The editorial in the Organiser quotes sangh icon Deendayal Upadhyaya and urges voters to elect representatives by giving “prominence to principles of governance”. “The voter should see that he votes for a principle and not for a party, that he votes for a party and not for a personality, that he votes for a person and not for the purse,” it says quoting Upadhyaya, who said that the voter should “go with the worthy rather than with the winner”. Commenting on the significance of these polls, the editorial says that “this is the first ever round of major elections after the daring and system-shattering decision like demonetisation”. “Many would like to play it as a mandate on the all-pervasive pronouncement” of demonetisation. “As electoral water is untested in Uttar Pradesh after the splendid performance by the Bharatiya Janata Party during the 2014 General elections, how much of that ground is still retained is a matter of curiosity for everyone,” it notes. Underlining the recent decision of the SC, that “termed the elections as a ‘secular’ activity and therefore banned the use of caste, religion, language and creed for seeking votes,” it says how the order “will be implemented and in turn affect the electioneering and final outcome is still unclear”.
Politics over budget
The editorial in Panchjanya slams the Opposition’s demand to postpone the announcement of the Union budget after March 8 as it “can affect elections”. “But then, why only the budget?” it asks, adding that certain other things could also have been postponed. “For instance, the foreign holiday of the prince of the country’s oldest party”. “Rahul might be a political novice,” but “haven’t the many political parties in the country lost the faith of their workers and their intellectual capital (if they ever possessed it)?” Is it not a matter of concern that various parties, who are “involved in fostering regional separatism”, get their “political nourishment by opposing a political party”? Such a fall in politics lends a severe blow to democracy and the nation. If Rahul Gandhi and Arvind Kejriwal, who are “chirping on social media platforms over notebandi”, “had spared time to tweet even once to criticise Dhulagarh riots then they would have held their credibility among their workers”.
Cricket in Crisis
An article in the Organiser comments on the recent Supreme Court verdict on the BCCI and says that “the very sport in which India could claim to be the global superpower is facing the huge crisis of credibility”. “Will Indian cricket transform itself for transparency and still realise its full potential?” it asks. It notes that “the final chapters of the unfolding saga on Indian cricket are yet to be written”. “If Indian sports are compared to a whole body, cricket looks to be the healthiest organ of this body,” it says, and asks “what was ailing this seemingly healthiest organ?” The article notes that how following the 1983 world cup victory and the advent of “global icon Tendulkar”, “cricket administrators like Jagmohan Dalmiya, I.S. Bindra, A.C. Muthaih made Indian cricket commercially viable”. “They changed the center of cricket from London to Eden Gardens/Wankhede Stadium,” it says, adding that “India became cricket’s financial super power and subsequently its world leader”. It underlines that emergence of the Indian Premier League, which “soon grew into one of the wealthiest sports leagues of the world”. This brought in new set of challenges, but “unfortunately, the approach and the structure to manage these challenges failed to evolve with the changing times”.