Mastering The Art of Marriage

By Geeta Ram

Marriage is a continuum comprising of three inter-linked stages: pre-marriage, wedding, and post-marriage. All the three stages throw many issues on daily basis which are so arcane that it is difficult to understand and deal with them. If due care is taken in the first two stages; success of third stage, known as married life, increases. This book embodies ideas, tips and suggestions in 14 chapters on spouse selection,  dealing with in-laws, understanding concepts of husband, wife, individuality, woman, family, domestic violence and divorce. How to deal with issues and problems has been discussed exhaustively. American Architect Ludwig Mies Rohe said that “God is in details” meaning thereby  that when attention is paid to the small things it can have the biggest rewards. Exhaustive work has made this book a laser torch to throw light on complex marital issues to make the married life full of joy, success and contribution to national development. Hence it is A to Z guide for mastering the art of marriage.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Blue Rose Publishers
• Release date: Mar 6, 2024

Book preview

A HOT POTATO CALLED CONGRESS

The much anticipated and needed transformation of the Congress party with the entry of Priyanka Gandhi into mainstream politics did not happen as envisaged. Her callow and puerile approach to politics was obvious in more ways than one. In fact, the BJP did well to give her a cold shoulder and not to overplay her role as that would have given a boost to her stature much beyond what she deserves. Perhaps, it realised that Rahul Gandhi had benefited from the over-attention that he had received from the party and Mr. Modi over the years. If that had not been done, it may have added to his insecurities and compromised his stature within the party instead of the support that he enjoys today.

In the run-up to 2019 national elections, it seemed as if Congress was living on the mercies of other political parties. In Uttar Pradesh (UP), both Samajwadi Party (SP) and Bahujan Samajwadi Party (BSP) had shown it the door. This, despite the fact, that the over hundred-year-old party was ready to accept less than ten seats out of a total of eighty if included in the alliance. But SP and BSP were in no mood to take a loser on board, and therefore refused. The hard reality was that the Congress had serious claims only on two seats — Amethi and Rae Bareilly. The BJP had planned to throw all its might to defeat the Congress party in both these high-profile constituencies that had been bastions of the Gandhi family for decades.

In Delhi, Congress thought that by playing hard to get it might be able to browbeat Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) into getting a better seat share, but that was not to be. The Congress party’s Delhi Chief, Sheila Dixit, was in no mood to tie up with AAP even though a sizeable section of the party favoured an alliance. Later, AAP made some efforts to seek an alliance, but Congress was unable to decide one way or the other. AAP was ready to offer only one of the seven parliamentary seats in case an alliance came through. Its real motive was to corner the Congress votes in the other six constituencies for its own candidates to ensure a win against the BJP. When the alliance did not come through, the party declared its candidates for all seven seats, foreclosing any chance of an alliance.

In Karnataka, Janata Dal Secular (JDS) bullied Congress into securing eight out of a total of 28 seats. Some Congress leaders were rather unhappy at this division including the choice of seats given to JDS. In West Bengal (WB), Congress’ alliance with the Communist Party of India (CPI-M) had broken down and it was left to fight a lone battle. In Maharashtra, as expected Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) had its way and Congress succumbed to their demands to seal an alliance at any cost by agreeing to contest only 26 seats. In the northern states of Punjab, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh, the party hoped to do well. In Punjab, the tide seemed to be in its favour with people’s disenchantment with Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) and BJP reaching a peak. However, the AAP threat loomed large. In Bihar, Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) and other alliance partners called the shots and Congress grudgingly agreed to contest only nine seats.

After the rout in 2014, one would have hoped that the grand old party would do some serious introspection and reinvent itself before the 2019 national elections. But surprisingly no course correction was on view in the five years leading up to 2019. In fact, the party was not even expected to replicate its success in state assembly elections in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh at the national level. The defection of some key leaders became a matter of concern for the beleaguered party. The ever-nagging doubts about acceptability of Rahul Gandhi as the leader of the party continued to linger on. His constant exhortation to the voters not to vote for BJP had started sounding like the blabbering of an old woman. His inability to convince voters to vote for Congress seemed to have become a serious issue. Neither he nor his party seemed to have any answers in this regard.

The Congress’ half-hearted and sceptical support for surgical strikes against Pakistan and the fight against terror had not gone well with a lot of voters across the country. The corruption charge in the Rafael deal had become all noise and seemed to have run out of steam. Rahul Gandhi’s ‘Chowkidar’ barb too appeared to have boomeranged to haunt the Congress as BJP was now using it to their advantage. If the BJP’s ‘Congress Mukt’ Bharat was a slogan that did not have many takers, the same was true for Congress’ conduct in the last five years, which was based on stone walling anything and everything that the BJP government did. In short, a negative, obstructive, and unconstructive approach became the hallmark of Congress that seemed to irk many voters. A seasoned party, with an unmatched vintage, should indeed have been more responsible and pragmatic while it sat on opposition benches.

The Congress party had won forty-four seats in the 2014 general elections when the Modi phenomenon was at its peak. The question was would it do substantially better in 2019? Given the party’s track record over the last five years, it was becoming increasingly difficult for most people to answer this question in the affirmative. This, despite the fact, that most wished it could do so since the nation needed a strong opposition. The party’s biggest failure seemed to be on the leadership front. King’s new clothes has always made an interesting bedtime story for kids. But political parties cannot hope to achieve glory or survive in today’s times if their cadres fail to question dubious leadership that is thrust on them. In such circumstances, the party will suffer, both internally and externally. The outside world will always see such a party as a loser. Is it any wonder that in the run-up to the 2019 elections, the Congress party appeared to be a hot potato that no other party wanted to hold in its hands?

PREPOLL POLITICAL DISCOURSE - A SEASON OF LIES AND HALF-TRUTHS

The most popular lie doing the rounds in the run-up to the national election in 2019 was ‘Chowkidar Chor Hai’ (watchman is a thief). While some attribute its origin to Mr Rahul Gandhi, others believed that it was the farmers who coined it at a rally in 2018. Mr Gandhi continued to repeat this falsehood day in and day out without any regard for propriety towards a duly elected Prime Minister. His party men followed suit to mouth the same line blindly. Perhaps, the party leadership saw this jibe as a magical wand, that would see them marching as the ruling party into the Lok Sabha on 23 May, 2019 after the results.

Is it any wonder that after the Supreme Court (SC) ruling on the Rafael deal case, an exuberant Rahul Gandhi went public with a statement that the court in its judgement had stated that ‘Chowkidar Chor Hai.’ Two days later he admitted, to the highest court of the country, that he had erred in attributing the remark to the SC. His excuse was that it was done in the heat of electioneering, and therefore, he begged for forgiveness. Even a child would have dismissed it as a lame excuse but the court gave a 50-year-old Rahul, the benefit of the doubt.

Immediately after leaving the court, he reverted to the same infamous jibe once again. He was unconcerned that there was neither any case nor any investigation against the Prime Minister. On the other hand, he conveniently forgot that he was out on bail on charges of serious financial fraud in the National Herald case. Therefore, his charge not only sounded hollow but also frivolous to most voters and without a doubt, to many within the Congress party itself. Perhaps, Mr. Gandhi believes in the famous adage, attributed to the German Nazi leader Joseph Goebbels, that ‘repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.’ It would have done him good, if he had also remembered another one that says ‘Once a liar, always a liar.’ It is time some of his well-wishers advised him that if he continues in the same vein, sooner than later, the nation will start disbelieving him even when he chooses to speak the truth.

The other lie that seems to have come back to haunt the Congress party and some of its stalwarts, after nearly a decade, was the falsehood about ‘Hindu Terror’ or ‘Saffron Terror.’ Many senior Congress leaders were the main propagators of this falsehood during the Congress-led (United Progressive Alliance (UPA 2) government when the Samjhauta Express train blast occurred in 2007. In March 2019, a court in Panchkula acquitted all four Hindus charged under the UPA 2 regime for the blast. The acquittal put to rest the devious and dangerous propaganda, advanced by various Congress leaders, about the existence of saffron terror. The court verdict was a slap on the face of many leading voices of the party, who had fabricated and abetted in the furtherance of the theory of Hindu or Saffron terror.

The next oft-repeated lie in 2019 was about the Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) that the opposition claimed were tampered with to register only BJP votes. Over the last five years, this lie has surfaced whenever the opposition has been on the losing side. There were obviously no problems in places where they won. This was despite the assurances given by the Election Commission (EC) on several occasions, that the EVMs were standalone devices which were not connected to the internet, and therefore, not subject to manipulation. They were distributed in a random manner to different polling booths which further reduced the possibility of any tampering. EC also clarified that occasionally a few machines could malfunction but that could be expected as it uses millions of such voting machines. More importantly, EC has always been proactive to take corrective measures whenever the need has arisen. The EC has rightly stood its ground as losers often cry wolf.

Another interesting development in the domain of lies was the formation of ‘gathbandhans’ (alliances) before the elections. All kinds of opposition parties seemed to be coming together with a lot of fanfare and pledges of unity with the sole aim of beating the BJP. A lot of false promises, a show of strength and support for each other was on show to hoodwink the electorate. Overnight, sworn enemies for decades could be seen hugging and eulogising each other. Some called it the ‘Modi effect.’ There was little doubt in the minds of most voters that such gathbandhans would have a very small shelf life. Selfish interests would invariably overtake gathbandhan interests when it came to seat sharing before the elections or power sharing after the results.

Who can forget Rahul Gandhi’s lies about the Rafael deal offset? He had repeated the lie about Prime Minister Modi putting the whole of Rs 30,000 crore offset into Mr. Anil Ambani’s pocket so often, that he seemed to believe in it explicitly. The fact that this figure was the total offset that was to be invested in India, over many years, by all French companies that were part of the deal was of no consequence to him. In his single-minded pursuit of lies, he refused to acknowledge that Mr. Anil Ambani’s company was just one of the many Indian companies that had been short-listed under this offset investment agreement. As per authentic data released, the share of his company was pegged at less than Rs 800 crores. Moreover, in April / May 2019, no one knew the details of when and how this proposed investment would come to India. But the Congress wanted the voter to believe as if Mr Ambani had already pocketed the whole Rs 30,000 crores. It was indeed surprising if they thought that this lie would become their Pied Piper’s tune to lure the voters.

There are also some half-truths - statements that mingle truth and falsehood with a deliberate intent to deceive- that invariably do the rounds during electioneering. 2019 was no exception. First of course was the information put out by the government on Rafael’s deal. The charge on the government was that they had spent more for buying the planes as compared to the earlier pricing worked out in the failed deal of the UPA 2 government. It was important for the government to set the record straight. If it was transparent in giving the total deal figure and the cost of buying each plane in its basic form, they could have proved their case without divulging any secret information about the add-on weapon systems. Instead, the government put out half-truths in bits and pieces. The stand that the cost of the plane was many percentage points cheaper because it was an inter-government deal and no middlemen were involved was not very convincing. No wonder even the SC was not satisfied with the government’s replies that lacked conviction.

The other half-truth that was doing the rounds was about the constituency from where Priyanka Gandhi would fight elections. She often hinted about her willingness to fight from Varanasi while her party-maintained silence in this regard. Anyone who knows even a bit about the Gandhi family understands that they fight elections only from safe seats. Chickmagalur, Rae Bareilly and Amethi, have always been Gandhi bastions. In 2019, they added Wayanad in Kerala to the list, as a backup for Rahul Gandhi, since the constituency has a predominantly minority population. Any assumption that Priyanka Gandhi, a novice politician, would fight the lion in his den on debut could only be termed as a half-truth to fool the public. It went without saying that she would steer clear of Varanasi and find a Congress-affable constituency like other family members. Subsequent reports confirmed the same as Congress fielded someone else from Varanasi.

In a democracy, political lies and half-truths do have varied effects on voters depending on their education levels, political awareness, prevailing political environment, and the stature of individual leaders. If political discourse is base and vindictive, then lies and half-truths abound as is the case in our country. Unfortunately, lies and half-truths may entertain crowds at rallies, but they are never sufficient to win elections. To win elections, political parties must have well-defined strategies, capable and committed leadership with an ear to the ground, a national vision, and a road map for governance post elections.

OF OPPOSITION & OPPONENTS IN INDIAN DEMOCRACY

In the run-up to the 2019 national elections, the buzzword in media was ‘OPPOSITION’ and mostly for the wrong reasons. The opposition wanted to remove Mr. Modi, opposition opposed the use of EVMs, the opposition claimed EVMs had been tampered to suit the ruling party, opposition wanted EC to verify hundred percent paper trail, opposition questioned the integrity of EC, opposition leaders were meeting to decide on their next course of action, opposition got its plans ready for results day, the opposition had yet to decide on a consensus candidate for the chair of Prime Minister, opposition warned of bloodshed if they lost and so on. All of this and much more was connected to the word ‘OPPOSITION.’ The point everyone was missing here was - who was the opposition and what constitutes the opposition in our country?

There were no signs of a viable and strong opposition anywhere in the country when the EC announced the schedule for the 2019 national elections. In a democracy, the opposition is perhaps, as important as the treasury benches, provided it is strong, represents the people and has character. Being strong implies that it should have credible numbers that are ideally marginally short of the halfway mark in the parliament. Representation means it must represent most if not all, regions of the nation. Character defines quality, acceptability, and ability to lead the nation in case it comes to power. Till that happens, it must display these attributes as a responsible opposition by acting as a watchdog in the parliament, which is a twofold responsibility. It should add to the government’s efforts when it is right and stop the government in its tracks if it is wrong. Do we, as a nation, have this kind of opposition?

Since 2014, our opposition has been a cauldron of tattered and battered political parties with leaders who have no common agenda, barring one comprising of two words ‘Modi Hatao’ (remove Modi). In a democracy, numbers are always important. The Congress party, the largest in this ragtag group, had only forty-four members in parliament after the BJP came to power in 2014. As per the rules, that figure does not even give its leader the status of Leader of Opposition (LOP). All other parties had lesser members, and therefore, none of them was even in contention to be an opposition party of note. The reality is that the Indian parliament has only opponents, masquerading as opposition, who huddle together based on their mutual need for survival.

As far as representation is concerned, it was difficult even for Congress to claim that it represented all parts of the nation. Barring AIADMK, TMC, BJD, and a couple of other parties, the rest had only single-digit numbers in the parliament. Thus, no party could claim to represent the people of the whole nation by any stretch of the imagination. The tag of opposition, in all fairness, was a misnomer for all parties.

Next comes the question of the character of the opposition. Does Congress have character? It certainly had some in the past, but in 2019, it appeared to be an overstatement. This may offend some but please read on. Did it present any creditable road map or agenda about how it planned to govern the nation if it came to power? The party’s electioneering in 2019 was limited to ‘Modi Hatao’ and nothing more. If there was anything else, it was only the perceived wrongdoings by Mr. Modi’s government in the Rafael deal and beating the dead horses of Demonetisation and GST. Finally, in their bid to woo the minorities, they did not hesitate to exploit the communal divide between Hindus and Muslims. In fact, at times they encouraged it.

The nation had gone past demonetisation long ago and it was not a topic that the voter was interested in 2019. Most agreed that GST was an imperative need for the country that was long overdue. Some initial hiccups were expected in the implementation of such path-breaking reforms. To the government’s credit, it had been proactive in resolving the same. As far as the Rafael deal was concerned, the whole nation knew that Congress was bluffing.

Was India really a divided society at the macro level in 2019 between Hindus and Muslims? There are certainly differences between the two communities, but terming it a communal divide of humongous proportions will be a fallacy. Communal incidents were there in the past, are there today, and will continue to be there in the future. This is primarily because politicians and community leaders play one community against the other to further their selfish motives. This is a cost the nation has paid and will continue to pay till the quality of our politico improves manifold and our community leaders stop exploiting their flocks for personal gains. This issue is also linked with the perceived spread of Hindutwa, as alleged by opponents of the current government, to increase the insecurities among Muslims.

Is it not a joke that many in the opposition wanted the leader of BSP, a party that had no representation in the parliament after the 2014 elections, to be their Prime Ministerial candidate if a coalition came to power in 2019? The fact that this leader had no plans to contest the elections made it even more absurd. That perhaps exemplified the dire state that the opposition found itself in. Leaders of parties, with just one or two members in the parliament, made tall claims to be fighting for the entire 1,400 million people of the nation. In short, they masquerade as opposition leaders at the national level when they cannot even justify being called state leaders.

Indian democracy is laudable in many ways. It has stood the test of time for over seven decades, despite being surrounded by nations who forsake it long ago. It conducts peaceful polls across the nation, the size of a continent, with super efficiency. The Indian voters have surprised many with the verdicts they have given by punishing politicians and political parties alike. On the flip side, Indian democracy is yet to come of age where an individual politician’s track record becomes an important issue apart from his party’s image and agenda. It has still to come to terms to weed out criminality, criminals, corruption, and dynastic linkages from the political system to enable entry of clean, honest, and able individuals.

Finally, there is no provision in Indian democracy for opposition parties to unite and be treated as one entity in the parliament. However, the irony is that they can unite in a coalition and form a government and be seen as one entity that occupies the treasury benches. In the run-up to the 2019 elections, the nation has no opposition, but the opponents, who falsely claim to be the opposition, are already dreaming of forming a government in case the BJP and its allies fail to reach the halfway mark. The question is – will that be democratic?

23 MAY 2019 – INDIA’S DAY OF RECKONING

The nation had voted and results were awaited. Would the BJP and Mr. Narendra Modi win a second term, or will the nation see a coalition of all kinds of politicians and their parties coming together to form a government? The former was certainly a better option for the nation since national pride, growth and development would remain on track. The spectre of a multi-party coalition government with dubious leadership and no credible road map for development appeared to be a very scary alternative.

Can India afford to have a coalition government in power given the current status of the political opposition in the country?

Nowhere during the elections had any coalition stated why the nation should vote for them. Their war cry was limited to either ‘do not vote for BJP and Mr Modi’ or ‘BJP Hatao, Desh Bachao.’ These parties and their leaders did not showcase any vision of how they intended to govern the nation if they won the elections. They left such important matters to fate that could be addressed after they come to power. With at least four confirmed aspirants for the chair of the Prime Minister and others angling for plum ministerial positions, the formation of government itself would be no easy task. It is no secret that most opposition politicians and their parties have been starved of funds, power, and perks - things they had taken for granted for many decades. Their priority would be to correct this scenario in a hurry if they came