| Narendra Modi under attack from IPL Kochi franchisee | |
 | |
| The controversy surrounding IPL Kochi franchise took yet another political turn on Thursday as Lalit Modi was accused of working under the pressure of Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi for taking away the bid to Ahmedabad. | |
|
| |
Monday, March 28, 2011
Narendra Modi under attack from IPL Kochi franchisee
Gujarat A la Modi
Gujarat
A la Modi
THE teetotal state of Gujarat, in the west of India, has once again revealed a taste for a strong p
olitical brew. On December 23rd a vote count showed that the state's chief minister, Narendra Modi, romped home to another big victory in elections to the state assembly held earlier that month. Mr Modi, a member of the Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), was already the most controversial figure in Indian politics. He may now become one of the most influential.
Once the size of Mr Modi's win was confirmed—the BJP carried 117 out of 182 seats—it became hard to remember why anyone thought he might lose. But the Congress party had raised its hopes, if not its game, in this campaign. Sonia Gandhi, the party's leader, crossed swords with him. The leaders of two powerful Gujarati castes, the Patels and the Kolis, had fallen out with him (at least until he won). And some of the party's foot-soldiers also resented a leader who owes more to a personality cult than to them. As Mr Modi's supporters donned smiling “Modi” masks, some of the rank-and-file grumbled that no one was bigger than the party.
Mr Modi had won the previous election, in 2002, in special circumstances, just ten months after 58 rail passengers, many of them Hindu activists, died in a blaze blamed on a Muslim mob. The anti-Muslim sentiment unleashed by that incident—up to 2,000 people were killed in the pogrom that followed—helped sweep Mr Modi to victory.
Since then, the state's Muslims have “learned to live with downcast eyes”, as a report by one local lobby group puts it. But the rest of the state has its head up and its chest out. Always prosperous and enterprising, Gujarat is now booming. Its voters clearly credit some of this prosperity to Mr Modi's administration, which is notably less venal and ineffectual than those Indians in most other states have to endure.
India's nightmare is that the millions left behind by its new prosperity might lash out, turning to Maoist violence. But equally sinister is the prospect of its aspirant classes casting their lot with a business-friendly strongman who promises to make the proverbial trains run on time and to keep disaffected minorities in check.
The BJP is short of “tall” leaders. L.K. Advani, its candidate for prime minister, is 80. The party's president, Rajnath Singh, has made little impression: no one is wearing masks made in his likeness. Mr Modi, on the other hand, has attracted intelligent and ambitious strategists, such as Arun Jaitley, who would not waste their talents on him if they thought him no more than a provincial demagogue.
But his campaign, so successful within the state, may have done some damage to his larger ambitions. His frequent appeals to Gujarati chauvinism jar outside the state, and he struggled to maintain decorum when provoked. After Mrs Gandhi's reference to “merchants of death” was taken as an allusion to his alleged connivance in the 2002 pogrom, his defiant response appeared to justify a notorious 2005 murder by policemen in his state. The exchange earned both leaders a reprimand from India's Election Commission. This populism may win votes. But the BJP must also remain acceptable to a coalition of parties if it is once again to head a national government. Mr Advani has had to soften his image to lead his party. If Mr Modi is ever to succeed him, he too will need to try on a different mask“Narendra Modi & The Trains Are On-Time Again!
“Narendra Modi & The Trains Are On-Time Again!”
Image by World Economic Forum via Flickr
This morning’s Wall Street Journal has a long feature on the Indian State of Gujarat, which is essentially a PR piece for Narendra Modi, the Chief Minister of the State, who has been identified by a series of groups, inquiries and reports to have actively encouraged the killing of hundreds of Muslims in Gujarat in 2002, after the mysterious death of 58 Hindu pilgrims in a train fire that year.
The article (by Gita Anand and Amol Sharma) takes up the by now well-worn argument that Modi has helped to open Gujarat for large corporate interests from India and abroad. The article quotes several sources (including my friend Mira Kamdar) who cast doubt on Gujarat’s development “miracle” under Modi’s leadership. India’s Supreme Court is still (all too slowly) investigating his culpability in the 2002 genocide.
My question is: When will we cease to use “economic miracles” to justify the actions of tyrants, hard men and demagogues? General Pinochet was alleged to have done a lot for Chile, Shah Reza Pahlavi for Iran before the Islamic Revolution, and Lee Kwan Yu for Singapore. There is a still lively debate going on about the pros and cons of Hitler’s bizarre form of Keynesian interventionism in Germany. China has obviously done brilliantly over the last decade. Do Mr. Modi’s supporters support the Chinese state?
Genocide against Muslims, inviting global corporations to push through high-profit projects in minimally-regulated special investment regions and making all those who speak for secularism in Gujarat fear for the jobs and their livelihoods, is not a developmental model to be endorsed for India or for any other humane democracy.
Indians do not mind their trains running slow some of the time. But they do not want to be forced passengers on the Tyranny Express.
-Arjun Appadurai is an expert in Globalization, Cultural Anthropology, Media, Cities, and Violence.
Narendra Modi visits Cinemax Ahmedabad for special screening of "Khichdi”
Narendra Modi visits Cinemax Ahmedabad for special screening of "Khichdi”
The event flow started off with the screening first followed by the 1 on 1 interaction with the media | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| |
Narendra Modi's remarks on Dalits angers people
 |
Narendra Modi's remarks on Dalits angers people National Commission for Scheduled Caste (SC) chairman Buta Singh and other members of the panel who were on a two-day visit to Gujarat to review the status of the SC community in the state, criticised chief minister Narendra Modi for his allegedly calling Dalit community as 'Mandbudhi (mentally retarded). Singh in his media briefing said, "I respect Modiji but his statement calling Dalits as Mandbudhi is highly regrettable. Those who call Dalits as Mandbudhis are Mandbudhis themselves. Lord Rama ate the fruits offered by Shabri and our culture respects Shabri even though she belonged to the backward class.''
Singh said that after meeting MP/MLAs, representatives of various SC organisations, chief secretary, all the principal secretaries and DGP, he has got a very sad picture of the status of SCs in the state. He said that, "The status of the SC community is highly pitiful in the state. UP, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Rajasthan are ahead of Gujarat, which stands fifth in atrocities against scheduled castes.''
"I have asked the state government to provide details regarding the various issues pertaining to the scheduled castes. The main issue is the ineffective implementation of atrocity law which has resulted in very low rate of conviction in the atrocity cases. The conviction rate in atrocity cases is very low in Gujarat with only 6% of the cases ending in conviction in 2009," he said.
He added that 1,106 atrocity cases were registered in 2003 while in 2009 the number was only marginally down at 1,082.
"In Gujarat, SCs account for 7.5 % of the total population and given this proportion, the number of atrocity cases is considered very high,'' he said.
Singh said that when it comes to recruitment, promotions, allocation of funds and implementation of various centrally sponsored schemes as well as special component plan, grave injustice is meted out to the scheduled caste by the government.
"Against the required 7% mandatory provision, Gujarat has allocated between 2 and 5.5% maximum during 2002-03 to 2009 which is against the law,'' he added.
Despite Gujarat high courts' clear order to use technology for underground gutters instead of manhole workers,26 workers have died in Gujarat, he said, adding "Despite the national ban, manual scavenging in Gujarat is widely spared at places, including Mahatma Gandhi's birth place Porabandar and Ahmedabad.''
Gujarat's Social Justice and Empowerment Minister, Fakir Vaghela, gave a detailed presentation on special steps undertaken by the Gujarat government for the welfare of the scheduled castes.
THE EDUCATION OF MODI
THE EDUCATION OF MODI - | |
Narendra Modi is notorious as the abettor, if not organizer, of the killing of Muslims in Gujarat during the 2002 riots. His sway is such that the judiciary, elsewhere generally secular and impartial, failed to punish the killers of Muslims in Gujarat, and the Supreme Court had to transfer their cases out of Gujarat. But Modi is not just a simple man of evil deeds. He has also run the administration cleanly, and made it friendly to industry. He made a spectacular coup when he succoured Ratan Tata from the clutches of Mamata Banerjee. In this way, his dark image has been filling with other colours in recent years. But he is a taciturn man; no one is close to him, and no stories leak about him. So he remains a dark horse. But he too must have been a toddler once, making sweet googoo sounds and crawling between the feet of his parents. He too must have climbed mango trees and eaten green mangoes. He too must have been a bridegroom in a turban smiling shyly at guests. In other words, he may have done devilish deeds, but he is still a human. He does not show his human side too often; but how did he grow up? How was he formed into his present shape? The story starts with the general election of 1971, and the Gujarat election that followed in 1972. The Congress won both. Indira Gandhi sent Ghanshyambhai Oza as chief minister to Ahmedabad. He lasted seven days. There was a revolt in the Gujarat Congress, and he had to resign. Then Indira Gandhi chose Chimanbhai Patel. He managed to form government. But unlike in the rest of India, the Congress (Organization), formed by the older leaders whom Mrs Gandhi had broken off with, was strong in Gujarat. Chimanbhai was in danger of losing legislators to it, and he secured support by corrupt means. He became notorious for it. Then came the Great Inflation; in 1972 and 1973, prices rose by 50 per cent. In December 1973, students in the hostel of the Morvi Engineering College started an agitation against the rise in the mess bill. The student agitation spread, and soon there was a broader agitation against the government. It turned violent. Morarji Desai went on fast. Chimanbhai was in danger of losing support in the assembly. So Mrs Gandhi dissolved it. Then she delayed holding elections. Morarji went on fast again. Elections were held in June 1975, and were won by a People’s Front. Mrs Gandhi allowed its government to last for 18 days. On June 26, 1975, she declared Emergency and ordered arrest of opposition leaders. After that, opposition went underground. Leaders went into hiding. News travelled by word of mouth or in code on telephone or was printed and distributed clandestinely. Students were in the forefront of the agitation; many were killed. Spots where they were killed became memorials. People would gather there, hold prayers, organize impromptu meetings and make fiery speeches against Indira Gandhi and her henchmen. Meetings would bring forth police, lathi charges, shootings, and create even more martyr memorials. The conditions were eerily similar to those in 1942, when the British government arrested Congress leaders and the agitation went underground. Then too, the government spied actively on “agitators”; its police raided homes at night and took away young men suspected of nationalist activities. That is what happened in Gujarat in 1975. It was combined with inflation, which is a standard formula for making governments unpopular. Narendra Modi was then a young volunteer of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh in Ahmedabad. He was a handler of leaders, involved in organizing the concealment and taking care of politicians in danger of being arrested. In this way, he came to know Gujarat’s political landscape intimately, and made friends and enemies across it. In the ensuing decades, he used the knowledge and the contacts skilfully; it is his grasp of Gujarat politics and his ability to manipulate it that explain his extraordinary success. And as he experienced the Emergency, he acquired the prejudices he holds to this day. It is these early experiences of his that explain his visceral hatred of Indira Gandhi’s followers, and the vulgar, tasteless remarks he makes from time to time about Sonia Gandhi. He wrote a book on the Emergency in Gujarati which is an illuminating guide to his personality. It is largely a chronicle of politicians of that time, what happened to them, what they did and how they coped with the Emergency. But that is not what is remarkable about it. What is striking is the absolute absence of thought in it. One would have thought that he would at least display the standard prejudices of an RSS man. But no; there is no reflection, stereotyped or otherwise. This unreflective, practical, personality-oriented style is behind Modi’s subsequent success. Early on, he developed a functional approach to people. He looked on them as potential tools or obstacles, and dealt with them as such. He single-mindedly concentrated on peopling the Gujarat BJP with people who could work with him. When he came to power, he applied the same techniques to the bureaucracy, and turned it into an instrument of his will. Thus when he decided to “teach a lesson” to Muslims, he used the police and judiciary effectively to do so. There was no mercy and no justice; there was just efficient intimidation. But his objectives have changed a good deal since then. He watched with consternation as Gujarat became infamous because of the violence he had orchestrated, and unpopular amongst investors as a consequence. He has worked hard in recent years to erase that unfavourable impression. He created a forum for publicity in his annual Vibrant Gujarat conferences; and he used annual NRI meetings, in which Gujaratis are prominent, to spread his message. It is interesting how little the people of Gujarat figure in this campaign, except as stereotypes — singers, dancers, schoolchildren, or docile workers. His campaigns are mostly about material conditions and achievements — about Gujarat’s ports, which handle a quarter of foreign trade, its excellent road network, its share of India’s industrial output, etc. And the campaigns have worked — not so much because of their content, but because the material conditions for setting up industry are really better in Gujarat than in most other states. Maharashtra used to have equally good conditions, but has been falling behind. The south also has good infrastructure, but is extremely corrupt. Gujarat always had a relatively good administration — an inheritance from the old Bombay province. Modi has done two things. He has reduced the leakage of government revenue that goes all over India into enrichment of politicians and bureaucrats, and diverted it to building up Gujarat’s infrastructure. And out of his own necessity, he has publicized Gujarat’s good administration. Modi’s success is more due to Gujarat than the other way round. But he is an autocrat, and has used his autocratic powers to give Gujarat a considerable competitive advantage over other states. His intellectual equipment is limited, but he has concentrated it in a remarkable manner to rebrand Gujarat, to his own collateral benefit. | |
 |
Rajnikanth compared to Narendra Modi!
Rajnikanth compared to Narendra Modi!
A biography on the famous Tamil superstar, Rajnikanth, has been released on March 6 at Taj Connemara in Chennai. Writer of the biography is the well known political analyst and the editor of the Tamil magazine Thuglaq, Cho Ramaswamy.
The chief guest at the function was M Saravanan, producer AVM Studios who produced Rajni’s last film Sivaji: The Boss. Former Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, D R Karthikeyan was the guest of honour.
Main highlight of the function was amusing speech by Cho Ramaswamy in which he compared the actor with Narendra Modi, Chief Minister of Gujrat. He said bith are similar. Rajni is a good administrator and can lead the state to prosperity if enters politics.
“Honesty and probity are in short supply in politics today. If Rajnikanth comes to power, he will bring in a corruption-free government,” he added.
Cho confessed that he had not gone through the book yet but he praised the actor and said, “Even though he is in films, he is not arrogant. Neither is he after power or money. He follows whatever God says. Perhaps he is the only man who follows God’s words diligently,”
Cho said regarding Rajni’s visit to Rishikesh, “When I asked him why he spends 15 days in a year at Rishikesh (gateway to the Himalayan pilgrimage) surviving on porridge and fruits, he replied with a smile saying, ‘I go there so that I do not have see people like you!’”
Most of the People thought Cho as the advisor of Rajni on political issues. Cho cleared these confusions and said, “People say I am Rajni’s advisor. If he had followed my advice, he would not have become so successful!”
Cho described Rajnikanth as a man who “talks politics but is not a politician. He believes in spirituality but he is not a sanyasi. Rajni is a special creation of God.”
D R Karthikeyan, former said, “The book is a good attempt at recording the events in the life of an actor who achieved success after crossing several hurdles. Rajnikanth was no hypocrite as he accepts his failures and shortcomings in his life openly in the book”,
First copy of the book was given to Rajnikanth’s daughter and filmmaker Soundarya Rajnikanth. She said, “I am proud to be the daughter of a great man.”
For the time being, the book is translated into Tamil and Japanese. Published by Om Books International, the 384-page book includes 100 pictures and costs Rs 490.
Why Narendra Modi Loves To Hate Prof. Ashish Nandy?
Why Narendra Modi Loves To Hate Prof. Ashish Nandy?
Prof. Ashish Nandy, India's leading intellectual acknowledged as the founding fathers of postcolonial studies has recently got a new 'identity'. According to the Gujarat Police he is now an accused in a criminal case supposedly for 'promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth and language.' Definitely neither Prof Nandy nor many of his admirers would have ever imagined in their wildest dreams that a day would arrive when he will face prosecution for his writings. But as they rightly say it, in Gujarat things happen bit differently.
According to media reports the Ahmedabad police have admitted a petition filed by an advocate belonging to National Council for Civil Liberties over Professor Nandy's leader page article in the Times of India ( 8 th January) 'Blame The Middle Class'. It need be added that this is the same council which had filed a few petitions against social activist and leader of Naramda Bachao Aandolan Medha Patekar on some frivolous charges which were later dismissed by the court.
To put it straight, the particular article had tried to analyse the election results for the Gujarat assembly held in December 2007 which had once again given a mandate to Mr Narendra Modi. The article in question revolved around basically three points : One, it had tried to delineate the plight of the Muslims who were condemned to live a second class existence in the post 2002 phase. It had clearly stated that '..[G]ujarati Muslims too are “adjusting” to their new station. Denied justice and proper compensation, and as second-class citizens in their home state, they have to depend on voluntary efforts and donor agencies. The state’s refusal to provide relief has been partly met by voluntary groups having fundamentalist sympathies. They supply aid but insist that the beneficiaries give up Gujarati and take to Urdu, adopt veil, and send their children to madrassas.'
Secondly, apart from the plight of Muslims it had also explained the situation in which the political formations who espouse the cause of secularism find themselves today. And he was unsparing in his criticism of these formations/individuals.For him :
'The secularist dogma of many fighting the sangh parivar has not helped matters. Even those who have benefited from secular lawyers and activists relate to secular ideologies instrumentally. They neither understand them nor respect them. The victims still derive solace from their religions and, when under attack, they cling more passionately to faith. Indeed, shallow ideologies of secularism have simultaneously broken the back of Gandhism and discouraged the emergence of figures like Ali Shariatis, Desmond Tutus and the Dalai Lama — persons who can give suffering a new voice audible to the poor and the powerless and make a creative intervention possible from within worldviews accessible to the people.'
Of course the focus of its attention was on the 'state's urbane middle class' which has remained 'mired in its inane versions of communalism and parochialism'.
The article had concluded with the observation that :
'Recovering Gujarat from its urban middle class will not be easy. The class has found in militant religious nationalism a new self- respect and a new virtual identity as a martial community, the way Bengali babus, Maharashtrian Brahmins and Kashmiri Muslims at different times have sought salvation in violence. In Gujarat this class has smelt blood, for it does not have to do the killings but can plan, finance and coordinate them with impunity. The actual killers are the lowest of the low, mostly tribals and Dalits. The middle class controls the media and education, which have become hate factories in recent times. And they receive spirited support from most non-resident Indians who, at a safe distance from India, can afford to be more nationalist, bloodthirsty, and irresponsible.'
While one may agree to differ with Professor Nandy's observations on various counts, still any concerned reader can see that it did not engage itself in any rhetoric and tried to delineate the challenges which lie ahead. Question naturally arises why did the state government felt pertrubed over this article and decided to give a green signal to its police department to admit the said petition by the council and file a criminal case against him ?
At a general level one can say that targetting of individuals and stigmatising them in very many ways is part of the modus operandi of the Hindutva brigade. And this particular case does not seem to be different. In fact it is a politics that seeks to silence critique, and battles for a notion of the past that is homogeneously Hindu.
Last six year history of Gujarat is replete with many such examples where they tried to silence all those voices who did not fall in line with their agenda based on hate and exclusion. We have before us the examples of the dansescue Sarabhai or for that matter social activist Nafisa Ali or scholar-activist G.N. Devy who were targeted on different occasions.
In Prof Nandy's case perhaps the powers that be did not like the manner in which he tried to delineate the future prognosis of a movement like RSS. He concludes :
'Events like the desecration of Wali Gujarati’s grave have pushed one of India’s culturally richest, most diverse, vernacular Islamic traditions to the wall. Future generations will as gratefully acknowledge the sangh parivar’s contribution to the growth of radical Islam in India as this generation remembers with gratitude the handsome contribution of Rajiv Gandhi and his cohorts to Sikh militancy.'
The criminal case filed against Prof Ashish Nandy reminds one of the villification campaigns which were organised during BJP led regime at centre.In fact with the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) assumption of power at the centre in 1998 and its ongoing attempts to remake the educational curriculum in its own chauvinistic image gaining momentum, intellectuals and academic positions at odds with the Sangh Parivar’s view of history came under attack under various pretexts. The BJP has pursued a concerted effort to malign and delegitimise scholars and intellectuals at odds with its view of India’s past. After the stalling of the Indian Council of Historical Research-sponsored ‘Towards Freedom’ project edited by professors Sumit Sarkar of University of Delhi (DU) and KN Panikkar of JNU, the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) went all-out to weed out the influence of, in the words of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh chief KS Sudarshan, “anti-Hindu Euro-Indians” from the curriculum. In 2001, when the moves by NCERT were underway to delete passages from school textbooks that allegedly ‘hurt’ the sentiments of this religious sect or the other, a delegation of Arya Samajis met Murli Manohar Joshi, the human resource development minister, and demanded that Romila Thapar, the legendary historian along with historians RS Sharma of DU and Arjun Dev of NCERT, be arrested. Not to be outdone, Joshi had also reiterated time and again his pet thesis that ‘academic terrorists’ are more dangerous than armed ones.
Narendra Modi given time to file reply before Election Commission
New Delhi, Dec. 8: Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi was today given more time to file his reply to a Election Commission notice over his justification of the 2005 fake encounter of Sohrabuddin Sheikh.
The Election Commission set a new deadline of Saturday evening at the request of Modi’s lawyer.
The notice was served on Thursday and Modi was given time till 11:00 am today to file his reply.
The three-member Election Commission took the decision after consideration of various inputs, including a complaint filed by social activist Teesta Setalvad alleging that Modi's speech on December 4 at Mangrol amounted to an open exhortation to violence and misuse of religion for political ends.
The Commission also viewed the video recording of the speech.
The Commission prima-facie is of the view that the references to late Sohrabuddin and the linking of his name to terrorism by Modi in his speech amounted to a violation of the model code of conduct.
The Commission said Modi’s observations might aggravate existing differences, create mutual hatred and cause tension between different communities.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has decided to hear two separate petitions seeking action against Modi on his "inflammatory" remarks, on Monday.
The petitions were filed by senior counsel Dushyant Dave on behalf of Rubbabuddin Sheikh, the brother of Sohrabuddin Sheikh and by Prashant Bhushan, who appeared for Javed Akhtar.
Both sought an inquiry into Modi’s justification for the fake encounter.
Sohrabuddin Sheikh, was gunned down on November 26, 2005 after being branded a Lashkar-e-Toiba militant by the Gujarat Police. He allegedly was trying to hatch a conspiracy to kill Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi. The cops also allegedly killed Sohrabuddin's wife, Kausar Bi. (ANI)