Secularists are helping build Brand Modi

The naked secularist
R Jagannath, DNA, 1 Apr 2010

How foolish secularists are helping build Brand Modi

Recent media coverage of Narendra Modi's interrogation by the Special
Investigation Team (SIT)and the Amitabh Bachchan controversy constitute
further evidence of the emptiness of Indian secularism. By gloating over
the simple fact that Modi was called by the SIT for questioning, and
then fulminating over his non-appearance on March 21, the secularists
have proved that what they care about is not justice, but their own
vanity. India's humbug secularists have personalised the definition of
secularism for narrow political ends.

It corresponds to no dictionary meaning of the word. Secularism is
defined as the opposite of what the Sangh parivar stands for. Like
Pakistan defining itself as "not India," secularists define themselves
as "not the Sangh parivar". The Sangh is the unspeakable "other", the
demon they are trying to exorcise in themselves. And in Modi they have
found the perfect personification of all that they hate in themselves.

Modi has often been accused - and legitimately - of equating his
state's interests with his own. But his detractors are playing into his
hands. When Amitabh Bachchan is asked to be the state's brand ambassador
for tourism, he is pilloried for his impertinence. Modi may have had his
own agenda in inviting him to promote Gujarat's cause, but isn't that
what politicians do anyway? Why is anyone who promotes Gujarat an
instant target for secularists? This is ideological tyranny.

If Modi is wrapping himself in the state's colours, the secularists are
helping him do so through sheer stupidity. By blasting anyone who is
hired by the state, they are effectively saying that working for Gujarat
is the same as working for Modi. So when Modi says the secularists are
trampling on Gujarati asmita, it is entirelybelievable.

Blind hatred cannot lead to any good. Before the Gujarat elections in
2007, Jairam Ramesh made out a case suggesting that the state's economic
success under Modi was less due to him than the Gujarati's business
instincts - which may be partly true. But this no different from saying
that the UPA's economic performance is due to India's demographic bulge
driven by George Bush's global growth engine -which was equally the
case. Being a supporter of dynasty, Ramesh, of course, won't have the
guts to acknowledge this. But Modi's achievements are worth sullying.

It is also sickening to see secularists salivating at the prospect of
Modi's humiliation - when justice is the priority. No one noted that
Rajiv Gandhi was never called to answer questions on Bofors when it was
more than clear that he and his nominees were the unstated suspects. The
Swedish prosecutor in the Bofors case expressed surprise why Sonia
Gandhi was not quizzed in the scam - when she is also the obvious link
to Ottavio Quattrochi. Is it any surprise that Quattrochi gets a quiet
exit during the UPA regime?

Much is also being made of the fact that the Congress expressed regrets
for the anti-Sikh riots of 1984 while Modi has kept mum. Ask yourself:
is the apology of a Sikh prime minister for his party's anti-Sikh pogrom
really worth taking at face value? Not that apologies make any
difference. LKAdvani's belated "saddest day of my life" apology was not
good enough for the secularists to forgive him for the Babri demolition,
but Manmohan Singh's apology 20 years after 1984 is a wonderful example
of contrition!

As for the Bachchan episode, he has no chance of being excused by the
secular cabal. In fact, he is doubly guilty. His first crime was, of
course, related to the fact that he had the temerity to bat for Gujarat.
His second crime was that he had fallen foul of the Gandhi family.
Combine the two, and he had no chance of being left alone. This is why
Congress party buffoons are busy demanding all kinds of explanations
from him when Ratan Tata, Mukesh Ambani and Anil Ambani -all businessmen
who showered praise on Modi directly - got away unnoticed, as Amitabh
pointed out in his blogs.

It is not anybody's case that Modi should not be punished or tried for
whatever he did or didn't do in 2002. But we have already tried him in
the media and convicted him. Even assuming this is poetic justice for a
man who let unspeakable things happen in his state eight years ago, it
is no excuse for one-sided secularism.

In Hans Christian Andersen's immortal tale, it took the innocence of a
child to tell the emperor that he was wearing no clothes. The emperor's
tailors had told him that the invisible clothes they had made for him
would not be seen by anyone who was "just hopelessly stupid." Since the
emperor did not want to be labelled stupid, he pretended to wear the
clothes when he was really walking stark naked.

It seems our secularists are also running stark naked - and they don't
seem to know it.