जो कुछ ये तिकड़ी कर रही है
सागरिका घोष -राजदीप सरदेसाई ,बरखा दत्त
नाम अलग अलग हैं लेकिन काम तीनों का एक ही है। वर्तमान राष्ट्रवादी राजनीतिक प्रबंध को दिनरात कोसना ,छाती पीटना। पहले लेख लिखना फिर उसके लिए समर्थन में तर्क जुटाना। आग्रह मूलक लेखन है यह। एक और वामपंथी पत्रकार थे कमसे कम उनमें एक ईमानदारी थी। वे लबादा ओढ़ के कभी नहीं आये। कागद कारे किए और साफ़ लिखा -सुबह उठकर आरआरएस को कोसना नित्यकर्म बन गया है।
ये तीनों निगमित टट्टू लबादा ओढ़ के आते हैं। इन्हें हिन्दू नाम से चिढ़ है। राष्ट्रवाद और भारत धर्मी समाज ,सनातनधर्म से चिढ़ है। इन्हें इतना भी नहीं मालूम -जल ,अग्नि ,आकाश ,पृथ्वी और वायु कभी अपना धर्म नहीं छोड़ते। अपने स्वभाव में रहते हैं। अग्नि का धर्म ताप और रौशनी देना है ,अग्नि अपना धर्म कभी नहीं छोड़ती। आरआरएस का धर्म (स्वभाव राष्ट्र सेवा है ),वही भाजपा का प्राण हैं। भारत धर्मी समाज का स्वभाव है।
लाख सागरिकाएं आएं ,प्रलाप करें इस्लामिक कट्टरपंथ की गोद में बैठके आशिकी करें।क्या फर्क पड़ता है। रोज चै चै चीं चीं करें ,ट्विटियाएं।
राष्ट्र के खिलाफ विषवमन करने वालों के समर्थन में खुलकर लिखें। अपने पूर्वज महिषासुर का नित्य वंदन करें कौन रोकता है। आप अपना काम कीजिये ईरानी अपना धर्म निशा रहीं है। मोदी अपना धर्म निभा रहें हैं। भारतधर्मी समाज की हर सांस आज मोदीमय है।
जैश्रीकृष्णा !
Qismat hamaare saath hai jalne waale jala karen...Da Da Da Da DaDa DaDa Da Da Da...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QbNPk9MTfQ
Grappling with Mahishasur: When ideology dominates perpetual confrontation is inevitable
Violent lawyers and MLAs, student arrests and vigilante squads who bask in political patronage, somewhat evoke the mid-70s and the heyday of Sanjay Gandhi. At that time as now populist frenzy ratcheted up by party-backed strongmen and violent intimidation of opponents, made a government with a massive mandate and a powerful prime minister look very different from its campaign promises.
In fact, colossal mandates in India seem to be subject to the law of diminishing returns. Indira Gandhi swept to victory in 1971 on garibi hatao, but within two years of her Bangladesh war triumph, the Railway strike of 1974 began the countdown for the Emergency. In 1984, Rajiv Gandhi thundered to power on the sympathy wave after Indira’s assassination, only to have the momentum falter with the Shah Bano case and for the honeymoon to be dealt a terminal blow by the Bofors scandal in 1987.
n fact, colossal mandates in India seem to be subject to the law of diminishing returns. Indira Gandhi swept to victory in 1971 on garibi hatao, but within two years of her Bangladesh war triumph, the Railway strike of 1974 began the countdown for the Emergency. In 1984, Rajiv Gandhi thundered to power on the sympathy wave after Indira’s assassination, only to have the momentum falter with the Shah Bano case and for the honeymoon to be dealt a terminal blow by the Bofors scandal in 1987.
And just two years after the thumping win of 2014, the Modi government seems to be hurtling along on a path of permanent confrontation, the victory lap now transformed into a daily hurdles race. The recent histrionics laden, politically divisive speech by HRD minister Smriti Irani has only reinforced the image of a ‘fighter cock’ government, the likes of which India has perhaps never seen.
Paradoxically, the Vajpayee-led coalition, dependent on allies for survival, energetically pushed forward economic and foreign policy goals from Shining India to peace with Pakistan. The rickety allies- dependent UPA, before it sank in a cesspool of scams, was still able to quietly win political support across the spectrum for a slew of policy breakthroughs from RTI to Nrega to Aadhaar. Weakness in numbers forces accommodation and negotiation.
For the Modi government, by contrast, a huge mandate and the burden of ideology are together creating a gilded cage. From Dadri to the face off with writers, to Rohith Vemula’s death and JNU, the government seems to be in constant fighting mode, a pugilist central administration that takes pleasure in picking fights with a range of groups from students to Dalits to writers.
Rather than sound a note of reconciliation and conflict resolution, belligerent-sounding ministers and aggressive ruling party members revel in making provocative and bellicose statements rather than trying, as pragmatic governments generally do, to resolve matters, lessen tensions and push for a middle ground. Smriti Irani’s pugnacious approach makes for great TV, but is hardly the consensus building style expected of a minister.
Has India ever had such an aggressive cabinet? Dadri was an accident, snapped Mahesh Sharma; students at Hyderabad university are anti-national, blustered Bandaru Dattatreya; Rohith Vemula was not a Dalit, fulminated Sushma Swaraj; writers protests are a manu- factured rebellion, scoffed Arun Jaitley; and JNU students are supported by enemies of India, proclaimed Rajnath Singh on the basis of an apparently false tweet. The prime minister’s silence suggests he doesn’t disapprove of his cabinet colleagues.
The difference between Indira Gandhi’s government and Narendra Modi’s is that while she set herself on the path of accumulating greater power for its own sake, the ruling NDA is driven by accumulating power for the sake of its Hindu nationalist ideology. At a recent rally in Ahmedabad Amit Shah told party workers, this is not a political journey but a journey of ideology. When the pursuit of the ideology is uppermost then continuous tension, picking fights and deepening the political divide is inevitable.
An ideologically driven government and a party that relentlessly seeks to galvanise core Hindu nationalist voters, cannot then be a government that seeks accommodation or give and take with detractors. A genuine reach out to all stakeholders to defuse tension points becomes difficult when the “us” versus “them” mentality dominates.
Thus there can be no public sympathy from the government either for Mohammad Akhlaq’s family or for Rohith Vemula’s mother nor with the parents of Kanhaiya Kumar. There can be no equi-valent of the way Barack Obama tweeted, “Cool clock, Ahmed. Want to bring it to the White House?” when Muslim American teenager Ahmed Mohamed was arrested for building a homemade clock.
When party faithful over-read a big mandate as a victory for ideology then the politics of negotiation, backing off from confrontation and winning over enemies, is given short shrift. The healing touch is glaringly missing. That goon lawyers and street fighting MLAs have only been mildly censured shows that the government is willing to take the risk of being identified with them.
Governments often don’t have the luxury of too much ideology because they have the responsibility to deliver. On economic policy, this government’s ideology seems confused, switching between pronouncements on lower taxes and ease of doing business to forcing banks to open loss making accounts for the poor, a measure from the 70s socialist handbook.
Only the grand narrative of Hindu Rashtra seems a clear priority and a predisposition to endless Hindu nationalist disputes. The inclusive politics that the PM speaks of in Delhi is impossible when cadres are playing ideologically driven divisive battles in Muzaffarnagar.
Hindu nationalism is far too contested in 21st century India to work as a governance plank however much it may fire up the core voter. Arresting students may enthuse cadres but this government – many of whose members earned their spurs as student leaders – should remember that in the 70s it was among students that the first protests, which finally brought down a mighty government, began.
DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author's own.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QbNPk9MTfQ
Why does the Modi government always sound so bellicose and confrontational? My op-ed today
कोई टिप्पणी नहीं:
एक टिप्पणी भेजें