Some thoughts on Modi after the latest "puppy" comments and the reactions of his fans....
I was struck by how those of us against Modi feel the need to be defensive and justify ourselves.
Best case for Modi: He was CM when law and order broke down in his state and 2000 people were massacred while the government chose not to respond. Worst case: He is accused of having orchestrated it.
Best case:He has supervised economic growth that is not significantly higher than his predecessors. Worst case:This is Chicago school economics with no inclusive growth. There's extra-judicial killings.
There's the ghettoisation and economic boycott of Muslims. There's an autocratic leadership style with opponents being "eliminated". There's zero accountability towards the environmental considerations of his business decisions as well as to marginalised sections of society. There's millions paid to publicists and lobbyists to exaggerate his achievements and build a propaganda machine. There's the henchmen like Amit Shah. There's the exposes like Tehelka that have been buried or stonewalled.
The crazy part is that all this is documented. All this is can be read about. in books, in newspapers, in magazines, in Government reports... by anyone who chooses to do some basic research.
And yet when we say someone like this is not fit to lead our country we need to defend ourselves against people who can't give any facts beyond opinions like "he is decisive, he is good for the economy, he isn't corrupt, what about the Congress in 1984?"
1) I would not vote for rajiv Gandhi... but look around. He isn't here. And no one is making Jagdish Tytler or Sajjan Kumar a PM candidate
2) 2 wrongs do not make a right
3) The same things that people praise about Modi have been used to praise EVERY fascist leader from Hitler to Mussolini to Pinochet. But then of course you can't expect "fans" to have a worldview that is based on facts and learning from history.
"Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it"
Best case for Modi: He was CM when law and order broke down in his state and 2000 people were massacred while the government chose not to respond. Worst case: He is accused of having orchestrated it.
Best case:He has supervised economic growth that is not significantly higher than his predecessors. Worst case:This is Chicago school economics with no inclusive growth. There's extra-judicial killings.
There's the ghettoisation and economic boycott of Muslims. There's an autocratic leadership style with opponents being "eliminated". There's zero accountability towards the environmental considerations of his business decisions as well as to marginalised sections of society. There's millions paid to publicists and lobbyists to exaggerate his achievements and build a propaganda machine. There's the henchmen like Amit Shah. There's the exposes like Tehelka that have been buried or stonewalled.
The crazy part is that all this is documented. All this is can be read about. in books, in newspapers, in magazines, in Government reports... by anyone who chooses to do some basic research.
And yet when we say someone like this is not fit to lead our country we need to defend ourselves against people who can't give any facts beyond opinions like "he is decisive, he is good for the economy, he isn't corrupt, what about the Congress in 1984?"
1) I would not vote for rajiv Gandhi... but look around. He isn't here. And no one is making Jagdish Tytler or Sajjan Kumar a PM candidate
2) 2 wrongs do not make a right
3) The same things that people praise about Modi have been used to praise EVERY fascist leader from Hitler to Mussolini to Pinochet. But then of course you can't expect "fans" to have a worldview that is based on facts and learning from history.
"Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it"
Comments