Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Y I Patel
BRFite
Posts: 624
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Y I Patel » 01 Jan 2013 02:47

Happy new year Pentiah, and happy new year friends at BRF!

Pentiah, I have been following some professional interests in my spare time, time which would normally have gone to hobbies/addictions such as BRF. So you are really witnessing me falling off the wagon for holidays :) Soon it will be back to the old grind and away from BRF.

Yogendra had asked why NM is the only brand that has arisen from Gujarat, and if he is really just a product why are there not others like him. It is a valid question, and the answer is that there ARE others who would have moved into the political space he so deftly positioned himself in. A very recent past example is Chimanbhai Patel, who, while being humongously corrupt, was recognized within Gujarat as being a formidably capable administrator and was very middle class friendly in his post-Navnirman political avatar. Closer to the present, Shankersinh Vaghela was all but certain to have occupied the same space/persona that NM now occupies, HAD he remained within the BJP fold. So it is sometimes a matter of being in the right place at the right time, as NM was.

But let's move beyond NM to talk about the true problem of creating a pan-Indian coalition. And a coalition does not merely mean a grouping of different parties, it really means a grouping of different interest groups. In the Indian context, INC was the first true pan-Indian coalition, and it was built (IMHO) by Gandhiji, who recognized that interest groups in the Indian context ment the existing community groupings represented by caste and relegion. He was the one who expanded INC from its original debating club ambience. But let's not go too far into that, except to say that for all these years the current Congress has been surving on that legacy and the other parties have been trying to break into it by making themselves regional clones of INC that try to cobble together winning coalitions based on caste and communal lines. And this is where you have successful power brokers like LP Yadav, MS Yadav, Mayavati, et al. Nitish Kumar is very interesting, because he is trying a soft Moditva approach if you will. He lays great stress on good governance, but below that veneer he also operates a skilled caste based operation.

So it is no surprise that he is receiving so much attention. Another politician I continue to have very high hopes for is Mayavati. I am very surprised no one is talking about her right now, but I would expect that NM, in particular, will be hectically trying to build an equation with her while she is weak enough to not demand too much. This might seem like contradicting what I said just one post earlier when I opined that it would be a really bad idea for him to get entangled in UP politics, so let me expand. If he gets directly involved, he is competing against Mayavati. If he brings her into his coalition, he outsources a very important political function to her. He is not yet big enough to transcend caste and communal politics, and IMHO a NM-Mayavati coalition is a winning ticket in itself.

As NM goes about his next steps, he will do well to learn the lessons from LK Advani's successes and failures. The ABV-LKA duo still remains a master case study in how an alternative force to INC was created. ABV was the coalition builder, and LKA the party apparatchik who tried to build up BJP. We all talk about ABV, but LKA is the real reason BJP got big and strong enough to be the nucleus of the anti-INC coalition. ABV, when he was the sole standard bearer back in the post-Indira assasination days, tried to peddle BJP as a mushy good-governance + socialist brand in the image of Jay Prakash Narayan, and failed miserably. It was Advani who seized the possibility of playing the same communal game as INC, only overtly so. No wonder the ire of the seculars was reserved for him.

But that was LKA's success. Where he failed, IMHO, honorably, was in remaking BJP sufficiently. Perhaps the task was too much for him alone, and the current national level BJP continues to be an INC clone in saffron clothing. But he still deserves great credit in nurturing the current crop of rising state-level talent, and I continue to respect him and his legacy. What NM needs to realize is that if he sticks with a reforming BJP and taking it to national power strategy, he will face some of the same challenges LKA did, plus he will face increasing competetion from his contemporaries within and outside for becoming the standard bearer of good governance. So he does need to move fast, and the only way he can do so is by combining the roles of LKA and ABV in himself. He will have to be a party builder as well as a coalition builder, or risk loosing the chance to do either.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby RamaY » 01 Jan 2013 03:03

Theo_Fidel wrote: He is a man and at some point if he wants to be PM he has to say what he will do in places like S.TN. And no, we have no interest in becoming another GJ, what ever that means.


Can you please explain further on
1. What does S.TN want?
2. What aspect of GJ that S.TN would never want to become?
3. Who are more acceptable leadership idea/person for S.TN?

prahaar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2797
Joined: 15 Oct 2005 04:14

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby prahaar » 01 Jan 2013 03:11

No wonder NM detractors call him dictatorial, he is a de facto leader of the Gujarat BJP and he is also the CM.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby RamaY » 01 Jan 2013 03:28

I do not think the real value proposition of NM is building/raiding the neo-middle-class wave as the paid media is trying to portray. The real wave NM is building and raiding is the Hindu self-awareness and self-confidence. Since admitting such a thing by paid media would make this wave even more appealing to rest of India hence the smoke screens.

Many people think it is a big NO NO for Hindus majority of India to come together under a political dispensation based on their religious identity. This is mainly due to their imposition of Abrahamic memes and constructs on Hindu dharma.

There is no need for a political party to appease the religious minorities of India, irrespective of their perceived or projected fears. As long as the minorities of India are offered the same justice, law and order, economic opportunities and most importantly nationalistic education, the religious minorities should be very happy with what they got. Anyone who is not comfortable with such a Bharatiya society are free to move on to greener pastures across the national borders.

It is very interesting to note that the pundits tell us that any national leader must be able to build coalitions across various caste, communal sections, while blaming these very caste and communal divides for any/every ill of Bharat. So the pundits are either farting loud or just are creating further smoke screens. Any suggestion for coalition with leaders like MullahM, Lallooo, Karat, CBN, Abdullah's ETFs or based on caste/religious identity means creation of another C-System, that too a worse cousin of the current C-System that is ruining India now.

I pray NM/BJP offers a truly Bharatiya and Hindutva political alternative to the nation. If the nation doesn't want to take it for any reason, it would be their loss. BJP has already seen in UP, KA, Bihar and AP what happens when it allies with people like Maya, Devegauda, Nitish and CBN.

ranjbe
BRFite
Posts: 267
Joined: 12 Apr 2011 21:25

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby ranjbe » 01 Jan 2013 03:33

Sanku wrote:
Theo_Fidel wrote:..


The whole point Theoji is what you are saying, how to make the perception match reality. That is the key.

Unfortunately it is not given, lot of NaMo fans thinks because he is good, he will be perceived as good. Unfortunately not.

Maha following NaMo or Delhi urban middle class realizing that BJP is their future (when it is) -- are things that should happen, but will they? Different questions.

MH is very doable. It is 45% urbanized, and would be a BJP/SS state but for something called Raj Thakeray's MNS. In the last LS elections Congress won 17 seats, Pawar's NCP won 8, and BJP/SS won 20. All analysts were unanimous in saying that MNS badly affected BJP/SS vote in 8 Mumbai seats, and 1 seat in in Pune and Nashik. These 10 seats went to Congress or NCP.
Have you seen NM addressing rallies at Shivaji Park in Mumbai? He speaks fairly good Marathi, and is a crowd puller.
http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_maharashtra-third-most-urbanised-state_1567143
http://zeenews.india.com/zeeexclusive/2009-05-19/532875news.html

Y I Patel
BRFite
Posts: 624
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Y I Patel » 01 Jan 2013 04:12

Post-Independence India has not treated regional satraps very kindly. Morarji Desai was a tremendously powerful regional leader in the unified Bombay province and then in newly created Gujarat, but was sidelined in favor of Gungi Guudiya by the infamous syndicate, which was itself a group of regional satraps. Then we have other very powerful regional figures like Charan Singh and Deve Gowda (aka Sleeping Beauty). Remember them? Many times, it is easier ambitious politicians of roughly equal stature to weild power under the shadow of a political figurehead, than to risk one of themselves becoming too powerful and edging the rest out. That is why the Dynasty has so much staying power, much as the Mughal empire did in its last days.

The fact is that the Indian political landscape remains highly fragmented. It is a built in federal system, surpassing EU in terms of cultural and political diversity and with additional Third World developmental challenges to boot. And the existing caste structre provides centuries of political precedent in how power bases were created and sustained. Such a deep seated reality cannot be wished away. If it were that easy, the communists would have been ruling from New Moscow on Yamuna long since. India's political diversity might seem an impediment, but is also a very useful check against uncontrollable concentration of political power around or from any one source.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby RamaY » 01 Jan 2013 04:23

YIP garu,

The punditry comment was not about you.

Up until 1700s the mughal empire was highly centralized. Again under British it was centralized rule. The federal structure comes only when the central leader is weak, that too ideologically.

The current federal structure where the sleeping beuties are considered Powerful regional powers comes to play only when the national identity and leadership becomes hijdas.

The federal structure we need is the one that existed durin dharmic era; where the foundation is dharma.

What is the point of having any structure (weak or strong) when the foundation is asuric?

How many of us want to make Bharat an Islamic nation or Christian nation (by mass conversion) even if it means a developed nation tag or leader of Ummah tag?

vijayk
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4542
Joined: 22 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby vijayk » 01 Jan 2013 07:14

Modi should start vivekanada yatra nationwide. The people have been totally taken over by dhimmitude. They are in such a bad state of funk that they are literally brain dead based on my conversation with few people. I some times wonder if this country can be saved ever or forever screwed.

devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby devesh » 01 Jan 2013 09:09

best outcome would be for BJP under Modi to become the single largest party, around 180 seats in Lok Sabha, and yet the assorted regional/Left parties coming together and getting propped up by INC for a 3rd Front, or the INC itself being the prime partner in a coalition, aka UPA-3.

the people of India, especially those who espouse Hindutva, need to understand that they are well and truly isolated. even if they band together to get the single largest share in the Parliament, a whole host of forces will come together and block their aspirations: this simple fact has to be known. this is crucial. it should be like a smack to the head, and the slumbering slouch finally wakes up with wide eyes, looking all around him, completely gobsmacked.

it needs to happen.

Sushupti
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 22 Dec 2010 21:24

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Sushupti » 01 Jan 2013 10:46

Narendra Modi’s Hat-trick and Global Impact for India

http://deshgujarat.com/2013/01/01/naren ... for-india/

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Singha » 01 Jan 2013 10:53

RamaY wrote:
Theo_Fidel wrote: He is a man and at some point if he wants to be PM he has to say what he will do in places like S.TN. And no, we have no interest in becoming another GJ, what ever that means.


Can you please explain further on
1. What does S.TN want?
2. What aspect of GJ that S.TN would never want to become?
3. Who are more acceptable leadership idea/person for S.TN?


yes I am curious about it too. is the place is arid and incapable of supporting high density agriculture? what is the pop density? if its something arid like parts of Guj which have industrialized could industries be feasible there? it already has a huge cachement market in N.TN, S.KA and S.Kerala right next door, well connected by rail and bus routes.

Sushupti
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 22 Dec 2010 21:24

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Sushupti » 01 Jan 2013 11:41

Y I Patel wrote:Happy new year Pentiah, and happy new year friends at BRF!



So it is no surprise that he is receiving so much attention. Another politician I continue to have very high hopes for is Mayavati. I am very surprised no one is talking about her right now, but I would expect that NM, in particular, will be hectically trying to build an equation with her while she is weak enough to not demand too much. This might seem like contradicting what I said just one post earlier when I opined that it would be a really bad idea for him to get entangled in UP politics, so let me expand. If he gets directly involved, he is competing against Mayavati. If he brings her into his coalition, he outsources a very important political function to her. He is not yet big enough to transcend caste and communal politics, and IMHO a NM-Mayavati coalition is a winning ticket in itself.

As NM goes about his next steps, he will do well to learn the lessons from LK Advani's successes and failures. The ABV-LKA duo still remains a master case study in how an alternative force to INC was created. ABV was the coalition builder, and LKA the party apparatchik who tried to build up BJP. We all talk about ABV, but LKA is the real reason BJP got big and strong enough to be the nucleus of the anti-INC coalition. ABV, when he was the sole standard bearer back in the post-Indira assasination days, tried to peddle BJP as a mushy good-governance + socialist brand in the image of Jay Prakash Narayan, and failed miserably. It was Advani who seized the possibility of playing the same communal game as INC, only overtly so. No wonder the ire of the seculars was reserved for him.

.


IMO, too much credit is being given to ABV-LKA duo. Real brain behind rise of the BJP was Moropant Pingley, if one agrees that meteoric rise of the 90's was due to RJM. ABV wouldn't play the ball for the game plan devised by Pingley leading to the RSS support to the Congress post Indira murder. BJP's defeat in 1984(2 seats) resulted into weakening of the ABV and getting sidelined and LKA put into the leadership role.

Note the dates, it was when Indira was alive. Pingley had planned to challenge Indiramma through RJM in cow belt.

"The first Ekatmata Yatra in 1983 was followed by the "Ram-Janki" Rath Yatra in 1984{September 25- October 6}. It was a precursor to the Ram Janmabhoomi movement. The aim of this Yatra was to reunite the Hindus, and to kindle the feeling of pride amongst them. Seven chariots traveled through Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, where Lord Shriram was shown behind bars depicting His state inside the Ram temple in Ayodhya. Moropant was appointed as the convener and contoller of this Yatra. In 1986, the Faizabad court ordered to unlock the temple marking the awakening of the Hindu society."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moropant_Pingley


Top RSS leader Pingle no more

Moropant Pingle, one of the topmost leaders of the RSS and widely believed to be the brain behind the Babri Masjid demolition plan {Actually Behind whole RJM}

In the 80s after the death of the third sarsanghachalak, Balasaheb Deoras, he came very close to be his successor. His exclusion and annointment of Rajendra Singh as the fourth RSS chief was believed to be a part of a strategic plan to give a pan-Indian appeal to the parent Hindutva organisation.

Thus, Rajju Bhaiyya, a north Indian, became the first non-Maharashtrian brahmin to assume the top RSS post when the Ram Janmabhoomi movement was at its peak. But Pingle continued to serve the cause with dedication.

Sangh insiders credit him with the meticulous planning to bring down the imposing structure of the Babri Masjid at Ayodhya on December 6, 1992. As an important VHP functionary, he was responsible for whipping up the Hindutva frenzy in the country by planning Ganajal rathayatras decades ago.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes ... ss-workers


suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3634
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby suryag » 01 Jan 2013 23:56

Is it just me or do others feel that NaMo has been putting on a lot of weight? Time he takes care of his health too

devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby devesh » 02 Jan 2013 03:41

what vision did Sonia and INC give for S. TN? for that matter, what vision did BJP/NDA give for S. TN under Vajpayee, that it got elected in '98 and '99?

we should take these statements for what they are: total lack of sensible arguments due to their brain-meltdown about Modi...

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby RamaY » 02 Jan 2013 04:13

Devesh garu,

When people say acceptance of Kerala, NE, certain areas of AP, TN etc we must understand that acceptance of Christians. Similarly when they say acceptance of UP, Bihar, WB etc it means acceptance of Muslims.

People get very sensitive on this form when we question the patriotism of certain minorities. But no one have any issues when these very minorities say they oppose some X technology or Y national symbol or Z leader just because their faith says so.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21158
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Prem » 02 Jan 2013 04:21

Guys, some thing happend to DIENesty Terrior Dickpeejay Stink?

Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9252
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Hari Seldon » 02 Jan 2013 04:27

+1 RamaY garu.

All the pious bromides about NM's chances pored on here for show's sake besides, its quite clear why NM stirs such opposition. He is unapologetic about an assertive (read non-appeasing) Hindu identity. So I'd take the faux concern for NM's chances on display salted only. Chalo, light lo, yawn and move on.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby RamaY » 02 Jan 2013 04:36

In India (and in other non-Abrahamic societies) the effect of (sic) secularism is that the public not only think it is quite normal for minorities to demand the leaders to bear their religious symbols, but also think it is unsecular for a leader to deny such symbolic measures.

That is why NM's unapologetic Hindu model of governance (equal law & order for all, equal opportunities for all, equal treatment of all, non-communal & non-castiest politics, uncorrupt administration, efficient infrastructure, self-confident ethos etc.,) is anathema to this section of indians.

For them Bharat must be destroyed permanently so a colonial Indian construct can savor the populace without any opposition.

Sushupti
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 22 Dec 2010 21:24

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Sushupti » 02 Jan 2013 10:11

@KartikeyaTanna: "It is ultimately the Gujarat model that has delivered in Kerala". Interview w/ Jagdish Bhagwati and Arvind Panagariya http://t.co/RctU0vhG

Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9252
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Hari Seldon » 02 Jan 2013 10:32

^thx sushupti for that article. Many recurring myths and psec canards debunked in that wonderful erudition by two great economics minds who know what they're saying and are under no pressure to downplay Guj's (or NM's) achioevements.

Here's one excerpt:
[Interviewer]Professor Bhagwati has said in an interview that growth in Gujarat is on track. So far, it hasn't shown any impact on social indicators. Do you believe in trickle-down effect?

[Bhagwati and Panagriya] First, we have always argued that the use of the conservative phrase "trickle-down" is misleading. We prefer to use the more radical phrase "pull up". By reducing poverty, the growth strategy increases incomes which, in turn, can be expected to improve most social indicators (though nutrition in particular may get worse if the diet shifts to less nutritious but tastier foods).

Most social indicators have in fact seen a lot of progress in Gujarat and in many of these, the changes (which economists call "first difference") in social indicators make Gujarat look pretty good indeed. Gujarat inherited low levels of social indicators and it is the change in these indicators where Gujarat shows impressive progress. The literacy rate has risen from 22% in 1951 to 69% in 2001 and 79% in 2011. The infant mortality rate per thousand has fallen from 144 in 1971 to 60 in 2001 and 41 in 2011.

[peeved interviewer] Why do you say all seems to be well in Gujarat? In literacy, too, Gujarat ranks 18th out of 35 states and Union Territories. In sex ratio, the state is way behind the national average of 940 females per 1,000 males. In poverty reduction of 8.6% in 5 years (2005-10), it is still behind states like Odisha (19.2%), Maharashtra (13.7%) and Tamil Nadu (13.1%).

[the economists] But you are again failing to distinguish between low levels and changes therein. On the latter criterion, which is the relevant one, Gujarat is making good progress in most areas. The additional good news is that with relatively high per-capita incomes as well as a high growth rate, it will continue to generate high and rapidly rising levels of revenues that, when combined with its good governance (which predates the current chief minister Narendra Modi), promise continued accelerated and all-around progress.

[more peeved interviewer]There are more reasons to worry: 44.6% of children below the age of five suffer from malnutrition in Gujarat whereas nearly 70% of the children suffer from anaemia. States like UP and Bihar have fared better in malnutrition.

[the economist gents] Such comparisons selectively focusing on one or the other social indicator, especially their levels, are not particularly meaningful; one must consider the changes in several indicators. By that test, Gujarat has done quite well. But we also need to appreciate, and this is what one of us (Panagariya) has ceaselessly argued in recent writings, that the nutrition measurements leave a lot to be desired.


That bolded part above was likely inserted by the peeved ET outlet only.

BTW, excellent articulation of the Guj model, what it stands for, what it has done remarkably well and how it can extend easily to the rest of India. Read it all, only.

kvjayan
BRFite
Posts: 233
Joined: 23 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby kvjayan » 02 Jan 2013 12:49

A good part of S.TN has been secularised since a few centuries. During the time of elections, assorted NGOs will launch a stong anti-BJP/Modi campaign in those parts.

devesh wrote:what vision did Sonia and INC give for S. TN? for that matter, what vision did BJP/NDA give for S. TN under Vajpayee, that it got elected in '98 and '99?

we should take these statements for what they are: total lack of sensible arguments due to their brain-meltdown about Modi...

Sushupti
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 22 Dec 2010 21:24

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Sushupti » 02 Jan 2013 13:36

Expect dirty game to start. This Mehta guy is secular turd.

SC upholds Justice Mehta's appointment as Gujarat Lokayukta
http://t.co/vAS17Pku


@chinmaykrvd: @albatrossinfo Is congress planning to play the same game with Modi that it successfully tried with yeddy

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3643
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Neela » 02 Jan 2013 14:45

RamaY wrote:I do not think the real value proposition of NM is building/raiding the neo-middle-class wave as the paid media is trying to portray. The real wave NM is building and raiding is the Hindu self-awareness and self-confidence. Since admitting such a thing by paid media would make this wave even more appealing to rest of India hence the smoke screens.

Many people think it is a big NO NO for Hindus majority of India to come together under a political dispensation based on their religious identity. This is mainly due to their imposition of Abrahamic memes and constructs on Hindu dharma.

There is no need for a political party to appease the religious minorities of India, irrespective of their perceived or projected fears. As long as the minorities of India are offered the same justice, law and order, economic opportunities and most importantly nationalistic education, the religious minorities should be very happy with what they got. Anyone who is not comfortable with such a Bharatiya society are free to move on to greener pastures across the national borders.

It is very interesting to note that the pundits tell us that any national leader must be able to build coalitions across various caste, communal sections, while blaming these very caste and communal divides for any/every ill of Bharat. So the pundits are either farting loud or just are creating further smoke screens. Any suggestion for coalition with leaders like MullahM, Lallooo, Karat, CBN, Abdullah's ETFs or based on caste/religious identity means creation of another C-System, that too a worse cousin of the current C-System that is ruining India now.

I pray NM/BJP offers a truly Bharatiya and Hindutva political alternative to the nation. If the nation doesn't want to take it for any reason, it would be their loss. BJP has already seen in UP, KA, Bihar and AP what happens when it allies with people like Maya, Devegauda, Nitish and CBN.


Very good points RamaY-j. Indeed, more and more true Indians are realizing that parties and governments pandering to the minorities' interests has only made the state of the nation worse.
Consider this:
Increasingly, Muslims are beginning to realise that at best, an Akbaruddin Owaisi is a fanatic preacher who can make a clap-trap speech but cannot deliver on governance. Owaisis cannot fool the audience, for those Muslims know that the same speaker has been an MLA since 1999 and has been part of the coalition in the Congress Government that built those 44,663 houses. If no Muslim got a house in Adilabad, then the Owaisis are responsible for that and the clapping, jumping audience knows that. In that passing moment, Akbaruddin Owaisi stands naked in front of his audience of die-hard Muslim


The very same minorities' leaders who continuously project victim-hood to justify their actions are the ones who have NO INCENTIVE to better the lives of the people they represent. The irony of this is lost on the voters.

anmol
BRFite
Posts: 1837
Joined: 05 May 2009 17:39

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby anmol » 02 Jan 2013 16:28

This is the judgement :

74. CONCLUSIONS:
(i) The facts of the case reveal a very sorry state of affairs,
revealing that in the State of Gujarat, the post of the Lokayukta has
been lying vacant for a period of more than 9 years, as it became
vacant on 24.11.2003, upon the resignation of Justice S.M. Soni from
the said post. Since then a few half-hearted attempts were made to
fill up the post of the Lokayukta, but for one reason or another, the
same could not be filled. The present Governor has misjudged her role
and has insisted, that under the Act, 1986, the Council of Ministers
has no role to play in the appointment of the Lokayukta, and that she
could therefore, fill it up in consultation with the Chief Justice of
the Gujarat High Court and the Leader of Opposition. Such attitude is
not in conformity, or in consonance with the democratic set up of
government envisaged in our Constitution. Under the scheme of our
Constitution, the Governor is synonymous with the State Government,
and can take an independent decision upon his/her own discretion only
when he/she acts as a statutory authority under a particular Act, or
under the exception(s), provided in the Constitution itself.
Therefore, the appointment of the Lokayukta can be made by the
Governor, as the Head of the State, only with the aid and advice of
the Council of Ministers, and not independently as a Statutory
Authority.

(ii) The Governor consulted the Attorney General of India for legal
advice, and communicated with the Chief Justice of the Gujarat High
Court directly, without taking into confidence, the Council of
Ministers.
In this respect, she was wrongly advised to the effect that
she had to act as a statutory authority and not as the Head of the
State. Be that as it may, in light of the facts and circumstances of
the present case, it is evident that the Chief Minister had full
information and was in receipt of all communications from the Chief
Justice, whose opinion is to be given primacy as regards such matters,
and can only be overlooked, for cogent reasons. The recommendation of
the Chief Justice suggesting only one name, instead of a panel of
names, is in consonance with the law laid down by this Court, and we
do not find any cogent reason to not give effect to the said
recommendation.
(iii) The objections raised by the Chief Minister, have been duly
considered by the Chief Justice, as well as by this Court, and we are
of the considered view that none of them are tenable, to the extent
that any of them may be labeled as cogent reason(s), for the purpose
of discarding the recommendation of the name of respondent no.1, for
appointment to the post of Lokayukta.
(iv) There are sufficient safeguards in the Statute itself, to take
care of the pre-conceived notions in the mind, or the bias, of the
Lokayukta, and so far as the suitability of the person to be appointed
as Lokayukta is concerned, the same is to be examined, taking into
consideration the interests of the people at large, and not those of
any individual. The facts referred to hereinabove, make it clear that
the process of consultation stood complete, and in such a situation,
the appointment of respondent no.1 cannot be held to be illegal.
The appeals lack merit and are accordingly dismissed.



75. Before parting with the case, we would like to mention that as
the respondent no.1 did not join the post, because of the pendency of
the case, he may join now. Needless to say that the appellants shall
provide all facilities/office, staff etc., required to carry out the
work of the Lokayukta. More so, we have no doubt that appellants will
render all co-operation to respondent no.1 in performance of the work
of the Lokayukta.
In view of the above, no separate order is required to be passed
in SLP (C) Nos. 2625-2626/2012; and 2687-2688/2012. The said
petitions and all IAs, pending, (if any), stand disposed of in terms
of the aforesaid judgment.


So SC says that Governor must consult with Council of Minister, but Governor did not do so... still "process of consultation"... does this make any sense ?

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3643
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Neela » 02 Jan 2013 17:19

abhishek_sharma wrote:From facebook

Image



Abhishek-ji , cheeky cheeky. He he ...bliss to note that NM is wearing saffron. And that makes him a "bhagwan" - the choice of the word betrays true thoughts in the context of usage.
And that "stained" color is sufficient grounds to pray for incompetency in Nai Delhi in the future! Guess whose hands rub in glee when lawlessness looms - take your pick...there are indeed many.
This from some in a nation that gave "Ano Bhadraaha Kritao Yantu Vishvatah" and "Lokah Samasta Sukinoh Bhavantu" " . More Bharat-Rat_shak than Rakshak! Ack thoo!

Theo_Fidel

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Theo_Fidel » 02 Jan 2013 18:14

delete... wrong crowd.
Last edited by Theo_Fidel on 02 Jan 2013 18:46, edited 1 time in total.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10034
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby sum » 02 Jan 2013 18:31

From the lay man point of view, NM has a long record of picking winners and losers and essentially abandoning the losers to their fate. What would he do for the losing side of India.


Would love to see which neta in this Desh prepped up the losing side and treated both winners and losers equally!

So what would be his relationship with GJ & TN if a similar tussle came up. I think history shows that TN would lose or have little voice. So why should we vote for such a grouping. A win for GJ is not always a win for India.


Wonder who is the national level neta who will do the above and favour TN above all else? Will a AIADMK supported NM be able to ignore TN?

Amazing that so many answers have already been finalised even before the exam began

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby geeth » 02 Jan 2013 19:17

how long is Mehta's tenure as Lokayukta going to be? Anyone, any idea?

devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby devesh » 02 Jan 2013 20:06

ah...that post should not have been deleted, if the quotes by sum ji are any indication..

yeah...would like to know which politician/party treated both winners and losers equally?
the real question is perhaps, "will minorities get the same level of special treatment by Modi, as they do from the Left/Lib/INC/psec crowd?"
instead of asking that out loud, we hear all these twisted, and deceptive questions which seek to rabble-rouse on the basis of regionalism..
it's a good cover..

when regionalism is raised, really it's about protecting the special interests of an exclusive crowd.
it has nothing to do with that region, or with protecting the "majority" of people in that region.
it simply is a ploy rising from insecurity of an exclusive minority "leadership" which has elite rights under the current setup.

Sushupti
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 22 Dec 2010 21:24

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Sushupti » 02 Jan 2013 20:25

anmol wrote:
This is the judgement :


74. CONCLUSIONS:
(i) The facts of the case reveal a very sorry state of affairs,
revealing that in the State of Gujarat, the post of the Lokayukta has
been lying vacant for a period of more than 9 years, as it became
vacant on 24.11.2003, upon the resignation of Justice S.M. Soni from
the said post. Since then a few half-hearted attempts were made to
fill up the post of the Lokayukta, but for one reason or another, the
same could not be filled. The present Governor has misjudged her role
and has insisted, that under the Act, 1986, the Council of Ministers
has no role to play in the appointment of the Lokayukta, and that she
could therefore, fill it up in consultation with the Chief Justice of
the Gujarat High Court and the Leader of Opposition. Such attitude is
not in conformity, or in consonance with the democratic set up of
government envisaged in our Constitution. Under the scheme of our
Constitution, the Governor is synonymous with the State Government,
and can take an independent decision upon his/her own discretion only
when he/she acts as a statutory authority under a particular Act, or
under the exception(s), provided in the Constitution itself.
Therefore, the appointment of the Lokayukta can be made by the
Governor, as the Head of the State, only with the aid and advice of
the Council of Ministers, and not independently as a Statutory
Authority.

(ii) The Governor consulted the Attorney General of India for legal
advice, and communicated with the Chief Justice of the Gujarat High
Court directly, without taking into confidence, the Council of
Ministers.
In this respect, she was wrongly advised to the effect that
she had to act as a statutory authority and not as the Head of the
State. Be that as it may, in light of the facts and circumstances of
the present case, it is evident that the Chief Minister had full
information and was in receipt of all communications from the Chief
Justice, whose opinion is to be given primacy as regards such matters,
and can only be overlooked, for cogent reasons. The recommendation of
the Chief Justice suggesting only one name, instead of a panel of
names, is in consonance with the law laid down by this Court, and we
do not find any cogent reason to not give effect to the said
recommendation.
(iii) The objections raised by the Chief Minister, have been duly
considered by the Chief Justice, as well as by this Court, and we are
of the considered view that none of them are tenable, to the extent
that any of them may be labeled as cogent reason(s), for the purpose
of discarding the recommendation of the name of respondent no.1, for
appointment to the post of Lokayukta.
(iv) There are sufficient safeguards in the Statute itself, to take
care of the pre-conceived notions in the mind, or the bias, of the
Lokayukta, and so far as the suitability of the person to be appointed
as Lokayukta is concerned, the same is to be examined, taking into
consideration the interests of the people at large, and not those of
any individual. The facts referred to hereinabove, make it clear that
the process of consultation stood complete, and in such a situation,
the appointment of respondent no.1 cannot be held to be illegal.
The appeals lack merit and are accordingly dismissed.



75. Before parting with the case, we would like to mention that as
the respondent no.1 did not join the post, because of the pendency of
the case, he may join now. Needless to say that the appellants shall
provide all facilities/office, staff etc., required to carry out the
work of the Lokayukta. More so, we have no doubt that appellants will
render all co-operation to respondent no.1 in performance of the work
of the Lokayukta.
In view of the above, no separate order is required to be passed
in SLP (C) Nos. 2625-2626/2012; and 2687-2688/2012. The said
petitions and all IAs, pending, (if any), stand disposed of in terms
of the aforesaid judgment.


So SC says that Governor must consult with Council of Minister, but Governor did not do so... still "process of consultation"... does this make any sense ?


Image

chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby chaanakya » 02 Jan 2013 21:11

It is a fit case for Revision Petition before a larger bench raising constitutional questions and therefore to be heard before a Constitutional Bench. Matter may not end here as the Judgement is apparently self contradictory.

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7089
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Muppalla » 02 Jan 2013 21:20

chaanakya wrote:It is a fit case for Revision Petition before a larger bench raising constitutional questions and therefore to be heard before a Constitutional Bench. Matter may not end here as the Judgement is apparently self contradictory.


Will that give a stay to current appointment? Otherwise Modi will be targetted to put him in jail before he can be made PM candidate.

svenkat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4725
Joined: 19 May 2009 17:23

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby svenkat » 02 Jan 2013 21:28

I dont think GJ and TN have any problem with each other.The problems could be
1)The most dynamic business classes are in North India-the savarna vaishyas.There could be fear that North Indian business people will overwhelm south indian chettiars,chettys,shettys,naadars,gounders.
2)The huge influx of hindi speaking people into south india and conflict between indigenous labourers and north indian labourers.
3)The same tension if small businessmen start migrating into South India.
4)At a social level,North Indian popular culture overwhelming south indian films etc.

These fears exist in Assam,Bengal,Punjab and also among people in Jharkhand.Thats why Naveen Patnaik broke his alliance with BJP.

One must remember the political idea of India is essentially brahminical with strong baniya support.Until 1990,the public sector controlled the commanding heights of the economy.A strong consensual leadership which accomodated dominant peasant castes(reddys,marathas,jats in some regions,rajputs in many regions,jutt sikhs),odisha,assam,influential elements in Punjab,KL,TN was developed by Congress.

The challenge surprisingly came from Eastern UP.Chandrashekhar and VP Singh were both rajputs.They had high positions in Congress.Yet they were disgruntled and why we do not know exactly.What more could the Cong have done to accomodate rajputs in UP,Himachal,Jammu,MP? The Cong was committed to a democratic India.The Cong supported Indian capital.Indian capital financed Congress coffers.

When Mandal killed old 'socialism' and Rajiv was assasinated in TN,PVNR a southern brahmin changed course.But this change was skilfuly sold through a khatri sikh than a savarna hindu.OBC/dominant caste/rajput/OBC/dalit interests were not amused in power going to corporate savarna India away from the demographic majority.

Sitaram Kesari/Vazhapadi Ramamurthi(vanniar)/Undie Tiwary/Arjun Singh were aghast at 'socialism' being rolled back.Shri Deve Gowda was the 'reasonable' peasant caste leader who did not hate brahmanas or Indias Hindu traditions.He was brought down by GK Moopanar/Sitaram Kesari who couldnt countennance their losing importance for these old satraps had supported Congress against the main currents in their states(Mandal/dravidian politics).PVNR had contempt for Sitaram Kesari/GK Moopanar/Jayanthi Natarajan/PC types who in PVNRS eyes were just old baggage.But thats India.The Undie Tiwary/Arjun Singh/Jayanthi Natarajan/GK Moopanar were people who had supported the idea of India during decades of nation building.We call it Anaadi Karma.People enjoy the fruits of the pas.

In ancient times,India was defended by rajputs.The moopanars and mudaliars were the strongest supporters of orthodox hinduism in TN when there was no democracy,no modern industry/IT-vity.It was much easier for a brahmana landowner to call for land reform in 1950 than a rajput feudal because a brahmana was looking forward to the 'idea of India' given his intellectual/spiritual frame.It would be much more difficult for a rajput feudal to accept dalit reservation or corporate nabobs.VP Singh who opposed the Ambanis was at home with TDP and DMK.He claimed that Rajiv did not understand dravidian pride.Like a thakur,he said that businessmen cannot override politicians.In ancient India,the kshatriya who defended the land was higher than a vaishya.We might talk of democracy etc but there are million people with million views of India.

1)The American historian Walter Lipson writing in the context of Russian revolution remarked that the mainsprings of human conduct did not change because of the revolution.The farmers still sought fertile land with better soil,better irrigation and personal services like chaffeurs were utilised by the leaders.

Karl Marx wrote that politicians exploit history for injustices of the past rather than for dreams of future.Is not BJP guilty of raking up RJB when muslims had been reduced to the margins in 1980s?Its as guilty as DMK which used history in a selective way.

2)In Advaita,theres a concept called 'Svaatmaanupreethi"(Sva-atma-anupreethi) The term is self-explanatory.We care most for our own selves.An ignorant person identifies atma with body.A better person with buddhi.We identify ourselves with families,regions,languages etc.

A Jnani sees the atman everywhere(they say).In the domain of politics,it is about identification with land,its people and its about power to enforce ones ideals,good or half-baked.Indian people have multiple narratives(Even something as fundamental as creation,the Naasadiya Suktha says (rightly) that no one can talk about creation,for the seers too came after creation).We are constrained by our diversity.We are constrained by constitutional provisions for dalits,OBCs.We have multiple visions of India.Add to it dangerous minority appeasement.

I dont think southern TN is any special case.I happen to know this place fairly well.It will NOT be hold out if theres a genuine national movement.Bharathiyar was from this place,just to give a sense of this region.It will be a part of a genuine national movement.The Congress has the great advantage,it was the main playeracross India during freedom struggle and Indian renaissance and has painstakingly built alliances and responded to multiple pulls and pressures within Hindu society.No doubt they have made mistakes but they had no readymade template before them.

Rant over.Not meant as diatribe against North India,but just to state certain political realities.

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3643
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby Neela » 02 Jan 2013 21:32

I don't know which of the choicest refined stuff induces megalomaniacal visions ( of claiming to represent all of TN and speaking for it) . Boy does it work well or what!
BTW, just called up the producers of my B$hit-o-meter to re-calibrate and add two brand spanking new levels - "Surprised youtube cat level" and "Get-the-faq-outta-here"


NM and JJ have been allies in the political space from some time now. Not new! If the people of TN were so apprehensive of NM, they should not have voted her into power in 2011 as she is guilty by association. Would JJ go out and be seen on the same dais as NM if this were a serious issue with the TN populace.

It takes imagination and b$ to come up with weird stories....but my B$hit-o-meter never lies! 8) . let that be known!

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5835
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby vishvak » 02 Jan 2013 22:04

If someone can do better, he has to go about convincing that he can not do worse in all scenarios. That is how the logic is however the logic itself is selective. The prince Raul has not been a CM of any state and does not have to prove it. Instead of CMs, who have performed well in individual states, get together for country we have to go about proving how inappropriate any scenario but not seeing what is going on currently and what looks like in future as could be done by the prince Raul.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54430
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby ramana » 02 Jan 2013 22:17

svenkat wrote:I dont think GJ and TN have any problem with each other.The problems could be
1)The most dynamic business classes are in North India-the savarna vaishyas.There could be fear that North Indian business people will overwhelm south indian chettiars,chettys,shettys,naadars,gounders.
2)The huge influx of hindi speaking people into south india and conflict between indigenous labourers and north indian labourers.
3)The same tension if small businessmen start migrating into South India.
4)At a social level,North Indian popular culture overwhelming south indian films etc.

These fears exist in Assam,Bengal,Punjab and also among people in Jharkhand.Thats why Naveen Patnaik broke his alliance with BJP.

One must remember the political idea of India is essentially brahminical with strong baniya support.Until 1990,the public sector controlled the commanding heights of the economy.A strong consensual leadership which accomodated dominant peasant castes(reddys,marathas,jats in some regions,rajputs in many regions,jutt sikhs),odisha,assam,influential elements in Punjab,KL,TN was developed by Congress.

The challenge surprisingly came from Eastern UP.Chandrashekhar and VP Singh were both rajputs.They had high positions in Congress.Yet they were disgruntled and why we do not know exactly.What more could the Cong have done to accomodate rajputs in UP,Himachal,Jammu,MP? The Cong was committed to a democratic India.The Cong supported Indian capital.Indian capital financed Congress coffers.

When Mandal killed old 'socialism' and Rajiv was assasinated in TN,PVNR a southern brahmin changed course.But this change was skilfuly sold through a khatri sikh than a savarna hindu.OBC/dominant caste/rajput/OBC/dalit interests were not amused in power going to corporate savarna India away from the demographic majority.

Sitaram Kesari/Vazhapadi Ramamurthi(vanniar)/Undie Tiwary/Arjun Singh were aghast at 'socialism' being rolled back.Shri Deve Gowda was the 'reasonable' peasant caste leader who did not hate brahmanas or Indias Hindu traditions.He was brought down by GK Moopanar/Sitaram Kesari who couldnt countennance their losing importance for these old satraps had supported Congress against the main currents in their states(Mandal/dravidian politics).PVNR had contempt for Sitaram Kesari/GK Moopanar/Jayanthi Natarajan/PC types who in PVNRS eyes were just old baggage.But thats India.The Undie Tiwary/Arjun Singh/Jayanthi Natarajan/GK Moopanar were people who had supported the idea of India during decades of nation building.We call it Anaadi Karma.People enjoy the fruits of the pas.

In ancient times,India was defended by rajputs.The moopanars and mudaliars were the strongest supporters of orthodox hinduism in TN when there was no democracy,no modern industry/IT-vity.It was much easier for a brahmana landowner to call for land reform in 1950 than a rajput feudal because a brahmana was looking forward to the 'idea of India' given his intellectual/spiritual frame.It would be much more difficult for a rajput feudal to accept dalit reservation or corporate nabobs.VP Singh who opposed the Ambanis was at home with TDP and DMK.He claimed that Rajiv did not understand dravidian pride.Like a thakur,he said that businessmen cannot override politicians.In ancient India,the kshatriya who defended the land was higher than a vaishya.We might talk of democracy etc but there are million people with million views of India.

1)The American historian Walter Lipson writing in the context of Russian revolution remarked that the mainsprings of human conduct did not change because of the revolution.The farmers still sought fertile land with better soil,better irrigation and personal services like chaffeurs were utilised by the leaders.

Karl Marx wrote that politicians exploit history for injustices of the past rather than for dreams of future.Is not BJP guilty of raking up RJB when muslims had been reduced to the margins in 1980s?Its as guilty as DMK which used history in a selective way.

2)In Advaita,theres a concept called 'Svaatmaanupreethi"(Sva-atma-anupreethi) The term is self-explanatory.We care most for our own selves.An ignorant person identifies atma with body.A better person with buddhi.We identify ourselves with families,regions,languages etc.

A Jnani sees the atman everywhere(they say).In the domain of politics,it is about identification with land,its people and its about power to enforce ones ideals,good or half-baked.Indian people have multiple narratives(Even something as fundamental as creation,the Naasadiya Suktha says (rightly) that no one can talk about creation,for the seers too came after creation).We are constrained by our diversity.We are constrained by constitutional provisions for dalits,OBCs.We have multiple visions of India.Add to it dangerous minority appeasement.

I dont think southern TN is any special case.I happen to know this place fairly well.It will NOT be hold out if theres a genuine national movement.Bharathiyar was from this place,just to give a sense of this region.It will be a part of a genuine national movement.The Congress has the great advantage,it was the main playeracross India during freedom struggle and Indian renaissance and has painstakingly built alliances and responded to multiple pulls and pressures within Hindu society.No doubt they have made mistakes but they had no readymade template before them.

Rant over.Not meant as diatribe against North India,but just to state certain political realities.



Its not a rant and deserves a reply at leisure.

ramana

johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby johneeG » 02 Jan 2013 22:34

Neela wrote:I don't know which of the choicest refined stuff induces megalomaniacal visions ( of claiming to represent all of TN and speaking for it) . Boy does it work well or what!
BTW, just called up the producers of my B$hit-o-meter to re-calibrate and add two brand spanking new levels - "Surprised youtube cat level" and "Get-the-faq-outta-here"


NM and JJ have been allies in the political space from some time now. Not new! If the people of TN were so apprehensive of NM, they should not have voted her into power in 2011 as she is guilty by association. Would JJ go out and be seen on the same dais as NM if this were a serious issue with the TN populace.

It takes imagination and b$ to come up with weird stories....but my B$hit-o-meter never lies! 8) . let that be known!


:rotfl: :mrgreen:

---
I think Modi becoming PM is more easy than many people think. The critical point is the Modi enjoys the support of business networks(particularly the big sharks). As far as I know, Tata endorsed him for PM-ship. Ambanis are gujjus anyway. And if push comes to shove, SP can be made to support through chota bhai. Jaya supports Modi. Most of the NDA has kept quiet(except Nitis), which means they are fine with Modi candidature.

Apart from all these calculations, Modi enjoys real public support. Not just in Guj, but across India. This can really make a 20-seat(or even more) impact for BJP. That means, BJP can win additional 20 seat, if Modi is the PM. Many non-BJP voters are enthusiastic about Modi for PM.

Finally, even the videsi players like UK and US seem to be fine with Modi for PM.

In short, Modi has more chances of winning than many of his supporters and opposers think.

There are two parties: JDU and TDP that are going pawki by the day. The seculars would be hoping that these two play the spoilsport.

chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby chaanakya » 02 Jan 2013 22:56

Muppalla wrote:
chaanakya wrote:It is a fit case for Revision Petition before a larger bench raising constitutional questions and therefore to be heard before a Constitutional Bench. Matter may not end here as the Judgement is apparently self contradictory.


Will that give a stay to current appointment? Otherwise Modi will be targetted to put him in jail before he can be made PM candidate.


Sc might give stay pending determination of constitutional questions. But it all depends on Judges .

ShyamSP
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2493
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby ShyamSP » 02 Jan 2013 23:51

johneeG wrote:
Neela wrote:I don't know which of the choicest refined stuff induces megalomaniacal visions ( of claiming to represent all of TN and speaking for it) . Boy does it work well or what!
BTW, just called up the producers of my B$hit-o-meter to re-calibrate and add two brand spanking new levels - "Surprised youtube cat level" and "Get-the-faq-outta-here"


NM and JJ have been allies in the political space from some time now. Not new! If the people of TN were so apprehensive of NM, they should not have voted her into power in 2011 as she is guilty by association. Would JJ go out and be seen on the same dais as NM if this were a serious issue with the TN populace.

It takes imagination and b$ to come up with weird stories....but my B$hit-o-meter never lies! 8) . let that be known!


:rotfl: :mrgreen:

---
I think Modi becoming PM is more easy than many people think. The critical point is the Modi enjoys the support of business networks(particularly the big sharks). As far as I know, Tata endorsed him for PM-ship. Ambanis are gujjus anyway. And if push comes to shove, SP can be made to support through chota bhai. Jaya supports Modi. Most of the NDA has kept quiet(except Nitis), which means they are fine with Modi candidature.

Apart from all these calculations, Modi enjoys real public support. Not just in Guj, but across India. This can really make a 20-seat(or even more) impact for BJP. That means, BJP can win additional 20 seat, if Modi is the PM. Many non-BJP voters are enthusiastic about Modi for PM.

Finally, even the videsi players like UK and US seem to be fine with Modi for PM.

In short, Modi has more chances of winning than many of his supporters and opposers think.

There are two parties: JDU and TDP that are going pawki by the day. The seculars would be hoping that these two play the spoilsport.


I don't know if you follow elections thread. TDP doesn't fetch much votes with (p)secular politics and can't play spoilsport with respect to BJP as both BJP and TDP are mutually exclusive in terms of vote banks as of now (may have had common votebank in the past).

TDP is extremely boxed in by INC which sliced AP into regional, religious, caste votebanks to extreme. Any public support to BJP by TDP is unnecessary till elections as such deal can be directed to net loss for them by INC. BJP has to show they can win more seats and bring INC seats down, all non-congress parties will automatically come to its support. They need to fix their own stupidity (KA and UP for example) than cribbing on JDU, TDP, and other potential allies.

TDP is extremely careful with their strategies and tactics and even wording which can be even seen in recent Telangana all-party meeting by home minister Shinde.

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Postby member_20317 » 03 Jan 2013 00:13

ramana wrote:
Its not a rant and deserves a reply at leisure.

ramana




Yes, but where does any reasonable man start.

svenkat ji, wrote an years supply of newspaper concentrate. :lol:


Return to “BR Nostalgia Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest