Showing posts with label surgical strikes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label surgical strikes. Show all posts

Saturday, 27 April 2019

General election 2019 blues

This is a waveless election (2019) wherein the preference or dismissal of a leader and issues seem to be pre-determined by the social background (caste and community) of voters. 
  • The BJP  won 31% of the vote with 282 seats nationally in 2014. This is the highest vote to seat conversion indicating heaviest fragmentation of the anti-BJP votes. Plain arithmetic suggests that if all major non-BJP forces come together, the Modi machine will halt.
  • Today BJP today rules 17 of 29 states (a year ago 21/29 states), either directly or with its allies. Despite BJP's countrywide presence, it is also true that the opposition has been winning most of the Lok Sabha by-elections which is a sign of defeat for the Modi-Shah combine in these elections.
  • Anti Modi factors are: Demonetisation, GST, cow vigilante  lynchings, agrarian crisis, unemployment, inflation, cattle trade ban, etc.
  • Pro Modi factors: Good governance, divided opposition, Balakot airstrike, surgical strikes, absence of major scams, etc. Factors such as welfare schemes like the PM Awas Yojana, Ujjwala Yojana (free LPG cylinder connection to BPL families), Rs 2,000 to the farmers, are secondary reasons for BJP.
  • BJP which won in UP (71/80 seats), Rajasthan (25/25), Gujarat (26/26), Bihar (31/40), MP (27/29), Chattisgarh (10/11), Maharashtra (22/48) and Karnataka (17/28), in 2014, may lose most of these seats in 2019. 
  • There is no perceptible Modi “wave” this time and the muscular nationalism plank that the BJP banks on fails to evoke the required response in the face of widespread agrarian crisis.
  • The public resentment against the BJP governments is glaringly evident even though some believe that Modi has no alternative. It is also clear the BJP is not adding any new constituency of voters. The trends point to a clear reduction of the BJP’s tally from its commanding position of 2014. 
  • Stung by the failure of the campaign based on muscular nationalism in the early phases of voting, the BJP desperately looks for new strategies and altered roadmaps, with emphasis on Hindutva. The candidature of the Malegaon blast accused, Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, in Bhopal against Digvijaya singh is a major step towards Hindutva consolidation.
  • Modi's election campaign is increasingly looking like his style of governance over the last five years, particularly the manner in which demonetization and GST were pursued. A new narrative every day, with new reasoning and strategies along with altered road maps to attain a proclaimed objective. This could also lead to results as chaotic as demonetization and GST produced.
  • Congress party has scored some vital points in terms of ideation of new policy initiatives and programmes, but has failed to follow this up with solid organisational initiatives and electoral strategies.
  • In Uttar Pradesh, multiple narratives are impacting the election in different ways. BJP's candidate's weaker profile as compared to BSP-SP-RLD alliance is widely acknowledged.
  • People are not interested in communal issues but have economic concerns. The BJP had impar­ted a larger-than-life cult image to Modi. Even now they are projecting him as a lone lion in the jungle versus the rest. This is not going to work now.
  • Had even a single person been killed in Pakistan by our our strikes, would they have returned Wing Commander Abhinandan in one single piece within days? Is Imran Khan not answerable to the people of Pakistan? So how did Amit Shah claim we killed 250 Pakistanis!” -- Raj Thackeray 
  • EVM's are neither easy to tamper with and at the same time not tamper proof. Its non-transparent mechanism gives scope for losing candidate to think that EVM has been tampered with. Unless public confidence is earned, EVM will remain a contentious issue. EC telling that EVMs are perfect without explaining how they are perfect is nonsense.
  • This election is not about who wins but to ensure that the BJP loses so that the nation survives. “We will take on each other later.”  -- Raj Thackeray 
  • Mukesh Ambani had recently extended his support to Congress candidate Milind Deora in South Mumbai constituency. Raj Thackeray called this shift in Ambani’s loyalty from BJP to Congress is a big message to the country. Ambani is Uddhav Thackeray’s close friend but decided to side with a Congress candidate is a clear indication that Modi is heading towards defeat.
As things stand today, a weak opposition is Modi’s biggest strength and he is likely to benefit from the TINA (there is no alternative) factor the most, with other positives contributing towards making him virtually unassailable. Reactions from the echelons of the Sangh Parivar after the first two rounds of polling point towards a sense of unease. Many leaders admit that there is a possibility that the BJP would only win half the seats it had in 2014. 

Jammu and Kashmir Governor Satya Pal Malik’s act of dissolving the Assembly when three non-BJP political parties in the State were on the verge of forming a coalition government is of a piece with the systematic undermining of democratic polity. Modi unleashing CBI, ED, Income Tax etc on all anti-BJP parties terrorizing opposing candidates and immobilizing their associates is gross misuse of institutions which are supposed work autonomously. In order to safeguard democracy it is important that Modi & BJP must be defeated in this 2019 elections and be watchful that future governments don't follow the same path. 


Tuesday, 17 October 2017

Bhakts makes leaders infallible

The dividing line between the use and abuse of power is very thin. It is not adulation, but criticism that keep people in power from crossing the line. Bhakti makes political leaders believe in their own infallibility, inflates their self-opinion and, inevitably, leads them to take missteps. History has shown that every authoritarian regime has ended up doing harm than good to their countries. 
  • In the history about the rise of authoritarian regimes in 20th-century, two questions confound us. First, how did entire nations and populations allow themselves to be so hypnotised by a person or a political party? Second, how did they permit leaders or regimes to take absolute control and then chip away their liberties and then they could hold sway with an iron grip for decades thereafter?
  • The process is even more inexplicable and intriguing in countries that were once democracies and democratic takeovers of power, which eventually degenerated into authoritarian reigns.
  • The demonetisation has been aggressively touted as a master stroke against everything from black money to terrorist funding to counterfeit money to corruption, while also being hailed as a major reform towards a cashless economy. 
  • Any criticism is almost considered blasphemous and anti-national. This sentiment was not only stoked by the government or party in power but also ordinary middle-class citizens have started behaving like accomplices of the regime by shouting down, mocking and denouncing any contrary views, branding these as unpatriotic. 
  • The shoddy and inept planning and execution of the demonetisation exercise is being defended as inevitable. We are being exhorted to treat it as our patriotic duty to suffer long queues, inconveniences, disruptions to our lives caused by this man-made crisis, without complaining or criticism.
  • We became so much mesmerised by the larger-than-life aura of a leader that we refuse to believe that he and his government can do any wrong? 
  • Popularity has never ever chastened any politician, except very rare exceptions — a Nehru, a Mandela. Most of those who have relied on personal appeal over everything else, have eventually led their nations to grief, when their self-belief descends into megalomania. Megalomania is always fed by popularity and fawning bhakts. The bhakts create an echo chamber, which resounds only with what the leader wants to hear and believe, totally shutting out different viewpoints and realities. 
  • Modi and his party won a majority single-party mandate for the first time in 30 years in 2014 and his personal popularity has remained high, despite many questions that still remain unanswered. The authoritarian and majoritarian streak cannot be denied. 
  • In the case of the surgical strikes, Modi and his party exploited nationalistic and strong-man sentiments to the hilt. In the case of demonetisation, we have seen him play the brave, lone-crusader card, the selfless, sacrificing leader rhetoric and the emotional appeal. In case of GST, introducing in Lok Sabha as 'money bill' undermining the rights of Rajya Sabha and avoiding constitution amendment speaks volumes about Modi's crookedness in defeating the spirit of constitution, laws and institutions. All these points to his tendency to personalise all his government's decisions to make his regime seem almost presidential in nature and help to build his image as a towering, decisive leader.
  • What kind of leader Modi is for time to tell. Many people have bought his spiel hook, line and sinker, while others are sceptical. Whether his regime turns into a democratically elected one with autocratic tendencies, especially if he gets a second term, depends on his bhakts. \
  • People are free to support and adore the Prime Minister but they must realise that love for one's country is completely different from love for a particular leader, party or a government. 
  • These bhakts have no right to attack, browbeat and brand as unpatriotic those questioning the policies of their beloved leader. If India turns less-than-democratic once again, the bhakts are to be blamed squarely. Every leader derives his delusions from the reflections seen in the distorted mirrors put up by his fanatic supporters.

The theory that leaders are infallible is trash. That is why in our parliamentary democracy, constitution provides checks and balances in the form of independent judiciary, parliament to account for government's actions and independent institutions. How ever a simple parliamentary majority makes all these checks & balances vulnerable and two-thirds majority makes constitution ineffective. Financial interests exposed weakness of media houses and they tow line with authoritarian rulers. For democracy to survive and deliver what is expected these things must be incorporated in constitution or statutes: (1) Truly federal structure with near total autonomy for states and local bodies. (2) Prime Minister's and Minister's executive powers must be severely restricted except during war like situations. (3) All discretionary powers must be replaced with robust processes. (4) No expenditure should be allowed without prior legislative approval. (5) All projects must undergo tendering process and all allotments either by merit or auction. (6) All appointments must be through open & transparent process providing chance to all eligible candidates. (7) Lok Pal and investigative agencies must be granted total autonomy with their scope covering every one and excludes no one. (8) Finally thrift should be the guiding policy in government spending with no extravaganza of any kind.