Tag Archives: development

Sermon on the Streets

The lefties are in general experts in deception. For one, they use disruption and blackmail as replacements to what is required in a civilized society – most significantly truth and transparency in public discourse, stability of state and society, and respect for institutions processes and their proper functioning. The recent phenomenon of AAP is not really different in this matter. Whether it is moralizing to others without having any morality themselves, assuming a pedestal to escape scrutiny, looking for soft targets, immoral use of public emotions, conflating goals with high sounding and vacuous theories, essentially AAP is through and through commie. Their discourse is best described as ‘Sermon on the Streets’ – something meant to catch following with no clue what the following is for.

Main Problem – Lack of Accountability

What Kejriwal demonstrated inside and outside of government is his absolute lack of accountability. When making false allegations, he is not accountable because his goal is not to ‘prove’ – after all his goal is what matters, not his action, and he is not accountable either to society or to state in any matter! He can go blackmailing the society and state with disruption. And worse, he can do that even as CM of a state when his primary responsibility is to ensure no disruption actually happens.

 Given that Kejriwal’s ascent to power happened without a clear majority, his primary role one would expect is to set things right in Delhi before initiating things that require a bigger mandate. Yet he does things entirely opposite, and without showing any consistency or commitment to his responsibilities resorts to blackmail every now and then. He threatens people that if his proposed bill does not get passed through his insisted unconstitutional method, he would resign. In spite of an assurance of support from both opposition and alliance in case he follows the procedure, he does not. He undermines the protocol and Lt Governor and tries to push things in his usual unruly ways. Finally he resigns after making false allegations against other parties.

The brief story of his ascent and resignation only that of his lack of accountability, untrustworthiness and dishonesty. Five year tenure for a government is not laid down for no reason – it is meant to allow the government function, consistently perform its basic duties while taking time for well thought out reforms as needed. Leaving a position within two months is considered unprofessional and unethical even in small time jobs, unless one can demonstrate and indispensable reason. To quit government in less than two months without any compelling reason like sabotage is unforgivable. Kejriwal must know that legislation is a small part of governance – majority of governance involves execution and implementation of what is already legislated. Can the country afford such unreliable leaders to be voted to power? Forget power, can they be trusted to function responsibly even in opposition? In spite of conducting so irresponsibly if they think they can audaciously compete for lok sabha polls, is it bringing down politics or reforming it?


The real test of someone’s conformance with an open society democracy is the way they deal with dissent and opposition. The congress has a history of suppressing dissent and opposition for want of truth in their favor – right from illegitimately trying to fix opponents into fake cases and character assassination to banning books. Whether it is the targeting of Savarkar and RSS in 1948 or emergency or the recent bogie of Hindu terror, congress leadership in its socialist friendship conducted itself in the most inimical way to an open society democracy. Communist parties always stood one step ahead of congress in this matter. AAP with its cong-naxal background can therefore not be expected to augur well for any open society democracy.

Legislations are meant to be proposed, presented, reviewed, revised, refined until they are found to be in perfect consonance with existing law and implementable. The purpose of dissent is so thoroughly undermined by Kejriwal that he does not fit into any kind of democracy. It is as if he has the right to dissent with out of power and there can be no dissent when he is in power. Such duplicity is not just his individual trait but of his unfit-for-democracy party.

Here is a compilation on mediacrooks of the way in which the AAP leaders respond to criticism and opposition:

ImageCan any democracy or a civilized society allow such unruly, anti-social and rowdy element to lead it?

This being the fact, the party calling itself a common man party is where the real deception lies. Open society democracy is of the people precisely because it is of the common man – there is nothing more inimical to the interests of the common man than being damaging to democracy and democratic methods.


The anti-corruption movement that was initially started by the nationalists threatened the corrupt and congress because its primary agenda included not just prosecuting scamsters but bringing back the black money from abroad. Right from 2G and coal allocation several scams were exposed and brought into public awareness. Bringing back black money stashed abroad was one of the major demands of the anti-corruption agitators like Ramdev Baba.

Anti-Corruption Achievements of AAP

  1. AAP or its gang did not expose any of the scams or corruption – they happen to be exposed by the nationalists. Kejriwal merely repeated some allegations against Robert Vadra, riding on someone else’s work to gain some public space. Prashant Bhushan tried to hog the limelight for 2G expose he did not do – it was exposed by Pioneer.
  2. Black money issue was completely subverted by friends of congress – black money is not just about fiscal corruption, it is anti-social in many ways and AAP hides this more dangerous aspect, vacuously making noise in the name of corruption, trying to equate pickpocketing to treason.
  3. AAP hijacked the original agenda of anti-corruption, fizzled it out of its spirit and word, reduced it to some farce of a law and then finally aligned with the party that has been looting the country for decades.
  4. Kejriwal made false allegations against Nitin Gadkari and retreated when asked for proof. He called Modi corrupt, which even congress did not dare accuse. So essentially he brought down the movement from its roots in truth to the realm of allegations and mudslinging. This is a bigger sabotage of the otherwise sustained anti-corruption activity in the country.
  5. Kejriwal cynically abused and misused the public sentiment against corruption to malign the BJP while carefully covered up congress in multiple steps.
  6. Not surprisingly for skeptics, the moment AAP got to power there is no talk of congress corruption anymore, Sheila Dixit and other scamsters are no more villains. This deception seems to be lost on many, in the vain hope that Kejriwal needs more time to do things right. However Skeptics cannot ignore the possibility of the cynical way in which sample scapegoats are being kept ready to be sacrificed for elections – while the AAP agenda has nothing that can contain or catch the biggest criminals.

It is not an exaggeration to say Kejriwal was brought to render the anti-corruption agitation harmless for the congress – his achievement is precisely that. Many quickly jump to call this a ‘conspiracy theory’, as though conspiracy needs an evidence. But we have not proceeded from allegation to data – we are proceeding from data to deduction and that leaves no scope for calling this a conspiracy theory or a speculation. Now whether his ‘intentions are good’, whether he meant to fizzle down the movement or did it by mistake is for him to demonstrate, because it is his actions in question ultimately.

What’s with corruption, anyway!

Corruption itself, is one of the several problems – being fiscally non-corrupt is a virtue of many commies of Bengal and Kerala, does that save the destruction they did in these regions? And if one were to bear a sense of proportion, both stagnation and growth of a society involve both corrupt and non-corrupt methods. To disorient the public discourse as though corruption is the only issue and suppressing topics of importance, is in itself deception of people. Look at the way issues of foreign funding or anti-nationals like Prashant Bhushan in the party or Kejriwal’s dubious friends like NAC members, convicted criminals like Binayak Sen become non-issues when in reality they are far more serious problems than corruption.

Who does AAP actually threaten?

India in the days of Russian friendship has seen a dangerous consolidation of communists in politics and academics. Naxalite movements, communist parties and communist influence within congress party rose steeply. While their stranglehold on academics remains, the naxalite movements and communist hegemony was controlled to an extent after the fall of USSR. Maoism, a Chinese gift is still being fought.

The prospects of a party like AAP threatens the revival of India in every way –

  1. Economic revival is threatened with its freebie culture and anti-investment climate they are creating.
  2. Development of the country is threatened by its apathy towards infrastructure and job creation.
  3. Both internal and external security is threatened, with the way the likes of AAP try to weaken the morale of security forces and align openly with naxals and jihadis.
  4. Integrity of the nation is threatened by their antagonism to the core identity of the nation.
  5. Social order and harmony are threatened by their anarchist ways.

Save Congress

It threatens the nation more than anyone and anything. That AAP does not threaten congress, that it is meant to protect congress, that its challenge is to BJP and other nationalists should by now be clear to any observant mind. That a vote for AAP is an indirect vote for congress, is already said by some – but it should be realized that a vote for AAP is a vote against the stability and development of the nation, and an invitation of danger to the nation. Outfits like AAP are floated to cynically exploit anti-incumbency, to curtail the strong anti-congress sentiment from expressing itself in the ballot, which is essentially an antithesis of democracy.

While AAP is the most recent example, the trick that congress uses is not new. Here is the algorithm –

  1. Rise credibility for the person by making him shout against congress misdeeds and corruption
  2. Make him look like a personification of ideals and employ media in his favor
  3. Garner votes in his name and divide anti-incumbency vote
  4. Keep the person and outfit as long as it suits, merge him back when it suits.

PRP and TRS of Andhra Pradesh are precursors of AAP in this matter. It is their success that made congress attempt AAP in Delhi. A partial success of AAP in Delhi was sufficient to prevent a good government – and emboldens them for a bigger bait in loksabha. However their actions and intent are both clear by now, and the common man should by now be seeing through those.

AAP is not the only player in this, though. Third front, a prospective stitch of currently pro-congress parties like the SP and JD, is another similar attempt at dividing anti-congress vote and reinstating congress in power through the back door. The fact that a third front conveniently keeps forming and disintegrating, is itself the evidence. Sometimes it is a left front, sometimes third front, sometimes it is AAP. Goal remains the same – preventing a strong nationalist dispensation by fracturing votes. A strong nationalist dispensation hampers the prospects of petty and selfish politicians and remains their biggest enemy. There is no other reason why these savers of congress, be it AAP or JD or SP should hate BJP or RSS so much.

Development Impossible Without Defeating Naxalites

Cart before the horse
Rohit Pradhan, Sushant K. Singh
Date: August 15, 2009

URL: http://www.indianex press.com/ news/cart- before-the- horse/502351/ 0

Introduction: PM’s address must take it clear that development is
impossible without first defeating Naxalites

Exactly two years ago, Prime Minister of India, Dr Manmohan Singh, in
his Independence day address, had labeled Maoists as the gravest
internal security threat faced by India. But it is only now, two years
later, that the government is taking the threat seriously. In the recent
session of Parliament, Home Minister P. Chidambaram admitted that the
national security threat posed by the Maoists has been underestimated
for the last few years. His ministry has also recently circulated a
draft note for the union cabinet – ‘Meeting developmental & security
challenges in the extremist affected areas’ – to key departments of the

While the armed response to the Maoist challenge has received much media
attention, what has largely passed unnoticed is the attached
“development” package: huge volumes of central assistance provided to
the Maoist-affected states in the implicit belief that Maoism is
essentially a socio-economic problem – not ordinary terrorism or
insurgency – and can be defeated by improving the means of livelihood
and winning the “hearts and minds” of the affected populace. There is no
military solution to Maoism, so goes the conventional thinking.

Prima facie, it is an approach which is hard to fault. Maoism thrives on
persecution – both real and perceived – and it is no surprise that it is
rampant in some of India’s most impoverished states. Indubitably,
winning internal security battles requires a multi-faceted strategy
which includes establishing the rule of law, development and
rehabilitation of the reformed rebels.

Unfortunately, because it treats Maoism as qualitatively different from
terror groups operating in Kashmir and the North East, this approach
subtly de-emphasises the security angle; arguing, in essence, that
security can be ensured by promising development. No doubt, people of
Maoist-affected areas have genuine grievances against the Indian state,
but Maoists, just like the terrorists in Kashmir or North East, have
cynically exploited them for their own larger ideological goals:
establishment of an internationalist “people’s democracy” – euphemism
for a one party communist state. The Maoists seek the dismemberment of
the Indian state -at least its current structure – and it is naive to
hope for reconciliation between them and the Indian state at this stage.
It is fatal to look at Maoists as a few misguided youth fighting for the
oppressed and poor; whereas in their approach towards their political
opponents and the police – large numbers of whom have been mercilessly
massacred – Maoists have shown themselves as ruthless and despotic
outlaws. The nature of the beast does not change merely because the
context is local and the idiom is communism, and not religion.

This is not a mere pedantic argument: the latent belief that Maoism is
“different” has willy-nilly facilitated the establishment of a virtual
“red corridor” where the authority of the state has been severely
corroded. Maoists have been allowed to erect a parallel structure of
governance with all its trappings: taxation, policing and dispute
resolution. Without re-establishment of the state’s authority, which, in
turn, rests on the removal or reduction of the competing authority of
the Maoists, no developmental approach is likely to succeed. Therefore,
attention has to be focused on the security which must necessarily
involve a well directed and purposeful offensive against the Maoists.
History teaches us that while all successful counter-insurgencie s are 80
per cent political, it can only work once the 20 per cent military
component has been effected first.

In states where even policemen are shying away from serving in Maoist
zones, is it reasonable to believe that the local population would risk
their lives by challenging Maoist authority because they have – or are
promised – more electricity or cleaner water by the government? Indeed,
Maoists – wary of even the slightest challenge to their authority in
areas they control – are selectively targeting contractors, civil
agencies and NGOs. Genuine progress in reconstruction and economic
development rests on adequate security. Unless security is established
first, any “hearts and minds” approach is destined to fail, fuelling
even more discontent among the local population and providing further
ammunition to the Maoist propaganda machinery.

Similarly, the ‘rewards for surrender’ scheme can deliver results only
when the core groups of Maoists have been neutralised. With Maoists
running a lucrative extortion racket in the “red corridor”, there are no
incentives for even the ideologically uncommitted cadres to surrender.

Indeed, numerous examples show that insurgents never negotiate from a
position of strength but only when the state has broken their back. The
political solution to Maoism must follow their removal from their areas
of influence and reclaiming of the authority of the state: it can
neither precede it nor can it run concomitantly. Ample academic research
(such as James Dobbins & Seth Jones’ The Beginner’s Guide to
Nation-Building) suggest that ending war is a critical pre-condition of
economic progress, and not the other way around.

So today, as the prime minister outlines the nation’s priorities atop
the red fort, he must make it clear that Maoists must go. Only then will
development be possible.

– Sushant K. Singh is the contributing editor and Rohit Pradhan is
associated with ‘Pragati – The Indian National Interest Review’