Thirty years ago, when the West was yet to discover fully the potency and potential of new information technology to package and sell politicians, an old-school British Conservative Party strategist, Norman Tebbit, had sceptically noted that the public “can smell a dead rat even when it is wrapped in red roses”. Narendra Modi and his NRI promoters have disproved the Tebbit formulation by carving out an impressive victory. The Modi hat-trick comes despite a marked disquiet among significant sections like the poor, tribals, Muslims and Patels against the style and substance of his leadership. What is more, Modi has proven his invincibility, and that too on his own terms.
Much was made of the Gujarat chief minister’s so-called 3-D virtual campaign; but much before the 2012 battle began, Modi and his handlers had put in place a sophisticated campaign centred on another set of three Ds: deception, disrespect and dabangiri.
The element of deception has been in the making for the last three years. Its central objective was to manufacture a ‘false consensus’ in which Modi became synonymous with ‘development’, as if Gujarat was a total stranger to concepts and practices of ‘development’ before the BJP’s inner intrigues saw him oust Keshubhai Patel from the CM’s office in 2001. The ‘sadbhavna’ farce was part of this carefully crafted deception; it enabled the moderate, reasonable and secular Hindu middle classes to believe that perhaps the chief minister has turned a new leaf. So successfully has this false consensus been cemented up that New Delhi-based professional hype-meisters have become his ‘(un)paid’ acolytes, and who easily bought into ‘the inevitability of Narendra Modi as the prime ministerial candidate’ project.
The second D in the Modi spiel was the invocation of ‘disrespect’ as a defining attitude. The CM demonstrated a natural absence of any restraint in calling his rivals names, not because of personal animosity but as part of an expedient calculation, aimed at catering to our baser instincts. In particular, Modi unveiled a cheerful disposition to be roughly disrespectful towards the Nehru-Gandhi family or Prime Minister Manmohan Singh or Ahmed Patel.
The third ‘D’ can only be described as dabangiri: a massive and unorthodox use of the state police and its coercive machinery to instil a sense of fear among all detractors, particularly the minorities. After the sadbhavna farce had served its purpose, Modi turned his back on Muslims and excluded them from any representation in the BJP’s list of candidates. In the last days before the elections, the police in the urban areas (which have provided the decisive seats) was commandeered to send out a message to the minorities to behave and to just keep in mind that the central forces would eventually go back after the votes had been counted.
What has gone largely unnoticed is that Modi practised his dabangiri vis-a-vis the BJP too; not only did the central leadership have no say in selection of the candidates, but national leaders like Sushma Swaraj and L.K. Advani were corralled into giving certificates of prime ministerial eligibility to the CM, and then were scrupulously kept out of the campaign. The national leaders were welcome to come to Ahmedabad and address press conferences, but not a public meeting. The central leadership had no choice but to swallow this.
Modi cannot be grudged his victory. Particularly because, unlike 2002 and 2007, he did not have the local stormtroopers of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh in his corner; he could do without the VHP or RSS karyakarta and his much-vaunted ‘energy’. This is a bitter lesson that the Nagpur cabal will have to factor in before the thinking of rearranging the BJP leadership musical chairs.
Having tamed the BJP high command and the RSS, Modi’s handlers will want to position him as the party’s prime ministerial mascot. The success of this project will hinge on how the Modi phenomenon is understood by different political formations and forces.
Second, the second defining element of the Modi leadership is a cultivated antipathy to minorities. This remains the core of his appeal among his flock and self-imagined political persona. But this will not and cannot have any traction outside Gujarat. Sober and serious politicians across the country have watched with apprehension Modi’s ability to galvanise and convert this antipathy to minorities into an electoral asset.
After the Gujarat verdict, the BJP is stuck with Modi. In the run-up to the 2014, the name of the game will be the creation of umbrella alliances: ability of the two rival camps—the UPA and the nda—to hold on to their current partners as well as to attract new allies. The strategic question facing the BJP and the rest of the NDA remains: is Modi the man to help expand the alliance and convert it into a winning proposition?
On the other hand, the Himachal Pradesh victory and a respectable show in Gujarat don’t spell unmitigated disaster for the Congress and its UPA allies. The combined outcome in the two states should enable the Congress managers to renew their conversations with all those parties and groups who believe in equity, inclusiveness and social harmony. The Congress showed considerable finesse in its Gujarat campaign and lives to fight another day; in Himachal Pradesh, neither charges of corruption against Virbhadra Singh nor price rise/lpg cap seemed to hurt it. And if the Congress can weave the lessons from Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh into its 2014 narrative, it may do itself a good turn. Whereas Narendra Modi’s hat-trick can only aggravate the BJP’s internal leadership turmoil, the Congress, for better or worse, is happy to be stuck with Rahul Gandhi at the moment.
In fact, Rahul Gandhi and his many teams can be expected to take heart from Modi’s success: if a man who ten years ago was just a district-level leader can be packaged and sold as the BJP’s best national bet, surely there was at least some hope for the ‘young prince’. The Congress strategists may not be all that averse to having an unrepentant Modi as the nda’s prime ministerial mascot.
On the eve of the 2009 Lok Sabha election, the BJP had sought to sell Advani as a man without rough edges and a consensus-builder. In its editorial, dated March 16, 2009, the party mouthpiece Kamal Sandesh had formulated: “India today needs a leader who is acceptable to all, who appeals to all and who touches the heart of everyone. And that person is and can only by Shri Lal Krishna Advani”.
Modi fails the Advani test. The polity is no less fractured today than it was in 2009, and there will be no dearth of prima donnas in 2014 who would need to be cajoled and appeased—something Modi abjures. He has tasted success on his terms, and it would be unrealistic to expect him to abandon his systematically honed personality cult. The rest of the polity, including the BJP, will have to take a call on the Modi model of leadership and its inherent authoritarian ambience and corporatist tilt. And, let there be no mistake, there is no Modi a la carte. It is a fixed Gujarati thali. Take it or leave it.
(Former media advisor to the prime minister, Harish Khare is the recipient of the Jawaharlal Nehru fellowship for 2013)
Harish Khare’s piece on Modi (See it only in 3D...), was a hilarious read, highlighting his own deception, disrespect and dabanggiri.
Pratik, Missouri, US
I hope all this loyalty to the Congress pays and Khare gets to go back to the PMO.
Arun Nair, Mumbai
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.
Harish Khare has lost his bearings. The strangest claim he has made is of Modi managing to get the media, which, for ten years has been baying for his blood, being brought round, along with the civil society, to support him by the four big industrial groups!
Harish Khare says nobody should grudge Modi his victory and proceeds to grudge with all his 'might' Modi his victory throughout the article. In fact, he has infused hate into every sentence.
If people had any doubt about why MMS, a supposedly good man, got a bad press consistently for the last four years, Harish Khare provides the answer with this article.
Corrected post 23
What a trashy, scurrilous defamatory article. What confuses me is whom exactly is Harish Khare targetting. Even die hard Con-gress supporters will find it difficult to swallow this rubbish.
What a trashy, scurrilous defamatory article. What confuses me is whom exactly is Harish Khare targetting. Even die hard Con-gress supporters will swallow this rubbish.
'Modi’s success: if a man who ten years ago was just a district-level leader can be packaged and sold as the BJP’s best national bet, surely there was at least some hope for the ‘young prince’.
That is quite true. In a country where the likes of Harish Khare can pass off as respectable journalist, Rahul Gandhi has a pretty good chance.
"Modi fails the Advani test. "
Is that not a good thing for Modi? After all Advani failed. Why should Modi play the same game as Advani and fail as Advani? He should try something different.
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