The coronation of Narendra Modi and Rahul Gandhi has been never in doubt. In both cases, however, the real control will still remain with the original power centres—the Sonia establishment in the case of Congress and the RSS-Rajnath Singh line-up for Modi. Within this constraint, the two have already begun policy posturing within their parties. This is more apparent in the case of Rahul. The transfer of authority will give him the necessary policy flexibility to cope with the exigencies of a general election. His ‘outsider’ image will make him freer to effect compromises. This is not so with the incumbent prime minister or his mother who had shared some baggage as the core committee chairperson.
Unnoticed by most, nuances of the policy shifts are already in operation. Congress leaders hardly conceal the ongoing strategic repositioning under Rahul. He and Sonia did praise the outgoing prime minister at the aicc session. But Manmohan Singh was left to himself to defend the performance of his 10-year regime in his last address to the aicc as prime minister. Mother and son had virtually skipped the economic policy resolution.
It won’t be surprising if the new posturing leads to a fine-tuning or partial policy reversal. Apparently, the salvaging operation had begun much before the formal power transfer. The first was Rahul’s public disapproval of the criminal legislators’ ordinance. Initially, there had been uproar when he had put his foot down on the food security and land rights bills. These were dubbed as anti-growth. Then came the Lokpal bill and now half a dozen anti-corruption bills aimed at refurbishing the party’s image. It’s another matter whether such last-minute efforts will shield it against the ignominy of corruption and price rise.
For BJP, its national council was a really impressive spectacle. Delegates from states with good BJP presence were in high spirits. Much more than in Bombay when Atal Behari Vajpayee was anointed. But as they dispersed from the Ramlila maidan, many of them realised their leaders had not given them anything new to counter their electoral opponents with. True, they were presented with as many as three ‘visions’: one in Rajnath Singh’s presidential address, a second in Arun Jaitely’s economic resolution and finally, Modi’s elaborately drafted set. Waiting in the wings is yet another vision—India Vision 2025—which Nitin Gadkari’s been tasked with.
Delegates had high expectations from their PM candidate’s ‘rainbow’ vision, ‘details’ of which had started appearing in the media much before the actual presentations. Workers had hoped Modi would arm them with some attractive schemes, not wishful thoughts, to win over the voters. Selling such abstract ideas is an uphill task when aspirational voters insist on workable schemes.
By far, what disappointed them most was Modi’s berating of welfare programmes. ‘Garib-garib-garib’, he mimicked Rahul Gandhi with elan, to demolish the party’s ‘dole-dole-dole’ approach. The performance may have impressed TV audiences or foreign rating agencies, but it left the ordinary BJP worker with little. On the ground, no political worker can seek votes anymore without a doles-filled manifesto. Every BJP government, even allies like sad, had offered a set of pre-poll lures to engaged groups like farmers, students and weaker sections. The main plank of Raman Singh in Chhattisgarh and Shivraj Chouhan in MP has been their schemes for the poor. AAP’s entry has made things tougher.
Ranting against corruption and shahzada is losing sting. BJP workers do not know what to tell people about the party’s position on earthly issues like 12 gas cylinders, NREGA, food for poor, land acquisition and permission for FDI in retail. Does all this fall into Modi’s ‘garib-garib’, ‘dole-dole’ category? These are hard questions at ground level. Will the BJP roll back its known opposition to FDI in retail to step up investment and growth? Will its government abolish caste quota? Then there are wider issues like nuclear liability.
Modi has already trapped himself in the policy paradox that had gripped UPA during much of its tenure. When conflicting economic interests reach breaking point, even macho PMs start looking weak. There has always been a conflict of interest between the imperatives of growth and political compulsions. The UPA had tried to manage the contradictions, howsoever clumsily, with the party-inspired welfare schemes. Modi has a more meddling 10, Janpath at Nagpur.
(P. Raman is former political editor of The Economic Times and Business Standard.)
Apropos P. Raman’s column In the Doledrums, selling reforms to voters is a tough call. Even so, in an elemental sense, common citizens are beginning to join the dots between sops/freebies, giveaways and inflation that has hurt people across income classes. It also does not help that faltering growth is not creating jobs for the employed or increments for those who have them.
Ashok Lal, Mumbai
The early positioning of Modi as a PM candidate and the launch of the campaign gave him a head start. With time, though, his speeches seem to be losing their sting despite the oratorical skill.
R.V. Subramanian, Gurgaon
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
RV subramanian >> With time his speeches seem to be losing sting despite his oratorial skills.
Yup, UPA 3 will get 270 seats, Rahul will be PM and Kejjibaba is deputy PM. Laloo can made speaker of the house and zero loss Kapil sibal can be the next finance minister. And Chidambaram can be made as our minister of coal and natural resources.
RSS types who spend their evenings discussing Muslim affairs know little else. Like Vajpayee, he will not know what to do if he becomes the PM.
Mr PARTHASARATHY : Do you realise the fallacy of the equation ?
If private savings =0 the Deficits = Net Imports
i.e all indian govt has to do is to print money and inport everything the country needs (oil food tv).
The question is what will the importers do with the rupees ?? And why would anyone have to work to produce anything? If all countries do the same thing who will produce the goods ?
[[Early positioning of Modi as a PM candidate and launch of Campaign gave a head start ]]
You're talking as if the BJP was unfair by naming Modi the PM candidate. What stopped the Congress from announcing Rahul Gandhi as its PM nominee? Even now, they don't have the guts to name him, why?
Early positioning of Modi as a PM candidate and launch of Campaign gave a head start With time his speeches seem to be losing sting despite his oratorial skills.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT