For the past four and a half years, India has had a classy, educated, honest Prime Minister in Manmohan Singh. He’s often been criticized for not seeming forceful enough, but he did score a major success against both left and right in the nuclear deal and subsequent vote of no-confidence, and will probably join a relatively small number of Indian PMs in finishing out a complete five-year term. (Quick quiz: how many have there been?)
One person who is being talked about as a viable candidate for India’s next Prime Minister couldn’t be more different — Lalu Prasad Yadav. Yadav is the ex-Chief Minister of Bihar, where he rose to power in the “Mandal era” by mobilizing what are referred to as backward caste voting blocs in the state. Once in power, Yadav became nationally notorious as a rampantly corrupt figure, who embezzled at least $267 million in the “Fodder Scam”. He was eventually forced out of office, but was able to continue effectively running the state after he installed his wife, Rabri Devi, as Chief Minister in his stead. Starting in the late 1990s, Lalu Prasad Yadav became the punchline of many Indian jokes; even saying his name in some circles leads people to start smiling, in expectation of the joke to follow. (Another quiz: what are the names of his nine children?)
During the current UPA (Congress) administration he has had a second political life as the National Railways Minister — and he’s had remarkable success in turning around a huge government operation that had for decades been dominated by inefficiency and losses for the government. During its tenure (1999-2004), the NDA (BJP) had even been making noises to the effect that the only solution would be privatization, or failing that, raising ticket prices aggressively. But under Yadav, in 2008 alone the Railways earned profits of $6 billion — without raising passenger ticket prices at all. He may have been incredibly corrupt (and may still be corrupt), but he has been remarkably effective at turning around a major government agency.
I mention Lalu Prasad Yadav as a Prime Minister possibility as a reflection of the chatter I was hearing, mainly from relatives, as I was traveling in northern India last week. I have no idea whether it’s a real possibility, and I’m certainly far from thrilled about the possibility of someone so corrupt becoming Prime Minister. But it would nevertheless be interesting, partly because it would involve the country making a clear departure from the Nehru family and western-educated elites, in favor of someone with a strikingly different profile.
He may or may not become Prime Minister, but it does appear that while Lalu Prasad Yadav is still the butt of a few jokes, many Indians are starting to utter his name with newfound respect.
206 · NaraVara said
As they say on the banks of the Vaigai – Saadhu! Saadhu.
205 · rob said
If the sangh as it stands today is the only plausible hope of Hindu revivalism, well, Hindu philosophy must be on far more tenuous ground than what I am always told. It is one thing to insist on the rights of Hindus to observe their faith, it is entirely another to insist that everybody who lives in India must observe the Hindu way of life (and violence against minorities of every religious stripe endorsed top down in public statements by sangh leaders is obviously in that category, but trying to reclaim some centuries old mosque and muckraking and manufacturing issues such as Krishna Janmabhoomi or Ram Setu also do). The reasonable criticisms of the sangh parivar are about its behavior of the latter ilk – if this is what Hinduism needs to be strong again, then it is destined to become a toxic system of belief much as the Islamic unification of religion and societal norms has resulted in fanaticism and extremism.
Even that admission is rare. But, what is needed is much more: a definition of the ideology that does not naturally drive people to the violence that has become endemic in the name of preserving Hindutva. Claiming that some elements of the Sangh seem to indicate in violence as if it has absolutely nothing to do with the operational definition and organizational philosophy of Hindutva misses the point completely.
There is a difference between Hinduism and asking that Akhand (or the reality of Khand) Bharat needs to be run according to Hindu norms.
203 · Amit said
Apparent not, in an alternative planet of deniers where cold hard facts, documentation, and evidence become mere POVs, paranoia about existential threats to Hinduism an indisputable fact, and basic human morality a “school of thought”.
You are confusing op-eds and cold hard facts. The criticism of Modi is not because of some generalized Hindutva beliefs he holds, much as you’d like to believe it, nor is it based on vapor spouted by Adiga or Friedman. Of course, we can also go down the exercise of seeing Adiga and raising Vir Sanghvi or even some solid hard hitting op-eds by Barkha Dutt, but of course, protestations of media bias by looking at what you want to look seem to be ingrained in the right in more than one place.
Any discussion of the Sangh with Indians is going to be like a discussion of the morality of settlers and right-wing Likud actions with Israelis. Maybe my new years’ resolution should be to avoid getting into these
discussionsratholes on Sepia. It only makes my blood boil whenever I think of what is happening in India, and it is not as if Sangh apologists are suddenly going to have a change of heart because of something I say, anyway.All that straw constitutes a serious fire-hazard.
211 · NaraVara said
Would that I had the concrete in my head which would lead me to say such things as “Does this matter, when they subscribe to the same school of thought and if their staff goes to the same “school” in their formative years?”!
Rahul, re: #210–I wouldn’t be so discouraged–I find your stance and comments useful.
210 · Rahul said
Yup in a way true but it is a difficult and circular logic. You can ask if Bush-Cheney did along with their Anglo-Saxon brethren is right, just because unlike Lalu kinds, these folks wore nice suit and boot, were media savy and debated in a civilized way ?
193 · Lupus Solitarius said
It’s just the pseudo-secular anti-national conspiracy by the New York Times, Human Rights Watch, communists, Christians, Coalition Against Genocide, Sonia Gandhi, Nehru’s Ghost, Jayati Ghosh, Wendy Doniger, The Guardian, Al Jazeera, the ISI, the Pakistani prime minister, the California School Board, and the American Friends Service Committee to tar all true Hindus like you and Modi. We have secret meetings where we elaborate on our beliefs that Hindus have no right to defend themselves against the Flying Spaghetti Monster that is attacking your masculinity and then write textbooks documenting our lies.
210 · Rahul said
Suresh Colbert, my friend, Suresh Colbert. If you can do justice to the character, I’ll happily give him to you. It’s, in seriousness, the only way to deal with people who are living in an entirely different discourse that is patently absurd.
Dr Amonymous said
Dr A… That was awesome!! Now if you can say all that while doing the Macarena, you would be a top act. Seriously, stop taking yourself so seriously.
Oh, come on.. boiling blood is not good for health.
Watch this tamil movie link .
Look at how the police after catching hold of a couple of thieves on petty offences assign the blame for all the unsolved crimes to them. Goundamani is awesome. 🙂 .
More like the HRW blaming Hindutvadis for the Sikh massacre.
No, I think you folks are indoctrinated in schools/colleges much like how the RSS schools are said to indoctrinate children ;-).
I confess, I have been to not one, but TWO degree-granting institutions in which i was encouraged, or given the space at least, to understand, rather than to recite what we have been told. Also there were books there besides Mein Kampf and “The Best of Golwalker – Slapstick Ideology in Three Acts.”
But in between we have prayers to Marx and go cowtipping for fun, just to piss you off. Enjoy the dustbin of history along with Osama Bin Laden and George W. Bush, my friends…your time is running out 🙂
217 · Lupus Solitarius said
Says the person with the latin handle…
Okay, off to eat hamburgers! See you later!
219 · Amit said
Well, more power to you for proving so resistant to that education thang and sticking with the “whom are you going to believe: me or the rest of the whole wide world?” shtick. I understand your firm adherence to your belief in the liberal bias of reality and the vast global anti-sangh conspiracy as it is your only defense against the barrage of facts with citations by a large number of independent organizations – hrw, ai, several competing indian newspapers, uscirf, un, and so on. You are a card carrying co-traveler of 9/11 zionist conspiracy advocates, h—— deniers, and the like.
Ponniyin, your clip is more like the analogy of finding some petty goons and pinning all the blame for the massacres on them, instead of any higher ups. You too insist on harping on those 6 words in the 1999 report, to the detriment of fact after fact after fact in the 2002 report (of course, those inconvenient facts were generated by Boo! “the indian media”, which of course relied on Boo! “the anti-hindu bigots in the hrw” for their reporting), as well as their clear mention of the congress culpability in 1984. As I mentioned before, the 1999 report did not mention the bjp responsibility for the 1989 bhagalpur blindings, which clearly shows that the hrw has been less than thorough in its documentation.
rob, thanks for your comment.
Figures. What did I say about being indoctrinated in a certain POV above?
1989 bhagalpur blindings
i meant 1989 bhagalpur riots, not blindings – those were in 1980.
Ah, but these are facts that don’t always stand up to scrutiny and undermine the credibility of these organizations.
And BTW how did something religious like the USCIRF get funded in a supposedly secular country? I suppose what goes for liberals in the US were asleep on the job or going after Hindutvavadis 10000 miles away.
People should read the extensively documented and footnoted HRW report on 2002, as well as the separately sourced CAG report in response to the campaign to deny Modi a visa, and, if you have the stomach, watch Babu Bajrangi‘s gleeful admission of his role, goals, and support from higher-ups. I’ve linked to these above.
Also, for amusement, here’s the litany of allegations of bias against the HRW (apparently, it is both pro-western and anti-western)
The end.
I also just learnt that HRW is apparently anti-Israeli (anti-semitic, even!) and anti-Palestinians too. Damn, that’s some education this global conspiracy has given them!
If you say so. Doesn’t change the fact that they have played fast and loose with the facts or had an axe to grind with respect to the Sangh prior to 2002.
What is the guarantee that the so called “fact” after “fact” in 2002 won’t be repealed in the 2012 HRW report. Afterall we have a precedence. 🙂
228 · Amit said
Anyone with half a brain and familiarity with India would be aware that Sangh groups prior to 2002 had engaged in a lot of incitement of violence and violent activities. Those people will have many different opinions about many different topics, which is why you need to look at the strength of the argument rather than solely the source of the argument. This is what they teach us in our pseudosecular madrassas (i.e. schools).
Or, you can just join Bajrang Dal and help them update their “Hit list”/”Black list” . Because, you know, clearly Meera Nair, PBS, and the Times of India pose a mortal threat to Hindus, much like HRW 😉
It is interesting that you brought Bhagalpur riots in the board for Lalu.
The funny thing is that it is the “secular messiah” Lalu who snowballed the proceedings of enquiry and prosecution into the Bhagalpur riots what Modi is now been accused of doing. The reason is that the culprits in this case are the Yadavs. 🙂
It is upto the current NDA government in Bihar led by Nitish Kumar and supported by the BJP who are dusting off the old files, setting up new commissions and prosecuting the rioters. Indian politics will never fail to throw up surprises.
In addition to my earlier comment, no wonder the 1999 HRW report did not talk about the Bhagalpur riots (assuming what Rahul claims is true, I din’t read the entire report), because it will show Mr.Lalu in bad light and not the Hindutvadis. 🙂
i bowed out of this argument a while back because i cant see any ambiguity around who was the man in charge when ahmedabad burned, and in the aftermath when the perpetrators should have been brought to justice. it isnt what is inside, it’s what you did when your electorate needed you. modi fucked up. if he is not culpable in the mass-murder then he must be incapable of governing.
232 · Ponniyin Selvan said
Huh? The fact that Lalu and Nitish are using Muslims as political footballs does not change the antecdents of the riots themselves.
233 · khoofia said
Evidently, his fabled efficiency and ability to make the trains run on time must have been acquired after the pogroms. Or maybe they were just evidence…
In that case, anyone with half a brain will known that there have been a lot of allegations that Sangh groups prior to 2002 have been involved in or incited violence. In fact anyone with any familiarity with India will also know that the Sangh has been called fascist for a good deal longer than that. In fact there have been some convictions of people who are alleged to have been Sangh members some time in their lives like this one, just like other completely unassociated parties have been convicted for other cases originally blamed on the Sangh.
I think everyone realizes you dislike the Sangh, but I don’t see how your tirade adds up to Modi’s complicity in the 2002 riots or his chances to be Prime Minister, which was the implication with which Rahul derailed the thread using a link from HRW.
Well, his capabilities to govern are not in doubt as he’s been re-elected twice since 2002, the last time on his development agenda, so as things stand it’s neither one of those options.
236 · Amit said
I think what may be most unique about Hindutvadis is not the social violence they engage in (which virutally every social force in India does), but how annoying they are on the Internet. See 6:18 – “You know what I hate about people who criticize you? They criticize what you say, but they never give you credit for how loud you say it…or how long you say it.”
Or as Modi’s spiritual ancestor Golwalkar said,
“German national pride has now become the topic of the day. To keep up purity of the nation and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic races, the Jews. National pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well-nigh impossible it is for races and cultures having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into a united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindustan to learn and profit by.”
or
“From the standpoint sanctioned by the experience of shrewd nations, the non-Hindu people in Hindustan must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and revere Hindu religion, must entertain no idea but the glorification of Hindu nation i.e. they must not only give up their attitude of intolerance and ingratitude towards this land and its age long traditions, but must also cultivate the positive attitude of love and devotion instead; in one word, they must cease to be foreigners or may stay in the country wholly subordinated to the Hindu nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, for less any preferential treatment, not even the citizen’s rights.”
Of course the modern Sangh’s rhetoric and structure is different from Golwalkar – but Modi’s variant, most leftists and non leftists and pretty much anyone who’s not a sanghi who has familiarity with India would probably agree, is fascist. Have fun continuing to try to defend it and advocating for a fascist to be put in charge of the lives and welfare of over a billion people. It makes you sound real responsible and compassionate.
🙂
Right, what year was that said in, and why are you pretending as if that is the what the RSS stands for today?
At one point the Catholic Church blessed the inquisition. Who believes that they stand for that today?
but Modi’s variant, most leftists and non leftists and pretty much anyone who’s not a sanghi who has familiarity with India would probably agree, is fascist. Have fun continuing to try to defend it and advocating for a fascist to be put in charge of the lives and welfare of over a billion people
I missed this one earlier. The Marxists have been labeling the BJP and the RSS as fascist since before Modi became Chief Minister of Gujarat. Now that a “fascist” movement has been in charge of a billion people and all it’s resources (for what 6 years from 1998-2004) with the ability to remake the constitution under Emergency procedures if they felt so, what’s with the attempt to find and label a “variant” as as fascist?
Dr Amonymous said
You really love the word Fascist, don’t you Dr A? It is the gobar you fling at anyone who doesn’t confirm to your narrow socio-political world view. You know, for a man with liberal pretensions, you come accross as a rather angry and intolerant person. Anyhow, apart from the 2002 riots (we can debate it till the cows come home), what else substantiates your allegation that the main villain in your life, Modi, is a fascist? (and if you mention fake encounters, please provide some proof of Modi’s direct involvement)
240 · Lupus Solitarius said
It’s kind of like when Republicans insist on trying to claim any Democrat must automatically be a “Socialist Fascist.” It doesn’t really bear any relationship to reality and the only thing it really reveals is that the mudslinger in question doesn’t really know what the word means.
Sorry. That should read “Socialist Communist.” Because taxation = communism just like nationalism = fascism.
236 · Amit said
Sorry for mentioning Modi’s complicity in mass murder. I agree it was inexcusable, and a distraction.
Generally anyone who supports Modi is called a ‘fascist’ by the so called ‘liberal’ and ‘progressive’ crowd. We should not worry too much about labels and move on.
People goto Ahmedabad organise press conferences / public meetings and call Modi worse names for the last 6 years. The amount of hatred whipped up against Modi is unprecedented. He must be a “compassionate fascist” to sit quiet in this onslaught ?. As far as I know, the only case filed against any detractor of Modi was against Ashish Nandy, by a local police officer. All others are doing fine and improving their ‘careers’ getting many awards, a lot of press and recognition, etc.. . 🙂
237 · dr amonymous said
not just hrw, all the members of the vast left-wing global conspiracy, including babu bajrangi.
244 · Ponniyin Selvan said
poor modi. poor al gonzales. poor laura bush. such victims.
poor modi.
That’s right. Atleast half the electorate of Gujarat thinks so and probably many more millions all over India.
Amardeep, You and your readers may find this post I wrote in May ’07 interesting: On track for 7, Race Course Rd
Here’s Orwell writing in 1944 about the use of the term and among other things he writes that Gandhi and Congress were called fascist at the time. Modi seems to be in good company if he’s attracting the “fascist” label today.
I tire of this. But this was my favorite part:
What exactly do you think we’re debating? Those who are claiming that Hindutva organizations and the government of Gujarat, run by Modi, are demanding such an enormously strong standard of proof to establish what happened there that if you were to be consistent, you would never comment about anything that goes on outside the narrow confines of your room – and perhaps not even that. Who can you trust? I’m surprised you buy milk at the supermarket without the fear that the label is a lie and has a longstanding anti-Hindutva agenda. There is no debate – your arugument is weak and Rahul’s, HRW’s, and every other remotely intellectually honest party that has written on the Gujarat pogrom’s in 2002 is strong. The BJP, the government of Gujarat, and other Hindutva organizations were complicit in those targeted mass murders and the denial of justice that continues to date.
To answer all the other extremely important and pertinent questsions that all of you Hindutvadis have raised: yes, I label everyone I disagree with a fascist, including my mother, my aunties, my brother, and the young women in Chak De prior to being disciplined by Shahrukh Khan (after that, they weren’t fascist anymore). This is because I am totally unfamiliar with politics and history and therefore have no ability to understand what the word “fascist” means.
The only exceptions are a small group of pseudosecular communists, all of whom share a small flat with me except for the staff at the New York Times, the Times of India, the Christian Science Monitor (they help with the missionary activities), HRW, and of course everyone else who doesn’t agree with you. I adore these people and organizations so much that I am willing to parrot everything they say, and never think for myself, mainly because I hate myself for being raised Hindu, having been corrupted by the West.
I secretly dream of the day when the Hindu Rashtra is finally weakened enough because Hindus are never willing to stand up for themselves. Then, I will gather all my Marxist and Hezbollah friends and we will raze all the mandirs and build masjids upon the land, complete with McDonalds in them that ONLY SERVE BEEF AND ALCOHOL. NO CHICKEN NUGGETS!!!!! Not even barbecue sauce unless it has beef lard in it!
You are all invited. It will be on Christmas, and you will be forced to sing carols.
Enjoy your day.
Here’s Orwell writing in 1944 about the use of the term and among other things he writes that Gandhi and Congress were called fascist at the time. Modi seems to be in good company if he’s attracting the “fascist” label today. i>
Thanks for the link. Orwell, as usual shoots right on target.
It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley’s broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.
He..he.. , looks like Modi is in the company of another famous Gujarati.
Invoking Orwell to defend Modi extends the use of the phrase “Orwellian” from language to logic.
Although I have to say I am a fan of this equivalence been established Modi and Gandhi. This way, maybe the RSS can provide a final solution to Modi, much like they did for Gandhi. There is the risk of the rest of us dying of laughter though.
I see constructing strawmen and triumphantly knocking them down must be great sport in your circles.
From what I see no amount of investigation or reports has historically satisfied you or the people you quote unless it reaches a conclusion you like. Exhibit A is your reaction to the first part of the Nanavati Commission report on the 2002 Gujarat riots. Also I present Exhibit B where the Wadhwa commission’s report is called into question. Exhibit B at the bottom also shows a propensity to blame the Sangh for Gandhi’s murder, a case which was investigated some 60 odd years ago while the Sangh was banned, politically weak and the Congress Party was in control.
So the question is that given the long running disregard for judicial opinion from your side, why should any non-judicial opinion like HRW be assigned any greater weight by me, specially when such non-judicial parties are shown to make careless mistakes at the very least and may be politically motivated at worst.
Dr A said
He also said
Totally agree.
He then emitted this cloud of hot malodorous air:
And why this juvenile bragging about your beef eating proclivity? Do you think you are scoring some cheap points here? I can speak for myself, and I don’t give a toss about whether you eat cow or cabbage or pig. I eat all of the above, if and when I feel like it, and not to spite someone or to show-off my ‘broad-mindednes’. I think your post quite graphically demonstrates the violence, fear and hatred that swirls around in your mind. It is more about your fears than mine/ours.
PS….what do you think about the Nanavati commission report on the Godhra incident?