Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Questions and counter-questions; no answers!!

Even if you are an occasional watcher of that abomination called news hour on prime-time TV, like this scribe, you don't have to be very perceptive to figure out something rather ridiculous is going on. This tactic all mediocre politicians (mostly that is what we can boast of) use, when they are painted into a corner by a disturbing query from the opposite number or the anchor about some misdeed of their tribe.  They try dexterously to dance around the periphery and stonewall (for exactly these skills they are the anointed spokespersons of their respective parties) because the answer is something which will show them in unflattering light.  When they realize their plight, they use the final asthra in their armour in order to wriggle out of the tight corner - they effortlessly slide back to the oft-used tactic of delving into their archives and posing a counter question in the same domain, which shames the opposition .  No answer is provided, but the problem is solved.  While the younger generation of politicians attempts to provide some answer, however weak, the old bandicoots are shameless experts in exploiting this strategy.


The 1965 Thamizh movie `Thiruvilayadal' is about how Lord Shiva physically comes to the rescue of serious devotees in times of trouble.  One episode shows Shiva trying to help a small-time struggler of a  poet compete in the king's court, in a contest of verses to answer a question giving the King sleepless nights.  Shiva descends to earth, commiserates with the poet, who is desperately trying to compose the verse for the contest and without disclosing his own identity, offers to provide the verse, encouraging the poet to plagiarize - not the right role model for kids,  but then Gods can do what they please, right?   The poet bristles at having to borrow the verse of the stranger and pooh-poohs the idea, expressing doubts about the capability of Shiva.  So, Shiva wants to settle the matter through a session of catechism between the two and asks the poet `do you want to ask the questions or do I ask them'?  The answer from the poet - and he says this without even pausing for breath or batting an eye-lid - is etched in the memory of all Thamizh moviegoers for life - `No, No, I will ask the questions and you answer; because I only know the questions, never the answers'.  This classic line repeatedly plays in the absurd theatre of contemporary Indian politicians, whenever they are asked an inconvenient question.  In response, they go through plain evasion, then switch to equivocation and finally, when they see no way out, they raise a counter-question, knowing fully well that an answer will not be forthcoming.

Take the latest example of this worthy from Congress, who will remain unnamed (a clue: he is highly prone to this foot-in-the-mouth disease, his first name begins with D and ends with Y and  is a shameless practitioner of sycophancy) and who had this laughable poser in the context of the Supreme Court saying that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is a `caged parrot, with many masters'.  Not a single person with even a modicum of intelligence and understanding of ground realities of Indian politics, would have a problem with that super-accurate statement of the court, since CBI has long become subservient to the government of the day and has been a tool to beat its opponents with.  Obviously this individual does not measure up to the parameters specified above and fails to comprehend why the court said what it said.  He wants to play holier than thou and develops a sudden love for our institutions overnight.  So, instead of providing a rational answer to the court and public to rebut or explain as to how the government can improve things with reference to CBI, he has the temerity to ask his own question: `Are we not belittling our institutions by calling them parrots etc'? What an astounding level of brazenness in one who is a seasoned politician? Or is this so only because he is a seasoned politician? If anyone has unabashedly belittled our institutions day in and day out, there should be absolutely no doubt that it is our politicians of all hues.  Just look at our parliament and assemblies when they are in session and the charades that go on in the name of democracy, if you need proof.  And here is D......Y saheb, shedding tears even the crocodiles would find hard to match!

How about the Gujarat riots of 2002, consequent to that horrendous incident at Godhra?  Nearly 1100 people perished and the arson scarred the Indian psyche for good in the aftermath.  Various inquisitions might have been held and the inconclusive verdicts issued, deliberately or otherwise.  But, there is no doubt that ultimately the government of the day should bear at least moral responsibility if not more.  Congress never tires of raising the uncomfortable question of the government's and Chief Minister's culpability for the pogrom, especially when they find themselves mired in more than the usual quota of scams.  Tired of squeamishly providing unconvincing responses for over a decade, of late BJP has started countering with their own question: `What happened in 1984 after the anti-Sikh riots? Did the government and the Prime Minister (since this happened in Delhi) accept accountability and resign or what?'.  Now, between the two parties, they probably think the matter is settled and they can move on to the next phase of their diabolical existence. But the general populace, the most affected party, is left in the lurch, still looking for some kind of closure with judgements from the courts delayed for almost one generation in one case.

Thanks to the devious practices of the political bigwigs, even common men, who are sympathizers of these parties, resort to similar tactics, when confronted with uncomfortable questions.  Recently, during a heated discussion involving a mixed group of people owing allegiance to different parties, a rabid BJP follower wondered why our External Affairs Minister should visit China and kow-tow there when the Chinese army had ingressed into Indian territory in Ladakh, obviously with the approval of the government.  He averred that Salman Kurshid's visit as well as the visit of the Chinese Prime Minister to India should be summarily cancelled by India, until China restores status-quo-ante.  There are a hundred diplomatic nuances surrounding such visits, which could have been the basis for a smart, well thought-out response from the Congress member in the group.  But his retort was typically shallow -`Aha, what was the venerable BJP Prime Minister doing, fiddling with his Pakistani counterpart, when that country was setting Kargil on fire'? This is what happens when leaders do not display the maturity and political savvy to provide reasoned responses to questions; how would the tiniest cogs in the wheel and minions behave differently?

When the 2G scam was raging and the details were being discussed threadbare everywhere, fortunately for the ruling party, the mining and land allotment scams surfaced almost simultaneously in Karnataka as minor reprieves, even though the numbers involved were nowhere comparable.  The demand of the opposition for the resignation of the Prime Minister was met with a cool `Why is not the Karnataka Chief Minister resigning, even after having been indicted by the court for corruption in land allotment?' was the answering question from the ruling party.  This did puncture a hole in the wheel of the opposition, regardless of its hoarse protests that the situations were not comparable (are they not?).  But once again, instead of a question and an answer, we ended up with two questions and nowhere to go.

This pitiful game will continue until our political culture changes and for that we need a good crop of genuine leaders with loads of maturity and willingness to accept their mistakes.  That is not going to happen in a hurry because as my wife usually says, one can wake somebody who is actually sleeping; how do you wake up someone who is pretending to be asleep?  Yes, our politicians have to crawl out of their own self-inflicted coma first, for things to show semblance of transformation.  Until then, we can only dumbly watch the flow of counter questions!!



 



2 comments:

Jujubax said...

Varada-san
Thoughtful post. Thanks.
Since you are alluding to an awesome movie, I will also take one more example. In the movie "Panchathanthiram" (Kamal & host of others) where the same poet (now much older) starts asking questions... and Kamal replies with exasperated tone, "Well, it is easy to ask questions, answers are really hard to come by".

Firstly, I think, our Babus are not formally trained to handle press and other external interfaces. Foot-in-the-mouth is not an error but it is part of specification.
Secondly, there are no major exceptions in positive way who would serve as role model.
Thirdly, cost of such errors are very small (if at all) compared to the benefits of being self-confessed "YES" person - the carrier is secured so long the ambition is tempered

You may want to recall, PG Woodhouse remark “Genius has got lot of limitations, stupidity is not thus handicapped”.
If you are proven non entity and YES person under any conditions, then one can test freedom of infinite stupidity !

Regards
Madhu
PS: I loved your hint.

Doreswamy Srinidhi said...

Grey cells are really working overtime here!
I am afraid to make a comment. I remember cartoonists were arrested because they made fun of a politician, one elected by a loving majority. Are we allowed to criticise them in a blog?

I have a few questions:
Why do politicians avoid decisions and actions unless there is a SC or HC order?
Whose responsibility is it to reduce the himalayan pile of pending cases in courts? Is it the governament or the judiciary? Or does it fall inbetween?
Why are TV debates allowed on sub-judice matters?
How many hours should be allowed on TV for discussing nonsense like spot fixing? Should not some regualtor limit these discussions so that we can go on to more important subjects?
You can see the list can become endless!
My suggestion is that the cable TV should not be allowed to discuss subjects on political issues, may be they could be, but should not invite a single politician if the parliament is adjourned sine die because the netas who collected around the speaker and did not allow a debate! The area, is it called the pits?

Lawyer's Documents

Caveate - This is not about all the practising lawyers in the filed today.  But most of the specimens we go to for day-to-day transactions a...