On seeing the release of
the book, I decided to buy it, not necessarily to read it, because I almost
knew what it was about and have heard many episodes of the author’s ‘Midweek
Matters’ and have had a fairly good idea about his thought process and concerns
but because I knew that it will contain data and important instances quoted,
which will be indeed a document on important socio-politico-economic events of
the last decade. This I anticipated
because, in the episodes of the ‘Midweek matters’ I had seen that the author
came out with well researched data and quotes and his expressions were not
emotional, but one of deep concern. The
author could not be branded a political activist, an economist, a sociologist,
journalist, etc. But he was all of these
in parts.
The very of
‘Crooked Timber’ is seen to date back to Immanuel Kant, wherein human basically
held to be like a crooked timer and could not be straight, without inspection.
The author of this book
perhaps believed that it was natural for the nation to become of crooked
timber, if not inspected, questioned and put on the right path. That way, the book does not disappoint.
Before I get into some of
the specific issues dealt with in the book, as a prelude I should say that the
book is a record of current history – to stand against propaganda
material. It speaks with facts and
data. It quotes the source of the
information and data. Hence, it is not
essays, merely conveying the impressions of the author.
Most of the essays are those that have come out as episodes
of ‘Midweek Matters’. The essays are not
important just because they are a record or make a remark over the events from
2014, but because they compile the facts and data to prove it. It supports our
worst fears, looks at reasons behind or beneath it.
Now some of the
observations in the book and comments wherever found necessary (which are put within brackets):
In the Introduction the
author says, ‘The Modi regime is obsessed with untrammeled power to do as it
pleases. Democracy is a nuisance’.
(No it is a vehicle for them to convince the
society that they are doing everything in a democratic manner.)
He says, ‘The lofty
remarks of their lordships during court hearings and in lectures outside the
court rooms are rarely reflected in their judgments and orders.’
(They are also part of
the system.)
Further he says, ‘The BJP
chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, the largest state in our Republic, openly said
that the 2021 electoral fight in his state was between 80% and 20%, thus framing
the election as a fight between the Hindu majority and Muslim minority’.
(Was it not L.K.Advani
who understood and spoke about the ‘bandwagon effect’? Then how can his followers not be expected to
take full advantage of that?)
Then he has said, ‘…China
continues to enjoy the fruits of its recent incursions and sit pretty on a
major chunk of our territory unchallenged.
But the Prime Minister tells the nation that there was no incursion at
all. Hardly anyone calls him out.’
(What is there to call
out? Every one, knows. Every other day, even Subramaniam Swamy
tweets about it. But ordinary people are
not bothered whether or not a blade of grass grows in the occupied territory.)
He speaks about ‘Transparency
in electoral bonds scheme’.
(Yes, they are
transparent. Collecting money in the
name of the party is not corruption – when done in a legal frame work, which
they alone can use.)
He laments that, ‘The
government does not share information with Parliament about farmers’ suicides;
or the deaths of migrant labourers during the COVID waves and the brutal
lock down of 2020; or the loss of jobs due to the pandemic and the loss of lives
due to lack of access to hospital beds and oxygen cylinders; or the level of
unemployment in the country’.
(How does one expect all
this when they have not been able to count the notes that came back?)
He observes, ‘Between
2016 and 2019, 79% of the funds released went only into media advocacy. A mere 21% actually went towards any concrete
initiative for the education, health and welfare of girls’.
(One should be happy that
it helped those in the media to earn their bread.)
He concludes, ‘To
criticize the government or the BJP is to be anti-Modi, and, therefore,
anti-national, unpatriotic.’
(Something all powerful
rulers right from Indira Gandhi and their supporters propagated.)
In the chapter about the
Pandemic, the author has pointed to the fact that any criticism against the
government handling or mishandling the pandemic is projected as an attempt to
defame Bharath.
(Yes, the same thing that
was done when Domnique Lapire wrote ‘The City of Joy’.)
In the Introduction
itself he has said, ‘Our democracy is in crisis, our social fabric is torn, our
economy is in peril, and we are being dragged back to the dark ages’.
(But when those
exercising adult franchise are more on emotional issues, how do these issues
concern them?)
The book says that the
dark elements that swim below in the surface are being summoned to increase
animosities and cleavages that lie dormant in a stratified and diverse society
like India.
The world over, right
wings have resorted only to his method.
They try to instigate the animal instincts. The leaders of earlier generations, atleast
after the ‘age of reason’, had tried to make people rise up to higher levels,
by overcoming their base instincts. But,
now to allow the base instincts of one set of people to play against that of
other and make use of the divide is ‘Chanakya tantra’.
The rise of the BJP and
the Hindutva in India has also been helped by the twin tower blast and Mumbai
and Parliament attacks. This enabled BJP
to sharpen their anti-Muslim propaganda by focusing the nature of terrorism and
its’ colour. On this aspect, the Muslim
community needs to become all the more vigilant and ensure that its’ youth do
not get carried away in the stream of emotions and counter emotions.
The basic problem in any
society is that whenever a group is organized, whether in the name of
community, caste, ideology, language, or anything else, the others who do not
belong to that group and who do not have any other group which is as much
organized, start looking upon the organized group and its people with fear and
envy. The Muslim community like the
Sikhs also is a well knit community with strong bonds of brotherhood. On the other hand, the Hindu community does
not have a common bond. It is a
loose-knit one, with no single prophet, no single holy book, no single
philosophy or outlook and even a single way of life, to be defined. The smaller groups within the Hindu community
which are organized on lines of the caste structure, get pulled down by other
caste groups. Thus, they are not a match
to the Muslim community which is organized.
The Christian community also by its different churches and
interpretations of the Bible are also similarly placed.
However, those who know
Islam also know that it also has different streams within and a dialogue
between the different faiths is the only method to bring a lasting solution to
human problem created due to different faiths.
But, that concept of
peaceful co-existence is not desired by vested interests who want to make quick
money and power.
The book gives a detailed
study on how the theory that Muslims will overpopulate compared to Hindus and
take over India is a flawed one, based on hard statistics. Its analysis of the Total Fertility Rate
(TFR) of different communities, over a period of time is worth noting.
The book points out that
connecting Hinduism to India and India to Hindi are part of the great
plan.
On reading about how the
Modi government survived on propaganda, I was reminded of what a veteran told
me in 2013 – that Modi was only emulating what Karunanidhi and DMK did in early
60s and 70s.
The author states that
people like Angela Merkel of Germany are living examples that self-confident
and accomplished leaders and their parties do not show themselves as
extraordinary and superhuman beings.
-But, even the Germans
fell for the macho man image of Hitler.
Indians are still prone to Hero worship.
They tend to depend upon one or the other avathar to come to their
rescue.
The author under the
chapter ‘Egocracy’, Digital Freedom and Data Privacy’ gives important inputs
regarding how dangerously compromised our personal data is. It is rightly pointed out that while
Government wants data for surveillance, business requires it to make
money. He also points out that
Government cannot be sole custodian to declare what is fake news. But most of the BJP supporters will not agree
with that, until BJP is out of power.
In the chapter, ‘Poverty
data and data poverty’, the author points out how 108 economists and social
scientists from around the globe have expressed concern over the loss of
credibility of Indian economic data. He
also points out that while tech giants amass enormous amount of our personal
data to manipulate our decisions and make money, Government on the other hand
does not want to give access to us to it so that we are kept in the dark and
confused so that political discourse is manipulated. He concludes by saying, ‘Both the State and
Capital ar working by stealth to construct and economic and political future
for us – without our consent. Both need
to be combatted.’ THIS IS VERY SERIOUS
AND IMPORTANT.
In the chapter, ‘Subhas Bose and New India’s Legacy Raiders’,
the author seeks to show how BJP has tried to misappropriate the legacy of
Subash Bose and Patel by using them against Nehru. ‘But the New India that was
announced in 2014 has concocted a folklore, which recruits Gandhiji, Patel and
now Bose, along with Sarvarkar and Godse, to serve its crafty narrative of
patriotism. It is not troubled by the
conflicting ideas of India these men held, as long as it can fire the gun off
their shoulders at Nehru, who they believe with the persons who denied them a
Hindu Rashtra and who may do so again through his continuing legacy’, says the
author.
But on this I feel that
either the author does not want to admit, or admit now, that it is Gandhi who
is their main target. How can a party which thrives on their majority-based claim accept that Right is might and how can they accept that Ends do not justify means? It was and is
Gandhian philosophy which stands in the way of Hindu Rashtra. They know that in their hearts. But do not want to say that openly until
Nehru is demolished. That is why they
carry Godse on their shoulders. The
attack on Nehru is only like their propaganda against pseudo-secularism. After it reaches the subconscious mind of the
average Indian, they will go for the next step.
On the JNU culture and
the students being concerned about all world affairs, the author seeks to know
whether it is wrong. Yes, in the eyes of
those who think that students are supposed to think only on lines that they are
taught, that discipline is a sine quo non for learning, culture of questioning
is anathema. They may, for sake of
argument say that in the ancient India students questioned their masters to
learn. But that was only on the subject. Not on morality or such things.
In the chapter on sale of
PSUs and VIZAG ‘STEAL’ the author makes a very important observation that it is
a myth that PSUs cannot perform and that private sector will flourish. He gives numerous examples and data for that.
In the chapter on ‘Who
killed Father Stan Swamy’, the author gives the complete history of
legislations which have led to this situation and concludes that all political
parties are directly and indirectly responsible for this.
In this connection,
questions asked about why the Supreme Court of India convenes special hearings
even on holidays when it comes to cases regarding very important persons but
many are languishing in jails as under-trials, becomes very relevant. It is
something very serious and needs attention of any concerned citizen.
Regarding the attitude of
selective speak of the PM and how he conducted Manki Bath during the pandemic,
selecting only a few who survived and not anyone who had lost their near and
dear to the pandemic, I was forced to think that we should thank our stars that
some family who had lost their kith or kin to the pandemic had not been brought
up to thank whatever the government did, inspit of their loss ‘which was purely
due to bad karma or fate’.
The present regime
survives only because of people who want them to ‘teach the others a lesson’,
as the author concludes in his last chapter.
This is precisely the
problem.
The underlying and hidden
animosity of the majority community towards the ‘others’ who are organized, is
the real issue to be dealt with.
There have been in the
horizon great philosophers and social activists who could rise above petty
politics. They were those who did not
seek power, wealth or fame. The nation requires
such personalities, only if we should come out of the crisis.
The real problem is not
what we are in today. It is regarding
how we are to come out of the hole. There is a famous adage: Every successor
makes the predecessor better. That way,
we have to be wary not only about what if BJP or Modi continues after 2224, but
also about whether the next incumbent, even if replacing BJP would be able to
set the wheel back.
Already, many of the
political parties are falling in line with Hindu appeasement. This is the inverse of what was being done
earlier – as if nothing of Hindu matters.
Between the two extremes
of 'India was good for nothing until the British came' and that 'India was the
Vishwaguru and everything was known to the Indians all along in human history',
rationality requires to stop and think, what was known and what was not. Then, the present position is to be
assessed. What if my grandfather knew
something, but it has no relevance for my present stature – intellectual or
economic or cultural. How does past
glory alone matter?
In an environment with
social dis-harmony and mutual hate and suspicion between groups and communities,
no economic progress can take place. On
one hand seeking foreign investments and on another hand bashing anything
foreign unless it falls within our likes would be riding on two horses, without
a cart.
The insightful points
made by former Home Secretary G.K. Pillai in the interview with Karan Thapar is exactly on these
lines. He emphasizes that not only
Hindus, but those with secular outlook in all religions have to speak out, otherwise,
our next generations will be in deep trouble.
People of other faiths
have to stop their Hindu bashing – whether openly or within the confines of
their closed meetings. Hindus have to
revert back to their real secular roots.
I have deliberately not covered all aspects in the book so that if anyone is interested in reading it, my observations should not stop them from that. It is to be read and preserved.
Hope more like Parakala
Prabhakar come out to stem the tide.
