It's time Modi shows the strength in softness

Barkha Dutt
March 15, 2014

The following piece by Barkha Dutt is the best advise Modi can ever get. Indeed, my advice was similar.  If Modi is smart, he can spend half of the time, energy and money on nurturing goodwill and restoring the lives of the riot victims, than spending on the PR machine.

Remember Dumb Bush blew America's budget and a trillion Dollars on war and destruction of lives,  where as smart Obama got Bin Laden without any damage and for pennies.  Modi could learn from Obama. His present attitude is not good for India, it may be good for Hindutva mind set, but not for Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Jains, Dalits and others. 
We need a cohesive India, an India where no Indian has to live in apprehension or fear of the fellow Indian. No one should be treated any less regardless of their faith, caste, region or language. Modi needs to learn the full meaning of Vasudhaiva Kutumubukum, besides history and geography of India.

Modi should wear every possible hat Indians offer, he has worn over 25 different hats-pagdis, but has refused to wear a Muslim cap? Shouldn't he apologize for this blatant anti-Vasudhaive Kutumbukum attitude? Is he a good Hindu?

No Indian wants a leader that is divisive and does not care about one Indian or the other, is that too much to ask?  Modi lacks humility, he is as it appears to be too arrogant to express regret over the loss of life in Gujarat. It is time he does, not in words, but in action.

Modi should listen to the sane advice given by Burkha and myself. Links provided below.

1. URL- http://mikeghouseforindia.blogspot.com/2014/03/its-time-modi-shows-strength-in-softness.html

2. Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IndiaPluralism

3. Yahoogroups : DallasIndians@yahoogroups.com

Mike Ghouse, committed to a cohesive India# # #

It's time Modi shows the strength in softness

Even if Narendra Modi believes he was needlessly vilified for the riots, as PM aspirant, he could make a visible attempt at reconciliation.

Unless there are major undetected cross-currents the Narendra Modi wave seems all set to hit the shore as forecast. For a country that lost its moorings over the past few years and felt adrift because of the sheer listlessness of the men and women steering its course, this election, more than any before, is being fought on leadership as a central issue.

The wishy-washy ineffectual style of Manmohan Singh, the reticence and erratic interventions of Sonia Gandhi and the mostly abstract, platitudinous approach of Rahul Gandhi have all added up to create a gigantic appetite for a tangible, measurable strength of personality. It is this void in leadership that the Gujarat chief minister’s definitely more muscular and aggressive campaign has been successfully able to fill. Of course the backdrop of this leadership debate is corruption, scandal, inefficiency and poor communication. But no matter which way you break down the statistics of the much-debated Gujarat model, people backing Modi aren’t actually responding to data; they are validating what they believe to be a decisive and tough persona.

In other words, Modi’s manly campaign, down to the boast of the 56-inch chest, is the robust and toned alternative to the anorexic and diminutive quality of the incumbents. The abdication of leadership by the UPA and the somewhat fumbling articulations of the Congress vice-president have created a psychological gap; one that Modi has seized and converted into a political opportunity.

But as we wind down to the fateful day in May, now that the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate has presented himself as the Tough Guy that a leaderless country has been waiting for, why isn’t he more willing to show a softer, gentler side? In its previous stint in power, the BJP was able to offer a dualism of leadership style in Atal Bihari Vajpayee and LK Advani. Whether you saw them as the Good-Cop, Bad-Cop combination that all smart management tricks fall back on or as the Vikas Purush (Development Man) and Loh Purush (Iron Man) characters that their party colleague Venkiah Naidu cast them as, there was a yin and yang balance of perceived strength and softness.

Read: After Kejriwal, Narendra Modi to attend fund-raising dinner in Delhi

With no Vajpayee to soften his angularities, it is imperative that if Narendra Modi wants to be seen as a more inclusive leader, he should now be willing to take his politics beyond the confrontational or the antagonistic. His acerbic and abrasive taunts at his principal rivals do make for better copy and a more interesting television watch than others but if he is the man to lead a country as diverse as India, sooner or later he will have to reach out to those who are wary of him — not just the large mass of Muslim voters, but also to fence-sitters across communities.

By focusing his speeches exclusively on issues of governance and economics, by declaring the Constitution as his sacred book, by studiously avoiding any mention of Mandir or Masjid — Modi has tried to keep his national campaign strictly non-controversial. But this is not enough. The weight of history combined with the lingering baggage of some ill-chosen, insensitive metaphors (the ‘burqa’ of secularism; the ‘puppy’ analogy for 2002) still make Modi seem unwilling to empathise fully. He must understand that the evolved modern man is expected to be both strong and sentimental without it being mutually exclusive.

If the 2002 debate is not to be endlessly bookended with 1984 or if it is not to be a self-defeating argument about a missing apology, there is a simpler way for Modi himself to take the national debate forward. Now that a local court has upheld the finding of the RK Raghavan-led Special Investigation Team (SIT) that there is no prosecutable evidence against Modi for 2002, instead of only brandishing the ‘clean chit’ as a vindication, the BJP’s prime ministerial campaign could go further and use this moment to reach out and meet with the riot victims.

As it is, many believe that had Modi simply done so earlier, the healing process could have started sooner. I remember, JS Bandukwala, the soft-spoken university professor in Vadodara, whose own house was ransacked by a mob in 2002 and whose daughter Umaima is married to a Gujarati Hindu, telling me this a few years after the riots.

“If the chief minister had just placed a gentle hand on the head of Bilqis Bano,” he said, referring to the young woman who was three months pregnant when she was repeatedly raped by a mob, “we would be able to build bridges faster.” Even if the Gujarat chief minister believes he was needlessly vilified for the riots by a hostile media, as prime ministerial aspirant who could soon be leading India, there’s nothing to stop him now from making a more visible attempt at reconciliation.

Similarly, it would only increase Modi’s stature if he were to distance himself vocally from the foul-mouthed misogyny of many of his online supporters whose statements can sometimes border on the violent. Many of these online diatribes are located within the larger culture of aggression that seems to be the dominant political style of the day, across party lines.

In the build-up of his campaign, Modi used a bellicose force very effectively to expose the weaknesses of the Congress. In the last lap, and especially as polls indicate that he may well be the next prime minister, this trademark combativeness could be tempered and moderated by some compassion. In any case, in the age of coalition politics Modi will have no choice but to be a consensus-builder. This may be a good moment to start that process and show that softness complements strength and doesn’t detract from it.

Barkha Dutt is Group Editor, NDTV

The views expressed by the author are personal
- See more at: http://www.hindustantimes.com/comment/barkhadutt/it-s-time-modi-shows-the-strength-in-softness/article1-1195268.aspx#sthash.k4iWqEqS.dpuf

My Advise to Modi:

1. Op-Ed News: Modi's Nakshatras' are not in his favor - http://www.opednews.com/articles/Narendra-Modi-s-Nakshatras-by-Mike-Ghouse-Anti-christian_Bharatiya-Janata-Party_Business_Congress-131227-999.html

2.  Huffington Post: India's future and Narendra Modi -  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ghouse/indias-future-narendra-mo_b_4177079.html

3. Saudi Gazette - Modi's stars are not aligned - http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?method=home.regcon&contentid=20140227196984

...............................................................................................................................
Mike Ghouse is a speaker, thinker and a writer on pluralism, politics, peace, Islam, Israel, India, interfaith, and cohesion at work place. He is committed to building a Cohesive America and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day at www.TheGhousediary.com. He believes in Standing up for others and a book with the same title is coming up. Mike has a strong presence on national and local TV, Radio and Print Media. He is a frequent guest on Sean Hannity show on Fox TV, and a commentator on national radio networks, he contributes weekly to the Texas Faith Column at Dallas Morning News; fortnightly at Huffington post; and several other periodicals across the world. His personal site www.MikeGhouse.net indexes all his work through many links.

Devyani Khobragade - Is India making a big deal out of the diplomatic row?

Yes! If Salman Khurshid, the Foreign Minister had not protested strongly, and beyond reason - Modi would have taken big time advantage of it - Salman virtually shut Modi out on this issue, and this will continue through 5/12.

Indian Politicians duping the public as usual

BJP, INC and AAP are making an effort to look good, not by sharing what they can do, but by denigrating the others. Does this mean, they really have nothing to offer?

Kejriwal needs to explain if all the candidates his party is giving tickets to subscribe to his policies... are they standard?

Modi needs to explain the holes in Gujarat development Model, and need to quit attacking the others - his blind followers will believe him, but the public will not.

Gandhi - needs to tell the public, if he has any plans to bring about a change in the economic and social order. 

--
Mike Ghouse
www.MikeGhouse.net 

India's experiment with clean politics and preferred election outcome

Years ago, India ranked # 1 on the list of corrupt nations in the world, and today it is not. Despite the economic, social, cultural frictions we have, we are inherently a pluralistic democracy.

The General Elections are going to be held from April 7 through May 12, 2014, and we have several regional and national parties competing for the 543 Parliament seats. There are two major alliances of regional parties;  NDA - National Democratic Alliance with BJP as its anchor, and UPA- United Progressive Alliance with Congress as its anchor. There is a third front is emerging with regional parties and AAP.  It takes 272 Members to form a government.  Currently Congress holds 228 seats and BJP 137, all of this is likely to turn upside down.

Arvind Kejriwal leads a brand new Party called AAP -Aam Aadmi Party, and his party will be competing with two well organized established parties – Narendra Modi leads the BJP – Bharatiya Janata Party (Indian version Republicans) and Rahul Gandhi heads the INC- Indian National Congress (Democrat equivalent).

You may differ, but my personal choice is for no party to win the majority. A coalition government would be much better, as it compels them to be watching each other, decisions will be made by issue and not party line. It will also lend to greater debates on the issues. Unlike the US, if the coalition government does not perform, it can be brought down with a no confidence vote.

Arvind Kejriwal – no experience in governance, nor does he have an established system to carry the Party – the AAP; Aam Aadmi Party – common man’s party. But he is good for India. He wants to run a clean corruption free government. My worry is simply this –what if he is killed by the same party that killed Mahatma Gandhi, does he have an established system to carry the party forward without him? Is the manifesto written up?

Arvind is a good guy – at least corruption will be checked, but we need to make sure, he has systems in place to carry the business of governance.

The man leading the BJP plank is Narendra Modi, who needs lessons in history, biology, math and society, he is making blunders upon blunders. His popularity sounds like Ted Cruz's but not sure if it is managed or real. He is not an inclusive man and does not seem to believe in freedom. His state is one of the few where Christians, Dalits and Muslims are harassed, people do not have the freedom to choose their faith.

In the last two months he has worn over 25 different style hats in every town he visits, but refused to wear a hat given by Muslims – Under his watch nearly 1200 people were massacred while he did not stop the mayhem, 20,000 People are still living in wretched camps displaced by the massacres. To this day, he has not expressed remorse or regret for the deaths, just like George Bush has not done it yet. He promises prosperity and development, and is compared to Hitler, who promised and delivered prosperity to Germans at the cost of Jews and others, at the end nothing survived. If he does not care for social structure, all that development will not be sustainable.

Rahul Gandhi on the other hand represents the INC – it appears that he does not want to fight to win, nor does he have the experience. The only thing going for him is the party machinery which is well established. He lacks experience and does not have guts to run the largest government in the world.

Again, no one should be given a free hand, let there be a coalition government, let them learn to work with each other and deliver prosperity without hurting the social structure. A cohesive India is the way to go, a prosperous India without cohesiveness is doomed, the disparities may give birth to communism - to rip from the over night rich to give it to the depressed ones.

A COHESIVE INDIA

An Indian is an Indian is an Indian, period. We are Adivasis, Atheists, Bahá'ís, Bos, Buddhists, Christians, Dalits, Hindus, Jains, Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Tribals, Zoroastrians and every possible grouping. We are Brown, Black, White, Yellow and green with envy and phir bhi dil hai Hindustani . Every Indian must be free to eat, drink, wear, speak or believe whatever he or she wants to believe, as long as others freedom is not robbed.

Each one of us is responsible for building a cohesive India, where no Indian has to live in apprehension, discomfort or fear of the other. Everyday, we need to ask ourselves, do my words, acts and thoughts mitigate conflicts and nurture goodwill? This is patriotism!

Affiliated sites:

• Faceboook: https://www.facebook.com/IndiaPluralism

• Yahoogroups: DallasIndians@yahoogroups.com 

• URL: http://mikeghouseforindia.blogspot.com/2014/03/indias-experiment-with-clean-politics.html

...............................................................................................................................
Mike Ghouse is a speaker, thinker and a writer on pluralism, politics, peace, Islam, Israel, India, interfaith, and cohesion at work place. He is committed to building a Cohesive America and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day at www.TheGhousediary.com. He believes in Standing up for others and a book with the same title is coming up. Mike has a strong presence on national and local TV, Radio and Print Media. He is a frequent guest on Sean Hannity show on Fox TV, and a commentator on national radio networks, he contributes weekly to the Texas Faith Column at Dallas Morning News; fortnightly at Huffington post; and several other periodicals across the world. His personal site www.MikeGhouse.net indexes all his work through many links.

Hate not fear: How Muslims view Narendra Modi

Good piece, and good analysis about Muslims

Hate not fear: How Muslims view Narendra Modi
by Hasan Suroor Mar 11, 2014

Muslims may be forgiven for feeling slightly bemused by the current debate raging around the “Muslim Question’’ in the run-up to next month’s elections. It is riddled with flawed assumptions intended (with some deliberation, I suspect) to polarise and sex-up the political discourse.

 

 Meanwhile, the Modi factor goes beyond Muslims and this election. It has wider implications for the very idea of India we have to come to believe in. His brand of Hindu nationalism should worry anyone who believes in a pluralist and inclusive India irrespective of their religion. And that is a more important debate to be had than whether Muslims will vote for him.

 

And that is a more important debate to be had than whether Muslims will vote for him.

 

Read more at: http://www.firstpost.com/politics/hate-not-fear-how-muslims-view-narendra-modi-1428605.html?utm_source=ref_article

 

Hate not fear: How Muslims view Narendra Modi by Hasan Suroor Mar 11, 2014 #BJP #Hindu nationalism #LK Advani #Lok Sabha elections 2014 #Muslims #Narendra Modi #Politics inShare 135 CommentsEmailPrint Muslims may be forgiven for feeling slightly bemused by the current debate raging around the “Muslim Question’’ in the run-up to next month’s elections. It is riddled with flawed assumptions intended (with some deliberation, I suspect) to polarise and sex-up the political discourse.

Read more at: http://www.firstpost.com/politics/hate-not-fear-how-muslims-view-narendra-modi-1428605.html?utm_source=ref_article

Hate not fear: How Muslims view Narendra Modi by Hasan Suroor Mar 11, 2014 #BJP #Hindu nationalism #LK Advani #Lok Sabha elections 2014 #Muslims #Narendra Modi #Politics inShare 135 CommentsEmailPrint Muslims may be forgiven for feeling slightly bemused by the current debate raging around the “Muslim Question’’ in the run-up to next month’s elections. It is riddled with flawed assumptions intended (with some deliberation, I suspect) to polarise and sex-up the political discourse. Modi-Jammu-Shahid-Tantray The sheer electoral arithmetic is against Muslims when it comes to deciding Modi’s or his party’s fate. The way the debate is playing out there is the “Muslim factor” at one end of the pole and the Narendra Modi “factor’’ at the other with the entire campaign reduced to a “Muslim versus Modi” affair. No doubt, Muslims are a factor (haven’t they been a factor in every election in the past 60 years?) and so is Modi. But to suggest that the fate 170 million Muslims turns on the outcome of whether Modi gets to be prime minister is absurd. The reality is that however much Muslim wish, they can't stop Modi. If they could they would have stopped him in Gujarat long ago, and he wouldn't have gone on to win three successive elections after the harrowing events of 2002. The sheer electoral arithmetic is against Muslims when it comes to deciding Modi’s or his party’s fate. And he knows it. Otherwise by now he would have been down on his knees apologising for Gujarat riots and pleading for Muslim support. His fate will be determined not so much by Muslims as by his fellow Hindus. It is the millions of moderate Hindu voters who are going to give him the run for his money even, if in the end, they don’t quite succeed. Remember the campaign to hold him and his government to account for the 2002 riots has been led mostly by Hindu secularists and they have no intention of giving up. Forget the “M’’ factor. What he is really up against is the “H’’ factor. Another flawed assumption around which much of the Muslim-Modi debate is taking place is the so-called Muslim “fear factor’’. There is a general perception, fuelled by the BJP’ opponents who are trying to woo the Muslim vote, that the Muslim community is “scared’’ of Modi. It is argued that the Muslim opposition to him is prompted by their fear that they would not be secure under a Modi government. Muslims are said to be on “tenterhooks” at the prospect of him becoming prime minister. Given his Gujarat baggage, they are naturally concerned but there is no panic in the community. Muslims are not paranoid, and they're not spending sleepless nights thinking that come 16 May and they will have a wolf knocking at the door. But, yes, there is a deep sense of helplessness that they are not in a position to thwart his ambitions, and this has led to a stoic acceptance of a Modi premiership. Some are even planning to vote for him, albeit for purely pragmatic reasons (if you can’t beat them, join them); and more might follow if he and his party make a genuine effort over the next few weeks to reach out to them. Muslims don’t so much fear Modi as they hate him. I’m afraid there is no softer way of putting it, so deep is their anger over Gujarat. They are convinced that he aided and abetted the riots, and that violence on such a scale was not possible without his overt or covert say-so. They hate him for what they see as his indifference to Muslim suffering and anguish. And they hate him for his bullish refusal to show any contrition for what happened under his watch. The footage of Modi refusing to accept a skullcap from a Muslim cleric on the disingenuous plea that he doesn't believe in “identity politics” will, for many Muslims, remain an enduring image of his hardline anti-Muslim prejudice. But does it follow from this that they fear India will become a Hindu state under him? Or that he would “punish” them for not backing him? The answer is an emphatic no. Contrary to the Muslim stereotype –“alienated” from the national mainstream and “distrustful” of the majority community—most Muslims have sufficient faith in the inherent secularism and moderation of the vast majority of Hindus who, they firmly believe, will not allow Modi to run amuck. Even within the BJP there are enough sane voices which would oppose any attempt to turn India into another Pakistan, if for the simple reason that it is not in the BJP's own long- term interest to be identified with an overtly hate agenda if it wishes to prosper as a truly national party of governance. And it knows better than to pander to the ideology of one leader however popular he may be at a given point of time. Indeed, Muslims have been here before. Once they hated L.K. Advani (Modi’s original role model) with the same intensity for his role in the demolition of Babri Masjid. But when he became deputy prime minister and home minister, he was forced to give up his Hindutva avatar. Today, he is regarded as a moderate and a lot of Muslims would happily accept him as prime minister. Meanwhile, the Modi factor goes beyond Muslims and this election. It has wider implications for the very idea of India we have to come to believe in. His brand of Hindu nationalism should worry anyone who believes in a pluralist and inclusive India irrespective of their religion. And that is a more important debate to be had than whether Muslims will vote for him.

Read more at: http://www.firstpost.com/politics/hate-not-fear-how-muslims-view-narendra-modi-1428605.html?utm_source=ref_article

Hate not fear: How Muslims view Narendra Modi by Hasan Suroor Mar 11, 2014 #BJP #Hindu nationalism #LK Advani #Lok Sabha elections 2014 #Muslims #Narendra Modi #Politics inShare 135 CommentsEmailPrint Muslims may be forgiven for feeling slightly bemused by the current debate raging around the “Muslim Question’’ in the run-up to next month’s elections. It is riddled with flawed assumptions intended (with some deliberation, I suspect) to polarise and sex-up the political discourse. Modi-Jammu-Shahid-Tantray The sheer electoral arithmetic is against Muslims when it comes to deciding Modi’s or his party’s fate. The way the debate is playing out there is the “Muslim factor” at one end of the pole and the Narendra Modi “factor’’ at the other with the entire campaign reduced to a “Muslim versus Modi” affair. No doubt, Muslims are a factor (haven’t they been a factor in every election in the past 60 years?) and so is Modi. But to suggest that the fate 170 million Muslims turns on the outcome of whether Modi gets to be prime minister is absurd. The reality is that however much Muslim wish, they can't stop Modi. If they could they would have stopped him in Gujarat long ago, and he wouldn't have gone on to win three successive elections after the harrowing events of 2002. The sheer electoral arithmetic is against Muslims when it comes to deciding Modi’s or his party’s fate. And he knows it. Otherwise by now he would have been down on his knees apologising for Gujarat riots and pleading for Muslim support. His fate will be determined not so much by Muslims as by his fellow Hindus. It is the millions of moderate Hindu voters who are going to give him the run for his money even, if in the end, they don’t quite succeed. Remember the campaign to hold him and his government to account for the 2002 riots has been led mostly by Hindu secularists and they have no intention of giving up. Forget the “M’’ factor. What he is really up against is the “H’’ factor. Another flawed assumption around which much of the Muslim-Modi debate is taking place is the so-called Muslim “fear factor’’. There is a general perception, fuelled by the BJP’ opponents who are trying to woo the Muslim vote, that the Muslim community is “scared’’ of Modi. It is argued that the Muslim opposition to him is prompted by their fear that they would not be secure under a Modi government. Muslims are said to be on “tenterhooks” at the prospect of him becoming prime minister. Given his Gujarat baggage, they are naturally concerned but there is no panic in the community. Muslims are not paranoid, and they're not spending sleepless nights thinking that come 16 May and they will have a wolf knocking at the door. But, yes, there is a deep sense of helplessness that they are not in a position to thwart his ambitions, and this has led to a stoic acceptance of a Modi premiership. Some are even planning to vote for him, albeit for purely pragmatic reasons (if you can’t beat them, join them); and more might follow if he and his party make a genuine effort over the next few weeks to reach out to them. Muslims don’t so much fear Modi as they hate him. I’m afraid there is no softer way of putting it, so deep is their anger over Gujarat. They are convinced that he aided and abetted the riots, and that violence on such a scale was not possible without his overt or covert say-so. They hate him for what they see as his indifference to Muslim suffering and anguish. And they hate him for his bullish refusal to show any contrition for what happened under his watch. The footage of Modi refusing to accept a skullcap from a Muslim cleric on the disingenuous plea that he doesn't believe in “identity politics” will, for many Muslims, remain an enduring image of his hardline anti-Muslim prejudice. But does it follow from this that they fear India will become a Hindu state under him? Or that he would “punish” them for not backing him? The answer is an emphatic no. Contrary to the Muslim stereotype –“alienated” from the national mainstream and “distrustful” of the majority community—most Muslims have sufficient faith in the inherent secularism and moderation of the vast majority of Hindus who, they firmly believe, will not allow Modi to run amuck. Even within the BJP there are enough sane voices which would oppose any attempt to turn India into another Pakistan, if for the simple reason that it is not in the BJP's own long- term interest to be identified with an overtly hate agenda if it wishes to prosper as a truly national party of governance. And it knows better than to pander to the ideology of one leader however popular he may be at a given point of time. Indeed, Muslims have been here before. Once they hated L.K. Advani (Modi’s original role model) with the same intensity for his role in the demolition of Babri Masjid. But when he became deputy prime minister and home minister, he was forced to give up his Hindutva avatar. Today, he is regarded as a moderate and a lot of Muslims would happily accept him as prime minister. Meanwhile, the Modi factor goes beyond Muslims and this election. It has wider implications for the very idea of India we have to come to believe in. His brand of Hindu nationalism should worry anyone who believes in a pluralist and inclusive India irrespective of their religion. And that is a more important debate to be had than whether Muslims will vote for him.

Read more at: http://www.firstpost.com/politics/hate-not-fear-how-muslims-view-narendra-modi-1428605.html?utm_source=ref_article

URL -http://mikeghouseforindia.blogspot.com/2014/03/india-crosses-moral-line-of-no-return.html

Thank you Thane Richards for expressing this so well. It is a shame that a few Indians have lost their morality for money. I like your question, "Has India become so desperate for rapid economic growth, so blinded by the promise of prosperity, that she has forgotten basic humanity? It seems that, in the race towards higher GDP, the majority of India is willing to inject itself with the steroids of bigotry or ruthlessness. Ethics be damned"

In my articles, I have expressed similar thoughts "all that prosperity Hitler brought was lost completely by ignoring the the human aspect of development." Modi's arrogance is amazing, no regrets? He has a lot of praischit to do before he heads India. His Nakshatras are not in his favor at this time, until he shows humility, how can you have an arrogant man run our country? All the money that is thrown will be down the tube. Indians finally are made of some good morals and ultimately morality triumphs.  

A few of my articles, all of them have been reproduced by many Newspapers.

1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ghouse/indias-future-narendra-mo_b_4177079.html

2. http://www.opednews.com/articles/Narendra-Modi-s-Nakshatras-by-Mike-Ghouse-Anti-christian_Bharatiya-Janata-Party_Business_Congress-131227-999.html

3. http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?method=home.regcon&contentid=20140227196984

Mike Ghouse
www.MikeGhouse.net

India crosses the moral line of no return if Narendra Modi becomes prime minister

By Thane Richard March 10, 2014

Thane Richard is the founder of the Dabba, an independent digital radio station covering Indian culture and politics. He is also a co-founder of Jaunt, a journalism startup.

Economic development should not change your morals. Reuters/Mansi Thapliyal

In October 2012, I spoke to a crowd of mostly Indians in the Detroit area about the need for innovation in Indian media. After my talk, I was stopped by an Indian woman who looked to be in her forties, was elegantly dressed, well-spoken, and struck me as someone who I could have easily run into at a gallery opening in Mumbai or high tea at a five-star hotel. She complimented me on my speech, I thanked her, and we began talking about the far-off 2014 Indian election. What she said to me that day festers in my memory:

“Even if Narendra Modi was involved in the Gujarat riots, I don’t care. His economic work wins out. I will vote for him.”

Since then, I have not been able to shake a deep-seated disturbance at her disregard for essential humanity. This disregard, I fear, is shared by many in India. Before I lose your attention, this is not another piece debating Modi’s guilt. In fact, the argument about Modi’s guilt feels to me like the argument about whether Delhi is better than Mumbai—it will never end. I have my view, you have yours, and facts are facts—some we know and others we never will. That’s not the point. The point is not even whether you think Modi is better than Rahul Gandhi, Arvind Kejriwal, or any other potential prime minister. What matters here is where you draw the moral line between what is acceptable in a politician and what is a deal breaker.

What this woman showed me—and I have heard this thinly veiled sentiment often—is that if Modi walked into a press conference tomorrow and confessed to all of the crimes he is accused of, then she would still vote for him. She had already made peace with the possibility of him being guilty. To me, that position is untenable.

Certain stances or items on one’s political resume should disqualify them from consideration. If Modi came out and said women should not be allowed to vote, or that the caste system should be formally reinstated, or that he supported ethnic cleansing, then it wouldn’t really matter what his stance on taxation is. Such views are so contrary to the principles of India’s democracy that they should cancel his eligibility. We all have different spectra of morality and your list of deal breakers will likely be different from mine. Yet, our lists will probably contain a lot of similar items, too. Suggesting we end homelessness by rounding up and gassing all the homeless people? Nope, you’re out. There are some things we can all agree on—hopefully, “no mass executions” is one of them.

We also should not obscure the facts of the incident with our views on Modi’s guilt. The 2002 Gujarat Riots have been called ethnic cleansing, a pogrom, and even genocide. The government estimated, according to the BBC, that “790 Muslims and 254 Hindus were killed, 223 more people reported missing and another 2,500 injured.” Those are facts, regardless of whether you think Modi was involved. Here comes the test: if you believe he was behind the riots—behind “genocide”—then Gujarat’s economic growth rate does not matter. Rather, it shouldn’t matter.

Has India become so desperate for rapid economic growth, so blinded by the promise of prosperity, that she has forgotten basic humanity? It seems that, in the race towards higher GDP, the majority of India is willing to inject itself with the steroids of bigotry or ruthlessness. Ethics be damned.

When I took European history, I was always puzzled when it came to the politics leading up to World War II. I wondered, how could the German people have ignored Hitler’s obvious anti-semitism (he laid it out plain as day in his book, Mein Kampf) just because he preached a fast road to national recovery? The only reason this large electoral oversight makes sense to me is extreme economic need. If I were starving or my family were starving, I might not care about the costs attached to keeping them alive or to electing a person who promised to put bread on my table. While India certainly has enormous need, those are not exclusively the pockets that support Modi. The woman I spoke to was not starving. The political columnists of India’s newspapers are not starving. Anyone reading this article on this website is not starving. Obsession with the promised economic wizardry of Modi is not selfless patriotism for India’s advance, it is greed without regard for cost.

Is it extreme to compare electing the BJP (with Modi at its head) to electing the Nazi party with Hitler as its chancellor? Maybe, but it is eerily similar in many ways. If anything, it brings into sharper relief the absurdity of Modi’s candidacy. India has not just lost a war, or recently faced hyperinflation, or had her national pride stomped on by embarrassing terms of surrender. And let’s not forget that the political right of India has an odd, not-quite-closeted obsession with Hitler’s leadership style. Shiv Sena, anyone?

We look back at Weimar Germany and think “never again could we be so short sighted; those things cannot happen today.” Such sentiments are the blinders of ignorance—symptoms of our human need for proximity to facts before we believe them. We see war on television and think “not in my hometown,” but, sadly, the march of backwards thinking continues everyday. The Gujarat violence happened barely more than 10 years ago. In the United States, Kansas is about to pass a law that re-creates the “No Blacks Allowed” segregation of the 1950s and 1960s, they’re just changing the word “blacks” to “gays.” Our duty as informed citizens of the world is to always remain vigilant against regression, regardless of how modern we think we are.

In a recent New York Times article, Ashok Malik, an Indian columnist, was quoted saying: “Twenty or 30 years ago, Modi may have believed a lot of those things to different degrees, but Modi’s experience as a chief minister for the last 12 years, especially in a state like Gujarat, has proven an enormous learning process for him.” 

 

To be clear, Malik was not referring to the riots when he said “those things” in the above quote, he was talking about cultural censorship. However, at best I hope people who support Modi feel similarly when it comes to the riots and acknowledge that he has learned not to instigate violence to achieve his political aims; they hope he has, well, matured. At worst, his supporters just don’t care. For myself, I don’t want to cast my vote for someone who requires that learning curve at all. I learned that lesson in detention in third grade.

4

If you truly believe Modi is innocent, then you are excused. You then only have to reconcile with having a prime minister who is obviously incompetent at maintaining law and order in a nation where Naxals abound and multiple secessionist movements are ongoing. But if you believe he may be guilty of either ordering the riots or not preventing them, then you cannot comfortably ignore that judgment just because it is convenient to your privileged view of India’s future. To do so is nothing less than cowardice.

URL - http://qz.com/178362/india-crosses-the-moral-line-of-no-return-if-narendra-modi-becomes-prime-minister/

You can follow Thane on Twitter @ThaneRichard. We welcome your comments at ideas@qz.com.

Zulfiqar's committment to build a harmonious Gujarat

This is the kind of orientation our kids need to have, to bring about positive changes despite difficulties.  I was impressed by this kid's commitment, "As for his future plans, he said he was studying to bring Gujarat back to its harmonious days, when there was no fear and aggression." Indeed, that is how cohesive societies are built, that is pure patriotism,  a commitment to build an inclusive and not divisive Gujarat where no Gujarati has to live in apprehension and fear of the others, after all, the inhabitants of Gujarat are humans and not rakhshasas.

 I hope at least the new parents, both Hindu and Muslim do not poison their kids with hatred towards others. After all at least 10% of current 50-60 ish generation of Gujarati's, both Muslims and Hindus are loaded with hate for the other, and live in misery. Even those Gujarati's living in the United States, of a similar percentage are loaded with hate. I wish and pray, that these men clean their hearts, if they can, then they can ask Gujaratis in Gujarat to clean their hearts.

There is an old saying, evil exists not because of the evil people, but because of Good people doing nothing about the talks and acts of bad people. What can you do? The least you can do is to tell bad guys to shut up when they spew hatred towards all Gujaratis instead of individuals villains. Get a few more to say shut up, deep inside, the bad guys are not really bad, because they do shut up when a few people say it - otherwise they think they have the permission to spread hatred or belittle fellow Gujaratis.

Mike Ghouse

Committed to work towards building cohesive societies.

www.MikeGhouse.net

The following piece was sent by Shabnam Hashmi, and I have asked her to provide the link to the source, but the piece is a good piece.

A historic achievement!

A victim and survivor of Gujarat Riots of 2002; now a student of AMU; has beaten all records of hard work and dedication.

AMU research scholar selected for $1,20,000 scholarship:

In February 2002, when 15-year-old Sheikh Zulfiqar Mohmad Yusuf peeped out from the window of his house in Himmatnagar in Gujarat, he saw two communities baying for each other's blood. "That incident didn't take my life or my property but it attacked my sense of belonging and identity. The riots emboldened my resolve to rise above the circumstances," he said.

Today, this research scholar in economics from Aligarh Muslim University whose experience of staying in a relief camp prompted him to research what is now known as the 'Gujarat growth model', has got a scholarship worth 120,000 USD (Rs 74.28 lakh) from the Illinois Institute of Technology (IIT), Chicago to study business administration. This way, Zulfiqar has joined a select group of students from across the globe earning distinction for academic, social and extracurricular activities.

Recalling his early days, the madarsa-schooled researcher said his family shifted to a relief camp in Gujarat because "we wanted to stay with the community." "The feeling of mistrust and fear had seeped in so much that there was no escaping from it. We found safety in numbers and gathered around our community members."

Zulfiqar conducted Research on "GUJARAT GROWTH MODEL" and has condemned the claims made by Gujarat Government and admits, they are Fake. During the research, Yusuf said he found that the rural population and members from the backward class have not benefited from any development. "Only the occupational structure of most of the communities has changed".

As for his future plans, he said he was studying to bring Gujarat back to its harmonious days, when there was no fear and aggression.

Zulfiqar admits that Gujarat riots were the failure of administration of Gujarat, "I would like to be a civil servant, because the riots were also the result of administrative failure."

For his above Research work, the Illinois Institute of Technology (IIT), Chicago has selected him for a prestigious presidential scholarship of 120,000 USD (74,28000 INR).

Zulfiqar, a recipient of SEAL (Services, Excellence, Academics and Leadership) award by Northern Virginia Community College (NVCC) in 2012, was nominated by Robert G Templin, President of the NVCC for the IIT Presidential Scholarship. The exemplary academic record of Mr. Zulfiqar has earned him a place among the distinguished students of the University whose alumni include a Nobel laureate.