In the wake of the Nuclear deal, the absurd political theatre that one is witnessing leads to a few interesting observations/conclusions both, about the conduct of the Indian polity and the metamorphosis of the “aam aadmi”.
1. Its about time we saw through the charade that is Manmohan Singh. If one were to objectively look beneath the impressive professional credentials, gentle demeanour and apparently apolitical conduct, one would instantly discover the canny manipulator devoid of any lasting principles. If Vajpayee introduced the “I-don’t-need-to-be-PM-but-I-will-do all-it-takes-to-stay-there” brand of politics in our country, Manmohan Singh has converted it into a sublime art form. From embarrassing Abdul Kalam with dubious President’s Rule recommendations in Bihar to aiding a petty legislation aimed at merely dethroning a doctor (coincidentally his personal cardiac consultant) to cozying up to anyone who promised him support in a trust vote for the nuclear deal, Manmohan Singh has displayed a near Machiavellian penchant for expediency. Unfortunately for him, the nuclear deal forced him to reveal his hand and he can no longer hide behind the garb of being a non-playing captain with little control over a team which has a rule-book of its own. Having said that, his exemplary handling of his public image should merit closer examination from global political leaders most of whom would do well to have an image like our PM that is completely de-linked from their actions. Even the opposition chooses to call him “weak” at best, a clear pointer that it is still considered politically unwise to publicly demean the face behind the “mukhota” (oops, wasn’t that a Congress favourite?)
2. Never before have Central or State Agencies been so unabashed in their subservience. Political re-alignments at the centre lead to overnight action from the CBI/Customs Authorities against opponents. This is also a departure from the past where at least an attempt to display adherence to procedure could be expected and actions at the behest of political masters would not be as obvious and immediate as one has seen in the last few weeks. Add to this the whimsical re-opening or dropping of cases by state agencies and the plot thickens. As an aside, for all their officer associations etc, the police cadre does not even attempt a feeble protest when their brethren get shifted on the basis of say, media coverage of a murder. It is justifiable for this to happen if there is organized crime prevailing for a considerable length of time but rampant transfers in the wake of unfavourable media reports on an odd crime investigation is a little inexplicable. In certain states, civil servants are moved on mere rumours of corruption since it helps protect a clean image for the political class in the run-up to the elections. For a bureaucracy that steadfastly closes ranks when it comes to protecting their ilk, this helplessness is intriguing. Judicial activism has also become a thing of the past and the judiciary seems more intent on flexing its muscles on matters of far less import like declaration of assets by judges and insulating brother judges from alleged dishonourable acts of the past.
3. This may raise the hackles of feminists but contrary to their behaviour in civil society where the fairer sex is generally more mature, tolerant and sensitive, women leaders seem incapable of handling power sensibly and consistently overplay their hand and effortlessly convert opportunity into adversity. Mayawati, just a few months ago had both, a strong electoral result and favourable initial overtures from the centre going for her. Contrast it with the potential mess she has landed herself in with strengthened political alignments in her state, CBI back to baying for her blood et al. This, after having had the carpet pulled from under her feet by the BJP whilst trying to pull off a similar feat in the days of power-sharing by rotation. In the not so recent past, Jayalalitha had landed herself in a similar situation largely by demanding more than her rightful pound of flesh in her parleys with George Fernandes and Mulayam Singh only to end up with egg on her face. It is not only in the face of victory that one has seen displays of avoidable rash behaviour. Uma Bharti did her cause no good by initially playing hardball and then throwing a messy tantrum when things did not go her way. From being an important player in the saffron scheme of things, she has only seen herself getting increasingly marginalized and has to now eat humble pie in order to engineer a comeback from the wilderness. Is it a deep rooted need to prove that they are not the weaker sex in the big bad world of politics that one sees such frequent displays of mindless aggression and bad timing? I do not have an answer yet but perhaps this will form the subject of a research thesis by another observer of politics (or maybe psychology).
4. What is interesting though is that the only people who seem overtly outraged by the lack of spine in the recent political re-alignments are a few TV journalists in perpetual search of sound bites. The rest of the country could not care less and has accepted this as par for the course. Most involved citizens are more concerned with discussing the pros and cons of the nuclear deal, impact of inflation or at best life of the current government. There is hardly any anguish at the volte face of the ruling class and one does not see anyone sympathise with the Left as they moan at the “betrayal”. Sympathy towards the Left, if any, seems to derive itself from their foolhardiness at staying married to a position once pregnant with it. Is this a growing indifference of the Indian middle class towards seemingly earth-shattering goings-on in their country? Or is it the coming of age of Indian citizenry who have objectively accepted the fact that politicians have a job to do and part of it entails doing all it takes to govern the country regardless of any moral considerations whatsoever?
Time (and the next elections) will tell.
4 comments:
hey this is seriously good stuff,should reach out to a much more wider audience.keep them coming bro.cheers.samahit
As far as the Prime Minister is concerned, what really comes out here is your grudging admiration of his recent actions. You wished and hoped - and were happy in that belief till proved otherwise - that he didn't have it in him to make ( albeit was maybe forced to) the moves that he finally did in the last two weeks. Now that he has finally done so, the honourable course would have been to graciously accept this reality - if not applaud it - rather than sermonise on the irrelevant moral aspects of it. Otherwise you’re running the risk of being clubbed in the same category as the jilted fakes – “liberal” loonies like Vinod Mehta front and center of this brigade – that you refer to at the beginning of point 4.
Granted that we’re on opposite sides of the political divide here but, if we really get into the business of keeping moral score, what about the BJP’s own pathetic show on the nuclear deal, having been the original proponents in the first place? Surely, politically the Congress and the SP have much more in common than do the BJP and the Commies, or is there some intrigue there as well?
The wiser course, my friend, would be the one adopted by your real heroes – ABV, AJ, and you know where the late PM would have stood on this one - stay silent. Even Yechury’s done the same and old man LK was not even able to fool himself, leave alone V. Naidu sitting beside him, by his show of holier than thou shock.
No. 3 is a contentious one and wading into slippery territory. That said, if tantrums is indeed what we’re talking about, there is a prime candidate who deserves a definite mention in such a list ….Mamta.
However, consider this: In our system and society, is it really possible for a woman -outside of the established political dynasties – to make it to any level of success in any sort of political arena unless she has demonstrated the capacity to rock the boat of the gender status quo. This means having publicly – and more than once - shown the balls to take the political bull by his horns and possessing the reputation of unleashing this weapon at short notice.
Extrapolate this and let’s evaluate how many women : a) have the capacity to fight this handicapped fight ( and at the same time ask yourself how many men would have had it in them if politics was indeed a woman’s world. Have you considered the career path to becoming a successful make up artist?) and b) then have the will or the need, indeed the audacity, to go down this rough road?
I reckon that if we zero in, and zero is probably the operative big picture number, on this subset it does indeed leave us with just the type of women that you’ve listed out. An odd tantrum here and there is not just part of the territory but in fact part of the essential armoury that got these ladies to where they are in the first place. True, as they play for higher stakes and become part of the established mainstream, the requirements or benefits derived from such public shows does reduce…..…and that’s the fine act, between balancing their instincts and the “now required” mature image , that they have to manage better and consistently so as they aspire for the next levels.
Look around, or think back and, even at local levels, this would be the mould for the typical woman politician, even a municipal councillor or a student leader. Now think of the balanced, gritty, connected, shrewd , persistent , intelligent and respectable women that you know of and try fitting them – or ask them if they would – into this mould. The day any one of them puts her hand up would be the day when this country really comes of age on this one.
Mahesh - I am getting high on the lithe consistency in your prose-writing, the apt choice of phrases, and a reasonable persecution of all the topics under the umbrella. But hard to figure out whether it is neutrality or ambivalence, unless you script the way forward. The facts that remain are (1) nuclear deal does not harm anyone (wastes apart) (3) women historically have bungled up or left the men behind in moral disarray (4) the generation of professional politicians is still in the breeding stages and (2) sadly not withstanding the tenacity of our civil servants - many never get to implement their dreams. The bottomline is that we are not perfectionists and we shall never be.
Mahesh - I am getting high on the lithe consistency in your prose-writing, the apt choice of phrases, and a reasonable persecution of all the topics under the umbrella. But hard to figure out whether it is neutrality or ambivalence, unless you script the way forward. The facts that remain are (1) nuclear deal does not harm anyone (wastes apart) (3) women historically have bungled up or left the men behind in moral disarray (4) the generation of professional politicians is still in the breeding stages and (2) sadly not withstanding the tenacity of our civil servants - many never get to implement their dreams. The bottomline is that we are not perfectionists and we shall never be.
Post a Comment