Well now that we have seen YSR working to get a separate Telangana, the outcry is that, he is a gandhi. Well I m not sure. I am thinking what would have Gandhi done for a separate state hood. The first principle of satya-grah is non violence and mass mobilization. Though YSR did mobilize the masses but could not attain non violence. Public property was burnt by mob(TSR supporters), home of politician was attacked and all kinds of hooligan was displayed. Then the question is, why did he succeed. Well his success is not his own success but a cumulative negatives and positives. The weak government in AP could not control the violence. The media blew the issues putting pressure on the center. Though this small movement gathered mass support, it will have a bad effect on overall political situations.
Leaders will assume it as a new Gandhian way to protest. On one hand they will burn buses, and on the other they will fast. The former scares the state rulers of riots and later shows their sacrifice to get emotional benefits. Media get stories from both ends. If I were at the top, I would have certainly requested my supporters to all go on fast and try sacrifice instead of burning buses, try for once and show their will by not acting against police when they thrash them, try and educate the opponents about the need of separate state and include them in agitation and work for people not against them.
But its not easy to be Gandhi but its easier to be YSR.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
What to say, Gandhi way have been proven wrong in many cases. Gandhi's fasting to get money for pakistan have been the biggest example, that he can fast and get anything done. I think both ways are wrong, burning buses or fasting (giving threat that you will die)
Post a Comment