Deal Netas Vs Grounds up Netas

Deal Netas Vs Grounds up Netas

By: Amit Bhushan Date: 26th Oct. 2016

‘Tikhram’ is word that perhaps needs to go in English Dictionary. Perhaps the visit of British PM set the onset for some serious introspection by the likes of Okford perhaps because ‘Machiavellian’ doesn’t fully capture the essence of the word and also because it is difficult to spell and pronounce for a number of subjects in the commonwealth where such machinations are common practice. The ‘never say die attitude’ of our netas is perhaps from where even James Bond can draw inspiration from.

What does one do when there is battle in ones party. Well Offer a deal to some of the other like-minded parties. What is achieved? Well the Deal hungry netas, who may not be able to survive the multi-dimensional vote split, since they haven’t been in touch with the ground level people would began savouring the deal, also even taking credit for it since they were the ones maintaining the good rapport with other Netas in other parties. The slogans that Indian vote their Caste and all sort of euphemisms about funny behavior of our voters would come to fore delightfully & dutifully carted to public by commercial news media. The win-win formula is hung as garland around the neck of the wise & foresighted Super Netas, and the ground level party-workers are given amiss. A defeat is such a case is also usually deflected to other supporting parties in fray and the issue of inability to manage ‘vote transfer’ is a big help.

What the Tikhram essentially does is robs voters of choice/s for political options. This is because when such a conglomeration is formed, it often reduces competition and even competitors are forced to look for deals with others in the fray. Essentially in such ‘deals’, ‘interests’ of supporters are being discussed apart from (winning) political combination and competition in various constituencies, ‘tikhram required for winning. To say that compositions would be taking interest in people’s welfare, well almost all such combinations have always failed to return to power, but the commercial news media would rather depict as combinations splitting in between.

It is time perhaps that newbie party to test waters again in such scenario. This is because they have had a good past experience in giving alternative in states where there has been only two dominant parties. This would also help in raising their profile in other states going to polls and allow them to emerge faster on the national horizon. And there would be more alternative for people. It would help the change politics, even if not win. Lets’ watch how the ‘game’ evolves…

 

[Dhruv Bindhani]

Deal Netas Vs Grounds up Netas

By: Amit Bhushan Date: 26th Oct. 2016

‘Tikhram’ is word that perhaps needs to go in English Dictionary. Perhaps the visit of British PM set the onset for some serious introspection by the likes of Okford perhaps because ‘Machiavellian’ doesn’t fully capture the essence of the word and also because it is difficult to spell and pronounce for a number of subjects in the commonwealth where such machinations are common practice. The ‘never say die attitude’ of our netas is perhaps from where even James Bond can draw inspiration from.

What does one do when there is battle in ones party. Well Offer a deal to some of the other like-minded parties. What is achieved? Well the Deal hungry netas, who may not be able to survive the multi-dimensional vote split, since they haven’t been in touch with the ground level people would began savouring the deal, also even taking credit for it since they were the ones maintaining the good rapport with other Netas in other parties. The slogans that Indian vote their Caste and all sort of euphemisms about funny behavior of our voters would come to fore delightfully & dutifully carted to public by commercial news media. The win-win formula is hung as garland around the neck of the wise & foresighted Super Netas, and the ground level party-workers are given amiss. A defeat is such a case is also usually deflected to other supporting parties in fray and the issue of inability to manage ‘vote transfer’ is a big help.

What the Tikhram essentially does is robs voters of choice/s for political options. This is because when such a conglomeration is formed, it often reduces competition and even competitors are forced to look for deals with others in the fray. Essentially in such ‘deals’, ‘interests’ of supporters are being discussed apart from (winning) political combination and competition in various constituencies, ‘tikhram required for winning. To say that compositions would be taking interest in people’s welfare, well almost all such combinations have always failed to return to power, but the commercial news media would rather depict as combinations splitting in between.

It is time perhaps that newbie party to test waters again in such scenario. This is because they have had a good past experience in giving alternative in states where there has been only two dominant parties. This would also help in raising their profile in other states going to polls and allow them to emerge faster on the national horizon. And there would be more alternative for people. It would help the change politics, even if not win. Lets’ watch how the ‘game’ evolves…

In the often-murky waters of political commentary, this article shines as a beacon of clarity. The writer's writing style is refreshingly direct and remarkably insightful, capable of distilling even the most convoluted political machinations into understandable terms. It's a voice that not only informs but empowers, cutting through partisan rhetoric to focus on tangible realities. The structure is intuitively logical, carefully organizing arguments and evidence in a way that progressively deepens the reader's understanding of the political issue at hand. This thoughtful arrangement allows for a comprehensive grasp of the intricate relationships between policy, power, and people. Furthermore, the exceptional clarity with which the political arguments are articulated is truly commendable. There's no room for misinterpretation; the issues are presented with such transparent precision that the article serves as an essential guide for navigating and understanding today's political environment.

 

[Priyani Gupta]

Your article is an impressively layered critique of contemporary Indian political culture, laced with wit, sarcasm, and a sharp-eyed understanding of grassroots realities. It boldly reclaims the term “Tikhram” to encapsulate a uniquely Indian style of political maneuvering—where opportunism is not a glitch but a feature. This coinage indeed deserves a space in the global political lexicon, sitting somewhere between Machiavellian and Jugaadu, but more pungent and tailored to our democratic context.


The portrayal of deal-making during intra-party or inter-party tensions hits the bullseye. You highlight how certain leaders, far removed from their constituencies, reappear only to broker deals under the pretext of political strategy. What emerges is not democratic collaboration but a cleverly disguised form of voter disenfranchisement. “Vote transfer” becomes both the excuse for failure and the escape route from accountability. Your depiction of how credit is claimed by those with the loudest microphones—while grassroot workers are ignored—is a painful yet accurate reality.


What’s particularly commendable is how you reveal the vicious cycle at play. The more “Tikhram” politics persists, the fewer genuine alternatives voters have. When parties converge into deal-based conglomerations, competition evaporates. Voters, instead of choosing among ideologies or visions, are forced to pick between alliances stitched together through convenience, not conviction. It’s political theater performed for optics, not outcomes.


However, a slightly controversial but practical reflection must be offered. While your call for newbie parties to step in is refreshing and valid, their past experiments haven’t always translated into sustainable change. Political freshness often hits the wall of electoral arithmetic, media muscle, and internal discipline. Without a solid grassroots structure and long-term ideological consistency, many of these parties, too, risk being swept up by the very currents they seek to disrupt. In the name of providing “alternatives,” they too have occasionally resorted to the same brand of Tikhram they oppose. So, the road for alternatives isn’t just open—it’s steep.


Nonetheless, your hope is not misplaced. New entrants can break the duopoly in states and disturb the comfort zones of legacy parties. But this will require more than electoral ambition. It demands deep listening, real dialogue with citizens, and transparent funding models that don’t rely on hidden quid pro quos. If Tikhram is to be countered, the antidote must be systemic—not just symbolic.


In conclusion, your article dares to name the invisible elephant in Indian politics—the normalization of tactical deceit dressed up as pragmatism. Your writing doesn’t merely commentate; it challenges, questions, and proposes. By rooting satire in truth, you don’t just tickle the reader—you nudge them to think, which is exactly what political writing should aspire to.




#Hashtags:
#IndianPolitics #TikhramCulture #PoliticalDeals #VoterRights #DemocracyInCrisis #PoliticalSatire #GrassrootsPolitics #Election2025 #VoteSmart #NewPoliticalAlternatives