RBI chief’s ‘in the land of blind...’ overplayed
There was absolutely no justification for the furore that broke out following Reserve Bank of India Governor Raghuram Rajan's remark that, in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king. It's an old saying that speaks of relativity. Rajan was commenting on the robustness of the Indian economy in the midst of a general global downturn. In saying so, the RBI Governor was seeking to remind people that, much as there is to cheer about the nation's economic strength, there was a great more that needed to be achieved. He also meant to point out that, while the Indian economic growth was good, it looked better when compared to other less-growing as well as developed economies. This was not just an apt but also harmless comment, without any intent to run down the country's economic performance, especially over the past two years. And yet, unfortunately, certain important people saw offence, or at least a potential for misunderstanding, in the remark. Rajan has thereafter been compelled to ‘clarify' the statement even apologising to the visually impaired just in case he had hurt their sentiment! This is all so silly. Sensitivity has a place and must be exercised, but over-sensitivity leads to problems, especially in a democratic system where people have the right to air their views which they do by often using colourful proverbs and idioms. Rajan's remarks should not be taken to mean that he was adversely commenting on the incumbent Government's performance (more so when he never meant to do so). To this extent, Union Minister for Finance Arun Jaitley correctly brushed aside the issue when somebody sought a comment from him, and instead complimented the RBI chief for having done “fairly well” in the last year-and-half in managing the country's monetary policy.
While comments can get misinterpreted in an innocent manner, at times there is mischief at play. Two examples will suffice to indicate the latter. Not long ago, Narendra Modi had, with reference to the death of people in communal violence, said he would be sad if even a baby dog came under the wheels of a vehicle. His opponents instantly pounced on the remark, claiming that he was equating the lives of humans killed in communal violence (read 2002 Gujarat violence) to dogs. The second example was that of the Union Minister of State, General VK Singh's comment, in the wake of the Centre being blamed for the death of two Dalit children in a fire in Faridabad district of Haryana that was allegedly deliberately set. Rejecting the allegation against the Union Government, he wondered if even a stone thrown at a stray dog should invite accusation against the Centre. He was, for days together, slammed for equating Dalits with dogs and went red in the face trying to put the remark in perspective. Opposition parties believed they could nail the Government for vote-bank politics, but the attempt was so ridiculous that it died a natural death.