Skip to main content

Arvind Kejriwal’s Apologies



Is Arvind Kejriwal a symbol of the increasing effeteness of truth?  He has been issuing apology after apology, the latest being to Nitin Gadkari.  Earlier he apologised to Bikram Singh Majithia.  Along with Manish Sisodia, he apologised to Kapil Sibal’s son Amit Sibal.  The offended are accepting the apologies with surprising promptness.  There are 30 more defamation cases against Kejriwal.  So are we going to get 30 more apologies and 30 more prompt acceptances?

It is understandable that Mr Kejriwal does not wish to waste his time on court cases.  He says he wants to devote his time to more fruitful administrative activities.  That’s fine.  The people need those services and not court entertainments. 

But the promptness with which the offended people accept the apologies raise our suspicions.  Is truth being buried facilely with each apology?  Do the apologies and their prompt acceptances mean that it is not easy to defend the truth in today’s India? 

Is it Kejriwal’s defeat or is it the defeat of truth itself?


Comments

  1. Before making allegations he should have understood it is impossible to prove them true

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, proving has become more important than truth. That's precisely what I'm questioning.

      Delete
    2. It's very sad, his was a refreshing change. Hope people understand he was cornered

      Delete
  2. It's the question of might. Kejriwal is in a weak position. The Prime Minister levied serious allegations against the ex-PM, the ex-VP and the ex-Chief of Army Staff during his election campaign in Gujarat. Leave aside tendering any kind of apology to the aggrieved ones, he has never shown even the most feeble sign of any regret for that. Why ? Because, quite opposite to Kejriwal, he is a very mighty person who can get away with anything said and anything done by him. And 'Might is Right' is the biggest truth continuing for ages. Which truth can be bigger than that ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Precisely. This is just what I fear too. Kejriwal is targeted by the most powerful party and he knows he has no other choice. After all, even Galileo apologised just to save himself from villains.

      Delete
  3. I think there is something bigger cooking under the table !! We will know soon :) Nice blog@

    http://www.bootsandbutter.com/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, Sneh, there indeed is a vicious power game that is smothering the truth.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Adventures of Toto as a comic strip

  'The Adventures of Toto' is an amusing story by Ruskin Bond. It is prescribed as a lesson in CBSE's English course for class 9. Maggie asked her students to do a project on some of the lessons and Femi George's work is what I would like to present here. Femi converted the story into a beautiful comic strip. Her work will speak for itself and let me present it below.  Femi George Student of Carmel Public School, Vazhakulam, Kerala Similar post: The Little Girl

The Ugly Duckling

Source: Acting Company A. A. Milne’s one-act play, The Ugly Duckling , acquired a classical status because of the hearty humour used to present a profound theme. The King and the Queen are worried because their daughter Camilla is too ugly to get a suitor. In spite of all the devious strategies employed by the King and his Chancellor, the princess remained unmarried. Camilla was blessed with a unique beauty by her two godmothers but no one could see any beauty in her physical appearance. She has an exquisitely beautiful character. What use is character? The King asks. The play is an answer to that question. Character plays the most crucial role in our moral science books and traditional rhetoric, religious scriptures and homilies. When it comes to practical life, we look for other things such as wealth, social rank, physical looks, and so on. As the King says in this play, “If a girl is beautiful, it is easy to assume that she has, tucked away inside her, an equally beauti...

Helpless Gods

Illustration by Gemini Six decades ago, Kerala’s beloved poet Vayalar Ramavarma sang about gods that don’t open their eyes, don’t know joy or sorrow, but are mere clay idols. The movie that carried the song was a hit in Kerala in the late 1960s. I was only seven when the movie was released. The impact of the song, like many others composed by the same poet, sank into me a little later as I grew up. Our gods are quite useless; they are little more than narcissists who demand fresh and fragrant flowers only to fling them when they wither. Six decades after Kerala’s poet questioned the potency of gods, the Chief Justice of India had a shoe flung at him by a lawyer for the same thing: questioning the worth of gods. The lawyer was demanding the replacement of a damaged idol of god Vishnu and the Chief Justice wondered why gods couldn’t take care of themselves since they are omnipotent. The lawyer flung his shoe at the Chief Justice to prove his devotion to a god. From Vayalar of 196...

The Real Enemies of India

People in general are inclined to pass the blame on to others whatever the fault.  For example, we Indians love to blame the British for their alleged ‘divide-and-rule’ policy.  Did the British really divide India into Hindus and Muslims or did the Indians do it themselves?  Was there any unified entity called India in the first place before the British unified it? Having raised those questions, I’m going to commit a further sacrilege of quoting a British journalist-cum-historian.  In his magnum opus, India: a History , John Keay says that the “stock accusations of a wider Machiavellian intent to ‘divide and rule’ and to ‘stir up Hindu-Muslim animosity’” levelled against the British Raj made little sense when the freedom struggle was going on in India because there really was no unified India until the British unified it politically.  Communal divisions existed in India despite the political unification.  In fact, they existed even before the Briti...

Our gods must have died laughing

A friend forwarded a video clip this morning. It is an extract from a speech that celebrated Malayalam movie actor Sreenivasan delivered years ago. In the year 1984, Sreenivasan decided to marry the woman he was in love with. But his career in movies had just started and so he hadn’t made much money. Knowing his financial condition, another actor, Innocent, gave him Rs 400. Innocent wasn’t doing well either in the profession. “Alice’s bangle,” Innocent said. He had pawned or sold his wife’s bangle to get that amount for his friend. Then Sreenivasan went to Mammootty, who eventually became Malayalam’s superstar, to request for help. Mammootty gave him Rs 2000. Citing the goodness of the two men, Sreenivasan said that the wedding necklace ( mangalsutra ) he put ceremoniously around the neck of his Hindu wife was funded by a Christian (Innocent) and a Muslim (Mammootty). “What does religion matter?” Sreenivasan asks in the video. “You either refuse to believe in any or believe in a...