"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." — Socrates.
The ancient wisdom of Socrates finds a modern, local resonance in the Hyderabadi concept of Tehzeeb (refined etiquette). A famous regional proverb warns: "Zabaan hi ek aisi cheez hai jo insaan ko takht par bhi bitha sakti hai aur takhta par bhi" (The tongue is the only thing that can place a person on a throne or send them to the gallows).
This evocative sentiment perfectly captures the gamble currently being taken by Telangana’s political leaders, who increasingly trade dignified statesmanship for "street speech."
History offers a cautionary tale in Andrew Jackson, the 7th U.S. President. Nicknamed "Old Hickory," Jackson was a populist who brought "frontier manners" into high office, using aggressive and unrefined rhetoric to disparage his rivals. Today, Telangana’s political leadership seems intent on reenacting this role.
The blatant use of unparliamentary language has become a staple of the state's political landscape. This shift toward severe personal abuse raises a troubling question: How much further can political discourse deteriorate before it permanently damages the prestige of the state's institutions?
During a recent parliamentary discussion marking the 150th anniversary of Vande Mataram, Congress leader Priyanka Gandhi Vadra offered a pragmatic solution to repetitive political mudslinging. She suggested that rather than sporadically dredging up past mistakes, a comprehensive list of "errors" should be presented and debated once to bring the matter to a definitive close.
Telangana’s ruling Congress leadership would do well to adopt this "Priyanka Model." By listing all allegations against the BRS at once and allowing for a formal response, the government could put a full stop to the current "cycle of insults." Continually recycling routine allegations only serves to further contaminate the political environment.
Even in the high-stakes era of United Andhra Pradesh, titans like Dr. Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy and N. Chandrababu Naidu maintained a baseline of decorum. Despite an intense rivalry, they critiqued each other on policy and administrative grounds, rarely crossing the ethical "Lakshmana Rekha" of public discourse.
In contrast, the current boundary between dignified debate and abusive rhetoric has all but vanished. The mocking of the Kaleshwaram project as "Kooleshwaram" (Collapsed Project) serves as a prime example. While criticism of project failures is valid, using it primarily as a political bludgeon while farmers await repairs suggests that political points are being prioritized over public welfare.
The decision to target the state's first Chief Minister with language unbecoming of the high office of the Ruling leadership is particularly polarizing. Regardless of political flaws, he remains the face of the Telangana statehood movement.
BRS leaders have raised a poignant counter-argument: "If the BRS leadership had not achieved Telangana, would you even be ruling the state today?" It is an objective truth that had United Andhra Pradesh continued, the opportunity for local leaders to occupy the top seat might never have materialized.
The current political climate in Telangana is a stark reminder that while aggressive rhetoric may dominate a 24-hour news cycle, it rarely constructs a lasting legacy. For those currently occupying the "throne" of Telangana, it is worth reflecting the saying of Hyderbadi Thezeeb quoted above, on whether their words are building a foundation of lasting respect or merely carving a path toward their own political undoing.
