Modi
ji and Khan saheb
Today, in the
age of social media we are living in the cosmos of parallel universes and
alternate realities or rather fabricated realities. These notions of parallel
universes and multiple realities were, so far a good fodder for sci-fi movies
but social media has facilitated, as the best carrier, for them to invade our
commonplace existence. A human being juggles between several identities namely
; his real life identity, Facebook identity, Twitter identity, Orkut identity
and the ultimately distorted one, which comes out as a consequence of juggling
between these multiple identities. This digital tampering with human existence
has not only affected his routine, social life but also his realm of thoughts
i.e. the realm where theories of political science, philosophy and metaphysics
are formed, the realms where the foundation of future political, social and educational
institutions are laid. In this scenario, it becomes essential to identify the
points and sources of such tampering and, fix them in advance. One such case of
digital distortion is the subject matter of this article.
Today, from
various quarters, I hear about the comparison between Mr. Narendra Modi and Mr.
Imraan Khan saheb. Since the subcontinent is having its own bouts of democracy
these days, such comparisons have become common. The primary reason for the
comparison is the vigorous and over enthusiastic presence of their supporters and
their campaign machinery on social media. Besides this, the comparison emanates
from the nature of support base for both of them. It has been observed and
alleged that they are primarily middle class heroes. They are the ones with
whom middle class, with all its ambitions, reservations, confusions and
self-serving presumptions can identify with. The overarching presence of
social media in their campaign machinery has brought them more or less in the
same league.
But, I feel that
these similarities are superficial and they end here. One need not draw too
many political theories and conclusions about political processes, developments
and thoughts from this superficial and the so-called digital cloud which hides
the reality.
As far as
support base is concerned Mr. Khan could purely be categorized as a middle
class candidate but Mr. Modi is much more than a middle class hero. He is a
trained RSS (Rashtriya Svayasewak Sangh) cadre who has spent years, spreading
Hindutva ideology and, doing social work in rural areas, among the tribal community.
So, he possesses a great understanding of rural society, its concerns and
culture. His supporters, not only in Gujrat, but also in other states of India have
strong rural base. He is a quite popular character in rural areas of India. The
imagery, examples used by him in his election speeches and political rhetoric
are often reflective of his rural experience and connect with the masses. Besides
this, there is an additional reason for his support in rural areas. Mr. Modi’s
support and popularity emanates from two sources :a) His governance model and
development initiatives; b) Hindutva ideology, brilliantly spiced with rousing communal
rhetoric.
In urban areas,
Modi Ji is better known for his polarizing agenda, dictatorial approach and
efficient governance. The urban middle-class, though likes him for his smart
and high-tech governance, but it also has some soft corner, if not for his
communal and hatred agenda, then at the least for his nationalist, pro-hindutva
ideology and his opposition to extreme minority appeasement. In rural areas his
efficient governance model (real or hyped: that needs to be investigated) may
not be that popular but, without doubt there is a big constituency for Hindutva
ideology. In addition to this the farmers have lately started identifying Mr.
Modi with 24 hr. electricity, excellent agricultural extension facilities and a
helpful bureaucracy. I have often observed in my personal conversations with
the people of Gujrat, from all the communities, that they neglect his polarizing
agenda for his efficient government. Even the Muslims of Gujrat have opined, in
my personal interactions with them, their preference for Mr. Modi.
The next
important issue regarding middle-class support base is the role, nature and
strength of middle class in both the countries. In India, although the size of
middle class (25%) is smaller than that of Pakistan (about 40%) but role played
by it in political processes and economy is much more significant than the one
played by its counterpart in Pakistan. The nature of middle class, its voting behavior
is different in both the countries. In my personal interaction with many
representatives of Pakistani middle class, I have felt that its tolerance for
democracy and its side-effects is really low. It often indulges in romancing with
dictatorial utopias and corruption-free bacchanalias. Its support for Imran
Khan was not, because of any love for democracy but, because of a certain image
i.e. of a young, modern, liberal, handsome and promising man with solutions for
all the ills of Paksitani society and polity, which Mr. Khan projected against
the corrupt and status-quoist government of Zardari Saheb. This support comes
out of the tendency to look outward for all the solutions. It comes out of the
psyche of waiting for avtars (incarnations) to solve your issues, when talking
actions on your own gets you out of your comfort zone, physically as well as
mentally. Then the middle class do not play a very important role on opinion
making and government decisions. It does not have a strong impact of government
policy.
On the other
hand, Indian middle class has no demonstrated love for any form of dictatorship.
Indira ji’s emergency taught the lessons of dictatorship to Indian middle
class. There all fantasies of dictatorial utopias vanished with that dark phase
of Indian democracy. In spite of the fact that Indian middle class wants
efficient and quick-decision making government, it shows no penchant for any
dictatorships. The anti-emergency protests were led by middle-class student
groups and leaders. Indian middle class is the bedrock of India’s political and
economic growth. This major presence in the political and economic growth
scenario could be traced to a different growth trajectory that the political
and economic institutions took place in India. Hence an outright comparison
between the two, without taking into account the contextual factors, will be
unjustified. Nevertheless, broadly speaking we can say that the two sets of ‘Imran
khan-Pakistani middle class’ and ‘Narendra Modi-Indian Middle class’ should be
seen and anaylzed in more detail, capturing those nuances and subtle features
which arise out of broader socio-economic and political forces and the course
of development these institutions took in these two countries. A comparison
based on literal or conventional understanding of the terms would be
superficial and misleading. Therefore the origin, attitude, nature and the role
of middle class in both the countries needs to be studied in more detail
Besides this, it
is not the case that entire middle class uniformly supports Modi ji. A major
section especially the intelligentsia does not approve of the polarizing
policies and communal ideology of Mr. Modi. There are several other chasms. The
middle-class is divided along the lines of caste, community and ideology. Even
among Muslims there is a strong middle class and surprisingly even in that
group, one can very often find Modi supporters.
Both the leaders
have glaring differences in their personalities. Mr. Modi has led a religious,
regimented life of a Sangh worker, steeped in Hindutva ideology. He has been
trained and has retained his own strains of fanaticism from Sangh background.
On the other hand, Mr Imraan Khan has led a very, flamboyant, and glamorous
life, basking in the limelight of cricket and his adventures with white
beauties. There is slight funny, comparison which can be drawn. People like Mr.
Imraan Khan have already been through the ‘Jannat’(heaven) promised by
religious scriptures, where as people like Mr. Modi are in the preparatory stage
for the so called ‘Indralok’(Hindu notion of heaven) or ‘Jannat’. Despite being
at two opposite ends, still there is something that connects them!!!!!
Besides this, Mr.
Modi has served almost three terms as chief minister so he is a well trained
politician in realpolitik, whereas Imran khan has no actual experience of
being in power. He still dwells in the
comfort zone of a naïve and moth-eaten visionary, confused between the
idealism, pragmatism, religious fundamentalism, opportunism and of course, last
but not the least ‘pleasure…ism’. His development agenda based on ‘Bihar model’
and his panacea to tackle fundamentalism by appeasing Taliban smacks of sheer
immaturity and lack of understanding. Basically, the societal contexts in which
the two leaders are operating are very different. In Pakistan, the issues of development
and corruption are not the real issues. Mr. Imran khan has not been able to
identify the real issues impacting and dismantling that society. Those real
issues are religious fundamentalism and its increasing and overarching
presence, devastating almost all the political, social and cultural
institutions and the last remnants of state power and legitimacy. The society in
which Mr. Modi flourished i.e. Gujrat is also a highly communal one, but its,
more important concerns are material prosperity and economic growth. So, in
that society the issues of development, corruption and effective governance are
the real issues and State government’s better performance on those fronts won
support and nation-wide popularity for Mr. Modi. All over the country, not just
middle class but people from all classes, communities and backgrounds now feel
connected with these issues. In fact in Indian politics these days, the trend
is not of ideologies but substantial developments. The days of dreamy
ideologies, religious passions and narrow minded caste fraternities are more or
less gone. This is the reason why Mr. Nitish Kumar has been successful in
Bihar. If not Mr. Modi anyone who has proved himself as pro economic reforms
and efficient administrator would have been able to woo the masses.
In the light of
above analysis, I prefer to conclude that Mr. Modi’s electoral future could
most certainly be very different from that of Khan saheb. The current state of
affairs in India is marked by status-quoism, complete policy paralysis and
corruption, demands a leader who means business and efficiency. Hence in spite
of intense hatred for his communal ideologies the sections of intelligentsia
has also started nurturing hopes in Modi ji. They have seen a government full
of brightest intellectuals performing worse on the front of governance so now
the search begins for sound and effective leadership.
No comments:
Post a Comment