Saturday, February 15, 2014


Arwind Kejriwal has resigned.        
The real story behind is like this –
Poll predictions and different voter surveys suggested that in 2014 Loksabha elections AAP would get 7 to 8 seats which was not fitting in Kejriwal's design. There was a dire need to create a situation where AAP appeared as a martyr, to blame both Congress and BJP and also to have an escape route to come out of the Delhi government. While in the Govt, Kejriwal was not available for party affairs and also was not able to concentrate on Loksabha polls. Since Kejriwal is the only known face of AAP, there was no other option but to make him free, shown as an activist and contest Loksabha polls on his name. AAP thinks that doing this would improve the seat tally further. Therefore the game plan was hatched around two weeks back by AAP. The whole resignation drama was enacted as per the decided script.
The first step was to call a press conference and file FIR on an issue which is already in the court and take big names of Central Ministers and Mukesh Ambani in the FIR.
The second step was to quickly reward the supporters of AAP who defaulted in payment of the electricity bills during last year AAPs agitation so that in case of snap polls there is a sure shot ready support base or vote bank.
The third step in the script was to create a situation where the tabling of bill itself becomes a contentious issue as regards to the Transaction of Business Rules.
The fourth step was to somehow resign and blame it on Congress and BJP. Having done that now Arwind Kejriwal is free to start Loksabha Campaign.
Arwind Kejriwal resigned on the frivolous issue of not being able to table the bill. In the first place the bill was purposefully not introduced properly as per the transaction rules. Here are some facts –
(a)  Delhi public was consulted (or atleast a show was done) when AAP wanted to form the govt and a referendum was taken. Why was it not taken then before resigning as Chief Minister?
(b)  The moment he resigned AAP declared that, they would contest more than 300 seats and an announcement of country wide rallies was made, which shows it was decided and scripted earlier than his resignation.
(c)  They got defeated during the bill introduction stage not on any other account. His support was intact. There was no reason to resign he could have concentrated on other 17 issues on which he formed the government and then tackled this issue but it seems they never wanted to govern it seriously. It shows that they wanted to make use of this govt to further their agenda of contesting Loksabha elections.
(d)  Arwind Kejriwal comes out with mostly hit and run type outlandish allegations terming all others corrupt except him. This is a classic case of demagogue who wants to cash on ignorance of the public, extreme populism and extreme narcissism.

Saturday, February 8, 2014


Aam Aadmi Party scoffs at ideology. They say it is for the pundits and the media to indulge in ideology. They say that they are solution focused rather than ideology driven. Solution focused thinking originated from its founders Steve de Shazer and Insoo Kim Berg in Milwaukee and now occurs in an increasingly wide range of individual and group contexts.


This is why the party speaks in many languages as there is no ideology that binds them. Every person in Aam Aadmi Party thinks he is a leader and a prominent leader. Next that self proclaimed leader arrives at a solution of the problem as he comprehends and offers a solution. This is combined by the the haste in implementing it. Prashant Bhushan (who donated Rs 1 Cr to the party! and so practically calls the shots in the party) says that there should be a referendum in Kashmir on whether Army should be deployed in Kashmir or not. Mr Bhushan with his comprehension has solved the problem and gave solution post haste! Kejriwal says we (or I?) don’t agree to what Prashant Bhushan says.


The fact of the matter is any person who knows the history of the region would never say what Mr Bhushan advocates.



Like Mr Bhushan’s solution on Kashmir, for Mr Kejriwal there is a solution of protest for every problem. He protests in defence of Mr Somnath Bharti. He protests if some crime has taken place. He may soon protest when power outages happen in Delhi. People want to see governance not protests.


The solutions emerge from the study of the subject. The study gives insight into the problems. Insight gives birth to conviction. Convictions are translated into an ideology.


Leader plays on a larger canvass and has greater vision. He can mould the opinion of the people and also address a long standing issue. With a myopic vision, a manager addresses day to day issues. Bigger problems cannot be solved with such an attitude. In this context, there is a bill in the offing called ‘Nagar Swaraj Act or Mohalla Sabha Bill’. This bill is again a solution for bringing out more participation of people in decision making or more decentralization or making democracy more participative than mere representative. This bill has some additional provisions of right to recall a public servant, lodge a FIR and some more provisions. Now this is again a solution invented by Aaam Aadmi Party to the existing problem of less participation, corrupt politicians, lethargic police and inefficient governance. AAP must understand that this Bill is not a novel solution nor is the answer to the problem. Earlier local panchayats with far more moral authority and moral powers used to effectively solve day to day problems. Panchayati raj is still in vogue. There are problems in panchayati raj also and there will be problems in the new system which AAP wants to bring. There would be charges of corruption, anarchy, inefficiency in the new system also. Any system gets its character by the people who are in the system - the citizens. Whether it is participative or representative. People who make the system give the colour to it. The color of being corrupt, being lethargic, being inefficient or of misgovernance. So the question arises is why this new system?


We don’t want to be in constant election mode. We dont require Kejriwals so called 'Swaraj'. We have achieved Swaraj, what we yearn for is 'Surajya' other wise with mohalla sabhas again one day we will find the committee members as corrupt, lethargic and inefficient, then there will be yet another demand for a system of ‘Galli Sabha’ brought by some other Kejriwal in some other time. What we require is to galvanise the same system. Therefore we require leaders not managers. We require ideology not solution focussed half cooked answers. A manager plans, organise and coordinates an event where as a leader inspires and motivates. Kejriwal and party are managers whereas we require a Leader.