Showing posts with label laloo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label laloo. Show all posts
9.11.15
Laloo is the mouse that's licked all the cream: Bihar elections
Like many others, I too have been riveted by the Bihar elections. Or, rather, its coverage. And the feeble response to and recognition of the man whose party has got the maximum number of seats. RJD chief Laloo Prasad Yadav is being treated as a side dish when he is the main course.
The media influence has resulted in drawing room opinion that he will pose to be an impediment to Nitish Kumar, leader of the JDU, an ally in the Grand Alliance, and Chief Minister of the state. "Laloo will try and halt development," they say, when the whole country is wondering how development has in fact been about benefiting only a few. If anything, Laloo should most asseetively work as an opposition within to keep Nitish Kumar on his toes to ensure development for everyone and not just the chosen ones.
Bihar, even its cities, does not really qualify as urban in the metro sense of the term. However sleek the new roads and development the new anthem, the ethos of the state is grounded in a more basic sense of roots. Denial of this beneath the blanket term progress, or even secularism, would mean denying the majority of its population an identity.
The slur of "backward" for Lalu is essentially an insult to those deemed "backward caste" for centuries. But, as he himself had stated with some arrogance long ago, "Jab tak samosey mein aalu, tab tak Bihar mein Lalu." It was, and is, as basic as that.
Here is my column from Rediff (April 21, 1997) when he was CM:
When the chief minister of Bihar, one of India's worst-ruled states, organises a mother or father of all rallies, there are sniggers. Laloo Prasad Yadav has become a joke but, let us be fair, he is not quite our Dan Quayle.
In fact, he is good for our culture. He is the living example of the virtues of being oneself. Whether elections are rigged or the coal mafia rules, Laloo remains Laloo.
The Yadav who has made it big suffers from the pride of the lowly for their humble background and the insecurity his new position has thrust upon him. That is the reason he is slightly brash. He is up against everything -- hypocrisy, stereotypes and our congenital pigeonholing of men in power and how they should behave.
Yadav behaves in no particular manner. He has no set agenda for his politics or his life and, in a world that is getting increasingly ideological (never mind that the ideology is to blow up someone's brains), this might seem like a classic case of spinelessness.
Instead, he comes out trumps. He has made this an anti-establishment stand, though riding on the back of the establishment is his unique selling point.
I don't care what his motives are. When he appointed Harijan priests in temples and Harijans as Shankaracharyas, the media response was typical: it was a political gimmick rather than a reform measure, they said. This is only partially true, unless you insist on wearing blinkers of doubt. Here, Yadav was "testing the Hindu religion."
It would have been far more dramatic and gimmicky had he put a brahmin on a donkey and paraded him through the streets.
To suddenly upturn what, for centuries, has been the status quo requires guts. This is not mere symbolism. He has put those who were considered the scum of the earth into the most sanctified position; he has legitimised their place in society. He may look like a country bumpkin but it is no more passé to be so. Because there is a certain confidence instilled in the people who have been at the receiving end of atrocities.
In a country where 180 million people belong to the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, we still have a situation where action for crimes committed against them is slack, despite untouchability being forbidden by law by the Civil Rights Act of 1955 and the Scheduled Caste and Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Yadav is not the panacea; he is merely the looking glass; he has shown that it is possible to hold your head high wherever it is you come from.
How, then, can anyone dismiss Laloo Prasad's efforts only because, as a lot of academics are fond of saying, they come naturally to him? We have the amazing ability to transfer our tunnel vision into overviews - they sound so much more authoritative. Hence, Yadav's looking after the interests of the lower castes is considered a one-dimensional approach.
This is what has kept Harijans in a bind for years. In Bombay, there is a small colony where sweepers live. On my visit there once, they were celebrating Dussera. For the first time, I realised how important these festivities are for them -- while the ghettoisation is complete, this is the one time when it does not become circumscribed.
I know that talking about Harijan values may seem like a very patronising thing to do, but there it is -- a nice little hierarchy wherein one scheduled caste person is superior to another.
These are the lessons history has taught them. That equality is a myth. That someone has to pip someone else to the post. That tomorrow is not another day, but a continuation of today as today was of yesterday. That you are stuck for life.
And in this marshland appears Laloo Prasad Yadav. Not to tell us about the lotus in the gutter or the phoenix rising from the ashes. But about how cheese balls sometimes fail to become rat-traps. He is the mouse that's licked all the cream.
2.12.10
Bihar's Mythic Development: No Looking "Backwards"
Bihar's Mythic Development
No Looking "Backwards"
by Farzana Versey
Counterpunch, December 1, 2010
India, once considered a natural democracy, now needs shaky excuses to be so sanctified. Bihar, one of the most backward states in the country, has elected Nitish Kumar’s party, the Janata Dal (United), to power in a ‘stunning victory’. The bellicosity of commentators to be flagholders for such a myth has to be read to be believed.
It is amazing that this glorification is for his second term. Everyone knows that ruling parties have an edge to bulldoze their agendas. Such agendas may include pushing all the real issues under the carpet.
Bihar’s backwardness had little to do with the existence of scheduled castes and more to do with the manner in which they were treated. In Nitish Kumar’s utopian state, caste has got sidelined. This is not cause for celebration but concern. We are talking about a large segment of society being covertly discriminated against by two deceptive options – co-opting and debarring. The larger political spectrum that is being hailed has, in fact, narrowed it to the pyramidal apogee by selective probity.
One report came up with a rather dodgy analysis: “The Bihar results will have rippling effects in other areas where negative agendas of caste and communal forces do not allow people-driven agenda of development.”
Caste and communal forces are about people and do not spring from the bottom but the top; they have been traditional vote-banks thus far. They remain so, but in a non-conservative fashion by being covered beneath the veil of poverty. It is a real issue. However, the trick here is not to deal with poverty but make it a palpable saleable idea. Water, food, education, healthcare, electricity, roads are necessities that are sold as comforts. There is a reason for it; it is to set the ground for the development agencies to send in their quotations. The people of Bihar are not going to say “let there be light” and have shining bulbs nor will dry taps start running by the mere expedient of thirst; roads won’t be tarred for bare feet. All these require raw material, infrastructure and money. The poor obviously do not have money. Therefore, the rich come into the picture.
The rich in Bihar belong to the feudal class or criminal gangs. Both have tremendous political clout if they are not already in politics. It is pertinent to point out that both these categories are extremely caste conscious. The landlords use labour belonging to the lower castes and consolidate their position based on such bondage. Crime, too, relies on caste equations to settle scores. Therefore, the current development will need to not only factor in such disparities but also rely on them. Since over 80 per cent of the population is Hindu, communal politics can be reined in by sheer force. It ought to surprise no one that Nitish Kumar has been an ally of the right-wing parties.
During this election, he skirted Gujarat’s Narendra Modi’s involvement in electoral matters. This was seen as keeping away from a controversial figure. On the contrary, Bihar has cunningly emulated the Modi formula; the snub to Modi could have been a tactic or an ego trip. Either way, he is the role model here. The difference being that Bihar has been considered a backward region, Gujarat is not. But the economic saviours have worked along similar lines by co-opting those they have scant regard for. In Modi’s Gujarat the Muslims have stood by him despite the horrific establishment-engineered riots and killings of 2002; Nitish’s Bihar has used the abused members of society to the same effect by showing them glittering streets and whitewashed ideas.
The female voter turnout has been much-lauded without seeing the larger picture. This is not about empowerment or a woman’s natural understanding of development. Bihar, for all its progress, still has a large number of migrants to other cities. The question to ask is this: if the growth rate is 2.5 per cent more than the national rate of growth, then why have these sons of the soil not returned?
Iconoclasm has the ability to camouflage all con jobs. It is a rather sad statement that the original patented hero of Bihar, Lalu Prasad Yadav, is seen as a beleaguered has-been today. Despite his not-so-clean record and his scams that were out in the open for all to see, he had made Bihar into a brand of sorts. It was not mere rural hubris. If his was a one-man show, then no one really knows of any prominent people in Nitish Kumar’s cabinet. Lalu made no attempt to hide the caste of his candidates; at the national level this is an important element if the reservations policy is to be made use of by adhering to authenticity rather than fakery.
It is also an irony that while Bihar under Lalu Prasad was the only state to prevent the rath yatra of L. K. Advani from passing through in what was to turn out to be the worst communal divide after Partition is now dependent on the BJP. Long before talk about development, Lalu had the courage to appoint backward caste priests and shankaracharyas. These were quite possibly gimmicks, but for a country that still has such an aversion towards Dalits this was a strong statement.
Development must include political vigilance and progressive inclusive thinking. The end of the road is not roads.
No Looking "Backwards"
by Farzana Versey
Counterpunch, December 1, 2010
India, once considered a natural democracy, now needs shaky excuses to be so sanctified. Bihar, one of the most backward states in the country, has elected Nitish Kumar’s party, the Janata Dal (United), to power in a ‘stunning victory’. The bellicosity of commentators to be flagholders for such a myth has to be read to be believed.
It is amazing that this glorification is for his second term. Everyone knows that ruling parties have an edge to bulldoze their agendas. Such agendas may include pushing all the real issues under the carpet.
Bihar’s backwardness had little to do with the existence of scheduled castes and more to do with the manner in which they were treated. In Nitish Kumar’s utopian state, caste has got sidelined. This is not cause for celebration but concern. We are talking about a large segment of society being covertly discriminated against by two deceptive options – co-opting and debarring. The larger political spectrum that is being hailed has, in fact, narrowed it to the pyramidal apogee by selective probity.
One report came up with a rather dodgy analysis: “The Bihar results will have rippling effects in other areas where negative agendas of caste and communal forces do not allow people-driven agenda of development.”
Caste and communal forces are about people and do not spring from the bottom but the top; they have been traditional vote-banks thus far. They remain so, but in a non-conservative fashion by being covered beneath the veil of poverty. It is a real issue. However, the trick here is not to deal with poverty but make it a palpable saleable idea. Water, food, education, healthcare, electricity, roads are necessities that are sold as comforts. There is a reason for it; it is to set the ground for the development agencies to send in their quotations. The people of Bihar are not going to say “let there be light” and have shining bulbs nor will dry taps start running by the mere expedient of thirst; roads won’t be tarred for bare feet. All these require raw material, infrastructure and money. The poor obviously do not have money. Therefore, the rich come into the picture.
The rich in Bihar belong to the feudal class or criminal gangs. Both have tremendous political clout if they are not already in politics. It is pertinent to point out that both these categories are extremely caste conscious. The landlords use labour belonging to the lower castes and consolidate their position based on such bondage. Crime, too, relies on caste equations to settle scores. Therefore, the current development will need to not only factor in such disparities but also rely on them. Since over 80 per cent of the population is Hindu, communal politics can be reined in by sheer force. It ought to surprise no one that Nitish Kumar has been an ally of the right-wing parties.
During this election, he skirted Gujarat’s Narendra Modi’s involvement in electoral matters. This was seen as keeping away from a controversial figure. On the contrary, Bihar has cunningly emulated the Modi formula; the snub to Modi could have been a tactic or an ego trip. Either way, he is the role model here. The difference being that Bihar has been considered a backward region, Gujarat is not. But the economic saviours have worked along similar lines by co-opting those they have scant regard for. In Modi’s Gujarat the Muslims have stood by him despite the horrific establishment-engineered riots and killings of 2002; Nitish’s Bihar has used the abused members of society to the same effect by showing them glittering streets and whitewashed ideas.
The female voter turnout has been much-lauded without seeing the larger picture. This is not about empowerment or a woman’s natural understanding of development. Bihar, for all its progress, still has a large number of migrants to other cities. The question to ask is this: if the growth rate is 2.5 per cent more than the national rate of growth, then why have these sons of the soil not returned?
Iconoclasm has the ability to camouflage all con jobs. It is a rather sad statement that the original patented hero of Bihar, Lalu Prasad Yadav, is seen as a beleaguered has-been today. Despite his not-so-clean record and his scams that were out in the open for all to see, he had made Bihar into a brand of sorts. It was not mere rural hubris. If his was a one-man show, then no one really knows of any prominent people in Nitish Kumar’s cabinet. Lalu made no attempt to hide the caste of his candidates; at the national level this is an important element if the reservations policy is to be made use of by adhering to authenticity rather than fakery.
It is also an irony that while Bihar under Lalu Prasad was the only state to prevent the rath yatra of L. K. Advani from passing through in what was to turn out to be the worst communal divide after Partition is now dependent on the BJP. Long before talk about development, Lalu had the courage to appoint backward caste priests and shankaracharyas. These were quite possibly gimmicks, but for a country that still has such an aversion towards Dalits this was a strong statement.
Development must include political vigilance and progressive inclusive thinking. The end of the road is not roads.
9.4.09
Election sidelights: Milind Deora's two daddies, Rahul Gandhi's poor babies, and some more...
But you love me daddies…
Milind Deora may be a badey baap ka beta, but he does not have only one dad’s support. Murli Deora who virtually ruled the roost as BRCC head and was stuck to the seat with adhesive as facilitator and lobbyist has definitely played a role in his son’s rise. Now we have don Arun Gawli openly supporting him.
This man is in jail for murder under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA). His daughter, Geeta Gawli, a municipal corporator, said:
“Although there was huge public demand for him to contest, he has decided to opt out in favour of Deora. The ABS will now support the Congress in Mumbai South.”
Almost in an Adi Godrej-like language, she calls him a “secular and dynamic youth leader”! If Dagdi Chawl’s ‘Daddy’ could contest, he would not be considered secular or a youth.
However, what surprises me (why do I still manage to get surprised?) is that Milind Deora has not issued a statement strongly disassociating himself with this gangster. I can understand if some regular roughneck was a candidate and one of the ganglords supported him. Remember Dawood Ibrahim’s brother’s ambitions? Or how Varadarajan blessed a lot of candidates?
What will all those SoBo (that is South Bombayites – nah, they won’t call it Mumbai) club types think? It is not like diamond merchant Bharat Shah, also a jail regular, giving him the thumbs up. What makes Milind not tell the Gawlis to shut up and stay away from messing around with his name? Or, is no one bothered anymore? These are the same people who are going to vote against the “sab chalta hai” attitude. What is this if not chalta hai?
Karan Johar has written a long article in today’s TOI telling the readers about what all Milind has managed to do. No one needs paid advertisements anymore? Or is it all about ‘kind’ now? After all, this paper charges you to get featured in some of its privileged sections.
Here are some of Karan’s bon mots:
“So what if he is the son of a cabinet minister? I am the son of a producer, does that make any of my films any less relevant? In our country, a lot of newsprint is focused on dynasties — film, political or otherwise — but what most forget is that ultimately, being born with a silver spoon doesn’t guarantee a platinum-lined future.”
He clearly cannot tell the difference between reality and make-believe. The country is not a film and the fate of millions is not the same as a show at multiplexes. The point is not about being born with a silver spoon; there have been cases of individuals from notable families who have contributed substantially. But his words are a dead give-away when he talks about a “platinum-lined future”. It only means that it is about individual aspirations.
And the concerns these people have are clear when he writes:
“On 26/11, my city changed. Irrevocably. As we all watched glued to our television sets for the next 72 hours, it seemed almost surreal that our beloved home was burning — a city that had always held the promise of fulfilling dreams was suddenly everyone’s worst nightmare.”
Your beloved home has burned several times, but many kilometres away from where you and Milind live, so obviously you did not notice. Also, it was not covered with such intensity for you to be glued to your television sets.
Had these attacks not taken place, let me assure you all these corporate waalas and waalis would not have cared. The city has not changed. These people have. The dabbawallas, cabbies, domestic helps, drivers do not find the city has changed “irrevocably”.
“The last few years, the focus on India has been tremendous, Mumbai has been called the new New York, Shanghai, London — and the city and country has gone from strength to strength.”
Then, honey, why don’t you shoot your films here? Create employment, help with the infrastructure.
“Our usually press-friendly, vociferous leaders were suddenly shy, it seemed, hiding in their ivory towers with their Z security. The only political face Mumbai saw in those abysmal days was that of the quiet, unobtrusive Milind Deora.”
Well, Milind is not exactly muddying his hands, unless it is rubble from the Taj/Hilton. And he will be answerable to the same people with Z security. Incidentally, that night he was returning from a social engagement and he has been quoted as saying that when he heard some gunshots being fired and a car being chased he thought they were headed towards his vehicle!
Those 72 hours created many wannabe martyrs.
For those who haven;t read it, here is my take again: 1992 vs. 2008: Mumbai’s Charge of the Lightweight Brigade
Amar, Azam and SP
Amar Singh says he will quit the Samajwadi Party and ditch his ‘brother’ Mulayam Singh Yadav. I would have been happier to see him change his bungalow’s name again from Aishwariya to whatever it was called originally. He is sulking because of his differences with Azam Khan of the same party. Yadav has said he will help resolve this feud.
I suspect there is no such feud. Everyone in the SP knows that Amar Singh brings in the shor-sharaaba (yeah, you can delete the ‘a’ at the end too). This looks like a neatly planned division. With Mayawati going for the upper castes, they want the Amar Singh faction to play that role, while Azam Khan woos the Imambara types on the side. See, politics too is becoming like modern medicine – too much specialisation.
Laloo-Rabri talk the baulk
They are insisting that Laloo Prasad Yadav should be arrested under the National Securities Act for his hate speech against Varun Gandhi.
What did Laloo say?
"Had I been the country's home minister, I would have crushed Varun Gandhi under a roller and destroyed him without caring for the consequences for his hate speech against Muslims.”
This would amount to attempted homicide, and depending on whether he was driving a BMW or a tractor he would be meted out a sentence accordingly.
His wife and RJD chief took on rival Nitish Kumar:
"Nitish is sitting in the lap of L K Advani, who was directly involved in pulling down the Babri mosque, but his dream will never come true."
Which dream won’t come true? The mosque has been demolished and he seems to be already sitting in the dream lap…maybe it is the dream to get somewhere. Like godi ke baad gaddi (Throne after the lap)?
Rahul’s new slogan: ‘Garibi bachao’
One fine day Rahul Gandhi invited a British minister to a village in his constituency to show him the spirit of the poor. What is so difficult to digest about that? Wouldn’t a British MP invite one of our ministers for a spot of fox hunting or to watch the changing of guards or the spirited jugglers at Covent Garden?
Rahul had to justify himself:
“I don’t believe in hiding things I am proud of and I don’t believe in hiding the spirit of the poor. The difference between the Congress party and opponents… We are proud of the poor people of India. We believe in the poor people of India and they are ashamed of the poor in India.”
I honestly think this guy must be sent for some urgent classes. How can he be proud of the poor? Has he created them? Or their poverty? Or even their spirit?
If the Congress believes in the spirit of the poor, then does it follow that they plan to let them remain like this - “as they faced difficulties with a smile and they believe in this country”? It is called survival. Stop romanticising all this.
Neither the Congress nor the Opposition can be proud or ashamed of the poor. They have to jolly well do something for them. Unfortunately, our largest majority, the poor, cannot do a thing.
If anyone is interested
Mallika Sarabhai has responded to the post on her and I have replied. Both are here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

