“I have a history of making decisions very
quickly about men. I have always fallen in love fast and without measuring
risks. I have a tendency not only to see the best in everyone, but to assume
that everyone is emotionally capable of reaching his highest potential. I have
fallen in love more times than I care to count with the highest potential of a
man, rather than with the man himself, and I have hung on to the relationship
for a long time (sometimes far too long) waiting for the man to ascend to his own
greatness. Many times in romance I have been a victim of my own optimism.” ― Elizabeth Gilbert, Eat, Pray, Love
I have been in love with my country in pretty much the same manner,
loved it with a passion, trailed its struggles, and thanked every moment for being
a part of it. Listening to our PM, Mr Manmohan
Singh yesterday was a moment when I became the victim of my fervor…. a trice
that added a wrinkle to the romantic in me, a jiffy that inadvertently (or not)
made me question my loyalties to a party (or presumably its history), a split
second that marked the beginning of an entropy (that was bound to happen,
haphazardly so). For years, I have held
on to the political idea that the Congress Party is the one that reflects the
soul of my nation – a party that saw heroes, secularists, nationalists (albeit misinterpreted
at times), and tide turners. It was revelry of what mattered most for my
country – a forum that would ensure a Sovereign Democratic Republic!
For the Prime Minister to make his third public
appearance to the media in 2 terms, as the leader of the largest and the toughest
democracy in the world, as an individual who represents a process responsible
for the governance of a nation … his idiom was something that shook my faith! I
am listening to a man who gives precedence to politics than to governance, to belief
than to facts. I am watching my faith sewer through the cracks and crevices of
an invisible wall.
The PM sets the stage for a Modi vs Rahul battle for
the 2014 elections. Really? Did he
actually say that? I am not too sure! The
leader accents his confidence that the next PM will be from UPA! Whatever
happened to the Congress Party? Did I miss
a page in history? Wasn’t the UPA a marriage of convenience way back in 2004? Is
it a done deal that we need to go ahead living with this compromise? The UPA
was a settlement of terms… a point in history where the emotional political formula
was that of a 1 + 1 = 1 ½. Neither of the parties is happy; and we want to continue
with this!! There is no win-win in a UPA!!! No age when we can hope that a 1+1
can perchance be a 25, 100… or 1000. We continue to be in a state of 'My way or
the Highway’… there never is or never will be a Higher Way. For the leader of a
nation to infer that THIS is ALL we are capable of, is a slap to anyone who had
romanticized their relationship with this nation.
Mr PM….. A compromise is a compromise in every
sense of the term and aims at the nucleus of a relationship. It is NOT peripheral
and does impact the ability of an individual(s) / group / community in any
relationship to take decisions that are objective and necessary.
Mr Singh rules out serving a third term
as PM and comments that Narendra Modi as PM would be disastrous. Without
commenting on whether the latter would or would not make a good leader (irrespective
of the quality of the candidature), the reasons given by the PM were based on a
public massacre that the entire nation stood witness to. While the mass carnage
of innocent citizens in Ahmedabad is a physical representation of cruelty; the mow
down of a nation’s expectations that we have witnessed for the last decade by the
supposed ‘progressive politics’ of the UPA qualifies for genocide. Framing a
political ‘message’ to an entire nation basis the emotions directly experienced
in one part of the country is not just emotionally dense but also regressive.
The backlash is going to be thought through, rationalized, and
opportunistic. While at one level, it is
great to display emotional public and political intelligence; at another, it is
idiocy to suggest an over identification in a completely thoughtless manner. It
is not inciting, but pacifying a thought that a political agenda is being
played out. Communicating a thought that is loaded with boxed in views is indulgent
and reflective of failed leadership.
The progressive leader of UPA identifies
the best moment of his two terms in office as the signing of the India-US
nuclear deal in 2008! None domestic, none local…. Is there no moment/ incident
/ event representing the reasons that any of us who voted for that you could
relate to? The best moments of a relationship is versed outside of it!!!! The
potential of commendation laid to rest within the folds of a complicit ‘nuclear’
pact. So, in the last 10 years we have performed well, we have worked through
trials and tribulations, lived up to promises…. And amidst your supposedly great
performance, I feel a sense of loss. I guess this is what disappointment is – a
sense of loss for something I never had.
To walk up a podium, look into the
camera and tell the nation that it is UPA and not Congress, “perhaps” Rahul
Gandhi, and lay impotent blame on a massacre as a means to subvert attention is
not just disappointing but devastating.
The nation today stands a victim of its own optimism, collecting its own
thoughts. The relationship with Congress / UPA (am not sure who I am with) has
failed and here I am trying to make sense of who next!
No comments:
Post a Comment