THE EVOLUTION OF PARTY SYSTEM IN INDIA

The party system in India has changed from time to time. In the beginning, it was a one party dominant system, briefly a two-party system, and subsequently a multiparty system moving two words chaos with no semblance of a 'system'. Party politics in India has passed through different phases of development characterized as follows: (1) Congress System (1952-67) (2) coalition model (1967-71) (3) second one party dominant model (1971-77) (4) second correlation model (1977-79) (5) third one party dominant model (1980-89) (6) multiparty system (1989 onwards).

Congress System (1952-1967)

From 1952 to 1967, the peculiar party system generally described as the one party dominant system prevailed in India as only the Congress was voted time and again with an overwhelming parliamentary majority on plurality (not majority) of votes in democratically contested elections. It coincided with the premiership of Nehru, Shastri and pre-1969 in the Indira Gandhi.

It was based on a peculiar pattern of government-opposition relationship that produced a party system with difference and provided and interesting alternative to other existing party system. Robert Dahl puts India into the category of nations which have a party system with one normally dominant government party that gains close to 50% of the popular votes and a lot more seats in the parliament with the opposition fragmented in three or more parties. Here was a paradox of a party getting majority of seats with minority of popular votes the cause of the fragmentation of opposition votes. Rajni Kothari described it thus:

It is a system in which a historically dominant party is opposed by a large number of parties and factional groupings that are dispersed throughout the country, the role of the dominant party has been to evolve a consensus on both normative and procedural matters as well as major policy issues. In such a system, the dominant party becomes a norm setter for all other parties and the model set by the Congress had in fact been spreading both in terms of policies and programmes. In this system it is the dominant party that acts as an aggregation by developing into a comprehensive, representative mechanism, it represents all shades of opinion, all major interest groups in the society and indeed all other parties as well.

Ideologically, the Congress took root and came to political power not as a party but as a movement for independence and reform. Secondly, from the beginning the Congress was committed to a democratic ideology. Thirdly, the comprehensive and authoritative organization of the Congress party provided the basis for bidding community and national leadership under Nehru who symbolized the unity and progress of the nation. Historical reasons are necessary but not sufficient for the efficacy of the system. There is no doubt that in its character and depth, the Congress was unparalleled movement for independence, and this had significantly contributed to its place in India. Nehru's charismatic personality was described by his critics as a "banyan tree" under which independent leaders could not grow. In the same way the Congress was described as an "umbrella" with no scope for other parties to stake claims to independent bases of support.

The first general elections, under Nehru's direct stewardship, attracted worldwide interest. The Congress, by virtue of its being a pioneer in the freedom struggle, became an increasingly effective election winning machine. The people returned Congress candidates in impressive numbers. In 18 out of 22 state assemblies the Congress had absolute majorities. All the opposition parties put together a secured and 125 seats, that is, 25.6% of the total but in terms of token votes cast it was as much as 55%.

The second general election in 1957 came at a time when Nehru's influence and power was at it's the zenith, and before various economic, political and internal troubles assumed critical proportions. The Congress occupied 365 seats in Lok Sabha there as the next largest party, the Communists, occupied only 34, and the Independents numbered only 135. This impregnable position of the Congress is largely attributed to Nehru's immense popularity among the masses.

In the years preceding the 1962 election there were signs of factional strife within the Congress party which endangered the chances of success of candidates representing the Congress. In a number of states, Congress factions fought each other under the very nose of the High Command. The leadership of the Congress party faced for the first time an position which was very vociferous in criticizing its politices.

The formation of the Swantrata party in 1959 represented an effort on part of some of India's most distinguished public figures to build 'non-leftist' opposition to the ruling Congress party. The third Lok Sabha elections in 1962 came at the time in Indochinese relations deteriorated abruptly and the country faced serious economic difficulties. The post-Nehru elections put on a different character, because the great leader, who had lost public esteem because of a defeat in Indochina war, was no longer at the helm. Lal Bahadur Shastri succeeded Nehru. The syndicate played the critical role and in coalescing the diverse interests behind Shastri and in securing consensus within the party. He knew that his stature was considered to be less than his illustrious predecessor. In January 1966, within two or years after he had assumed the office, Shastri died. The syndicate chose Indira Gandhi as the Prime Minister.

The first three general elections were won by the Congress party with massive mandates because of following reasons:

(a) There was the charismatic leadership Nehru which acquired the form of personality cult. During the greater part of the Nehru era, complacency had creeped in the Congress which made it reluctant to provide for the development for the essentials to stabilization of democracy. It entertained the firm belief that it was irreplaceable force and could retain power through cleverly managed permutations and combinations.

(ii) As Rajni Kothari says, in the "Congress System" the Congress had organizations at the grass-roots level which helped in assessing the interests and requirements of the masses. The politics of India operated at two levels - traditional and modern - and the party which had the capacity of combining both had better prospects of electoral success. In this respect the Congress was most apt because of the leading role it played during the struggle for independence. Besides, this provided it enormous legitimacy.

(iii) During the first three elections, the success of the Congress was partly explained by the splitting of the opposition votes. Since the opposition to the Congress mainly obtained from the divisions in the same elite groups, their future policies and perceptions of the problems were the same. They could not emerge as a better alternative to the Congress, but act merely as "parties of pressure". Thus, these elections were conducted and fought in the framework of an established and stable one-party dominant system.

The main features of the first model were intra-party competition within the Congress Party, based on a historical of consensus, and the role of opposition as a pressure group. The Congress party was successful in evolving a national consensus. The party system was oriented to conflict avoidance and group accommodation even at the cost of ideological coherence and effectiveness of performances.

This model is characterized as the locality oriented pluralist model marked by a complex multi-layered functional and party political structures which were locally articulated along cost, community and the factional lines in villages and districts and aggregated at the state level and an by reasonably autonomous sets of a party elites in various states. This was a period of "consociational" dominance by the Congress party ruling with overwhelming majorities in the parliament and almost all the state legislatures. All the three general elections held in 1952, 1957 and 1962 adhered to the abovementioned model. The 1967 one in particular held after Nehru's demise broadly conforms to this model.

Coalition model (1967-1971)

The fourth general election was qualitatively different from the previous three elections for the following reasons:

(i) In the first general elections, Nehru was a great mobilizer of votes for the Congress, while other political parties lacked such a one. On the plane of leadership, competition among these political parties was on an unequal basis. Death of Nehru meant that at the level of leadership or national political parties stood, by and large, on an equal footing in their respective zones of influence. Indira Gandhi (initially), S.A. Dange, E.M.S. Namboodiraoad, Atal Behari Vajpayee, and Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia, were leaders of more or less equal stature.

(ii) The dominance of the Congress during the first three general elections typified more a renewal of confidence in the Congress rule than a genuine competition among the political parties for capturing power. The fourth general election, on the other hand, brought into prominence formidable claimants for power. The Congress party faced the fourth general elections with certain liabilities, by the position of the opposition parties had somewhat improved. The public image of the Congress had been tarnished owing to the charges of corruption against it, and also on account of growing economic crisis in the country. Intra-party conflicts and the role of the bosses weakened the party, dissidents and splinter groups moved of the from the Congress in the form of Jana Congress in Bengal, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Jana Kranti Dal in Bihar; Jana Paksha in Mysore; and the Jana Party in Rajashthan.

(iii) During the first three elections, the Congress victory was partly explained by the splitting of the opposition that vote. At the time of the fourth general elections, the opposition parties therefore, used the strategy of forming united fronts to avoid conflicts among themselves. Other important factors which influence the voters at the time of the fourth general elections were the growing economic crisis, the socialist path of development followed by the Congress, sharpening of social conflicts, devaluation of the Indian rupee, failure of the government's economic and political parties, famine in Bihar, stunted growth, growing discontentment among large sections of people, rising prices, prospering of the niche as a result of benefits accruing from the three five-year plans. Added to these was the sensitive issue of cow slaughter. In this atmosphere, the opposition parties were preparing themselves for "opposing, exposing and disposing" the Congress party from power.

In view of the above changes in the national climate, and the capacity of the opposition parties to shore and effective challenge to the Congress, the capitalists also changed their strategy. For them financing the party elections is an investment for future returns. At the time of the fourth general elections, some of the capitalists turned towards other political parties also and contributed to the election expenditure, while some industrial houses like the Birlas continued to finance the Congress. The voters, at the time of the fourth general elections, did not take heed of the advice of the defenders from the Congress System, and exercise their franchise with a sense of discrimination.

So 1967 was a watershed in Indian elections in a true sense. For the first time a challenge was posed to the ruling party and seemingly its support base was on the decline. The Congress thus faced the danger of being reduced to a minority party. Aboard a rise a Xiong of politics through radicalization of certain sections of Indian voters also began with the 1967 elections.

The decline of the Congress, apart from bringing about a change in its numerical position, left a tremendous impact on the institutional setup of the whole political system. To start with, and the Congress wave swept the 1967 election for the first time in the post independence period. The dominance of the party in parliament too was reduced. Added to this, the formation of non-congress coalition governments in some north Indian states had a considerable impact on the nature of federation. Above all, the Congress is faced with leadership problems during the period 1967-69. During this time there was no leader who commanded undisputed loyalty. This period was passed marked by India's transition from a dominant party system to a system of competitive sharing of power.

The 1967 elections underscored two factors:

(i) A large number of voters expressed their deep dissatisfaction at the poor performance of the Congress and the government officials on several fronts, and

(ii) There was a widespread opposition sentiment against the establishment which was then identified with the Congress party.

This dissatisfaction led to a decline in Congress voters and strengthening of political forces both of them left and right, indicating radicalization of Indian politics. Thus, the fourth general elections replaced the Congress party with a coalition or other parties, in at least half of the states.

Several political analysts observed that with the 1967 elections and 1969 splits in the Congress party, the system of dominant party had come to an end. According to Kothari, the 1967 elections "put the Congress System on trial" and marked the end of one party dominance system in India. A national precedent was established that non-congress parties could win and form governments. The election also "brought to an end the real of Congress dominance. Iqbal Narain remark that this country was then passing through an essentially transitional period of political polarization. Angela Berger described it as a part in which moved from "one-party dominance to moderately competent if multiparty system".

The year 1967 therefore should be seen more as a period of transition caused by the erosion of the Congress System and its ability to contain divergent forces within its ranks and produce some sort of a consensus. In the articulation of this transition from the Congress System to a more fragmented political system, mobilization of popular discontent played an important role. Stanley Kochanek noted, "the 1967 general election marked the beginning of the transformation of the Indian political system from a dominant one party system to a multiparty system".

Thus, the 1967 election represented a major step in the direction of and increasingly competitive polity.

All said and done, the Congress was still in how are both at the centre and in other states. It was still a force to reckon with and the most important party in the Indian party system. The dominant party system could not be taken for granted after 1967.

The second phase of the party system was a brief interlude of multiparty some configuration following the 1969 Congress split between the Indira faction and the syndicate faction when the Indira Gandhi government was reduced to a minority status and survived with the support extended by leftist and regional parties from outside. Thus, the second phase in the party system was a brief interlude of minority government politics.

But the 1967 elections and the split did not alter the Indian party system in a significant way and the one party dominant system, as stated by Kothari did not come to an end. In fact, as W.H. Morris Jones observes, only a decline of the Congress dominance during 1967-71 took place and India appeared to be developing her own chaotic form of multi-party politics. The nature of electoral support the Congress received in 1967 in terms of percentage of seats (if not of the popular votes) determined that he was given the largest political party. Though it lost in quantity, yet qualitatively the support for the Congress in 1967 came almost evenly from all the religions and from the various demographic, socio-economic and ethnic categories in the population. A sharp decline in the size of its support indeed indicated reduction in the strength and spread of the party, but not so much dismantling of the structure of its dominance.

What had changed was the environment around the grand old party. The elected it was one generation removed from the event of independence. The old, charismatic leadership of the independence movement had departed from the scene. A large number of young voters (who lacked a sense of commitment to the Congress) had entered the electorate. New alliances of interests had begun to emerge in politics, marked by accruing politicization of vast numbers of the middle and lower peasantry and the middle cast groups. This led to a large scale differentiation of the electorate, the diverse party identification based on new interests and ideological alignments. If the party remained cut off from these developments, its dominance, say, its very existence as a national party, was jeopardy.

Indira Gandhi's performance this sometime after 1967 was rather unimpressive, if not positively bad. As the dessert, the 1967 elections saw the Congress suffer public humiliation and it went out of power in quite a few states. Apprehensive of the worsening image of their party, the Congress leaders persuaded Morarji Desai to hold the office of the Deputy Prime Minister under Indira Gandhi and. This make-shift to arrangement, however, could not last long. Indira Gandhi felt constrained in the company of Desai and determined to get rid of him and also of the Congress leadership which was not allowing her a free hand. This leadership was now in a state of disarray. Most of them had lost in the 1967 elections. S.K. Patil, Kamaraj and Atulya Ghosh no longer appeared to Indira Gandhi as invincible giants.

To attain her objective of retaining power, Indira Gandhi used Machiavellian strategy and tactics. To discredit the syndicate leaders in the party and to project herself as a progressive leader she used radical slogans. She did not hesitate to confront the Congress leadership on a number of issues and went ahead with the nationalization of 14 private banks despite finance minister Morarji Desai's reservation on the issue. Further, she also divested him of the finance portfolio as a consequence of which he quit the cabinet. The privy purses which were being paid to the former princes were also abolished. The old leadership, which was not very enthusiastic about these steps, was effectively portrayed as reactionary, conservative and supporter of the haves as against the have-nots. After President Zakir Husain's death, Indira Gandhi in a clever move, instead of opting for syndicate's Sanjeeva Reddy as her successor, supported V.V Giri's candidature which eventually caused a split in the Congress.

This went along the way in projecting Indira Gandhi as a dynamic leader, which indeed was considered be helped by the incapacity of the opposition to reap full advantage of the decline in voter support of the Congress party. For instance, the opposition parties failed to capitalize on the propellant and the Congress mood of the people when they came to power in some states and formed coalition governments in 1967 and 1969. They tended to exploit the newly emergent situation for their sectional gains at the expense of their coalition partners, thus rendering the coalitional government weak and ineffective. The common programs evolved by the coalition partners went into flames on account of its lighting and self-aggradizement. By the time the 1971 elections came, the opposition parties were thoroughly discredited.

This led to the refurbishment of the image of the new Congress and the emergence of Indira Gandhi as the savior of the poor. The left rhetoric kindled a new ray of hope in the people. Indira Gandhi symbolized the personification of opposition to what the old Congress stood for, to the vested interests in the country and to the policies and programmes that perpetuated social and economic injustices. In this sense, Indira Gandhi rode on the crest of the anti establishment, oppositional wave that had been striking so ineffectively against the Congress bulwark till 1967. She succeeded in translating this oppositional wave into a new channel of electoral support. The 1971 election represented, therefore, the new alignment of voters in favor of the new Congress based on oppositional and radical sentiments.

Sensing public support for her policies she decided to go directly to the people and receive a fresh mandate by hoarding midterm poll in 1971. This preempted the development of party system towards a multiparty system and the growth of politics of coalition building at the national level. But at the same time this strategy brought to an end the first phase of the Indian party system. The Congress leadership destroyed the historical organization the Congress System. Indeed the strategy resulted in the established hegemony of the Congress at the center, based on populist politics and plebiscitary election.

Second One-Party Dominance Model (1971-77)

Did the 1971 parliamentary elections the one party dominant system was restored after a brief interlude of four years, encompassing many features of the pre-1967 era. However, it also included some notable differences and significant modifications of the first phase. A major difference in the new model was the collapse of the competitive mechanism within the dominant party. The Congress split and the emergence of the Indira leadership role the destroyed the balance of internal factional competition. Factional bosses were suppressed and crashed. Such a combination of the monopolistic dominance of the Congress led to a steady erosion of the "openness" of the system, and there emerged an authoritarian concentration of power, resulting ultimately in the imposition of emergency.

The second major difference in the new model was the decline of institutionalized politics and the growth of populist style and why the third concerned the articulation of the goals of the system. In the aria dominance model, consensus making by accommodating various interests was itself a critical value; conflict avoidance and group accommodation or press third even at the cost of ideological coherence and effectiveness of performance. But in the new model, economic performance was accorded high priority.

Thus, the second dominance model was a model of one-party dominance without the balance of internal competition. Its dial put a premium on the confrontation rather than consensus. This phase was characterized as the model of nationally oriented personalized mass appeal in which the national content of the preceding model became very persuasive. In addition, two of the preceding model's critical features - the autonomous state Congress leadership and locality orientation of the electorate came to be seriously undermined by personalized mass appeal of the national leader by-passing the intermediary structures of power and seeking to "nationalize" political issues. This marked the revival of personality cult manipulated by populist appeal as and media support.

However, these differences affected the open and competitive nature of the Indian one party dominant system and led to the transformation of the dominant party system with a highly institutionalized party at its call the dominant party system that the call parties rests primarily upon the capacity of a single leader who enjoys wide public appeal, is without a dominant competition within the party or without.

The major characteristics of the new model were: the collapse of competitive mechanism; the decline of institutionalized politics and the growth of populist style; and a clear articulation of the goals of the system.

In the 1967 elections the leadership of Indira Gandhi was questioned, but by 1971 she was able to establish the charismatic leadership.

Such an important factors molded and greatly influence the political behaviour of Indira Gandhi. To start with, she inherited a rich political legacy and got ample opportunities to understand the political life of India, the leaders of the Congress party and the power dynamics of the nations in the international arena. She lost no opportunity in highlighting the name of Nehru and the Nehru clan out of proportion. Absence of the genuine and powerful leader with a mass appeal and a well organized political party with the mass base to counter her gave a tremendous psychological boost and developed in her a superiority complex vis-a-vis other political forces. Above all and, having tasted power once, she developed a strong last for it. To fulfill her ambition Indira Gandhi went to the extent of using force, fraud, dubious means, tactics of divide and rule and reward and punishment, and playing with the sentiments of the people. She did this very successfully, but, in the process, eroded the base and essence of democracy in India. No force was effective enough to counter the nefarious designs.

Regarding Indira Gandhi's relationship with the Congress, the following observations standout prominently: she used the party as dual and to achieve her objectives and completed the process of identification between the party and the government; the decision-making process in the Organisation became centralized and all the powers were vested in her; no ideological debate or dissent in the Organisation - one of the prominent features of the party earlier - was allowed and, lastly the very core of democracy of the party was destroyed and it came to be totally identified with her.

From 1973 onwards, Indira Gandhi began to lose her popularity and credibility due to: a Nationwide dropped in 1971, 1972 and 1973; international inflation; and the strike of the railway workers and the Jayaprakash Narayan movement in 1974; and, finally the decision of the Allahbad High Court against her in June 1975. Adamantly, she found herself placed in a situation where imposition of emergency (on 26 June 1975) was the only way to keep things under control.

Imposition of emergency of and consider them notoriety because in its grab many act of cities are committed by Indira Gandhi, Sanjay Gandhi, her son and some of their ardent followers. The situation and logic resulted in the rise of Jayaprakash Narayan whose charismatic leadership helped in mobilizing the masses. He succeeded in overthrowing the Congress regime and in installing the Janata party - an "absorbing party" to use Sartori's phrase. Maulana Abdullah Bukhari, the Shahi Imam of Jama Masjid, considered the victory of the Janata party a triumph of Hindu-Muslim unity. The defeat of the Congress meant the end of oppression. In this election the caste consideration, due to popular reaction to the emergency depression, was relegated to the background, and the masses united to fight against Indira Gandhi's authoritarianism. The Janata victory, as it can all agree, reflected not simply the consolidation of the opposition vote, but a substantial shift away from the Congress.

Second Coalition Model (1977-1979)

The fourth phase is the face of bipartisan technology. For the first time in India a two-party system appeared and it was in existence from 1977 to 1979 when only two parties - the Janata and the Congress - accounted for over 80% of warts and seats back together. The political system dominated by one person prior to 1977 was replaced by collective leadership of the new party where bargaining once again became a prominent feature of politics. This verdict of 1977 also brought to the fore the North-south division, which called for a deft handling so as to ensure that the nation-building process was not hampered. Thus, a new tendency developed in 1977 - a tendency to words a two-party system. Had this trend continued, the two-party system would have prevailed in India. But the developments of 1979 for the club on it. Election results reflected the incapacity of the masses to endure atrocities beyond a certain limit. But soon cynical squabblings among the 'big-three' with criticism of Indira Gandhi as the only item on their agenda made the party lose popularity. According to one observer, the reason for the breakup of the Janata party was the absence of the spirit of compromise. Another observer holds that the over-ambitious attitude of some individuals, temperamental incompatibilities and the party's failure to appear to the people responsible for the split in the Janata Party.

Most of the squabbles within the Janata party had not arisen over the grand philosophical themes which are reported in the western press - the Gandhian vision of the self sufficient village, "small is beautiful", etc., But over the distribution of what Indians call, "loaves and fishes". This feuding which Morarji desai's described as a "foul stench" weakened the party in two ways. First, difference over which of the many interest groups within the party should be accorded priority widened the gaps among Janata factions. second, these disputes weakened their rapport between the national and state levels in respect of both the party and the political system. The factions which dominated the Janata party in the national parliament were antagonistic to those which had an upper hand in several key Janata-control and state legislatures.

The most pervasive and crucial issue that brought the downfall of the Janata government in 1979 was the dual membership of the erstwhile Jan Sangh members in the Janata party who also had affiliations with. the RSS. The parties forming the coalition government other than the Jan Sangh raised this issue to the embarrassment of the Jan Sangh. The Jan Sangh members persisted in their pride of having affiliations with both - the Jan sangh, as a political party and the RSS, as a cultural organization. Under no circumstances - even if they were due to an relinquish power - one day prepared to snap this bond. Moreover, absence of a strong leadership was also one of the reasons for the failure of the party. Morarji Desai could not hold the party together. And the emergence of two-party system was merely an outcome of specific circumstances and a matter of mutual convenience. As a result, Indira Gandhi return to power in 1980 elections with a bang. Negative voting, massive expenditure and basing the campaign on shrewd caste calculations at the time of distribution of tickets contributed a great deal to the comeback of Indira Gandhi government who gave the slogan: "government that works". The 1980 elections the alleged believed, apart from the fact of polarization of forces between the Congress (I) on the one hand and the left forces on the other, the social political dynamics of the Indian Society. The victory of Indira Gandhi in the election to the seventh Lok Sabha is attributed to the solid support extended by the minorities all over the country. The fragmentation of the opposition resulted in massive parliamentary majorities for Congress despite its having secured marginally over 40% votes.

The "Indira factor" was a major reason for both Congress (I)'s Debackle (in 1977) and its comeback with a huge majority (in 1980). By drawing seven or 8% of the electorate (more secure by Congress(I) increased from 35% in 1977 to about 42.5% in 1980) out of their prior group attachments, Indira Gandhi provided their margin needed to assure success to one-party across a broad spectrum of constituencies. While agreeing that "Indira factor" was important in determining the outcome of the elections, Harold A. Gould feels that the split in the Janata Party was no less important.

Third One-Party Dominance Model (1980-1989)

The fifth phase of the systems may be called that Indira Gandhi and Rajeev Gandhi phase of Congress restoration. The fall of the Janata government believed to be for an astounding victory for the Congress at the polls and the election of Indira Gandhi as the Prime Minister. Having a Zealand this office, she adopted the same old style and placing total reliance on a small coterie, extensive use of media for personality projection, and deffering of organizational elections in the party. Perhaps after what transpired in 1977, Indira Gandhi lost faith in the support which the government consistently received from the minorities. Her actions now seemed to be calculated ones, aiming at presenting her as a leader who was genuinely concerned about the welfare of the Hindus. Some went to the extent of saying that she had stripped the saffron robes of the BJP, leaving it thoroughly exposed. The fact that she won seats in Jammu, where the Hindus are in a majority, and lost heavily in Kashmir valley, where Muslims are a majority lends credibility to this hypothesis.

Some may say that 1980 election restored the validate the of the Kothari-Morris Jones Model, though with a difference. In the 1980s, there was an increasing tendency towards a multiparty system which became evident from the fact despite the role of Congress at the center, new opposition parties will be established in the states. After 1980, these started splitting away from the center. The multiparty tendency was further enforced as the years rolled by. In 1983, the Congress lost hold in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. Sikkim too was lost and so was Punjab and, towards the closing years of 1980s, nearly half of the states of Indian union select out of the hands of the Congress. And, finally in the 1984 elections, Rajiv Gandhi got unprecedented mandate mainly on account of fort is known as "sympathy vote". To a certain extent his personal image too (of "Mr. Clean" and "scientific man" who would take India to the 21st century) played its part. The new leader raised new hopes and inspired the youth.

Marred by a tactic decision-making, false starts, public scandals, and successive Debackles, his style of functioning is said to be an anticlimax to the charismatic bearing of the Nehru dynasty. Rajeev had a massive mandate to prove his worth as a rightful heir of the Nehru dynasty which had shaped India's post independence destiny, but lacking both in farsightedness of Nehru and the firmness of Indira, he seemed to have missed the historic opportunity to make his mark. Indira too had to encounter dramatic ups and downs and was out of favor of it the people for sometime. Nevertheless, her tenacity was a great redeemer and she re-emerged from political disgrace with an honorable acquittal by the electorate. Rajeev's predicament was unlike his mother - his decline does not reflect an "emotional break" with the masses but a "relational rejection" facilitated by poor performance. The "leadership card" has always paid rich dividends to the Congress but it seemed to have proved otherwise in the wake of growing distrust in Gandhi's leadership qualities. He may well be the one to have presided over the "liquidation of the Congress empire".

He had earned considerable goodwill by initiating peace process is in trouble spots like Punjab and Assam. His preference for settlement of political disputes through negotiations rather than armed conflict was well known. He was also given credit for greater tolerance of dissent for clean politics. But his honeymoon with democratic functioning was brief; he was so overwhelmed by the establishment and slipped into authoritarian grooves. His peace initiatives had backfired. The Punjab accord was violated with the purpose of securing electoral gains in Haryana, but the Congress lost credibility in both the states. In Assam too his failure to abide by commitments had turned a good effort counterproductive. Apart from the enduring seek insurgency, which defied with impunity, the two year-old president's rule in Punjab was imposed by Rajeev to "combat terrorism". The simmering unrest in Kahmir had grown into an uprising. In terms of electoral politics, the Sikhs in Punjab and the Kashmiri Muslims were not to be a significant factor, but Rajeev government's inability to restore normalcy in these to trouble spots was a fallout on national politics. His second term was thus marked by disillusionment.

After an initial flash of sympathy which expressed itself in stupendous victory of the Congress in the 1985 general elections, the sheen of the so called "Mr. Clean" started wearing thin - his governance was marred with corruption at the highest level. Scandals like Bofors burst out with all of intensity. He played the Muslim card by modifying the Shah Bano judgment, and finally the Hindu card by permitting shilanayas at the disputed site. He enrolled with the help of his coterie as if he the presiding over a personal fief. Thus, Rajeev was condemned both for offending vested interests and for so called "blunders of judgment" committed by him.

Rajiv Gandhi failed to accomplish the three basic tasks of the Indian state: maintenance of law and order in a sharply divided society; playing of the positive role in facilitating economic growth in an economy with a high saving rate, skin and managerial and technical personnel, and promising entrepreneurial talent; and coping with an uncertain International Security environment.

Multiparty System (1989 Onwards to Date)

The elections of 1989 were held in an environment charged with the motions variously aroused by the anticorruption campaign, murder of Mrs. Gandhi, the Sikh riots, and terrorist threats to national unity and integrity. In spite of the disturbed at most feared, imposition of emergency was totally ruled out because of beta experience in the past which resulted in the overthrow of Indira Gandhi's government. However, restlessness among the people was growing fast and factors like poor leadership, sycophancy, personality cult, and abuse of the media for highlighting the sacrifices of one family to the total negligence of other equally illustrious leaders aroused and the government sentiments among the masses.

Besides Borfors, the concealing of the Thakkar commission report from the parliament, and the subsequent reinstatement of the key man pointed to the commission's reports, institution of enquiry into the assassination of the prime minister after lapse of five years, and some such acts put to serious question mark on the Bona Fides of the government.

Over the last 40 years vain promises of clean and efficient administration left the people disillusioned. Widespread indiscipline and rampant corruption had become the order of the day. Rajiv Gandhi's faith in the men at the helm to control the situation was totally belied. Other factors such as rising prices left the people with no other option but to seek an electorate remedy through democratic means. Chief feature of the ninth Lok Sabha elections was that there would no communal basis of factors. Struggle for democracy in India would have to be a struggle against so do secularism and minority appeasement policies.

Even though regional identities meant backwardness, stagnation, obscurantism and even incipient separatism, ironically, for the second time, it was this out that saved the Congress from near extinction. In 1977, and again in 1989.

The myth of the North-south divide was demolished by the SITA factor ( Singh is the Alternative) which countered the TINA (there is no alternative to Rajiv) factor, within a matter of just two years.

One Rajeev's managers believed that negative campaigning was best strategy, V.P. Singh remained in touch with people. Absence of Inter-party democracy caused the downfall of the Congress.

The opposition unity index was the true indicator of and the Congress and the total swing. The Janata Dal of V.P. Singh attracted widespread support throughout Northern India. The fact that he himself belonged to the north increased his party's appeal. Men elections were called for in November 1989, the national front, the BJP and left formed an alliance in some 400 constituencies to select one opposition candidate face the Congress(I) candidate in a street fight, as to ensure that the opposition votes did not split.

To sum up, Federal coalition governments in India have by now come of age. Initially to test it like playing the Indian experiment suggests that given a serious attempt and reforms, coalition governments can in fact contributes to a more democratic and Federal governance.

There u hav it :D

u hav any oder doubts? mail me.. cyclotron_girl@yahoo.co.in

u hav any oder doubts? mail me.. cyclotron_girl@yahoo.co.in

Other than being a criminal there is nothing so bad that should make you want to disappear.

It would be far more enlightening if you would repost and let us know why you want to disappear. Sometimes the problems you think you can't resolve without basically "getting lost" is something we can help you with. Sometimes one can't see the forest for the trees.

Before you decide to such a thing, think of people that love you. Not hearing from you would alarm more people in your life than you ever could imagine. Even angry words from parents, a sibling, spouse, etc., doesn't mean they don't love you. To disappear without a trace (short of being a criminal or hiding from someone that will do you harm) is cruel and selfish.

There is one way to disappear. Move to another country. I really hope you do take me up on the offer to repost. Do you have the courage to tell us why you want to disappear?

Marcy

I am not putting you down when I say, "are you being dramatic over this" and is it just a few girls accusing you of this? Young girls can often be dramatic and gossip. If a handful of girls sees a guy that is shy, awkward and trying to make friends they will sometimes think the guy is strange or odd in some way. Kids can be cruel.

The question is .... do you stalk girls? Stalking girls is following them around; phoning them and bothering them; emailing them constantly when they don't want to hear from you. That's stalking!

Are you just shy and how do you act around girls? Do you think you deserve the label of "stalker?"

It helps to express yourself to us on this board. We don't know you, will not trace you or bother you, so please, just spit it out and let me know what type of person you are. If you are shy, feel awkward around girls don't get too upset. Many guys are shy and you need to pick out another shy type of guy to hang around with and get out and have some fun. Get away from the computer and live a little life. I also want to remind you that although going to school is stressful for some and there is a great deal of peer pressure, school isn't forever, and if you have been unduly labeled as a stalker, once you change grades or get out of school you don't have to take this.

If you are truly innocent of this I wish you would talk to your parents. If these girls are labeling you unfairly your parents can go to the police and bring this out into the open. Creating misery in someones life by lies is called "harassment" and these girls can be stopped as long as there is no validation to their claim.

I sure hope I hear from you and I would like to help you. Please tell me a little more about yourself.

ThanksMarcy

This whole incident happened with this girl l really liked in school. i have liked her for a really long time and was always too scared to speak to her as have heard her comment something about me. So i just used to try to catch a glimpse of her whenever i could. when i was really lucky she would walk on the opposite of me when i was going somewhere. what puzzled me though is that she always used to look behind her.

This carried on for a long time until the idiocy of someome at school i thought she found out so i asked a friend of hers and mine what to do and he told me somthing that really shocked me. from there the infatuation with her went way but whenever i saw her i managed to say hello and she smiled. i was so happy.

then a period of confusion came as the same guy told me to quit on her so i wrote her a letter just because i would scare her if i told her imperson and it would be less embarressing.

anyway things all went downhill from there and have absolutley no idea what to do

I am a little perlexed that you said you just ended up smiling and saying hello to her, yet in a next sentence you said you wrote her a letter so as not to scare her as much as if you told her in person. May I ask what you said in that letter? Young women of today don't really feel getting a letter is that cool, and often, young women are so immature and overly dramatic they would show their girlfriends and have giggle over it (quite pleased with herself I would say.)

To say the least some women of all ages can be fickle as hell! I am female, and I'll admit it, but would never hurt anyone's feelings. This is a younger woman, so she is just learning by making her own mistakes in life just like anyone in your age group.

Here's a little secret about single women. Many young women really enjoy a mysterious guy called the "bad boy" that is a "hard catch" and it's called "the excitement of the chase." What I am telling you is ... don't try pleasing this young woman so much and, in fact, ignore her! The more you ignore her and the more of a mystery you are to some women the more they are interested. This young woman is immature, fickle, a drama queen, and as the old saying goes "One does protest too much" she is quite tickled to get the letter, but letting on to her friends that she doesn't really think it's cool and doesn't feel the same about you. It's time to walk away from this girl and get on with your life.

There are many more women in this world than men, and you have just begun to experience women and have a long ways to go. While you may feel you are deeply in love with this young woman, chances are you will meet someone much better that will treat you with the respect you deserve.

What has ever happened to you is not reason enough to lose yourself somewhere out in this vast world. NO WOMAN OR ANYONE is worth that! You should be treated decently, with the respect you give others, and sometimes, none of us get what we give and that's just the way of the world. If we didn't meet the odd ego-maniac out there or someone that tromps on another's feelings, we wouldn't know when the real thing came along.

I am so sorry you were put down by this girl and I would appreciate it if you could give me a run-down on what you said in the letter. As I said before, no one on this board knows you, so you are safe with what you say.

There are many wonderful young men out there that wear their heart on their sleeves, and you seem to be one of them, but unfortunately, young women can be silly (every so often ... when the moon and stars are right) you might bump into a very mature young woman. There is nothing wrong with a young man having deep feelings of love for a woman and later, when most women mature and know more of what they want in a man you'd be on their "A list."

Hope to hear from you soon.

Hang in thereMarcy

I think I know what is wrong with this whole situation. You are simply "ahead of your time." Don't get me wrong, when I tell you that you don't fit in with the people your own age. They are still immature, learning, and afraid of being "uncool" by expressing their feelings such as you do. This DOES NOT make you an outcast. You need to find friends (perhaps a little older) that think along the lines that you do. There are a lot of deep thinkers out there and the word "wise" has no age preference. In other words, it's not just reserved for the older generations.

What you said in your letter was a lovely thing to say. However, when asked on this board by a young man/woman if they should write a letter to one they are attracted too, I will always tell them not to do it. Love letters or expressions of ones love amd should be retained until the two people are going together. Young women are often fickle and "need to tell" others to make themselves look important and the most beautiful or handsome person on the face of the earth. Usually these are not the true inner feelings of that individual, but they feel they need to act the part of being "cool" and unruffled. So, instead of being flattered, or, in your case a little confused about your letter and approaching you about it, she ridiculed you to get attention (she's just young and foolish and really means no harm.) Young women can often be drama queens and young men can often be egotistical and sometimes be the type that drink beer, belch and crush beer cans on their foreheads. LOL

I want to be honest with you and if you put the quote "a coward faces death many times but a courageous man tastes death only once" in her letter (wasn't sure if you had) it is one quote I do understand and you put it well. However, in the age group this young woman is in, she would not appreciate such a quote and she probably misunderstood it. Perhaps from that quote she and her friends think you may kill yourself over her. Have you ever thought of that? I know what you meant by it, but they sure didn't.

I am glad that you have moved on from her. As I said, you are a young man ahead of your time and I call people such as you "old souls." This means the person's body is young, but they have a soul of a wise old person. Someone special! Don't ever change, and all you need to do is let your body mature enough to fit your brain! LOL The words that you have used aren't words that usually come out of a young person. Most people that love poetry, quotes, etc., keep it to themselves. I have been on poetry sites and found some beautiful poems by the young, but many don't have the courage to talk about them to their friends.

It's bothers me that you would use that particular quote, "even though I'm no better than a beast, don't I have the right to live." I know it's not an odd choice you made, but how you feel inside. Why would you feel this way?

I have to laugh at many of the youth today (just like the 60's) when I grew up. They don't want to be part of the establishment because they hate what they see so they go too far over to the left. I look at them (even back then) and have a little chuckle and think to myself, "you are no different than the establishment. The rules have changed, but you're just carbon copies of each other." Yup, they all dressed the same, gave the same peace sign, and ran around off and on buck naked with flowers in their hair. The strive to be different, but they really aren't. They remain followers and only a certain few become leaders in this outbreak of "being oneself."

I am 64 years old, and I've learned that if you are a kind individual and care about things, there is a time when you can spread those words of wisdom on society, but the timing has to be right. I still make mistakes over that one! I have also learned that one should be true to themselves and NEVER change who they are for any group or individual.

I hope you will answer me yet once again as I am concerned about that last quote you made. I don't want you to go away thinking you are the Hunchback of Notre Dame! You aren't. You're an "old soul." I would advice you to loosen up a little, have some fun, and don't take life too, too seriously at your age. You have many years ahead for this.

Hope to hear from you soon.

Be strong!Marcy

just to clarify i didnt write the coward quote in the letter i was just using it for inspiration when deciding what to to do in the situation. you see i could never speak to her but then when i did i was real nervous and when i went to do it.... i froze, so i thought im tired of this and i want my sanity back. I wrote the letter to just tell her how i feel and just get it overwith as i didnt like just doing nothing. remember that shocking truth i found out? shes bi! so i just thought its getting ridiculious and put an end to it. don't call me silly for this but i also wrote the letter for another reason because 5 days after i found out this truth my beloved cat of 7 years died of poisioning so i took it as a sign of god saying i shouldn't love so by the time i wrote the letter i just didnt care i was partially dead inside. once the letter was passed on the guy who was helping me just said she mentioned that i gave her a letter. i didnt know what to think and just waited for a reply. what im about to tell you is really hard for me and you may judge me and the other people on the board may as well. where her crew sits and hangs out is opposite a drinking fountain so whenever i went over for a drink of water i would take a look over at her. i would do this quite a few times until one day one of her lackeys told me to stop because im scaring her (this was after the letter) i know youre probably thinking "well its your own fault for doing that" but theres nothing wrong in looking and its not like i was going to harm her. but then what i was doing isn't wrong but it is frowned upon and she did have a right to say you are putting me off. however SHE should have been the one to tell me and they could have been alot nicer about it. i went over to her one day and apologised and here i am today. because of all these transgretions i have stayed hidden and have watched who i speak to as they may be another one of her friends. someone did say though if you don't here it directly from her then youre ok and girls get catty when you take intrest in their friends and not them but i have just 'disappeared' to be on the safe side. i hope at least deep down i made her happy when i gave her the letter but as a result im branded a bunny boiler by her friends and her. she'll be the one to tell her kids about me 'the stalker'.

I meant by the beast quote is that since i am just an average guy with a leg prob and after what i did (the beast) don't i have the right to do as i wish?

the thing is that after all that has happened i feel like a real piece garbage and i feel ashamed as im getting judged for my actions.

how can people be so cruel?

I didn't think you put that quote in the letter, but had to check.

Because this girl is bi she is really out of your league and I don't mean anything against you by that. Most heterosexuals don't want to get mixed up in this. You seem shy, not too experience with women and you sure don't want to slip into her world. I believe "bi" is a choice one makes consciously and they are not gay. Some people like to experiment in sexuality and each to their own as long as they don't hurt the innocent.

God IS LOVE and he was giving you no such sign that you shouldn't keep loving. Right now it just appears that everything you love is either running away from you or dying on you. You are just grieving right now, but the pain will cease. Think of it this way, God is giving you signs to stay clear of this girl as he has better things in store for you. Life is about being born, living and experiencing things, then getting old and hopefully wiser and then we die. If we have great faith we know that's not the end of things.

I certainly don't think you are silly for being upset over your dear pet cat dying. Losing a best friend such as you had in your cat is devastating. I own two dogs and a cat. One dog is a 20 lb. Bichon Frize by the name of Tootsie and my male dog is a Cockapoo cross, named Booker T. and my sweet cat Molly (nicknamed "The Incredible Molly Brown" are like children to us. My husband I have had to put other dear pets to sleep and it leaves a big hole in ones home and heart and both of us have a good cry over it. I suggest you go to your ASPCA if you are in the States, or the SPCA if you are in Canada, and get another cat. There are many cats out there (adults) and they have such beautiful personalities. These cats could sure use a good home and are grateful for it. That would help you a bit. I know you can't replace a pet, but you have love to give and I suggest, when you are ready to get another cat.

I know it seems between this girl and losing you beautiful pet you feel your life is at an end and you'd like to disappear off the end of the earth, but please, believe in an old broad like me, when I tell you, that if you did such a thing you would be missing out on a wonderful part of your life. High School is not forever and these people that are giving you problems will be a faint memory (if anything) when you get older. There is a wonderful life for you out there if you'll just be patient and when that special girl comes along then seize the moment. One day you will meet that special someone, get engaged, get married and have a family of your own. You have much to give, so don't waste it on the likes of these malcontents poking fun and bullying you.

No one is judging you on this board, and the other poster said it in a nut shell ... you have every right to look at anyone you wish. You didn't harm her. Please believe me when I tell you, this girl is a piece of work, and by getting her lackey to come over and threaten you, it makes her feel important in the eyes of her peers. She's nothing more than immature, confused (lordy, she doesn't even know what sex she prefers) and is playing head games with her own peers. You'd think they'd catch on. As I said before you are out of your league with this girl and her gang of malcontents. Move on! You deserve better!

After receiving your letter anyone who was mature would have kept what was in that letter private and a mature person would have confronted you about it and either told you they liked you or that no, they didn't like you. She is nothing more than a drama queen trying to look important in the eyes of her peers. She wants to send the message, "See, I'm so cool, that this guy is sending me a love letter and I can't shake him." She may not even mean all this, but she's got to say something to look important and get those peers of her sucked into her mind games and unfortunately, you are the target of her little game. Don't allow it! You are in total control of your own destiny.

Writing letters re your feelings should always be reserved for a girlfriend that you truly love and not to someone you are just attracted too. Writing your feelings down on paper is proof it was you, and so many young girls are so immature and would show the letter around. A girl that loves you may let a favorite friend see it only because she's proud and thrilled by it or she may well just keep it private.

I am glad you are staying away from this bunch because if you don't, you could get into some very serious trouble. Gangs (and even gangs of girls) can be brutal and you just never know how far they will carry out a threat against you. You friend gave you poor advice, and yes, girls can be catty, but this isn't the game this chick is playing. She's playing a very dangerous game at your expense and I don't think she realizes that perhaps a couple of her peers may just decide to take things into their own hands and deal with you. Again, I cannot stress the importance of staying away from this group.

What is a "bunny boiler?" I'm a little behind on the terms the young kids use these days.

You are an intelligent and gentle young man, and I'm shocked that you would ever believe she is ever going to tell her kids that you stalked her. As I said before, we leave high school, then we get out in life, land a job and all the garbage that went on in high school is soon forgotten. People change, and hopefully she will mature as most of the kids will in school.

Your leg problem is no excuse to hide-out in your own little world. I have a sneaking suspicion that you are a loner (whether it's because of your leg problem or you're just shy) but you certainly are an intellect and far too mature for these silly games in high school. Bide your time! Don't use that leg problem as holding you back. We have a new Mayor of Vancouver, British Columbia who is in a wheel chair and he's a darn good Mayor! There are many famous people with afflictions. In some ways, we all limp through life from time-to-time. It's time to get away from the computer, get out in life, look around high school and see other students that you may have more in common with. All the students can't dislike you. You just find this girl exciting because she's different. Stick with what you know for now.

Quit feeling embarrassed and ashamed! YOU DID NOTHING WRONG! You put your heart on your sleeve, but it was just the wrong place at the wrong time. As I mentioned in a previous post you are an "old soul" so you react differently than many of your peers, but this doesn't mean you are strange in any way. NEVER let anyone take away your dignity or change who you are!!!!! You are in charge of your own destiny, so come on boyo .... get that steam going again and be as strong as I know you are!

Get use to some people being cruel, because it won't be the last time you will see this whether it happens to you, someone you know or a total stranger. The upside is, there are whole lot of wonderful people out there if you are willing too look, listen and digest what they are saying. Good people give off good vibes, just as cruel people give off negative vibes.

I sure hope to hear from you. It does you good to talk on this board and get our opinions. Many of us have been hurt in school, and I'm one of them, but, I never faltered once. I could have joined the "in crowd" at high school, but found them useless, sometimes cruel, full of themselves and actually pretty damned dumb. I decided not to join the group and I was ridiculed, never made cheerleader because of it, but I knew in my heart I was my own person, and that one day I'd be out in the world and these people would be but a shadow of a memory and I wasn't about to let them ruin my life. How right I was!

Hang in there and be strong!Marcy

the term bunny boiler is from the film 'fatal attraction' where a married man hooks up with a woman for the weekend for a one night stand, only problem is that the woman becomes obsessed with him and follows him home and writes i love you in menstual blood on his wall, he also boils his pet rabbit andd leaves it to simmer on the table.

don't think me sad for this but i still care about her. i wont be doing anything to encourage this. ie hanging around to look at her or saying hi or even seeing her if i can help it. i just cant seem to let go but then that's the case with most people. i don't love her anymore but i care if you know what i mean.

i really appreciate when you call me intelligent because i don't think i have made alot of wise desicions as of late but i know what youre gonna say 'that's why we make mistakes so we can learn from them' but ive made too many mistakes and may cost me a great deal of my lifetime.

by the way i don't spend all the time on the computer i spend a majority of time but i just have alot of questions that my friends/parents cant answer.

the loner comment you made sort of rung a bell cause when i was in primary school my leg problem was really bad (its spastic triplegia, a result of ceberal palsy) i was made fun of so i spent most of my time on my own which leads me to where i am today. i consider myself fairly well known and generally well liked but im not exactly a socialite but that's only because i don't want to be (too tiring!). im pretty wary of trusting people (especially now) as im self concious of my problem. my dad says to me the other day 'if you want a little female attention then you should cast your net far and wide' i said after what happened ill probably get a fishing ban. my sis prattles on and on about her 'suitors' are players and how fit they are. i just say hello and she said your a nice guy and you'll be a nice guy when youre older. i thought great im really stuffed now. women don't want nice guys! you know the guys that think they have alot of girlfriends cause they tell him their probs? they only tell him cause they think hes gay!

i still want to disappear as i lack a purpose amd feel depressed most of the time

I missed talking to you and was getting worried about you. You see, when I answer some serious posts on here and there is a big lull in between my imagination plays a little on me, and although I can't save the world I often feel I have let that person down in some ways. Not everything I say is 100% right, but I do think deep and hard and say things from my heart, yet I can be blunt so I give the best I've got to the person in trouble. Also another poster can improve on my answer.

Well, I must say you certainly do have one heck of a good sense of humor (made me giggle here and there in your post) even though you are feeling very depressed right now, so I'd sure like to know how wild your sense of humor gets when you are not feeling depressed!

I remember that movie "Fatal Attraction" and it was a good one, but I felt badly about that poor bunny. Hey, I learned something new "bunny boiler" and now I can drive my friends whacky with that one because they won't know what it means either. LOL

You have to ask yourself why you are so attracted to this particular girl. It's time you stopped thinking about caring about her so much and be brutally honest about why you can't seem to get her out of your mind especially after the way she has treated you. I think somewhere in your heart you feel if you try hard enough to can win her over to your side, but why? She has made a choice of who she is in her life (at least for the time being.)

I truly do feel you are highly intelligent. Now using that great intelligence you have you tell me of one person that hasn't made a score of mistakes through their lives? Have you ever studied "Martin Luther King?" I admire this man a great deal and so I studied up on him. I was amazed after he gained a large following that he was on the road at long periods of time on racial/freedom/peace speeches. Little did he know that the blacks in Chicago were running against him and angry that they felt Martin Luther was full of himself and had left them in the dust. Of course this wasn't true and Martin Luther King had just made a mistake. He couldn't be all things to all people, and he was exhausted. So, what did he do? As exhausted as he was he did go to Chicago and made a great effort to give his support, but unfortunately it was a little too late and the blacks in particular didn't accept him as well as blacks in other cities and towns. It was at this point in time that Martin Luther King slipped into a great depression. He felt he had let his black comrades in Chicago down and he was questioning himself as to whether he was doing any good at all and was all his work for not. The depression lasted for some time and he actually became ill over it. He wasn't a quitter! That's what frightened some people about him. These people needed to be frightened, and think of this ... Martin Luther King wanted peace in this world (something I personally feel we can't attain because of the way some human beings are) but he tried and I respected him highly for this. He made more ground on trying to get people of all races and getting people out there to try peace for a change instead of violence than he will ever know. The fact he was assassinated was a sure sign he was getting somewhere. I told you this story about Martin Luther King, so you could see what a difference some people can make and you are one of those people that can make a vast change in the world and the world is limping along and not doing so well. We can all make small changes for the better. So, to be depressed is simply a part of life, but then we have to get up, dust ourselves off and get going again. Yup, we'll make more mistakes, but we learn from them!

So, you think you are the only one who has made some major mistakes in your life? Well boyo, this gal can sure tell you a story of two. I never hurt another person intentionally (but did hurt my parents by my idiotic actions when younger many times) but I learned my lessons well and moved on and strengthened my inner self and once older became not just the daughter of my parents but a friend. We laughed together and those very mistakes I made and caused them to worry were the height of teasing me endlessly about them and we would break up laughing. There were friends I let down, classes I failed because I was a smart-ass and skipped classes. I married a man that my family and friends begged me not to marry simply because I thought I could change him and I realized later what a waste of life I'd done to myself later. The man was abusive, mentally/physically and a cheater. Still, I trudged on and learned from this and now I have met and been married to a wonderful man for 34 years. There are actually times in my life now when I look back on some of my mistakes and it's enough to make a hooker blush! LOL For a short time, but only for a short time I am embarrassed all over again. I am still making mistakes, but learning from them. Now, if I hurt a friend without realizing it I own up to my mistake and make a genuine effort to apologize, and if I screw up in any other aspect of my life I try to rectify that as best I can too. That's all one should expect from themselves or others.

If you have a lot of questions that your family or friends can't answer why don't you run them by us. There are a lot of intelligent people on this board from all over the world.

We all limp through life boyo (in one way or the other.) I know how cruel kids can be in school when someone has an affliction. These kids don't even remember it anymore, so why should you? I have one girlfriend that is married to a paraplegic, another to a man that is blind, and they love each other more than a lot of people that can walk and see. So what is your excuse????? There are things you can do to help your leg and you know what it is ... therapy! Work out! You may always limp to a degree, but so what! Truthfully, (I do remember when I was younger. LOL) I wouldn't hesitate to date a guy with a limp, one arm, or no hand, etc. If I liked him a lot it just wouldn't matter. As my husband and I grow older together we know we are running out of luck with our health (no matter how well one looks after themselves) but we enjoy each other, laugh and hug life to us so we don't let it slip through our fingers. Each minute, hour, day, week and the years to pass are so, so important (mistakes and all.) He's balding, has false teeth, but he looks hot to me! I am getting older, a little gray in my hair, and a few wrinkles and a little heavier than when I was younger, but he still sees me at 28 years old (when he met me.) As we mature, most people see the genuine personality of that person and not the limp or that they are blind or in a wheel chair. You won't be super young forever.

Your dad is so right ... spread that net! There are so many more women in this world than men. I laughed so hard at your "fishing ban" comment to your dad. Good one! That's how my husband and I joke with each other. We 3 have the same sense of humor.

You're sister is impulsive and immature right now, but loves you and is trying to help you whether you realize it or not. I have a sneaking suspicion she wants you to work out just like I do. You can strengthen body parts very well if you put your mind to it. No one is asking you to be a "jock", but just strengthen those muscles in your leg. So you go through life with one bulging leg, and a good leg that's skinny! LOL

I still have male friends and I go over a few problems with them and I don't think they're gay and I had male friends growing up. We were more like brother and sister, but certainly not gay. However, I do see what you mean and as the old quote says when you're looking for love in all the wrong places, "I have enough friends, I don't need more!" You are at the age where you want a girlfriend of your very own. You see your sister dating and some of you friends and you ponder as to why you don't have one. Many guys and girls, fall in love with people that are playing hard to get or they are mysterious and sort of out of reach for them. It's the name of the game and most of us have been through it.

Now, I gave you the story of Martin Luther King for a reason! I think there is much more to you (inside) than even you realize at this point in your life. I am asking you if you would consider volunteering? I want you to choose something like working in programs with the Vietnam Vets (they'll set you straight and if what you see there ... broken limbs, no limbs, broken minds and hearts) doesn't do it for ya, then try volunteering in the children's ward of a hospital and see little ones fighting for their lives and some dying of cancer! I want you to volunteer just like I have and many of my friends (it keeps us centered! No pity parties for us!) You need to see what real suffering is all about and most of those vets would give everything they have if they are missing a leg to have your one crippled leg. Most children dying of cancer or fighting cancer would rather have a leg like yours than be where they are. Sometimes we need a rude awakening and that's why I volunteered at the Abused Women's Center in my area. It keeps me balanced.

I know there is something else bothering you, so why don't you just let it all hang out. I for one care!

I hope to hear from you and I hope you will listen to me about volunteering. You will be surprised how much better you feel within yourself and how many wonderful people give their time to help others that are less fortunate and there are lots and lots of young girls there I might add. Right now you go to school, don't work, and feel you aren't in the stream of life (that's normal) so get out and get in the stream and I'm sure they'll be no fishing ban going on. That only happens in British Columbia, Canada! LOL

Hope to hear from you soon.

Stay strongMarcy

for all those who don't know me although marcy has answered a question of mine before. my names john

im glad i could make you laugh as i try to make most people laugh.

the thing with the girl is i just cant forget about her as she is the first girl that i have actually liked and just cant let go. dispite what she did or maybe did not do. her friend who told me to get lost is the jealous type and has been acting very funny around me (meaning having a really guilty look on her face, hell she can't look me in the face). just because she isn't getting any male attention shes being a cow! ive still 'disappeared' in school and have no intention of reappearing. guess what? im being pittied because of what happened so im definitly gone for good! all i want to do is get to know the girl not hook up with her. im too inexperienced to go 'fishing' and after what happened i can never trust a girl or anyone for that matter again.

I really don't believe there is anyone out there for me because im different and most girls only want 'jocks' (players where i come from) (im English btw) who get drunk on 'wife beater' (Stella artois) and treat them like complete rubbish. most girls are shallow, immature and vain anyway so they deserve it. they havent got time for guys like me.

Well a Brit, EH!!!! (how can you tell I'm Canadian. LOL) It's nice getting to know you.

Do you mind me asking how old you are?

You sure do have a good sense of humor and intelligent to boot. So, I find it hard that you are feeling so depressed. Instead of being "the good old chap" around your friends and making them laugh or being a good listener, it's time you took care of yourself and saved some of those good qualities for a special girl that I KNOW will come into your life.

It appears that this girl you are so interested in (being bi) is mixed up with what we call "butches" (females trying to be males) but to be polite we just say "gay." There is nothing bitchier than a butch and so now you are dealing with this girl's friend. I've been to gay clubs that one of my male friends took me too and I almost got into a lot of trouble. I wasn't use to this sort of scene, so when a man finally did ask me to dance I was relieved. Unfortunately, this tall, strong looking man happened to be gay (I was young at the time) and his "lady" came over and was furious he was dancing with me. When she asked ME what I was doing with her man, I turned around and stood looking up to a 5' 10" tall, burly looking guy that could have ripped the posts out of the dance floor. Thank heavens my friend came to save the day, but I was angry at him for not preparing me for this sort of night life. I just didn't know the rules at the time. Now when I look back I have a good chuckle over it.

John, I think you are bored in your own skin and you have picked this girl out for safetys sake because you know you can't have her and from the way she's treating you why bother? This girl is nothing but cruel because she is well aware of what she says and does and what is going on with the actions towards her. Sometimes it's just nature and we may want something in life we can't have, but dream a little dream about it.

Now why would you want to be pitied? I think it's a bad choice of words, and others that see what has become of this situation simply feel badly that it happened to you and that it's this so-called girl you care about that is the root of the cause. If you can't see this, then the care from others will vanish quickly. I can't help but feel you are on a road of destruction by your own hand.

I don't know if you've had other bad experiences with girls and now a bad experience with this girl, but did you ever ask yourself the question that you are walking on the wild side? You seem to be choosing the "bad girl" or "untouchable girls" in your life and you know it even before you get started. You have to ask yourself why! What's wrong with a pretty girl that is kind and considerate and how do you know someone in that school that has those qualities isn't interested in you?

Sorry, not buying "all girls want jocks" because it's simply not true! I dare you to go into shops where you live and look around. There are plain girls, plain guys, some thin, some fat, some nice girls that are good looking with plain guys and they are together. Searching for someone that you care about and that cares about you isn't easy and we all have to go through it. These types of people just don't drop out of thin air and if we aren't out there circulating and giving ourselves a chance to know different people then we won't get that chance.

Of course in your age group girls are immature, shallow and vain. Many are just silly and immature while others are vain, but not all. It's part of growing up. When I met my second husband he was 4 years younger than me. I didn't know it at the time since he was 23 and I was almost 28. We knew we loved each other and he was so shy I had to not just go out with him, but his 2 friends (great guys) and it was exhausting for me because I had to dance with all three of them! LOL Finally, he had the nerve to just go out on a one-to-one date with me and nature took it's course from there. I was patient and kind and didn't push and just let him be who he was. I was very extroverted and so I didn't really have a shy problem at this stage of my life (but was extremely shy in my teens.)

Sometimes we misinterpret what others are feeling towards us. We may think they hardly like us never mind expecting them to go out with us, but sometimes it's because they are too shy or perhaps they've been hurt in love before as well.

John, I just don't see you as a quitter! That's what you are trying to convince yourself to be!!!! You would rather have the students at school pity you, than stand up with a determined chin out and your head held high no matter what anyone does to you. That's dignity! You would rather give up on girls, then search elsewhere to find someone worthy of your attention?

You never mentioned if you would consider volunteering somewhere and I think it would do you the world of good. Not only are you helping others, but you meet some great people and that includes girls!

I need not tell you that you are going to have to find a girl on the same intellectual level as yourself or the relationship will grow stale. You aren't any different than a lot of people John. You are just making yourself different.

Did you ever see the movie "A Beautiful Mind?" Well, that's what I see in you and you're wasting yours. Of course you are going to have some difficulties at your age (we all did) but, before you know it you'll be old enough and independent enough to make your own destiny come true if you work at it. You just have to have patience.

So, what are these terrible things you feel you've screwed up in, and why don't you trust SOME girls?

I'm still here!

Marcy