Author:
Publication: www.vigilonline.com
Date: May 31, 2004
URL: http://www.vigilonline.com/reference/columns/columnsList.asp?columnist_id=1
Thoughts on issues of current interest
[my comments - as an Indian citizen - within square brackets], including
instances of some double standards of our public figures, especially in
the construction of Indian identity (all those Macaulayan myths, and the
hypocrisy that is Nehruvian secularism) - Krishen Kak
{The word "funny" in its usual application
in the English language is funny-ha ha (as of a joke). It is also
used colloquially as funny-peculiar (as in "I've a funny feeling in my
tummy"). Rahul Gandhi created a third application - funny-sad (that
you pity, as he does our country's largest opposition party - V'mala 60).
Now, caro Raul had announced that
the value that he'd uphold in politics is "Truth. I have seen that in politics,
especially in our country, truth has been the first casualty" (V'mala 60).
Well, here's a fourth application
of "funny"; "funny" as in the Raulian understanding of Truth. Therefore,
funny-verita ("truth" is "verita" in caro Raul's mother tongue), as you'll
see from the examples that follow in this and the next offering...]
-----------------------------------------
"Myth 1: Nehru promoted a `dynasty'"
(Ramachandra Guha, "Five myths about Nehru", The Hindu, Magazine, May 23,
2004).
"...the family script. Jawaharlal
Nehru inducted Indira Gandhi in the early 1950s.....Twentytwo years later,
Indira Gandhi brought her younger son Sanjay Gandhi into politics.
After his tragic death, Rajiv was inducted into the party. And now Sonia
too realised that none other than her son was worthy of the mantle. If
Indira chose Amethi for Sanjay and later for Rajiv, Sonia vacated the same
seat for Rahul" (Prabhu Chawla, "Sonia Strikes Back", India Today, May
31, 2004).
-----------------------------------------------
"Sonia alone can reinforce the values
for which Indian nationhood stands" (Ashok K Singh, "Born to lead", The
Pioneer, May 29, 2004).
"The Jewel Turns Down the Crown"
(N.Ravi - editor of The Hindu - in The New York Times, May 19, 2004).
[In 1990, Devi Lal was elected leader
of the Janata Dal Parliamentary Party, but he recommended VP Singh who
became the PM. In 1996, Jyoti Basu rejected the offer to be
prime minister. So Maino Gandhi is hardly the first - as her flunkeys
and the "secular" media want us to believe - to "renounce" prime ministership.
And for the earlier two there was none of that tenth-rate tamasha here
and the world over of "sacrifice in the true Indian tradition" (though
Basu's was described as "a historic blunder'). So why?...]
"If Sonia Gandhi had been black,
had been a person of African origin, this problem would never have arisen"
(Cho Ramaswamy, in A Surya Prakash, ed., "Sonia Under Scrutiny", India
First Foundation, 12E Feroz Shah Road, New Delhi 110001, 2004:58).
[Neither Devi Lal was nor is Jyoti
Basu - oh, holy words, only to be whispered - White and European.
To take another example, Amritanandamayi has done far far more for Indians
(and she even runs soup kitchens in America) than Mother Teresa ever did.
And without the scandals of double standards and tainted money (V'mala
10). Yet Mother Teresa received far far more recognition from our "secularists"
and the Indian State. Because MT was White and European. In
my own professional career I saw, for example, how doodhwala Verghese Kurien
and culture czarina Pupul Jayakar gave Whiteskins the attention - at public
cost - no darkie would ever get. It is absolutely demeaning, this
abject fascination we Indian Browns have for the White.]
-------------------------------------------------
"Only one born of Indian soil can
lead India" - letter to Sonia Gandhi signed by Sharad Pawar and others
before they split from the Congress to form the Nationalist Congress Party
(A Surya Prakash, ed., "Sonia Under Scrutiny", India First Foundation,
12E Feroz Shah Road, New Delhi 110001, 2004:130)
Sharad Pawar's "NCP not to raise
Sonia's foreign origin" (The Hindu, May 15, 2004).
[Sharad Pawar has been rewarded
with a union ministership]
"I'm ready to sacrifice even my
life", Ram Vilas Paswan to Sonia Gandhi "pledging his life to work under
her leadership" (Rana Ajit, "Paswan won't accept Sonia's decision as final,
will try again", The Pioneer, May 19, 2004).
"Sore Paswan threatens pullout.....unhappy
over being denied the portfolio of his choice..." (Navin Upadhyay in The
Pioneer, May 23, 2004).
[Paswan has a union ministership]
----------------------------------------------------
"Mr [Buddhadeb] Bhattacharjee had
earlier termed the Congress a party of landlords.....L[eft]F[ront] chairman
Biman Basu [said] that the Congress was no less than a `cobra' waiting
to bite the Left" (Saugar Sengupta, "Buddha's remark on Congress irks Basu",
The Pioneer, May 26, 2004).
"In the unfolding burlesque on succession
to the throne of Delhi, the most enduring and funniest image was that of
octogenerian Jyoti Basu, former West Bengal chief minister and veteran
communist, rushing forward to push Ms Sonia Gandhi's candidature for prime
ministership.....he had voluntarily decided to function as the spokesman
for the Gandhi family" (Anuradha Dutt, "In search of la dolce vita", The
Pioneer, May 20, 2004).
"...Jyoti Basu said...that...Sonia
Gandhi had been dissuaded from becoming Prime Minister by her children,
who fear that she might be killed" ("Children dissuaded Sonia: Basu", The
Hindu, May 19, 2004).
"Security threat was not the reason
for...Sonia Gandhi not taking up prime ministership, according to her son,
Rahul" ("Security threat not a reason: Rahul", The Hindu, May 20, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------
"The Congress cannot do anything
on its own" ("Laloo talks tough", The Hindu, May 21, 2004)
"Aamader chhara ekta paao egote
parbena (they can't move a single step without our support)"...is how...Buddhadeb
Bhattacharya would like to project the Congress-led UPA at the Centre"
(Saugar Sengupta, "In the hands of Left, Congress feels the pinch", The
Pioneer, May 25, 2004).
Dayanidhi Maran publicly thanked
Sonia Gandhi for "interfering" to give his party the ministerial portfolios
it wanted.
"...it is Sonia who will be at the
head seat, Manmohan is merely her CEO, a family trustee" (Lakshmi Iyer,
"The Upper Hand", India today, June 7, 2004).
"Yesterday (May 20), his party leader
Mani Shankar Aiyar said on CNBC, 'Mrs Sonia Gandhi is a queen and she has
appointed Dr Singh to do some governmental work.' Now, if this is how the
Congress party is going to demolish the office of prime minister, then
Dr Singh will have a problem with governance" (email dt. 28-5-04 circulated
by Arindam Banerji).
[MS Aiyar was rewarded with a union
ministership.]
"Dr Singh declared: `The government
will be run under her guidance'" (Harish Khare, `We will focus on the poor',
The Hindu, May 21, 2004) just "as...Jawaharlal Nehru had needed the Mahatma's
benign hand on his shoulder" (Inder Malhotra,"Congress culture too needs
reform", The Hindu, May 23, 2004).
-----------------------------------------------------
"The Congress President's Office
(CPO), for all practical purposes, will be the headquarters of the new
Government" (Shankkar Aiyar, "What Can He Do?", India Today, June 7, 2004).
"Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf
Tuesday spoke to Congress president Sonia Gandhi...inviting her to visit
Pakistan.....External Affairs Ministry spokesman Navtej Sarna said" (The
Pioneer, May 26, 2004).
"Foreign Minister Natwar Singh said
that Congress president Sonia Gandhi may visit Pakistan...(The Pioneer,
May 30, 2004).
[It is not just that this was announced
by a government spokesperson and then by the union minister himself, and
not by a party spokesperson, but that....]
"the Musharraf-Sonia interaction
seems even more of a breach of protocol on considering that Ms Gandhi was
invited to visit Pakistan before the Indian Prime Minister was extended
the `honour'.....
Ms Gandhi's present status is equivalent
to any other party president's, be it of the BJP or Kashmir's Panther's
Party. She is not deputy prime minister. She is no longer even opposition
leader. More, the Prime Minister belongs to her party. Questions will,
therefore, be raised about why she did not politely remind General Musharraf
that Mr Singh is the sole overseer of neighbourly ties, and it is he who
should be Islamabad's guest before she could. Neither did she do this nor
has the Government expressed displeasure. Rather, the General's call has
been greeted with unseemly enthusiasm and an apparent sense of misplaced
gratitude. By soliciting Ms Gandhi's backing for peace talks, President
Musharraf has only broadcast his belief that a divide exists between de
jure and de facto authority in India. By not disabusing him, Ms Gandhi
and the Government will be perceived as endorsing his assumption" (The
Pioneer, editorial, May 27, 2004).
"...a recent editorial in an English
daily...said: "...Already, there is a sense of disquiet that career-minded
officers and agency chiefs are calling on her and briefing her on matters
of national security" ("`Official fealty to Sonis must stop'", The Pioneer,
May 31, 2004).
"What has to be seen is whether
the Prime Minister's role in leading the Government and his position is
undermined or not. Till now, there is no such indication" (CPI(M)
leader Nilotpal Basu in The Hindu, May 31, 2004).
[No such indication? Not even when
indications stare you in the face? That's funny-verita!
More in the next offering......
PS
For those of you ignorant natives
who've still not realized you must butter your bread on the Italian side,
and that too with White (not coloured) butter, "caro Raul" is the politically
correct form of "dear Rahul" and is in his mother tongue.
