Guest guest Posted July 7, 2012 Report Share Posted July 7, 2012 Thought Provoking Bharat, Ashok 1984 Sent from my iPad > > It was reported that > Pranab Mukherjee enjoyed the company of UP's biggest > criminals at a lunch. It > was ostensibly to garner support for his presidential candidacy. It made me > think about our presidents. > > The Indian > constitution provides for a president to head the nation. It is only a > ceremonial post, though. He has a symbolic presence. Unfortunately, nobody > knows what he is supposed to symbolize. He is more of a mascot of the Indian > democracy. Sometimes, a president remains just a caricature of the honourable > man we expect him to be. > > There have been > different persons as presidents in our history. The first one was a product of > the freedom struggle and exuded the values that propelled us toward > independence. The second president was an erudite scholar. He had a love for > philosophy. His teachings were widely accepted as work of a high standard. The > third president was a man with an honourable intent. It is extremely difficult, > if not possible, to compare the successive presidents with the first three. > > The presidents who > followed had nothing of real distinction in their life, perhaps with the > exception of one man. He is remembered as the people’s president. It is said > that he was a distinguished scientist who headed the country’s > missile-development programme. However, the real reason why the nation adored > him was his simplicity and goodness. He was an ascetic, undemanding. Others > were largely unsuitable to occupy the president’s chair. A few were even > somewhat dubious in their outlook. > > The president’s post > is a debatable necessity. Notwithstanding what is enshrined in the > constitution, neither the president himself nor the people know what he should > really do. This apart, there are other irritating issues related to the > president. Most of them have been unacceptably old and often infirm. They are > dull and frankly boring. They always have a funereal appearance. Their speeches > are depressing, having an effect opposite to the intended. It is doubtful > whether a sensible man would be pleased to meet them. > > The election for the > president, like any other election, degenerates into a tamasha. Interestingly, > the women who do not have ‘patis’ (there are four of them) will decide who our next > ‘Rashtrapti’ will be. > > So what should be the > criteria for selecting a president? Most of us would like to set simple > standards. For example, any president who can promptly decide on the mercy > petitions by sentenced-to-death convicts would be seen as a good president. > > Bharat > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.