India Against Corruption (IAC) Vs Aam Aadmi's Party (AAP)

Finally, Arvind Kejriwal and team have thought of a name to their political outfit. It has been named "Aam Aadmi Party" (or Common Man's Party). Here are my thoughts on this development:

In a way I am happy that we did not repeat a historical event (mistake in the opinion of many). Indian National Congress (INC) was by and large a political organization to unite and channelize nationalists efforts to ensure freedom of India from the British. When India achieved independence in 1947, many proposed that this party should be dissolved and a new party with a new name may be floated which can take part in the democratic process of a living democracy of post-independent Bharat. But somehow this did not happen and we still have a political party in the same name of Indian National Congress (INC) whose several members have been accused of numerous large scale corruption charges and scandals. In a way it pains us to see the name of Congress party which is inseparable from our freedom struggle and with Mahatma Gandhi, to be regressed and defamed in this manner. The good thing with Anna Hazare's anti-corruption movement called India Against Corruption is that it has not allowed its name being used to start a political party separate from its own agenda.

India Against Corruption (IAC) was by and large an organization identified with two things: (1) To demand Jan Lokpal Bill from the government, (2) A social movement against corruption in government and government organizations. Also, IAC has been identified with social activist Anna Hazare and other leaders like Kiran Bedi also played important part in it. By the time it accepted failure in securing Jan Lokpal Bill, Arvind Kejriwal almost individually eclipsed it. The IAC Brand was gradually shifting from being identified by hugely popular, and "saint like" Anna Hazare, towards sharp, retorting, reactive and "aggressive" Arvind Kejriwal. The brand transition happened with every passing day and increased at mammoth pace ever since Arvind Kejriwal started his own political party. Some even felt that whole people's movement started by IAC has been "abducted" by him. I salute Anna Hazare's leadership, clear vision and boldness to demand that Kejriwal should stop using IAC's name and brand, given that their ways have gone the separate ways. Therefore, it is satisfying for people like me to see that Arvind Kejriwal has announced a new name for the political party - Aam Aadmi Party. (Though I still see much harm and dilution done to IAC's brand due to being used by Kejriwal's political outfit so far.)

I was surprised at this name "Aam Aadmi Party" and initially I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw news about it on TV. The term "Aam Aadmi" has been used extensively by INC (Congress Party) during all these years and it looked like it was an attempt by Kejriwal & team to make a dig at it while using the term for their own political party's name. Now every time Congress leaders will call us "Aam aadmi", they will in a way take their rival's name. But I was in a way disappointed by Kejriwal & team. Choosing this name indicates their lack of vision and imagination. Could not they have named their party more 'appropriately' for better presentation and matching its vision? In a way, this over-zealousness to "steal" Congress party of its oft used term "Aam aadmi", Kejriwal & team became victims themselves of their negative politics. If you keep thinking about your rival or keep hating someone, gradually you become used by your own hatred. It appears to be a huge opportunity lost by Kejriwal & team to not being able to show some courage and imagination in naming their political party. If IAC and Anna Hazare's successes were also marketing case studies, then this name 'Aam Aadmi Party' comes as their poor cousin. 

The name "Aam Aadmi Party" is 2/3 Hindi and 1/3 English; perhaps ironically just like Kejriwal's politics is 2/3 "anti" things and only 1/3 as "pro" other things. It is typical of upstarts lacking vision in basing politics on the "anti" or the negative plank - it takes you only to an extent. I was also surprised how Kejriwal had the courage to accept this negative politics in naming his party openly in front of us. He made the following comment as published in today's TOI:

"Cong could never hijack the aam admi despite using the term 'aam admi'. Now they have lost the word too." - Arvind Kejriwal.

First, if his "hijacking" means making people of this country believe in the party and its vision, then Congress party did it successfully! The party is still in power and has enjoyed power for all these years. If Kejriwal thinks that the party "could never hijack" aam admi, then why did the aam admi elected Congress to remain in power for all these years? Obviously, Kejrwal sees things differently, which can be called hallucinating perhaps at times. 

This politics of "hijack" has weird dimensions. Hindustan Times has this article titled "Arvind Kejriwal ‘hijacks’ Cong’s aam aadmi". It is widely seem that Kejriwal "hijacked" the term "aam aadmi" from Congress party either to enjoy making fun of them (as can be seen in the comments from Digvijay Singh and Manish Tewari), or it was named like this because Kejriwal and team could not think of any better name. On any account, it looks like a huge opportunity loss. 

For the man who was accused of "hijacking" Anna Hazare's social movement for his own political agenda to hijack IAC to start a political party, it is ironical to see him boasting that he has "hijacked" the term Congress party used so many times. 

Anyways, I am happy that finally India Against Corruption (IAC) brand is free from being used by Kejriwal and his team for their political party. We had lost the moment once when we allowed Indian National Congress (INC) brand being used in the post-independence era, and glad that this time there was a man who did not allow history to be repeated for the wrong - Anna Hazare. 

- Rahul

Note: Views are personal and do not represent views of any organization associated with the author. [Detailed disclaimer]

What India thinks of Kejriwal

Ever since Arvind Kejriwal took the controversial decision to turn into a politician and start a new political party (which will subsequently fight all Lok Sabha seats after making a beginning with Delhi Assembly elections), he seems to have lost much of his fan base. Though it is also controversial to say that even before joining politics he enjoyed so much fan following personally, because most of his fans of today are basically followers and admirers of Anna Hazare who had to stop his non-political social movement against corruption because of unknown reasons. Many people blame Mr. Kejriwal's political ambitions for breaking up and failure of Anna Hazare's anti-corruption movement also. No matter what, it is certain that after joining politics, Kejriwal has lost many admirers. 

Let us see what India's best achievers, leaders of their fields who are looked up to by young Indians, are speaking about M. Kejriwal and his "brand" of politics: 

Deepak Parikh, Chairman of HDFC Bank

Deepak Parikh said, "I think the manner in which he (Kejriwal) is going about is not right. When asked whether he would help Kejriwal if he seeks his advice on economic policy matters, Parekh said he will never do so and would never vote for his candidates as he does not approve of the way he is going about with his plans. Parekh also slammed the media for incessant coverage of Kejriwal & Co. and asked it to report other important issues. "I would like to blame you, the media...you have nothing else to report other than Kejriwal. Why do you give so much of importance to all this? Give us some news, don't tell us what Kejriwal said," Parekh said. [Ref1], [Ref2], [Ref3]

Nandan Nilekani, Chairman of Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) and former CEO and MD of Infosys

Nandan Nilekani said that he does not believe Arvind Kejriwal‘s style of fighting against corruption is good for India and especially slammed Kejriwal for focusing his campaign on grabbing TV talktime and eyeballs. He said, “The notion (that) you can bring corruption by having bunch of OB vans, I think that’s not going to solve the problem.”There is a lack of appreciation of the long term institutional and systematic changes required to get to the desired goals, he added. “I’m as much for fighting corruption as the next guy. But, I certainly don’t believe that by passing a law or putting more penalties on bureaucrats or creating more inspectors is going to solve the corruption problem. That’s absolutely the wrong prescription,” he said. [Ref1], [Ref2]

NR Narayana Murthy, founder and ex-CEO of Infosys

NR Narayana Murthy has revealed that he had spurned a request last month from Arvind Kejriwal, the activist-turned-politician, to fund his political activities. "Mr Kejriwal approached me in September 2012 asking for financial assistance, I declined. I have not financially supported Mr Kejriwal's political activities," Murthy said. "Mr Arvind Kejriwal approached me in 2008 to donate money to raise awareness about the RTI Act by instituting awards to recognise the contribution of public information officers, public information commissioners, NGOs and citizens. I agreed to give Rs 25 lakh a year for five years and requested Tatas to contribute an equal sum, which Tata Social Welfare Trust was kind enough to agree," the statement said. In all, the Infosys founder contributed over Rs 1 crore between 2008 and 2011 for RTI related work. [Ref1], [Ref2], [Ref3]

Javed Akhtar, veteran poet, lyricist and scriptwriter

Javed Akhtar hit out Kejriwal hard during the event Agenda Aaj Tak 2012, accusing him of being like a journalist, pointing out problems but with no solutions. [Ref1], [Ref2]. Javed Akhtar wondered if Arvind Kejriwal's dislike and non-belief was in a particular set of politicians or all politicians and accused him of not believing in the system including India's constitution and the parliament. He said that he would believe what BJP or Congress leaders say because they have been elected by the people of India, but Arvind Kejriwal has self proclaimed to be people's voice and uses undemocratic means to demand what he believes is good for India. At the near end of his speech, Javed Akhtar challenged Arvind Kejriwal, asking him to visit Pakistan once and when he would return to India, he would love our nation. 

Note: Views are personal and do not reflect views of any person or organization associated with the author. 

Origin of Urdu Language

Here is a learned article on the subject which sums up the origin and evolution of Urdu very well.

Ameera Kamal is a research writer based in Islamabad. She holds a Masters degree in Anthropology from Quaid-e-Azam University, Pakistan.

Urdu – The Origin and History of the Language

By Ameera Kamal

http://ezinearticles.com/?Urdu—The…age&id=2181915

I am writing a summary of the article, in my own words, but definitely taking facts from her article:

The article stars with defining the term “Urdu” – it derives from a Turkish word “ordu” meaning camp or army. Urdu developed amongst Muslim soldiers of the Mughals (Mughal Empire was established by Muhammad Babur who invaded India (Hindustan) because of its riches and wealth). Mughal armies belonged to various ethnicities, e.g. Turks, Arabs, Persians, Pathans, Balochis, Rajputs, Afghans, etc. Present day Urdu evolved with the different dialects these soldiers used to communicate with each other. Because of this reason Urdu is also called “Lashkari Zaban” or “language of the army”.

The author says that during its development Urdu language also assumed various names like “Urdu-e-Maullah” (the exalted army) and the term “Rekhta” (scattered (with Persian words)).

The article says that the history of a language is definitely linked to the history of the people speaking it. Urdu emerged as a “distinct language” after the year 1193 – the time of Muslims conquest. When the Muslims conquered these lands, they made Persian the official and “cultural language” of India. Ameera Kamal writes:

“as a result of the amalgamation of local dialects and the language of the invaders – which was either Persian, Arabic and Turkish, a new language evolved which later became Urdu.”

In the later part, the article says that “with the coming of the British, new English words also became part of the Urdu language. Many English words were accepted in their real form while others were accepted after some modifications. Currently, the Urdu vocabulary contains approximately 70% of Persian words and the rest are a mixture of Arabic and Turkish words.”

Do read her full article. Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/2181915

Some more expert opinion on this issue for everyone’s reference:

“The birth of Urdu language was the direct result of the synthesis between the invading armies of Mahmud of Ghazni with the civilian population of the Indian cities. The word Urdu itself means Lashkar, derived from the Turkish language meaning armies.”

The Essentials of Indian Culture by K.K.Khullar, Employment News, New Delhi, 21-27 Jan. 1995, p.1

“Urdu was thus self-evidently the language of the soldiers of the armies of Mahmud-e-Ghazni, the only militarist sovereign of the era who maintained a large enough army for a considerable period to provide sufficient time for a new language to develop. It is for this same reason that the earliest surviving Urdu literature is that of Sufi saints who accompanied the Ghaznavids during their expeditions.”

Language of the armies, Urdu, by Dr. Samar Abbas, June 11, 2002 http://www.iranchamber.com/literatur…_of_armies.php

“The old Urdu was a mixture of Turkish, Persian and Arabic and was the language of the most powerful warrior tribes of Central Asia. These tribes would invade, conquer and occupy areas within easy reach for their wealth, gold, silver and precious stones. Wherever these tribes went, they took their language which had an amazing mingling and absorbing local words and proverbs.“

A Brief History of Urdu; http://www.bbc.co.uk/languages/other…/history.shtml

“the impact of Islām created a new language, Urdu (from Persian: Camp), based on Hindi; Urdu was the lingua franca of the army. Urdu was used later for literature and at present is the mother tongue of most Indian Muslims and their brethren”

Encyclopedia Britannica: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/…ture#ref532147