Party Of The Poor
India that is Bharat
FOR Satiricus the curious cuss, the Congress revival plan is getting curiouser and curiouser. His first shock was when the Congress asked itself: Are we anti-Hindu? Of course not. Satiricus has already said so once, and will say once more. But this time he knows the real reason why. The Congress is not, and has never been, anti-Hindu simply because there was no Hindus to be anti. Even a dimwit like Satiricus has now understood this, thanks to a learned paper by Congress chief Sonia Gandhi. In this paper she has called secularism an “article of faith”. See? For the Congress, secularism is a faith, a religion, and so it has religiously kept away from acknowledging the existence of any such irreligious entity. Explaining this quintessence of secularism Sonia says in the paper, “The Congress has historically been a national coalition, especially of SCs/STs/OBCs and Minorities.” Translated into English this means there were just no nationals called Hindus around, then what could the Congress do? Of course, of course. It is now as clear to silly Satiricus as the wart on his nose that there were no Hindus in Hindusthan, and the only nationals worthy of coalition of the Congress were the SCs, STs and OBCs and of course the “Minority” (politely put in plural), the majority partner. Naturally it was to acknowledge and honour the majority status of this minority that one Congress prime minister said the history of India was the history of Islam, another prime minister said Muslims had the first right tothe assets of the country, and the present Congress chief rushed to the Shahi Imam to save secularism from non-existent Hindus.
Has this heroic struggle for secularism been given up? Of course not. Rather, something has been added to it. For the Sonia sermon says, now “the party must take up all progressive issues, including but not limited to secularism or welfare of the poor”. In other words, secularism will continue to be progressive, but tending tenderly to the poor would also be acceptably progressive.
To take up the first, secularism, part, secular Satiricus is happy to see that the Hindutva of the non-existent Hindus would continue to be doubly damned damned if it rains so much that there are floods, and damned if it rains so little that there is a drought. That is as it should be. And of course the Congress Vice-President will continue to accurately shoot off his mouth. He is already illustriously on record (according to Wiki Leaks) as telling an American ambassador that “Hindu fundamentalism is a bigger threat than Jihadi Islam”. That our famous Fifth Columnist has called this statement “a big, fat lie” is neither here nor there.
About the second part, however, the part of Progressive Welfare of the Poor, Satiricus feels flummoxed. The simpleton that he is, he wonders….how can there be welfare of the poor when there are no poor? Did not the poor cease to exist when Indira Gandhi said “Garibi hatao” long ago?” And if any poor perniciously persisted after that, did they too not vanish into thin air when Rajiv Gandhi said “Garibi Mitao”? Oh, well, it seems the puzzle of the poor is beyond Satiricus’s poor imagination. Or perhaps Satiricus, who, being a pen-pusher is as poor as a Catholic church mouse, does not know poverty as well as Rahul Gandhi does despite his two billion dollars in a Swiss stash. For only the other day he declared that the Congress is a party of the poor. But how can it be a party of the poor if there are no poor? So as per the infantile understanding of yours truly, the future progressive economic agenda of the Congress will be to ensure that the poor will continue to be poor, so that the Congress can continue to be the party of the poor.