In India, a win for communalism

Modi’s convincing victory tells us that communal politics, all that they stand for are alive, well in ‘secular’ India.


Editorial December 20, 2012

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had, as most polls have predicted, raced to victory in the state of Gujarat — leading on a vast majority of the provincial assembly’s 182 seats as results from that crucial electoral exercise began to pour in. Most significant of all is the ‘hat-trick’ recorded by Chief Minister Narendra Modi, who has claimed his seat in his home constituency of Mani Nagar with a whopping margin of some 56,000 votes. According to the BJP, Modi’s third term as chief minister makes him a prime candidate to take to post of future prime minister — when, as the party predicts — it wins India’s next general election due in 2014.

The results from Gujarat and Modi’s own win are being seen as a first suggestion of what may happen about a year down the line. Modi is confident his party will fare well in other states as well and certainly, a string of recent by-poll results for the Congress have not been encouraging. Whether things can turn around is yet to be seen in the volatile world of India’s politics where small factors can trigger big changes. It is, of course, far too early to say what will happen when polling time at the national level comes around.

But what Modi’s convincing victory does tell us is that communal politics and all that they stand for are alive and well in ‘secular’ India. It is clear that despite the terrible part played by his party in riots directed against Muslims in Gujarat in the past — and his own controversial stance on such affairs — Modi retains a huge following.

This is clearly alarming. It suggests that more than six decades after the violent events of the Partition, India has not been able to create the communal harmony that Jawaharlal Nehru had dreamed of and written so eloquently about in his many pieces of writing. Gujarat is clearly still a long way from this vision. So, too, perhaps, is the rest of India with Modi representing all that is dangerous about a nation where many tensions between communities still live on.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 21st, 2012.

COMMENTS (46)

Indian | 11 years ago | Reply

People of Pakistan and, particularly, the author of this ridiculous editorial about "communalism" in India: It's a bitter irony that you should point fingers at others when your own backyard has so much rubbish in the form of Islamo-Mania that allows you to kill minorities (Hindus, Christians, etc.), destroy their places of worship, and generally let your law-and-order organs tolerate the persecution of minorities because "they have to be persecuted" since they live in a "very modern, tolerant and hospitable" Pakistan where only Muslims can exist. Isn't that a piece of stone-age crap on the part of cave-dwellers who even call themselves "democratic"? Do you Pakistanis know how ridiculous you sound when you call others "communal"? By the way, none of the Pakistani papers reported today about an incident involving the slaughter of a mentally deranged Muslim man in Pakistan for "insulting" the Koran. I ask myself why the media, which plays a watchdog role in a democratic society, not report such incidents. Or is it that the media is run by some goons in politics or, worse still, by your mullahs? I suggest you check out the link below but also read the outrage felt by readers worldwide over this incident. The comments of the readers will be found below the story: http://news.yahoo.com/mob-pakistan-kills-man-accused-burning-quran-074301668.html

gp65 | 11 years ago | Reply

@Dee Cee: You say : "It is the symptoms of hate (Modi, the 3D Hindu hriday what not) and ignorance (Swaraj with the song), that I oppose." and you also say "BJP would do well to junk a hatemonger (staunch Hindutvavadis like Advani never fared well) and look for somebody like Sushma Swaraj, who can counter Sonia and Rahul well."

So what is your real opinion about Sushma?

You say "Gujarat is communally divided and hence Modi won. He could bring a trillion dollars, make amazing highways, but he will still be inimical to the spirit of Gandhi and Nehru. More bridges mean ZILCH if India is not secular" and you also say "I have never argued that Congress is is not communal."

So if you agree Congress is is communal and it is in power, then we have a party which is neither building bridges nor is secular. Why then is Modi who is supposedly communal but at least builds bridges not a better option? My definition of secular is anyone who swears by the constitution and implements laws fairly between people of all faiths and castes. But your definition of secular is a party during whose rule no riots should have occurred. And also according to you only a secular party can come to power, so who in your opinion can come to power?

You continue to call Modi hateful even though there have been no riots in Gujart in the last 10 years and in 9 out of 14 seats where Muslims had a sizable voting percentage, BJP won, so why do you say that BJP won due to a divisive vote? You ARE entitled to have your own opinion but you are not entitled to your own facts.

Also he explained why the riots happened , he did not justify them HAd he justified them, riots would have recurred after Akshardham temple episode in October 2002 wher e50 devotees were killed in the temple.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ