in the series of endorphin-raising public movements is the protest in Delhi over the macabre gangrape and murder of a young girl. That it is still continuing for two weeks is unprecedented and promising, but to believe that it is going to be the real wave that will change India because the country’s youth are riding it, is a bit too optimistic. The earlier movements too looked really forceful and promising.

This pessimist-futurism might enrage many, but given our past, that too the recent past, the protestors going back home and the country slipping back to its stone-age comforts is a near certainty. The reason is not a lack of sincerity or disinterest of our people, but the wile and guile of our politicians and establishment.

If they have done it in the past, they will do it now and several times in the future as well. They are our biggest obstacle to progress and transformation; but being a democracy, we cannot do without them.

The first signs of this inherent twisted mind of our politicians was visible as soon as people poured into Vijay Chowk, Raisina Hill and the India Gate. Perhaps after closely watching the Anna crowds swelling, flaring up and dying down in a few days, their natural instinct was to ignore and wait; but when it didn’t happen, they tried their basic trick of perverse reductionism and symbolism.

The anger of the people, although triggered by the angst of the rape, was against a regime that couldn’t do anything to curtain the violence against women. People came out, not only because of the outrage, but also because of the genuine fear of violence against them — most of them had some personal experience. They, in fact, openly expressed it in their placards and vox pop.

But the government, the administration and the police consciously tried to disaggregate the anger, and pick up just the keyword — rape. Every single response, despite unpardonable delays, smacked of this clever reductionism: address the most immediate, promise something and send the protestors home seemed to be their strategy. Therefore, their promises were so predictable: stringer punishment of the accused, stronger laws, more policemen on the road, and steps to make the public transport system more secure for women.

What people asked for was a system change; but what the regime promised was response to a rape.