Ba, Beti aur Bahu

This article reads a bit better the second time around.

The fact that Sonia Gandhi – an ostensible “outsider” – can get elected without a hitch shows one thing – the Indian electorate is not hostage to prejudice on such accounts as the national origin. Sonia is not really a “suspect candidate” – except perhaps among the intellectual-types. The vast majority of people do not hold her in suspicion of any kind. That is one area where even the USA lacks – where an immigrant can never occupy the White House.

It also shows that the Indian masses still look at a married woman the same way as they have done for ages – as somebody who comes from another family (in this case, from another country), but is supposed to break all ties of blood and become a part of her new family – perhaps its pivot.

The fact that somebody – in this case Uma Bharti (who comes across as a real lightweight by comparison) – has to harp back to the “daughter of the soil” theme indicates that she really has no creative ideas of her own. The fact that she had to start a party of her own is a bit similar to Indira Gandhi – who broke up the original Congress party – again and again. (Note: in her claiming Hanumana as her elder brother, people should perhaps not look for a family resemblance.)

People with dictatorial tendencies are simply unable to conform to a common set of rules set by others. It applies in politics and it applies in other domains of life.

One advantage of having Sonia in there is that she – the “outsider” – is less likely to divide the masses along fault lines for her own political gains – she does not belong to any of those factions.

Sloganeering is a favorite pastime for many Indians – especially of the “socialist” variety. Sloganeering requires little effort (other than some hot air) and it gets to the ears that matter to it – the ears of those it is trying to please. There is not much to be read in such acts. Sonia is no more and perhaps no less corrupt than most of her peer politicians. Her “tyag” was not so much the giving up of her MP seat – perhaps her act of handing over the PM chair to another person fits the term better.

One weakness of the article is that it harps back to the days when Sonia was just the wife of Rajiv who was just the son of Indira Gandhi – before she decided to bring him into politics. That is unfair – for all practical purposes, her vision was very limited at the time – limited to her (nuclear) family. The acts of long ago do not define her and should not be used for judging her. Also, the fact that she valued ties to her place of birth should be taken for what it was – just like many desi people continue to do to this day.

The article also fails to tell the Indian voters who they should vote for. Uma, who appears to be a divider - or Sonia, who appears to be a uniter?

Abstaining is not a practical option!

Re: # 29,Zeena:
So, the cat is out of the bag!!
India and Pakistan both have the same democracies, so why not the civilian nuclear deal with Pakistan also? Did you cc to Nicholas Burn also?

#28 delhiwala

delhiwala sweetheart

Chillax, take a chillpill and cool it off.

I never said I hate India. I am just giving my point of view about patriarchal democracy which ultimately leads any nation towards monarchy. Same kind of feudal democracy is in Pakistan as well. Even in Bengladesh, if president dies, his widow becomes the president.

Look at Bhutto clan in Pakistan, Bhuttos believe that Pakistan is their property and it is their right to rule Pakistan.

And the irony is,all these feudal clans , Bhuttos, Ghandis etc, etc with this mind set of a monarch, yet call themselves followers of true democracy.

Now, look at General Zia`s sons in Pakistan , both have become political leaders , Anwar and Ijaz. Ijaz is even trying to be PM of Pakistan.

My whole point is , there is no true democracy in India and same is for Pakistan. Democracy needs ULTRAFILTRATION to filter weeds out of the main stream and let the main stream run the politics. Let the real political gems shine.

Why same families hijacking the true democratic system of these countries? Why not new faces? Why not new breed from average middle class families with new bright ideology?

Zeena and some others:
Can someone explain to me if George W Bush was not the son of George H Bush would he ever had been a President of US OF A?

Dynasty rules everywhere in the world and is a big factor most of the time.

However, it is not a norm rather an exception. Bajpayee is a grass roots leader and so is Advani(I am not a supporter of them). However, they still made it.

Same way, Nawaaz Sharif was not a dynasty leader, yet still he was elected as PM of Pakistab.

You cannot attact Indian Democracy by dismissing it as a sham even if you hate India with full force.

Pakistanis need to be more smart if they want to make a genuine case against India. Otherwise it always feels that every Pakistani wants to criticize India for every single thing happens here. They need to mature little more and make a solid case with facts that are more appealing.

For e.g. one glitch in Indian Democracy that I often point to others is that:

People: Oh! India has a Sikh PM now, so Hindus must love Sikhs and there no tension between them.

Me: With a little smile, Sir/Madam Sikhs love Hindus and Muslims alike, however please note that MM Singh is not an elected PM. He was appointed. No Hindu belt Indian would have voted for him, had they known that a Sikh is a contender for Congress`s nomination.

#25, Inquirer {``in absence of any documentation of fraud in American elections in 2004, I beg to differ from your implication of lack of ability of American Electorate. ``}

Inquirer,
I was merely comparing the sophistication of the Indian electorate to the jingoism of the 29% of the American electorate (evangelists, KKK, white supremacists, bubbas, etc) who would vote Republican even if George Bush had one eye, a tail, and foam all over his mouth. My point is that the solid ``red`` states, that Bill Maher ridicules all the time, are a manifestation of the lack of objective thinking on the part of the electorate, especially down south and out west. :)

Re: # 24: Who hates and who fears?

Re: # 23, Salim:
While I appreciate a Pakistani recognition of the success of democracy in India, in absence of any documentation of fraud in American elections in 2004, I beg to differ from your implication of lack of ability of American Electorate.

We have to realize that in democracy a platform can lose, no matter how high falutin it may sound, if the leadership fails to factor in the will of the majority of the voting groups. The Democrats have singularly failed, and John Kerry was a symbol of that general failure in 2004, to grasp what the voting people in America want. They need to stop acting like a guardian of the people. Democrats should listen to the people`s call. Let us hope that they do better in 2006 and not demand that the people (voters) do better.

Zeena madam ko phir se gussa aa gaya.
Madam - Dynasty politics does happen in India, but they keep getting routed out. It is a cycle.
Not much unlike the Kennedy`s have a certain aura around them.

Oderint, dum metuant. Huh.

Delhiwala #12 {``It is interesting that Indian Politics are so disorganized and yet being able to function. ``}

Dillidost,
You said it my friend. With all the tradition of violence, vote buying, demagoguery, and dynastic rule, the Indian electorate has been getting progressively more sophisticated over the years. I think that by their performance in the recent national elections, that threw out the BJP, Indian voters have demonstrated more maturity and resolve than Americans did in 2004. I am very happy for India.

#15 FarzanaVersey {``Re. “women are really equal to men”, I would like to quote that our aspirations are not that low! ``}

Farzana,
Touche. In that case, we men should do our very best to step up to mediocrity. :)

Re: # 20,D_M:
It is important that people who look at the developments in India take care to see the contributions of the previous leaders in India. Your pointing out of the significance of ``gucci gang`` is valuable.
India has developed because of what India is. And that is what made Indian leaders. The commonsnse of the Hindus as a vast majority should also not be underplayed. Pakistan without its dynamic Hindu population and the concomittant commitment to rational national policies is a pool of quagmire - universally acknowledged.
Where India and Pakistan are is a consequence of the policies adopted by the people of the two countries - hence, by its leaders. Though the leaders have kept the proper flame alive and that is where their own personal contribution lies.

Dear Farzana:

``I do not believe a woman whose marriage plans, whose flag hoisting, whose resignations , whose CMship become issues can be a bit player.``

The Indian media is all ``page 3`` even on front pages these days. Uma is certainly a celebrity but I dont think that she can be a power by herself. As for running parallel tracks, I tend not to look for hidden explanantions if what`s apparent makes sense. I agree with you that Khuranas, Bharatis, Shingals, etc. all subscribe to the RSS agenda just as do the ``moderates`` in the BJP but this does not mean that they do not have clashes of personality and ambition, which is what politics is all about.

I would like to address something that you wrote to another interactor re. Rajiv Gandhi and his gucci gang. I think that they get less credit than they deserve. I have said it before that the foundation of economic reforms were indeed laid during the Rajiv period. The economic reforms were started by none other than his ``socialist`` finance minister, V.P.Singh, who dramatically reduced the income tax rates and reversed the earlier socialist tax regime. The gucci crowd brought in by Rajiv included World Bank economists Montek Ahluwalia and Shankar Acharya who have played important role in the reform process. I was at that time a visiting Senior Research Fellow at the National Institute of Punlic Finance and Policy in New Delhi and was aquainted with some of these people. Another of the gucci crowd was Sam Pitroda who initiated the reforms in the telecom sector, which laid the foundation for the IT sector in India.

Re: # 10: I hope to God that you are a Sikh. If you are then we need more of you.

Re: # 15, Farzana:

My congratulations and appreciation to you for being a caring and thinking author of an article. Chowk is full of authors who sleep-write their articles and then hibernate. They are either uninterested in responses to their musings or are unable to grasp and respond to the commenters.

And while I am at it, I do commend your effort for watching carefully the propriety level of discussions at Chowk. You do not have to reduce this watch, I believe it can be still more effective. We will abide by the Chief Editor`s judgement on this.

As for ``I really wish you had delved a bit more into the non-political aspects of this article.``: I agree. But the subject of the article was so predominantly political that I could not give importance to other - interesting, but less important aspects. I suppose there will always be a difference in women`s often dominantly emotional and men`s correspondingly intellectual approach to any problem.

Finally, about the substantive contents of the debate between us, I am reasonably sure that we probably cannot convince each other but I would be content with the readers` judgment about it. So, let it reflect.

PS. Oh, yes I could not let this one go. PV Narasimha Rao was one person who was most faithful to the Nehru philosophy about the development of India. He was present in all Congress Ministries from Nehru`s time. Rao stood at the shoulders - or was it in the lap - of the giants Jawahar Lal Nehru and Indira Nehru so that he could reach goals put infront of him. Without the substantive preparation that Jawahar-Indira-Rajiv provided Rao could not do what he initiated.

Without the infrastructure built during fifties to seventies the Green Revolution could never arise. As for the vote banks, your myopia is remarkable. Nehru did not need the vote bank. One of the valid criticism of Nehru is that he deferred too much to the Indian Electorate. He did that to bring them up in the democratic procedures of the twentieth century.

Regarding Punjab: I remind you of Mahabharat. For the right things War is not to be automatically ruled out. The consequent calming down of the sessionist Sikhs is proof enough.

Further, the BJP`s NDA was defeated in elections of 2004 by massive support of Congress by the farmers of India. They were neglected by the NDA`s computer wizzards!

On side note:-
So, what if, her hgihness Mrs.Sonia Gandhi is not blue blood herself. She is widow and daughter in law of blue blooded clan.

Farzana sahiba

Thank you for re storing my posts. I appreciate that.

Farzana Versey
Why my posts are being deleted? Can you please, check this glitch?