Of Franchise & Follies - The Salad Issue

I was led into a very thought-provoking issue by one of the few men who inspire me and for whom I have genuine respect - My elder brother Shayne John. He told me, "If you don't think much of a person's integrity or ability, criticize that - propaganda that attacks a person is absolutely scurrilous and shows how low public debate in India has fallen." He was referring to a forward that supposedly discussed the private life of some very famous people.
I do not normally investigate the private lives of people. However, just for the sake of a good debate, I wrote about why normal rules of decency don’t apply in India…Imagine a public debate between 2 Prime Ministerial candidates in India.

[Jacob]
Blinded by the glare of the propriety of Democracy we fail to notice that 'exercise of franchise' devoid of a specific social-structure background means nothing...at least in India. In a country like India, an educated person would be part of a minority. A 'reasonable' and educated person would be part of an exceedingly small minority. Frankly, in our scheme of things, criticism of integrity would not be worth much...it sounds good...better on television as a discussion between a couple of JNU professors...In truth, nobody buys it...and even if they do, it does not change ground realities.
Like the East India Company of the late 1700s (after 1757) and the great West Indian sides of the 1980s, fear is the key for the continuing breed of power vendors - they distribute it like cheap lager, through the brooding gunslinging certainty that their 'bhais' and 'sadhus' bring to every tight display of 'franchise'. Even today, as I am writing this, the only terror in our minds is that of an encounter with these menaces. More than 50 years after our 'assumption' of 'self-rule', we have not been able to successfully exorcise the ghost of feudal submission, albeit in the backdrop of the 21st century. 60% of the country may have cell phones but it has not changed the basic equations that govern their political psyche. Swaraj started out in 1947. It failed much before that. 'Swaraj' was demonstrated by a headstrong Mr. M.K. Gandhi as 'my rule'. His shameful treatment of popular politicians and open bias for Nehru makes for good reading material.
The situation is made dicier by the knowledge that an election involves choice of the lesser evil. We are not making much progress in the light of the 'politics-is-the-last-refuge-of-the-scoundrel' proverb. Honest people do not wish to get embroiled in politics... the few who do get annihilated (take Mr. A. K. Antony for instance). In the face of such a situation, people - educated or not - tend to flock together on the basis of community...religious affiliation is the name of the game. The point is not whether Dr. Manmohan Singh's grandfather was a Marthomite or not. The point is that his being Sikh wittingly or unwittingly fits perfectly into the dynamics of the political strategy of the ruling party. If his grandfather were a Marthomite, it would suit his party just as well - The more the merrier (And I very much respect Dr. Singh). In India there is an incongruity in the communal allowances made to Indians - For the common man the option is an 'OR' gate while for the public figure an 'AND' gate is critical. Multiple affiliations signal the ability to prise open multiple vote banks. Is it just co-incidence that the President as well the Prime Minister of the country, appointed by different parties, are part of minority communities? Is it entirely an assumption that Dr. P.C. Alexander was not appointed president because:
a.) He was part of a smaller (vote-bank) minority.
b.) It would be an anomaly if both the President and Prime Minister (Ms. Sonia Gandhi was touted to be P.M. at that time) were of Christian origin?
You are absolutely right about the level of political rhetoric existing in India. However there is nothing anybody can do about it. The truth is that India was Gandhi's gift to Nehru (wittingly or not...I won't debate). The point is that we, as a people, are governed highly by the social stys we are born in. Our 'loyalty' is unerring and as stated by Abraham Maslow's theory we strive for acceptance within our community. That is the reason why we stick by our 'favourite' politician or dynasty or pastor or sitcom. In any other country the religious affiliation of the ruling dynasty is strictly their business but not in India. Unfortunately, for those who look at the world through ‘developed’ eyes, the situation is the same even in the US of A. Conservative Christians grouped together and voted Dubya back into power...and he is probably the least popular leader in the whole wide world! This is a perfect example for my earlier points - criticizing lack of certain traits in your local politician might not do the trick anymore. Criticism does not ever inhibit scoundrels. They act in spite of it and it gradually yields to them.