The Sadhvi's remarks and the implications for India - Newskarnataka.com
adhvi Niranjan Jyothi is important to the BJP’s electoral agenda, and they cannot afford to drop her from the ministry, the sustained demand of the combined opposition in parliament. This much is clear from the PM’s refusal to take action on the collective demand of the opposition for the same following her controversial remarks on the 2nd of December during an election rally in Delhi when she said in Hindi, "It is you whom must decide whether the Government in Delhi will be run by the Sons of Ram or by illegimates”
Sadhvi Niranjan Jyoti subsequently expressed “deep regret” over her remarks, when she was compelled to by a public outcry. She said she did not intend to hurt anyone’s feelings but by then, she already had, and the damage was done.
Who’s feelings did she think she hurt when she expressed 'regret'?
If the remarks were really inadvertent and not by design, her apology on the floor of parliament after the controversy erupted, which was not an apology per se, but an expression of deep regret, would possibly have been accepted.
By all accounts, and from whichever side of the fence one views them, the remarks were deliberately designed to hurt one section of people – those who are not yet fully saffronized, but importantly, that was not the key objective. It was designed to energize and polarize into a winning corner, those that are partially saffronized with those that are wholly so.
This is an effective electoral strategy of the BJP, that has seen success across the May 2014 Lok Sabha elections, the state elections that followed it and it will be continued to be used across the country, when and where elections are held. It will continue to pay dividends for the BJP and their main backers the RSS, who now have unqualified power in their back pocket for the first time since independence, and are certainly not likely to let go of it – after all its been a long wait and hard earned.
Who’s feelings did she think she hurt when she expressed 'regret'?
If the remarks were really inadvertent and not by design, her apology on the floor of parliament after the controversy erupted, which was not an apology per se, but an expression of deep regret, would possibly have been accepted.
By all accounts, and from whichever side of the fence one views them, the remarks were deliberately designed to hurt one section of people – those who are not yet fully saffronized, but importantly, that was not the key objective. It was designed to energize and polarize into a winning corner, those that are partially saffronized with those that are wholly so.
This is an effective electoral strategy of the BJP, that has seen success across the May 2014 Lok Sabha elections, the state elections that followed it and it will be continued to be used across the country, when and where elections are held. It will continue to pay dividends for the BJP and their main backers the RSS, who now have unqualified power in their back pocket for the first time since independence, and are certainly not likely to let go of it – after all its been a long wait and hard earned.
Opposition recalcitrance – Justified?
The opposition world view and actions based on that view, may appear opportunistic, but the way it pans out in the days to come may have a long term soothing effect on the communal cauldron that many desperately seek to stir, or it may not, and this could be the signal that many are looking for.
It’s a rare chance for the opposition to beat the growing clout of the BJP both within and outside parliament, and seeing this opportunity they have closed ranks. They make a valid point too. The Sadhvi is a minister of the union government, and anything she says can have either a bearing on government policy, or actually reflect it.
Secondly such polarizing remarks are in contrast to the principles enshrined in the constitution, the architect of which ironically was the champion of the weaker sections of society, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, and when uttered by a minister who has taken an oath to defend the constitution, it amounts to a grave misconduct, and consequently she must be dropped .
Thirdly, if the Sadhvi’s remarks do reflect in any way the policy of the government or the ruling party, this will be in direct contrast to the avowed policy of the government as enshrined in the president’s message to parliament at the start of this government’s tenure, that of “development” first.
And lastly, and certainly not the least, it has important implications for the country’s secular fabric, which post the BJP government’s taking over, has emboldened the more radical of its associate organizations to pursue their own agendas which are in contrast to the stated agenda of of the Union government – development.
It’s a rare chance for the opposition to beat the growing clout of the BJP both within and outside parliament, and seeing this opportunity they have closed ranks. They make a valid point too. The Sadhvi is a minister of the union government, and anything she says can have either a bearing on government policy, or actually reflect it.
Secondly such polarizing remarks are in contrast to the principles enshrined in the constitution, the architect of which ironically was the champion of the weaker sections of society, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, and when uttered by a minister who has taken an oath to defend the constitution, it amounts to a grave misconduct, and consequently she must be dropped .
Thirdly, if the Sadhvi’s remarks do reflect in any way the policy of the government or the ruling party, this will be in direct contrast to the avowed policy of the government as enshrined in the president’s message to parliament at the start of this government’s tenure, that of “development” first.
And lastly, and certainly not the least, it has important implications for the country’s secular fabric, which post the BJP government’s taking over, has emboldened the more radical of its associate organizations to pursue their own agendas which are in contrast to the stated agenda of of the Union government – development.
Disruption of Parliament – an eye for an eye?
No work has been done over four days in the Rajya Sabha, where the combined opposition has a majority that will quickly dwindle, with state after state going the BJP way, while in the Lok Sabha, a firm Speaker and a brute majority have ensured some work is being done, albeit in the absence of the opposition who have no option but to walk out to register their protests over the issue.
The opposition cites the similar methods of the current ruling dispensation to highlight differences with the government on policy matters while they were in the opposition, to justify their own disruptive practices. Now in the government, the BJP differs, but their defense is hampered by their own past sins.
N.Ram, the widely respected senior journalist, speaking on a television debate yesterday, approved of the opposition’s parliamentary disruption on the issue and said the disruptions are justified and must continue till the issue reaches a logical conclusion as the issues they deal with are very important for the nation.
No doubt, an ambitious legislative agenda of the BJP is getting derailed, but they seem have to revised their priorities in favor of defending the Sadhvi for electoral gains, over the much touted development agenda, or what else will explain their refusal to drop the minister from the council of ministers?
PM Modi’s silence
The change in priorities is evident in the PM’s refusal to unequivocally condemn the remarks of the Sadhvi both inside and outside parliament, and then attributing them to her inexperience and rural background. It was a clearest indication of where the party’s priorities lie in the face of sustained questioning on the impact of such remarks on the future polity of India and the prolonged disruption of parliament.
No work has been done over four days in the Rajya Sabha, where the combined opposition has a majority that will quickly dwindle, with state after state going the BJP way, while in the Lok Sabha, a firm Speaker and a brute majority have ensured some work is being done, albeit in the absence of the opposition who have no option but to walk out to register their protests over the issue.
The opposition cites the similar methods of the current ruling dispensation to highlight differences with the government on policy matters while they were in the opposition, to justify their own disruptive practices. Now in the government, the BJP differs, but their defense is hampered by their own past sins.
N.Ram, the widely respected senior journalist, speaking on a television debate yesterday, approved of the opposition’s parliamentary disruption on the issue and said the disruptions are justified and must continue till the issue reaches a logical conclusion as the issues they deal with are very important for the nation.
No doubt, an ambitious legislative agenda of the BJP is getting derailed, but they seem have to revised their priorities in favor of defending the Sadhvi for electoral gains, over the much touted development agenda, or what else will explain their refusal to drop the minister from the council of ministers?
PM Modi’s silence
The change in priorities is evident in the PM’s refusal to unequivocally condemn the remarks of the Sadhvi both inside and outside parliament, and then attributing them to her inexperience and rural background. It was a clearest indication of where the party’s priorities lie in the face of sustained questioning on the impact of such remarks on the future polity of India and the prolonged disruption of parliament.
Elections in India, won on the basis of such polarization, will have a long term impact on the secular fabric of the nation that has been built brick by brick on the basis of a constitution that has stood the test of time and the fragility of a widely diverse nation. As one leader said, it will lead to ghettoisation on a scale never envisaged before, and this is what a combined opposition appears to be genuinely concerned about.
These concerns must be addressed over the weekend.
No comments:
Post a Comment