The lifeline for sustenance and growth of any terrorist or violent movement anywhere in the world is publicity. It is the most precious oxygen on which these outfits that do not believe in democracy and rule of law survive. They use media as a perfect tool to promote their cause which, in any way, does not contribute to peace and social harmony. What comes out of their so-called struggle, whatever veneer they may apply to it, is nothing but anarchy and chaos in society.
Should the media oblige such organisations? It is difficult to give a categorical reply “yes” or “no” to this question. It is debatable and it all depends on which side of the political spectrum you are perched. Conventional use of tags for those on the left is that they are “liberal” and those on the right are “conservatives”. This is no longer so in China. Those who are opposed to communism are “liberals” and those who stand by communist ideology are “conservatives”.
Be that as it may,there were two instances in the recent past where the media, wittingly or unwittingly, played into the hands of the political and left extremist elements which are not only discredited but lost public support. Media has only helped them in their efforts for revival.
First, let us take the case of Telangana Rashtra Samiti chief K Chandrasekara Rao. 2009 general elections have exposed his hypocrisy and the elections only helped him grow richer by crores. He is the most discredited and cantankerous politician today known for his thoroughly inconsistent stands and language that does not befit a civilized politician. Of late, he has been talking of militant movement and civil war for Telangana statehood. He knows that people of Telangana no longer trust him. He wants to be in the news and so he talks of civil war. But neither the people nor the state administration takes his talk seriously.
But his only lifeline for survival is the media. When he organised a rally in Siddipet, in a desperate attempt to regroup his truncated party, almost every Telugu news channel (there are 12 in the state) telecast his rally live including the one owned by late Dr YS Rajasekara Reddy’s son. This is the rally in which he reiterated his “resolve” to launch a civil war.
Well, there can be no legal bar on the channels to report the rally in whatever manner the electronic media wanted. But, is there something like professional judgement and discretion in going “live” for the (mis)adventures of a politician? This is where unhealthy competition in the electronic media makes them shed all sense of professional propriety. There is a sheepish mindset. If one channel does “live”, everybody else has to follow suit; otherwise the competing channel may pip the post in the TRP race.
There can be no restriction in reporting the event especially when KCR threatens “ civil war” and people should have enough inputs to judge his credentials. But covering the entire rally “live” is to give an importance that he or his party does not deserve. This is where the editorial judgement should have come to play rather than senseless competition.
Politicians like Ambika Soni are making politically correct statements that the government would not constitute a regulatory body on its own and it should be left to the media establishments to come out with their own regulatory body and a self code. In the competitive atmosphere that we witness not only in Andhra Pradesh, but in the entire country today, will the media barons come out with such a self-regulatory body, and even if they come out with one, will it serve any purpose?
The second instance where media did not come out with flying colours was the one revolving around the West Bengal cop abducted by Maoists. The media space/airtime that Maoist leader Kishenji aka Koteswara Rao got on the national channels in every bulletin was amazing. He was giving exclusive interviews, phone-ins which were getting updated and bytes “behind” the camera. Besides, he also addressed a press conference with a hood covering his head and gun totting over his shoulders. It would have been a “romantic” interlude for the young journos to interview one of the dreaded left extremists rather than interacting with run-of-the-mill politicians who give a boring copy and sedate headlines.
To digress, hitherto, a journalist had to trek several miles blind-folded in thick forest to have an interview with a naxal leader. Now, the Maoists are holding press conferences within ear-shot distance of the Police station.It only reminds us of Nepal Maoist leader Prachanda’s interaction with the media.
But the point here is that Kishenji used media as a tool (not that the Maoists have any love lost for the bourgeois media) to blackmail the establishment. According to the West Bengal government, “the police had nearly cornered the top Maoist leader, but he very shrewdly used the media to blackmail the government threatening that the officer’s life would be in danger if the offensive was not halted immediately”
It is possible that the W Bengal government did not have the nerve to corner the Maoist and developed cold feet. But was it right on the part of the media to have allowed itself to be used for blackmail?
As the Prime Minister had stated time and again, Maoists are the single most internal security threat and the Home Minister has declared “war” on Maoists. Maoists don’t believe in democracy nor in peace talks. They believe in armed rebellion and are not prepared to give up arms under any circumstances. They would like to over throw Costitutionally elected governments. When the state declares “war” against them, what should be the role of media? Should it do something, whatever the professional obligations, that will only publicise and further the cause of Maoists who pose a grave threat to the very concept of nation-state?
There is a school of thought that believes in the jargon “Publish and be damned”. Media cannot be expected to analyse the intentions of those in the news and then report. During the Balkan war, when British media did not toe the official line, it was said that media had no territorial loyalties and truth is the only overriding factor to guide the media. Otherwise, we would not have had “Watergate”.
While it is a case of professional discretion in the case of KCR, it is undoubtedly a dilemma when it comes to Maoists. At least, the latter deserves a debate.
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Friday, October 23, 2009
IS THERE A POLICY ON CHINA?
Amidst revived war of words between India and China, the Prime Ministers of both the countries, Dr Manmohan Singh and Wen Jiabo are slated to meet at Bangkok today when they go there to attend the East Asia Summit. There is an accuracy deficit when we say “war of words” because war can only be with the particicpation between two entities. While Chinese media has been using abusive language against India and its diplomats threaten India on a regular basis, Indian response is to go on the defensive except on one occasion when it pointed out China’s infrastructural activities in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. So, the war is unilateral in the absence of a clear China policy for India. We can only pray, with Dr Singh’s track record being what it is, there is no repeat of Sharm-el-Sheikh in Bangkok.
When Indian media was talking about Chinese incursions on the border, Indian government was only trying to pretend as if nothing has happened. The nation was told that there was nothing to panic about such minor skirmishes on the border which are not uncommon on the disputed territories of any nation. The home ministry went a step further and warned criminal action against those correspondents who wrote about such incursions. Further, what was most unimaginable was that the government censored its own Prime Minister’s remarks on China when he addressed the military commanders. Alas, China does not take note of this “good-neighbour” conduct of India.
Now, the issue has become a full-blown controversy with China’s intentions becoming quite clear. Our China friends and those who supported China at the time of 1962 war were also making noises that what was happening on the border must be the handiwork of China’s border police and it may not have anything to do with the country’s rulers. But, will they change their tune after the People’s Daily editorial on October 14?
One should remember that there is no free press in Peoples Republic of China, unlike India, and People’s Daily is the official organ of the Communist Party of China and its subsidiary is Global Times which advocated “balkanisation” of India. The editorials in People’s Daily unmistakably reflect the official position as they are published only after getting clearance from the party higher-ups.
This is what People’s Daily said in its editorial. It describes India as hegemonistic power and talks about the common experience and common difficulties of both China and Pakistan in dealing with India with which both have unresolved border disputes. Look at the diplomatic mischief. It takes Pakistan along while talking about its “difficulties” while dealing with India.
The acerbic editorial further says “In recent years Indians have become more narrow-minded and intolerable of outside criticism as nationalist sentiment rises with some of them even turning to hegemony. Given the country’s history, hegemony is a hundred percent result of British colonialism. A previous victim of hegemony, it is developing its own hegemony. Obsessed with such mentality India turned a blind eye to the concessions China had repeatedly made over the disputed border issues and refused to drop the pretentious airs when dealing with neighbours like Pakistan”.
The editorial also gives gratuitous advice to India. “India which wants to be a super power needs to improve its relations with neighbours and abandon the recklessness and arrogance. For India, the ease of tension with China and Pakistan is the only way to become a superpower.”
Let us look at the “concessions” China has made to resolve issues between the two countries.
1. It blocked the Asian Development Bank loans to India for developmental projects because the project included one in Arunachal Pradesh.
2. It expressed serious reservations on our Prime Minister’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh for electoral activity. Elections have been taking place for decades in this border state and top politicians both in the government and in the Opposition have been visiting the state.
3. China has warned India against Dalai Lama’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh.
4. It started issuing separate visas to people of Kashmir origin to underscore the point that J&K is a disputed territory.
5. It showed J & K as a separate nation in its maps.
6. It establishes a spy station in Nepal to monitor India.
7. It has befriended all those countries around India like Pakistan, Lanka, Nepal and Myanmnar with a view to encircle India.
Just three years ago, when Chinese President Hu Jinto visited India he said China was keen on building a strong and cooperative relationship based on shared and common interests. He also said that India and China were willing to work hand in hand for long-term friendship and common development.
What happened in the last three years for China to reverse its stand? Dalai Lama, whose very name is allergic to China, has been staying as our guest for more than half-a-century. Arunachal Pradesh is not a new phenomenon. Why then this sudden hostility?
If we have to understand this, we have to understand human nature. After all, a country is no different from human being when it comes to the mindset and a country is again ruled by human beings. When a person becomes rich all of a sudden, he thinks big, acts big and expects his neighbours to pay obeisance to him. In short, he becomes a “dada” in his neighbourhood.
China is undergoing such a transformation. It has grown fabulously rich. It holds three trillion dollars in foreign exchange reserves which no other country in the world can boast of. Together with the US it accounts for 30 percent of the world’s GDP. The recession in the West, particularly in the US, added to its importance. It has emerged as the world’s largest growth engine and is out to economically humble the mighty US. There is also a talk of saying good-bye to G-8 and replacing it with G-2, i.e. China and the US.
The only country that can come in the way of China’s ambitions to be a unipolar power, militarily, economically and politically, it is India whose political and economic clout in the international arena is on the ascendant. It also suspects that Indo-US strategic relationship is only to counter China. Therefore, it wants to create tension in the border areas so as to divert India’s attention and resources. Not only in Arunachal Pradesh, even in Sikkim it wants to resurrect the ghost that was buried long ago. Dalai Lama is only a red-herring.
When Indian media was talking about Chinese incursions on the border, Indian government was only trying to pretend as if nothing has happened. The nation was told that there was nothing to panic about such minor skirmishes on the border which are not uncommon on the disputed territories of any nation. The home ministry went a step further and warned criminal action against those correspondents who wrote about such incursions. Further, what was most unimaginable was that the government censored its own Prime Minister’s remarks on China when he addressed the military commanders. Alas, China does not take note of this “good-neighbour” conduct of India.
Now, the issue has become a full-blown controversy with China’s intentions becoming quite clear. Our China friends and those who supported China at the time of 1962 war were also making noises that what was happening on the border must be the handiwork of China’s border police and it may not have anything to do with the country’s rulers. But, will they change their tune after the People’s Daily editorial on October 14?
One should remember that there is no free press in Peoples Republic of China, unlike India, and People’s Daily is the official organ of the Communist Party of China and its subsidiary is Global Times which advocated “balkanisation” of India. The editorials in People’s Daily unmistakably reflect the official position as they are published only after getting clearance from the party higher-ups.
This is what People’s Daily said in its editorial. It describes India as hegemonistic power and talks about the common experience and common difficulties of both China and Pakistan in dealing with India with which both have unresolved border disputes. Look at the diplomatic mischief. It takes Pakistan along while talking about its “difficulties” while dealing with India.
The acerbic editorial further says “In recent years Indians have become more narrow-minded and intolerable of outside criticism as nationalist sentiment rises with some of them even turning to hegemony. Given the country’s history, hegemony is a hundred percent result of British colonialism. A previous victim of hegemony, it is developing its own hegemony. Obsessed with such mentality India turned a blind eye to the concessions China had repeatedly made over the disputed border issues and refused to drop the pretentious airs when dealing with neighbours like Pakistan”.
The editorial also gives gratuitous advice to India. “India which wants to be a super power needs to improve its relations with neighbours and abandon the recklessness and arrogance. For India, the ease of tension with China and Pakistan is the only way to become a superpower.”
Let us look at the “concessions” China has made to resolve issues between the two countries.
1. It blocked the Asian Development Bank loans to India for developmental projects because the project included one in Arunachal Pradesh.
2. It expressed serious reservations on our Prime Minister’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh for electoral activity. Elections have been taking place for decades in this border state and top politicians both in the government and in the Opposition have been visiting the state.
3. China has warned India against Dalai Lama’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh.
4. It started issuing separate visas to people of Kashmir origin to underscore the point that J&K is a disputed territory.
5. It showed J & K as a separate nation in its maps.
6. It establishes a spy station in Nepal to monitor India.
7. It has befriended all those countries around India like Pakistan, Lanka, Nepal and Myanmnar with a view to encircle India.
Just three years ago, when Chinese President Hu Jinto visited India he said China was keen on building a strong and cooperative relationship based on shared and common interests. He also said that India and China were willing to work hand in hand for long-term friendship and common development.
What happened in the last three years for China to reverse its stand? Dalai Lama, whose very name is allergic to China, has been staying as our guest for more than half-a-century. Arunachal Pradesh is not a new phenomenon. Why then this sudden hostility?
If we have to understand this, we have to understand human nature. After all, a country is no different from human being when it comes to the mindset and a country is again ruled by human beings. When a person becomes rich all of a sudden, he thinks big, acts big and expects his neighbours to pay obeisance to him. In short, he becomes a “dada” in his neighbourhood.
China is undergoing such a transformation. It has grown fabulously rich. It holds three trillion dollars in foreign exchange reserves which no other country in the world can boast of. Together with the US it accounts for 30 percent of the world’s GDP. The recession in the West, particularly in the US, added to its importance. It has emerged as the world’s largest growth engine and is out to economically humble the mighty US. There is also a talk of saying good-bye to G-8 and replacing it with G-2, i.e. China and the US.
The only country that can come in the way of China’s ambitions to be a unipolar power, militarily, economically and politically, it is India whose political and economic clout in the international arena is on the ascendant. It also suspects that Indo-US strategic relationship is only to counter China. Therefore, it wants to create tension in the border areas so as to divert India’s attention and resources. Not only in Arunachal Pradesh, even in Sikkim it wants to resurrect the ghost that was buried long ago. Dalai Lama is only a red-herring.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
COMPETITION DRIVES MEDIA TO GO PRO- ACTIVE
While the nature was flooding four districts of Andhra Pradesh in a manner that was not witnessed in the last one hundred years, eleven Telugu news channels were flooding the drawing rooms of millions of households in the state with non-stop coverage of floods for full five days. Of course, it was necessary to keep the people and the administration informed of the ground realities with visual support. Though such in-depth coverage and studio discussions with irrigation experts and engineers might have sacred some people because of forecasts of deluge, there was no choice before the channels. Even visuals repeated like nobody’s business, dubious claims to exclusivity, “first”- to- reach- the- spot claims and the like are understandable in the electronic media keeping in view the mindless competition. But the problem was, the claims were taken to ridiculous levels.
Anyone who was watching the Telugu news channels during those agonising days of flood fury would have come to the conclusion that it was the electronic media in the state that has taken over control of the flood management, rescue, relief and rehabilitation measures from the state administration.
It was the market leader TV9 that showed the way for others in the fraternity. On October 2 itself the channel started the claim that it was TV9 team that could reach out to places where official machinery could not venture. Of course, there were no specific details or visuals except “bytes” from the villagers to this effect. There was a pattern. A loaded question will be asked to the people “Did anyone come to your area to help?” You can’t expect the marooned people to say “Oh yes, many people came and we are all happy with their timely help” It is quite natural for them to be disappointed and angry. Obviously, when hundreds of villages were affected due to sudden inflow of more than 10 lakh cusecs of water, you can’t expect government officials to be present everywhere. So, a byte will be extracted from them to say that TV9 was the first to visit them. What is the strength of a television channel’s team in the affected areas to replace government machinery? A stringer in each mandal with a cameraman? Besides, the channel might have sent dozen teams from the capital.
How can the competitors of TV9 keep quiet when a rival is taking all the credit? TV5 went a step further. It announced that it was the only channel to have conducted an aerial survey of flood affected areas. If a chief minister or prime minister conducts an aerial survey, the purpose is to assess the damage due to floods and to chalk out plan of relief and rehabilitation measures. What would a TV channel do with an aerial survey if it is not just to shoot visuals? The channel also announced in bold fonts across the screen (not just scrolling) that TV5 rescue teams were active in the affected areas and that affected people in the submerged areas thanked TV5 profusely for the timely help. It was also claimed that the TV5 personnel were operating along with fire service authorities to rescue the flood victims.
The trend that was set by these two channels was meticulously followed by others in making claims and counter-claims. Every channel had “exclusives” and was the first to reach affected villages to lead rescue efforts.
However, there was a blessing in this competition which cannot go unnoticed. It was TV9 again that started collecting relief materials to be sent to the flood victims. The channel gave an appeal for aid and the channel claimed, throwing all decency and modesty into thin air, that the response it got was unparalleled in history and that even the government, NGOs, or the political parties could not get the same level of response which in turn reflected on the credibility of the channel among the people and the unshakable faith they repose in the channel.
On the positive side, this spurred other channels to collect relief materials and if we go by the visuals shown in all the channels there must be hundreds of trucks heading towards those four districts of Kurnool, Mahabubnagar, Krishna and Guntur. This is one area where the competition among the channels benefitted the people if we ignore the tendency of some channels to run down the competitors. When TV9 was collecting clothes, TV5 ran a ticker that it was of no use except for propaganda. Since some channels received cheques/drafts, an attempt was made to discourage it saying that the cheques/drafts must be sent only to the chief minister’s office, as otherwise, there is a likelihood of misuse of funds.
Though Sakshi TV was trying to be professional in the first few days, even cutting live to TDP leader Chandrababu’s press meet in Vijayawada and not making exaggerated claims, it could not probably resist the temptation to cater to its owner’s political interests. There was an extensive coverage of YS Jagan Mohan Reddy’s tour of Cuddapah district with a voice over that smacked of sheer sycophancy.
Of all the channels, ETV2 maintained semblance of balance and sobriety. The reason is not far to seek. There was no YSR in the scene to let loose its prejudice.
While the Telugu channels went overboard because of the real threat perception involving millions of people of the state, the coverage of national news channels was abysmal. On the afternoon bulletins of Times Now, IBN and NDTV 24x7, the lead story was the collapse of two cranes in the Delhi Metro project even as the Krishna flood was threatening to submerge hundreds of villages taking the lives of scores of villagers in the process. On the prime time bulletin at 9.00 PM on 2nd Oct, Times Now found Karan Johar’s apology to Raj Thakeray as more important than the flood fury in the South. Speculation about Shiney Ahuja’s exact time of release from jail was also considered to be more important to be taken before the break whereas the flood fury in the South was pushed as the last item before Sports news.
If we go by conventional wisdom, role of the media is to inform. But then, we are passing through changing times and changing priorities. When we have an Executive whose mantra is “positive discrimination”, judiciary which is told to be committed to social justice, and not just Constitutional justice, why can’t we have a pro-active media? Media which wants to replicate state administrative machinery.
Anyone who was watching the Telugu news channels during those agonising days of flood fury would have come to the conclusion that it was the electronic media in the state that has taken over control of the flood management, rescue, relief and rehabilitation measures from the state administration.
It was the market leader TV9 that showed the way for others in the fraternity. On October 2 itself the channel started the claim that it was TV9 team that could reach out to places where official machinery could not venture. Of course, there were no specific details or visuals except “bytes” from the villagers to this effect. There was a pattern. A loaded question will be asked to the people “Did anyone come to your area to help?” You can’t expect the marooned people to say “Oh yes, many people came and we are all happy with their timely help” It is quite natural for them to be disappointed and angry. Obviously, when hundreds of villages were affected due to sudden inflow of more than 10 lakh cusecs of water, you can’t expect government officials to be present everywhere. So, a byte will be extracted from them to say that TV9 was the first to visit them. What is the strength of a television channel’s team in the affected areas to replace government machinery? A stringer in each mandal with a cameraman? Besides, the channel might have sent dozen teams from the capital.
How can the competitors of TV9 keep quiet when a rival is taking all the credit? TV5 went a step further. It announced that it was the only channel to have conducted an aerial survey of flood affected areas. If a chief minister or prime minister conducts an aerial survey, the purpose is to assess the damage due to floods and to chalk out plan of relief and rehabilitation measures. What would a TV channel do with an aerial survey if it is not just to shoot visuals? The channel also announced in bold fonts across the screen (not just scrolling) that TV5 rescue teams were active in the affected areas and that affected people in the submerged areas thanked TV5 profusely for the timely help. It was also claimed that the TV5 personnel were operating along with fire service authorities to rescue the flood victims.
The trend that was set by these two channels was meticulously followed by others in making claims and counter-claims. Every channel had “exclusives” and was the first to reach affected villages to lead rescue efforts.
However, there was a blessing in this competition which cannot go unnoticed. It was TV9 again that started collecting relief materials to be sent to the flood victims. The channel gave an appeal for aid and the channel claimed, throwing all decency and modesty into thin air, that the response it got was unparalleled in history and that even the government, NGOs, or the political parties could not get the same level of response which in turn reflected on the credibility of the channel among the people and the unshakable faith they repose in the channel.
On the positive side, this spurred other channels to collect relief materials and if we go by the visuals shown in all the channels there must be hundreds of trucks heading towards those four districts of Kurnool, Mahabubnagar, Krishna and Guntur. This is one area where the competition among the channels benefitted the people if we ignore the tendency of some channels to run down the competitors. When TV9 was collecting clothes, TV5 ran a ticker that it was of no use except for propaganda. Since some channels received cheques/drafts, an attempt was made to discourage it saying that the cheques/drafts must be sent only to the chief minister’s office, as otherwise, there is a likelihood of misuse of funds.
Though Sakshi TV was trying to be professional in the first few days, even cutting live to TDP leader Chandrababu’s press meet in Vijayawada and not making exaggerated claims, it could not probably resist the temptation to cater to its owner’s political interests. There was an extensive coverage of YS Jagan Mohan Reddy’s tour of Cuddapah district with a voice over that smacked of sheer sycophancy.
Of all the channels, ETV2 maintained semblance of balance and sobriety. The reason is not far to seek. There was no YSR in the scene to let loose its prejudice.
While the Telugu channels went overboard because of the real threat perception involving millions of people of the state, the coverage of national news channels was abysmal. On the afternoon bulletins of Times Now, IBN and NDTV 24x7, the lead story was the collapse of two cranes in the Delhi Metro project even as the Krishna flood was threatening to submerge hundreds of villages taking the lives of scores of villagers in the process. On the prime time bulletin at 9.00 PM on 2nd Oct, Times Now found Karan Johar’s apology to Raj Thakeray as more important than the flood fury in the South. Speculation about Shiney Ahuja’s exact time of release from jail was also considered to be more important to be taken before the break whereas the flood fury in the South was pushed as the last item before Sports news.
If we go by conventional wisdom, role of the media is to inform. But then, we are passing through changing times and changing priorities. When we have an Executive whose mantra is “positive discrimination”, judiciary which is told to be committed to social justice, and not just Constitutional justice, why can’t we have a pro-active media? Media which wants to replicate state administrative machinery.
Friday, October 2, 2009
SOUL OF OUR POLITY IS AUTHORITARIAN
We adopt all universally recognised motions of democracy. We have periodical elections to state assemblies and Parliament and elected representatives of the people “elect” chief ministers or Prime Minister. We have a written Constitution which swears by democracy. We follow its provisions in letter. But can we say we follow it in spirit?
The farce that is being witnessed in Andhra Pradesh in electing a successor for the late Dr Y S Rajasekara Reddy only confirms, if confirmation is needed, that we are yet to imbibe the true spirit of democracy notwithstanding the fact that we follow all the superficial features of democracy. Democracy has come to stay, we say; and indulge in self-flagellation comparing ourselves with our neighbours. But, what is the quality of our democracy?
For centuries we were ruled by kings or emperors. Indian tradition treats kings as incarnation of God. A king, benevolent or malevolent, is accepted without a question and what he says is law and his subjects have to obey. In fact, there were kings who, despite unquestioned powers, acted in accordance with the wishes of his people.
Now that we are the world’s largest democracy, atleast in the eyes of the world, has anything changed? “High Command” has replaced the kings in any political party and the credit, shall we say “dubious credit” goes to the Congress for setting this authoritarian trend right from the time of Mrs Indira Gandhi and it has, regretfully, caught up with other parties as well. Only the nomenclature has changed and the king or queen is now called “High Command”.
The state is witnessing an interesting scenario where leaders, who were either defeated by the people, or those who survive in politics because they are the “retainers” of the Nehru-Gandhi family, or those who can never win an election, vent their spleen for something which cannot be considered “democratic” by any standards.
In order not to leave a Constitutional vacuum soon after the death of Dr YSR, an arrangement was made by the High Command to usher in a leader who is not even a member of the Legislative Assembly. True, there was no legal bar. The Congress Legislature Party should either endorse his nomination or elect a leader of its choice. But look at the chorus of Congress leaders both at the Centre and in the State. They shamelessly say that the tradition in the Congress is that the High Command has to zero in on a person and he/she alone will be duly “elected” by the CLP. Do you call this democracy? May be, we can call it “authoritarian democracy” or “despotic democracy”!
Here was a chief minister who stood by the party like a rock and was instrumental in a way for the Congress to be in power at the Centre and the CLP is yet to meet to condole his death even after one month. What is the hitch in convening the CLP meet? There is a fear that the overwhelming majority of elected representatives may elect a new leader which may not be to the liking of the High Command.
That’s why a CWC member from the state says “party high command is the ultimate authority to decide on the state leadership issue”. Do we call this democratic tradition? Legislators are reduced to mere puppets who just have to nod their heads or raise their hands for whatever the direction of the High Command. This is what the kings used to demand from their courtiers. Is there any change under the so-called democratic dispensation?
Look at the audacity of an AICC member, who is at best a domestic help of the first family of the party, and made a political career by singing bhajans to the family, to say “Those who say they won on account of the late YSR should realise that YSR was made Chief Minister due to Mrs Gandhi”. The reality is the other way round. Both in 2004 and 2009, it was YSR who made Mrs Gandhi to wield real power behind the throne. Here was a chief minister who won on his own strength. It amounts to blasphemy to admit that and the credit has to be laid at the feet of the queen. This is another dimension of our unique democracy.
Do you know that in the olden days when any hint of dishonour to the king would be perceived a “Raja Droham” and a severe punishment would await those who committed it? Are you not reminded of it when you watch the reaction to the innocuous incident when a flexiboard poster of Sonia Gandhi was torn in Khammam? Though those who are accused of committing such a “heinous” crime say that their real target was former minister and pink chaddy activist Renuka Chaudhury who happened to be in the camp of “defeated loyalists”, an attempt is being made to paint “YSR loyalists” as the culprits and “Raja Drohi”. The incident is termed in choicest epithets like “ghastly”, “heinous”, “unpardonable”, “very serious” etc. Yes, tearing of a poster is “heinous” crime!
Therefore, the state Home Minister orders a probe into the Khammam incident, chief minister writes to the High Command apologising for the “heinous crime” and assures her of stern action, APCC chief has suspended some four persons, deemed to be partymen. We can only wish that the government machinery at the state level has shown the same seriousness in apprehending the terrorists of Mecca Masjid blasts and the twin blasts in Gokul chat bhandar and Lumbini park or preventing acid attacks on hapless women or increasing incidents of rape and murder.
The High Command also should realise that allowing this anarchy to continue in the state is going to cost the party dearly. If it is under the illusion that it is the brand image of the Nehru Gandhi family that has won them 33 seats giving a decisive advantage in the number game, as is claimed by sycophants, it may have to pay a heavy price in 2014. Those who are singing the praise of the High Command are not only rootless wonders, there are many in the party, of course, but they are born dissidents and they will be of no help to the party when the chips are down.
High Command’s prevarication in taking a timely decision is only going to deepen the crisis in the beleaguered party and make the TDP chief to relax. It should remember that the present chief minister has opted out of the electoral politics. It will be a little too much to expect him to deliver 30 odd MPs to the Lok Sabha in 2014?
The farce that is being witnessed in Andhra Pradesh in electing a successor for the late Dr Y S Rajasekara Reddy only confirms, if confirmation is needed, that we are yet to imbibe the true spirit of democracy notwithstanding the fact that we follow all the superficial features of democracy. Democracy has come to stay, we say; and indulge in self-flagellation comparing ourselves with our neighbours. But, what is the quality of our democracy?
For centuries we were ruled by kings or emperors. Indian tradition treats kings as incarnation of God. A king, benevolent or malevolent, is accepted without a question and what he says is law and his subjects have to obey. In fact, there were kings who, despite unquestioned powers, acted in accordance with the wishes of his people.
Now that we are the world’s largest democracy, atleast in the eyes of the world, has anything changed? “High Command” has replaced the kings in any political party and the credit, shall we say “dubious credit” goes to the Congress for setting this authoritarian trend right from the time of Mrs Indira Gandhi and it has, regretfully, caught up with other parties as well. Only the nomenclature has changed and the king or queen is now called “High Command”.
The state is witnessing an interesting scenario where leaders, who were either defeated by the people, or those who survive in politics because they are the “retainers” of the Nehru-Gandhi family, or those who can never win an election, vent their spleen for something which cannot be considered “democratic” by any standards.
In order not to leave a Constitutional vacuum soon after the death of Dr YSR, an arrangement was made by the High Command to usher in a leader who is not even a member of the Legislative Assembly. True, there was no legal bar. The Congress Legislature Party should either endorse his nomination or elect a leader of its choice. But look at the chorus of Congress leaders both at the Centre and in the State. They shamelessly say that the tradition in the Congress is that the High Command has to zero in on a person and he/she alone will be duly “elected” by the CLP. Do you call this democracy? May be, we can call it “authoritarian democracy” or “despotic democracy”!
Here was a chief minister who stood by the party like a rock and was instrumental in a way for the Congress to be in power at the Centre and the CLP is yet to meet to condole his death even after one month. What is the hitch in convening the CLP meet? There is a fear that the overwhelming majority of elected representatives may elect a new leader which may not be to the liking of the High Command.
That’s why a CWC member from the state says “party high command is the ultimate authority to decide on the state leadership issue”. Do we call this democratic tradition? Legislators are reduced to mere puppets who just have to nod their heads or raise their hands for whatever the direction of the High Command. This is what the kings used to demand from their courtiers. Is there any change under the so-called democratic dispensation?
Look at the audacity of an AICC member, who is at best a domestic help of the first family of the party, and made a political career by singing bhajans to the family, to say “Those who say they won on account of the late YSR should realise that YSR was made Chief Minister due to Mrs Gandhi”. The reality is the other way round. Both in 2004 and 2009, it was YSR who made Mrs Gandhi to wield real power behind the throne. Here was a chief minister who won on his own strength. It amounts to blasphemy to admit that and the credit has to be laid at the feet of the queen. This is another dimension of our unique democracy.
Do you know that in the olden days when any hint of dishonour to the king would be perceived a “Raja Droham” and a severe punishment would await those who committed it? Are you not reminded of it when you watch the reaction to the innocuous incident when a flexiboard poster of Sonia Gandhi was torn in Khammam? Though those who are accused of committing such a “heinous” crime say that their real target was former minister and pink chaddy activist Renuka Chaudhury who happened to be in the camp of “defeated loyalists”, an attempt is being made to paint “YSR loyalists” as the culprits and “Raja Drohi”. The incident is termed in choicest epithets like “ghastly”, “heinous”, “unpardonable”, “very serious” etc. Yes, tearing of a poster is “heinous” crime!
Therefore, the state Home Minister orders a probe into the Khammam incident, chief minister writes to the High Command apologising for the “heinous crime” and assures her of stern action, APCC chief has suspended some four persons, deemed to be partymen. We can only wish that the government machinery at the state level has shown the same seriousness in apprehending the terrorists of Mecca Masjid blasts and the twin blasts in Gokul chat bhandar and Lumbini park or preventing acid attacks on hapless women or increasing incidents of rape and murder.
The High Command also should realise that allowing this anarchy to continue in the state is going to cost the party dearly. If it is under the illusion that it is the brand image of the Nehru Gandhi family that has won them 33 seats giving a decisive advantage in the number game, as is claimed by sycophants, it may have to pay a heavy price in 2014. Those who are singing the praise of the High Command are not only rootless wonders, there are many in the party, of course, but they are born dissidents and they will be of no help to the party when the chips are down.
High Command’s prevarication in taking a timely decision is only going to deepen the crisis in the beleaguered party and make the TDP chief to relax. It should remember that the present chief minister has opted out of the electoral politics. It will be a little too much to expect him to deliver 30 odd MPs to the Lok Sabha in 2014?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)