The writer is a columnist. He is also a former editor of the Mumbai-based English newspaper Mid Day and the Gujarati paper Divya Bhaskar.
aakar.patel@tribune.com.pk
The shows were about Narendra Modi being denied the chance to speak at the Wharton India Economic Forum over a satellite link.
The desi students of Wharton had called him to speak to them about development. Some others from the campus in Pennsylvania objected and got a petition signed by 300 people. This put paid to Modi’s talk. The people opposing Modi were led by three professors, Toorjo Ghose, Ania Loomba and Suvir Kaul. In their note they said two things that were relevant. First, that “In February 2012, the Supreme Court again criticised the Modi government for harassing activists fighting for justice with trumped up charges”.
This is current and not to do with the riots. It shows, depressingly, how Modi chooses to keep the riots alive. In fact, one of Gujarat’s finest police officers, Rahul Sharma, is facing action next week for going after the killers. The other thing the professors referred to was the Indian National Human Rights Commission report, which states there was “a comprehensive failure on the part of the state government to control the persistent violation of rights of life, liberty, equality and dignity of the people of the state”. Both of these are things that will follow Modi wherever he goes abroad, whether now or as prime minister. Something for him to think about, and possibly correct.
Personally, I think it silly that Modi should not have been allowed to speak. It is an old Indian habit to bully people into silence rather than to debate them.
However, what surprised me was that the division here was between the professors, who were upset with Modi, and the students, who were excited by him. Young Indians abroad seem to love Modi while older Indians are more circumspect. This is similar to Delhi’s Shri Ram College, where students were also greatly taken in by Modi.
When Wharton’s invitation to Modi was withdrawn, the Indian students put out a note saying: “The student organising body was extremely impressed with Mr Modi’s credentials, governance ideologies and leadership, which was the primary reason for his invitation.” They explained their reason for cancelling the talk by saying they did not want controversy: “Therefore, we as a team, would like to apologise for being a catalyst may (sic) have put Mr Modi and the Wharton school administration in an (sic) difficult position.” So, it seems to me that Wharton is producing the wrong type of Indian abroad. It is worrying that they should have, without a single reference to the objections raised by their professors, put out this defiant note after their capitulation.
Previously, this same student body had invited, for some reason, Varun Gandhi. I saw this reported in The Hindu. You will remember him as the man who promised his Hindu constituents that he would amputate the limbs of those they saw as enemies. What wisdom he could have given the students is not easy to figure out. In fact, it is disturbing. The other thing that struck me over the same issue is how different our entertainment industry is from Hollywood, which is the liberal citadel of the United States. Unfortunately in India, the Bollywood artist is opportunistic and not driven by any great liberalism.
Almost any television debate one is on, the BJP or the RSS is assured to have some figure from the entertainment business defending it. Most often it is Smriti Irani, who demanded Modi’s resignation in theatrical manner just after the riots but then saw the light and is now his supporter. Other film stars on the BJP’s side or endorsing Modi are Dharmendra, Hema Malini, Amitabh Bachchan and Shatrughan Sinha. This is not to say there aren’t any in Congress or elsewhere, but we don’t have Hollywood’s revulsion for politics based on nationalism and religion. This week, I had the unpleasant experience of being on a panel with actress Kiron Kher, who I did not know was a fan of Modi, screaming at one of the soft-spoken professors who moved the anti-Modi petition. Shouldn’t Bollywood, with its pretend liberalism, at least pretend to be against Hindu fundamentalists? Strange that it isn’t.
And how interesting to learn in the same week that our students and our actors are becoming creatures of the Right.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 10th, 2013.
COMMENTS (49)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@MAHAKAALCHAKRA: It should also be mentioned what triggered Gujrat 2002 riots. Burning alive 58 persons including women and chilren was the gravest provocation. Though it does not justify riots, can you imagine what would have happened if 58 muslims were burnt alive in Pakistan by Hindus or Christians?
Modi has already answered all the questions related to riots of 2002. In one of the answer he asked reporter to compare various riots and make your own conclusion.some facts and figures. Gujarat riots less than 1000 dead, 10000 police firing rounds, 150 dead in police firing,35000 arrest,27000 Hindu arrested and 7000 Muslims arrested, hundreds convicted of crime. Delhi riots ,3000 Dead,police firing less 500 rounds,none dead in police firing,less 400 arrest,only few convicted.
Modi's requests for additional police force were denied by congress led Maharastra. Rasajthan and MP government.Supreme court confirmed that he did all that was required to contain riots. compare 2002 riots with any other riots and you will know the truth.
Riots happened because 59 innocent ,including 40 women and children were burnt alive. Many congress workers are convicted for that crime.
@MSS: I also felt strongly at that time that Rajiv Gandhi should not have become the PM and Pranab Mukherjee should have become the PM of India. Rajiv Gandhi had very little experience at that time. However, Rajiv Gandhi became PM only because of Giani Zail Singh.
@Author
Apt analysis. As the comment forum is dominated by Indians so here is a Pakistani's take on the issue: the younger generation is enamoured of 'Rising India' ,so in their calculations only a strongman like Modi ,who he is personally untainted and has good track record in improving economic indicators, can catapult India onto the firmament of global powers. Thus, their dreams of greater India can only be realised by chauvinistic and firm Modi and not fumbling and inexperienced Rahul or any other Congress leader. That don't realise that Hitler also showed dream of Greater Germany to Germans and in his reign Germany made unprecedented economic progress but his particularism brought Germany to knees. Apparently, they are bartering dream of Greater India with a vision of inclusive and secular country.
@mahakaalchakra I agree with most of what you wrote. Anti-Sikh riots are a blot on the congress regime. Sikhs raise this issue from time to time and I support them. Rajiv had not yet become the PM when the riots started. Nobody is defending Rajiv or his goons of that time. He should not have become the PM but Pranab Mukerjee should have become the acting PM. The nation had to learn from it and sadly did not. However, it was not Rajiv himself but his supporters like Tyler and Sajjan. Third electoral victory does not wipe out all the crimes committed before. In that sense, it is another reason why Modi must be stopped. A tainted person cannot be the leader of over 1.2 billion. Prosperity in Gujrat is also selective. Some groups have been purposely left out of it. In any case for Modi to become PM, first BJP have to gain an overall majority in Parliament and that is not likely. In case of a coalition government, Modi is not going to be an acceptable figure. Even if is, read his statement of yesterday " elections are a by-product". He may have meant it differently, but it speaks volumes about his thought. (He might have said " when I am PM, elections will be a minor irritant)"Do you seriously consider him to be the person who is going to support and uphold democracy? I think last time BJP were in power, they did pretty well and might do well again. But it should without Modi.
@Yoghurt lover:
You think there is no corruption in Gujarat....you are surely one of those who think axe deo will get you laid....so naive !!
@gp65: "tPreventive arrests of 17,947 Hindus and 3,616 Muslims were made. In total 27,901 Hindus and 7,651 Muslims were arrested. Nearly 10,000 rounds of bullets were fired in police shootings that killed 93 Muslims and 77 Hindus. On day 3, the army was called by Modi." The crucial things happened in days 1 and 2 when the government machinery was complicit in fanning the "equal and opposite reaction". Senior police officials in Gujarat administration have been at loggerheads with Modi on this and we all know how councilors of the ruling party targeted Muslims with voting list in hand. This was as much a state-sponsored riot as much as the Sikh riots were.
@Razi: " ... On a side note, I think Pakistanis should consider Hafiz Saeed as a counterpart of Modi here for the coming elections. That will really even things out! ... "
I am in absolute awe of your formidable intellect.
@Rakib: "He will learn to behave. Democracy empowers but at times emasculates. Gujarat has found him useful; India will make him quite useless. Once done, life will go on as usual.." Although I agree that the electoral logic makes things difficult for Modi, it should not be reason of being relaxed about it. We need more and more voices, free from political association, to come up and obstruct the rise of this person. It is time ordinary citizens of India show NaMo that we have more power than his American PR agencies. And it is not just the next election. He, and people of his ilk, need to be routed again and again and again till BJP comes to its senses and throws up decent people like Jaitley or Swaraj or Jaswant Singh.
@Quantum: "That it says something about the contemporary Indian religious consciousness and brings to light the dark side of democracy is disturbing. In that sense, I think Pakistan, despite its monumental problems, fares much better in this regard on the electoral side of things." Whoa, wait a sec! This sort of antagonism is less religious and more political, as Rakib has so masterfully pointed out. The narratives of Muslim oppression, and consequent quest for retribution is complex, readily available, plausible from a layperson's perspective, and morally and constitutionally reprehensible. It is not a "dark side" of democracy – it is a test that our democracy, like many others, has to pass. Bangladesh is a model to follow these days, but, I'm sorry, not Pakistan. Although Pakistani media and the liberals are fighting a valorous and righteous fight, my deep respect for them, the social fabric in Pakistan has been severely vitiated.Even RSS is no match for the alphabet soup of "charity" organizations that regularly are courted by mainstream parties and the mother of all agencies.I am sure that Pakistan has turned a corner, and I sincerely wish it becomes a role model for India and all other countries to follow, but that time has not come yet. Best of luck and best wishes, friend! :)
I agree that Modi will make India a powerful country in every sense, but I do not see BJP/Modi coming to power. How are they going to get the majority?. The lefties are allergic to BJP. BJP cannot win UP or Bihar. The only party going to support is AIADMK and they can atmost get 40 seats and that too is very unlikely. Indian are basically stuck with Soniaji.
@MSS:
For the leftists, pseudo-secularists, English media journalists, many Muslims and core-corrupt elements, "Gujarat of Modi has to do better than just PROSPER"; It is not enough to satisfy them that the State displays phenomenal improvement across the board and it is not enough that the State’s pace and extent of development has been hailed as inspirational internationally including the UN. They want to measure mortal Modi on an unheard of set of standards, whether it is on the only one communal riot occurred during his rule 11 years ago or the development work done during his time to improve the lot of masses
Where was this animal you call MORALITY when more than 3500 Sikhs were burnt alive in the Capital in just 2 days openly on the roads of Delhi in October 1984? Mind, not even a single non-Sikh was killed during that Genocide. The central government had the best police and military available right under their nose and command then.
Rajiv Gandhi was the PM then and in next month's election in 1984 Congress was returned to power with unprecedented two-third majority by the voters.
Blame divisive policies of Congress or the mentality of voters.
Why all this moral high ground reservered for Modi? He is neither saint nor shaitan; he is a politician who has a vision for the development of India and is NOT CORRUPT as rest of the tribe in India.
@Raj-USA
I am not equating nationalism with religion. These two are used by different groups in India to advance their pernicious ideas. With due respect, your ideas about nationalism are rather infantile and betray a lack of historic outlook. Nationalism of the kind that is paddled and practised today especially in our part of the world is the most vile of all ideas. And before you become so beholden to the 'virtues' of nationalism, I urge you to read Ernest Gellner and Eric Hobsbawm on nations and nationalism.
On a side note, I think Pakistanis should consider Hafiz Saeed as a counterpart of Modi here for the coming elections. That will really even things out!
@Raj-USA, I would say, if Akbaurdin has made a hate speech, try him and punish him in accordance with the IPC. He is out on bail. Law will deal with him. Nobody is hailing him. I am all for nailing him to the mast. But Modi is at the very least is morally responsible for the killings of so many and he wants to be in in the national driving seat. That is immoral. Nobody can unite Hindus and Muslims because there are too many brands of Islam currently in fashion. The problem is more than social and political.
@gp65 The figures you gave show that the ratio of Hindus/Muslims in preventive custody was 4.96:1, those arrested was 3.6:1 but with a barrage of 10000 rounds those killed was 0.82:1. I am not disputing any figures but these would TEND to to show a bias in favour of Hindus dead. However, that is not the point. The Issue raised by Raj-USA was that Modi should be absolved of all responsibility. I have a different opinion. The jury is still out on this. I too want a strong leader to lead India who is above reproach. Sadly, Modi is not that person. In my extremely limited knowledge of Modi, I think he is one person who could impose emergency in India like IG when he is in danger of being pushed out and lo and behold, bang goes the democracy. BJP must look at the alternatives. There are many capable persons in its upper ranks but not Advani, Jaitley or Sushma. Try Jaswant Singh.
@HelloWorld: "What about Modi’s hardcore stance on other communities such as Muslims? – Leader should be the one who take everyone on board not just one sect…."
Please provide reference to any statement on Muslims which is inappropriate. Muslims in Gujarat have the lowest poverty level in the country and lower than overall poverty level in Gujarat. This would not have been possible if Modi was discriminating against Muslims. His policies are all oriented towards develpment of 6 crore Gujaratis without reference to caste or religion be it irrigation, electification of villages, bringing more and more industries to provide employment and so on.
@MSS: Raj is not aware of facts and hence he says that Modi may not have asked police to ac. HEre are the facts as reported to parliament. tPreventive arrests of 17,947 Hindus and 3,616 Muslims were made. In total 27,901 Hindus and 7,651 Muslims were arrested. Nearly 10,000 rounds of bullets were fired in police shootings that killed 93 Muslims and 77 Hindus. On day 3, the army was called by Modi.
@Angel of peace:
Would you mind sharing and giving links for any of his speeches where MODI has preached violence?
Was 2002 riots first or worst in India?
More Hindu-Muslims died in Bhagalpur and Ahmadabad riots during congress rules. UP with SP (closer to Muslims) and Assam/Maharashta/Andhra run by Congress continue to face frequest serious communal riots as we discuss and these states are not ruled by BJP.
Please stop spreading false propaganda if you cannot provide a solid evidene against a democratically elected (thrice) CM of an Indian state.
I do not understand how ET can allow such comments while many of my comments based on facts and figures have not been published.
@MSS: @Quantum: You say: @Dee Cee You have articulated quite well the rising tide of nationalist/religious extremism among Indians, a sample of which is exhibited daily on these pages too.
You ar so confused to equate or compare nationalism with religion.
It is religion over nationalism that has brought Pakistan to this chaotic stage and I think Pakistan can never realize or recover from this self inflicted disease. Religion over nationalism creates, promotes and nourishes terrorists and traitors, which we all see now in Pakistan. I would like India and for that matter any country, including Pakistan to develop nationalist feelings and sentiments. @MSS: You are comparing Hitler with Modi. All I would say is don't hail Akbaruddin and try to nail Narendra. Modi did nothing more than what Akbaruddin Owaisi and his followers are now asking openly ....... just withdraw the police for 15 minutes is what Akbaruddin said. I am not blinded by the progress he has brought to Gujrat. I sincerely feel that if there is one person in India today who can unite hindus and muslims, it is Modi. Both have to know how their actions will affect others. Anyhow, it was a one time incidence and not like we see often repeated actions by others. Surely, If I see Modi keeps repeating this, I would change my mind. But not for now.
@Quantum:
The mere idea of Modi becoming the PM of India, or that it is even raised as a possibility and vigorously advocated on the internet, at least, is confounding.
PM of India is now no longer as powerful a position as it was during the first three decades after independence. Indira Gandhi was the last PM to have wielded enormous power. (But she too was thrown out by people!) Even her son Rajiv with higher numbers favouring him in Parliament did not have her authority. Modi is authoritarian but he won't have the numbers in Delhi. He is far more powerful as CM-Gujarat than he can ever hope to be in Delhi if by some quirk of electoral arithmetic he does become PM-India. The best he can hope for is to head a Coalition of disparate groups. The Party that wins overwhelming majority of seats in UP, Bihar & Andhra or has strong tie-ups with winning local parties,is most likely to rule the country. BJP stands a slim chance due to failures of Congress & since Indians certainly want a change but it may miss the bus due to infighting, poor relationship with other parties, communal image & since Modi is a controversial & divisive force. India has 35 States.That many legislatures, CMs & that many Super Egos! Modi will have no choice but to sing the same tune of Compromise, Corruption & Pseudo-Secularism! His Hindu-Hindutva-Hindi-Hindustan will not work everywhere. He can not implement Hindutva Agenda of building temple in place of mosque or getting rid of Art 370 or forcing Hindu Civil Code down the throat of Muslims under pretext of Uniformity. He will learn to behave. Democracy empowers but at times emasculates. Gujarat has found him useful; India will make him quite useless. Once done, life will go on as usual..
What about Modi's hardcore stance on other communities such as Muslims? - Leader should be the one who take everyone on board not just one sect....
Modi is a dark black spot on hindushatan secular politics he has destroy the basic nomenclature of the social society of India.His preaching of violence has destroy the communal interaction between them,his ideology has damaged the basic roots brotherhood and peaceful existence which will ruin India in the days to come such monsters should not be allowed to propagate their destructive ideas.
The problem here is precisely the so called secular politicians who have been ruining India with their opportunistic policies. Had the congress government removed the roadblocks to development and reformed so many other sections of Indian governance (reduce corruption, reform justice system, etc), we may not be talking of a Modi here. To the young educated Indian, who knows enough to know that India has become a failure globally (economically and in global politics) and domestically, Modi, and only Modi provides the only believable alternative. Forget about secularism and communalism, these terms are so warped and overused by now that they are almost useless. The truth, is that especially to the overseas Indian, Modi may not be perfect, but he provides the only tangible hope for a country doomed to be at present, a second rate nation. That tangible hope is enough for people like me, to enthusiastically support the man and to despise those that oppose him blindly based on what are often simply allegations.
READ TODAY ET PAPER before commenting on Gujarat riot.
@Rakib:
What is your point? Modi has unleashed some sort of Hindu fanaticism and he is not able to control it?
That is sooo not true. There hasn't been a single incident of Terror in Gujrat, rather anywhere in India.
He is a powerful guy in Gujarat, RSS hates him for various reasons, one of the reason being the Temple thing.
I am not calling him by a single name, because he is not black and white, its more complex than that. That is why I support him. He stood back and let mobs take revenge for the Godhra burning. At the same time, he put Gujarat first, because bad image and violence would hurt it.
A society has to respect its own systems. Until Modi is convicted or sufficient evidence comes up against him(the evidence in possession by most Pakistanis and Indian Muslims but are reluctant to share it with the world), we have to respect people's wishes. In a Democracy everyone is dispensable, but only by the people.
@MAHAKAALCHAKRA:
Your case for Modi.is fully valid. Only a leader of the extreme right is able to control the extreme right criminal rioters. My vote for Modi the next PM. Enough with congress who are nothing but bunh of wolves.causing riots everwhere and acting from the centre.
Rex Minor
Rakib:
Not a single duly authorised temple was broken.
So what exactly you propose? That in order to prove himself a secular guy he should demolish each and every temple that comes as an obstacle.
Ok, How many duly authorised darghahs have been demolished?
One “temple” of Shirdi baba in Sector 22 was running a “house of ill repute” on the first floor.
I mean you want to say that they were running Flesh Trade from the temple. Right.
But aren't we having so many mosques planning next attack and blast on innocent Indians. Or, in your views it's kind of ok to plan to kill innocents, but flesh trade is more objectionable.
now, i know why gujarati Hindus are a wee-bit more fundamentalist that those in other parts.
@BruteForce:
Re:Temple demolitions.Your inferences appear to be based on faulty inputs. Besides,it proves nothing. One can find Aurangzeb gifting money for constructing a Jain Derasar & Akbar demolishing a Hindu temple in very same Gujarat. Under Modi temples were demolished mainly in Gandhinagar,capital of Gujarat. Not a single duly authorised temple was broken. Without exception they were unauthorised, illegal structures. No "stay" could have been obtained for such encroachments on Govt land from Court even as a Magistrate could have heard cases at his residence after court hours. One "temple" of Shirdi baba in Sector 22 was running a "house of ill repute" on the first floor. Yet another in nearby Sector 17 was a gambling joint. To shield Modi from criticism the then chief engineer (road & buildings) whose name I would rather not reveal took the blame on himself when VHP & Bajarang Dal made a song & dance about it. Finally Modi had to eat humble crow & give an undertaking to Ashok Singhal that he will not demolish even a hole-in-wall of a structure or an illegal obstruction to roads anywhere. You will find such tiny but irritating obstructions even in the middle of BRTS corridors of Ahmedabad. Modi can no longer control the tiger he rode!
@Raj-USA "At the worst, Modi can be faulted for not calling in the police and security forces to act quickly" What a position to take? A physically fit father not making any effort to douse flames when his house is on fire and his children are sleeping in inside? This is a crime of Himmalyan proportions. Modi is complicit in the crime by inaction at the very least. There can be many other views. Try to empathise with the families of the dead. Do not let Modi's other achievements blind you. Hitler too was seemingly a great Fuhrer for the masses who literally worshipped him, yet history tells us otherwise.
@Dee Cee:
The other day in office, I was witness to an otherwise-nice person from Gujarat explaining how the riots were necessary and effective in silencing the Muslims for once and all.
And the tragedy then is one wants to become like one's "enemy". This behaviour comes from grudging admiration that Hindus of certain bent of mind have for certain Muslims that are bent. That fascination stems from vicarious fear due to fevered imagination. And Modi played on that fear post 2002....elect me or else bogeyman will get you to take revenge! He doesn't have to keep at it any more; now conditioned Pavlovian Response works by itself! . Of course as you know there is no such thing as "for once & all" in life. I survived 1969 riots of Gujarat by the skin of my teeth. Even that was supposed to be a riot to end all riots. Peace lasted for almost 15 years. Today I find claims to be rather laughable that for 11 years there is no riot in Gujarat (which is due to TV-Media's sentinels,non existent in '69) as if it's a great achievement. Riot is an aberration & BJP wants medal for not creating more aberrations while world is watching closely! There was no H/M riot from 1969 to 1984 too & so what, that's what Govts are supposed to take care of. In 1992, post-Ayodhya, with its chief instigator Advani as MP from Gujarat one knew it was matter of time before Gujarat became experimental lab of Hindutva. Around that time Ashish Nandy the eminent social scientist & clinical psychologist had interviewed the then RSS Pracharak (ideologue) Narendra Modi. He came away with the distinct impression that he had just finished talking to a very dangerous man, a paranoid pracharak whose perception of ( & prescription for) Muslims was quite frightening. A decade before 2002 Nandy did not know that he was being prescient.
@ Raj-USA
Below is the YouTube link for that interesting debate recorded in INDIA TODAY CONCLAVE sometimes in 2007. Watch the entire debate until the end.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ruZLBeelhs
@ Author - First you invite someone then you cancel his invitation citing reasons which has no proof. Isn't that ridiculous ? Remember, it is Wharton's loss not Modi's that the students could not hear him speak.
@Mahakaalchakra: Thank you very much for referring the debate. I shall surely try to google and watch the debate.
If Modi is Hindu fanatic, why would he bulldoze Temples which were in the way of the construction of a highway?
I am not saying he is a saint or a secular guy. But, you cannot paint him in black and white.
There will be two things: 1) He demolished those temples for the greater good of Gujrat. 2) He demolished those temples because he loves himself and doing good for Gujrat will help in the process.
But, the second point could be made for most politicians are doing good. But, in the two points the end result is the same. The youth love that. Everybody wins they say!
It is interesting to note that all these so called writers/authors take shinning example of USA when it suits to their ideology and same writer crucify USA when it doesn't suit to his thinking. Talk hypocrites!
India is the only country in this world tourtured, brutalized and ruled for 400+ yrs by barbaric and invaders from around world. India's so called liberal thinkers don't get it. Ever
While I completely disagree with your shallow opinion, I have to correct you on one thing :
"The other thing that struck me over the same issue is how different our entertainment industry is from Hollywood, which is the liberal citadel of the United States. Unfortunately in India, the Bollywood artist is opportunistic and not driven by any great liberalism."
You must be joking comparing the jokers of Bollywood with real actors of Hollywood.
Please don't call these jokers as actors. You believe the following people are actors : Bachchan Jr, his wife, Shah Rukah Khan, Kaif, Salman Khan and most other Khans with the exception of two Khans, Most all kapoors, Bhatts, Veena Malik, Ali Zafar...
These are good looking jokers. They need to go to an acting school to learn the basics of acting.
Please don't insult our intelligence Mr. Patel.
For a high caliber analysis on the Wharton situation, Patel might want to read the Huffington post write up.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rajiv-malhotra/the-hijacking-of-whartonb2814421.html
Dee Cee
So long as you place the onus of stopping religious hatred on people from all sides you will have the support of many people. If your corporate water cooler teaches anything else, it will do you no good.
@Dee Cee
You have articulated quite well the rising tide of nationalist/religious extremism among Indians, a sample of which is exhibited daily on these pages too. The sad thing is that many, if not most, of them do not even realize it but rather defend it. I won't be surprised to read a comment, similar to the one made by your Gujrati colleague, offered here by any number of Indian commentators. The mere idea of Modi becoming the PM of India, or that it is even raised as a possibility and vigorously advocated on the internet, at least, is confounding. That it says something about the contemporary Indian religious consciousness and brings to light the dark side of democracy is disturbing. In that sense, I think Pakistan, despite its monumental problems, fares much better in this regard on the electoral side of things.
Those who have condemned and protested Sabarmathi has every right to protest Modi. In fact I would support & encourage them. Those who did not, be they Arundathi or Akbaruddin; Warton or Varun have no moral, ethical or religious grounds to condemn Modi. Just don't go back to Babri which would only open up Akshardham and many such.
@ET: Most of my posts have been getting rejected - rather odd given that they are generally polite and within ET policy. Pls consider this one. In their note they said two things that were relevant. First, that “In February 2012, the Supreme Court again criticised the Modi government for harassing activists fighting for justice with trumped up charges”. In reality, the "activists" do not exist - only one, Ms. Teesta Setelvad, a paragon of objectivity who has been feted by the National Knowledge Commission for her eagerness to fabricate evidence and manage witnesses.
For one, it is amazing to note the intolerance that the pseudo-seculars have for dissenting opinions, describing them in the most derisive terms like this one - Unfortunately in India, the Bollywood artist is opportunistic and not driven by any great liberalism. Apparently you are free to air any view as long as it matches theirs - pulling a Henry Ford in political pusillanimity. Second, Mr. Patel targets Wharton students for the cardinal sin of explaining their point of view. So, it seems to me that Wharton is producing the wrong type of Indian abroad. It is worrying that they should have, without a single reference to the objections raised by their professors, put out this defiant note after their capitulation. Pls understand that no objections were raised by Wharton professors. You need to research your articles more thoroughly. Although I do agree that they should have either anticipated the reactions of rabid leftists and erred on the side of caution, or stood their ground.
@Raj - USA:
Modi is on record in one of the live debate with Digvijay Singh and Shekh Abdulla (available on You-tube) in which he claimed that on February 28, he asked all three neighboring states Rajsthan, MP and Maharashtra to sent police reinforcement immediately to Gujarat to help restore peace but all THREE REFUSED to sent any help.
Note that Digvijay Singh himself was the CM of MP in February 2002 and other two states were also ruled by Congress. Digvijay had NO response to Modi's disclosure in the famous debate.
Google it and you will love the debate.
"Steven Wilkinson, Duke University, has authored a paper on Violence and Riots in India. Raw data has been published in the paper "Varshney-Wilkinson Dataset on Hindu-Muslim Violence in India, 1950-1995, Version 2.":
During NEHRU’s rule – 1950-1964, 263 riots in 16 states occurred.
During INDIRA GANDHI’s rule (1966-1977 and 1980-1984) 337 riots in 15 states have been recorded. And, this is apart from the Khalistani violence and then Sikh Youth cleansing in rural Punjab – a chapter of violence by Congress led Police rule, that no one ever talks about!
During RAJIV GANDHI’s time 291 riots in 15 states have been documented incl. the massacres of thousands of Sikhs in Delhi in 1984.
Given the rhetoric against Narendra Modi for having “blood on his hand” because of his error of omission in Gujarat just 3 months after assuming his first leadership post, and the subsequent vilification that has happened, one needs to look at the Governance as a whole and compare the politicians.
Modi has ruled Gujarat for 11 years - there has been ONLY 1 riot. 2002. And, for that he is being made to pay. Ostensibly by people, whose heart beats for Secularism (and against Communalism) and that high road concept of Human Rights.
So, surely, when so many riots and killings were going on in Nehru’s, Indira’s, Rajiv Gandhi’s rules, they must have been at the receiving end as well. Right?
WRONG!!
All THREE of them received BHARAT RATNA for exemplary Governance.”
Courtsey, Huffington Post.
"So, it seems to me that Wharton is producing the wrong type of Indian abroad." It's funny that Mr. Patel thinks only he's the right kind of Indian. Indian students in Wharton are 'wrong' kind of Indians according to this pseudo secular writer. Keep it up Mr rightist. I can only feel sorry for people like you.
Bollywood is as 'liberal' as a dog in heat-it makes a virtue out of its sexual compulsions and calls it liberalism. Shabana Azmi is not Bollywood's most popular representative. But you have rightly pointed out the gradually increasing volume of Hindu rightist voices in India. The other day in office, I was witness to an otherwise-nice person from Gujarat explaining how the riots were necessary and effective in silencing the Muslims for once and all. They had apparently been a great nuisance and needed to be shown their place. Although I was aghast, the statement did not create the flutter I expected around the apparently-PC corporate water cooler. This needs to be stopped, and NOW!
At the worst, Modi can be faulted for not calling in the police and security forces to act quickly. Is it not what Akbaruddin Owaisi recently wanted when he said that let the police be removed for 15 minutes so that his thugs can cause mayhem? What Modi did was to make everyone realize that it is only the State machinery that can protect it citizens. He did nothing more and nothing less. Varun Gandhi, on the other hand, in my opinion, is an opportunist who would not hesitate to become a terrorist if it suits him. In many ways he already is. There is no comparison between Varun Gandhi and Narendra Modi.
Security forces are there to protect patriots and to punish the traitors. This is the universal principle. The patriots and not the traitors pay for the security forces and the security forces belong to the patriots. Over 99% of the Indian muslims are patriots and they never came out in support of Owaisi when he was summoned by the courts. This brave Owaisi, after his chest thumbing hate speech had to pretend sickness to avoid court action. The muslims of India have demonstrated their patriotism when they refused to bury the bodies of the terrorists who carried out the Mumbai attacks.
Well said Aakar... but you won't be spared by the "Modi-is-the-best-thing-to-have-happened-to-the-world" brigade. It's a sad state of affairs.
The problem with Mr. Patel as i see it is not with Indians turning into rabid right wingers but people like you who have hijacked the definition of liberal. Many of lefties consider them judges sitting up high in the sky and passing judgements on whether someone is a rabid right winger fanatic or an intellectual liberal. If such people(marxist) stop using their lenses to see this world then perhaps they can objectively see the bright side of Narendra Modi.
@author: Kiron Kher, who I did not know was a fan of Modi, screaming at one of the soft-spoken professors who moved the anti-Modi petition.
That "soft-spoken" Professor Toorjo Ghose pretty quickly exposed his intellectual depravity. Needless to say, Wharton is really scraping from the bottom of the barrel.