Finding the Golden Mean: The Importance of Centrism in India

In a recent podcast, I heard Ganesh Prasad Sridharan and Ranveer Allahbadia discussing that being centrist in India has become problematic. They lamented the growing hostility directed towards them while making political content, noting how their efforts to produce balanced content often incur the wrath of both the left and right wings. Humorously, they suggested that the barrage of criticism from all political quarters could paradoxically signify their success as content creators. Centrists may vary in their policy positions, as the term encloses a broad range of beliefs. Some may lean slightly to the left or right on particular issues but generally aim to find common ground. But presently, extreme ideologies have rendered the middle ground a precarious place.

Speaking of centrism, it encompasses adopting moderate or balanced positions amidst the extremes of political ideology. It entails appreciating and supporting specific governmental policies while also discerningly critiquing areas for improvement. India exemplifies a longstanding tradition of centrism, where diverse ideas and ideologies are assimilated. A notable illustration is the respectful accommodation of materialistic Charvaka philosophies despite their rejection of the theism found in Upanishadic teachings and the ethical precepts of Buddhism and Jainism.

?In one of his renowned speeches in parliament, Atal Bihari Vajpayee revealed that despite serving as the leader of the opposition, he was entrusted by former Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao to represent India at a UN meeting in Geneva. It exemplifies a pragmatic approach to transcending political divides in pursuit of national interest.

The erosion of centrism is a multifaceted issue influenced by various factors. Maintaining a balanced perspective has become increasingly challenging in our current political landscape as partisan divides deepen. Historically, political discord is intrinsic to democracy's vitality. However, recent trends reveal a troubling descent into unprecedented venom and personal attacks. Lawmakers in the parliament mimicked and mocked even esteemed constitutional figures like the vice president. Such behaviour diminishes public discourse and fosters intolerance among the populace, making genuine dialogue elusive.

Social media exacerbates these tensions, serving as a battleground for fervent supporters of opposing ideologies. Dissent is often met with accusations of harming nationalism or treachery, perpetuating a toxic cycle of polarization. It is imperative to recognize that regardless of political affiliation, leaders typically strive to act in the national interest, though their policy occasionally backfires. While robust debate is essential, it should never come at the expense of our societal cohesion, a cornerstone of our strength as a nation.

In recent years, political discourse in India has been increasingly dominated by issues of religion, caste, and regional identity, often at the expense of broader national interests. As all the parties vie for electoral support along narrow sectarian lines, the space for moderate voices advocating for inclusive policies and consensus-building diminishes. The pressure to align with polarised viewpoints rather than embracing centrism has become palpable in contemporary discourse. Whether influenced by political factions, societal norms, or public scrutiny, individuals often find themselves compelled to choose sides on contentious issues.

With every passing day, the possibility of implications for India's global standing and diplomatic relations will increase. In an increasingly interconnected world, navigating complex geopolitical challenges requires a nuanced and pragmatic approach that transcends ideological divides. However, when domestic politics is driven by narrow partisan interests, India's foreign policy decisions may become susceptible to short-term considerations at the expense of long-term strategic objectives. It could also weaken India's position on the global stage and undermine its ability to effectively address global challenges like climate change, terrorism, and economic inequality.

The absence of centrism can lead to economic policy volatility; we still remember what happened during demonetization. Reduced investor confidence, slower growth, widening inequality, policy gridlock, fiscal instability, and weakened international competitiveness, extreme policies disrupt markets, deter investment, hinder growth, exacerbate inequality, impede legislation, destabilize finances, diminish global standing, and destabilize long-term economic health and prosperity. Our neighbouring countries, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, still bear the brunt of such eccentric decisions. Thus, embracing centrism fosters stability, fosters growth, and ensures equitable prosperity, safeguarding a country's and its citizens' long-term economic well-being.

?As the fourth estate, the media also bears a significant responsibility in shaping public discourse and holding power to account. Often, we see journalists wielding their powerful platforms, contributing to this decline by amplifying extreme voices and mirroring the polarization they report. Journalists should uphold the principles of objectivity, fairness, and impartiality in their reporting, resisting the temptation to sensationalize issues for ratings or political agendas. The media can foster a more inclusive and pluralistic public discourse that transcends ideological divides. Though media is a business at the end of the day, a culture of accountability and fairness is imperative.

In light of these challenges, it is essential for all stakeholders, including political leaders, civil society and the media, to reaffirm their commitment to the principles of centrism and pluralism. It requires a concerted effort to foster a culture of dialogue, tolerance, and mutual respect, where diverse viewpoints are welcomed and considered on their merits rather than dismissed based on ideological affiliations. Political leaders must prioritize national interests over partisan considerations and work towards consensus-building on crucial policy issues.

?Now, why do we need centrism to prevail? According to the great Aristotle, virtue is finding balance, avoiding extremes and embracing moderation. This idea is referred to as the golden mean, which signifies that taking the middle path is significant in pursuing personal growth and self-improvement, which can be replicated while functioning in a country. The policies are pragmatic and inclusive, which would create overall stability and promote economic growth as the government has iterated, laying the foundation for a prosperous nation for the nation for the next thousand years as a priority. Centrism is essential for ensuring long-term prosperity and stability for India.