A Hero for NO Reason.

The student leader’s loud proclamation of new-found patriotism has nothing to do with a change of heart; it’s a change of tactic after sensing hostile public opinion and understanding the High Court’s mood

A few days in prison can miraculously change a person’s conduct. India’s rising star on the ideological and political firmament, the one and only Kanhaiya Kumar, is now singing a patriotic tune that should gladden Manoj Kumar’s heart. Out on bail for a period of six months after spending 20 days behind bars on a variety of charges including sedition, the Jawaharlal Nehru University Students Union president’s fresh statements have been hailed as “amazing” and “brilliant” by his political admirers. On various platforms since his release, he claimed that his ideal was Rohith Vemula (why?) and not Afzal Guru; and that the azadi he is demanding is freedom from poverty, from hunger, from inequality.

Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar could not contain his excitement, claiming that “the coming forward of such a talented student and youth will strengthen the roots of democracy in our country”. He leaves unexplained how the roots of democracy can be strengthened when the likes of Kanhaiya Kumar remain mute to break-India campaigns. Mr Nitish Kumar’s colleague in the Janata Dal (United), Mr Sharad Yadav, was moved enough to declare that the country needed “more Kanhaiya Kumars so that the people could live and sleep peacefully”. Live and sleep peacefully, when university students and others plot the destruction of India! Not to be outdone, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal chipped in with his “amazing clarity of thought expressed wonderfully” endorsement, accompanied by a warning to Prime Minister Narendra Modi to not “mess with students”. In other words, the Prime Minister and the Government must remain silent spectators (like their predecessors) while sections of the student community go on a verbal rampage — not just against the incumbent regime but also institutions that symbolise democratic authority — Parliament, judiciary, police etc.

Just in case you thought all the gushes has to do with Kanhaiya Kumar’s patriotism, a correction is in order. The student leader is the toast of the Opposition especially because he used his homecoming to launch a tirade against the Prime Minister and the Bharatiya Janata Party. Patriotic sentiment doesn’t excite this crowd of opposition leaders; in fact, it embarrasses them. What has had the opposition leaders cheering like possessed fans at a rock concert is Kanhaiya’s diatribe against the Prime Minister. Two of the student activist’s gems are as follows: “Modiji only says mann ki baat but doesn’t listen to it”; and, “We have some people like that (selling magic) in our country, who say black money will come back; sabka saath sabka vikas”.

After all this, certain Left leaders have reportedly decided to use him for electoral campaigning. Kanhaiya Kumar claims he is not into politics. We will soon know. He has shown the veteran politician’s knack of milking situations. Meanwhile, he is being felicitated as if he has been discharged of all allegations, and in a manner reminiscent of the adoration freedom-fighters received from the public on their release from colonial prisons.

Kanhaiya Kumar has no option but to adhere to the undertaking he has given to the Delhi High Court, that he will not participate actively or passively in any activity that may be termed as anti-national. On his part, the student leader maintains he is not anti-national. The irony appears lost on his admirers. Why would the court ordinarily ask a law-abiding citizen to provide an undertaking that he will not engage in anti-India actions, as part of the bail proceeding? It would do so only if it has reason to believe that the person concerned may do what the court considers wrong. The judge had even gone to the extent of quoting a patriotic song from a Manoj Kumar film and observing that anti-nationalism was an “infection” that had to be addressed.

Kanhaiya Kumar has discovered the virtue of patriotism after his time in jail. He had not found it necessary to condemn and confront the anti-India and pro-terrorist sloganeering crowd in the JNU campus in the second week of last month. If he had wanted, he, together with the other students of the university, could have easily done that. He didn’t, just as he had not opposed the ‘cultural meeting’ that was organised with the deliberate aim of demeaning the country and its sovereignty and integrity, and in which calls for India’s disintegration were raised.

Kanhaiya Kumar today talks grandly of the difference between “deshdroh” (anti-nation) and “rajdroh” (anti-Government), but since he remained silent (even complicit, according to his detractors and Delhi Police) over calls for India’s dismemberment and terrorist Afzal Guru’s ‘martyrdom’, he must educate us on whether that silence had to do with deshdroh orrajdroh.

Incidentally, Kanhaiya Kumar’s (after-thought) sanitisedazadi call is interesting, since he now wants freedom ‘within’ India and not ‘from’ India — and from a host of socio-economic ills. The student leader is now craftily projecting for  himself an image of an activist out to provide succor to the toiling millions struggling for two meals a days or decent clothing. If he is sincere, he should train his guns on the Congress which ruled the country the longest and ruined it the most. He must turn around and demand that his comrades explain why they ground West Bengal’s economic development to dust in the more than three decades of uninterrupted reign. If he is a progressive, he must seek answers from both the Congress and the Left parties on why they have continued resorting to brazen appeasement policies based on religious identity (even as they condemn the BJP and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh for precisely that) and not on economic considerations.

On matters of ideology, he and his ilk have the memory of Gujarat 2002; how is it that they have forgotten the 1984 Sikh massacre, or the various acts of violence involving the Left cadre in Kerala and West Bengal over decades?

Kanhaiya Kumar may want to reflect on the observation by legendary businessman and builder of the iconic McDonald’s, Raymond Albert ‘Ray’ Kroc: “The quality of leaders is reflected in the standards they set for themselves.” The JNU scholar might not be Kroc’s ideological fellow-traveller, but as a student leader (and a soon-to-be political leader), he can ponder over Kroc’s observation without being infected by the ‘capitalist’ virus. Did he set the right standard by his silence over anti-India campaigns? Reports suggest that he had even opposed the cancellation of permission by university authorities to the so-called cultural event.

Kanhaiya Kumar’s loud proclamation of patriotism has nothing to do with a change of heart; it’s a change of tactic after sensing hostile public opinion and the High Court’s mood.

 

Advertisements

Why a Jew is not anyone’s Enemy.

While swiping my Facebook I came across a status update from a group I am a part of saying , “The so called Islamic terrorism is a Jewish conspiracy to defame Islam backed by Mossad”. When I opened up the profile I came across another similar post stating that Abu Bakr al Baghdadi was actually a Jew. I was not surprised because my interaction with  the Muslim community has taught me that there is a deep rooted Anti Semitic feeling in them. But why?? I decided to delve deeper and bust the myths.

Anti Jewish sentiments date back to the pre Islamic era to the Crucification of Jesus which was done on the behest of the Jew leaders of that time. This was how it started. For Muslims it is a relatively a new phenomena which started with the creation of Isreal in 1948. Since then Muslims think that anything bad that happens to them is a Jewish and Zionist conspiracy.

Quran Sharif lists 124000 prophets in Islam and one of them is Mosses or Musa. So Muslims consider Mosses or Musa as their prophet at par with Prophet Muhammad. Now this gives rise to a serious question. How can you consider Jews your enemy and a Jew as your Prophet and leader? This demands a serious thought.

Since the creation of Israel in 1948, Muslims consider it as an enemy because of bifurcation of Palestine and its conflict with Israel on border issues. But one should remember that you cannot challenge the legality of the state of Israel because it was created by a UN plan named “United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine”. It was proposal developed by the United Nations , which recommended a partition with Economic Union of Mandatory Palestine to follow the termination of the British Mandate. On 29 November 1947, the U.N. General Assembly adopted a resolution recommending the adoption and implementation of the Plan as Resolution 181(II). And while talking about Israel and Palestine why do we conveniently forget Hamas’s attacks on Israel and how Innocent Israeli citizens are also killed. Or is it that only Palestinians are innocent?

In the words of Elka Ruth Enola, ” Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what we are told;
Religious Dogma is doing what we are told,
no matter what is right.”
Now its up to you that you are moral or Dogmatic.
Adieu.

Does RSS have an agenda to undermine the Constitution??

Organisations are born in different circumstances and go on to become something else. The best example is that of the Congress, which was essentially a social organisation in the beginning but after the Independence transformed into a political party and is today a family enterprise of Sonia Gandhi and her children. Ordinary Indians cannot hope to rise in this party by the independent dignity of merit. The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) began in a unique historical circumstance and has emerged as an advocate for the ideals of the Indian Constitution.

In September, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat suggested that an apolitical committee be formed to review the reservation policy so that its benefits could reach the neediest of the Indians irrespective of their caste and religious identity. Bhagwat asked the government to “form a committee of people genuinely concerned for the interest of the whole nation and committed for social equality…; [the committee] should decide which categories [of Indian citizens] require reservation and for how long.” Currently, India’s quota system is based on caste, which continually engenders divisive politics that divides Indians on caste and religious lines, with Muslims demanding quota based on one’s faith in Islam. It also denies welfare benefits to the poorest Indians from the upper castes and therefore is violative of the Constitution’s Article 14 on the Right to Equality.

Bhagwat’s constitutional idea was meant to resolve a corrosive problem in India’s politics. It was compatible with the Indian Constitution’s original idea that quotas, as a measure to end social backwardness, should be for a short-term period. “If we would have implemented this policy as envisaged by the Constitution makers instead of doing politics over it, then present [divisive] situation would not have arrived,” Bhagwat said. However, his wholly constitutional suggestion disappeared from the nation’s political debate. Both the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP – for the fear of losing votes) and India’s counterfeit intellectuals (for the reason of liberal-leftist ideology) did not deem it fit to write op-eds, or organise seminars and debates on television channels.

In purely secular terms, there should be no objection to Bhagwat’s suggestion to review the quota policy so that its benefits reach all Indians from underprivileged sections irrespective of their caste and religion. But in India’s national discourse, secularism – as practised in India – has come to mean appeasement of Islam and Pakistan, and is therefore rightly being dubbed by its critics as sickularism. India’s counterfeit sickularist intelligentsia (journalists, actors and authors), which controls the nation’s narrative, rejects good ideas because they originate from the RSS. As a result, India is witnessing the emergence of a Constitutional Right led by the BJP and its mother organisation the RSS, while the Congress is being pushed into the arms of the ideological Left.

At the India Ideas Conference in Goa, on 17 November, Tufail Ahmed, director of South Asia Studies Project at the Middle East Media Research Institute, Washington DC, suggested that to overcome the divisive politics originating from the quota system, the Indian government could evolve a Comprehensive National Policy on BPL families (i.e. those holding “below poverty level” cards), giving their children up to the age of 18 free books, free clothes and free education. This objective can be achieved by diverting all subsidies and, for an example, shutting down the Air India which is a humungous burden on our poor children. Once all BPL families, irrespective of their caste and religious affiliation, receive these benefits, the need for quota politics will become redundant in people’s eyes and will free politicians from the practice of divisive politics. There can certainly be other ideas to steer the country out of the divisive politics emanating from the quota system.

Shiv Sena, which is from the Hindu family of political parties but unrelated to the RSS, has endorsed Bhagwat’s idea. It has also said that the government must replace religious books by the Constitution for people to take oath in courts so that the Indian polity can be pulled out of the religion-based politics. On November 30, in an editorial in its newspaperSaamna, Shiv Sena observed: “Let people swear by the Constitution in courts instead of religious holy books.” It added: “The Constitution should be the sacred book for (people of) all religions. All religions are equal before law.” Such purely secular ideas are being currently rejected by India’s dominant liberal-left sickularist intelligentsia.

It is true that some Hindu groups have threatened book launches and have dug up cricket pitches especially with regard to Pakistani writers and cricketers, but it cannot be argued that they will not abide by the Indian Constitution. In fact, it is their angst not against Pakistanis visiting India but against India’s liberal-sickularist intellectuals that often results in such incidents. It must not be forgotten that in Gujarat, Modi, despite a solid background in the RSS, demolished scores of temples to widen roads despite opposition from the Hindu groups aligned with the BJP and RSS, notably the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. It is difficult to imagine if a Muslim politician emerging from the Jamaat-e-Islami Hind can even think of removing mosques and shrines situated by the roadsides to somewhere else.

At this point in time, the BJP is better placed in the nation’s polity because it is on the side of both history (which teaches us who we are) and the Constitution (which teaches us who we want to become). While the Congress promotes dynastic politics, the BJP furthers the constitutional ideals. It is not incidental then that it is not from the Congress but from the RSS’s womb that a new constitutional species of Indians – represented by Narendra Modi, the former tea-seller who is now our prime minister – emerged last year. After the victory in the 2014 parliamentary elections, Modi – the former RSS regional organiser – walked up in Delhi on 20 May, knelt down in prayer with folded hands and touched his forehead to the footsteps of the Indian parliament, an institution created by the Constitution and essentially not a religious place of worship.

Not many people can grasp the symbolism of Modi, the RSS man, bowing before the footsteps of the Indian parliament. Indians have always bowed before temples, not before institutions created by reason. Modi has lived his adult life in the RSS and it is entirely predictable that he has emerged as the upholder of the Indian Constitution. Modi told his biographer Andy Marino: “the democratic values that I found” during the anti-Emergency struggle became “a part of my DNA.” “I became aware; I understood the Constitution, I understood the rights, because before that I was living in a different world. The Emergency became a university for me,” Modi explained.

Indian writers who paint Modi in sectarian terms should read his speech on the role of constitutions in human life delivered before the parliament of Nepal last year. He was not preaching Hinduism to the Nepalese. Addressing Nepal’s parliament, Modi declared: “The constitution is not a book, it connects yesterday, today and tomorrow.” Earlier sages authored Vedas and Upanishads, he said, observing: “In the same series, in modern life, a nation’s constitution is born as a new scripture.” Before the 2014 elections, Modi told the BJP National Council Meet in New Delhi that the Indian Constitution is “a cherished heritage” and observed: “We can look in the eye of the world because we are a democracy… We are proud that we follow the tradition of a republic.”

While village republics existed in ancient India, the Constitution’s democratic ideals about equality and liberty of individuals arrived in modern India via the British colonial rule. Originating from the Greek philosophy, the movement of democratic ideas known as European Enlightenment flowered into the American and the French revolutions. “We the people”, the opening words of the Indian Constitution, are borrowed from the U.S. Constitution which begins with the words: “We the people of the United States.” In the contemporary times, Modi is the European Enlightenment’s best representative in India. It is not surprising that on vital issues of modern times, notably on the issue of Muslim women’s rights to quality and individual liberty, it is the Constitutional Right led by the RSS and BJP that stands in tune with the ideals of the European Enlightenment while the Left-of-the-Centre parties led by the Congress are silent and ideologically lost. Even Liberal-leftist-sickular writers and journalists are totally silent, or wayward and diffident, on social media networks with regard to jihadism, Islamism and burqa.

Individual liberty and human rights are no longer the forte of the Leftist intellectuals mugged by ideology. The current state of the Indian mind is such that if you tweet in favour of ending Triple Talaq and other Islamic legal archaisms affecting the liberty of Muslim women, it is the RSS and BJP followers who rise to become the first line of defence for Muslim women’s rights. Regarding the advocacy of the Uniform Civil Code, an objective set in the Constitution to give equal rights to members of all religions, it is the RSS and BJP which are at the forefront. As the Constitution’s tenets take deeper roots in the Indian society, it appears that Hindu groups, which have been wrong on multiple counts in the past, are shedding their sectarianisms and are imbibing the constitutional norms and values in their outlook.

Even on the question of eating beef, it is not the BJP or RSS that made laws against cow slaughter in different states. It was essentially the Congress that enacted such laws because this is what the Constitution requires regarding the protection of cows. In fact, in the BJP-ruled Goa, you could openly and legally eat beef. If the law allows you to eat beef in an Indian state, you are free to eat beef. If the law in a certain state doesn’t allow you to do so, you cannot slaughter a cow. This constitutional principle, differing from state to state, is entirely compatible with the diverse culture of India. So, what is the RSS’s cultural agenda for which it is being scorned by liberal intellectuals? This question was answered by RSS leader Dattatreya Hosabale in great detail at the India Ideas Conference where he argued that the RSS has no cultural agenda for the nation, and that the Indian culture that has existed for centuries is itself the agenda of the RSS.

#OddEvenFormula-Desinged to shift blame??

Delhi Government has come up with an innovative idea to curb pollution in the city. Allowing vehicles with odd numbers and even numbers on alternate days. Some people see this as a radical step and are hailing it. I can do nothing but pity the intelligence of such people. There are multiple points where this policy is bound to fail. I hope the Government is ready

Circumventions- People will surely try to circumvent to law and buy a cheap low quality car with alternative number plate to drive every day. This proves to be more deadly than present circumstances. Lucy Saddler who run a Low emissions Zone Website in Europe says that drivers inevitably circumvent restrictions by buying cheap, inefficient cars with opposing number plates. This means this scheme has had an adverse effect on air quality in the long run.So people will circumvent the law and create a bigger problem than the one in hand.
Another provision of the law is that cars from other state are out of the ambit of the law. This is where its designed to shift blame. People will start getting their cars registered from UP or Haryana and drive in Delhi. Then AAP will say other state commuters are responsible. We are not responsible. Classic Kejriwal politics.

Public transport is not that good- From my 4 month stay in Delhi, one thing that I have come to know is that the public transport is not good enough to bear the burden. DTC is overcrowded and not frequent enough, and Metro is not everywhere.Also the problem with metro is that is you want to go from Maharani Bagh to Noida, you first need to go to Govindpuri and from there all the way to Noida via Mayur Vihar. It takes double the time you would take in a private vehicle. So again its flawed.

Late Night Problems- There is no public transportation in Delhi after 12 am. So for late nighters and for students who work part time or stay back in their institutes for some reason will have to rely on Cabs. Now not everyone can afford cabs everyday. And also if someone has a night shift so which number would he fall in? Going to office on an odd day and coming back on even day. At around 3 or 4 when night shifts get over there is no public transportation. So again Cab every day.

Analyzing it, we see this policy has too many flaws. Will this work? Hope it does. But my gut feeling says it won’t.  Lets see what time has in its folds.

Journalists undermining the “Elected Government”

If India Were An Animal Farm, It Has Been Encroached By A Class Of One-Eyed Animals, Who Are Better Educated… Live In Comfortable Homes, Drink Bottled Water, And Infest Our Television Studios”

“If India were an animal farm, it has been encroached by a class of one-eyed animals, who are better educated and have given themselves awards, live in comfortable homes, drink bottled water, and infest our television studios and Sahitya Akademi [India’s National Academy of Letters]. Celebrated as intellectuals, this class of one-eyed animals, with feet deep in the dynasty that ruled for the maximum period since Independence, has long tails which wiggle in the direction of the well from where honey once flowed.

“The one-eyed species, journalists and politicians included, sees the killing of a Muslim man in Dadri by extremist Hindus, but by habit goes to pretend-slumber when Professor T.J. Joseph’s hand is chopped off by Islamic terrorists in Kerala.

“Baba Ramdev, the yoga guru, can at least claim that he tried to avoid an ink attacker. But the one-eyed intellectual understands the inner workings of media industries. Sudheendra Kulkarni, for example, calmly allows Shiv Sena members to blacken his face, more thoroughly the better, waits for television crews and proceeds to host former Pakistani foreign minister Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri in Mumbai. This intellectual will not release Nobel Laureate Malala Yousafzai’s book in her birthplace, Swat. He knows where to host book events, and, importantly, where not to host them. Backed by paid media, this one-eyed species collides against the unpaid social media and elected representatives.

“In Bihari writer George Orwell’s Animal Farm, the pigs that rule over all other animals are clever and educated, and are guarded by carefully raised dogs, or journalists in modern times. Journalists bark on Twitter, authors return awards; and the Congress party is defended, not by its own leaders. Also in Orwell’s novel, dogs help cause a political coup for the pigs. A one-eyed journalist elected Haryana chief minister M. L. Khattar to seek his views on beef; she could have chosen the more suave Arun Jaitley, or gone to any village to seek views on beef.”

Journalists Use The Truth “As An Inflammable Weapon To Effect A Political Coup… Inserting Words Into Mouths Is A Journalistic Talent”

“As per a Pew forecast, India will have the largest Muslim population by 2050. Since the cuddly cow is grammared into Indian civilization, beef riots are easy to stoke and to roast our politics, or human lives. We naively believe that journalists seek truth. The case is otherwise: Journalists know the truth and use it as an inflammable weapon to effect a political coup.

“In India, beef has been an issue for centuries, notably when Mughal emperor Akbar banned cow slaughter. Khattar’s interview was headlined by the editor as: ‘Muslims can live in this country but they will have to give up eating beef, says Haryana CM.’ Without mentioning Pakistan, the editor conveyed this message: Muslims should leave for Pakistan if they do not give up eating beef. Inserting words into mouths is a journalistic talent. The actual interview was published in actual context the next day, after the editor’s tongue tasted blood. Truth does not prevail; what prevails is the truth.”

“The One-Eyed Intellectual Who Shouts On The Killings Of Muslims Routinely Stitches His Lips When It Comes To The Murders Of Hindu Activists”

“In Kerala, the communists who organize beef[-eating] festivals are the moral cowards of our times, and will not organize a pork-eating festival in Kozhikode and Malappuram, or in front of Delhi’s Jama Masjid. The one-eyed intellectual who shouts on the killings of Muslims routinely stitches his lips when it comes to the murders of Hindu activists in Kerala and Tamil Nadu.

“Journalists and socialites who stoke beef riots will not draw a cartoon of Prophet Muhammad, not even from their kitchen. Secular editors usually do not write or tweet for Muslim women’s rights. But if Hindus tweet for Muslim women’s equality, they are dubbed by secularists as Sanghis. In the West, such truth-speakers are dubbed as Zionists.

“Thanks to the one-eyed rulers, Indian secularism is half-Islamist and half-Pakistani. Akhilesh Yadav, the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, hosted Pakistani singer Ghulam Ali in Lucknow after his show was cancelled due to the Shiv Sena’s threat. Arvind Kejriwal, the secular chief minister, invited Ali to Delhi. Kejriwal and Yadav did not invite our Oscar-winning musician A. R. Rehman after his show in Delhi was cancelled due to a Barelvi cleric’s fatwa.”

The Intellectual’s “Cowardice Is His Weapon,” Masked As Morality, As He “Hatch[es] A Media-Created Political Plot Against [Prime Minister] Narendra Modi”

“Indian secularism loves Pakistanis, not Indian Muslims. Mamata Banerjee lauds Ali, vomits silence on Taslima Nasreen, the Bangladeshi writer. Indian secularism is truly Pakistani, not even a quarter-Bangladeshi. The one-eyed intellectual nurtures his type. Khushwant Singh, who defended Emergency, was loved and celebrated. He sides with Islamists who attacked T. J. Joseph, or gets The Satanic Versesbanned. He is comfortable with criminals.

“Vikram Seth, the novelist, was morally comfortable to receive an award from an accused in the 1984 genocide of Sikhs. The one-eyed coward hiding behind literary work finds every newspaper and television channel to air his views, but accuses our nation of lacking freedom of speech. Salman Rushdie, who was prevented by the secularist-Islamist goons from speaking in Jaipur, walks into the embrace of the one-eyed species, the ruling seculariate.

“A newspaper reported that Panchjanya, a magazine close to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, justified killings for slaughtering cows. The same newspaper shuts its eye to the justifications of hate against non-Muslims, or killings of apostates in the Koran and Hadiths (traditions of Islam’s Prophet Muhammad). The Mumbai-based newspaper Roznama Urdu Times, in an article on December 26, cited the Koran and Hadiths to justify that Muslims converting to Hinduism be murdered. It wrote: ‘The first interpreter of the Koran, Prophet Muhammad, has clearly ordered the killing of a person becoming apostate.’ If Panchjanya be banned, what about the Koran?

“Antonio Gramsci, the Italian Marxist, said: ‘All men are intellectuals, but not all men have… the function of intellectuals.’ In the Gramscian sense, voters (and Twitter ‘trolls’ who fight for truth) are intellectuals who shape politics. In the 2014 elections, this class of two-eyed species filled up the creative deficit in the nation’s politics which the one-eyed animals had created.

“Consequently, a tea-seller became the prime minister, whose mission is to build toilets, clean streets, and create jobs. The one-eyed intellectual is now unhappy. Masked as morality, his cowardice is his weapon; it is hatching a media-created political plot against Narendra Modi, the elected farmer on the farm.”

An Overview of Wahhabism

Wahhabism or Wahhabi mission is a religious movement or branch of Sunni Islam.It has been variously described as “orthodox”, “ultraconservative”,”austere”, “fundamentalist”, “puritanical”(or “puritan”) and as an Islamic “reform movement” to restore “pure monotheistic worship” (tawhid) by scholars and advocates,and as an “extremist pseudo-Sunni movement” by opponents. Adherents often object to the term Wahhabi or Wahhabism as derogatory, and prefer to be called Salafi or muwahhid.

Wahhabism is named after an eighteenth-century preacher and scholar,Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (1703–1792). He started a revivalist movement in the remote, sparsely populated region of Najd,advocating a purging of practices such as the popular “cult of saints”, and shrines and tomb visitation, widespread among Muslims, but which he considered idolatry (Shirk), impurities and innovations in Islam (Bid’ah). Eventually he formed a pact with a local leader Muhammad bin Saud offering political obedience and promising that protection and propagation of the Wahhabi movement would mean “power and glory” and rule of “lands and men.”The movement is centered on the principle of Tawhid,or the “uniqueness” and “unity” of God.The movement also draws from the teachings of medieval theologian Ibn Taymiyyah and early jurist Ahmad ibn Hanabal

The alliance between followers of ibn Abd al-Wahhab and Muhammad bin Saud’s successors (the House of Saud) proved to be a rather durable alliance. The house of bin Saud continued to maintain its politico-religious alliance with the Wahhabi sect through the waxing and waning of its own political fortunes over the next 150 years, through to its eventual proclamation of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1932, and then afterwards, on into modern times. Today Mohammed bin Abd Al-Wahhab’s teachings are state-sponsored and are the official form of Sunni Islam in 21st century Saudi Arabia.

Estimates of the number of adherents to Wahhabism vary, with one source (Michael Izady) giving a figure of fewer than 5 million Wahhabis in the Persian Gulf region (compared to 28.5 million Sunnis and 89 million Shia).

With the help of funding from Petroleum exports (and other factors), the movement underwent “explosive growth” beginning in the 1970s and now has worldwide influence.

Wahhabism has been accused of being “a source of global terrorism”,inspiring the ideology of  Islamic State of Iraq and Syria(ISIS) and for causing disunity in Muslim communities by labeling Muslims who disagreed with the Wahhabi definition of monotheism as apostates (takfir), thus paving the way for their execution for apostasy. It has also been criticized for the destruction of historic mazaars and other Muslim and non-Muslim buildings and artifacts.The “boundaries” of what make up Wahhabism have been called “difficult to pinpoint”, but in contemporary usage, the terms Wahhabiand Salafi are often used interchangeably, and considered to be movements with different roots that have merged since the 1960s. But Wahhabism has also been called “a particular orientation within Salafism”,or an ultra-conservative, Saudi brand of Salafism.

Credits- Different sources

Decoding Modi Wave and What Went Wrong In Bihar

With Debacle in Bihar and Delhi elections, Many have raised the voices that Has Modi Wave Gone? Has the strategy of Amit Shah failed completely? Was the changing factor Prashant Kishor and because he joined hands with Nitish, It was a better campaign to pull of Victory from Modi? Is Prashant Kishor creator of Modi Wave and many more questions.

Lets first understand Modi Wave and Indian polls along with strategy coined by Amit Shah and Prashant Kishor, which worked wonders in Election 2014 for BJP and reasons, why the same formula is not working anymore.

Modi Wave

Narendra Modi was Chief Minister in Gujarat and won elections there for 3 consecutive terms, Off late after Atal Bihari Vajpayee Govt in 2010-2011, When NDA was not doing well at center and with great performance and development by Modi ji in Gujarat, Many people say 15-20% of population in India wanted Modi Ji to be named as a PM candidate of NDA and revive ruins after 2 consecutive defeats at hands of UPA.

With corruption charges and scams faced by then UPA, Large scale non corruption moment, Good performance and development+ clean government for 12+ years by Modi Ji in Gujarat and also his ability to attract global investor to pump funds in various projects in Gujarat, more and more people started believing in Him and wanted him to be the PM candidate in Election 2014, which happened and Modi Ji’s NDA won a decisive mandate crossing 300+ seats with BJP alone crossing majority. This feeling of people behind modi was nothing but Modi Wave.

How Elections in India Work?

The real beauty of our democracy is that we can have multiple parties and since each party would be based on certain ideology, an election in its generic form is a battle between ideologies. When a party manages to cross the halfway mark single handedly, it wins and forms the Govt. But when no party crosses that mark, then the one which has got the maximum seats usually tries to convince one or more parties to work out common ideology (common minimum programme or agenda) to form a coalition and form the Govt.

However, there can be instances where parties which are not confident of winning single handedly, might form pre-poll alliance with other parties based on some common agenda. In some cases, that agenda can be to uplift depressed classes, and in some cases, it might be to build a temple, and in some cases, to develop infrastructure, and so on. But here comes a psychological factor. Due to fear of getting obscure, especially when there is a very strong contender, some parties might form pre-poll alliances with just a single agenda: “To defeat that strong contender”.

The sole purpose is to get maximum vote share to defeat the best contender, who would have won having better plan and agenda. Indian National Congress had really mastered this strategy in India since years and hence they have ruled us from so many years generation after generation.

Few more examples of then Congress, which was strong were case of Janata Party, which was a grand alliance of all parties which wanted to defeat Indira Gandhi in the 1970s. How about the Third Front in late 1980s headed by VP Singh? Or the United Front in mid 1990s by HD Deve Gowda? What was their modus operandi? Just to form a huddle so they can actually keep a deserving party ( read with majority votes percentage) out of power. The same method was used by Atal Bihari Vajpayee many times and he finally succeeded to get a government for 5 years with many allies to support him.

What was the Chanakya Strategy of Amit Shah to implant Modi Wave?

Well, Amit Shah and Prashant Kishor with his campaigning and strategy team had the same formula to get highest vote share in each seat, which is described above with some improvisation. What they did in General Elections 2014 is put right candidate in seats, which were difficult to win or BJP had some doubts on it. Kar Sevaks and ground workers did grass root level work. Candidate was carefully selected in these seats, who has capability to pull maximum Votes and the formula ensured that after vote split in Multiple Parties, BJP in each such seat will emerge with highest share there by winning the seat comfortably. This was modi wave and chanakya formula, which swept to complete majority with BJP itself crossing magic figure of 272.

 

State elections at Jharkhand, J&K, Haryana and Maharashtra-What really happened?

The same Amit Shah Chanakya Strategy and Vote share formula was applied. It worked in below states amazingly well.

Jharkhand- Votes Split Across JMM, RJD and BJP . BJP winning Majority and formula worked.Haryana-Votes Split Across Congress, INLD and BJP. BJP winning Majority and formula worked.J&K-Votes Split across Congress+NC, PDP and BJP and Formula worked well to be second largest party in Vally sweeping Jammu for the 1st time in History.Maharashtra- Here since Shiv Sena and BJP fought separately, because of huge incumbency of existing Congress+NCP, BJP did perform well but short of majority.The formula did not completely work to Majority as expected since Votes got split between Sena and BJP resulting in loss of many seats as expected.

What really went wrong in Delhi 2015 polls?

Delhi elections second time was completely swept by AAP with a margin of 67-3 for 70 seats contested. Such a Huge debacle was completely a result of Formula and Chanakya Strategy of Amit Shah clearly not working.

Since Delhi did not have any 3rd party. Of course, there was congress but everyone knew, it cannot win and hence it did not poll desired number of votes in each seat. The competition was clearly between AAP and BJP. BJP under shah and others tried the same trick and formula used in election 2014 and other states mentioned above but it failed completely since the opposition was one(AAP) and not many as it used to be and votes used to get split. This resulted in complete strategy going wrong and AAP winning Delhi with huge mandate.

What really went wrong in Bihar 2015 polls?

The same delhi Story was replicated in a even better way. We all know that Prashant Kishor Switched Sides and joined Nitish Kumar, Its not new, if we check his history before 2014, he approached with his election strategy to Sonia and rahul gandhi. When congress said No to him since they were hiring a foreign PR team, he approached Modi and BJP, who accepted his proposal and with strategy and formula of vote share created swept 2014 polls. Now, when he has switched sides, the formula and strategy was also leaked to opposition.  Hence Mahagatbandhan was well prepared to counter this.

Same Delhi formula was used. No third contender and choice is either NDA or Mahagatbandhan. Nitish started ground work and campaigning 6-8 months back and when NDA was busy in other state polls and was way ahead in campaigning. He also did door to door and house to house campaigns to woo voters in areas, where he was sure to loose and considered them as hubs of BJP as guided by Prashant Kishor.

To Prove that it was just and just formula did not work considering single opposition, who was prepared with better candidate and single option cutting and negating any chance of vote split in all seats, it was really tough for BJP, who was caught unprepared.

It was not the reason that people, who voted for NDA in 2014 General Elections did not vote for NDA. In fact, the voting percentage of elections held in 2010 in Bihar and in 2015, there is a increase of 10%, which proves popularity of our PM and Politics of Development but the opposition this time has come single consolidating major percentage of remaining vote share in seats, which are neutral or difficult for NDA and has swept them all because they knew strategy of NDA and were better prepared with counter formula to defeat Chanakya strategy of Amit Shah.

What is going wrong actually?

Even when BJP and strategist Amit Shah know that Prashant Kishor has switched sides and his winning formula/strategy is open to opposition, NDA and BJP has gone with same approach and hence it was easy for opposition in Delhi and Bihar to read strategy of NDA and combat it.

Example on similar lines from cricket is Ajanta Mendis destroyed Indians in Asia Cup Finals of Asia Cup picked up 6-13 and destroyed Indian team. Problem was the carom boll of Mendis was new to Indian team and batsmen did not read it. After it, in all other tournaments, bowling of Mendis was destroyed by Indians since they read it over videos and knew, what was coming. Similarly, Nitish and Mahagatbandhan knew, what was coming from BJP and NDA and was well prepared to destroy.

Role of Media and Aggressive Media talks by Yogi Adityanath

Role of media has been always against ruling party BJP. Be it dadri or dalit kid burning, which was always projected fake and against BJP with full Media cover with series of debates during phases of elections to tweak voters mind. Also Award Wapsi was planned in same time again to destabilize voters , which might have created impact but extremely minor.

Yogi Adityanath and Sadhhvi Prachi gave provocative response to SRK statements in Intolerance which they should have avoided. Like there could be many BJP supporters, who are bigger Bollywood fans then politics lovers. This statement could tweak their votes against BJP if they were die hard fans of SRK. These kind of statements by BJP,RSS and VHP spokesperson including reservation comment by RSS Chief Mohan Ji Bhagwat should be avoided in future. Again, this could have had a extremely minor impact on electoral results.

Many other things, which went wrong in Bihar Polls-

BJP needs to understand one thing that Modi is no magician and Amit Shah is no Chanakya. They are humans with their limitations. Modi understands the national narrative well. He knows Gujarati politics well, may be he knows politics elsewhere too but in all other elections except the General elections and Gujarat Assembly Elections, he will never be considered as a local face. Villagers, uneducated people, less educated people and people who cast votes purely on the basis of caste do not invest their 100% confidence in non-local campaigners. This is what happened in Bihar Elections. The Bihar BJP Team looked like Modi, Shah and a few hangers who nodded at everything that Modi and Shah said.

As far as oratory is concerned, Modi is a natural. But to assume that he is the only orator in BJP is a huge mistake. Even Atal Bihari Vajpayee who I consider the best orator ever in Indian politics allowed the likes of Sushma Swaraj, Pramod Mahajan, Lal Krishna Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi to address rallies. I used the word “allowed” because that’s how it seems.

The way BJP were going in this elections, it seemed as if there were no other faces in BJP, let alone local faces.

BJP failed in training and nurturing local leadership who could respond to Nitish and Lalu’s jibes in chaste Bhojpuri, Maithili, Magahi, Angika or the Bihari tapori language of Patna belt. Many of Modi’s Shuddha Hindi words were undecipherable for the local masses. Amit Shah’s heavily accented Hindi was well alien for them. Why did no BJP leader of Bihar take the center stage? Or were there none? Probably the latter because Sushil Modi, the tallest Bihar BJP leader has proved himself to be a complete dud as far as realpolitik skills are concerned. He first allowed Nitish Kumar to walk away with all glories of development, he allowed him to stop Narendra Modi from entering Bihar few years back and then to top it all, he allowed Nitish Kumar to dump him and his colleagues like a heap of filth.

No Rallies and Speech by Ravi Shankar Prasad

No Rallies and Speech by Radha Modhan Singh

No Rallies and Speech by Shahnawaz Hussain

No Rallies and Speech by Giriraj Singh

No Rallies and Speech by Rajiv Pratap Rudi

Regenerating IT cells and Empowering Right Winged Blogs

While the Left wing works like a mafia wherein there is a structure and people even from the lowest ranks are supported and promoted, Right Wing works like a small shop, where the shopkeeper likes less competition so that his shop runs well. BJP IT CELL completely failed at creating a right wing ecosystem and hence small blogs like us or our friends at tfi, Shankhnaad and opindia remain unnoticed while the scrolls and firstposts and DailyOs are nurtured, funded  and promoted by the leftists. BJP also should not worry about loss of Prashant Kishor, there are many Prashant Kishors available, who will do their best for Modi Ji. All they need is call, guidance, motivation and recognition.

It is better that BJP accepts now that Modi Wave and Chanakya Niti formula of Amit Shah is now well known to opponents. Now either formula and strategy needs a change to get 50+ percentage vote share on own by doing ground work and strategic candidates, better campaign on some seats and also play what is called “Rajneeti” to make sure that Vote share is split in case of seats, where new strategy cannot be applied.

General one strategy for election now wont work for BJP and it needs to work hard and come up completely new and customized strategy and approach to beat the opponents, who now know the tricks.

Credits : Some contents taken from The Frustrated Indian website and SatyaVijai website