The editorial further says the mandate of 2019 is all about breaking the traditional frameworks of understanding electoral politics in Bharat.The editorial in Organiser says the naysayers are still not willing to change. The likes of Amartya Sen are bent on bringing some obscure Western category of plurality to negate the popular mandate. The award-wapsi brigade and the larger project of breaking Bharat in the name of “lynchistan” are back in action. It adds that many more Time magazine stories and secular media stories about Narendra Modi being a divider and selective outrage over certain crimes, giving them a communal colour, will keep emerging. “In 2014 itself, they could not accept the fact that despite spitting so much venom globally about Bharat and a leader emerging from the soil and soul of Bharat turned out to be victorious against them. The shock of 2019 is even bigger. So now the strategy is to question the very edifice of democracy, the election process and outcome itself. Their perennial hatred for Modi and his school of thought is one reason for their continuous negativism. At the same time, the real problem lies elsewhere, and that is their non-Bharatiya understanding of Bharat,” the editorial reads.
The editorial further says the mandate of 2019 is all about breaking the traditional frameworks of understanding electoral politics in Bharat. It adds that if three speeches of Prime Minister Modi, the ones he delivered at the BJP headquarters, the Central Hall of Parliament and the at Varanasi, are taken as a reference point, the problem with “the colonised intellectuals” could be understood. Modi, in his victory speech, did not only talk about the paradigm shift in electoral politics but also said there were only two castes — the poor and those who wants to lift them out of poverty.
A Naya Congress
An article in Organiser says the time has come for a Naya Congress. The article says a pall of gloom has descended on the Congress headquarters after the Narendra Modi-led BJP’s resounding victory in the elections. Referring to Rahul Gandhi’s offer to resign from the party president’s post at the first meeting of the Congress Working Committee after the results were announced, the article says, “In what is being seen by critics as a drama, Rahul has insisted on quitting notwithstanding efforts by leaders including his mother UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi and sister Congress general secretary in charge of Eastern UP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra to persuade him to withdraw his resignation”. It adds added that some Congress leaders are seeking to project the move as proof that the party was not dynastic as is perceived and Rahul, therefore, wanted a non-Gandhi to take over the reins of the party. The article further adds that Rahul reportedly took potshots at certain top leaders who worked exclusively for the success of their sons who were contesting the polls and not for the party candidates. “But critics wondered whether being a dynast himself, was Rahul being fair to his party colleagues? Why in the first place did he allow them to get party tickets and if they were indeed only focusing on their wards, couldn’t he have ticked them off during the campaign itself? But the bigger question is whether Rahul is running away from responsibility and is looking for scapegoats?… Is he displaying mature behaviour by refusing to meet leaders like Gehlot (Ashok) and Sachin Pilot and even address newly elected Members of Parliament?” The article says the million-dollar question is, can the Gandhis then remain the ceremonial head and nurture a capable and futuristic leadership or will it only lead to another power centre akin to the National Advisory Council headed by Sonia Gandhi during the prime ministerial tenure of Manmohan Singh? “In that case, are they looking for another puppet, another yes man, another accidental Congress president? If so, the party stares at a bleak future,” the article says. It further says the journey for the Congress must begin with playing the role of a constructive opposition, which is critical for the success of any democracy. “The time has come for a Naya Congress,” the article concludes.
Reflecting Lalu
A report in Panchjanya says RJD supremo Lalu Prasad, who is admitted in RIMS hospital, Ranchi, is upset and anxious after his party’s worst-ever performance in Bihar. Lalu was not part of an election in Bihar for the first time in 42 years. Since Lalu became chief minister in 1990, the “M-Y” combination (Muslims and Yadavs) had become an important part of politics in Bihar. Lalu gained the support of Muslims in 1990 by stopping the rathyara of L K Advani. Lalu did no extraordinary work for “M-Y” combination to stay in power, but sheltered goonda elements. The article claims there is resentment against Lalu’s son Tejashwi Yadav because of his style of working and speaking.
