CRITICS OF GOVERNANCE
SHOULD BE PATIENT
AND GENUINELY
CONSTRUCTIVE
(WHEN VISION VILIFIED
UNDERMINING GOVERNANCE
Be Patient, Do not
answer Hate with Hate)
Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao
The Hans India
(25-05-2025)
{Governance should be
evaluated through a lens that considers context, compulsion, and consequence,
not merely political convenience. In a federal, multi-party, high-stakes
democracy, like India, governance is rarely linear. When a Chief Minister takes
a decision, it is often grounded in strategic compulsions and should not be
hastily dismissed as mere extravagance} – Editor’s Observation
It has become fashionable
to irresponsibly dismiss and comment on ‘Ambitious or Visionary Governance
Efforts’ irrespective of initiation by any Chief Minister, often at
the hands of opportunistic and untrustworthy Fly-by-Night Operators, who
become ‘Powerful Metaphors’ in political and administrative treatise.
Public Discourse is
increasingly erasing the line between genuine ideological disagreement and
accusations of betrayal.
The paradox of Indian
Parliamentary Democracy functioning is that, every move by Chief Minister or
Prime Minister, is subjected to political scrutiny, moral and sometimes immoral
judgment, often without grasping the deeper compulsions at play. For those
steering the wheels of governance, the world becomes a ‘Battlefield of Competing
Ideas’ weighed down by expectations, and frequently judged before being
understood. Urge to delegitimize relentlessly corrodes the very space needed
for thoughtful and democratic governance.
This battlefield is habitually
infested by fleeting disruptors, not genuine stakeholders or the Fly-by-Night
Operators, whose voices grow loudest in moments of visibility, only to
vanish later.
They neither bring
alternative vision, nor policy depth, nor intent to endure the long, thankless chore
of governance. Their interest is not to build, but to bait. They flourish on
spectacle, distortion, and algorithms, but not on responsibility or
accountability. Their favorite role, is Nicknamed as ‘Opposition: Loud in Critique,
Light on Responsibility.’
In such a climate, a
Chief Minister (or Prime Minister) must fulfill not only ‘Constitutional
Responsibilities’ but also obligatory burdens with dignity, vision, and the
patience to endure those ‘Nicknamed Individuals and Groups’ whose
democratic contribution is ‘A Little.’ These unethical critics,
unwilling to grasp the compulsions or unable to understand the obligations
behind a Chief Minister’s decision to initiate a program they dislike, opposition
it completely (Lock, Stock and Barrel).
For instance, Telangana
Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy and his government faced scathing and deliberate
criticism for successfully hosting the 'Miss World Contest' overlooking
its benefits. The critics dismissed it as extravagance, ignoring its potential
for boosting tourism, generating employment, and enhancing branding.
Before engaging in such
criticism, one must reasonably and appropriately understand the ‘Compulsions
Verses Choices’ inherent in governance. Not every action by a political
leader stems from free will. True democracy is neither blind applause nor
opposition, but in conscientious understanding and evaluation. Public criticism
often lacks constructiveness and reduces complex governance to mere political
point-scoring.
Prime Minister’s
foreign visits are often dismissed as PR exercises, overlooking the tangible
FDI inflows and diplomatic gains.
Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister
N Chandrababu Naidu’s Amaravati project has been vilified for its ambition,
though visionary in design. Similarly, the former Telangana Chief Minister K
Chandrashekhar Rao’s Kaleshwaram Multi-Purpose, Multi-Stage Lift Irrigation
Project, once praised for its engineering brilliance and global ambition, is
now increasingly criticized for placing a massive financial burden on the
state’s exchequer!!
The culture of
political critique in democratic India, especially in the Telugu states, is
often marked by ‘Knee-Jerk, Indiscriminate Opposition’ that values ‘Optics
over Outcomes.’
Optics refer to how
actions appear in the short term, shaped by emotion or media visibility.
Outcomes reflect the real, measurable impact of policies over time.
Unfortunately, much of the opposition preoccupies on what seems appealing or
popular, rather than what truly works or delivers results. The media, lacking depth,
and informed scrutiny, frequently amplifies this superficial narrative,
reinforcing a culture that prioritizes perception over substance in democratic
engagement.
A culture of holistic
evaluation, the one that distinguishes between short-term costs and long-term
gains, direct and indirect effects, and local perceptions versus national
implications is essential. Real-time challenges like balancing public sentiment
with administrative responsibility, managing international diplomacy,
sustaining investor confidence, competing with other states, and advancing
tourism or development goals are rarely acknowledged purely to derive political
gains.
Critics must pause
before drawing conclusions or passing judgments.
Governance should be
evaluated through a lens that considers context, compulsion, and consequence, not
merely political convenience. In a federal, multi-party, high-stakes democracy,
like India, governance is rarely linear. When a Chief Minister takes a
decision, it is often grounded in strategic compulsions and should not be
hastily dismissed as mere extravagance.
Critics of the ‘Miss
World Contest’ may dismiss it as frivolity amid poverty, overlooking its
role in building global visibility, tourism, soft power, job creation, and
asserting Telangana’s cosmopolitan identity.
It is worthwhile to recall
Rudyard Kipling’s Great IF Poem: ‘If you can bear to hear the truth you have
spoken; Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools.’ Opposition, the
lifeblood of democracy, must question, probe, and challenge responsibly. However,
there is a fine line between critique and character assassination, between
healthy skepticism and destructive sabotage.
As Kipling wrote, ‘If
you can trust yourself when all men doubt you, But make allowance for their
doubting too’ exploitation by critics holds little weight. Governance does
not mean pleasing everyone; it is about enduring criticism, managing
compulsion, and pushing boundaries in the pursuit of progress. Kipling further
reminds: ‘If you can fill the unforgiving minute, with sixty seconds’ worth
of distance run, Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it.’
Governance in India and
its states often walks a tightrope between intent and interpretation. The
dynamic role of a Chief Minister can turn even well-structured efforts into
flashpoints of controversy. Critics seize on these moments, narratives get
hijacked, and the true essence of governance is obscured.
As Chief Public
Relations Officer to two Highly Knowledgeable Chief Ministers during 1989–90
and 2014–23, who led the first and second phases of Separate Telangana
Agitations, I witnessed firsthand, the unseen strain, meticulous preparation,
and strategic coordination behind routine looking, but mandatory official
tasks, not to mention complex decision-making. Nothing was ever done casually.
Crafting of the
Governor Speech delivered on Republic Day, Governor Address to the Joint Session
of the Legislature, Budget Speech of Finance Minister, Chief Minister's
response to the Motion of Thanks on the Governor’s Address, CM speech on the
Appropriation Bill, or Statements made in Legislature, CM Independent Day
Speech etc. requires every sentence to undergo multiple layers of consultation,
discussion, legal scrutiny, and data validation. I had the privilege of being
part of this intricate process.
These are not mere
political monologues but sincere statements of intent, responsibility, and
direction. Yet, public discourse often reduces them to selective sound bites or
dismisses them with populist criticism. The deeper tragedy is that the very
framework of Legislative Functioning remains largely invisible to the
average citizen, and certainly to Fly-by-Night Operators. Well-backed
development initiatives, supported by thorough reports and feasibility studies,
are labelled as vanity projects or corruption avenues, perhaps including showcasing
‘Telangana Rising 2047 Vision’ at NITI Aayog meet
Events like the 72nd
Miss World Contest, with significant potential on many fronts, are
often dismissed without balanced consideration. Critics conveniently overlook
tourism potential, hospitality growth, international branding, and city
infrastructure development. It is easier to mock a runway walk than to assess
its downstream economic impact. Why not afford the benefit of doubt to
decisions whose returns may not be immediate or clearly visible?
Intellectual honesty to
distinguish necessary evils, strategic compulsions, and political missteps is
crucial. Political leadership is rarely a simple choice between right and
wrong; it involves navigating conflicting demands, pressures, fiscal constraints,
bureaucratic inertia, and legal tightropes at every turn.
Every Chief Minister
undoubtedly is aware of these realities. The wisdom in Rudyard Kipling’s IF
feels almost prophetic: ‘If you can wait and not be tired by waiting, or
being lied about, don’t deal in lies, or being hated, don’t give way to
hating...’
In essence: Be Patient.
Stay Honest. Do not answer Hate with Hate. These lines could well be the
silent prayer of any Chief Minister at the end of a long, taxing day, torn
between duty and doubt, legacy, and backlash, Treading wisely, holding
spirit firmly, and surging ahead with renewed strength.
