The austerity potion: too difficult to swallow

I was initially happy when I came to know that the Indian politicians, especially the Congress party leaders, are on an austerity drive and that they were giving 20% of their salary for helping out the people affected by the drought. Though this might not be a huge help, a small step in the right direction, I thought. However, as always, the happiness was short-lived, as this "drive" went way out of hand. This turned out to be another of those dramas that our society demands - be austere in public, do anything in private - just like almost every other "norm" in our country. It is high time we get out of such mentality.

Demanding the politicians to travel in economy class, instead of business class; commanding them to vacate their suites at the hotels - if this is what the austerity drive boils down to, then I feel that the whole idea is absurd. The reason the Congress party gives for the "drive" is that the politicians need to observe austerity in the current situation, since the nation is under draught. How ridiculous can the argument get! If we look at the numbers, the amount saved might not even come up to 0.1% of the resources needed to deal with the draught. The party should be worrying about other ways of countering the issue - stop building monuments or statues that drain the state or national exchequer, provide alternate means of livelihood to the affected people - there are many ways; one just needs to "think". Instead of going for such ludicrous drives, if they could reduce corruption by a minuscule amount, the nation will move ahead by huge strides.

One rarely gets to hear the "truth" from a politician. But I guess, Dr. Shashi Tharoor was going against the norm and being candid, when he said that he was staying at the hotel since the Kerala Bhavan (residence provided by the government) was not able to furnish a gym and privacy, which he needed. Is it wrong to have such needs? I don't think so. Is he using the taxpayer's money for satisfying his requirements? Nope. Is anyone harmed by his residence at a hotel? Nope! Dr. Tharoor was using his own hard-earned money (it doesn't actually matter if it was hard-earned, or not - as long as it is his own earning) to pay for his stay. I do not see the need for the hue and cry raised by the government over the issue. If the people feel that the politician is misusing his money, he would be thrown out in the next election.

What does one mean when one says that the sole purpose of the politicians is to "serve" people? Why is it a requirement that there should be a sense of sacrifice when someone decides to become a politician? What sort of a non-sensical notion is that? If we stick on to such notions, we will remain in the dark ages of yesterday and never move forward. If the educated, forward-thinking, liberal youth has to be inspired to even think about a career in politics, there should be a basic incentive, in addition to the feeling of "serving" people. And unless the educated youth of the country are inspired to get into politics, there is no way our country will ever move forward. One thing to be noted here is that I refer to politics as a career, a means of livelihood. A doctor, a social worker, an engineer, a lawyer, a cop, a professor and a myriad of other professions - "serve" people in one way or the other. Just because a politician is a "representative" of the people does not mean that he should lead an austere life. Why would a sane, educated person join politics, if he will not be able to send his kids to a good private school providing a high quality education, just because he is a politician and needs to be "austere", when he could have done the same, had he remained in any other profession he had chosen... say, an engineer at a private company. Such incidents only drive home the point that politics is not the career to aspire for, instead of encouraging the youth to think about the same!

Now, the other issue that this whole drama has brought to light is the hypocrisy of the public. Hypocrisy thrives in our society - we see it in our everyday lives, our own family and friends. But there has to be a time when one needs to make a stand, have a say... just a statement that the sanctimoniousness is not going unnoticed - maybe someone might even understand and change, though that might be asking for too much... or, is it? Hope is on what I live... Anyway, let us not digress. How can the public say that the politicians should lead an abstinent, austere life, when they themselves cannot live up to those standards? When every man tries to have as lavish a wedding as he can afford for his own son or daughter, what right does he have to criticise a rich person when they spend lavishly on their own requirements? Is it not utterly hypocritical to point hands at a politician for travelling business class, when it is the natural tendency of every man to try to live comfortably, to the best of his affordability? Why should we punish someone just because he is successful, or he is rich?

Moderation is a virtue - I do not disagree with that. I do not condone a lavish wedding, irrespective of who has it. However, I have issues when a politician is "ordered" to vacate his suite in a hotel, just because of his choice of career. The public should not care if the politician lives a frugal life - as long as he is efficient in accomplishing his duties, it should not matter to the public whether he is austere or not. The politicians, as well as the bureaucracy should be held accountable, should not use public funds for their own purposes. But I think they should have the right to use their own money in any way that they feel right. Ours is a diverse country in a huge way - let people live as they want, let us not discriminate based on some one's success, prosperity, or anything else... as long as they are not harming anyone, and doing what they are supposed to be doing!