We all know about political persons. There are apolitical persons too. It is easy to identify them. They would most probably affluent. Any change in socio-ecnomic domains in India would not affect them. Pranab Mukherjee can rise prices of diesel or petrol any number of times. In fact, they would welcome it. It would ensure a higher outgo, from fast ‘cash’ accumulation.
These apolitical persons would be most probably working in multi-national environments. Salaries would be easily 5-figures or more. They would have ‘boxed’ vision, as they would keep travelling in boxes – from flights, to airconditioned 3-box cars to vertical box lifts and studio boxes called apartments. Then, they would constantly gaze into any of the three box-like gadgets – black berrys, television or computers. They cannot see beyond their noses, or the bonnets of their cars.
They would care less for their neighbours. They never know who are their neighbours, but would be eloquent on Facebooks. They are also asocial persons – living amidst society and yet loathe interacting with social persons in general. Most of them are male. Women in general are social, whatever class they belong to or wherever they are.
They would depend on ‘stringers’ (not the lowest level of journalists), who would pull ‘power strings’ for them, whenever they require social support. An ornament is lost, a ‘stringer’ would be contacted and the maid servant would be promptly hauled to the police station. Their apartment does not get ‘piped’ water, a ‘string’ is pulled and promptly a water tanker would come.
They would be comfortable in foreign locations. In India, they feel they are getting all the comforts because of their ‘right’. They would not know that their comforts come in an unjust political and policy environment. They do not learn that their lifestyle is ‘subsidised’ by poor people and government alike. When ‘recession’ in Europe and US kicked them out of jobs, they would not acknowledge the fact it is the ‘public sector’ in India which has saved them. A ‘public’ sector which is built on sweat of millions of poor families across rural and urban landscape.
They would be least bothered to know that in Hyderabad the so-called world-class airport was built at the cost of 5,000 acres provided by the government, after displacing 10,000 families. More than Rs.1400 crores from JNURM were spent on widening roads that lead to the airport. Their bottled water comes from water diverted from projects, which diverted water from two rivers, denying water to thousands of families in three districts of Telangana, for the past twenty years.
These apolitical persons are a threat to public movements, including Telangana struggle. They abound in Hyderabad. In Hyderabad, they belong to all castes, regions and cultures. Not just a bunch of ‘land sharks’, but these people would also influence various political processes, because of their purchasing power. They would influence the ‘content’ of the media – in competition, their preferences get upperhand. Because of their ‘fast’ accumulating wealth, they would steer investments and investment choices. Their platforms, amply aided by the stringers would articulate policy choices. They would influence commodity prices, imports, exports, mining and in general undemocratic, development planning.
These apolitical persons would turn their noses on any public protests, not just the bandhs. Ofcourse, they know it does not affect them – life goes on – they can travel as and when they like. They are protected from rallies and bandhs, as more police personnel are deployed in ‘insensitive areas’, than ‘sensitive areas’.
Yet, their genes keep reminding them that as human beings they are social animals. This ‘inner’ push leads some of them to join ‘apolitical organisations’ most often charities or voluntary organizations. One such voluntary organization in Hyderabad was ‘smart’ enough to start a political party for them.
The most dangerous phase is when these ‘apolitical persons’ becoming political. They would become political, only when their world is threatened, like in US, UK and Australia. They would become conscious of their social environment, only when they are ‘thrashed’ by the ‘locals’. This might look like endorsement of violence, but then how can these educated people with complete access to information become aware of the ‘real’ situation.