For "Parliamentary Democracy's" sake, stop the madness Anna

On the 17th of August, 2011, Dr Manmohan Singh, embittered, harrowed, hurt, heart-broken by the wave of protests against corruption led by Anna Hazare charged Anna for "misleading" the Indian populace. Even though this is not his style, he stooped low and cried foul at Anna, all for a good cause. For the sake of "Parliamentary Democracy".

He reminded the unintelligible billion plus that in a Parliamentary democracy, only the parliament is entitled to enact laws. Nobody external to the parliament has the right to demand what the parliament does not grant. Neither does anyone have the right to protest if any such demands are not met. Such protests are akin to blackmail and tend to mislead the nation.

Oh yes for sure Dr. Singh it is the prerogative of the parliament to frame and pass laws. I agree. Protesting to forcefully bring in a legislation is against the parliamentary process. Agreed again.

Now if you could please tell me. What if the parliament is in the process of bringing in a retrograde legislation or a useless-piece-of-bull-crap legislation with ulterior motives, and people can see through the intentions of the members of parliament? Should they let you bring in the law "in the name of parliamentary democracy" or should they protest?

Mr PM, the difference between your bill and the civil society's is as stark as that between apples and peanuts. Your bill ( the peanuts ) has neither the content nor intent of making any dent in corruption. The news for you is that we, the people, very well understand the differences. We also understand that you want to derive greatness out of passing your good-for-nothing "peanuts". Having got numerous assurances from you, being able to see through the web of diversions you are busy weaving, if this is what we get, should we not protest?

The spirit of the Jan Lokpal was, is and should always be unamendable. "Honesty in service at every level of governance" is the spirit of the Jan Lokpal bill. The discussions between Civil society and government were supposed to decide how to put this spirit into form. Anna Hazare went to you with one form of it. What was expected of your GoM was keep the spirit alive and intact, in a form which would be most efficient. But you gave us a bill which diluted the "spirit of Lokpal bill". That is to say, "We do not need honesty at every level". We understand what your actions mean, pretty well now. Should we still not protest?

Reasons you cite for this dilution are, suppposed administrative inefficiencies that might creep in, dignity of office and other jumbo-crap. What this translates to is, "I need absolute autonomy, I want to be able to dwindle public money without getting caught, I do not want to be accountable to anyone, only then will I try to work and yet, targets may move by decades, by crores of people and by billions of rupees". If these are the conditions you covertly put before us, should we not protest?

When the parliament is so intoxicated with power that it ignores the legitimate demands of people, when parliament is so manipulative that it makes laws to benefit a coterie of few, ignoring the vast majority, when members of the parliament are so unabashedly crude, overtly mideval in handling valid protests in speech and action, democracy has to flex a muscle. When the fight is for "my right versus your priviledge" I would have little respect for any institution, office or person who stands in the way of my right, and holding the prop of your priviledge. If you stand in the way of my right to an honest governance, with your priviledge of autonomy in drafting public bills, should I not protest?

It was high time, someone had to take a stand, someone had to say "Enough". What Anna Hazare and the people are doing could be a travesty of parliamentary system. It could be wrong, but if it is wrong, it is not something they enjoy doing. It is something, they have been forced to do, by you and your Members of Parliament. You are contesting against Anna Hazare for the sake of Parliamentary System, but you should know that it is YOU who is responsible if you feel that the Parliament is forsaken.

How to manage a lake

The CPI way

• Win the contract of managing the lake by assuring all the big fish, small fish, red fish, green fish and alligators that there shall be equality, hence prosperity and peace.
• Pick the smallest fish and note it's diet.
• Make sure that the red fish, green fish and big fish get only as much as the smallest fish get to eat.
• Make friends with the alligator.
• If any fish ever feels hungry, feed it to the alligator.
• Allow mosquitoes to lay eggs in the lake.
• During subsequent elections, provide a certificate to all the mosquitoes and their larvae saying that the mosquitoes are fish and belong to the lake. Secure their vote to counter dissatisfied fish and win the elections.
• Rule the lake for the next 34 years until the water becomes green and algae, moss and bacteria infest each and every corner of the lake.
• The fish, alligator, moss, algae, bacteria, mosquitoes ( certified as fish ) finally decide to throw the contractors out of the lake.

The Bahujan Samaj Party way

• Tell the numerous small fish that they are small because of the discrimination of other big fish. That, they will get more food and allowed to grow if BSP gets the contract..
• Tell the big fish that they would live peacefully only if they patronize the BSP contractors.
• Win the contract.
• Evict the small fish from their dwelling holes in the lake and acquire the lake area to raise decorative coral polyps.
• If the fish protest, let loose the Piranha ( supposed to protect the lake from intruders ) on them.

The BJP way

• Promise a grand temple for the red fish in the middle of the lake.
• Destroy the meeting centre of the green fish in the middle of the lake. Station the piranha in the centre.
• Win the contract with the support of the emotional red fish.
• Erect a giant Scarecrow at the Pokhran corner of the lake in the name of deterring external enemies.
• Get into a dialogue with the dogs to persuade them to stop excreting on the bank.
• Turn around to find a whole pack of dogs excreting on the banks of the lake.
• Throw bombs at the dogs and scare them off. Get the emotional support of the fish and get elected for a second term.
• Invite twenty other sub-contractors to help in management.
• Undertake cleaning of the lake.
• Take a boat to the middle of the lake to initiate cleaning.
• All sub-contractors row the boat in different directions. The boat does not move, the lake is still dirty.
• Sublet the management of crab village and mollusk colony to eagles and crows.
• The eagles and crows get fat.
• Tell the lake dwellers that there is a "feel good factor" as the health of the crows and eagles is improving.

The Congress way

• Tell the small fish that they are small because of the discrimination of the big fish.
• Tell the Green fish that they are under mortal threat from the Red fish.
• Remind all lake dwellers that the Congress drove off fishermen from the lake. Also that "The Great Dolphin" which led the struggle against fishermen belonged to the Congress.
• Make friends with the alligators.
• Appoint a Shark who calls itself "Dolphin" as their leader.
• Win the contract.
• Undertake projects to clean and develop the lake.
• In the name of clean-up of the lake, secretly sell the fish-eggs, allow the alligators to eat the fish, contract out multiple projects to the crows and eagles.
• Announce brilliant programs for development of fish larvae, worms and other endangered creatures in the lake. Tax the working fish for the development work.
• Hide the taxed amount in safe holes in other ponds and lakes. Distribute some among the alligators, crows and eagles.
• When fish complain of dirt, low oxygen levels, less food, expensive food, tell them:

1. These are signs of prosperity and development. The fish are getting more food hence excreting more, the fish are growing bigger hence consuming more oxygen, food is scarce because of the "globalized" order of lakes and subsequent food shortage in other lakes.
2. If the fish still protest, call it an outcome of flawed policies of the previous contractors.
3. If fish still protest, call the protest a conspiracy of the frogs.

• Finally if some fish decide to clean the lake on their own and start eating the dirt, call them "frogs" and throw them out of the lake.

Ban The Baba – Let's find reasons

This is to all my fellow-critics of Baba Ramdev.

Baba Ramdev is a gimmick, a big-mouth-small-act, politically motivated, maybe not even the best of yogis. He is an ordinary man who learnt some yoga tricks and set out preaching and got famous. Let me first extend my acceptance to all that the fellow critics have to say. BABA RAMDEV IS AN ORDINARY MAN who wears a saffron dhoti, sports a bushy beard, talks in hindi and has a big empire. I presume we are together on it so far.

An ordinary man who learnt yoga tricks: Yoga is a traditional INDIAN ( not confining myself to Hindu ) fitness mantra. Yoga is no tricksy hymns and chants to invoke blessings of unseen deities. Yoga is normal sequence of stretching, pulling, breathing techniques which suits everyone from age 3 - 100. It's a wonderful means to stay fit for one and all. We were ( and are) so proud when Britney Spears, Madonna and god knows who else heaved praises for the INDIAN yoga publicly and adopted yoga as an essential part of their lives.

But Ramdev baba went a step ahead and tried to make Yoga a practice of the masses in addition to the classes. We should give him that credit. So what if he is an ordinary man, so what if he is the not the best of yogis. He has done something which the best of yogis did not. This isn't such a bad thing. I believe all the fellow critics of Baba Ramdev will not object to this.

A man who wears saffron: I see little reason to object to that. He is a hindu and likes to wear the color he deems holy. That's not such a bad thing. Priests in churches like to wear white and they do, fakirs like to wear green, and they must. They have the right and liberty to don the color of their choice and one they deem holy. India can honorably proclaim that it gives people the right to uphold their customs, believes, faiths and modes of worship. So I guess the use of saffron doesn't make him a villain either.

One could infer that he wears saffron so he is not secular and must be hated... How would that even qualify as an argument? I wear my underwear inside my pant. Does that make me "anti-Superman"?

You could say he espouses Hindu Fundamentalism: I have little reason to believe that. I have seen many of his shows. He talks about "Aarogya" ( freedom from illness ), he talks about shunning McDonalds, Coke, Pepsi ( I like coke and Pepsi and McD is yummy but we all know these are not the healthiest of intakes ), I have heard him talk of reviving the greatness of India, making nationalist speeches ( even as he asks people to do the butterfly ) but I don't find that objectionable either. I rather believe nationalism is a good thing to pursue and arouse in people.

I have seen muslims, christians, doctors, industrialists flocking to his shivirs. I have also seen him on TV talking of religious harmony and fraternity. That sounds good to me. If any of my fellow critics have any videos / evidences that reveal the "dhongi baba's" religious fundamentalism and communal bend, please share it with everyone, let's expose him guys.

The fact that he talked about getting into politics: Yeah!! That was stupid. And then I think again and I feel, if the baba can, why not you and I. Why can't we, educated, sophisticated people who have our hearts, minds and sentiments in the right place, we who know the right from the wrong, why shouldn't we get into politics? Anyone who thinks for the good of the nation can and should get into politics, actively or in spirit.

And if anyone can, why can the baba not think of getting into politics. It would be mean and hypocritical of us to deny him that, given that he is a nationalist and accidentally or intentionally does good things. C'mon, we are liberals of the highest degree, we allow rated criminals to contest elections. I wouldn't want to be a hypocrite denying him that. If I feel he is not good enough, I would not vote for him, but I wouldn't stop him either.

Baba knows nothing about politics: True. I have no reason to doubt this one. He made some comments. Some people met him and talked to him and then he changed his comment. And then another group of people met and talked to him, and he changed his comments again. Looks like he has no concept of political leadership. But this doesn't qualify as reason enough for anyone to hate him.

It gives me the picture of a man trying to build a ship. A group of engineers asks him to start off with the hull. He pics up his saw, welding machine and other stuff and gets going. Then another group of engineers tells him that he should prepare the design first and he gets on searching for a pencil and paper. This does tell me that he has no idea nor imagination of ship-building. I cannot figure out though, how it can mean he is malicious.. something which would give me reason to hate him.

He has a lot of money, and it's dirty: How would I differentiate between dirty money and thrift in a country where the only people who have no dirty money carry an “Antyoday Anna Yojana” card instead, registers for a job under MGNREGA and is officially known as a BPL ( Below Poverty Line ) citizen? It would hypocritical of me to hold “only him” as a culprit. So what, if he has thousand of crores, I have yet not heard of his hidden cassino or him spending his fortune over his international super model wives or him buying a diamond studded swatch or gold-plated Armani. I would have the right to hate him the day I hear about these, but not until then.

He ran off the stage and changed to women's attire: Haven't we already established that he is an ordinary man who has done something that made him extrordinarily popular? I am an ordinary man, if I knew and believed that there is an attempt to take my life, I could do end up getting into the most outrageous acts. I could bury my head in the sand, I could play a lunatic, I could try and impersonate someone else, I could tell my assasins that I am ManMohan Singh's son and they'd be dead if they even touched me. Clearly baba did not have any of these bright ideas and all he could think of was changing into a woman's attire. Perhaps he was scared, perhaps this was the first time he had seen such an orgy of ruthlessness and didn't know how to react. These are possibilities that I can't ignore and these being possible, I see nothing hateful in an ordinary man going over the edge to save his life.

He broke his fast and he did not die: O, this is a conspiracy!! He knows he has failed this time, nobody is coming to talk to him, few people are bothered whether he is dead or alive. Those who are bothered are the village folks from haryana, UP, MP etc, but village folks, people who can be rated as demagogues, batoned, fired at and yet nobody will cared after the first two days of telecast on news channels. These are the people who are beaten up in bhatta parsaul, people who died in Bhopal and the Indian heads hardly turned off the computer screens and FB pages in response. These are people who rise only at their own peril and he civilized urban society feels uneasy, if at all only for a while in response. What difference are these guys going to make?

He knows this. Perhaps he now understands the futility of his hunger strike and though he knows that he has created for himself critics who are going to spurn him till his very death, he is breaking his hunger strike. I guess he wants to be better prepared and come back stronger again. But then, even this fails to make me hate him, rather, it is sort of respectable. A man, who's fallen off his feet and trying to get up again and get ready to run the race to the finish, is the mark of a respectable man.

My dear fellow critics, I did my best to find reasons to hate baba but I'm sorry I have failed you all. Even though I detest him from the very core, and even though I want to ban the baba, I have not yet found reason enough to justify my hatred and the ban. I am exhausted hunting for reasons. Please help me out here with some new arguments if you have any.

In the name of Anna

Another high-TRP contest, another victory for INDIA. A new set of pictures with scenes of jubilation, lights, camera, action and "Anna wins".

The government was humbled!!

Or was it?

Hours passed and gradually the political class playing possum until now started stretching their limbs. "Anna is a great man, but his actions do not quite fit in a democracy and the constitutional set-up" some said. "Anna is a good man but isn't this a sort of blackmail of a popularly elected government?" asked few others. In the hours that followed, the political class showed concern, none about corruption though and gave India free lessons in polity through the media.

The people, on the other hand were out there, jubilant and upbeat. Some said "I support Anna", other's promised, "I'd fight till the end for Anna". Anna, has been the buzz-word for sometime now. Actors, activists, students, professionals everyone loves Anna. Everyone supports "Anna".

Question: Who would they support if (God forbid) Anna is down with an illness, so much so that he cannot be involved in any public affairs? Mr Kejriwal? What if Mr. Kejriwal subsequently meets with an accident? Justice Hegde? What if he is implicated?

The point is, does the movement have enough fuel to sustain itself even if the agents of this new-found awakening are strategically plucked out? Do we, the people have the ability to bring up new stalwarts to the scene? Are we dedicated enough to stand behind a new champion "for the cause"? These will be the determinants which will transform the protests that we saw into a movement that we want.

It is a marvel that the country has come out of the drudgery or excitement of life, as they live and view the spectacle of a national protest and support Anna and his men. It is high time now that people came up to be his men, if the movement is to succeed. Anna has done his bit in uniting the people for this cause, creating awareness and initiating the impending process of mental reform in the country. It is time now that the country plays it's part by individually and collectively weeding out corruption, case by case.

The strength of the movement will not just be defined by "how many people turn up to Jantar Mantar next time Anna calls. The strength of the movement will be defined by how many us resolve to not give or take a bribe, by how many of us stand by our neighbors when they report wrongdoing on part of a government servant.

The awakening would come forth:

When a person in a police station out to get an FIR written is joined by tens of other passers by if he argues with the policeman asking for a bribe,

When even the last person in a long queue says "No" if he is offered a back-door entry for even a small illegal payment,

When government offices are flooded with complaints of any such wrong-doers.

That will send the message across the table, that will tell any scheming perpetrators that there is not just one Anna Hazare or one Arvind Kejriwal to put down, that there are a billion strong who will not stop until propriety is maintained.

Anna will live to be only a name in history if we, the people, fail to gain on the momentum he as got for us. He stood up for the people when nobody else was ready to stand. It is time the people paid back, not by shouting/scrapping/posting slogans "in the name of Anna" but by standing up for his cause, for our cause and causing the demise of "corruption" on this day to be put down in the history of the country.