[Reader-list] my view on cellular silent day on 30/01/09 by Ranjan Kamath

[Taha Mehmood]

Dear Rakesh

Thank you for your response.

I agree with you however to a certain extent we cannot just point our
fingers at -development- only to suggest that this was the sole reason for
Shivraj Singh Chuhan's win in the recently concluded elections at MP. There
has to be a host of other factors. There has to be a whole gamut of reasons.


I am also quite certain that when it comes down to assessing the performance
of a public scheme in a way which quantitatively informs us whether that
scheme was successful or not; one can safely make an assumption, especially,
with respect to a country like India, that, corruption, nepotism, red tapism
etc must have played a role in making such a scheme, a resounding failure.
But I am not interested in analysing the success or failure of this or that
scheme in an actual sense in this thread because I think, following from
Bipin's first mail in this thread the issue at hand is surely that of
perception.

It was in this regard that I submitted by the way of an example, that in
direct contrast to Modi was this guy who appeared to be cool, calm and
composed. Furthermore he fought and won an election wherein classic BJP
election issues were conspicuous by their absence.

Modi is perceived as someone who has over the years cultivated a disregard
for authority, for constitution and for any sense of basic decency,
especially towards the weak. In his rhetoric he has constantly projected
himself as someone who is capable of dealing with terror. Yet facts show
otherwise. For instance during recent Mumbai terror attacks we saw how easy
it was for Kasab and party to sail past through Modi's nose. The Gujarat
coast line, which was used by Kasab and his men for the final leg of their
journey, was virtually unguarded. I do not think, it would wrong to argue
that had Modi been true to his words Mumbai terror attacks would not have
been the same.

Warm regards

Taha





On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Rakesh Iyer <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Taha (and all)
>
> I think while I am not sure whether Shivraj Singh Chauhan actually won on
> the plank of development at all, I am also not sure whether the development
> which was being portrayed by him and his govt, did actually take place on
> the ground at all or not, leaving aside its' impact on development. Govt.
> figures aside, there have been cases as also perceptions that many cases
> like NREGA and central govt. sponsored schemes were not being implemented
> properly in the state. And corruption was a major issue against the
> incumbent BJP govt., the foremost of which was the corruption cases in the
> health ministry, and also those against the CM and his wife known as the
> 'dumper scandal'.
>
> Secondly. Having said all this, Shivraj Singh Chauhan is a contrasting
> personality compared to Modi, and personally looking at the coalitional
> politics of India, where one wants a PM who is less controversial and more
> acceptable to all, Shivraj seems to be a better figure compared to Modi,
> though he may never rise up to such a case at all. This does not mean I
> support him, or endorse him for the post. There are other better contenders
> even now in the fray, as well as possibly those whom I and others don't know
> as of now. But with the kind of coalitional politics we have at the centre,
> who knows what may happen.
>
> What I like most about Shivraj is the way he conducts himself in public,
> even in his election campaigns. He never mentioned terrorism in his election
> speeches at all, though he did criticize Congress on many issues, which is a
> normal phenomenon. Similarly, there were campaigns in which he went to
> villages, telling old women, "Agar humse koi bhool ho gayee ho ya galti hui
> ho, to maaf kar dena," (If me or my govt, have made any mistake or forgotten
> something, please forgive us). These statements may be a gimmick, but I
> don't think Modi has ever gone on and said such kind of statements in his
> election campaign. And this entirely reflects the difference in the two
> personalities itself.
>
> The statements could not be more different and contrasting. On one hand,
> Modi was concentrating on 'mout ka saudagar' and 'Delhi Sultanate' ruling
> India; on the other Shivraj was putting forth his achievements on
> bijli-sadak-pani and contrasting them with Congress rule. Infact, Modi when
> campaigning in Madhya Pradesh, was forced after a talk with Shivraj (as
> insiders say, though not publicized), to campaign in the same way. And his
> speeches turned out to be less about gutter politics and more about debates
> on development and issues like corruption and reach of the system of
> governance to the public.
>
> And last but not the least. Shivraj allowed other leaders to plan their
> campaigns as they felt comfortable. In Gujarat, Modi planned campaigns for
> most of the leaders. That also reflects a difference in their mentalities.
> And probably, it could well be a difference in the way they were brought up
> as children and in the party itself. And may be, it may be a difference in
> the ground realities of Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh.
>
> Regards
>
> Rakesh
>
>