Zachary opines ” Essentially we are supposed to take solace from the fact that a mass murderer like Modi (staying on in his job) can’t get the electoral clout to be PM of this great land.”
Fair point but needs to be unpackaged a bit. Modi lacks electoral clout (pan-India) specifically because of the charges against him. He has tremendous electoral clout in Gujarat precisely because he is considered to be a victim (of anti-Hindutva forces). This clout acts like a shield to protect him and grows stouter with every re-election. Just like Rajapaksa, Modi will “stay on in his job” as long as his people keep bestowing the “raksha-kavach” on him.
The situation on the ground has changed largely in favor of Modi with a few setbacks. Owing to the efforts of the Supreme court some of Modi’s closest associates have now gone to prison. This has however given convenient cover to countries like UK who have opened diplomatic contacts with Modi. Even the US has hinted that it is not averse to Modi re-applying for visa. It does seem that the financial clout of Gujaratis bear considerable weight in the decision making of Western politicians.
The general rule of thumb is that mass murderers in SA will prosper unless retribution comes through unofficial channels, Even then it has been possible only due to the dedication of fanatics (Sikhs, Tamils etc).
regards
I think the Gujarat mass riots were in themselves a global event, moreso than other comparative South Asian events.
The fact that the man considered either responsible/provocative/negligent was still able to stay on and even have speculation considering a national run is an indictment of the political process.
This is not a scoring process of South Asia rather just that basically South Asians need to refocus entirely on matters of economy and not identity.
Zach, the problem is that the economy grows, but your caste rivals get rich much quicker than you. In a society where money and power are highly fungible, there is no silver lining, win-win situation for all the communities involved. So then its back to square one tribalism.
“This is not a scoring process of South Asia rather just that basically South Asians need to refocus entirely on matters of economy and not identity”
The group that most consistently upholds this principle are the communists who have the best record in India in upholding communal harmony. Unfortunately they are stuck in pre-modern times as far as their economic theories are concerned. Also they seem to be curiously deaf towards “secular crimes” like what goes on in China.
regards
How does George W. stack up in this order of things. Why did the great American society (as opposed to SA) give him a second chance by reelecting him?
Because he did it through sanctioned channels and legislation. If Modi had started a civil war he would probably be seen less as a murderer and more as a militarist.
Sorry if I was not clear. I meant G.W. Bush and his campains in Asia.
i too was referring to the iraq and afghan campaigns. There was an Iraq Resolution passed by the US congress in 2002 authorizing military force against that country. It was a fairly transparent process, wrong headed and cynical perhaps, but it happened through legitimate channels. On the other hand, the Gujarat massacres were acts of revenge conceived by party operatives of the BJP and other affiliate organizations, but made to look like a spontaneous reaction of street justice. In indian pogroms, the canard of the furious and ungovernable mob is the typical excuse of the ruling party.
What about the contention that the Iraq war resolution was driven by “misinformation” about (non-existent) WMDs?
After all John Kerry when he campaigned against GBW in 2004 famously said “I voted for the war before I voted against it.” Other democrats were even less constrained when they chanted “Bush lied, people died.”
regards
Sid, certainly the whole effort was predicated on lies. we can read deception into all sorts of politics. The mechanism of power, however, that was used to mobilize force was transparent and legal. The scandal was in the manufacturing of fraudulent intelligence, but even that was done expertly. Anyone who wants to go to war badly enough can pull any information it wants out of a mountain of intelligence paperwork. The elected representatives were suckers to fall for it. In the end, it was a cynical war not an illegal one.
Modis appeal cannot be ascribed to Hindutva alone. Every Gujarati politician is on board with that. (E.g. Congress never fails to remind voters that it was Sardar Patel who rebuilt Somanath.) He was able to survive the riots politically precisely because he focuses on the economy. I come from Saurashtra (Keshubhai territory as Sid mentioned.) and last time I was in our ancestral village, the Congress sarpanch was full of compliments for how Modi had gotten Narmada water to that perrenially drought-stricken place. That’s where his electoral clout comes from.
Even the contacts with the west show how different he is from the stereotypical Hindutvavadi. The stock response to the various bans would be to retreat into a bubble of righteous self-pity and rants against how the colonialist mlecchas are out to suppress the most ancient and scientific civilization etc. etc. But contacts with the West have resumed not just because they want Gujarati money but because Modi wants Western investment and tourism. Ok mainly he is appealing to the Gujarati diaspora but for example the Vibrant Gujarat ads you see all over the New York subways are aimed at the general audience.
I agree that Modi could not sucessfully run for PM but that is because the Indian political scene is too fucked up to accept a capitalist reformer. A few murders here and there can be worked around.