Why Modi built Sardar Patel statue?

  

The Statue of Unity, depicting Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, is being championed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, but there is far more to the story of this expensive project. It was Dy PM Sardar Patel  who banned RSS in the aftermath of Gandhi's assasination said "the RSS was not involved... his assassination was welcomed by those of the RSS ...". Golwalkar repeatedly pleaded with Patel, but Patel remained firm. He lifted the ban only after the RSS pledged to stay away from politics, not be secretive and abjure violence and professed "loyalty to the Constitution of India and the National Flag". After removal of ban, RSS hoisted the flag at their headquarters on 26th January 1950. 

• The hope is that this monument to Patel will attract lakhs of tourists, but there is far more going on with this strange and expensive statue.
• The statue was a bold assertion of Gujarati nationalism as it was to give Narendra Modi a political lineage to distinguish him from the parent RSS, which sat out the freedom movement. 
• Why he didn’t build a statue of Guru Golwalkar or Deen Dayal Upadhyaya or V.D. Savarkar. Or even Subhash Chandra Bose, speaks volumes about his designs to snatch Patel's legacy from Congress.
• Patel is a historic Indian figure - crucial to the Indian independence movement and political organisation of postcolonial India. This on its own, though, does not exactly warrant building the ‘world’s tallest statue’ in his honor. Rather, it is the contemporary politics of Modi’s nationalist project and its model of development that explains Patel’s extraordinary memorialization. 
• During his term as Jawaharlal Nehru’s Deputy Prime Minister, Patel negotiated - through diplomatic tact underpinned by the threat of force - the incorporation of the 562 princely states of colonial India into the Union of India. This earned him a reputation as the “Iron man of India” and as the unifier of India.
• Today, the assertion of Indian unity has political meaning beyond the incorporation of the princely states into modern India. Within the Hindutva view of India, unity must be centred around Hinduism and India as a distinctly Hindu civilization.
• Modi’s statue project seeks to emphasise moving away from secular leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru. Patel’s reputation as an ‘Iron man’ and his willingness to use force to unify India is a counter to Nehru’s nonviolent foreign policy.
• The statue is connected to Modi and the BJP’s promise for development and investment. In Modi’s time Gujarat was known for authoritarian leadership, communal tensions, and largely jobless, GDP growth.
• Many believe that BJP has become aware of lack of faces among in the ranks in the list of freedom fighters and that the statue might be a gimmick ahead of elections.

There were so many iconic personalities of independence struggle but the reason why Modi selected Patel for 'Statue' is due to his Hindutva inclinations despite banning and RSS and professing secularism is due to his hatred towards Nehru and Congress and that Gujarati Patel would have become first PM in the absence of Nehru. What he ignores is Patel and Nehru - admiration they had for each other. Patel, in his reply to Nehru on August 3, 1947, wrote "Many thanks for your letter on the first instance. Our attachment and affection for each other and our comradeship for an unbroken period of nearly 30 years admit of no formalities. My services will be at your disposal. I hope for the rest of my life, you will have unquestioned loyalty and devotion from me in the cause for which no man in India has sacrificed as much as you have. Our combination is unbreakable and therein lies our strength. I thank you for the sentiments expressed in your letter." No matter what ever Modi does, Patel remains Congressman and his legacy belongs to Congress. Never to RSS who were hand in hand with British during pre-independence days.

With majority eluding in 2019, BJP has to accommodate allies

As things stand at the moment, it is unlikely for BJP to get simple majority in 2019 elections but will retain the position of the single largest party. Assuming that large parts of the opposition remain together, BJP may hold on to at best 210 seats in the Lok Sabha. This would bring the BJP to the size of the Congress in the last UPA government. 

• Regional parties that are not currently in it but have been at one time, like some of the Tamilian parties, may join in. Which were once there but have become opponents (TDP, BJD etc.) could join again or remain neutral. Therefore, even if the BJP loses 70 or 80 seats, it should still be possible for the party to return to power.
• This will be an entirely new situation for Modi, who became the chief minister of Gujarat without having fought a single election. He has always led a majority government. A few months into his term, Gujarat burst into flames.
• Modi's only experience is as a CM in heading government where he controlled the full majority and often a two-thirds one. Old leaders were sidelined. New loyal faces were brought in. Modi picked and chose his Cabinet and dominated by holding all the key portfolios.
• Amit Shah, the second most powerful leader in the country today, was not given cabinet rank and was kept as MoS in the decade he served under Modi in Gujarat.
• Modi’s brilliant campaign of 2014 then produced a similar situation in Delhi and he was the undisputed leader of a party that had previously had some divisions but was always more disciplined than the Congress. Old leaders like LK Advani and MM Joshi were shunted out. Others like Sushma Swaraj had to submit. The party is seen as a big happy family today but it is not. BJP also has many who are capable of doing more but are being deliberately held back. With BJP having less than 210 seats, these individuals & regional leaders will assert themselves in a way that they are not doing now. 

It will be fascinating to see how Modi, for the first time in his political life without a majority, will manage the ambitions and the conflicts. At 210 seats, the position of the PM will be like that of Manmohan Singh. He was wrongly seen as weak, rather than the position of a man whose allies have a veto on his actions. There is no defence against such allies except for martyrdom. One can sacrifice the government, or one’s position, and move on. But if one wants to lead in a government where the majority is missing, then allies will have to be accommodated. This is something which Modi never did. Running a minority government requires flexibility and the ability to swallow humiliation. Allies will make sure that their hold is made public and this will mean getting the government to bend a few times. It will be fascinating to see how Modi manages this, particularly for those who have observed the meteoric trajectory of his career. Minority governments and khichdi coalitions has not hampered India’s economic and social growth. Those who fear a minority government or a hamstrung BJP should not despair. Coalitions are not evil. What will be instructive will be to see how Modi manages one.

Read the source article

Modi & Amit Shah duo would like to sit in opposition and allow a 'kichdi' coalition take charge and collapse with its own contradictions in an year or two and win back in mid term polls emulating fall of Janata Party and return of Indira Gandhi in 1980. Although not easier, RSS have given clear direction that it would like Modi to pave way to more acceptable person like Nitin Gadkari to lead BJP lead NDA government. Easing out Modi & Shah is a big challenge for RSS and softliners. 

Hinduism, Islam and Christianity are equal

• Retired Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, Ajit Prakash Shah, declared scathingly, “The Republic of Intolerance that India has turned into in the last few years reflects and confirms to us our collective psychological malady, where we have lost sensitivity to the pain of our fellow citizens, and have become numb to the increasing loss of rights as citizens.”
• Justice Shah confessed that his own roots were seeped in saffron: “My grandfather was one of the founding members of the Hindu Mahasabha in pre-Independent India. I grew up reading the poems of Veer Savarkar.”
• He said, “Until the day the RSS declares that Islam and Christianity are equal to Hinduism and other religions born in India, there will be little scope for social harmony.”
• He said that those who lead the mob violence are clearly doing so with impunity, while fear spreads amongst the minorities. The mobile phone and the violent content it brings to you has become a terrorising device, with mob lynchers recording their acts and spreading them.
• The home ministry has directed wide publicity of the severe punishments that participation and abetment to mob fury can draw, it needs to be seen how sincere the government is in implementing this stated intent, Justice Shah said.
• The Indian media has been a big disappointment. “Far from questioning the government on behalf of the people, the media today circulates fake news and questions those who question the government. If the media at large feels compromised, barring a few exceptions, then democracy is in peril. Lynchings have to be condemned by news anchors, not used as ‘masala’ for prime time television,” he said.
• Justice Shah said that in the recent judgement of the Supreme Court directing continued detention at home for activists accused of conspiracy, the value was is in the dissenting verdict of Justice DY Chandrachud. 
• “Dissent is being curbed. Sloganeering is becoming a test of patriotism. When Akhlaq was killed, it wasn’t his body that was sent for post-mortem first. It was the meat which was sent for testing,” he said, pointing out the prejudice in the law and order machinery.
• “When violence happens in small doses, and regularly, we find it hard to remain angry, and accept it as commonplace.”
• The hope for the nation lies in common citizens refusing to accept any deviation of the founding values of the Constitution, Justice Shah concluded.

The one-day event saw nearly 2,000 people register to attend and listen to various speakers, which also included the articulate MP Shashi Tharoor and student leader Kanhaiya Kumar.

Who is trying to bring down PM Modi?

The right-wing Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) in India kicked off a three-day conclave in Delhi on Monday by praising the main Opposition Congress party for securing India's independence. It also clarified it did not believe in a Congress-mukt (Congress-free) India but a sarvalok-yukt (all-inclusive) India. It came as a surprise because the RSS' prime minister, Narendra Modi, has spent four years spewing venom against the Congress, its prime ministers and the family that holds the party together. Certainly, the RSS revealed its changed thinking when it invited Congress chief Rahul Gandhi to this conclave. Despite Rahul's surprise hug for Modi in Parliament, better sense prevailed and he spurned the RSS invitation (unlike former president Pranab Mukherjee, who attended an RSS function in Nagpur in June, thinking he was laying the ground for himself to head a coalition government after the 2019 election). And though the RSS is eternally tainted with the assassination of "Mahatma" MK Gandhi in 1948, it has occasionally flirted with the Congress as evidenced by the fact of dozens of RSS men named as culprits in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots.

Still it is surprising that with a majority government still in the saddle and about eight months to go before the parliamentary election, the RSS finds it necessary to extend an olive branch to the main opposition party. It cannot be, as the RSS claims, that it is a misunderstood organisation and that this exercise is meant to dispel the wrong notions surrounding it. The RSS thrives on a certain element of mystery and myth given its rigid hierarchy and organisation and its para-military nature. There is only one explanation for the RSS's current behaviour: it has read the writing on the wall that its government is on its way out. Hence it is building bridges with opposition parties, because it fears what may come once Modi is out of power.

That things are not going well for Modi is evident from various other recent developments. NDA allies like Nitish Kumar's Janata Dal (United) have started acting tough. The Bihar chief minister, who till recently was silently facing all-round opprobrium for dumping his electoral partner (the Rashtriya Janata Dal) and hitching his wagon to the BJP, is now demanding his pound of flesh before the next parliamentary election - he does not want just a handful of seats to contest and has formally inducted Prashant Kishor, the data-genius behind Modi's 2014 victory, into his party to ensure it remains the senior partner in any future electoral alliance in Bihar. Telangana chief minister K Chandrasekhar Rao has demanded an early assembly election in which he hopes to do well, and he is least bothered about Modi's pet project of a simultaneous parliamentary and assembly election. Even Ram Vilas Paswan, a dalit leader from Bihar who is reliably a political weathercock, has been talking about leaving Modi's National Democratic Alliance (NDA). The rats are obviously deserting the sinking ship.

The RSS would likely be concerned. In Delhi there is a general expectation that Modi's parliamentary tally will decrease to around 150 seats following the 2019 election, and while that would ordinarily be enough to remove a leader and replace him with someone acceptable to coalition partners (who have been silently licking their wounds of neglect the past four-plus years), the RSS also knows that removing either Modi or party chief Amit Shah will not be easy. Both these gentlemen are apparently willing to sit in opposition and let a coalition government totter about for two to two and a half years before finally collapsing under the weight of its own contradictions. Modi fashions himself after iron lady Indira Gandhi, and like her, might bide his time to return to the top post as she did in 1980, after a nearly three-year hiatus.

This does not suit the RSS, which would rather try to retain governance under a different prime minister, heading a coalition that was much like the late Atal Bihari Vajpayee's government. There are various advantages to this: to consolidate much of the hidden social work and deep changes in the education sector that the rightwing has undertaken since May 2014. Modi has been such a polarising figure that a replacement government would want to first of all undo much of the damage to institutions that he has inflicted, in the name of getting things done, where his will was supreme over any Constitutional nicety or propriety.

First things first, however: the RSS has to save its own skin. There are many political parties who would like to give the RSS cadres a thrashing of their lives. The RSS must be highly conscious of the fact that the atmosphere against it will change drastically once Modi loses power. Hence, the RSS top brass have humbly recounted Congress's contribution of independent India's history, and have extended the peace pipe to Rahul Gandhi. It is a heartening sign for Indian democracy that Rahul has showed the RSS its place - that it does not rule supreme over all Indians, but merely over a sullen part of society, whose achhe din are hopefully soon coming to an end.

Read the source article

Modi unites all opposition parties against himself

• Recent developments suggest that Narendra Modi and his BJP can no longer afford to be over confident about their prospects in the next parliamentary elections. 
• BJP's recent victory in Gujarat is so much narrow that in next LS elections it may not even get 13 of 26 seats. In last elections BJP won all 26 seats.
• BJP's impressive victory in Tripura and in North East has just 24 LS seats only. 
• The recent LS bye poll humiliating defeats with massive majority in MP, UP, Rajasthan and Bihar only indicates its vulnerable position in Hindi heartland states, where it has won thumbs down in 2014, almost 90% LS seats.
• RSS survey had warned that unless BJP makes some in roads in South, East and North East, BJP may not be able to form Government in 2019, even with the help of allies.
• BJP allies from several states have either jumped ship recently or have begun making dissonant noises and a federal front is being talked about, and many has begun exploring viable anti-BJP groupings.
• The realignment conversations could be described as signs of political desperation and opportunism, the BJP will take these lightly at its own peril. Even the smallest allies that had  contributed to the 2014 result and their exit will hurt.
• Regional and small parties are usually more closer to the people, and their growing openness to considering non-BJP options suggests that they may be sniffing a change in voter mood.
• The first is the puncturing the exaggerated claims of the Modi government and its all-round failure in delivering "achhe din" by the Congress took with some success in Gujarat.
• The second is the Modi government’s callous attitude to regional aspirations and its unfair treatment of regional opposition-led states, the factors said to be behind the TDP’s exit from the BJP-led NDA.
• The third is the strong anti-democratic strain in the functioning of the BJP and Modi government, with sweeping decisions such as demonetization taken without much consultation, opposition leaders being hounded, much energy being devoted to sabotaging opposition governments and installing BJP/NDA state governments even after electoral rejection, and meddling in the working of constitutional and other authorities.
• The SP and the BSP tie-up for the UP by-elections has made the most news, but there are others too. 
• The BJP is facing criticism on non-performance, regional neglect and anti-democratic attitude, but the fact of the matter is that these have emerged as the principal themes and much of the blame must go to the Modi-Amit Shah duo. 
• The BJP’s top two have made no secret of their Congress-mukt Bharat agenda or their desire for a longer stint in the government, to realise a "new India". Political ambition of Modi-Shah duo’s chosen approach are exceptionable as their plans to continue in power appear to rely less on demonstrated performance, more on headline management, a systematic crippling of the opposition, and projection of their electoral record as a popular vindication of positions and endorsement of performance.
• The BJP has never spared the Congress for the propaganda and opposition stifling the grand old party resorted to in its heydays, and its position on electoral record smacks of duplicity. If the BJP’s election wins reflect the people’s approval of what it is doing, surely the Congress must have performed extremely well for it to have ruled the roost for decades.
• The Modi-Shah recipe, viewing BJP more as an election machine has driven the BJP to high-voltage propaganda, riding roughshod over regional sentiment and established democratic proprieties.
• Modi’s carefully crafted larger than life persona is another reason for the kind of Opposition build-up being witnessed. In painting Modi as a hugely popular, unassailable political mastermind, and Modi himself seriously invested in perpetuating the image, the BJP has hastened the process of self-reflection across various Opposition parties and given a certain credibility to charges of self-aggrandizement and totalitarianism against Modi.
• It is likely that the Modi-led hegemony not been pitched so strongly and that the men and strategies that catapulted the BJP to parliamentary majority and have delivered several important Assembly election wins will emerge as the party’s weak links now. But then, as Shah himself says, every election is different and the past matters little.

While not understating Modi's charisma and oratory skills of mesmerizing and carrying audience with him, the fact of the matter is that the people in the seats of power must deliver to the expectations of people over time of 3-5 years. Otherwise, building up anti-incumbency is inevitable. In 2014 it is not Modi's victory but loss of elections by UPA regime. Same thing will repeat in 2019, due to no-performance by Modi and humiliation of allies & opposition parties. All BJP electoral victories from 2014 onward, are mainly due to divided opposition not an endorsement of its performance. Now visible BJP's losses are also due to unification of opposition parties. The desire to defeat Modi is reverberating, unification of all opposition parties is a certainty by 2019 general election and that would ruthlessly consign Modi & Co to their hometowns. The ever increasing crude oil price will aid economic distress for people of India and will aid destruction & demolition of Modi & BJP. 

Modi & BJP's desperation to form government in Karnataka, despite falling short of majority while JDS+Congress having clear majority, with the help of their own Governor and SC passing strictures has only united all the opposition parties in the country. In the end, truth will prevail i.e. JDS+ Congress will form government and BJP will stand isolated. That would seal BJP's ambitions to make way into South and will have negative effects in 2019 elections.

RSS, Tricolor flag & Patriotism

• One fact is certain: the organization (RSS), which runs the party (BJP) that runs the regime (Modi led NDA) cannot just appropriate the 'Indian national movement' as its own.
• RSS had refused to participate in the freedom struggle. It has, therefore, no right to claim its glory even though the Congress cannot also monopolize on any 'sole heir status' for various reasons.
• K.B. Hedgewar, who founded the RSS in 1925, did have some initial loose association with the freedom struggle. But from the 1930s, he ensured that his boys in khaki shorts stayed away from this historic movement. He said "Patriotism is not only going to prison. It is not correct to be carried away by such superficial patriotism." 
• The Hindu Mahasabha's V.D. Savarkar, who is another cherished role model of the current dispensation, had been active long before Hedgewar but he was rather mercurial. He did lead strident anti-British agitations and was jailed, but he also signed multiple clemency petitions to the colonial government, promising total cooperation if he was released. The Congress retaliated in 1934 and banned its members from joining communal organizations like the Hindu Mahasabha, the RSS and the Muslim League. 
• In any case, during the critical phase of the Quit India movement and other agitations, not only was the RSS missing but we also have British reports of the 'good conduct' and the law-abiding nature of its members, while thousands of women, children and men all over India braved the onslaught of imperial repression.
• Nana Deshmukh in his book, RSS: Victim of Slander (1979): "One might well ask: why did the RSS not take part in the liberation struggle as an organisation? The question arose for the first time when Gandhiji launched his movement in 1929-30. It was decided that the members of the RSS were free to take part in their individual capacity". Fine. But it may be instructive to know which particular RSS member actually took part and what suffering he went through for it. 
• It is only logical that the RSS and its dedicated cadre that run the government should come clear on this phase of history before attempting to snatch credit in this new version of ultra-nationalism.
• On the eve of Independence, when much of the nation was preparing to celebrate freedom, the RSS's mouthpiece, Organiser, declared that the Indian tricolour will "never be respected and owned by the Hindus. The word three is in itself an evil, and a flag having three colours will certainly produce a very bad psychological effect and is injurious to a country." 
• Second head of the RSS, M.S. Golwalkar lamented that "our leaders have set up a new flag for the country. Why did they do so? It is just a case of drifting and imitating... Ours is an ancient and great nation with a glorious past. Then, had we no flag of our own? Had we no national emblem at all these thousands of years? Undoubtedly we had. Then why this utter void, this utter vacuum in our minds?" 

Gandhi's assassination on January 30, 1948, however, changed the political chessboard of India decisively. The government banned the RSS and the then deputy prime minister, Patel, declared quite unequivocally that though "the RSS was not involved... his assassination was welcomed by those of the RSS and the [Hindu] Mahasabha who were strongly opposed to his way of thinking and to his policy." Golwalkar repeatedly pleaded with Patel, but the leader, whom the current regime seeks to appropriate, remained firm. He lifted the ban on July 11, 1949, only after the RSS pledged to stay away from politics, not be secretive and abjure violence. More important, it had to profess "loyalty to the Constitution of India and the National Flag". After removal of ban, RSS hoisted the flag at their headquarters on 26th January 1950. Sardar Patel died on 15th December that year, and RSS never hoisted the flag in their headquarters after that until 2002.

Rahul Gandhi proves his mettle

Today, after winning successive elections since 2014 except Bihar, Delhi and Punjab [BJP & allies rule expanded to 19 of 29 states; Congress rule restricted to just 5 states] the invincible Prime Minister Modi is scared of only one man by the name Rahul Gandhi, whom he & his trolls once described as 'pappu' and a 'reluctant politician'. During the past six months Rahul Gandhi smashed all these and gave a spirited and stunning fight in Gujarat election making Modi and his BJP machine sweat like never before. Here are some points proving his mettle:

1. Rahul Gandhi said on demonetisation "Initially the government spoke about black-money, then moved to counterfeit currency and then again to a cashless society campaign. The prime minister took this so-called bold decision single-handedly. The bold decision can also be a foolish decision. And this has devastated the country. More than 100 people have died. Farmers, fishermen, daily wage earners have been hit hard." He also said "Dr Jaitley, the economy is in the ICU because of notes ban and GST. Aap kehtey hai aap kissi sey kum nahi/ magar aapki dava mein dum nahi."
2. Rahul Gandhi said on GST roll out "A reform that holds great potential is being rushed through in a half-baked way with a self-promotional spectacle. GST is being executed by an incompetent and insensitive government without planning, foresight and institutional readiness. India deserves a GST roll out that does not put crores of its ordinary citizens, small businesses & traders through tremendous pain & anxiety. Their GST is 'Gabbar Singh Tax'. Small shopkeepers are finished. Lakhs of youths have been unemployed. But they are still not ready to listen. Congress GST is 'Genuine Simple Tax'. Modiji’s GST is 'Gabbar Singh Tax'." 
3. Rahul Gandhi hammers on 'unemployment' issue repeatedly. On his superb trip to USA he said, "I think the central reason why Mr. Modi arose is the question of jobs in India. There’s a large part of our populations that simply do not have jobs and cannot see a future. But, certainly our prime minister is not doing enough in creating jobs. 30,000 new youngsters are joining the job market every single day and yet the government is only creating 500 jobs a day. My main issue with Mr Modiji is that he diverts that issue and points the finger somewhere else instead of listening." Though the ruling government floated a plethora of schemes like ‘Make in India’, ‘Startup India’ and ‘Digital India’, all of these initiatives proved to be duds.
4. Speaking on women rights back in 2014 Rahul Gandhi  said, "We talk a lot about becoming a superpower in the world but till the women of our country do not feel comfortable and secured, our country cannot become a superpower. And to tell you the truth, we don’t want such a superpower status, where women are not empowered. One thing I have learnt is if you empower women, they can do anything. One important battle we have to win is the women’s reservation Bill in Parliament. We’re not going to let go of it." The BJP had promised during their pre-election rallies that the women’s reservation bill would be passed as soon as they got into power. Despite three and a half years of Modi rule, the bill has not come up in the Lok Sabha so far.
5. Rahul Gandhi while speaking on intolerance had previously said, "Truth and Power are not the same thing. Truth is what stands up to power. Today, there is no doubt that the emperor is completely naked but there is no one with any courage to point it out. When the British came to India, people handed over freedom to them. It was never taken away from us. This could very well happen now. Both the RSS and Mr Modi want to create a country where people live in utmost fear surrendering their voice so that they can rule unhindered. Mr Modi, after locking his cabinet colleagues in a room announced demonetization which wiped off lakhs of jobs. Many media houses have been depicting this as a work of genius even while admitting in private that it was an act of insanity. Most of them have lost their voice." At his recently concluded USA trip, he again said, "What happened to the tolerance that prevailed in India? What happened to the harmony? For thousands of years, India has had a reputation of peace and harmony. This is being challenged. Our most powerful asset is that 1.3 billion people lived happily, non-violently, peacefully. This is something that as Congress people, every single one of us has to defend."
6. On agrarian crisis Rahul Gandhi said in a rally in Maharashtra, "Everyone knows that a farmer needs the support of the nation and the State Government. If you ask any farmer, how much money comes from their farm, then every farmer will tell you – if the MSP is not increased, if there are no rains and no compensation or bonus is given, then they won’t be able to work, and this is the truth behind today’s India."  Criticising the ruling NDA Government, Rahul said in Gujarat "the suit boot government doesn’t do anything for the farmers." Speaking earlier this year to the bereft farmers from Tamil Nadu, he said,” The farmers have been sitting here for so long. But neither the government nor the Prime Minister is listening to them. The people and farmers of Tamil Nadu deserve to be heard by the Prime Minister who is disrespecting them by not initiating any dialogue. Over the last three years, debt worth Rs 1.4 lakh crore held by 50 industrialists have been written off. Why the same is not being done in case of the farmers? Why are their debts not being waived? It is the Prime Minister’s responsibility to do so.” 
7. Rahul Gandhi has made the 'failed development model of BJP' as the body and soul of his Gujarat campaign. Modi had come to power based on the stellar work he had apparently done in Gujarat which he promised would be juxtaposed to other states as well. But Rahul Gandhi ripped that narrative to pieces saying, "Gujarat model of development can be called toffee model or ‘gubbara’ (balloon) model, which is nothing but loot of public money to benefit big people like Tata and Adani. Modi had given away 45,000 acres belonging to poor farmers and the size of Bihar’s Purnea district to a single person (Adani) at a rate of rupees one per sq metre which is equivalent to the price of a toffee. He gave away the entire stretch of land at a paltry sum of Rs.300 crores. Modi had also provided Rs.10,000 crore loan to Tata Motors for its Nano car project at 0.1% interest, while the common man get loan from banks at 12% interest. For every Nano car, the Gujarat government is providing Rs.40,000 assistance. The total budget of the Gujarat government on education, health and other welfare is less than Rs.10,000 crore." Speaking later he added, "Vikas has gone crazy? India’s economy has been destroyed. But everyone is quiet because they are afraid to speak against Narendra Modiji. These are not my words. Senior BJP leader Yashwant Sinha has written this in a newspaper article today. Poverty reduction in Gujarat was highlighted as a huge success but reports have since shown that it has been slower than most of the other states. There has been undoubted progress in electrification and infrastructure development but that has mostly played in the hands of the corporate sector with little to no improvement for the masses! If Gujarat model was dissected, an entire thesis could well be written on it with both pros and cons. We would just stop short of calling it a bigger success than it was.
8. We worked for 10 years to bring peace in Kashmir. Speaking in USA on the violence in the valley, Rahul Gandhi said, "PDP was instrumental in bringing youngsters in politics, but the day Modi made alliance with PDP, he destroyed them (PDP). He (Modi) massively opened up space for the terrorists in Kashmir, and you saw the increase in violence.Violence against anybody is wrong. Hatred, anger and violence can destroy us, the politics of polarisation is dangerous. These incidents are making millions feel that they have no future in their country. I lost my father, my grandmother to violence, if I don’t understand violence then who will?"

Read the source article

Rahul Gandhi blames the BJP for spreading abuses about him

GST: Why Modi calls it a collective initiative?

• Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s repeated and uncharacteristic observations on Goods and Services Tax (GST) since the middle of October reveals the political impact of the “historic economic reform” initiated by the NDA government on July 1, 2017.
• The central argument in Modi's repeated assertions was that the introduction of the GST regime was a collective decision of all political parties and State governments and that the Centre only played a small part in the decision-making process. The Central government is only a 30th part in the entire GST Council, he says.
• Modi's pronouncements stood out in contrast to his normal style of speechifying, which is usually marked by self-aggrandisement and claims of great achievements and triumphs in various fields.
• Modi is also known for running down political adversaries in his speeches. But the tone and tenor of the GST-related references were conspicuously defensive, and while adopting this posture Modi also sought to apportion credit or blame, whichever way one wanted to see it, to his political associates and adversaries. 
• What he wanted to convey was evident. It was the responsibility for the mess in trade, industry and agrarian sectors caused by the new tax regime and its implementation cannot be placed solely on him or his government and the BJP.  These points also flagged a sort of desperation that Modi supposedly does not display under normal circumstances. 
• A former Bihar RS member describes this new role-play by Modi as a political act, devious and amusing at the same time. “Here is a man who, in the run-up to Lok Sabha elections in 2013-14, unabashedly took the credit even for Amul Dairy in Anand, Gujarat that was set up in 1946 and nurtured as a successful model since the 1970s under several regimes, including the Congress. Modi was CM of Gujarat only from 2001 to 2014, but he had no qualms about claiming credit for the dairy cooperative movement. So now when he says that you are all partners in GST and his government is only one-30th of GST council, there is little doubt that it is driven by a realisation that the political challenges thrown up by the new tax regime and its implementation are indeed grave.”
• All sections of the population, including traders, industrialists, salaried employees, daily-wage earners and farmers, minced no words in expressing the hardships they had suffered over the past one year, not only on account of GST, but also demonetisation. 
• Even supporters of the BJP and RSS outfits, in trade, industrial and agricultural bodies, were critical of the demonetisation-GST continuum.
• “When GST was launched Modi had promised four things. First, there would be a uniform tax structure across the country. Second, it would remove corruption and prevent generation and circulation of black money. Third, the harassment of traders by high-handed officials would come to an end. Fourth, all trade in the country would be documented and receipted. Now, as we see the implementation of GST, not one of these promises is being fulfilled,” a BJP MP from UP said.
• Given our striking infrastructural deficiencies, is it possible to fulfill the digital requirements demanded by the GST regime? The listening quotient of Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, is very low. Out of 62 specific anomalies in the GST structure, just 12 of them have been accepted. Government will have to come around and accept the other 50 too, because they are legitimate demands, strong on facts and reasoning. But every genuine demand is addressed with extreme laxity while arbitrary and ill-thought-out directives emerge out of the big officers of the government. Modi will have to address all this at the earliest and put the government back on track.
• The mess and the unending economic hardships inflicted by demonetisation & GST are now increasingly alienating the poorer classes from the BJP. This situation presents an opportunity for the disparate mainstream and regional opposition parties, including the Congress, Communist Party of India (Marxist), the SP, BSP, the RJD, the DMK, NCP etc, to build a campaign and make it an effective anti-government political weapon.
• If the opposition was able to put up effective campaign on these lines, the Modi-Amit Shah duo, along with RSS, may only have the option of propping up an aggressive Hindutva rhetoric to create a communal divide in the name of the Ayodhya Ram temple or some other polarising issue. 

You are a failure when you blame and criticize others for your mistakes. 

Stop blaming others and take responsibility. 
Owning responsibility is the trait of a statesman.

Modi was elected by people of India to govern them within the framework of constitution and laws of the land for their growth and prosperity. GST seemingly good for all, did immense damage to informal sector, due to flaws in design and implementation. The informal sector accounts for 45% of manufacturing and employ over 117 million people. Unable to migrate into formal sector, half of these companies are either out of business or have gone underground completely. GDP growth rate nose dived to 5.7% (below 6% is considered a catastrophe) from what otherwise should have been around 9.5%. Instead of owning up responsibility and taking corrective steps PM & FM (Modi & Jaitley) resorting to passing on the buck is definitely a catastrophe for India. While steep fall in economic indices happen due to self inflicted injuries, recovery is painfully slow and will happen over next several years. Modi is disastrous Prime Minister of India ever had, better than only VP Singh in 1989. Modi, a egoistic and fame hungry, will not accept defeats but will continue to make reckless adventures (political & otherwise) for his survival. The worst fear is BJP invoking 'Hindutva' which will divide, polarize India on communal lines. Repetition of  1992 Babri Masjid demolition like things are not ruled out. If that happens, economy will end up in shambles.

Swachch Bharat - Failure

India Today  |  Oct 16, 2017  |  Page 9

Without going into too many details, it is safe to declare that 'Swachch Bharat' has derailed and a 'Failure', simply because World Bank hasn't released any money committed for 'Clean India' even after three years of its launching and spending huge amounts mostly on publicity, with participation of President, PM, Governors, CMs, Ministers and everyone from politics and government with broom sticks posing for TV cameras, citing "moderately unsatisfactory" and "campaign's wider ineffectiveness". Thousands of crores of rupees spent so far has gone down the drain burdening exchequer with no lasting benefits. Modi & co must own up responsibility for this debacle along with many more failures. But it is too much to expect such nice things from third rated politicians from BJP and Sangh parivar. The reason for failure of 'Swachch Bharat' is insufficient home work done and improper planning prior to launching etc.

Give me six hours to chop down a tree and 

I will spend the first four sharpening the axe ... Abraham Lincoln

Modi's thinking big has style and no substance.

• For Modi, “thinking big” is essentially about showcasing “our strengths” [like bullet train] and not necessarily bringing any benefit to the people.
• Modi's another big idea is building a Statue of Unity to commemorate Sardar Patel, India’s first Deputy Prime Minister, and fixing its height at 186 metres, twice as tall as the Statue of Liberty (United States), exposing fascination for spectacle that the politician, termed widely “as the most powerful after Indira Gandhi”, nourishes within his political self.
• Modi’s penchant for thinking big has a chilling similarity with Mussolini’s Fascist Italy is that in the Mussolini regime, politics starts to be less concerned with the act of governing people in an efficient way, for instance, in solving their economic problems. Instead, it is focused more on the spectacle of power, on the visual and impressive display of symbols, myths and rituals. In terms of everyday life this anesthetization of political power takes the shape of a domination of form of visual appearance, effects over the content. It also means that politics ceases to be measured by political criteria. Politics itself assumes the form of an artistic act; to govern means to Mussolini to create a new Nation and a new Empire and Mussolini views himself as the creative soul of the nation, the propeller of new ways of living. 
• Modi and other leaders of the BJP had repeatedly promised, through the 2014 Lok Sabha election campaign and even after the formation of the government, that the farmers’ income across the country would be doubled by 2022. Three years into that promise, while FM Jaitley said it was for State governments to initiate measures to double the farmers’ income, Modi has exhorted cooperative societies to come up with their own facilitation.
• Modi regime has been repeatedly claiming that India’s economic situation is good and that it has the potential to improve despite global recession. But Jaitley had to admit that the economy had decelerated to the slowest pace in three years and that there was a need for more concentrated and specific efforts to revive growth. The demonetisation by Modi in Nov 2016 which aggravated economic deceleration, was strongly denied by government but were eventually forced to admit it.
• RSS has taken note of the repeated reverses suffered by the Modi government.The RSS leadership warned the BJP to be wary of a repeat of the 2004 electoral defeat suffered by AB Vajpayee who faced the 2004 elections with  “India Shining” campaign only to be humbled by a practically leaderless but united opposition. The BJP leadership, including party president and Modi’s close associate Amit Shah, has taken the RSS warning seriously.
• First, they would fall back on their time tested ploy of communalising society and polarising communities in the name of religion. Now that Modi and his Ministry are increasingly displaying their inability to live up to their development vision, they would revive the Ayodhya Ram Mandir agitation for this. 
• The second response would be by appropriating gains made by other governments as their own through clever propaganda and media management. Even as Chief Minister, Modi had shown his mastery over this stratagem when he took credit for the Amul dairy, set up originally in 1946, and nurtured under several regimes, including the Congress but then Modi’s propaganda and media management is what prevailed in the end.
• Arun Shourie terms the Modi Ministry essentially as an event management company where everything is turned into a spectacle for one individual and a clutch of political courtiers.
• The opinion that the ruling BJP in Gujarat needs a booster to face elections in 2018 and that is why Modi inaugurated the Sardar Sarovar dam and initiated the work on the bullet train. But field reports suggest that the BJP continues to be on a strong wicket in the State because of the absence of a cohesive opposition and a popular leader in the Congress.
• New spectacles on display in Sep 2017 are aimed at reinforcing the omnipotence of the big leader. That task is of utmost importance given the warnings emanating from different quarters of the country and the RSS.

Essentially Modi's propaganda machine produced results in 2014 based on anti-incumbency factor faced by Congress/UPA. But in 2019 elections Modi's propaganda machine without any other support might not be able to repeat 2014. On the contrary, one more mistake by Modi, similar to failed demonetization or badly implemented mangled GST and some improvement by Rahul Gandhi & Congress could spell doom for BJP & Modi. Another 18 months to go, Modi leader of a dud team, will surely do one or two or even more blunders because one can't expect Modi doing nothing as he gets wonderful ideas on and often. Modi won't realize that he will do least harm to BJP and himself, if does nothing till 2019 elections.

Deendayal Upadhyaya: Who features in every Modi speech?

Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya (1916-68),
RSS Pracharak & Bharatiya Jana Sangh Ex-President

• Until 2014, he was unheard in public life nor found any space in Indian history but yet finds reference in Prime Minister Narendra Modi's every speech. He is Late Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya.
• He qualified the civil services examination, where he got his nickname as Panditji for appearing in the examination hall wearing tradition dhoti-kurta and cap. Deendayal Upadhyay did not join the government service. He rather became, in 1942, a life-time volunteer of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, which he had joined five years ago.
• He never participated in freedom movement in line with RSS ideology and cooperated with British for its continuation of colonial rule in India.
• In 1951, Syama Prasad Mookerjee founded the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, Deendayal was as appointed as General Secretary of its Uttar Pradesh branch. After Mookerjee's death in 1953, Deendayal Upadhyay was instrumental in shaping the ideology and socio-political principles of the BJS for next 15 years.
• He contested for Lok Sabha from Uttar Pradesh, but failed to attract significant political traction and did not get elected.
• He kept company with Nanaji Deshmukh and Sundar Singh Bhandari, RSS pracharaks who went on to play a critical role in anti-Congress politics in the 1960s and 70s. 
• Deendayal Upadhyay is best remembered for his principle of "integral humanism", which has been defined as "a classless, casteless and conflict-free social order". It talks about the integration of indigenous "Indian culture" with the social, political and economic fabric of the nation. However, his critics point to his lectures saying he was "biased" against Muslims. Some also criticised him for not seeing evil in caste system.
• He died on Feb 11, 1968 at Mughalsarai in UP, while travelling in a train under mysterious circumstances. Balraj Madhok, another of Jan Sangh’s founding members, has said categorically on many occasions that Upadhyaya’s death was a murder, not an accident. The then President Zakir Hussain and Prime Minister Indira Gandhi were among the dignitaries who paid tributes to Deendayal Upadhyay. 
• On June 11, 2014, in his maiden speech in the Lok Sabha Modi said “We are people who have grown up with the ideals of Deen Dayal Upadhyaya...who taught us the principle of Antyodaya. This government's priority is the benefit of the most underprivileged, going by the ideals of Deen Dayal Upadhyaya, Lohia and Gandhi.”
• On Sep 11, 2017, Prime minister Narendra Modi praised his work and honoured his statue along with Swamy Vivekananda but this was criticized by many as Modi was misusing his power to impose the RSS ideology on youths and trying to saffronise young minds.
• Last year, PM Narendra Modi had started the nationwide celebration programme to mark the birth centenary of Deendayal Upadhyay.  A budget of Rs 100 crore was allocated for the functions. Such brazen abuse of the government’s machinery and funds to commemorate the birth of a politician who belonged to the present ruling party is patently unconstitutional. 
• The BJP has called its national executive meet in New Delhi on the centenary birth anniversary of Deendayal Upadhyay in the national capital on Sep 25, 2017. More than 2,200 including chief ministers are expected to attend the executive meet. Tributes will be paid to him while the party members will discuss and devise strategy to counter the negative narrative about GST and demonetisation. Deendayal Upadhyay will be portrayed as the inspiration for economic and pro-poor policies of the Narendra Modi government. But, many still don't know who Deendayal Upadhyay was.
• The BJP is now on a mission to propagate his ideas to counter the challenge from the Congress, which was the most dominant political force.

Deendayal Upadhyay's biographers maintain a studied silence on his role and activities till 1947 and suddenly jump to 1947 to tell us that he was made Sahpracharak of UP in 1947 etc. During the tumultuous period in India's history, between 1942-45, one does not find any self-criticism on his part rather a subtle justification for non-participation in the anti-colonial struggle. Worst is that RSS cooperated with British for continuation of their colonial rule by giving written assurances to British. Modi's RSS career and politics started after the death of Deendayal Upadhyay in 1968. He was neither a disciple nor a follower of Deendayal Upadhyay. What can be seen as common is that their anti-Muslim and Hindutva tendencies which are questionable in secular democracy. Profound humanitarian vision of Gandhi is being replaced with the parochial notions of people like Upadhyaya. The young people who have not read the history of the country are easily persuaded by Modi's rhetoric. The greatest tragedy of India today is the lack of good leader. Consequently we will have Upadhyayas being thrust upon us.

India's Freedom & Liberalisation

• India was at a crossroads 70 years ago when it made choices that were enshrined in the constitution, so that its workers and peasants were freed from class and caste oppression.
• Nehru said at the midnight when India woke up to freedom. “To bring freedom and opportunity to the common man, to the peasants and workers of India; to fight and end poverty and ignorance and disease; to build up a prosperous, democratic and progressive nation, and to create social, economic and political institutions which will ensure justice and fullness of life to every man and woman.”
• The zamindars and landlords finding that open defense of landlord's interest was no longer feasible, switched over to communalism for their class defense.
• Pakistan's falsity of religion-based nationalism and a state was founded on theocracy. It was one area where the Hindu right-wing emulates its sworn enemy and India was sought to be converted into a theocratic state called Hindu Rashtra. 
• M.S. Golwalkar, RSS supreme leader for more than 30 years minced no words: “The non-Hindu peoples in Hindusthan must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence Hindu religion, must entertain no ideas but those of glorification of the Hindu race and culture…. 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, far less no preferential treatment—not even citizen’s rights.”
• It is no accident that the Hindutva forces had nothing to do with anti-colonial struggle and independence. Infact, the RSS chief M.S. Golwalkar had so little sympathy for the anti-colonial struggle that he thought that the British would have to be invited back shortly after Independence in order to govern India. Today they laud Ambedkar today for sheer opportunistic reasons.
• The first major victim of this narrow cultural nationalism of the Indian right-wing was the Father of the Nation. After being driven to the margins of Indian politics in the wake of Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination, the right wing RSS and its latest political incarnation, the BJP, is at the helm of India, now.
• The slide started post-Nehru and was complete in 1991, when the Congress went back on its promises and ushered in the neoliberal order. The Congress ceased the cause of workers and peasants ostensibly called national interest, but in reality for the material prosperity of the merchants and manufacturers. Now with the BJP unburdened by the legacy of any egalitarian struggle, the free people of India are under the onslaught of neoliberalism and rabid communalism.
• Ambedkar argued that the political equality, guaranteed by the constitution, would get jeopardised if there was no corresponding movement towards social and economic equality. The first setback to independent India's was its inability to carry out any significant land redistribution. The top 15 per cent of landowners continued to hold the same percentage of land area as before. Dalits, the landless class, who had been denied the right to own land under the old system continued to remain landless and therefore both socially and economically disempowered. By the end of the 1950s, Jawaharlal Nehru was worried about growing wealth and income inequality in the country, he has to set up the Mahalanobis Committee to inquire into it.
• The per capita annual foodgrain availability, which had been around 200 kgs at the beginning of the 20th century in “British India” declined to 148.5 kgs during the 1939-44 and even lower to 136.8 kgs in 1945-46, was pushed up close to 180 kgs by the end of the 1980's. It has since declined, over the neoliberal period, reaching 163 kg for the years 2012-14.
• The spontaneity of capitalism was breaking the bounds set by state control. And soon it was to jettison the institute a regime of neoliberalism, under which the domestic corporate-financial oligarchy got closely integrated with globalised finance capital.
• The economic travails of the dirigiste regime arising from the sluggish growth of the home market owing to growing economic inequality, its loss of social support among the people for the same reason, and the big bourgeoisie’s wish to break out of it has contributed towards effecting a transition from dirigisme to neoliberalism.
• Neoliberalism greatly accentuated the increase in economic inequality, though it accelerated the growth rate in the tertiary sector. The acceleration in growth rate was resolved through larger exports of services, larger elite consumption of luxury goods, and the effects of asset price bubbles. The top 1 per cent of households in India currently owns 60 per cent of the country’s total wealth puts India with the fastest increases in asset inequality.
• The process of primitive accumulation of taking over of peasant's land 'for a song' for corporate projects and squeezing the peasants through higher input prices, by withdrawing subsidies and the drying up of institutional credit, but without commensurably higher output prices. These output prices, especially of commercial crops are allowed to fluctuate widely with world market prices. Even phenomena like Demonetisation and the GST are also mechanisms for imposing primitive accumulation upon the petty production sector. 
• A tragic consequence of this primitive accumulation at the expense of peasant agriculture has been the suicides of over three lakh peasants over the last two decades. And large numbers of peasants have left agriculture and migrated to cities in search of jobs, which are not being created to an adequate extent despite the apparently high GDP growth. The net result has been a proliferation of casual employment, intermittent employment, part-time employment and disguised unemployment. The growth in the casualisation of employment and privatisation of public sector units have weakened trade unions. While capital is international, workers are still organised along national lines, making national unions ineffective.
• The middle-class segment that has done well out of globalisation, owing to the outsourcing of services from the metropolis, and owing to the rise in the share of surplus which supports a range of activities from finance to advertising, has expectedly belonged to the upper castes which have been privileged enough to acquire the skills to make use of the opportunities that have been opening up. Since these beneficiaries attribute their own success not to their privilege but to their talent, the inevitable conclusion is drawn that those who are excluded from such jobs are untalented. An impression spreads that children from the oppressed castes do not make it because they lack talent, which boosts casteist prejudice.
• Development in India started on a wrong foot by eschewing land redistribution and the pursuit of capitalist development contributed to growing socio-economic inequality, that got a free run under neoliberalism. The adherents of Hindutva in power this social counter-revolution is being carried forward with a vengeance. India is not a fascist state, but the growing socio-economic inequality is destroying the constitutional provision of political equality.
• Fascism arises when the system besieged by crisis is challenged by a threat from the revolutionary forces whom fascism is used for eliminating. Fascism grows when the system is at a dead end and when the working-class movement is not in a position to mount a challenge. That is when large sections of the people flock to fascist movements, not because it provides a credible way out, but because it projects a messiah, it resorts to flamboyant but meaningless rhetoric, it appeals to unreason, and it holds not the system but the “other” (the Jews or the Muslims or whatever) as responsible for the travails of the people.
• It may seem intriguing that neoliberalism has reached a dead end, Modi promises even greater neoliberal reforms while a Trump rails against neoliberalism. But this contrast between two current manifestations of fascism arises because neither has a coherent programme anyway for overcoming the crisis and the frustration gripping the people. Both are essentially purveyors of unreason for whom the economic agenda as a thought-out rational programme is incidental.
• The corporate-financial oligarchy adopts the fascist movement, finances the fascist movement, and promotes the fascist movement, which exists independently of it. Fascism provides “stability” and also an ideal ideological prop for neoliberal capitalism. Fascists in government represent, in the Indian context, an alliance between corporate capital and Hindutva. The fact that capital is globalised while the state remains a nation state entails that even a fascist nation state must abide by the wishes of globalised capital (to prevent capital flight) and this fact restricts its ability to overcome the crisis.
• At peril are the gains and achievements made by the movements for national independence, socialism and social justice. India is once again is at crossroads where the choices it made 70 years ago are being undermined.

The left and democratic forces can have an alternative agenda that promotes equality, that strengthens democracy, and is willing to withdraw from the neoliberal regime. They should for instance have an agenda of introducing a set of universal, justiciable economic rights, to supplement the political rights that the constitution guarantees. These can include the right to food, the right to employment, the right to publicly-funded free and universal quality health care, the right to publicly funded free and universal quality education up to a certain level, and a right to adequate old-age pension and disability benefits. The implementation of these rights together would cost less than 10 per cent of the GDP annually, which the country can easily afford. 

There comes a time in the life of every nation when it stands at the 

crossroads of history and must choose which way to go ... Lal Bahadur Shastri

Globalization benefits just minuscule percent of population to prosper, who are rich, educated and with access to power & resources. Trickle-down theory that says benefits for the wealthy trickle down to everyone else is unacceptable nonsense. In a large populous country like India, where most people are illiterate & poor, governments ignoring their welfare and chasing money making machines is nothing but abuse of principles of democracy and Constitution of India. Globalization is a concept propounded by developed & educated western countries to expand their reach for marketing their products and services rather than extending helping hand for upliftment of suffering masses in the world. India blindly embracing it for monetary gains, is not only height of insanity but also detrimental to its large segments of population. Development is not facilitating educated and/or rich people to prosper but enhancement of living standards of all classes of people simultaneously.

Quit India Movement 1942: Remembering after 75 years.

• The Quit India Movement was launched at the Bombay session of the All-India Congress Committee by Mahatma Gandhi on 8 August 1942, during World War II, demanding an end to British Rule of India.
• The Cripps Mission had failed, and on 8 August 1942, Gandhi made a call to Do or Die in his Quit India speech delivered in Bombay.
• The All-India Congress Committee launched a mass protest demanding what Gandhi called "An Orderly British Withdrawal" from India. Even though it was wartime, the British were prepared to act. Almost the entire leadership of the INC was imprisoned without trial within hours of Gandhi's speech. Most spent the rest of the war in prison and out of contact with the masses. 
• The British had the support of the Viceroy's Council (which had a majority of Indians), the Muslim League, the princely states, the Indian Imperial Police, the British Indian Army and the Indian Civil Service. Many Indian businessmen profiting from heavy wartime spending did not support Quit India Movement. Many students paid more attention to Subhas Chandra Bose, who was in exile and supporting the Axis Powers. 
• The only outside support came from the Americans, as President Franklin D. Roosevelt pressured Prime Minister Winston Churchill to give in to some of the Indian demands. 
• The Quit India campaign was effectively crushed. The British refused to grant immediate independence, saying it could happen only after the war had ended.
• Quit India failed because of heavy-handed suppression, weak co-ordination and the lack of a clear-cut programme of action. However, the British government realized that India was ungovernable in the long run due to the cost of World War II, and the question for postwar became how to exit gracefully and peacefully.
• At the outbreak of war, the Congress Party had passed a resolution during the Wardha meeting of the working-committee in September 1939, conditionally supporting the fight against fascism, but were rebuffed when they asked for independence in return. Gandhi had not supported this initiative, as he could not reconcile an endorsement for war.
• At the height of the Battle of Britain, Gandhi had stated that he did not seek to raise an independent India from the ashes of Britain.
• Cripps draft declaration of 22 March 1942 included terms like establishment of Dominion, establishment of a Constituent Assembly and right of the Provinces to make separate constitutions to be granted after the cessation of the Second World War. Congress felt this Declaration only offered India a promise to be fulfilled in future. Gandhi remarked "It is a post dated cheque on a crashing bank." There was growing realization of the incapacity of the British to defend India.
• Several political groups active during the Indian Independence Movement were opposed to the Quit India Movement. These included the Muslim League, the Hindu Mahasabha, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the Communist Party of India and the princely states.
• The Indian nationalists knew that the United States strongly supported Indian independence. After Churchill threatened to resign if pushed too hard, the U.S. quietly supported him. The American operation annoyed both the British and the Indians.
• In 1942, the RSS, under M.S. Golwalkar refused to join in the Quit India Movement. The Bombay government appreciated the RSS position. RSS, in turn, had assured the British authorities that "it had no intentions of offending against the orders of the Government".
• The British, alarmed by the advance of the Japanese army to the India-Burma border, responded by imprisoning Gandhi. All the members of the Party's Working Committee (national leadership) were imprisoned as well. Later the Congress party was banned. Despite lack of direct leadership, large protests and demonstrations were held all over the country. Workers remained absent en masse and strikes were called. Not all demonstrations were peaceful, at some places bombs exploded, government buildings were set on fire, electricity was cut and transport and communication lines were severed.
• Although the British released Gandhi on account of his health in 1944, Gandhi kept up the resistance, demanding the release of the Congress leadership.
• By early 1944, India was mostly peaceful again, while the Congress leadership was still incarcerated. A sense that the movement had failed depressed many nationalists, while Jinnah and the Muslim League and Congress opponents like the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and the Hindu Mahasabha sought to gain political mileage, criticizing Gandhi and the Congress Party.

RSS under Golwalkar, Communists etc opposed Gandhi's quit India movement and cooperated with British. Modi stating in Lok Sabha that "...everyone had worked for the common goal of Independence" is pale and a blatant lie. Modi & Co have no right to talk about Gandhi & independence movement which RSS etc opposed and cooperated British. The only exception was that RSS founder Hedgewar participated in the Civil Disobedience movement of 1930s in individual capacity without involving RSS fearing it could be construed as being anti-British. Sonia Gandhi stating “...there were people and organisations which had opposed the Quit India movement and had played no role in getting our country freedom” is factually correct and directly refers to RSS, BJP and Communists. Now Modi should have courage to talk to people of India - truth as truth. If not, he should avoid talking truth rather than than talking lies.

Hindu Raj: Ambedkar’s warning

• Proponents of Hindu supremacy knew that democracy could be used to establish a Hindu Raj. They and their followers have sought to use the vote for ends of power using the Hindutva card.
• If Hindu Raj does become a fact, it will, no doubt, be the greatest calamity for this country.… Hindu Raj must be prevented at any cost - wrote B.R. Ambedkar in 1946. He was against majoritarianism, which in the Indian context meant unbridled rule of the majority community, the Hindus.
• Unfortunately for the minorities in India, Indian nationalism has developed a new doctrine which may be called the Divine Right of the Majority to rule the minorities according to the wishes of the majority. Any claim for the sharing of power by the minority is called communalism, while the monopolising of the whole power by the majority is called nationalism. Under these circumstances there is no way left but to have the rights of the Scheduled Castes embodied in the Constitution. 
• In the forties, even Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was sometimes accused of being soft on the Hindu Revanchists, who believe in and practised tit-for-tat in that turbulent and fateful period.
• Patel’s retort to BM Birla on announcement of Independence: “I also feel happy that the announcement of June 3, 1947 at least settles things one way or the other. There is no further uncertainty. I do not think it will be possible to consider Hindustan as a Hindu state with Hinduism as the state religion. We must not forget that there are other minorities whose protection is our primary responsibility. The state must exist for all, irrespective of caste or creed.”
• Ambedkar was perceptive. It is not necessary to declare India a Hindu state formally by amending the Constitution and making Hinduism the state religion. The same result can be achieved by administrative measures. The Supreme Court has held secularism to be part of the basic structure of the Constitution which cannot be discarded even by constitutional amendment.
• Ambedkar thought that the elaborate constitutional provisions on administration would work. He told the Constituent Assembly on November 4, 1948, when he moved for the adoption of the Draft Constitution: “While everybody recognises the necessity of the diffusion of constitutional morality for the peaceful working of a democratic Constitution, there are two things interconnected with it which are not, unfortunately, generally recognised. One is that the form of administration has a close connection with the form of the Constitution. The form of the administration must be appropriate to and in the same sense as the form of the Constitution. The other is that it is perfectly possible to pervert the Constitution, without changing its form, by merely changing the form of the administration and to make it inconsistent and opposed to the spirit of the Constitution. Can we presume such a diffusion of constitutional morality? Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated. We must realise that our people have yet to learn it. Democracy in India is only a top-dressing on an Indian soil, which is essentially undemocratic”.
• The leaders of the Congress sought to inculcate secularism right from the first Congress held at Bombay in 1885. S. Srinivasa Aiyangar, president of the 41st Congress in 1926, articulated the credo of secularism very ably. So did Vallabhbhai Patel in the presidential address to the 45th Congress at Karachi in 1931. Hindu-Muslim “unity can only come when the majority takes courage in both hands and is prepared to change places with the minority. That would be the highest wisdom.”
• But by then, forces that did not share the Congress’ ideology, did not participate in the freedom movement and were charged with revivalist hate had come to the fore.
• Nehru once remarked that Hindu communalism was the Indian version of fascism, and, in the case of the RSS, it is not difficult to perceive certain similarities. The leader principle, the stress on militarism, the doctrine of racial-cultural superiority, ultra-nationalism infused with religious idealism, the use of symbols of past greatness, the emphasis on national solidarity, the exclusion of religious or ethnic minorities from the nation-concept—all of these features of the RSS are highly reminiscent of fascist movements in Europe.
• With an RSS pracharak, Narendra Modi, known for his antipathy towards Muslims, as Prime Minister, and Yogi Adityanath chosen by him as Chief Minister of India’s largest State, Uttar Pradesh, we have crossed the threshold to a Hindu state. The BJP’s presidential candidate, Ram Nath Kovind, is “deeply rooted in the ideological stream of the RSS”. A brand new rubber stamp has been manufactured for the Rashtrapati Bhavan, 25 years after the last rubber stamp, R. Venkataraman.
• We now have a Prime Minister whose Hindutva puts Vajpayee’s Hindutva in the shade. Lynchings of Muslims has become common. So are cries for a Hindu state. Yogi Adityanath said on the Hindu Swaraj Diwas that no Indian should be hesitant about being proud of his or her Hindu identity.
• The drive will pick up speed. Modi made blatantly communal speeches during the Uttar Pradesh election campaign, as 65 former civil servants recalled in their open letter. He will do worse for the Lok Sabha elections in 2019. He aims to claim that he has fulfilled the BJP’s triple demand. His Kashmir adventure had “solved” the problem. For a uniform civil code, no other Prime Minister has so relentlessly campaigned for a reform of Muslim law. As far as the Ram temple at Ayodhya is concerned, he will say: “have patience, I have crossed the threshold to a Hindu state in India. Can’t you see the dread on the faces of Muslims, Christians, Dalits and other minorities?

My View:
Democracy in its true spirit is rule by people. Among all models, the model of rule by majority is the most popular and probably the best. That doesn't mean that minorities can be thrashed out by majority. Rule of the law must prevail. This Hindutva philosophy will only lead to civil war, sooner or later. In a democracy, ruled by majority, it is the duty of majority to uphold the rights & dignity of minorities. Polarization of people on the lines of religion, caste or creed - is not democracy. It is only a distortion and perversion. In a society corrupted with religious extremism all constitutional provisions and laws of the land will not work properly and the country will be heading for anarchy. When constitution fails, it is mafia that rules and then nation will be heading for disintegration!

RSS hold on India is total

• Venkaiah Naidu's selection for Vice President is as per expectations because Modi's vision of India doesn't go beyond RSS.
• President, Vice President, Prime Minister, Home Minister, UP CM - all crucial power positions are now under the armpits of RSS.
• None of these people, other than their politics in RSS & BJP, have no accomplishments worth advertising! Of course they had the artistic gift of public speaking.
• Their contributions or sacrifices for nation, poor or peasants are none, so far.
• Minorities, especially Muslims and people from Southern and Eastern states be careful in their political, business and industrial activities. They have no love last for these people. Their vision is confined to North, West & Central India, the Hindi speaking belts.

Here are few important points about RSS:

• The RSS was banned once during British rule, and then thrice by the post-independence Indian government – first in 1948 when a former RSS member assassinated Mahatma Gandhi; then during the emergency (1975–77); and for a third time after the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992.
• RSS founder KB Hegdewar was  a political protege of B. S. Moonje, a Tilakite Congressman. Hedgewar personally participated in the 'Satyagraha' launched by Gandhi in April 1930, but he did not get the RSS involved in the movement. 
• The Bombay government, in a report, appreciated the RSS by noting that the Sangh had scrupulously kept itself within the law and refrained from taking part in the disturbances (Quit India Movement) that broke out in August 1942. RSS assured the British authorities that it had no intentions of offending against the orders of the Government.
• The RSS initially did not recognize the Tricolor as the National Flag of India. The RSS mouthpiece, the Organiser, demanded, in an editorial that the Bhagwa Dhwaj (Saffron Flag) be adopted as the National Flag of India. After the Tricolor was adopted as the National Flag of India by the Constituent Assembly of India on 22 July 1947, the Organiser viciously attacked the Tricolor and the decision to adopt it as the National Flag of India. The RSS hoisted the National Flag of India at its headquarters in Nagpur, on 14 August 1947 and on 26 January 1950, but stopped doing so after that.
• The RSS initially did not recognize the Constitution of India, strongly criticising it because the Indian Constitution made no mention of "Manu's laws" – from the controversial ancient Hindu text Manusmriti, which had been said to denigrate the lower castes and untouchables in India. 
• The RSS criticised B. R. Ambedkar's public pronouncements that the new constitution would give equality to all castes. On 6 February 1950 the Organizer carried another article, titled "Manu Rules our Hearts", written by a retired High Court Judge named Sankar Subba Aiyar, that reaffirmed their support for the Manusmriti as the final law giving authority for Hindus, rather than the Constitution of India.
• The RSS' opposition to, and vitriolic attacks against, the Constitution of India and its author Ambedkar continued post independence, even long after Ambedkar's death.