Whom should one vote for—party or candidate? Over the last few months, there has been a growing, disturbing, visceral intolerance across party lines—not just amongst the political parties, but within the citizens—in drawing room arguments, Facebook posts and comments and in media debates. But, there's a reason why the ballot paper has the names of individual candidates and not just the party symbols. We choose an individual to represent us, and through our choice we express what kind of parliament and parliamentarians we want.
We need to balance our party preference with the individual candidate. It's a fine, but, critical, balance. We need to ask ourselves some uncomfortable questions before we plunge into the polling booth and vote.
Let me list out those questions, along with how I have answered them in my particular case. It's for you to answer those for yourself as a responsible citizen. But answer you must.
Am I voting for a rubber stamp, worthless candidate in the name of a party or has the candidate actually demonstrated that s/he has achieved something worthy of being one of the 543 people to represent 1.2 billion people? The BJP says that we should be voting for proven competency. Maybe its PM candidate fits the description, but which of my local candidates fits that bill?
In an ideal world, Nandan would have been a shoo-in. Educated at IIT Bombay, co-founder of Infosys, architect of the Bangalore Agenda Task Force, creator of the Aadhaar card—Nandan has demonstrated an extraordinary range of competencies. At Infosys, he helped create one of India's first, and most visible, world class organization, and created hundreds of thousands of jobs. Through Infosys, he was also instrumental, more than anyone else, in putting Bangalore on the world map. As the prime mover behind the Bangalore Agenda Task Force, he helped in professionalizing urban governance in the areas of roads, toilets, transparency of accounting in government bodies and spent over nine crores of his personal money in the bargain. With Aadhaar, he has delivered a gigantic sized, complex project on time and on budget—an extreme rarity in India. He also proved that he could work with and navigate through different state governments, political parties, bureaucracy and government organizations. He fits the BJP's—or anyone else's—description of the ideal candidate for me. Does your candidate?
Am I sure that the person I am going to vote for in the name of the party is going to be clean or am I compromising my principles by voting for a corrupt person in the name of voting for a party? AAP says that we need clean politics and incorruptible non-politicians; which of my local candidate would fit the AAP criteria?
Nandan happens to be a self-made billionaire with his moral compass firmly in place. I think AAP, with all its mistakes, is a positive force in the Indian political scene and my wife and I have both donated generously to it. They talk about getting clean people into politics and—let's face it—it's difficult to find anyone cleaner than Nandan. If AAP tried to create the perfect candidate, chances are high that it would end up with Nandan. Yogendra Yadav is on record as having said “He ticks all the boxes”. Then, why is he not standing on an AAP ticket? Because there's no law that says that all clean people need to be in AAP and frankly, I can't visualize Nandan leading a mob and tearing up electricity bills. AAP's political tactics are predicated on urban guerrilla-ism and that's not Nandan's style. He would not last five days in AAP even if he tried. But, he fits the description of AAP's—or anyone else's— ideal candidate for me. Does your candidate?
Whether you go by the stated principles of AAP (clean non-political candidate) or of the BJP (effective, proven administrator), Nandan fits the bill. Does the candidate of the party of your choice?