Does India need MODI fication? Avinash Vishvakarma It is the incident when I was in school and Indian administration was in the hands of United Progressive Alliance led government under the leadership of cold blooded and cold headed ,one and only, Sardar Manmohan Singh. There was a physics teacher in our school who often used to use metaphor to explain something. One day he asked a student who was not paying attention to him in class and was mentally absent that why were you sitting like ‘Manmohan Singh’. So the matter of fact is that within 2-3 years of becoming Prime Minister he became popular as an administrator whose authoritative power remained obscure to general mass and who did not respond to the public in even critical situations . Before going into the debate of whether there is a need of different government with different ideology in the country or it would be appropriate to let the recent party in power to continue to have the authority to spend money and use law and order that we delegate them after each general election by showing faith in Indian Democracy and Its legal System by participating in parliamentary election and accepting to pay taxes to the state authorities. It should be worthwhile mention here the words of Albert Einstein who said that we could not solve the problem with the same approach with which we created them. Same thing is happening in India where we have been delegating power in the same hands since our independence. ……………. let’s have a look on the background of present two major parties active in Indian politics. From the onset of independence one of the biggest national political party of India which was earlier In the form of national movement against British Raj started to produce itself as a party In the Indian politics. The statement of the then president of Indian national Congress Jawaharlal Nehru in 1939 that only British and the congress were the party in India to alienate Muslim League and other parties was the open expression of this approach. After partition congress took the strongholds of Indian politics by initially forming interim government under the British followed by transforming itself into formal political party to contest election in independent India. It inherited the legacy of Indian National Movement under the banner of which Gandhi JI used to organized his struggle-truce-struggle type non-violent war against atrocities of Britishers. So INC enjoyed a unilateral monopoly over the States as well as national government for over two decades under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru. And later under his daughter Indira Gandhi for another period of more than a decade. In between that different regional parties grew within states and formed government in some states but congress maintained its control over national government until the outbreak of strong protest under the leadership of anaoher giant Jayprakash Narayan against the economic crisis and abuse of state power followed by emergency on the grounds of foul reasons in the regime of Ms. Indira Gandhi which resulted in the massive defeat of Ms. Gandhi and formation of short lived government by newly formed Janata party under the leadership of oldy Morarji Deshai. But real change happened when the successor of janshangh Bharatiya Janata Party formed a stable government with help of 24 regional parties in 1998 which lasted for 6 years. So this was a brief review of the party politics of India. Here it would be worthwhile to mention the story of another side . Besides congress there were another several parties were active at the time of independence and before that. One of them was Hindu Mahashabha founded by B.D. Sawarkar . He wrote a book on Hindutva to provide a theoretical base to his Hidutva Ideology. The concern was that after India was divided on religious line into Hindustan and Pakisatan. Pakisatan declared Islam as its State religion where majority were Muslims . so it was the political demand of Hindu Mahasabha that Hindustan must also be declared a Hindu Nation. But Congress adopted secularism and provided some safeguards after coming into government to religious and linguistic minorities living in India majority of which were Muslims who didn’t migrate to so called Muslim State and allowed to live in very same place. Hindu Mahasabha which had the political base in Maharashtra , nationally remained weak politically over a long time. Eventually the agenda of Hindutva took another shape in form of Janshangh with the help of nationalist organization RSS. It also did not do well. It was the part of Janata Party Government which collapsed in 1980 resulting in disintegration of coalition and formation of BJP after isolating from Janshangh. Actually it was a newlook of Jansangh under the ideological mentorship of RSS an organization to promote and save Hindutva worldwide. It started with only two seats in parliament and formed national government within 20years with the help of its hindutva and development politics under the charismatic leadership of its leaders like Atal Bihari Bajpayee. This was a brief history of evolution of another major party in Indian politics. These two parties are different in their ideologies . Now come to the prevailing political scenario which is centred around personalities of some top level leaders. There have an in depth and a long lasting debate in India about the ‘secular credentials of Narendra Modi who is recently anointed as prime ministerial candidate of BJP the principal opposition party . The prevailing Debate is that whether he will be able to provide inclusive development or equitable governance to a socially , culturally, economically, and geographically diverse country like India. for he has administered a state which is largely monolith with large urban middle class population suited to his development politics . So it is alleged that he lacked the depth of understanding of Indian diversity. Let’s first discuss the arguments against him and their feasibility and truth values. The first major allegation against him is that he play communal politics to come to power and does not represent all section of society specially minorities. these allegations are made on the grounds that he tacitly supported Gujrat Riots which took thousands of muslims lives in 2002 and he never apologized for that as a chief minister. Let’s discuss the feasibility of this argument. Suppose Modi would have apologized for the riots. So it would have created another chance to get away from the responsibility to maintain law and order situation just by making another apology to the public. And apologizing something means accepting fault. So if he is not doing so or has not done so means he does not see his fault in administrating riots. He condoled for that. And now it has passed a decade since that incident and the state under his rule did not encountered with any riots or curfew like situation. So it can be said that he has the realization of maintaining communal harmony in a heterogeneous country like India. Second allegation against him is that his administrative behavior is more like authoritative. So was of Ms. Indira Gandhi who imposed emergency at the stroke of his authoritative nature. It might be assumed that in the age of coalition government such type of authority can not be exercised by prime minister. Same was happened with Atal government which was formed by integrating 24 parties. BJP was not able to implement its ideologies.so we can say that we never experienced the other approach except the government led by cogress. Modi will have to be flexible in the wake of lacking majority in the upcoming general election. Now lets see how he can modify the Indian Governance One thing Modi has is the strong communicative power to communicate with the general public in which current prime minister has a poor record. He never responded to any situation arose in last two years. It created a vacuum after the strong orator like Atal Ji which can only be filled by Narendra Modi. Country need a mass leader. Second is his non corrupt administrative behavior. In a developing country like India which run in fiscal and current account deficit continuously a large chunk of tax-payer money went into the coffers of ministers of UPA government . It also created the problem of black money and eventually price rise. Black money invested in property eventually increased land prices and construction prices. So unlike Manmohan Singh who gives tacit support to the scams like Coal scams and 2G Spectrum Modi has a clean record of office. The third point in favour of Modi is that he is clear in his agenda . Once decided he starts to implement policy without delaying. This is required for efficient administration. He also proactive in adopting new technology in for better governance compare to other leaders of his time. And the strongest point he often raise in his speeches is that there is a need of modernization without westernization. What is happening right now is that we adopt what developed countries refuses. We are not focusing to build up owe own technology base but are importing their products. We can’t remain the house keeping department of developed countries. Like right now maximum information technology companies outsource their secondary works to the companies working in developing companies as they would have to pay comparatively little to their land. Modi talks about converting Indian into Innovation Hub. He talks about channelizing all research works being done in Indian universities and research institutes. So that government can take help from the specialist of the topic.Right now governments be it state governments or central they do not keep the data about the research happening in their universities. Due to this they failed to take valuable help from the researcher of the topic on which they have to work and this cause un necessary delay . They give every project to the team headed generalist bureaucrats who lack deep knowledge in specific topic. His opinion about bereaucrats is clear. He says that in British time officers were appointed to collect revenues and stop revolutionary activities. But at present officers are a part of development administration . They have to be by side of public and should act for the development of the region. This is god attitude. He has appointed a development officers along the district magistrate in each of his state. Another thing is his use of technology in governance. With the help of GIS his government would have been able to allot the required land to TATA for the manufacturing plant of Nano car in Sanad within just three days . Above all a leader should be like that who speak in the same language in which public communicate. At present our leaders in government barely speak in Indian languages. Modi resonates with the public by speaking in their language. So at last I believe all politician are not leaders . Be become leader a politician needed to struggle , to take responsibility , to do sacrifice etc. the life of Modi is the inclusion of these three parameters. He does not belong to a political family neither he had any politically influential background. He came from to middle class other backward class family to be specific. He has made his own path. So he struggled for whole his life. Whenever he was given the responsibility he accepted it and worked well in that. His carrier is it’s evident. He did not marry to any one. This a sacrifice to serve the country. To say least every political parties are playing politics with the public . Each of them has some hidden agenda. And each of them are playing communal or secular politics. So time have come to focus on the personality of the leaders and to listen what they says . then decide who to be vote….because level of politics of a country shows and eventually decides the level of people living in that.
Posted on: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 15:14:39 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015