Narendra Modi: A role model of development for India towards building a civil society: Gujarat State has since become a role model for economic development in India. The Chief Minister as an individual too, has become a role model for any political administrator--- of a political party as well as of a government. Shri.Modi has brought about a typical dynamism in the attitudes of the bureaucracy and the entire administration. He has set up a lesson for the functioning of a political party esp. if it is a ruling party. He has infused a strong sense of discipline in the peoples’ psyche and a sense of belonging.
Armed powerfully with all the above-mentioned qualities, Narendra Modi assumed on 26th May 2014, the charge of India i.e. Bharat, as the Prime Minister of India only to serve the poor and the deprived ones. He deployed the entire public administrative machinery to serve the ‘haves-not’.
Night of the nightmare: Narendra Modi's first one single majority party (albeit in alliance with a few others ) in alliance with a few other non-Congress supporters’ full dream tenure came to its completion. Five years is certainly not an optimum period for a fair appraisal, but one can certainly explore the stage in which the progress stands.
Modi regime rolled into power with huge expectations coupled with unbelievable impatience as a result of hopeless preceding years replete with numerous scams and rampant nepotism.
Lawlessness seemed to have reached a scenario of ‘free for all'. The polity suffered from a paralysis of initiative, policy-making and its consequent administration. The State appeared hung. The incidence of atrocities against the weaker sections of the society and the women were rising. Of course, it was not because of the UPA regime since such instances do take place everywhere all the times. The difference is adjudged as to what punitive actions are taken, which tell upon the quality of the governance.
It was very fortunate for the Indian citizens to adore an academician as their, (UPA’s) Prime Minister, however, it was most unfortunate on the part of the Indians to see him as a prisoner of languishing outlived political party. He was not a politician-leader. He appeared to be a docile errand boy at her Majesty's Service. It was this faculty which paid him the highest political prize.
26th May 2014 was the day when a new government under the command of Narendra Modi assumed the reigns of power and authority over the governance of India. He must have felt the pressure of a huge task ahead. Seventy years of independence had made India a terrible irreparable mess. Not that there was no progress, India had made progress, to a great extent it was a natural growth. It will be fair to submit that everything that went wrong need not be ascribed to the Congress government. It is therefore submitted that growth was the result of a natural process of growth and not the earlier government's initiative.
There are several factors which seem to be threatening the plans and proposals of the new government particularly since 2014 in Indian public administration. These elements are the real threats to the parliamentary democracy and if these are not reorganised without disturbing the democratic framework, anarchy does not seem to be far away.
The illustrative list is as follows- (a ) hostile bureaucracy ascertaining its preference towards ‘chalta hai', ( b ) dejected and desperate opposition political leaders exposing their their poverty of wisdom , ( c ) domination of individual ambitious leaders without convincing followers, ( d ) PIL making most of the judicial activism, (e ) hostile and biased media relentlessly targeting the Modi factor rather than his governance , (f ) irresponsible petty politically motivated lobbies waging war mongering threatening calls against Modi , (g) petty religious sectorial minority groups instigating communal hatreds, ( h ) violation of the law of the land by all , ( I ) unruly behavior of the ruling party legislators and workers , ( j ) growing cynicism on the part of every one , thereby depriving the voters of the facts and figures.The myth of ‘civil rights’ and ‘liberty’:There is a school of thought which believes in the limitless scope of the value of ‘liberty'. It is a myth in the sense that the advocates of liberty do not seem to support the idea of ‘nation'. It seems that their definition of liberty ‘as a value' is which crosses the boundary of a nation and treating the whole world citizenry as one unit in which nobody can restrict the individual freedom limiting it to any national boundary. This is certainly something very important per se. This school of thought tends to forget that believing in a nation or focuses on national interest, is not contradictory to the life and property or freedom of thought of an individual. These human rights activists forget that their chances of enjoying liberalism are possible only when the state is secure and it does not fall prey to any authoritarianism creeping in through anarchists' plans and programmes under the garb of ‘liberty' hounds.
Anti-national activities do not necessarily mean overthrowing the elected government, it is equally dangerous to witness an atmosphere of lawlessness generated by the so-called ‘leftist' tendencies. The intolerant leftist tendencies carefully prepare designs of anarchist movements and agitations ( like the one organized by these very associations at the beginning of the year in Maharashtra) ) culminating in bloody riots claiming the lives of several innocent citizens. Remember Stalin who in the erstwhile USSR was responsible for the massacre of several thousand innocent dissident citizens in USSR? Stories of several thousand assassinations for over three decades in West Bengal in India during the Marxist regime need not be overlooked. It is interesting to find that these advocates of Stalinism are now human rights activists and these are the ones shedding crocodile's tears. In brief, the ‘left' have always considered liberty as their shield to save themselves from their anti-social agitations. ‘Liberty' for them is an excuse to hide their anti-social battles waged against the peaceful decent society. It is a shield to defend themselves from their social sins. Liberty for these pseudo-liberals is a myth.
Period of hypocrite ideological war:
The cunningness of these human rights activists is that these leaders shout at the Executive and demand justice for them if their plans of creating unrest and commotion are in jeopardy. A few activists minority in number enjoy holding the rest of the majority at ransom. These accuse the Executive of being irrational and anti-human. Accusing someone of being anti-human is the easiest way of belittling the Executive. It is the cheapest battleground to fight on. Accusing Narendra Modi of anti-human or anything else has become a popular fashion and quickly responsive. Modi must have swallowed several hitherto unknown allegations and accusations. The left veered ideologues keep on levelling several charges against Modi in the name of bourgeoisie ideology and Indian primitive ancient history. The fact of the matter is that the Left ideology is smashed and thrown to dust everywhere in all parts of the world. The citadels of the Left ideology –the USSR, a few South American countries and of late – China too are seen jettisoning their burden. The Indian citizens in West Bengal have realized their democratic folly and since corrected it.
Of course, the Left ideologues have always shown a sort of arrogance and were never prepared to relent. These have always declared themselves to be the sole saviours of freedom of every sort. These have always pronounced themselves to be the guardians of human rights. These conveniently forget the lambasting massacres of the innocents in several communist countries in the world. The case of the horrifying period of the lawlessness during the Left-rule in West Bengal in the Indian federation, cannot be overlooked by the students of ‘peace'. The regime even went to the extent of passing several controversial legislative resolutions ‘flouting the spirit of the Indian federal structure' and denouncing the constitution of India. Many thinkers tend to believe that the Marxians are essentially anarchists. Communists in their earlier history were not prepared to believe in national boundaries ( …remember their slogan—workers of the world unite,.).Many of the Communist ideologues did not subscribe to the theory of ‘India as a nation', these considered that India was a cluster of ‘nationalities', India was never a nation.
Indian National Congress developed the theory of ‘composite culture'. The party believed that India was a nation but her constituents were several religious groups including Hindus, Muslims, Christians, and other smaller sects. The Party caused the 42nd Amendment during the ‘emergency era', a period during which the selective implementation of the Constitutional provisions, enabled its passage without any public reference and debate, vide Article 51A,(f), which necessitated its abidance , that maintained, ( it was the duty of the citizen ) "to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture," this happened in 1977. The usage of the term ‘composite culture' paved the way for a gradual strength-gaining program of the politically conscious religious minority groups.
The Left and the INC did not lose the opportunity to sow the seeds of the social cleavages in the otherwise peaceful Indian society while destroying the sanctity of the nation. Vivekanand is quoted by a well-known Russologist and the National Professor Dr.Ashok Modak in one of his ( unpublished ) research paper ( quote) " every nation is a cultural entity, which emerges on its own, which is born and not created or manufactured artificially. Every nation has its own past, peculiarity and individuality with which it is born. Each represents, as it were one peculiar note in the harmony of nations, and this is its life, its vitality." In the face of this statement made on nationalism by a great philosopher like Swami Vivekanand, the very mention of an absurd concept like ‘composite culture' that too in a mandatory legal document like the Constitution of India ( as prepared by Mrs.Indira Gandhi ), deserves to be dismissed forthwith.
Modi's induction in the Indian scenario is a harbinger of a new era of "nation first" idea. Narendra Modi like Vivekanand has a typical affection for the masses suffering from social isolation and utter neglect. Like Vivekanand, Modi too has expressed time and again his concern over the progress of the working people. Modi is characterized by his ‘progressive features' of socio-political views.
The first tenure of the BJP government has this undercurrent ‘concern for poverty and the poor. The findings in regard to the economic growth of the commoners in India during the first tenure of the Modi Government is certainly an important measure in the process of the economic development, but it needs to be analysed and studied in the light of the social considerations which was the very purpose of Modi administration's planning. I for one firmly believe that merely quoting economic indicators to measure the economic growth will certainly not depict a true and factual picture of the economic status of a nation. It is equally important to take a note that the analysis of the society too in the nation is required to be analysed meticulously. The society in the ‘Middle East' is an example in this regard where you have a cluster of countries which, of late have acquired higher economic standard, the question, however, emerges as to its social conditions. What is the answer?