Rajputs Burn as Congress defies democracy

I have no right to doubt or criticize Rahul Gandhi as the candidate of choice to head the Indian National Congress as it is a choice of the Congressmen.

I would reserve my rights to criticize him when he is in a position to drive the national policies.

As a citizen, I wonder though when the Rajput will burn without a genuine pride.

The freedom of India is not about going back to when India lost its freedom. In reality, there was no freedom before the various foreign invasion. The freedom to be the will of the people came in 1947. So the true freedom exists in shaping the way ahead for democracy. Not principally, or literally but really.

If the party that has been at the forefront of the majority of democratically elected governments in India, itself fears the right to elect its own leader, it is equally responsible for obstructing the path of the nation to evolve democratically.

As people, India may not get over the hangover of being ruled, or go beyond the wish to have a Master, or let the Monarchy stay as a history of the Rajput or other kingdoms. However, how will India change until it gets an opportunity to see democracy in practice at the leadership levels?

Congress must take that responsibility.

I do not expect the BJP to do so, as the BJP has failed to establish itself as a party that will represent the diverse interests of India. Not that the 'Rajput' in BJP has shied away. Oh! being in BJP even as just a member is taking the Lordship by the horn. Further, BJP is just a political representation of the RSS, whose goals are limited to imposing a Hindu India as a vengeance against Islamic Pakistan.

Congress may claim to govern better, or lead the socio-economic growth in India, or be expansive in its reach. At its core is just a political strategy. Not a democratic means.

One may argue why the BJP, the only other political party with a sizeable representation, as a democratic political party. Is it truly or really? The RSS signature, just as the Gandhi legacy helps the image fall apart. And the BJP is unlikely to change that as they too fear to lose the ground without the backbone of the RSS religion. Modi may have cried for India but he never willed to use the power of his mandate to reflect a change within the BJP. Instead, he was more willing to be the Lord of the party, the Government and the nation without upsetting its political foundation that is yet to rest at 11, Ashoka Road. 

Is it harsh to assume that whereas the Congress limits its scope in the national interest, the BJP does the same by their compulsive addiction to Congress, RSS and Pakistan in the guise of national interest?

If people are left without genuinely democratic political choices, the war of ego between the Congress and the BJP will build further as political strategies, at the cost of national pride. And India will be denied its freedom.

Indira Ungandhi

Indira Gandhi is perhaps India’s most powerful and popular Prime Minister. Following the more diplomatic and visionary Nehru, and the honestly dedicated Shastri, Indira Gandhi relied on power of the seat. In doing so, she compromised much with the values of liberty or human freedom that Mahatma Gandhi stood for. 

Was Indira, Gandhi enough?

It is not graceful to be critical of a Prime Minister on her anniversary. Yet it is not easy to forget the damages that the Prime Minister did to the process of democratic evolution in a country that was fighting hard to survive against the genetics of monarchy.

Her achievements are abound no doubt. Abolishing private banking, nationalising mining and liberating East Pakistan as Bangladesh were drastic decisions lending enormous power to the less privileged or the more deprived people. If it was not for the public sector enterprises the middle and lower income groups in India would not have seen wider opportunities for employment. The private industries neither had the resources, nor the capacity or the drive to establish large enterprise. They simply would not have invested as much. It is a genetic issue, very visible today when despite several emerging opportunities, the giants limited themselves to profiteering within India. At least the Government bankers reached out to include less accessible geographies in India so that more people would have access to capital and other banking services.

Bangladesh was a phenomenal success, as its people found a proud existence than being the poor cousin of West Pakistan.

However, with a will to execute predetermined goals, Indira Gandhi did not have the patience to let the law of the land prevail. Over a period of time she pushed ahead the Executive Bodies to compromise on the values and the framework of the Constitution of India.

The Constitution of India is perhaps more vital to the country it meticulously cuts across the challenges of multiple diversities. It challenges the civilisation weaknesses in a way that yield a place of pride for India amidst the evolving world. Provided of course if it is followed for the sake of national prosperity. It enables the people to evolve with a sense of discipline and integrity. It is uniquely endowed to help humanity evolve whether one is rich or not, educated or not, equal or not, and even loyal or not. 

The election process of a Government itself is an example of how the country can emerge powerful against a history of turning weaker. It is not designed to mobilise the electorate in favour of a candidate, or even a party. Look at it closer, it is simply designed to elect the most competent or relevant representation at its micro levels upwards. One that ensures the continuity of the chair of governance more powerful than the person occupying it periodically. The difference between the Indian Constitution and others is that it obstructs the path of an individual turning popularly powerful. In fact it attempts to subvert every such possibility. 

Whilst the Prime Mininsters of India before Indira Gandhi graced the chair with honour, Indira Gandhi began the process of guarding the one occupying it without a genuine need for it. The process gradually emerged to coerce the laws. 

Once the law breaks at the top, can you stop it from destroying its fabric on the streets?

Despite several crimes, India was a country of noble people with strong faith and trust in its Governments. Not just law abiding but law fearing as well.

Crossing the boundaries of law got a booster of sorts, and its impact on the politics of India were immense. While she may have acted rudely to check the opposition gaining favours, she also permitted the opposition to turn more rude.

One wonders how long India will take to overcome the brutal disaffection towards the law of the land. One wonders how much more the test of good governance will lie in how ‘strong’ a Government is. One wonders if at all one will see citizens inspired by the power to be just, fair and graceful, and its Government enabling that further.

The successive fall of the Governments in India in the 80s 

and 90s may be seen as the weaker period of a feee India. Yet the continuity of democratic governance justifies the strength of the India founded in 1947. In fact that period ought to be considered more successful against testing times. Weaker Governments elected constitutionally may not be as powerfully endowed to deliver. Yet they are more likely to yield a better nation over time. On the other hand, the examples laid by Indira Gandhi to deliver unconstitutionally will continue to haunt India being susceptible to autocratic rule of law for a long time. Every enormously powerful government in India will be tempted to attempt at making the Indira Gandhi rules of law better.

At the moment one can see such an attempt by the current Prime Minister Modi.

Credibility

CREDIBILITY

If you do not manage the cash flows, you are bound to err on honouring credits. If you have not honoured credit over six months, a year or more, it is time you relook if you are worth running a business.

If you believe that your creditors reflect trust when you stretch their credits, know well that they would dump you unhesitatingly when they can.

I recall an attitude reflected by a very large conglomerate. They believed in negotiating real hard as they believed just their name in the customer list of a business would expand the scope of the vendor. You may call it an attitude or find it exploitative crass.

Misusing credits tell about a business that is deprived of cash in hand. There is no limit to engaging the payables as capital for investing more in one's business or expanding its scope. There is also no limit to riding on cash owned by your vendors. Equally, there is no limit to stretch the fallacy of trust.

If the practice is common in an industry, it may just be justifiable to doubt the true strength of the industry and its competence. The stakeholders may not read beyond the revenues and profits. The owner themselves may overlook how definitely their business is playing havoc with their cash and their credibility.

Some companies stretch credits on an average of 3 to 6 to 12 months and beyond. Its telling effect is truly seen when the industry takes an adverse swing, or the economic mood is uncertain. It transforms into a snowball effect on the entire industry or even the economy.

Maintaining the just right cash reserves is an art that the accounting professionals ought to know. It may help during adverse business. It may enhance credibility. It may make a business feel proud of its worthiness.

The Dream to be Indira in India

The Dream to be Indira in India 

Several political leaders in India would have lived a dream. The dream to be Indira Gandhi.

Indira Gandhi showed the power of being Supreme in India, using the Constitution to her advantage than being committed to it in its true sense.

Her own father Jawaharlal Nehru believed intensely in the rule of law and the Constitution as the final word in a democracy, and her predecessor, Lal Bahadur Shastri, a duty-bound Prime Minister, who perhaps knew to engage the systems towards a goal, rather than use the privilege of the seat to derive power.

Sure Indira Gandhi may have had her own dreams for India. Yet in managing her team of Ministers or the systems that she inherited, she pronounced her words as a Commandment of sorts. For her, the people around or the resources available were mostly for the purpose of directing them unquestionably. In return what she got was several 'yes men', even though she had a few among them well qualified as her best Counsels. She never, however, compromised on her authority.

She used the Constitution to cross over the boundaries of her position. Whether it was the media, the Judiciary, the Independently elected state Assemblies, she never considered it improper to impose her authority or intervene in their normal process. Leaders like her are always on the verge of converting a democracy into an autocracy. Particularly so in a country that may not be as disciplined, or its citizen law abiding. They create a need among 'some' to have a leader who is an autocrat than a champion of human freedom and liberty. When the sum of 'some' multiplies it suits both the leader and its constituencies.

However, the one reason why the Indian National Congress lost its values and stifle its able leaders is that Indira Gandhi helped that process of decline the most. She left competence questionable, authorities deprived of responsibilities and leaders turn into a moth.

Yet she is undoubtedly the most successful Prime Minister of India ever. Therefore the dream to be the Indira Gandhi is justifiable.

Narendra Modi may be absorbed in that dream. He may not, therefore, be able to see how it may impact the nation or its constituencies. At least so it appears.

Buying out opposition leaders, persuading institutions to adopt like-minded people, engaging the Council of Ministers in image making, influencing the system to second him.

I wonder if he is living the dream of being Indira. A dream of his own. Whether or not it is the Indian dream in reality.

India may have gone through such a change that millions do not flock to get a sight of their leader, but Mr Modi might want to see that happen.

Indians may have become more mature to see through the slogans and expect duty-bound deliveries from a Government, but Mr Modi wants slogans broadcast.

The Indian democracy may have become more broad-based with the Governments in the past, having learnt from intruding into the independence of its various functionaries, but Mr Modi wants one goal.

The Judiciary, the Media, the Executive may have all become more responsible individually in a more willing-to-listen administration, but Mr Modi wants more listeners.

Informal or formal social groups may have turned more vocal, but Mr Modi does not want voices.

The state broadcaster may have been turning into being a competitor with the private broadcasters, but Mr Modi wants them to air well.

Thankfully BJP is not a one-man party, so it has a better chance not to decline under Modi like the Congress did.

Think however about the Constitution, the Democracy and the Indian Executive Mr Modi will leave behind after it outlived the torture of a Supreme leader.

Bachchan - A Signature

Bacchhan - A Signature 

There have been stars in India - not just in Bollywood, in politics and sports as well. Milkha Singh, Ajit Pal Singh, Gavaskar, Tendulkar, Amritraj, Nehru, Indira among others.

Amitabh Bachchan is an unparallel legend. I do not think anyone, anywhere in the world has been ever such a legend as Amitabh is.

Being popular is one. Being the symbol of popularity is another.

Taking the transit bus at the Delhi airport to board a late night flight with my wife, we suddenly saw him rushing in. Lo and behold, he stood right next to my wife. From her expressions and behaviour, I knew that she had her dream come true. Those were not the days when one had a camera on phone. She was so spellbound that she did not take the opportunity to speak with him. So I shared with him, how, like most people, she was simply enamoured by him, and that as he stood by her, she would cherish the moments all her life. As a gentleman, he said he was fortunate and honoured. He scribbled his signature on the Boarding Card for her and smiled.

As a gentleman, he made the way for her when the bus halted by the aircraft.

The next time I met him was as a guest at a special show of KBC in a Mumbai studio.

You are struck by his dignified presence. Graceful, polite and wears so elegantly.

For a person who did not possess the looks or the personality of the typical Bollywood star material, he used his voice and delivered expressions most compellingly attractive.

His roles were cast almost in the image that one fancied him being. Call that the Angry Young Man, or whatever, but the scriptwriters followed a unique, definitive fancy of his character when they wrote.

Yet the man saw his worst period. Almost rejected by the industry, his face showed beleaguered nerves, and his eyes cast a defeated scar.

That is when the legend in him rose I think. When he fought the various allegations politically and as an entrepreneur and reemerged as an actor, the skill that he mastered like his pet.

Roles after roles, you know it is Amitabh when one sees him in his late age characters. The way he lends an aura to the character defined.

Remarkably disciplined as the industry will acclaim him for. Arriving on time, rehearsing in quick time and delivering without the least retakes. That's exceptional cost efficiency for a director or producer.

Boy, hasn't he arrived his 75th with aplomb? Challenges of health, an unsuccessful career of the son he loved most, gossips, accusations and other odds just did not pervade upon his will to excel.

For anyone who is in search of excellence, Amitabh can be a real-life example!

The Price of Development

The Price of Development 

When there was no democracy there was wisdom.

Strange. Isn't it?

Do review. I urge, to see the truth.

There was a time when the noble did not have to be rich. They had to be wise and intelligent. They were in a better and stronger position to decide for the society as a whole and impact their communities better. The process fell I guess when they did not pay as much attention to the have-nots. That, however, is just one argument.

In a democracy, one found the opportunity to give the have-nots the power to decide. It worked fine only so long as the educational have-nots got the grip on power.

However, as the democratic establishment expanded to be more inclusive and bring in people with or without education in the decision-making process, it appears to have presented an unforeseeable dimension.

What do you do when the goals have been limited to make ends meet? What do you do when the aspirations for an age beyond just the means to live, or live better take over the greater human pursuits? What do you do when the wisdom to prevail over the needs and explore knowledge to transcend the basic curve of life loses priority?

That's when the intelligent, the wise or the knowledgeable turn minorities. Minorities who may simply argue, debate or make a point of view. Yet fail to impact the decision making. Further, they will not find a share of quotas as they will be branded critics of policies and crying loud.

It is a challenge that not just the emerging nations like India face, but the more advanced nations - the UK, the USA and the Europe are unable to manage.

The voice of the majority people in a more established democracy narrows down to the lower end of the constituency, thereby, giving power to those who are faced with the basic challenges of lives, than carry forward the greater human aspirations inspired by the more evolved generations of the 18th or 19th centuries.

Consider a few harsh possibilities. As the educated, the wise or the more evolved people lose their significance in the more inclusive society, will the exchequers find it more reasonable to stop at the basics of human lives?

I must concede that more advanced or evolved soap is just a basic need. So is the laptop, mobiles or the gadgets at home. They are driven by the aspiration of consumption. Will the R&D, education or technologies orient themselves to meet better consumption? Will the Universities find more vacancies in the philosophies, literature, humanities, social sciences, scholarships? It is laughable when the mission to the moon or Mars are being imagined as a way to make a fancy trip or making a township. Such an advancement may turn more mammoth by the big size commerce giants meeting the larger common needs. In its process eliminating perhaps the possibilities of more evolved boutiques or the signature brands.

And the entire fraternity of poets, writers or thinkers will remain happy so long as they get their share of the audience - good, bad or woeful?

Already you can hear the whispers about the quality of news or the quality of entertainment.

Wonder then if democracy is a cruel form of communism.

Am I serious?

Modi Beyond 2019 - Published December 8, 2017 LinkedIN

What is wrong with PM Modi?

Nothing I dare say, even as his critic.

He is doing everything that is politically right and possibly justified.

Mr Modi’s demonetization move tells much more than one may have ever guessed or learnt about him.

Let us begin with the fundamentals of Modi: he is a highly ambitious, aggressive and risk-taking leader. And, he makes better from the opportunities he gets.

In just one move he has given a thrust to his goal to take forward his PM tenure beyond 2019. Power is addictive. But it is only those with a genuine appetite to swallow the addictive pill who can make it work for the better.

Modi has given Indian politics a new edge, to cut across the barriers of class, castes or religion. He has in one stroke attempted to consolidate his appeal among a hugely potent electorate by nudging their deep-seated emotions.

No, it is not the poor or the deprived. It is perhaps what I would like to call the Mr Righteous, in order not to sound sexist, let us call them The Righteous.

The Righteous exist in every society, more so in age old civilisations that have been bred upon and cast against high morals or ideals. In India, it exists in a wide range of masses amidst its billion people.

Those who have held vengeance against the ‘unjust’ owners of wealth and prosperity. Those who suffer from being the less fortunate. Some who could not succeed being lazy. Some who enjoy and rejoice painting the grey-white.

The Righteous chain is not necessarily the prerogative of the one deprived or challenged. The Righteous could well be a fairly well to do, except that they have deep-seated ambition amidst wide-ranging opportunities that they cannot touch. The Righteous will also be the one who knows deeply that the Heavens will come one day, the Ram Rajya. You may call The Righteous the proverbial fool as well if you wish. However, as they do not yield to a definite character, they cannot be measured on a scale.

One of them is the auto rickshaw driver who may not know the why and the how, but he believes fairly firmly that rich and wealthy are cruel people who for generations have shelved the vast resources, a part of which could be theirs. Another, the delivery boy in a restaurant chain who is mesmerised by the gloss of the living room when they knock upon the doors to deliver the cargo. Another, the executive who cannot see their daily worksheet as their mind is ticking in becoming Bill Gates one day sooner. The community may also include the milkman who adds chemicals in the fresh milk but justifies that they would not do so if they were to get a fairer share of profits whenever their conscience bites them. And, it also includes that big wealthy guy who does not yet have the best mansion in town.

They may be a Yadav, a Jat, a Rajput, Brahmin or the Bania. And they will be a Hindu, a Muslim, a Christian or a Parsi.

I know I am failing to define them more precisely, but there is such a broad and complex range of shades to their persona or the degree of vengeance in them against the powerful or the wealthy and plentiful. As much as the shopkeeper who barely survives to meet their ends, in their eyes is a person loaded with wealth and plenty. Merely because they have a shop, even if rented.

Trump could see that in an enormously rich America. If Modi saw that in India is no big deal, you may say. But, let us accept that Mr Modi saw that to his or his party’s advantage, or he could make that corridor open for him. Mind you; he has just nudged the corridor. He still has several options to build upon that.

Obviously it is a whole new political benchmark Mr Modi has set for the leaders within and outside the BJP. Mr Modi's ppt must be well drawn to rationalise as the new age political formulae. How this new corridor could help access electorates over a longer term as its first mover. Therefore he may well be using the ppt to lure leaders from across parties. It must be an arithmetic that the political sense will see it more sharply.

The Dalits, the Scheduled Castes, the poor, the aam aadmi is passé. Except for Aam Aadmi, which is limited by its tilt towards the Hindu land, Mr Modi’s constituency of The Righteous offers the touch and feel across the North South barrier, and covers the North East, Kashmir, the Bimaru States and perhaps every single community segment dissected by the politicians so far in India.

It also breaks the divide between the haves and have-nots, as it is an emotional, sensitive and a very personal appeal. Why not I? Why only they? I now have an opportunity. I can look into their eyes and dare.

Remember, Lalu used that most brazenly to reduce the middle class to a disabled minority in Bihar. As Lalu made the literate, the educated, the better off or the rich seek shelter across a range of other parties.

If middle-class adults are just 14% of all adults in India, the social media opinions can at best be the inconsequential minority voices. And, the Upper-class adults have the entire range of abilities to fit in with the current political trend, with a few having the more powerful potential to support a favourable political direction. Take a sizeable The Righteous from the Middle and Upper-Income Indians, and, convert more The Righteous from the lower Income Indians. That is a huge number sympathising with one another.

It is no rocket science that it is Modi who knocked at the open doors, while others ignored, or may not have seen. And he is doing so as The Righteous himself. Someone who fought so hard. And is fighting still against the more powerful who are leaving no stone unturned to make him bite the dust once again. Indira’s grouse was very different. She was fighting the battle against the foreign hand. Modi’s enemies are within and more dangerous.

At the same time, Modi is not throwing in a magical never before scarf. BJP has proliferated upon the disgruntled Indian community, ever since the days of Independence or perhaps even before. The grousing Indian who could not be at the right place at the right time. And the BJP has mobilised that community more, using the sentiments, emotions and sensitivities. So the bond is stronger and has a potentially longer life. Modi has now redefined its parameter by crossing the boundaries from the better off to the more deprived. He has repositioned the opposition, to quote the advertising term.

He will lose some among the traditional BJP base, but he will win many more numbers in this game. So, it is a pay off all the way.

If the phenomenon of driving The Righteous aggressively has ensured at least two terms for a debutant at a state level, there is no reason to doubt its efficacy on the national scale.

Conceptually it is social justice: reaching out the advantages of democracy to those who may not know what democracy is. So, he is not wrong. Is he?

Move over Lalu, Mulayam, Mamta and Kejri. Modi is here to stay. 

Recounting Modi.

In 2014, I thought India took a huge step forward. They denied every idea for the sake of having a singularly powerful mandate.

Very reasonable and mature I thought as Indians set aside their other choices to favour the need of the hour. Surgical decision. Let us forget our differences and get what may help a Government work for us better.

Mr Modi gave very strong reasons: Sabka Saath. Sabka Vikaas. Minimum Government. Maximum Governance. Two Clear Objectives. Growth and Development.

In many words, Modi emphasised that if we make BJP powerful, he would compromise upon the popularity missions of their party so that Indians get convinced that the BJP offers competent abilities in leading India.

I believe that a leader recognises the opportunity more than the popularity laced in it. Opportunities well-taken returns many times more glory, I think.

Oh, what an opportunity Modi got?

Wasn’t that a Cinderella dream come true?

After decades a single party formed the Government with a substantial majority. A PM with three-term of leading a state Government successfully. A strong PM candidate. Ambitious. Powerful and willing to take the next step with greater zeal and elan.

What chained Modi to sacrifice the opportunity for India and work towards building trust and faith among the ever loyal segment of the BJP vote bank. I mean 'their' Hindu votes is always with them? The minor Hindu segment with an idea or a notion of their own will never surrender BJP as they cannot reconcile to another. Further, the 29% formulae at best stretches to 31%. Did Modi stoop to a bird in the hand is better than two in the bush? But that's ownership, not inspiring leadership. Its foundation lies in building loyalists, favourites, die hard, herd like concretes. Uninspiring for an evolving people.

Worse, the formula disowns the majority as they want to have a choice, as they wish to consider, or because they want to evaluate.

On the other hand, I would have felt that Modi would have seen the golden opportunity to prove to the vast majority of India that the BJP is a stronger candidate to lead India because it can. Almost as it has reflected at the state levels, based on able governance. 

Do I get a sense that Modi slipped when the time walked through your doors? 

Then on November 8 he emerged to show that he could use the power in him to take a big decision. For the first time since 2014. I say first time as on most other occasions the focus was driven towards the opposition obstructing Modi brilliant ideas to take shape. 

Modi continued rapidly in less than a month to exhibit how the golden move was never secure in its start. The one opportunity that could reflect upon a Modi like giant decision making, he came by poor in decision making, planning and execution. Worse he shook the trust in him. Is he capable in taking able decisions upon the situations that the nation is posed against? when he could not direct his own craft.

Mr Prime Minister. More than what you did, what you said thereafter shakes my confidence in you as a citizen. When you said that having sacrificed his family he had nothing to lose in walking away. Isn't India part of your family? Isn't taking responsibility of one's family along side not as much pride? 

Giving time to work over family commitments is a human reality. The parking boy leaves their home early morning, many miles away from the city for their daily duty and returns late. The soldier on the border leaves their family upon the call of duty. The son goes away to another town upon transfer of duties. It really is no big deal when you abandon your mother and wife to work for India. 

I dig more. What was the contextual relationship of that statement with demonetisation? Why did Modi sound as if he was compelled? I thought the opportunity to address the people was to convince them how he thought his grand plan would work for them?

And then he cried his life was under threat. What was its context when the issue was just demonetisation? 

Even Indira Gandhi or Rajiv Gandhi did not cry that their lives were under threat, when they were really shot dead. Such rare incidents also do not prove that the Indian security system is incompetent. In one struck Modi shook my confidence and faith in the Police, the IB, the para military forces. Mafias will exist. Isn't the state machinery powerful?

Mr Modi is India's PM whether one likes his party or not. His stakes are in the nation. In its people. Why should he weaken my trust and faith in him? Why should he set a doubt that he would leave me high and dry if that comes to? An able head of family never says that they would run away as they had nothing to lose. And I thought the term that he crafted for Kejri ji 'bhagoda' signified incompetence!

As I see India losing its golden opportunity of 2014, I am back in hope and prayers that the brighter side of his leadership makes good the possibilities that still exist to make the lifetime moment of 2014 work for India, even though the first 15 overs were forsaken.