 |
||
|
||
|
||
The confusion in Satiricus tiny brain is getting worse confounded day by day. So long as everyone was out to save secularism from the cursed communalists called Hindus things were fairly simple. But what is poor Satiricus to understand when a newspaper, heading puts it, "Mulayam takes upon himself the holy task of freeing God from clutches of saffron party"? According to the report that goes with the heading his Samajwadi Party would soon launch a campaign "to free Lord Rama from the evil designs of the B
P". Well, now, campaigns are the bread and butter of every political party, but this particular campaign looks stranger than fiction. For in the first place, will it not irreparably damage Mullah Mulayam's secular reputation? How can a secularist who fearlessly gunned down rabid Ram-bhaktas even think of doing anything for Ram, the very embodiment of communalism? If the BJP has evil designs on Ram is that not good for secularism? And what exactly is that evil design? Is it the grand design of the temple
that the BJP (in criminal collusion with the RSS and the VHP) keeps saying it wants to build for Ram? As it is, Satiricus recalls the various designs that the VHP architect had prepared for the Ram temple, and we of them actually showed the Baburi mosque, repeat mosque, inside a portion of the temple. Would that design have been secularly unevil? Would that recompense for the collapse of structural secularism when Baburi fell on that fell day? Simpleton Satiricus has no answers for these complex questions
What, in fact, is adding to his woes is the fine distinction (if any) between Samajwadi secularism and Congress secularism. For about the same time as Mullah Mulayam's rescue of Ran Congress President (Hey, Sitaram!) Kesri "lashed out", as the favourite journalistic phrase goes, at the RSS and the BJP and warned Congressmen to beware of the "black caps and khaki shorts culture'. Now here Satiricus must protest, Kesriji has publicly admitted he is an old man, but he has never admitted he has grown forgetf
l. Then how come he forgot to use that picturesque Tavleen term "Knickerwallahs"? Would that not have been suitably disdainful? And should his clarion call to Congressmen not have contrasted the RSS' black caps and khaki shorts culture with the renowned Congress culture of Bofors bribes and petrol pumps and Sukhram toilets? And finally Sitaram Kesriji says BJP's rule would mean Rajju Bhaiya's decree. A fearful prospect indeed? It must be thwarted at all costs and we must all work for that golden era in w
ich Sitaram's rule means Sonia's decree.
These days there is a school for everything. There are schools for cooks and caterers and there are schools for painters and pickpockets. So Satiricus was not greatly surprised when he learnt that the Mumbai University was going to introduce a three-month certificate course for parliamentarians. However he cannot help wondering how a certified Member of Parliament would be like. Normally a madman is certified as such, and these days we also have certified secularists like the Muslim League. But of course
atiricus cannot expect MPs to be certified madmen. Neither, of course, does the Mumbai University. To start with it says the course would aim at teaching "the theory and practice of parliamentary procedure". That is certainly important. For when an MP who is president of the ruling party indulges in the practice of berating his own government it is vital to learn the theory on which such a practice is based. The course will reportedly cover subjects like media management, constitutional law, election law
nd theories of representative government. Satiricus is impressed. But does the Mumbai University have experts on all these subjects? Would it not be better if they invited outside experts to teach their specialities? For instance, as Satiricus is himself a media minion he suggests that the subject of how to manage the media should be left in the capable hands of BSP leader Kanshi Ram. A year ago he got mediamen beat up, and the other day he called them bastards. The point here is, will a university don
now when to beat up a journalist and when it would suffice to call him dirty names? As for constitutional law, who is better than a Congress lea eagle who knows how to change the constitution 80 times in 40 years? Then again, election law is best left in the experienced hands of those who have mastered the technology of capturing booths. Finally, should the theory of representative government be taught in isolation? Should it not be the theory versus the practice? In fact Satiricus suggests that the topi
should be titled "How to topple a representative government". And here again the Mumbai University could draw upon Congress expertise. All in all, the university can avail itself of ready-made experts in all these disciplines (or indisciplines). But one thing the course leaves out-who will teach parliamentary abuse? In India MPs can call each other threats and in Australia MPs can call each other criminals. But is it parliamentary to call a cheat a criminal and a criminal a cheat? Only a university don can say.
|
||
|
||
|
||