Obama wins Premature Prize

I am a big fan of Obama. I have taken enough beatings from my Libertarian and Conservative friends for saying so. I have scars and emails to prove.

But Nobel for Obama? Come on! For what ?

I too like some of the attempts his administration is making to improve relations with other countries including Iran and Cuba. But these are just attempts and good intentions.

Problem is, my kids are now going to ask for rewards every time they have a good thought or intention. No results required.

Unfortunately this may even back fire on his efforts. Expectations were high anyway, but now it has been raised to unrealistic proportions.

Bad decision by the Norwegian Nobel Committee.

Who succeeds in politics?

It is election time. Every one and their dog has an opinion on how the nation should be run, who is corrupt, who is not, etc. This election has been a bit different as it seems like another direction changing election. This, even though it appears to be a very bland election, at least on the surface, with no real issues to debate.

One interesting direction changer possibly is the number of new candidates contesting the election. Some kind of a barrier has been broken. Probably an Obama effect being felt in India. Yes, even a novice can! seem to be the refrain. Which may be a good think, in the short run.

It is easy to forget how hard Obama worked and for many years towards the Presidency. That brings me to the matter at hand. There is an annoying trend especially this election cycle. Annoying, but hopefully not very harmful. This annoying trend seem to be fueled by the ease with which people can email and send documents over the internet. The educated and the elite among us seem to take politicians and their profession very lightly. To some it seems like–all you need is a good man or woman to contest and win, every thing else will fall into place.I don’t think we reserve this kind of naive contempt for any other profession.

So here is my thought on who succeeds in politics, if at all. I believe only two kinds of politicians succeed — either a Karunanidhi/Jayalalitha (K/J) type or a Rahul Gandhi/Rajiv Gandhi type. (For this discussion it does not matter whether you vote for them or like them or not).

What does it take to succeed in politics, assuming you have the natural abilities? You need a vast array of teams, organisations, contacts, networks, etc. etc. How long does it take to get all this? A very long time indeed. It takes years of toiling, speeches, plotting, begging, cajoling, coercing, etc. to even have a shot at doing anything worth doing in politics.

K/J, for example, have been in politics for years. Both are considered accomplished politicians, good administrators, nationally respected players. But they got here after spending much of their time in isolation, in opposition, sometimes even declared politically finished. Yet they have survived and stayed relevant. In power or in opposition, they have complete control, or as much as humanly possible, over their party, the state machinery, etc. They have to use all these just to stay relevant, but they also have to constantly work to expand their base, party, network, organisation, etc.

Now ask yourself, with all this–natural ability, control over the machinery and party which are absolutely required to get anything done–are they able to get all that they want? Clearly a big no. In fact I would be surprised if they are able to deliver a fraction of what they probably dream of doing.

The point is, it takes a lot of deliver even a little bit. Especially in a complex, chaotic and democratic society like India. Come to think of it, it takes a lot to deliver a bit in any society. Otherwise all dictators would be delivering amazing societies. (I am just playing along with people who think politics or govt can deliver everything in society, if only we had good political leaders. Govt/politics has a very important yet limited Or limited yet important role in society. There is only so much it can or should do. Even though there are things it must do and do well.)

Now take the example of Rahul or Rajiv Gandhi. It may be too early to judge Rahul Gandhi. But Rajiv Gandhi (RG) we can judge. RG was not the most naturally gifted politician of his times. Yet he did succeed in many ways. Much of the reform, IT revolution in India, talk about youth and twenty first century started when RG was Prime Minister.

He succeeded because what K/J worked to build–party, network, contacts, power, etc.–RG inherited. Which means even if he does not know how to do something, there would be enough competent veterans around him, at his service, to get the job done. Of couse this is not to take anything away from RG or other similar politicians who inherit. It takes talent to manage anything, especially a massive organisation like the Congresss or the Prime Minister’s office.

The moral of the story as I see it is, if with all this power, K/J or RG can deliver only so much, how much can some middle class or rich, more importantly Independent candidate deliver? Have you estimated the time it takes for a group of middle class citizens, with no prior experience in politics, to establish a new, functioning and election-winning party. (By the way, in my opinion, with all due respect, if your party cannot win elections, then it is no different from any another NGO.)

These are some serious questions all arm chair politicians should consider seriously. Otherwise we cheapen politics and the fact of how difficult it really is to succeed in politics.

Chekhov was Indian