England is often called the “mother of democracy”. Our former rulers don’t have a Constitution. Till about 2009 they didn’t even have a Supreme Court. They have managed a democracy pretty well without a Constitution. We borrowed their parliamentary system, retained some laws from Jurassic park and we borrowed the concept of Constitution from others. The ones who scream most about democracy in India are usually the ones who hate it the most.
RahulG quotes the Constitution as if his party actually believes in it. This is the party that “appointed” and unelected loser as the PM. And then he claims those who are anti-democratic are against Congress. The undisputed truth is Congress neither believes in democracy for itself nor for you. Their only Constitution is “Gandhis”; Chinese Gandhis if you like. This hypocritical approach to democracy also goes for all Commies who would like to overthrow the state and have a single-party rule like the Chinese. This is what the Maoists, Congress, Commies and the Johny-come-lately, AAP, would like to have. On January 23 on HeadlinesToday Yogendra Yadav, the umbilical cord between Congress and AAP, once again reiterated his “Idea of India”. This being “democracy, inclusiveness and diversity”. Yadav is the classic Commie liar who will use deception to further his ends. Which part of the nonsensical dharna by him and the AAP thugs constitutes democracy by elected members of a house? That brings us to the question: Are these people really Aam Aadmis at all? Do they even understand democracy or how it works? Take a look at this motley crew of AAP members and their supporters:
Was Dhirubhai Ambani an Aam Aadmi? When he was a gas-station attendant he could be called one but once he built his business and became one of the richest men in the country he ceased to remain an Aam Aadmi. The same is true for all the people you see in the pic above. Some are politicians, some are political-brokers. Most of them also have a shared resume of suspicious foreign funding whose interests aren’t exactly transparent. Kumar Vishwas claims he worked his way up in life earning Rs.100 for some shows. His climb is admirable but now that he stays in a 7-room bungalow, does he still qualify to be called Aam Aadmi? Absolutely not! Same is true for Arvind Kejriwal, Ashutosh, Yadav and the rest. The possible exception could have been Binayak Sen but he’s actually “special” because he’s a convicted criminal. The lies of Ashutosh claiming to be a journalist already stand exposed. There’s another guy called Punya Prasoon Bajpai who claims to be a journalist but was caught sleeping with AAP. I guess it’s not hard to identify the other closet AAP members who still pretend to be journalists.
The deception of AK is evident by his tweet to Bajpai. He claimed Bajpai was batting for BJP while in truth the guy was sleeping with AAP and AK probably knew it. This same AK claimed Congress had spent 1400 crores on the media to damn them when almost the entire media was batting for AAP in the hope that they can deliver a final “Blow to Modi”. All the crooks haven’t managed it so far so they will have to try some new tricks. Latest allegations are that AAP offered money to write positive posts about them to a Pune writer. What comes through clearly is that both AK and AAP are a big front for the Congress and their deceptions have been cleverly peddled by the CNN-IBN group, Aaj Tak, Headlines Today, TOI group and quite a few other media dealers. On January 23 (on his election tracker show) a panellist, Manini Chatterjee, stated this bluntly to Rajdeep Sardesai. It is important to ask, therefore, if these guys are really Aam Aadmis.
For a start, how many Aam Aadmis would have done what AK did for 2 days at the Rail Bhawan and gotten away with it? Any other man or group would have been quickly arrested, lathi-charged and dumped into some open-air stock yard. That the police and the Centre watched quietly is only because AK, Somnath, Yadav and their gang is NOT “Aam Aadmi” anymore. “Sponsored revolutions’ invariably go wrong. I have no doubts the so-called AK and AAP “revolution” is sponsored by forces that want to destabilise India, create anarchy and keep a certain party away from power. Only a thorough ignoramus will fail to see through this. Over 40 years ago, John Lennon, out of experience, warned us of these FAKE revolutions with bad tactics and bad intentions. It may be of some solace that he wrote “Revolution” in the hills of Rishikesh in 1968. This video should tell you all about it (3.20 mins):
Claims of representing the Aam Aadmi when these Commies and Maoist-sympathisers are actually fooling them now stand exposed. Each person in the Commie gallery that appears earlier in this post has nothing in common with any Aam Aadmi. The great Commie ambition is to overthrow democracy and establish a system where their members alone will dispense instant justice on the streets or wherever they are. Ask CPM, they know all about it. They want to make laws that will suit themselves and not democracy. I have long maintained that our MSM itself is infested with Commies and anti-nationals of all kinds. They find it easy to fool people because people have been fooled for ages by the Congress+Commie combine. Let me quote again “People don’t drink the sand because it quenches their thirst, they drink the sand because they can’t tell the difference”. It is this helplessness coupled with ignorance that is the prey for anarchists of the AAP variety.
The kind of threats that AK made during his stupid dharna can only come from an anti-national. He threatened to fill Rajpath with supporters to disrupt the R-Day parade. He asked the police to shed their uniforms and join the protest. That is the equivalent of provoking a revolt and he grandly claimed “I am an anarchist”. Ask yourself an honest question. Would any Aam Aadmi get away with what AK did? Would he or any of his goons get away with what they did if they didn’t have the title of “minister” and “MLA” after their names? Any real Aam Aadmi doing what these thugs did would immediately be arrested. The horrible fact is that AK, Yadav and his gang neither respect democracy nor understand it. Democracy was deliberately meant to be slow and not instant. Dictators can be swift and take instant decisions. During wars an army general or a leader is better as a dictator than a democratic leader. Take Cincinnatus or even Winston Churchill, when the battle was over Cincinnatus went back to his farm and Churchill was voted out. Look at some of the other foul-mouthed utterances of these so-called Aam Aadmis once they got into power:
I have little doubt that this AAP gang is nothing but foot-soldiers for the Congress which is well-aware of its possible death in the general elections. The history of Commie Congress and their other Commie friends is one of destroying democratic processes; not nurturing them.
So for RahulG or Yogendra Yadav to claim they believe in any form of democracy is the biggest farce being peddled in this country. Their friendship is inevitable as RahulG expressed his admiration for them and has poll-campaign friendly meets with them. None of their actions have proven their claims. The same AK who called MPs “murderers and rapists” now protects a thug as Law Minister. Somnath Bharti has been indicted for tampering with evidence and also has FIRs for his illegal behaviour with the Africans. What exactly is different between a Khap Panchayat and the AAP Panchayat? AK and AAP continue to defend this Bharti despite undeniable evidence of wrong-doings. They want instant laws, instant doles, and instant street justice. Democracy doesn’t work that way. Sometime back the US had a shutdown over debts and their Congress and Senate were at loggerheads. A brilliant article explains why this conflict is the best part of democracy and that democracy wasn’t meant to be as “efficient” as people imagine it should be. It was deliberately meant to be a bit slow but considerate. Let’s read a bit of this:
The founders did not want an efficient government. They feared tyranny and created a regime that made governance difficult. Power was diffused among local, state and federal governments, each with their own rights and privileges. Even the legislative branch was divided into two houses. It was a government created to do little, and what little it could do was meant to be done slowly. The founders' fear was simple: Humans are by nature self-serving and prone to corruption. Thus the first purpose of the regime was to pit those who wished to govern against one other in order to thwart their designs. Except for times of emergency or of overwhelming consensus, the founders liked what we today call gridlock.
At the same time, the founders believed in government. The U.S. Constitution is a framework for inefficiency, but its preamble denotes an extraordinary agenda: unity, justice, domestic tranquility, defense, general welfare and liberty. So while they feared government, they saw government as a means to staggeringly ambitious ends -- even if those ends were never fully defined.
… The founders needed to bridge the gaps between the need to govern, the fear of tyranny and the uncertainty of the future. Their solution was not in law but in personal virtue… Their Senate was both a Roman name and venue for the Roman vision of the statesman, particularly Cincinnatus, who left his farm to serve (not rule) and then returned to it when his service was over… They also wanted virtuous rulers… It is the virtue that most reasonable men would see as praiseworthy: courage, prudence, kindness to the weak, honoring friendship, resolution with enemies. These were not virtues that were greatly respected by intellectuals, since they knew that life was more complicated than this. But the founders knew that the virtues of common sense ought not be analyzed until they lose their vigor and die. They did not want philosopher-kings; they wanted citizens of simple, clear virtues, who served reluctantly and left gladly, pursued their passions but were blocked by the system from imposing their idiosyncratic vision, pursued the ends of the preamble, and were contained in their occasional bitterness by the checks and balances that would frustrate the personal and ideological ambitions of others”.
People like Arvind Kejriwal and his gang (as also the Congress party and the Commies) do not like these checks and balances. Their bitterness spills on to the streets. They will do anything and everything to have their way even if it means disrupting your lives and destabilising our democracy. It’s another R-Day celebration and a celebration of our Constitution. However weak in some areas our Constitution maybe, we do not want fake Aam Aadmis pretending to be revolutionaries. At the very first opportunity, after being elected, they abused their positions and the Constitution. The only place for elected representatives to seek change is through the Assembly or Parliament. Even before AK and AAP have started doing any good they have already started destroying some of the best things about India. These guys neither understand democracy nor do they respect it. More importantly, these fake Aam Aadmis neither understand governance nor have the skills to deliver.
PS: Please vote on India's worst journalists poll (Right margin of this page).