The ascent of civility

The post-electoral rhetoric has been dignified

Post-election commentary has focused on the Bharatiya Janata Party’s defeat in three traditional strongholds and what these Congress victories may presage for the Lok Sabha elections due next year. In the excited post-electoral speculation, including over the choice of the chief ministerial candidates, one aspect has gone unnoticed, perhaps because it concerns an absence, but a commendable one.

This is the all-round grace with which all parties, winners and losers, accepted the verdict of the voters. Yes, supporters and party workers performed their usual triumphal singing and dancing, but the post-election rhetoric was dignified. The glum faces of BJP party chief Amit Shah and Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke volumes, of course, but Mr Shah chose not to comment at all, and Mr Modi used his Twitter handle to send out a tactful message. “We accept the people’s mandate with humility,” he wrote, adding, “I thank the people of Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan for giving us the opportunity to serve these states. The BJP Governments in these states worked tirelessly for the welfare of the people.” Congress President Rahul Gandhi was more combative, not unexpected given that these victories finally vindicate his ability to counter the famous Modi charisma after serial poll disasters in the past few years. 

But his remarks, too, stayed within the bounds of decorum. His biggest lesson was humility, he said, though he could not resist placing this within a Modi context. “Frankly, Narendra Modi taught me the lesson — what not to do,” he remarked. “PM Modi was handed a huge opportunity. It is a sad thing that he refused to listen to the heartbeat of the country. The arrogance came in.”

This is a notable shift from the dismayingly squalid nature of the recent campaigning. Mr Gandhi certainly played his part in contributing to it with his persistent phrase “Chowkidar Chor Hai” (the guard is a thief) to highlight the questionable nature of the Rafale fighter jet deal that Mr Modi had renegotiated with the French government early in his tenure. Taxed about the derisory nature of the remark, Mr Gandhi countered that he had not employed objectionable language. Even if that disingenuous excuse were taken at face value, he should know better than anybody that offensive remarks need not be couched in abusive language. He did not think it necessary, for instance, to censure functionaries who made unacceptable remarks about Mr Modi’s mother’s age and cast aspersions on his father. Still, it is to Mr Gandhi’s credit that he chose to apologise publicly for a former Union minister’s insulting reference to Mr Modi’s caste (though not those against his family). It is not, of course, as though the BJP has occupied the moral high ground in the business of gratuitous insults. One Gujarat minister thought nothing of accusing, without a shred of evidence, the late Verghese Kurien of diverting funds from Amul to Christian missionaries. It is a pity Mr Modi did not repudiate this aspersion on a bureaucrat who contributed so much to making India the world’s largest milk producer. 

Incivility has increasingly become the hallmark of our elections. Just last year, the gaffe-prone Mani Shankar Aiyar was dropped from the primary membership of the Congress party for a comment that suggested disrespect for Mr Modi’s caste. But in the past few years, everyone — from Arvind Kejriwal to leftists — has thought nothing of calling opponents psychopath and cowards, “son of Khilji” (a reference to Mr Gandhi’s foreign origins), and so on. In the wearying 24X7 news cycle to which politicians are forced to respond, the descent of electioneering into indecency is an easy ruse. But it neither enhances nor edifies the political discourse. The display of all-round dignity after this current round of elections, therefore, is so noticeable as to be worthy of comment – and politicians would do well to uphold these values during the hectic electioneering to come.