BJP is BJP, no matter how you split your and other's hair.It was a "broad tent" party. Yes. It was so as a legacy of the run up to independence and the freedom struggle itself. Once that unifying goal was achieved it devolved into a schizophrenic party with no real set ideology beyond that of individuals who could grab power. Enough that half way through Indira Gandhi could ram through a "socialist" into the description of our country in the constitution for electoral calculations. Narrow political expediency triumphing over everything. That pretty much defines the Congress since then. The NAC, an extra-constitutional body (paid for by the tax payer) to generate policies for maximum short term gains, is the natural evolution of the path of the Congress. In it's current form it's basically royalty(the party leadership is choc-a-bloc with former rajahs and the MSA "My friends, Her Majesty's ministers type) having exchanged their crowns for the Gandhi topi.vina wrote:That is a mis characterization of the Congress, which traditionally was a "broad tent" org, which had all shades of opinion in it. Nutters like Diggy and Doofus Aiyer are a product of the 70s perversion of the Congress and lets face it, the failure of AB Vajpayee to win a second term (largely due to the decimation of the TDP) and the consequent stick the reforms got as politically non saleable , and the UPA win for the 2nd term on the back of the MNREGA and giveaways , basically boosted the "leftist" wing in Congress (and the NAC nutters went beyond all control). Now in hindsight, it is clear that the UPA -I win was due to the back of the strong economy , the base for which was laid during the Vajpayee year reforms and it just coasted along on good global macro tailwinds.
I'll say this again. In a democracy you can't keep looking for perfect solutions, and insist that you'll take the obvious bad to the uncertain good. I'd take a Modi held back by the lunatic right to a show entirely run by the lunatic left.Trouble with Modi Aayega and everything will be fine (I listened to Modi on TV, very impressive and persuasive) is that , India doesn't have a presidential form of govt. Modi will be severely limited in what he can do, and will first have to deal with the luddites within the RSS camp itself (like Vajpyaee had to do with the likes of Dattopant Thengdi) .
When indegenious kings and kingdoms exististed before the downfall of India to invasions everyone lived with some kind of pride for whatever they did. Whether one is a sanskrit scolar or a mininster or a pot maker or a trader, apart for human competetion there was never a loss of pride. In otherwords, there was never a insecurity in identification for oneself a role in the society.anjan wrote: What is it that so worries you about a Modi government that you'd rather pick the Congress and desperately hope that it turns from the balls out cuckoo crazy path that it's been on for the last 4 decades? I'm trying to understand because I've seen this in lot sof my friends and they never articulate a clear reason.
To the idea that with Pranab Mukherjee gone it's all going to be sunshine and roses I have only one things to say: Food Security Bill.
Pretty much same thing.Muppalla wrote:When indegenious kings and kingdoms exististed before the downfall of India to invasions everyone lived with some kind of pride for whatever they did. Whether one is a sanskrit scolar or a mininster or a pot maker or a trader, apart for human competetion there was never a loss of pride. In otherwords, there was never a insecurity in identification for oneself a role in the society.anjan wrote: What is it that so worries you about a Modi government that you'd rather pick the Congress and desperately hope that it turns from the balls out cuckoo crazy path that it's been on for the last 4 decades? I'm trying to understand because I've seen this in lot sof my friends and they never articulate a clear reason.
To the idea that with Pranab Mukherjee gone it's all going to be sunshine and roses I have only one things to say: Food Security Bill.
Then came the invasions. The structures got disrupted and people started scrambling for an existential role in the society. The invaders needed local help in bringing the order to the scrambling society. This local help is from those who has knowledge of language, translation, geography and knowledge of the society. This "local help" was given special status in the midst of hundereds of years of slavery. This "local help" initially learnt arabic, urdu and later the first to learn English. This the same class later became brown sahebs and then Congress party.
The aura that one gets being in the so called "elite" or being associated to the so called "elite/eglatarian society" is in the imagination of themselves in such a way so that the rest of the society is always visible as second class citizenry. This so called elite always thinks that they are natural leaders and rest shoud listen and follow and not get into the roles that they are not fit since the times of great great forefathers.
This reason is something that cannot be openly expressable in the liberal/democratic and open equal society. My thing is always has to be assumed an inch taller than yours even if when measured with a scale actually falls short by a centimeter is the attitude and hence it is un-expressable.
Hence Sonia is always great. Modi is alway bad. Take a spreadsheet and prove it wrong by putting numbers but still it is not right. Period. Because it is liberal/democratic society and openly you question with proofs, it is all the fault of Pranab Da but the lungi man is superb with dreams only budgets.
It may be remembered that Pandit Nehru was by no means a unique character. Nor is Nehruism a unique phenomenon for that matter. Such weak minded persons and such subservient thought processes have been seen in all societies that have suffered the misfortune of being conquered and subjected to alien rule for some time. There are always people in all societies who confuse superiority of armed might with superiority of culture, who start despising themselves as belonging to an inferior breed and end by taking to the ways of the conqueror in order to regain self confidence, who begin finding faults with everything they have inherited from their forefathers, and who finally join hands with every force and factor which is out to subvert their ancestral society. Viewed in this perspective, Pandit Nehru was no more than a self alienated Hindu, and Nehruism is not much more than Hindubaiting born out of and sustained by a deep seated sense of inferiority vis a vis Islam, Christianity, and the modern West.
Muslim rule in medieval India had produced a whole class of such self alienated Hindus. They had interpreted the superiority of Muslim arms as symbolic of the superiority of Muslim culture. Over a period of time, they had come to think and behave like the conquerors and to look down upon their own people. They were most happy when employed in some Muslim establishment so that they might pass as members of the ruling elite. The only thing that could be said in their favour was that, for one reason or the other, they did not convert to Islam and merge themselves completely in Muslim society. But for the same reason, they had become Trojan horses of Islamic imperialism, and worked for pulling down the cultural defences of their own people.
The same class walked over to the British side when British arms became triumphant. They retained most of those and Hindu prejudices which they had borrowed from their Muslim masters, and cultivated some more which were contributed by the British establishment and the Christian missions. That is how the British rule became a divine dispensation for them. The most typical product of this double process was Raja Ram Mohun Roy.
Fortunately for Hindu society, however, the self alienated Hindu had not become a dominant factor during the Muslim rule. His class was confined to the urban centres where alone Muslim influence was present in a significant measure. The number of this ******** breed was few and far between in the countryside where Muslim rule had never struck strong roots. Secondly, the capacity of Islam for manipulating human minds by means of ideological warfare was less than poor. It worked mostly by means of brute force, and aroused strong resistance. Finally, throughout the period of Muslim rule, the education of Hindu children had remained in Hindu hands by and large. So the self alienated Hindu existed and functioned only on the margins of Hindu society, and seldom in the mainstream.
All this changed with the coming of the British conquerors and the Christian missionaries. Their influence was not confined to the urban centres because their outposts had spread to the countryside as well. Secondly, they were equipped with a stock of ideas and the means for communicating them which were far more competent as compared to the corresponding equipment of Islam. And what made the big difference in the long run was that the education of Hindu children was taken over by the imperialist and the missionary establishments. As a cumulative result, the crop of self alienated Hindus multiplied fast and several fold. Add to that the blitzkrieg against authentic Hindus and in favour of the selfalienated Hindus mounted by the Communist apparatus built up by Soviet imperialism. It is no less than a wonder in human history that Hindu society and culture not only survived the storm, but also produced a counter attack under Maharshi Dayananda, Swami Vivekananda, Sri Aurobindo and Mahatma Gandhi such as earned for them the esteem of the world at large. Even so, the self alienated Hindus continued to multiply and flourish in a cultural miliu mostly dominated by the modem West. And they came to the top in the post independence period when no stalwart of the Hindu resurgence remained on the scene.
http://voiceofdharma.org/books/hibh/ch9.htm
Janata Dal-United on Thursday made it clear that it has no plans to support the united Progressive Alliance f the Centre grants special status to Bihar, saying there is no question of any ‘bargain’ in the matter.
JD-U will welcome any move by the Centre to grant special status to Bihar, but it does not mean that the party will break out of the National Democratic Alliance coalition, JD-U spokesperson and general secretary K C Tyagi told reporters in New Delhi [ Images ].
"Granting special status to Bihar on the basis of its backwardness is not a matter of bargain. It is Bihar's right and not a bargain. Whether it is the UPA or the NDA, other backward states should also get such a status. It is the responsibility of the Central government," he said.
The JD-U leader denied that his party was discussing any proposal to extend support to the UPA government if special status is accorded to Bihar.
"If the UPA government does this (granting special status to Bihar), for which we have got signals during the budget session, we will welcome this. But JD-U has no such proposal to support UPA or Congress in lieu of this," he said.
With the DMK pulling out its 18 members of Parliament recently over Lankan Tamils issue, the strength of the UPA in the Lok Sabha was reduced to 224, but it enjoys the support of 281 MPs, including those of outside supporting parties Samajwadi Party (22) and the Bahujan Samaj Party (21).
The Lok Sabha has 539 MPs at present as four seats are vacant. The half-way mark is 270. JD-U has 20 MPs in Lok Sabha.
Tyagi also sought to clarify that Presidential election, during which JD-U supported UPA candidate Pranab Mukherjee [ Images ] instead of NDA nominee P A Sangma, was an exception.
"There are exceptions such as the Presidential elections during which JD(U) decided to support Pranab Mukherjee on the basis of his seniority and capability in place of Sangma. In that case, we and Shiv Sena [ Images ] voted against NDA. But that does not mean that we are out of NDA," he said.
Tyagi said his party will lend its support for any good decision or work by the present dispensation.
"Our party has supported the law prepared to protect women in the Rajya Sabha. But that does not mean we are out of NDA. If government does anything good, for which there is very little possibility, then we will support it," he said.
Tyagi also said he has been nominated by his party to negotiate with the BJP over the issue of seat sharing during Karnataka [ Images ] assembly polls in May.
"Obviously coalitions face issues," the Prime Minister said when asked if his government had weakened after the exit of DMK and the alliance's resort to outside support from the SP and the BSP.
Wrong question. Who are the millions of people in the villages in the far off places vote?RamaY wrote:SwamyG garu
Imagine 2014 race is between Rahul Gandhi led INC and say Bandaru Laxman led BJP. Who, as an educated and progressive indian, would you vote for?
NM is a polarizing person for who, You or common Indian or a S.TN-Vasi?
It is just a political term. In TN MuKa and JJ are polarizing, while lesser political figures are less.The term polarization from political science. There, it is a measure of the electorate's response to a political figure or position;[1] it is not an assessment of, or a value judgment upon, a political figure. It does not mean that a political figure is necessarily unelectable.[2] Political figures can receive a polarized response from the public through actions of their own,[3] through historical trends or accidents,[3] or due to external forces such as media bias.
People reject BJP because BJP cannot do perception management. INC can do it in spades, its in their blood.RajeshA wrote:SwamyG ji,
I guess RamaY ji is trying to say that the people themselves need to be aware what is best for Bharat. INC and BJP are treated with two sets of standards. While INC can get away with murder, people reject BJP simply for having a public piss.
RamaY ji is probably saying people need to think not on the lines of "Show me what you got?" but rather "We know what you're not!". INC has already proven to be disastrous.
He is telling to the dynasty that he has some aces. We should read back BRF discussion in the early pages of 2G thread. He may be a puppet to the world but in reality he himself emerged as a power center.ramana wrote:HS as far as scuttle butt MMS wants full term so he can go down in history and he has the babucracy behind him to achieve this.
But as cabbages and kings its right now in soft(Mulayam) hands!!!!
And Mulayam will pull them down if he thinks he has a chance to laed a future third front.
So what would Chankaya do?
RamaY wrote:SwamyG garu
Imagine 2014 race is between Rahul Gandhi led INC and say Bandaru Laxman led BJP. Who, as an educated and progressive indian, would you vote for?
NM is a polarizing person for who, You or common Indian or a S.TN-Vasi?
SwamyG wrote: Wrong question. Who are the millions of people in the villages in the far off places vote?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarization_(politics)
It is just a political term. In TN MuKa and JJ are polarizing, while lesser political figures are less.The term polarization from political science. There, it is a measure of the electorate's response to a political figure or position;[1] it is not an assessment of, or a value judgment upon, a political figure. It does not mean that a political figure is necessarily unelectable.[2] Political figures can receive a polarized response from the public through actions of their own,[3] through historical trends or accidents,[3] or due to external forces such as media bias.
SwamyG garumerlin wrote:People reject BJP because BJP cannot do perception management. INC can do it in spades, its in their blood.RajeshA wrote:SwamyG ji,
I guess RamaY ji is trying to say that the people themselves need to be aware what is best for Bharat. INC and BJP are treated with two sets of standards. While INC can get away with murder, people reject BJP simply for having a public piss.
RamaY ji is probably saying people need to think not on the lines of "Show me what you got?" but rather "We know what you're not!". INC has already proven to be disastrous.
Are they all "english speaking elite?". Do they want to "look sickular"? I ran into one elite, Sonia is bad, but Modi is all very bad. First they are ignorant, and then they are arrogant (because they are better off compared to somebody else) and hence are stupid.anjan wrote:What is it that so worries you about a Modi government that you'd rather pick the Congress and desperately hope that it turns from the balls out cuckoo crazy path that it's been on for the last 4 decades? I'm trying to understand because I've seen this in lot sof my friends and they never articulate a clear reason.
So let us call Rahul Polarizing.SwamyG wrote:It is just a political term. In TN MuKa and JJ are polarizing, while lesser political figures are less.
Chandrababu Naidu promises Gujarat model development in Andhra Pradesh
Kakinada: The Telugu Desam Party chief N. Chandrababu Naidu on Friday said that he will develop Andhra Pradesh on the Gujarat model, if he is voted back to power. He was all praise for Gujarat’s progress at several meetings, including the party’s foundation day celebrations.
Addressing the people in the villages at Pedapudi and Domada during his padayatra, Mr Naidu said that when he was in power, Andhra Pradesh progressed and states like Bihar and Gujarat adopted his policies. However, during the Congress regime, AP has regressed by 10 years, he said.
The TDP chief said that both the Congress and YSR Congress are working in collusion. The YSRC is pretending to be a foe of the ruling Congress in the state and extending support to the Congress in New Delhi, he said, adding, the people of the state should see through this game plan of the two parties. He said that he would make all efforts to revive the past glory of TDP and the state would once again play a role at the national level.
Referring to deserters, Mr Naidu said it was good riddance and the exit of such people would help the party to strengthen itself with new faces.
During Mr Naidu’s padayatra, women at Pedapudi and Domada villages complained about power bills, gas and other matters. Mr told them to expect a power tariff hike from April 1. He called upon them to defeat the Congress, and not encourage the YSR Congress, which has emptied the state’s coffers.
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/130330/n ... ent-andhra
I thought the basic precept of democracy was that it is a two way street?SwamyG wrote:Rama: It is one of the most ridiculous ideas I have read in BRF. So you expect people to give confidence to a national party?
munna wrote:Loh Purushji started to cultivate his strategic pawns towards the fag end of ABV premiership in order to undertake a praetorian coup. Defeated by fate LP-ji did not rest one bit and converted BJP into a place where pliability was prized over winnability and it continues till date.
munna wrote:Gadkari tried to bring changes and was partly successful in it but he somehow underestimated the might of entrenched Dilli establishment of the party to dislodge him. Modi's brilliance lies in his ability to strike fear into LP's political camp, suppress AJ's media friends, cultivate SS and blunt dismissal of VN/AK types. No other leader in BJP can do that and survive, a litany of leaders were side lined and stifled within the party between 2008 to 2012.
Muppalla wrote:But Gadkari and Mohan Bhagawat has problems too. See no one like a no-nonsense types because even in the truthfulness there is an utter fear that this man will dump everyone and the system itself.
Muppalla wrote:Possible but we are all looking for chanikanism in everything done by BJP folks. I totally disagree in this thought process. Power brokering, sabotage to kill their own party by being at the top is a fact. The way folks explain it has variations. This is the cultural emerged under the leadership of Advani and later Rajnath Singh. Things did get corrected but massive sabotage even by colluding with congress happened in Karnataka.
Right after that discussion, I had googled "Chitpawans". What I found is exactly what AtriJi said:munna wrote:Regarding the RSS and its cold reception to NaMo one must keep in mind that they are designed to prevent a hijack of the organization. They are not suited for tail end of the bell curve operations, by design they select mediocrity over extremes. Such is the nature of the beast.
Basically Chitpawans have been on receiving end. So preference for Chitpawans is because of that. I also think that LKA's actions(if what RSS-insder have said is true) are not very different, LKA 1.0 worked very hard for BJP and deserved to be PM… hawala bomb made sure that he could not become PM and since then LKA 2.0 is doing everything that there are no more Hawala 2.0.Atri wrote:As far as I understand RSS (which clearly much less than many gurus here), there are lot of wheels within wheels..
I am VERY afraid that history may repeat. LKA would do what Narsimha Rao(if claims are true) did… and I have STRONG feeling that SS == ABV.Atri wrote:As far as LKA is concerned, like gollum, is yet to play his final scene on the stage before he makes the exit.. and his "cue" is not far away. I am keen to watch him "act" one last time..
I think RSS-insider was more buoyant than last time. Last time he was VERY confident that Modi does not have a chance.SwamyG wrote:BJP insiders are not buoyant. One reason why INC is care free
Modi is working hard, he is taking a HUGE risk. In fact, I had asked RSS-insider whether he would campaign in Karnataka(which is a trap). His response: "If he wants to be PM then he have to campaign in states where BJP would not do well".RamaY wrote:So even at the chance of getting into power and more importantly serving Bharat the most critical time, some of BJP insiders are not working hard just because they have to accept NM's leadership and work in his team?
ROFL, last time I had same reaction. What is the point of being "party with a difference" when party does not win.RamaY wrote:What kind of party with difference is this?
It is hard to tell whether they are happy or unhappy.. But a) it does not hurt if Modi gets more time to campaign all over India and b) I think Modi said somewhere that BJP should not work in any way to divide anti-Cong votes anywhere.SwamyG wrote:The point is why are BJP leaders not so happy about the elections, with the kind of corruption and scandals INC has been involved they should have 2014 in pocket. I think it is because people do not vote on development plank or issues alone. The foot soldiers realize their party is not really different. It starts from the top, the leaders have to have a vision for India and its people.
If BJP does not pitch Modi, then Modi should break away no point in staying with a characterless organization. Fight alone, and see what may happen. Hopefully it does not come down to that, and BJP has some sense. I have said it, it boils down to alliances and grassroots work. BJP has been caught napping again, I see no work in TN. It should have worked to gain 5-10 seats in TN, but after 2009 it did zilch. Stupid party.
That is possible. In fact this was my reaction to lot of anti-Modi stuff he told me(does not work with others etc)…Sanku wrote:Anmol-ji --> if he knows that you are going to put his words in public space then you must be careful that he could have been deliberately passing off misinformation.
May be he is scared of what polarization caused by Modi contesting from UP would do to his votebank.Pratyush wrote:The objective is to confuse the so called Saffron vote.
I have no idea, but that is what RSS-man told me. But is Narsimha Rao brahmin ?Atri wrote:Anmol ji,
Gadkari and Bhagwat (and other rss chiefs) are not chitpavans. They belong to the other denomination of MH brahmin community. Chitpavans have sadly become persona non grata since Nathuram Godse in Indian sociopolity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P._V._Narasimha_Raoanmol wrote:I have no idea, but that is what RSS-man told me. But is Narsimha Rao brahmin ?Atri wrote:Anmol ji,
Gadkari and Bhagwat (and other rss chiefs) are not chitpavans. They belong to the other denomination of MH brahmin community. Chitpavans have sadly become persona non grata since Nathuram Godse in Indian sociopolity.
P.V. Narasimha Rao had "humble social origins".[7] He was born in 28 June 1921 at Lakkampally[citation needed] village near Narsampet in Warangal District to a Telugu Karanam family. At the age of 3 years he was adopted and brought up to Vangara village in the present-day Karimnagar district of Andhra Pradesh (then part of Hyderabad State).[1][7] His father P. Ranga Rao and mother Rukminiamma hailed from agrarian families.[7]
Yes Sir, he is not a Brahmin. I suspect your RSS contact is either deliberately feeding you junk, or is a person trying to show himself as much better connected than he is (higher in the core of the wheels within wheels) -- since he has certainly made a number of points which are not correct.anmol wrote:@SankuJi,
Read the wiki article, and that paragraph... "agrarian families" are usually not brahmin.
That is possible and have suspected that, but as far as "connected" is concerned he is certainly connected. He served for ABV and worked with Brajesh Mishra.(similar post). Some time back he had gone to Brajesh Mishra's funeral so I didn't ask about him... but soon I would ask about rumors around Rahul Baba's arrested and BM's Italian Damaad.Sanku wrote:deliberately feeding you junk
Sahi to keh raha hai, mulayam will be buried in the polls. His UP governance is horrendous and the statewide negative revulsion will cross over to the national level.Pratyush wrote:Beni predicts ‘funeral procession’ for SP in 2014 LS polls
the drama continues.............
I want to say BJP will rise from ashes in UP but scared to say. This is where Modi from Lucknow is an earthquake.mahadevbhu wrote:Sahi to keh raha hai, mulayam will be buried in the polls. His UP governance is horrendous and the statewide negative revulsion will cross over to the national level.Pratyush wrote:Beni predicts ‘funeral procession’ for SP in 2014 LS polls
the drama continues.............
