US presidential candidate Julian Polonius Foley Marcos DeWiki III was born on February 29, 1964. Senator DeWiki hails from Rhode Island where he lives with wife, Talia Jessica Rhonda Falkus DeWiki, and their nine children, five dogs, three cats, eight rabbits, two guinea pigs and numerous goldfish.
He majored in political science at Berkeley, and then did a law degree from Yale. Prior to being elected to the Senate in 2000, he practised criminal law in New York with the firm, Swindle, Scrooge and Miserly. DeWiki learnt the art of animation to keep his progeny entertained. Spouse Talia is a full-time mother and part-time nurse.
This biography is culled from www.wikicandidate08.com, a website designed to exactly resemble genuine campaign sites in layout and functionality. The twist is not that the candidate is fictional but that it is collaborative fiction reflecting political attitudes.
The site was set up by a bunch of Cornell students as a research project. Any surfer can help in the task of producing the “perfect presidential candidate”, by adding details.
For example, DeWiki prefers the Beatles to the Rolling Stones, though he risked losing Bible Belt votes by admitting he liked Sympathy for the Devil. He is a regular, non-denominational protestant churchgoer.
He has never been indicted in a scandal. He strongly denies involvement in the ongoing investigation of AIP Mortgage Co for bribery of elected officials to vote against the Foreclosure Protection Act.
He is assumed to be pro-choice, given the size of his family. But he has cleverly avoided answering questions on the subject. He also backed Rhode Island’s green power initiative while being simultaneously supportive of Texas’ oil industry. He had an Inuit governess (who was allegedly his father’s mistress) and is therefore, reckoned sensitive to minority rights.
It’s a statistically reasonable profile for a US president; WASP, young, church-going, married, with kids, pets, hobbies and legal experience. DeWiki has mainstream “man of the people” tastes and that is indeed his slogan. He has avoided polarising his electorate on issues like energy lobbies, guns, death penalties and religion.
In trying to put together an analogous profile of a standard-issue Indian prime ministerial candidate, the gulf between American democracy and that of India becomes apparent.
It’s easy enough to list some basic criteria for an Indian PM.
An Indian PM may be of either gender. But he or she will be well past retirement age and have significant medical problems. He or she is also likely to be from a prominent political family. Any Indian PM would also have been embroiled in a couple of scandals or the family would, at any rate.
Beyond that, the Indian PM’s profile is much more random. Despite being part of a much more conservative society, Indian voters seem to care less about the family lives of politicians. India has been graced with several PMs, who led unorthodox personal lives. Being irreligious is no disqualification. Nor is an unusual taste in beverages.
Opinion polls and census data suggest 60 per cent of Americans consider co-habitation without marriage ok, 30 per cent consider gay relationships ok, and 12 per cent are avowed atheists or agnostics. But US presidents have to be married, and church-going!
One reason for this dichotomy is that Indian politicians would scream loudly in bipartisan chorus if their personal lives were highlighted. Also of course, any website dedicated to creating spoof Indian political profiles would be shut down on some pretext if it came anywhere near the mark.
Americans may go too far in their relentless pursuit of the details of personal life. Indians probably don’t go far enough. There must be a happy medium somewhere.
