Time magazine has featured Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on its cover for May 20, 2019 with headline that reads: 'India's Divider in Chief".
"Under Modi govt, minorities of every stripe – from liberals and lower castes to Muslims and Christians – have come under assault, India is "more divided than ever,"the cover story “Can the World’s Largest Democracy Endure Another Five Years of a Modi Government?” by journalist Aatish Taseer reads.
Highlighting the rising populism in democracies like Turkey, Brazil, Britain, the US and India, Taseer writes , “Of the great democracies to fall to populism, India was the first.” Under Prime Minister Modi, nation’s most basic norms, such as the character of the Indian state, its founding fathers, the place of minorities and its institutions, from universities to corporate houses to the media, were shown to be severely distrusted,” it said.
" Lucky to be blessed with so weak an opposition–a ragtag coalition of parties, led by the Congress, with no agenda other than to defeat him.
Modi will never again represent the myriad dreams and aspirations of 2014.
Then he was a messiah, ushering in a future too bright to behold, one part Hindu renaissance, one part South Korea’s economic program.
Now he is merely a politician who has failed to deliver, seeking re-election.
Whatever else might be said about the election, hope is off the menu,” the article reads.
Here is a point by point rebuttal of this article.
1) Taseer asserts "The cherished achievements of independent India–secularism, liberalism, a free press–came to be seen in the eyes of many as part of a grand conspiracy in which a deracinated Hindu elite, in cahoots with minorities from the monotheistic faiths, such as Christianity and Islam, maintained its dominion over India’s Hindu majority."
Taseer makes this assertion sound like something very bad/alarming without bothering to understand the motivations on both sides and offering any counter-view. This is a very primitive argument. .
If India is truly secular then why is it that the Church owns the largest portion of non-agricultural land despite being a miniscule part of the population? Is this not an example of establishment being in cahoots with the minorities?
https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/b...ho-indias-largest-landowners-are-1129773.html
2. 4 lakh acres is the land Wakf properties account for as of 2009. Wakf Acts The 1954 and 1995 central laws endow huge powers with the state governments that set up and run Wakf boards in their states.
https://www.outlookindia.com/magazine/story/allahs-left-the-building/261789
3. Why is it that in a "secular" India only temples are under govt. control and mosques and churches are free to operate whilst they amass massive land banks. Does Aatish Taseer see the irony in this ?
Don't the above examples already demonstrate that minorites are maintaining a dominion over majority?
I have used facts to disprove your claims which dismiss this idea as a conspiracy.
4. The author also claimed that "The country had a long history of politically instigated sectarian riots, most notably the killing of at least 2,733 Sikhs in the streets of Delhi after the 1984 assassination of Indira Gandhi by her Sikh bodyguards. The Congress leadership, though hardly blameless, was able, even through the selective profession of secular ideals, to separate itself from the actions of the mob."
Firstly what happened in 1984 was a state orchestrated Sikh genocide. These weren't RIOTS unless by your apologetic definition even the Holocaust was an anti-Semitic riot.
Nanavati Commission report clearly mentions that the instructions to kill the Sikhs came directly from the PMO. The then President & the Home Minister wanted to call in the Army but the decision was VETOED by 'father of mob lynching' PM Rajiv Gandhi.
https://www.dnaindia.com/india/phot...from-rajiv-gandhi-s-office-hs-phoolka-2747559
Exactly how is Congress "SECULAR" by your definition despite 1984 is something only a bigot or an apologist could explain. You blame Modi for not apologizing for Gujarat riots but you absolutely FAIL to mention that the army was called in Gujarat unlike secular 1984.
5. The Author also fail to mention that Modi had sent a letter requesting CMs of 3 neighboring states to immediately send additional police forces. It is a well known fact that police force ratio for population is really low. Given below is the photocopy of the request to home min.
Why was army not deployed in 1984? Instead of apologizing for 1984, Rajiv said "when a big tree falls, the Earth shakes." Yet he is secular.
Andy Marino writes in his book "Modi appealed to the Chief Ministers of Gujarat's three neighbouring States — Ashok Gehlot in Rajasthan, the late Vilasrao Deshmukh in Maharashtra and Digvijay Singh in Madhya Pradesh — to send aid in the form of law enforcement and paramilitary personnel.”
The letters of request were sent to the three Congress Chief Ministers on March 1, barely a day after after the violence broke out. What was the response Marino notes, “Maharashtra eventually sent a very limited number of personnel to help, but the others flatly refused.”
Why haven't you mentioned why Congress ruled states didn't help stop the riots by sending additional forces? Modi did his best to tackle the riots, why should he apologize when he wasn't the perpetrator?
https://www.dailypioneer.com/2014/columnists/the-real-villains-of-gujarat-2002.html
6. In perfect display of your bias and selective secularism you failed to mention why is Congress silent on it's cadres linked to the Godhra Carnage.
58 Hindus were burnt alive, mostly women and kids. 140 litres of petrol was stocked from before.
https://m.timesofindia.com/india/Cong-silent-on-cadres-linked-to-Guj-riots/articleshow/122796.cms
7. Aatish Taseer writes "in 1992 had destroyed a 16th century mosque, said to stand at the birthplace of the Hindu epic hero Ram" This is pure bigotry. What do you mean by "said to stand". The Archaeological Survey of India has already given proof that the temple existed. The same ASI which also had Muslim members who also agreed that a temple existed.
Also what do you mean by Hindu epic hero?
Rām isn't just some 'epic hero', he is the Supreme Personality of Godhead as per our Vedic texts. I dare you to say the same thing about Abrahamic faiths.
8. AatishTaseer writes "They feel their culture and religion has been demeaned; they entertain fantasies of “Hinduphobia”. - BIGOT! Exactly how Hinduphobic is New York Times is displayed in the below article.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/how-the-nyt-masks-hinduph_b_5608266
New York Times Also had to apologize for it's racist, Hinduphobic cartoon on Mangalyaan success. Those who deny Hinduphobia, Islamophobia and anti-Semitism are all bigots just like Aatish Taseer.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-29502062
9. Based on my above facts, racist NY Times is rightly called "New Yuck Times". According to your article "cow protection mobs have killed at least 46 people since 2015". In a country of 1.3 BN people, 46 people killed in a span of roughly 4 years. Is this statistically significant enough to claim that there's majoritarian violence? In the Godhra carnage in 1 day 58 Hindus were burnt alive vs 46 people who were killed due to cow related violence in a span of 4 years. I would believe that there's a case for majoritarian violence if the data calculated based on % terms would prove that victims are mainly muslims.
Purely on the basis of a mathematical argument, if for every 100 humans 1 is a bigot perpetrator of hate crime then logically speaking the hate crime perps will always be more from the majority in any country, community at any point in time. The only case when this would be alarming is when in % terms there's a trend of perps being from a particular community. Your argument is absolutely specious with no logical/statistical basis.
FYI 49 Muslims died in New Zealand in the mosque attack. 49 Muslims die in 1 day in NZ in a hate crimes vs 46 deaths in India due to cow related violence over FOUR YEARS! Also the population of NZ is miniscule compared to that of India. Truth is India needs better hate crime stats.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019...uslims-western-countries-190316150024125.html
10. TheAuthor also make a point lauding Nehru for his scientific temper but obviously omit to mention that he used to go to astrologers & tantriks. An astrologer had also warned Nehru of a Chinese attack coz of which Nehru flew into a rage. Even J B S Haldane, polymath biologist, who was Marxist in his ideological leanings, was disenchanted by the dominance of bureaucracy and politicians in the scientific establishment in India during Nehru's time, and criticised it. Proof for above statements given in the article below.
https://swarajyamag.com/ideas/nehru-modi-a-comparison-of-scientific-legacy
11. He go on talking about all the controversial statements made by BJP leaders but carefully omit the statement of Owaisi who called for a genocide of Hindus in 15 mins. India is so intolerant that the same Owaisi is roaming about freely. Ah the joy of secularim.
You also omit the statement on Sikh genocide by Sam Pitroda "Hua to hua." You also fail to mention that increase in the Haj subsidy under Modi and the laptops etc given to modernize Madarsas. Yes absolutely, so much hatred for Muslims.
https://indianexpress.com/article/o...adrasa-congress-modernism-of-madarsa-4934529/
12.
"Modi’s record on women’s issues is spotty." Really, I don't understand why our secular govt. till now never banned tripal talaq when even the country most known for women empowerment Saudi Arabia has banned it. 6 women in cabinet compared to 4 during UPA. Also defence and MeA are extremely critical ministries both run by women.
Here in this link is a list of all schemes for women.
https://wcd.nic.in/schemes-listing/2405 … Here are more details on the success of those schemes.
https://yourstory.com/smbstory/women-empowerment-schemes-boost-women-entrepreneurs
13. "Amit Shah, speaks of women as having the status of deities, ever the refuge of the religious chauvinist who is only too happy to revere women into silence." So now you have a problem with deification of women? Do you know anything about the idea of Shiva & Shakti? Hinduphobe.
14. "What Modi cannot–or will not–do is tell India the hard truth that if she wishes to be a great power, and not a Hindu theocracy, the medieval Indian past, mired in superstition and magic, must go under." This proves exactly how DERACINATED you are. Unlike a racist like you who feels Indian culture = Superstitions we have a lot to be proud of.
Did you know that "A little known school of scholars in southwest India discovered one of the founding principles of modern mathematics hundreds of years before Newton "?
https://www.manchester.ac.uk/discover/news/indians-predated-newton-discovery-by-250-years/
In 600 BCE, ancient Indian physician Sushruta performed nose surgeries & skin grafts and wrote treatises on the same. This 2500 years ago! Here giving you a proof from Sanghi Columbia University\
http://columbiasurgery.org/news/201...ient-indian-nose-jobs-origins-plastic-surgery
