So, on my last post, which someone shared, a gentleman named Aarnab Mitra wrote the following comment.
Now, I almost never comment on someone else’s shares on their wall. But, I thought I would make an exception this time.
So, Aarnab, here’s an entire post all for you, for your 15 minutes of fame. Enjoy it.
Why do I write it? Because it is fascinating, the way this thought process works, not just with you, but with people like you, who seem not merely to tilt at a windmill but to first build one out of straw, adorn it with your misguided assumptions, and then gallop at it triumphantly waving your lathi, declaring you are slaying a dragon (apologies for the mixed metaphors, though frankly the absurdity of the situation demands them).
Anyhoo, there are two issues here.
First, this post is not speaking of Rahul Gandhi’s suitability or otherwise as Prime Minister. Not once. Not implicitly. Not by suggestion. Not between the lines. I have written elsewhere, and at length, about what I think of that question, but this particular post? This one does not discuss governance, Prime Ministerial aptitude, administrative capability, or any comparison of leadership. So I have no idea where you deduced that from, unless, of course, you are constantly looking for any threats to the fragile eladership of your Führer. What I simply said was for someone to think Rahul Gandhi is “Pappu” while the current incumbent is a philosopher king is laughable. That is it. A narrow point. A clear point. A factual point about the word “Pappu”, its implications, and its grotesque misapplication.
Second, since you insist on dragging the conversation into the Prime Ministerial arena, let me indulge you briefly, if only to tidy up the mess you have made. You seem to believe Narendra Modi is a good (no, cross that, great) Prime Minister. But by what metric, exactly? On the fact that half the country now survives on free rations because the economy has been so comprehensively mismanaged that purchasing power has collapsed? On our slide down the Human Development Index, the Press Freedom Index, the Passport Ranking, the Global Hunger Index, and every sober international measurement of human well-being? On the absence of even cordial relationships with a single neighbour, not one, not even by administrative accident? On the Trump tariffs that walloped Indian manufacturing harder than any previous US policy? On the humiliation in Ladakh, where Chinese troops walked in, sat down, erected tents, and our grand retaliatory gesture was banning an app? On the constant skirmishes with Pakistan where the international press routinely hints that India is not, shall we say, coming out on the winning side? On the communal temperature that has left millions of ordinary Indians feeling insecure in their own homes? On the degradation of institutions, the collapse of debate, the suffocation of dissent, the erosion of trust?
If this is your idea of a successful Prime Minister, then it says more about your expectations than about his performance.
But again, since you dragged us here, let me be very plain. I do not know whether Rahul Gandhi will make a good Prime Minister. I make no such claim in the post you commented on. But I know, with the same certainty with which water is wet, that he will be a better Prime Minister. How do I know this? Because even a lamppost would be a better Prime Minister. A lamppost does not lie. A lamppost does not manufacture hatred. A lamppost does not divide citizens. A lamppost does not behave like an emperor at the head of a republic. A lamppost does not hollow out institutions, intimidate journalists, or weaponise fear. A lamppost does not dream of genocide. A lamppost does not narcissistically reshape the country in its own image. A lamppost stands still and quietly provides light. That is already more than we can say for the man you are defending. Rahul Gandhi तो दूर की बात है. Even you will make a better PM. I will make a better PM. Anyone but the current holder of the title will make a better PM. Because, after this disaster we have on that chair, the only direction we can go now is up, right?
But all this is still beside the point. Because my post never compared them as Prime Ministers. My post compared them as human beings.
When people use the word “Pappu”, what they mean is juvenile, under-educated, mentally stunted, incapable of reason. So I looked at these two human beings, as human beings, and asked myself: between these two, who is actually juvenile, who is actually under-educated, who is actually mentally stunted, who is actually incapable of reasoned thought? And the answer is so obvious it insults the question.
As a human being he is a failure. As a son he is a failure. As a husband he is a failure. As a colleague he is a failure. As a student he is a failure. Where are his classmates? Where are his professors? His schoolmates? His batchmates? The people who say they learned with him, laughed with him, studied with him? Where are his peers who say “We worked together, we grew together, he inspired us”? Where are his seniors who proudly say “He was my protégé”? Where? Because such people do not appear. Because such stories do not exist. Because he is, and always has been, a hollowed-out man elevated by mythology (and a whole lot of PR money spent by his sponsor), not merit.
And here, Aarnab, is the part you entirely missed. My post was not about Rahul Gandhi. My post was not about Narendra Modi. My post was not about who should or should not be Prime Minister. My post was about us. About Indians. About how thoroughly we have been conditioned, marinated, softened, and prepared for self-destruction. About how we no longer need to be bribed or threatened or coerced to harm our own civilisation. We do it willingly now. Cheerfully even.
What I was saying is that Alvin Toffler wrote about three qualities of power. The lowest is force. The next is money. And the highest, the purest, the most dangerous, is knowledge, the kind that convinces you to do what no gun or bribe could achieve. We have now reached that third level. We do not need a threat at our temples or a bribe under the table. We drink the poison because our cult leader assures us it is nectar.
This is not new to India. The last time Indians willingly gave up everything at the signal of a Gujarati leader, it was a man called Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi who, without force, without inducements, without bribes, called upon us to stand unarmed before the British Empire and say, in the simplest, most astonishingly courageous words, “Quit India”. Tens of millions responded. For freedom. For dignity. For a republic. There was, even then, another Gujarati leader, who too had cult followers, and who too asked them to do something they would not ordinarily do: stand up and demand a ‘homeland’ based on faith, a singularly bad, and ultimately destructive idea. He didn’t live long enough to see how bad, and how destructive the exercise truly was. JInnah died a bitter man. Gandhi still lives. The contrast between these two could not be starker.
Today, another Gujarati gives signals. And we respond again. But not to free ourselves. Not to elevate ourselves. Not to restore our civilisation. This time we rise at his signal to tear down our own house. To divide our own people. To discard our own institutions. To poison our own wells. To extinguish our own democracy. If we must compare the two Gujarati leaders for an apples to apples comparison, it is Jinnah that Modi very closely resembles, not Gandhi. Not because of outward similarities, but because of what they use their power to convince us to do, to be, and to act.
That, you see, is the tragedy I wrote about. That is what you failed to see. The problem is not that Indians follow cult leaders. We always have. Perhaps it is cultural, philosophical, historical, genetic… who knows. The problem is not that we follow slavishly. That is a discussion for another time. The problem is what the cult leader we follow demands of us.
A Gandhi, whether a Mahatma or a Rahul, asks us to free ourselves.
A Modi, whether a Narendra or a Nirav, asks us to destroy ourselves.
That is the difference.
So yes, Aarnab, Toffler’s Third Level of Purity is indeed at play here. Just not in the direction you imagine. It is you who have been convinced, not by evidence but by narrative, not by reason but by repetition, not by thought but by propaganda. It is you who cannot see that my post is not about governance but about humanity. It is you who believes the poison to be nectar because you have been told so often and so loudly that you have forgotten the taste of plain, cool, potable water.
And if you cannot see the difference between being a good human being and performing the performance of power, then perhaps the windmill you are charging at is not made of straw after all. It is made of your own illusions.
