Friday, February 19, 2010

Damn that rose!

A party is a party, by whatever name you call it, right? Yeah, right...

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...

For Complete IIPM Article, Click on IIPM Article

Source :
IIPM Editorial, 2009


An IIPM and Professor Arindam Chaudhuri (Renowned Management Guru and Economist) Initiative

Read these article :-