हमने केजरीवाल के दो रूप देखे है पर तीसरा वह रूप जिसे हम देखने के लिए आकुल थे कहीं नहीं दीख रखा . पहला रूप तो आन्दोलन कारी केजरीवाल था जो जनता में भ्रष्टाचार के प्रति गुस्से को सरल भाषा मैं व्यक्त करता था और एक आशा देश को देता था क अन्ना का जन लोकपाल देश को इस सर्वव्यापी भ्रष्टाचार से मुक्ति दिलाएगा . जब सररकार ने अन्ना को गिरफ्तार किया और जब उनका अनशन असर हीन हो गया तो उनका राजनीती की तरफ जाने का रास्ता भी एक मजबूरी की तरह समझ आता था. उसके बाद उन्होंने जो साधारण लोगों को आन्दोलन से जोड़ कर एक राजनितिक क्रांति की वह एक मिसाल हो गया .
पर यहीं से एक दूसरे केजरीवाल का जन्म हुआ .
दूसरा केजरीवाल भी आम राजनीतिज्ञों की तरह अवसरवादी था . वह भी कोंग्रेस की तरह मुस्लिम धर्म गुरुओं के पास वोट मांगने जाता है . चाहे उसने दिखाने के लिए जनता से पूछ कर ही कोंग्रेस का साथ लिया पर फिर भी उस भ्रष्ट पार्टी के साथ जुड़े जिसके खिलाफ वह सारा आन्दोलन कर रहे थे . उसका राजनितिक फैसला अब उन्हें चुनाव तक शीला सरकार के कुकृत्यों पर चुप्पी के रूप मैं दें पड़ेगा . जब शीला सरकार पर चुप रहेंगे तो बी जे पी के विरुद्ध भी ज्यादा नहीं बोल पाएंगे . इसलिए चुनाव तक तो भ्रष्टाचार के खिलाफ युद्ध ख़तम ही समझो .उसके बाद भी किस गुट के साथ जुड़ेंगे इस पर मंथन शुरू हो जायेगा .यदि वह फिर कांग्रेस के साथ जुड़ गए तो राजनीती मैं शुचिता की सारी आशाएं ख़त्म हो जाएँगी . उनकी पैसे की लिए जो जद्दो जहद हुयी है उससे तो यही प्रतीत होता है की वह सम्प्रद्यिकता के नाम पर कांग्रेस से ही समझौता करेंगे जो उनकी सरकार को समर्थन जारी रखेगी.
जनता एक बार फिर ठगी खड़ी रह जाएगी .
यह भी याद रखना होगा की कभी कोंग्रेसर बी जे पी भी अत्यधिक आदर्शवादी पार्टियां होती थीं
उसी अवसर वादी केजरीवाल ने अपने दो गलत वादों को पूरा करना मैं जो जल्दी दिखाई है उससे उनके दुसरे रूप को ज्यादा बल मिलता है . उनकी लडाई यह थी की बिजली के दाम झूटमूट बढ़ाएं हैं . अब सरकारी खजाने जो अनुदान दे कर विश्वास मत से पहले बिजली व् पाने के दाम कम कर के उन्होंने कांग्रेस को चरों खाने चित्त तो कर दिया पर इसी मैं उनकी दूसरी बड़ी सैद्धांतिक व् बौद्धिक हार छुपी है . पुराने कारखाने बिजली सस्ती नहीं बना प् रहे न ही सरकारी प्रणाली मैं बिजली की चोरी रोकने का कोई प्रावधान समझ आ रहा था . प्राइवेट बिजली कम्पनियाँ चोरी का खामियजा नहीं भुगत सकती थीं .पर फिर भी उन्होंने बिजली की चोरी बहुत कम मर दी . जितनी दर पर बिजली के नए कारखाने उत्पादन कर रहे वह ज्यादा थी . यदि नए संयंत्र लगाने हों तो नए कारखाने खोलने होंगे . सस्ती दर पर बिजली देने से बी नये संयंत्र नहीं लगेंगे . भारत मैं बहुत अधिक बिजली का उत्पादन बढाने की आवश्यता है .
यह अब केजरीवाल के बाद संभव नहीं होगा . यही हाल पानी का है . क्या केजरीवाल अपनी गलती मान सकते थे . राजनीतिग्य केजरीवाल आदर्शवादी केजरीवाल पर फिर जीत गया . और भविष्य मैं येही होता रहेगा . आदर्श वादी आन्दोलन करी केजरीवाल की मृत्यु उसी दिन हो गयी थी जिस दिन उसने भर्ष्ट कोंग्रेस का साथ लिया . राजनीती की काजल की कोठरी मैं सब को काला होना ही है पर केजरीवाल कुछ जल्दी काले हो गए.
अब तो आदर्शवादी केजरीवाल के मुर्दे पर कफ़न डालने की प्रक्रिया हो रही रही हैऔर भारत माता रो रही है .
नेचे के लेख को लिंक पर क्लिक कर पढ़ें .
R JagannathanFirstpost.com
We have seen two Arvind Kejriwals so far. There is a Citizen Kejriwal, whom we all like, and there is a Populist Kejriwal, and this persona is not who the citizens of Delhi voted for. On the dimension of personal probity, there is Honest Arvind. He speaks the language of clean government and politics with the purpose of serving the people. But there is also an Arvind who seems to lack deeper honesty – an honesty that acknowledges a mistake and makes amends; an honesty which calls for telling the truth to the people, especially when this truth is not palatable or popular. We saw Citizen Kejriwal in full flow at last evening’s Delhi assembly trust vote. I doubt anyone was left unmoved by the directness and simplicity of his speech – and the TV channels were quick to contrast this Kejriwal with the Congress’ and BJP’s double-speak on corruption. But even before the appearance of Citizen Kejriwal, we saw Populist Kejriwal announcing measures to give free water to the privileged, and not-yet-warranted cuts in power bills. And we even saw him justifying these actions during the trust vote when he said he saw nothing wrong in a free water scheme that may benefit only 400,000 or even 200,000 people. So what’s wrong with that, he asked us, even as we were being bowled over by Citizen Kejriwal. The Aam Aadmi Party’s (AAP’s) supporters in the media used these bad decisions to laud Kejriwal for keeping his promises. During a honeymoon period, even warts look like beauty spots to lovers. But should we not stop to ask: which politician does not keep his freebie promises? The rational counter to the assumption that keeping a promise is always a good thing is this: promises that should never have been made are worth wriggling out of. And promises that only involve handing out taxpayers’ money to voters are not as important as delivering great governance and making fundamental long-term changes that will make our polity less corrupt and venal. How many media people would applaud the BJP if it came to power and decided building in temple in Ayodhya is its top priority – after all it has been making this promise in manifesto after manifesto? Would they laud the fact that the BJP is trying to keep its promise? This is where Kejriwal’s apparent honesty is at variance with a deeper form of honesty that all politicians lack. If you have made a rash or dubious promise, real honesty requires you to recant and apologise, not go ahead with ideas that almost the entire media has criticised. To be sure, some media commentators have even seen virtue in giving free water or cheaper electricity (clean water can reduce water-borne diseases, and cheaper power will enable the poor to be more productive, etc). A related argument is that by capping the amount of water given free, Kejriwal is actually enabling water conservation . Neither argument holds water. These are, in fact, post-facto excuses invented to justify freebies. Giving anything free leads to wastage and corruption. If you want to conserve water, the best way to do so is to lower the threshold for free water, and have a progressive pricing system that penalises people who use more water. Thus, if you use 200 litres, the price is X, if you use 300, the price is X + 10 percent, and so on. As RK Pachauri, Director of The Energy Research Institute, noted in The Times of India today (3 January 2014): “If something is given free, it will never be used efficiently. Give the poor cash transfer subsidy to reduce their burden but give incentives to use water more efficiently. Energy, food and water are closely linked — you cannot address one without looking at the other.” He also points out that Gujarat had a better answer, especially in agriculture, where 80 percent of our water is used. “Drip irrigation could prevent a great deal of water lost in evaporation. Gujarat CM Narendra Modi set a good example by covering canals with photovoltaic panels that double up as water savers and power generators. They free land that would otherwise have been occupied by solar panels.” As for the decision to lower power tariffs for those consuming less than 400 units a month, this single action of Kejriwal has probably set back the Indian power sector by at least another half-decade. For two reasons: it was wrong of Kejriwal to presume that Delhi’s power distribution companies (discoms) were cooking their books even while an audit was being initiated. The right time to cut tariffs, assuming all his election-eve allegations against the discoms turn out to be true, is after the audits are in. By cutting rates on arrival in the CM’s office, Kejriwal has essentially prejudged the issue. The other reason is simpler: India’s power sector is bleeding profusely. It has accumulated losses exceeding Rs 2,50,000 crore and even today its annual losses exceed Rs 25,000 crore. And this is after more than 17 discoms hiked tariffs by huge amounts in 2012 . A Credit Suisse report suggests that if state electricity boards (SEBs) keep raising tariffs by 10 percent every year for the next three years, they will just about break even. In this context, it is more than likely that the so-called profiteering by Delhi’s three discoms is partly mythical – even though it may also be true that they are gold-plating their investments to claim higher returns (returns in the power sector are given based on the amounts invested, hence there is an in-built incentive to claim higher investments). The right corrective for this tendency is to change the pricing policy to reflect not claimed investments, but through a system of competitive tariff-based bidding linked to fuel prices. Already, there are calls in Maharashtra to cut power tariffs , and in the run-up to the 2014 elections, Haryana has already announced rebates in tariffs . Haryana is where AAP plans to make its next big foray, and the political message that’s come from Kejriwal’s dubious moves is that power tariff cuts are vote-winners. If this idea catches on, India’s (already weak) power sector reforms are DOA – dead on arrival. Clearly, not only is AAP setting a bad trend, it also seems unaware of the reason why people are seeking to join the party today. If former Infosys CFO V Balakrishnan has joined AAP, it is because of the attraction of Citizen Kejriwal, not Populist Kejriwal who offers free water or cheap power. The children and wealth-creators of post-reform India – from the IT wizards of Bangalore to the finance whizkids of Mumbai – are not attracted by Kejriwal’s anti-reform agendas in the power and water sectors. Nor would it be the case with slum-dwellers, who already pay for water and electricity. To be sure, one can be charitable to Kejriwal. It is quite possible that he made the two rash promises on water and power when he did not believe he was a serious contender for power. Now that he is, he needs to become more honest and less populist. If the Delhi audit truly shows up the power companies as crooked, they should be hauled up and made to pay for it. If their accounts are by and large kosher, Kejriwal should apologise and reverse the cuts. If the report is somewhere in the middle, Kejriwal needs to opt for reforms that make it less possible for power companies to cook their books. In all cases, there is no need for subsidies from the exchequer. Citizen Kejriwal and Populist Kejriwal cannot attract the best and the brightest till the two are aligned. The Kejriwal we saw during the trust vote has to hold back the real dishonesty of the Populist Kejriwal who can’t wait to offer his freebie to the electorate.
Read more at: http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/current-affairs/two-arvind-kejriwals-so-far-analysis_1018965.html?utm_source=ref_article
One Response to “दो केजरीवाल : सैद्धांतिक व् बौद्धिक इमानदारी भी आवश्यक है : Two Kejriwals”