Manger Politics

The Manger narration, a soft, melodious folk piece, gives an impression of an age-old historical setting in palace with king’s costumes with classical literary scenario. The genre of the manger narration was silent fusion, the rhythm was mild to put all asleep, the lyrics are to sooth the hearts to have hope for the best in their future, and that is the theology of manger. Is it a great and interesting story to the Gen Y (People born after mid 90s)?

But the reality was different indeed! On the one hand, a brooding threnody of the citizens of Judea over the assassinations of their own children, and on the other, the rulers had marathon of meetings with the religious leaders and diplomats in order to subdue the unknown, newly born king for Judea. This insecure delusion of the empire has gone to the level of erasing a generation from their own land history.

In this story, the mere birth of a migrant individual created a political trauma for the rulers. The land of Judea, the citizens and the empires and rulers had experienced political commotion. So, it was not a silent night, rather a night with cries, disorders, threnodies, restless political and legal meetings with a declared and undeclared emergency over the citizens. As no one could have maintained a silence in that particular night, we shall presume that, this 'manger' created political instability in Judea. Commonly, any political story begins from the palace or state houses. However, this political story begins from the manger, which is usually found outside the household(s) or fields. Therefore, manger has become politically powerful space than the palace in Judea in this event.

Some stories slip back forever, forward into future, down to depths of ambiguity, and up to heights of liberation! This story of manger is one among such indeed! This is a quiet strong and powerful political story, which is transformative in nature that comes, not from the Palace up above, but from the Manger down below. Secondly, this manger story in the history conveys the significant message hitherto that the mightiest person who challenged the empires and the rulers was born in the manger to a peasant girl in an unknown land.

During the time of the birth of the mightiest, Caesar Augustus was portrayed as the greatest of the empires. Using his power, in order to favour his treasury, he levied the tax on people and forcing them to go to their natives to register themselves as citizens.  At that time, Herod was a governor of Judea, a backward province. Caesar as a federal empire did not heed enough to Judea since there was less response to chess or levy response from Judea and Caesar did not give the Governor Herod importance. When the Governor was struggling to favour his treasury because of the people’s financial crunches, Caesar ordered a census to raise funds for his treasury. When this annoying economic politics was going on, the governor received the message of the birth of the king of (for) Judea. This further aggravated his anger and ordered a massacre over infants below two years in his province, where the manger vs palace politics began.

This manger politics concretes our understanding to realise the bottom line political thought, i.e., the economy of the States. Every empire is seen powerful, not on the basis of their administrative skills of managing poverty, employment and assuring the standards of lives to every citizen. Rather the swollen size of their treasuries measures up the empire’s power. All the more so, in the present context the people, who are in power and ruling failed to assure social protection to their own citizens. On the contrary they levy citizens heavily with lots of taxes like GSTs, Income Tax, and Professional Tax and so on. Although the constitution which believes in democracy says all citizens are queens and kings of their country, the largest part live in manger with the swaddling clothes even after paying heavy taxes. Far and wide the rulers and the empires articulate the economic flourishments of the country rather than concerning the life of the citizens.  The laws and policies make the citizens economically vulnerable and forced to migrate from one place to another for their survival and for the future as we see in the story of this manger. 

Despite the fact that we are familiar with the palace vs palace politics, manger vs palace politics, which is illustrated in this story, is a new paradigm in political thought.  An unassuming and newly established manger became the political ground for the empire(s). The manger became the attraction to the global conversation starting from the intellectuals to the common people from all directions.  The manger made everyone to talk about the new politics of leadership for Judea. But neither the parents of the newly born child nor the child knew about these ripples in the political thought.

In fact, this could be described as 'peoples' politics' which is alternate to the popular top-down politics. This down-top politics creating ripples among the political thought especially among the rulers to root-down such emerging leaders with alternate political thoughts.

While people of Judea mourn for the loss of their immediate generation and for obscured future of the society without next generation (children), the rulers are concerned only about their present regime not the future of the society.  In this milieu the manger politics works towards the hope for the future by grooming people to encounter tomorrow instead of worrying much and concentrating on the present. This is another paradigm in the political thought created by this peoples’ (manger) politics.

The insecurity of the empire and the people in power, when people come together, make them to strategize against the citizens. Here in this story the manger panicked the ruler though it was away from the palace (city). They employ all intelligence means to get the information to ridicule and destroy the space and the meetings.  In this story the ruler's strategy did not work because of the importance of the hope that this manger provided. In peoples’ politics hope and the future have become the backdrops, which this manger beckoned to the people who have concerns for the societies. 

Manger politics has emerged out of an immediate need. The traces of the establishment of it earlier were not found. The demand of the situation and the context ended up in the temporary, unorganised and unfledged establishment of manger politics. Manger politics seems to be amateur, whereas the palace politics is seasoned and structure oriented. But the former has got its own vibrancy, vigour and power which goes with commons, not with powerful. It builds up a momentum to propose alternates. Though the manger politics have small beginning, it pulls and attracts the like-minded individuals and fraternities who have concern for the society. It is not an extravagant mass gathering rather a small group of one mind come together for a cause.

Hence manger is a political symbol and it represents people. It was not a royal cradle but a common corn crib. Today's India needs such Manger Politics as an alternate to the mass and popular politics. The bottom line for this Manger politics is Justice. It has to propose alternates to the dominant political thoughts of injustice. It should magnet the intellectuals and the common mass to come together to advocate for alternates that affirm social justice, equality and hope. It makes the power-less to become powerful in realizing the 'kin-dom' of God. 

The political thought of the manger is good for the justice seekers and bad for the empires. The other importance of the manger politics is this manger (margin) has become the center of the peoples' politics. 

By this time of the general election of our country is nearing, what type of politics that we are going to adopt, promote and propagate. Is manger going to be our political symbol? The power of manger is the Power of People.