In a rare and highly amateur show of politics, the second-rung leadership of Aam Aadmi Party has made baseless allegations against party ideologue Yogendra Yadav of planitng stories against its leader Arvind Kejriwal in the media, essentially belittling Indian media.
Appalling but minus-Yadav and minus-Kejriwal in Delhi, the party is showing its pre-natal phase unable to learn quickly the decorum of dealing with realpolitik and the media. While the party cannot prove allegations made against Yogendra Yadav, who is one of the highly respected psephologists in the country, they have made a bigger blunder by accusing Indian media of succumbing to such planted stories. AAP is forgetting the fact that the media acted as it backbone always but it was their cadre which tried to bulldoze the media with their sarcastic comments.
But AAP’s stature, as is always, lacks maturity and its second-rung youngsters and blind supporters have often fallen prey to short-term instigations than long-term party goals. In their hurry to replicate Delhi model elsewhere, they cannot jump into the web of fascist moves. Any party that lacks a political thinker on the top is moving in the direction of harakiri. And the ouster of Yogendra Yadav would just pave the way for it.
First and foremost, no party can accuse its leadership of the actions taken in the larger interests of the party. If Prashant Bhushan had said something to save the party’s image and ideology, it cannot be misinterpreted as an anti-party move at a later date showing him the door. This is opportune politics and highly restrictive move the way Nazism worked under Hitler a century ago shutting the voice of the second-rung leadership.
With Yadav, they cannot pinpoint any planted story but they can certainly make it an excuse to show him the door. In a way, the signal is that his “use” for the party is over. The party may loose an ideologue and cement its own death knell, unknowingly soon.
Intriguing but Kejriwal should know that dissidence is inherent in every party. It was his failure not to have acted upon it positively by engaging in inner democracy. A man who challenged Kiran Bedi to open debate before Delhi elections has failed to engage in a debate in his own party?
Now that he has chosen the hard way to oust the top leadership, it gives birth to more dissidence within the party. It was Stalin who tried to silence dissidence in the party that it finally became the Communist form of Nazism in Russia.
Are we seeing Arvind Kejriwal, who speaks for the common man or a Neo-Leader trying to step into the shoe of Hitler or Stalin? It is easier for the party to fall prey to 3 tenets of Nazism easily — Single Leader, Single Ideologue and Single Word — and Arvind Kejriwal has acquired all of them now with the ouster of Bhushan and Yadav.