AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

        Words are the assiduously planted counters of all unscrupulous politicians and the ready-money of the foolish and credulous multitude in India.

        Albert Einstein rightly observed:'Although words exist for the most part for the transmission of ideas, there are some which produce such violent disturbance in our feelings that the role they play in the transmission of ideas is lost in the background'.

        All political words are both better and worse than thoughts. They express them, and add to them. They give them power for good or evil. They start them on an endless flight for instruction and comfort and blessing, or for injury and sorrow and ruin. Words may be either servants or masters. As servants they may safely guide us in the way of truth. As masters they wield the power to intoxicate the brain and lead into swamps of hypocritical thought where there is no solid footing. Words, when written, crystallise history; their very structure gives permanence to the unchangeable past. Among the sources of those innumerable calamities which from age to age have overwhelmed mankind, may be reckoned as one of the principal sources, the gross abuse of words. Particularly in public affairs and politics, 'The Last Word' is the most dangerous of infernal machines. A husband and wife should no more fight to get it than they would struggle for the possession of the most powerful hand grenade. That is why Lord Bacon in his Essays wrote: 'Men arrogantly suppose that their reason has command over their words; still it happens that words in return exercise their arbitrary authority on reason'. A great political theorist from India has studied this question of how the language of politics in India has been degraded, debased, and debauched by our dastardly politicians after our independence.

        Sita Ram Goel (1921-2003), a 20th century intellectual Kshatriya of India in the line of Voltaire and Rousseau of 18th century France, wrote a brilliant book called Perversion of India's Political Parlance in 1984. In this book Sita Ram Goel wrote:

        'To my mind, the key to an understanding of the whole situation is to be found in the political parlance which has been prevalent in this country since the second decade of the 20th century. Over the years, this parlance has been maligning the R S S as a 'Rightist, Reactionary, and Revivalist Movement of Militant Hindu Communalism'. Over the years this parlance has been pillorying Hindu society as 'a crowd of caste-ridden, cow-worshipping and superstitious primitives.' Over the years this parlance has been ridiculing Hindu culture as a 'close preserve of Brahminism and some other forms of obnoxious obscurantism.' Most of this hate-directed mud has got stuck to the R S S as well as to Hindu society because neither the RSS nor Hindu society at large has thought it fit to put up a defence, not to speak of turning the tables on the vicious adversaries. ' I am not referring to those who have consciously chosen to be inspired by Christianity, or Islam, or communism, or consumerism, and who are thus committed to be hostile towards every effort at strengthening Hindu society and culture as a means to strengthening the nation. They are the hawkers of this poison, and find the profession very profitable. My reference here is to that Hindu intelligentsia who see a lot that is valuable in Hindu culture, but who run away when it comes to the defence of society which serves as the vehicle of that culture, or who join the hawkers of poison whenever they find this society is not going to take it any more'.

        Sita Ram Goel has investigated into the history and role of this pernicious political parlance which has now become stereotype into a series of mindless pseudo-secular slogans. Today, everyone from Sonia Gandhi to Karunanidhi, from Mulayam Singh Yadav to Ram Vilas Paswan, from Lalu Prasad Yadav to Chandrababu Naidu, from Bardan to Karat, is shouting these slogans back and forth. These great political masters of India have not tried to find out the sources of these slogans or the character of causes they serve. Sita Ram Goel has undertaken this exciting task and completed it with great intellectual vigour, critical acumen and fearless objectivity.

        As we survey India's political parlance, the first feature we will notice is that while certain people and parties are described as Leftists, certain others are designated as Rightists. Occasionally, political scientists and journalists would add nuances to this broad bracketing by declaring some splinter groups as Left or Right of the Centre. But they would leave everyone guessing about the location of the CENTRE itself. Some journalists and political analysts have suggested that the 'Centre' is constituted by the ruling Congress party. The Congress party has always repudiated this description.

        Another interesting feature which invites attention is that these contra-distinctive labels - Leftist and Rightist - have never been apportioned among people and parties concerned by an imperial authority like, say, the Election Commission of India. Like many confusing and intractable things in India's public life, it should also be noted that certain people and parties on their own and unilaterally have appropriated one label - LEFTIST - for themselves and reserved the other label - RIGHTIST - for their opponents, without permission from or prior consultation with the latter.

        The third feature which we notice is that people and parties who call themselves 'Leftists', always claim themselves to be progressive, revolutionary, socialist, secularist and democratic. At the same time, they accuse Rightists as being reactionary, revivalist, capitalist, communal or fascist. Sita Ram Goel beautifully puts it: 'At this stage these labels become laudatory or denunciatory as well. Labels like progressive and revolutionary, etc. acquire an aura of virtue and holiness. On the other hand, labels like reactionary and revivalist, etc. start smelling of vice and sin'.

        The fourth feature of the Indian political scene requires a somewhat deeper look because it goes beyond the merely political and borders on the philosophical! The Leftists claim that they are committed to a scientific interpretation of the world-process including economic, social, political, and cultural development, and that, therefore, their plans and programmes are not only pertinent but also profitable and suitable for the modern age. Simultaneously, they accuse that the 'Rightists' are addicted to an obscurantist view of the same world-process and, therefore, to such outmoded forms of economy, equality and culture are bound to be harmful and injurious at this critical stage of human history.

        The Leftists in general arrogate to themselves the historic destiny of being placed in a supreme position to decide the destiny of the Indian people and to lead them on the royal road of an ultimate and inevitable victory. At the same time, these tyrannical and self-proclaimed Stalins and Mao-Tse-Tungs expect the Rightists to be filled with remorse for having committed heinous crimes against humanity and therefore they ought to know that they do not deserve any future except the dustbin of history.

        Leftist versus Rightist, Progressive versus Reactionary, Revolutionary versus Revivalist, Socialist versus Capitalist, Secular versus Communal, Democratic versus Fascist, Saffronise and Non-saffronise, these and many such words are employed by all the Leftists in order to applaud themselves and denigrate those who differ with them. The meanings of these words can be found in any standard dictionary of the English language. But unfortunately for the Leftists and comically for the rest of mankind, the standard dictionaries do not vouchsafe for the 'Values' with which the Leftists load these words with so much revolutionary gusto and fervour. In most cases, the dictionaries usually in a passionless manner assume prior definitions derived from different universes of intellectual, social and cultural discourse.

        Sita Ram Goel concludes that the dictionaries are not at all helpful in deciphering the Leftist language. The source of that language has to be sought elsewhere. At the same time we have to admit that this language has so far proved very profitable for the Leftists. They have no roots in India, and are altogether an alien implant on our body-politic. But with the help of their perverted parlance, they have so far managed to pass as paragons of patriotism, progress and public welfare. In this context, to illustrate the Leftist way of reasoning, Sita Ram Goel comes out with an interesting story from rural Haryana, to which he belonged. A Jhat (peasant) was carrying a Khat (cot) on his head as he passed by the house of a Teli (oil man). The Teli was a poet. He burst out in rhyme: Jhat re Jhat, tere sir par Khat (Oh! You Jhat, on your head you have a khat). The Jhat was also a poet. He hit back: Teli re Teli, tere sir par kolhu (Oh! You Teli, on your head you have a kolhu, an oil press). The Teli protested: 'My friend, your lines do not rhyme!' The Jhat smiled with self-satisfaction and said: 'To hell with rhyme! Who cares for rhyme? What matters is that you are going to collapse under the weight of the kolhu (oil press)'.

        This is exactly what is happening in India's politics today. The so- called 'Rightists' are collapsing under the weight of certain words which the 'Leftists' have heaped upon their heads without rhyme or reason but with calculated passion.

        Moral of the story:

        You may tame the wild beast; the conflagration of the forest will cease when all the timber and the dry wood are consumed; but you cannot arrest the progress of that cruel word which you uttered carelessly yesterday or this morning.