|
|
|
|
|
| HOME | NEWS | DEAR REDIFF | |||
|
ELECTIONS '98
|
|
|
E-mail from readers the world over
Date sent: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 15:23:21 -0800 I am a middle class Indian, yet support neither of the various political parties and their hoodwinker demagogues, Sonia and Rabri both included. Pray let the author tell us how the author reconciles with Laloo, Mulayam and Mayawati's corruption adventures (an expertise that is not specially cornered by anyone party in particular), simply going by their genetic constitutions. The debate as whether leader X is better than leader Y because X hails from a certain party/caste/sex/place is too trite to be any use in helping the public understand the real issues and developing a vision of the future. There isn't really any reason to choose one above the other. Only those who enjoy the fidgety drama polarising themselves into human factions, irrespective of their irrelevance to noble causes, engage in these dysfunctional debates about this party versus that party and this leader versus that leader. The real action today seems to be originating from the numerous activists and volunteers who have chartered their personal futures in the cause of the poor and the depressed. They do not seek political power for obvious reasons. Much to his irony, the author will find that most of these activists hail from the educated middle class. The author would be better off realising and praising these great volunteers instead of all those miserable wretches and wolves clothed in khadi as sheep. Hari K Tadepalli
Date sent: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 11:08:11 -0600 I read your article "Sonia Gandhi exposes middle-class Indian hypocrisy." I want to congratulate you for your simple yet profound analysis. I hope this article gets translated into many Indian languages, please make sure of that. I think this is an important article because it shatters the notion that you don't need well groomed leaders who really do not understand the plight of the people. Indian politics require people that have some vision. A leader in India should be a consensus builder, whether s/he comes from the middle class or from a small village. This problem is further complicated by the lack of training given to amateur politicians when they assume powers of position. There should be a good training programme that should be set up at every level. Whether it is a chief minister or prime minister, they need to adopt an attitude toward life long learning. This is required of heads of states in the developed world and Indian politicians need to embrace this concept whole heartedly. Keep up the good work. Navin
Date sent: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 12:13:56 -0800 (PST) You have beautifully expressed the sentiments of many Indians about Sonia's presence in Indian politics in paragraphs two and three of your article. (I am not saying I agree with them, but just that you have expressed them beautifully.) However, your reasoning -- which begins in paragraph four -- seems faulty. In para five you say the middle-class cannot stomach leaders like Yadav and Kesri. Again you have captured the middle-class opinion. But in my view the reason the middle class doesn't like these people is not that they are rustic and cannot speak English (although, it probably does play a minor role) but that these people are uneducated mostly or at least fail to show any intellectual capabilities. Even if they spoke Hindi or any regional languages but talked sense, I don't think people would object to that kind of leaders. Even if they represented lower caste/class but made their points in a reasonable manner then it would be acceptable to the middle-class. Sophistication does matter to the middle-class, but not of physical appearance but of thought. Take Atal Bihari Vajpayee, for example. He doesn't speak English most of the time. Does he look good? I don't know. The thought never occurred to me and I think to most people. Is he sophisticated in terms of being westernised? I don't think so. Is he sophisticated in terms of thought? At least that's the impression he gives to most middle class people. The "Legacy Factor:" Is this prevalent in India? Yes. But does it apply to the middle-class? I think not. Industrialists and business owners, of course, inherit their business. Lower classes also typically inherit their occupation in India. But the middle class? If someone's father is an engineer the son still needs to compete in the exams and get admission on his own merit. The same holds for other professional pursuits. The father cannot help his son much in getting admitted to good schools and universities (Of course, there is some corruption in some places but not in IITs, medical colleges and IAS-type of exams for the most part). Most of the middle-class people have to fight on their own. So their not wanting competition from the lower classes is not true. They have competition already. Plus there is a quota system to make sure they do. Anyway, I think the whole basis of your article is flawed in assuming that the middle class supports the "Legacy." Vikas
Date sent: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 14:24:51 -0600 1.Who objected to Rajiv succeeding Indira? Rajiv was born in India unlike Sonia. Moreover, he came on the overriding sympathy wave. There were always Opposition parties who objected to family rule. It's so convenient for you to overlook that. 2.You talk about offspring coming into professions regardless of "ABILITY," excuse me: This argument should be made against the people supporting reservations. When you eliminate reservations everything would be open to everyone. 3. You say Sonia exposes Indian middle class hypocrisy by inviting objections about her nationality, and at the same time saying the middle class treated Rabri Devi worse than Sonia. No body can answer to this obvious contradiction of yours. The only thing this article exposes is your deep rooted contempt for the middle-class of India.
Date sent: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 15:31:49 -0500 A hilarious article.
Date sent: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 11:19:36 -0800 It is not that out of the 940 million people we cannot find a leader. In my lifetime, which is the last 30 years, I have noticed that people of India get more impressed by the appearance of an individual than the qualities of that person. This is one of the reasons that our democracy is void of any good leaders, who can raise the standard of this country which always has the notion that it is one of the greatest. Vijay Shrivastav
Date sent: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 13:50:31 -0500 I think the first time I have seen the true voice or thought in writing. Great work. Good article! Harshal
Date sent: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 13:11:58 -0600 Are you kidding? Mulayam Singh Yadav or Rabri Devi or for that matter Sonia can never be the leaders of the middle-class. Stop being a stooge to these people. Sunil Pai
Date sent: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 12:49:02 -0500 This is the worst kind of column that I have read for a long time. First, you can't compare Sonia with Rabri, they are from different backgrounds. Moreover, you can't afford to have an illiterate leader. It is a major handicap, unless that person has learnt a lot from real life experiences which will come from a lot of travelling and interacting with various people across the globe. Who says Rabri Devi has taken over from Laloo? She still is a puppet and is forced to rule to maintain control of power. As for inheritance of power, it should not be a problem if the next person is competent enough to take charge rather than experiment with newcomers like Narasimha Rao. I think the single most important reason why people are disenchanted with the Congress is because of the level of corruption among its members, and they will again get the same from any party that comes to power. Corruption in our nation is institutionalised, it's omnipresent, it's there at all levels from the poorest to the richest, the basic mindset has to be changed. This can be achieved only through education and for that first we need to get rid of corruption from the educational system. It is a Catch-22 situation and hope somebody would understand it.
Date sent: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 14:50:26 -0800 Your article is simple brilliant! The reason being -- everything was objectively placed to the reader. Please make sure that articles like this are translated and published in regional languages, for the less-than-urban group would be fortunate to understand the reality of the Indian political system. Venkat
Date sent: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 17:49:22 -0800 This is one of the worst arguments I have ever heard in my life. Maybe you can attribute it to my "Middle Class Hypocrisy." In fact why stop with illiterate politicians, all they have to do is deal with inconsequential stuff like the national Budget, defence policy etc. Let's fill our banks, industry, finance sector with illiterate, mafia elements. I am all for it. Seshu
Date sent: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:22:19 +0530 (IST) This is a classic case of postulating a theory and then massaging facts to try to prove it. The author first informs us that the middle class doesn't like Sonia Gandhi as their leader: "Why, asks this chattering class in disgust, can't an Indian be at the helm of the Congress ...". He then tells us that "Sonia Gandhi represents most middle-class values." Further down we are told that since "a primary reason for Sonia Gandhi's popularity is the legacy factor". Since middle-class people inherit businesses, and the legacy factor is apparently evident in sports, besides politics, the author concludes that the middle-class supports the legacy factor. Finally the kicker: "Take the case of the middle-class's attitude when comparing Rabri Devi and Sonia Gandhi. When the former took over from her husband Laloo Yadav, there was a national outrage. Rabri Devi was seen as incapable, unsophisticated and ignorant, a village bumpkin. None of the same charges have been made at Sonia. On the contrary, she is seen as sophisticated, urbane, and while the middle-class may chaff at her alien origins, they don't doubt her ability as they did Rabri Devi's!" What the heck was that all about? Suddenly the middle-class likes Sonia Gandhi taking over and doesn't like Rabri Devi "inheriting" the mantle. I thought they didn't like Sonia Gandhi being at the helm rather than an Indian? Besides, how in the world can you compare the two. The basis of the legacy factor is the hope that the inheritor will behave like the forerunner. That's why Rabri is seen as a female version of Laloo who was a joke in his own right. Sonia Gandhi didn't step in because Rajiv Gandhi was tossed into jail because of corruption. The conclusion from all this babbling is that the middle-class is out of touch with reality. I'm not arguing the validity of this point. I'm simply complaining about the weird logic in this article. This article rambled on, but didn't really support it's hypothesis. It reminded me of Pritish Nandy's column on one-day politics, which also rambled on, pretty much losing the point it was trying to make (which I incidentally thought was a very valid point -- it's a good thing that the lower classes who represent the majority are getting a say). I've enjoyed most of what I've read on Rediff. I'm a fan, but these two articles prompted me to write in. I hope you aren't slacking up on your editing. I'll attribute it to an aberration. K G Chinnappa
Date sent: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 09:13:13 -0700 If your assumption is true that the middle class prefers suave, urbane and English-speaking politicians, then how does it explain the fact that Shri Vajpayee is the most popular leader among the middle class too?? Actually you make a mistake in calling Sitaram Kesri, Mulayam Singh Yadav and Rabri Devi politicians. They are all illiterate fools who carry no vision of the country and clearly are not statesmen. The middle class has the depth to find out who really is capable. As far as Sonia goes, it's the curiosity that takes over, rather than any genuine interest in her as a politician. The "impressive" crowd of 80,000 to 90,000 is really brought out of the rural areas. Sameer Kuppahalli
Date sent: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 07:54:22 -0500 Excellent piece of work. Keep it up!!! Many more such columns to come!!
Date sent: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 10:37:31 -0600 The article seems to be one sided in that when he compares Rabri Devi and Sonia Gandhi, he seems to forget that somebody at the helm of a country or a state needs to be well educated, if for nothing else but to be able to discern what people tell them and where they put their signature. Rabri Devi may know what the problem is, but can you trust her to find a solution to the problem? Even then implementing the solution and how to go about it is a different ball game altogether. Also to enter politics is a decision taken by Sonia herself, rather than one imposed upon her by her husband. If somebody is dependent upon her husband to take the decisions, then why do you want her as a leader? Just for a symbol!!! About the middle-class wanting their sons to take their positions, whom would you trust more than your son to take over your empire? And tell me how many scheduled class people after entering jobs (for which they are ill qualified) through reservations have proved their worth and somehow contributed to make India go forward. Vikram Khurana
Date sent: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 10:49:42 -0800 Your column is excellent and thought provoking. You have provided a good insight into both sides of the issue.
Date sent: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 19:52:56 -0800 If this is the best case that can be built, as Mr Amberish Diwanji is trying here, for the acceptance of Sonia Gandhi by India, particularly the educated middle class, then I am relieved that she won't make it. I was amused at this reading: "Strangely, Sonia Gandhi represents most middle-class values: she speaks fluent English (albeit with an accent); looks good and sophisticated." As far as I, and perhaps most people, understand the term value, fluency in English or looking good or sophisticated are NOT values, whatever else they may be. In my way of thinking Mrs Gandhi is white. Pradip Parekh
Date sent: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 07:11:43 -0800 I think middle class Indians have a beef against Sonia. Why can't the Italian girl compete in her country? Is she laying the carpet for Priyanka to exploit the ignorant of India? Or, is it that politics in India is no self sacrifice, but a avenue of untraceable wealth. Families close to the Gandhis have a lot of real estate in Europe, the US and Asia, why don't they make a declaration of all their true assets? Let them then stand for election and prove that they can provide a clean government. It took India 200 years to get the "Whitees" off our hair and, lord behold the Congress goondas have brought the white back in 50 years. We are worse than the Africans; at least they don't select a white to rule their country.
Date sent: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 00:29:49 +0800 INDIANS ARE GOOD SERVANTS, BUT BAD MASTERS! That was the birthmark inherited upon Independence. No other nation suffered the ignominy of briefly surrendering their responsibilities to the very master from whom you won the freedom in the first place. The middle class had all along betrayed the values and issues at stake whenever their personal comfort and fortune was threatened. It starts with the very mundane attitude of keeping one's private enclosures clean, but readily willing to pollute and spill his filth outside. Read this with Varsha Bhosle's Alien Resurrection bogey. The world can study hypocrisy at its best. Indeed leaders are at least the reflection of the majority. But then the right to lead should not be questioned or deprived whether one is high born or low born. That is already proven in your presidency. Sonia has only just started campaigning, perhaps out of conviction. So why the pandemonium? Reminds me of Bernard Shaw's Caesar and Cleopatra. The forerunners warn that their (Romans, of course) women give birth in 24 hours. The very suggestion that a Rabri Devi whose proxy's hand is in the state treasury and a Phoolan Devi whose hand was on the trigger is acceptable than a foreign born, but an Indian at heart is indeed a sad state to reflect upon. So why bother? It is better to educate your young at the nation's expense and send them away for the ALIENS's benefit.
Date sent: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 20:23:00 +0100 The usual trash about the 'caste system' -- in the terminology of 'upper castes.' Why don't the supposed elites who criticise the Indian middle class, reflect a little about their own ruling ideologies, and enquire, whether the categories they use have any grip on Indian reality? I am from Karnataka, from a rural area. My father was a brahmin. He was not rich, he was a small farmer -- much smaller than the so-called 'rural castes' leaders like Deve Gowda, or Mulayam Singh Yadav. I am also a first generation graduate, having English as a second language very badly taught. As I entered the Manasagangotri, I could read and write in English, but hardly talk in English. I had difficulty finding a job in India. I was kicked out from Bangalore university during the tenure of the 'progressive' H Narasimhayya's vice-chancellorship, because I am a brahmin. I didn't have any brahmin leader supporting me, no 'upper caste lobby' as people like Amberish day in day out write, and the foreign press and the academic literature on India endlessly repeats, without any empirical work being done on it. It is part of the traveller's tales from the 16th century, but so far hardly any investigation has been done to test it empirically. Through some kind of a semi-legal method I landed here in Germany, had to start all anew, without any support from the Indian elite -- brahmin or non-brahmin. My father didn't know he was 'Hindu', he knew that he was a brahmin. But all that I hear from people like Amberish is that in India there is a religion called Hinduism, of which the caste system, supposedly hierarchical in its principles, is deep rooted. In my childhood, if there was a hierarchical system, the 'bunt' and Konkani castes were at the upper echelons, not the brahmin castes of the region like the Shivalli, or Kota. I have met a few people from UP and Haryana over here, whose childhood reminiscences though differ in many other respects, but as far as the so-called caste system goes, are very similar to mine. People like Amberish, who perhaps have no idea of rural India, just repeat the theories of caste in their commentaries without bothering to ask some basic empirical questions. Narahari Rao
Date sent: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 16:59:45 +0900 I think it is written in a very thought out and balanced manner. It is also positive in the sense, it spells out what will be good for Indians, unlike most other Indian reporting. It will help if the final conclusion / suggestion is drawn out more clearly. If you can tell an ordinary Indian on why and who he should support more clearly, it will be beneficial considering the absolute turmoil of Indian politics. Kalyan Kumar J Japan
Date sent: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 20:52:30 EST Interesting article, but ill informed. Sonia exposes nothing, Amberish exposes his views. Middle class values are not about talking English and appearing refined, they are about hard work, good manners, and about making an independent living and adding value to society. I grew up in Bhilai, a township built around a steel plant. Bhilai epitomises what the middle class is about. It is like other public sector institutions loathed by today's farmers and private industry alike for being a drain on India. I grew up in a town with people from all over India of all castes. I grew up in a town which provides an environment that has fostered more engineers and doctors than most big cities. Sonia Gandhi does not share middle class values nor does Laloo Yadav. One is condescending, the other is rude. Neither exposes hypocrisy; they just don't understand or represent middle class values good or bad. Both Sonia and Rabri are ignorant about running a country and quite likely are just puppets for others who know how to manipulate the political structure. Family progression in industries: it's not the lower castes or the rich who face those issues, it's hard working middle class individuals who have struggled to break those family ceilings. Reservations and quotas squeeze the middle class, the rich and the politicians stifle entrepreneurship and hoard controls, selling India's wealth and assets to multinationals and Indian big industry alike. It is ill informed journalists who blame hard working middle class folks for being caste conscious, two faced and hypocritic.
|
||
| HOME |
NEWS |
BUSINESS |
CRICKET |
MOVIES |
CHAT
INFOTECH | TRAVEL | LIFE/STYLE | FREEDOM | FEEDBACK |
||