We all know who Modi is
Hypocrisy of Modi's Secular Critics. Sp modi is secular or not?. Those who call themselves secular hate nay, loathe Narendra Modi. Now there are two sides in this battle between Modi and the “Seculars”. We all know who Modi is. It is the other side that needs examining. First of all, let us look into the meaning of the word secular. Wikipedia describes the word as follows:
Secularism is the principle of the separation of government institutions and persons mandated to represent the state from religious institutions and religious dignitaries. One manifestation of secularism is asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people. Another manifestation of secularism is the view that public activities and decisions, especially political ones, should be uninfluenced by religious beliefs and/or practices.
Essentially public activities especially political should not overlap with religious and vice versa. Though an ancient concept, became more important in modern times. In 1155, Pope Adrian IV gave orders to the then King of England to invade Ireland because he thought that the Irish were corrupt. Colonialism in the name of economics was one kind of crime. It involved exploitation of the indigenous population which left the local culture and religions reasonable intact. Invasions in the name of religion involved economic and as well as religious subversions in the worst ways.
With the advent of democracy it became evident that church and religion needed to be kept separate. In organized religions like Christianity, there are religious leaders behind whom the believers stand united. Catholics have Pope, Baptists have mega-churches and their pastors, Buddhists have the Dalai Lama, Muslims have keepers of Mosques, Mullahs (giving sermons every Friday), Madarsa leaders and other pseudo-religious outfits like the Waqf board. Hinduism is a religion unlike any of these. Not being an expert in it, I will not go into the nature but the overt observation is that we do not have a leader per se. I have not seen the pandit come out and make fiery speeches after the Tuesday prayers at the Hanuman Temple. You would be hard pressed to see the interference of Hindu priests during Indian elections (except for superstitious reasons – finding out auspicious time and days). Secularism is clearly not the biggest need for a “Hindu” country.
You would be right to point out that India is not a Hindu country. We need secularism because of the presence of the organized religions in the country. Even then the word was not used very much until the BJP started to gain strength. Congress, in attempts to consolidate their votebank started to use secularism as a stick to beat the BJP. Since then non BJP personnel and parties have started using the term “Dharm-nirpeksh” when addressing crowds and Secular when addressing media or when there is a need to sound erudite and sophisticated (most of these people would be hard-pressed to spell the word let alone know what it connotes).
The only time when the BJP mixed politics and religion was during Advani’s rath yatra. Now call for converting seldom used mosques which used to be temples of great reverence (converted during Mughal rule) like Ramjanmbhoomi or the Gyanvapi Masjid have more to do with reversing historical atrocities rather than inflicting on Muslims. It is about log delayed justice rather than revenge. The BJP did not ask for Jama Masjid to be converted into a Hanuman Mandir. So the BJP’s foray into religion and the back-page Hindutva demands are not truly breaking the secular spirit of the country. On the other hand, preferential treatment meted to minority religions does break the secular spirit in the worst way. Can Mamata or any of the secular champions tell me why a poor Hindu who wants to go on a pilgrimage deserves no government help but a Muslim does? And that is just one example of the hypocrisy of the so called secular brigade. Which is why Modi’s “India first” brand of secularism is so refreshing to the voters and galling to his detractors and enemies.
Of course as he got stronger in this election, Modi started to face the worst possible vitriol from his opponents. Congress stayed away from any of the oft repeated “Maut ka saudagar” kind of name calling but they have been replaced by the likes of Abu Azmi (you are not a Muslim if you don’t vote for SP), Azam Khan (too many remarks to mention but his remarks on Kargil warriors has to be a new low in Indian politics), Mamata Bannerjee (who has since gone rabid in name calling), Lalu Yadav, Nitish Kumar (they are facing political deaths and are reacting rather predictably).
But these are politicians. One cannot expect any better from them. We have NRI academics who have taken it upon themselves to rile up their respective new masters against Modi. These people do not go to India unless there is an all expense paid junket or to mire in poverty porn (thank you Slumdog Millionaire). My appeal to them is to extend the Indian voter some courtesy and shut up as we have during various Congress rules. We have worms crawling out to spew whatever venom they can against Modi. Recently the principal of St. Xavier’s in Mumbai writing a letter to the student body advising them to vote against Modi. Father Frazer Mascarenhas who is a Catholic priest is breaking the most basic tenet of secularism. If this man were in the west, his outfit would lose any tax benefits from the government. If all this were not bad enough, we now have couple of Shankaracharyas actively campaigning against Modi in Varanasi. At least Mascarenhas was appointed by a Vatican recognized body. These two seers are in their exalted positions by happenstance. They do not represent any Hindu, not in the way that a Mullah or a Catholic priest does. What gives these ignoramuses any right to use their tenuous hold on Hindu leadership and use it for political reasons. That is not secularism but rather political posturing for their own benefits.
To accuse these people of hypocrisy assuages some anger in me but it would be naïve of me to expect better from them. These people need to suck it up and let the election take its own course. Democracy means that if we deal with Lalu Yadav, Mayawati, Sonia Gandhi then you have to deal with Narendra Modi. It is as simple as that.
0 comments:
Post a Comment