The writer is a columnist. He is also a former editor of the Mumbai-based English newspaper Mid Day and the Gujarati paper Divya Bhaskar
aakar.patel@tribune.com.pk
If one is interested in knowing why economics has turned flaccid and what will be done to make it roar again, what our relations in the next five years with America, China and Pakistan will be like, and how bits of essential legislation will be passed by the next parliament, one will not have answers from the election campaign.
The Congress party, which has had a bad couple of years, is moving the debate away from policies and performance. Its leaders, at the moment, appear more interested in speaking about the consequences of having Narendra Modi in Delhi, rather than revisiting their decade in power.
This is understandable because the Manmohan Singh government has more or less given up on its term and is coasting towards May 2014. The serial disasters that have visited it through serious allegations of corruption and incompetence had already deflated it by the start of 2012. We must expect little from it in the next six months. Though she may be well meaning, Sonia Gandhi does not have it in her, given her lack of education, to offer direction.
Manmohan Singh has, by the looks of it, given up and is waiting to leave office and retire. The Congress Party will likely play a negative game and hope that the Muslims will flock to them out of fear of Modi. The only Congress leader, who approaches issues through the fundamentals, is Rahul Gandhi. But he is, for some reason, seen as flaky and laughable and so most ignore him.
On the other side, in my opinion, Modi doesn’t have the intellectual capacity to engage with policy at a high level and certainly not at the level of legislation.
This is understandable given his education and exposure. He is better off doing what he does, which is offer broad criticism of Singh’s government. Modi’s great skill, and this must be acknowledged, is demagoguery. He is entertaining and forceful, but nothing more than that. It is true also that it is this sort of thing that voters are looking for. Manifestos in India are neither written nor read seriously. They are incidental.
Modi’s total dominance of his party means that even if there were people within the BJP, who could provide some intellectual firepower, they will remain in the shadows for fear of altering his narrative.
Both major parties are thus unlikely to provide much by way of quality. The regional parties in India are shallow and petty. They have never been part of the national debate and are uninterested in this beyond the things that concern them narrowly. They are flexible and many can attach themselves to either grouping, whether led by the Congress Party or the BJP, based purely on self-interest (meaning getting choice ministries). We can safely rule out anything of high quality from them.
The media in India, whether print or broadcast, has never been interested in serious policy material. It is said that the only place India’s economic reforms were debated was in the almost unread Economic and Political Weekly. The other elements of the media were interested in two other stories at the time. The Bofors arms scandal dominated news coverage before that critical election and the Babri Masjid after it. Both of which were ultimately irrelevant things. It is the economic reforms, not debated, which transformed India.
But the media is forced to follow the tabloid story over the substantial one. The reason for this is that the vast majority of readers and viewers are unengaged with matters of substance. Anything lacking in immediate passion puts us off and economic policy and foreign policy and strategic affairs are not, in any case, the domain of popular politics.
Given all of this, the debate will be tepid and uninteresting for those who are not attracted to passion. For those who are, of course, this will be the most exciting election in India since 1996 and perhaps, even since 1977.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 20th, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (19)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1672385156-0/Andrew-Tate-(1)1672385156-0-405x300.webp "article")
"This is understandable given his education and exposure. "
Modi's exposure is that he has run a state for 11 years. What is Rahul's exposure?
@Razi: And what is wrong?
@Aakar
From the comments above, you can easily discern all that is wrong with India today.
@Chai: i would like to see Aakhar patel as PM of India rather than rahul gandhi please!!!,,,no rahul,no congress!!!
I am an apolitical person. Let's analyse some facts. 1. Modi is less educated: M.A. in poliitical science, would you call someone less educated. 2. Less intellectual: How on the earth wld a party like BJP which does not have a dynastic hold has elected a person like him. Top level BJP has a competant thinktank in form of Sushma Swaraj, Jaitely, Shourie, Yeshwant Sinha, etc. This people have firebrand and at time spoken against their party policies which itself demonstrate that there is freedom of expression. I have observed Modi over a period of time and he has adopted changes in macro environment more than any politician.. be it technology, social media. This itself speaks of his ability to rise to the highest level. 3. "..who approaches issues through the fundamentals, is Rahul Gandh" .. Sir which planet have you come from .. Jupiter. This itself demostrates your own intellectual ability. 4. "..Regional parties are shallow and petty"... Sir you certainly don't belong to India.. Go and do some news reporting for US. I would be surprised if regional parties score anything less than 200 seats. Sir please go through history.. why parties like TDP, Shiv Sena, DMK, etc came into existance when congress ruled these states with iron fist. 5. List item
quote: The only Congress leader, who approaches issues through the fundamentals, is Rahul Gandhi" On the other side, in my opinion, Modi doesn’t have the intellectual capacity to engage with policy at a high level and certainly not at the level of legislation."
Well, Rahul is appointed leader whereas Modi has raised himself within party. I do not know how come he is a chief minister of a state for more than a decade, without being intellectual ? But for sure, this election will be contested Modi vs Rest and I agree will be the most contested election for a long time to come.
I am communal and I want Modi to win. Even if he does not become the next PM, it is a given now that BJP will have one of the largest block of seats in the parliament and will drive the agenda. I would prefer Modi who has run a successful state of Gujarat to and good for nothing Rahul Gandhi who has not even run a pan shop in his life, has lost every election he managed and cannot even make a decent speech. Millions of us are now communal thanks to the pseudo secular minority appeasing politics and policies of the Congress, SM and their allies. In another five years time millions of us more will be communal and a force to be reckoned with. Just give us five years more.
my vote is for modi,,,,and BJP!!!!!,,we dont want dynasty politics,,,rahul gandhi is just normal MP,,!!! what is the big deal in it???,,it is the time to stop dynasty politics in India!!!!
The writer of this column and many like him make me laugh. Most Indian journalists (with some rare exceptins like MJ Akbar) build up a case with a "predetermined" prejudice. It is obvious this man Aakar is prejudiced against Modi. Most so called pseudo-intellectuals are.
Modi is a man from the "street" so to speak. He speaks a language that seems rustic and uncouth to the educated Indians enamoured by accents and soft talks. Has this author cared to listen to Modi. I used to be prejudiced until i listened to him on youtube. He has uncanny ability to go to the root of the problem and solve it. While congress leaders speak of GDP growth and don't deliver, Gujarat has shown what it can do with good leadership. Modi is busy building a HiTec city. He can boast of the best rapid transport ( and cheapest too) in Ahmedabad. He has built the biggest solar energy park (500 megawatt) in Gujarat in record 1 year. He opened a pilot Solar Canal project that can potentially produce moe than 2000 megawatts of energy. Modi is a " go-getter" unlike most netas of today who just speak and do nothing. Rahul Gandhi is one of the netas who has learnt to talk. He still can't talk and mesmerize a big audience like Modi but he can impress pseudo-intellecutals with his "fundamentals". India has big problems and needs someone like Modi to solve them. Gandhis and the ilk should be relegated to the dustbin of history if India is to progress.
The only Congress leader, who approaches issues through the fundamentals, is Rahul Gandhi.
I find this statement more funny than Rahul Gandhi.
The only Congress leader, who approaches issues through the fundamentals, is Rahul Gandhi. But he is, for some reason, seen as flaky and laughable and so most ignore him. On the other side, in my opinion, Modi doesn’t have the intellectual capacity to engage with policy at a high level and certainly not at the level of legislation.
OK Friends: We need to vote on some Questions here... 1. Does Rahul Gandhi have any fundamental education to approach any of the issues that a huge and complex nation like India face? 2. Can any non-intellectual CM have the grit to make a state prosperous the way Modi has done in Gujarat?
MY VOTE IS FOR MODI.... HE IS COMMUNAL ALRIGHT BUT CONGRESS IS MUCH WORSE.. BECAUSE IT IS NOT SECULAR, IT IS MULTI-COMMUNAL THE WAY BRITISH WERE.. CONGRESS IS ONLY CARRYING THE BRITISH LEGACY FORWARD....
Modi does not understand economics. Like he said China uses 20% of GDP for Education. Or he said that he will build 500 solid waste management projects. (He hasn't built even one in Gujarat in the last 10 years). Or like he sold Gujarat Petroleum Corp., a state company shares to a Barbabas firm. Or like he gave 30,000/- Cr subsidies to Tatas to produce Nano ( For every Nano produced Gujarat govt. loses 60,000/- of taxes. Or Nano would have cost 60,000 more than it actually does). Or when he claimed that Lijjat Papad and Amul were his creation. Or when he is buying a unit of power @ 16/- from solar companies. These are within Gujarat. In Delhi he can commit many more.
Mr Patel scams and good governance are non issues , please enlighten us what the issues should be ?
Dear Mr. Patel, You mean as opposed to the intellectual battles on which all previous elections were fought up upon until now? Lets be very honest here, Indian elections till date are fought on identity --- regional, language, caste, religious and even sexual but never on policy. If it were on policy we should never had such dysfunctional government such as this, since you noted how educated Dr. Singh is as he is from Oxford thus having the "intellectual" depth you so desire. Modi is the man who have changed the dialogue in this election, and we should accept that whatever policy we are discussing, its is all because of him. (Which past election do you recall economists are called to refute state level performances to rubbish a candidate and to inform us that Gujarat Model is a hoax) He has changed the election tone, language and content. So give it a rest! You have no intellectual arguments against the man therefore are tying to dilute the significance of the moment that a low caste, self made man from the non intellectual classes has a hold over the masses that was once reserved for high caste kashmiri Brahmans like Nehru, is just unbelievable. Come to think of it, you sound more petty than intellectual, considering how much education and thus the intellectual depth you have!
Thought provoking article by ahmed patel.
In which election till date have issues relevant to the discerning voter (corruption, inflation, foreign policy, state of the economy, jobless growth, populism in parliament, pseudo-secularism) been debated even to the extent of this election - and did the Congress come to power by providing convincing answers to any of these issues? Of course not - we get to hear a generous amount of nonsense on someone's "idea of India" and how secularism is a certificate that only some are eligible to hand out, depending on which community they patronize (during elections alone). Rahul Gandhi does not approach issues through fundamentals, he approaches them not at all. And from where did Mr. Patel manage to divine that Sonia Gandhi means well? - no doubt, she has impressed him by her consistent outspokenness against corruption, nepotism and populist legislation. Does free press merely means free to play the same word games that our "secular " politicians play? It appears so. @ET - pls read carefully before deciding to disallow.
You should make an urgent phone call to your fellow ET columnist Mustafa to enquire about regional politicians. You call them petty and she calls them tall.
You think Rahul Gandhi is the only Cong leader ( Chidambram, Sibal, Antony, et al all note) who thinks through the fundamentals but people laugh at him. You think Modi lacks the intellectual capacity but too many others think he does have it. Pls consider the possibility the problem may be with you.
Did you manage to write an entire column without the word caste in it? Let me look again.