When there were reports of Delhi’s law minster ordering (or begging) the Police for action, his party was called a fascist organisation. When the CM of Delhi held a sit-in against Police’s inaction, the party was suitably labelled anarchist. And if one were to believe the mainstream media(MSM), AAP is both – anarchist and fascist.
Firstly, this is theoretically impossible; fascism is a system of governance in which all power is held by one person(a kind of dictatorship) where as anarchism is a theory which supports stateless society, i.e. having no government at all!
Secondly, the MSM’s fanfare might find it astonishing but there exists an India beyond Lutyens’ Delhi. In that part, the police functions in a manner similar to British Raj, the bureaucrats need “oiling” to get the work done and people try to solve problems within the circumference of system – resulting into the well-known India of Jugaad, the pros and cons of which can be left for a GD-PI session in a room full of non-voting MBA enthusiasts. Flexibility, thoda app ka faayda thoda humara, has been practiced till now in the name of democratic consultation and it is against this arrangement, rightfully, stands Mr. Kejriwal, undeterred by the distaste of stakeholders in current system.
I think the standoff can be avoided by a reformist way of governance: a system which advocates gradual reform rather than abolition or revolution. What is the point in forcing all the shops to sell a new product, when their customers keep asking for the older (Jugaad-based) one? It is only through gradual, scientific reforms we can increase awareness about the new product (incorruptible, accountable and prompt service) and also prepare a workforce that is ready to offer that in their shops (government agencies.)