| Published on 18-02-2007 In National |
| Viewed 1810 times |
| Dharmapuri bus burning and political culture in Tamil Nadu |
|
|
Written by
RajanMarx |
There is a strange contradiction between the rulers and the ruled in the nature of their responses to the Salem Sessions Court verdict in the Dharmapuri bus burning case.
"Ah, at last…late, yes, certainly better than never. The rule of law has asserted itself and none can escape it…," so say the people of the state in general.
Even those from outside who perhaps came to know of the February 2000 incident from newspapers and television channels only two days ago have recoiled with horror. In short no sympathy for the three sentenced to death.
But the political class seems to have chosen to seal its lips, not just Amma and her retinue alone. The DMK and its allies would not react either. Even the Left, which could be said to have little axe to grind, have not bothered to comment.
Why so? Is it only for reasons of taste or because they are all secretly feeling the pangs of guilt, realize full well that they have, in no small measure, contributed to such a sickening political culture?
While there could be opposition to death sentence on questions of principle, few would care to speak up for the likes of the trio.
Even granting that one often goes to ridiculous or even outrageous lengths to appease the Implacable, the Dharmapuri kind of gory obeisance is difficult to comprehend.
It was not a vendetta killing at all. Not a case of lynching resulting from some mob hysteria either. Simply some persons were trying to demonstrate their loyalty to their leader.
Does not one cut one's own finger or stage one's own funeral in order to propitiate the Poes Garden deities? Well, those who find the pain of self-flagellation a bit too difficult to put up with, do run amok and destroy public property.
Burning buses is certainly a standard response of agitated cadres in any party. But how could one afford to remain indifferent to cries of help and mercy from some unknown young girls trapped inside? And walk away after everything is burnt to ashes with a sense of triumph?
Even the Pope who reportedly threw a child into fire during medieval times, exulting, "One more soul saved," though perhaps driven by a similar sense of zeal for his Master, should have been genuinely passionate whereas the Dharmapuri incident was nothing but cold-blooded murder, if ever there could be one. The perpetrators were certainly looking for some reward in the not-too-distant future.
If Jayalalithaa has deliberately encouraged such a horrifying culture, others are no less responsible, though they might have relatively more qualms.
Bourgeois democracy anywhere is today nothing more than patronage distribution. Whoever wields power can demand to be appropriately appeased, and they are, invariably.
For me the defining moment of February 2000 was not Jayalalithaa's conviction in the Pleasant Stay hotels case or even the burning of the bus in Dharmapuri, but the weak-kneed response of Karuppiah Moopanar, who was preparing to forge an alliance with the AIADMK. He confined himself to a token condemnation, but nothing beyond.
As I was then looking for something from Moopanar, very naively of course in hindsight, I felt deeply hurt by his waffling.
Here was a man with a relatively clean record. He was a feudal baron all right, but cherished certain values. He shunned ostentation and was never given to parochialism. He did try and seek to build an alternative to the degenerate Dravidian parties.
And did he not protest alliance with "a corrupt and authoritarian" Jayalalithaa and walk out of a party he had served so loyally for decades?
He might have come up trumps in the process, but the fact remained that he had taken a big risk. To do so called for a lot of moral guts, I had presumed.
Again in 1999 he broke with the DMK on the question of supporting the BJP-led government and went on to strike out on his own. This time his gamble failed, but his stature increased. He had stood up for secularism.
Certainly it was a friendless Jayalalithaa who courted him thereafter avidly. If he was giving in, that could be due to pressure from his followers. So he could be pardoned on that score, but how was one to explain his unwillingness to denounce the Dharmapuri outrage or to try to persuade Jayalalithaa to look at least contrite? Yet another idol crashed.
The less said about the Left, the better. They too, in their zeal for secularism, were willing to forgive Jayalalithaa's known proclivities and depredations. Hence would not like to be seen quaking with indignation, as they would indeed be otherwise. The Left opportunism thus touched one more nadir.
I am only trying to argue in such a depressing scenario of all round moral bankruptcy one does not have to be too very exercised about what Nedunchezhian and company did near Ilakkiyampatti or the subsequent twists and turns in the case.
The very editors who today write editorials expressing satisfaction over Krishnaraja's verdict have had no problem groveling before Amma. And trust them to keep doing so for as long as possible if it suits their convenience. Can our misery be more complete then?
|
|
|
|
|
| Social Web |  |
| |
|
|
| |
Processing please wait ...
Top Stories
