Author: Vishweshwar Bhat
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: April 23, 2005
A few days ago, former Karnataka
Chief Minister and current Maharashtra Governor SM Krishna was slated
to attend a function in Mysore. But he cancelled his visit at the
last moment when he learnt that the chief guest was NDA heavyweight
George Fernandes. Afraid that he would be thrown out office if he
shared the dais with Mr Fernandes, who frequently criticises his
party president Sonia Gandhi, Mr Krishna chose to stay away from
the function.
He is just one among scores of politicians
suffering from "political untouchability", as severe a disease as
caste-related untouchability. While illiteracy and superstition are
the causes of caste-based untouchability, education and literacy
are instrumental in triggering political untouchability.
The nature of this disease is such
that it pits politicians against each other. Once a politician is
infected by it, he does his best to portray himself as a sworn enemy
of certain other politicians who do not belong to his party. Untouchability
is, indeed, not a new gambit on the political chessboard. However,
it has so far remained limited to policies and principles, not to
individuals. Earlier, politicians would not shy away from exchanging
a smile or even shaking hands with leaders of rival political groups.
They would even chat. But, today they hesitate to do so in public.
Regrettably, today every political party is being run as someone's
fiefdom.
When Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee had
stood for election in Balarampur, Jawaharlal Nehru skipped the campaign
there. When the Congress candidate in the constituency insisted that
he should canvas there, Nehru said, "No, I cannot. Don't ever try
to persuade me to do so. Vajpayee is a fabulous orator and he is
very much interested in external affairs. He plays a crucial role
in Parliament, too. His election to the Lok Sabha will be good for
democracy." Mr Krishna, one must have the guts and honesty to talk
like Nehru.
One day in Parliament, when the
entire Opposition was busy criticising Nehru for his policy on India's
relationship with China, Vajpayee stood up and asked whether it was
mandatory on the part of the Opposition to criticise every move of
the Government just for the sake of opposition. He further said,
"When it comes to the integrity of the nation, we should all stand
by the leader, cutting across party lines." Of course, soon after
Indira Gandhi took charge, the Congress became her private fiefdom.
But on that day, several Congress leaders came over to Mr Vajpayee
and praised him for showing guts and ignoring party politics.
When Jana Sangh leader Syama Prasad
Mookerjee passed away, his party leaders in Shimoga got together
and planned to name a street after the departed leader. But their
plan had to be sanctioned by the city municipal corporation. To their
misfortune, from the president to ordinary members, everyone was
a Congressman in the corporation. When they made bare their idea
before then president C Ramaswamy Shetty, he agreed at once saying,
"Syama Prasad Mookerjee is one of the greatest leaders our nation
has ever seen. It should be our pride to name our roads after him."
What a statement from a Congressman! Today, let alone the talk of
felicitation, you cannot even imagine any leader praising the good
work of a rival party leader.
Decades ago, Nanaji Deshmukh requested
Congress leader Sampoornananda to write a foreword for a book written
by Jana Sangh leader Deen Dayal Upadhyaya. Hearing the news, some
Congress leaders contacted the former and told him not to do so because
the latter was an ardent critic of their party. But Sam-poornananda
ignored the party diktat and wrote the foreword. In that note he
described Upadhyaya as a towering personality, and said he considered
himself lucky for getting an opportunity to write the foreword.
Why does Mr Janardhan Poojary unnecessarily
praise Ms Gandhi? Why do Congressmen attribute their poll victories
to her? Why does no one in the Opposition praise the Budget, no matter
how apt it is for the growth of the country? What prompts them to
talk something other than what they themselves do not believe in?
What if the BJP named an airport or a parking lot after Indira Gandhi
or Rajiv Gandhi? What has the Congress to lose if it used the name
of Hedgewar or Golwalkar? This is what happens when politics becomes
greater than the nation.
Did you see any American politician
criticising George W Bush when terrorists crashed aeroplanes into
the Twin Towers in New York? Instead of cashing in on the deadly
attack, they threw their weight behind President Bush. Because they
knew it was not the time to demand his resignation or to seek political
mileage. If the same thing had happened in India, our Opposition
parties would have tried to capitalise on the incident as best as
they could. Even the newspapers would not have missed the chance
to single out the President for the attack.
Former US President Richard Nixon
once said, "I love and respect the Opposition, because it deters
me from working against my colleagues." If someone talked like this
in India today, he will be ridiculed. Honouring Mr Vajpayee with
the Best Parliamentarian Award, former Prime Minister Narasimha Rao
had said, "Vajpayee is my guru." Then he was also the president of
the same Congress that Mr Krishna belongs to. Today, Congressmen
do not even dare to praise Narasimha Rao in front of Ms Gandhi.
(The writer is Editor-in-chief,
Vijay Karnataka, daily)
