How #AAPBreakup is essential for its evolution

Supporters of the Aam Aadmi Party, or AAPians as they sometimes call themselves, are a highly emotional lot. Where workers and leaders of other parties take ups and downs in their stride, AAPians tend to get upset the moment there is a small bump in the road. The current "crisis", a fairly routine event in the life of a political party, or any organisation really, is being perceived as an existential threat to the fledgling outfit, when it is nothing more than a simple, old fashioned power struggle.

AAP - and its top leaders - are themselves to blame for this tendency. They positioned themselves as not just different from other, older political parties but somehow morally superior. The tone of AAPians - including that of the leader and his top ideologues - was self-righteous, often bordering on the sanctimonious. There was a lot of talk of how AAP would not indulge in the petty and corrupt ways of the Congress and the BJP, but instead bring in a new, refreshing style to politics in India. That won them supporters and the Delhi elections, though it needs to be mentioned that in the Parliamentary elections in May 2014, it proved quite ineffective.

This AAP pitch, coupled with the relentless combative style of Arvind Kejriwal, who raised questions others wouldn't, turned what was a new and inexperienced kid on the block into a national phenomenon. It showed that Indians were disgusted with the ways of the older parties and were ready to seek out alternatives. It also fed into the urban prejudice that "all politicians are corrupt" and that politics is somehow "dirty".

Now, when AAP is being perceived as indulging in the same "dirty" tactics, its hardcore followers are shocked. One Mumbai senior leader Anjali Damania, who had once before quit and rejoined, quit again. She said she was terribly upset at finding out that Kejriwal was doing "horse-trading". And what exactly was Kejriwal doing in the tape doing the rounds? Exploring ways in November to get six Congress MLAs to join AAP so that a government could be formed in Delhi without an election. Kejriwal's supporters do not deny the tape is genuine-they claim that it was not horse trading but "political realignment." Somewhat like saying a divorce is "conscious uncoupling." Same difference.

While this drama unfolds, the party is dealing with the publicly aired differences between Kejriwal and the Yogendra Yadav-Prashant Bhushan duo. These two are said to be the intellectuals and conscience keepers of the party. Both come from the old socialist school of politics, whose characteristics are to over-discuss an issue and then finally break up. Even a cursory look at the various socialist groups (also called the Janata Parivar) will show that. Is the internal struggle in AAP an ideological conflict, a genuine difference of opinion about the future course (to expand or not to expand?) or just a simple personality clash? Perhaps a bit of everything. Kejriwal may find the two holding up his plans and interfering too much; they may see their role as equal to Kejriwal's and may resent being sidelined in decision making. They may also have doubts about some of Kejriwal's methods and his tendency to surround himself with those who largely agree with him, or, "yes-men"; he could be thinking of them as needlessly disruptive. The fact of the matter is that Kejriwal not only has a vast majority of the Delhi MLAs on his side, but they were also voted out of the Political Action Committee by a majority vote? How much more democratic can it get?

Moreover, and this is crucial, there is no doubt that Kejriwal is the vote grabber. His rallies pull in lakhs of people, he has shown the ability to slaughter the giant, the BJP and it is clear that he has a plan, for himself and for his party. Yadav and Bhushan provide some intellectual weight, but when it comes down to a fight in the election arena, who would be more effective? This is not to say that Kejriwal's blind ambition and his tendency to stay away whenever awkward decisions are to be taken are not problematic; they are and could even disastrous in the long run, unless he curbs them. The old halo has also slipped. But at the moment, it is he who is in charge of the party and like all leaders, will want to run it his way.

AAP's current problems are akin to a student organisation's, which is full of enthusiasm and noble ideas when it is formed, but has to come to terms with harsh realities once it gets what it wants. In this case, it is power. With great power come great headaches-harsh decisions have to be taken, occasional compromises have to be made and egos are hurt. It's a party of growing up and evolving into a more mature entity. If the fundamental objective-governance and fulfilling all that the party set out to do for its constituents-is met, then all will be forgotten and forgiven. If not, there will be finger pointing and legitimate questions will be asked. For the moment, it is Kejriwal and his highly vocal band of supporters who are triumphant. Once the dust settles down they need to get on with the job of running Delhi, which they were elected for.