Leadership

The recent ongoing events in the BCCI and BJP made me blog this. What is at stake? Is it the person or the institution. Majority of the public as well as the people involved think it is the former and that is the root of the problem. The question is not Ganguly / Chappel and Khurana / Vajpayee / Advani. It is the position as a coach/captain and President / member. The moment Ganguly spoke in public about what transpired between him and the coach, he is lost. Remove Ganguly and Chappel from the picture, is a person of this stature (whatever is said in the chappel's email is right/ whatever Ganguly's complaint against Chappel) is good for Indian Cricket or for the cricket world in itself?
Nobody could dispute the role played by various members (Advani, Vajpayee,Khurana, Sinha) what BJP is today? But where were these people or do the general wider constituents (not just few states in north India) know these men before 1989? It is Advani's leadership (not Advani) that developed BJP from a two MP party to 87 and then 200 MPs. Is Advani only a proponent of discipline when he says it? No, he is a disciplined person in himself. Could we forget the discipline he followed as a Deputy PM. He maintained silence outside even when he didn't agree to what Vajpayee is doing, because the government is running under Vajpayee's leadership not him. That is with the same discipline he developed the party base. When BJP was in disarray after the elections, it is the BJP that wanted Advani's discipline back, so annointed him back to the post. No matter what or what is the stature of the person (senior / junior), they are junior to the party president. If one ought to run the party as one wishes, then he/she has to be the party president to do it. Otherwise, they have to wait for their turn or could go out. Because if something goes wrong it is the party president who is responsible and not this member.

So what changed these people (Vajpayee, Khurana, Yashwant Sinha....), the taste of Power! Ganguly doesn't want to leave Captainship (it is the power) and doesn't care whether he is fit or unfit.

I'm reminded of a dialogue in the film "The Matrix", the character Oracle would say "What men of power wants? More POWER".

Limit of democracy

I listen to npr almost everyday. The thing that caught my attention today was a BBC report on the definition of "democracy". It was mentioned that orange county in California democratized almost everything that the local water board chief is also elected. None of the people interviewed knew who that is but he is an elected person!
This is going to lead to a day when the govt. is going to keep on pushing the citizens asking them what to do next? Come on guyz, just do it and there is a limit.
Next the reporter was pondering why "democracy" is so popular in the past 50 years? Why is that everybody wants democracy.
My answer is "that is most marketed product in the world", backed by the richest country in the world!
I can't digest that judges are being elected... People are buying justice, not getting it.