Saturday 28 January 2012

An Interview of Idiocy and Vainglory!


At last the cat is out of the bag! Now it transpires beyond doubt what ‘The Rising Sun’ editorially observed in the issue dated February 7, 2010, under the caption ‘Much Ado About Nothing’, was correct. “…. She (Jayalalitha) herself started the hype-up game by issuing a statement as if she was obliging the personal invitation extended to her over phone by Chief Election Commissioner Navin Chawla. She made out as if it was a rare gesture bestowed only upon her by the CEC,” in the background of a section of media lobbying for Jayalalitha, blowing out of proportion an inconsequential chance meeting of her with AICC President Tmt. Sonia Gandhi at the diamond jubilee function of the Election Commission in New Delhi.
In a ‘rarest of rare’ interview to two women journalists of ‘The Times of India’ (of whom one is said to be a relative of Sasikala), when asked, “Is there any significance in the meeting?” she has said, “That remains to be seen”, thus leaving the gullible readers guessing, instead of honestly admitting that it was a chance encounter for a very brief while and no political significance should be attached to it. But honesty and herself poles apart, she goes further when asked, “What exactly was the exchange you had?”, saying  “I was invited personally by CEC Navin Chawla. He sent two letters inviting me. And then a formal invitation, and (he) followed it up with a telephone call. So, I decided to go. There I was taken to the VIP lounge. The Vice-President, the Prime Minister, the AICC President Sonia Gandhi, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha Meira Kumar and other dignitaries came there. So, when Ms. Gandhi came there, we greeted each other and exchanged pleasantries. And BJP leader Sushma Swaraj was also there. We were chatting for about 15 minutes. Then the President arrived. So, I went to the auditorium and others went to the dais and the function started.”
By this statement, Jayalalitha cannot categorically say that she had absolutely one-to-one meeting and discussion with Tmt. Sonia Gandhi and leaves it ambiguous for one’s guessing either way. But even now she consciously buttresses the speculation, originated by her, of a possible tie-up between her party and the Congress in so many vague phrases like, ‘All remains to be seen in the future… people would like a change… Anyway, any decision has to be taken by the Congress leadership… Let us see how things work out” etc., - all betraying her craving for an alliance somehow or the other.
Kalaignar had pointed out that Jayalalitha had created an impression of closeness to the Congress Party and Chief Election Commissioner Navin Chawla by claiming that the CEC had phoned her to get her to participate in the diamond jubilee of the EC and even seated her among the important leaders. Her satellite TV channel went to the extent of telling that the CEC came out of the venue of the function upto her car and saw her off, luckily sparing him of the ignominy of being told that he reverentially opened the door of the car to let her in. Nonetheless the entire episode of her visit and its significance is Jayalalitha’s exercise in vainglory! And the rest of her ‘planted’ interview in which she speaks on national security, internal security, war in Sri Lanka, welfare schemes, economy etc., are exercises in triviality and idiocy.
In keeping with her attempt to strike a friendly chord with the Congress, she had taken a soft stand on the UPA government’s performance, against which she had all along been leveling wild allegations. While all shades of public opinion and well-meaning politicians and intellectuals wish to improve relations with China in the interests of both countries even while not compromising the security of our borders, it is only war–hawks like half-baked Jayalalitha who want ‘strengthening of our armed forces, providing them the latest equipment and motivating them with more perks and concessions’ in order to ‘equal the challenge posed by China.’
Similarly her remarks on Sri Lankan situation in the context of last Parliament elections in the State smacks of her utter disregard for people’s verdict. Pointing out the ‘number of suicides committed by farmers in other states’ (not Tamil Nadu) she goes on to say that, “That was one point I stressed upon in the parliamentary election,” thereby admitting that she and other opposition leaders had been harping on non-issues and getting rebuffed by the electorate.
Her view on distribution of freebies and welfare schemes reflect Jayalalitha’s class and caste bias and intellectual bankruptcy. Moreover, it is antithesis of the declared policies of her mentor MGR, who assiduously cultivated a pro-poor image of himself and introduced many freebies including nutritious meals scheme during his rule. It is only orthodox capitalism that segregated the State and the welfare of its people leaving the latter to their own destiny. Even in the avowedly capitalist state of the USA there are many welfare measures for the poor and downtrodden like health insurance, agricultural subsidies etc., That the charter of the United Nations Organisation and its wings like the UNESCO commit the member nations to the welfare of their peoples underlines universal acceptance of welfare measures as the criteria of a welfare state, which is defined in many forms like subsidies for food, energy, power and inputs for agriculture and industry, pension for old aged persons, destitutes and widows without assistance, concessions for physically and mentally challenged persons, education, public healthcare and insurance, unemployment relief etc., In a caste-ridden society like India, even the system of reservation for education and employment opportunities is a welfare measure.
The argument advanced by Jayalalitha against welfare measures per se is the governing philosophy of the developed and rich countries in international relations, where they try to impose restrictions on developing and poor countries, in order to sustain and develop their hegemony over the economies of the latter and continue to exploit their markets. While the developed countries try to impose conditionalitieslike cut in subsidies, concessions etc., through the instruments of international financial agencies like World Bank and International Monetary Fund and trade regimes like GATT and WTO, they resort to protective measures for their own industry, trade and agriculture. In fact the highest agricultural subsidy is given in the USA followed by European countries. Even in the on-going international conclaves on climate change and environmental protection, sharp contradictions arise between the developed and developing world.
She is arguing against welfare schemes putting forward the time-worn and out-dated statement, “You must enable the people to buy things themselves. If a state government spends money on starting local industries and provide employment to the local people there, that will enable them to send their children to ‘good’ schools. And those children when they grow up will get good jobs and earn good salary. With that they can build their own concrete houses and buy their own colour TVs. That is the way you take the society forward.” If this is her concept of society, she seems to be influenced more by the likes of empty-boaster Cho Ramaswamy and their caste and caste outlook than by her mentor MGR. The two lady-journalists, like their counterparts in the field in Tamil Nadu, consciously did not ask her how many industries did she start during her 10-year rule, how many were provided employment enabling them to send their children to ‘good’ schools, how many of those children grew up and earn good salary and how many built their own concrete houses and bought colour TVs. This is what even unlettered villagers in the state say, ‘nghfhj CU¡F Ïšyhj tê fh£Ljš’ (Pointing non-existent route to unintended place). If this is the guiding principle of her party for governance, will she declare that in her election manifesto for the Assembly elections in 2011 and promise to cancel all the freebies and welfare measures implemented by the DMK government.
She had cast aspersions on Tamil Nadu government officials and State police and insisted on bringing in government and police personnel from ‘Gujarat’ or some other state for election duty (By opting particularly for ‘Gujarat’ she seems to believe that her friend Narendra Modi would lend her a helping hand as reciprocal gesture for her attending his swearing-in ceremony and hosting for him sumptuous lunch with 49 dishes at her residence). Well, if any misfortune, she gets elected to rule the state again, will she dismiss from service all these ‘untrustworthy’ government and police personnel and recruit her own loyal servants?
The problem with Jayalalitha is that the ever-growing popularity of Kalaignar’s welfare schemes and their acceptance and replication at the national level, and her inability to ingest the same driving her to madness, are directly proportional. Unfortunately there are none around her to tell that greatness cannot be thrust upon one. She does not seem to learn lessons from repeated experience of misguided (by the servitude media) inflated ego invariably landing her in troubles and failures (during the last parliamentary polls inclusive). She may only be prescribed to read in sobriety the great British thinker and humanist philosopher Bertrand Russell’s book ‘Is happiness still possible?’ in which he graphically illustrates the fact of over-estimation of oneself inevitably leading to disaster!

(21-02-10)

No comments:

Post a Comment