Hate-Modi is acceptable, but not the denigration of Indian democracy’s biggest festival that is constitutionally mandated the-first-past-the-post system based election and its result that leads to formation of internationally appreciated governments since 1951, the year when first General Election was held post-independence India. Though losing political parties have accused winners for frauds after each election, the verdicts have been -as a rule- respected as per the constitution’s mandate. And wherever there is any hiccup, judiciary has stepped in and prevailed with respect.
The above mentioned issue came to mind when this author read eminent journalist, former Editor-in-Chief of The Indian Express, former President of the Editor Guild of India and present Editor-in-Chief and Founder of digital media The Print Shekhar Gupta’s tweeted dated 23 December 2020 that I quote “A government of the 38% people, by the 38% people, and for the 38% people” and attached column with same title as the tweet authored by Shivam Vij published in The Print on the same day.
Of course, this kind of comment is nothing new since GE2014. Earlier, eminent politician and estranged BJP leader Yashwant Sinha branded ‘the Modi government of the 31% people, by the 31% people and for the 31% people’. This is a different matter that the Modi government’s vote share went up from 31% in GE2014 to 38% in GE2019. And, in GE2024, the vote share may go up or down, that is difficult to predict three and half years before. But, the government will be formed and the nation will be ruled as had been in 1989 -albeit for a shorter period and mid-term election held- when the party/alliance called National Front (NF), which formed the government despite having own only 143 seats with 18% vote share, the lowest ever for a ruling party and alliance in the history of Democratic India, as per the constitutional mandate. However, the said minority government had made the laws in the Parliament which were enforced by the government machineries, and people respected the same.
Has anybody then made ‘the government of 31%/38% of people….’ kind of comments when one of the most controversial decision in independent India that is implementation of Mandal Commission report, which was responsible for large-scale riot and violence for months together and divided the society on the ground of castes, picking up the report from Home Ministry’s decade old cold-store with objective to create an invincible vote-bank? In my knowledge, there was none as such.
From 1989 to till 2009, as per the-first-past-the-post system of elections, 10 governments were formed and only three of them completed full-terms, but no party had majority of MP seats ie 50% +1 seats won, forget about getting the government with vote-share 51% to 100% of the people, by the people and for the people, which had never happened in independent India, even during heyday of the so-called great Pandit Nehru who despite being rejected by Congress (0/15) became first PM of India. And during the period from 1989 to 2014, Indian democracy had a Head of the Government ie PM for two consecutive full-terms after GE2004 and GE2009 without ever being elected though the same was not constitutionally incorrect. And it is to be noted that in GE2004 and in GE2009, the ruling party Congress had vote-share of 19% and 28% respectively.
Now, let’s discuss the content of the column by Shivam Vij which was appreciated by the eminent journalist, Mr. Shekhar Gupta with his personal tweet highlight.
In the intro of the column, Vij quoted former President late Pranab Mukharjee’s comment on CAA and argued that ‘The mandate is to govern as a majority party with a stable government, but carry others with you’. Is Pranab’s comment a sermon and above the wisdom of Parliament and Supreme Court? If so why his comment on RSS founder that he is a greatest patriot, and RSS as a patriotic organization are criticized and branded communalism? CAA bill has been passed by Parliament after lengthy discussions, and the Apex Court and the Minority Commission have not found in the same any scope of loss of citizenship of any genuine citizens of India. Where the government has left the people who are not part of 38%, if Pranab mean to say? Here, I quote what The Print had reported dated 17 January 2020 with a quote from Indian secular’s high priest called Shahi Imam of Delhi Jama Masjid, “The Shahi Imam of Delhi’s Jama Masjid Ahmed Bukhari changed his stance on the Citizenship (Amendment) Act Friday, speaking out against it before the Jumah prayers. At the same time, Bhim Army chief Chandrashekhar Azad sat on the stairs of the mosque in protest against the law. Only a month ago, Bukhari had defended the legislation, saying ‘it has nothing to do with Muslims’. But Friday, he remembered those killed in the anti-CAA violence in Uttar Pradesh.” Is it wrong in the part of Indian Government to welcome persecuted from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan? Indian civilization has welcomed persecuted, and preserves their culture for generations which India’s Western breed so-called secular and liberals preferred to forget for their vested interest.
In the next paragraph, the author argued that for BJP with 303 three seats in Lok Sabha and 38% vote share, allies does not matter in GE2024 to come to power. He picked up BJP allies such as Shiv Sena and Akali Dal, which left NDA in the recent past, and their politics ignoring BJP’s magnanimity in accepting JDU supremo Nitish Kumar as CM of Bihar, though latter’s party had much lass MLAs elected in just concluded election, as per poll commitment. When eminent columnist ignored JDU issue, he picked up the cause of Shiv Sena, a party of undemocratic dynasty, regional chauvinist, hafta collectors, and the last but not the least is the party which used to say openly and proudly that its cadres had pulled down Babri Masjid, the prayer house of secularists. Regarding undemocratic dynasty owned corrupt Akali Dal(Badal), less said is the best as it is now the most rejected political outfit in Punjab, now dreaming to return to power piggybacking misguided farmers.
Under the sub-head “Polarisation to retain voters”, the author writes that I quote “where are the jobs, where’s the money in our pockets, where’s the promised bullet train or the doubled farm income” a la they were writing ‘Where is Ram Temple?’ before GE2019, forgetting theirs and Shiv Sena’s opposition to land acquisition for bullet train route, media paddling of fake news on farm reform bill, their alleged sponsors’ export of Covid19 from across the border, and absence of any proof that Modi had promised money to fill journalist pockets (as only journalists and opposition politicians say Modi promised Rs.15 Lakhs). Regarding the comment of 38 per cent versus 62 per cent, I wish to remind the columnist and his applauder that it has been a proofed fact that ‘late Rajiv Gandhi and his party goonda went ahead in more than 3000 Sikh killing spree in 1984 with 48 percent versus 52 percent thought in mind’, and late Pranab Mukharjee, whose statement has been a sermon now, was one of his four senior cabinet ministers then. Was that massacre done because 2% Sikh votes did not carry much importance to Rajiv Gandhi’s Congress?
In so far as Khalistani matter that the author raised, I request him to read what Congress CM Captain Amerinder Singh said. He, after meeting Home Minister in regard to Farm Reform Bill early December 2020, has clearly stated Khalistani element penetrated in Farmers agitation. I wonder how Farmer Agitation supporters’ vandalisation of Mahatma Gandhi bust, the apostle of peace, in Washington could not come to the notice of columnist Vij?
Also the author raised the issue of pro-government channels. If the anti-government channels and media (both Indian and Western) behave like opposition political parties and allegedly present and write like paid media with fake facts like seen in the Vij’s column, what is wrong on the part of pro-government media showing Modi slogan when Bharat Bandh protagonists forced shopkeepers to close their shops which they did not like? The self-designated election tourist cum columnist Shivam Vij also raised EVM issue forgetting since 2000, EVMs have been used in all elections: 4 Lok Sabha and 122 State Legislative Assemblies. Modi was not elected in 2004 and 2009 elections. Was the then Congress led non-BJP parties elected to power manipulating EVM? In 2014, Modi came to power when Congress-led UPA was in power. It is not understood how could Modi manipulate EVMs to win the GE2014 when his political opponents were in power in Centre and majority of states?
By being engaged in this kind of fake and baseless anti-government propaganda, the media and its loudmouths are losing the trust of public which is nothing less than self-destruction of one of the most important pillar of democracy. Now, due to this kind of activities, the mainstream media are slowly but steadily losing the space to social media where Tom-Dick-Harish have started prevailing. Yes, the journalists can indulge in self-destruction. But, who has given them right to denigrate the credibility of Indian Democracy. Modi has not introduced the-first-past-the-post election system. How could the same found defective only when Modi got elected not once but twice with increased vote share?
