The welfare of the common people constituted the leitmotif of his philosophy and exercise. In democracy he placed `demos' above everything else and this concern for `demos' had its fructification in his concept of `Total Revolution'. An anatomy of this concept would reveal that Total Revolution is the logical culmination of Gandhi's concept of village self-rule. A complete overhaul of the social structure was its aim, because the system, in his opinion, was touching the cesspool of degradation and a moral and egalitarian society could not be formed without throwing out the existing system completely. JP served the country without any desire for return
By Sudhanshu Ranjan
October 11, 2002, marks the 100th birth anniversary of Jayaprakash Narayan, popularly called JP, who is described as the second Gandhi for liberating people from the tyranny of their own government. A hero of the 1942 Quit India movement, JP emerged as the Loknayak in 1974, when he assumed the leadership of the Bihar movement to extirpate corruption. Today the people at the helm of affairs in the Government of India as well as in the Bihar Government owe their allegiance to JP, but have completely forgotten the leitmotif of his ideology— State power must be subservient to people's power.
Jayaprakash Narayan carried on the legacy of the Mahatma. While Jawaharlal Nehru remained at the apogee of state power, JP symbolised Lokshakti (people's power) and his life was a selfless expression aimed at fortifying people's power, so that it kept a check on state power. In fact, after Gandhi, he was the only person to expound and propagate this philosophy with utmost firmness and sacrifice.
JP's critics carp that his life was an awful expression of contradictions and incongruities — a man who jettisoned Russian communism but refused to discard Marx, adulated Gandhi's satyagraha but did not leave class struggle. He was dubbed an escapist who kept making detours. The main reason behind levelling the charge of escapism was his consistent refusal to accept any office. But this was inspired only by his conviction that government has only a limited role in effecting social change and that the state alone cannot vouchsafe people's welfare. Though he did not reject the institution of Parliament as Gandhi did initially in 1909, his emphasis was on decentralised economic development and the concept of gram swaraj (village self-rule).
After Independence, the Governor-General, Mountbatten, wrote to Nehru that he should induct some young blood into his Cabinet and specifically mentioned JP's name. In 1953, Nehru invited JP and his socialist comrades to join the Cabinet, but JP imposed 14 conditions for doing so. There could not be any such agreement.
Discontent against the then Government was quite palpable. President Radhakrishnan told him, ``JP, make ready to take over''. MPs favouring a change in leadership held a meeting at the residence of the socialist leader, Purushottam Tricumdas and urged JP, to accept the leadership. He not only spurned the offer, but also met Nehru to express his solidarity with him.
In 1964, the death of Nehru precipitated a power struggle in the party. Some leaders suggested the name of JP, for the post of Prime Minister. Lal Bahadur Shastri also announced that he would withdraw his candidature if JP, became a candidate. Again JP, declined. In 1967, Ram Manohar Lohia and Minoo Masani proposed his name for the Presidency. But he announced his support for Zakir Hussain. All this can be attributed to his unflinching faith in people's power and also because he basically distrusted all politicians: ``politicians of all brands from time immemorial have practised amoralism, no matter how much they might have denounced it in words''.
More than a politician, JP was a seeker after truth. In order to slake his thirst he came under the impact of several ideologies, viz., Marxism, socialism, gandhism, sarvodaya and led several movements. The welfare of the common people constituted the leitmotif of his philosophy and exercise. In democracy he placed `demos' above everything else and this concern for `demos' had its fructification in his concept of `Total Revolution'. An anatomy of this concept would reveal that Total Revolution is the logical culmination of Gandhi's concept of village self-rule. A complete overhaul of the social structure was its aim, because the system, in his opinion, was touching the cesspool of degradation and a moral and egalitarian society could not be formed without throwing out the existing system completely. JP served the country without any desire for return, which gave him a lofty height and moral authority. This moral authority had its sway even on the ferocious dacoits of Chambal, whom the Government failed to nab, but they surrendered before JP. Such instances abound. Once a group of Anandmargis squatted before his house to ask him to arrange their meeting with their leader, P.C. Sarkar, in jail.
Like Rousssea, JP had profound faith in the innate goodness of man. The surrender of the dacoits of Chambal, conclusively demonstrates it. Many people took advantage of his sentimentalism and faith. Therefore, several persons, including his friends and close associate, are of the opinion that JP was credulous and would not judge people correctly.
JP respected friendship. In a few meetings he became intimate with any person. The selfish ones did not lag behind in deriving mileage out of this relationship. He trusted everyone to this extent that the whole movement was being obstructed by some undesirable elements.
But JP always said, `don't condemn anyone so soon, In fact he gave the benefit of doubt to everyone till the last movement.In today's murky political scenario, JP's selfless service stands out as a beacon light for the present generation.
(The writer is the author of JP's biography, published by the National Book Trust.)
No comments:
Post a Comment