This has always been a vexing problem.
Who is better? A good man who is incapable or a crook who is dynamic?
Whom would you prefer to lead you?
Indians, with their deep religious moorings that espouses the cause of virtue, tend to tolerate the former and are not comfortable with the latter, who though devious gets things done.
The issue is not whether someone is good or not. It is whether what he does benefits the people at large. Some might argue that I am propounding the theory of 'end justifies the means'. In a way yes. Ultimately, whatever one does should benefit all.
Now you might ask what made me go into the above. It is because everyone seems to be unanimous in giving a clean chit to our Prime Minister Manmohan Singh just because he is a nice guy, forgetting the fact that his tenure as PM has been an unmitigated disaster whose hallmark has been indecision, pervarication and poor judgement.
We have a saying in malayalam 'Pavam dushtante bhalam cheyyum'. Loosely translated ' a good mans (not the exact meaning, more like a timid man) effect is that of what a villain does.
For me, give me a crook who is dynamic anyday. He at least gets the bloody thing done.
