Sachin=GOD Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 Senior Journalist MJ Akbar joined the BJP yesterday. Here is an article written by him on 31 March 2002. Why Modi deserves Nishan-e-Pakistan NEW DELHI, 31 March — Narendra Modi has done enough by now to win the highest honor that a nation can give. Not our nation. What the chief minister of Gujarat truly deserves is the Nishan-e-Pakistan. There are at least two Indians who, to my knowledge, have received this high honor from Islamabad, the late Morarji Desai and Dilip Kumar. Neither served the interest of Pakistan remotely as much as Modi has done in the last four weeks. For Modi has been trying to destroy the idea of India as a nation in which every citizen is equal irrespective of his faith. He has provided the evidence that was once offered only as argument. That is not the only major favor that Modi has done to Pakistan. Till he started his lynch-mob response to the cruel tragedy of Godhra, all the negative focus of South Asia was concentrated on Pakistan and the state of terror that had been spawned by the state of Pakistan, to use a depressing pun. Modi has, in a space of days, taken Pakistan off the world’s front pages and replaced it with Gujarat. Suddenly, the stories of violence and state-sponsored terror are all coming from Gujarat, each day’s tragedy focused through television cameras. If President Pervez Musharraf has not yet sent a thank you letter to his benefactor in Ahmedabad, then the president is remiss. The television camera has existed through all the stages of the Ayodhya movement, from its revival by Rajiv Gandhi, misled by Arun Nehru, to the searing Rathyatra of L.K. Advani, to the demolition of the Babri Mosque in December 1992, to the riots and bomb blast that followed. But television as a news-force did not. Television news was still what Doordarshan chose to show you, and it did not choose to show you very much. Zee was still an incipient dream of Subhash Chandra, offering fresh lines in entertainment that would eventually grow with extraordinary speed to become an empire. Star was but a faint glow over a Hong Kong sky, searching for a focus on India. CNN existed, but more in theory than in fact as cable had not yet begun to chain the living room to the box; BBC was still getting its act together. Channels like Aaj Tak and Sahara were not even conceived. E-mail did not exist. Modi’s Gujarat has happened after the media revolution, when every story can become world news in a way that is unprecedented. Modi has shamed India before India and before the world. He has unhinged a crucial element in India’s sense of itself as a civilized democracy, and offered every television viewer an image of anarchy wreaking havoc with the wolfish help of a chief minister gone berserk. That image walked across the world, through the clearing house of American media, even as newspaper journalists confirmed its footprints with detail and analysis that created whirlpools of shock. The shock was not about the violence itself; no one is so naïve as to believe that any society can eliminate the horrors of internecine conflict. The shock was the daily sight and sound of a chief minister justifying lynch mobs, finding excuses for a pogrom and telling blatant lies that were broken up and exposed by reporters. As if death, arson and revenge were not enough, Modi laced each day with another mental and emotional shock that pandered to the worst aspects of inhuman nature. He valued tragedy on different scales, offering what might be called a two-price theory for death: A Hindu life was worth twice the life of a Muslim. Even to write this seems obscene. Man has not been fortunate enough to create equality among the living but at least there used to be some comfort taken in the fact that death left us all equal. Even that has changed. No responsible Indian has ever thought in this manner through all the horrors that we have witnessed in our nation since its bloodied birth. No Indian can. No Indian will, for such thinking lies outside the ethos, culture and civilization of my India. Modi belongs to a political party, the BJP, which calls itself more Indian than any other: I doubt if any such communal valuation ever occurred to Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee or Home Minister L.K. Advani or Human Resources Minister M.M. Joshi, to name the triumvirate at the top of this political hierarchy. Less dramatic perhaps, but of a piece with the twisted thinking that dominates Modi’s politics, are the lies that he has been using ad lib and at random and to everyone, including his own leaders about matters such as relief and rehabilitation. What is it that makes Modi do what he has done? It cannot be politics alone. He is not the first Indian politician to have played politics with communal riots. That list is long and cuts across political parties. The conventional idea is that he was handed Gujarat at a time when the BJP had lost its moorings, and is doing what is necessary to reconsolidate the Hindu vote. The operative word here is "necessary". For that becomes a subjective interpretation. Cynicism comes naturally to a politician. Perhaps that is a natural defense mechanism in a difficult job. Cynicism is a non-partisan characteristic. Modi is not a cynical politician. Cynicism implies a degree of indifference, and Modi is not indifferent to anything. He is passionate in whatever he does. But his preferred passion is hatred. This is what makes him unique: He actually uses hatred as a political weapon, and employs both subtle and crude means to provoke a similar passion among others. You can see the difference in his eyes; there is gloat floating in them. This is why it is especially dangerous to leave power in the hands of a man like him. It is almost implicit that anyone who has been soaked in the RSS version of Indian history has acquired a deep sense of grievance against Muslims, but Modi is not the only graduate from the RSS school. You do not see this intense, Nazi-type hatred in either the attitude or the behavior of others from this school; the political stance, even when it is acrid, does not become a personal vendetta against a community. The Gujarat carnage does not stop because Modi does not have the desire to stop it. In one sense he is helpless, because the vengeful emotion that controls him is far more powerful than any other competing force, even suggestions he may be receiving from his own periodic bouts of good sense. The desire to "punish" Muslims just a little more, to "teach them one last lesson" in some unknown village, to spread the political poison to yet another corner before supplies are curtailed becomes irresistible. Where murder has been prevented by the arrival of civil society, pettiness takes over. Officers who have done their duty and shown that there is an India that can keep hold of its values through the haze of blood are transferred. Relief to refugee camps is held back so that hunger may revive dried tears. Hatred generates far greater energy than love; that is one of the tragedies of human existence. Love is warm blood; hatred is cold blood. If you need a vehicle for your hate, Mr. Modi, direct it at the evildoers who are guilty; no one will stop you from bringing the guilty of Godhra to justice, and let them rot in their own hell. But to hate the innocent is depravity. No government can prevent an incident, however evil it might be. Perhaps an instant reaction is also unavoidable. But the margin of error disappears after that. One of the first instructions given to a civil servant during training is how to stop a mob. There are instances in Modi’s Gujarat itself where civil servants have done their duty because their conscience was above the signals of hate they were receiving. One serious difficulty about using hate as policy is that at some point it begins to consume the perpetrator. Maybe Modi does not understand this, heady as he is with life-and-death power; what is surprising is that Vajpayee refuses to see what is obvious. He is of course being told what Modi wants him to hear; that this politics of revenge has made Modi into some kind of hero, and that this "heroism" will deliver votes. If Mr. Vajpayee believes this then he does not believe a single line of what he himself has written as a poet. Strange coincidence. Just as I had written the last sentence, a colleague entered my office and handed me an agency story. It was the text of a new poem by the prime minister, written in Nainital. Geet nahin gata hoon. / Benaqab chehre hain / Dagh barhe gehre hain / Toota tilism aaj / Sach se bhay khaata hoon / Geet nahin gaata hoon. / Lagi kuch aisi nazar / Bikhra sheeshe ka shahar / Apnon ke mele mein / Meet nahin paata hoon / Peeth mein churi-sa chand / Rahu gaya rekha phand / Mukti ke shaano mein / Bandh jaata hoon. / Geet nahin gaata hoon. I cannot sing a song. The masks are off; the wounds are deep; the mystery is gone; I am afraid of truth; I cannot sing a song. The eye is evil; the city of glass is shattered; even among my own I cannot find my love. The knife in the back is like a moon, and Rahu has crossed the line; instead of salvation I find myself in shackles. I cannot sing a song. You have felt the pain, prime minister. You must now give the India we want back to us Indians. http://www.arabnews.com/node/219568
Precambrian Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 Yep 12 yrs have passed - so are u doing what u did in 2002, mister?
ravishingravi Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 ^ answer is yes. On this matter. If anything Sidiqqui's change in position is indicative of what most Indians feel. His interview with Modi convinvced my mind to large extent.
Shunya Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 The 1989 Advani Parallel for Modi in 2014 A major milestone of BJP’s history came about on September 25th 1989 when the party’s national executive met at the Shanmukhananda auditorium in Bombay. It was in the run-up to the 8th Lok Sabha elections that many opposition stalwarts and ideologues were trying to bring about an alliance between the BJP and the Janata Dal to oust the Bofors-tainted Rajiv Gandhi regime. The main stumbling block for such an alliance to fructify was V.P. Singh who had recently joined the Dal and was vehemently opposed to what he berated as a “communal party” (at least in public). One of the chief negotiators from the saffron camp for a broad opposition coalition was Bhaurao Deoras a genial RSS man who had friends cutting across party lines. Deoras suggested only seat sharing instead of an alliance as a solution to the vexed problem of lack of opposition unity. A foxy V.P. Singh wanted seat sharing only in states like Rajasthan, Gujarat, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh, but wanted to keep BJP out of the loop in the then undivided UP and Bihar which together accounted for as many as 140 MPs. He wanted to ride on BJP’s strength in Western India but was unwilling to forego Muslim voters in the heartland. Many in the saffron circles, still weary of a 1984 like result when BJP spectacularly under-performed by winning just 2 seats, were willing to make compromises of all kinds to stay politically relevant. In fact, it is quite well-known among the saffron camp followers that the top leadership of the Sangh and the still fledgling BJP were inclined to accept seat-sharing arrangement on V.P. Singh’s terms for the ostensible reason of defeating Rajiv Gandhi. One man though stood strong on his ground, rejecting any purely opportunistic seat-sharing arrangement. He spoke thus in the Bombay national executive of September 1989, “If they come, with them; if they don’t, without them; and if they oppose us, in spite of them… irrespective of what the Janata Dal does, we are determined to get rid of this most incompetent and corrupt Rajiv Gandhi government”. He stuck to the principle of either a seat-sharing arrangement everywhere or nowhere. Only one man possessed such clarity of thought in the initial years of the BJP, he was none other than Lal Krishna Advani, the then president of the party. His tough stance stood the party in good stead as BJP made a historic leap from 2 to 85 MPs in the 1989 elections. It was indeed a strange long jump seldom seen in democratic elections anywhere in the world, let alone in India. BJP had arrived on the national scene, and from that point in time of history, the party has never looked back. Had Advani not stuck to his guns in 1989, BJP may well have suffered the fate of the Janata Dal which kept shrinking with each passing election even as BJP kept growing. Today Janata Dal does not exist, while BJP is the only national alternative to the Congress. But, unfortunately, the same Lal Krishna Advani who once conquered all the adversaries of the BJP with his clarity of thought, is today a confused soul. It was Advani who had articulated in the same Bombay session of 1989 that BJP believed in positive secularism, whereas Congress and other parties believed in vote secularism. He had then gone on to define positive secularism as “justice for all and appeasement to none”, a political philosophy that is the corner stone of Modi’s BJP in 2014! Political philosophies are never prisoners of individual leaders, for age cannot wither them nor custom stale them. As today’s Modi speaks of “Constitution as the only holy book and India as the only religion”, the Advani of today sulks that his party is not as “inclusive” as it should be! As today’s Modi speaks of governance for all and appeasement for none, the Advani of today is more enamoured by the pseudo ideas of “inclusive growth” propagated by the likes of Nitish Kumar. As today’s Modi wants to take a decisive right turn in the economic trajectory of India, the Advani of today is all praise for socialist leaky cauldrons like NREGA. History has a strange sense of humour reserved for old men who refuse to gracefully accept their own ideas transforming into more viable political entities. History ridicules them as a petulant child who cries for his lost toy. L.K. Advani’s spectacular achievements of the 1990s are indeed praiseworthy, but it must also be remembered that it was Advani who made it possible for the BJP to go below the 20% mark for the first time in two decades in 2009. When a party goes into the sub-20% vote-share region, its electoral significance gets reduced by a factor much larger than what is borne out by mere numbers, for seat conversions are almost halved in late teens as compared to early 20s. In simple terms, a party that goes into the sub-20% vote share is clearly on a path to national suicide! http://centreright.in/2014/03/the-1989-advani-parallel-for-modi-in-2014/#.Uy41LqiSw5s
bulbul Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 NaMo ask supporters not chant Har Har Modi :hatsoff:
Crookbond Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 Didn't have a problem in the last 6 months with people chanting it on his stage on rallies across India.
bulbul Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 May be he thought it will die down,it didnt happened so Modi spoke out
Crookbond Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 Yes, it went on increasing from September to February and he was hoping it would "die down". Also, good strategy to "die down" by allowing chants on his stage during rallies.
bulbul Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 You can start :whine: after a week or so if it continues...atleast today you can keep calm.
seedhi Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 Controversial Muthalik forced to exit BJP in hours http://www.ndtv.com/elections/article/election-2014/controversial-muthalik-forced-to-exit-bjp-in-hours-499103?pfrom=home-lateststories Good that a misstep by the Karnataka unit has been corrected immediately.
bulbul Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 Great move by BJP..listening to its leaders. Feel sorry for secularists or shall we say they made BJP make this decision.
seedhi Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 Didn't have a problem in the last 6 months with people chanting it on his stage on rallies across India.Apparently, some seers had recently requested that the slogan not be used. I personally find nothing offensive in it as "Har" stands for eliminating evil. But if some people have an issue, who may have more religious knowledge than a layman or Modi, then it is perfectly logical for Modi to take cognizance and ask his supporters to not use the slogan.
Texan Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 The 1989 Advani Parallel for Modi in 2014 http://centreright.in/2014/03/the-1989-advani-parallel-for-modi-in-2014/#.Uy41LqiSw5s Good article. True that BJP vote share was in decline after Vajpayee's retirement until recently.
seedhi Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 Pramod Muthalik thrown out of the BJP within three hours of joining. He is facing charges of assaulting women. Somnath Bharti violates the privacy of women in the middle of the nigh - and is also facing charges for that. He remained a minister in the AAP govt, and has no action has been taken against him by Kejriwal.
seedhi Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 Great move by BJP..listening to its leaders. Feel sorry for secularists or shall we say they made BJP make this decision.As a consolation prize they have their Somnath Bharti to worship and seek solace from.
asterix Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 Good that a misstep by the Karnataka unit has been corrected immediately. BJP Kanara unit SUCKS!
Texan Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 Pramod Muthalik thrown out of the BJP within three hours of joining. He is facing charges of assaulting women. Somnath Bharti violates the privacy of women in the middle of the nigh - and is also facing charges for that. He remained a minister in the AAP govt, and has no action has been taken against him by Kejriwal. You really expect AAP to see any wrongdoing of their own leaders?
bulbul Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 BJP Kanara unit SUCKS! Have to agree....they are big embarassment
ravishingravi Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 Looks like 210-230. For NDA. They ll have to get 50 or more from UP to have strong govt. Amma will come through. Few independents and tally could be at 280. Hope congress never comes back. If it does, then u hope its different leadership.
Recommended Posts