Should our politicians set a retirement age?

Politicians irrespective of their age and state of health usually don’t choose to retire. Some just fade away, while others cling on till the last breath. There have been some honorable exceptions across the political spectrum, like Jai Prakash Narayan (JP as he was called) and Nanaji Deshmukh.

Mallikarjun Kharge, President of the Congress Party while releasing the autobiography of former Union Minister, Sushil Kumar Shinde, “Five Decades in Politics”, observed, “I think nobody should retire from politics. I am saying those who believe in an ideology, those who want to serve the nation and serve the community they have to do until the end…”

In a democratic order, politicians do contribute substantially to shaping the future of the nation. Their decisions and contributions impact the lives of millions. They are expected to make informed choices. “A good shepherd always feeds his sheep first, even when he is hungry”, said Mashona Dhliwayo, a Canada-based philosopher and author of ‘Lalibela’s Wise Man’.

JP was persuaded to step out of retirement to lead the agitation for the restoration of the constitutionally enunciated democratic order in India. The experience and expertise gathered during a political career is helpful and probably that is why he was persuaded to lead the agitation.

However, in a dynamic society where the socio-politico-economic order is transforming with the speed of light, experience is not enough. Expertise is relevant to a given environment and circumstances. Noble Laureate, Daniel Kahneman wrote, “There are domains in which expertise is not possible. Stock picking is a good example. And in long-term political strategic forecasting, it has shown that experts are just not better than a dice-throwing monkey.”

“A leader is a dealer in hope,” is a statement attributed to Napolean Bonaparte. Currently, the global society comprises people of different generations. It is understood that the Silent generation-1925-1945, baby boomers-1946-64, Gen X-1965-79, Millennials -1980-94, Gen Z-1997-2012 Gen Alpha-2012 (to now), are all there navigating the vagaries of their own lives. Their hope, aspirations, priorities and even preferences are not always common. Many of the choices made by the politicians don’t meet the hopes and aspirations of different generations.

Even Meera Naik, a Puppet theater (that plays on cognitive fantasy) veteran suggests that there should be a retirement age for politicians in order to make way for a younger generation. Apparently, she is conscious of cognitive decline with age.

Currently, Indian politics is dominated by baby boomers. Understanding the aspirations of the electorate, which consists more of generations other than their own warrants a direct connect with them. Many of the senior politicians are not even physically fit to travel and be in touch with their voters regularly. When they are defeated or are likely to be defeated at the ballot box, they make a quiet entry into the Upper House-Rajya Sabha or State Legislative Council.

In quite a few cases politics becomes a self-nurturing way of life.

They seek to bask in the goodwill of the era gone by, which often becomes overbearing. Love of office, limelight and perquisites that go with political positions, encourages such politicians to make compromises. The ideology, if any, dissolves in partnering with the political formation of diagonally opposite ideologies.

In fact, the decision to hang on has given rise to the perpetuation of political dynasties. Successors like their parents or grandparents are not trained at the grassroots to understand the nuances of politics and often are not competent to occupy the seat of authority. Their politics produce sub-optimal outcomes, and society is deprived of the benefits of the democratic franchise.

“I start with the premise that the function of leadership is to produce more leaders and not followers,” says Ralph Nadar, American Political Activist. Dynasties believe in in-breeding and distribute political offices to family members, kin and clan. They indulge in identity politics and filibustering of bills even for the national good. The language of bi-partisan consensus gets lost in the din of narrow sectarian interests.

That said, there are quite a few well-meaning septuagenarian politicians who genuinely seek to serve society. They like elder statesman should work for the politics of change. Change to subordinate narrow political interests to the larger national good. Change to bring younger generation in politics who have the aptitude to serve society rather than themselves, who are prepared to slog and make sacrifices. As King Arthur tells Sir Bedivere, the last of the Knights of the Round Table, in Tennyson’s poem “Morte d’Arthur” : “The old order changeth, yielding place to new.”

Freedom fighters and the first-generation political frame that emerged post-independence consisted mostly of such individuals. Their love for office, if at all it was, was to serve the deprived. Alas! that creed is disappearing fast. Millions of deprived Indians are beckoning for a change in the polity.

The writer is the former Chairman SEBI & LIC, and is author of the book ‘A Game Changer’s Memoir’. Views are personal. (Syndicate: The Billion Press)

editor@thebillionpress.org