[Reader-list] FW: FW: ATTEMPT OF TARNISHING GUJARAT IMAGE

[Rajendra Bhat Uppinangadi]

Rakesh,
who am I to judge anyone or their likings or dislikes, but having seen the
life for last sixty years, born in a family of individuals who gave
everylife for freedom struggles, having lost material wealth for the values
inculcated by mahatma, having worked in sevadal as volanteer, all my dreams
crashed in 1976, in detention for "Talking" about the freedom of citizens,
which made the experience richer, knowledge digestible, that, our
constitution is bunch of papers and words, which can be used or misused by
power seekers with amendments to remain in power.In 1977 it was a sense of
being in heaven when the opposition unity saw the dictator out, but again it
was short lived bliss, as "leaders' fought worse than street dogs, behaved
like jokers in a big circus of governance, DmNT mORARJEE, rAJ NARAIN TAUGHT
THE NATION, HOW A LEADER SHOULD NOT BE IN PUBLIC LIFE.!
bY THEN, THE WORDS OF MAHATMA WERE REVERBERATING, THAT THE cONGRESS SHOULD
BE DISSOLVED, LEADERS CAN FOR THEIR OUTFITS SUITABLE FOR THEM, (1948) and
these did that, to subvert the democratic life on the caste, faith and
religion and region, thanks to Nehru who devised the linguistic states of
divide and rule legacy.!
Today as I see the party and the other parties, it is very difficult to
envisage any good governance as all are after power, none for common man, to
seek power, material wealth is necessity, so corruption is in built in the
system.
But once in a while a whip of fresh air does come from many a political
parties but not Congress.The Indian national Congress of Alan Hume is dead
in 1948, 30th Jan.What we see now is a bunch of sycophants held by the glue
of italy known also as sonia.
Regards,
rajen.

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Rakesh Iyer <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Rajen
>
> If you think that I am a Congress supporter, nothing can be far from the
> truth. But yes, I do like the values which the Congress while it was
> fighting the struggle for independence, be it the idea of socialism or
> democracy. The Congress, as Ramachandra Guha once remakred, represents the
> symptomatic decline of politics in India.
>
> Also, I do agree that Nehru practised Muslim appeasement. But he did so not
> out of being an appeaser, but because he didn't want Muslims in India to
> feel threatened. The Congress under him was still democratic and the state
> units could take decisions which Nehru would not like but had to adhere to.
> It's his daughter Indira Gandhi who destroyed not only the Congress but
> Indian politics.
>
> If political parties today are turning into dynasty-breeding grounds, the
> credit goes to Indira Gandhi. If Indian police, judiciary and administration
> are extremely politicized today, it's because of Indira Gandhi. If today
> corruption is one of the major problems of Indian polity, it's thanks to
> Indira Gandhi. If today communalization of politics has taken place (to the
> extent where the major opposition party to the Congress is the BJP), one
> should thank Indira Gandhi for it. If there was one politician who made it
> easier for politicians after her to indulge in extra-constitutional measures
> and use armed intervention with no regard for human rights, it was Indira
> Gandhi, through her Operation Bluestar. If there was one person who gave
> rise to the concept of state-sponsored terrorism in South Asia (namely :
> LTTE) it was Indira Gandhi (and RAW).
>
> If Lal Bahadur Shaastri had not mysteriously died, the political history of
> India would have been a lot different.
>
> Rakesh
>



-- 
Rajen.