feeds from sacw.net
print version[ . . .] His is a catch-all populism, capitalizing on popular discontent and welcoming all comers. In reaching out to the businesses classes, he has sung the praises of commerce and industry, and has insisted that “99 percent†of businesspeople are the victims, not the perpetrators, of corruption. Although opposed to some particular cases of privatization or corporate malfeasance, he sees the root cause of India’s problems as the corruption of the country’s political class — ignoring the much wider net of economic and political forces that entrap the “common man.â€
One of the AAP’s main ideologues, Yogendra Yadav, a socialist, is clearly trying hard to bring a more structural analysis into the AAP’s policies — insisting, for example, that “corruption†is actually a symptom of the country’s deeper structural flaws. But the rhetoric of corruption has more often relied on a middle-class moralism, with the suggestion that tough enforcement and moral rectitude will solve the problem.
So we should take Kejriwal at his word when he says he isn’t a leftist. But he also insists his political philosophy is grounded neither in the Right nor the center. In this, Kejriwal’s tone is reminiscent of 2008 Barack Obama. (In fact, he has cited Obama as an inspiration, and his campaign benefited from savvy use of social media, crowdsourced fundraising and a committed group of grassroots volunteers.) He is full of hope and change, ready to clean up the dirty political scene by focusing on solutions, not tired ideologies. Unlike Obama (wisely, given the current political climate in India), Kejriwal doesn’t promise to cross the divide and work with his opponents; he’s more of a pugilist, and delights in hurling accusations at Congress and the BJP alike. Still, his overall approach to governance seems Obama-esque: he wants to usher in a new era of post-ideological, pragmatic, transparent governance.
The concept of the post-ideological is, of course, fundamentally vacuous. The AAP says it is against rigid, unwavering doctrine, but this is mere common sense — an empty platitude with which almost no one could disagree.
But while the party’s “post-ideological†stance may be linguistically meaningless, it has certainly been politically expedient. While creating the facade of technocratic competence and reasoned good governance, post-ideological politics (along with its related phrase “the end of history†) has been used as its own ideology to suggest that there’s no need or possibility to question, much less attempt to restructure, the current socioeconomic system. We’ve seen how the ideology of post-political hope and change has worked in the United States: Obama’s “post-political†approach has been, in reality, a strong affirmation of the free market, in realms as disparate as healthcare, education and finance. [. . .]
FULL TEXT HERE: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2013/12/indias-post-ideological-politician/
