until delhi dies

one after another stooge gets out of the a.p.congress legislators meeting, beams at the cameras and tells you that they've unanimously decided that sonia gandhi should make the decision. any stray reporter making hesitant comments (hesitant because most reporters too seem to have come to accept this farce as natural and 'democratic'; some 'working' journalists' leaders have often been waxing eloquently on the wisdom of the 'high command' on talk shows) about discussions and debates and elections is brushed off with: we've discussed and passed a resolution, unanimously, that we shall abide by sonia gandhi's decision-- why isn't that democracy?'

why indeed. it's what they do at khap panchayats: let the elders decide. but the elders at khap panchayats are not elected, voted into wisdom. they just grow old and collect a lot of ignorance, hate and malice in their souls and ultimately qualify for wise panch-hood. but to become 'high command' in the congress, you don't even need to grow old.

that was a few days ago. now, nearly half the congress legislators in the state are in delhi, lobbying for posts in the new cabinet. like sons in a traditional hindu family, these folks will never grow into adults until their father, or delhi, dies.


SS said...

Tragi-comedy it is. One wishes to see strong regional leaders. And one gets Jaganmohan Reddy. One wishes the ruling party would not be a divided house. And one gets unanimous decisions to 'let Madam decide'.

kuffir said...

i'd rather settle for meaningful politics than strong leaders. strong leaders always mean weak institutions and less empowered people. the problem right now in a.p., in my view, is that we've too many strong leaders with too little relevant content in their politics for the people.

SS said...


In principle, ideally, yes I completely agree with you. Politicians (MLAs) ought not to be 'strong leaders' but mere representatives who bring to the Govt. people's needs. But 'meaningful politcs' doesn't begin and end with politicians does it? When people start voting for people who stand for meaningful politics, change will happen. (E.g. how many votes did the Lok Satta poll?)

People voted for the Telugu Desam because of NTR, and later because of Naidu. Ditto YSR.

As you have also often suggested, ordinary people seem to be able to run their lives with very little support from politicians. What we've seen in the last year is politicians messing up public life in AP. A strong leader is needed not for you and me and the countless people who scramble out of APSRTC buses when some party's hired goons stone them under the pretext of a protest, but to keep those elected nuts under control. That's all I meant. We need politicians to stay out of our lives.

(I do not admire these 'strong leaders' per se. NTR was too much of a maverick for me. And the Lok Satta also suffers from the same leader-syndrome...)

kuffir said...


hmm.. we come back again to the question of 'who should rule?'. that again drives you back to old norms. that can't bring about any structural change, in my view.

Sridhar said...

I think we need those leaders that would let the institutions do their work. Instead what we have today are the elected legislators -- that are supposed to make laws and build policies in the larger interest of the people they represent and use the institutions to effectively deliver good governance -- in reckless manipulation of institutions and bending laws in pursuit of private gains. The executive is completely subordinated, manipulated, and weakened to the interests of the ruling class. The judiciary is let weakened and ineffective by overburdening and neglect. The result is the largest banana republic of the world.

gaddeswarup said...

My impression is that many of the institutions before independence were extractve, though there were some enlightened officers. I think some were formed after independence and there was the new constitution, Hindu Code Bill (which gave most women equal rights) and some new institutions like the Election Commision which functioned well. I am just wondering about the institutions that were functioning well and the rot set in later on. Just enquiring.
I remember films like Peddamanushulu around 1954, which suggested widespread corruption of (new?) institutionsalready. The video
gives a synopsis of the theme.

Kiran said...

Another beautiful post Kufr.
Indeed for the indian experiment (I use indian in its best sense ...a bonding which recognises the humanness of a person irrespective of his linguistic..cultural and racial diversity) to succeed Delhi has to die.

also I do not agree with Sridhar that the executive should be strengthened ..No the problem we see in legislature are not due to any system defects in legislature but problems in general hindu society which reflect there. In this sense executive is no exception as those executives are recruited form same society.
Instead we need to strengthen political institutions and reform the federal structure to give more independence to the states

oremuna said...

could you send me a mail? chavakiran@gmail.com

(You can keep this comment to yourself)

Add to Technorati Favorites