Skip to main content

The Truth behind Anna Hazare Movement

This is not an article about breaking news disclosure about the movement which today stares us squarely in the eyes without a blink, nothing of the kind which Congress spokesmen love to break on the camera about Kishan Baburaon Hazare, before, retreating with the official line "I do not speak for the party" when cornered in the debate. Their love for their own voide and own face keeps pushing them into 24 hours debates, but it is so easy and logical to loose a debate when you do not have truth on your side. Only debates that can be won without having truth on your side are the ones which wives have with their husband, but that is a separate discussion, which I am for obvious reasons bound to loose. But this is facinating, they even today, come on television and talk of procedure. Well, was the minority protection bill proposed by National Advisory Council against the procedure, since NAC was not parliament, and it was also a civil society congregation, albeit sanctioned by the Government. Was the arrest of Anna Hazare as per procedure? if it was, then was the release of Anna Hazare as per procedure? Both entering into an act and then negating it by the end of the day can not be correct. If in the morning, an always intellegent looking P. Chidambram, was correct in claiming that Police acted independently based on its own intelligence; what changed in the evening. Did the Government interfere in Police functioning and asked it to release Anna Hazare? Can it not force the Lokpal act similarly if Lokpal is elected by the Government just as the CVC or CBI chief today? While denying it vehemantly, it has actually demonstrated what it can do with its tools. Then they say, so called Civil Society has no mandate, but then why was Government talking to the same set of people earlier, and who has mandated the Dilip Padgaonkar led committee to decide on the future of J&K? Then they say that the Government is not bound to accept the demands of civil society and the civil society can not threaten the government. But when asked to explain the actions of Manish Teewari and the likes, they go into cocoon saying they do not speak for the Government. I am surprised, if you can not defend what your government is doing, can not stand for or against what your party says, what are you in the debate for, and the statement made by legendary Jack Nicholson in ever so great a voice made in the movie "A Few Good Men" comes to my mind," Now what to you want to discuss, my favorite color of underwear?" as he thundered on the lawyer opposing him.
These people seem to be totally blind. This uprising is not about the bill or corruption, they are just the backdrop, a romantic music that plays softly behind the high action drama in the forefront in a movie. The people coming in to debate miss the whole point. It is like women watching a thought provoking movie and then checking the color and dress of the female protagonist. The argument started probably on those points but with the difficult to hide arrogance of the government, it has taken a different shape.
Two school boys in a school sit next to each other. One of  them nudges the other on the desk and they break into a fight. In the begining, the other guy could have asked and explained as to how they both are justly entitled to equal space on the desk. But one of them, drunk on power, pushes the other one and that is it. The are into a fist fight, and then you can not break it by offering more share of desk or even the change of seat. It is then a fight to win, a fight to prove that I am not an existence which is too easy to ignore.  It is the thundering voice of the middle class telling Ms. Ranuka Chaudhury to listen to the truth in air, which so cold and cutting that it if you hold your palm against them, you will have them bloodied, when just a month back right after PM address to select set of editors, when asked whether or not it is too little too late for PM to set communication with his people as the nation reels under the unapologetic loot under the CWG and 2G spectrum issue, says, PM will not talk based on when you want them to talk, he will decide when he is going to talk, what he is going to talk, how he is going to talk. Ask Madam again, if she intends to reconsider the position. PM will, of course talk whenever people want him to talk, right Madam. The middle class of this country was taken as a homeopathic medicine, which even if it does not bring any benefit, can not cause any harm. Ruling classes were all having set equations with High class elites with promise of high value contracts negotiated by the likes of Ms. Radia and with lowest rung of the society with blatant lies like reservation, and free Televisions and two kilograms of rice. They were so separated from the realities of the nation that they never noticed how the equations changed, how we now have a large population which can be now termed as middle class. Which understands that the liberalization that the current PM is credited for, happened not because he had great vision, but because in 1993 with empty coffers, there was no option, which can see through the claims of Delhi government for making Delhi clean, as it had followed multiple affidavits submitted by Delhi Government to scuttle CNG or whatever, the government takes claim of, it can see through how the government which now claims to be acting on 2G scam, was just some time back claimed the theory of zero loss to exchequer.
This whole struggle is not about one act or bill, this is about making the voice heard for some one who has just got his lost voice. It is a little boy who has pushed the school bully and to his utter surprise has found the big boy loose balance. It is the time to set things in place and show people their real place in democracy. It is not about an act or a bill.


Tintu said…
This is a great first step for India!

congress had no choice but to listen to the people of India! Aam aadmi's time is coming and soon everybody will get the same respect in this country!

Popular posts from this blog

कायस्थ- इतिहास एवं वर्तमान परिपेक्ष्य

सत्यम , दानम , क्षमा शीलमानृशंस्य तपो घृणा। दृश्यंते यत्र नागेंद्र स ब्राह्मण इति स्मृतः।। ( हे सर्पराज , जिसमें सत्य , दानशीलता , क्षमा , क्रूरतारहित भाव , तप एवं संवरण , एवं संवेदना हो , वह मनुष्य को ही ब्राह्मण मानना चाहिए। ) शुद्रे तु यद् भवेल्लक्षम द्विजे तच्च न विद्दयते। न वै शूद्रों भवेच्छुद्रो ब्रह्मणो न च ब्राह्मण : ।। ( यदि शूद्र में यह गुण हैं ( सत्य , दान , अक्रोध , अहिंसा , तप , संवरण एवं संवेदना ) और ब्राह्मण में यह गुण परिलक्षित ना हों तो वह शूद्र शूद्र नहीं , ब्राह्मण है ; और वह ब्राह्मण ब्राह्मण नहीं है। )  - युधिष्ठिर - नहुष संवाद , अजगर कांड , महाभारत , वन पर्व   वर्तमान परिपेक्ष्य में जिसे जाति कहा जाता है , वह वर्ण व्यवस्था का विकृत रूप है। सनातन धर्म का वर्ण जहाँ समाज को व्यवसाय एवं क्षमता के अनुरूप व्यवस्थित करने का प्रयास था और कर्म पर आधारित था , जाति उसी व्यवस्था का विघटित रूप बन कर जन्मगत व्यवस्था बन गई। जाति या कास्ट पुर्तगाल

Pathaan and Polarisation- Movie Review

Many have not seen Pathan, I have. I have a huge tolerance towards stupid movies and I love to watch all sort of movies. What has bothered me most about Pathaan is that in terms of content and characterisation, it is absolutely shoddy, much worse than much lampooned RaOne AND there is no review which openly tells you about it.  Most reviewers have reviewed the movie like a teenager, gushing over VFX generated body of ShahRukh Khan. This reminds me of my schoolmates bunking classes to watch tomato-sauce-laced movies of Ramsey brothers, gushing over semi-nude voluptuous actresses in the late 80s. Only difference being that those were school kids in class XII, with raging hormones and a stupefied intellect when a world around them was fast changing. Here we have middle-aged professional movie reviewers guiding people to their way in or out of Movie theatres. Their primary argument in favour of the movie is nothing but beefed up Shahrukh Khan and the gap between his earlier movie and this

बाल विवाह - हिंदू इतिहास और सत्य

  इतिहास का लेखन उसकी विसंगतियों की अनुक्रमिका नहीं वरन उसके समाज के आम रूप से स्वीकृत मान्यताओं एवं उस समाज के जननायकों द्वारा स्थापित मानदंडों के आधार पर होना चाहिए। परंतु जब लेखनी उन हाथों में हो जिनका मंतव्य शोध नहीं एक समाज को लज्जित करना भर हो तो समस्या गहन हो जाती है। जब प्रबुद्ध लोग कलम उठाते हैं और इस उद्देश्य के साथ उठाते हैं कि अप्रासंगिक एवं सदर्भहीन तथ्यों के माध्यम से समाज की वर्ग विभाजक रेखाओं को पुष्ट कर सकें तो हमारा कर्तव्य होता है कि हम सत्य को संदर्भ दें और अपने इतिहास के भले बुरे पक्षों को निर्विकार भाव से जाँचें।   बीते सप्ताह बाल विवाह को लेकर विदेशी सभ्यता में उठे प्रश्नों को भारत की सभ्यता पर प्रक्षेपित करके और उसकी स्वीकार्यता स्थापित करने पर बड़ी चर्चा रही। इस संदर्भ में   श्री ए एल बाशम से ले कर राजा राम मोहन रॉय तक चर्चा चली। बाशम की पुस्तक द वंडर दैट वाज इंडिया - को उद्धृत कर ले कहा गया कि हिं