In the 20 years and more since 2002, there has never been a greater need than today for a fair and balanced interpretation of the politics of Narendra Modi.
The state of Telangana goes to polls on Nov 30. People are already talking much about anti incumbency against K Chandrasekhar Rao (KCR)-led BRS. People are talking about Muslim voters getting disillusioned against KCR and suggest they will easily return to the Congress. For its part, the grand old party is also basking at the reflected glories of the phenomenon called Sickularism.
 |
| snap: 2019 |
Over the years, it has come to light and not without good reasons that while analyzing about Gujarat and Narendra Modi, the 'intellectuals' and BJP's detractors employ a politically saturation called secularism -- or so called Sickularism. Thus, revisiting the past is not without pitfalls. Are we glorifying a wrong?
Is there truly a negative evaluation of what went on since 2002? The Opposition parties have failed more than once to stall the phenomenal rise of Modi's popularity curve and BJP's electoral success. Modi is in power or an elected office for last 23 years and hence, if we talk about 'anti incumbency', he has able to brave through the same considerably !!
Anti-incumbency of 23 years is not a small thing. But the Moditva phenomenaon survives even as the 'brand Modi' could be facing some problems possibly.
On May 23, 2019, Narendra Modi led BJP to storm back to power for another five-year term after winning a landslide general election victory.
It was given to understand among political circles and amongst intellectuals and Left Liberals that with Modi and BJP now securely affirming their place, Indian political history could easily shed its status quo.
At the center of BJP stands Narendra Modi, the man who made a right synthesis of Hindu ideology and development. Modi effectively made use of national security vis-a-vis Pakistan and made the theme a successful vote-catcher phenomenon -- something never seen in elections in Indian history.
In a sense, many thought Modi's second successive landslide win echoes Ronald Reagan's abiding popularity as US president in the 1980s, when he somehow escaped blame for his country's economic woes. Reagan was called the Great Communicator and for being a "teflon" president whose mistakes never stuck to him. Mr Modi enjoys a similar reputation.
BJP won as many as 303 seats - a significant leap from the 2014 tally and certainly a mega turn of events since December 2018 when it had lost power in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan.
BJP’s political growth and 2019 electoral win are certainly linked to a surge of nationalism which reached great heights after the Prime Minister hardened his stance against arch-rival Pakistan in February. The Balakot aerial strike added a completely new dimension to election campaign and the results in the ultimate. The 2019 win has been seen as an approval of Modi’s muscular brand of nationalism. This obviously made a right synthesis along with the lethal combine of developmental agenda and the spirit of Hindutva values.
But by December 2019, his government faced immense challenge over the issue of the CAA Bill. A Pakistan-born intellectual and writer Mobarak Haider has said about 2019 election outcome that the "process of pampering the Muslims" has hurt Hindus and others in Europe and America and the phenomenon has also harmed the minority community.
This, he suggested must be looked upon in the context of the massive mandate given to the BJP in the recently held polls.
"The process of pampering the Muslims has brought pain to the majorities of India, Europe and America. But not only that. It has also brought great harm to Muslims who have wasted their energies and resources for the last hundred years running after a mirage," said Mr Haider.
Those who take pride in telling the country – pretensions understood – that booting out Modi would be their life long mission? Who were these crowd – who would swear by the ‘integrity’ of a cop whom Supreme Court does not believe? !!
"However hard one may grudge it, the truth is that Liberal Left has little contact with reality. They fail to see that nations love to assert their identity through nationalism," Haider has said. It goes without saying there is a great apprehension that the big majority for the Hindu stalwart party - that is the BJP - poses a serious threat to India's secularism and multi-culturalism.
An editorial in Britain's 'The Guardian' newspaper volunteered to describe the mandate of 130 crore Indians as "bad for India’s soul".
"The world does not need another national populist leader who pursues a pro-business agenda while trading in fake news and treating minorities as second class citizens," the newspaper stated.
The edit comment eloquently exposed the fault line in the Congress party and also said: "....the Nehru-Gandhi clan that leads it will have to seriously rethink how they can defeat Mr Modi. The BJP has been allowed to be funded anonymously to the tune of 10.3bn rupees (£120m) by big business after Mr Modi legitimised opacity in political donations. The party pays lip service to reducing the yawning inequalities that disfigure India, but political cleavages in India’s party system have grown along the lines of caste and religious conflict. This suits the BJP, with its pro-business and anti-Muslim nationalism. The opposition will need to be able to run a distinctive campaign on an egalitarian platform. To be fair, Congress did peddle, but without much vim, a form of universal basic income. Fights over symbolic aspects of identity need to be replaced by political competition over how to benefit all Indians. That will require an opposition in India far savvier and more in touch with the country’s poor than exists today".
Five years back, in 2014, the BJP came to power promising to create 20 million jobs annually and to make Indian cities "smart" with electric buses and green environs.
It also promised subsidies to farmers and to revitalize the sagging economy. Those promises remain - some of them unfulfilled.
Religious minorities such as Christians and Muslims accused the first-term BJP government of tacitly promoting bigoted attacks on non-Hindus as part of a bid to make India a "Hindus-only" nation.
In 2020 February riots between Hindus and Muslims, one slogan that was heard vividly was 'Hinduon ka Hindustan (India only belongs to Hindus).
This fear is also not new. In the 1990s, when Indian politics had entered an era of coalition regimes, veteran BJP leader L.K. Advani, a former deputy prime minister, had floated the idea of a presidential form of government. Advani said the Indian constitution required a “fresh look.”
The abrogation of Article 370, enacting Uniform Civil Code and a grand Ram Temple at Ayodhya were three principal yet contentious promises made by the BJP in electoral politics. Now, one of them has been implemented ! In terms of election promise - it has been fulfilled. Even the Ram Temple is now a reality as the Supreme Court has given a convincing and favourable verdict.
To make things clear, I must admit that abrogation of the Article 370 does make me happy. That is of course a vital step; but what is most admirable is that the development-starved Ladakh region has been given Union Territory status.
This will help the Ladakhis and give them the fruits of development.
In some other context, I have said earlier that one area the Modi government’s role remain far from satisfactory is - the absence of steps to be taken to dispel notion that India is heading towards majoritism. And Prime Minister himself seems to be not doing enough on this to eradicate the 'perception' that fundamentalism has been let loose in this country. I am saying this despite a firm belief that a section of 'self serving' intellectuals and the ‘sickular media and polity’ will never understand the genuine assertiveness of the majority community.
The Hindus are angry about 'minority appeasement' and the Modi-Amit Shah duo is smartly using this anguish no doubt.
No comments:
Post a Comment