Ataji's career is judged by the number of people he carries with him. Atalji was therefore the heir to the cohesiveness.
 |
| Photo courtesy: Twitter |
Today marks the first anniversary of the death of former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. He passed away on August 16, 2018, at the age of 94, after a long illness and unavoidable deportation. His death was followed by a flood of writings of various types and lengths in the media and on social media. Among them, Vajpayee was a poet, he had a sense of humor to overcome adversity, he took many bold decisions as the Prime Minister, from Vajpayee was a mask against the sharpness of the Sangh's communal politics, many things were written. Considering the Indian society, this kind of emotional stupidity and its back-and-forth gentleness and bigotry are bound to come naturally. But there is no clarity in our society as to how and when to evaluate the career of a politically powerful person after his death. So the thing that survives after a person dies in wholesale love and wholesale hatred is the whole conscience.
It would be presumptuous to say that post-independence India has inherited a collective conscience, no matter how much we care about its ancient culture. After 2014, however, various elements of the society, whether they are present or not, are in a fierce competition to lose their sanity. Therefore, they are behaving as if the goal of life is to throw bread in the well and decide whether it is ours or not. It has become difficult for people on both sides of the aisle to agree that Vajpayee can be both like and dislike you.
Vajpayee remained in opposition for a long time. After becoming the Foreign Minister in the Janata Party government, Vajpayee got the post of the Prime Minister of the country directly. But in the meantime, 18 years passed. Although he has been Prime Minister three times, the total term of office is not more than 6 years. In the five years from 1999 to 2004, he ran the first non-Congress government. Had it not been for the spread of India Shining, his government could have lasted a few more months. The end of Vajpayee's rule and the end of his politics are almost here and there.
According to his autobiography, Advani was given the PM's job at the behest of Vajpayee. However, there is no reason to think that the Ram Janmabhoomi agitation would have liked the fact that Advani, who brought the BJP to the center of power from two seats in 1984, had to hand over power to Vajpayee. Advani's politics brought his party to the center of Indian politics. The same politics made Advani, along with the party, untouchable in national politics. Among them, Advani may have tried to obstruct Modi's politics, sometimes as Deputy Prime Minister and sometimes as the face of the Sangh.
Vajpayee wrote poems. His book Fifty-One Poems was published. Many of these poems were transcribed. However, these are the poems of a politician. Therefore, it is natural to have political and similar contexts, as well as the voice of the general public. But it is not only unfair to those politicians, it is also underlining our reasonable understanding of language and culture as a society.
Many of Vajpayee's poems and lines are being quoted by people. In fact, the fact that a politician's writing gets so much publicity after his death is a sign that the system of forwarding on social media has been established. ERVs are not part of our collective discourse of literature, culture, language. If we think positively about the bad, let's assume that people will look at the writing journey of other leaders like Vajpayee in their lifetime as well.
All the governments under Vajpayee were in the lead. In that sense, Vajpayee cannot be said to be as fortunate as the Congress Prime Minister or Modi, as Vajpayee has endured many compromises, respect (considering the talk at the time that Samata-Mamata-Jayalalithaa did not like Vajpayee politics). It was clear that the government was not allowed to fall. Vajpayee had experienced during his tenure that the government could collapse like an address bungalow if there was a lack of dialogue and coordination. Despite many efforts, Jayalalithaa's stubbornness led to the fall of her government by one vote. In such a situation, the Sangh Parivar did not have the expected sharpness, so Vajpayee survived and was able to succeed.
The BJP and the Sangh are upset if they say that Vajpayee is the successor of Nehru's co-ordinated politics in that sense, but if they want to disprove it, then whose successor is Vajpayee? And at least people who are as generous as Vajpayee may not be in the Saghparivar. To think of it as poetic justice, the Sanghwalis have flatly said that everything from Bhagat Singh to Ambedkar belongs to their ideology. In this case, the people of the Sangh do not mind to know how much trouble it is when outsiders claim a person from their own family.
Economic liberalization had begun before Vajpayee came to power. If that had not happened and the economic situation of 1991 was when Vajpayee was in power, thinking about what his government would have decided would have told us more about Vajpayee's economic and political role. Although Vajpayee's efforts to befriend Pakistan in foreign policy may not be to the liking of family members, it is consistent with his position that you can change friends, not neighbors. The process that started with the Lahore bus journey has not progressed due to Musharraf's advance and Advani's collusion in the dialogue process. But some of that was continued by the later United Progressive Alliance government.
Even an aggressive leader like Advani, during his visit to Pakistan, visited Jinnah's shrine and showed readiness to make Vajpayee his own. As a result, his politics came to an end. This means that if you want to stay in the family and do co-ordinated politics, then there is a problem with the virtue of a personality like Vajpayee. The humiliation inflicted on the Indian government at the time of the Kandahar hijacking ruined the politics of Vajpayee's favorite ally like Jaswant Singh. However, it cannot be said that all this did not please the Vajpayee opponents in the family. It is clear that Vajpayee remained silent at the time of the fall of the Babri Masjid. Narasimha Rao was almost silent. The then Prime Minister has been accused of having hidden sympathy for the Sangh.
Vajpayee proudly belonged to the Sangh. It is not that they did not have an idea of the polarization that would take place after the Ram Janmabhoomi agitation. However, it would be easy to understand Vajpayee's opposition to the framework if one considers the characteristic of a stagnant politician to be in an organization, to be aware of his downfall and to sow alternative conversations without waiting for the right opportunity. At that time, Vajpayee could have become a talisman for non-BJP groups by opposing the BJP or leaving the party on this issue - this is only temporary. But his next politics would have ended forever and maybe he would have met Modi and politicians of similar tendencies sooner.
Vajpayee's press conference, which has repeatedly gone viral after the 2002 riots, told Modi about Rajdharma. While answering the question asked by the Prime Minister at the press conference, the expression on Modi's face saying that he is following the rule of law is a clear indication that this incident is out of place. At that time, he must have regretted that Advani followed Modi. It was Advani's last chance to control Modi. It is not possible to say when the heirs of the politics created by bigotry will turn against their parents and when they will show more bigotry than them. Advani's experience after 2013 is rooted in his 2002 follow-up.
The answer is yes if Vajpayee could have done more as Prime Minister. But those who say that they have done nothing mean that no matter how much the top leaders of any party in power want to, they do not always understand the politics of running a government and a party like their own. If not, H. K. El Bhagat and Jagdish Tytler should have been jailed for the 1984 riots. Politics is an incredibly complex process. Of these, the concept of the rule of law is often the victim of political attention. To give an example, there is no need for an astrologer to know that the report of the Shrikrishna Commission on Shiv Sena's involvement in the 1992-93 riots will not be accepted or even implemented after Manohar Joshi of Shiv Sena was in power. Democracy is suppressed, criminals,
The fact that a living person like Vajpayee is at the top of the system is often the answer to why the system's cruelty is temporary. A characteristic of Vajpayee's personality is that he gives an abstract, invisible basis to the common man to make life easier in this vast system. The ugliness and hypocrisy of the kind of political system we are facing today is further underlined by the fact that Vajpayee is not alive.
The man who holds the highest position in the country does not run the country alone. That is not to be expected. But his career is judged by how many people he thinks he has. With this in mind, Vajpayee's long political career was certainly noteworthy and challenging a variety of studies. Not only Vajpayee but everyone who can be deified and demonised should think like that.
Post a Comment