http://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/standpoint-how-is-the-xavier-s-principal-different-from-lata-mangeshkar-ramdev-sri-sri-anupam-kher-chetan-bhagat-any-clue-1981304
How is the Xavier's principal different from Lata Mangeshkar,
Ramdev, Sri Sri, Anupam Kher, Chetan Bhagat? Any clue?
Wednesday, 23 April 2014 - 4:40pm IST | Agency: DNA
Parth MN
The principal of St Xavier's College, Frazer
Mascarenhas pulled a rabbit out of his hat when he
wrote an email to students of the college,
outlining a certain criterion to consider before
exercising the right to vote. The email criticises
the Gujarat growth model for being conducive for
merely big businesses. It cites the Human
Development Index and the poor quality of health
and education in Gujarat to indicate that where
quality of life is concerned, the state has not
done well. The email then praises the Rojgar
Yojana and the Food Security Act as they enhance
the wellbeing of citizens. It also commends the
Right to Information Act.
The email concludes as follows: 'The prospect of an alliance
of corporate capital and communal forces coming to power
constitutes a real threat to the future of our secular
democracy. Support people who pledge to work to take Human
Development Indicators higher and who commit themselves to a
pluralistic culture in diverse India.
Unsurprisingly, the email has created a bit of a furor. BJP's
Mumbai chief Ashish Shelar has called it a violation of the
election code.
Defending himself, Mascarenhas explained, I have
laid out certain criteria such as human development
indicators, corruption, inclusive development and
the environment for students to think about and
make a choice. As an educational administrator, I
only urge students to vote and make an informed
choice.
Even though Mascharenas has rightly given the diplomatic
answer and even though the email does not mention any party
or a candidate, there is something called 'subtext'. Let
there be no doubt about the fact that it bats for the
Congress against Narendra Modi's BJP. However, the
fundamental question one needs to ask is: Why such hullabaloo
in a democratic country if a principal exercises a right
given to him by the constitution of India?
If a certain section of the country openly wishes to endorse
a particular party, it is definitely well within its rights
to do so. Did we object when Lata Mangeshkar 'wished' on
behalf of the country for Modi's Prime Ministership? Do we
demur when Baba Ramdev or Sri Sri Ravi Shanker eulogise Modi
and BJP? Or has Mascarenhas been targeted because he belongs
to the minority?
Not long ago, senior journalists Bibek Debroy,
Surjit Bhalla, Arjun Dangle and company issued a
statement in favor of 'strong and stable
government', which clearly supported BJP. Girish
Karnad, on the other hand, has been campaigning for
Congress' Nandan Nilekani. Our intention is that
communal forces like BJP should never come to
power. We are against Narendra Modi. For this, a
few responsible citizens like us including Girish
Karnad, GK Govinda Rao and others decided to
campaign against the BJP and support Congress,
said K Marulasiddappa. 60 odd members of the Hindi
film fraternity issued a statement, which evidently
opposed Modi but the likes Anupam Kher, Madhur
Bhandarkar and Chetan Bhagat are on the other side
of the fence.
Any citizen, with slightest of social awareness will have
political inclinations and people expressing those in public
is, in fact, a healthy sign of our democracy being alive and
kicking. There are a few objections against Mascarenhas.
One of them is timing. Now if the principal has sent an
email regarding voting, it is but obvious that the email will
be circulated before polling. Another important objection is
of influencing the voter. Mascarenhas is the principal of an
educational institute. The precise point of an educational
institute is influencing its students. Therefore, he has
done nothing unusual than what he does on the other 364 days
of the year.
Having said that, what amazes me the most is the insecure
reactions of the political party and its supporters. Is your
party so brittle that an email can hamper its chances? And
the more important question is: Are the voters so fragile
that an email can prove so decisive? Let us not forget that
the voter is the king at the end of the day. The voter has
made Indira Gandhi fall flat on her face. The voter has
thrown out Winston Churchill when he was on top of his game.
The voter has the power to make or break governments.
Let us not mock the intellect of the electorate.
[NOTE: The spelling of Mascarenhas'
