If you are given a ticket to contest Lok Sabha elections by

the Aam Aadmi Party from New Delhi, would you contest
leaving behind your IAS dream? Give a reasoned
explanation.




AAM AADMI PARTY(Common Mans Party) is a new hope to the people of India who
are looking for a clean governance, free from corruption, high command Party culture,
nepotism, Dirty nexus between politician-Mafia goons- Corrupt bureaucrats- some
unethical business groups. The origin of party lies in Social mass movement against
Corruption led by Social Activist Anna Hazare. Philosophy of AAP is to bring back the
Power of decision making in Governance, to Common People. i.e. SWARAJ as dreamed
by GANDHIJI. In line with Swaraj, other agendas of the party is to implement Right to
Reject & Right to recall, so that Democracy does not limit itself just to Come out and
vote once in 5 year.

Bringing true Swaraj is not just the dream of AAP but also of millions of common People
in India, including me. So now coming to the question whether I should join AAP or
continue toward my dream of becoming IAS, first I have to analyze over why I want to
become IAS officer at all. What advantages/disadvantages to the PEOPLE in choosing
either way by me. I have to critically analyze politics vs. Administration, way of their
working, strengths and weakness of both.

Firstly, Yes, the Philosophy of AAP is just reconciled with my dream of becoming IAS,
and contributing my effort to bring a clean, responsive and welfare government to serve
the people of India so that India can realize its true potential. Now the next question is
via which way. Both ways have to be analyzed critically before coming to my final
answer.

Politics is an art of articulating peoples demand, resolving conflict between different
interest group & consensus building. Politics is basically a Science of analyzing the
problems of the society and art of solving them. Politics is not just being winning
support of your own interest group, becoming famous in your area, fighting election and
just winning 1 more seat for your party as happened in India till now. Here I want to
emphasize the difference between traditional way of politics and politics as dreamed by
AAP. Doing politics via traditional way is very easy, because corruption is not just self
supporting but self expanding. All you have to do favour a return to the group who
supported you to win election.

But doing a clean Scientific way of politics, which is really benefit to all different section
of Society is very difficult, especially in a country like ours. New challenges from
Globalization, climate change, Sustainability of ecology and environment has to be well
understood by politicians. For me Politics is not just articulating Peoples view and
making some policy according to their demand, but also creating awareness in general
masses about both long term and short term consequences of any decision affecting
their life. For this you must understand the nitty gitty of Governance. How practical is
any policy announced by political leaders. For this I must say your past experience in
working toward good governance counts.

Without any experience, without knowing the complexities of the problems of such
diverse society, without aiming the long term vision of a nation just joining politics on
the bases of popular support via fault finding the opponent will not be sustainable.
Either the popular support will die down with passage of time as people will realize that
you are not able to solve their problems or the party has to come back to the traditional
way of politics, joining hand with culprits to sustain themselves. In both situation there
is loss to nation, loss to the democracy which saw a ray of hope from AAM AADMI
PARTY.


The vision of AAP, which led to me toward thinking about joining Politics over IAS, also
depends on able Administration. If support from inside the system itself is weak then
even the existence of AAP can come to threat. It is the responsive bureaucracy which can
realize the dream of AAP and bring True Swaraj in India. For example any law which is
passed has a good intension behind it. No law itself is bad. It is the implementer who
makes the Policy successful or bad. Case being the law of land ceiling was introduced for
the benefits of public, but it was lack of enthusiasm in bureaucracy, nexus between
interest groups and bureaucracy which led to the failure of a well intended scheme.
Corruption in India is not just due to crooked people who enters into politics but also
due to pliable officer, who does not able to stand upright against evil either due to not
willingness considering them a family man/woman or due to their incompetence to fight
against the mighty system.

Any well intended law can be abused by the vested interest to threat even the existence
of that law if your administration is not strong and responsive to the challenge.
Case being the frivolous request of information via RTI act, make the politician to think
about amending it to save crumbling of Administrative system. So a responsive,
innovative, change adaptive and evolving bureaucracy can only determine the success of
any political Government. And yes for that you also need support of same politician
who are against whistleblower act. So the solution of problem lies in AWARENESS of
the general Public, which can put pressure on political establishment here comes the
huge responsibility on the civil society and media.

Retired bureaucrats, professionals like lawyers, journalists, social scientists forming a
number of well informed civil society groups which can create mass awareness. Our
country needs a vibrant civil society which can control as well as guide both
administration and political parties.




So after analyzing strength and weakness of both the paths, situation prevailing in the
society as well as in considering the future challenges, if you ask me whether I should
Join AAP right now at the cost of my dream of becoming IAS, I would say NO. Because
there is no guarantee that system you created with the help of popular support once, will
be able to sustain for longer. Moreover, the hand on experiences you gain via being an
insider of system for some time can give you a great opportunity later in life to do well
for betterment of nation. Yes you can support voluntarily via spreading the philosophy
of AAP, but joining politics and supporting it from outside, both are different. You can
join politics later also with great experiences and insights but cannot become IAS after
age of 30 (Gen candidate). You can take part in political movement for a cause like
supporting a NGO while in service or after retirement or you can even leave the service
say after 15-20 year of Experience. Best solution according to me is liberalizing the
Political activities of civil servants to take part in politics like France. Because I believe
neutrality of civil service is already a myth specially in a diverse country like ours.


















Mahatma Gandhi v/s Nehru v/s Sardar Patel
Whom would you choose as your PM if they were
alive today? Explain why and why not.


To answer this question, first we have to analyze the role of PM in our country,
challenges before a PM in the prevailing time, vision of nation, personality of PM,
qualities which can help him to realize these complex problems.
So coming to the role of PM, he is the spokesperson of India in this globalized world. He
is linking pin of the wheel moving toward the betterment of nation. He role is
coordinating different ministry, different alliances specially in the coalition era. He is
not just the leader of Majority party but also leader of ALLIANCE group. Responsibility
of providing a stable decisive government lies on his shoulders. Flexibility,
assertiveness, clear communication, co-ordination, acceptability and decisiveness are
the key abilities an INDIAN PM should have.

Now if we analyze life of Mahatma Gandhi, we will see many of the above said qualities
he possessed. He was a able communicator being the spokesperson of INC for many
years, quite clear and decisiveness his ideas like Swadeshi, non violent movement, Civil
disobedience. Acceptable to large section of Society. Assertiveness in his decision like
taking back civil disobedience movement after choura-chouri incident. And also flexible
being ardent opposer to the separate electorate but showing flexibility via Poona pact
with Ambedkar and allowing reservation for depressed classes.
His view about self sufficient village is also commendable. Which in a true sense can
bring SWARAJ , absent of any oppressive capitalistic class. His view of capitalism was
based on trusteeship, not just Profit making via using others labor. His Idea are The
Great to bring back the Ram Rajya, but problem is with the prevailing situation of the
country in the context of whole world. You can not remain secure in this world via not
being industrialized; not keeping defence forces, just being self sufficient village will not
be able to save the nation from Neo- colonialism. The problem with Swaraj is that U
alone can not bring Swaraj in a single state or nation. It will come only when the whole
world will realize its need and importance, and yes it is coming little by little by different
names like participatory govt, sustainability, green energy, need not greed.


Now coming to Jawaharlal Nehru, he was an excellent orator. More supporter of
Industrialized India, in the wake of the prevailing condition of country like massive
unemployment, lack of technology, problem of food shortage for huge population,
health needs, science and technological needs of a nation. His ideas of Foreign Policy
still influence the diplomats all over the world. Panchsheel, NAM concept are still play a
big role in Indian Foreign policy. Are still as much as relevant as 60 years back.
Supporting technology via opening IITs, IISc, Agriculture universities, CSIR, BHAKRA
Dam, and much other great contribution by him which led to self sufficiency Toward
food grains need of this country. Only thing not good about Nehru was his elitist nature.
He was much a representative of India not Bharat. His critic on bureaucracy without
giving any other alternative was not an intellectual answer. Sustaining power seems to
be more important for him, example being either Accepting the Position of PM or no
position in any ministry at all.

Sardar Patel, Iron man of India. the Nation we are proud today being the largest
democracy in the world, the most diverse nation in all aspect, class-caste, ethnic,
religion has been possible with contribution of this great man. Uniting 562 princely
nation at the time of Independence just after the already division of country into 2 parts
was not just a small feat. People, who say that he was the Bismarck of India, seemingly
forget that the challenge he faced was much more than faced by Bismarck.
The most admirable characteristic of this person was that he was a true nationalist. Not
being power craziness, he knew he can contribute to the nation even not being the PM.
His flexibilities and assertiveness can both be seen in uniting 562 princely states via
using all methods like Friendly advice, fear of security, princely purses, and autonomy to
states, separate lists for state in 7
th
schedule of constitution.
His flexibility and decisiveness can also be shown by this incident, In spite of ardent non
believer of separate constitution for J&K, when in the absence of Nehru in the country
he has to take call of the threat posed by Maharaja of J&K, he supported article 370 just
for the betterment of the people of that state via providing some special privileges in
administrative and legislative flexibility to suit the needs of particular state.
His idea of ALL INDIA SERVICE was best idea of that time to unite nation in a single
unitary feature. It was the most practical solution to improve the relation between states
and Union. His idea of outsider of states being appointed to the key position of
administration was also worth mentioning.

So after analyzing both the prevailing needs and complexities of todays INDIA as well
as the personalities of our great leaders, if I have to answer whom I would like to see the
PM of India in todays time, my answer would be MAHATMA GANDHI.
Reasoned being his evolving and accommodative style of leadership. His life is a
MESSAGE. Starting with pure vaishnav, even rejecting milk-considering it non
vegetarian. Not taking allopathic medicine considering them as un-natural..against the
order of nature. Later accommodating his views with scientific facts and validation of
their usefulness. This shows his leadership style was also evolving. Taking back a
successful movement after choura-chouri incident was not just only accordance with his
principle but also estimating the peoples enthusiasm toward mass movement. He knew
mass movement cant sustain for long. People start losing hope after some time and
after oppressive treatment by Police, so it was better to take back movement from its
good time so that Hope of People that movement was not unsuccessful remain alive and
that hope can again be galvanized in future with much greater force next time.
His idea of non violent also shaped with time, he knew fighting against mighty force
with violent ways can be suicidal for normal public. His shrewdly force the Britishers to
show their true face. Like Breaking of Salt law was just a small step, but Britishers felt
helpless by his move, Neither they can take Strict action against just a small violation of
law, neither they can sit silently, because it was a challenge to British Govt. by AAM
AADMI. Normal People started breaking inhuman law, rejecting foreign clothes and
readymade material which was the root motive of British raj in India.
Moving from non co-operation to civil disobedience then Quit India movement showing
his idea of evolving non violence.
Basically What I want to say that no particular leadership style can be great in all
situation. Leadership is also context dependent. So any leader who evolves with time is
a great leader in all TIME.An evolving leader can take challenge of all new
complexities of coming future also. Because today you dont have limitation of expertise
in any field. All you have to accommodate great ideas into a cohesive manner.
This was THE most important characteristics of GANDHIJI.