Phew. That was a long bout of bloggers' bloc. I have been silent even as a new disorder called karimullahphobia was discovered, fears were expressed over a government supported by "two fat women", a Modi besides the BJP butcher got more political coverage and a grandson took to mimicking the antics of his grandfather as though facial and nomenclature-al resemblances were not enough.Sigh. This Is the 'dance of democracy' and my rhythm is all awry!
Anyhow, better late than never, as the saying goes, and so I inaugurate my own chronicle of this election season which will be momentous for many reasons, not the least because I will be casting my vote for the first time. Yes, it took 6.5 years and the Mumbai blasts and Tata Tea to get me to fulfill my duty to Mother India, repay my debts etc etc. After all, it's for my children :P
First of all, Sidin Vadakut, hitherto known to me as a immensely amusing and eminently readable blogger, dispenses some useful gyan on some of the better sources of online information on the elections.
Then, there is the famous interview by Barkha Dutt of Sanjay Dutt and Amar Singh. It's an awesome piece and not just because Amar Singh and Sanjay Dutt are such natural partners(Amar Singh is stupidly eloquent and Sanjay Dutt is eloquently stupid). Those 41 minutes, with all the contradictions, the interruptions and vacillations, provide a fascinating view into some of the engines that run Indian politics. Amar Singh(who definitely was providing the cues for 'Munnabhai') managed to cast aspersions on the Congress, the Communists, Vir Sanghvi, the CBI, the Supreme Court and yet refused to go all out as he had to keep in mind the possibility of "doing business" with them. The only permanent enemy seemed to be Mayawati(with whom the SP has done business before). Most if the innumerable political parties that dominate India's political spectrum are of similar persuasion, negotiating an unending set of political and social permutations. Rank opportunism and greed play a huge part no doubt, yet these phenomena also say something of the inherent flexibility of representative democracy in India and the constant search and failure of organizations to forge the optimum social coalitions. This is why I suppose we 'adore' middlemen and fixers like Amar Singh and the late Pramod Mahajan.
Another interesting fact that struck me was how the Congress is benefiting from a perception shared by many regarding its 'weak' leadership. Manmohan Singh has been pilloried as the weakest PM ever with L.K Advani challenging him to a debate and making much of the lack of response. Sonia Gandhi, on the other hand has built up a reputation of being impossible to get through to. What is fascinating is that Sonia Gandhi's inaccessibility and Manmohan Singh's general good nature/weakness, while providing the impression of a vacuum, also permit ex-allies and potential allies to criticize and ridicule the Congress while exonerating Manmohan and Sonia from most of the blame. Notice how Amar Singh and Dutt make it a point to express the deepest regard for Sonia and Manmohan. The same strategy was recently employed with great distinction by the ever-ingenious Lalu Yadav.
So the regional parties and the Congress get to go all out against each other even as they try to reach adjustments. In the event of their failing to achieve the latter, they fight each other and post-elections, the whole paltan gets back together without any loss of face. Post-poll alliances, as Yogendra Yadav pointed out today, are what will most probably decide the fate of the next government and most of the protagonists of the drama have made sure all doors are open. Just like Amar Singh.
Of course, the downside to all of this is that(to quote Yadav) "sub-optimal alliances are always a sub-optimal option for the people.". Or to summarize, we are most likely screwed, but then, we are most likely screwed anyway!
Cheerful way to begin election analysis no?
PS. The interview is to be specifically noted for Amar Singh's reference to Sanjay Dutt's wife Manyata being "domesticated"(somewhere around the 23rd minute) and for Sanjay's own idea of the role of his wife(the 30th minute). But then, what is a little chauvinism among politicians?
Showing posts with label nehru-gandhi family. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nehru-gandhi family. Show all posts
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
How to not win friends and not influence people by Public Speaking or Why Rahul Gandhi should hire a ventriquolist!
I try to not to be too offensive to specific individuals in my musings in this blog(fine! The Katrina Awards are an exception) but every once in a while there is the occasion that really gets on my nerves and necessitates a "focussed" personal assault :). I refer, of course, to aRahul Gandhi's speech in parliament yesterday. It was a most mortifying experience and to someone who has a had a brief career in public speaker, a speech full of badly missed opportunities and calculations.
I suppose it is nothing surprising to find a bad speaker in Parliament. However the context is important. Here was a vote most important to India's future, where parties fielded their most experienced speakers to express their views. Mr.Gandhi got a chance solely because he is the son the Congress President(and the son of the former PM and the grandson ...). He was one of the youngest speakers, especially from a major party. Considering the so many hymns sung to the youth of India, there was a brilliant opportunity to speak for this huge demographic of the Indian population. It is not that he lacks education or a skill in language either. His CV lists some of the most prominent educational institutions.
To begin with, it was a most uninspiring speech, delivered in the most deadpan tone possible. The interval between words was monotonously long. Mr.Gandhi was obviously disconcerted by the interruptions which were not even directed at him and he kept re-starting his sentences every time he was interrupted. His location was most unsuitable for some one whose speech would be so closely examined and worse of all, he looked most baffled. There were occasional flashes of irritation and amusement but most of the time he looked heavily under pressure and so maintained a very grim face.
Each one of the mentioned points is in itself not a problem but together they badly tilt the scales against any speaker. What finally cooked Rahul Gandhi's goose was his subject and the way he chose to approach it. His limitations would have been bearable if he had chosen a technical approach to the debate. He however chose to personalize it. He declared he was speaking as an Indian and not as a politician. He tried to bring in the pain of other Indians to the debate. He specifically brought in Sasikala and Kalavati, two women whom he had visited. He then tried to appear bi-partisan, continuing his earlier narrative of speaking as an Indian, by praising A.B.Vajpayee. He tried to paint the picture of the new Indian century urging the MPs to think how India could change the world rather than vice versa.
When a speaker personalizes an issue, he/she takes a considerable risk. The risk is that the gravity of the issue becomes inseparable from the speaker's credibility. The speaker must be credible enough and sound credible enough to convince the audience of the highs and lows of the experience he/she describes. It is not necessary that the audience buy the speaker's message in full, it is enough that the speaker opens up the audience. This requires experience and skill honed by long years of practice. Else the speaker sounds like a bored teacher reading out a story. The tone descends to condescension both for the subjects of the story and the audience. That is exactly what happened yesterday.
Again, a good speaker's greatest ally is not his/her talent but the context. Even the most insipid speaker can be carried by the wave of the situation. On the other hand even the most well-intentioned speaker will turn out to be a damp squib if he/she mistakes the mood of audience and the context of the speech. Rahul Gandhi's speech would have worked well if he were addressing, say, corporate employees who would have marveled at the initiative displayed by him. But there he was, talking Kalavatis and Sasikalas to people who had spent a lifetime among them, who had worked their way up by working(at least in name) among people like them. No wonder there were snide comments while he was speaking! A confidence vote is a battle-field, platonic appeals won't even be audible. The context requires a specific amount of combativeness, you are defending your own government after all, not delivering a "Distinguished Lecture". Bi-partisanship is not (as Barack Obama would seem to suggest) a magic potion to solve all ills. A skilled politician/manager realizes that and utilizes the odd sectarian message at required intervals to perk up his own people, to enthuse them and to prepare them for the battle ahead.
The Congress and the UPA did not require much from Rahul Gandhi. A simple but effective speech, delivered in a firm,precise and decisive manner. The emphasis on power was a great idea and it should have been presented as a macro-message, a statement on the behalf of the youth for instance or any other over-arching statements conveying determination and great pride in his government, even his disappointment or confusion on the way things were happening. This speech would have inspired his fellow MPs and even enabled him to claim moral high ground by not attacking anybody. But disappointingly all the Government got from the MP from Amethi was a bland narration of personal anecdotes! What a waste and what a Shame!!
I suppose it is nothing surprising to find a bad speaker in Parliament. However the context is important. Here was a vote most important to India's future, where parties fielded their most experienced speakers to express their views. Mr.Gandhi got a chance solely because he is the son the Congress President(and the son of the former PM and the grandson ...). He was one of the youngest speakers, especially from a major party. Considering the so many hymns sung to the youth of India, there was a brilliant opportunity to speak for this huge demographic of the Indian population. It is not that he lacks education or a skill in language either. His CV lists some of the most prominent educational institutions.
To begin with, it was a most uninspiring speech, delivered in the most deadpan tone possible. The interval between words was monotonously long. Mr.Gandhi was obviously disconcerted by the interruptions which were not even directed at him and he kept re-starting his sentences every time he was interrupted. His location was most unsuitable for some one whose speech would be so closely examined and worse of all, he looked most baffled. There were occasional flashes of irritation and amusement but most of the time he looked heavily under pressure and so maintained a very grim face.
Each one of the mentioned points is in itself not a problem but together they badly tilt the scales against any speaker. What finally cooked Rahul Gandhi's goose was his subject and the way he chose to approach it. His limitations would have been bearable if he had chosen a technical approach to the debate. He however chose to personalize it. He declared he was speaking as an Indian and not as a politician. He tried to bring in the pain of other Indians to the debate. He specifically brought in Sasikala and Kalavati, two women whom he had visited. He then tried to appear bi-partisan, continuing his earlier narrative of speaking as an Indian, by praising A.B.Vajpayee. He tried to paint the picture of the new Indian century urging the MPs to think how India could change the world rather than vice versa.
When a speaker personalizes an issue, he/she takes a considerable risk. The risk is that the gravity of the issue becomes inseparable from the speaker's credibility. The speaker must be credible enough and sound credible enough to convince the audience of the highs and lows of the experience he/she describes. It is not necessary that the audience buy the speaker's message in full, it is enough that the speaker opens up the audience. This requires experience and skill honed by long years of practice. Else the speaker sounds like a bored teacher reading out a story. The tone descends to condescension both for the subjects of the story and the audience. That is exactly what happened yesterday.
Again, a good speaker's greatest ally is not his/her talent but the context. Even the most insipid speaker can be carried by the wave of the situation. On the other hand even the most well-intentioned speaker will turn out to be a damp squib if he/she mistakes the mood of audience and the context of the speech. Rahul Gandhi's speech would have worked well if he were addressing, say, corporate employees who would have marveled at the initiative displayed by him. But there he was, talking Kalavatis and Sasikalas to people who had spent a lifetime among them, who had worked their way up by working(at least in name) among people like them. No wonder there were snide comments while he was speaking! A confidence vote is a battle-field, platonic appeals won't even be audible. The context requires a specific amount of combativeness, you are defending your own government after all, not delivering a "Distinguished Lecture". Bi-partisanship is not (as Barack Obama would seem to suggest) a magic potion to solve all ills. A skilled politician/manager realizes that and utilizes the odd sectarian message at required intervals to perk up his own people, to enthuse them and to prepare them for the battle ahead.
The Congress and the UPA did not require much from Rahul Gandhi. A simple but effective speech, delivered in a firm,precise and decisive manner. The emphasis on power was a great idea and it should have been presented as a macro-message, a statement on the behalf of the youth for instance or any other over-arching statements conveying determination and great pride in his government, even his disappointment or confusion on the way things were happening. This speech would have inspired his fellow MPs and even enabled him to claim moral high ground by not attacking anybody. But disappointingly all the Government got from the MP from Amethi was a bland narration of personal anecdotes! What a waste and what a Shame!!
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Of confidences and nons
The confidence motion is being tabled by the government. As a corporate employee, it hurts me that I am in no way able to witness this historic occasion. What is sad about this situation is that there are no blogs/sites which can provide frequent updates like the ones which do the same for cricket scores. Speaks volumes about our national priorities. It would be so nice if we had sites which posted details of the stirring debate:
1:03 pm. Rahul Gandhi calls opposition a bunch of uncomprehending nincompoops.
1:03 pm. The UPA benches rise up and applaud the statement
1:04 pm. Rahul Gandhi says the government exists only to serve the nation.
1:04 pm. The UPA benches rise up and applaud the statement
1:05 pm Rahul Gandhi pauses because he has nothing else to say.
1:06 pm ....
You get the drift.
The US primary season saw loads of bloggers covering every single utterance, gesture and non-gesture during the debates between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Considering the importance of this moment in Indian history, it truly is sad that there is no such thing of this sort.
PS.The NDTV website has an article on the responses of Indians settled in America to the crisis. A typical extract:
".. politicians of any party should stay away from national security interests. They can politicise internal issues,''
PS2. People who appreciate the sentiment expressed in this post would surely remember the 1996-98 period as the high-point of No-confidence motion debates. The 13- day government debate and the Gowda and Gujaral debates saw a bevy of distinguished and non-distinguished speakers in a series of slug-fests which were truly exciting. Sigh.. those days!
PS3. Actually I just noticed that both NDTV and CNN-IBN(possibly other media organizations as well) have constant updates on the debate on their websites. However they exist mostly in the realm of reporting with none of the analysis or reflection that blog-reporting would bring to the debate.So...
1:03 pm. Rahul Gandhi calls opposition a bunch of uncomprehending nincompoops.
1:03 pm. The UPA benches rise up and applaud the statement
1:04 pm. Rahul Gandhi says the government exists only to serve the nation.
1:04 pm. The UPA benches rise up and applaud the statement
1:05 pm Rahul Gandhi pauses because he has nothing else to say.
1:06 pm ....
You get the drift.
The US primary season saw loads of bloggers covering every single utterance, gesture and non-gesture during the debates between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Considering the importance of this moment in Indian history, it truly is sad that there is no such thing of this sort.
PS.The NDTV website has an article on the responses of Indians settled in America to the crisis. A typical extract:
".. politicians of any party should stay away from national security interests. They can politicise internal issues,''
PS2. People who appreciate the sentiment expressed in this post would surely remember the 1996-98 period as the high-point of No-confidence motion debates. The 13- day government debate and the Gowda and Gujaral debates saw a bevy of distinguished and non-distinguished speakers in a series of slug-fests which were truly exciting. Sigh.. those days!
PS3. Actually I just noticed that both NDTV and CNN-IBN(possibly other media organizations as well) have constant updates on the debate on their websites. However they exist mostly in the realm of reporting with none of the analysis or reflection that blog-reporting would bring to the debate.So...
Monday, May 19, 2008
Monday, April 28, 2008
Nepotism Notes
A really funny one
However nothing surprising for us in India. Visualise:
The fracas began when Mr.Ajit Pawar (son of former Minister Sharad Pawar)accused Mr.Gandhi of failing to fulfill his promise of reviving the party's fortune. He called upon Mr.Gandhi to step down and requested Ms Gandhi Vadra to take over the reins of the party "in the tradition of your most noble mother and grandmother".This is the culmination of the on and off power struggle between the siblings that erupted 2 years ago when their mother Ms.Sonia Gandhi retired from politics to pursue what she called 'vanaprastha'.Attempts to contact Ms.Sonia Gandhi at her Rishikesh residence have not yielded any results.
otttapalam:in one of the most emotional reunions in the history of Indian politics, the indian national congress(i-r) and the indian national congress(i-p) effected a merger after 30 years of fierce infighting and rivalry which brought india's oldest party to the verge of destruction. the merger was officially announced at the 85th plenary of the inc (i) at ottapalam by antonia rahul gandhi and reihan priyanka gandhi vadra the presidents of the inc(i-r) and inc(i-p) respectively.It is worth remembering that the party split into two in 2016 after the acrimonious proceedings of the 84th plenary of the party and the famous lok sabha fight between rahul gandhi and priyanka gandhi vadra. antonia(36) and reihan (46) spoke in eloquent terms of the sacrifices of their parents, grandparents ,greatgrandparents, greatgreatgrandparents, greatgreatgreatgrandparents and countless other relatives and family friends including mahatma gandhi who had all given their lives to the nation.it is speculated that the reunited party might be renamed as the inc(jirsorp) after the names of the prominent members of the nehru-gandhi family to celebrate the efforts of the family and inspire the party workers. the new party has two seats in the lok sabha-rae bareilly which is held by antonia rahul gandhi and amethi which is represented by reihan priyanka gandhi vadra.
However nothing surprising for us in India. Visualise:
Tuesday, March 15,2016
Indore: The proceedings at the 84th plenary session of the Indian National Congress turned ugly today as supporters of INC president Rahul Gandhi and his sister Priyanka Gandhi Vadra clashed violently over the future of the beleaguered party. 1 AICC delegate was injured as he tried to immolate himself to express his support for Ms. Gandhi Vadra. Both Mr. Gandhi and Ms. Gandhi Vadra have condemned the violence.
The fracas began when Mr.Ajit Pawar (son of former Minister Sharad Pawar)accused Mr.Gandhi of failing to fulfill his promise of reviving the party's fortune. He called upon Mr.Gandhi to step down and requested Ms Gandhi Vadra to take over the reins of the party "in the tradition of your most noble mother and grandmother".This is the culmination of the on and off power struggle between the siblings that erupted 2 years ago when their mother Ms.Sonia Gandhi retired from politics to pursue what she called 'vanaprastha'.Attempts to contact Ms.Sonia Gandhi at her Rishikesh residence have not yielded any results.
THE DAILY PHEESH
wednesday 14 february 2046
wednesday 14 february 2046
otttapalam:in one of the most emotional reunions in the history of Indian politics, the indian national congress(i-r) and the indian national congress(i-p) effected a merger after 30 years of fierce infighting and rivalry which brought india's oldest party to the verge of destruction. the merger was officially announced at the 85th plenary of the inc (i) at ottapalam by antonia rahul gandhi and reihan priyanka gandhi vadra the presidents of the inc(i-r) and inc(i-p) respectively.It is worth remembering that the party split into two in 2016 after the acrimonious proceedings of the 84th plenary of the party and the famous lok sabha fight between rahul gandhi and priyanka gandhi vadra. antonia(36) and reihan (46) spoke in eloquent terms of the sacrifices of their parents, grandparents ,greatgrandparents, greatgreatgrandparents, greatgreatgreatgrandparents and countless other relatives and family friends including mahatma gandhi who had all given their lives to the nation.it is speculated that the reunited party might be renamed as the inc(jirsorp) after the names of the prominent members of the nehru-gandhi family to celebrate the efforts of the family and inspire the party workers. the new party has two seats in the lok sabha-rae bareilly which is held by antonia rahul gandhi and amethi which is represented by reihan priyanka gandhi vadra.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
