From AAP to BJP: Protest politics is a case of serpent eating its own tail

Madhya Pradesh chief minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan is organising a state-wide bandh today in a geography he governs to seek a Rs 5,000 crore relief package for the farmers of his state from the Centre. It is the culmination of a new trend in protest politics and its subsequent legitimisation. For a party that termed a similar act by former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal as “anarchic”, protest politics is fast becoming a case of the serpent eating its own tail. “There is on display a ‘Federation of Anarchists’ on the streets of Delhi,” BJP leader Arun Jaitley wrote in a January 21, 2014 blog. “Anarchy cannot be Alternate Politics.” He was referring to, among other things, Kejriwal’s January 21, 2014 dharna at Rail Bhawan, where Delhi’s chief minister was protesting the inaction of Delhi Police that reports to the Centre. [caption id=“attachment_1422405” align=“alignleft” width=“380”] AAP workers at a rally in Amritsar. AFP.[/caption] Alternative or substitute, a trend had begun, with Andhra Pradesh chief minister Kiran Kumar Reddy following suit on February 5, 2014, with a little twist. His dharna at Jantar Mantar was against the bifurcation of the state by his own party, the Congress. The currency of his protest was the same as Kejriwal’s — a few members of his Cabinet, supporters jumping over barricades and so on. Minus the barricades and police drama, on January 13, 2014, two Congress MPs, Sanjay Nirupam and Priya Dutt, took protest politics further. In a sit-down dharna, they sought reduction in electricity rates in Mumbai — following the script of Kejriwal in Delhi. Like Reddy, the two Congress MPs were protesting against their own government. Perhaps, the party is experimenting with protest politics once it’s ousted from the Centre and these are safe practice sessions. On March 2, 2014, Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar went on a dharna to seek a special status for his state. The pivot of his dharna was political largess: “What parameters were followed for giving special category status to Seemandhra,” he asked. “We will not tolerate this and so in spite of being the chief minister, we decided to call a bandh.” Almost like a relay race, the baton of dharna is being handed from one party to another, with several others possibly waiting and watching. First off the blocks was Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) against Congress and broke new ground — and earned itself the ‘anarchic’ label. Next followed Congress against Congress. The Janata Dal (United) followed. And now, BJP. Intellectuals, writers and commentators, who embraced the A-word to denounce AAP forgot it completely when Reddy, Kumar and Chouhan used the tool of dharna to express similar angst. As a political entrepreneur, Kejriwal took on and faced the risk of being so labelled. Now that other parties are travelling on the same path, the label has became meaningless. And so, street protests by serving chief ministers have been legitimised. While this is good for political parties to garner attention, beyond a point it holds an uneasy bubble of constant instability for the rest of us. Every time a dharna is organised, a large number of people face inconveniences — irrespective of whether they align themselves against corruption, seeking special status, making new states or demanding aid from the Centre. But we will have to learn to deal with it. As all students of political science know, protests are a legitimate way democracy provides for expression of dissatisfaction, even discontent. A democracy without protest infrastructure is incomplete, shallow. Violence, of the kind we saw yesterday between BJP and AAP volunteers, is out of the question — no compromises there. The rising trend of serving chief ministers hitting the streets of protest can be delegated to centre-state relations, where both can tighten or loosen their politics such that an equilibrium is attained. In these disruptive times, however, that equilibrium is going to take some time coming.