His politics of communal hate is not separate from his agenda of development. Together they form the core of a programme in which one becomes a prerequisite for the other
As the Gujarat Assembly elections approach, the Indian voter is deluged with two conflicting images of Narendra Modi. The battle lines appear to be drawn between those who glorify the achievements of Modi the administrator, and those who view the Gujarat Chief Minister through the prism of the 2002 carnage. In a climate rife with recurrent scams, lack of governance, economic slowdown and political instability, the first of the two images is a persuasive one. Without dwelling long and hard on the administrative prowess of Modi — for that entails a debate different from this one — it is not too difficult to see that Modi presents to the urban Indian electorate, an alternative leadership capable of leading the country out of its morass.
Global examples of development
However, are the two faces of Narendra Modi mutually exclusive? Does a rejection of Modi automatically signal our preference for a politics of corruption and malfeasance? Alternately, do the sympathisers of Modi believe that his politics of development will trump the politics of communal hate, once he is voted to power?
The flaw in both of these propositions lies in the assumption that the two faces of Modi are orthogonal to one another. In fact, not only do they share a close relationship, but also constitute the core of a politics where religious chauvinism or other forms of social authoritarianism become pre-requisites for economic development.
There are many examples of rapid economic development under authoritarian regimes. South Korea recorded miraculous growth under a military regime, until democracy was established in 1987. Singapore too emerged as an example of a shining economy under authoritarian rule.
There are also cases of democratic establishments sliding into authoritarianism in times of adversity. There is perhaps no example better than Germany of the 1920s. Reeling from the adverse economic clauses in the Treaty of Versailles, particularly in the years of the Great Depression, the Germans elected Hitler on planks of anti-Semitism and Pan-Germanism.
Coalition vs. a majority
In a multi-cultural democracy such as India, the presence of a wide array of cross-cutting cleavages means that it is almost impossible to garner majorities along a single axis. The ruling United Progressive Alliance (UPA) is a classic example of such a government comprising political parties with widely varying casteist, communitarian and regional agendas. As a result, it functions at a low level of efficiency, and frequently degenerates into chaos. The lack of political stability also engenders corruption, as politicians pursue self-serving agendas in their limited time in office. The severe maladministration under UPA rule is then a symptom, at least partly, of the fragile political equilibrium in our country.
Conversely, Narendra Modi’s success as an administrator has much to do with the political majority he enjoys in the Gujarat Assembly. Taking over from Keshubhai Patel in 2001, Narendra Modi reversed the sliding fortunes of the Bharatiya Janata Party in the State, and did so in a lasting manner. It is also a well-known fact that the religious polarisation following the carnage of 2002 was central to Modi’s electoral fortunes a few months later. Ever since then, he has steadily consolidated his reputation as an able administrator, albeit authoritarian in his approach.
Is there fertile ground for Narendra Modi to replicate the Gujarat story on a nationwide scale? Viewed objectively, the answer would be, no. The sheer heterogeneity of identities and interests in national politics will probably ensure that polarisation along the axis of religion will be difficult, if not impossible to accomplish. In particular, the upsurge of regional parties in national politics, as well as the emergence of States as the centres of political decision-making, will pose considerable challenges to the unbridled exercise of authority by Narendra Modi.
In that case, what promise does a government led by Narendra Modi hold for India? Which of his two faces can we expect to see, should he assume the office of Prime Minister? Given the widespread consensus on Modi’s authoritarian attitudes, it is not premature to assume that he will pull out on all stops to acquire the mandate necessary to implement his ideals. The manner in which such a politics will pan out may not be crystal clear immediately; however, if history is an indicator of things to come, the two faces of Narendra Modi will almost certainly parade side-by-side.
(Simantini Mukherjee has completed her PhD in political science from Rutgers University, U.S. and is now based in London.)
Dr. Simantini Mukherjee has done the smartest thing for a budding intellectual elite i.e., indulge in hindu-bashing, and what best way than punching away at NaMo. She is also doubly smart because the 1984 massacre of our Sikh brothers somehow does not touch a chord in her very sensitive heart, a massacre in which 35,000 (thirty five thousand) Sikhs were killed, burnt alive. This was even justified by a Congress-I leader who said "when a big tree falls, the earth is bound to shake". Having started her stint as a journalist she has begun well knocking NaMo for a 2002 even after various Enquiry Commissions, Supreme Court judgements have ruled that he is innocent. But for a budding Simantini, these certificates are not good enough. So you have to continue harping the favourite anti-NaMo tune even after the Gujarat public continues to vote in his favour. All the while our country is being looted away by the EAT INDIA COMPANY even while calling us MANGO MEN in a BANANA REPUBLIC.
Some of the comments suggest only the illiterates, non intelligentsia
support Modi, I find these comment rather funny. There can be opposite
view points about Modi but calling others as stupid illiterate and
followers of mass hysteria is rather a sad situation where only one
vie point is considered correct. I support Modi policies, n Gujarat
has prospered. Having lived in different parts of India including the
capital I can confirm the amount of development. The media has been
unfair to Modi, it is very urban intelligent approach to criticize
Modi. please if u think the electorate is stupid that applies to whole
India, whereby even Congress or any other party chosen should also be
rejected on the same lines as the choice is exercised by idiots.
Prefer to add just two more lines to the thought- provoking and the most sane and reasonable comments made by Baikadi Suryanarayana Rao.Do we need the 'Modern Nero'(as rightly named by a Supreme Court Judge)who it seems was allegedly enjoying the death cries of thousands of innocent Muslims massacred by his hooligans like his former minister the heartless Maya Kodnani and Bajrangi now condemned in jail for life post Godhra incident,as our Prime Minister? Touch your conscience and say friends,does this person with an allegedly blood stained face cleverly covered by the so called 'development mask' deserve to sit in the chair which was earlier occupied by such great and compassionate persons like Nehru,LalBahadur and the most respected Atal Bihari ji?
Again a Modi story from Hindu..i am completely disagreeing this article.How can the author says Modi winning the elections by religious polarization?.Is she is trying to say people of Gujarat supporting communitarian?. Then the answer is no.People are supporting him because he deliver the good governance,peace and development to them.
You people are doing postmortem again and again about the Gujarat riots even through supreme court itself given clean sheet to him .You are not talking this much about anti-sikh riots,riots against Kashmiri pundits and most recent example of Assam riots.People like Simantini are thinking if they write anything against Modi then they are secular and great in political science.Instead of doing this first go inside Indian politics and analyze what the people of India actually needs.
We need a corruption free politics which will give us real development and peace.And we are believing in Modi because he deliver this in Gujarat.He is man of action.
An outraged Motilal Nehru burnt down all that which had anything to do
with western culture when he found that Hunter Commission did not do
enough to punish Gen Dyer.Not just Motilal Nehru, in fact the whole
Indian Nation was shocked by the massacre and this led to a freedom
movement and finally we won our Independence. The dream of founding
father of our Republic was, a leader taking oath of office would cease
to be a leader of a particular caste, community, region or class of
people but would consider himself as a servant of all. Here is a
leader who instead of taking swift action to maintain law and order
when communal riots break out quotes the action reaction theory and
justifies the organized violence against a particular community and
till this date doesn’t utter a single word condemning the violence. It
is a matter of shame and regret that most of those well educated who
commented consider him as a fit candidate to become our PM. During the
years 2001 to 2008 I had the opportunity to travel the length and
breadth of Gujarath on duty. I find the development being talked about
is confined to VIP areas of big cities only. Inside the ghettos where
poor people live the condition is more deplorable than what it was
before Modi. Pity the nation where even the well educated do not have
the capacity to think in an objective and dispassionate manner.
Modi-bashing is a favorite pastime of the English media for things happened nearly 10 years ago. Same media don't even mention 1984 Sikh killings as though they would wilfilly endorse Rajiv Gandhi's notorious justification "when huge tree falls, small beings get killed under it". If Gandhi family and media justify Delhi carnage as non-communal, Godhra should also be forgotten on the same token. Mrs Indira Gandhi was no less dictatorial when she was PM than Mr Modi as described by you. Perhaps India deserves PMs like Manmohan who is dictated by masters, Indian or foreign, even while the common man is suffering from high prices and nobody bothers about people living below poverty line. Modi is a learner and he would learn fast the dynamics of ruling at the Centre given a chance by his masters in BJP and problem lies with BJP with so many self-serving leaders who want to restrict him to Gujarat. At the same time they did not prove themselves to be natural leaders like Narendra Modi.
I totally agree with udaychaitanya who commented above. The mass hysteria and illiteracy among our intellectuals when it comes to Modi is just unbeleivable.
I would like the HINDU to be more objective in its analysis rather
than trying to tar the image of man just because he doesnt represent
its ideology.Its a well established fact that Narenbdra Modi has
delivered stupendous development in Gujarat and that state has surged
ahead of most on a plethora of parameters.Across the country there is
widespread talk of Modi becoming PM.Even in Rural Andhra Pardesh The
state to which i belong people are able to identify Modi and
appreciate him.The comparison with Hitler is uncharitable to say the
least as Modi still operates in a state that has functioning
democracy.If people get disenchanted they can well boot him out.
We always have a tendency to undermine one's ability - be it in any
sphere of competence - Narendra Modi deserves all the credit for what
Gujarat is today, this has been acclaimed even by his staunch critics -
at least there is one state in India which has developed substantially
in the last 11 years though many claim to have sown the seeds of development!!!!!
Narendra Modi is undoubtedly a good politician and it's better if we
stop it at that. Modi's meeting with Osamu Suzuki and later his open
request to him to set up unit in Gujrat on the line of direct investment
contradict what he claimed recently about BJP's stand on FDI. It is
either Modi is open to FDI in Gujrat or he doesn't belong to BJP.
if a nation wants to ever walk ahead, its media and authors to blame of for keeping wounds open, running with hares hunting with hounds, the media hug the winners and stab the losers, comign elections if modi is elected prime minister i wont be surprised the author holding the side of the bridge where modi is a good administrator, and if modi does nto make it there, then yes the author again gets a chance on the page to demonstrate how his words of 2 faces theory worked and he helped to not get modi his deserving desk at PMO ... i pity such authors and their two faced views
People are being subjected to manipulated debates on the issue of Governance of Mode in Gujarat in regard to political vacuum at center. Development of Gujrat is a story of Developed State to more Developed State hence it can not compared with those states who became Developed from under Developed States. WE are 120 crore in all including 6 crores living in Gujarat. It means Modi is governing on 5% of Indians. A leader who is governing on 5% of population is dreaming to rule remaining 95% Indians. The present assembly election will show how many of the Indian Voters who are residing in Gujarat would be voting for his party (BJP). The percent of total vote which would be polled in his favor (being projected as Chief Minister for the third time)become a barometer of popularity among those on whom he ruled for 11 years. He may win the elections in Gujrat in coming assembly election but it would not be an indicator that other CM who are governing other states are worse.
During 1995-2000 and 2001-10, Gujarat increased its annual rate of
growth from 8.01% to 8.68%. But so is the case with other major
states such as Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, Maharashtra, Punjab, Tamil
Nadu and Uttar Pradesh. In fact, Gujarat was ranked second after
Rajasthan (8.34%) in the first period and third after Uttarakhand
(11.81%) and Haryana (8.95%) in the second period. What is
remarkable, Bihar and Orissa, the two most backward and poverty-
stricken states, have also shown growth pick up from 4.70% and 4.42%
in the first period to 8.02% and 8.13% in the second period. Even
smaller states like Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh have registered
growth of 11.01% and 8.96%, respectively.
How long can you flog a dead horse? Post-Godhra was triggered by Godhra, not Modi. It just around an year of Modi by then. We now see his performance over a long tenure. He is simply superb. Gujarat is peaceful and prosperous. Just by inventing terms like "communitarian" you cannot save UPA from its sins of unmasked communalism. Also, the author's idea of "religion" seems to have been borrowed from the semetic religions, therefore she refers to diversity as opposing religion. In India, Religion is diversity, there is no religion without diversity in India :-) It is the Semetic faiths that are Monochrome.
Using three global examples, she sought to establish that economic
development is the prerogative of a strict authoritarian regime, but
ignored other examples such as India, USA & UK where economic
development were accomplished by political and administrative regimes
where were not so authoritarian.
Anyways, these academic shortcomings apart, article seemed unclear about
its ideology and core argument.
As soon as you bump into opinion or editorial on Modi in any of the national media, even before reading it, you can assume with almost certainty that the contents won't be different from what you have read in past 10 years.
This opinion is surprisingly different and more importantly balanced. Different because it dwelves into future possibilities unlike your routine stories on Modi which are mostly one sided.
Narendra Modi is a Gujarat figure and may be popular among the Gujarati-speaking people. But you move into the hinterland of North or South, he is a non entity. So I don't see how he thinks he can command a pan-Indian response. It is more of a delusion and given that minorities will not come close to even touching him with a barge pole that makes it even more difficult. So BJP would be making a big mistake if they fall into his trap of parading himself all over the country as a leader who has answers to all problems. Instead more neutral leaders like Sushma Swaraj has a better chance across these axis that the author is talking about.
How can Modi and his followers could forget that there is no
development in rural and tribal areas of Gujarat? Modi has hired PR
agencies to project himself as man of development and one who can
become the PM but the reality on grass root is totally different. Modi
has allowed industrialist to loot Gujarat .
Good analysis.But,given the mass hysteria and illeteracy,we can't be very much sure that Gujarat story may not replicate all over India by Modi and co.
Why are authors at Hindu so skeptical about Modi ? Why do they fail to
recognize the communal harmony in the state during last decade. At the
same time they fail to understand that its not Modi but Congress that
does 'Minority' politics in India instead of treating them equally. If
you have any doubts compare the statistics of Muslim's economic growth
in Gujrat in to other states in past 10 years.
It seems that the time has come for Narendra Modi to win Gujarat election once again and move to form NDA government by 2014.
if he did have a biased communal mind why would he do that? do we even bother to ask such questions?
The author here Makes a invalid and out of line acquisition that Modi has won elections based on religious polarization which has no truth to it, the only reason he won the way he has won is because he has delivered.
A true leader is always authoritarian with a vision for the nation's well being otherwise we end up in leaders will total zilch political will and strength, who can over govern and act only under guidance.
oh Hindu , you do it again. Your previous and current editorials on Modi reflect a singular bias far away from what I had grown up with unbiased and fact based paper. The degeneration is perhaps a reflection of the wider phenomenon of intellectual dishonesty if not depravity. What next? Modi and Nazi comparison? How beautifully, with such superfluous intellectual shean, lacking any honest examination the author, and Hindu have squarely blamed coalition politics for a corrupt morally depraved government. Hope someday truth prevails over pseudo intellectualism and false malicious propaganda
Its clear we have run out of all ideal PM material.
BJP's Advani now talks only a little milder and shriller than Kejriwal.
Sushma Swaraj appears more gentle.(or is it lady like?)
The last real PM look and performance was from Vajpayeeji.
The analysis of Modi is perfect-his authoritarian stance may only be to earn an image of Gujarat's modern Sardar.
When we don't have any ideal PM material, no one should grudge Modi usurping the slot.If we can have Congress(UPA)PMs after anti-Sikh riots of 1984, there is no reason why we can't have Modi after 2002 Gujarat riots?
This despite the fact that whether or not a Modi like CM was at the helm of Gujarat, the state would have progressed, may be a bit unperceptible less.
Modi may have his rough edges but he is an able administrator. To attribute his success to
polarization of votes is to discredit the intellect of the indian voter.
Leftist media viciously villifies him. But I ask them, are the indian people with you in this?
NO
Much of democracy is about experimenting. I think the mood of the nation today is that it is
ready to give Modi a chance.
Please Email the Editor