In an interesting article in TOI, Chetan Bhagat suggests that he ran a poll on his Facebook page asking people to vote for the person Who should be India’s PM?.
The choices were simple – Narendra Modi or Rahul Gandhi or None of the Above.
The result was astonishing.
Narendra Modi got 82%. Rahul Gandhi got 5% and None of these two was 13%.
So, Modi got 16 times the votes that Rahul Gandhi got.
He brings up the “controversial element” of Modi and then asks two relevant questions:
However, to ignore these numbers completely will also be foolish. Modi always had some sort of a fan following in cyberspace, but a 16-to-1 lead is a staggering one. This means his fan base has increased dramatically in the last two years. Rahul Gandhi is a far better known national brand, and is younger, better looking, suave and aspirational in some ways. Then why are the youth of this country not rooting for him? And if Modi is as much of a demon as some say, why do people vote for him?
Admittedly, this was a web only poll, and people are of a certain background. But, that background – educated, urbane and suave – is supposed to be Rahul Baba’s strong hold! Modi is an old hag compared to him in looks and demeanour.
But not in terms of energy and work.
In these two areas, there is no parallel to Narendra Modi right now. And, that is what Bhagat surmises. That people who are anti-Congress are probably now coalescing towards Modi in very large numbers.
The problem that I see with the Prime Ministership of Narendra Modi isn’t that if the country is ready for Modi. But rather if BJP is ready for Modi??
BJP of Advani et al is no different from Congress in many ways. The old guard is not free from the charges of corruption and their track record in their constituency and the Government hasn’t been all that spectacular. But Modi trumps all that.
More importantly, Modi as PM means no minister will be able to make money. So, keeping Modi from being the PM, is the best insurance for making money. Which is what many BJP guys will be after.
They don’t care – including Advani – for the longevity of their party or the ascendance of BJP, but with their own personal ambition.
Whenever I read or see movies on India’s history just before and during the Mughal and British period, I am very frustrated and ashamed at the stupidity, selfishness and short term vision of the people who were at the helm with the power. For they were remarkably shallow and un-intelligent people. And, with a lot of respect yet honesty, I would include even heroes – Rana Pratap and others – in that bunch.
Why?
Because wars and those wars which can make or break a country’s future are not to be fought to show one’s mettle or bravery, but to win! Specially, when you are facing an enemy which has no qualms of unethical behavior. If you keep looking for that pure, ideal, ethical situation to win, then you are only self serving!
In that situation, one has to win. It would not be an exaggeration to say that the loss of wars against the Mughals and then against the British, are directly responsible for so many hungry people today. The deaths in the famine of Bengal and many other calamities that befall a population because of its penury.
Mughals and British were no altruistic force, so one can hardly hold much against them – although they were barbarians. But those who were fighting them purported altruism. And if that altruism didn’t make them do “what was needed” to win the wars, then they didn’t do anything good.
And that is the situation now. If we go one the way we are going, this country will again be colonized, albeit in a different way. So, a war – an intellectual and a social war has to be fought, which will not be easy or any less demanding than the one fought by Rana Pratap or Rani of Jhansi; and it will need tough decisions and no mercy for those who will stoop to anything against the country.
At that time, we need a person who stands apart. One, who can take decisions. Not because he has to be a hero, but because it is needed for the country. And, in that role, I only see Narendra Modi.
