What's right and wrong in trusting a leader like Narendra Modi ? ..... Entrusting one's fate to a big or great leader is often tempting

 Entrusting one's fate to a big or great leader is often tempting. 

It is believed such a contention spares people the burden of thinking for ourselves. Or we tend to believe that we need not work hard.

In 2024 elections, Indians demonstrated this dichotomy. Hindus remained divided guided by selfishness. Muslims united in a pure communal agenda - let us hate Narendra Modi and BJP and vote for anyone who can defeat BJP especially in UP. In Mharashtra, UP and Bengal -- the BJP understood very late that things went haywire. 

Blogger 

We forget easily that for democracy to work or to achieve big results under a leader of our own choice, citizens have to pay some taxes some price. 

We have to pay some amount of attention and also be willing to hold politicians genuinely accountable for failures and success. In fact if we are to get success -- we have to even swallow some bitter situations. 

In 2024, everyone turned selfish - Hindis, Muslims, Christian, Dalits, OBCs, Yadavs, upper caste Hindis, lower caste Hindis and Muslims.
Hence the big national plot was lost and elections became too localised -- not because someone dragged it. But because people got bored with 10 years of long and to many -- overdose of Moditva. 

Localised elections triumphed against Modi's big picture national image -- eve n among Hindus. 

The Hindus were happy with Ram temple but they thought, the BJP was rewarded adequately.  

Pinning hopes on a big leader allows us to check our judgement. All people thought is let us believe Modi and his 'wisdom' and all wlil be well.  

The fact of the matter is none was prepared for an electoral debacle for Congress. 

What happens on the other side ?

The truth is that the mandate 2024 represents a stunning personal setback for a man (Modi) so convinced of his invincibility that he had begun to claim divine origins.

 This may be half truth; but it is a fact -- he turned a little arrogant and also over confident. Both are not proved per se; but both these vices were not necessary. 

 

"The politics of hate and division and stark economic inequality championed by Narendra Modi and the BJP has been dealt a chastening blow by the Indian electorate, which returned a verdict for the ruling coalition far short of its hoped-for landslide. 

Has Indian democracy been pulled back from the brink, or will this humiliation lead to Modi digging in his heels? -- commented an article in a leading Pakistani newspaper 'Dawn'.

But there is another crucial factor vis-a-vis success stories of great leaders. Something from the entire stock need to be taken with a pinch of salt. 

Mao Zedong, whose 'Great Leap Forward' produced a massive famine and whose misguided policies over three decades kept the Chinese people trapped in needless poverty.

** Napoleon, -- may have been a genius on the battlefield, but the end results of his unchallenged leadership marked -- France's total defeat.

There were also the deaths of millions of his followers, and his own lonely exile.

History warns us time and again. Great leaders tend to think they are infallible, and they are often very good at removing threats to their rule and obstacles to their authority.

Singapore's Lee Kwan Yeh also was such. There is a host of great leaders who led their countries to disaster.

Stalin -- whose social and economic policies killed millions and who left Soviet Russia vulnerable to a German invasion in 1941. 

There is another example. The more Gorbachev urged the therapeutic values of Perestroika everywhere, the more he was untying the bond of force which alone maintained his own and his empire's standing. The paradox was his own making.