Why does Modi do what he does ?

Every ruler wants to be remembered for something or the other when they die. There never was any selfless work. Those who we remember for ‘nishkaam karma’ fooled us into remembering them for that.

Jawaharlal Nehru is remembered for being the architect of democracy in India. And rightly so.

Most of my student life I spent abusing Nehru – the man who sowed seeds of dynasty. I blamed him for Chinese aggression, Kashmir dispute, price rise, unemployment, poverty, hunger, pretty much everything I didn’t like. I never read much about him, or for that matter anybody or anything, but for me he was a villain.

It took me seven years of Narendra Modi’s rule to realize Nehru’s greatness.

A few months ago I was at a temple festival where my drinking buddies, all of them bhakts, cornered me, telling me how Modi is being victimized by everyone. One versus 10 arguing about Modi’s policies, but still he is the victim.

I said, “All these years I abused Nehru, I could do so freely, no one ever threatened me. I do that now with Modi the chances are I will not escape without a sound thrashing.”

That is why Nehru is the architect of democracy in India. Without him, India could well have become a nut case like Pakistan.

Poor Lal Bahadur Shastri didn’t rule enough to leave a legacy.

India Gandhi will be remembered as the Iron Lady. The Wonder Woman who won a war with Pakistan and split that country into two. The only war since WW2 to have a clear victor.

Rajiv Gandhi, unfortunately, will not be remembered for much. He was dashing and handsome, but that pretty much sums up his term. He was unlucky not to have ruled the country for long to leave a legacy.

Narasimha Rao perhaps would have been happy surviving his full term. But he left a lasting legacy. The man who transformed India. He is the reason I have a decent job in Delhi despite being an utter flop in studies. One could argue there was no escaping liberalization, but had it come 5 or 10 years later, I would have spent my post-college days standing in queues outside the employment exchange.

Atal Bihari Vajpayee wanted to leave a grand legacy. He wanted to solve the Kashmir issue, but didn’t reach anywhere. So did Manmohan Singh, but he too failed after 10 years in power. While they will be remembered for the economic reforms, welfare schemes, nuke test and deals, will they feature in school history textbooks 20 years down the line? Highly unlikely.

Now where does Narendra Modi stand?

Often people ask why Modi does what he does?

To win elections, one might say, but that goes without saying. There is more to what he does.

The PM started by wanting to be a superhero of sports. A leader who got India its rightful place on the global stage. That has got him nowhere.

Like a good batsman, Modi studied the pitch and paced his innings. The construction of the Ram mandir, the removal Article 370 and the possible enactment of a Uniform Civil Code in his remaining term will ensure he is remembered as the architect of the Hindu Rashtra.

Modi’s place is assured in history textbooks in the decades to come.

For good or bad, he is up there with Nehru, Indira and Rao.

But that is not enough. Modi’s dil maange more.

This is where the rebuilding of New Delhi comes into the picture.

The Dilli we have been taught about has many faces – Indraprastha built by the Pandavas, Old Delhi built by the Mughals, New Delhi built by the British. Add to that the Modern Delhi being built by Modi.

Years from now, when my grandkids visit Delhi, the tour guide will tell them, “On your right is the Parliament, this is the central vista where the govt is run from, that is the national war memorial, there is an Amar Jawan Jyothi there in memory of fallen soldiers, look at this Netaji statue, etc etc… All this was built by Narendra Damodardas Modi.”

You may want to forget Modi, but Modi is here to be remembered.

Mandir Needs Modi More Than Modi Needs Mandir

Ten days ago, millions of Indians watched Prime Minister Narendra Modi preside over the bhumi pujan for the construction of the Ram mandir. The seating arrangement was a message in itself. The sants and spiritual leaders got a place in the audience, the RSS chief, UP governor and CM sat a few inches back forming a square. The pride of place was reserved for Modi. 

Modi that day was the king conducting ashwamedha.

His critics were appalled to see the absence of Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi, they were upset to see the line between the State and religion converge. They called Modi the publicity hunter who stole the whole occasion for his sole benefit – the man who won't share the limelight with anyone.

I differ.

If Modi wasn't there, there wouldn't be a show to talk of.

Do you think people will switch on TV to watch Mahant Nithya Gopal Das and Mohan Bhagwat, or for that matter Advani, do the puja? Nah.

Did you see any buildup to the bhumi pujan off the TV screens. Many RWAs asked people to light up diyas and celebrate Diwali in advance. I feared I would be blacklisted if I didn't do it. But to my surprise in an apartment complex of 1,000 flats, hardly 10 to 20 households celebrated Diwali that day.

Do you see anyone rushing to donate money to build the temple?

Do you see anyone quitting jobs to do kar seva in Ayodhya, though you may argue enough jobs will be lost to coronavirus pandemic and there will be enough jobless people do the honours when the time comes.

Even when the Supreme Court gave its verdict, gifting the land to Ram Lalla, viewers switched off television sets once the ruling was read out.

The mandir movement died long ago. To be precise: on December 6, 1992. Narasimha Rao, knowingly or unknowingly, finished the agitation. Once the Babri Masjid was gone, the Hindus didn't feel the emotional connect anymore. It didn't win anyone votes in all the elections that followed over three decades that even saw 10 years of Manmohan Singh rule.

Half of India's current population was born after 1992, says an Indian Express report. None of them saw the rath ratra or the riots it triggered.

The excitement about the mandir is limited to TV, with much of its audience above 40 – the generation that actually saw or took part in the movement. The rest are on Netflix or Amazon or YouTube or any of the hundreds of OTTs.

That is not to say Hindutva is dead. Hindutva is alive and kicking. It has metamorphosed into Moditva, which is essentially Hindutva raised to the power of two. Mandir is only a small subset. 

It is safe to say the mandir needs Modi more than Modi needs the mandir.

What Modi is doing Manmohan couldn’t have done

Sometime when the the capital city was done with rioting, when the ruling party was plotting the fall of a state govt, when the country was busy wondering if the junior finance minister actually said goli maaro, an Opposition leader warned the novel coronavirus was heading India’s way and it wasn’t getting the respect it deserved.

That Opposition leader, you may find it hard to believe, was the Pappu of Indian politics - Rahul Gandhi. Now his fans are asking what if Rahul Gandhi was the PM and not Narendra Modi. Would India have been better prepared?

That is an unfair question to ask. We know what Modi’s performance is like but we don’t have any work by Rahul Gandhi that could be compared with Modi’s. When he could have become a minister and honed his skills under the best tutor he could possibly get, he refused. Instead he chose to wield the remote control to the govt even as he let his advisors remote control him.

Now one can argue, as I often do, it is better to have someone who does nothing than have someone who does demonetisation.

The valid comparison one can make though is between Manmohan Singh and Narendra Modi.

What if Manmohan was PM

We can safely assume Manmohan’s govt would have been prepared for the coronavirus crisis. We can expect that for many reasons. He has done it many times in the past, so he can sniff trouble when it comes. We would have had enough PPE kits, we would have mass produced ventilators, etc, etc.

Yes, there would be media plants on how Sonia Gandhi put her foot down, Rahul Gandhi put his best foot forward, how Digvijaya had his feet on the ground, while the sardar was always on the wrong foot.

In all that chaos, Manmohan would have ensured order, and seek no credit.

But we would still be unhappy. We Indians are like that. How many Indian victories we didn’t savour because Sachin Tendulkar scored a century and the match got over with a few overs to spare. Instead what we ask is why didn’t Tendulkar win that match we lost.

Now think of the present day. We didn’t plan for the novel coronavirus and we are where we are now. In such a situation Narendra Modi is the best PM India can have.

No other PM could have announced a lockdown at 4 hours’ notice.

No other PM could have asked citizens to bang their thalis and belans and katoris and made them do exactly that.

No other PM could have asked citizens to light lamps and candles and mobile flashlights and received total obedience.

In fact they did more than what Modi asked for. Like the old Hindi dialogue goes, Modi ne dil manga, hum jaan dene ko taiyaar hai.

No other PM could have made the Amit Shahs, the Ajit Dovals, the Rajnath Singhs of his govt fall in line so meekly. No hunt for headlines, no hunt for credit, it is all reserved for the Saheb.

No other PM will come out of the crisis unscathed and blemishless like Modi is going to do. The man is going to blame every failure on coronavirus - the failing economy, the social strife over citizenship law, the Kashmir distrust, the badly made dhoklas you get in Aggarwal’s mithai shop. You name it, it was all because of corona. And the countrymen believe it.

Some time last week, a message started spreading that we all have to stand in the balconies for 5 minutes to salute the PM. We were all getting ready to do exactly that -- some out of fear and some out of bhakti -- when a wise soul said it was a prank.

Good or bad, it is this unquestioned obedience to Modi that is going to save our lives in the pandemic, though many of us may not have a job to survive.

Jaan hai to jahaan hai.

CAG's Report on Rafale Explained

After Aiyar's 'neech' remark, Modi alleges Cong-Pak nexus