Join Friends of BJP Network
We invite you to join us!
Article 377 – Food for Thought
In an opinion piece titled “Shy society. Shameless debate“, S Gurumurthy writes: “Homosexuals displaced the Economic Survey for the year 2008-09 from the headlines of most media on July 3, 2009. New headings such as, ‘Historic benchmark’; ‘Sexual equality’; ‘Landmark Judgement’ appeared in the media. This is how the media had headlined the Delhi High Court judgement holding Sec. 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which makes homosexual acts offences in law, partly unconstitutional. Sec. 377 of the Indian Penal Code was not Manu’s code. It was Macaulay’s. This colonial law made homosexuality punishable. In Judeo-Christian tradition homosexuality was seen an act against the law of God, punishable even with death. The Islamic rules also prescribed capital punishment for the offence. In all Abrahamic traditions the hostility to homosexuality originated in the story associated with a city as Sodom [the etymological source of the world 'sodomy'] where the sexual sin was first committed according to their texts, though the respective accounts varied. This is the philosophy of the law against homosexuals in Abrahamic societies. Macaulay’s law reflected their theological position. Earlier, there was no state law in India to punish homosexuality. Does that mean that the Hindu Â- read Indian Â- tradition approved of homosexuality?”
The article adds: “What was the position of the state and state enacted laws in India in such matters? The king or the state in India had refrained from handling most issues which the society or families could handle. It is the colonial state, with its laws and courts, that began to intrude the sovereign domain of the family and society. The Indian discipline was always built around unenforced social and family norms; not state laws. Self-restraint and shyness were the tools to regulate the deviants from the norms, not the police or courts. Even today, it is this non-formal moral order Â- read dharma Â- not the laws of Parliament or State assemblies, that largely governs this society. India is otherwise ungovernable; just some 12,000 plus police stations in some 7 lakh towns and villages cannot regulate over 110 crore people. Thanks to this moral order, the Indian society had handled, and even now handles, such sensitive issues with great finesse than does state law. It is in stark contrast to the gross state law and media discourse of today. Historian Devdutt Puranik says that in Hindu literature ‘though not part of the mainstream, the existence of homosexuality was recognised, but, not approved’.”
It concludes: “Tolerance for the deviants from generally accepted human conduct is part of the Indian ethos. Here the society would wisely ignore the marginal deviants rather than punish them, even discuss them Â- a more subtle, sensible social management principle. The society felt, even now feels, shy to discuss them. That is why the traditional religious scholars have refused to be drawn into the current debate on the issue. In the Indian tradition, homosexuals, as elsewhere, were thus regarded as deviants. But, here, unlike in the Abrahamic, the right of these deviants to exist without being punished was never denied; and will never be. Yet no one can argue here or elsewhere that homosexuality is a virtue. No law or court of law can declare it as a virtue”.
Given that the Supreme Court has upheld the Delhi High Court’s verdict decriminalizing homosexuality and on the other hand a survey indicates that 81pct of Indians do not approve of same sex relationships, let us know what you think ?
This piece first appeared in Indian Express on 16 July 09.
Leave Hindutva as it was mean to be
by Sharrayu Aroskar
I have been following the BJP quiet regularly in the media. There was a sizeable population who wanted BJP to be in power for intellect and integrity reasons. However, the rule was not destined to be in hand for next five years. Never the less BJP has emerged as a largest opposition party and has a myriad contribution to make to influence the government policy decisions positively. BJP supporters in India and living abroad have been waiting since the results for the BJP top brass meeting and lessons thus learnt from introspection.
The media had BJP “atma-chintan” meeting on beat. Some did the job genuinely others either wanted to paint it black or gather news of street side gossip quality. Of the statements that came first from the print media, I was surprised to read one that stated “BJP would re-cast “Hindutva” Knowing the quality of journalism in this country in recent election times, I was waiting for the prints of speeches given by L.K. Advani and Rajnath Singh. It was good to see how BJP supported cultural nationalism.
Ever since I opened my mind and head to politics the word Hindutva was always talked of as a brand that is pro Hindu and anti Muslim. The word to ears also sounds like Hindu extremism these days. I have heard young college girls talk of voting for Congress because BJP is all good except for too much of Hindutva in them. Even educated urban population both settled in India and abroad abhors this word or translates it into Hindu communalism and hates the party or organization that uses it. Naturally its the BJP and RSS that bear the popular brunt.
It is surprising to see how cultural nationalism was tainted by handful of politicians. More surprising is how the people in general have accepted it and even more surprising is the irresponsible print and visual media that leaves the cultural pride of this country on back tracks to make sure they are running on fast TRP tracks.
In my opinion the term Hindutva coined by Vinayak Damodar Sawarkar is an exemplary concept that unites India with its various colors. It is one that makes the blue complement the orange and orange complement the green. It is one that is so essential within this country that it makes the intrusion of foreign rotten brain difficult to penetrate. This concept of Akhanda Bharat houses and encompasses every religion sect and cast. What is refers to is not those who pray like “Hindus” but those that call this motherland their “aai” “ma” “ammi” “mother” etc. When you analyze this a little more, you start observing examples around that support this concept.
I have relished the sheer kurama at friends place on Id. I was born on Pateti and hence Parsi New Year is celebrated in my home in India every year. Having studied in a convent school and alternatively living outside India for a while I and many of my friends who follow other religions except Christianity celebrate Christmas. All Hindu festivals are always celebrated. We look at the office holidays and regardless of the reason of Diwali, Id or Independence Day, it is always welcomed with all zest. In school what binds you in a group is not your caste or religion or language but it’s the culture that you share with your classmates and like experiences. A random someone following Islam doesn’t backfire on Miyan Musharraf because he is a Muslim. He does that because he stands for a culture and knows that the rest, regardless of their religion will stand by his statement in praise and prove him right. It is not out of coincidence that you see Md. Azzaruddin of the Slumdog Millionaire fame touch feet on the podium in spite of being a Muslim. It is not random that a Muslim stands against imposed “Ghunghat” and a Hindu woman stands against forced “Burkha”.
What this states is that something that binds us all in this Indian subcontinent is not our religion or language it’s the culture that we grow in and experience till our death. This beautiful concept of “Akhanda Bharat” or United India was termed as “Hindutva” and every person who calls India his motherland was called a Hindu.
In light of this discussion, the word Hindutva essentially belongs to neither the Congress nor the BJP. It was coined by Vinayak Damodar Sawarkar who was an ardent freedom fighter and an iron man of Sardar Patel cadre. Thus it is the sub standard quality of the Congress thought and other pseudo secular parties to malign a concept that holds Indian culture together for petty votes. It is the arrogance and lack of understanding of common and historical India within the so called “High Command” that has further perpetuated this. It is shameful that the media endorses such actions and maligns parties like BJP and organizations like RSS. The aftermath of which is anti BJP undercurrent because of the use of the word Hindutva.
In my opinion, no party in this country has a right to recast Hindutva as they anyways weren’t the creators of it. Only thing possible is to champion the concept to build a stronger India or build a secular concept better defined than “Hindutva” itself.
[The author http://sharrayuaroskar.com/ is working with a well known Sales & Marketing strategic consulting firm in Pune. She has an under-grad in Computer Science from Mumbai University and Masters from Texas A&M University, USA.]
D-Day Discussion
Use this post to discuss the election results as they come out.
NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC ALLIANCE
Advaniji talks about the formation of the NDA
“We decided to form a post-poll alliance based on a common minimum programme acceptable to all the constituent parties.While all other allies agreed to join the government, one of them, the TDP in Andhra Pradesh, headed by its Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu, declared that it would support the Vajpayee government from outside. There was much bonhomie when leaders of all the alliance parties assembled at Atalji’s residence on Safdarjung Road in mid-March to formally elect him as their leader. We also had to settle a small matter- the name of our common platform. Several suggestions were made. Ultimately, my suggestion-National Democratic Alliance (NDA)-was readily accepted. For us in the BJP, it had an emotional resonance. The name of the conglomeration of Opposition parties, headed by Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee in the 1st Lok Sabha, was National Democratic Front. I suggested the slight change because ‘Front’ implied ad hocism, whereas ‘Alliance’ carries a sense of durability.
Even though it was evident that the BJP-led alliance on its own had the mandate to form the government, this did not deter some of our adversaries from trying to stitch together an alternative minus the BJP. ‘We will not allow the BJP and its allies to form the government at the Centre. There will be a coalition government of the United Front and Congress,’ said departing Prime Minister I.K. Gujral. A Congress spokesman said, ‘Although the BJP is the single largest party, we don’t expect the President to call them first because the Congress and the United Front will reach an understanding…and send him a communiqué.’ Ultimately, the logic of elementary mathematics prevailed over the lust for power. ‘We have no numbers to form a government, so we are not staking a claim,’ conceded Sonia Gandhi after meeting President Narayanan. It was clear from her statement that what prevented her from staking claim was the failure to rustle up the necessary numbers, not the realisation that the Congress had been denied a mandate by the people.The ten-day delay by President Narayanan in inviting Atalji to form the government raised many eyebrows. He had set a new precedent concerning the appointment of Prime Minister-namely, if an election to the Lok Sabha produced a hung House with no party or pre-election coalition having a majority, then only that person would be appointed Prime Minister who succeeds in convincing the President, through letters of support from allied parties, of his ability to secure the majority. In doing so, he diverged from the actions of his two illustrious predecessors, R. Venkataraman and Shankar Dayal Sharma, who had invited the leader of the single largest party or pre-election coalition to form the government without ascertaining their ability to secure the confidence of the House.
Atalji was able to meet the President’s demand and was sworn in as Prime Minister on 19 March, on the condition that he would prove his majority in the Lok Sabha within ten days. I remember the proud occasion on that bright Thursday morning. The forecourt of the majestic Rashtrapati Bhavan was aglow in the warm sunshine of early summer. After Atalji, it was my turn to be sworn in. After a gap of almost twenty-one years, I was back as a Minister in the Government of India. There were, however, two differences. In 1977, the swearing-in ceremony was an indoor affair: it had taken place in the Ashoka Hall of the Rashtrapati Bhavan. More importantly, Atalji, who had then been sworn in as a Minister in Morarji Desai’s government, had now become the Prime Minister. I became the Home Minister in his Cabinet”.
REDRAWING THE POLITICAL MAP
Elections in March 1998
“With the Congress party withdrawing support from the Gujral government in November 1997, President K.R. Narayanan had only one option before him: dissolve the Lok Sabha and call for fresh elections, which were subsequently announced for February-March 1998. The BJP sought a mandate from the people with a simple slogan, which stood out for its positive content and direct appeal: Vote for a ’stable government’ under an ‘able Prime Minister’. Our manifesto for the 1998 Lok Sabha elections stated: ‘In Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee, the people see a leader who combines ability with integrity, charisma with character and experience with universal acceptability. He is not a person who claims leadership by birth in, or relationship with, any dynasty. He is a leader by virtue of his long and dedicated service to the nation and its people in and out of Parliament.’ As soon as I hit the campaign trail, I realised that this election would be a watershed in the history of the Indian Republic. I could see tremendous enthusiasm for the BJP in almost all parts of the country, including states such as Tamil Nadu and West Bengal, where we had never won a Lok Sabha seat. Atalji’s charisma was palpable among all sections of society. The people were eager to elect, for the first time ever, a completely non-Congress government under a non-Congress leader. It did not take much to predict which party would emerge as the frontrunner to form the government. The pollsters’ task, therefore, was limited to projecting the BJP’s tally. The actual results, when they started pouring in, showed that the BJP had literally redrawn the political map of India, having significantly improved its 1996 performance (161 seats) by winning 182 out of the 384 seats that it contested. In contrast, the Congress, contesting from a much greater number of seats, 462, managed to win only 141-as against 140 that it had won in 1996. The strength of the United Front too came down from 183 to 86. A closer look at the results revealed many notable advances for the BJP, and sharp reverses for the Congress. Firstly, this was an election in which Sonia Gandhi campaigned extensively for her party. Secondly, the Congress’ vote share came down to 25.72 per cent-a fall of 14 per cent since 1989, the last time it formed the government at the Centre. The BJP’s vote share, 25.38 per cent, almost equalled that of the Congress but, no less important, it had risen by 14 per cent since 1989. Thirdly, the BJP could boast of representatives in the Lok Sabha from more states and union territories than the Congress.
Both Atalji and I won comfortably from our traditional constituencies of Lucknow and Gandhinagar respectively. What was particularly gratifying to me was that the BJP had succeeded in expanding its social and geographical base. For the first time since 1952, the BJP had representation from Tamil Nadu, West Bengal and Assam. In UP, our success was staggering: we won fifty-seven out of eighty-five seats. Another interesting feature was that in the new Parliament, the BJP had the highest number of women MPs, (sixteen, as against ten belonging to the Congress), as well as the largest number of MPs belonging to the Scheduled Castes (twenty-four) and Scheduled Tribes (fourteen). In short, the goal of becoming an alternative to the Congress, which we had set for ourselves at the founding conference of the BJP in 1980, had finally been realised in 1998″.
BJP’S FIRST PRIME MINISTERIAL CANDIDATE
Advaniji announces Atalji as the PM candidate
“In my presidential address at the BJP’s ‘Maha Adhiveshan’ (mega conference) held in Mumbai on 11-13 November 1995, I traced the party’s highs and lows from its evolution to the founding conference in Mumbai in 1980-how our strength in Parliament had gone up from two in 1984 to eighty-six in 1989 and to 121 in 1991. Expressing the hope and confidence that the BJP would win the people’s mandate to form the Central Government in the 1996 Lok Sabha elections, I declared, ‘We will fight the next elections under the leadership of Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee and he will be our candidate for Prime Minister. For many years, not only our party workers but also the common people have been chanting the slogan “Agli baari, Atal Bihari”. (It is Vajpayee’s turn to be the next Prime Minister.) I am confident that the BJP will form the next government under Atalji’s premiership.’
What transpired on the dais after this announcement is best described in a column by Kanchan Gupta in the Pioneer: “For a moment there was stunned silence. Then followed thunderous applause. The declaration came at the fag end of Advani’s speech. It was not a matter-of-fact statement, but an emotional announcement. He later told some of us it was a ‘historic moment’ for both him and the party, something that he had been waiting for years to declare…. Before Advani, his voice by then choking with emotion, could return to his place on the dais, Vajpayee got up, took the microphone and, giving a pass to his long pauses, said, ‘The BJP will win the election, we will form the Government and Advaniji will be Prime Minister.’ Advani said, ‘Ghoshana ho chuki hai. (Announcement has already been made).’ A smiling Vajpayee retorted, ‘To phir main bhi ghoshana karta hoon ki pradhan mantri… (Then I too shall announce that …).‘ Advani chipped in, ‘Atalji hi banengey (Atalji will become the Prime Minister.).‘ Vajpayee said: ‘Yeh to Lakhnawi andaaz me pahley aap, nahi pahley aap ho raha hai, (What the people are witnessing here is Lucknow’s famed custom of courteousness-’You be the first…’ ‘No, you have to be the first’). For a while, both of them looked at each other, two old colleagues and close friends who had nursed the Bharatiya Jana Sangh since its formation and later the BJP, both of them clearly moved to tears…. In the summer of 1996, Advani’s public declaration came true. The BJP emerged as the single largest party and was invited by President Shankar Dayal Sharma to form the Government. Vajpayee was sworn in as Prime Minister. The rest is history’.
My announcement took everybody by surprise. Until then, neither the BJP nor other non Congress political parties had declared a Prime Ministerial candidate ahead of any parliamentary election. (The Congress party in this respect is in a class of its own because its Prime Ministerial candidate invariably belongs to the ‘dynasty’ or is nominated by it.) The announcement, which I made in Mumbai in my capacity as President of the BJP, produced a surge of enthusiasm among the rank and file of the party, besides being warmly welcomed by the general public. It was not only my own personal conviction that the country deserved a government under the leadership of Atalji, but also the sentiment of millions of Indians”.
POKHARAN II
Eleven years ago, India went Nuclear. This is what LK Advani has written in his memoirs:.
“The first and foremost task of the Vajpayee government was to make India a nuclear weapons power-a vital commitment in every election manifesto of the BJP since 1967. That our government implemented this promise within two months of assuming office showed that we had the courage, as they say in contemporary parlance, to walk our talk. As I look back, I find that the people of India have noted many contributions of the Vajpayee government towards the development of India’s infrastructure-highways, rural roads, telecom, IT, power sector reforms, etc. But our government’s greatest achievement was instilling a sense of pride, confidence and hope in Indians, both within and outside India. A major contributor to this national resurgence was, of course, a historic event that took place on 11 May 1998, confirming our resolve to make India ’shaktishali (strong), samruddha (prosperous) and swabhimani (self-confident)’. It was on the auspicious occasion of Buddha Purnima, the day of Gautam Buddha’s birth, when this long-standing commitment of the BJP was translated into reality. On that very morning, Atalji had shifted his residence from 7 Safdarjung Road to the Prime Minister’s official address: 7 Race Course Road. The mandatory puja had been completed but the day was destined to become memorable for him, and for the nation, for another reason. Sitting in the Prime Minister’s living room were seven of us-Atalji, Defence Minister George Fernandes, Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission Jaswant Singh, Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha, the Prime Minister’s Political Advisor Pramod Mahajan, his Principal Secretary Brajesh Mishra, and myself. We were eagerly awaiting a message from the deserts of Rajasthan-to be precise, from Pokharan. The message came, slightly before 4 pm, on a specially installed top-security telephone line: ‘Tests successful’. India’s nuclear scientists had succeeded in conducting three simultaneous nuclear explosions, heralding India’s emergence as a nuclear weapons state. None of us in the room could control our emotions. I, perhaps the weakest in this regard, had tears in my eyes. Atalji thanked the scientists who made it happen-in particular, Dr A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, Head of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO); R. Chidambaram, head of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE); Dr Anil Kakodkar (who is now the head of DAE); and Dr K. Santhanam, Chief Advisor to DRDO. Shortly thereafter, he went to the sprawling lawns of his residence to make the following announcement before the media: ‘Today, at 1545 hours, India conducted three underground nuclear tests in the Pokharan range. The tests conducted today were with a fission device, a low yield device and a thermonuclear device. The measured yields are in line with expected values. Measurements have also confirmed that there was no release of radioactivity into the atmosphere. These were contained explosions like the experiment conducted in May 1974. I warmly congratulate the scientists and engineers who have carried out these successful tests.’ Two more nuclear tests were conducted at Pokharan on 13 May 1998, thus completing the planned series of underground tests. What stunned the rulers in western capitals was the complete failure of their intelligence agencies to penetrate the cover of secrecy surrounding the tests.”
FUTURE OF INDIA
Advaniji’s thoughts on the future of our country
I have always believed that India has limitless potential for progress. We are blessed with rich resources, both human and natural, to realise that potential. Above all, we have an invaluable spiritual and civilisational heritage to guide us. We can utilise our resources properly, employing the power of modern science and technology, and being guided by our heritage, we can indeed create a Swachcha Bharat (Clean India), Swastha Bharat (Healthy India), Saakshar Bharat (Literate and Educated India), Shaktishali Bharat (Strong India), Samruddha Bharat (Prosperous India) and Prabuddha Bharat (Enlightened India).
India, I believe, has been expectantly looking for honesty in governance and strong leadership that is uncompromisingly committed to the nation’s unity, integrity, security and progress. Our people want to see an end to ‘pollution’ at the Gangotri of Governance ― at the top centres of power in New Delhi ― so that the rest of the Ganga can become clean and life-supporting. And by ‘pollution’ I do not refer only to financial corruption and misuse of power in politics and administration. Of course, corruption of this kind is a foe of both national security and national development, and our people, who are being harassed and humiliated by it at all levels, want to see it eliminated. But ‘pollution’ also manifests itself in other poisonous forms: as pseudo-secularism, minorityism, vote-bank politics, criminalization, emasculation of institutions and insult to the sacred symbols of our nationalism, all of which are weakening India and making it vulnerable to grave threats.
No less worrisome is the fact that, even after sixty years of Independence, a majority of our population is receiving only the few left-overs of economic growth, while the bulk of its fruits are allowed to be cornered by the rich and the privileged minority. Our people want a government that cares equally for every section of our diverse society, especially for the poor and deprived. And they are looking for a leadership that genuinely respects democracy and is determined to safeguard its institutions from assaults inspired by base and selfish considerations. Each of these expectations is legitimate, even urgent. And the future belongs to those in India’s political class who hearken to the people’s demands with a firm commitment to good governance, development and security.”
HOBBIES
Advaniji’s love for Books, Films and Cricket.
“My lifelong love for books began in college and I read all the novels of Jules Verne, the famous nineteenth century French science fiction writer, including Journey to the Centre of the Earth, Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea, Around the World in Eighty Days, and others. These novels were quite prescient and accurate in describing technological inventions that materialised many decades later. For example, Paris in the 20th Century talked about air conditioning, television, etc., which were nonexistent in Verne’s time. Similarly, the description in the novel From the Earth to the Moon-three astronauts launching into space from Florida and returning to the earth by landing on the ocean-now seems almost like a preview of the voyage of Apollo 11 in 1969. It was also in my college library that I read all the novels of Charles Dickens and Alexander Dumas and some other classics by European and American writers. I was particularly impressed by Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities and Dumas’ The Three Musketeers. Quite a few of the novels that I had read then were subsequently made into films, and I would never miss an opportunity to watch them in my later years. My other love in school was cricket. I was not an extraordinary player, but I was an avid listener of A.F.S. Taleyarkhan’s radio commentary of Test cricket, Ranji Trophy and the highly popular Bombay Pentangular matches,played among the five teams of Hindus, Muslims, Parsis, Europeans and the rest. Taleyarkhan’s was a legendary voice on radio, and, like many cricket fans, I too was as interested in his style of commentary as in the match. I used to frequently entertain my friends by mimicking his description and analysis of the game. I remember that the only time I bunked school was when, instead of only listening to the radio commentary, I was able to watch the five-day Ranji Trophy final in Karachi between the teams of Sindh and Maharashtra.”