I am an avid reader of news on the internet. The advantage you have is that you get to read different points of view. So when there is an India-Pakistan conflict, you can find out what people, journalists and politicians on each side are thinking and saying. What I often find, and this is particularly true about the subcontinent, is that people love to blame their politicians for their woes. There is a five hour a day power cut, we say the politicians only care about their votes and not basic needs of the people. We see filth on the street and we say that if only the politicians spent more money and time in building and maintaining infrastructure rather than filling their pockets. I remember that scene from the movie 'Swades' where Shahrukh as Mohan Bhargav gives a preachy dialogue to the villagers as to how we all keep blaming each other for our woes.
But more than it being a sub-continental trait, I think it is very much a part of the human psyche. You see, if you are not responsible for your problems you don't feel guilty and then you don't have to do anything about it. So when there is a bomb blast in Pakistan, they blame India and India does the same thing. The BJP blames the Congress for creating the religion and caste based politics while the Congress blames the BJP for being a communal party. The funny part is that both blame each other of using community based politics, of course supporting different communities. I wish at least one of them found out that the problem was not which community they support, but rather the whole concept of identity based politics based on religion or caste. It is a bigger problem because as long as you seem to represent your community, the community will vote for you, whether you do any work or not. But here again I am blaming the politicians for being myopic, while least realising that he/she is a politician. If we as voters stopped supporting such politicians, they would not exist.
Let me put it this way. A politician is a politician, not because he has strong ideals or is a good administrator or even has a honest character. He (please pardon me for using 'he', using 'he/she' all the time becomes tiring. Hence to make the better gender not feel left out, 'he' from hence forward refers to both 'he' and 'she') is a politician, because he can get votes. I mean ideals, honesty or good administration skills help, but are not essential. I recently read an article on the Pakistani newspaper site 'Dawn' which said that people vote based on emotion and as long as a politician can appeal to people's emotion, he doesn't need to do more.
I am reminded of our home grown Hitler, Mr Narendra Modi. During his election speeches he would openly talk about how bad the minority community was and how ineffective the Congress government has been. Now, if the minority community is bad, the majority community is good. And also if the minority community is to blame for all the problems, the majority community is exempt from any guilt and hence it makes the majority community feel better. I know, I know, that this feel good thing can't last long, and that is why we talk about the 'anti-incumbency factor' where it is assumed that all parties are equally ineffective in dealing with issues, and hence will loose the election after one term. But to top all that majoritarianism, Mr Modi is a good administrator with a clean character. And so people in a big way vote for him. What we have seen in Gujarat is amazing. The Congress and the old BJP politicians find themselves completely incapable of standing up to Mr Modi. But would Mr Modi have been such a formidable leader had he not appealed to the majority's emotions? I doubt it. I know that most of the rhetoric he makes is bullshit and I believe even he knows it. But I guess what he has understood is that bullshit can win you one election but to stay there you have to make people's lives better. I guess BJP should also realize that opportunism by compromising on ideology is not a long term fix. I talk about BJP only because I think Congress is to a large extent beyond redemption. And I don't even want to talk about the Mayawatis, Laloos, Mulayams, Amar Singhs, Karunanidhis, Jayalalithas, Mamata Banerjees, the list is endless. I have better things to do.
But more than it being a sub-continental trait, I think it is very much a part of the human psyche. You see, if you are not responsible for your problems you don't feel guilty and then you don't have to do anything about it. So when there is a bomb blast in Pakistan, they blame India and India does the same thing. The BJP blames the Congress for creating the religion and caste based politics while the Congress blames the BJP for being a communal party. The funny part is that both blame each other of using community based politics, of course supporting different communities. I wish at least one of them found out that the problem was not which community they support, but rather the whole concept of identity based politics based on religion or caste. It is a bigger problem because as long as you seem to represent your community, the community will vote for you, whether you do any work or not. But here again I am blaming the politicians for being myopic, while least realising that he/she is a politician. If we as voters stopped supporting such politicians, they would not exist.
Let me put it this way. A politician is a politician, not because he has strong ideals or is a good administrator or even has a honest character. He (please pardon me for using 'he', using 'he/she' all the time becomes tiring. Hence to make the better gender not feel left out, 'he' from hence forward refers to both 'he' and 'she') is a politician, because he can get votes. I mean ideals, honesty or good administration skills help, but are not essential. I recently read an article on the Pakistani newspaper site 'Dawn' which said that people vote based on emotion and as long as a politician can appeal to people's emotion, he doesn't need to do more.
I am reminded of our home grown Hitler, Mr Narendra Modi. During his election speeches he would openly talk about how bad the minority community was and how ineffective the Congress government has been. Now, if the minority community is bad, the majority community is good. And also if the minority community is to blame for all the problems, the majority community is exempt from any guilt and hence it makes the majority community feel better. I know, I know, that this feel good thing can't last long, and that is why we talk about the 'anti-incumbency factor' where it is assumed that all parties are equally ineffective in dealing with issues, and hence will loose the election after one term. But to top all that majoritarianism, Mr Modi is a good administrator with a clean character. And so people in a big way vote for him. What we have seen in Gujarat is amazing. The Congress and the old BJP politicians find themselves completely incapable of standing up to Mr Modi. But would Mr Modi have been such a formidable leader had he not appealed to the majority's emotions? I doubt it. I know that most of the rhetoric he makes is bullshit and I believe even he knows it. But I guess what he has understood is that bullshit can win you one election but to stay there you have to make people's lives better. I guess BJP should also realize that opportunism by compromising on ideology is not a long term fix. I talk about BJP only because I think Congress is to a large extent beyond redemption. And I don't even want to talk about the Mayawatis, Laloos, Mulayams, Amar Singhs, Karunanidhis, Jayalalithas, Mamata Banerjees, the list is endless. I have better things to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment