The joke that has a political meaning in between the lines

The poverty stricken population(s) in poor countries like Nepal, India, Bangladesh and Pakistan despite their untold misery enjoys their lives to the hilt. Perhaps they have plenty of reasons to be happy even if they were not. Posing to be a happy man in the world perhaps is not a crime. Even if it were a crime, there was no authority in my knowledge that could penalize persons who commit such crime and that too very pleasingly.

Understandably, the people living in abject poverty in these countries create fables, jokes and stories, real or unreal, which makes them happy at least for few minutes or say hours. Needless to say, the millions and millions of unemployed population in these countries, in the process, have become addict to listening to satirical jokes and humors. Indeed these jokes and rumors contain some messages therein. It is simply unfortunate that the messages therein are summarily rejected by those who should listen to such jocular jokes and correct their characters and behave like a person befitting a person. However, they do not.

One such joke I wish to share with my valued readers today. The joke has political meaning. The joke very candidly represents the state of our politics and that of the politicians.

The joke runs like this.

It was election time. Politicians were busy in their electioneering campaign. In a particular constituency, two politicians had been awarded party tickets by their respective institutions. The first one had already represented the constituency for three consecutive elections. During his three terms in office, read five years each, this duffer parliamentarian did nothing for the people. The voters were really very angry with him and had practically decided not to vote him but instead mange the win of his rival that is the new one.

The second one was a new comer. Things were very new for him to the extent that he did not know how to be-fool the voters, which normally is expected of our leaders.

It so happened that one fine morning both arrived at the open theater for an election-speech. Both came face to face and started talking very high of their impending political agenda for the constituency and the nation at large. The seasoned one commented that the new comer was simply a chap and hence suggested the voters not to vote for him. The new one told his voters that since the old man did nothing for the constituency and hence he is offered their votes.

The population became confused. Whom to believe was the LAUDA question for the illiterate voters of that constituency.

The seasoned politician finally made such a revelation that erased the confusion from the minds of the confused population.

He says: "Look dear voters! I feel really very much ashamed of my previous conducts. I could have done so many things for you during my three terms as your representative, which consumed fifteen years in total. The fact was that I utilized my first five years in office as your representative in collecting wealth for myself. The second term got consumed in amassing wealth for my own family members. The third term, very sorry to say, unfortunately were spent in taking care of my "relatives" who were in very bad shape economically speaking. So this means that during these three terms, I have accomplished all the jobs that were necessary for a politician like me. Rest assured dear voters! Since I have nothing to collect any more so this term would be utilized for your development. Mind it that if you do not vote in my favor this round and by mistake prefer to support my rival then the developmental efforts of this constituency will be pushed back by fifteen years again. It is because the new candidate will definitely toe my line that will hit you very hard.

" So it is up to you my dear voters to decide whether to vote for one who is committed for your development now or you prefer a new candidate who for three-terms will remain engaged like me in his personal and familial developments".

The confused population got plausible answers in the questions itself. The illiterate population calculated mathematically that it would not be wise to vote for the new one because it would push their development by fifteen years back. The population made a wise decision and voted the seasoned corrupt one.

The LAUDA question is that whether we too have such politicians? Perhaps in abundance.

Headline | National | 5 Question  | Editorial | International | Past