'The more Italian Mama Mia tries to put her foot in,
the more the Parivar's point of view regains credence'
How Readers responded to Vir Sanghvi's recent columns
Date:
Tue, 09 Mar 1999 20:50:42 +0530
From:
Ashok Row Kavi <arkavi@bol.net.in >
Subject:
Vir Sanghvi's comment
Oh dear, we're back to the little sophistry about Vajpayee versus the Sangh. If only Vir and his other 'veers' knew that the first without the other is a dialectic dodo! The more Italian Mama Mia tries to put her foot in, the more the Sangh Parivar's point of view regains credence.
Sonia symbolises foreign interference and MNC games. After all, Vir may have missed out the small item last year where Rupert Murdoch was awarded by the present conservative Pope for "special services to the Roman Catholic Church". But then busy columnists and equally busy MCs on Star TV don't read the papers like we old reporters do, do they? Vir, we're going to see more polarisation, which is what the Sangh wants. You liberals will be the death of us.
Ashok Row Kavi
Date:
Fri, 12 Mar 1999 14:48:02 -0600
From:
Challa Sitaram <ChallaSitaram@JDCORP.deere.com >
Subject:
Vir Sanghvi
While his analysis of the Congress strategy seems plausible, exonerating Sonia of any scheming underlines Sanghvi's status. Are fair skin and Western origin so venerable, despite the question marks in many people's minds about Sonia's toying with the Congress, her demeanour during P V Narasimha Rao's time and her erstwhile indifference?
C S Jawahar
Date:
Fri, 26 Feb 1999 21:44:27 +0530
From:
Dr Mathure <matnan@bom4.vsnl.net.in >
Subject:
Vir Sanghvi on the fickle middle-class
I think this article was very intelligent. It is a keen observation of the thinking of people in India. Most of us still blame the political parties for not being able to maintain a stable and satisfactory
central government. And I have come to see your point of view. I have always had a good amount of faith in our prime minister and I still trust his instinct and his integrity. I think no matter who the current prime minister is, he would have faced the same praise and abuses that our dear prime minister is now facing. I think we should allow him to prove
his worth.
We as ordinary citizens coming from all kinds of professions do not always know or understand what is actually happening in the Centre. If we go on to weigh the plusses and minuses, he has been making a conscious effort with our neighbour which is so evident. As for the Pokhran stuff, it was bound to happen. Our previous PMs pushed it away
shrewdly, whereas Mr Vajpayee allowed the tests to be carried out for concern of the nation.
I would like to thank Mr Sanghvi for the brilliant insight into our faulty society. And lastly, I would like to quote Mr Kennedy: "Ask what you can do for the country not what the country can do for you."
Mekhala
Date:
Tue, 09 Mar 1999 23:19:34 -0800
From:
Hariharan Ramamurthy <harihara@ix.netcom.com >
Subject:
Vir Sanghvi is the typical Congress sycophant
The boot licking has already started. After all, if Sonia has a moral right to be the next prime minister, why blame Rabri Devi? Whatever few sensibilities Sonia might have had like her husband in his earlier days have vanished by her nearness to the nefarious cliques of
Congressmen. We are going to see the same old ineptitude. It is funny to see how some two penny journalists demand that the defence minister should reveal why the naval chief had to be sacked. Does he think a leader of Fernandes calibre would dismiss a chief unless the situation
demanded it? Mr Vir Sanghvi, stop your ranting and write something that makes sense.
Ramamurthy
Date:
Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:03:07 +1000
From:
Himanshu Roy Pota <pota@adfa.edu.au >
Subject:
Action Stations
I think the column is crafted on a pattern that needs to be understood: The article mainly refers to 1. Sonia Gandhi. 2. Congress Party. 3.
Narasimha Rao. 4. Atal Bihari Vajpayee. and 5. RSS-BJP combine.
Here are some of the references:
Sonia Gandhi -- "degree of political maturity", "busy reviving the
Congress", "not power hungry", "she would have done it [toppled Vajpayee
government]", "open mind", "urged ... agreed to oppose the Bihar
decision", "neglecting the national interest [by not assuming power]"
Congress Party -- "Congress is power hungry ... There is something to
this view"
Narasimha Rao -- "charisma of a tranquillised bullfrog"
Atal Bihari Vajpayee -- "highly popular prime minister", "But when he is
under pressure -- as he was in the first three months of his term -- he
seems depressed and befuddled"
RSS-BJP combine -- "Knickerwallahs", "Christians have been targeted by
communalists", "being infiltrated", "appalling judgement", "irreparable
harm to the Indian system", "deeply unpopular government."
The picture that emerges from this pattern is:
1. Atal B Vajpayee is a capable man, but even he cannot check the menace
of the RSS-BJP combine.
2. Yes, Congress has its limitation but with Sonia Gandhi at the top
things will be all right. The only Congress PM outside of Nehru's
family, Narasimha Rao, was a good for nothing fellow. A relative of
Nehru is the only hope.
3. Don't question the policies, it is only the individuals who matter -- Congress is Sonia Gandhi.
Here is what the facts tell us:
1. Sonia Gandhi has been an active political figure for the last 18 months or so. There has not been even one report that discusses Sonia Gandhi's policy focus. Is there any new policy that she has proposed? Has she made any statement of intellectual merit that is worth considering? What makes her any different from the common person? All we hear is how she is manipulating people in the Congress party so that every single decision is left to her; this it seems is party discipline. Content of her intellectual effort is what never gets discussed. And yet that should be the sole concern of journalists.
Sonia Gandhi didn't come to power in 1991 because she was shocked by two assassinations in the family. Nevertheless she was running a parallel administration by holding regular drubs and passing instructions to the government. She was gifted millions of rupees of tax payers' funds to run the Rajiv Gandhi Pratishthan without any public accountability. In 1991 the hope was that she could control things without risking anything; her wish will be their command. Narasimha Rao's unwillingness to follow her wishes and Sharad Pawar's ambition created worries for Sonia and she realised, like her mother-in-law (party president and parliamentary
leader the same, etc), that one has to hold power legally to exercise power. Sonia's coming out in 1997-98 was an attempt to legitimise her power. There is no intellectual or moral aspect to her and yet she needs to be built into a cult figure as this article tries to do. This is the first thread in the pattern -- create a cult figure.
2. The only man at the helm apart from Nehruji's relative was Narasimha Rao. It was during his time that the Punjab problem was solved. The significance of the Punjab problem cannot be overstated.
The trouble in Punjab was infighting in the same family; had we lost Punjab India as an entity would have been permanently damaged. I believe Narasimha Rao-Manmohan Singh duo did a lot to make us economically brave. Indian businessmen are travelling all over the world now. Because we can import basic infrastructure items we can export other products. Cement is available in plenty, etc. In short, the one Congressman, Narasimha Rao,
who did lasting work for the country is ridiculed to build a relative of Nehruji into a cult status.
This is another thread in the pattern: Congress is Sonia and Sonia is Congress.
3. What ideology does the Congress have? Why is it not discussed? The answer
is that the Congress has no ideology but a burning desire to remain in power. No ideology is a fundamental creed of the Congress. The Congress is a party made up of different individuals with one thing in common -- a desire for power. With all these power hungry people, who is to act as a referee, ie, their leader? They can't choose a referee from amongst themselves because the selection process has to be based on some rules or basic understanding of which they have none. And to have none is their fundamental creed. So they always desire to choose a referee whose choice transcends all reasons, who is ruthless, who knows when to kick and when to suck up, and to whom there isn't anyone else alike. Put these factors together and one would realise that Sonia Gandhi is the only choice for the Congressmen.
Remember the jubilation when she agreed to take up the reins of their party? The Congress is a party fundamentally organised on no vision, no ideology, no nothing. So the reaction of
Congressman to the ideologically based RSS-BJP is understandable. It is embarrassing to admit the no ideology creed; so the Congress has always mouthed creeds which have no meaning, like secularism, and which cannot be a matter of intellectual engagement. The next thread of the pattern is to promote absurd ideologies.
4. The right way to point out the dangers of the BJP-RSS should be: the BJP has
Hindutva or Swadeshi as ideology, Hindutva means such and such and therefore it is harmful to the nation. This will need some intellectual engagement and will invite counter questions about the Congress's own ideology. The best way is to attack the word itself. The Congress has ruled
for 50 years and India sits at the bottom of the heap of poor nations. There are no achievements to show so the BJP can't be attacked on the performance front -- so declare it as communal party.
Even regarding fighting corruption, the Congress has an ingenious strategy. Congressmen don't say that they will fight corruption -- they even admit to being corrupt themselves -- they only declare that the BJP cannot fight corruption and what's more they say that BJP is a hypocrite for saying that they will fight corruption. This strategy means that even the most burning issue of corruption cannot be engaged intellectually.
Finally, the most important thread in this pattern is to paint the other party dark.
Why would individuals like Vir Sanghvi, Kuldip Nayar, Natwar Singh, etc
do this dirty work for Sonia Gandhi? There are many reasons for this but in short they are similar to why Indians supported Robert Clive to conquer India. These people are busy spreading poison more powerful than of any snake. As there is antidote to a snake's poison so is there to this journalistic poison. Let us understand the pattern and make a cut in their pattern so that it all comes apart and the face behind the mask is exposed.
Himanshu
Date:
Mon, 15 Feb 1999 11:37:56 PST
From:
"indian indian" <indian_indians@hotmail.com >
Subject:
Mesg. to Vir Sanghvi
Mr Vir Sanghvi,
From your writings, anyone can conclude that you are critical about the majority people of India. If we look into the entire history of India, we can find only one person who matches you and
persons like you: The Nawab of Hyderabad.
Persons like you declare yourself as secular, patriotic and so and so. But always side with the foreigner, most corrupt, power-hungry people or organisations. A few people like you in the Middle Ages forced our country to surrender before foreign barbarous invaders. Now you guys are doing the same, by supporting the individual or organisations which are not loyal to India and foreign in origin. The British ruled the county because some traitors supported them from within. The same is happening now again.
Do some good for the country, yaar.
Date:
Wed, 10 Mar 1999 11:06:08 -0500
From:
vinay@rohini.delhi.nic
Subject:
Vir you better join the Congress!
Why don't you join the Congress? If you are so afraid of the BJP and its approach, you must join a political party and then start writing against the party all the time. Whenever you write, you write against the BJP. Do you believe in democracy? The BJP has not grabbed power, but the people have asked it to rule. It went to people with it allies and won over 250 seats together. Where were you secularist then?
Please don't try to destabilise India. Your writing shows that you hate a strong and prosperous India.
Vinay
Delhi
Date:
Sat, 23 Jan 1999 21:14:34 +0530
From:
"priya d'cunha" <pdcunha@hotmail.com >
Subject:
Vir Sanghvi's column on conversions
The freedom to practise one's own religion is among the various other freedoms in our country. The only reason being, when push comes to shove the state will not uphold the law... and will let these so-called politicians/ mischief-mongers let loose some serious mayhem! The day the people realise that all issues are politically motivated (alternatively, over-hyped by the media) and stop listening to the crap, India will be a better place... Till then.... I'll be hoping, wondering and praying...
Date:
Mon, 08 Feb 1999 15:14:05 -0800
From:
Nitin Shroff <nshroff@telogy1.com >
Subject:
No facts, all fiction
Please get your facts before you speak. You seem to have your "hate Hindutva hat on". Of course, that is a great marketing tool, because when you say "hate Hindutva", everybody,
including Hindus listen... they are just so naive! And, of course, since you write English, your word must be the truth, right?
Date:
Thu, 28 Jan 1999 19:11:51 +0530
From:
Farid Sheikh <skyking@bom4.vsnl.net.in >
Subject:
Till the moment of reckoning
The Congress party is trying to appease the Muslims once again. They have these Eid Milan parties while they just stood by doing nothing when the Hindu fundamentalists razed Babri Masjid to the ground. Even in Bombay it was their government which just stood by while the riots were in full swing. They have a lot to answer to the Muslims. Just the other day I met an old lady who said that they have not celebrated Eid for the last 67 years... & what about those who broke down the masjid & others?
Vir Sanghvi
|
