Modi A New Nationalism
Modi A New Nationalism
Narendra Modi was born on 17 September 1950 in Bombay State of the Vadnager village (once Bombay was the state of India which got divided into Gujrat and Maharashtra and therefore now it comes under Gujrat state).
His father name was was Damodardas Mulchand Modi. and mother name is Heeraben Modi. When Narendra Modi was born, his family was very poor and they used to live in a small hut. Among six children of his mother father, he is the third child. Narendra father used to sell tea at the railway station.
Narendra Modi used to help his father in selling tea by taking the tea in various train coaches and selling them. Along with helping his father, he was an average student in studies. He completed his schooling from vadnagar. Narendra Modi married jasoda at the age of seventeen but after some time they weres separated. In one way we can say that his married life was over.
From starting only Narendra Modi was a patriotist person. In India China war. Narendra Modi used to sell tea and food for the soldiers on the trains. During India Pakistan war also Modi helped and served many soldiers. In 1971 Modi joined RSS and started promoting it.
He uses to work there for a full time, that is from early morning to late at night. Because of RSS, Modi visited many places in Gujarat and listens to the problems of people and tries to help them. When Emergency was declared in many states, Modi used to help other people secretly on behalf of RSS. Along with doing this all, in 1980 he completed his PG degree in political Science from Gujrat University.
BJP Modi A New Nationalism
Ans by his work, he became a member of BJP(Bharatiya Janta party). Modi organized 1920’s Advani’s Rath Yatra and it was successfully executed. By this the senior leaders of BJP were impressed. After that Modi impressed leaders many times. With all this hard work, in 1995 BJP made their government in Gujrat and Keshubhai Patel was made as to the chief minister of Gujrat. Modi was given CENTRAL MINISTER responsibility in BJP.
In 2001, KeshuBhai Patel started having some health problem and along with this BJP was losing many seats also. So due to all this, in October 2001 Narendra Modi was appointed as the Chief Minister of the Gujrat. Narendra Modi did his work with full honesty and made Gujarat a strong state.
Asia’s biggest solar park is also constructed in Gujarat. Narendra Modi did many things for Gujarat and slowly he made Gujarat among one of the best states of India and he made himself a famous minister who was loved by many of the people in Gujarat.
Is Modi communal?
The Modi years have witnessed a dictatorial pressure upon society by an increasingly centralized state, the setting up of one part of society against another and the promotion of religion of hatred, behind which the state acts directly in corporate interests.
In its attack on civil rights, it’s restructuring of the state to effect an acute centralization of power, and its pervasive purveyance of fear, the Narendra Modi years resemble Indira Gandhi’s Emergency. But the resemblance stops there. In fact, the two differ fundamentally in several ways.
First, there were no lynch mobs or street thugs terrorizing people and giving them lessons in “nationalism” during the Emergency. It was only the state that repressed people then; now we have gangs of Hindutva crooks, who force critics of the government to apologize for their “misdeeds”, with the additional threat of arrests still hanging over these browbeaten critics. One cannot easily forget the putrid sight of a professor is to made to ask for forgiveness on bended knees for a Facebook post that was critical of the government.
Modi A new nationalism
Second, unlike the Emergency, the current suppression entreats an ideology, that of “nationalism”, interpreted as being synonymous with Hindutva but cashing in opportunistically on the éclat of India’s anti-colonial nationalism despite having nothing in common with it.
As a result, while Indira Gandhi’s control had the effect (no doubt unwanted by her) of making her critics appear honorable, the current repression deliberately portrays them as dishonorable, as “enemies of the people”. This vilification is further magnified when state agencies are used to accuse these opponents of “corruption” and “wrongdoings” of various kinds; the idea is to destroy their moral standing before the people.
The third difference is the government’s capturing of the media. During the Emergency, the print media was subject to pre-censorship; papers would appear with vast spaces inked out, because of which they actually gained people’s respect. Now the media, barring a few honorable exceptions which, too, may not remain so for long, are totally in the Hindutva camp, and the task of destroying the moral stature of the opponents is promoted because of the media’s conspiracy in it.
The media’s changing role, in turn, is linked to the fourth difference between then and now: the Modi government is entirely in cahoots with corporate interests, while the Indira Gandhi regime maintained its difference with the corporates and even presented a “progressive” anti-corporate image.
Indeed, no government in post-independence India has been as close to the corporates as the Modi government, a point exemplified by his traveling in Adani’s aircraft to New Delhi to be sworn in as Prime Minister.
(It is worth recalling, by way of contrast, that Jawaharlal Nehru, the Hindutva bete noire, did not have enough funds to visit his wife, Kamala, when she was dying of tuberculosis in a Swiss sanatorium and had refused G.D. Birla’s offer of financial assistance; eventually Nehru himself managed to raise the money.)
The fifth difference is the Modi government’s impetus against minorities, especially the hapless Muslim minority. Indira Gandhi’s repression did not have any specific ethnic or communal or caste target.
It was repression, pure and simple, directed at her opponents and those of her son Sanjay, who was notorious for his shenanigans. Correspondingly, it did not have any egotistic projects of rehashing history, of presenting a narrative defaming a particular religious community, and of using state power to thrust this narrative down the throats of even schoolchildren, inculcating in them a sense of hatred towards fellow countrymen belonging to a different religion.
Difference A New Nationalism
The sixth difference, associated necessarily with this project, is a promotion of unreason, prioritization of faith over rational discourse, cultivation of scorn for evidence and even for the internal consistency of argumentation. This phenomenon has for long characterized the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh, but it has now meddled official public discourse, with even the Indian Science Congress not in a position to free itself of this discourse.
The seventh difference is the destruction of institutions that the Modi government has initiated, and this is especially true of public universities and other publicly funded centers of learning. All these institutions are faced with a “heads I lose, tails you win” situation.
If they cave into the demands of the government to change their ambiance and curricula, they become intellectually dead anyway since intellectual survival requires independent critical thinking. But if they persist with independent critical thinking, then they are starved of funds and charged with harboring “anti-national” insurgent elements, as has happened to Jawaharlal Nehru University.
The fact that some of the finest institutions in the country, from JNU to the University of Hyderabad to the Film and Television Institute of India, Pune, to the Tata Institute of Social Sciences and the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, have been struggling for breath is emblematic of our times. Nothing like this has happened before; no government in the past has ever shown such haughtiness for thought.