agree to disagree....

I was surprised to know that there were peaceful protests against Sonia Gandhi at NY. This time, they gave it a different pitch rather than her origin. Clearly, it was motivated by the extremist groups. This time they took the Mahatma issue - that Sonia is not a Gandhi...lol ! If you ask Why - the answers were those of a silly teenager, who wants to fight with you for the heck of it.

An interesting article about the issue if Sonia Gandhi must lead the nation's ruling party despite of foreign origin is discussed here: Sonia Gandhi is Indian by choice. This came out in 1999, long before she would become the next leader.

I agree on the point of the view of the extremists that this may send out wrong signals in the world - such as we need a non-Indian to rule India.

The fallacy of the argument is that Sonia is an Indian. In 1983, when Rajiv was to become Prime Minister (against his natural wish), she had to get an Indian passport and become Indian. Later, she started wearing saree, speaking Hindi, and took various steps to get accepted. What else do you want in an Indian bahu? She is trying to learn about culture of her sasural and embrace it by adopting it fully. Similar to her, I have met a lady here at my workplace - she is a non-Indian who married an Indian. They are an extremely progressive couple, I must say. She is making every effort to be as Indian as possible - such as learning Hindi despite of challenging work schedule, get married in India as per Indian ritual, etc.

So, someone twisted the argument that Sonia was not born in India and hence, not supposed to represent India. That's an interesting twist - just to make a point. Even though she was not born in India, she spent 20 years (1983 to 2003) to reach where she reached. She is legally Indian, she has Indian kids, and she is Indian by behavior as well !

Narrow minded folks dont seem to get that. Manuism still persists. Caste system still persists. East v/s West and North v/s South still persists in India. Those who oppose her existence on grounds of place of birth are as discriminatory as the folks who gave 1/3rd voting rights to the Americans of African American descent. Extending this logic further, quite a few north Indians are not Indians as quite a few have their origins amongst the Aryans, who were clearly not Indians.

The whole issue is politically motivated. Those who support this issue against Sonia are either loyal folks to extremist parties or folks who envy that a waitress can have such a position just due to her getting married to the right person.

However, I agree with the fact that she was inexperienced to politics when she gave her first speech in 1999. However, that is rarely used as a pitching point. I am amused why that is not the single most important point held as a propaganda against her by opponents. I guess they will alienate some of the young voters - lol ! Also, her Hindi has become far better.

I guess, being educated - most of Indians agree to disagree - except for a few - who end up misrepresenting India on foreign soil. Such a display of intolerance is counter-productive. As India, we have to display diversity and inclusion. Mahatma never fought for such causes such as religion (Sonia is a Roman Catholic and it was held against her by the protesters).

All in all, I was sad that NYC had to see this difference in opinion in India. The protesters could've done this in India. However, they wanted to wash the dirty linen in public. Such a shame !