Rahul Gandhi and the Politics of Hate and Sarcasm

A look at the world of politics, statecraft, diplomacy and books

One of the major drawbacks of dynastic politics is that individuals born to political and social privilege start believing in their entitlement to high office. In a Democratic polity, dynastic succession runs contrary to the very idea of an inclusive society as high office is often reserved for those born within a close circle. In the case of the Congress Party, the choice of succession is restricted to the members of the Nehru Gandhi family and the entire Party is reduced to being a mere props to the chosen Crown Prince. Rahul Gandhi who has succeeded his Italian born mother, Sonia, to the President of the Congress Party is making an utter fool of himself by his thoughtless patronizing and at time downright insulting public utterances.

Rahul Gandhi,s public display of ignorance and naivety is reflected in his remark that he has a machine capable of making potatoes into Gold. He is known to have spoken of the escape velocity of Jupiter and he even said quite seriously that his family was responsible for the Freedom of India. His thoughtless and arrogant remarks about the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (the RSS) has got him into trouble with the courts and a case of criminal defamation is currently under way. Similarly, thanks to the efforts of Dr Subramaniam Swamy, Rahul and Sonia are both facing criminal prosecution for cheating in the National Herald Case. In each of the cases mentioned above, Rahul got into trouble due to his lack of understanding and his inability to discern the damage his public statements will cause. More recently he declared that he is fit to be the Prime Minister of India even though his Party has only 44 seats in Parliament.

The remerks made by Rahul in Mubai after paying a visit to the ailing former Prime Minister of India, Atal Behari Vajpayee was both crass and immature. Rahul Gandhi, against the advice of the Medical team looking after Ataji at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, gatecrashed into the room of Atalji and later bragged about being the first to visit Atalji and then went on to pointedly say that the present Prime Minister had not gone to the Hospital thus showing lack of respect. Nothing could be further from the truth. None of the senior leaders went to the Hospital as the great Atalji was critical and nobody in his right mind disturbs a critically ill individual and then milks that for political gain. The entire country condemned the crass and senseless remarks of Rahul, the Clown Prince of Indian politics as he is derisively  called. There are also rumours swirling that he was caught in New York Airport with drugs and cash ans it was Atal Behari Vajpayee as Prime Minister who got the immature Rahul Gandhi out of trouble. Be that as it may, Rahul showed his lack of intellect and character by making that crass remark.

Will Rahul Gandhi emerge as a serious contender for political office. It is too early to say. However,Indian electorate is rather short sighted and is capable of being swayed by identity considerations.

Natwar Singh's autobiography. One Life is Not Enough: A Courtier's rant

A look at the world of politics, statecraft, diplomacy and books

Natwar Singh has an unlikely admirer, another Sonia Gandhi loyalist, Mani Shankar Iyer. Knowing very well that the Natwar Singh has fallen out of favor in the Gandhi household, Mani Shankar Iyer has given a very laudatory account of Natwar Singh in the current issue of India Today. Probably both studied in Cambridge and were part of the elite IFS unities both men in a common miasma of mutual admiration. Mani Shankar Iyer is known to possess an acerbic tongue which can be hired by the Gandhi dynasty and unleashed against anyone daring to ask the dynasty inconvenient questions. Yet Man Shankar is very reverential when he engages with Natwar Singh and his work. Probably another courtier waiting for the opportune time.

Natwar Singh's so called revelations do not add anything of substance to what we already know about the regime of Sonia-ManMohan Singh, the duo that had dominated the power structure during UPA I and UPA II. Man Mohan Singh's pussinanity was too well known and it did not require Natwar Singh's laboured history to confirm what we all knew. Sanjay Baru in his book the Accidental Prime Minister  had alerted the Nation to the dyarchy that prevailed in the UPA regime.  Even his explosive revelation that Rahul Gandhi prevented his mother from taking up the Prime Ministership is hardly an expose. Being a shrewd politician, Sonia Gandhi knew that her public acceptance  was very limited and she could not have been an effective PM. Holding the Remote Control in her hand ensured that she held the sinews of power. Natwar paints himself as a victim of a ruthless woman. Natwar Singh is really the quintessential courtier whose entire life was spent in the personal service of the rich and the powerful. He thinks that he is doing great acts of State when he is  asked to carry messages to and fro people who matter. Message carriers cannot deceive themselves into believing that they are confidants of their handlers. This is the truth of Natwar Singh's petty existence. he a mere factotum carrying messages between Indira and her Ministers and later between Sonia Gandhi and her extended court. Butlers and Factotums like Natwar Singh are expected to maintain discreet silence. I remember that Princess Dianna's butler also came out with a salacious book on the Princess.

Natwar Singh does not say anything about the Vocker Report and he was dismissed from the Government because of his involvement in the Food for Oil Scandal. It is true that the name of his son, his friend and Natwar Singh's own name appear in the list of beneficiaries of Saddam Hussein's largess. He had the opportunity to say his side of the story and Natwar Singh is quiet about the whole issue except to say that he was implicated in the scandal at the behest of the Americans. This line of reasoning is suspect because the Vocker Commission was set up by the UN Secretary General and there are documents to prove the involvement of Natwar Singh in the scandal. It is unfortunate that Natwar Singh chooses to obfuscate the entire affair instead of bringing out the truth. And there is not a word about the mysterious death of his daughter in law who was killed after falling from the roof of a hotel in New Delhi and her cell phone did not even have a scratch. Natwar Singh and his great admirer Mani Shankar do not raise these inconvenient facts because public memory in India is only as long as the days' headlines.

Natwar Singh, a jat from Bharatpur packages himself as royalty and I recall Mahavir Singh a man who claimed to be his nephew always addressing Natwar as Kuwar, a feudal title of respect. Men like Natwar Singh are mere courtiers and their lives are not enriched either by reflection or refinement. An unworthy man has written a sly book which evades all the real questions and the hard controversies. Raising questions over Sonia Gandhi will not make us forget Natwar Singh's involvement in the Iraq Scandal. Yes, in one way this man is right. One life is not enough for a corrupt predatory courtier like Natwar all ofn 83 years of age.

The Metaphysics of the Political Imagination: Narendra Modi, the Indian Intellectual and the 2014 Elections

A look at the world of politics, statecraft, diplomacy and books

A noted Indian "sociologist" in a center page article in the Hindu (April 5, 2014) has made some bold and superficially interesting speculations abort the brand of politics Narendra Modi represents.  I wonder why such eminent sociologists do not subject the Congress Party and its mascot, Sonia Gandhi to the same kind of rigorous scrutiny as many of his conclusions can with equal justification be extended to the Congress. In politics style matters as much as substance and when Indian intellectuals train their guns on one individual and suddenly find his ideological soul mates like Atal Bihari Vajpayee and l K Advani more authentic than Narendra Modi from a "civilization" point of view, then we know that something is seriously wrong about the logic behind such ideologically constructed posturing. Until not that long ago, Indian middle class intellectuals, particularly the tele intellectuals of the JNU breed were articulating  their wisdom in terms of sound bytes aired on NDTV which   drove home just one point: the BJP and its politics is a threat to the "secular" values of the country and by default must support the Congress party. The intellectuals found it both prudent and professionally rewarding to mouth the empty slogans of "secularism" and "inclusion", the stock in trade of high political discourse in India/.

The JNU brand of tele intellectuals were never enamored of the politics of the BPJ and if they start discovering  virtues in Atal ji and Advani ji it can only mean that any kind of rhetoric is justified when it comes to Modi bashing. All the three leaders named above share a common vision of an India that is strong, free from corruption and can hold its head high in the high table of world politics. Unlike the intellectuals who hog prime time television in India, Modi does not seek the approbation or approval of the western world. It does not matter whether Economist endorses Narendra Modi. However, the intellectuals like the author of the center page article referred to, thrive on signets of professional recognition from the Western media and institutions. This particular intellectual was opposed to the nuclear policy of India, and throughout  his long and distinguished career has not criticized USA for the slaughter in World War II  or the repeated acts of armed aggression all over the world. Yet when it comes to India they will pose as if they are the civilizational strength of India lies in its ability to produce publicists like themselves.As far as Narendra Modi is concerned his public rhetoric is civilized and yes, his language is strong and effective but does not degenerate into gutter rhetoric like Mrs Sonia Gandhi and her Congress courtiers. Why does this man not take the Congress woman to task for making public discourse so  vulgar and coarse.

As a sociologists, the writer must be aware that in terms of social inclusion as empirically measured by voting percentages and seats won, the BJP scores much higher than it rival the Congress. At least in North India, most of the SC reserved seats and ST seats have been won by the BJP and there is no use in taking recourse to the Marxist line that such figures only represents false consciousness on the part of the "subaltern" classes. At the end of the day the tele intellectual is always right and facts be damnned. Why let facts and empirically verifiable date come in the way of a politically correct and rewarding statement. The intellectual goes on to gratuitously advive the BJP   to be more "discursive" more "conversational". The discursive space in Indian politics is hogged by the Congress and its academic bandwagon who have monopolized public space in the name of secularism and nationalism. If they want to suggest that the hysterical style of ranting against electoral adversaries like the way Sonia, Rahul and other members of the First Family, the Royal Dynasty represents discursive expanse and a conversational style of politics, I am afraid that people will not accept. The electorate sees the shrill hysterical ranting of the Congress as hate mongering and it is time that the soft intellectuals like the author of the center page article recognize the political style of the dynastic fascists as divisive and fraudulent

To harp on Jaswant Singh has become fashionable. Suddenly the opponents of Narendra Modi have rediscovered the virtues of Jaswant Singh after his rebellion. But the same class of tele intellectuals were berating him until the other day for the views on Partition and his analysis that Congress too was responsible for the Partition and do In need to remind my readers of what they said about Jaswant Singh when the then NDA Government released the Taliban prisoners in exchange for the passengers of the Indian Airlines flight which was hijacked to Kabul. I agree Indians do not have a sense of History, but if "sociologists" who write about the civilizational strengths of the BJP should choose tom ignore recent events then it is not oversight but deliberate distortion for political purposes. Is there anything "civilizational" about Sonia Gandhi or Rahul Gandhi. If Narendra Modi is faulted for not being "civilizational" them I wonder if the hate filled rhetoric of the First Family is civilizational.

It is obvious that the writer has not followed the Campaign of Narendra Modi and therefore is unaware of the reasons why he resonates all around the country. He is not an "ersatz"version of the BJP as the writer inelegantly puts it, but rather one who has crafted his political message keeping the complex realities of an ever changing India. The fact is that Narendra Modi has jettisoned the old style identity politics and has changed the terms within which India debates its future. And "sociologists" of course are livid as he has out did them in their own game. He has crafted a message of social and economic development based on the principle that the State has to ensure that the basic structure within which resource transfers and nation building takes place is in tune by and large with the aspirations of the people. And he has successfully sold the argument that the economic downturn in India is linked to the massive and egregious corruption under the congress. What is offensive or objectionable about this fundamental message. Governemnts will be voted in and voted out not on the basis of real and invented identities but on the grounds of performance as seen by the common man. I do not see anything alarming in all this and wish the author had used the resources of his mind to reflect on the conditions prevailing all over the country. The sense of gloom and doom are there in the eyes of eveyone except the starry eyed wonder struck sociologists of JNU.

The upcoming elections will mark a decisive turning point in the history of India. Under Narendra Modi, India will be able to stand and take strides towards improving its economy, living standards and social harmony all of which were ruthlessly compromised during the past 10 years.

This writer can say that Dharampal will certainly endorse Narendra Modi.

WHEN IS A GOVERNMENT ILLEGITIMATE: L K ADVANI SPOKE FOR ALL OF US

A look at the world of politics, statecraft, diplomacy and books Parliamentary Democracy is predicated upon a very delicate balance between public perception and the illusion of permanent power. Since the tenure of a President is fixed for a certain period of time by the Constitution, there cannot be too many question marks over the legitimacy of a President. This is not the case in a Parliamentary form of Government and more so in the case of India where the fist past the winning post system is in place. In the electoral battlefield, candidate resort to violence, intimidation,bribery, impersonation and other mal practices are employed in spite of the best efforts of the Election Commission. Ultimately candidates sit in the LOK SABHA with less than 15% of the valid votes polled. In the case of Mr P Chidambaram, the present Finance Minister of the Government of India, he was actually defeated and got the certificate of election by fraud and in all probability his election will be struck down. The legitimacy of the parliamentary process is already in doubt and so there is no harm in speaking of "illegitimacy" of the Government. In the Lok Sabha debate on the violence in Assam, Shri L K Advani a stems frosenior leader of the Opposition referred to the UPA-II as an "illegitimate government" and the sustained outrage of the Congress benches aided and instigated by Sonia Gandhi led to Advani withdrawing the remarks. While it was gracious of Shri L K Advani to withdraw the remarks, I would like to ask if his remarks were actually true and if there is truth in his remark why did he withdraw the remark. I think Shri L K Advani is making noises which may get his headlines but he is not helping in the gigantic task of getting rid of the two headed hydra--Sonia and Singh--who are ruling the country. The increase in the level of terrorism in India itself raises doubts the ability of the two headed hydra to govern. The ruthless Mumbai Attack of 26th November 2009 took place during the watch of the present government and India has made no progress in getting cooperation from Pakistan. Though Kasaab has been sentenced to death, a soft state like India is unlikely to have the political will to carry out the sentence. The Government has had no success in controlling domestic terrorism. Naxalite violence has only increased and CRPF soldiers are being killed by the dozens. In Dantewada incident alone 80 soldiers were killed. The main reason for the doubts on the legitimcy of the Government stems from the large scale corruption indulged in by the present regime. In the allocation of spectrun scandal, popularly known as the 2G scandal more than 8 to 10 billion US dollars were lost to the country and to make matters worse a senior minister Kapil Sibal even justified the loss saying that it was a zero loss to government.THis matter is pending before the Supreme Court of INdia. In the allocation of coal blocks for mining huge bribe were paid and the Comptroller and Auditor General of India has documented the loss to the exchequer. Then there are a host of smaller scams like the Adrash Scandal. The involvement of Congress politicians in serious crimes is another cause for concern. And the dynstic obsession of the Congress party which projects the higly inexperience and volatile Rahul Gandhi as the next Prime Minister of India raise question about the legitimacy of the regime in power. L K Advani was certainly right in condemning the regime as illegitimate.