Modi and Tehelka: Democracy, secularism? Excuse me

Modi men were caught on camera bragging about their sordid acts, which we all knew very well about. Without state complicity the mass level violence of this kind could not be sustained for so long. What probably has shocked us – assuming it has – is the shamelessly remorseless way of admitting it. But then, if we think it is shameless, there is something wrong in our vision. Mr. Modi is not a passionate Hindu, he is just a politician and the carnage was nothing more and nothing less than a political ploy to mobilize votes. The fact that he was voted back in power is proof enough that he did not play the wrong card. This time again, the Tehelka expose, though appreciable, would only benefit him. He is lucky to reap the fruits of what he sowed twice. The riots will doubly fructify for him. So, what was he playing upon? It was and is the egoism of the Hindus and their self-image which is far from flattering. The collective pride of the Hindus seems to have been badly injured making them angry and making them see themselves as a cowardly lot, which is why they seem to be appreciative of violence because violence is the way to assert one’s dominance over others. Non-violence as the tool of the brave is certainly good to hear and might also carry substance but we have not been away from our roots in the jungle for long enough to realize it. In nature, might is right and human beings still see it that way subconsciously. Therefore, Modi is not the problem, we are. He is nothing more than the unification of our collective demonic selves. It is we personified and of course we hate him just like an ugly man hates the mirror. He gave us what we wanted and what we deserved and if it is shameful and sickening, it is we who are sick. He’ll be voted back in power because it is just emergence of symptoms, wait for the diagnosis and the cure will, of course, come much later. Let’s be thoroughly ashamed first. Let’s first learn how to hang our heads in shame before we even dream of holding it high. What democracy, what secularism?

General Musharraf vengeful?

New Delhi

November 8, 2007

8:30 pm

General Musharraf has acted like a general – sensing the danger, he resorted to making a definitive strike. I call it ‘definitive’ not because I think it is the final blow and the tables have been turned and all dangers to Musharraf and his authority conclusively averted, but simply because the blow he has dealt is something that seals things tight in the state of a deadlock. Against the use of brute force only greater brute force can strike and win quickly enough. In this case the greatest force is the military might, which is what General Musharraf has at his command. So, no greater force is available. Now, the only force greater than brute force can be moral force, which is like a storm that first gathers momentum, builds itself and then dashes on. This too is not likely given the fact that if the power is somehow wrenched off Musharraf’s hands – let’s assume – what other hands are available to put it into. Pakistani politicians have made it tough for the electorate to decide in favour of democracy. The Pakistani masses see the rule of Musharraf as a rule clear of political muck and corruption. Things look relatively rosy under Musharraf’s rule. That’s how it appears to be from the outside.

Musharraf won the elections but he doesn’t seem to be a fish that is sure of the waters of democratic process. We may say that he is acting on account of self-interest. I think self-interest would still be there even if it were Benazir Bhutto or Nawaz Sharif or Imran Khan or anyone else. Self-interest is not a political problem, it is human nature. Corrupt motives, however, need to be seen in a dimmer light. And politicians in general have given no hope to Pakistani masses.

Seen from a purely legal angle, the move is certainly unconstitutional and the justification of preventing Pakistan from ‘committing suicide’ like a jilted lover fails to convince unless of course getting rid of Musharraf is equated with committing suicide.
Apparently, Musharraf saw the Supreme Court turning against him and hence took an extraordinary step to avert extraordinary dangers. Among the first steps he took was to sack Chief Justice Iftikhaar, which was expected considering the kind of beating Musharraf has to take when he tried sacking the Chief Justice the last time. It is more of an act of vengeance than a political manoeuver. And, of course, survival is also a key factor.