A new low in public discourse
Thousands of miles away, the MAGA universe is showing signs of splintering over Trump’s attack on Iran. The rising tension within the MAGA universe – that has been united thus far and of course accused of groupthink or hive mentality by its opponents, could have been a great opportunity to engage with a public discourse on the merits and demerits of US policies under Trump.
However, in the past three days, this tension has regressed – and I mean literally regressed into a back-and-forth volley, that are no longer veiled but dripping with vulgarism, banalities, and inane if not insane accusations within its splinter groups. And all of this is happening in public view!
Mark Levin (a former FOX TV host and a successful radio show host in the past) is a “hawk” in Trump’s team and is on one side of the split within MAGA for he supports the war on Iran and backs Operation Epic Fury. Mark seems to have taken up the cudgels to attack any internal dissenters on this front as a way of demonstrating his loyalty to Trump.
A reasonable man may have had some expectations of rigor or principles in his arguments for the war or at least the hypocrisy of it. But Mark Levin defends Epic Fury in a manner that puts a high school bully to shame – he stoops to a new low by calling out his critics on the opposite side of the split and thinkers including Megyn Kelly as “degenerate,” “emotionally unhinged,” and a “Woke Reich psycho”. Kelly, as the public feud degenerates, calls Mark a ‘micro-penis’ – and multiple times amongst other insults.
On March 15 (two days ago), Donald Trump – the President of the most powerful nation, is forced to intervene in this public and vituperative feud by taking a side – but his intervention is equally strange as he hails Mark Levin as a “Great American Patriot” and “The Great One“. Trump further in his text dismisses Levin’s critics (Kelly, Tucker Carlson) as “jealous and angry Human Beings” with far less intellect. He explicitly states, “THEY ARE NOT MAGA, I AM!”. Beyond name-calling and insults Trump does not offer any rationale.
This tete-a-tete becomes further abusive as Marjorie Taylor Greene backing Kelly’s offensive terms for Mark and attacking Trump in public by stating that people are done with DJT.
All of this is quite surreal because one could never imagine a public feud of this abject quality in any of the earlier Presidential regimes – including Bush or even Nixon. My friends have stated that the mask of civility has split and a lot of what Prime Minister Carney had stated in Davos a couple of months ago gets reinforced.
Closer Home …
However, the quality of Public Discourse has ebbed and frayed in most other democracies today including India. In India, it is not just the “gutter-gas” story that the opposition seems to have leveraged in the past two days as the country battles a shortage of natural gas and its consequences on the poor and the marginalized. As opposed to working together on policies or solutions, the public discourse has moved to idiotic and inane performance from both sides.
I am not a BJP supporter and I think I must mention the shameful debacle of Galgotia university in the recent AI summit claiming to have designed a robotic dog – Orion, has not been worked with given that we are looking at sponsoring private universities and schools. There are no references to policy challenges nor on the guard rails within the institutions that we have inherited.
Corruption scandals do not get dialogue over today – the role of Anil Ambani in a recent scandal has not been worked with beyond labeling him. The real issues, challenges and themes that crony capitalism brings with it deserve a deeper dialogue and a collective scrutiny as opposed to denials and accusations.
Public discourse is not just limited to our politics.
Take for example, this morning, Sunil Gavaskar criticizes the bidding and selection of a Pakistani cricketer in a team playing in the 100s – a limited over tournament based in UK. Gavaskar states that the player would be paid or compensated lavishly by his club, and the tax collections by his government would pay for missiles and bombs and other arsenal to attack India.
This argument has no merit!
The ICC – which is headed by Jay Shah – the son of the Indian Home Minister, is a body that would be paying Pakistan Cricket Board USD 144 million dollars – Pakistan payout is fourth largest trailing after BCCI, ECB and CA and comes to nearly 6% of ICC’s earnings. Beyond this revenue share the PCB also gets specific funds for hosting and participating in ICC events.
Surely a body such as PCB which is being paid by an organization headed by the son of a powerful politician needs more scrutiny than a single Pakistani player – I wish Sunil Gavaskar had spoken of the perils of ICC paying princely sums to PCB, and how these funds under the PCB chairman – Mohsin Naqvi – who is also the Minister of Interior and supervises national security, may get used for sponsoring terrorism… I wish he had accused Jay Shah of being an ‘anti-national’…
Public discourse has been replaced by performative nationalism – and much of it is steadily degenerating to what is happening in the MAGA world of USA. It is used in cricket matches where players don’t shake hands with each other and yet Indian and Pakistani Cricket commentators share warm nostalgic stories with each other.
Public Discourse and Democracy
ChatGPT says that – “In a healthy democracy, public discourse is the engine room. It’s the process where “we the people” debate, disagree, and eventually find enough common ground to function as a society”
I could not have put it better for to me, public discourse acts like a watchdog or a guard-rail to governing. Policies need to be debated, dialogued over and collectively owned. There needs to be civility and dignity in the way we conduct ourselves.
But today we are more driven by “Public Outrage” and “Echo Chambers” – these get sustained and amplified by social media.
But there is hope as I write…
Sonam Wangchuk on his release has not come across as vindictive, bitterly angry, and accusatory (and he had every right to be just that after having spent 170 days in detention).
Wangchuk displays leadership by publicly describing the government’s decision to revoke his detention as an “extending of hand” to build trust. He expresses optimism for a “win-win” (or even “win-win-win”) outcome that benefits the people of Ladakh, the central government, and the environment. He has signalled a willingness for “give and take” in negotiations, stating that both the government and the people of Ladakh must remain flexible to ensure a constructive dialogue. While the core demands for Statehood and inclusion in the Sixth Schedule remain, his tone contrasted with the more rigid positions of regional bodies like the LAB
As Wangchuk puts it – “while I am hopeful for “meaningful, effective talks,” I have not stepped away from activism.” He indicated a reluctance for future hunger strikes, saying he only undertook them out of “compulsion” when dialogue was blocked.
I stand with Sonam Wangchuk when he speaks of keeping “dialogue” alive and I think all of us who believe that we are educated, intelligent, and love our country – we need to keep dialogue alive and sustain public discourse that explores multiple perspectives, innovative approaches, and sustains an enquiry.
Incorrigibly romantic ... 