Thank GOD she ain't Anna!

One of the biggest problems about the media blitz around Anna Hazare is that one is exposed to a barrage of comments, views, opinions, etc from 'experts', 'commentators' and self-appointed guides of perception that our fecund country breeds like rabbits. Hence, whether one likes it or not, one comes across stuff like "I'd rather not be Anna" by Arundhati Roy in the Hindu.

There are a set of assertions in this article which foxes me in this context of the fight against corruption:

• "the Maoists and the Jan Lokpal Bill have one thing in common — they both seek the overthrow of the Indian State"
• "‘The People' only means the audience that has gathered to watch the spectacle of a 74-year-old man threatening to starve himself to death if his Jan Lokpal Bill is not tabled and passed by Parliament"
• "...we've heard him say nothing about things of urgent concern. Nothing about the farmer's suicides in his neighbourhood, or about Operation Green Hunt further away. Nothing about Singur, Nandigram, Lalgarh, nothing about Posco, about farmer's agitations or the blight of SEZs. He doesn't seem to have a view about the Government's plans to deploy the Indian Army in the forests of Central India."
• "He does ... [support] Raj Thackeray's Marathi Manoos xenophobia and has praised the ‘development model' of Gujarat's Chief Minister who oversaw the 2002 pogrom against Muslims."
• In Anna's village community in Ralegan Siddhi, there have been no Gram Panchayat or Co-operative society elections in the last 25 years

Frankly, as a concerned citizen of India and a patriot, and on the face of it, at least as intelligent and well-aware as Roy, I can't figure out why these assertions find place in her article.

My line of thinking one this subject is simple: Indians are sick and tired of corruption. We want it out of our system and we know it won't disappear with a waft of a magic wand. But a start needs to be made somewhere. Anna Hazare is a rallying point for our dismay and disgust, this movement is our starting point and our new-found conviction that we can indeed do something about it.

I don't associate Anna with any other cause or issue, and as far as I can recall, I don't think that in the last few months, he has tried to grab our attention for any other purpose either.

So, why does Roy drag in things like suicides in his neighbourhood, or about Operation Green Hunt, Nandigram, Lalgarh, farmer's agitations, SEZs, the Government's plans to deploy the Indian Army in the forests of Central India, Narendra Modi, Marathi Manoos, Ralegan Siddhi... (I am sure Roy could have thought of a million other issues if she had put her mind to it). Why does Anna or anyone else for that matter have to have a point of view on all the issues that face our country? More important - having a point of view is easy, Roy shows us how extremely easy it is; she probably has thirty of them before breakfast - why should Anna or any one person be expected to do something about all of these issues?

He has picked on one, been able to mobilize support and attention to the extent of getting an extremely unwilling Government to finally get on its knees and cry uncle. Is this why Roy uses the phrase "overthrow of the Indian State?" If yes, since when is this ridiculous UPA Government equal to the Indian state?

Anna stands for the move to eradicate corruption - hopefully there will be other Annas who will take up and champion the other causes that Roy has listed, and do something about them, beyond just talk. Let's not expect one person to do everything - in our country of a billion plus people, there will be more Annas.

One other thing - since when is Roy the arbiter of who or what is "the People"? How did she come to the conclusion that the 'the people' only means what she wishes it to mean? Come on Roy, we Indians are infinitely more intelligent than you seem to give us credit for. Here's a story about people who did not gather to watch Anna fast, but went a little beyond that.

From the start of the latest round of Anna vs the UPA, the Congress has attempted at character assassination. Manish Tiwari said that Anna was “neck deep in corruption”. Since then, interestingly, there has been a retraction, and there has been reports of Tiwari being dragged to court for defamation. There was a news item that Anna was a deserter from the Indian Army; this attempt also backfired. Maybe there were other attempts as well - I don't recall.

In David Lean's classic "Lawrence of Arabia", there is this classic one-liner: "Is he your tongue?" I am tempted to ask Roy the question "whose tongue are you?"