Date: 14 April 2011
Subject: Communalism Bad, Development Good by Badri Raina



ZCommunications | Communalism Bad, Development Good by Badri Raina | ZNet
Article<http://www.zcommunications.org/communalism-bad-development-good-by-badri-raina>






<http://www.zcommunications.org/communalism-bad-development-good-by-badri-raina#>
[image: 793] Communalism Bad, Development Good
------------------------------
Anna lauds Modi
By Badri Raina <http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/badriraina>

Wednesday, April 13, 2011




 *Anna, the Voice of the Upwardly Mobile:*



A voice has been raised in India against the  venal misdeeds of politicians
and, mutedly, of bureaucrats  (no mention of the corporates here).



Groups of  protestors led by a most unlikely mix of civil society
leaderships, ranging from  those with staunch secular credentials and proven
personal integrity (Prashant Bhushan, Arvind Kejrival, Kiran Bedi, Swami
Agnivesh, Mallika Sarabai)  to those others  with known affiliation to
right-wing Hindu organizations and dubious claims to probity (Baba Ramdev,
Sri Sri Ravi Shankar), racuously foregrounded by corporate electronic
channels with barely concealed antipathy to any  mass assertion from the
Left, have been holding fort.



True to pattern and apprehension, the politics of a section of the
protestors could not after all hold back mentioning chief ministers of two
BJP- ruled and BJP-in-coalition- ruled states as exemplars of the India of
their dreams.  Most significantly, that mention this time came from no less
than Anna Hazare himself.



As per Anna speak,  Nitish  Kumar and  Narendra Modi  belong to a common
category—chief ministers who  do good development work without being
corrupt.  More of the corruption part hereunder. But,

what of Modi’s  fingers dipped  in  blood?  Response:  communalism is bad,
but  “I  was speaking only of his development work.”



To be fair to  Nitish Kumar,  he, although bracketed with Modi, has sought
consistently to resist the equation, and keep the fascist Modi at arms
length, disallowing the  BJP to unleash him in  the  last two election
campaigns in  Bihar, thereby seeking to draw a line between himself   (and
presumably a section of his party, the JD-U) and Modi atleast on the  issue
of secularism even if merely to avoid offending Bihar’s considerable Muslim
 electorate.



So, here is the inference, one that neo-Nazis—many of them Indians--  to
this day make with aplomb and pride:  Hitler may have liquidated some  six
million innocent human beings for no fault than their racial characteristic,
but look he gave to Germany great autobahns and provided fillip to German
industrial houses at a time of depression.   Whereas what they always mean
to say is  how Hitler’s  greatest contribution was to achieve  Aryan racial
purity.  (See Golwalker’s, *We, Our Nationhood Defined*, 1923, and *Bunch of
Thoughts*, 1938—two  texts  on which  the edifice of the  RSS rests.)



This is precisely the hub of the  barely concealed support that Modi enjoys
among India’s  proto-fascists; namely, that whereas they may feel on
occasion publicly obliged to disapprove of the Muslim massacres of 2002, all
under total State connivance, at bottom, in their hearts they are filled
with glee that he gave to the Muslims what has been coming to them, setting
in motion the Hindutva-fascist project of purifying India racially as Hiter
had sought to do to Germany and Europe.  Add to that  the welcome to the
corporate chiselers, and Modi  is up on the  middle-class pedestal.



Here is what we ask, charitably:  if  the operative profiles of political
leaders can be so neatly and conveniently separated,  why wouldn’t Anna and
those others with him agree that many among  the politicians they seek to
pillory may be corrupt, but are also known to be fine administrators with
substantial records of achievement to their name.  After all, many corrupt
politicians since 1947 must have done some development work to bring India
to her present status among the comity of  nations that matter (sic).   So
why does not the same charitable  double-speak apply to them as it does so
often and so heinously to Modi?  Modi may be a communalist murderer, but
look at his developmental activity; likewise, why can’t it be said, X or Y
may be corrupt, but  look at his record of achievement in government?



*The Modi model of “development”:*



There has of course been a studied refusal to question the Modi model of
“development.”   Tainted and disfigured by his marshalling of the massacres
of 2002,  influential sections of his party leadership, closet communalists
among the new middle classes, and  those in the corporate media who have
been busy touting and  boosting the “India story,”  the future they desire
for Modi has been sought to be pinned on  his  personal probity and
developmental genius.  Clearly, those that wish Modi to  occupy the high
table in Delhi sometime soon  use with ruthless dishonesty the  Podsnappian
fore-arm to deny some pretty ugly truths about what he has done for which
Gujaraties.  If only they would listen to a litany of facts on this that are
in the possession of social service organizations located in Gujarat.



Briefly, without let or hindrance, Modi has sought to parcel out Gujarati
assets in land and other natural resources at a pittance  to a clutch of
favoured industrialists whose every wish takes precedence over the lived
requirements of rural Guajrat and of its forest dwellers. Innocent as he may
be, Anna Hazare, the part-Gandhian (since, it turns out he is also by his
public admission a votary of Shiva ji Maratha, by no means an icon of
non-violence in the annals of Indian history)  needs to know that of all
chief ministers now operating in India, not one may be more rapaciously
anti-rural than Modi.  And what would Gandhi have said of that preference in
“development” given his passion for a village-centred India?



Indeed, the  Mahuva farmer’s agitation in Gujarat was to showcase all of
those preferences.  Farmers, fishing communities, salt-pan workers, tribals,
dalits, industrial workers, minorities—a pretty substantial section of
Gujaraties wouldn’t you say—all have come to be at the receiving end of
those preferences, as gauchar lands and irrigated farmlands have been
acquired to be at the service of a club of industrialists, all at throwaway
prices.  One has to visit rural and tribal Gujarat to register the extent of
the loss of livelihoods, displacement and loss of natural resources, and the
pace of land grab, with withering consequences for swathes of poor and
indigent Gujaraties. And, as to the  Muslim minority, read the recent
Wikileak US consulate report of how Modi has  sought with unmitigated
single-mindedness to marginalize and ghettoize the Muslims of Guajrat. And
never to this day as much a politic  “regret.”  Only   continued
machinations to thwart and  vilify the plethora of investigative mechanisms
ordered into the Gujarat massacres and the countless fake encounter
liquidations of Muslims by no less than the Supreme Court of India.



*Does Corruption Apply to Modi and Nitish?*



A recent report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, a
Constitutional body (CAG)  has indicted the Nitish Kumar government in Bihar
for submitting no  “detailed contingency” bills against  “abstract
contingency” withdrawals amounting to no less than Rs.15,850.41 crores!
Useful to know that this is the same CAG whose  report on the  2G Spectrum
goings-on was to bring about the current massive upheaval in  how neoliberal
economics in India has been proceeding, leading to the arrest of  the
central cabinet minister in-charge of Telecom.  That being the case, it may
be a forgiveable question to ask Anna ji as to why  CAG should be so
venerated with respect to the central ministry, but wholly side-stepped with
respect to Bihar.  Remarkably, although a CBI enquiry has been  ordered into
the  Bihar matter, ask any tv-guzzling middle class Indian and he would not
have heard of it.  For the  simple reason that the very media that pillories
the said Telecom minister turns a Nelson’s eye  elsewhere.



And what of Modi?  Three  fair-sized scams come readily to mind:  the  *Sujalam
Sufalam * scam  estimated to be of the order of Rs.1700 crores;  the NREGS
Boribund scam (Rs.109 crores), and the Fisheries scam worth about Rs.600
crores.



And would you know, whereas  the whole Anna-led  “movement” has had  the
institution of an all-powerful  *Lokpal *(Ombudsman) at its focus,  Modi in
Gujarat has refused to implement the mandatory requirement to install
a *Lokayukta
*in his own state, even as he is heard ranting about the need for the *Lokpal
* at the centre!



The less said about the Yog guru, Baba Ramdev, the better.  Only a few years
ago the world came to know how he refuses to supply correct information
about the content of the medicines he sells from his  establishment, defying
thereby a statutory requirement.  The disclosure that those medicines
contain human-bone components was to be made in full public view in Delhi by
dozens of people who have been working at his medicine factory.  Just as it
was  found that he violates another statutory requirement as well, namely,
refusing to pay mandated  “minimum wages” to workers  who make his millions
possible.  Indeed, just last night here in Delhi on one electronic channel,
a venerable sadhu maharaj from the holy city of Hardwar had this to say:
“Ramdev is the Hassan Ali of Hardwar; more dubious, in fact, because Hassan
Ali atleast had horses for generating those thousands of crores, Ramdev did
not even have a donkey.”  Hassan Ali, you  might know, is the man currently
in the eye of the storm as India’s biggest tax-defaulter, and thought to
have billions stashed away in those Swiss and suchlike other banks.



*Corruption vs All the Rest*



The fact here, we hold, is a rather ugly one.  Crimes issuing from class or
caste  or community or gender based  oppressions have never borne the same
purchase among upwardly-mobile Indians as “corruption” for the two reasons
that “corruption” as enemy brooks no opposition, obliges no self-definition
and scrutiny, and  can be fashionably deployed to decry not just politicians
but the institution of politics per se.  It was no mere accident that the
Nazis during the twenties and thirties of the last century in Germany made a
big issue of “corruption” with the ulterior purpose of  doing dirt on all
democratic institutions floated by the Wiemar republic, and dissolving the
nation into the State, and vice versa.  Keeping those histories in mind,
there is more than a valid point to voices today who caution that the Anna
Hazare  phenomenon has to it aspects which are deeply anti-democratic, and
which threaten to void all institutional procedures authorized by the
Constitutional regime.  Recall that only some months ago the Left parties
came out in even bigger mobilization against corruption on the streets of
India; yet one saw nothing of that protest on India’s  gung-ho electronic
channels. What one did see over the last week of the Anna  mobilization
however, was more than a sprinkling of  Hindutva-based icons and groups,
making strenuous efforts to float symbols and slogans with barely concealed
pedigree.  Predictably, one did not see a single shot of  supporters of the
cpi (ml) who, in their wisdom, had decided to stand with the Anna-led
protestors  at  Jantar Mantar.



Put the question to any of India’s current day urban-elite young person as
to whether the roots of corruption being talked about lie only in  corrupt
politicians or in a political economy driven by neoliberal capitalism, and
you will be told unambiguously that the latter has nothing to do with what
has been happening.  Some reason why during the current campaign one has
heard no mention of corporate houses whose corruption it is at bottom that
has been spilling all over the systems of governance.  After all, those
corporate fortunes are precisely where so many of the protestors who have
been on display hope to  find  entry as India rises and shines.  Not to
speak of systems of electoral funding that ensure that politicians must  do
the pay back.  Again, not an issue for the “corruption”-baiters.  And for
good reason: make elections state-funded, and the corporates lose what clout
they have under the present dispensation.  Anna’s  young warriors might not
see that as a desirable prospect, assuming that they have any use for
elections in the first place.  The eradication of corruption  merely and
only requires the clenched fist from the Right.



You may then well wonder whether we  will  soon see  another Anna-type
“movement” on the subject of  refurbishing the governmental draft of a bill
designed to eradicate communal mayhems, or an Anna putsch to seek the
adoption of the Womens’s Reservation Bill, pending in parliament now for
aeons.  Or to force the government to draft purposive legislations to
eradicate  female infanticide, atrocities on dalits and adivasis, or to
enforce without nonsense the right to food and education.  Or how about
ensuring clean drinking water,     affordable health-care and sanitation,
and securing housing, and freedom from police atrocities to some eighty
percent of Indians?  Or easy and credible access to systems of  justice and
grievance redressal?  Or justice for a Binayak Sen who rots in a Chattisgarh
jail on a charge of sedition, and sentenced without a shred of proof  for no
less than life.  Or indeed a “movement” in support of an Irom Sharmila in
Manipur who has now entered the  *eleventh year* of her fast  (kept forcibly
alive on drips by a terrified state) for the withdrawal of the draconian
Armed Forces Special Powers Act.  Not a chance.



I doubt me very much that any such “movements” are in the offing on behalf
of the support base that has been on show during the Anna-led putsch.



And thereby hangs a tale.



Just as well to suggest that in the days to come  the ideological content,
the active politics, the leadership-profile, and the Constitutional
consequences of this recent event receive considered debate.  Most so among
sections of  civil society and individuals whom I respect deeply who for
idealistic reasons chose to be a part of what they thought to be  a
single-minded objective  (the *Lokpal *Bill), with insufficient attention
perhaps to the surrounding political milieu of the Anna  event.



-- 
Adv Kamayani Bali Mahabal
+919820749204
skype-lawyercumactivist
*
*
*"Nobody is giving up violence. Neither the state nor the Maoists are giving
up violence. I am interested in furthering my cause, which is the cause of
peace with justice.- DR BINAYAK SEN *
*www.binayaksen.net*
*PL SIGN ONLINE PETITION: *
http://www.petitiononline.com/sen2010/petition.html
*JOIN THE FACEBOOK EVENT: ONE MILLION FACES
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=179177728772740*
*FREE BINAYAK SEN CAMPAIGN VIDEOS*
*http://www.youtube.com/user/Kamayaninumerouno#grid/user/B4A70E211712242B*
*
*
*
*
*
*

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"humanrights movement" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/humanrights-movement?hl=en.

Reply via email to