So it seems to me that the upcoming 2014 elections has brought to fore the age-old debate between stability and chaos. Leaving aside the individuals and their ideologies (or the lack of it), how do we choose between stability and chaos?
While stability is definitely comforting, because we impulsively feel secure to delegate the country's future to an experienced, efficient leader, it's incredible that for the first time in our country(or probably in the world),we've begun to entertain a choice which embodies chaos in the true sense of the word.
What makes this embodiment of chaos interesting is the way it callously throws away our cherished assumptions about politics and leadership. Firstly, it doesn't have a solid, cohesive identity congealed out of a certain poltical ideology. It appears to be, weirdly, more of a "non-party" entity which has arisen as a result of collective outrage that has arisen in a country which had inured itself to corruption.
Secondly, it doesn't have any trappings of the single-hero, mythic leadership we are familiar with. It is headed by a leader who doesn't have any qualms in saying " I don't know" in front of the masses who are so conditioned to hearing confident, highfalutin rhetoric about "change", "destiny" and "victory".
I don't know if we are ready yet to come out of our comfort zone and choose a leader who stands miles away from our cherished dreams and ideas of a leader. We like comforting, stable leaders probably because we can then get back to our own lives and get our minds off the country. Nation's welfare has been effectively outsourced to these experienced, stable leaders. After all, aren't we the outsourcing experts of the world?
But, what if we resist such urges to outsource the managing of our country and be ready to take complete ownership of our civil lives? I know, for sure, it requires tremendous courage. The million dollar question is: Are we ready?