Times of India has just announced Arvind Kejriwal Indian of the year 2013. NDTV had done so back in 2011 along with his mentor Anna Hazare. According to Times of India, in a country of 1.2 billion people choosing person of the year can be as tough as getting Manmohan Singh to smile. With his a year old Aam Aatmi Party (Common Man's party) who would have thought that he will dethrone Delhi's longest serving Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit. Well, India do not have to worry about countries like Australia making fun of her unusual surname anymore.
Kejriwal's victory is an endorsement of the people to root out corruption at all levels. True democracy is about making right choices and elect the right person to take power. The common man wants change and the wind of change will sweep into other states as well if not immediately but over a period time. The wind of change is evident from the fact that a number of ex-BJP and ex-Congress politicians joining the aam aatmi party. Truly sticking to what he preaches Kejriwal has refused red beacons and Z-Security which is considered as a status symbol by many politicians.
Kejriwal is a risk taker. Risk taking seems part of his DNA. The story goes that when his father advised him to apply to all engineering colleges, he took the gamble of applying only to the prestigious IIT and he did get in. Similarly when he contested election he decided to face off with none other than Sheila Dikshit herself in the polls and the rest is history.
Aam Aatmi party has no legacy and no baggage of caste, religion and region. Hence fresh ideas and changes can be brought in with the same spirit as their fight against anti corruption. Some critics point out that while Kejriwal is good at motivating party workers, he isn't adept at working with other social groups and being part of a larger team. That he has firm belief in his own methods and style and sticks to them. That it is either his way or highway kind of approach. Only time will tell whether these traits are blockages to his' and his parties rise.
It is a long road for AAP to spread its wings towards other states and it is unlikely that AAP will make much impact in the next parliament election due in 2014. But the political flame AAP has lit in Delhi will have far reaching consequences in Indian politics and the future of India. Kejriwal believes "change begins with small things". He has inspired many with his unrelenting approach of humbleness, firmness and his clean politics. Let us welcome the new revolution of change and hope that other political parties align their ways of working if not exactly the way AAP works, but very similar to its ways. If Kejriwal has been able to accomplish that much, then we can truly say that he has made an impact across all political parties. In the mean time for AAP, it is still a work in progress. Kejriwal and his party have a long way to go.
As we approach one year this Dec 16 into the ghastly
gangrape of a young paramedic in Delhi, the public outrage that had erupted in
its wake didn’t fade away just as quickly as it had built up. The perpetrators did
not get away, the case did not drag on for years. Exactly a year after the
barbaric rape, the discourse on women’s rights has not only persisted, it has
acquired new vigor, more nuance and a stronger, more assertive tone. Suzette
Jordan, a single mother of two who was gangraped in Calcutta, refused to be
referred to as the ‘Park Street rape victim’ and demanded she be identified by
her real name, even though the law prohibits anyone from naming a rape victim;
of the law intern who plucked up the courage to blog about retired Supreme
Court judge A.K. Ganguly as the man who harassed her in a Delhi hotel; of the
young journalist from Tehelka who spoke up against her powerful editor Tarun
Tejpal and subsequently quit; of the women who exposed godman Asaram Bapu and
his son Narayan Sai, landing both in jail on rape charges.
Statistics are shocking. Every 22 minutes a
woman is raped in India. Abuses occur both within and out of the circle of
trust. With the rates of crime against women escalating at an alarming level, a
group of activists has come to the forefront and championing the cause of
womens’ rights. Some of these groups are
very inventive in their tactics. Mind the Gap, stages anti eve-teasing flash
mobs on the Delhi Metro wearing T-shirts reading ‘Main cheez nahin hun mast mast’ or ‘I am not an Item’.
Blank Noise Project, a campaigning community
art group that put a lie to the tired argument about eve-teasing victims
‘asking for it’ by wearing western outfits when they staged an exhibition of
garments Indian women were wearing when they were sexually molested—most, of
course, turned out to be in saris and salwar kameezes.” More than ever, we are
just about coming to terms with both an increase in violent crimes and an
understanding of the inequalities women face every day but have learnt to brush
under the carpet over the decades.
While various groups are doing all sort of
campaigns, here is a very interesting video satire by Kalki Koechlin.
It is heartening to know that more are now
coming out to speak about the harrassments as did the young Tehelka journalist.
Here is what the young Tehelka journalist had
to say about the recent sexual advance by her former employer.
I am
heartened by the broad support I have received over the past fortnight.
However, I am deeply concerned and very disturbed by insinuations that my
complaint is part of a pre-election political conspiracy.
I
categorically refute such insinuations and put forward the following arguments:
The
struggle for women to assert control over their lives and their bodies is most
certainly a political one, but feminist politics and its concerns are wider
than the narrow universe of our political parties. Thus, I call upon our
political parties to resist the temptation to turn a very important discussion
about gender, power and violence into a conversation about themselves.
Suggestions
that I am acting on someone else’s behest are only the latest depressing
indications that sections of our public discourse are unwilling to acknowledge
that women are capable to making decisions about themselves for themselves.
In this
past week, television commentators who should know better, have questioned my
motivations and my actions during and after Mr. Tejpal molested me. Some have
questioned the time it took for me to file my complaint, more inquisitive
commentators have questioned the use of the word “sexual molestation” versus
words like “rape.”
Perhaps
the hardest part of this unrelentingly painful experience has been my struggle
with taxonomy. I don’t know if I am ready to see myself as a “rape victim”, or
for my colleagues, friends, supporters and critics to see me thus. It is not
the victim that categorizes crimes: it is the law. And in this case, the law is
clear: what Mr. Tejpal did to me falls within the legal definition of rape.
Now
that we have a new law that broadens the definition of rape, we should stand by
what we fought for. We have spoken, time and again, about how rape is not about
lust or sex, but about power, privilege and entitlement. Thus this new law
should be applicable to everybody – the wealthy, the powerful, and the well
connected – and not just to faceless strangers.
As seen
by some of the responses to this case, instances of familial and custodial rape
present doughty challenges to even the most adamantine feminists.
Unlike
Mr. Tejpal, I am not a person of immense means. I have been raised
singlehandedly by my mother’s single income. My father’s health has been very
fragile for many years now.
Unlike
Mr. Tejpal, who is fighting to protect his wealth, his influence and his
privilege, I am fighting to preserve nothing except for my integrity and my
right to assert that my body is my own and not the plaything of my employer. By
filing my complaint, I have lost not just a job that I loved, but much-needed financial
security and the independence of my salary. I have also opened myself to
personal and slanderous attack. This will not be an easy battle.
In my
life, and my writings, I have always urged women to speak out and break the
collusive silence that surrounds sexual crime. This crisis has only confirmed
the myriad difficulties faced by survivors. First, our utterances are
questioned, then our motivations, and finally our strength is turned against
us: a politician will issue a statement claiming that speaking out against
sexual violence will hurt our professional prospects; an application filed in
the Delhi High Court will question why the victim remained “normal”.
Had I
chosen silence in this instance, I would not have been able to face either
myself or the feminist movement that is forged and renewed afresh by
generations of strong women.
Finally,
an array of men of privilege have expressed sorrow that Tehelka, the
institution, has suffered in this crisis. I remind them that this crisis was
caused by the abusive violence of the magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, and not by an
employee who chose to speak out.
Thank you everyone for
your support.
The words of the journalist just about sums up the entire point. Let us hope
that more and more victims will come foreward and more will be done on the
prevention for crime against women.
