Congress Undemocratic Ideology - 4

[Guest]

Signs of takleef and internal differences in CONgress.



http://blogs.hindustantimes.com/capital-...own-party/

Normally speaking as people who have covered the Congress for many years will tell you, the party would have held Rahul’s speech as the gospel truth and would have crafted its strategy around it. But what amazed everyone was that till Jyotirditya Scindia took the floor towards the end of the debate, there was hardly any reference to the thoughts expressed by the general secretary. Sandeep Dikshit who was surprisingly fielded after Sushma Swaraj, the leader of opposition had said her piece, did not make any mention of Rahul Gandhi or his thinking and went on to give his own line which many found to be closer to that of Team Anna than that of his own party. Mr Scindia did try to do a late damage control but the matter had by then become a huge talking point in Congress circles. I believe that the manner in which the party fielded the earlier speakers irked many who took up the matter in the Lok Sabha lobby with Parliamentary affairs minister Pawan Bansal. Bansal on his part defended himself by shifting the onus on the Prime Minister.

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1110831/js...446765.jsp

Although sources said Aron had been “informally” summoned tonight for “an explanation”, no punishment is expected as powerful people in the party seem to appreciate “his sentiments”.



The dominant view in the party is that an investigation would be conducted and corrective measures taken after Sonia Gandhi’s return so that such blunders are not repeated. Some senior leaders may have to pay for the mismanagement.



Aron’s letter was written sometime before Pranab Mukherjee, Salman Khurshid and Vilasrao Deshmukh had entered the scene. Some party leaders are wondering if P. Chidambaram and Kapil Sibal are the target of a choreographed attack.



Ironically, both Chidambaram and Sibal had advocated a tough line, which the majority in the party supported.

This is a brilliant insight into Rahul Brand and the contemporary expectation of people and governance.

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes...nna-hazare

Even if it is too early to seriously judge the long-term political impact of the churning we have seen in terms of the public-neta equation, among the many questions that emerges as a by-product is one on the politics and political style of Rahul Gandhi.

His deafening public silence in the days between Anna's arrest to his eventual prepared speech in the Lok Sabha on Friday only served to raise more questions than answers.



By dodging direct questions on the Anna movement until then, the Congress' leader in waiting not only strengthened the impression of a rudderless party being left adrift, he did himself no favours. Even when he did speak, seeking to regain the initiative through his call for an Election-Commission like Lok Pal, the biggest question was why did he not say so earlier?



Crises often tend to show up weak points in sharp relief and this crisis has shown up the inadequacies in the making of Brand Rahul.

In short, he has preferred not to get his hands dirty, but to take safe, mostly choreographed positions. This style of cocooned politics, while seeming to maintain a distance from its daily hustle bustle, is at odds even with his family's record in the Congress.



Long before she inherited Nehru's mantle, Indira Gandhi was deeply involved in the cut and thrust of daily politics, including in the decision to sack Kerala's first Communist government in the 1950s, and even Rajiv Gandhi who had a short induction period, oversaw Buta Singh's efforts to run the 1982 Asian Games.



Rahul Gandhi has now had 7 years as an MP, four as party general secretary, and the question is how long will he be an absentee leader, a perpetual leader in training; of the party but somehow seeming aloof from it.