India’s political rhetoric, academic discourses, media mumbo-jumbo, and everyday conversations of the people in general are punctuated by the phrase ‘common man’. Yet the phrase is elusive: it is easy to understand in a figurative sense, but difficult to define it definitively.
‘Common man’ has no precise or definite dictionary meaning: A person who holds no title; a common person; a commoner or one of the common people lacking class or rank distinction or special attributes; an unsophisticated country person; an ordinary person devoid of power and privilege; the average citizen as contrasted with the social, political or cultural elite; rank and file; as rural commons or the social class composed of commoners, and so go the dictionary meanings.
As the emphasis is on the commonness of the people and their ubiquity and the reference is in the context of the masses, a proper understanding of the term would be in the sense of the nation reneging on its Constitutional mandate to the common man and increasing social deprivation of the overwhelming majority of the society who lack the basic necessities of life such as food, shelter, clothing, access to child-care, health, and education. Corruption, misrule, the Centre mostly working more for the World Bank than for uplifting India’s unwashed millions, crony capitalism, lack of accountability and transparency all have exacerbated the condition of the common man.
Laxman’s common man best symbolises the mute millions of India
While on the common man, often reference is made to R. K. Laxman’s daily comic strip, “You Said It” in The Times of India, in which the ‘common man’, as Laxman said in one context, ‘symbolises the mute millions of India, or perhaps the whole world, a silent spectator of marching time.’ Eminent jurist Fali S. Nariman starts his latest book, The State of the Nation in the Context of India’s Constitution (2013), with an R.K. Laxman cartoon under the headline “To the little Indian in whom rests the future of the nation”, with the common man in the cartoon casting his vote in the ballot box surrounded by a crowd. Nariman later asks whether or not the Constitution has truly benefited the common people – for whom it was framed.
A more important statement by Nariman in relation to the common man is: ‘We the People’ tells us that at the start who this Constitution is for. But in a pluralist society like India’s – in this land of a ‘million mutinies’ (as the Nobel Laureate Sir V.S. Naipaul described it) – WHO really are the people? For me, they are typified by the renowned cartoonist R.K. Laxman’s endearing representative of Indian humanity, ‘the common man’!
In the Constituent Assembly Debates , the ‘common man’ figured prominently and repeatedly, and its meaning was taken as understood. For instance, in one session, H.V. Kamath, author and seasoned journalist said: ‘In a democracy, the psychology of the common man has its place. Democracy is largely conditioned by the psychological reflexes of the common man’. In the same session Dr. S. Radhakrishnan former President of India, cautioned that ‘a free India will be judged by the way in which it will serve the interests of the common man in the matter of food, clothing, shelter and the social services.’
In another session stating that the High Courts are the guardians of the fundamental rights in the Constitution, Shrimati G. Durgahai said: ‘Every common man must look to these courts for fair treatment and justice. They have got to see that their rights are safeguarded and they are in safe custody.’ This has not happened even after sixty years; and Indian judiciary is a god that failed and betrayed the common man.
Common Man squeezed out of politics
In yet another session Sardar Hukam Singh, who was the Lok Sabha Speaker from 1962-67 was upfront: ‘To sum up, our Constitution does not give anything substantial or concrete to the individual. It only gives solemn promises and pious platitudes. The Fundamental Rights are worthless as they have so many restrictions and are left at the mercy of the legislature. The right to work is not guaranteed. There is no assurance for old age maintenance or provision during sickness or loss of capacity. Even free primary education has not been provided for. The minorities and particularly the Sikhs have been ignored and completely neglected. The Provincial units have been reduced to Municipal boards. The common man has been squeezed out of politics and the President has been enthroned as the Great Moghul to rule from Delhi with enough splendour and grandeur (Emphasis added). Any ambitious President would discover a rich find in this Constitution to declare himself as a dictator, and yet apparently be acting within this Constitution. The discontent and dissatisfaction is sure to grow without any economic solution of difficulties of the masses. This shall consequently facilitate the development of administration into a fascist State for which there is enough provision in our Constitution. May we be saved from such contingencies!’ The manner in which the Constitution has been worked over the years has proved Hukam Singh right, and the common man has been really squeezed out of politics.
In his address on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the first sitting of the Constituent Assembly, Dr. Shankar Dayal Sharma, President of India had said: ‘I believe this is an important occasion for all of us to contemplate ways and means of improving the functioning of the institutions of our democratic polity. We should bring the meaning and import of the Constitution closer to the common man. This would be possible if we take up the challenge of making our institutions, our administration and systems of work, more and more directly accountable and fully mindful and sensitive to the needs and feelings of our people.’
While the Common Man has also been figuring from time to time in different political contexts in the comic strips of other newspaper, it is important to note that the comic strips are for the relish of the newspaper readers to which many of the common men and women who may not be literate may not belong. That however, does not diminish the import and the political and social impact of the cartoons which in some sense holds a mirror to the privileged society in particular its political class. Whether they have been learning anything from these cartoons, more so when it is likely that different politicians may have their own perception of the common man, is a different issue. What is important is while doing hardly anything for the common man, they make use of him for vote-bank politics.
The aam aadmi disconnected with the system
For instance, in an article, Who is India’s Common Man? in the Wall Street Journal of February 24, 2011, Krishna Pokharel said: ‘To ruling Congress party youth leader Rahul Gandhi, the “aam aadmi in India is that person who does not have a connection to the system. Whether he is poor or rich, Hindu, Muslim, Sikh or Christian, educated or uneducated, if he is not connected to the system, he is an aam aadmi.” “We call him the common man but in fact he is unique,” said Mr. Gandhi during his party’s anniversary conference in December. “We will never build a nation until we build a system in which this man’s progress is based not on who he knows, but on what he knows.”
Rahul Gandhi did only his occasional talk, that too in limited words, which going by the election results had no effect on the electorate. It was the Arvind Kejriwal team and the Aam Aadmi Party launched by them barely a year ago which showed its oneness with the aam aadmi, and assumed power in Delhi in a well worked out programme for the aam aadmi. To what extent the party will be able to persist with its programmatic in a climate of all-round corruption, administrative sloth, and exploitation of the aam aadmi is difficult to say. But there is absolutely no doubt that the AAP is in earnest to bring in a new political culture, whose main beneficiaries will be the aam aadmi who is working overtime to achieve its goals. To conclude, as the aam aadmis may have many things in common as a heterogeneous ensemble their problems have to be addressed at different levels in different ways.
[/column][column size=”4/5″]
Prof. P. Radhakrishnan
The writer is a Professor of Sociology at the Madras Institute of Development Studies; and is a media commentator on public affairs.[/column]