Party with deifferent to party of diffident

A fiction writer is not someone a political party should pay attention to, I would normally say. If the fiction writer is Chetan Bhagat, I would rather stay away. However Chetan Bhagat in his recent article makes some simple points for BJP’s rejuvenation and I feel BJP must pay attention to it.

I was once into RSS. There was one strong observation I made about them is that, they generally deal in absolute. If you are not with them, you are against them. And as Obi Wan Kenobi would say, only Siths deal in absolute. I think a party acquires this trait once it gets into the hands of lawyers. People like Kapil Sibbal and Arun Jaitley always come up with nonsensical arguments on TV. That kind of argument might work in front of the Goddess of Justice but certainly it doesn’t work with our people.

Leave Chetan Bhagat aside and look for more sophisticated advice from someone who is more respectable, Tavleen Singh. Mere the title of her article points out to the biggest problem with BJP. She asks the question “Does the BJP stand for anything ?”.

When Atal Bihari Vajpeyi was at the helm of affairs, I remember my opinion of BJP was something like below. Yes argument suggesting otherwise may come from some people but then no one can deny that the impression they gave was similar to what I felt.

1. Party with right leaning economic policies. The party looked pro-business, started disinvestment and so on.

2. A party that can take tough stand on national security. This image got a blow after Kandahar hijacks but looking as Manmohan Singh I wonder if he would have decided to declare war if Pakistan had tried to occupy Kargil. Vajpeyi at least got it back.

3. Party that is faithful to it’s principles.

4. Party which promotes clean and competent people. It was BJP that got Shourie, Jaswant Singh, Yashwant Sinha into cabinet ministry despite they having a mass base.

When I heard Vajpeyi talking in parliament I could see that he is driven by principles and not opportunism. His decisions reflected that now and then.

Compare it to today’s BJP. It seems like a party with jokers. They spend a lot of time telling us that Congress is corrupt. We all know that we ask “How is BJP any different ?”. Once we ask that question the leadership blames us to be anti-BJP or pro-congress. A trait that the party shares with it’s parent organization. Dealing in absolute when it comes to criticism.

I meet very dedicated and young party workers in Goa and Maharashtra. Whenever I bring up the issue of politics they are very apologetic. The conversation starts with the sentence “I know BJP is not 100% clean..”. Now this is a clear sign that the top leaders have failed their young supporters. Your own foot soldiers don’t believe that the party is clean neither do they believe that you are committed to make it clean.

Each time I see Arun Jaitley, Sushama Swaraj , Advani on television I see that they hunger for power. They have no principles what so ever but they will take the first opportunity to grab power. They do not take a stand on any issue because they don’t know from which side the opportunity might come. The moment you take a stand on some issue some doors are closed for you. If you are driven by principle you don’t care. If you are driven by opportunism you wonder what if “the opportunity to grab the power lies behind that door?”. You try to take an unclear stand.

Tavleen Singh highlights BJP’s failures

When it comes to anti-corruption sentiment in public BJP supported the two idiotic movements headed by Anna Hazare and Baba Ramdev. Could not BJP come up a more political movement of it’s own with a more clear agenda? Couldn’t it see that both Anna and Ramdev are essentially advocating a “statist” approach which is against BJP’s perceived right leaning economic position ? BJP saw a wave and tried to jump on it. #EPICFAIL

The BJP’s reckless support for Hazare and Baba Ramdev is of a piece with the role it has played in Opposition since 2004. It is as if the party’s senior leaders have no political ideas of their own and so are forced to pick them out of newspaper headlines and news bulletins on our 24-hour news channels.

Second, is BJP’s failure to oppose MNREGA. Yeah, it is pro-poor but one can clearly see it is like giving away money from government’s funds to buy votes. Not only it is a stupid scheme it is putting forth a wrong path. Giving our dole. another #EPICFAIL. Why would BJP do that? It feared that if it takes a stand against it, it might lose vote of poor. If the scheme screws up economy, screws up agriculture its okay. All we need is some votes, which too they are not going to get.

If it was genuinely rightist in its economic views, it should have protested vigorously when the Prime Minister agreed to pour taxpayers money into schemes like MNREGA. Even its creators now admit that it has served mostly to spread corruption down to the village level. And, it has created difficulties in the agricultural labour market by handing out dole. This has caused such a crisis that the Ministry of Agriculture itself recently asked that MNREGA be suspended in seasons of sowing and harvesting. Yet, not only has the ‘rightist’ BJP remained silent about the scheme’s flaws, it has allowed it to spread to states it rules.

Third point that Tavleen brings up is the most important one. NAC. National Advisory council is a Sith council set up by the Sith Lord Sonia Gandhi. This an unconstitutional body interferes into all government matters. NAC is powered by whos who of left-secular-liberal lobby that includes Manu Joseph to Teesta Setlwaad (two people were advisors for the recent communal violence bill). The official member list is here. NAC is completely off the media radar. They maintain a very low profile. Most of the people are not aware of it’s existence. NAC drafts laws, it tell PM what he should be doing. In short is a group of unelected people who form policies. BJP should thrown all it’s weight to oppose and dismantle NAC which sadly they havent done.

The National Advisory Council itself is something the BJP should have objected to but never has. From its dubious lawmakers, now comes a food security bill that makes no sense. If it is ever implemented, we might need to start importing shiploads of food grain as we used to do in socialist times when India was famous only as ‘a land of starving millions’.

More puzzling still is the inability of the BJP to speak up even when senior members of the Congress Party have openly declared that Hindutva terrorists are more dangerous to India than the jihadi groups Pakistan sends us. This is so outrageous that political commentators who despise Hindutva, have spoken up but the BJP’s senior leaders have remained silent. So the question that we need to ask is whether the BJP stands for anything at all? Does it have ideas on governance that are different to Congress? Does it have a vision of India that is different to Congress? Does it have a foreign policy that is different to Congress? Does it believe in free markets or a subsidised socialist economy? Does it oppose hereditary democracy?

At least in my case, if BJP wants my vote in 2014 elections they will have to answer the questions mentioned by Tavlee, and that too with absolute clarity and through their actions. Otherwise I would rather like to see Congress coming back into the power and Rahul Gandhi becoming Prime Minister. Under Rahul Gandhi’s completely nincompoop leadership country will travel to a catastrophic destruction at much after pace. After that destruction there will be a hope for a much better future than the B-grade copy of Congress aka BJP can offer us.

 

 

 

 

BJP’s faultlines

Sadanand Dhume is among the few journalists who actually makes a point when he writes something. Indian media overall doesn’t really write about BJP and if it ever writes something it seems as if congress paid them to write it.

In his recent article of WSJ he makes some astute observations about India’s so-called right.

As long as it continues to be limited by a narrow focus on identity politics, and as long as it pursues policies based on opportunism rather than on principle, the BJP will fail both India and itself. [Source]

I think this description of BJP is spot on. BJP’s stand on most of the issues does not reflect their ideological position but clearly reflects their sense of opportunism.

As Dhume explain BJP is probably the only party on horizon that can stand for economic freedom, strong and assertive defense strategy, strong counter terrorism strategy and so on. But party risks this status by supporting Anna Hazare and Baba Ramdev and their bizarre ideas.

Probably the BJP leadership thinks that they should not lose an opportunity to build a negative image of congress party in the mind of people. It probably thinks that it should ride the “popular” wave in order to  win elections and that is where the line between BJP and Congress begins to get blurred.

As Dhume continues:

In recent months, for instance, the BJP has attacked the government’s tawdry record on corruption not by demanding less government and fewer cumbersome regulations, but by backing assorted crackpots and activists: from lawyer Prashant Bhushan, to yoga guru Baba Ramdev, to ardent alcohol-prohibitionist Anna Hazare. Mr. Bhushan believes that corruption in India has soared on account of too much liberalization rather than too little. The less said about Mr. Ramdev’s bizarre views on currency valuations and punishment for tax offenders, the better.

BJP in that sense has been behaving like a Kati Patang. I feel the party only reflects the character of its leaders. People like L.K. Advani and Arun Jaitley are currently sitting on top. Problem with these people is that they dont stand for anything. Advani made some insane attempts to build his image and in the end made a fool of himself. It is a big question why he is still sticking to his chair.

Arun Jaitley’s case is a bit different. Outside politics he is a very successful lawyer. His political image perhaps only helps him in the private business. He is capable of arguing for a point and two days later he can perhaps put up even more splendid opposition.

Nation expects a lot from BJP. Whatever Vajpeyi started they need to take it forward. The party needs to clearly state that they are FOR more economic freedom, more individual freedom, less and less government interference, more aggressive foreign and defense policy.

In the end, it is not enough just to claim that you believe in something, your belief gets tested only when you are ready to take something on it. In BJP’s case the stake is probably electoral success in short run but it will surely rip good results in long term.

Singh is an idiot

When we were kids breaking rules was a thrill. And when we got caught we would often claim ignorance and get away with it.

I am not supposed to get calculator for the exam??? Oh I dint know that, sorry. take it back and let me continue the exam.

As I grew up I realized that the true strength of character lies in accepting responsibility even if it brings a momentary setback. I am sure almost everyone learns that lesson. However our Prime Minister who has decorated so many facy posts who flaunts a Phd in economics has not learned this lesson.

In Goa we have a metaphor to describe something ineffective, immovable and incapable of acting on it’s own. Its “lump of cow dung”. Some congress leaders in Goa use to proudly say a few years back that even a lump of cow dung can get elected on a congress ticket in “so and so” constituency. In my opinion Manmohan Singh, a man who deserves no respect but a deep contempt from the countrymen has finally reached a station where he can be called “lump of cow dung”.

He apparently did not know that Votes were purchased to keep his government afloat. The whole country saw BJP MPs showing cash in parliament. If Manmohan Singh had even slightest trace of honesty within him and unless he had kept his eyes and ears shut throughout, would have questioned his own party-men. Of course assuming he has some authority in the party. IB reports directly to the Prime Minister. They would have told him what was the reality. But he dint do anything like that because the concept of honesty and integrity was foreign to him. He could not question anyone around him because he is a lump of cow dung.

The very reason why Manmohan Singh was made prime minister was because no one in the party considered him dangerous. A man without ambitions, a man without guts, a man incapable of acting against anyone no matter what happens. In this case Manmohan Singh has chosen not to act despite the immense harm that is brought to this nation. Not that he was capable of stopping it but he could have chosen not to be part of it. Instead this jerk has been denying that such things have happened.

Indian system gives immense power to the Prime Minister. If he is good at his job he can know what very few people know. Reiterating a story that Arun Shourie told in an interview.

The prime minister of India has unlimited power. Our system is so structured that the PM knows everything.
Yashwant Sinha [ Images ], when he was finance minister, told me an incident. He got a message from a leader of the state that s/he wanted to see him. He asked Prime Minister (Atal Bihari) Vajpayee if he could can meet that person. Vajpayee said he could meet her/him.
When Sinha went to the state he met the particular leader without anyone knowing about it. He had lunch and talked about all sorts of things. At the end of it, the leader gave him an envelope. He kept it in his pocket. He came to New Delhi and only then opened it.
It was a legal brief on why cases against that leader should not be pursued by the Enforcement Directorate. He put the envelope in his drawer and did nothing about it. He forgot the case.
Several days later he met Vajpayee and spoke about his meeting with the state leader. Vajpayee listened quietly and kept looking at him. At the end of the meeting he asked Sinha, ‘Aur woh lifafa (what about the envelope)?
Sinha was astonished since he had told no one about the meeting and he did not act on what was requested.
Unless the prime minister deliberately shuts his eyes there is no difficulty in knowing everything. It would be incredible that the prime minister would not know. The system is so structured.

How long will Dr. Manmohan Singh continue to fool people by constantly lying ? If his job is to know nothing then why not have a real piece of cow dung in prime minister’s chair? Tomorrow China might attack India and Manmohan Singh will claim that he dint know anything about it.

Manmohan Singh has already lost the “Paragon of Virtue” deception he had created for aam adami. It is time we see him as a despicably dishonest person.

Weekend Re-reading

Came across a very old interview of Dr. Koenraad Elst. A person I admire the most. His intellectual rigor is even better than my other idol Dr. Arun Shourie. The whole interview can be read here.

Q: Let’s put it this way. Going by your own thesis, why has this “Hindu civilisation” failed to produce scholars/intellectuals who respect the tradition of dialogue and accommodation? There is an impression that the RSS volunteers, the self-proclaimed “torch-bearers of this civilisation”, are mostly inward-looking and even their “baudhik pramukhs” are found wanting as far as intellectual rigour is concerned. No wonder, we fail to produce an Edward Said, a Noam Chomsky or even a Huntington!

A: The Indians need not be so modest. Allow me, as an outsider, to have a higher opinion of India’s intellectual performance. Huntington’s notion of a “Clash of Civilisations” was already used by Girilal Jain, who died the year before Huntington gained fame. Have you ever cared to read the works of the late Ram Swarup? He was soft-spoken and avoided hurtful language, yet his observations on the deeper issues underlying the communal problems in India were razor-sharp. The RSS reduces everything to the typical nationalist discourse of “the Motherland vs the anti-national forces”. But there is more to Hindu revivalism than that.

And I would trade Edward Said’s books any time for those of your own Arun Shourie. Said’s “Orientalism” wrongly dismisses criticism of Islam as a colonial ploy. In Belgium alone, there are plenty of Christian refugees from Turkey and Lebanon, and they know who chased them out. Said, however, has become the leading apologist for Islam in the West.

It is, however, true that the RSS has failed to produce great minds. But then that may not be the job of a mass organisation. On the other hand, it is indeed a glaring failure of the RSS that it never produced a serious analysis of the very problems which led to its creation, apart from some sweeping nationalist slogans about “anti-national forces”. This has to do with a choice made by KB Hedgewar and MS Golwalkar against intellectual activity and in favour of mindless activism. But this mistaken party-line of the RSS matters less and less, because there is more and more Hindu self-organisation outside the Sangh Parivar framework. The “shakha” gatherings are becoming obsolete as a form of mobilisation. Hindu civilisation has always functioned in a decentralised manner, and now the “Hindu awakening” (announced so often at RSS forums) is taking place through informal networks, for example, the internet. The movement is reverting to decentralised forms of mobilisation, after the RSS interregnum of boy scout-type uniformity and centralism.

Congress, Communists and other media people have criticized RSS of so many things but none of them comes up with pertinent criticism as by Dr. Elst.

Also, I always get astonished to see all my favorite authors cross refer each other and sometimes use similar language. Elst had invoked Alice In Wonderland long before Shourie did in his classic piece after BJP defeat in 2010.

“The question is”, said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is”, said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master-that’s all.”

A lot of ink has flowed over the question how to define Hinduism.  There is no other religion for which the question of definition is so difficult.  A Roman Catholic could be defined as a person who is baptized by a priest ordained within an apostolic succession going back to Jesus, and who accepts the Nicean Creed and the authority of the Bishop of Rome.  A Muslim is defined by the Muslims themselves as one who has affirmed the Islamic creed: that there is no god beside Allah and that Mohammed is Allah’s prophet.  A Buddhist is one who has taken the triple refuge into the Buddha, his teachings and his community.  But there seems to be no accepted definition of a Hindu, neither one sanctioned by Hindu tradition nor one on which the scholarly community agrees.[Source: Who is a Hindu?]

Elst blew up the tantrums and stratagems of all the secularists, Islamist and communists on the Ram Mandir debate. Today it might me completely taboo to say anything in support Ram Mandir partly because the opponents are in power and some due to the weakness of it’s proponents like BJP.

In India, political incidents frequently pit Hindu nationalism, or even just plain Hinduism and plain nationalism, against so-called “secularism”. In practice, this term denotes a combine of Islamists, Hindu-born Marxists and consumericanized one-dimensionalists who share a hatred of Hindu culture and Hindu self-respect. What passes for secularism in India is often the diametrical opposite of what goes by the same name in the West. Recent events in the Ayodhya temple/mosque controversy confirm the disingenuous character of Indian secularism.

Dr. Elst compares the Hindu revivalism against the so called secularists and if you have your eyes open it is not difficult to see that he has a very strong point. But most of the people dont wish to see.

Genuine secular states have equality before the law of all citizens regardless of religion. By contrast, India has different civil codes depending on the citizen’s religion. Thus, for Christians it is very hard to get a divorce, Hindus and Muslim women can get one through judicial proceedings, and Muslim men can simply repudiate their wives. The secular alternative, a common civil code, is championed by the Hindu nationalists. It is the so-called secularists who, justifying themselves with specious sophistry, join hands with the most obscurantist religious leaders to insist on maintaining the present unequal system.

Likewise, legal inequality in matters of temple management, pilgrimage subsidies, special autonomy for states depending on their populations’ religious composition, and the right to found religious schools is defended by the so-called secularists (because it is invariably to the disadvantage of the Hindus) while the Hindu nationalists favour the secular alternative of equality regardless of religion. In India, sharia-wielding Muslim clerics whose Arab counterparts denounce secularism as the ultimate evil, call themselves secularists. Just as the word deception differs in meaning from its French counterpart déception(= disappointment), the word secularism has a sharply different meaning in Indian English as compared to metropolitan English.

He speaks about the Hindu view and Muslim view of temple in Ayodhya.

We could look at the Ayodhya affair from the Hindu angle. The contentious site is a Hindu sacred site, it is not a Muslim sacred site, so it should simply continue as a Hindu place of pilgrimage and be adorned with the appropriate architecture.

We could look at the Ayodhya affair from a Muslim angle. Of course Ayodhya is not sacred to Muslims. It would amount to blasphemy to claim any sacredness for Ayodhya: Allah is everywhere so He doesn’t need sacred sites, and to the extent that any place on earth can be called sacred, it is Mecca, not Ayodhya. Yet, Muslim warriors have performed their duty of iconoclasm, replacing an idolatrous temple with a mosque. This creates a clear new situation under Islamic law: once a mosque, always a mosque. Muslims should fight to re-conquer the site, and in case Hindus manage to rebuild their temple, a well-planned bomb attack should remedy that anomaly.

Koenraad Elst is a rare scholar who has observed the temple issue very closely without taking sides of any stakeholders. Today both Congress as well as BJP will deny that it was Rajiv Gandhi who had the most pragmatic approach towards Ram Mandir.

One such secularist, a modern man ready to deal with the matter pragmatically, was Rajiv Gandhi. He allowed the Hindus to prepare for the construction of a new temple with the ceremonial laying of a foundation stone (shilanyas) on November 9, 1989. He pressured the Chandra Shekhar government, which was dependent on Congress support, into organizing the scholars’ debate about the historical evidence, in the full knowledge that the temple party would win such a debate hands down. The thrust of his Ayodhya policy was to buy off Muslim acquiescence with some of the usual currency of the Congress culture: maybe nominating a few more Mians as ministers, banning a few Islam-unfriendly books (hence the Satanic Verses affair), raising theHajj subsidy, providing cheap loans to the Shahi Imam’s constituency, donating government land for some Islamic purpose, things like that. Meanwhile, Hindus would get their temple. Muslims would have scolded their leaders for selling out, Hindus would have lambasted theirs for cheapening a noble cause with such horse-trading, but in the end, everybody would have accepted it.

Congress and Communists have criticized Elst to be a RSS man. Elst on the contrary happens to be a strong critique of both BJP and RSS.

The anti-intellectualism of the Sangh Parivar is a sufficiently serious problem to warrant a closer discussion.  The situation on the ground is that RSS men seldom sit down to do any thinking, but are always on the move.  As a US-based Hindutva activist told me: “When I make a phone call to an RSS office-bearer in India, he will most often not be in the Delhi office, not in Nagpur or another town, but somewhere on the way.”  And the wife of a BJP stalwart told me: “Being on the way from one place to another is a status symbol among RSS men.”  With all this physical locomotion, little time and occasion is left for concentrated mental work.

The Sangh has a basic commit ment to India and to Hindu culture, but beyond that, its ideological position is hazy and undeveloped, and therefore mal leable in the hands of ideologically more articulate forces.  It has been more influenced by dominant polit ical currents and intel lectual fashions, often emanating from its declared enemies, than one would expect from an “extremist” movement.  Like in the Congress and Janata parties, quarrels within the BJP are never about ideology.  As ex-insider Balraj Madhok writes in a comment on the Gujarat quarrels: “Personal differences rather than ideolog ical factors lie at the root of the rifts within the Sangh Parivar.”

To an extent, the BJP has its lack of ideological sophis tication in common with all non-Communist parties, most of all with Congress.  A few recycled old slogans, a picture of its long-dead leaders, some material presents for the voter (ad hoc food subsidies, writing off farmers’ loans), and there you have a complete Congress election campaign.  Mutatis mutandis, the same is true for most parties.  The simple slogans on the outside are not the summary of a profound and complica ted programme too esoteric to trouble the voters with (as in the case of the Communists).  The surface is all there is to it, at least as far as ideology is concerned. [Source]

Today, Dr. Elst is not so active. He retired from his role as India watcher long back for reason not known. He also suffered from a rare heart disease which has not restricted his activity.

Dr. Elst has written many books only few of which can be found on bookshelf of any reputed bookstore. However most of his books can be found for free on http://koenraadelst.voiceofdharma.com/books

CAG reports on IFFI

Manohar ParrikarBhagwan ke ghar der hoti hai ander nahi. so goes the adage. But in the Andher Nagari of Goa, where the Choupat Raja Digamber Kamat is ruling, there is both der as well as andher.

Mr. Manohar Parrikar who is largely responsible most of the good things in Goa that exist today, was summoned by CBI on April 16, 2010. An FIR was filed by Mavin Gudinho (Congress Legislator) with local police but when the case was handed over to CBI he withdrew it.

Why would Mr. Mavin Godinho do so? Answer is simple. Mr. Parrikar had unearthed the multi-crore power rebate scam done by him. I am not aware what happened to that scam and the inquiry involved in it. Had Mr. Parrikar been in power possible he would have been behind bars.

Navhind Times reports that the CBI’s assertions against Mr. Parrikar as ascertained from the questions he had to face were based on the 2005 CAG report.

Why of all Mr. Parrikar is held guilty? There can be two reasons

1. Mr. Parrikar in his capacity as a chief minister was the chairperson of Goa Infra. Dev. Corp. which was the nodal agency responsible for building necessary infrastructure for the film festival. The additional secretary budget was holding the managing director position.

2. Mr. Parrikar was part of the committee formed to make policy decisions for IFFI. But there were more people on it. Who exactly?

The Core Committee comprised the Chief Minister, Ministers for Urban Development, Health, Town and Country Planning, Revenue, Tourism and Art & Culture, Shri H. Zantye, MLA and Government Officials being the Chief Secretary, Secretary to the Chief Minister, Principal Director Information,
Publicity & Films and the Managing Director, GSIDC. All other Ministers and the Chairman Kala Academy were special invitees.

CAG generally advises government on the matters that involve spending of money. Irregularities are brought to the notice of government and government has to respond to them over which the CAG also comments in it’s final report.

CAG has noted down several points where irregularities were observed in the execution of pre-IFFI works. CAG has not blamed any specific person but only the company  (GIDC ).  While we read through the notes it must be noted that government had only 6-8 months to build all necessary infrastructure and it was achieved in that time frame.  CAG report is here.

Bidding for Multiplex construction

3 bids were received.

Adlabs 3 screens 16 crores

INOX 6 screens 21 crores

PVR 34 crores

20% weight-age was given to the technical competency and 80% to financial bid. The consultant appointed was HOK Canada Inc. After the committee saw the presentations based on HOK’s advice the bid was awarded to INOX. HOK also suggested that  the screens should be 4 but the total seating capacity should be same as quoted. INOX reduced the original bid by 1 crore because of one less screen and renovated old GMC for 2 crores. This was despite the fact that there was major original rework in the construction design. The superstructure was changed from RCC to steel.

CAG’s contention is that the clause for renovating old GMC was removed without changing the bid amount. The government’s reply to the same was that, the change in superstructure based on HOK’s suggestions resulted into extra cost and the multiplex was shifted away from old GMC hence the clause was dropped. The government’s explanation in this case is acceptable given that government had not time to renegotiate the price based on the the minor modifications.

The show stopper here however is ICICI bank. This bank was a special invitee by government to give their expert advice on financing multiplexes. CAG notes that ICICI bank advised that a “World Class” multiplex costs Rs. 2000 per square feet.  CAG also notes without any references that multiplexes in other cities were built in 6 crores. I searched google to find the truth in this claim. Those who didn’t get the joke try searching for price of an ordinary office space in Goa.

ICICI Bank, who were special invitees for giving their 

professional advice on the cost of multiplexes financed by them, had informed

the Company that the cost of a world class multiplex would be around Rs.2,000

per square feet. Accordingly, the cost of a multiplex of 30,000 square feet would be around 6 crores.



Kala Academy’s Exceeded budget



Kala academy renovation was estimated by consultant Uttam Jain at Rs 24.18 crores. The contract was awarded but the budget exceeded by 9 crores. which is 41%. Jain was paid Rs. 1.5 crores for making this estimations. Though the CAG is silent on why this could have occurred probably because of acceptable replies from government has problem with not issuing a separate tender for the additional 9 crores. Isn’t the pressing deadlines could be the reason?

But Goan news reporters are overenthusiastic. For them things are crystal clear. Goan Observer reports



Unity Infraprojects Ltd. will be conferring the Infrastructure Award on Shri Manohar Parrikar for giving them Rs 24 crores to convert the toilet in the Old Kala Academy into an state-of-the-art Art Gallery. The award will bear the legend “ United we can loot and plunder the Government of Goa.” Simplex will be inaugurating the new bridge from the special IFFI jetty at the Kala Academy to the official residence of the Chief Minister in Altinho. So that the Chief Minister does not get caught in traffic jams on his frequent trips to the Kala Academy and the tarted up old GMC complex which houses the offices of the Entertainment Society of Goa.

What work did the company actually do? If one can trust their word for it here it is for a curious mind. Notable point is that CAG has not casted doubt on the figure itself, his only contention is that the government lost competitive advantage of bidding while exceeding the budget by 9 crores.

What happened in 2006?

Let us see what happened in 2006 when Mr. Pratap Singh Rane was the Goa CM.

Let us see what CAG has to say.

The ESG approved (September 2006) the proposal of EMA for engaging popular artists for various events like opening and closing ceremonies, concerts, etc. at a total fee of Rs 4.92 crore subject to the EMA generating sponsorship of the like amount. The actual expenditure on artists’ fee was Rs 5.05 crore as compared to the expenditure of less than Rs one crore spent on the artists for IFFI 2005.

Artist’s ? Who Artists? See what government had to say.

The Department stated (July 2008) that the increase in expenditure on artists cost was that the artists were internationally renowned, and charged a huge premium. The reply is not tenable as the huge expenditure on artists and low sponsorship resulted in extra burden of Rs 2.05 crore on public exchequer. [Source]

Internationally renowned? If you can find any in the entertainment event list of that year please let me know. Do not get fooled by the name Bony M. Its just a group name.

Conclusion

Certainly IFFI 2004 was not executed in a flawless manner with everything bang on. Budgets were exceed is the only conclusion one can draw. Mis-appropriation of funds can be claimed only if money was spent without taking it through required scrutiny and procedures.

The artist’s 5 crores fee in IFFI 2006 is one prime example, where EMA got paid Rs. 5 crores for giving a service which was exactly same (rather inferior) as previous year only to cost Rs. 4 crores more.

Mr. Parrikar built all the necessary infrastructure within the required time-frame and without any wastage of money. One can not ignore that CAG has nothing to say about the beautification exercise, procurement of additional busses, renumeration given to IFFI artists and so on. Where as when it comes to IFFI 2006 it is compelled to note that even procurement of television sets had a major scandal in their. TV sets were purchased but they were not of the  brand given in the tender.

Also both IFFI 2006 and 2005 involved unnecessary self-promotional advertisements that’s cost around 1.5 crores. The event management company (EMG) was responsible for this. But the leaders were not sure if their photos withe leading actresses and actors would be published in newspaper or not hence they employed publicity department and ESG to publish advertisements worth crores.


Ayodhyaa: A cursed Kingdom?

In my opinion whole Ram Janmabhumi Babari Masque issue remains a shame for our judicial framework and concept of secular government. It takes 20 years to deliver a dud report on the whole issue itself is a testimony that no one actually cares about the justice. The generation that was actually behind the movement is forgotten and the younger generation is rarely aware of the issue.

Unfortunately the only thing we are told about the issue is that few Karsevaks destroyed a mosque claiming it was the birth place of Lord Rama. Indians have shown capability to remember historical facts for a very long time but then whether or not there existed a Lord Ram and whether or not he was born at that very same place can certainly not be proven. Destruction of a building irrespective of what that structure was and what was the motive of the people behind the structure was is an act of vandalism that needs to be punished.

Liberhan’s report on the issue remains a dud. But it points out some important facts. Merely the list of people it mentions shows that it was a mass movement. The kind of political leverage that BJP derived from the issue indicates that the issue in fact had a support of large Hindu mass. However the politically correct media and pseudo secularists always claimed that this was a conspiracy of a few people. L K. Advani and Bajrang Dal and RSS and other few to polarize the nation based on religion and gain votes.

It is true that polarization did happen and people responsible for the same should have been punished. But then why shouldnt Hindus be given their plausible demand of building a temple there? The structure in fact though architecturally a mosque, it was being used as temple for all practical purposes right from 1949. Hindus flocked to Ayodhyaa for centuries for pilgrimage where as no muslim went to this mosque for any significant reason. While the place had some special sacred meaning for Hindus it had no special importance for muslims.

The roots of this destructions were actually in Rajiv Gandhi’s decision to open the locks of the temple. Clearly this move was in accordance to Congress’ law of parity. Gandhi had just changed the consitution to overthrow supreme courts correct judgement in favour of Shah Bano. He declared tha  locks of the site to be opened. The presence of locks or their absence had no implication in temporal sense. But it made muslims feel that Rajiv is favouring Hindus.

Over years Congress had bestowed the leadership of muslim community to fundamentalists such as Sayyed Shahbuddin. They knew how to take advantage of such situations. Every time government tried to make some concession to Hindu community they would shout foul and in return to keep them quite government will give them some ministry, a house in Goa or increase the Hajj subsidy.

So when the muslims led by some of the most fundamentalist among them, cried foul, the congress government could have very easily kept them quit by these methods. Which did not happen. Because every one wanted this issue to escalate. And rest is history.

As long as the issue was alive it gave birth to several good things. The Marxist historians wrote imaginary histories to support illegitimate Muslims claims such as “there was no temple in Ayodhyaa”. There was no destruction of any temple there. RSS VHP never had any intellectual base. They were caught unaware in this propaganda and they lacked support to refute this.

It was made to appear that BJP and co. have unearthed some imaginary issue. Sita Ram Goel came to the rescue and later Mr. Lal. These two historians of rare breed refuted all Marxists claims in such an away that I haven’t heard these people talking on the issue again. In fact Sita Ram Goel documented cases of 2000 temples that were destroyed by muslims. No one has yet refuted even a single instance from his book.

Whats the point in talking about things that happened few hundred years ago some would argue. Ignorance of history is what Indian are happy to live with. But in this particular case, Hindu claim on the land is old yet continuous. The muslim argument however is more of arrogance and notorious.

We as a nation  failed to build a system where we could legally do what is just and correct. Our secular institutions tried to be politically correct and search for parity even when sufficient evidence was brought before it. It was our failure and we are paying a price.

To end we will see what Sir. Naipaul had to say

(P): The people who climbed on top of these domes and broke them were not bearded people wearing saffron robes and with ash on their foreheads. They were young people clad in jeans and tee shirts.

(N): One needs to understand the passion that took them on top of the domes. The jeans and the tee shirts are superficial. The passion alone is real. You can?t dismiss it. You have to try to harness it.

Hitherto in India the thinking has come from the top. I spoke earlier about the state of the country: destitute, trampled upon, crushed. You then had the Bengali renaissance, the thinkers of the nineteenth century. But all this came from the top. What is happening now is different. The movement is now from below.

Part 2 : BJP and Ramjanmabhumi

Home | Experts’ Opinion | Sir V.S. Naipaul

 

About Sir V.S. Naipaul

The wanderer who writes of cultures in upheaval. Trinidad-born author V.S. Naipaul, 69, who was awarded the Nobel Literature Prize in 2001,writes eloquently about cultures in upheaval, describing at first hand the loneliness of the refugee. He has often been described as a man without a country despite having lived in Britain for nearly half a century. Author of more than two dozen books and already showered with literary prizes; his life and art have been a series of journeys as he has sought to find a niche in several worlds. The outspoken author, who famously said he is without rival, has increasingly courted controversy in latter years, recently attacking the work and reputations of distinguished authors.

Naipaul, who gained a knighthood to become Sir Vidia, has sharply criticised what he saw as backwardness and corruption in his native West Indies and elsewhere in the developing world from India to Africa. But in his books An Area of Darkness and India: A Wounded Civilisation Naipaul showed distaste for what he thought was intolerance, fanaticism and self-satisfaction there. In 1971, he became the first non-British author to receive Britain’s most valuable literary prize for fiction, the Booker Award, for his 11th novel In a Free State. V.S. Pritchett, once called him “the greatest living writer in the English language”. We bring to our readers a very valuable interview of Sir V S Naipaul on the Ayodhya issue.

Interviews

The basic ethos of the Shri Rama Janmabhoomi movement is to restore the honour of the Hindu Samaj (society) and Hindu culture. It is not just an issue of bricks and mortar. The renowned Vidiadhar S Naipaul has very tellingly expressed this, when he said:
What is happening in India is a new historical awakening ?. Indian intellectuals, who want to be secure in their liberal beliefs, may not understand what is going on. But every other Indian knows precisely what is happening: deep down he knows that a larger response is emerging even if at times this response appears in his eyes to be threatening.

Given the response received from the masses in India and other places in the world for the Shri Rama Janmabhoomi movement, Shri Rama is clearly at the heart of our civilization and a major unifying force. There is no section, no region, of the Hindu Samaj that does not exhibit a deep attachment to Shri Rama. This empathy is strongly exhibited not only in other lands where Hindus have settled, but also where the indigenous people accepted Hindu culture, as in the entire Southeast Asia.

To understand the true ethos of the entire Rama Janmabhoomi Movement, it would be pertinent to quote Shri Vidiadhar Naipaul, the great thinker and litterateur whose literary genius, ruthless objectivity and deep perspective of history has been acclaimed the world-over.He was interviewed by Dilip Padgaonkar published in the Times of India, on 18th July, 1993, under the caption “An area of Awakening”, and again by Rahul Singh published in Times of India on 25th January, 1998 under the caption “Hindus, Muslims have lived together without understanding each other?s faith”, and by Sadanand Menon published in The Hindu under the caption “The truth governs writing”. The portions of the three interviews relevant to this point are reproduced below:

“An area of awakening”

Interview by Dilip Padgaonkar
The Times of India,
18 July 1993.

Padgaonkar (P): The collapse of the Soviet Union and the subsequent rise of Islamic nations in Central Asia, the Salman Rushdie affair, similar harassment by fundamentalists of liberal Muslim intellectuals in India: all these factors taken together persuaded some forces to argue that a divided Hindu society cannot counteract Islamic fundamentalism.

Naipaul (N): I don?t see it quite in that way. The things you mentioned are quite superficial. What is happening in India is a new, historical awakening. Gandhi used religion in a way as to marshal people for the independence cause People who entered the independence movement did it because they felt they would earn individual merit.

Today, it seems to me that Indians are becoming alive to their history. Romila Thapar?s book on Indian history is a Marxist attitude to history, which in substance says: there is a higher truth behind the invasions, feudalism and all that. The correct truth is the way the invaders looked at their actions. They were conquering, they were subjugating. And they were in a country where people never understood this.

Only now are the people beginning to understand that there has been a great vandalizing of India. Because of the nature of the conquest and the nature of Hindu society such understanding had eluded Indians before.What is happening in India is a mighty creative process. Indian intellectuals, who want to be secure in their liberal beliefs, may not understand what is going on, especially if these intellectuals happen to be in the United States. But every other Indian knows precisely what is happening: deep down he knows that a larger response is emerging even if at times this response appears in his eyes to be threatening.

However, we are aware of one of the more cynical forms of liberalism: it admits that one fundamentalism is all right in the world. This is the fundamentalism they are really frightened of: Islamic fundamentalism. Its source is Arab money. It is not intellectually to be taken seriously etc. I don?t see the Hindu reaction purely in terms of one fundamentalism pitted against another. The reaction is a much larger response?. Mohammedan fundamentalism is essentially negative, a protection against a world it desperately wishes to join. It is a last ditch fight against the world.

But the sense of history that the Hindus are now developing is a new thing. Some Indians speak about a synthetic culture: this is what a defeated people always speak about. The synthesis may be culturally true. But to stress it could also be a form of response to intense persecution.

(P): How did you react to the Ayodhya incident?

(N): Not as badly, as the others did, I am afraid. The people who say that there was no temple there are missing the point. Babar, you must understand, had contempt for the country (that) he had conquered. And his building of that mosque was an act of contempt for the country. In Turkey, they turned the Church of Santa Sophia into a mosque. In Nicosia churches were converted into mosques too. The Spaniards spent many centuries re-conquering their land from Muslim invaders. So these things have happened before and elsewhere.

In Ayodhya the construction of a mosque on a spot regarded as sacred by the conquered population was meant as an insult. It was meant as an insult to an ancient idea, the idea of Rama, which was two or three thousand years old.

Poor Arent Lifeless Bricks

India is a poor country. As per world bank reports there are about 450 million people living below world poverty line. (less than $1.25 or Rs 62.5 per day). Over all the World Human Development Index HDI report keeps India in the company of Sub saharan countries. We are with countries like Solomon Islands, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Sierra Leone and Equatorial Guinea. But shut your eyes wide to this. Say that we have half million people working in IT industry and soon we will be a superpower.

What does it REALLY mean to be poor? I personally have not faced extreme poverty. India’s poverty can be best expressed through following facts, unless one questions World Bank and other organization’s integrity.

1.Over 200 million, or about one-fifth of India’s population, is chronically hungry.

2. 2.5 million children in India die every year before reaching the age of five. (Gujarat Riot Victims: 2000, Tsunami Victims: 7000)

3. Literacy Rates in India today are 66% for Adult and 88% for youth while the same figures for China are 91 and 96%.The difference between male and female literacy rates is 21%

Unemployment, Healthcare, Public Transportation, Urban Waste management, Education are few more areas where I can cite that few million people are not getting even the basic structure that every human must deserve.

If we compare china with India. Take 1978 as the base year where India and China were at par. Even a century ago when United States was Emerging as a superpower, Argentina was just at par with it. Today we know the difference between US and Argentina. India’s comparison with China has been exactly the same. When in 1978 India and China were at par, today China has overtaken India by a margin too large. In fact China has beaten India squarely.

But India is democracy. Things happen at a slow rate here. I think this is the worst excuse one can give. There is no logical relation between democracy and being slow. Even Japan, England , US are fairly democratic. Democracy being slow is acceptable logically only if we use “democracy in India is corrupt” as a intermediate premise. But whatever it may be, any system that allows 2.5 children to die every year when they could have been saved is essentially useless.

We must note that all the governments right from 1947 were self professed pro-poor governments. They implements what they called pro-poor policies. Their every speech promised elimination of poverty. Despite that nothing has happened. The reduction in poverty over years has happened largely due to luck and global development. Its not a change brought by systematic planning and policies.

The roots of India’s failure in eliminating poverty (or any other failure) lie in its faulty policies. Refer to any article on India’s poverty today. In the cause one cause is never missed. That is the license Quota Raj. Despite this the Indian government was just not ready to do it. They finally had to do it in 1991. It was done because the only choice left was to go bankrupt. People responsible for this dark period not just went unpunished but were even glorified. The same license quota raj is also one primary reason of increasing corruption in India.

One decision to give up the license regime and open the markets made significant difference to India’s economy. But this was neither predicted nor wished by Indian policymakers. China did. They opened their economy in early 80s and India lost 10 important years.

As this article argues these faulty policies look at poor as a lifeless bricks. Bricks that are used to line up and build the ladder that helps to attain power. The pro-poor policies are not actually targeted at “eliminating” poverty but they actually “sustain” poverty. The best example is of NREGS explained beautifully by Atanu Dey. I think its the ignorance of masses (which is again a result of intellectual poverty attributed to our poor education system) and even the media hero that consider such schemes as pro-poor.

Let me quote from the livemint article

One of the authors of this study, Narayan, even told The Times of India in an interview: “People want a free-market economy. But they need the skills to connect with it. The government machinery needs to treat the poor with dignity and respect. This is something that they value a lot. The people also desired free and fair elections and honest leaders as it helps in empowering them.”

The true way to eliminate poverty is by viewing these people not as helpless ones but as able people. Provide them with opportunity and not outcome. Dont provide the employment but just provide them with opportunity to employment. If you dont allow to setup industries, if you dont allow private companies to setup schools you end up having an employment guaranty scheme which produces ZERO output. It help the poor to sustain for another day but doesn’t help him a day after.

If the government has stressed enough on education, urban planning, industrialization and wealth generation instead of slogan against poverty. Today India would have been a far better country. Even today we fail to recognize our mistakes.

The only reason why we hope India is developing is because of handful of industries like IT. (But India’s computer infrastructure is very weak and underdeveloped compared to that of china. ) These industries have comes into existence only due to free market policies. The planning comission had never visualised IT as an industry and outsourcing as a component adding to GDP. Still today IT has grown. In fact every aspect that the government has ignored has grown. Just compare Cricket (not controlled by government) and Hockey (Controlled by Government).

I think it is time for government to think of poor people not as lifeless bricks that deserve compassion and support but as able individuals who need freedom from cliches. Given them freedom to write their own destiny. Give them freedom to choose their own future. They are very much capable of doing well, but only if government doesnt interfere.

My Related Posts

1. India’s Growth Story

2. My thoughts on Recession

3. Atlas Shrugged

4. India’s Middle class failure

Trust Vote: Trust Lost and Gained.

 

Needing something is sometimes like a parachute. You need them only once and if they are not there for you at that time, you never need them again. – Dilbert

 

The nation and media is debating if UPA will survive or not. They call it a Trust Vote. Trust? Isn’t it ironical to use that word with our politicians and system?

 

The trust vote is called to prove that the PM and his cabinet has faith of majority of MPs who claim to represent the people of this nation. Majority MPs => Majority people.

 

Forget about majority. Do we really trust our government? For last 60 years the system that we have developed, is it something we can put our trust into? How many of us run to Government Hospitals if we can afford a good private one? How many of us send our children to government schools?

 

We fear our on politicians, police and judicial system. The system that was meant to protect us and especially the poor class has turned into a system that won’t change and give encouragement to oppression and crime.

 

A system that encourages reservations under the name of equal opportunity, protects fundamentalists under the name of minority, allows Bangladeshi to settle in our land for personal gains.

 

A system that has failed miserable in having good educational infrastructure for our bright minds, to give us chaos free roads, planned cities, water safety is a far away while we struggle to provide water even in cities.

 

Look at our PM. He is defending himself against a trust vote. But what does he stands for? Congress is not even considering him as PM candidate for next elections, Rahul will be their candidate. The party itself doesn’t trust him.

 

Our country has reached to a point where the system and politicians have lost trust of the most important part of democracy “The people”.

 

After this trust vote many will become richer by a few crores. There will be a hell lot of ‘what if’ analysis. The common man will get back to work on his scooter next morning. And the people in pune will have to face the load shading as usual.

 

Steve Bucknor of Goa. Aka Shakuni Mama of Goa

spt4-a.jpgIf you think cricket is the only game where umpires go out of their way to make a team loose or win I think you haven’t read newspapers recently. Goa-ki Giri huee government firse gir gayi kyaa? Asked me a friend on Gtalk.

Apparently the government had fallen not for the first time but like innumerable times before. And the way Bucknor supported Australia in cricket, Mr Jamir the governor of Goa was as prompt as Porter on the railway station to come to the rescue of his parent party’s government. Without any notice to any one he suspened the assembly house session for the day (it can be the whole sssion as well) without citing any reason.

The assembly house is not a circus, I beg your pardon. It is a circus now! but constitutionally it is not meant to be a circus01_010904.jpg. But like in all other legal cases since the constitution doesn’t explicitly mention that assembly can not be converted into circus (sometimes I wonder if the constitution mentions anything explicitly, apparently all decision taken are based on the implied meaning, I think it was written by taking inspiration from the Ramayana and Mahabharata where the text says something but the it’s implied meaning is well beyond common man’s perception) I think His Highness thought that he can make one of it.
[poll=6]

When the nation was moaning Tsunami’s disaster this man danced in a party with his wife. He gave just three days to Parrikar to prove his majority but more than a week to Mr. Rane(Sr.).

Panjim 2nd Feb, 2005. At 5.40 p.m. vote of confidence was won by the BJP government which had apparently been rendered into minority after the resignation of four MLAs. Yet, in a more than prompt response, the Congress governor dismissed the BJP government at 6.10 p.m. without even hearing out both the sides and a new Congress government was hastily sworn in at 11.30 in the night. Under the Indian Constitution and also as per the established norms of democracy, the Governor has no powers to annul the ruling of the Speaker and judiciary is the sole forum before which an appeal can be made against the Speaker’s ruling. But an outrageous assault on the Constitution was committed and democracy was murdered.”

I think for the first time in History the sworning in of the chief minister happened at midnight. As convention midnight is the time reserved for thieves and ghosts. Ministers have already replaced thieves in daytime, at least night should be kept for them.

I am not concerned about the government falling or saving itself. I am concerned about the trends that Mr. Jamir is setting. Governor is supposed to be like an elderly figure who will always be there to sort out issues between the opposing parties. Someone like Bhishma Pitamaha. At least he shouldn’t behave like a Shakuni Mama. He was posted in Goa by removing earlier governor (in an insulting way). He showed his intentions pretty well. Besides his uncooperative behavior he extravagantly spent the public funds.

Assembly is a house of public representatives. It has a honor that can not be insulted. Power comes with responsibility. Transparency in governance can not be assured through rules but through strength of character. He perhaps only tried to listen to his master’s (or madams) voice (does this phrase remind u of something?) .

This is not the first time the congress is making similar mistakes. In their whole history person has always come before constitution or ideology. See this

In the year 1938 Subhas Chandra Bose was unanimously elected President of the Congress and re-elected the following year. But owing to his differences with Mahatma Gandhi he was made to resign his Presidency in April 1939. The democratically elected leadership of the party budged under the pressure of a powerful lobby within the party and democracy was murdered.

Then we all know the history of Indira Gandhi and her emergency to save her chair. Perfect example how misplaced egoism can take the whole nation at ransom even in democracy.

When she died (or murdered by a Sikh) riots broke out on the streets of Delhi killing 2000+ sikh (number of people died in Gujrath were less than 1000). The secular Rajiv Gadhi leading the secular party after his mother officially made a statement “When big tree’s fall they shake the Earth”. If ‘Maut Ka Saudagar” phrase was written by a bollywood script writer for Sonia Gandhi , the media should have found who wrote that poetic phrase for Rajiv Gandhi.

It will interesting to see to what level His Highness can go. Still deeper? Can he go below this?


Note: The two paragraphs appearing in different font were taken from http://www.ivarta.com/columns/OL_050212.htm written by Shachi Rairikar. His permission is awaited.

Electorate, Modi and Media. The Good the Bad the Ugly.

I was waiting for a bus to college when my friends informed me that Gujarat is burning in Riots. Being a 12th std student no one liked me watching the television especially since I was not staying at my own house. Nor I had read papers for those few days. Not that I studied so much I would just lie in my room day dreaming while the world though I was studying.

In one way those Riots had an impact on me. I started reading news papers about the issue. Discussed it with my journo friends. Every one blamed Modi , RSS and VHP. of course BJP as well. They blamed Hindus. When I approached RSS leaders they blamed it on Muslim’s and supported the Riots. When I read editorial’s in Indian Express or in TOI I somewhere felt that they are just trying to prove that they are secular and trying to gain sympathy of their readers who are mostly upper middle class urban English taking society. The RSS or BJP on other hand supported something I felt was out of some purely misplaced emotions. They were the people who had not slapped even their own kid in their life were supporting the revenge.

Soon I had piled up in my room along with the Physics and Math note a bunch of news paper cutting and magazines. That issue was hot in India till Gujarat elections sealed the fate of Modi. I had read every possible article on the issue and had collected many books as well. I attended few talks which were organized in Menezese Braganza hall. They showed there photographs of dead bodies, raped women and crying kids. I soon walked out.

By that time I had read a lot about Hindu-Muslim relationship and their history in India. When a man kills another man there is no religion he follows. I cant imagine my neighbour Khansaab taking a sword and killing some one at least for some religious purpose. Nor I can imagine myself doing the same. Rape and torture at any day and for any reason are highly condemnable.

I have no doubt in my mind that it was people who suffered. The people who killed Kar-sevak’s in Godhra must have escaped. They were those people who were blot on name of ISLAM as well as humanity. I dotn have any doubt in my mind that these people were not only islamic fundamentalist who did it with purely religious hatred but I am also convinced that such elements proliferated in society because of the “so called secular” parties like Congress. It gave an opportunity of organization like VHP to convince that Hindus are always get step motherly treatment in their own country. Polarization is what has happened there.

In India political parties have adopted a very dangerous strategy to keep themselves in the Race of power. Thet splinter the electorate and try to scare one part of the other. It gives rise to hatred among the two groups while the leader encash it in terms of votes. Same has happened in Gujarat. Muslim’s have got no choice but voting for Congress which will save them from Hindu’s and particularly Modi. While Hindu’s would prefer voting Modi for his development. Hindu’s will never vote Modi only because he is the Hindu poster boy and the anti incumbency factor (if it exists) would hurt him more.

Its not the case that Modi hates Muslim, I dont think so. No political party would hate a potential group of voters. Had given a chance Modi would have tried to woo the Muslims as well. But the media has taken his image far beyond acceptability among Muslim community. He has been portrayed as a mass murderer etc etc.

The only thing he can bank on now is his hindu voters. Which will vote for him only if he gives them good governance. Even if Modi tries to do anything for Muslim’s the media and Congress will shout and spoil his efforts.

Looking at his track record minus the riots I think Modi is a Prime Ministorial material. I have feeling that he made a mistake by some where not taking stringent steps to curb riots. He hurt his image and spoiled an opportunity for himself.

Modi will win the coming elections, most of them say. But he will have lot many things to loose. The Party too is going to loose many things. Modi no more replies on BJP its BJP who is relying on Modi for its win. I dont think its a Good news for a party whose Back Bone is “Sanghatan”. Is Modi a Sonida Gandhi counterpart of Gujarat BJP?

Many answers to look forward in coming days.