Kamal Haasan and the messiah complex in politics

Not at all. In fact, in a string of high-profile media interviews in the run-up to his formal announcement of his entry into electoral politics, Kamal Haasan has, if anything, pointedly downplayed his centrality in the process of political change he says is desperately needed in Tamil Nadu. And he may have in recent times actually found the nuance in articulation that was missing earlier in some of his motormouth outpourings.

Because he appears at the first level, going by the breathless media commentaries, to epitomise a collective, and somewhat overoptimistic, yearning among people for wholesale change from the malefic socio-economic effects of the wholesale debasement of politics inflicted by the two main Dravidian parties in the State — the DMK and the AIADMK — over 50 years. That encapsulates a popular projection of him as a ‘Trump-ian’ celebrity outsider who has come to “drain the swamp” and clean up politics. Those narratives haven’t played out so well in the political space.

No, I’m merely channelling the voice of realism. Tamil Nadu’s political history, and more anecdotal instances in other geographies of “new brooms” that claim to sweep clean, offer a sobering assessment that the odds disfavour Kamal, however well-intentioned he may be.

Tamil Nadu has somewhat uniquely catapulted film personas to political power: besides screenwriter M Karunanidhi, and actors MGR and Jayalalithaa, all of whom became chief ministers, there are a string of two-bit actors strutting about on the political stage. MGR himself came to power claiming to rid the State of corruption under the DMK. You know how that strand of history played out. Elsewhere, most recently, Arvind Kejriwal represents the folly of betting on ‘outsiders’ who come to power on an anti-corruption plank, only to be swamped by the system.

Don’t get me wrong. Kamal is an extraordinarily talented actor. And in his chosen field of endeavour, he has pushed the limits of artistic excellence. And yet, for someone who cultivates an image of himself as thoughtful and reflective, his political posturing and his recent utterances on matters of public policy reflect a ready resort to populism and an inadequate grasp of economics.

I’ll cite just one instance. In 2015, after the Chennai floods, his statements, while well-intentioned, were low on economic rationale. An anguished Kamal vented against ineffectual governments and economic inequity and said in an interview that instead of spending ₹4,000 crore on, say, a corporate project, the government should “distribute” the money among 120 crore Indians. “That would make all Indians tri-crorepatis,” he reasoned.

Not only was his prescription arithmetically challenged, it channelled the idiocy of the ‘helicopter money’ fallacy — that people will feel richer if money were showered on them from a helicopter — which economists from Milton Friedman to Raghuram Rajan have debunked.

I wish him well. Every time an ‘outsider’ comes in to cleanse politics, it represents the triumph of hope over failed experience. A heart bowed down with the weight of woe will cling to the weakest hope. But it’s prudent to temper unreasonable hope with a touch of realism.

A weekly column that helps you ask the right questions

COMMENT NOW