If the intent of this idiotic article is to provoke, Indian Express has poorly chosen Seema Chisthi to do the job. It is notable for total lack of clarity, overt one-sidedness, and loudly communal. That it is nakedly pro-Congress is obvious because it is published where it is. But if the intent–which I suspect it is–is to offer sane advise to the Congress party, this article is an example of what not dish out.
Seema Chisthi displays her absolute ignorance about the run up to these elections when she says
In the past 12 years, barring one election, in all the four Lok Sabha polls, the BJP has been consistently getting more seats in Karnataka than the Congress. It was just in 1999 that the Congress got 18 seats and the BJP seven. So, the BJP victory in the assembly this month was something waiting to happen — something the Congress number-crunchers should have anticipated.
This is right in parts but completely wrong as a whole. What is your wager that the BJP would have won so spectacularly had the JD(S) allowed them to completed their share of 20 months, and polls were held in 2009? As I’ve mentioned before, the JD(S) has gifted most of the 110 seats to the BJP, which is a reasonable conclusion if you compare the seat swings between the two parties during 2004 and now. The BJP and JD(S) bagged 79 and 58 seats respectively in 2004 while in 2008, this stands at 110 and 28. Something other than pure magic should explain this corresponding increase and decrease in just 3-plus years. Seema reminds me of a Congress leader who speaks like a sore loser.
She also talks about weekend Congress election managers
About eight chief ministerial candidates, para-trooping national leaders, weekend election managers, not a single local face to embody its politics and, most of all, no real “politics” it could claim as its own.
This is complete bunkum. The paratroopers and weekenders were adequately shown their place by the very non-existent “single local face(s).” They had plenty of local faces: S.M. Krishna the campaign manager (who ironically was denied a ticket), Kharge, the Dalit Chief Ministerial face, Dharam Singh, D.K. Shiva Kumar, H.K. Patil who famously thundered about getting “justice for Gadag,” R.V.Deshpande, Siddaramaiah… But as we shall see, the real damage was done by the very person Seema absolves of all guilt.
So the Congress did well in seats visited by Rahul Gandhi, but the stamina needed to turn his freshness and charisma into a new or energetic “politics” (not just seats) just wasn’t there.
When the Crown Prince Rahul Gandhi did a whirlwind tour of the state, he exactly visited pockets of the state. He semi-skipped most of Southern Karnataka for understandable reasons. As the results demonstrate, Congress has met expectations in this region. I recall the TV footage that showed his Scorpio zipping inside the thickets of Bandipur and Nagarhole, amazing locations for delivering bloodcurdling election speeches. His North Karnataka tour lasted longer again, entirely understandable. The BJP has virtually pocketed the entire region. TV footage of Rahul Gandhi’s tour of this region disrobed the ugly face of Congress sycophancy. An angry Rahul Gandhi yelling at senior–the same local faces–leaders like Kharge and co, and the latter bearing the insult with utter equanimity. But Seema is an honourable columnist for she says the Congress did well in these regions. However, the results show the exact opposite.
However, the mandatory BJP-bashing takes an unintelligible but highly communal overtone. Fathomable because she invokes (horror!) Narendra Modi.
The much-Sanskritised chief minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi, who had also campaigned in Karnataka, was calmly in conversation with the TV anchor, commenting on national issues. Very difficult to engage on matters outside Gujarat usually, he signalled his stepping onto a national stage on Sunday — a Sanskritisation (a phrase coined by a Kannadiga sociologist M.N. Srinivas, incidentally) in political terms, which could have violent consequences for not just his party, but also for how politics may take shape quickly, and feverishly, before 2009.
A brief backgrounder is necessary to even (vainly) attempt decrypting Sanskritised. Now, this used to a widely-circulated obscenity pejorative term in the heydays of fierce anti-Brahmin movement. Very similar to how it is enough to declaim Saffron (and its other variants) today to seal an argument, Sanskritised was an effective invective to shut people up. In the hands of highly skilled elocutionists, it worked magic (I refer here to some very interesting forms of debate that D.V. Gundappa, S.L Bhyrappa, and others have documented). But it was gradually abandoned because ever since, Brahmins have been “shown their place.” Sanskritisation, a noun used as a verb form is a strange creature that really defies definition. Interestingly, Seema uses this without defining it, an act similar to her boss Sonia Gandhi who wields power without responsibility but alludes to M.N. Srinivas who coined it. M.N. Srinivas in turn, is (was?) regarded as one of the pioneers of Indian sociology. Much of what he has written is based on and derived from Western conception of Indian sociology but couched in different language. And Sanskritisation, however, you want to define it, has no factual basis in Indian history or tradition or society–unless you equate Sanskritisation with Brahminisation (ugh and sic!). In which case, we know what Seema refers to. I’m willing to stand corrected if you come with a convincing counter argument on the definition of Sanskritisation/Sanskritised.
And does Seema say violent consequences? Just shut up, Seema!
Tags: Commentary, Indian Politics, Media Watch, Pseudo Secularism Hall of Shame, War on Communism
Sandeep -i guess u are wasting too much time trying to fisk such a utterly dubious piece of journalism that seems to be increasingly the norm in IE
What a Puke worthy article from the Yechury household(Seema w/o Yechury).Welcome to Incestous world of Leftist establishment.
Even a cursory analysis indicates a significant downsing in Congress voteshare in constitutencies where Rahul GAndhi campaigned.And this has been the clearly the case since UP election.
The shameless Indian MSM deliberately underplayed the humiliation that veteran Congress Dalit leader suffered from the young upstart.
In Gujarat and now in Karnataka BJP has shattered the venomous secular media propaganda that its a party with a narrow social base.Leftist media personalities including this one from Yechury household cannot reconcile with this reality.
The sanskritisation reference was utterly out of place and extremely mischevous.If at all there is a political party that provides no space for socially disadvantaged ,its the marxists party of which Seema ’s husband is a prominent member.As always,its middle castes that is forming the bulwark against the unending assault from the Abrahamic forces(that includes marxism).Karnataka is yet another demonstration of this
Kudos to the BJP for attempting to perfect a model which is a heady mix of powerful regionalism and strong nationalism
I believe M.N.Srinivasan is dead though his concept of Sanskritization is very much alive in the left-dominated study of Sociology in India.
Nice, very nice.
A friend forwarded this blog. Am happy to see some honest and straightforward talk.
Chisti never shuts up does she?
I seriously believe BJP needs some decent spokesmen.
Please for god sake get these jack-asses off my screen - Ravi Prasad, Rudy and worst of all Javdekar.
Even on the day they win, BJP does not know how to spin the debates. They are ever so defensive!!! Kills me.
NDTV (who else) kept poking and pinning BJP guys in studio and there was no one to shut them up. At one point Barkha almost scolded Ravi Prasad like a school teacher. Bet she wouldn’t dare to do this to any Congress guy.
Also Prannoy Roy kept insinuating that BJP got this win because of delimitation of Bangalore. God damn it, BJP, here’s this guy clearly insulting Karnataka voters and not one spokesman calls the bluff.
BJP won fair and square across all pockets including urban ones. When will BJP learn the tricks of media politics!!!!
Jayanti Natrajan who’s party got a slap on face looked so much more in control than all the BJP jokers. Beats me, how this national party cannot get good screen people.
I hope atleast some official BJP person would be reading this comment. And if s/he is, then here’s a desperate suggestion.
Recruit someone from professional institutes like Management schools etc and have a hard-ass, hard core media guy be your Spokesman for god sake. Remove that sucker Javdekar and let him micro-manage elections. Please ask him and Ravi Prasad to shut the f**k up!!!!!
you know what? i quite like the rough and ready attitude of the homegrown BJP spokepespeople compared to the foregin educated airheaded drawlers of the Congress. Rajiv Pratap Rudy is a truly terrible partyman - profligate spender more in place in the Kaangress. But Ravi Shankar prasad, Sushma Swaraj and others are a hard nosed folks who deliver their replies with economy and pure command over their facts. The BJP scores over all the other parties in having seasoned organisers who are capable of wielding political power when necessary. Ravi Shankar Prasad is a lawyer from Patna who built up te state’s PUCL, and Sushma Swaraj is the legendary lawyer of the Emergency who was taking on the Kaangress in the Courts when she was fresh out of law school. In contrast the talking heads of the Kaangress are pale imitations of the first family and utterly useless.
I agree with kaangeya, most of the congress spokesmen are vacuous windbags.
If BJP can win nine elections with “poor media management” then media management is overrated.
Indian media (of the NDTV and CNN-IBN variety) is (to use a cliche) hopelessly out of touch with ground realities in India. Let them root for Kaangress, and Madame Sonia. It won’t make the least bit of difference to BJP’s poll prospects. This is not to say that it won’t feel good to have some articulate BJP chap beat the crap out of venal Kaangressis in a live debate.
My money will be on Arun Jaitley, Arun Shourie and Sushma Swaraj too accomplish the needful. It is on such occasions that we miss the urban suaveness of Pramod Mahajan.
I wonder who reads Indian Express anymore… I find even the new startup - DNA - better than Indian express in terms of coverage and presentation.
I am waiting for the day when Indian Express will wind up .. the sooner they do so, the better it would be for them… they still seem to be living in the license quota permit raj , Emergency and CITU Laal Jhanda days..
I also suggest them a new tagline - “Journalism of Dhimmitude” rather than “Journalism of courage”
I tend to agree with kaunteya. Other than Arun Jaitley who is priceless when it comes to taking on the likes of Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Kapil Sibal, all other BJP talkers have their shortcomings. They are not aggressive enough and do not come up with the right counterpoints in arguments. Of late, Ravi Shankar Prasad is showing a lot of improvement. But Prakash Javdekar, Rudy, Naqvi, etc are quite poor.
In comparison, even a greenhorn like Manish Tiwari of the Congress looks much more in command, even though to us non-Congresswalas he may appear to talk rubbish, but he does that very confidently and gets his point across. Also, it depends upon the anchor on whom he/she allows to complete their point.
Hey Sandeep…
Why boil your blood over a “SYCOPHANT” like Seema Chisti???
These page 3 journo’s, only wish their 15 minutes of fame, why ponder our valueable time over these white ass licker’s???
Drop her mate, IE published some other superb article’s on BJP’s spectacular victory in Karnataka.
I read such article’s and let stray’s like Seema Chisti, bark…..
@Bibek Chatterjee : Media management is not overrated. You’ll see it in national elections.
@kaangeya : the problem is Ravi Prasad et al are not even rude to them. They at times try to hard to please the anchors.
Sandeep,
What were the debating styles that DVG and SLB refer to? And could you write up a post on DVG? His essay on liberalism in the Indian context is a masterpiece of learning and intellect. URA is such an odd man in that galaxy of luminaries. How ever could anyone award him a Jnanapith?
kaangeya,
Well, DVG has written in several places about how the word “sanskritized” and all its variants was usually used to smother debate. Actually, that was the ONLY debating style but perfected with different variants. If a demand was rejected on genuine grounds, the proponents used to simply say, “ah! this is a Brahmin conspiracy that’s why it was rejected.” And the demand usually was met. Read SLB’s autobiography for a fuller treatment of this phenomenon.
I’m surprised you even mention URA in the same breath
Late MN Srinivas was an original thinker and scholar. He was left of center, but not being cut of the loonie JNU cloth, he never allowed ideology to cloud his academic judgement. Do read his books. Of course, his theory of sanskritization is no longer valid because of the impact of quotas, but there was a time when it held more than a grain of truth.
Chishti’s article is mediocre crap, and is not worth analyzing.
I suggest that we henceforth use quotes when referring to non-BJP parties as “secular”. Using the word secular without quotes gives legitimacy to their claim, while using quotes would expose them to be the hypocrites that they are.