Cash strapped – Not me says Rajdeep Sardesai

The formal charges may have not been filed in the cash for votes for scandal but it didnt take too long for the rationalization to hit the newsprint. The CNN-IBN’s Rajdeep Sardesai may have feigned ignorance but this piece by him in the Hindustan Times confirms his guilt by indecision.

Titled “Cash Strapped” the piece is about everything to do with the “cash for votes scandal” and nothing. How is that possible one may ask ?

Well nothing is impossible with the intellectual gimmickry the likes of Sardesai are capable of.

Sardesai begins with this question

is parliamentary democracy being strengthened by what we have observed this week?

while conveniently side-stepping the role played by him and his channel in the events of the week.

Be that as it may, a simple litmus test for the credibility and intellectual worth of a piece like this, especially one that purports to take a hard look at the events of the week, would be to ask

Does the piece analyze the consequences of the events of the week to determine if Parliamentary Democracy was strengthened or weakened ?

OR

Does the piece pass value judgement on the events themselves on the basis of crude generalizations and oversimplifications to conclude that Parliamentary Democracy was strengthened or weakened ?

So let us apply this simple test to this piece by Rajdeep Sardesai.

Sardesai essentially raises 4 issues

- Convicted MPs voting in Parliament

- Abstentions and Defections

- Leverage by smaller parties

- Conduct of large parties

Sardesai’s comments on the first issue are symptomatic of the template he applies throughout this piece where he goes on to pass value judgement on the actions or events on the basis of generalizations and oversimplifications.

If Sardesai really wanted this to be about Democracy being strengthened or weakened he would not have merely covered familiar ground on convicted criminal MPs and instead he would have focused on the moral legitimacy of the trust earned by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on the strength of convicted criminal MPs to make the case that Parliamentary Democracy stands weakened because the party in power is prepared to make shady deals with those in Jail.

On the second issue Sardesai goes on to give the impression that he is questioning the moral legitmacy of the trust earned on the basis of abstentions and defections while sidestepping the real issue. He and his channel are especially guilty of concluding that the trust vote was a mandate for the Nuclear Deal from Parliament and a convincing and powerful one at that.

How can Sardesai expect us to take his moral generalizations on abstentions and defections at face value when he glosses over the fact that Parliamentary Democracy stands undermined by the fact that a Minority Government negotiated an International Agreement when it clearly lacked the mandate to do so.

Once again you see the template being repeated of passing value judgement on actions while glossing over the consequences.

The third?and fourth issue are classic Sardesai generalizations and oversimplifications. He introduces a new phrase called the “JMMisation” of politics but fails to point out the crucuil difference between the Congress’ many deals with the likes of JMM from NDA’s alliances with smaller parties?none of which were premised on survival at any cost. Vajpayee lead NDA’s loss of trust twice despite being the party in power are testimony to this fact.

Sardesai’s closes his piece with typical Progressive Liberal rhetoric – claim victimhood and transfer the blame while obfuscating the real issue.

What is actually needed is a bold new initiative to clean up the entire relationship between cash and politicians. Sunlight, it is said, is the best disinfectant and it is perhaps time that political parties openly acknowledge that our political system is linked to hard cash. Cash is needed to fight elections. Cash is needed to keep cadres loyal. So, how is this cash to be legitimised and the taint of ?dirty money? removed?

So “dirty money” is to blame and all politicians are victims and they need social justice. Forget that what we had just now was not an election but a Confidence Motion.

So instead of posing tough questions of the real issue at hand which is upholding the rule of law, in this case the anti-defection law, Sardesai diverts attention to the unrelated issue of political funding.

Speaking of funding it begs the question of politico-business interests funding media channels such as Sardesai’s CNN-IBN. With reports of Anil Ambani having purchased a minority stake in the holding company of TV18, will Mr. Sardesai care to explain his channel’s conduct in the last 48 hours ?

Sardesai closes his piece with what has become the Communal Socialist scoundrel’s?last refuge to deflect attention from any kind of public scrutiny of their conduct – to appropriate moral high ground by invoking the Gujarat Riots. Omar Abdullah’s speech may have earned him brownie points for his passion but it leaves behind a question mark on his capitulation to Islamist Majoritarianism in Kashmir.

Offstumped Bottomline: Rajdeep Sardesai’s crocodile tears on cash strapped politicians do little to wash away the taint of his own cash laden Channel’s conduct over the past 48 hours. Displaying classic symptoms of psuedo-intellectual Progressive Liberalism, Sardesai deflects and obfuscates to take the moral high ground with anything he can lay his hands on from Gujarat riots to Campaign Finance Reform. The bitter truth however for Sardesai is that his channel aided and abetted a fraud on Parliamentary Democracy and his silence on the same answers the rhetorical question he asks of others.

Filed under: Uncategorized