(excerpts below from a recent article id written elsewhere on an MP who adores the limelight and perennially chases it; being more sinned against than a sinner in a recent controversy). Please indulge. :) The ability to hold a multitudinous, complex viewpoint is a rare, fading art in todays politics. The hon. MP for the capital constituency of the small green southern state is one of the few of recent vintage to take a holistic, nuanced position on the rightist government at the center. This without compromising his own core beliefs and his long standing reservations against right of center sectarianism. His position is abundantly clear if one reads over three decades of his published pronouncements, which at a minimum, are stylistic and textural without the depth of gravitas that is often erroneously attributed as a core quality of the man. They leave little doubt on the stance the gentleman has consistently taken over time. The Rt. hon. MP has been one of the few politicians in the Modi era to be able to contribute to worthwhile, multi-layered,academic analysis in our public discourse. He has been critical, incisive, and cautiously cognizant in the ability to rise above parochial, aaya Ram, Gaya Ram sounds-cape and think of the larger issues of national bearing and the way the nation is perceived on the international stage. He has also been one of the surprising few to articulate that when a Prime Minister goes abroad, he represents our nation, and not his party. And for all his labors, he will now stand accused by the career stooges and the flatterers/flamethrowers-with a skill and dexterity of cliche perfected over decades- of not toeing an increasingly imaginary, dinosauric line; of not continuing to muck around in the bog of shortsighted politics, and horse-trade lingo based around evening news attention-span based sound bytes. Pundit Nehru,the same doyen of the entity that the flamethrowers pretend to represent was a past master of the turn of phrase, the generosity of viewpoint, the visionary ability to accommodate diversity of views. All with civilized, persuasive, humor laden prose and speech. The entity of course, has long since moved on. With the on being abjectly questionable! I speak as someone who continues to believe that the most deserving candidate sadly failed to unseat the same hon. MP in the previous election. I was personally disappointed that the more deserving candidate in my book lost the last election in the constituency we allude to. And for reasons that had nothing to do with anyones private life. Or lack of it. Which should not be a decisive factor in public space anyways... The right to take a position that is neither black or white (or green) is sacrosanct in a liberal democracy that also calls itself a republic. This is an enshrined freedom that is important for the sake of nuanced parley and consensus based, logic driven, governance.This is important for the sake of liberalism in this land. And for the sake of extending the secular debate away from the cliche infested sycophants who have built careers mouthing inanities around the concept. That mean little. And actually do it a disservice. It is also the reason why we call ourselves a liberal democracy. But for how much longer?
Posted on: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 04:44:39 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015