These irritants notwithstanding, Vajpayee managed reasonably well, as Nagpur allowed him some leeway, a tactical space. And the strategy paid off. While the BJP was untouchable in 1996 and its minority government fell within 13 days, it was the Sangh’s pragmatism that allowed it to use ABV’s personal charm and diplomacy to attract regional and secular allies, enabling the BJP to form governments in 1998 and 1999.
Modi is no Vajpayee. The Gujarat CM has already become a cult figure, much to the Sangh’s discomfort. But the RSS, its eyes firmly set on the end rather than the means, will have to countenance Modi and his social, economic and political philosophy at least in this ‘semi-final’ phase. The final will be when the BJP bags a simple majority on its own.
If Modi becomes the prime minister next month as his spin doctors are projecting, he is unlikely to have a smooth run. Having raised the expectations of powerful corporate and US lobbies, he will have to deliver, and for that to happen, the RSS has to hold back its ‘swadeshi’ slogan and wink at the western model of economic growth pushed by the IMF and World Bank. In short, the Sangh should cease to interfere in policy formulations and the decision-making of the new government, an unlikely scenario.
Only time will tell whether Modi will be able to coopt the RSS or vice versa. If he allows himself to be controlled by the Sangh, his honeymoon with the corporate and foreign handlers will not last. Many corporate lobbyists believe Modi will liberate the BJP from the RSS economic vision, change its dna and complete its conversion to a pro-corporate and market-friendly party, perhaps a clone of the Congress with a saffron tinge. That a la Rahul Gandhi in the Congress, Modi (once at the helm), will drastically alter the existing power structure within the BJP and dismantle ‘collective’ leadership, say some Modi-watchers.
The thesis being propounded by them is that parties run by strong women or men (read Mayawati, Mamata, Jayalalitha, Nitish Kumar, Laloo Yadav, Mulayam Singh, the Thackerays et al) are successful whereas those encumbered by ‘collective’ leadership such as the BJP and the CPI(M) have been on the decline. That is, an ‘autocratic’ personality is needed to make a party victorious and that it’s Modi who can do that for the BJP.
That’s a flawed premise. The CPI(M) created history of sorts ruling West Bengal uninterruptedly for 34 years by balancing personality with collective leadership. If the party lost power, it is not because of collective leadership but due to its failure to respond to the changing times. In Kerala, the Congress and the CPI(M) alternate every five years irrespective of the type of leadership.
Collective leadership is not such a dirty word. Advani and his peers contributed to a great extent to increase the BJP’s Lok Sabha tally from two in 1984 to 182 in 1999. It will be interesting to watch if an organisation as multilayered as the RSS, and one which at least claims to stand for an egalitarian society, would tolerate the emergence of a persona of a Putin or Indira Gandhi in the BJP.
Modi handlers who believe the RSS is ‘desperate’ for power after a long spell of drought and ‘beholden’ to Modi’s leadership qualities, and therefore willing to play second fiddle to him, should dissect the recent statement of sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat: “The question is not who should form the next government.... The bigger question is who should not form the next government.” That reveals the thinking.
Kay Benedict is a senior political journalist
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.
>> CAIR supporting Indians will surely lose this time...
"CAIR supporting Indians"! What an idiotic phrase! CAIR is a domestic American civil rights group working for American Muslims, only a small percentage of whom are Indian Muslims. It has become a big bugaboo for sanghi morons in this forum who were desperate to find something to tag me with!
>> (Pakistan) where your ideology of hate and discrimination.
That actually is your ideology! You would fit in nicely in Pakistan!
>> “The question is not who should form the next government.... The bigger question is who should not form the next government" - A loaded comment and meaningful!
A billion people will wait for hours in queues rain or shine and vote to have someone form the government - seculars will sit together in mediahouse meeting rooms and decide who shouldnt form the government.
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