KS Muralidharan
Oppose Modi, but be sensible. Don’t lose your sense of proportion, propriety, and probity. Tweeting a hashtag on Modi using cusswords (too vulgar to mention here) and that too from a verified official party Twitter handle like the Aam Aadmi Party did, is just that — trying to win you over by showcasing their stupidity and hatred for Modi. Should one say shame on such secular parties or shame on those who unwillingly and unwittingly support such behaviour?
In Indian politics, stupidity is a bit like a wobbly stock market. No one knows how low it can get.
Consider just one of many Prime Ministerial aspirants lurking before 2024. Mamata Banerjee of the TMC with around three dozen MPs in her kitty and a visible electoral footprint in only one State, brags that the BJP which has pan-India presence barring a few southern states, will not only fail to be the single largest party in 2024 LS polls, but she will lead an opposition-led government at the Centre.
Whoa. No one in his senses would believe this — not even her ardent party workers. So Didi is putting her money on the Indian voter not voting sensibly! In other words, her stupidity is banking on how stupid you, me and all of us can get!
But strangely, a clutch of café intellectuals in the mainstream media run insightful (!) stories on how Mamata Didi, a solitary Bengal Tiger, or Sharad Pawar, a fading Maratha half warrior, and a ridiculously ambitious KCR, a small state satrap, can collectively de-combust the Modi juggernaut.
To say that the BJP will not even be the number one party in 2024 is like saying Narendra Modi will lose in Varanasi.
But expect the ambitious hopefuls and wannabe PM aspirants to say precisely that.
Why act so stupid? Does it even appeal to the voters fanatically opposed to Modi? Can it really move the needle, or upend the narrative?
Even the worst Modi haters know in their hearts, that such utterances are senseless and even demeaning to their intelligence. They also understand that such senseless posture is only a dog whistle to their vote banks.
Not wanting Modi to win is one thing, but believing that Mamata or any leader from the opposition will become PM is going beyond even wishful thinking. It reveals a willingness to expose the country to avoidable danger in these extraordinary circumstances.
With China itching to sneak into Indian terrain, Pakistan desperate to use India to distract its people, and the Ukraine war threatening to disrupt the world economy, India needs a safe hand at the helm to ride over the troubled waters, and even the worst Modi hater knows that is lacking in the opposition. The question they have to answer is: Is your hatred for Modi more than your love for the country?
Before they answer, it is better they pause for a moment and remember the old adage, that in the end, a gambler’s luck always runs out, and the house always wins. Meaning, the majority who decide always win.
Yes, there will always be political somersaults like what Uddhav Thackeray did in Maharashtra after the elections when he won on the weight of Modi and later ditched him to hitch up with the NCP and Congress, but today he is staring at near oblivion. Such triumphs are transient and temporary, and popular mandate has an uncanny knack of making a return — either before or after the subsequent elections.
True, the BJP too is guilty of making equally if not more inane remarks, but they don’t have the body language of a loser, which is essentially because the electoral math is on their side, powered by a solid electoral machinery with boots on the ground to work towards their goal. So they can afford for example to say that Rahul Gandhi will lose from Wayanad and it would certainly not rank as a benchmark for stupidity. On the contrary, it is like a warning bell for the Congress. They can harbour outlandish dreams of becoming a strong force in Tamil Nadu politics, and even DMK-friendly TV channels will take it seriously.
Why then do the PM hopefuls like Mamata, Pawar, KCR, and of course, the forever PM-in-waiting, Rahul Gandhi, compete with each other on proving who is more stupid than the other? And why is the mainstream media peddling such patent nonsense in debates designed as democracy in danger and showcasing the critical necessity of an opposition in a democracy. Are elections meant for voting in a majority or a minority? There is no paradox between the two, as they are two sides of the same coin revealed when the results are out.
The hidden motive for acting stupid like this is that it has currency for the anti-Modi voters, presumably, the minorities the backward class and the Dalits. But the question arises, does this trinity of vote banks comprise brain dead folks, who can’t think for themselves or does their supposed hatred for Modi override what basic common sense tells them? That they need Modi more than the leaders who parade their stupidity to win them over. It is also in their interest to make the transition from the margins to the mainstream of society — and that transition begins at how you make your political choice.
If your choice is made on the premise of blind hatred and uni-dimensional and cynical opposition to Modi, you will continue to be electoral fodder for the secular opposition to Modi, but also the reason for their defeat.
On the other hand, if your choice is made on the premise of issues such as governance, candidate, national issues, credibility, track record, and the like, there will be pressure on all the stakeholders in the political system to make our democracy work more productively for the citizens based on real issues of concern and not fake notions of secularism, the idea of India, silly debates on dictatorial trends in a prime minister who people forget has been voted to office by the people, and not airlifted to Delhi by diktat.
The liberal media keeps the pot boiling by making a big issue of majoritarian rule described as dictatorship in the garb of democracy. While this sounds smart and so saleable because of certain useful historical parallels, this too is a benchmark for stupidity in the present Indian context. The only way our democratic system operates is on the principle of a majority vote, and so the minority who have voted differently cannot devalue and demean the majority who have mandated a party or an individual to power, and dub them as a dictatorship, merely because they have an axe to grind.
There can of course be exceptions like Prime Minister, Smt. Indira Gandhi who showed up her dictatorial side by declaring emergency in 1975 and throwing the opposition to jail. But people taught her a lesson in the ensuing elections in 1977 and India has come a long way since then as a democracy, with systemic safeguards and checks and balances.
So it is not just the opposition to Modi who are being stupid. It is also the media and the voters who exercise their vote on the basis of identity — and though this is certainly not exclusive to Modi haters, the secular satraps by their antics make it seem so.
There is no virtue in stupid and senseless choices. We know, accept and realise that in our life, but the secular and senseless opponents to Modi, are trying to make a virtue of it.
Oppose Modi, but be sensible. Don’t lose your sense of proportion, propriety, and probity. Tweeting a hashtag on Modi using cusswords (too vulgar to mention here) and that too from a verified official party Twitter handle like the Aam Aadmi Party did, is just that — trying to win you over by showcasing their stupidity and hatred for Modi. Should one say shame on such secular parties or shame on those who unwillingly and unwittingly support such behaviour?
Blind, unalloyed, hatred is not uncommon in India. The Hindu majority have been victims in their own land. But we live in self-denial, though the coming of Modi has changed the trajectory of this script. History is unmaking itself. And as this change gains in momentum, those who harbour such brazen, hidden and utterly irrational hatred for Modi in their hearts, will also gain counterweight, even as they diminish in numbers, while amplifying their voice and noise, with help from the western liberal press barons, who are their companions in crime. You can see them in your midst, you can sense their invisible malice hidden behind slick and sophisticated liberals and the coiffed politician. And then it may suddenly dawn on you that in your midst, maybe, just maybe, somebody you know or read is maybe, just maybe, a sleeper cell psychopath in the making — unknowingly, unwittingly, and absolutely innocently.