Anarchy is order, whereas government is civil war. Such a differentiation between anarchy and government as illustrated in the Anarchist Manifesto in 1850 appears more real than an academic formulation in today’s India. With Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal proclaiming himself to be an anarchist, the transition from order to disorder is quite palpable.

Kejriwal is neither the first chief minister to raise a banner of revolt against an autocratic centre nor would he be the last. He conformed to the pattern of chief ministers who took on the centre in their own way – since the unconstitutional sacking of the communist regime in Kerala in 1959. Of late the chief ministers of Gujarat, West Bengal, Odisha and Bihar have been known for using every forum to run down the union government.

But Kejriwal is still an exception for many reasons. He is the first self-styled anarchist who is trying to enforce an order through the tool of governance. This contradicts the ideal state of anarchy as prescribed in the Manifesto. But what is more significant is the fact that unlike his garrulous counterparts from others states, Kejriwal does not qualify to be a conventional political adversary subscribing to traditional logic and idioms.

His formulations are unusual and strategies quite subversive. His decision to lay siege to North and South Blocks, the ultimate seat of India’s political power, was just an indication of his strong belief in himself and his self-righteous approach to politics. At times he appears be a statist who promotes his political agenda in the garb of public opinion. In the midst of this growing contradiction what is particularly interesting is the fact that Kejriwal sees his politics as a precursor to change. But given the way he is acquiring the trappings of power, it seems that more things change more they remain the same.