|
Before
writing this I thought twice and accepted on
mental plane that water can freeze at hundred
degree Celsius and can boil at zero degree
Celsius but it happens nowhere else except in
politics where its own sets of very complex and
very simple, highly adaptive and extremely
inertial or hard, hidden as well as crystal
clear, saving as well as killing and so many
others (of course I am unable to mark)
contradictory, complementary and supplementary
rules, notions, visions, are working in tuned,
out-of-tun, related, correlated and fuzzy
manner. The winners or experts in this field are
our rulers. In my view so is politics and
business in it. I like to cite my own lines
"Bhavarth yahan kee bhasaon ke na jane kaya-kaya
hote hain
kara band palak jagate hain yahan sab khol kar
kar ankhe sote hain"
So I am talking about the election for the first
person of the nation that is turning into high
voltage drama. Unfortunately, general public
like us have no role to play, except as passive
spectator, in that election. But the way in
which matter is getting twisted and the interest
of general public is ignored attracts our
attention. Despite many survey reports, public
opinions in the favour of Dr. APJ Kalam,
political system of the nation seems to fail to
fulfill it by consensus. In the last election of
HE Dr. Kalam two factors were highly favorable.
Of course the most powerful is his personality
bearing splendid career, contribution, vision,
service and so many other good things he gave to
nation. However, it can also be not denied that
the last NDA government took it as a political
healing step to reduce hate, that arose after
riots in a BJP-ruled state Gujarat, of the
Muslim community for it.
The first person who brought the idea to convert
India into a developed, a prosperous nation is
Dr. APJ. He has proved himself as one of the
most successful presidents of India.
Undoubtedly, people like to see him for the next
term too. The newborn third front made abortive
attempt for this. However, the way in which
political system of the nation took and remarked
views and desire of Dr APJ Kalam is undoubtedly
not good either as personal or in respect to his
contributions. The will of Dr. APJ for second
term was not autonomic rather it came after the
request by the third front and by many general
people. There was nothing wrong in his statement
as the second term for any president.
So far in our history second term has been
decided by consensus probably influenced by
popularity, working style in the first term. Dr.
APJ's desire to accept second term if there
develops consensus for him is also based on the
similar line of reasoning. However, some
political parties took view of Dr. APJ as
political greed and suggested him to retire
respecting prestige of the post. I do not think
any general public will accept such blames on
Dr. Kalam. In fact people of India will miss
something what they have experienced with Dr.
Kalam as the President. Last day I came to read
some lines in newspapers that the number of
emails, requesting for second term, that came to
Dr. Kalam is not enough even to win a municipal
election. Can it be taken as challenge on
popularity of Dr. Kalam? The way in which
political comments came is certainly against
respect for Dr. Kalam. I am sure if people of
India get power to elect their president
directly it will be cumbersome for any political
party to find a candidate who can defeat Dr.
Kalam. I do not have any idea about Dr. APJ's
plan after retirement, but if he comes to accept
the challenge he can change the rotten face of
Indian politics. It's his personality that can
produce nationwide change and this will also
turn his dream true to convert India into a
developed nation by 2020. However, no president
in Indian history has taken political step after
stepping down so my expectation may be like a
daydream. But if he really moves the things it
will be a successful movement.
Now it is cent percent certain that the
candidate supported by UPA will be successful in
becoming president of India, but the pros and
cons coming everyday in news about the
candidates are necessarily not a good sign in
the Indian democracy. The way in which UPA
declared candidature of Pratibha Patil for
presidential election is similar to Sri Lalu
Yadav's experiment which made Smt. Rabari Devi
the CM of Bihar. However, Rabri Devi has cleaner
back background and there were no allegations in
advance. It was totally unexpected in Bihar even
in RJD camp. Nobody was aware of it. Something
similar is declaration of candidature the of Dr.
Pratibha Patil. If the allegations leveled
against Dr. Patil come true, one cannot expect
honest working from tainted persons and
certainly opposition in future will put
responsibility of pushing such a person to the
highest post on UPA. However, if allegations in
news become false, situation will be different.
So now a big question is if the public of India
get power to elect their president, how will be
the face of Indian democracy? What is wrong (except
financial burden) in involving people of India
if our political system fails to find an
undisputed and consensus candidate for the first
person of the nation?
|
Comments: |
I read
the article with interest.
There is not much importance to the
first person of the nation in the
present context and drama though
part of politics was unnecessary.
General public's role even in
general elections have been
minimized by money and muscle power
and an apathy has taken them away
from going to polling booths and
hence Mayawati could get thumping
majority with 13 per cent of the
total electorate and Congress had
ruled country mostly on the minority
votes.
Despite many survey reports, public
opinions in favour of Dr. APJ Kalam,
I feel howsoever great a person may
be, it should not be thought that
there were not better alternatives.
I appreciate Kalam barring two or
three episodes - Bihar and Jharkhand
tangle and Afjal's hanging.
Though he did a bold task in Office
of Profit Bill too by returning
that.
In the last election of Dr. Kalam
the factor of being the Muslim
community then BJP led NDA the other
factions of which would not have
agreed on any BJP/RSS person's name
though there were many such names (e.g
Nanaji Deshmukh whose unblemished
character, whose arm was broken to
save JP in lathi charge at Patna;
whose renunciation of the cabinet
post and taking sanyas at 60 and
devoting to the poorest region of
Chitrakoot and Gonda which was far
away from his native place
Maharashtra) and Dr. Kalam was
called 'a politician among
scientists,' and a scientist among
politicians,'; his Geeta love and
unmarried stature wooed all
including majority Hindus. The work
in atomic blast the credit of R.
Chidamabarm was somehow went to his
cap.
I do not agree that he was the first
person who brought the idea to
convert India into a developed, a
prosperous nation though he was one
amongst them and one well received
name by media.
True, he has proved himself as one
of the most successful presidents of
India for his utter simplicity and
dedication and many people like to
see him for the next term too but he
was not only one among billion
Indians that his successor could not
be chosen.
Neither the newborn third front's
abortive attempt to make agree Kalam
for next term nor his remarked views
and desire of Dr APJ Kalam was good
either as personal or in respect to
his contributions nor his
disinclination to fight in the wake
of impending loss.
I feel winning or losing is not a
matter for a student of Geeta.
He was an NDA candidate and when
Third front + NDA had asked, he
should have fought even to lose like
a soldier.
I agree that there was nothing wrong
in his statement as the second term
for any president and many
democracies (US) have this and in
India there is no bar for any number
of terms but whether country might
be thought to be dependent on one
and only one - this thinking should
go from the mind of any person.
Second term in India was given to
Deshratna Dr. Rajendra Prasad only
and probably only he was a fit
personality to be the President so
far - one must remember that it is a
political post and not the post of
RAJGURU (then Vinoba was the best)
or academician or industrialists or
a yes-man (there have been) or a
yes-woman (coming).
True, Dr. Kalam is not enough even
to win a municipal election though
it can not be taken as challenge on
popularity of Dr. Kalam but this way
coming on the scene through
backdoors of Rajya Sabha or
nominations would not make any post
vibrant - if a good person is chosen
by this way, other not-so good or
even bad men/women may be chosen or
is going to be chosen by this way.
The country needs a pragmatic way of
selection of persons on all posts be
in service or politics, be in party
or in elections, if it is to be
democratized in a true way.
Some political comments might have
been against the respect for Dr.
Kalam but many more came in favour
of too though in fact he deserved no
comments good or bad for this as he
was in fact not a suitable candidate
for presidency which was a political
post and he had added nothing to
that way to politics before entering
in fray that too by a winning
chance.
The countrymen should also not be
under the impression that all
politicians are bad and hence we
should opt for non-politicians
(several names had come in this
connection) rather good people
should also enter into politics to
clean it - without entering in the
mud of the pond it can not be
cleaned.
I am sure if people of India get
power to elect their president
directly it will be cumbersome for
any political party to put a
candidate of anonymous position and
it would see people of the caliber
of Dr. Rajendra Prasad who knowing
all odds in social life entered into
it - then for freedom struggle now
for economic and moral emancipation
of a billion of people which is to
me probably a harder task than
freedom fighting - it is easier to
die than to live dying every second
like burning a candle and leaving
nothing in the end as Swami
Vivekananda said an ideal for a
social worker. And hence, Savarkar
or Subhash is given greater respect
than many revolutionaries who kissed
the gallows.
And time will come when those who
struggled for the masses would be
given even more honour than those.
It is said that Dr. APJ's plan after
retirement would join universities
as visitor, but true it would have
been better if he would have taken
up the task of the challenge to
change the rotten face of Indian
politics.
However, no president in the Indian
history has taken a political step
after stepping down so he has chosen
universities to teach.
True, supported by UPA president of
India for the candidate is not a
good sign in the Indian democracy.
And it is more disastrous for the
policies of the so-called ideal LEFT
that it has made one point programme
(NO BJP).
True, the way in which UPA declared
candidature of Pratibha Patil for
presidential election is similar to
Sri Lalu Yadav's experiment, which
made Smt. Rabri Devi the CM of
Bihar. I do not agree, however,
Rabri Devi had a cleaner back
background and there were no
allegations in advance when she was
made to the post only being BETTER
HALF of Lalu Bhaiyya when it was
totally unexpected in Bihar even in
RJD camp. Nobody was aware of it.
Now electorate has to choose among
two - certainly second is a better
public figure who rose to Second
position by public work.
Yet, what is wrong in involving
people of India in finding an
undisputed and maybe consensus
candidate for the first person of
the nation? is to be sought and a
thorough change in the constitution
maybe essential - should we go to
the presidential form for electing
President or PM (at least one among
them) directly so that proxy PMs too
are avoided.
In fact, in the present scenario
Vajpayee was the best candidate for
the Presidency, which I had written
in the TOI also supporting the move
by Mamta Banerjee. He should have
been acceptable to UPA (and Left
too) as he had continued policies of
liberalization espoused by the
Congress Govt. and is said among RSS
circle more Nehruvian than Nehru
himself was and in his tenure
Congressization of the BJP was full.
In fact Congress' dynastyism + BJP
orthodox and militant Hinduism would
have been the best combination to
rule the country with Left
(including Socialists) would have
been best opposition giving country
a TWO PARTY stable Rule.
I am thankful Prof. Rajkishore has
written a lot on it and also
enthused me to write something
though many of my statements would
be controversial but anyway I am a
simple Indian whose words do not
carry much. - Dr. Dhanakar
Thakur, Founder Antarrashtriya
Maithili Parishad (AMP) & National
Medicos Organisation (NMO) - July 7,
2006
The
last paragraph... So now a big
question is if the public of India
get power to elect their president,
how will be the face of Indian
democracy?
Did you forget the answer?
Corruption, crime, greed and
hollow-chauvinism are the four
pillars of our Indian democracy. We
all (forms of) Indians come under
these four categories. What else!
Ashoka Pillar is a show-piece for
tourists (non-Indian) visiting
India.
What is wrong (except financial
burden) in involving people of India
if our political system fails to
find an undisputed and consensus
candidate for the first person of
the nation?
Here is an example. I was attending
marriage ceremony of one of our
relatives in Chhapra. All “baraatis”
were enjoying dinner at bride’s
house. Suddenly, one of the
“home-grown” terror, now leader, of
our ‘caste’ appeared from our
(groom) side. Except me, everyone
stood on feet. The funniest part was
that he was waiving hands to
everyone as if he hadn’t come to
bless the “marrying-couple”, but to
get the blessings from "Baraatis".
People (Baraatis) were very
responsive. I saw anger in his eyes
because I was enjoying food, not his
presence.
"AISE HI HAIN, HUMLOG". Given a
chance we will surely choose the
same for the post of President. Do
we have an option?
Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam, is he really
people’s President? Give me one
example where he can stand straight
in public arena. He failed to repair
even an inch of corroded pillars of
Indian democracy. He could not
decide what to do with Afzal Guru –
the most important decision or a
turning event in Indian history of
democracy. In fact, President can’t
do anything other than drama of
sending, resending bills passed by
council of ministers. So, why do we
need to search just "one person"
corruption-free for the post of
"President"?
Pratibha Patil's changing statements
are very interesting, similar to one
of our great president (late) Gyani
Zail Singh. One should be thankful
to UPA and self-intellectual-ated
Left for giving us an opportunity to
watch “Bheja Fry” live from Lutyens’
Delhi. - Dr. Sudhir Ranjan, USA -
July 7, 2007
A
brief re-cap of controversial
decisions made by various Presidents
in India would be interesting:
1. Giani Zail Singh - made an
un-announced visit to the Golden
Temple immediately after more than
ninety valiant members of our armed
forces had given their lives
battling terrorists. His expressed
sorrow at the damage to the temple
but omitted to mention the loss of
lives suffered by our armed forces.
2. Neelam Sanjiva Reddy-openly
espoused linguistic and regional
chauvinism leading to the "re-organisation
of Southern States". He confirmed
the imprisonment of the former PM
Indira Gandhi " for electoral
malpractices"
3. Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed
"rubber-stamped" the Emergency of
1975.
4. Every President has succumbed to
pressure from the parliament. After
parliamentary elections state
assemblies have been dissolved at
the behest of the winning party
denying the state governments their
rigt to fulfill their full term of
office, and burdening the nation
with huge expenses for additional
elections. - Reza Sami, SC USA -
July 8, 2007 |
|
Discussion on this topic is now
closed. |
Return to previous Page |
