Monday, June 19, 2017

Kalam to Kovind

Kalam to Kovind 

Journey of BJP 
from Statesmanship 
to Pusillanimity 

     

     In 2002, NDA under Vajpayee, proposed the name of APJ Abdul Kalam as its Presidential candidate. In 2017, a far stronger NDA under Modi proposes the name of a career politician Ram Nath Kovind for the same post. 

     The choices & the underlying narrative couldn't be starker. Vajpayee promoting Kalam was primarily a sign of his statesmanship. Of course, the secondary benefit NDA accrued was that Kalam's name evoked immense respect amongst the citizens too for the sheer contribution Kalam had made to India's security. Needless to say, Kalam got spontaneous support from non NDA parties too to become one of India's most admired presidents.

     15 years on, NDA which has a massive 49% votes compared to opposition's paltry 35% & 13% non-aligned votes in the electors collegium, choosing Kovind as its candidate is a consummate statement in itself. BJP president Amit Shah, while announcing Kovind's candidature, described him thus : "Kovindji has worked tirelessly for the Dalit community & the backward castes". This caste calculus, coming from BJP which pomps itself about a singular Bharat where caste, creed etc becoming irrelevant in a Hindu ocean reflects the imminent jitters within the BJP. 

     Kovind's promotion is an unambiguous acceptance by BJP that it is now unsure of its popularity, hence it is skeptical of its numbers in the presidential election. Its wobble is amplified by the fact that presidential polling is paradoxically not conducted via the trusted EVM's, rather thro secret ballot on paper with no whip. This essentially compounds BJP's nervousness as presidential electors (MLA's & MP's) will vote as per their conscience & in BJP's assessment its unpopularity may not even fetch it its guaranteed 49% votes. 

     Common sense would have dictated BJP to propose a renowned publicly adulated figures (media too reported it) like Justice Santosh Hegde, E Sreedharan, Amitabh Bacchan etc. However, choosing a career politician & highlighting his lineage only points out the obvious BJP  disquietude. 

     The choice of Kovind is clearly reflective of a defensive BJP on its back foot which knows it has lost considerable ground of public support vis a vis its politics of polarization, DeMo fiasco, farmers anger, parochial policies, economic slowdown, UP governance failure to name a few issues.

     In the short term, by promoting Kovind, BJP plans to wash off its anti dalit image & at the same time ensure his victory with non NDA support. However, by not putting up a national icon as nominee, the BJP is acknowledging its malgovernance mea culpa aloud. 

     Via Kovind, BJP admits the fact that the 2014 Acche Din popularity bubble has burst & it is in a jittery state of trepidation about the next general elections. 

Wednesday, March 1, 2017


THE GURMEHAR BINARY

     Gurmehar Kaur has today become a rallying point. A student of Delhi University, she exercised her right to publicly state her opinions. In response, dozens of Page three gimmicksters and an few ministers jumped into the bandwagon to answer the 20 year old. 

     If the sinisters are threatening physical violence to her, Mr Minister of home seems to have donned a clairvoyant's robe to diagnose her mental state. In this theatre of the absurd, a few people seem hell bent on twisting the meaning of freedom of speech. It is an absolute right. Period. This fundamental right is guaranteed by the constitution of India. Period. The constitution does not subscribe to threat of violence. Speech and expression are in itself abstract, hence benign occurrences -whereas actions are tangible and the potential to have malevolent manifestations. 

     As for the Mr Minister, suffice to say that he voluntarily ceded his free speech right on the day he took oath of office & secrecy. This oath is administered in view of the sensitive information a minister gets privy to. His free speech right is substituted by discretion during his ministerial tenure. 

     The epicentre of this storm is the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi parishad which is a declared subsidiary of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh. To understand ABVP's actions, it is imperative to understand the ideological moorings of its parent body, the RSS, in an objective manner because there is flurry of debates for and against the Sangh. 

     In this din, there is a need to dispassionately see similar occurrences across history around the world, their objectives and their behavioural pattern - for readers to arrive at a logical conclusion.

     Sangh-like establishments around the world by their very nature are communal organizations. Communal here being an ideology which overtly stresses on liturgy (particular way of worship) and Organization here meaning a confederation of homogeneous people who openly advocate gaining political power to achieve the purpose.

     A critical difference between an organization and an institution is that -heterogeneous people constitute an institution and they are more concerned about rendering social service driven by duty consciousness - whereas organizations are more concerned about attaining power & dominance.

     The second yet very important characteristic of any communal organization is when it is out of power, it demands equality/privileges for itself but when in power, it imposes its own supremacy over others.

     Another irrefutable trait of organizations is that during times of social emergencies, when the majority population is immersed in overcoming the emergency - these organizations propagate and indulge in cultural activities. However, once the social emergency phase is over, they declare their own monopoly over patriotism.

     Classic examples of such uncanny behavioural pattern are galore -especially National Socialist German Workers Party's role of indulging in cultural activities in the 1920's when majority Germans were trying to rebuild their nation after its defeat in WW 1. The same party declared its monopoly over patriotism in 1940's in a resurgent Germany. Or the actions of Italian Socialists during 1910's when Italians were going through an economic crisis whence Socialists initiated cultural programs. But by 1920's with the crisis over, the Socialists anointed themselves with supreme nationalism.

     Such examples are found aplenty in the Arab world, esp Iran. While Iranians were demonstrating against the western crony Shah in 1970's, Basij Mostazafan propounded cultural activities. But the moment the Shah was overthrown in 1979, the BM claimed ownership over patriotism and is till date in power in Iran. In the case of Afganistan, in 1991, While ordinary Afgans were struggling to get rid of Soviet Backed crony regime and the resultant chaos after Soviet withdrawal, The Talib propounded cultural activities by opening religious schools. But by 1994, when an interim government was in place in relatively calmer times, Talibs claimed sovereign ownership over their queer brand of religious patriotism and went on to usurp power too. 

     Sangh's historical evolution as well as behavioural trajectory reflects that although it existed during pre-independence era, its primary activity then was to promote cultural programs (including the times during freedom struggle). However, post 1947, it changed track swiftly to promote, propagate as well as claim nationalism as its USP which it continues to do unto this day.

    Today as Sangh backed BJP is in power, it is but natural for Sangh to project as if its idea of India has gained constitutional validity. From here on its easy. Either my way or the highway, any divergent view can be dubbed treason.


Ps:
The objective of this piece is not to be critical of any organization. This narrative is just a juxtaposition of similar organizations around the world, more so now, because this has become national discourse.

Karpuri Thakur

  भारत रत्न कर्पूरी ठाकुर  का कर्नाटक कनेक्शन (Click here for Kannada Book Details)        कर्पूरी ठाकुर कम से कम दो बार बैंगलोर आये। एक बार...