Changing shape of Political Competition and Political Parties
By: Amit Bhushan Date: 7th Sept. 2014
Political parties and leaders, those are slow to realize and respond to the changing nature of political competition, invariably fare poorly in the hustling. Either this fact is either ignored or the changing nature of political competition has not been fully understood. This is fact is true for a majority of political leaders and parties including those who call themselves 'real champions' of the Common man, whatever difference that may imply. This is because of the political parties and leaders are still not mature enough to identify & seize opportunities to pitch themselves to 'identified constituencies'. Major announcements and initiatives go unresponded while to some other stimulus, squabbling is out in open over some 'petty things'. If political parties and leaders are able to develop a habit to think deeply and formulate suitable responses to 'stimuli' coming across, some of squabble will end itself.
For example, a major initiative from the government is to pitch for better relations with say Africa and major initiatives are going on to get 'Head of States' for hob-nobbing conference. If say the Common Man's party responses to the same by say 'will undertake major initiatives to develop a global 'Edu-IT' hub at Ansari Road (or another suitable destination in consultation with 'the industry') or say a Faridabad or Loni responds with developing a global Medi-tourism destination or a Gautam Buddha nagar bids for Higher Education hub complete with a Tour passes for the delegates as well as side conferences & stalls, some of the question like who has to form government in Delhi might look like a secondary question. Same is true about China which is a big importer of food items, formulations and potential importer for IT software. These initiatives have the potential to bring in customers as well as 'potential investors' to these 'markets' to which I am sure people will respond more enthusiastically than they would to any ordinary cavalcade of a 'Neta'. Nearly all such opportunities are left to the leaders running the government (as per past traditions) which often is found wanting on many fronts. This is despite the fact that the leaders know very well that public is concerned about 'value delivery' rather than 'pitching someone to a seat'. This however doesn't stop them to brazen it out publicly. Such an initiative by 'opposition leaders' will help them pitch to their constituencies by closing gaps in policy as well as get them international exposure and media footage. I am sure this is one 'change' the current regime may not want to reject outright since such an action may have repercussion on their image of being 'business friendly' for 'all businesses'.
What we face is a squabble for 'chair' rather than a competition to deliver a 'value' from leaders who are 'champions of the masses'. To say that ordinary man doesn't respond to such gestures is a misnomer. This is because though a single gesture will appeal to one cross section of people, what we need is many more gestures from the leaders for different cross sections and together this will constitute a majority vote share.
By: Amit Bhushan Date: 7th Sept. 2014
Political parties and leaders, those are slow to realize and respond to the changing nature of political competition, invariably fare poorly in the hustling. Either this fact is either ignored or the changing nature of political competition has not been fully understood. This is fact is true for a majority of political leaders and parties including those who call themselves 'real champions' of the Common man, whatever difference that may imply. This is because of the political parties and leaders are still not mature enough to identify & seize opportunities to pitch themselves to 'identified constituencies'. Major announcements and initiatives go unresponded while to some other stimulus, squabbling is out in open over some 'petty things'. If political parties and leaders are able to develop a habit to think deeply and formulate suitable responses to 'stimuli' coming across, some of squabble will end itself.
For example, a major initiative from the government is to pitch for better relations with say Africa and major initiatives are going on to get 'Head of States' for hob-nobbing conference. If say the Common Man's party responses to the same by say 'will undertake major initiatives to develop a global 'Edu-IT' hub at Ansari Road (or another suitable destination in consultation with 'the industry') or say a Faridabad or Loni responds with developing a global Medi-tourism destination or a Gautam Buddha nagar bids for Higher Education hub complete with a Tour passes for the delegates as well as side conferences & stalls, some of the question like who has to form government in Delhi might look like a secondary question. Same is true about China which is a big importer of food items, formulations and potential importer for IT software. These initiatives have the potential to bring in customers as well as 'potential investors' to these 'markets' to which I am sure people will respond more enthusiastically than they would to any ordinary cavalcade of a 'Neta'. Nearly all such opportunities are left to the leaders running the government (as per past traditions) which often is found wanting on many fronts. This is despite the fact that the leaders know very well that public is concerned about 'value delivery' rather than 'pitching someone to a seat'. This however doesn't stop them to brazen it out publicly. Such an initiative by 'opposition leaders' will help them pitch to their constituencies by closing gaps in policy as well as get them international exposure and media footage. I am sure this is one 'change' the current regime may not want to reject outright since such an action may have repercussion on their image of being 'business friendly' for 'all businesses'.
What we face is a squabble for 'chair' rather than a competition to deliver a 'value' from leaders who are 'champions of the masses'. To say that ordinary man doesn't respond to such gestures is a misnomer. This is because though a single gesture will appeal to one cross section of people, what we need is many more gestures from the leaders for different cross sections and together this will constitute a majority vote share.