The Narendra Modi thread

[Crookbond]

Lessons the Army can teach Mr Modi http://www.hindustantimes.com/editorial-views-on/KaranThapar/Lessons-the-Army-can-teach-Mr-Modi/Article1-1125422.aspx

There are times when Narendra Modi can be absolutely correct and yet trip himself up. His speech last Sunday was a telling example. To a mammoth crowd he declared that the Indian Army is our finest example of secularism. He’s absolutely right. However, what Mr Modi doesn’t realise is that the Army’s practice of secularism is almost the exact opposite of his own conduct. This is where he stumbled. A few simple facts will explain how. Regiments of the Indian Army, depending on their character, have their own mandirs, masjids, gurudwaras or churches. They have regimental maulvis, pandits, granthis, and priests. The Commanding Officer participates in all religious festivals. On Eid he will happily wear a topi. On other occasions a tikka or a pagri. An article in Daily Bhaskar.com (16/9) says: “(The) Army is the only place where you can see a maulvi conducting the proceedings of Janmashtami as Panditji was on leave.” Also, you will never come across a Commanding Officer taunting a minority. They don’t refer to Muslims as Mian Musharraf or compare them, even allegorically, to a kutte ka bachcha. Modi-speak would be an anathema. The truth is you can serve in the Army for years without being conscious of the religion of your colleagues. It simply doesn’t matter except in their private lives. During the 1965 war the 3rd Rajputana Rifles fought Pakistani soldiers on the Line of Control. Twenty-five percent were Muslim. Their CO was Christian. Muslims have risen to be Army Commanders, the critical post below Army Chief. At least two have commanded 15th Corp, a bastion of our defence in Kashmir. Many others have served as Lieutenant-Generals and Major-Generals. Many Muslim soldiers are a part of the Army’s roll-call of honour. Hawaldar Abdul Hameed won the Param Vir Chakra, India’s highest award for gallantry, in 1965. Brig Mohammad Usman posthumously won the Maha Vir Chakra in 1947. Lt. Col. Salim Caleb in 1965. In contrast, how many Muslims are part of Mr Modi’s government? How many did he field in December 2012? The answers are stark and revealing. Mr Modi doesn’t have a single Muslim minister. In fact, in the 12 years he’s served as chief minister he’s never had one. In December 2012 he fielded 182 candidates for the state elections. Not one was Muslim. Actually, he’s hasn’t fielded a Muslim candidate in any of the three elections he has won. Yet, 9.1% Gujaratis are Muslim. They play no part in Mr Modi’s government or legislature party. The Indian Army would find that inexplicable, offensive and wrong. Fortunately, Mr Modi has realised the Indian Army is the country’s most secular institution. In fact, he wants us to “take lessons in secularism from the Army”. Perhaps he should be the first. I recommend he spend time with one of the Army’s mixed units. All Mr Modi would need to do is keep his eyes and ears open and mouth shut. I don’t mean that to be offensive. He simply needs to look and listen. That’s best done when you’re not pontificating. Last Tuesday Mr Modi celebrated his birthday. Perhaps General Bikram Singh should gift him a week’s stay at the Rajputana Rifles Regimental Centre in Delhi. It has a little masjid visited by Hindu soldiers on Eid. It would be an ideal vantage point for his first lesson. And if he visits their temple on Janmashtami or Ram Navmi he’ll find the regimental maulvi and many Muslim soldiers in attendance.

[seedhi]

Lessons the Army can teach Mr Modi http://www.hindustantimes.com/editorial-views-on/KaranThapar/Lessons-the-Army-can-teach-Mr-Modi/Article1-1125422.aspx

Way to miss the point. The Army does not provide special benefits to armymen solely on the basis of religion. The army does not give more funds to regiments depending on how many minorities it has. This is in contrast with minority oriented politics of largesse adopted by the Congress.

[Number]

Narendra Modi dominates Congress's five-day workshop for spokespersons http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/narendra-modi-dominates-congress-s-five-day-workshop-for-spokespersons-421868

Narendra Modi seems to dominate not just BJP strategy sessions, but also those of the Congress. How to counter Modi in cyberspace reportedly had Congress leaders exercised at a recent party workshop. Some, said sources, suggested carpet-bombing the Web, even if it means creating multiple accounts - read fake accounts - :hysterical:to counter the followers of the Gujarat Chief Minister, who has over 23 lakh on Twitter and whose tele-conference with NRIs this morning was streamed and promoted aggressively from his website narendramodi.in. The five-day media workshop for Congress spokespersons and TV panelists also thoroughly debated issues such as corruption, policy paralysis, impact of legislations like right to food and the right to compensation from land acquisition among others. Several eminent experts like Sayeeda Hamid, Montek Singh Ahluwalia, Madan Gopal among others lectured the group. Congress leaders deny a Modi theme to the workshop, but the inclusion of a special session in the workshop on Gujarat, indicated otherwise. "We have discussed everything that's relevant in today's politics," said a senior Congress spokesperson, dismissing questions on whether the Congress is obsessed with Modi. Shakti Singh Gohil and Arjun Modvadia, Congress leaders from the state, briefed the gathering and are learnt to have used both harsh words and personal comments against Mr Modi, who is the BJP's Prime Ministerial candidate for 2014. Not everyone was impressed though. "What can they teach us? They have ensured that we lose the state for over three terms," said a participant.

Some of them might pop-up here too. Modi has become a nightmare for congis. :haha:

[someone]

Way to miss the point. The Army does not provide special benefits to armymen solely on the basis of religion. The army does not give more funds to regiments depending on how many minorities it has. This is in contrast with minority oriented politics of largesse adopted by the Congress.

Add to that, the very idea of being secular being judged on Muslims representation is wrong itself. Do he think Muslims are greater Indians while the rest are less Indians with little representation? As then, I guess our Army itself isn't secular as there aren't Muslims in key positions and numbers. As the army make their decision on merit other than religion. And that's the way to make a truly secular approach instead of plain begging and appeasement of various parties and group. Also to mention, like the common men including Muslims being better there. Ridiculous article and surprised to see that a reputed journalist spewing such a nonsense and plain hatred for the army and common men.

[Crookbond]

Way to miss the point. The Army does not provide special benefits to armymen solely on the basis of religion. The army does not give more funds to regiments depending on how many minorities it has. This is in contrast with minority oriented politics of largesse adopted by the Congress.

Does the Army belittle men based on the number of children in their families? I guess not.

[ravishingravi]

Add to that, the very idea of being secular being judged on Muslims representation is wrong itself. Do he think Muslims are greater Indians while the rest are less Indians with little representation? As then, I guess our Army itself isn't secular as there aren't Muslims in key positions and numbers. As the army make their decision on merit other than religion. And that's the way to make a truly secular approach instead of plain begging and appeasement of various parties and group. Also to mention, like the common men including Muslims being better there. Ridiculous article and surprised to see that a reputed journalist spewing such a nonsense and plain hatred for the army and common men.

Or he was genuinely being apna version of "Secular". I think this might just begin to annoy or even humiliate the urban Indian muslims. The poor can still be emotionally manipulated.

[asterix]

The only Muslim I've seen who appears to abhore this Pseudo-Secularism and Muslim Appeasment, is Shahid Siddiqui...

[seedhi]

Does the Army belittle men based on the number of children in their families? I guess not.

This is about official policies and programs not one phrase spoken at a rally 11 years ago.

[ravishingravi]

The only Muslim I've seen who appears to abhore this Pseudo-Secularism and Muslim Appeasment' date=' is Shahid Siddiqui...[/quote'] I personally know people who happen to be muslims who are genuinely irritated by this "victim" mentality been imposed on them by the secularist. I doubt they would ever vote for BJP but this experimental perversion of secularism is failing I believe among the educated urban Muslims.

[Crookbond]

This is about official policies and programs not one phrase spoken at a rally 11 years ago.

And the article was about the attitude of the army and not the policies/programs.

[ravishingravi]

Bharat ek secular khoj.

[seedhi]

And the article was about the attitude of the army and not the policies/programs.

That is the bane of Indian "secularism", where the discourse is about a phrase in one speech 11 years ago, tokenism and gimmickry rather than policies and programs. Even when we do focus on the latter, we make the mistake of evaluating policies and programs based on their intent and not their results. If we look at even the great stalwarts like Ambedkar, Gandhi and even Nehru - many a times in their writings and speeches they made generalizations which could be considered insulting to one community or another. But did we disown them for that and keep harping on their flaws. For example Gandhi called Muslims more aggressive than Hindus. Ambedkar made disparaging comments about both Hindus and Muslims. We still venerate them.

[The Outsider]

That is the bane of Indian "secularism", where the discourse is about a phrase in one speech 11 years ago, tokenism and gimmickry rather than policies and programs. Even when we do focus on the latter, we make the mistake of evaluating policies and programs based on their intent and not their results. If we look at even the great stalwarts like Ambedkar, Gandhi and even Nehru - many a times in their writings and speeches they made generalizations which could be considered insulting to one community or another. But did we disown them for that and keep harping on their flaws. For example Gandhi called Muslims more aggressive than Hindus. Ambedkar made disparaging comments about both Hindus and Muslims. We still venerate them.

Forget about speeches if you want. Are you are trying to say that of all the hundreds of MLAs and ministers under Modi all of them were better qualified than a single Muslim?

[seedhi]

Forget about speeches if you want. Are you are trying to say that of all the hundreds of MLAs and ministers under Modi all of them were better qualified than a single Muslim?

Or a Sikh or a Jew or a Buddhist ? You see a political party will field folks for elections from within its cadres and not pluck them out of thin air. This again is back to the same question of tokenism and gimmickry. UP and Bihar have many MLAs who are Muslims, how has it helped the community there ?

[The Outsider]

Or a Sikh or a Jew or a Buddhist ? You see a political party will field folks for elections from within its cadres and not pluck them out of thin air. This again is back to the same question of tokenism and gimmickry. UP and Bihar have many MLAs who are Muslims, how has it helped the community there ?

Sikh, Jews, and Buddhists form a negligible percentage of the population in Gujarat. Muslims are around 10% of the population and even close to majority at some legislative level seats. Modi claims to have support of 25% of the Muslim population, and could not find one single Muslim among hundreds of MLAs and ministers who is more qualified than Hindus? This isn't about tokenism - it defies all logic that given these demographics all Muslim candidates for legislature and ministries are inferior to Hindus. Selecting candidates on merit rather than their religious affiliation is not tokenism.

[someone]

Forget about speeches if you want. Are you are trying to say that of all the hundreds of MLAs and ministers under Modi all of them were better qualified than a single Muslim?

Are you saying that secularism is all about Muslims representation? Are the rest not Indians? I guess Indian army won't be secular for you with your pathetic logic. Add to that, these questions never asked to other parties/ persons and yet you keep whining about one particular person.

[someone]

Sikh' date=' Jews, and Buddhists form a negligible percentage of the population in Gujarat. Muslims are around 10% of the population and even close to majority at some legislative level seats. Modi claims to have support of 25% of the Muslim population, and could not find one single Muslim among hundreds of MLAs and ministers who is more qualified than Hindus? This isn't about tokenism - it defies all logic that given these demographics all Muslim candidates for legislature and ministries are inferior to Hindus. Selecting candidates on merit rather than their religious affiliation is not tokenism.[/quote'] Well, so according to Outy, Sikh, Jews, Buddhists shouldn't be taken seriously as they are only negligible. Don't know what else to add. You love being communal, don't you?

[seedhi]

Sikh' date=' Jews, and Buddhists form a negligible percentage of the population in Gujarat. Muslims are around 10% of the population and even close to majority at some legislative level seats. Modi claims to have support of 25% of the Muslim population, and could not find one single Muslim among hundreds of MLAs and ministers who is more qualified than Hindus? This isn't about tokenism - it defies all logic that given these demographics all Muslim candidates for legislature and ministries are inferior to Hindus.[/quote']Is it not possible that within the BJP in Gujarat there arent too many winnable Muslim candidates ? People are selected to contest elections based on their winnability, history of work for the party and of course there are caste calculations involved. In municipality elections a lot of Muslims won on the BJP ticket. Those same people may later contest for MLA elections. Given the success in the assembly elections (even in Muslim areas) I would say that Modi is a good judge of winnability and merit.

[Crookbond]

That is the bane of Indian "secularism", where the discourse is about a phrase in one speech 11 years ago, tokenism and gimmickry rather than policies and programs. Even when we do focus on the latter, we make the mistake of evaluating policies and programs based on their intent and not their results. If we look at even the great stalwarts like Ambedkar, Gandhi and even Nehru - many a times in their writings and speeches they made generalizations which could be considered insulting to one community or another. But did we disown them for that and keep harping on their flaws. For example Gandhi called Muslims more aggressive than Hindus. Ambedkar made disparaging comments about both Hindus and Muslims. We still venerate them.

The gimmickry like 20% GDP for education or the one with largest producer of milk. The Indian "fekularism" is wear the hats of convenience. Rules for others, exceptions for my kids, family, community etc. Once again the original article is about the attitude of the army. The army doesn't go on labeling a class of citizens like we see here on this message board. Neither does the army rake up conspiracy theories about Ghazwa-E-Hind.

[seedhi]

The gimmickry like 20% GDP for education or the one with largest producer of milk. The Indian "fekularism" is wear the hats of convenience. Rules for others' date=' exceptions for my kids, family, community etc.[/quote']On the contrary, Indian "secularism" - which is a thinly veiled euphemism for minorityism - has been reduced to supporting the non implementation of a uniform civil code, even though it is in the directive principles of state policy of the Constitution. The army doesnt indulge in gimmicks to induct armymen on the basis of religion. It doesnt provide only kids of Muslim armymen with cycles and scholarships (a la UPA or Mulayam Singh). The current "secular" discourse is totally opposite to the way army handles religion. And there is no point comparing a message board or an individual to an institution like the army. What can be compared are the policies followed in the army and the policies followed in the civilian govt.