NARENDRA MODI - WORDS THAT HE CAN CHOOSE AND AVOID

NARENDRA MODI

&

WORDS, WORDS, AND WORDS

WHAT THEY MEAN

AND WHAT THEY DON’T MEAN

When Narendra Modi speaks, there is always a Huge Debate on it. His opponents pick out a word here and there and make huge issues out of them. It is a known thing.

Therefore, it is all the more reason that Mr. Modi must choose his words carefully. It is certainly the majority opinion that - no single section of the people need be appeased. Justice for All; And Appeasement to None – is of course the best Policy of Governance.

That said, when the opponents are so much driving on a single point that YOU ARE AGAINST a particular section of people and cite your own words as proof of it, I think, there is a need that Mr.Modi must also emphatically state that he and the BJP are as committed to ensure their welfare and safety, as much the welfare of anybody else. These must be specifically and emphatically stated since that is the main charge against Mr. Modi and BJP. Non-Appeasement does not also mean – NO-LOVE  for anybody. LOVE FOR ALL – JUSTICE FOR ALL - APPEASEMENT FOR NONE is a more comprehensive way of stating a Policy such as this.

The Ram Temple issue is not and should not be on the Political Plat Form at all. The Temple will come up only when the courts permit it finally. So, why rake it up as if it can and will be constructed soon after Elections? This issue must be totally avoided by BJP. If it can be constructed soon after elections, why was it not constructed when BJP was in Power for 5 long years? No one will blame BJP if it doesn’t construct the Ram Mandir  soon after Elections. Because, without a clear court verdict, it is not permissible. But, many people find it annoying that it becomes an election issue at all. It is at the least, a Vote Loser – not a Vote getter, for the BJP. RSS may not realize it, because they are not in public focus much. VHP may not realize it. But, BJP leaders, many of them, know it well.  They must not be repeating this issue parrot-like – and losing their chances of coming to Power.

Another issue is that of HINDU NATIONALIST.  The way, the question was asked by Reuters and the way, Modi answered it, to me it means, I am a Nationalist first. I am of course a Born Hindu, therefore you can say that I am a Hindu,  Nationalist. Saying that I am a Hindu, Nationalist, or, a Nationalist, Hindu is different from interpreting it as “Hindu nationalist.”

Anybody can be a “Nationalist, Hindu” or “Nationalist ,Muslim”, or “Nationalist, Sikh” and so on. We are all Nationalists, which is common for all. But, each may belong to his own religion. It does not prevent us from coming together as nationalists. But, these are words. If we know the person as a Nationalist, we won’t mind the words, whichever way they are put. We know the meaning meant.If not, we cry foul - rightly or wrongly.

Mr. Yashwant Sinha and a few other BJP leaders do state often that – we must focus more on real, people’s issues. That is the Key for success. What is Modi’s attraction among the People? He is a no non-sense Administrator of the TOP CALIBRE. 

That is accepted by all, though grudgingly, by some. But, that image must not be spoilt by getting into meaningless issues on WORDS, WORDS, AND WORDS used by him and by other BJP leaders. While negative words  can be easily avoided with some care – the focus must be on the use of more POSITIVE WORDS towards every section of people.  Friends don’t come easy. You must earn them. But, You can. That is the point.

What should 2014 give India? I prefer  the 2 National Parties only coming up with  all the seats shared between them in Parliament. I do not prefer their dependence on any regional parties. Either BJP or Congress, independently must form Government and the other must be a strong Opposition Party. Both should fight on the Agenda of Governance – not on communalism vs Secularism. In the last chance when BJP came to Power, it proved to be as much secular as anybody else. It must be better this time around.

I would extend the definition of secularism a little. I would say, there should be no Political Parties based on caste, caste-Groups  religion or religious groups. Every Party’s membership must extend to all. Every Party’s programs must cover all sections.

India has of course lost nearly 5 Years on the path of Development. UPA II has not even been a shade of UPA I in that respect. But, now at least, both Parties must focus on Development.

 *  *  *  E  N  D  *  *  *