0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)
36 просмотров1 страница
The article provides analysis of Rahul Gandhi's recent high-profile interview with Arnab Goswami. It summarizes the key events and reactions:
1) Rahul Gandhi's interview is described as a "public hanging" where he was left "sweating at the gallows" and unable to answer questions effectively.
2) There have been attempts to spin the disaster positively by claiming Rahul was faking stupidity as part of a strategy to appear more relatable to youth.
3) However, the article is skeptical of these excuses and argues the interview revealed Rahul's true lack of leadership abilities and understanding of issues. It suggests the attempts to find deeper meaning in his words
The article provides analysis of Rahul Gandhi's recent high-profile interview with Arnab Goswami. It summarizes the key events and reactions:
1) Rahul Gandhi's interview is described as a "public hanging" where he was left "sweating at the gallows" and unable to answer questions effectively.
2) There have been attempts to spin the disaster positively by claiming Rahul was faking stupidity as part of a strategy to appear more relatable to youth.
3) However, the article is skeptical of these excuses and argues the interview revealed Rahul's true lack of leadership abilities and understanding of issues. It suggests the attempts to find deeper meaning in his words
The article provides analysis of Rahul Gandhi's recent high-profile interview with Arnab Goswami. It summarizes the key events and reactions:
1) Rahul Gandhi's interview is described as a "public hanging" where he was left "sweating at the gallows" and unable to answer questions effectively.
2) There have been attempts to spin the disaster positively by claiming Rahul was faking stupidity as part of a strategy to appear more relatable to youth.
3) However, the article is skeptical of these excuses and argues the interview revealed Rahul's true lack of leadership abilities and understanding of issues. It suggests the attempts to find deeper meaning in his words
The poor reputation of Janus, the Roman god of doors and beginnings, is quite undeserved. Janus was not double-faced simply because he had two faces. He could look east and west simultaneously without swiveling his head; but this was clarity, not deception. His hindsight helped foresight; the charm of a door is that it enables you to go in as well as go out. January is named after Janus: one year disappears, another enters. As Indias electoral fog begins to clear this January, we can see that how precisely cause begets effect. The substantive failures of 2013 are shaping the general elections of 2014. Indias economy began to creak and collapse much before, but it was in 2013 that Indians were firmly convinced that problems which could have been resolved were allowed to accumulate into a serious crisis. An economic freefall is not some theoretical statistic for the voter. It translates into specifics: prices rise, jobs evaporate, confidence falters, hope evaporates. Voters blame governments rather than traders for a price rise, because they expect government to control profiteers, not surrender to them. A slump in economic growth aborts future jobs and threatens existing ones. These are bread-and-vegetable issues. It was in 2013 that govern- ance and the economy became dominant factors in the gradual process through which voters make up their minds before a general election. Many voters are, of course, still swayed by partisan emotion. But a significant majority will be influenced, in 2014, by calm logic. This is already evident from the opin- ion polls bouncing around media, predicting an NDA vic- tory, and reaffirming Narendra Modi as the preferred favourite for prime minister. Try this sequence of questions: Who can set the economy right? Not those, surely, who created the problem. What kind of government can turn things around? A stable one, capable of taking tough decisions. Can a remorseful and repentant Congress lead a stable coalition? Not likely: its own numbers have plummeted to less than half of 2009 in opinion polls, and allies are either breaking off or increasing their distance from Congress. Old reliable DMK has preferred isolation. Sharad Pawars NCP has told Rahul Gandhi to cool off on accusations against Narendra Modi over the Gujarat riots. Partnerships from Kashmir to Assam are in disarray. The one eager ally, Lalu Yadav, poses more questions than he answers, since he happens to be convicted of corruption. The torch of honesty cannot catch fire in Rahul Gandhis right hand, if his left is clasped to the ashes of Lalu Yadavs reputation. Can a Third or National or Partial Front patched through the strain of contradictions work? However which way you do the math, the numbers do not add up. There will be regional spurts in states like West Bengal, where Mamata Banerjee will win a handsome number of seats; but despite rhetoric this will not be sufficient to seed a post-election coa- lition. In any case, the times are too fragile, and voters across the country are not in a mood for experiments. Can Arvind Kejriwal, whose muffler will have to be discarded as the sea- son changes, offer stability? You know the answer. No prizes for guessing whos left. Narendra Modi might not be able to walk on water, but at least he can walk on land, unlike the competition, which stumbles disconcertingly whenever it tries to move at all. Congress lost the governance plot not just on the econ- omy, but also on Telangana. The impact of a disturbed Andhra, another long-form story of 2013, is much larger than the size of one state. The chaos in the south is not the best advertisement for firm governance in a year when voters want tough decisions. So is it all over bar the shouting? Not quite. Narendra Modi has attracted voters because he is the outsider, poised, in their wish-list, to cleanse Delhi of corruption, end dither- ing and propel the economy forward as happened in Gujarat. The one thing Modi cannot afford to do is slide into the syn- drome of politics-as-usual as he expands from regional con- cerns to national priorities. He cannot abandon the old school, for that is where present politics lives; but he cannot look stale even before he has begun. It is a tight-rope walk. Modi will need some dexterity to evade the siren call of Delhis prime-time sin, sycophancy. There is a scathing Urdu couplet, written by a Karachi poet, Parwin Shakir, who died in 1994 at the young age of 42, which describes Delhi per- fectly: Basti mein jitne aab ghazida thhe sab ke sab/Darya ke rukh badalte hi tairaq ho gaye (All those in town who were terrified of water/ Became expert swimmers when they saw the river change course). This is the double-face that becomes dangerous once January is over. My Times, My Voice: Like this article? SMS MTMVMJ <space> Yes or No to 58888. Charges applicable. Rs 3 per sms REVERTS Email the editor at sunday.times@timesgroup.com with Sunday Mailbox in the subject line. You may also post your letters to: Sunday Times of India, 7, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi 110103, marking the envelope Sunday Mailbox. Please mention your name and city SHOE-IN TO WIN? Modi attracts voters because he is poised to propel the economy forward as happened in Gujarat Rahul Gandhi simpleton or savant? So shall we say dumb is the new bril- liant??? Frankly speaking, those revealing80minuteslastweekstumped the nation in more ways than one. Arnab Goswami, the countrys con- science-keeper, was at his avuncular best when he spoke to the man who would be PM like a kindly uncleji dealing with a simple- minded nephew. Not bad as interview strategies go. A rope was given. It was gratefully grabbed. And the public hanging was complete. Rahul Gandhi broke several pro- tective, motherly hearts (mine included), as he blindly rushed towards a point of no return, watched by a billion jeering people. The noose was tightened pretty early, but our sweet, trusting Rahul Baba didnt realize what was happening till it was too late and he was left sweating at the gallows by an uncharacteristically calm interrogator- assassin. Without getting into specifics (sorry, Arnab!) of the lethal interview, let it be asked what made Rahul Gandhi take this self-destructive step in the first place? There are theories galore (He has nothing to losehe knows its all over for the Congress). But Rahul-watchers remain baffled. The thing is, this was a seminal interview. One assumes there was no death wish involved. Someone obviously talked Rahul into exposing himself on prime- time television. Who is that someone? Off with his head! Cant possibly be a friend or well-wisher. Once Rahul put his foot into it, he was stuck! Worse, he promptly forgot the script and mangled his lines. But lets be fair and give him some brownie points for actually finishing the inter- view and not running away, unlike Indias top orator and Rahuls chief rival Narendra Modi. Unfortunately, this interview is likely to haunt Rahul Gandhi for the rest of his life. Since then, there have been countless attempts by Rahul baiters, haters and rabid critics to dance on his grave and kiss him a quick goodbye. But what is far more interesting is the attempt by minders and admirers to provide an entirely different spin to the disaster. It has been suggested that Rahul Gandhi is NOT really dumb. He only sounds it! He actually fakes stupidity! Thats how brilliant he is!! Why? Because that is a part of his larger, grander design to woo his core electorate. This is how it goes: Rahul was advised by some super brains in the party to submit himself to the Arnab barbeque and then go flat out to appear daft. He was assured the nation was sick of listening to bombastic, old school netas making tall claims and sounding insincere. Young India, they told Rahul, was singularly unimpressed by crafty, nasty, oily politicians spouting clichs and pre- tending they had all the answers. Rahul had to create a different slot, even if that meant making an absolute ass of himself. His stubborn stone-walling is also being showcased as the master stroke of the century. For, no matter what Arnab threw at Rahul, the answers re- mained the same. This was no accident, insist his advi- sors. Rahul got the better of an exasperated Arnab by frustrating him. wearing him downby coolly repeat- ing himself over and over again. Rahul, they now claim, effortlessly managed to hammer home his message to those who matter the most in the next election the youth. Rahul also revealed his personal demons, confu- sions, contradictions, fears, hopes, dreams, concerns, anxieties, vulnerabilitieseven his monumental igno- rance! This, say his friends, made Rahul more relatable and real. The idea was to project him as a sensitive, pas- sionate seeker of a higher truth, leaving lesser beings to grapple with ground-level issues of leadership, gov- ernance and other boring stuff. Gushed an acolyte, How many leaders have the guts to bare their souls on na- tional television? True. They have better sense. While the attempts to intellectualize/contextualize his responses (an absurd face-saving device!) go on, an entire RG industry has sprung up online. People who are being kind to Rahul have been offering excuses and trying in vain to deconstruct those cringe-making gaffes. They are also providing a clever subtext to the entire exercise. Hours have been invested searching for deeper, hidden meanings, while analyzing each empty utterance. These strenuous interpretations are being dished out by those who would like to believe this was not a case of The Prince has no clothes. Alas, the less charitable openly mock his Power is poison refrain, pointing out how the Gandhi family had developed an effective antidote to poison 50 years ago. So what happens to Rahul Baba now? Will the wicked system which he is very much a part of, but likes to denounce, allow him to lick his wounds in peace and get on with life? Or will the collective scorn of opponents force him to adopt their ways and become one of them? A creature and creation of dynasty politics himself, Rahul thought nothing of rubbishing the notion with a straight face. Now, that requires solid acting! In many ways, and on several levels, Rahul Gandhi paid rich and direct trib- utes to familiar Gandhi traditions. The nation got a lump in its throat. Seriously Naani ki yaad aayi. My Times, My Voice: Like this article? SMS MTMVSD <space> Yes or No to 58888. Charges applicable. Rs 3 per sms In the past few weeks, sexual trag- edies have blighted some promi- nent and attractive lives. Sunanda Pushkar, wife of the writer and minister, Shashi Tharoor, died recently in Delhi. Around the same time, the French First Lady, Valerie Treirweiler, had to be hos- pitalized in Paris. Both events followed revelations of alleged sexual affairs. Sunanda Pushkar accused her husband of an intimate relationship with a Pakistani journalist. Ms Treirweiler was devas- tated by the French president, Francois Hollandes liaison with an actress; Frances first family split a few days later. These are not only titillating sex scandals about glamorous celebrities they reveal something deeper and infinitely sad about the mel- ancholic human condition. The standard narrative in such cases is to blame the unfaithful man, calling him scumbag and cheat. There is another narrative, however, which holds the institution of love marriage equally guilty. Modern marriage combines three idealistic ideas love, sex, and family which make distinc- tive but unreasonable demands on a couple. To raise a family was, of course, the original idea behind marriage. To it has been added the second ideal of romantic love; and a third that ones partner should also be a great performer in bed. We have a sensible institution in India called arranged marriage which we contrast with love marriage . Throughout human history arranged marriages were the norm in most societies. People got married to raise a family. In early 19th century, with the rise of the middle-classes, love marriage emerged in Europe. It coincided with the Enlight- enment, which incubated modern ideas such as liberty, equality, individualism and secularism that quickly swept the world. These liberal ideas, along with love marriage, came to India on the coat tails of the British Raj. Initially it infected a tiny west- ernized minority but today it has permeated a larger middle-class. Most Indians received their ideal of love marriage unreliably from Bollywood, which may explain why good old fashioned arranged marriage is still well and alive in India. In pre-modern times, men satisfied the three needs via three different individuals, according to the philosopher Alain de Bottons sensitively male perspective. A wife made a home and chil- dren; a lover fulfilled ones romantic needs clan- destinely; and an accomplished prostitute or courtesan was always there for great sex. This division of labour served men well. Given a chance, I expect, my grandfather would have lived thus. But today, we make impossible demands on a single person to meet romantic, sexual and familial needs. She feels huge pressure to fulfil all three roles plus make a career outside the home. What she mostly wants is a love marriage with good and faithful husband. The insane ambition of modern love marriage to satisfy so many needs places a huge burden and this might also help to explain the tragedies of Sunanda Pushkar and Valerie Treirweiler. It was certainly behind the tragedies that befell the hero- ines of two of my favourite novels, Madame Bo- vary and Anna Karenina. Both women had envi- able financial security but also loveless marriages. But both had modern, romantic expectations from life, and dared to fulfil them outside marriage. Society did not forgive their illicit love affairs and their lives ended in tragic suicides. Human beings may have become modern and liberal but society remains conservative. Who has not been tempted by illicit love? An affair with a beautiful stranger is a thrilling prospect, espe- cially after years of raising children. There is also fear of death if one is middle-aged life is passing and when will another chance come? But these exhilarating thoughts have to be weighed against hurting another human being. One must always empathize with the victim of adultery. Even the Kamasutra admits that dharma trumps kama. Does one betray another human being or one- self ? Either way one loses. If one decides to have a fling, one betrays a spouse and puts ones love at risk. If one abstains from temptation, one risks becoming stale and repressed. If one keeps the affair secret, one becomes inauthentic. Confessing to it brings needless pain. If one places ones chil- drens interest above ones own, one is disap- pointed when they leave. If one puts ones own interest above theirs, one earns their unending resentment. This, alas, is the unhappy, melan- cholic human condition. My Times, My Voice: Like this article? SMS MTMVGD <space> Yes or No to 58888. Charges applicable. Rs 3 per sms REPLAY WHAT HE (NARENDRA MODI) KNOWS ABOUT ECONOMICS CAN BE WRITTEN ON THE BACK OF A POSTAGE STAMP P CHIDAMBARAM, FINANCE MINISTER, IN AN INTERVIEW TO BBC Calm logic will decide the 2014 election Many analysts and businessmen fear that the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), dominated by socialists and Marxists like Yogendra Yadav and Prashant Bhushan, is an extreme Left party. These fears are overblown. The AAP has appointed a seven-member com- mittee to formulate its economic policy. This includes libertarian economist Laveesh Bhandari and business honchos like Meera Sanyal (former chief of Royal Bank of Scotland) and Sanjiv Aga (former chief of Idea Cellular). Clearly, AAP does not have a closed leftist mind, and wants to incor- porate a variety of views. Its main focus is good governance. So, unsurpris- ingly, the committee is headed by anti-corruption crusader Prithvi Reddy. This is an excellent starting point for economic liberals in the committee, because a dynamic, competitive market requires a corrup- tion-free business climate. Robert Klitgaard, a world- famous authority on corruption, famously declared that corruption is equal to monopoly plus discretion minus accountability (C=M+D-A). So, reducing cor- ruption means reducing monopoly, reducing political discretion and improving accountability. All three elements are intrinsic to economic liberalization. Removing all elements of monopoly means pro- moting competition to the maximum extent possible, abolishing preferences for all vote banks ranging from favoured business groups to regional and swadeshi lobbies. Reducing discretion means dis- mantling regulations and barriers that give politi- cians the discretion to favour this or that company. Improving accountability means open competition, not deals in the dark and reforms to create a police- judicial system that quickly penalizes law-breakers. Asking Marxists, socialists and libertarians to come up with an agreed formula may produce a messy compromise rife with internal contradictions. It will be helpful to cite a respected authority as an appropriate trail blazer. Probably the best candidate is Nobel laureate Amartya Sen. The recent book by Sen and Jean Dreze, An Un- certain Glory: India and its Contradiction, has an agenda broadly acceptable to a range of thinkers. The book highlights the lack of attention paid by governments to many essential needs, especially of the poor, and above all, of women. Rapid economic growth has co-existed with grossly inadequate social services (education and health) and physical serv- ices (safe water, electricity, drainage, transportation and sanitation). The book cites successful countries like Korea and China to argue that fast economic growth is not sustainable without strong develop- ment of human capital and essential infrastructure. India lags behind many countries at a similar level of development, and even behind poor Bangladesh. AAP leftists will happily accept the books social agenda. Economic liberals in the AAP Committee will also be happy to emphasize other aspects of the book. Sen has often been accused of underplaying the importance of markets and economic growth, but in this book he and Dreze emphasize that rapid economic growth is crucial. They say categorically that fast growth provides rising opportunities, jobs and incomes. Moreover, fast growth also produces revenues that can be used for essential social serv- ices and infrastructure that create more equality of opportunity for all especially the poor and women. There is no trade-off between fast growth and human development: the two buttress one another. Economic liberals in the AAP Committee will be happy to cite the condemnation by Sen and Dreze of red tape and senseless regulatory barriers that hit economic growth and benefit only the corrupt and powerful. Many sorts of regulations are indeed needed, but India is full of perverse ones. Sen and Dreze have roundly denounced populist subsidies that are not targeted at the poor. They oppose free electricity for all farmers. They oppose widespread subsidies on petroleum products, especially diesel. They say that by eliminating stupid subsidies and many unwarranted tax breaks, it will be quite feasi- ble to finance subsidies and essential services for the poor, and will not entail populist financial excesses. Reformers will agree with much of this. They will also have disagreements too. Sen and Dreze seem keener on expanding leaky, failed programmes than on formulating strong measures to punish teachers, health staff or other bureaucrats for non-perform- ance. Their data on poverty is outdated and hence very misleading. Now that GDP growth has plunged three years in a row, their complaint about excessive attention to growth sounds seriously misplaced. Yet if liberals are to create common ground with socialists and Marxists in the AAP, Sen and Dreze offer a promising blueprint, despite some shortcom- ings. It would be silly for the liberals to cite Adam Smith or Friedrich Hayek as appropriate gurus for the AAP Committee. Even Bhagwati will be unac- ceptable. Amartya Sen, in his latest avataar, fits the bill. Klitgaard is a good supplement. My Times, My Voice: Like this article? SMS MTMVSA <space> Yes or No to 58888. Charges applicable. Rs 3 per sms CREATING A DIFFERENT SLOT: RaGas stubborn stone- walling on TV is being showcased as a master stroke TRAGICTALE: The insane ambition to satisfy many needs places a burden on couples who wed today Modern marriages arent made in heaven AAP can take a leaf out of Amartya Sens book Savage nation With reference to Our true colours (Deep Focus, Jan 26), our obsession with fair skin is unbecoming. To term innocent Africans looking for suitable education and employment here, as prostitutes, is totally inhuman. India is already grappling with an image crisis as a corrupt, inefficient nation. Let us at least show the world that we are a forward-thinking nation. By describing Africans as savages, we are behaving like savages ourselves. Mohima Ghosh, Thane Prudence, not impatience Apropos MJ Akbars article (ATM, Jan 26), nothing can be farther from the truth than to say Kejriwal wants to get the PMs job. Akbar would do well to remember that he did not want to be CM, let alone PM. The Congress wanted him to form the government to discredit him. Even then, he was reluctant till an opinion poll favoured the formation of a government by him. Now to say he wants the PMs job is to be maliciously disingenuous. M Bhowmik, Delhi People power This refers to AAP: Urban party without an imaginative urban vision (ATM, Jan 26). Its still premature to call the AAP government in Delhi unimaginative or ineffective. The Indian voter has come of age and he will automatically show the party the door if it doesnt deliver. S Ramakrishnasayee, Ranipet MEN & MORALS GURCHARAN DAS Did the Time magazine cover declaring you The Great American Novelist affect your writing in any way? I live in New York, I know how its done. I did feel I had something to prove after The Corrections. I wanted to show it wasnt a fluke. Im proud of The Corrections I felt some pressure to say Im still here guys. None of the outside consideration adds up to one per cent of getting a novel out. You just do the best with what you have left. What anyone else might think is a million miles away from you at your desk. You said once that you were afraid that you were doomed to write about Midwestern families, is that still true? Im halfway through a new novel with no Midwestern family in it. It was not a perma- nent doom. Im not interested in novels about children but it is true that we are shaped by our first 18 years. In my books, families are important but at a distance. Nobody would feel cold within a family. Its a kind of love you can trust. You can hate your father while still loving him. If youre trying to push into dark territory, something every novelist must do, anything with love in it is a useful counterbalance. I am not unfamiliar with family struggles, but thats not where the drama is. The point is trying to find drama in a freely chosen relationship and family is there to give a world that those relationships inhabit. You comment quite frequently about the power of bankers and the theme of financial corruption is present in your writing. Are you angry with the state of democracy in the West? You have elected representatives saying, Lets do this and the bankers come in and say This is what were going to do and thats what happens. What the bankers want is what we get. It goes against the very notion of national sovereignty, espe- cially in Western Europe. In your debut novel, The Twenty- Seventh City you write powerfully about the decline of St Louis. Do you think cities have personalities? All cities are ideas. What tran- scends the individual is the idea of that city and the idea of that city in the minds of its citizens. Its related to geography and history though global monoculture is do- ing its best to destroy it. Do you think our self is under siege by mass culture and technology? Its attractive to be stimu- l at e d by social me- di a but one of the lies being sold there is that it is a com- munity, its not. Its also a lie that commu- nity is always better than solitude. Its like junior high school, is it better to be part of the cool kids and be in or the nerdy kids with their own interests? I know which one I was. Should novels be commercial and should they try to compete with television? I do see the novel in competition with televi- sion but it is important to see what televi- sion does well. New American television shows are actually doing what 19th century social novels were doing, which is giving people an insight into very different lives. If novels need to compete they need to con- centrate on things they do well, things that television doesnt: the manipulation of time, irony and above all, changing points of view, something television does badly. You claimed that an endorsement from Oprah would discourage men from reading your books. Do men and women read different things? It has always been the case that women read more than men, theres always been more female readers. Real male readers, hardcore readers, they dont care about the authors identity. As for the casual reader, fewer women are interested in books about vio- lence and technology. Men are not inter- ested in books about a mother car- ing for a sick daughter. There is a gender imbalance in the valuation of literature. Women are underrepre- sented in the literary canon and women are touchy about mens disinterest in their books. These are legitimate gripes. Which novel would you take to a desert island? I would take Independent Peo- ple by Halldr Laxness. (The novel won this Icelandic writer the Nobel Prize in 1955) And finally, do nov- elists ever run out of things to write? They run out all the time. There is a gender imbalance in the valuation of literature In 2010, Jonathan Franzen became the first novelist in over a decade to make the cover of Time magazine, which designated him this generations Great American Novelist. He is reputed for his insight, deep contrarian intelligence and powerfully charged writing style, all of which shine through his greatest novel, The Corrections (2001), and Freedom (2010). Despite his formidable reputation, he dislikes pretentious questions when he says, Thats deep, he definitely doesnt mean it as a compliment. Abhimanyu Arni treads lightly FOR THE RECORD OUT OF TURN MJ AKBAR SWAMINOMICS SWAMINATHAN S ANKLESARIA AIYAR POLITICALLY INCORRECT SHOBHAA DE