VICTOR’S CHALLENGE
READ BEFORE YOU PROCEED:
D2G wears no responsibility of the views published here by the respective Author. This Editorial is used here for Study Purpose. Students are advised to learn the word-meaning, The Art of Writing Skills and understand the crux of this Editorial.
MEANINGS are given in BOLD and ITALIC
The Election Commission of India has placed its imprimatur (a person’s authoritative approval) on a fait accompli (Something that has already been done) in Uttar Pradesh: Akhilesh Yadav is now the supreme leader of the party his father built, the transfer of power in the Samajwadi Party is complete. Mulayam Singh Yadav, the old wrestler, has lost the bout (a short period of intense activity of a specified kind), and the bicycle symbol, to the son he groomed in politics. For now, ahead of next month’s assembly polls, it would seem that Mulayam, who almost singlehandedly crafted a winning party out of a breakaway faction (a small organized dissenting group within a larger one) of the Janata Dal in 1992, is a lonely figure.
And Akhilesh has it all — the political legacy and the future, the party and the symbol, and going by Congress claims, an alliance. Yet, in the longer run, whatever be the outcome of the upcoming election, Akhilesh also has the burden and the responsibility: To grow into the role that seems to have been marked out for him. For, if there was one thing that emerged clearly in the often mystifying (utterly bewilder or perplex or confuse (someone)) confrontation (a situation where two players or sides compete to win a sporting contest) between father and son in the SP, it was this: In the eyes of a large section of SP MLAs, workers and supporters, Akhilesh stood for cleansing the party of its taint (contaminate or pollute (something)) of lumpenism (uncountable) and reputation for presiding over goonda raj when in power, even as Mulayam and Shivpal Yadav were seen to be ambivalent (having mixed feelings or contradictory ideas about something or someone).
It is possible to argue that the lines in the SP are more blurred (not clear or distinct) than they seem. It may be that Akhilesh is more the beneficiary of a projected image than a genuine change agent. But it is also true that he has spoken up against the SP’s association with those like D.P. Yadav in the past and Mukhtar Ansari, Aman Mani Tripathi and Atiq Ahmed in the run-up to next month’s poll. In fact, Akhilesh’s opposition to controversial (giving rise or likely to give rise to controversy or public disagreement) candidates being given SP tickets has become an important element in the package of a more forward-looking politics, less trapped in the past, that he has come to be identified with.
Ironically in 2012, Netaji himself had acknowledged the need for a reinvention of the SP and chosen Akhilesh as the instrument. Akhilesh’s installation as chief minister had followed a campaign (work in an organized and active way towards a goal) that signalled a new openness of Samajwadis to technology and change. Alongside the old commitments, for instance, SP’s 2012 manifesto (a public declaration of policy and aims, especially one issued before an election by a political party or candidate) had promised laptops to students, a significant break from the past for a party seen, till then, to be stridently (in an extremely forceful way) against English and computers.
The coming days will test Akhilesh’s ability to lead his party’s charge in the election, but even beyond that, he has a rare opportunity — to renegotiate (negotiate (something) again in order to change the original agreed terms) the balance in the SP between the old and the new. For SP’s new chief, then, the real challenge will begin once the dust has settled after the polls.
#################
