On BJP, supporting NaMo and the Long Road..
Back in December 2013, when I joined AAP, I was hoping this would be another front against the Congress/UPA…This is what I wrote then (emphasis added):
As for the BJP, in spite of Sh. Modi, my publicly stated opposition to its “collusion†with the rotten system remains in place. The big difference between my stance in July and today is that instead of “one man†who has a fighting chance of making Congress history, today we have two. One remains the front-runner to lead India.  It is time to work with the other (Arvind Kejriwal). Time for the good forces to converge and find common ground rather than argue about policy matters (on which differences exist)..
Unfortunately, the “other man” has sorely disappointed. Instead of being another front against the Congress, AAP today is in danger of becoming another front for the the Congress.
I left AAP because of deep frustration of not being able to move the leadership or the cadre on almost any issue of consequence . As I wrote earlier this month, “I felt constrained and frustrated – unable to make any meaningful or significant contribution to the party.”Â
I felt I was being wasted and I was worried the organisation had begun drifting sharply towards the socialist/communist ideology, both in terms of tactics (e.g. Dharnas etc ) as well as and people (including LS candidates). Â The danger signs were beginning to show even then – and had prompted me to go public with my concerns and unease. They are far more visible today.
And so I am back to supporting the ““one man†who has a fighting chance of making Congress history. In the nine months since I first wrote about him, that “one man” has gone from strength to strength – and in the process has won legions of admirers, some grudging, but mostly willing. I am therefore – once again – publicly endorsing Sh Narendra Modi.
And yet, my wariness with BJP remains. It remains because what I saw in the last few months at a “ground level” hardly inspires confidence. What I saw was not something I could support with a clean conscience. Almost all of it belied the claim of BJP being a “party with a difference”. The leadership at the local level – at least in my personal (albeit limited) experience – remains corrupt, deeply compromised and bereft of any ideological moorings or integrity. And this means – unfortunately – that there is no space nor the time for people like us.
So the wariness with BJP remains. A part of me wishes Sh Modi to be the President of BJP instead of its PM nominee. I wonder how would the party look if he takes charge of the organisation. A few years – perhaps a decade – under his leadership might just be what the party needs to make it more accessible to – and with space for – people like me. People like us who are committed to the cause of nation-building but do not wish to compromise their integrity and fundamental values. Â People like us who really wish for profound and lasting change in India. People like us who dream about the 21st century being India’s century.
I would like to think there is still hope for us. Â And If Sh Modi manages to keep that hope alive, that – to me – would be his biggest contribution to Indian politics.
Jai Hind, Jai Bharat!
What India badly needs is a party committed to free markets, individual freedoms, uncompromising commitment to national integrity and..
..committed to preservation of our culture, with intra-party democracy & space for capable people of integrity who wish to make a difference.
BJP comes close but not quite.
The day I feel it has, I shall be delighted to join, work with/ for the party.
Until then, I remain an alert supporter of Sh Narendra Modi.
Related Posts: Taking the Plunge, The Long Road Ahead and my earlier endorsement of Sh Modi.
A slightly edited version of this post appeared over at Times of India blogs.
After watching Satyameva Jayate on Star TV, I am convinced India has hundreds of well-meaning people who are making a difference. Good leadership is needed. Modi might be able to provide that. Arvind Kejriwal or Rahul Gandhi might also be able to provide that. At the very least, Modi/AK will bring in some changes.
You have to appreciate that everyone has to work within the system. If you found the local leaders of some party corrupt, that is a reflection on the overall system, not on the individuals. Corruption is more of a process than an attribute of any individual. (I am not sure you really agree with that. You probably believe that there is a corruption free world where every man, woman, and cat are nice nice. Possibly, cats are vegetarian in that world.)
The real problem in India is that a contestant for a Loksabha seat can openly talk of cutting someone to pieces and that the ruling party fields such a candidate. Media will not talk much about that because each of the media-man/woman will be afraid of being cut to pieces if he/she speaks the truth.
The other real problem is hero-worship. India should have dozens of good leaders. Modi cannot do everything. BJP has other leaders, too. So does Congress. Some Biju Janata Dal people are good and a couple of Shiv Sena leaders are good, too. The problem is there isn’t a method to evaluate leaders in a non-partisan way.
“What India badly needs is a party committed to free markets”.
I am not sure about that. There is an upcoming Mango and raw vegetables ban in UK and EU. You cannot have free markets for weapons, coca cola, and wallmart and not for Mangoes and Vegetables.
Perhaps AAP has sensed the folly of free markets…
Prakash: I don’t think we will ever see perfectly “free” markets..
My point was more generic..
Nations and economies will continue to restrict movement of products/services (and of course, people) on a variety of grounds (health, dumping, fear of epidemics, politics).
But I believe free markets – with freedom to trade and exchange are generally more efficient than controlled markets – as the examples of FSU proved (not to mention other formerly communist countries)
Shantanu: I understand your point as far as greater good goes. All that I would like to suggest is that a politician or a would-be-politician should not bind himself to a principle if it is a part of present or future bargain. If I were to consider voting a politician who follows a principle that is for the greater good of the world, and in the process, he might compromise my well being, I would think twice.