My grandmother used to spend her entire afternoon sitting at the doorstep and staring outside. Most of the time, even a word did not spill out of her mouth. Yet, sometimes she would get up suddenly from her perch and declare that it was going to rain. This, when there wasn’t a speck in the sky that could be construed as a cloud. But rain it did, most of the time.
I asked her once the basis of her prediction. “The ants,” she said. “When the ants come out by the scores, carrying their eggs in their mouths, it is sure to rain.” On another occasion she told me, “When birds wallow in the dust, it rains.” I know it doesn’t make any meteorological sense, but she sure was more successful than the city meteorologists.
She also did not need a watch to tell what time of the day it was. Our family got together at five in the evening for tea. Without ever seeing a clock, without ever asking anyone what time it was, she kept the tea ready at the appointed hour. “The length of the shadows.” She said by way of explanation of her ability to tell time. In the night, it were the stars and their position which told her how far insomnia had caught up with her.
Towards the fag end of my stay in the USA, I fell ill. While the illness did not incapacitate me, it was excruciating enough to consume all my rational interest during the daytime and leave me with irrational fears once the night fell.
The learned doctor, after giving me a clinical check, asked me to present myself again for further checks. “On the surface everything looks okay,” he said. “Yet more sophisticated checks might reveal something else. I advise we do a bit of endoscopy and another test to check the status of the biliary tree as well as the health of your colon.” I felt scared enough to not to show him my face again.
Back in India, I went to our family doctor, who patted my stomach, prodded my viscera with his fingers, told me to take deep breaths while this was going on. Then, examining my fingernails, he passed the verdict, “Acid peptic disease. Not to worry, though this disease might itself be a symptom of your worrying disposition. Just take these tablets, laugh a bit more often, and you should be alright.”
I asked him how he could reach a diagnosis while his counterpart in US required a bevy of tests. His answer I will never forget.
“As technology progresses, my two eyes and ten fingers become progressively blind. Even I don’t observe as much as I used to when I practiced in the rural area. My son is bestowed with practically blind fingers.”
Compared to my grandmother, I am a pygmy in the matters of observation. But the chances are bright that my grandson will write a piece eulogizing my observational prowess.
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Friday, September 14, 2007
VOTING IN INDIAN IDOL: DOES IT REFLECT UPON INDIAN DEMOCRACY?
The “Indian Idol” and “Saregama” have both become democratic singing competitions. The judges and their judgment are indeed important but the vote of the audience is even more so and final.
In one of the previous contests that I happen to remember, a contestant from North East won the competition on the basis of votes. The judges’ decision was contrary to what emerged out of voting. The anchor kept on stressing the fact that an overwhelming majority of votes have come from the North East and do not represent the entire India. The other contestant, supposed to be better if you believe the judges, received less votes and lost out.
This is not an isolated instance. Every time these contests take place, the voting goes on the lines of caste, religion, region, language.
The voters forget that the issue at hand is singing. That they are expected to vote for the better singer – the one who has more capability. In fact, from what I have so far seen, the main issue becomes completely buried under other, extraneous considerations.
The Indian media makes much of the Indian Janata in every election analysis. When we vote out a government or vote another in, the refrain is always “Wow! Even if most of the voters be illiterate, see how intelligently they have voted!” Immortalized in the Hindi songs and movies and channels is the axiom “Yeh to public hai, yeh sab janti hai.”
But think again. Do you think that a public which cannot vote straight even when the issue is simple like singing prowess of a singer will be able to vote on the basis of issues in the general elections? If they cannot see a singer of another region/religion/caste/language win a mere singing competition, how can they see someone heterogeneous to them winning an election to become an MP/MLA for the next five years and affecting their lives directly and indirectly?
The famed Indian Janata votes every time only on parochial lines and tries to elect people who belong to them. Rationales and issues actually do not count.
And if we select incompetent singers, we also select incompetent people to govern us. That is the sole reason why we do not move ahead. That is the sole reason why decisions of national importance get blocked by extraneous considerations on the part of every party. That is the sole reason why criminals can cock a snook not only at law but also actually become lawmakers. That is the reason why nuclear deals become confused with Muslim votes. That is the reason why Sachar Committees are set up. That is the reason that a foreigner can occupy a post that is greater than that of Indian Prime Minister and President combined and dictate terms to both of them and everyone in a completely unconstitutional manner. And that is the reason that the Indian voter will vote back complete mediocrity and actually love it.
In one of the previous contests that I happen to remember, a contestant from North East won the competition on the basis of votes. The judges’ decision was contrary to what emerged out of voting. The anchor kept on stressing the fact that an overwhelming majority of votes have come from the North East and do not represent the entire India. The other contestant, supposed to be better if you believe the judges, received less votes and lost out.
This is not an isolated instance. Every time these contests take place, the voting goes on the lines of caste, religion, region, language.
The voters forget that the issue at hand is singing. That they are expected to vote for the better singer – the one who has more capability. In fact, from what I have so far seen, the main issue becomes completely buried under other, extraneous considerations.
The Indian media makes much of the Indian Janata in every election analysis. When we vote out a government or vote another in, the refrain is always “Wow! Even if most of the voters be illiterate, see how intelligently they have voted!” Immortalized in the Hindi songs and movies and channels is the axiom “Yeh to public hai, yeh sab janti hai.”
But think again. Do you think that a public which cannot vote straight even when the issue is simple like singing prowess of a singer will be able to vote on the basis of issues in the general elections? If they cannot see a singer of another region/religion/caste/language win a mere singing competition, how can they see someone heterogeneous to them winning an election to become an MP/MLA for the next five years and affecting their lives directly and indirectly?
The famed Indian Janata votes every time only on parochial lines and tries to elect people who belong to them. Rationales and issues actually do not count.
And if we select incompetent singers, we also select incompetent people to govern us. That is the sole reason why we do not move ahead. That is the sole reason why decisions of national importance get blocked by extraneous considerations on the part of every party. That is the sole reason why criminals can cock a snook not only at law but also actually become lawmakers. That is the reason why nuclear deals become confused with Muslim votes. That is the reason why Sachar Committees are set up. That is the reason that a foreigner can occupy a post that is greater than that of Indian Prime Minister and President combined and dictate terms to both of them and everyone in a completely unconstitutional manner. And that is the reason that the Indian voter will vote back complete mediocrity and actually love it.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
EXISTENCE OF RAMA AND HENRY SCHLEIMANN
The Congress party is obviously gleeful (as the left will be) over the ASI contention that there is no proof for the existence of Rama. This is indeed wonderful. But let us look at certain things before we write off Rama.
There was a similar view about Troy and the Illiad of Homer. All archaeologists were unanimous that the whole epic was a figment of imagination of Homer and that neither Troy nor Helen, not any other character ever existed. But like typical scholars, these archaeologists searched everywhere for Troy except where Homer said it existed. And since they did not find Troy there, they assumed, and worse, asserted that Troy was imaginary and fictitious.
It just took one man and his belief to change this completely. The man was Henry Schleimann. He heard this assertion in his childhood. It became a passion for him to find Troy. In his adulthood he devoted his personal money to the search for Troy. His plan was simple - dig where Homer said Troy was. And Bingo! He found Troy sitting exactly where Homer had said it would be sitting and exactly where he dug.
Indian Archaeologists too have dug everywhere except where Valmiki says Rama was and where he went. So you have greats like H. D. Sankalia and B. B. Laal and others putting Ayodhya everywhere except where valmiki said it is.
The point is, why not dig where Valmiki says you should? Does this country of a billion and more not have a single person willing to do that and put his own finances at stake? better still, it fits Congress to say and do what it says and does. It shouldn't really; because even if you disregard the fact that the Hindus make the majority of this country, you cannot deny that they indeed are citizens of this country and have feelings and emotions for their religion too. Rama is an integral part of their religion. If you do not utter a single word when other religions are concerned and call other people communal even if an objective point is being raised, you should do the same when it is a matter concerned with hinduism.
The point is that that it still fits the Congress to say and do what it says and does. Is there no one in the VHP who can think and obtain necessary permission to dig where Valmiki says we should dig?
Also, if Babri masjid was such a holy grail that it could not be demolished and its demolition raised such a hue and cry, should the same criterion not be valid for for the Setu? After all the Setu is dear to a particular religion and its feelings are going to hurt.
There was a similar view about Troy and the Illiad of Homer. All archaeologists were unanimous that the whole epic was a figment of imagination of Homer and that neither Troy nor Helen, not any other character ever existed. But like typical scholars, these archaeologists searched everywhere for Troy except where Homer said it existed. And since they did not find Troy there, they assumed, and worse, asserted that Troy was imaginary and fictitious.
It just took one man and his belief to change this completely. The man was Henry Schleimann. He heard this assertion in his childhood. It became a passion for him to find Troy. In his adulthood he devoted his personal money to the search for Troy. His plan was simple - dig where Homer said Troy was. And Bingo! He found Troy sitting exactly where Homer had said it would be sitting and exactly where he dug.
Indian Archaeologists too have dug everywhere except where Valmiki says Rama was and where he went. So you have greats like H. D. Sankalia and B. B. Laal and others putting Ayodhya everywhere except where valmiki said it is.
The point is, why not dig where Valmiki says you should? Does this country of a billion and more not have a single person willing to do that and put his own finances at stake? better still, it fits Congress to say and do what it says and does. It shouldn't really; because even if you disregard the fact that the Hindus make the majority of this country, you cannot deny that they indeed are citizens of this country and have feelings and emotions for their religion too. Rama is an integral part of their religion. If you do not utter a single word when other religions are concerned and call other people communal even if an objective point is being raised, you should do the same when it is a matter concerned with hinduism.
The point is that that it still fits the Congress to say and do what it says and does. Is there no one in the VHP who can think and obtain necessary permission to dig where Valmiki says we should dig?
Also, if Babri masjid was such a holy grail that it could not be demolished and its demolition raised such a hue and cry, should the same criterion not be valid for for the Setu? After all the Setu is dear to a particular religion and its feelings are going to hurt.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
WHO IS THE BEST PRIME MINISTER WE HAVE HAD?
I just wondered who has been the best prime minister we have had in the history of independent India. If you ask this question generally, the name which will be thrown up immediately and spontaneously will be that of Jawaharlal Nehru. Some may say Indira Gandhi. A few BJP diehards may say Atal Behari Vajpayee. But when I began introspecting, believe me, the choice was not simple.
So here goes….
Jawaharlal Nehru
The first Prime Minster of independent India. Installed at the behest of Mahatma Gandhi when the Congress organization really wanted Sardar Patel. But whoever said Gandhi was democratic? As demonstrated in the case of Pattabhi Sitaramaiah vs. Subhash Bose during elections to the post of President of Congress during the English rule, Gandhi wanted his writ to prevail. He did pretty much the same after independence. So the first prime Minister of India was installed through an undemocratic act by the father of the nation.
Wow! What a Prime Minister to have nevertheless. A man who was erudite. A man who was an author. A man who knew, or thought he knew the history of India. A man who could give a speech like few others could. A man who was a dreamer.
A man who could charm Edwina Mountbatten, the Viceroyani as we would love to say. Wonderful. If you can get the wife of the last Viceroy to India to fall in love with you, a politician of a slave nation, you indeed get full marks as a man!
The man was a dreamer.
But the man was without the wherewithal to bring those dreams to fruition. His muddy thinking got us the middle path – the so called socialistic policy which was a cross between communism and capitalism. But often when you cross two different organisms, you get a mule – something which is barren, infertile, a beast of burden. And so the Indian economy rotted. Everything gradually became State controlled. Competition was never there and so efficiency was never a necessity.
The man had a deep mistrust of businessmen. So even those businessmen that had aided the struggle for independence had to eat the crow and the humble pie.
When everything becomes State controlled, corruption takes roots. When everything needs a license bribery is the via media. So, in more ways than one, Nehru installed the roots of corruption in the independent country.
The man was a dreamer.
In the dreams, everything is possible. It is also possible to forget reality so completely that you invite and show your military installations to Chinese. You dream of being seen as a messiah of peace. So you believe in Panchasheel. You are blind to the reality that is evolving in China behind the veil of Panchasheel. For all your erudition, you cannot think that where panchatantra is needed, you are putting in Panchasheel. So China attacks and knows even before attacking what the result is going to be. The nation is shamed.
But you don’t want to own up the responsibility especially when you have been pampered all along as someone great. So you do not admit any guilt. To a question in parliament from you own son in law, you give funny replies. This debate is parliament is famous and I recreate it below.
“Mr. Prime Minister, what about Aksai Chin? Are there any plans to take back the Indian land that has been annexed by China?” Asks Feroze Gandhi, Nehru’s own, but possibly hated, son-in-law.
After talking about here and there, Nehru manages the funny defense, “But not a blade of grass grows there. The land is completely barren. It is useless” Thereby he makes clear that he is not interested in taking it back. Pride, he can swallow and all Indians should too.
Feroze Gandhi comes back with the barbed witticism, “In that case Mr. prime Minister, not a blade of grass grows on your head too. Shall we take it as useless then?”
Nepal wanted to merge with India. Just think. Today ISI operates through that country too. Strategically it would have been wonderful if India had allowed its wish. But Nehru worried about his international image more than the benefit the country could derive. Nehru thought it would be seen as an imperialistic action and would rob him of the ‘messiah of peace image’. So, he declined!
USA wanted that we should acquire nuclear capability ahead of China and it would help us doing so. Ditto for that too – image of the messiah of peace will go out the window! So lose out on that opportunity too.
Nehru wanted universal franchise for our first general election. Others, Patel included wanted limited franchise for only those who were literate and later on a general franchise when literacy had spread. Nehru prevailed. Do you not think that the criminalization of politics today has some roots here? I believe that Nehru laid the foundations of criminalization of politics in India.
But let us end on a better note. He was the one who felt the need for IITs. He was the one allocated budget for these institutions and several others. He got all those huge dams made and called them the “temples of modern India.”
But just that much.
My vote: Nyet. I don’t want this Prime Minister today. It would simply kill India.
Your vote?
Lal Bahadur Shastri
Didn’t have a tenure where he could make a difference. Within this short tenure too he had to face a war. He acquitted himself more or less ok given the state of affairs that were handed over to him.
Jai jawan jai kisan. Beyond this slogan, nothing else survives of his legacy today. The man was obviously incorruptible. The man had good intentions at heart. Whether he would have been able to convert those intentions into reality is a matter that cannot be known.
My vote: Cannot judge. So, NO.
Your vote?
Indira Gandhi
Iron Lady! The lady who either had the guts that her to take many bold steps, or was insecure enough to take those steps to show her opponents that she was not insecure. But not all the bold steps benefited India.
Also, for me the most hated, single person responsible to dismantling all major institutions of India!
I do not want to speak about the Emergency. Much has been written about it and everyone knows of the things. So, let’s speak of other things.
Took the steps for India’s first atomic explosion. But stopped dead after that she should have gone ahead while there was still time. But alright, that was one big positive.
The space programme developed mainly during her time. She had the energy, the vision, and the will to pursue the costly programme even while others, lesser people, could have thought that the resources were well spent in feeding the masses. A leader does not look at just one thing in the present to make decisions. The true leader has a vision about the future and what all things the country will need, will be known for, and will reap the rewards of. Indira had this vision and relentlessly pursued the space programme.
She saved the Indian tiger from the brink. Project tiger was her baby and she spared nothing to achieve the target. In her times, the tiger got back from the precipice and the numbers grew till it was completely out of danger. Contrast this with what the present Prime Minister is doing when the danger is greater. You will understand the difference between a strong and a weak prime minister immediately.
But she single handedly destroyed the institution of the President of India. We got a Jhaduwala President called Zail Singh because of her. The man had no spine and he verbally demonstrated it. Only he had spinal trouble so he couldn’t bend. Otherwise ….
Even before Zail Singh, she had defiled that office. The media says that the election of Pratibha Patil was the first to have been politicized like that. They are wrong. Just go back and see what happened in the contest of Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy vs. V. V. Giri. Reddy was the official Congress candidate. Mrs. Gandhi played politics to the extent that she made the official candidate lose and V. V. Giri win on, hold your breath, “Vote of conscience!” This is exactly what the opposition tried this time round and lost badly. They didn’t have the political savvy she had.
Political savvy she had in abundance. See what she did with the slogan Garibi Hatao. Go back and see what wonderful use she made of the elephant on which she rode to Belchchi where a few dalits had been massacred. That gave her high visibility and brought her back to power.
The other institution she destroyed was the Judiciary. She meddled everywhere – in the appointments of the judges, in their transfer etc. The final straw was the answer she gave to the Allahabad court verdict that went against her. She got the constitution amended to save her skin and declared Emergency.
She muzzled the press. Only very few journalists had the courage to stand upto the tortures that she through her Goonda son, Sanjay, had fixed for them.
She was the one who was responsible for the Sikh terrorism. Jarnail Bhindranwale was her creation. This is something that is actually well known.
All in all, a lady with iron in her. But also a lady with dictatorial ambitions, with a love for her sons that was greater than her love for the nation, with a vision that few leaders have, but with a feeling of insecurity that laid these visions and quite a lot of good work that she did to waste.
My vote: NYET! I do not want her to be the Prime Minister again. MAY BE IN HER NEXT AVATAR SHE WILL MUZZLE US BLOGGERS TOO IN THE NEXT EDITION OF EMERGENCY.
Your vote?
Morarjee Desai
The guy who drank his own urine and wanted all us citizens to do the same. Highly disciplined but actually quite rigidly so. Therefore useless as a disciplinarian. Conjured an image of an irate teacher with a cane in hand to beat the impish student.
Myopic. Sold gold so that the prices depressed. Reverse happened. People bought and hoarded gold and the prices went up. Also, even with the stick in his hand, could not discipline his own cabinet members. These guys spread a stink that got his government down.
My vote: Pathetic. Good that the term ended sooner than later. Saved the PMO from donning the smell that all public latrines in India do.
(And I do not want Modi to read this blog. If he thinks I have hurt the Gujarati pride, I will be Best baked!)
Your vote?
Choudhary Charan Singh
The only image I have of him is this: One night I was walking just near the road that laid to Nagpur airport. Suddenly a jeep with a blaring siren and a voice blaring over that din goes along the road announcing for all the people “The Prime Minister of the country, Chaudhary Charan Singh has arrived. Kindly be on the sides of the road to get a darshan.”
ONLY NO ONE IS ON THE ROAD TO HAVE THAT DARSHAN!
WHEN INDIRA GANDHI USED TO ARRIVE, THERE NEVER WAS AN ANNOUNCEMENT AND THE ROAD USED TO BE TTEMING WITH PEOPLE TRYING TO GET A DEKKO.
My vote: Who cares!
Your vote? I don’t care what it is! So don’t bother.
Chandrashekhar
The great man actually became a puppet to get to the chair. Couldn’t do anything and cut a very sorry figure.
The less said the better. There is nothing to say either.
No need to vote. Sad that I write this after his death.
Rajiv Gandhi
The man who brought computers to India! You think so? Balls. The man was a comedy item. Hamein dekhna hai; Hum dekhengey; Hum Dekh rahe hain. GOD, and in the upper case!
For all his dekhna hai, dekhenge etc., the man was completely blind! He did not see the reality. Also the man, the only Prime Minister with that brute majority, who could not do anything.
I think that the man was the king of all foolish people who ever occupied that post. Let us see why he earns the title of the King of Fools.
The man first opposed the tamilians and favoured sinhalas in Sri Lanka. Then he sends Indian Peace Keeping Force to the island nation to see to the well being of Tamils. This was not the only time that he tried to play on both sides. There will be other examples I will recount. But here, it got our forces into a tizzy. They did not understand why they were there in that Nation, what they had to do, what exactly was their role. Many got killed, many wounded, and almost all utterly demoralized. And India won brickbats from both Sinhalas and Tamils. Mr. Gandhi also earned the bomb that took his life later. I THINK THERE CANNOT BE A BETTER EXAMPLE OF UTTERLY MUDDY THINKING.
But look at what he said in the parliament immediately after the Bofors controversy broke. The statement was to the effect that neither he nor any member of his family had received kickbacks in the deal! There was no need of this statement and the spotlight fixed on him automatically after this statement. Even before this he had told the parliament that there was no middleman in the deal. Later when it was proved that there indeed was a middleman, he was made to look like a liar. One after another, he used his own statements to hang himself.
Then look at the Shah Bano case and judge for yourself. The divorced lady was demanding subsistence (alimony? My memory regarding this is a bit hazy) and the Muslim clergy was opposing this. The court ruled in favour of the lady. Rajiv got this decision overturned in parliament to win the Muslim votes. This was bad as it is. You play the Muslim card inspite of talking about secularism. But the foolishness came after this.
Someone must have told him that his handling of Shah Bano case would lose him Hindu votes. So the guy now played the Hindu card and got the doors of the ram Lala Temple at Ayodhya opened and allowed shilanyas. He thought he had votes from both the communities now. He thought he was being very smart.
Dono thaur say gaye Pande
Na halwa mila na mande
(you get worst of both the worlds)
You go out to get the best of both the worlds, you must remember that you can get off getting the worst!
But that was not all. He also gave the memorable “Naani Yaad Dila Doonga” speech. He became the most loved subject of the cartoonists after this speech and a spate of bollywood and other street comedians used this line to extract unlimited laughter from the audience.
I mean, the man was an idiot. He was such a big idiot that with the biggest majority in the history of Indian Parliament, he could do nothing.
My vote: GOD, I will somehow make do with the likes of indira Gandhi, even Morarjee Desai and his cane, even Chaudhary Charan Singh, and may even considering drinking my own urine, but don’t get me Rajiv Gandhi again. Please…. Please….. Please…..
V. P. Singh
The man who divided the nation on caste lines. The man who otherwise achieved nothing in his short tenure. The man who was a sore loser – because his government was going to go, he hoisted Mandal Commission on a haless nation.
Also, this man is still a burden on the nation. His daily dialysis and blood transfusion bill has to be paid from my pocket – I pay the taxes and they go to make this man live longer than he deserves.
My vote: Let him pay for his own dialysis and blood transfusions.
Your vote: Even if you say something positive, you think I am going to listen?
Narasimha Rao
Famous in the media as India’s only pouting Prime Minister. He spoke nothing and yet got on the nerves of the media. The media loved Rajiv Gandhi because he spoke, a little too often actually. The media hated Rao because he never ever opened his mouth.
His was a minority government. Dependent for life on the crutches willingly provided by the BJP. But look at what good he did with even the minority government and contrast it with what Rajiv lost with even the brute majority.
The India that you see today, the India that is vibrant with its largely open economy and 9% GDP growth is the India that this pouting man launched. He had the savvy and the guts to give India a Finance Minister like Manmohan Singh. Media says Mr. Singh is architect. I think it was Narasimha Rao. He was the Prime Minister and he had the sense to put him up as Finance Minister and let him have a long rope inspite of protests that were vociferous and inspite of the fact that the government was in minority.
If Mr. Manmohan Singh were really the architect, he would have done much better in his innings as Indian Prime Minister. But look where is Mr. Singh headed currently. Nowhere. Mr. Rao had the political savvy and the guts and the stoicism that should be there in a leader to make a nation move forward even if the others do not share the vision.
The blot on him is that he did not do anything to save the Babri Masjid from being demolished. But I think no one could have prevented that. If BJP leaders themselves could not prevent that symbol which was essential for their future el;ectoral victories, nobody else could have either.
The actual blot is his bribing of the JMM MPs to vote in favour of his government during the no-confidence motion. He saved the government but those were not the means he should have used. Makes him seem perverted.
Also, one of the most erudite Prime Ministers we have had in this country where it is not necessary that the Prime Ministers are educated. He even wrote books. A novel, wow!
My vote: Right up there. May be one of the best we have had. But let us go further before we finally decide.
Your vote?
Deve Gowda
The guy was a compromise. The only thing he could really achieve was that last speech in the Parliament just before he got the boot – the “Old man in a hurry” speech. I am sure all of you must have heard it live. This most insipid of the Prime Ministers suddenly made me sit up with that speech and take notice. He made me laugh. He put egg all over Sitaram Kesri’s face and on the faces of all the Congress men too. Wow! What a performance.
But that is all.
My vote: Not necessary.
Your vote? Not necessary even if you do.
Indra Kumar Gujaral
His brother, the painter, was deaf. I have half a feeling that he went deaf trying to decipher what Indra Kumar Gujaral was saying. I could never understand one word he spoke. Probably no one did either. And that is how he probably stayed as Prime Minister over a year.
Vote? Nah. Don’t see the need. And you don’t bother either.
Atal Behari Vajpayee
The poet. The man who probably was the ultimate speech giver of Indian politics. Also, a Prime Minister of the first truly opposition Government of India – till his time all others were some time or other members of the Congress.
If Narasimha Rao laid down the policies that changed the nation, Vajpayee was the one who accelerated the change. He was also the one who had the guts to explode a nuclear device and declare India a Nuclear weapons capable state. He withstood the sanctions and got India through the turmoil into a state that led directly to prosperity and confidence. It was during his time that the Indian pride rode really high.
I do not want to count the economic reforms that were made during his regime. They are literally too many.
But the political savvy was in running a coalition Government of 23 parties (some of which of the likes of Mamata Banerjee) and yet giving a wonderful governance.
Blots? Exchanging the hijacked passengers with terrorists and in what obscene manner?
Gujarat riots and the non-handling of Modi.
Allowing Kargil to happen.
My vote: Right up there. But let us wait till the end for the final word.
Your vote?
Manmohan Singh
When he came to power, I felt happy. I wrote in a magazine “Stars must be shining upon India. Even when a good man like Atal Behari Vajpayee lost, and even when jokers like Laloo were around, India gets another good man as Prime Minister. It does not matter which party lost and which came to power. It is actually India which has won.”
I do not feel so happy now. I feel that I had overrated this man.
First things first. He learnt nothing from Narasimha Rao. He is the most spineless 70+ man I have seen. Even Chandrashekhar had more spine than him. This man is obsequious and for God knopws what reason. He has no thunder. His voice is a sqeak, only marginally better than Gujral. All his policy announcements are really pathetic whines because he cannot get them carried past either Sonia Gandhi or the left.
How many reforms has this economist been able to do? Zilch in his entire tenure. Moreover, he has clearly lied in case of the Jharkhand imbroglio. He also is the person who leveled the laughable allegation of BJP hiring tantriks to have him killed. Is he mad? If BJP does so, it will be for Sonia, not him. He is not important enough to waste tantriks upon.
To me the guy seems to be the Sikh avatar of Rajiv Gandhi. After him, this is the only guy who knows really well how to lose goodwill once earned.
My vote: He should go back to London School of Economics and make them hear his whiny voice.
Your vote?
Final Verdict
• To me, Narasimha Rao has been the best Prime Minister India has ever got.
• Mr. Atal Behari Vajpayee is a close second.
• The worst that we have had are Rajiv Gandhi and Manmohan Singh in that order.
• For most of the others, who wants to waste words.
• For Indira Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, better luck next time!
So here goes….
Jawaharlal Nehru
The first Prime Minster of independent India. Installed at the behest of Mahatma Gandhi when the Congress organization really wanted Sardar Patel. But whoever said Gandhi was democratic? As demonstrated in the case of Pattabhi Sitaramaiah vs. Subhash Bose during elections to the post of President of Congress during the English rule, Gandhi wanted his writ to prevail. He did pretty much the same after independence. So the first prime Minister of India was installed through an undemocratic act by the father of the nation.
Wow! What a Prime Minister to have nevertheless. A man who was erudite. A man who was an author. A man who knew, or thought he knew the history of India. A man who could give a speech like few others could. A man who was a dreamer.
A man who could charm Edwina Mountbatten, the Viceroyani as we would love to say. Wonderful. If you can get the wife of the last Viceroy to India to fall in love with you, a politician of a slave nation, you indeed get full marks as a man!
The man was a dreamer.
But the man was without the wherewithal to bring those dreams to fruition. His muddy thinking got us the middle path – the so called socialistic policy which was a cross between communism and capitalism. But often when you cross two different organisms, you get a mule – something which is barren, infertile, a beast of burden. And so the Indian economy rotted. Everything gradually became State controlled. Competition was never there and so efficiency was never a necessity.
The man had a deep mistrust of businessmen. So even those businessmen that had aided the struggle for independence had to eat the crow and the humble pie.
When everything becomes State controlled, corruption takes roots. When everything needs a license bribery is the via media. So, in more ways than one, Nehru installed the roots of corruption in the independent country.
The man was a dreamer.
In the dreams, everything is possible. It is also possible to forget reality so completely that you invite and show your military installations to Chinese. You dream of being seen as a messiah of peace. So you believe in Panchasheel. You are blind to the reality that is evolving in China behind the veil of Panchasheel. For all your erudition, you cannot think that where panchatantra is needed, you are putting in Panchasheel. So China attacks and knows even before attacking what the result is going to be. The nation is shamed.
But you don’t want to own up the responsibility especially when you have been pampered all along as someone great. So you do not admit any guilt. To a question in parliament from you own son in law, you give funny replies. This debate is parliament is famous and I recreate it below.
“Mr. Prime Minister, what about Aksai Chin? Are there any plans to take back the Indian land that has been annexed by China?” Asks Feroze Gandhi, Nehru’s own, but possibly hated, son-in-law.
After talking about here and there, Nehru manages the funny defense, “But not a blade of grass grows there. The land is completely barren. It is useless” Thereby he makes clear that he is not interested in taking it back. Pride, he can swallow and all Indians should too.
Feroze Gandhi comes back with the barbed witticism, “In that case Mr. prime Minister, not a blade of grass grows on your head too. Shall we take it as useless then?”
Nepal wanted to merge with India. Just think. Today ISI operates through that country too. Strategically it would have been wonderful if India had allowed its wish. But Nehru worried about his international image more than the benefit the country could derive. Nehru thought it would be seen as an imperialistic action and would rob him of the ‘messiah of peace image’. So, he declined!
USA wanted that we should acquire nuclear capability ahead of China and it would help us doing so. Ditto for that too – image of the messiah of peace will go out the window! So lose out on that opportunity too.
Nehru wanted universal franchise for our first general election. Others, Patel included wanted limited franchise for only those who were literate and later on a general franchise when literacy had spread. Nehru prevailed. Do you not think that the criminalization of politics today has some roots here? I believe that Nehru laid the foundations of criminalization of politics in India.
But let us end on a better note. He was the one who felt the need for IITs. He was the one allocated budget for these institutions and several others. He got all those huge dams made and called them the “temples of modern India.”
But just that much.
My vote: Nyet. I don’t want this Prime Minister today. It would simply kill India.
Your vote?
Lal Bahadur Shastri
Didn’t have a tenure where he could make a difference. Within this short tenure too he had to face a war. He acquitted himself more or less ok given the state of affairs that were handed over to him.
Jai jawan jai kisan. Beyond this slogan, nothing else survives of his legacy today. The man was obviously incorruptible. The man had good intentions at heart. Whether he would have been able to convert those intentions into reality is a matter that cannot be known.
My vote: Cannot judge. So, NO.
Your vote?
Indira Gandhi
Iron Lady! The lady who either had the guts that her to take many bold steps, or was insecure enough to take those steps to show her opponents that she was not insecure. But not all the bold steps benefited India.
Also, for me the most hated, single person responsible to dismantling all major institutions of India!
I do not want to speak about the Emergency. Much has been written about it and everyone knows of the things. So, let’s speak of other things.
Took the steps for India’s first atomic explosion. But stopped dead after that she should have gone ahead while there was still time. But alright, that was one big positive.
The space programme developed mainly during her time. She had the energy, the vision, and the will to pursue the costly programme even while others, lesser people, could have thought that the resources were well spent in feeding the masses. A leader does not look at just one thing in the present to make decisions. The true leader has a vision about the future and what all things the country will need, will be known for, and will reap the rewards of. Indira had this vision and relentlessly pursued the space programme.
She saved the Indian tiger from the brink. Project tiger was her baby and she spared nothing to achieve the target. In her times, the tiger got back from the precipice and the numbers grew till it was completely out of danger. Contrast this with what the present Prime Minister is doing when the danger is greater. You will understand the difference between a strong and a weak prime minister immediately.
But she single handedly destroyed the institution of the President of India. We got a Jhaduwala President called Zail Singh because of her. The man had no spine and he verbally demonstrated it. Only he had spinal trouble so he couldn’t bend. Otherwise ….
Even before Zail Singh, she had defiled that office. The media says that the election of Pratibha Patil was the first to have been politicized like that. They are wrong. Just go back and see what happened in the contest of Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy vs. V. V. Giri. Reddy was the official Congress candidate. Mrs. Gandhi played politics to the extent that she made the official candidate lose and V. V. Giri win on, hold your breath, “Vote of conscience!” This is exactly what the opposition tried this time round and lost badly. They didn’t have the political savvy she had.
Political savvy she had in abundance. See what she did with the slogan Garibi Hatao. Go back and see what wonderful use she made of the elephant on which she rode to Belchchi where a few dalits had been massacred. That gave her high visibility and brought her back to power.
The other institution she destroyed was the Judiciary. She meddled everywhere – in the appointments of the judges, in their transfer etc. The final straw was the answer she gave to the Allahabad court verdict that went against her. She got the constitution amended to save her skin and declared Emergency.
She muzzled the press. Only very few journalists had the courage to stand upto the tortures that she through her Goonda son, Sanjay, had fixed for them.
She was the one who was responsible for the Sikh terrorism. Jarnail Bhindranwale was her creation. This is something that is actually well known.
All in all, a lady with iron in her. But also a lady with dictatorial ambitions, with a love for her sons that was greater than her love for the nation, with a vision that few leaders have, but with a feeling of insecurity that laid these visions and quite a lot of good work that she did to waste.
My vote: NYET! I do not want her to be the Prime Minister again. MAY BE IN HER NEXT AVATAR SHE WILL MUZZLE US BLOGGERS TOO IN THE NEXT EDITION OF EMERGENCY.
Your vote?
Morarjee Desai
The guy who drank his own urine and wanted all us citizens to do the same. Highly disciplined but actually quite rigidly so. Therefore useless as a disciplinarian. Conjured an image of an irate teacher with a cane in hand to beat the impish student.
Myopic. Sold gold so that the prices depressed. Reverse happened. People bought and hoarded gold and the prices went up. Also, even with the stick in his hand, could not discipline his own cabinet members. These guys spread a stink that got his government down.
My vote: Pathetic. Good that the term ended sooner than later. Saved the PMO from donning the smell that all public latrines in India do.
(And I do not want Modi to read this blog. If he thinks I have hurt the Gujarati pride, I will be Best baked!)
Your vote?
Choudhary Charan Singh
The only image I have of him is this: One night I was walking just near the road that laid to Nagpur airport. Suddenly a jeep with a blaring siren and a voice blaring over that din goes along the road announcing for all the people “The Prime Minister of the country, Chaudhary Charan Singh has arrived. Kindly be on the sides of the road to get a darshan.”
ONLY NO ONE IS ON THE ROAD TO HAVE THAT DARSHAN!
WHEN INDIRA GANDHI USED TO ARRIVE, THERE NEVER WAS AN ANNOUNCEMENT AND THE ROAD USED TO BE TTEMING WITH PEOPLE TRYING TO GET A DEKKO.
My vote: Who cares!
Your vote? I don’t care what it is! So don’t bother.
Chandrashekhar
The great man actually became a puppet to get to the chair. Couldn’t do anything and cut a very sorry figure.
The less said the better. There is nothing to say either.
No need to vote. Sad that I write this after his death.
Rajiv Gandhi
The man who brought computers to India! You think so? Balls. The man was a comedy item. Hamein dekhna hai; Hum dekhengey; Hum Dekh rahe hain. GOD, and in the upper case!
For all his dekhna hai, dekhenge etc., the man was completely blind! He did not see the reality. Also the man, the only Prime Minister with that brute majority, who could not do anything.
I think that the man was the king of all foolish people who ever occupied that post. Let us see why he earns the title of the King of Fools.
The man first opposed the tamilians and favoured sinhalas in Sri Lanka. Then he sends Indian Peace Keeping Force to the island nation to see to the well being of Tamils. This was not the only time that he tried to play on both sides. There will be other examples I will recount. But here, it got our forces into a tizzy. They did not understand why they were there in that Nation, what they had to do, what exactly was their role. Many got killed, many wounded, and almost all utterly demoralized. And India won brickbats from both Sinhalas and Tamils. Mr. Gandhi also earned the bomb that took his life later. I THINK THERE CANNOT BE A BETTER EXAMPLE OF UTTERLY MUDDY THINKING.
But look at what he said in the parliament immediately after the Bofors controversy broke. The statement was to the effect that neither he nor any member of his family had received kickbacks in the deal! There was no need of this statement and the spotlight fixed on him automatically after this statement. Even before this he had told the parliament that there was no middleman in the deal. Later when it was proved that there indeed was a middleman, he was made to look like a liar. One after another, he used his own statements to hang himself.
Then look at the Shah Bano case and judge for yourself. The divorced lady was demanding subsistence (alimony? My memory regarding this is a bit hazy) and the Muslim clergy was opposing this. The court ruled in favour of the lady. Rajiv got this decision overturned in parliament to win the Muslim votes. This was bad as it is. You play the Muslim card inspite of talking about secularism. But the foolishness came after this.
Someone must have told him that his handling of Shah Bano case would lose him Hindu votes. So the guy now played the Hindu card and got the doors of the ram Lala Temple at Ayodhya opened and allowed shilanyas. He thought he had votes from both the communities now. He thought he was being very smart.
Dono thaur say gaye Pande
Na halwa mila na mande
(you get worst of both the worlds)
You go out to get the best of both the worlds, you must remember that you can get off getting the worst!
But that was not all. He also gave the memorable “Naani Yaad Dila Doonga” speech. He became the most loved subject of the cartoonists after this speech and a spate of bollywood and other street comedians used this line to extract unlimited laughter from the audience.
I mean, the man was an idiot. He was such a big idiot that with the biggest majority in the history of Indian Parliament, he could do nothing.
My vote: GOD, I will somehow make do with the likes of indira Gandhi, even Morarjee Desai and his cane, even Chaudhary Charan Singh, and may even considering drinking my own urine, but don’t get me Rajiv Gandhi again. Please…. Please….. Please…..
V. P. Singh
The man who divided the nation on caste lines. The man who otherwise achieved nothing in his short tenure. The man who was a sore loser – because his government was going to go, he hoisted Mandal Commission on a haless nation.
Also, this man is still a burden on the nation. His daily dialysis and blood transfusion bill has to be paid from my pocket – I pay the taxes and they go to make this man live longer than he deserves.
My vote: Let him pay for his own dialysis and blood transfusions.
Your vote: Even if you say something positive, you think I am going to listen?
Narasimha Rao
Famous in the media as India’s only pouting Prime Minister. He spoke nothing and yet got on the nerves of the media. The media loved Rajiv Gandhi because he spoke, a little too often actually. The media hated Rao because he never ever opened his mouth.
His was a minority government. Dependent for life on the crutches willingly provided by the BJP. But look at what good he did with even the minority government and contrast it with what Rajiv lost with even the brute majority.
The India that you see today, the India that is vibrant with its largely open economy and 9% GDP growth is the India that this pouting man launched. He had the savvy and the guts to give India a Finance Minister like Manmohan Singh. Media says Mr. Singh is architect. I think it was Narasimha Rao. He was the Prime Minister and he had the sense to put him up as Finance Minister and let him have a long rope inspite of protests that were vociferous and inspite of the fact that the government was in minority.
If Mr. Manmohan Singh were really the architect, he would have done much better in his innings as Indian Prime Minister. But look where is Mr. Singh headed currently. Nowhere. Mr. Rao had the political savvy and the guts and the stoicism that should be there in a leader to make a nation move forward even if the others do not share the vision.
The blot on him is that he did not do anything to save the Babri Masjid from being demolished. But I think no one could have prevented that. If BJP leaders themselves could not prevent that symbol which was essential for their future el;ectoral victories, nobody else could have either.
The actual blot is his bribing of the JMM MPs to vote in favour of his government during the no-confidence motion. He saved the government but those were not the means he should have used. Makes him seem perverted.
Also, one of the most erudite Prime Ministers we have had in this country where it is not necessary that the Prime Ministers are educated. He even wrote books. A novel, wow!
My vote: Right up there. May be one of the best we have had. But let us go further before we finally decide.
Your vote?
Deve Gowda
The guy was a compromise. The only thing he could really achieve was that last speech in the Parliament just before he got the boot – the “Old man in a hurry” speech. I am sure all of you must have heard it live. This most insipid of the Prime Ministers suddenly made me sit up with that speech and take notice. He made me laugh. He put egg all over Sitaram Kesri’s face and on the faces of all the Congress men too. Wow! What a performance.
But that is all.
My vote: Not necessary.
Your vote? Not necessary even if you do.
Indra Kumar Gujaral
His brother, the painter, was deaf. I have half a feeling that he went deaf trying to decipher what Indra Kumar Gujaral was saying. I could never understand one word he spoke. Probably no one did either. And that is how he probably stayed as Prime Minister over a year.
Vote? Nah. Don’t see the need. And you don’t bother either.
Atal Behari Vajpayee
The poet. The man who probably was the ultimate speech giver of Indian politics. Also, a Prime Minister of the first truly opposition Government of India – till his time all others were some time or other members of the Congress.
If Narasimha Rao laid down the policies that changed the nation, Vajpayee was the one who accelerated the change. He was also the one who had the guts to explode a nuclear device and declare India a Nuclear weapons capable state. He withstood the sanctions and got India through the turmoil into a state that led directly to prosperity and confidence. It was during his time that the Indian pride rode really high.
I do not want to count the economic reforms that were made during his regime. They are literally too many.
But the political savvy was in running a coalition Government of 23 parties (some of which of the likes of Mamata Banerjee) and yet giving a wonderful governance.
Blots? Exchanging the hijacked passengers with terrorists and in what obscene manner?
Gujarat riots and the non-handling of Modi.
Allowing Kargil to happen.
My vote: Right up there. But let us wait till the end for the final word.
Your vote?
Manmohan Singh
When he came to power, I felt happy. I wrote in a magazine “Stars must be shining upon India. Even when a good man like Atal Behari Vajpayee lost, and even when jokers like Laloo were around, India gets another good man as Prime Minister. It does not matter which party lost and which came to power. It is actually India which has won.”
I do not feel so happy now. I feel that I had overrated this man.
First things first. He learnt nothing from Narasimha Rao. He is the most spineless 70+ man I have seen. Even Chandrashekhar had more spine than him. This man is obsequious and for God knopws what reason. He has no thunder. His voice is a sqeak, only marginally better than Gujral. All his policy announcements are really pathetic whines because he cannot get them carried past either Sonia Gandhi or the left.
How many reforms has this economist been able to do? Zilch in his entire tenure. Moreover, he has clearly lied in case of the Jharkhand imbroglio. He also is the person who leveled the laughable allegation of BJP hiring tantriks to have him killed. Is he mad? If BJP does so, it will be for Sonia, not him. He is not important enough to waste tantriks upon.
To me the guy seems to be the Sikh avatar of Rajiv Gandhi. After him, this is the only guy who knows really well how to lose goodwill once earned.
My vote: He should go back to London School of Economics and make them hear his whiny voice.
Your vote?
Final Verdict
• To me, Narasimha Rao has been the best Prime Minister India has ever got.
• Mr. Atal Behari Vajpayee is a close second.
• The worst that we have had are Rajiv Gandhi and Manmohan Singh in that order.
• For most of the others, who wants to waste words.
• For Indira Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, better luck next time!
Thursday, September 6, 2007
HAIR: A post by Ruta Dharmadhikari
For the first time I am putting a piece written by another author on this blog. The piece is written by Mrs. Ruta Dharmadhikari. I met Ruta for the first time as one of the participants of an orientation course conducted by Nagpur University for young lecturers. As fellow participants, we interacted for a whole month. I do not respect many people; in fact I can count such people on the fingers of my two hands. No. Don’t get me wrong. I do not respect Ruta; for that she will have to slog hard, very hard at something she is actually good at – writing. The evidence of this was obvious even at the course that I have talked about above. A small piece had to be written by the participants on a series of photographs. Her piece was commendable and indeed the best. The piece that follows below is very well woven too.
Incidentally, Ruta is a Reader(?) in the Department of English, LAD College, Nagpur.
HAIR
My mother- in -law’s lovely long tresses depleted to a shadow of their former selves on account of the radiation and chemotherapy treatment she underwent for cancer. Her mother’s hair had maintained its growth and length and thickness (not its jet black colour, though) even at the ripe old age of 91.
As a young bride, I spent a lot of time with her and one of my daily tasks was to groom that Grande dame’s hair. Such a mass of long hair on an age- ripened head never ceased to daily astonish me. I would lovingly run a comb through the salt and pepper fall and untangle it gently; all the while listening to the answers to the leading questions I put to her about her family-and now mine.
She was my guidebook to Ashu as a young prankster, to Justice Saheb as a dashing upcoming lawyer and later well-known judge. As I oiled her scalp and massaged it vigorously, she introduced me to my beautiful, versatile and accomplished mother-in-law: dutiful daughter- in- law, caring wife and mother, gracious hostess and a career woman to boot, all rolled in one.
With each brush of the comb through the now well-oiled hair, my acquaintance with my extended family grew. My grandmother-in-law, widowed at age 30, had lived most her life with her illustrious son- in- law. Carefully parting her hair into three, I slowly learnt of each aunt, uncle and cousin. Every twist of each part, the fashioning of all three into a thick plait, wove me into a vibrant and energetic family. Midway through, a strand would slip through my nervous, awestruck fingers as I heard of her own experiences of raising three daughters alone, after facing endless death—a husband and seven children.
I would continue to plait those strands right till the very end … till there was not even a wisp left to plait. And then coil that thick-to-thin plait carefully into a bun, round and round and round at the back of her head. Positioning it exactly where she wanted it.
Hair. A woman’s source of beauty and pride: the loss of which is like the wrenching of heartstrings. Renowned feminist, Germaine Greer’s exposition- in her book The Whole Woman- on every womanly physical feature, needs an inclusion on hair.
Now, as I groom my mother-in-law’s hair in the same room, I try not to let her know what I know about her hair. But my mother- in- law is a wise woman. One of the wisest I know.
She knows.
Incidentally, Ruta is a Reader(?) in the Department of English, LAD College, Nagpur.
HAIR
My mother- in -law’s lovely long tresses depleted to a shadow of their former selves on account of the radiation and chemotherapy treatment she underwent for cancer. Her mother’s hair had maintained its growth and length and thickness (not its jet black colour, though) even at the ripe old age of 91.
As a young bride, I spent a lot of time with her and one of my daily tasks was to groom that Grande dame’s hair. Such a mass of long hair on an age- ripened head never ceased to daily astonish me. I would lovingly run a comb through the salt and pepper fall and untangle it gently; all the while listening to the answers to the leading questions I put to her about her family-and now mine.
She was my guidebook to Ashu as a young prankster, to Justice Saheb as a dashing upcoming lawyer and later well-known judge. As I oiled her scalp and massaged it vigorously, she introduced me to my beautiful, versatile and accomplished mother-in-law: dutiful daughter- in- law, caring wife and mother, gracious hostess and a career woman to boot, all rolled in one.
With each brush of the comb through the now well-oiled hair, my acquaintance with my extended family grew. My grandmother-in-law, widowed at age 30, had lived most her life with her illustrious son- in- law. Carefully parting her hair into three, I slowly learnt of each aunt, uncle and cousin. Every twist of each part, the fashioning of all three into a thick plait, wove me into a vibrant and energetic family. Midway through, a strand would slip through my nervous, awestruck fingers as I heard of her own experiences of raising three daughters alone, after facing endless death—a husband and seven children.
I would continue to plait those strands right till the very end … till there was not even a wisp left to plait. And then coil that thick-to-thin plait carefully into a bun, round and round and round at the back of her head. Positioning it exactly where she wanted it.
Hair. A woman’s source of beauty and pride: the loss of which is like the wrenching of heartstrings. Renowned feminist, Germaine Greer’s exposition- in her book The Whole Woman- on every womanly physical feature, needs an inclusion on hair.
Now, as I groom my mother-in-law’s hair in the same room, I try not to let her know what I know about her hair. But my mother- in- law is a wise woman. One of the wisest I know.
She knows.
WHERE IS THE BJP GOING WRONG
Where is the BJP going wrong? From all the news that you read in the print media and watch on the idiot box you would believe that the worst problem that the BJP faces today is the infighting in its ranks. I beg to differ.
Let us look at what happened just before BJP came to power. Let’s look at how BJP behaved just before it came to power.
The stage is just before 1989. Rajiv Gandhi commits the ultimate foolishness of his career (not that this was the only one; the man must have been the king of all foolish people ever to have come to power in India. Look at IPKF – what can be a bigger blunder and a product of utterly muddy thinking. Look at what he said in Parliament when the Bofors issue first broke, MY GOD! Look at the Shah Bano case and judge for yourself. Look at his dolphin saving show – I mean the man may have had completely noble intentions in his heart but do you completely forget, even after being a politician for some time, how it would be looked back at home? Or just hear back in your years his classic “Nani Yaad Dila Doonga” speech! That was just wonderful. It made you laugh outright and brought home the point that the man was basically foolish). He allows the gates of Ram Lala Temple to be opened for offering prayers. He thinks he is being smart. He thinks that having played the Muslim card in the guise of the Shah Bano case, he is now playing the Hindu card and will get votes from both the sides. He probably had never heard of the old Hindi couplet (not that anyone in the Gandhi family, save Nehru, can ever be accused of being a bibliophile)
Dono thaur say gaye Pande
Na halwa mila na mande
(you get worst of both the worlds)
You go out to get the best of both the worlds, you must remember that you can get off getting the worst!
The BJP capitalized on this immediately. It set the agenda right then and there. The cry was “Mandir wahin banayenge.” I do not like temple building etc. It is a retrogressive agenda. You can make far better things with the same money and that makes economic sense too. But in politics often what makes good economic sense does not make political sense. And in a completely emotionalized politics that we have in India, rational issues never make any sense (otherwise how would have the NDA lost the last election after the nation made all round progress under the regime?). BJP realized the emotional power of the issue that Rajiv Gandhi had handed over to it on a platter. BJP SET THE AGENDA THEN.
When Bofors came, the BJP combined corruption with the Hindu card that it has a copyright on. VP Singh walked out. BJP made him play in its lap. When Rajiv Gandhi lost the elections, it may have come as a surprise to some, but it was actually a foregone conclusion. The two emotive issues – corruption and temple – could never have made him come even to smelling distance of victory.
Then Advani came up with the biggest flash he has had in his life – the Rathyatra. That firmly put BJP in the position of agenda maker. It was this party that made the agenda and it was the other parties that reacted to the agenda. It was for other parties to be increasingly shrill in branding BJP communal. It was for BJP to go ahead with what it was doing and keep making the others dance to the agenda it set.
Till 2004, till it lost power, BJP had the savvy to be the maker of the agenda of Indian Politics. After 2004, it has utterly lost it.
People stick to magic. If you have magic in you, they will stick to you. Fissiparous tendencies grow when the magic ceases. You try finding magic elsewhere and you fall apart gradually and then increasingly. In politics the magic is agenda. You know how to set it, you will keep your people together. Not just that, your allies will stick to you. You have the magic. You cannot set the agenda, your allies leave first and then your own people start rebelling.
The infighting that you see is not a disease. It is a symptom. It is a symptom of the disease that is called loss of agenda making ability.
What is BJP doing today? It is dancing to whatever agenda is there. No. Other parties still do not have the ability to set any agenda. Congress is just pathetic. It is the governing party and it still does not know how to set the agenda. The other parties too are the same. The agendas are not really agendas. They are events that are taking place. But since the events are controlled by the ruling combination most of the time, by dancing to events, reacting to events, BJP is dancing to their tunes. This is what has principally gone wrong with BJP. This is the reason why there is infighting. This is the reason why its allies are increasingly belligerent and are deserting it either overtly or covertly.
Till the day BJP gets back its ability to set the agenda once again, it will remain in the doghouse. Look at the situation. The Congress is back to its foolish behaviour. The Left has always been made entirely of strident negative and persistently coughing gents who are even otherwise on the verge of extinction (only they don’t know it and their success in the past election makes them conveniently blind to their future). There is a situation which is tailor made for opposition that is BJP. But will BJP wake up? Will it get back its ability to set the agenda?
It is just this. Everything else is secondary and rides on this central aspect. So. Do you see BJP getting back its ability of setting an agenda? Or do you think it has lost it permanently like the Congress has? On this question rides the fate of the Indian parliament and who will form the nest government.
Let us look at what happened just before BJP came to power. Let’s look at how BJP behaved just before it came to power.
The stage is just before 1989. Rajiv Gandhi commits the ultimate foolishness of his career (not that this was the only one; the man must have been the king of all foolish people ever to have come to power in India. Look at IPKF – what can be a bigger blunder and a product of utterly muddy thinking. Look at what he said in Parliament when the Bofors issue first broke, MY GOD! Look at the Shah Bano case and judge for yourself. Look at his dolphin saving show – I mean the man may have had completely noble intentions in his heart but do you completely forget, even after being a politician for some time, how it would be looked back at home? Or just hear back in your years his classic “Nani Yaad Dila Doonga” speech! That was just wonderful. It made you laugh outright and brought home the point that the man was basically foolish). He allows the gates of Ram Lala Temple to be opened for offering prayers. He thinks he is being smart. He thinks that having played the Muslim card in the guise of the Shah Bano case, he is now playing the Hindu card and will get votes from both the sides. He probably had never heard of the old Hindi couplet (not that anyone in the Gandhi family, save Nehru, can ever be accused of being a bibliophile)
Dono thaur say gaye Pande
Na halwa mila na mande
(you get worst of both the worlds)
You go out to get the best of both the worlds, you must remember that you can get off getting the worst!
The BJP capitalized on this immediately. It set the agenda right then and there. The cry was “Mandir wahin banayenge.” I do not like temple building etc. It is a retrogressive agenda. You can make far better things with the same money and that makes economic sense too. But in politics often what makes good economic sense does not make political sense. And in a completely emotionalized politics that we have in India, rational issues never make any sense (otherwise how would have the NDA lost the last election after the nation made all round progress under the regime?). BJP realized the emotional power of the issue that Rajiv Gandhi had handed over to it on a platter. BJP SET THE AGENDA THEN.
When Bofors came, the BJP combined corruption with the Hindu card that it has a copyright on. VP Singh walked out. BJP made him play in its lap. When Rajiv Gandhi lost the elections, it may have come as a surprise to some, but it was actually a foregone conclusion. The two emotive issues – corruption and temple – could never have made him come even to smelling distance of victory.
Then Advani came up with the biggest flash he has had in his life – the Rathyatra. That firmly put BJP in the position of agenda maker. It was this party that made the agenda and it was the other parties that reacted to the agenda. It was for other parties to be increasingly shrill in branding BJP communal. It was for BJP to go ahead with what it was doing and keep making the others dance to the agenda it set.
Till 2004, till it lost power, BJP had the savvy to be the maker of the agenda of Indian Politics. After 2004, it has utterly lost it.
People stick to magic. If you have magic in you, they will stick to you. Fissiparous tendencies grow when the magic ceases. You try finding magic elsewhere and you fall apart gradually and then increasingly. In politics the magic is agenda. You know how to set it, you will keep your people together. Not just that, your allies will stick to you. You have the magic. You cannot set the agenda, your allies leave first and then your own people start rebelling.
The infighting that you see is not a disease. It is a symptom. It is a symptom of the disease that is called loss of agenda making ability.
What is BJP doing today? It is dancing to whatever agenda is there. No. Other parties still do not have the ability to set any agenda. Congress is just pathetic. It is the governing party and it still does not know how to set the agenda. The other parties too are the same. The agendas are not really agendas. They are events that are taking place. But since the events are controlled by the ruling combination most of the time, by dancing to events, reacting to events, BJP is dancing to their tunes. This is what has principally gone wrong with BJP. This is the reason why there is infighting. This is the reason why its allies are increasingly belligerent and are deserting it either overtly or covertly.
Till the day BJP gets back its ability to set the agenda once again, it will remain in the doghouse. Look at the situation. The Congress is back to its foolish behaviour. The Left has always been made entirely of strident negative and persistently coughing gents who are even otherwise on the verge of extinction (only they don’t know it and their success in the past election makes them conveniently blind to their future). There is a situation which is tailor made for opposition that is BJP. But will BJP wake up? Will it get back its ability to set the agenda?
It is just this. Everything else is secondary and rides on this central aspect. So. Do you see BJP getting back its ability of setting an agenda? Or do you think it has lost it permanently like the Congress has? On this question rides the fate of the Indian parliament and who will form the nest government.
Monday, September 3, 2007
SCENES FROM THE INDIAN ACADEMICA: VI
Napoleon Goes to Afghanistan
Dr. Dev Prakash Sharma is a picture of erudition. He is really gifted. From schooldays he has been a keen debater with a rare gift of mixing up his arguments with Urdu couplets and coming up with a heady concoction that never misses the judges’ commendations. Today too, he is one of the most powerful management council members of the University and one who can simply demolish the opponent’s citadel with the torrent of arguments that pour out spontaneously from his mouth. He is probably the most knowledgeable as far as the University law is concerned and can quote the section, sub-section etc. of the law that applies to a given point. He is also a public speaker in great demand. Numerous inauguration ceremonies cannot be called complete till he has spoken. He gets admiring glances from one and all – “how do you read so much and keep up to date with all branches of knowledge with the kind of busy schedule that you keep?” is often the gushy question asked by members of the audience. Obviously he loves to hear the question and his standard response is a smile that somehow projects his modesty and humbleness.
This bunch of young lecturers gets a bit suspicious about his knowledge. “The guy simply concocts facts,” says one over a cup of tea.
“I think you are right,” agrees the other. “Last time that I listened to him, he spoke about Napoleon. Now I am a Napoleon buff and do not remember having ever read what he had to say.”
“But that you did not read it does not mean that it is untrue,” disagrees the third. “After all, he is very well read. Everyone says so.”
The first two look at each other. The first one speaks again. “I too have my own things to add. I have heard him speak several times on the topic that interests me. Several times he has had to say things that actually went contrary to whatever I know of the subject. I am more or less sure that he conjures things up. And since no one has ever heard about these and since he keeps saying that this information has come up very recently, everyone gets impressed by his erudition and the desire in him to learn new things inspite of the busy schedule. Also, since the information is recent and since most people are internet illiterates, no one has any way to cross check. I looked up the internet about what he said and found nothing.” The guy got tired after the long tirade and took a quick sip from his now lukewarm tea.
“Even if you are right, which I doubt, it is of no use just making allegations. Who is going to believe you? Least of all I.” says the dissenter.
The two allegers now get their heads together. A plan is invented to nail the truth about Mr. Dev Prakash Sharma. They tell the dissenter about the plan and tell him that it will be implemented the next time the guy speaks.
“But what if he speaks on a subject alien to you,” the dissenter expresses his doubt.
“It does not matter. The plan goes ahead even with that eventuality. And it actually does not matter what he speaks about. Think about it and you will understand.” The allegers are obviously enthusiastic.
“I doubt you will succeed. I think Dr. Sharma is knowledgeable and it is your goose that is going to be cooked. And to think of the deviousness of the plan. Why? There is one person in this University who cares about knowledge and he has to deal with devious people like you. No. Its your plan that is going to come unstuck.”
“Let’s have a bet then. Dr. Sharma’s win is your win. If you win, we give you a treat, if you lose, you give us one,” the allegers are confident.
“That’s unfair,” protests the dissenter. “You two together give a treat if you lose and I give it alone to you two if I lose. No way.”
The deal is struck moments later. If the dissenter wins, he gets treated twice. If the allegers win, they get treated once. The game is on.
Dr. Dev Prakash Sharma arrives to speak as a resource person in an orientation course for young lecturers. He is speaking about Napoleon again. The allegers and the dissenter exchange quick glances; as per the plan, they are sitting far apart from each other in the audience. There is again new information about napoleon that he proffers this one different from his previous lecture. The guy, it seems keeps reading all the time! It also seems that most historians are so worked up about Napoleon that they keep uncovering new information about him at a rate that even Napoleon couldn’t create.
The lecture ends. The allegers move for the kill.
“Sir,” says alleger number one, “In a very recent article that has been published in the Journal of Asiatic Studies, it has been brought to light that Napoleon in fact traveled to Afghanistan to learn the methods of torture from the tribal people there. I wanted to know from you whether you think Napoleon was sadistic.” The alleger sits down.
“Sir, before you answer,” interjects the second alleger from another row across the room, “I just wanted to say that I too have chanced across that recent article, but my colleague here is slightly off the mark. Napoleon traveled to a province that is today at the border of Iran and Afghanistan and not Afghanistan itself. But I do not think that was sadism. It was just good learning about how to make spies speak.” The second alleger sits down.
Mr. Dev Prakash Sharma looks at both the allegers and the audience in general. His face is beaming. He speaks.
“This is lovely,” he gushes. “This is what I have always been talking about and have cherished all my life. Youngsters such as these keeping abreast of the recent most happenings in their fields. These are the kind of people that make a University go ahead.”
He pauses for effect, beams commendatory smiles at both allegers and then starts again, “I too have chanced upon that article and in fact was lucky to read it. It does appear from it that Napoleon did indeed come to Afghanistan and ……………”
In the evening, the dissenter is treating the two allegers and shaking his head in disbelief and the pain of needless lightening of his pocket. The plan was deviously simple. There was no such article and napoleon never went to Afghanistan. It was just a bait to see whether Dr. Sharma swallowed it. He did and proved that most of his “recent informations” were actually the result of his culinary skills.
Deviousness has its fruits of course and the two allegers were enjoying it that evening. And Dr. Sharma should know better because he has been enjoying the academic and intangible fruits of deviousness all along.
Dr. Dev Prakash Sharma is a picture of erudition. He is really gifted. From schooldays he has been a keen debater with a rare gift of mixing up his arguments with Urdu couplets and coming up with a heady concoction that never misses the judges’ commendations. Today too, he is one of the most powerful management council members of the University and one who can simply demolish the opponent’s citadel with the torrent of arguments that pour out spontaneously from his mouth. He is probably the most knowledgeable as far as the University law is concerned and can quote the section, sub-section etc. of the law that applies to a given point. He is also a public speaker in great demand. Numerous inauguration ceremonies cannot be called complete till he has spoken. He gets admiring glances from one and all – “how do you read so much and keep up to date with all branches of knowledge with the kind of busy schedule that you keep?” is often the gushy question asked by members of the audience. Obviously he loves to hear the question and his standard response is a smile that somehow projects his modesty and humbleness.
This bunch of young lecturers gets a bit suspicious about his knowledge. “The guy simply concocts facts,” says one over a cup of tea.
“I think you are right,” agrees the other. “Last time that I listened to him, he spoke about Napoleon. Now I am a Napoleon buff and do not remember having ever read what he had to say.”
“But that you did not read it does not mean that it is untrue,” disagrees the third. “After all, he is very well read. Everyone says so.”
The first two look at each other. The first one speaks again. “I too have my own things to add. I have heard him speak several times on the topic that interests me. Several times he has had to say things that actually went contrary to whatever I know of the subject. I am more or less sure that he conjures things up. And since no one has ever heard about these and since he keeps saying that this information has come up very recently, everyone gets impressed by his erudition and the desire in him to learn new things inspite of the busy schedule. Also, since the information is recent and since most people are internet illiterates, no one has any way to cross check. I looked up the internet about what he said and found nothing.” The guy got tired after the long tirade and took a quick sip from his now lukewarm tea.
“Even if you are right, which I doubt, it is of no use just making allegations. Who is going to believe you? Least of all I.” says the dissenter.
The two allegers now get their heads together. A plan is invented to nail the truth about Mr. Dev Prakash Sharma. They tell the dissenter about the plan and tell him that it will be implemented the next time the guy speaks.
“But what if he speaks on a subject alien to you,” the dissenter expresses his doubt.
“It does not matter. The plan goes ahead even with that eventuality. And it actually does not matter what he speaks about. Think about it and you will understand.” The allegers are obviously enthusiastic.
“I doubt you will succeed. I think Dr. Sharma is knowledgeable and it is your goose that is going to be cooked. And to think of the deviousness of the plan. Why? There is one person in this University who cares about knowledge and he has to deal with devious people like you. No. Its your plan that is going to come unstuck.”
“Let’s have a bet then. Dr. Sharma’s win is your win. If you win, we give you a treat, if you lose, you give us one,” the allegers are confident.
“That’s unfair,” protests the dissenter. “You two together give a treat if you lose and I give it alone to you two if I lose. No way.”
The deal is struck moments later. If the dissenter wins, he gets treated twice. If the allegers win, they get treated once. The game is on.
Dr. Dev Prakash Sharma arrives to speak as a resource person in an orientation course for young lecturers. He is speaking about Napoleon again. The allegers and the dissenter exchange quick glances; as per the plan, they are sitting far apart from each other in the audience. There is again new information about napoleon that he proffers this one different from his previous lecture. The guy, it seems keeps reading all the time! It also seems that most historians are so worked up about Napoleon that they keep uncovering new information about him at a rate that even Napoleon couldn’t create.
The lecture ends. The allegers move for the kill.
“Sir,” says alleger number one, “In a very recent article that has been published in the Journal of Asiatic Studies, it has been brought to light that Napoleon in fact traveled to Afghanistan to learn the methods of torture from the tribal people there. I wanted to know from you whether you think Napoleon was sadistic.” The alleger sits down.
“Sir, before you answer,” interjects the second alleger from another row across the room, “I just wanted to say that I too have chanced across that recent article, but my colleague here is slightly off the mark. Napoleon traveled to a province that is today at the border of Iran and Afghanistan and not Afghanistan itself. But I do not think that was sadism. It was just good learning about how to make spies speak.” The second alleger sits down.
Mr. Dev Prakash Sharma looks at both the allegers and the audience in general. His face is beaming. He speaks.
“This is lovely,” he gushes. “This is what I have always been talking about and have cherished all my life. Youngsters such as these keeping abreast of the recent most happenings in their fields. These are the kind of people that make a University go ahead.”
He pauses for effect, beams commendatory smiles at both allegers and then starts again, “I too have chanced upon that article and in fact was lucky to read it. It does appear from it that Napoleon did indeed come to Afghanistan and ……………”
In the evening, the dissenter is treating the two allegers and shaking his head in disbelief and the pain of needless lightening of his pocket. The plan was deviously simple. There was no such article and napoleon never went to Afghanistan. It was just a bait to see whether Dr. Sharma swallowed it. He did and proved that most of his “recent informations” were actually the result of his culinary skills.
Deviousness has its fruits of course and the two allegers were enjoying it that evening. And Dr. Sharma should know better because he has been enjoying the academic and intangible fruits of deviousness all along.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)