About Me

My photo

Krishna Kumar Singh, also known among friend circles KK and among close relative Krishna; Matriculation from Mithila High School Balour, Darbhanga in 1959, Graduated in Political Science Honours from C M College, Darbhanga, Bihar University in 1963; Joined post-graduate in Political Science the same year but dropped; joined Naxal movement under Charu Mazumdar, Kanu Sanyal, Satya Narayan Singh and Umadhar Singh in between but circumstances compelled to join literary work, clerk, proof readers etc in different publishing houses for livelihood; Finally joined journalism as career in different English newspapers and before my retirement from active journalism, I worked in The Times of India for about 19 years and retired as Chief Reporter  a few years back; continuing in journalism-reading more and more, writing more and more and praying to Almighty more and more-currently writing for different national English and Hindi dailies and magazines..

Wednesday, 30 January 2013


Obama's recent militaristic action has also exposed how he was selected for Nobel Peace Prize? Such selection has put big question mark over the 'authenticity and honesty' of the Nobel Committee  in awarding Nobel prizes, which many persons of the globe have alleged that such awards are given under America and Europe influences! Instead of spreading peace and non-violence President Barack Obama is spreading hatred by initiating 'strong-arm-tactics' throughout the planet.

Not only that a recent report, emanating from Washington , Barack Obama, on January 7, 2013, Obama has made certain changes in the administration's foreign policy, against the spirit of the 'Geneva convention'. He has nominated Nebraska Republican Charles "chuck" Hagel as the new Defence Secretary to join a team that may also include the nominated Massachusetts Democrat John Kerry as the new Secretary of State. Both Hagel and Karry are said to be veteran war heroes during Vietnam war. Instead of making them "war criminals for their over doings and misdeeds as per Geneva convention", Obama has made these unusual choices, signalling his intention for militaristic attitude.. Apart from that, Obama has further stepped up extrajudicial assassinations using US Special Forces and drones since he assumed president ship of USA.. Such measures of Obama will further escalate the conflicts in different pats of the globe like maintaining massive reach of US power through bases, utilise bases  to strike countries with drone, bombers and Special Forces and use covert means ( including sabotage and cyber attack) to send strong signal to adversaries in different parts of the planet.

This is how Brack Obama has changed himself from a "peace man to war monger"!

USA and its President Barack Obama have militarist mindset for Global dominance

'Prematurely acclaimed' Nobel peace prize winner Barack Obama is gradually proving more dangerous and aggressive than any of his predecessors to create the America, a 'emergency state' as well as rapidly militarising the country for moving towards destruction in the name of 'global dominance' of  the country. In the process, Obama has been keenly 'eyeying' developing countries in the South-East Asia (SEA). A  noted columnist A G Noorani, while reviewing the book in the Frontline, a fortnightly, published from Madras, "The Emergency state-America's pursuit of Absolute National Security at all Costs, written by David C Unger, has aptly said, "The United States Supreme Court, packed by successive Republican presidents, has often departed radically from its own earlier rulings. Those rulings bear recalling today because the records of the Supreme Court of India on the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), The Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) and the like issues has been worse than pathetic precisely because they are laced with eloquent rhetoric on freedom, while curbing freedom."

The Book David C.Unger,, editorial writer of The New York Times for over 30 years and teacher on the courses on American foreign policy at a prestigious university and a member of the Council of on Foreign Relations, has exposed the militarist mind-set based on  foreign policy of Obama while accusing him for violating civil liberties. The America has  always considered itself a 'super power' and its eyes were "set on global dominance" To spell -out the least about Obama, according to the book; he always carried "prosecuting the government whistle blowers" for speaking the 'truth'. All these actions of Obama have been very rare in the history of America. About the draft of the 'Defence planning Guidance' Noorani has said, " the draft Defence Planning Guidance set ambitious goals in almost every corner of the globe. Rest assured the US will not countenance a powerful  India." Thus US has never played any positive role in the world affairs!

'Barrack Obama is no better'. Unger  writes: Three years into Obama administration, emergency state thinking and habit con5inues to damage our democracy, weaken our economy, and poison our international relationship. As candidate Obama talked eloquently about the importance of the Presidents acting in accordance with the Constitution and the rule of law and promised a new relationship with the world. But as President Obama has addressed only a handful of Bush's most flagrant constitutional abuses while building his core foreign policies around the familiar' emergency' state model. The assumptions and institutions of America's emergency state have been nurtured by 13 successive presidential administrations. seven Democrats and six Republicans. Its practices and values have been sustained, and continue to be sustained by glib overreaching formulae for national security that politicians and foreign policy experts have trained voters to demand from all candidates for national office."

More over , Noorani has said that the state uses conflict for political mobilisation at home and the people inflamed by official propaganda and chauvinistic media, develop a seige mentality. This is true  of the US today for creating cold-war like situation to harm civil liberties and also of the states of South Asia., Noorani  added.When one trace the history of America, a strange but logical thing have come out. The London Economists, representing influential opinion in Britain, wrote on September 16, 1944, "The American prejudice against imperialism-British, French or Dutch- has led many post-war planners to assume that the old sovereign ties will not be re-established in south -east  Asia and that some form of international control or transfer of the imperium to local people, will take place of the old authority exercised by western nations. Since this attitude exists and is even backed by the most widely disturbed Americaan journals and newspapers, it is time that future intentions of British, the French, and the DUtch were frankly and fully explained. Since none of them has any intention of abandoning its colonial empire, but on the contrary regards the restoration of Mlaya to the British, the East  Indies to the Dutch and the French Indo-China to the French as an essential part of the destruction of Japan's co-prosperity sphere, it will be inviting the worst sort of misunderstanding, and even accusation of bad faith, if the three nations allowed any doubt on the matter to continue in the mind of their American ally."

Pundit Jawahar Lal Nehru, in his Discovery of India, has rightly said, " America is a curious mixture  of what is considered hard-headed realism and a vague idealism and humanitarianism. Which of these will be dominating tendency of the future or what will result from their mixing together?' Perhaps, the prophesy of Pundit Nehru about America has resulted into' hard-headed realism'! But one thing appear very clear that many of the western civilisations like America have 'fascism and Nazism' outlook.Pundit Nehru  had also predicted, " whatever the future may hold, it is clear that the economy of the U S A  after the war will be powerfully expansionist and almost explosive in its consequences The U S A and the Soviet union seem destined to play vital part in the future.They differ from each other almost as much as as any two advanced countries can differ and even their faiths lie in positive directions. All the evils of a purely political democracy are evident in the U S A; the evils of the lack of political democracy are present in the USSR.And yet of them much in common........."

In his Book Unger, has traced, "the emergency state 'in America took on its present contours in the days of Franlin Roosevelt, Henrry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower.. I agree with the opinion of The New York Times of March 8,1992, titeling "U S strategy Calls for Insuring No rivals Develop in a One-Superpower World" that the "US has no time for equals. It wants subordinates. Hence its resentment of China's rise".More over , the Obama administration's curb on civil liberties is taking a great toll to the Americans. Elimination of whistle blowers by the Obama administration is bound to result into keeping the American citizens in dark about what is happening in the country? People of America would have never known Abu  Ghraib prisoner abuse scandals on the National Security  Agency, warrant less wiretaps. and also about coming to surface Pentagon papers. Significantly personally vets papers, targeting assassination. by Barrack has taken no action against officials under Bush administration for crime committed in that administration.. On various fronts including Afghanistan , Libiya, affairs , the Obama administration has failed miserably.

Unger writes, " We Americans have built the world's most powerful military. Yet we now we live in greater fear of external and internal dangers than before the World War two. We have recorded the world economy to the American specifications. Yet globalisation has fed out fears of outsourced jobs and inassimilable immigrants. We have filled our malls with more consumer products than previous generations could have imagined. Yet we enjoy less economic security than our parents, and we worry, with good reasons, that global competition will mean fewer good jobs and relentless downward pressure on our children's living standards. We have fought repeated wars to preserve the world's freest democracy. Yet the seven decades we have been yielding our most basic liberties to a secretive, unaccountable emergency state-a vast but increasingly misdirected complex of national security institutions, reflexes and beliefs that so define our present world that we forget that there was ever a different America. But there was and we could have it."

"America's emergency state was originally designed to wage hot war against Nazi Germany and cold war against Soviet-led international communism.. Its institutions and the outdated world view they embody, are not good at protecting us against today's most dangerous international threats as the events  of 9\11 and the wrongly targeted and disastrously mismanaged wars that followed painfully  demonstrate,"Unger book informs..

And the USA is moving for 'absolute securty' Henry Kissinger had said, " absolute security for one state is absolute insecurity for all."

Sunday, 20 January 2013


If one makes objective appraisal of things or events historically , History definitely highlights 'truth' in shaping the destiny of a country like India !  In these aspects, the' thoughts and philosophy ' of Mahatma Gandhi and Subhas Chandra Bose during freedom struggle remained  diametrically opposite. Gandhi wanted emancipation of the country from the grip of British Raj through 'obsolete, orthodox and conservative manners' while Subhash wanted scientific solution through 'revolution' coupled with the 'modern development approaches'.

Although India's road to Independence had started from Ram Manohar Roy (1722-1833), the first comprehensive man that India had produced. Roy was called' Father of Indian Renaissance'. Since than , so many developments had taken place and this road to independence had run through an intricate, chequered and often painful route. Gandhi did not work for India's independence in isolation. There were galaxy of his contempories whio had nursed the trends in different ways. Many of  Gandhi's contemporaries and close followers had fundamental differences with him over 'ideology, methods and strategy and as to concrete results'.

To begin with, Gandhi was great, very great, but he was not free from enigma and had his limitations. At least on two momentous occasions, Gandhi failed to take 'quick decisions' and 'failed India'. Many political thinkers and historians feel or think if C R Das had continued living for some more years he could have isolated Gandhi and with the help of Abul Kalam Azad and others won India's independence much sooner. Many are of the opinion that if Gandhi had not thrown a wedge between Subhash Chandra Bose and Pundit Jawahar Lal Nehru, when they came closer, India's destiny might have been fulfilled much earlier. Home Rule was almost within reach in 1920. Gandhi has taken up Home Rule Movement from the hands of Annie Besant and had scuttled it. Lord Birkenhead had promised Home Rule in 1930 before his death But Gandhi sponsored the 'salt satyagrah' and set back the hands of the clock. Was Gandhi anxious to steal the thunder always and remain in the limelight?

More over Gandhi could also be impetus. He had described Ram Mohan Roy as a 'pigmy' in a meeting on the sands of Kathajuri river in Cuttack. Of all, Nehru was once much disillusioned and wrote to Gandhi, disapproving his  'style of functioning' ! There were many things where Gandhi erred. When Subhash Bose won the presidential elections of the Congress, Gandhi at once smelt corruption in the election and isolated Subhas ultimately making him quit India. An ardent Congressmen Jinnah had to leave Congress in 1921 because he was not given proper place in the party. And because of that Jinnah, who was great nationalist and seasoned member of the Indian National Congress , had to change his track and became propounder of two-nation theory, ultimately resulting into division of the Country-India and Pakistan.

Not only that Gandhi described Subhas Babu as a 'misguided patriot' in a letter to Amrita Kaur on the death of Subhas. Referring to Pakistan, Srinivas Shastri had mentioned that Gandhi had 'sold' India but that Gandhi would not admit it and describe in some other way, In spite of great regards  for him,  Gopal Krishna Gokhale turned down Gandhi's application for the membership of the Servant Of India Society. Many such instances had found places in the now defunct ,The Sunday Standard, a national English daily, published from seven cities In India, The Hindu (Madras), now defunct Anand Bazar Patrika (Calcutta) , Hindustan Standard defunct  (Calcutta) and many other newspapers. At that time, almost all newspapers had highlighted for probe as to what had happened to the money and jewels Gandhi used to collect on tours !.

Before analysing the facts, one must give honest appraisal about Subhash Babu and his backgrounds as well as Mahatma's thinking about India during war of independence. After a brilliant career in Cuttack and Calcutta, which was marked by certain amount of tumult, Subhash Chandra Bose went to England and competed in the ICS examination in 1920, standing fourth in the order of merit. However, the heaven-born service had no charm for him and he came back to India in 1921 to take a plunge in in the struggle of freedom. Bose met Gandhiji in Bombay. "Love at first sight may not be always true but mutual allergy at first meeting is possible. Bose had himself written that the meeting somehow did not hit and neither took to each other. This mutual allergy was a national tragedy," an eminent scholar and historian P C Roy Chaudhary had commented. On the advice of Gandhi Bose himself reported to C R Das in Calcutta and found Das as his political guide. From 1921 to 1925, Bose was the right hand man of C R Das., organising the Congress Party. Subhash Babu's dynamic personality put him on the all India canvas as a born fighter, a man of steel but with an extremely soft heart. Bose crisscrossed the Indian sky as long as  he was here and then became a legend abroad, fighting for India's cause according his concept.. Bose had wonderful combination of idealism, dedication and realism.

It was Subhas's ideology that brought him a rift first and a chasm afterwards with Gandhiji. Bose had always high regards for Gandhiji, evident from his broadcasts from abroad on Gandhiji's birth day and Kasturba's death during his many exhortions to the Indian people to revolt and await the arrival of ' Indian army' But Subhas babu thought very poorly about Gandhiji's as a politician and statesman.. Bose never believed in Gandhiji's creed of non-violence. "give me blood and I will give you independence" Bose thundered from abroad.. While contradicting Gandhiji's teachings of fighting for independence through a non-violence approach, Bose used to crank a joke that Gandhiji was more surrounded by "cranks and crooks". Bose was for complete revolutions and was in close touch with revolutionaries in India and abroad.
Before that Subhas was released from  Burma jail in 1927. Jawahar Lal Nehru also returned from Russia full of advance socialist ideas verging on communism. Both joined hand to to form leftist group within Congress under the m name of "Independence League". Subhash-Jawahar leadership gradually alienated the Congress old guards including Gandhi as the youth all over India flocked under its banner. At that time, taking into account the development in India, Bose had  told the All India Youth Congress conference in Calcutta, decrying Gandhiji's philosophy ".............. a feeling and impression that modernism is bad, large -scale production is an evil, wants should not be increased and the standard of living should not be raised......that the soul is so important that physical culture and  military training can be ignored". He further said,"....Mystics would always hold honoured place in India but it is not their lead, at once free, happy and great....we have to live in the present."

Subhah Babu has also a grudge against Gandhij that C R Das was being kept in Bengal while Gandhi ji has had pushed up Motilal Nehru more. The differences between Subhas and Gandhiji crystallised with the Calcutta session of the Indian National Congress in 1928. In the session Bose refused to toe the line of the  Gandhiji in favour of his principled stand. Intresting development took place in the session. Bengal wanted Moti Lal Nehru as president. But both Moti Lal and Gandhiji wanted Jawahar to become next president. From that point of time, it was made open that Gandhiji had wanted to create rift between both Jawahar and Subhash. Gandhiji succeeded in winning back Jawahar in his favour. by making him next president of the party. Gandhiji had always soft-corner towards Nehru family. Subhash never forgot the surrender of JawaharLal to Gandhiji.

On his return  from forced stay in Europe after continuous arrests and imprisonments from 1933 to 1936, while studying , contacting and pondering over the world problems and India's foreign relations, Subhas returned to India in 1936 and imprisoned under Regulation-three of 1818 but released in March 1937. In 1938, Subhash Babu was elected president of the Indian National Congress and presided Haripura Congress session. In the session, Subhash Bose, while giving "blue print"of " poorn Swaraj" Interestingly , for the first time in the history of India, Subhas Babu underlined the importance of phased planning for India. As president of the INC, Bose did not try to hide his allergy to many of Gandhi's ideas about how swaraj was to be won. He held that the adoption of village life and what he took to be watery type of politics and negation of scientific method of production would only help to perpetuate the conditions of servitude of the people. In a speech at the Indian Science News Association, Calcutta on August 21, 1938, Bose had said National reconstruction will be possible only with the aid of science and scientists and far reaching cooperation between science and politics was absolute necessary if India was to take its place with the advanced countries of the world., Such statements of Subhash Babu was open defiance of Gandhiji's philosophy and politics.

The dynamic personality of Subhash Bose and his pronounced socialist views were viewed with great deal of alarm by some of the ultra rightists like Vallabhbhai Patel, Rajendra Prasad, Rajgopalacari and others. Main thrust of Subhash Babu to pull out the Congress from what he thought was "Gandhian obscurantism and fascism." He  was also of the opinion that capitalists had grip over the Congress. When Subhas Bose term of president ship was to expire, Gandhiji selected Dr Pattabhi Sitaramayya for next president ship. Bose decided to contest election opposing Gandhiji's nominee and won the election. Two days later, Gandhiji said, "Mr Subhas Chandra Bose has achieved a decisive victory over his opponent Dr Pattabhi Sitaramayya..........I am glad of his victory.........the defeat is more mine than his (pattabhi)........" Both Gandhiji and Subhas Bose differed on ideological ground..Subhas made no secret of the fact that he thought Gandhiji was was' old-fashioned, orthodox and probably autocrat.' It is quite clear with developments Gandhiji worked for the ousting of Subhas from the Congress and Gandhiji's coterie fully supported Gandhiji. Subhas was practically driven to resign the president ship of the Congress.. Later Subhas was expelled from the Congress.

In a letter , written to his brother Sarat Bose, Subhash Babu observed ".................If power goes into the hands of such mean, vindictive and unscrupulous persons when Swaraj is won what will happen in the country? If we do not fight them now, we shall not be able to prevent power passing passing into their hands. Another reason  why we should fight them now is that they have no idea of national reconstruction. Gandhiasm will land Free India in a ditch---if free India is sought to be rebuilt on Gandhian non-violent principles. India will then be offering a standing invitation to all predatory powers.....The latest phase of Gandhism with its sanctimonious hypocrisy-----------its outrage on democracy and its queer and under-standable formula for political ills.....is \sickening degree. One is forced to wonder which is a greater menace to India's future--the British bureaucracy or Gandhian hierarchy.. After such last pronouncements, Subhas Babu disappeared from India in the middle of 1941.

There can be no doubt that the work of Subhas abroad and the marching of his soldiers to to Indian soil indirectly hastened India's freedom. Bose's voices  through foreign radio was listened by lakhs in India and the progress of the march of Bose's Liberation Army was followed closely. It will be pertinent to refer to some of Bose's broadcast from abroad so far his relationship with Gandhiji is concerned. In his message to Gandhiji after the death of Kasturba, Bose, for the first time , addressed Gandhiji as "Father of our Nation" and wanted his blessings and good wishes in his 'holy war of India's liberation' He concluded his broadcast by saying, " the armed struggle will go on until the Britishers is thrown out of India and until our tricolour national flag proudly flies over Viceroy's House in New India." It may be mentioned here that It was Subhas , who named Gandhiji as "Father of The Nation", which is yet to be conferred formally by successive union governments after independence

India achieved independence. And to some how, Pundit Jawahar Lal Nehru carried the leadership and under his stewardship, concept of "Modern India" on the line of Subhas's vision were taken up to some extend. In my opinion, Gandhiji's 'truth and non-violence as well as his philosophy of cottage and village industries' does not appear to have clicked . And only after adopting advanced scientific approaches, the concept of 'Modern India' as developed nation in the cosmos is gaining momentum. It is very difficult to understand the "real politics and philosophy' of Mahatma Gandhi and his 'cold attitude' towards revolutionaries like Subhash Babu and others under his (Gandhiji's self-styled leadership). His truth and non-valences might have succeeded in South Africa but as 'Leader' in India, Gandhi ji has failed! In one aspect, I strongly feel Gandhi and his philosophy and doctrines have become mascot of present days political classes to shield their 'deeds and misdeeds' in the name of 'truth and non-valences and other philosophies ' of Gandhiji and thereby  creating political anarchy in India on almost all the fronts!

Sources:-National Archives, New Delhi, Sarpru House Library, New Delhi, Gandhi National Museum and Library, Rajghat, New Delhi,, Sinha Library, Patna,, National Library, Calcutta,, Various books n Gandhi including Gandhi And His Contemporaries by  P C Roy Chaudhary !

Sunday, 13 January 2013


Some say India is nascent democracy! But ruling elites and almost all political classes are subverting the democracy and the constitutional provisions under the 'garb of matured democrats'. Growing influences of caste, community, creed, religion and regionalism since independence of the country and more vigorous in the last 20 years, have put 'a big question mark over the survival of true democratic tradition and values in India!

In the name of carrying parliamentary democracy: Are not political classes cheating people of the country in the name getting support on the basis of  mandate in the elections?; Have not  they become authoritarians in imposing their views and opinions in running the affairs of the country in the 'so called democratic tradition?; Is the religion like 'opium' not dominating the Indian political scenes?  These are the few points always rankle my mind and some time I become disappointed over the fate of 'India'!

 Although British Raj 'legacy' had left us 'largely feudal society' because of neglecting the country on industrial fronts during Raj  period, after independence political leaders led by Pundit Jawahar Lal Nehru  made efforts to industrialise   the country through 'modern democratic Constitution and contributions'. In the process, much had been done on 'indstrial fronts'. But as the process started giving fruitful results, the 'ills like feudalism, religion, caste , creed and regionalism' hijacked our democratic system. And since than, most people in the country vote on caste and communal line instead of united secular and democratic India'. The process goes on!

To trace out such malfunctioning in our system, one must has to travel to acquaint themselves with 'political developments' in the country since independence as well as some books like The Indian Ideology, written by Perry Anderson., highlighting the 'flaws' in our system and leadership A quote of Gurramdas 'Alam', Azaadi, 1946- Kyun bhai Nihal, Azaadi tu hai dekhi. Na bhai Prava, ne kha de ne vekhi. Main Jaggu ti sunni assi Ambala ti aaye si. (Listen brother Nihar, have yu seen Freedom? No brother Parva, I have not seen it nor eaten it. I heard from Jaggu-it has come up to Ambala.) aptly described the fruits of Independence in India

The reviewer of the book and an eminent writer,Vijaya Prashad has commented, "The Indian nationalism was stillborn. It had a very good run, but now finds itself on life support". The book surmises that there is serious mistakes within Indian nationalism that "dooms India's prospects for its ambitions to become a real power." The country has become vested interests of money and religion. In the present context, nationalism of yester-year has become tools in the hands of political leadership for encouraging religious thoughts, caste,and communal ism in the country to serve their own interest. Nationalism has far-sightedness! Anderson notes:" nationalism has become a discourse that fatally generates a culture of euphemism and embellishment, precluding and clear-eyed stock-taking of past or present." Conservatives and feudalism in the society dominate the  Indian society in the garb of nationalism as their shield against criticism. And this Indian ideology is running the Indian democracy!

This perception has naturally came from 'Hindu Right' in India and the jehadi currents in Pakistan and according to Prashada; liberal elites in both the countries sought shelter in illiberal state repression and in alliance with U S primacy.. Prashada further puts forward the views of Anderson and remarks, " It was Gandhi who injected religion into the arteries of of Indian Nationalism and forged Indian state with 'the particularists religion of his forebears', making Muslim 'second class citizens' and 'creating a caste-iron democracy'. "What is hidden within India is Hindustan", Anderson writes. It appears that nationalism itself  saturated with caste-Hindu concerns as if Gandhi were the true in charge of such nationalism! Much the same kind of censure came from Dr B R Ambedkar ("What Gandhi and Congress Have Done To Untouchables-1946).

But Prashada has point to say, "the arrival of Indian liberalism in the late 1980s and the 1990s is very significant-with the Congress setting aside its social democratic commitments, the 'Hindu Right' edging to mainstream of the political world and international situation shifting towards primacy of the United States.. "Exactly in these contexts economic liberalisation (1991) and for a caste-Hindu character to the arriviste middle class (emboldened by Mandal protests of 1990; the Ayodhaya incidents of  1990-92 and Kargil war of 1999), a different situation emerged, which gave encouragements of to caste, creed, communal bias, encouragement of hardcore religion and regionalism in the country. Thus, in my opinion, the Congress's obstreperous ways have generated counter reaction and the Indian society was badly tilted  towards religion, regionalism  and communal line!

Another significant important factor for the threat of India's secular democracy is emergence of 'Hindutva' forces under Rashtriya Swamb Sevak Sangh (RSS) and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). It had started taking deep root with the demolition of Babri Masjid in Ayodhaya but the Hindutva forcest has penetrated in the society with Gujarat pogrom under the headship of Chief minister of Gujarat Narendra Modi in 2002..Many reports and studies have suggested and exposed the so called development of Gujarat during Modi's chief minister ship. Such studies have pointed out that Muslims, labour classes, women, minorities, lower caste and Schedule Tribes have been marginalised and discriminated  in Gujarat in the last ten to 12 years.. But after his hat-trick in the last assembly elections, Modi's emergence at the national scene as prime ministerial aspirant could not be ruled out, again, a danger signal for already batter red India society communally.

Paradoxically, Hndutva, is gaining ground as 'New Right', a political acomplisher of the new liberalisation economic order. Strangely , the Hindutva also combines neoliberal economic policy and authoritarian social and cultural policy and politcs. Initially starting from upper caste groups of north India,, Hindutva has started spreading far and wide corner of the country with its stress on new liberalised economic policy, which is changing the political landscape of India.. In the process Congress declined as saviour as  upper caste and middle caste while Hindutva parties as well as regional parties have started emerging as new harbingers of the 'new middle caste propertied to their upper caste counterparts in many states to create 'provincial propertied classes'(PPC)' as enunciated by late K Balgopal.

More over, the regional parties of Chandra Babu of Telgu Desam in Andhra Padesh, Navin Patnaik of BJD in Odisha, TC of Mamta Bannerjee of West Bengal, JMM of Shibu Soren of Jharkhand, Karnataka Janata Dal of H D Devegowda, Prakash Singh Badal's Akali Dal  in  Punjab, JD(U) of Nitish Kumar of Bihar ,National Conference of Sheikh Abdullah in Jammu and Kashmir ,AIADMK OF Jaylalitha in Tamil Nadu, Bahujan Samaj Party of Mayawati of Uttar Pradesh, DMK of Karunanidhi off  Tamil Nadu and Siv Sena of Maharashtra have emerged time-to-time as strong forces in their respective states. They have got the notoriety of supporting BJP at the centre to form government despite their secular credentials. Some of these regional parties including  of Mayawati, Karunanidhi are also supporting currently the UPA government led by the Congress Party. On the other  had regional straps like Mulayam Singh Yadav of Samajwadi Party in Uttar Pradesh, and Laloo Prasad Yadav of  RJD of  Bihar  kept their secular credential intact and had never supported BJP in forming governments in states   or at the centre.

Significantly, all these regional parties have support bases among middle and intermediary caste people and to some extend the vote of minority community also. But in the case of Laloo Prasad Yadav and Mulayam Singh Yadav, apart from middle and intermediary  caste support base, both have solid grass root support among minorities because of their intact secular credentials.But the gaining ground of regional parties in the country is also a matter of concern. Regional hopes and aspirations of all these regional  parties are also harming the central political classes in maintaining equilibrium at the national level. But even than, the ruling political classes are keeping them in good humour and giving them 'undue favour politically to shield them from corruption charges and  financial assistance to the respective  states , violating  norms and rules of the Indian Union.

Because of weakening of left parties in the country in the recent years is also not giving good signal for the common masses of the country. At least the left forces have some principled stand for the welfare of masses. Thus the polarisation of class, caste, creed, religion and regionalism among the people of India between both UPA of Congress and Hindutva forces  of BJP in recent years have preferred party of capitalist class into party with lower caste-classes and minorities as their electoral base has become matter of concern and it appears that country is heading towards 'authoritarianism' in the garb of parliamentary democracy. This is bound to create widening gap between 'minority powerful' and 'majority powerless'..

Thursday, 3 January 2013


Is the India, the country of over 120 crore population, heading for alienating the majority of population from the national main streams? The facts appear very much like-the-same when I take a glance of the 'functioning' of the successive union governments as well as the 'say' of the people of  States of the Indian Union like Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Chhatishgarh, Bihar, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Maharashtra,Delhi, Haryana, Punjab, Jammu and Kashmir, Jharkhand, Maharshtra, Uttarakhand , Himachal Pradesh etc on important matters of 'governance and policy decisions' at the national-level.

Not only that, reports, emanating from union government's in Delhi, are seldom taken into 'considerations seriously' by the people of politically alienated states in South India and Eastern States like Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal, Assam, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland Odisha, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, West Bengal, Andmand and Nichobar, Chandigarh, POndicherry, Lkshadweep etc ! Rather the people of these states feel that they are 'not the citizens' of India. Their languages, culture and traditions are far different than the people of the mainstream states of 'cow- belt' like North India , Central India and West India. They consider their problems independently although mired in problem-galores.People of these states also 'consider' the people of the mainstreams states as 'of India'. They have their own 'India'. People of many eastern states ' want cecessation' from the rest of India because of their continued neglect.

 Media bias from mainstream centres like New Delhi  is also considered main factors for such 'story' of alienation of these states. After all India is country of Indians than why ignoring south and east in striking balance in the country in the dissemination of news and views! However, respect of the Constitution in respect of adult franchise goes smoothly and after all these alienated states have 'faith' in parliamentary democracy. But taking into account the hegemony and supremacy of mainstream states over southern and eastern states will continue for how many years for the nascent democracy in India?

There are wide gulf between rich and poor in India. Over 78 percent population of the country are under acute poverty. They have no house , no lands. Tribal, living in the forest areas are the worse neglected. Over 15 crore population living as 'khanabadiosh' in hills, ocean belts etc are yet to be brought under national mainstreams. They are yet to see the light of the day of Indian democracy! (my blog topic :- over 15 crore population in India yet to come under national mainstream, September 06, 2012)

Considering the back -ground of these facts, I want to trace the history of India. I strongly feel that differences of opinion among the mainstream states and alienated states are mainly due to the 'Indus Valley civilisation' of Aryan culture in medieval and ancient Bharat'. This Aryan culture, which entered 'Bharat land' from the central Asia, had discriminated Dravidian population of Bharat. In this game, the aboriginal population of the  India, mainly' black' living in  hilly region and extreme south, who are said to be the ' original inhabitants' of the ancient India, were continued to be ignored to create supremacy of Aryan culture and civilisation. At the cost of a'aborginal', the 'foreigners-Aryans' are ruling the country although it is facts that  Aryan culture also penetrated the south Deccan areas!  Eminent historian A L Basham, in his book-The Wonder That Was India- has said,  " While in northern India the standards of  Hindu culture declined somewhat after the  Gupta age, in the Deccan they flourished and advanced.By this time Aryan influence had penetrated the whole of the Peninsula, and the contact of  Aryan and Dravidian produced a vigorous cultural synthesis, which in turn had an immense influence on  Indian civilisations as a whole."

To substantiate further about the contribution of shaping 'Indian Nation' as a whole by Southerners, Pundit Jawahar Lal Nehru, in his book Discovery of India,, has pointed out, " The repeated invasions of North India did not affect the south directly. Indirectly, they led to many people from the north migrating to the south and these included builders and craftsmen and artisans. The south thus became a centre of the  artistic traditions while north was more affected by new currents which the invaders brought with them. This process was accelerated in later centuries and the south became the strongholds of Hindu orthodoxy."

In my opinion problem of north-south-east tussles mainly cropped up during the East -India Company domination of British Raj period Britishers played games to divide each other and without any substantial work of development and solving problems in India. The 'Raj" only ruled the country for their enlightened self-interest of imperialism. Real division and differences of opinions among Indians started from that point under the instigation of Britishers. In the process creation of Pakistan and "seed of discord' among Hindu-Muslim came into fore. And the country is facing a host of problems !

The political development in the Indian polity in the last 25 years should also be considered jolts after jolts in keeping the country united. It all started with demolition of 'Babr Masjid' demolition led by forces of Hindu Parivar of RSS, VHP, BJP. Since the demolition of the 'masjid', a clear battle line has been drawn between secular and communal forces in the country. Bunch of Muslim population have also started feeling discriminated! Subsequent to Gujarat riots , killing thousands of people in Gujarat and other parts of the country, the so called 'icon of saffron brigade Narendra Modi' has aggravated the politics of communal ism, Hndu nationalism and the society in India has been badly divided. The 'hat-trick' winning of the Gujarat assembly election  by Narendra Modi, who was an architect of  eliminating Muslims in Gujarat 2002,is aptly reminds the 'demonstration' of Modi to formalise the electoral victory in the line Hitler, who too came to absolute power through ballot and later became a 'fascist'.A political analyst of Patna, Surendra Kishore has said, " Since the advent of policies of globalisation and liberalisation these sections of socially and economically advanced, who are active in social media networks such as Twitter and Facebooks,  have been getting more and more vocal to protect their own narrow interests and at the same time deny the right of crores of the poor and the marginalised"

Thus, emergence of Narendra Modi is bound to have significant impact on the national political scenario in the wake of 2014 Lok Sabha elections. In the BJP circle Narendra Modi is widely expected to lead the BJP at the national level as prime ministerial candidate in the Lok Sabha elections.Modi's third victory has also proved that now a days , elections are not fought on issues like corruption, misgoverning, and administrative misdemeanours but stress is given on 'personality cult'- that happened with Modi, obviously to put Modi, a potential prime ministerial candidate.. Modi,  is being considered in Hindu organisations, a potential leader to polarise votes on communal  line throughout the country.The BJP leadership including national president Nitin Gadkari, party leaders like Sushama Swarajya, Lal Krishna adavani, have, however, certain reservation over the prime ministerial aspirations of Modi and they are opposed to bigger role of Modi at national level. Apart from that Sangh Praivar like RSS including its Sarsanghchalak' Mohan Rao Bhagwat are of the views that Modi will not make a good prime ministerial candidate.

But recent tacit move of Modi like his speech in Hindi (  in Gujarat , Modi never speaks in Hindi but only in Gujarati , but on his election in recent assembly elections, he addresses huge crowds in Hindii) after his victory in assembly election appears a significant signal at the country-level. Modi's apology for 'mistakes' any during his rule in Gujarat also indicates his design to mend his ways in days to come. Not only that slogans , of party men at different places, notably in Delhi,  for projection of Modi as prime ministerial nominee in the next Lok Sabha elections  is also taken seriously in political circles. Projection of Modi as prime ministerial candidate is also signalling break-up in NDA because its major partner -JD(U) led by the Bhar chief minister Nitish Kumar has opposed Modi as prime ministerial nominee. Rather , Nitish has said that prime ministerial nominee must have secular credential! In all tussles in NDA and its partners, particularly in BJP circles, are bound to be hot up in days to come over Modi issue.  Modi's authoritarian way oif functioning had alienated RSS and host of party leaders .But general cadre in saffron groups are hell-bent to bring Modi at national level! Prof Ghanshyam Shah , an eminent social scientist, who has mastery on minority population of India, has commented , " It will be a disaster if Modi goes to Delhi. He has personified the RSS and VHP ideology. Given the cynicism in the country and the phenomenon of risng middle class, he will have support-this class looks for authoritarian personalities in leaders.."

Thus nascent democracy is under serious threat. We Indian must for work unity and integrity of  the country to alienate one sections from another sections in the name of region, culture and of all communal ism. India must remain like the Preamble of our Constitution," The people of India having solemnly resolved to constitute into a sovereign, socialist, secular DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC AND TO SECURE ALL ITS CITIZENS:.......................................................................