HomeContact Site map   Google    www    iipm think tank
   
   
Home Scrutiny Publications Under Cover Mus'ings  
 

Home > Scrutiny > Damn that rose!

  
   
     
   Case Studies  
       
  Marketing    
  Human Resource    
  Information Technology    
  Finance    
  Strategy    
       
 
     
   Industries  
       
  Steel    
  Glass    
  Banking    
  Prophylactic    
  Auto    
  Hospitality    
  Energy    
       
 
     
   Other links  
       
  IIPM    
  Planman Consulting    
  Planman Marcom    
  Planman Technologies    
  Daily Indian Media    
  Planman Financial    
  4P's Business and Marketing    
  Business and Economy    
  The Daily Indian    
  The Sunday Indian    
  Arindam Chaudhuri    
  GIDF    
       
 
  
         
Scrutiny
  
Damn that rose!
A party is a party, by whatever name you call it, right? Yeah, right...
21/01/2010

25 June-9 July ‘09 issue



We wanted this one to be a frivolous piece (aren’t all of our articles?). It started with a strange trivial piece of history that took quite a lot of us quite a lot more double checks to confirm; but when we did, it put us on to something more trivial, something that possibly can’t add to your intellectual base this century – or the next. But given the irresistible urge we regularly have in bringing to you facts that generally can make even electricity (used here as a noun) go off to sleep, we decided any which way to present to you this trivia.

First, the curious historical fact playing shamelessly to the famous Shakespearian rose (...is a rose). During the regime of Richard M. Nixon, the 37th US president, finding Republican economic policies ineffective, Nixon borrowed all Democratic policies shamelessly, including Keynesian management theories. But that’s not where we come from or even half as eye opening as what happened next. Nixon, shockingly, went on to the extent of proposing that the Republican party name be changed to Conservative!! And why? Polls ostensibly showed, then, that a majority of the voters identified themselves as conservatives. Not that Nixon was known for thinking straight – but to imagine that you can fool masses with just a change in the party’s name... well, might probably be right. And it motivated us to look at all the Einsteins globally who have got it brilliantly right, seemingly!

Leading the butcher’s dozen is the State Peace and Development Council. Guess which country this peace loving party rules? Burma. It’s the name given by the ruling army to its own so-called party. Next in line is the People’s Front for Democracy and Justice, the ruling party of Eritrea, which strangely – or perhaps not so strangely – doesn’t allow any other party, and doesn’t seem to be that much in love with democracy either.
So what if Vladimir Putin has been accused by various observers and political bigwigs of operating Russia in a Mafia-like manner by not allowing civilians have their fair, democratic and free say? His political progeny Medvedev is not far behind when it comes to understanding Shakespeare. If United Russia is Putin’s ruling (rightist?) party, Medvedev supports various other interestingly named ‘opposition’ parties like Fair Russia (supposedly leftist, has recently shallowly repledged allegiance to Putin/Kremlin) and Civilian Power (used to claim that “freedom for every civilian” was their highest value; in 2008, once the sham was over, they supported Kremlin openly).

And how can we leave the Brits out of the discussion? If anyone can tell us how labour-friendly has been UK’s famously ruling Labour Party, we’ll tell them how supremely patriotic has been Robert Mugabe’s National Union Patriotic Front. And if you had an issue with the name that the former Soviet dictator Saparmurat Niyazov gave to the only autocratic party existing in Turkmenistan – the Democratic Party of Turkmenistan – then you perhaps forget that there’s a wonderful li’l country down south somewhere run by the loving, harmonious and modestly impressive Kim brothers; it’s known as the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Well, Shakespeare could never have understood his own statement as well as we did. For a dictator, is a dictator, is a dictator, by whatever name you call his party...

By:- Akram Hoque
Back

  
 
 
       
Home | Scrutiny | Publications | About us | Contact us
Copyright @2010 iipm think tank. All rights reserved.