A Pointlessly Pedantic Study!
INDIA THAT IS BHARAT
WHEN Satiricus decided to become a journalist by profession did he go for a psychological evaluation to find out if it was a suitable choice? He did not. He just assumed that as he was good for nothing, he was good for nothing, else except journalism. But that was then. Now there are all sorts of studies to identify what type of people suit what type of profession. Take, for instance, this latest among such studies, recently reported in a British newspaper. It says, believe it or not, that people who tend to cheat are most suitable for politics than any other profession.
Satiricus is stunned. He is stunned to see that a pointlessly pedantic study should be needed to find something that everybody knows already. In this study, according to a psychologist by name Lucy Redford, cheaters don’t feel they would get caught, or even if they do, they would be able to walk out of it easily, “which politicians are good at”. Of course, they are. They have to be. Otherwise how can the business of politics go on?
Look, for instance, at any election-time speech of any politician. Do they not take the voter for an enjoyable ride? How can a politician fight an election without promising the voter the moon? And even at other times, whenever a politician puts his foot in his mouth, he has many tricks of the trade up his sleeve to get out of the jam. For starters, of course, he will flatly deny he said any such thing. Deniability is the greatest virtue of what any politician says any time. The next step is, he will claim he has been misquoted. That is, the media is the man in the muddle, or it is the dastardly doing of the printer’s devil. Thirdly, he may recall and repeat the title of that Hindi play—“Mera who matlab nahi tha”. I did not mean it that way. Here, of course,
it is understood that nobody should ask him why he said something when he did not mean that something, nor ask him, if he did not mean what he said, what exactly did he mean, and in that case why he did not say what he did mean.
Anyway, the said study reportedly interviewed 1,000 cheating people, and found that 235 of them were in politics. Well, now for a patriotic citizen like Satiricus these figures are disappointing. For they mean less than 25 per cent Indian cheats are Indian politics. In the considered opinion of Satiricus, this percentage is lamentably low. For not long ago he had an article stating with facts and figures that Indian politics is one of the most lucrative businesses. Then why are 75 per cent Indian cheats cheating themselves out of political prosperity?