Time to be politically incorrect again,
yes; it’s become a pet peeve of sorts. So, Narendra Modi, NaMo, Voldemodi, Modi-vational, the much maligned, much championed CM of Gujarat, who at this rate will probably end up with more aliases than Lord Krishna. Now, I’m not a fan of the guy (he does give the
impression of being an extremist, admittedly), although he seems to display pretty
good administration and leadership skills, relatively speaking.
In all the brouhaha, past and present, two things I take
issue with –
1. Genocide – I’m pretty clear on this one. The chain of
events, the numbers, everything simply points to riots. Genocide is what the
Nazis did, what happened in 1984 against Sikhs, what happened to Kashmiri
Pandits. I’m still open to explanations though.
2. Government’s
Complicity – Now, this one is a bit trickier, I admit. It may very well be
true, I don’t know and no one else knows either, except Mr. Modi and those
close to him. As it stands, all investigating committees and the Supreme Court
have given him a clean chit. The Special Investigation Team led by Mr. Raghavan
actually even mentions that Gujarat Police did everything to control the situation.
So, what does this mean? It means that people put more stock
into anecdotes and journalistic media (which, by the way, is widely regarded
as the most dishonest profession in the world) than the Supreme Court. I mean,
sure, you have every right to do that. Believe whatever you want. The junta
becomes the judge and jury on the basis of allegations. Sure, you have every
right to do so, but it won’t be very wise if you act on it.
I am not trying to
change anyone’s mind. I’m also confused. You have his supporters and you have
his distracters. You have the journalists and local people with stories of
Government’s complicity; you also have other people with rebuttals to those.
What am I supposed to believe? As a rule, I never believe in anything people
say unless supported by evidence, facts or at least something that hints
towards a majority opinion, a la consensus (sometimes, even that’s not enough
for me). We are primates after all, faulty by default, prone to lying,
exaggeration and skulduggery.
On the other hand, we have our agencies and the Supreme
Court that believe he is not guilty. Now, let’s not kid ourselves here – with
India’s history (read non-existent)
of conviction and incarceration of politicians, we can’t put our blind faith
in these decisions either. This leads us to an impasse – and what I’m trying to
say here, ladies and gentlemen, is that we maintain status quo.
Yes, please DO NOT vote. No, I’m not saying please do not
vote for him, or do not vote against him. I’m saying do not vote at all. If you
find yourself at an impasse (not sure if he’s guilty or not), stay at home when
the day of voting arrives. Why? Let me explain –
1) If you vote FOR him (or the BJP), you run the risk of
being party to the election of an extremist Prime Minister.
2) If you vote against him (or the BJP), you run the risk of
being party to denying the country a Prime Minister with great administration
and leadership qualities, again, relatively speaking.
3) If you vote for someone else (or some other party), you
run the risk of giving one the advantage over another who could have made a
great Prime Minister.
Let’s take Nitish Kumar (RJD) as an example. Sure, he’s
also a very good administrator and a pretty affable fellow, to say the least. He still
doesn’t have the charisma and the presence that Indian leaders have sorely
lacked for quite a while. We need a Prime Minister who isn’t afraid of taking
hard decisions, someone who doesn’t find solace in eternal cootchie-cooing with
absolutely rogue neighbours. Yes, I am looking at you China, Pakistan, Bangladesh.
We need someone who speaks, speaks with heart, with
conviction. Take our manifestation of a lullaby Prime Minister as an example – a
koala getting up from a drunken stupor can motivate you more than Mr. Singh’s
hour long speeches. Okay, that was mean, I quite like him as a person actually, but he's not a leader in any sense of the word. Now, I’m not saying Mr. Modi displays all these leadership
traits in obscenely significant droves, but he does seem to have an upper hand
vis-a-vis his adversaries.
Finally, both
questions still loom large. What if he’s guilty, what if he’s not guilty? And
that’s why it would be a disservice to the nation if you’re at an impasse and
yet choose to act on it. So yeah, please do not vote at all. I realize it’s an
irresponsible and cowardly thing to do, but I don’t see any other solution. Those who've made up their mind, well, you've made up your mind.
1 comment:
If at all we INDIANS had the right to directly vote for our prime-minister I might have voted for him, because we have to select among the GIVEN ones only and HE seems to me ... more ASSERTIVE,a good ADMINISTRATOR, a less-vocal BOSS and definitely a more vocal PATRIOT.
Post a Comment