A Suitable Boy(134)
After ten minutes of thought, he got up, nodded at the two MLAs, and went downstairs to his room.
A few MLAs were already sitting in his room when he arrived, and several more gathered in the next few minutes as they came to know that he was holding court. Imperturbable, even smiling slightly to himself, L.N. Agarwal now held forth as he was accustomed to doing. He calmed down his agitated followers, he placed matters in perspective, he mapped out strategy. To one of the MLAs, who had commiserated with his leader because the twin misfortunes of Misri Mandi and Chowk had fallen simultaneously upon him, L.N. Agarwal replied: ‘You are a case in point that a good man will not make a good politician. Just think – if you had to do a number of outrageous things, would you want the public to forget them or remember them?’
Clearly the answer was intended to be ‘Forget them,’ and this was the MLA’s response.
‘As quickly as possible?’ asked L.N. Agarwal.
‘As quickly as possible, Minister Sahib.’
‘Then the answer,’ said L.N. Agarwal, ‘if you have a number of outrageous things to do is to do them simultaneously. People will scatter their complaints, not concentrate them. When the dust settles, at least two or three out of five battles will be yours. And the public has a short memory. As for the firing in Chowk, and those dead rioters, it will all be stale news in a week.’
The MLA looked doubtful, but nodded in agreement.
‘A lesson here and there,’ went on L.N. Agarwal, ‘never did anyone any harm. Either you rule, or you don’t. The British knew that they had to make an example sometimes – that’s why they blew the mutineers from cannons in 1857. Anyway, people are always dying – and I would prefer death by a bullet to death by starvation.’
Needless to say, this was not a choice that faced him. But he was in a philosophical mood.
‘Our problems are very simple, you know. In fact, they all boil down to two things: lack of food and lack of morality. And the policies of our rulers in Delhi – what shall I say? – don’t help either much.’
‘Now that Sardar Patel is dead, no one can control Panditji,’ remarked one young but very conservative MLA.
‘Even before Patel died who would Nehru listen to?’ said L.N. Agarwal dismissively. ‘Except, of course, his great Muslim friend – Maulana Azad.’
He clutched his arc of grey hair, then turned to his personal assistant. ‘Get me the Custodian on the phone.’
‘Custodian – of Enemy Property, Sir?’ asked the PA.
Very calmly and slowly and looking him full in the face, the Home Minister said to his rather scatterbrained PA: ‘There is no war on. Use what intelligence God has given you. I would like to talk to the Custodian of Evacuee Property. I will talk to him in fifteen minutes.’
After a while he continued: ‘Look at our situation today. We beg America for food, we have to buy whatever we can get from China and Russia, there’s virtual famine in our neighbouring state. Last year landless labourers were selling themselves for five rupees each. And instead of giving the farmers and the traders a free hand so that they can produce more and store things better and distribute them efficiently, Delhi forces us to impose price controls and government godowns and rationing and every populist and unthought-out measure possible. It isn’t just their hearts that are soft, it is their brains as well.’
‘Panditji means well,’ said someone.
‘Means well – means well –’ sighed L.N. Agarwal. ‘He meant well when he gave away Pakistan. He meant well when he gave away half of Kashmir. If it hadn’t been for Patel, we wouldn’t even have the country that we do. Jawaharlal Nehru has built up his entire career by meaning well. Gandhiji loved him because he meant well. And the poor, stupid people love him because he means well. God save us from people who mean well. And these well-meaning letters he writes every month to the Chief Ministers. Why does he bother to write them? The Chief Ministers are not delighted to read them.’ He shook his head, and continued: ‘Do you know what they contain? Long homilies about Korea and the dismissal of General MacArthur. What is General MacArthur to us? – Yet so noble and sensitive is our Prime Minister that he considers all the ills of the world to be his own. He means well about Nepal and Egypt and God knows what else, and expects us to mean well too. He doesn’t have the least idea of administration but he talks about the kind of food committees we should set up. Nor does he understand our society and our scriptures, yet he wants to overturn our family life and our family morals through his wonderful Hindu Code Bill…’