Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 17 Mar 2013 21:09

Tibet? Good one. Nehru lost Tibet for us, Tibet and this World. There is no more Tibet, it is a Chinese province.

Thriving military-industry complex of Western countries is what has been causing so much takleef all over the World. And now we want India to do the same. All good onlee.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 17 Mar 2013 21:11

SwamyG wrote:One thing I did not like about Modi's vision was India being an arms exporter. Though there are enough nuances and exceptions, where a country will need arms for its protection; I think India should not get into that business any more. In fact it should curtail that. Was it in BRF that I read, many moons ago, that India was one of the two countries to not export arms?

There are plenty of rural schools, run differently. And I am a business trying to make profit by selling them school supplies. I am ready to make school desks, tables, chairs, chalk, blackboard, smart board, printers, computers, uniforms, shoes, lunch boxes, water bottles, eye glasses, ityadi ityadi.....but I am not going to manufacture canes that would be used for punishing students. So is the case with geo-politics, there are plenty of ways to make money let us not make money by selling arms.

We have exported helis to equador. So that we do not export is nonsense, that we cannot for the most part is true.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 17 Mar 2013 21:13

Virupaksha: I realize my post's mistake. What I meant to say was once upon a time India did not export, and then it started to export. I see that my post does not capture that distinction clearly. Moi mistake onlee. Sorry.

member_23686 · Post by **member_23686** » 17 Mar 2013 21:14

muraliravi wrote:Sanku ji and Muppalla ji,

Thanks for seeing my viewpoint. I apologize if whined a lot. But the moot point which i dont understand is, being the shrewd politician that NaMo is, he committed 2 mistakes.

1. Unnecessary mention of ajmer and haji stuff, he could avoided hindu stuff also, which would have been more typical of Namo.

2. Even the 1st mistake maybe tolerable based your feedback so far, but here is the gem screwup totally un-Namo-like: If there is increasing trade with pakistan, pakistan will reduce its harkatein. Oh c'mon, is the Namo.

while i don't care about namo wanting to run a quran train or church train, i am concerned about the political impact of few things in his speech that can be misquoted. i thought that this aspect would be taken up here but since everyone is discussing "secularism" and whatever, so here it goes, kindly ponder-

things that are creating a bit of discomfort in hard hindutva types-

1. mention of trains to dargahs
2. mention of trains to goa churches
3. talk of public contact between gujarat and karachi

these quotes have taken up a bit of discussion in last three pages on a forum that only reaches a very small part of hindu "core". the impact of these minor quotes will be greater in mainstream where this can be used by the compromised people within bjp and sangh to sow seeds of discontent. they can basically say that look modi is secular so we need to go with some other, or worse- no, pm candidate.

modi's uncompromising stand and unwillingness to give a secular "show" is the reason why he gained such a following in past few years. no one is stopping him from running these trains but why mention namaaz and quran and bahichara with karachi? he could have just accepted the skullcap then, what difference does it make?

i found this against his usual style. the rest of the speech was awesome like always. i'm not going to reject him just because of a very small part of his speech. in fact he can start making secular speeches and he'll still get my vote- because he is the best option we have at present and not because i consider him some sort of messiah.

overall, my case is that there is nothing wrong in his speech technically, but he need to avoid bringing "showpiece" secular elements because it might get used to equate him with advani,and that is not good for us.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 17 Mar 2013 21:15

Swamyg,

Your view is taking non-violence to the extreme and it is a complete distortion of even Gandhi's views - he was always for supporting british wars.
Was US right to export arms to Stalin against Hitler, were they right or wrong?

When we gave arms to Mukti Bahini, were we not exporting arms? So what kind of ideological rubbish is this.

Creating wars just to sell arms is wrong, but selling arms to our allies or for our interest - how and when did that become wrong?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 17 Mar 2013 21:30

I think SwamyG garu is taking his personal views and behavioral patterns and trying to make national policy based on that. Unfortunately the world is not filled with SwamYG garus.

Yes our dream is to convert all humans in SwamyG garus. Even then it is prudent for the state/rulers to carry a big danda and have the capability to export that danda to all corners of the world.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 17 Mar 2013 21:37

SwamyG wrote:Virupaksha: I realize my post's mistake. What I meant to say was once upon a time India did not export, and then it started to export. I see that my post does not capture that distinction clearly. Moi mistake onlee. Sorry.

Even that is wrong. We have exported arms whenever we could.

Ofbs have an - how to buy for foreigners and which customers since a long time
http://ofb.gov.in/index.php?wh=howtobuy&lang=en

http://ofb.gov.in/index.php?wh=customers&lang=en

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 17 Mar 2013 21:43

Sushupti wrote: ....

Since you quoted my post -- Best you kept yourself out of this serious discussion between informed people instead of trolling for eyeballs.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 17 Mar 2013 22:10

Wow......how can you guys be so wrong. I never talked about non-violence. I never said India should adopt pacifism. I never said India should not manufacture arms or defend or even attack others. Where did Gandhi come here? Where did non-violence come into picture? It is a case of trading with some social cause/consequences at the back of our mind.

Seriously, if you have questions ask....do not go based on assumptions. After all this is a discussion forum. We can discuss politely, no?

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 17 Mar 2013 22:23

SwamyG wrote:One thing I did not like about Modi's vision was India being an arms exporter. Though there are enough nuances and exceptions, where a country will need arms for its protection; I think India should not get into that business any more. In fact it should curtail that. Was it in BRF that I read, many moons ago, that India was one of the two countries to not export arms?

There are plenty of rural schools, run differently. And I am a business trying to make profit by selling them school supplies. I am ready to make school desks, tables, chairs, chalk, blackboard, smart board, printers, computers, uniforms, shoes, lunch boxes, water bottles, eye glasses, ityadi ityadi.....but I am not going to manufacture canes that would be used for punishing students. So is the case with geo-politics, there are plenty of ways to make money let us not make money by selling arms.

SwamyG ji,

Lets consider the Dharmic Civilization. Once upon a time it covered an an area from Kazakhstan all the way to the Philippines. Let's say we wish to recreate this civilization with India at its center. Do you think India can offer these countries such a vision? Can we create such a regional security pact, a common market?

Any Civilization has to be able to secure itself. That means all those countries which would become part of an India-centered regional security pact would have to have the necessary weapons to secure themselves. The periphery needs to be secured.

Since we are talking about Westphalian nation-states, we would consider the sale of these weapons to a part of the world, as exports, but if we consider it from a civilizational aspect, it is simply selling in a common market.

When USA is selling some missiles to say Britain, it is can be considered exporting, or it can be considering securing the flanks. It is all a question of perspective.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 17 Mar 2013 22:28

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 17 Mar 2013 22:30

Rajesh:
I agree with the general premise that India has to offer a lot in terms of philosophy, opportunities and market. From a political and strategic perspective too I agree we should strike alliances and cooperate with other countries. You might remember by picture about the Ocean Rim countries in Asia and Africa, and the sphere of influence I talked about way earlier.

I admit your way/perspective is better than Modi's words of exporting arms. But one should not willy-nilly sell arms because of military industrial complex wants the exports.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 17 Mar 2013 22:34

A very good speech. The range of issues covered by Modi were truly magnificent and worthy of a candidate of PM. No other indian politician seems to have ever touched on so many topics with such authority(combined with anecdotes from personal experience). The short movie in the beginning was very informative and also a great idea to blunt(or impress) the potential hostiles(or fence-sitters).

More than the details, I am impressed with the broad vision along with capacity to find innovative solutions to the general problems and pursue them in a win-win manner with an ultimate goal of empowering the people. For this, I think, Modi deserves to be PM of India.

Sanku wrote:
muraliravi wrote:All I am saying is his dialogue was uncalled for.
muraliravi-ji; let me be the exception on the forum and agree with you. It would have been best had he skipped the reference. As someone who has followed each and every speech of Shri Modi, including one he recently made in Udaipur at Maharana Pratap's birth celebrations, I see what you are saying. This is fairly "out of character"

Sanku saar and Muraliravi saar,
I watched the interview after I saw the discussion here. So, I was alert for this particular topic. I don't know whether I would have noticed this if I was not already aware of this discussion. I cannot claim to have followed all his speeches so far. Yet, I do think this is a break from past, in terms of Modi's style.
a) Friendship(and trade) with Pakis will solve the problems.
b) Equal-equal mention of abrahamic creeds along with the indic ones while making a completely unconnected point.

I think there may be following reasons for it(one or all):
a) soft indications to attract the fence-sitters and/or
b) trying to change the image from hardcore hindutva to development and/or
c) speech made by keeping the audience in mind and/or
d) just a slip of tongue.

Maybe one needs to see the next few steps to see whether this is a decisive change of track or just a one off.

Sanku wrote: However this brings me to the larger point -- a number of people have "unrealistic expectations" with BJP and or its leaders. There are deep structural issues, and the solutions are not easily available. This is true of others who have been called names before, and is true now of NaMo. Expect to see more signs of accommodation. A little while back Modi was a important guest in a marriage between the Hindustan Times family and Reliance family.

I agree. I think the real goal of NaMo would be to rectify what has been done by Nahru and his descendents. SVPatel would have become PM. But, Ghandi intervened(most probably the brits are in the background) and foisted Nahru upon India.

I think NaMo is SVP 2.0. His mission is to rectify the mistakes of Nahru. And Nahru's mistakes are mainly in the realm of administration: misgovernment, corruption, dis-empowering the people, nepotism, imbecility, and foreign puppetry.

Nahru's one more contribution is the present version of secularism. In the Nahruvian secularism model, the state is expected to discriminate on the basis of the creed of the people. Secularism in this model work on community level. The majority community and the minority community have to be kept on equal keel, even if the actual numbers vary. That means the privileges and powers given to a community of 80% would be same as that given to a community of 10%. That means privileges and powers enjoyed by individuals within a majority community would have to be lesser than the privileges and powers enjoyed by the individuals within the minority communities. Because in any egalitarian system, a group/community with larger membership will naturally have larger say. But, Nahruvian secularism aims to defeat this process by trying to perpetuate equality of power-dynamics between an overwhelmingly larger community and a small minority. To do this, the state will have to encourage the minorities by pampering them in various ways(even if this sows seeds for anesthetization, segregation and division of society). And the state will have to suppress the legitimate political, religious and social aspirations of the majority community. In this model the state has to actively perpetuate the separate identity of the minority communities i.e. the minority communities must not be allowed to be 'digested' by the majority community culturally. That means the separate culture and identity of minority communities has to be perpetuated by the help of state and society even if they have to oppose natural social evolutionary processes. In short, this is a system that is based on active discrimination. This definition of secularism is is based on injustice, unfairness and discrimination by the state.

NaMo's 'India First' is a one-shot cure to the above model. NaMo's model seems to be based not on communities, but one individuals. NaMo is proposing no discrimination by the state. State will not discriminate among Individuals and individuals should keep 'India first' among all other priorities. This is a good model. In fact, this is what secularism should be.

If NaMo can implement this form of secularism by dislodging the Nahruvian version, that would be great. The mission of NaMo should be to weed out the Kongi system and replace it with a fair, transparent and healthy state that works for the empowerment and welfare of the people and indigenous culture.

Sanku wrote: It would be impossible for a NaMo, a ABV etc to come to power, wave a wand, and completely change the global structure which results in the current dead lock.

saar,
I am not sure ABV can be compared to NaMo. That seems like a wrong example. There is a difference between compromise and corruption(ideologically speaking). Sita Ram Goel attributes ideological corruption to ABV. In fact, Sita Ram Goel seems to say that ABV is like a mole. This is not unique. Many have said that ABV is a 'right man in wrong party'.

Sanku wrote: All said, I would have been much happier if those places were not mentioned.

Me too...

muraliravi wrote:So why did he do it, is he trying to be truly secular, then hell, i dont want that.

Saar ji,
'secularism' was not foisted upon India in one go. So, it won't go in one clean stroke either. 'Secularism' came in phases. Similarly, if it has to go, then it will go in phases.

Modi's phase is about removing the Nahruvian strain. If Modi is successful and establishes it, then the next phase come into picture. What is that phase? Well, it is the same as the situation in Gujarat. Who are the prime opposition of Modi in Gujarat? It is mostly the right-wing people. Why are they opposing him?

The same situation has to happen in India where the Modi's opposition will also be right-wing. Then one can talk about the next level. I think after dealing with Nahruvian corruption(in terms of organizing the state), one then has to deal with Ghandian corruption(at ideological level). Two strains introduced by Ghandi are:
a) Sarva dharma sama bhava
b) ahimsa

Both are quite mischievously named. The first name implictly suggests that there are more than one Dharma and all such 'dharmas' should be viewed equally. Of course, no 'dharma' agrees that there are more than one dharma(dharmic creed). All religions(including Sanatana Dharma/Hinduism), in the world, insist that they alone are correct and others are wrong. So, this equal equal is from a perspective of an outsider who does not subscribe to any religion wholly, nor rejects any religion wholly. This is quite characteristic of Ghandi. Instead of trying to understand things as they really are, he tended to give them whole new interpretation based on his own world view. And this tendency extended to his understanding of all creeds(including Hinduism). His understanding of any creed is not accepted by that creed. His interpretations of what constitutes Hinduism, is not accepted by Hinduism(orthodox schools, Hindu literature or Hindu followers). Similarly, his interpretations of what constitutes X-inity, is not accepted by X-ianity(orthodox schools, literature, followers). But, he was presented to the world and accepted by the west as a Hindu speaker during his life. He himself seems to have claimed to speak on behalf of Hindus. Eventually, this acceptance by the west and self-proclamation seems to have raised his profile among Hindus and now, his version is being presented as a version of Hinduism. This dhimmization of Hindus is the root of the 'secularism'. This was used as a basis by Nahru to peddle his version of 'secularism' which was even more unfair to majority community. This dhimmization was used by Nahru to push reforms ONLY for Hindus while exempting other creeds from this kind of reformation.

Similarly, Ghandi's ideas of Ahimsa are also a form of corruption and need to be weeded out.

But that can be taken up after dealing with the corruptions introduced by the Nahru. I am not sure NaMo is the person to do that. That job may fall on some other person's shoulders.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 17 Mar 2013 22:37

SwamyG wrote: I admit your way/perspective is better than Modi's words of exporting arms. But one should not willy-nilly sell arms because of military industrial complex wants the exports.

SwamyG, this is a speech where in he covered the whole 360 within 2 hours. Clearly it is not possible to cover everything to suitable detail.

I would give him some leeway on exactness, this was more of a vision statement thingy. I however do not share your concern about exports, even if Modi meant what is meant, in the crude simple way, I am all ok with it.

Just saying -- to me the only bit that rankled was unnecessary bringing in of Ajmer Dargah, I will not accept any deep reasons for it I am afraid (Savarkar model, Shia sunni schism etc) -- I see it merely as a nod to reassure others that he understand how to "work with others". Now while this may be understandable & necessary (as I said before) -- to me it is still not acceptable (that a prospective candidate as to show accommodation of this sort)

Chandragupta · Post by **Chandragupta** » 17 Mar 2013 22:43

SwamyG wrote:Rajesh:
I agree with the general premise that India has to offer a lot in terms of philosophy, opportunities and market. From a political and strategic perspective too I agree we should strike alliances and cooperate with other countries. You might remember by picture about the Ocean Rim countries in Asia and Africa, and the sphere of influence I talked about way earlier.

I admit your way/perspective is better than Modi's words of exporting arms. But one should not willy-nilly sell arms because of military industrial complex wants the exports.

Swamy ji, the military industrial complex you're talking about doesn't even exist in India. So let's not talk about hypothetical things here.

What is wrong with India exporting arms to other countries? Just because it has caused some takleef across the world (mind you : not to the exporter themselves but to the third parties i.e. the victims), doesn't mean India should desist. I would very much want to see a new world order led by India as not just a philosophical & dharmic leader but also a leader with a large oiled danda.

This is not going to happen in Modi's time anyways, it will take atleast 50 years for India to catch up & become an A-list military equipment manufacturer/exporter, but I'd be very glad if NaMo takes some steps to set the foundation for such a rise.

Assuming India is not taken over by secular interests by then (by means of outbreeding or compromising the leadership), I see no reason why a thriving military industrial complex in India would end up influencing the polity as much as it does in the west. Simply because India's history is not littered with the blood stains of other cultures & countries and it would remain that way for the good part of future until the Hindus fall.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 17 Mar 2013 22:45

johneeG wrote: But that can be taken up after dealing with the corruptions introduced by the Nahru. I am not sure NaMo is the person to do that. That job may fall on some other person's shoulders.

Excellent post Mahodaya!! (as always)

I do disagree a bit about your views on ABV, in terms of laddered re-establishment of the Indic thought, ABV was in a sense the FIRST ladder of modern India (Savarkar, DD Upadhaya, SP Mukhurjee etc) are essentially pre Independence post Modern foundations.

ABV to me, was a person who is far ahead of the pack, he lived, worked, compromised, fell, rose again and built a structure nearly alone at times, even Shri Advani's contribution in this political battle is second, even if by a whisker.

Modi-ji has at least the advantage of being given a BJPized Gujarat even before he came on the scene.

Modi-ji, is in that sense, to me less of SVP but more of a combination of ABV-Advani in terms of legacy.

These are of course my views only and may be disagreed with, but politely.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 17 Mar 2013 23:05

Lilo wrote:Re:"Bhikari sala"

Sagar ji,
If you heard NaMo's speech he too talks about begging as something far better (and Dharmic) than say rent seeking from the biggies for garnering his election funds. In this case even if Nitish ji is begging he is doing it for a far important purpose to feed and clothe his own people. As Singha ji says these non congressi CMs clamoring for greater share in central funds (i.e ownership over the resources a state generates - all rich states like Guj,TN,Punjab etc are doing this) or for special packages (as in poor but resource rich states - like Bihar and WB) are at least doing their DUTY (aka Raj Dharma).

Oh please don't be so naive that Nitish turd is doing this drama to get a foothold in the national scenario. He has been made to believe that he is not only capable of becoming the PM but is also a great leader

. If he was so great then he wouldn't have needed BJP' backing to warm the CM's kursi, and why even after being a resource rich state is Bihar still so backward ??? This shows a lack of leadership within the Bihari political setup as well as a lack of will within the people of Bihar for development. Whining about development is not going to bring development at your door step, you have to work very hard for that to happen and this is why Gujrat even after being not so blessed in resources is a developed state and Bihar is still a backward one and it will remain one for a long time I am quite sure of that. If a CM and the people of a state want to see there state developing then they will get there state developed. Centre can do ghanta about it. I never had an iota of doubt that Bhikari Kumar was a moron with no skills to show, he looked better only because he was preceded by a person like LALU. When you have something like that as your previous CM then everybody else other than the person will look jolly good only. You want another example look towards WB, before they had CPM and now they have a DIDI

Lilo wrote:In contrast the job nature of an average congressi CM is worse than a dog... .

Well congressies live for that so I don't give a shit for them.

Lilo wrote:In the end Nitish is far better than laloos or mullahyams absent or snoring away in NDC meetings

When Lalu and Mullah Yadav are the people whom you are comparing too, then even if I keep a huge stinking pile of shit besides them then a wise man would obviously pick the stinking pile of shit over the two asses, the pile can be used as a good manure whereas I can't think of any usage for the other two. That's why Bhikari Kumar looks so better because you have Lalu and Mullah yadav as competitor.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 17 Mar 2013 23:14

Singha wrote:atleast bihar and WB CMs continuously raise their voices and beg for bailouts.

This is not a bailout call by Nitish this is a sinister move by him to try and arm twist BJP into making some deal with the bhikari. BJP would be wise to crush his balls now and show him his place. Off course it should be done in a very subtle way.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 17 Mar 2013 23:23

johneeG wrote:'secularism' was not foisted upon India in one go. So, it won't go in one clean stroke either. 'Secularism' came in phases. Similarly, if it has to go, then it will go in phases.

Modi's phase is about removing the Nahruvian strain. If Modi is successful and establishes it, then the next phase come into picture. What is that phase? Well, it is the same as the situation in Gujarat. Who are the prime opposition of Modi in Gujarat? It is mostly the right-wing people. Why are they opposing him?

johneeG ji,

Agree.

Bharatiyavad is something that will take time cleaning the stables. If Modi has to reach the stables of certain religious ideologies, first of all he will have to go through the muck of Nehruvian Secularism, he will have to get all the people who swear by Nehruvian Secularism on his side! There is no short cut.

If he has to start getting Nehruvian-Secularist on board the Bharatiya Train, he has to talk to them first, and that can happen only through "inclusiveness" droppings every now and then!

I tried to model the phases here under Progressive Liberation of the Rashtra!

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 17 Mar 2013 23:32

muraliravi ji,

One has to weigh what one wants,
Does one want Modi to stick to the hard-line Hindutva message and hear what sounds right, or does one want its implementation.

I think Hindus have to know only one thing: does one trust the man or not? If one doesn't trust the man based on all his stands in the past, his several speeches on civilizational issues, his efforts to revive the Bharatiya Sanskriti, then perhaps Modi should not really try to get the vote of somebody whose faith is this fickle.

Within the first 5 years of Modi Raj itself, I am sure that Indians will learn to talk like Bharatiyas.

At the moment, only a minority of Indians really understand or believe in this Sanskriti talk! Basically Modi is going to shift the whole narrative in India from Nehruvian-Secularism to Bharatiyavad, much in the same way Gandhi-Nehru impacted the narrative through education and politics.

Once the narrative shifts, there is only going to be one party which would really fit in with this narrative - BJP. Then 80% of Indian population would be able to think on the wavelength of BJP, then one can move forward to more ambitious goals.

But today, Modi has to make some "inclusiveness" droppings here and there! Absolutely nothing wrong with it. It is the demand of the time!

Yogesh · Post by **Yogesh** » 17 Mar 2013 23:37

IMHO so far NM has tried to deliver his ideas/visions to the intellectuals, urban middle class, working folks, business people and succeeded to a great extent. It's about time he focus more on the core (Farmers, Teachers, Village folks etc.. ) and hit the street and spell out his vision in layman language to these folks.. this would be real game changer- in terms of vote transfer (supposing they buy the idea floated). the earlier group is most fluid - even thought many buy the idea, it's difficult to consider whether all will turn out of the house at voting day. In the latter case its more predictable, provided they conceive that hey look this man can help us do better and we should stand by him!

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 17 Mar 2013 23:39

Yogesh wrote:IMHO so far NM has tried to deliver his ideas/visions to the intellectuals, urban middle class, working folks, business people and succeeded to a great extent. It's about time he focus more on the core (Farmers, Teachers, Village folks etc.. ) and hit the street and spell out his vision in layman language to these folks.. this would be real game changer- in terms of vote transfer (supposing they buy the idea floated). the earlier group is most fluid - even thought many buy the idea, it's difficult to consider whether all will turn out of the house at voting day. In the latter case its more predictable, provided they conceive that hey look this man can help us do better and we should stand by him!

He needs to hit Uttar Pradesh next. However, his next urban sojourn should be in Bengaluru.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 17 Mar 2013 23:42

SwamyG ji,

I do remember, but pardon me, somewhat vaguely, your advocacy of Indian Ocean Rim countries, which was somewhat on the lines of demography distribution.

Can't find that post!

You had said you'd prepared some map!

On similar lines, there was one post I made.

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 17 Mar 2013 23:44

RajeshA wrote:muraliravi ji,

One has to weigh what one wants,
Does one want Modi to stick to the hard-line Hindutva message and hear what sounds right, or does one want its implementation.

I think Hindus have to know only one thing: does one trust the man or not? If one doesn't trust the man based on all his stands in the past, his several speeches on civilizational issues, his efforts to revive the Bharatiya Sanskriti, then perhaps Modi should not really try to get the vote of somebody whose faith is this fickle.

Within the first 5 years of Modi Raj itself, I am sure that Indians will learn to talk like Bharatiyas.

At the moment, only a minority of Indians really understand or believe in this Sanskriti talk! Basically Modi is going to shift the whole narrative in India from Nehruvian-Secularism to Bharatiyavad, much in the same way Gandhi-Nehru impacted the narrative through education and politics.

Once the narrative shifts, there is only going to be one party which would really fit in with this narrative - BJP. Then 80% of Indian population would be able to think on the wavelength of BJP, then one can move forward to more ambitious goals.

But today, Modi has to make some "inclusiveness" droppings here and there! Absolutely nothing wrong with it. It is the demand of the time!

+millions

Yogesh · Post by **Yogesh** » 17 Mar 2013 23:47

Muppalla wrote:
Yogesh wrote:IMHO so far NM has tried to deliver his ideas/visions to the intellectuals, urban middle class, working folks, business people and succeeded to a great extent. It's about time he focus more on the core (Farmers, Teachers, Village folks etc.. ) and hit the street and spell out his vision in layman language to these folks.. this would be real game changer- in terms of vote transfer (supposing they buy the idea floated). the earlier group is most fluid - even thought many buy the idea, it's difficult to consider whether all will turn out of the house at voting day. In the latter case its more predictable, provided they conceive that hey look this man can help us do better and we should stand by him!
He needs to hit Uttar Pradesh next. However, his next urban sojourn should be in Bengaluru.

Yeah..GV is too important to be left (No I do not mean only UP..it goes till Bay of Bengal

)..crucial is to take the fight to the street and let the heat be felt (to the power mongers that they be!) far and wide

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 17 Mar 2013 23:53

Sagar G wrote: Oh please don't be so naive that Nitish turd is doing this drama to get a foothold in the national scenario. He has been made to believe that he is not only capable of becoming the PM but is also a great leader . If he was so great then he wouldn't have needed BJP' backing to warm the CM's kursi, and why even after being a resource rich state is Bihar still so backward ??? This shows a lack of leadership within the Bihari political setup as well as a lack of will within the people of Bihar for development. Whining about development is not going to bring development at your door step, you have to work very hard for that to happen and this is why Gujrat even after being not so blessed in resources is a developed state and Bihar is still a backward one and it will remain one for a long time I am quite sure of that. If a CM and the people of a state want to see there state developing then they will get there state developed. Centre can do ghanta about it. I never had an iota of doubt that Bhikari Kumar was a moron with no skills to show, he looked better only because he was preceded by a person like LALU. When you have something like that as your previous CM then everybody else other than the person will look jolly good only. You want another example look towards WB, before they had CPM and now they have a DIDI

Well congressies live for that so I don't give a shit for them.

When Lalu and Mullah Yadav are the people whom you are comparing too, then even if I keep a huge stinking pile of shit besides them then a wise man would obviously pick the stinking pile of shit over the two asses, the pile can be used as a good manure whereas I can't think of any usage for the other two. That's why Bhikari Kumar looks so better because you have Lalu and Mullah yadav as competitor.

^^

Sagar ji,
Well what can i say ....
Then again referring to him as a Bhikari turd and all that , you are just being obnoxious for the sake of it.

I ll repeat again , at least he is not begging for HIS sake and that makes him a bigger man than most men in his field .

Leaders are a product of society they come from. Gujarat was quite progressive - so it produced Modi. Cowbelt is feudal and casteist so it produced laloo yadavs, but finally people in one state wanted change and they elected themselves a Nitish who was the best of the lot (frankly they were lucky at least he doesnt seem corrupt or casteist like the others even if he is supposedly inept (according to you))
Anyway i need not explicitly explain above stuff it is assumed to be commonsense knowledge in any political observer.

But still somehow you want such societies to suddenly start producing Modis and you want Nitish to work like Modi ?
I have a better advise go get yerself elected as CM of Bihar like state and then reform the state of its decades old habits without any assistance from center and then you can say what ever to "Bhikari Kumar" and his state supposedly destined to be mired in poverty (Sagar ji uvacha)

Iam not the one being naive here ....

In the meantime, dont be so insulting to supporters of Modi by calling yerself one while giving obnoxious judgements such as above on other states and their supposed destinies

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 18 Mar 2013 00:23

Lilo wrote:Sagar ji,
Well what can i say ....
Then again referring to him as a Bhikari turd and all that , you are just being obnoxious for the sake of it.

Well I will stop imitating Nitish Kumar if you don't like it.

Lilo wrote:I ll repeat again , at least he is not begging for HIS sake and that makes him a bigger man than most men in his field .

You have no understanding of the politics he is playing he is not doing it for the sake of Bihar but himself only. You need to take a deeper look into the situation.

Lilo wrote:Leaders are a product of society they come from. Gujarat was quite progressive - so it produced Modi. Cowbelt is feudal and casteist so it produced laloo yadavs,

As if the casteism is non-existent in south India. Please take a look at the southern states before making such ridiculous comments.

Lilo wrote:but finally people in one state wanted change and they elected themselves a Nitish who was the best of the lot (frankly they were lucky at least he doesnt seem corrupt or casteist like the others even if he is supposedly inept (according to you))

Ever heard of Ranvir Sena ??? If no then google for it, it's chief was recently killed and take a look at what your "great" Nitish Kumar did when they were rioting.

Lilo wrote:Anyway i need not explicitly explain above stuff it is assumed to be commonsense knowledge in any political observer.

Taking the high road is not going to help you hide your lack of knowledge about Nitish's political posturing.

Lilo wrote:But still somehow you want such societies to suddenly start producing Modis and you want Nitish to work like Modi ?

I didn't say anything like that I only want Nitish to f*ck off and stop trying to be something which he is totally incapable of.

Lilo wrote:I have a better advise go get yerself elected as CM of Bihar like state and then reform the state of its decades old habits without any assistance from center and then you can say what ever to "Bhikari Kumar" and his state supposedly destined to be mired in poverty (Sagar ji uvacha)

Ohhh what a mature advice

Lilo wrote:Iam not the one being naive here ....

Good for you.

Lilo wrote:In the meantime, dont be so insulting to supporters of Modi by calling yerself one while giving obnoxious judgements such as above on other states and their supposed destinies

See I am not looking for your certificate so as to be certified to support Modi or not so please keep those certificates with yourself and distribute them to people who are interested, I am not the one mate and also I am related with one of the states I talked about but that doesn't fog my ability to see ground realities so again thanks but no thanks.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 18 Mar 2013 00:24

The UnReal Times @TheUnRealTimes
Nitish comes up with #NiKuMantra to counter #NaMoMantra. Goes like this: "bhaiya, gareeb ko special status de do, bhagwaan bhala karega"

Supratik · Post by **Supratik** » 18 Mar 2013 00:58

SwamyG wrote: I agree with the general premise that India has to offer a lot in terms of philosophy, opportunities and market. From a political and strategic perspective too I agree we should strike alliances and cooperate with other countries. You might remember by picture about the Ocean Rim countries in Asia and Africa, and the sphere of influence I talked about way earlier.

I admit your way/perspective is better than Modi's words of exporting arms. But one should not willy-nilly sell arms because of military industrial complex wants the exports.

SwamyG, as a BRF vet you should know that one of the reasons we were subjugated for 1200 years was military deficiency and as a result inability to enforce our geo-political realm. Only the core has survived. To be able to influence the geo-politics you need to have a strong military and to use it whenever and wherever necessary. Arms export comes into the picture from that. We are not talking of exporting arms to oppressive regimes or dictators like the West.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 18 Mar 2013 01:29

Sanku wrote:
muraliravi wrote:All I am saying is his dialogue was uncalled for.
muraliravi-ji; let me be the exception on the forum and agree with you. It would have been best had he skipped the reference. As someone who has followed each and every speech of Shri Modi, including one he recently made in Udaipur at Maharana Pratap's birth celebrations, I see what you are saying. This is fairly "out of character"

However this brings me to the larger point -- a number of people have "unrealistic expectations" with BJP and or its leaders. There are deep structural issues, and the solutions are not easily available. This is true of others who have been called names before, and is true now of NaMo. Expect to see more signs of accommodation. A little while back Modi was a important guest in a marriage between the Hindustan Times family and Reliance family.

It would be impossible for a NaMo, a ABV etc to come to power, wave a wand, and completely change the global structure which results in the current dead lock.

We will still need oil from the Islamic hellholes in the ME. The Anglo-Saxon-Dutch commercial interests still control the money flow. Their illegitimate children in India are equally well entrenched.

Some amount of accommodation with them is mandatory -- NaMo/BJP/RSS cant take on the world single handedly and change the picture.

Of course there will be people like Sita Ram Goel to whom such behavior would be "windbag" like, but then this balance of ideology and practicality has never been easy. Supporters of BJP need to understand that, including the core 5%, maybe later this 5% when it has grown to 20% under more favorable climes can push the polity further towards it cause, but till then it has to go with the best available and bide its time with small incremental steps.

(And this is where I disagree mostly with Bji )

==================================================

All said, I would have been much happier if those places were not mentioned.

===================================================

Atri-ji --> over to you. Kindly offer your unique wisdom on the issue.

The discussion reminds me of a post I made long ago - about the necessity to appear to convince the "western" controlled transnational money-drugs-trafficking lobby, or bits and pieces of mullahcracy - or our internal interfaces to them - or even offering concessions to keep them neutral at the least.

But where I would also draw the line, and I discussed this before - Indian history shows - that compromises, even of the smallest order - almost always make further slide down the drain inevitable. The process becomes irreversible.

I suggested that the way to do this is to keep a second rung ready to "remove" or "dilute" the first stage of leadership who were forced to compromise. The compromise is as much necessary as the removal. It is the task of the second rung to reject the first rungs "compromises".

This is a very difficult task - because those externals who force the compromise - are not fools. They make sure that subsequent leadership selection and filtering is controlled so that this second-rung hitback or tactical denouncement does not happen.

There are certain things that one should not pretend on. If there is pressure to compromise - or appear to compromise, it is better to avoid such commitments publicly. The real mobilization will not happen until people see the leader as consistent and authentic.

disha · Post by **disha** » 18 Mar 2013 02:32

^^ The bigger elephant in the room that is not debated is the privatization of Railways. And "culture trains" are an example of what can be achieved by privatizing the railway. And an identifiable section of society ready to invest in that. The talk about privatizing railways itself is setting the tiger among sheeple. And the logic for that is very tight, no argument. Either privatize railways or nationalize "automobiles" and "planes". Will come back to this point later.

Second, Hindus have most piligrimage sectors in India, in a way this opens up the uttara-dakshin path and the purab-paschim path to ideas. Imagine a bunch of kar sevaks show up from Ayodhya to stop the setu samudra project. Or a bunch of Rajasthanis show up in Bihar/WB to stop pillage of Jain temples. It just opens up the path. Imagine a bunch of Sikhs showing up in Maharashtra and realize that without the dakshin their faith might have been as well lost! Imagine kids showing up in Goa and realizing the goa insurrection perpetuated on the people. Let them enjoy the beaches of Goa instead of the current Russian and Israeli mafia?

Third, it makes the religion subservient to nation. This is the need of the day, whatever be your faith, nation hood should be formost.

Fourth, it gives internal tourism a boost and wiith it, a boost to the history of India to. It really connects people and then ideas.

All this talk about "compromises" comes from a defeatist mindset. There is no compromise made here. Nothing stops somebody to run a Kanyakumari-Kashmir-Char-Dham yatra (it was mentioned). This actually gives more impetus to indic religions and indianizes the rest.

No core was given away, no masjid coming up at Ayodhya was mentioned for example. Compromize some and gain more.

Coming back to privatization, it will take away one more avenue for the maino-parivar to dispense favours. The need of the hour is to break the "C-System" or the mai-baap sirkar run by the maino-parivar. The first parivar (and thus the lower rung parivars like the Mullahyam parivar, the Pawar parivar etc) needs to be broken.

disha · Post by **disha** » 18 Mar 2013 02:37

All said and done, the point is Modi has been watched and parsed in detail. Sonia Maino being at the helm of CongI and a power center since last 9 years has not even been questioned, watched and parsed in such detail - not even a fraction of what NM is going through.

So take your pick (or poison), an NM at helm or a Maino-parivar loyal pet at the helm? An uncorrupt and uncorruptible leader at helm or few more years of maino-parivar? Given the way demographics are going and the way hindus are called terrorists, in a generation or two if the mainos are not taken out - all will be lost.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 18 Mar 2013 02:42

I watched the entire speech by NaMo - fantastic speech covering the entire breadth of problems in a simple way to make the elite Indians and media understand , covering the event.
It is also the same that is demanded by the poorer Indians. However this talk was strictly for the elites/middle class ones.
It was a resounding success on the message that he wanted to deliver.
His Q&A was superb.
------------------------------------
He gave very good yet practical solutions that a common Indian demands of their leaders.
He dreams of self sufficiency in many areas with tapping of local market, and globalization also.
Incredible stuff from a man who deserves to be the PM of our country.
----------------------------------------------
No Congi worth his salt as of today can ever talk like him.
ST comes to mind but he cannot the give ideas in a simple elegant way. He does not have administrative skills to back nor the authority. He cannot outshine the Congi parivar. He has no mesmerizing pull over the people.

----------------------

disha · Post by **disha** » 18 Mar 2013 02:58

^^ Or rather the maino-family has so long been at helm that the media, particularly the ELM has become their lap dogs. Look no further on how Katju-the intelligent is now the PTI chairman.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 18 Mar 2013 03:13

Rajesh: I have posted that map in the off-topic dhaaga.

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 18 Mar 2013 03:42

A striking anecdote in Namo's IT conclave speech was about Panditji inaugurating Ashoka hotel, right inside Delhi. The very fact that he had the guts to question Panditji's actions, show his readiness to take on the mighty INC system. The post-speech analysis would keep many a people with sleepless nights. NM comes across very clearly as a no-nonsense guy, who is in a hurry to implement his ideas.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 18 Mar 2013 03:48

Singha wrote:I have not seen this anywhere so far....canal topped with a cover 750m long that has solar panels - generate power and prevent evaporation in one shot

http://www.solarserver.com/solar-magazi ... india.html

A utilization rate of 10% of the existing canal network would allow the installation of 2.2 GW of PV, which would conserve 20 billion liters of water annually as well as prevent the use of 45 square kilometers of land.

Somebody was saying that "land conservation" is one of the benefits but I think that is an overrated befeit. The major side benefit as I can see is water conservation along with eco-friendly power generation.

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 18 Mar 2013 05:18

One quick question - what does the absence of sunlight do on the aquatic life of the water? No effect?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 18 Mar 2013 05:22

^
I am assuming they will avoid it by leaving some space between blocks.. Every 10mtrs or so. and since it is a flowing water, I assume it should be ok.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 18 Mar 2013 06:24

The canals in E. and W. Godavari districts of AP are much larger and wider with good amount of commercial largish boat traffic. These have quite a bit of aqua life. But the canal in the photo looks on smaller than the AP ones (can't figure out the scale from the photo). Would these canals have a lot of aquatic life, I wonder.