Angela Rangad is a Meghalaya-based rights activist who has been active on issues around gender justice and economic rights for close to 20 years. She has also been involved in promoting citizens’ governance participation at the block, village, district and state level.
Rangad is contesting the upcoming state assembly polls from the South Shillong constituency, where she is up against three-time Bharatiya Janata Party MLA and political heavyweight Sanbor Shullai. She is contesting as an independent candidate, but as a member of KAM Meghalaya – which calls itself a citizens’ political platform. Three KAM Meghalaya members, including Rangad, are contesting the upcoming elections.
In this interview to The Wire, she talked about her campaign, the political climate in Meghalaya and more. The interview has been edited for clarity.
Election fever has begun in Meghalaya; almost every political party is creating a high-pitched atmosphere. You [and other KAM Meghalaya contestants] have decided to challenge experienced or so-called heavyweight candidates. Can you please describe your poll campaign?
Election times, as we have repeatedly seen, and more so in recent times, come with a heightened focus on the contestant, but very little or nothing [is said] about the voters. But democracy is meant to be for the people, of the people, by the people. Therefore, the cornerstone of our poll campaign has been the citizens, the rights and dignity of the citizen.
We have gone house-to-house meeting people individually, listening to their concerns, fears, aspirations, struggles and ideas, and discussing possible solutions together. Our manifesto has emerged from these in-depth conversations and is, in a sense, a collective manifesto.
With this strength behind us today, our campaign is warming up, solidly grounded and directionally crystal clear. My one-to-one campaign with the people at their doorstep and being on the ground through street corner meetings and providing in writing our values, action plans and commitments is what is pushing the discourse in South Shillong and bringing that much needed shift in Meghalaya electoral politics.
We are extremely grateful at the number of volunteers pouring in from different cross sections to take this process forward.
In the history of Indian elections – whether state or general elections – there have been quite a few who have tried to contest. Some reached the finishing line, but others couldn’t. How do you see yourself fighting in the political arena?
I am a tenacious fighter and have been so for the last two decades. My 20 years of activism has readied me for electoral politics, both in terms of understanding the systemic failures and having ideas of how to fix them, but most importantly in strengthening my resolve that actions based on truth, justice and rights will prevail. I do not and have never given up on any of the issues that I have taken up, but always carried it to the finishing line – be it the fight for a Lokayukta Act, for implementation of the Central law on hawking and street vending in Meghalaya, or ensuring DSC-passed candidates got their rightful appointments etc.
I will be a strong, uncompromising, questioning voice in the assembly. I strongly feel that this significant gender, class, economic and mindset shift is urgently required. I embody that shift. I am not a traditional politician and that is my greatest strength. I do not believe in vote banks, middlemen, money, muscle power and cheap patronage. I strongly believe that a large section of the citizens also has similar views and will vote for that shift.
KAM is quite a diversified political platform but not a registered party. Its members include Wanpynhun Kharsyntiew, a former domestic worker and Kyrsaibor Pyrtuh, a former pastor, which is quite incredible. Do you feel that bringing in non-political players, and that too from diverse backgrounds, will usher in a different tone in Indian politics?
Yes, certainly so. We who believe in principles of inclusive development have come together, to deliberate and act. This is the significant shift that is required in Indian politics today. Non-political players need to change the political narratives, purge it of toxic masculinities, misogyny and muscle flexes. For example, it is not enough to just say we have so many women contesting or so many women are in political positions. But do they have an independent voice that calls out gender injustice, regardless of who the perpetrators are? We saw very little of that in the last couple of years at the state or country level. Apart from in our own state, we have been at the forefront calling out and questioning the release of Bilkis Bano’s rapists and [her family’s] murderers, while women politicians of the ruling party remained silent and mute spectators.
Both Kong Wanpynhun and I signify women’s leadership with complete and genuine agency that will never be shackled by patriarchal gagging. All three of us have also stood solidly behind all categories of workers including migrant workers, domestic workers, street hawkers and vendors, as well as different communities and religious groups. Pastor Kyrsaibor Pyrtuh is well known as an important voice of dissent both within and outside the church, and has fought extremely tough battles for justice and equality.
I think all three of us are marching into the electoral fray informed by an African saying: ‘If you want to walk fast walk alone, but if you want to walk long walk together.’ We will walk and work together, and are here for the long haul. We will be nimble in addressing issues as our track record of work shows, but we are not here for quick gains and quick fixes. We grew out of and led the Right to Information campaign in Meghalaya and remain committed to issues of accountability.
Do you feel that you are facing an uphill task contesting against a three-time MLA and political heavyweight like Sanbor Shullai?
If we go by the same old political thinking and equation of power residing only in muscle, money, middlemen, patronage and patriarchy, then yes, it is an uphill task. But I think there is a wind of change happening now.
I must say that I am already challenging Sanbor Shullai, who in the past three terms has become so over confident that he brags that he never campaigns or meets the people. Ours indeed is a battle for the soul of South Shillong and Meghalaya in that sense. It is time not just for workable ideas and solutions but also for a principled politics, and that is the alternative we are providing.
People are beginning to question what precisely the implications of a ‘political heavyweight’ in their lives are, in the larger context of democracy today. Sanbor Shullai is racing to double the distribution of sops and trying to initiate projects that should have been there for the last 15 years – drinking water, toilets in the cantonment areas of Jhalupara etc. But shockingly, he has not given accounts for the last 15 years. If a person is so confident of his work, he should not hesitate to share the accounts or respond to my challenge for a public debate in a public forum on his track record.
The question is, do citizens want to remain in this patronised hierarchy of the ‘political ruler’ and the ‘voiceless ruled’, or are people aspiring to be an equal partner with a voice? From our years of work with the unorganised sector, we know that they clearly understand these dynamics and the need for a voice.
Mamata Banerjee has dropped the Trinamool Congress’s hat in the ring. What is your take on her foray into Meghalaya politics, especially when she is seen as a tough challenger to and a fierce critic of Prime Minister Narendra Modi?
For a healthy democracy, anybody is welcome to throw in their hat. But it must be for the long haul, with the concerns of the people being the central driving force. We are totally against any kind of communalism, hate and divisive politics, and these are non-negotiables for us. Everyone is aware of my stand against majoritarian politics and the politics of hate, wherever and whenever it is being played out – be it nationally or locally. And I will continue to challenge the politics of hate and division, with an inclusive politics of love.
But what are TMC’s political and ideological non-negotiables here in Meghalaya is not entirely clear, and that is of concern and could have long-term negative implications for Meghalaya.
As clichéd as it is, Meghalaya is perceived as a place that is easy to romanticise, because of its natural splendour and beauty. But there are serious issues plaguing the state, as is clear from some indicators on health, gender equality, education, unchecked exploitation of natural resources, gender rights, women’s issues, gender violence etc., which are hidden from tourists’ eyes.
As an activist and now as a political candidate, how will you address these?
Yes, these are huge issues of very deep and urgent concern. Every other contestant today, and the people, talk about ‘development’ – but development in Meghalaya is like the proverbial elephant in the room with the blind men. Everyone, or every category, has a different concept of what that development should be.
With our people-centric approach, we are acutely aware of the disparities and vulnerabilities between the different groups. Contesting from the KAM Meghalaya platform, the manifestos of all three of us are very clear about what our development priorities are. We denounce a predatory, extractive, soul- and ethos-destroying glitter- and granite-driven initiatives. Our greatest assets, as you say, are our natural resources, and the way forward can only be a sustainable people and environment nurturing approach.
Khasi society is an example for other societies in India on account of its matrilineal structure. But there is a bitter irony attached to this legacy, because you and others have felt that this legacy is overshadowed by an overwhelming patriarchal superstructure. Do you feel that this matrilineal legacy has been overly romanticised?
Yes, indeed, it has been problematically romanticised. It is matrilineal – meaning lineage is traced through women – but otherwise all other community structures within are deeply patriarchal. Superimposed on that are the patriarchal structures and ideologies imposed by religion, markets and capitalism.
This romanticisation is also problematic at another level, because I find certain sections of our own community trying to justify and keep up a false rhetoric of a gender-just society and using shallow cultural relativist arguments to live up to that image, without acknowledging or attempting to address the gendered problems within.
How do you view the role of the church, especially when it comes to contemporary progressive issues?
Jesus the revolutionary, Christ the redeemer is my guiding principle. However, the church, like most institutions, has its progressive and conservative sections. Many within also call out injustices, violence, corruption and divisive politics. But the more important question now for the church and us Christians is growing authoritarianism and majoritarianism. We need to uphold constitutional values of secularism and pluralism, and for this we need to create newer alliances and not fall into the trap of Islamophobia or any other kind of othering.
Shillong has been a witness to violence between different communities, a type of violence which emanates from mistrust between different communities and is generally seen as a subtle conflict between tribals and non-tribals. As a political candidate, do you feel that experienced politicians from different parties have failed to generate trust between people and ensure longlasting peace? Is this a deliberate failure?
If you go by the logic of vote bank politics, then of course you can see it as a deliberate failure. It serves certain quarters to keep people divided. We can see it all over the country today. It is the dominant politics of the country today and is hollowing out communities.
To create a sense of fear, anxiety and paranoia serves the interests of certain political sections, so that they can keep projecting themselves as ‘protectors’ and make communities dependent on them for protection – much like how the hafta system works. I have and will always challenge the creation of fear by fringe elements for political gains through concrete actions. I fear no one and have always stood up against bullies and stood alone against the government if need be, and this is what I will continue to do to ensure safety, security, justice and peace.
How can the border dispute between Meghalaya and Assam be settled?
The border dispute between the two states is long drawn and complicated, and must involve the communities directly affected in dialogues and as part of the solution. Both states must also be equal in the negotiations. One cannot take on a one-upmanship attitude and try to arm twist and push an agenda.
I am confident we can find a way if our approach is right, and we are sincere in our efforts to find a solution. A bulldozer approach is totally unacceptable. Borders need to be seen as places of friendships and opportunities, and not conflict.
Edited by Jahnavi Sen.
