Futility of comparisons

Prime Minister Narendra Modi might have outnumbered the days in the prime ministerial office compared to Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the first prime minister of India. But this shouldn’t be an occasion for celebration. One cannot but feel that a campaign is being orchestrated from behind the scenes to compare the performance of the duo with a marked attempt to malign Nehru.

It is an absolutely disingenuous attempt to put them on a weighing scale that doesn’t recognise the context of the two PMs who are separated by a hiatus of 60 years. Nehru was born with a silver spoon in his mouth. But he voluntarily deserted the luxuries inherited by him, lived a Spartan life, spent nine years in prison and raised a generation of nation-builders through sheer hard work, persuasion, foresight, sacrifice and dedication, all under the shadow of Mahatma Gandhi.

All that existed in the name of infrastructure then was a network of railways with slow-moving trains, post offices and the vast cantonments where the British elite lived. Barely able to feed its populace, India was frequently visited by famines and starvation deaths. Epidemics routinely ravaged the land. Cities in the northern plains were burgeoning with refugees that Partition produced.

Punjab had been stripped of its jewel, Lahore and Nehru had to plead with Le Corbusier to come to India’s aid to set up a new capital altogether, which Punjab still shares with Haryana. He didn’t only build democratic institutions, he had to imagine and conceive them. He set up the Planning Commission, IITs, IIMs, ICCR, and laid the foundation forFive-Year Plans that have imparted to the Nation an economy that is sound, robust and resilient.

He brooked no corruption and just the scent of it had him send Punjab Chief Minister Pratap Singh Kairon to the political wilderness. Today, the ones who were caught on camera taking bribes, are happily anointed on the highest pedestal of power.  The agnostic that Nehru was, he never visited any temples.

Instead he laid the foundation for modern temples like the Bhakra Nangal and Hirakud Dams, steel and power plants all over India and the Bhaba Atomic Research Centre that became the cornerstone for all subsequent developments of the industrial giant that India is today.Nor would he indulge in religious rhetoric. Yet people trusted him for his words and character. His stellar role in the freedom struggle earned him credibility that eludes even the largest political party today.

The overwhelming majority that Indian National Congress garnered under his leadership—364 seats in a 489-member Lok Sabha in 1952, 371 and 361 seats in the 494-seat Lok Sabha in 1957 and 1962 Lok Sabhas respectively—never went to his head to the extent that he would regale while hurling barbs at the Opposition. He wouldn’t indulge in the sartorial gimmickry as is the wont of politicians today. Nor die he have the ben efit of teleprompters that lend the advantage to poorly trained politicos who fumble for words when challenged with sudden power outages.

 Nehru dealt with colleagues who had vision and foresight. He often disagreed with them but never lacked respect for them. Syama Prasad Mookerjee, BR Ambedkar, CD Deshmukh, Rajagopalachari and John Mathai walked away from his cabinet or the party but never left a trail of mystery that has marked Jagadeep Dhankhar’s exit in recent years. They aired their views freely in public unlike the toadies who seal their lips today.  

One shouldn’t forget that Nehru inherited a 17% literate India with villages sinking into darkness with sunset, floods submerging vast lands and casteist violence regularly drowning voices of justice and amity. But it was his visionary leadership that altered the shape and character of the nation that has been passed on to his successors. Comparisons are simply an exercise in futility.