I am not
saying this. Rahul Gandhi has been delivering speeches emphasizing these
words. Potato and potato chips are the recent inductions (a year or so) after
the FDI coronation of ‘his’ government.
Computer,
mobile phone and telecom revolution in India have been pet words in many of his
speeches and they continue to be so, patronizing, sometimes, Mr.
Sam Pitroda.
There were
some other tag words but Rahul is not talking them right now. Given the
similar streak of his speeches, they are bound to appear in some other speech
by his speechwriter, I am sure.
Also, there
are some whom his speechwriter is not going to recall again. There was once a
Kalawati. Named by someone else, but famed by Rahul Gandhi. Rahul visited her
hut, was appalled at her misery, and mentioned her in his ‘fiery’ speech in the
Parliament.
“I was
thinking about what I want to say and I came to a simple conclusion. I decided
that it is important at this point not to speak as a member of a political
party but to speak as an Indian.”
I would go
to the house of Kalawati. I am glad you find that funny. But
Kalawati is a person whose husband committed suicide. So, I would urge
you to respect her. I would take you to the house of Kalawati, which I
also visited three days ago. Kalawati is a woman with nine children whose
husband committed suicide three years ago. Her husband committed suicide
because he was dependent on only one crop, the cotton crop. When I asked
Kalawati as to why her husband committed suicide, her answer was that he was
dependent on only one source of income. … (Interruptions) …* I asked Kalavati as to what did you do. Kalavati responded
by telling me that I diversify … (Interruptions) … I spoke to two poor
families. One of them was called Mrs. Kala… (Interruptions) Mrs. Kala
said that she had diversified her income sources and she has used that to
stabilize her family and bring up her nine children.
Sir, at the
very least, nuclear energy is going to act like Mrs. Kala’s pond and it is going
to act as an insurance policy for this country in times of need. At its
maximum, nuclear energy is going to act like Mrs. Kala’s main crop.
This was the
career phase of Rahul Gandhi when he evoked expectations that he would practice
a different and positive style of politics. But it didn’t take much longer
before it ebbed away.
"I
would take you to the house of Kalawati ... a woman with nine children whose
husband committed suicide. I would urge you to respect her." When Congress
General Secretary Rahul Gandhi quoted her example in his July 21, 2008, Lok
Sabha speech, describing how she had diversified her income, Kalawati became
the symbol of rural resurgence. But Rahul didn't return to check on her. In
2010, Kalawati's son-in-law, plagued by debts, committed suicide. In September,
it was her daughter-the fourth death in her family in the last six years.
As Rahul started
taking more and more of the political public sphere, he needed to talk more and
what he needed to do above all was to do some real ‘walk the talk’.
But the
example of ‘Kalawati’ symbolizes what had been happening was not in-sync. Words
were coming fluently but equally superfluous was the support from the reality
based ground activity.
THE CELEBRATED TEAM AND A GOOD BEGINNING NOT SUSTAINED
Much has been
written about the celebrated team of Rahul Gandhi. They started very well. I am
not going into the overall details here. Here, it is basically about what Rahul
Gandhi talked and how it all went kaput. Rahul’s speeches sounded really
different initially. They sounded politically off-beat and that was the best
thing about it. They sounded politically experimental and that was the needed
aspect of it.
But it didn’t
get the support of the task-master in Rahul. He has worked hard. We saw it in
the elections of Bihar in 2012 and Uttar Pradesh in 2012.
Though the Congress party says the defeats (the humiliating ones) could
not be attributed to Rahul Gandhi, it was indeed Rahul’s loss.
And it
happened because Rahul could not walk the talk. There came many issues when the
country, especially its youth expected from him to take a different stand from
the worn-out line of the now-debased Indian politics, especially on the
corruption and Lokpal issue. He simply toed the line of the politicians who
were conniving to derail and dilute the Lokpal Bill.
He was biased
when it came to his visit to the agitating farmers in Bhatta Parsaul in
Uttar Pradesh where the Congress party was not in government. He didn’t show
that alertness in reacting on the police firing on Maval farmers of Maharashtra because his party was a
coalition-government partner there.
There are
similar case studies where Rahul had to take a different and clear stand.
But Rahul
either didn’t speak or if spoke, the words sounded more of speechwriters and
not his, increasingly sounding more and more alienated from the vital
facts.
The transition
that was a must from a communication management launch-pad for a beginner to
the growing presence of a full-grown politician with a difference looks
to have lost its rhythm midway.
It cannot be
said if Rahul and his team haven’t thought on these lines as Rahul’s speeches
and his ‘Team RG’ have been much in news and the recent history cannot
claim positive coverage. But given the consistency of the dull approach, one is
driven to believe that they haven’t or they prefer to ignore (for reasons, they
only can understand).
Giving
high-pitched speeches with an angry-mannerism has become style of Rahul and
that is good if exploited well. But that is not happening. Rahul is touring the
length and breadth of India
and delivering speeches. But the India’s political exploration goes
far beyond it and that has not happened. He is surface-touching India when
the need is to adapt a participative approach).
Also, covering
a vast area needs a divergent approach in words. Every speech has to be backed
well by sound research to get localized in the local context where it has to be
delivered.
But the
ones delivered during the campaigning in the Gujarat
assembly Election of 2012 say ‘no
lessons were learnt’ again.
THE GUJARAT GAFFE
How, when and
what of Rahul Gandhi’s campaign in the Gujarat Assembly Election said
the lessons were yet to be learnt.
He began the Gujarat campaigning only on the last day of campaigning
for the first phase (December 13, 2012) of the crucial assembly elections that was
going to decide many important aspects of the next national elections.
Rahul has much
at stake in 2014 and the outcome of the Gujarat election is going to tell us if
Modi is going to be Rahul and United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government’s
biggest challenger and possibly the ‘nemesis’.
His delayed
action in Gujarat only gives space to the opinion that he is yet to regain the
confidence that he lost after the election drubbings in Bihar
and Uttar Pradesh. And to add to it, Rahul began on the wrong note giving Modi
chances to exploit his words like the Gujarat’s
chief minister had done with Sonia Gandhi by turning the tables.
Okay, Rahul
did not go to the extent to breach the strategy-line like Manmohan Singh did
this time by raising the issue of plight of Muslims in Gujarat giving Modi a
chance to hit back blaming the PM of fomenting divisive politics or like Sonia
Gandhi’s ‘Maut Ka Suadagar’ (merchant of death) remark against Modi in the last
assembly election in 2007 that gave the communicator in Modi enough ammunition
to exploit emotions on divisive lines and polarize votes during the high
moments of the final phase of the election process, still what Rahul began with
was not in-sync again.
The hurt of
2007 still echoes is clear from the Congress’ strategy of avoiding use of
polarizing issues like Godhara, riots or Muslims of Gujarat. But even then,
what Rahul spoke of in Gujarat is not expected
from a leader who is being projected as the next prime minister of the country.
His team must look at these gaffes.
THE POTATO
REFERENCE
The old
one:
Rahul
Gandhi comes out in strong support of FDI in retail
In a
Farrukhabad rally, the potato price quoted by Rahul came out to be Rs. 2
or less than Rs. 2 a Kg (The report says, “Surprising all, Rahul told
election gatherings across Farrukhabad and Kannauj that FDI would solve the
puzzle of a kilogram of potato fetching Rs 2 or less to the farmer and a packet
of potato chips costing Rs 10.”)
A Business
Standard report (January 27, 2012) puts it more clearly: “I was in UP recently,” Gandhi told
a gathering of around 5,000 at a public-rally in the border town on Tarn Taran on Wednesday. “There (UP), a farmer asked me
that when he was getting Rs 2 for a kilo of potatoes, why a packet of chips was
being sold at Rs 10. Can anyone answer this question?” he asked the gathering.
The crowd seemed least interested, and when no replies came, Gandhi said, “The
answer is FDI in retail.” (http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/locals-want-basic-facilities-retail-fdi-not-in-radar/462949/)
Now the
recent one:
Rahul got
confused while explaining FDI in retail at Amreli. He asked the audience
'What's the price of potatoes?' From the dias he could hear people say,
"Rs 3" To which, he said," Potato chips are sold at Rs 10 a
pack. So why oppose FDI in retail?"
The fact is
in Amreli, the minimum price for a kg of potatoes is Rs 10 at the wholesale
market, and much higher in the retail market.
Accepted Rahul
Gandhi would not be going to do the shopping so might not be aware of the
potato price. But what then his team is for? From December 2011 to December
2012, for Rahul Gandhi, the potato price has gone up by Re. 1 only, and that,
too, from the paltry figure of Rs. 2 to Rs. 3 a Kg. Now I need to say a big
Bravo! for the team.
I do not do
such shopping for my family yet I am aware that it is not even the bulk price
of the potato.
Then there
were other avoidable things that Rahul said giving more chances to Modi to hit
back even more harshly.
THE GUJARAT GAFFE
– THE MISSING ‘ATTENDANCE’
Rahul gave
Modi on platter another golden chance to revert swiftly with an array of
taunting words. Rahul’s absence from the Parliament or his silent presence most
of the time when he is in the House is a well known fact by now. Rahul and his
team must be aware of it – the negative publicity that it has generated.
It is a
disturbing signal if they were aware of such facts and chose to conveniently
ignore it. It is bad signal for the Indian democracy.
Even if we go
by the assumption that they missed this set of important statistics while
framing the speech is equally bad because the future prime-ministerial
candidate of the country is going to bank on such a team.
"In Gujarat, the people's voice is not heard. The government
of Gujarat and the Chief Minister do not want
to listen to you. He wants to hear only his own voice. He has his dream and he
thinks only about his own dream. ...In Gujarat
the assembly functions for only 25 days a year and when it does, the Opposition
is thrown out."
Modi
tweeted, "Mr Rahul Gandhi talks of respect for Vidhan Sabha but his own
attendance in Lok Sabha between May 2011-May 2012 was 24 out of 85
sittings."
"From
May 2011 to May 2012, Rahul Gandhi's attendance in the Lok Sabha was 24 out of
85 sittings. From 2010 to 2011, it was 19 out of 72 sittings!" "If he
had respect for the Parliament, he would go for all sittings!" he reacted further.
Independent
media reports, too, confirm Rahul’s weak batting on this turf: Parliament not a priority for future leaders?
Rahul Gandhi, Akhilesh
Yadav cut a sorry figure with less than 40 percent attendance, PTI, August
28, 2012
Congress
leader Rahul Gandhi, H D Kumaraswamy (JD-S), Akhilesh Yadav (SP) and Navjyot
Singh Sidhu (BJP) are among those who barely attended Parliament in the third
year of the 15th Lok Sabha. While
Gandhi was present in the Lok Sabha on 24 days out of the 85 sittings it had
between May 2011 and May 2012, Yadav, the Uttar Pradesh chief minister,
fared slightly better by remaining present on 31 days. Sidhu and Kumaraswamy,
former Karnataka chief minister, attended the Lok Sabha on 16 days. (http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/low-attendance-in-parliament-rahul-gandhi-akhilesh-yadav/1/215083.html)
Another DNA
report (When Rahul Gandhi plays truant regularly…May 20, 2012) points
out: For someone tipped to be
the prime minister, Congress general secretary Rahul Gandhi’s record as a
parliamentarian paints a dismal picture. His attendance is just about 40%, and
has not taken part in any debate in last three years. When it comes to
attendance, the Gandhi scion seems to be skipping the House regularly. Out of
the 244 days that Parliament has been in session, Rahul attended Lok Sabha on
99 days only. Rahul’s attendance in the 14th Lok Sabha, from May 2004 to April
2009 was not best either.The data is available for last five of the 15
sessions. Rahul attended Parliament for 49 days out of total 90 days. (http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_dna-special-when-rahul-gandhi-plays-truant-regularly_1691183)
Why then, Mr.
Rahul Gandhi, Kalawati had to see that misery after you spoke so passionately
about her condition in the Indian Parliament?
There are
millions of ‘Kalawatis’ in India
waiting for a reformer to come and lift them up from a life of abject poverty.
Your one active step could have set, if not a milestone, a brilliant example to
do more.
THE ‘SO SIMILAR’ STREAK CONTINUES!
I cannot say whether Rahul Gandhi and his ‘Team
RG’ took note of such reports and went back
to women like Kalawati, but even this one rightly puts Rahul Gandhi in the
dock, and so his team of strategists.
Another oft-quoted element in Rahul’s speech is his experiences about Dalits and his
visits to the rural hutments when he targets the Dalit vote bank. But after
examples like ‘Kalawati’, poor show of Dalit
Congress candidates in the 2012 Uttar Pradesh assembly election and Rahul’s
discriminatory response on farmers’ miseries in Bhatta Parsaul and Maval, every
such assertion starts looking just empty.
If one
googles, one can easily find what Rahul had been saying on his visits to the
Dalit hutments or in the Dalit-targeted rallies. The observation in the
Business Standard report flats out the logic behind every such speech or
statement.
He had a
series of such visits but the accumulating quantum of a past of ‘not walking
the talk’ proved him wrong even if he campaigned hard in the immediate context.
He spoke
similar but he didn’t look to act,
equally similarly.
The
Business Standard report highlighted how badly the Rahul Gandhi’s Dalit
strategy had worked: The young Gandhi had travelled across half the 85 reserved
constituencies in the state, highlighting to his Dalit audiences the allegedly
corruption-ridden BSP regime. Yet, of the 89 Dalits fielded by the Congress
(including the 85 on reserved seats), it won only five. This was a fall from
even its 2007 tally, where it had managed to win seven.
Gandhi had
spent several nights in Dalit homes, sharing meals with their families on his
visits to community hamlets. Yet, it wasn’t enough. Still, in his interactions
with party leaders from the state, he has advised them to focus on winning over
Dalit support.
He had said
while flagging off Chetna Yatra in
Uttar Pradesh’s Ambedkarnagar district: “I
am here to change that politics; what UP needs is the politics of youth, the
politics of development and employment.” (Change?? – in fact, the
Congress party failed miserably in the Uttar Pradesh assembly elections)
Accepted it is
norm to do all such things for political survival and Rahul didn’t do anything
wrong. But he indeed was wrong for he didn’t have to do the things the way
other politicians used to do or were doing.
He had to be
extremely careful to see what he was speaking. He needed to see if the content
was localized and his words were going to see the light of the day.
His political
survival and ascension was dependent on the ‘innovation factor’ that he had to
bring to his personality and his ‘politics’.
He just had
not to target Mayawati or any other
established Dalit leader, he had to emerge as a leader of words, someone who
would never be seen in the league of Mayawati or the likes but it is Mayawati
who (along with Mulayam Singh Yadav), has been saving the UPA government, most
recently during the retail FDI vote in the Parliament.
That is not a
value-based politics. But, Rahul had
begun with generating such high hopes only.
IT HAS NOT TO BE ALL ABOUT FAMILY
Another thing
that Rahul often quotes is the how the Gandhi family has empowered the nation.
He attributes computer and mobile revolution to Rajiv Gandhi and Mr. Sam
Pitroda subsequently comes into the picture. He had started using Sam Pitroda
during the Uttar Pradesh polls to woo voters on the ‘caste plank’ (something
that had not to work).
See more of
it:
Rahul has been using such similar streaks in his
speeches more and more. Computer, information-technology and mobile phones are
big-ticket words and long-term business processes, not directly affecting the
psyche of the voter on the street. Shelter, food, water, health, education and
security still remain the mainstay of the development politics and not the
technological advances of sophistication.
Also, these being the long-term investment sectors, what Rahul mentions
attributable to his family and his people, is not acceptable. In a democracy
like India, one government takes a decision and another one continues with it,
and the industry builds more on it with the increasing consumerism. Governments
have nothing to boast in the process – not any longer.
And so we
often hear the retribution - from media reports:
And from
opponents like Modi: The Tribune, December 16, 2012 – He doesn’t spare Rahul Gandhi
either, referring to him scornfully as “Rahul Baba”. Late Friday evening, while
addressing a packed meeting in his constituency Maninagar, he tells the
audience that “Rahul Baba claims his father brought about the mobile
revolution.” And then asks, “Did Rahul Baba’s father give you mobile sets?”
When the crowds in unison answer in the negative, much to their amusement, he
tells them, “Then ask Rahul Baba to please distribute a free mobile set to each
of you.” (http://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20121216/ground.htm)
A personality
cult is never a healthy sign for any democracy, be it of Narendra Modi or Rahul
Gandhi.
STAKING CLAIMS
An angry
gesture! Concern for the ‘Aam Aadmi’! Hard-hitting words! Tearing into the
opponents!
This is what
makes the primary elements of Rahul Gandhi’s speeches, delivered hot on
location.
Largely not
customized! Mostly the context missing! Almost similar sounding examples and
epithets! Flood of claims signifying and cornering achievements in the name of
the grand old party of India not going into the nuances of
relevance!
All in the
magnificently big context of the mountainous anti-incumbency of his party led
national government!
It unwinds
all.
And when it
couples with Rahul’s abysmal record (till now) as the ‘politician with a
difference’, it makes his speeches sound
even more routine, just as flurry of
words without substance.
And staking
claims for achievements like mobile phones or computer revolution in the name
of the glorious history of the Congress party is equally counterproductive.
Now no one is
going to buy these statements. As said earlier,
these are basically consumer-driven industrial policies and have to be
followed and promoted by every government.
Like the retail FDI decision, every such
decision to introduce a new format of businesses or a new technology for commercial
purposes is taken in the global environment. It is not about who let the
television technology come to India or liberalized industrial policies for
the private players to play larger role in the business sectors like telecom,
information-technology and now retail.
Such decisions
are driven by the incumbent internal and external factors. The decision to
allow the multi-brand retail FDI is the telling example in hand. The slowdown
of domestic and global economy and the pressure of countries like the US played the major role in it. Had it
been the NDA government at the helm of the affairs in the circumstances, it
would have done the same.
And claiming
benefits of such decisions, the outcomes of which are so huge, spread over a
long period of time, dissected and diversified, to a single party or a single
or group of persons, is another thing that one should avoid while writing
speeches (India may be a half-baked democracy but certainly it is not a North
Korea or China) – no singing paeans please.
The maximum
one can go for in contextualizing the validity of such decisions by packaging
and customizing the speech keeping in mind the target audience.
And all this
reflects on the type of the politics Rahul has been practicing (and not what he
had raised the hopes about)!
Coming back to
his speeches in the light of all
this, it has been an observation that the elements of the speech that Rahul
begins a campaign with dominate verbatim throughout the campaign.
The problem is
not with the elements. It is about being them verbatim. Another factor is the
transfer of some of those elements from one campaign to the other without the
necessary circumstantial changes. Also the other major problem is the narrow
choice of the examples to exemplify. Some other relevant issues are:
Rahul’s
speeches are not localized.
The content
of the speeches is not customized.
Speeches
are high on rhetoric but low on
substance.
There have
been poor research to back the allegations made in the speeches and we have
seen misfires.
THE POLITICAL SOUL-SEARCHING
Uttar Pradesh
is his battlefield of political soul-searching. Apart from being the family
legacy of the political history of the Nehru-Gandhi family, this most populous
but economically backward state is also the state with the highest
representation in the Indian Parliament.
Bhartiya Janta
Party (BJP) being on the margins, Rahul’s main opposition here is Mulayam Singh
Yadav’s Samajwadi Party (SP) and Mayawati’s Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP). Rahul
had to search and claim his political ground away from these two political
outfits.
But,
ironically, these two political outfits, owing to their selfish agenda, have
been instrumental in saving the UPA government at many occasions, be it the
No-Confidence Motion of 2008 or the Lokpal debate last year or the recent
discussion and voting on the retail FDI.
You are
targeting Mulayam and Mayawati in Uttar Pradesh while your party is doing
backdoor dealings with them – saying something and doing contrary to it - it
has become the norm with the Indian politicians of the day – but it was not
certainly expected from the politician in Rahul Gandhi.
The
‘politician with a difference’ should have never done it. Rahul criticizes SP
government for U-turn on computer education. Rahul blames Mayawati for
miserable situation of Dalits. And his party led central government acts with
their active support. A major chunk of Rahul’s ‘pro-Dalit’ sentiment is based
on anti-Mayawati politics. Yet Mayawati has become the ultimate in-thing for
the UPA government these days after she voted for the government in the Rajya Sabha on retail FDI while Mulayam
is hell-bent on killing the ‘Promotion Quota Bill’.
Yes, it is
politics of compulsion and doing such compromises have hurt chances of Rahul.
His grand old party has been engaged in unethical political business believing
in the new-found dictum (of old origin) that there is nothing unethical in
politics (politicians proudly say there is no permanent friend or foe in
politics) and Rahul has seldom looked to react on such practices.
It is true he
cannot do these things publicly but given the clout he has in the Congress
party, he could have certainly brought positive changes to its functioning. That would be visible certainly. But
the congress party is still the same party blamed so-often for being anti-democratic. In fact, Rahul now looks
settled to promote the grand old way of functioning of the grand old party of India.
Rahul’s
political career is too short and the name of the ‘Gandhi family’ is not
sacrosanct anymore. Even then it is big enough to give a platform and what he
needed to do was to take bold and politically unorthodox decisions to claim the
top political position.
That track he
seemed to have lost by now. Yes, given the political equations and the poor and
shabby political opposition, he has all the chances to become the prime minister in future, if not in
2014, but then, he will be just yet another politician forced on the Indian
masses and not loved by them.
Rahul needs to
ponder over these:
Didn’t the
Mahatma’s teachings (Rahul said in a Gujarat rally
that the Mahatma was his role-model) tell him to practice ‘walk the talk’,
something that the Mahatma always maintained?
Didn’t
following the Mahatma tell our next prime-ministerial candidate that he must
truly know the India across its length and breadth
first?
Didn’t
reading the Mahatma tell Rahul Gandhi that personal integrity is all and the country’s first family must come clean on corruption allegations instead of
blatantly doing cover-ups something done audaciously in Robert Vadra’s case of
inappropriate land acquisitions?
Now only Rahul
can tell us if the country has still the chances to get back in Rahul the
‘politician with a difference’. That would, indeed, be the only political
soul-searching for him.
His potato and
computer anecdotes would self-correct then
and the masses would find the Connect that both, the politician and masses, seek.