Artist-activist Mallika Sarabhai and banker Meera Sanyal deserve applause for their decision to contest Lok Sabha polls. They are contesting against the strong candidates from national parties—Sarabhai faces the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP’s) LK Advani—so even if they falter in the polls, their defeat would be nobler than all the righteous indignation expressed by armchair intellectuals and drawing room activists.

But what if they succeed? Would that mean a drastic change in the way our political affairs are conducted? Would there be a paradigm shift in the Indian polity? The answer, unfortunately, is ‘no.’ For these two brave ladies, for all their verve and commitment, and quite a few others who have entered the fray in different parts of the country, do not really offer a viable political alternative; nor do they promise any realistic cure for the rot that has set into the system.

Their intentions are indubitably noble. Sarabhai, for instance, says in her manifesto: “Politics has to be inclusive, non-divisive and non-violent… A just, compassionate, tolerant and open society is the way forward for our development.” Her mission is “to deepen the democratic process and the space by reclaiming the electoral politics for civil society, to make individual conscience count as a force of the political life… To bring justice and compassion to the heart of political life.” But all these things are unexceptional; the Congress, the BJP and other parties would not oppose these. The question is: how would she do that?

It is here that she and others in her league falter. In their action plan, they intend to empower people, to enable them to get the benefit of government schemes, to make politicians accountable, etc. However, when empowerment is sought thro’ state patronage or intervention it necessarily degenerates in to enslavement, a very Left wing concept.

This is the antithesis of liberty or emancipation that classical liberalism and contemporary libertarianism espouse. Liberty is all about the individual. But even if we accept that state intervention would somehow redeem the poor, their action plan again begs the question: how? To this, these well intentioned new entrants to politics seem to have no answer. Incidentally, many of the things that they promise already exist; there are institutions and mechanisms; we have the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, the Comptroller & Auditor General and so on.

Sarabhai says in her manifesto, “Villagers have no idea of what they can access and what is their due—not even the benefits of National Rural Employment Guarantee scheme, nor the various housing schemes.” It is indeed depressing that she finds great merit in the rural job guarantee programme, that Magna Carta of postmodern serfdom.

Sanyal, being a banker, is more focused than Sarabhai and offers concrete solutions. She has a comprehensive Master Plan for Mumbai; she has the blueprints to promote financial services, media, IT & ITES, fashion and merchandising, the life sciences sector, tourism, and town planning. She has plans for education and health, sewage, drainage and waste management, environment and climate change. She has ideas for open spaces, heritage, conservation, culture, arts, sports, more investment in Mumbai, stronger security and Mumbai’s transport needs.

But she, too, fails to posit anything fundamentally different from the established orthodoxy; often, her prescriptions are oriented around state involvement. For instance, she favors taking “advantage of the Sarva Siksha Abhiyan program to increase computerization in schools and colleges.” She does not say anything about privatizing education, which is the only way out for the sector.

Not that all Sanyal’s ideas revolve around state role. She says in her manifesto, “The private sector should ultimately be given projects for construction and eventual divestment.” Her views on metropolitan cities are also relevant: “Ideally, the Union of India must convert all mega cities into states if it would like to prevent their decay. With services being the largest component of GDP, cities will continue to be the engines of growth and job creation for at least the next two decades. This is a developmental reality that India must face. Delhi has already demonstrated the positive benefits of statehood through the National Capital Region.”

Sanyal also stands for individual liberty. In the section on police reforms in her manifesto, she is against “restrictions on dance bars. No limits of bars remaining open beyond 1 a.m. Definition of indecent conduct in a public place to exclude couples kissing or making out in cars. This is Mumbai and it has always been liberal.”