Or what newspapers and media will not tell you about the 2009 Indian Parliamentary Election.
Will the new government go in for reform?
- Absolutely! Though there may be a slight difference between what everyone understands by reform and what the government means by reform. From the government’s perspective reform means re-forming the government. The party in power has to make sure that at the end of its term, it is in a position to re-form the government.
Why did the Congress win a sweeping majority?
- Because none of the other parties did. Seriously. Theories and political pundits aside, no one really knows. Anyone who pretends to, is just making money out of pretending.
What does the Congress stand for?
- The Congress stands for secularism.
What is meant by secularism?
- Secularism means securing your political future among as many religions and castes as possible. In order to achieve this, you need to appear impartial, which you accomplish by not doing anything for anyone. It also means letting right wing zealots from different religions torture, rape, and blast each other and each other’s religious structures (mosques, churches, temples), while you remain impartial and do nothing.
Why did the BJP lose?
- Apparently, there were different reasons in different states. Since the BJP is as confused after the elections as it was before, there is no clear insight into why it lost. The only definitive, plausible reason is that the BJP is a confused party, and does not own any sizeable vote bank in the electorate.
What about the urban middle class that was said to be the strongest BJP supporter?
- The urban middle class is an insignificant, almost non-existent vote bank. Contrary to popular perception, the Congress’ vote share actually increases as you move from villages to towns to cities.
Really? How did the Congress win a majority of the urban vote share?
- Urban in the western context has an entirely different meaning than it does in India. In India, urban dwellings are slums. Majority of those who live in apartments and high-rises do not go out to vote in the scorching tropical heat. Almost all the urban votes in India are from slums, which are controlled by gangsters, who are cozy with the Congress.
What does the BJP stand for?
- The BJP is a right-wing political party that stands for Hindutva.
What is meant by Hindutva?
- Hindutva is a flexible concept that can mean different things depending on the time and place. For example, before elections, it meant women should not go to pubs. After elections, it means overall economic development.
What will the BJP do now?
- The BJP is like a horse with a blind left eye. When it reaches a dead-end like it did in this election, it can only seek further ways to go right. When it can no longer do so, it does a U-Turn, meaning it sits in the opposition and opposes everything the government does.
Why did the Left parties lose?
- The Left parties controlled every civil institution in their geographical stronghold, like schools, hospitals, police, etc. After over 30 years of being abused in every imaginable way by the Left parties, the people realized that the Left’s stronghold was a stranglehold.
What will the Left do now?
- Introspect.
What conclusions will the Left reach after introspection?
- They will conclude that the Left parties were right, and the people of India made a grave mistake. The people of India were not able to fully understand the nationalist vision of truly independent India that the Left stands for.
Was there a youth wave in this election?
- Absolutely! There are millions of unemployed youths in India who have nothing better to do than attend political rallies and vote. The employed youth, who were an insignificant minority, were desperately busy working to avoid losing their jobs.
How did I end up in this Golmaal (confusion)? ‘G’ stands for all that is good and great. So how does one select a winner from among so many deserving candidates? Does one simply give up and disappear, as if Gone With The Wind? How does one separate The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly? With so many Goodfellas, who is The Godfather of them all? The father of the nation, Gandhi? With my readers having Great Expectations, I risk becoming a Ganashatru (Enemy of the People) by choosing one over the rest.
Situations like these are when I am forced to evaluate films on factors beyond that of film-making. Which films stand up for a better world? Which films go beyond entertainment and mastery of the creative process of film-making to talk about something greater? Which films make ordinary people aspire to be good?
G
Groundhog Day
Eternal déjà vu. A sci-fi premise used in a completely innovative way. A unique classic that has grown over time in its popularity, a testament to its multiple layers. Hilarious and yet extremely profound. Always enjoyable in repeated viewings. This is genius that is not immediately discernible. This is genius that is disguised as popular entertainment, winking an eye to those who eventually catch it.
Extremely intelligent editing. Remarkable performances if you think about enacting the same scene over again and again not for retakes but for different scenes, altering your behavior gradually in each new scene. Read my full review here.
In a way, this is one of the most spiritual films I’ve seen. I know I will be a better person if I am reminded of Groundhog Day in the morning when I wake up. How many films or art works in general can lay such a claim?
Runner Up
The Great Dictator
If you remember that The Great Dictator was written before Hitler invaded Poland, much before WWII, you will acknowledge that film-makers can be great philosophers. At the time the film was released, the scenes of storm troopers terrorizing the Jewish ghetto were viewed as ‘extreme’. Chaplin paid a price for his anti-fascist, anti-racist stance, by being suspected as a communist, and being exiled from the United States.
The ballet scene with the globe has permeated cultural consciousness across the world, beyond geographies, ethnicities, and cultures. The ego-games between the two dictators – Hitler and Mussolini, speak volumes more than dialogue can. The barber shaving a customer to the rhythm of classical music. Rodin’s Thinker with an arm raised in salute. There is so much to enjoy here!
This would have been my first choice if it were not for the out of sync speech at the end. It feels out of place, too long, and dilutes the comic entertainment of the entire movie. Chaplin probably felt very strongly about democracy and individual freedom, and was adamant in retaining the speech despite criticism. But considering his overwhelming contribution to cinema, I have no qualms listening to him, for he is, The Great Director.
Noteworthy Mentions
From you, my dear readers, in the comments! 
I’m sick and tired of all the politician-bashing that bloggers seem addicted to these days. Why do we have to be so critical all the time? Why not see the glass half-full? Deciding to be an optimist, I present “Virtues of Politicians”:
Politicians have great oratory skills.
Enthralling thousands of people at rallies who stand listening in rain or scorching sunshine is not easy. Not even a fraction of that many people would be reading our blogs daily!
They are extremely responsive.
Within a few minutes of one political party releasing their election manifesto, the spokespersons of the other parties are available for their expert analysis and comments on all the TV news channels. Many bloggers, like me, take hours to respond to comments on their own blog!
Politicians take care to look good at all times.
Imagine attending conferences, debating, traveling, protesting, making speeches, distributing cash – all within one day – and making it all appear so effortless, and appearing presentable for all media appearances! A famous example is of the great minister who took care to change his clothes before visiting the site of a bomb blast.
They never forget and have a great memory.
Ask any politician about the mistakes committed by their opposition party politicians and events going back several decades are at the tip of their tongue.
They forgive and forget.
Come election time, and see this virtue in full bloom. They can quickly forgive and forget lapses in communication, behavior, promises, commitments, or whatever, on their own or others’ behalf.
Politicians handle insults with the utmost grace.
Whether it is TV reporters making snide remarks, journalists throwing shoes, or whatever, observe the graciousness with which they handle the situation.
Politicians insult with the utmost grace.
Even if they may be bitter foes in real life, they always refer to their enemies as ‘my good friend, ….’ on TV and elsewhere.
They are flexible.
Electoral alliances in coalition politics has made this a must-have virtue for politicians. No ideology, principle, value, or goal can be such that it cannot be compromised if doing so can gain voters, or better still, seats in Parliament.
Politicians are punctual.
“What!” you say? No kidding. One can frequently observe them just waiting in advance to speak in televised debates. The entire mass of politicians of one party from one state in India filed their nominations exactly at 12:39 pm, since that is the auspicious time when Ram killed Ravana. Doesn’t this prove punctuality beyond a doubt?
Politicians are culturally sensitive.
When in Rome, do as the Romans do. Depending on the religious, economic, educational, cultural, and caste background of their followers, they suitably adapt their costumes, gestures, greetings, salutations, etc.
They have an extremely good vocabulary.
Oratory skills on one side, it takes much more than that to succeed at debates or interviews. You must have observed the mastery with which they twist and tweak words and their meanings to convey exactly what they wish, irrespective of the question or argument.
Political leaders are loyal and stand by their team members at all times.
Observe their loyalty and steadfastness when they support the questionable and often disgraceful behavior of their colleagues.
So are you convinced? I’m sure I must have missed many other virtues, so do please add to the list in the comments!
Note: I have not provided links to actual events for each of the above, since different readers will find different events in their own country. I’m sure my intelligent readers will find suitable incidents that provide examples of each of the above. That’s another virtue – politicians have universal virtues! 
Since it was introduced last year, Wordle has been very popular with bloggers and the general public. So I decided to join in the fun. Here are the US and Indian Constitution wordle outputs:
Observations? Nothing surprising here.
- Putting aside Law, observe the emphasis on Legislature, Legislative, and Court in the Indian constitution. Neither of these are prominent in the US Constitution.
- Government is prominent in the Indian constitution. Nothing like that in the US.
- Citizens are People in India, and Majority is not so important in the constitution as in the US.
- Time is easily visible in the US, not in India.
Oh, the more you look at it, the more you’ll find stuff!
Sudheendra Kulkarni says that major political parties in India are taking manifesto preparation very seriously. He says:
When it comes to manifestos of political parties, a section of the intelligentsia and the media exhibits a dismissive tendency that riles political activists like me. A major national daily last week called manifesto-making nothing but a “cut-and-paste” job. This tendency is symptomatic of a larger habit of the chatterati sneering from the comfort of their well-furnished drawing rooms at all political parties, indeed at the political process in general. The reality is quite otherwise. Most political parties, especially those with a national perspective, have begun taking policy issues—and, by extension, manifesto preparation—far more seriously than before.
So let’s look at the Congress and CPI (M) 2009 Election Manifestos. The BJP one is expected this week. I’ve removed ‘Indian’, ‘National’, and ‘Congress’ from the Congress one, and ‘CPI’ from the CPI(M) one.
- Public Sector and workers are obviously very dear to the Left, while the Congress is betting a lot of money on youth.
- Women are equally important to both parties.
- Protect – clearly visible in the CPI(M) – is nowhere in the Congress, while it is strongly focusing on something New.
- Police finds a reasonable mention in Congress, while I couldn’t find it in the CPI(M).
- Growth is huge for Congress, it is nowhere in the CPI(M).
- Reforms are equally low on the agenda of both parties.
I had earlier mentioned Text Analysis Tools, but Wordle makes it simpler and more fun than ever before!
From my newspaper reading of the past week, one line stuck in my mind: “The plain fact is that democratic government — which is systemically better than all other forms of government — inevitably panders to narrow but powerful interests to gather votes.”
While it was from an interesting piece by Dhiraj Nayyar in The Indian Express on What ‘Slumdog Millionaire’ can tell us about the virtues of free market capitalism, it was related to an email from a friend that has been lying in my Inbox for the past couple of months. My friend is associated with FRNV, and was writing about a National Conference on Electoral and Political Process Reforms. With me struggling to get free time away from my two-year old, the least I could do in response to my friend’s sincere exhortation was write about it here!
Many educated Indians today know that politicians contesting elections in India are required to submit details of their financial assets, educational qualifications, and any criminal cases pending against them. How did this come about? It was an NGO that filed the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that led to this landmark step forward. This NGO is the Association for Democratic Reforms.
I was planning to provide some statistics in this context, but a like-minded blogger has already done it very well – please take a look if, as an Indian, you want to feel terribly insecure about living in a country led by a motley crowd including a bunch of hooligans).
Want a better India for your children? Can ordinary Indians help in any way? Here’s what you can do. There are various ways ordinary Indians can get involved and support ADR’s mission – improving and strengthening democracy in India:
- Volunteer for Election Watches: We need people for various activities during election watches, like: data entry, interacting with election officers, etc.
- Answer the helpline: Answer the questions coming from states going to polls on candidates based on the affidavits filed by them.
- Design work: Create pamplets banners to support the Election Watch teams in states. The pamplets are based on current events and findings.
- Web site updates: Our website needs to be updated on a regular basis, with lot of content, a lot of which comes from different states. You can help us with updates to the website.
- Blogging site: Monitor and contribute to the blogging site
- Public dissemination: There are a lot of election watch public dissemination activities going in all states. You can participate in these activities.
- Media Watch: We have a media watch program going on. You can participate in the media watch program
- Translation Activities: A lot of our press releases, newsletter etc. need to be translated into local languages. You can help in these translations.
Disclosure: I do become cynical at times, thinking that none of this is really going to help or bring about significant change, that Indians will remain ‘like that only’, and the present is one of those times. But I’m trying to shrug myself out of that cynicism and hence decided to at least write about it. That’s the very least I ought to do.
(Credits: ADR Logo, copyright ADR)
After his recent visit to China, the Indian Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh had a message for the Indian industry: Try to learn from the Chinese industrialists. It was widely broadcast across all the Indian media. I do not know what he meant by that – Indian industry is as great or aspiring to be greater than the Chinese regarding quality, size, or any other parameter you might choose.
Why are great Indian industrialists buying and investing in foreign companies, and not investing in India? Why is FDI flowing into China at a much greater rate than into India? Wealth and investment goes where there is least governmental interference. This is the lesson our politicians are yet to learn.
In my opinion, it would be better if the Indian government learnt from the Chinese government regarding politics and economics. Particularly, the Indian Left, who is so glad about the PM’s visit to China, will do the nation a great good if it learns from the Chinese government’s economic principles. China has welcomed all sorts of capitalist investments, which the Indian Left still myopically opposes.
I thought the Indian PM is intelligent enough not to dish out a moral lecture to the Indian industry when his own government has failed to support the industry. Does he think intelligent Indians do not see the irony and hypocrisy in his speech?
These images tell a story.
The Twin Towers, a symbol of US capitalistic superpower, have collapsed. The US is busy fighting the war against terror.
In the meanwhile, Burj Dubai, the tallest free standing structure in the world, just reached a soaring 574.5m (1,885 ft) with 154 completed stories. It is predicted to be the tallest man-made structure in the world, as well as the tallest building by any measure. It’s official web site is here. Note the ‘.com’ address of its URL, it’s not a cryptic ‘.ae’ address.
Here are some of the amazing developments in Dubai:
- Dubai’s revenues from oil and natural gas currently account for less than 3% of the emirate’s revenues.
- Dubai Mall aims to be the largest mall in the world when completed.
- Its port, Jebel Ali, constructed in the 1970s, has the largest man-made harbor in the world.
- The Burj al-Arab, a luxury hotel in Dubai, at 321 meters (1,053 ft), is the tallest building used exclusively as a hotel.
- Dubai World Central will have the Dubai World Central International Airport, the world’s largest passenger and cargo hub.
- It is a hub for service industries such as IT and finance. Dubai Internet City, combined with Dubai Media City includes IT firms such as EMC Corporation, Oracle Corporation, Microsoft, and IBM, and media organizations such as MBC, CNN, Reuters and AP.
- The World is a man-made archipelago of 300 islands in the shape of a world map currently being built off the coast of Dubai.
- Dubai Financial Market’s trading volume stood at about 400 billion shares worth US$ 95 billion. The DFM had a market capitalization of about US$ 87 billion.
- The Palm Islands in Dubai are the three largest artificial islands in the world.
- Dubai Healthcare City is scheduled to open by 2010 to promote medical tourism.
- Dubailand is an entertainment complex under development, to include mega-tracts of various kinds of attractions.
- The Dubai Waterfront is proposed to become the largest waterfront and largest man-made development in the world.
Is anyone observing the contrast? While the US is struggling to fight a war against terror, a country right in the middle east is stealthily rising economically – without relying on oil – in the global economy. The contrast is stark. The US has to realize and focus on its core strengths, if it wants to remain an economic superpower, and not be swayed to distraction with the war against terror.
There is wide speculation that Al Gore will win the Nobel Peace Prize today, and the betting odds are highly in his favor. Let’s get this straight. Alfred Nobel’s Will says that the Peace Prize shall be given to:
the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.
Sure, climate change has the potential to cause wars, but aren’t there people who have been instrumental in fighting for peace in existing wars? Ironically, this is happening when a British court judge ruled that Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth contained nine errors.
What are the various opinions being expressed?
“Such an award would fall under the expanded concept of peace but the activity can be linked to the climate-conflict combination and is highly timely,” said NRK veteran journalist Geir Helljesen who has a solid record of tipping prize winners.
Please enlighten me if anyone understood that.
Salon: Why Al Gore deserves the Nobel Peace Prize
What’s world peace got to do with global warming? Perhaps everything. Or it will if things don’t change fast — if, in 10 or 20 or 40 years devastating floods and droughts displace millions of refugees and spur nations and tribes to desperate bloodletting. At which point, no one will have the slightest doubt why members of the renowned Scandinavian foundation thought former U.S. Vice President Al Gore was an obvious choice for the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.
There’s one ‘perhaps’ and two big ‘ifs’ in that statement. Since when were Nobel Peace Prizes awarded based on ifs?
Tennessee Center for Policy Research:
Handing a Nobel Prize to Al Gore, a proven hypocrite on the issue of climate change, would be an injustice to the many people bravely fighting for peace and freedom throughout the world. We discovered that while Gore told us to curtail our energy use, he guzzled more electricity at his posh Nashville mansion in a month than the average American family used in a year.
I don’t know about the hypocrite part, but I do think that it will be an injustice to the other deserving folks.
The Investors Business Daily (quoted on an Australian site) writes on how the stature of the Nobel Peace Prize has deteriorated over the years, and says:
“Just what the Nobel committee really needs, another fraud in its pantheon of laureates. If Gore wins the prize as expected, it will mark another step in the long politicized decline of a once highly regarded international award.”
Most environmentalists are gaga over the news. Brandon Keim, from Wired Magazine, stands out among the lot. A staunch supporter of the fight against climate change epitomizes my thoughts behind this post:
If the Nobel committee does choose Gore or Watt-Cloutier or the IPCC, they’ll certainly send a message to the world. A good message, in fact. But it would still be a shame if the meaning of the Nobel Peace Prize itself became a casualty of global warming.
If he does get it, the Norwegian Committee will have screwed up the AlGorethm for the Peace Prize.
Further Reading: Common misconceptions about the Nobel Peace Prize
An assortment of stuff I came across in cyberspace, offered second hand, for anyone who may be interested.
- If you haven’t read it already, Thomas Friedman’s penultimate op-ed 9/11 Is Over, is a must-read.
- China has now started blocking all RSS feeds as well.
- A woman has been sentenced to death by stoning in Iran for committing adultery. Kamangir and a group of Iranian bloggers are trying to stop that from happening.
- Microsoft launches HealthVault, an online repository where consumers can store medical information for free in an encrypted database. For once, Microsoft beats Google to something!
- Ashok talked about “Collective Intelligence” in the comments discussion on my post “Runaway Train“. Techcrunch reveals that a new site, CrowdChess, has launched. You log on and sign up for a game. Each side is made up of teams of dozens, hundreds or even thousands of people. Anyone on a team can suggest the next move, and the move that gets the most votes is the one that is played out. Like Erick, I too wonder if any number of amateurs can ever beat a grandmaster in this scenario! What do you think?
- MMP has his own insightful analysis of why he blogs. He has developed an interesting universal model that shows how we all live in blogging CAVES. Check it out.
- Check out Ashok’s take on the various categories of Indian bloggers to have a healthy laugh at The Blogosphere Zoopedia.
- A US Senate Judiciary Committee has passed the Free Flow of Information Act. There is still a long way to go and final outcome seems uncertain at this stage. See Are Blogging Journalists Shielded? for background information.
- The Economist paints a sordid and bleak picture of the challenges involved in revamping Mumbai. A must-read if you care about Mumbai.
- Financial Times puts Rahul Gandhi’s first populist action after ascending to the Congress secretaryship as the backdrop to describe how political short-termism is hampering retail reforms.
- I had pondered on a few questions regarding cricket’s status in India in my 10 Thoughts on T20 World Cup Win post. Social psychologist Ashis Nandy has some interesting answers in his interview with Outlook magazine. He says there are only three areas of our life—cricket, cinema (Bollywood) and crime that recognize capability wholeheartedly and unconditionally.
- I have written about the contempt of court ruling regarding Justice Sabharwal. Vinod Mehta brings greater clarity to the issue and wisely cautions that if the media and the judiciary engage in a war, the only winners will be the politicians.
- To bring this potpourri full circle back to the US, Rajinder Puri takes on a lot of controversial issues in his take on the decline of the US. Some of his comments resonate with Shefaly’s comments in the discussion on Right To Free Speech: What does it mean?.
The controversy started last week, when Verizon (one of the two largest telecom carriers in the US), refused to make their network available for a text message program advocating abortion. The program allows people to sign up for messages if they choose, and is a completely voluntary exercise of choice for consumers. Verizon would have earned (some) money from the business, but instead refused it.
The move led to a storm of protests. As NYT observed:
Legal experts said private companies like Verizon probably have the legal right to decide which messages to carry. The laws that forbid common carriers from interfering with voice transmissions on ordinary phone lines do not apply to text messages.
The dispute is a skirmish in the larger battle over the question of “net neutrality” — whether carriers or Internet service providers should have a voice in the content they provide to customers.
The idea that a telecom carrier will refuse to carry messages based on content is incredibly scary. Could they decide to broadcast messages sent by the Democratic party, but not Republicans? Christian messages but not Jewish? Everybody has a point of view that could be viewed as “controversial or unsavory” to someone else. Apparently the First Amendment does not in itself prohibit such censorship, but we should not accept such an action, which has been likened to the mass censorship of political speech by the Chinese government, no matter whether the carrier agrees with the content or not. Laws that forbid common carriers from interfering with voice transmission on phone lines do not apply to text messages. It’s time to change that law to protect free speech, no matter how it is communicated.
In a swift turn-around, Verizon reversed its decision and decided to carry the message. The Verizon public policy blog attributed the reversal to a dusty, internal policy, but remained ambivalent about whether any such policy will continue to exist in the future.
In the US, newspapers have the right to accept or reject any advertisement for decades. Newspapers are a publishing medium, clearly protected by the First Amendment, as they are liable for what they publish. Radio stations have a right to reject and censor what spots and ads they run (an antiwar campaign was turned down during Vietnam and the court upheld the station’s right to refuse). What about search engines like Google and Yahoo? In February this year, a federal judge settled that question when it gave the same right to search engines as that of newspapers: thus, Google can refuse to accept any ad, without any explanations required.
Free speech and net neutrality advocates like Timothy Karr on Huffington Post are lobbying to convene hearings on telecom censorship policies. If the telecom companies were purely private enterprises, a ruling either way might have been simpler. Being a government regulated industry adds further complications, as Richard Koman argues.
One of the earliest advocates (I could find) who saw all this coming back in 1995, was Nicholas Johnson in the Wired Magazine:
We find ourselves a little late in the free speech day, having already lost our rights to speak through dominant newspapers, broadcast stations and cable. But insisting on the total separation of content and conduit as the Internet is privatized may still be our best hope. It’s the only free speech forum left for those of us without $200 million in spare pocket change to buy our own newspaper or TV station.
The court has already ruled that Google is not your public square. Are Verizon and AT&T public squares?
-
-
An Unquiet Mind by Mahendra Palsule is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
