gaddam@remus.rutgers.edu (Surekha Reddy Gaddam) (03/07/91)
The Hon'ble Winston Churchil, in a moment of mental aberration, dismissed the humble Mohandas Gandhi as "that half naked Fakir", and the not-so-humble Jawaharlal Nehru as "that dangerous agitator". "men of straw" he said, "of whose names in twenty years time no trace shall be found". The "men of straw" did not buckle under that cold sneer and strove on regardless. "That half naked fakir" went on to become the Father of the nation. Dr.Ambedkar, who gave up a lucrative practice at the bar to free his fellow men and women from the immoral bondage of untouchability, went on to father of the "Indian constitution", and that "hard dangerous agitator", free India's first prime minister. Other "men of straw" too had given up their chosen paths and professions and turned to politics, not as a means of livelihood, but to help in the struggle to attain India's freedom. The list is too long and formidable several anonymous, forgotten and neglected. From the gladiator skills of clean politics, they and many became statesmen of high order. Being human beings after all, I dare say they had their human foibles in things that did not matter. But meanness, treachery or dishonesty were not among them. They were erudite men and women who strove for the nation, not for themselves. They were looked up to with admiration and the world heard them with respect. Their was intellectual and moral stature. In those days politics was not the dirty word it has become today. Those and many others were men and women of integrity and dedication, honour and distinction. A virtual political Who's Who. Such were the giants and such was the calibre of the politicians of yesteryears. Men and women who wrote the golden page of India's political history. The decline was yet to come so was the fall. And then, gradually, a new breed of politicians sprang up - the breed of the ugly politician. ( I do not suggest for a moment that all of today's politicians in this country are of the ilk of this ugly breed I speak of. We still have politicians of old, seasoned by experience and steeped in integrity, and the new, many of whom are cast in the mould of the stalwarts of the old school). They are respected. It is not of them I speak. This new breed of the ugly politician, never, to start with, had a profession to give up, not any ostensible means of income, and seemingly has made politics its sole and vastly profitable source of livelihood. It is this breed of the the politician I speak of, petty and pretentious, steeped in intrigue and in fighting, self-seeking and unprincipled, without honour, the political card-sharper, whose ability to sell himself is equated with his willingness to be purchased, and whose skills are directed towards the nauseating exercise of retaining power or clambering to power, no matter what the means, or how devious is the path. The ugly politician is recognised in the words of Alfred Lord Tennyson: "His honour rooted in dishonour stood and faith unfaithful kept him falsely true'. Pray, where do you see this breed? " si monumentum requiris, circumspecie" - If you seek his monument, look around. Great nations and hypocritical minds go ill togather. Sooner a brusque and blunt Morarji Desai, or a politically ruthless I.Gandhi or Devilal, said to be uncouth, plunging the dagger in the chest, than the Judas kiss and the sneaky stab in the back. In today's politics, there is nothing more than transience. There are no friends and no enemies. Anyone not with you is your enemy, but everyone with you is not necessarily your friend. What are the special skills that go to make this new breed of ugly politican? There are two sides of the coin, the negative and the positive. On the negative side it requires no qualifications, and no known standard of education or training; it requires no retirement age, even in dotage: it requires no application of mind or fixed hours of work. Actually, it is an extended ego trip at the taxpayer's expense. On the positive side, it calls for insensitivity, and dormant conscience, mental elasticity and intellectual vacuity, the ability to lie and the capacity to deceive, deviousness and moral cowardice, and, above all, the sickening agility at switching sides as soon as expendiency arises. Thanks to this breed, politics has touched the pits today. For the nation, the mule of today's politics engenders nothing and is good for nothing. It is we, the comman man woman, who are the unwitting, often hapless and, at time, unthinking playthings in the hands of this worthless breed. Politics must be a principle, not at an expedient, and cetainly not an exercise in one-upmanship. This breed does not reckon that power is trust which flows from the people, to be used for the people, because it is from the people that all springs and for whom all must exist. It forgets that governments may rise, politicians will come and go, but the people are eternal. This breed has never known the words of Lincoln (if, indeed, it has heard of him): "this country with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it." Ant any country the will of the people would dismiss this breed from public. But we are a long suffering tolerant people, with the ability and patience to wait for five grinding years. But when, at the end of it, that dreaded day of retribution comes, also comes the day of reckoning. The vote is cast, and with it, the dye. Not that at the end of the day it makes much of a difference. The forte of the ugly politician is resilience and virtually indestructable. Somehow, anyhow, a comeback is manoeuvred. There is nothing uncertain than permanence. However, thanks to a vigilant press, public conscience is awakening, though not yet sustained. But the rumblings are there. The writings on the walls blurred perhaps, but impossible to ignore. And when comman man awakens from his intermittent somnanbulance, beware the Ides of March. Today, it is thanks to this unprincipled brred of the ugly politician that politics has become as dirty a word in this country as anywhere else in the world. The principled ones are seemingly swamped out. To the nation and to the comman man, that is a disaster of the highest magnitude. Divide and Rule was the guiding principle of England's first Prime minister. It is this principle the ugly politician has cultivated to a fine art in this country. And, thus, for transient political ambition and politcal gains and political power, by appeal to caste, creed and religion, has blown the ill-wind of mistrust and hatred to the four corners of India, to divide the people within itself. You may agree with the policies of Indira Gandhi and her sons, or may not. That is not relevant. What is relevant is that no right thinking man or woman in this country can fault their sense of secularism. At the same time, should there be any amongst us who look beyond the motherland for solace, they are free to depart to wherever their hearts lie. "My country right or wrong: if right keep right, if wrong set right". Justice Bhaktawar Lentin (* Excerpts from Illustrated Weekly of India *) Narotham Reddy