BJP: Vasu Cut Down – Is Kamaraj Type Plan the Way Out?

October 24, 2009
BJP/RSS is showing poor understanding of how perceptions are formed. Perceptions are important in democratic polity. BJP
should know that it is operating in a hostile environment where its positive points will be under reported and its weaknesses
amplified.
Perceptions over a period of time shape credibilty and credibility is an important ingredient in electoral market place.
The way in which Vasu’s resignation was played out shows that either or both LKA/MB are making serious errors of judgement.
But for backing from LKA/MB, it seems unlikely that adhoc and arbitrary decisions’ll be continuously taken. RSS too cant wash
their hands off from these happenings as they unfold.
Despite Vasu’s mistakes, it is not untrue that the likes of Jaswant Singh undermined Vasu during her tenure. Vasu’s
accusations are a mere paraphrasing of what Arun Shourie highlighted in an even more damning terms – existence of double
standards. Vasu/Gen Khanduri might have failed to deliver. But so did Arun Jaitley(AJ)/Raj Nath Singh(RNS) in UP.
While failure in itself should not be a disqualification, as failures often result in learning key lessons, repeated failures
is a disqualification. From this perspective, Raj Nath Singh much more than Vasu/Khanduri should have been shown the door
first. The argument that RNS is anyway on the way out is specious.
Bleed an enemy by thousand cuts is something delivered on hostile elements. Not on oneself. Protracted bleeding that is being
manifest in BJP’s transition, reflects serious mistakes that BJP/RSS leadership is making.
When drastic changes to the organization are being carried out, it is better if it is done fast as a surgical strike. If
there is a bloodbath, so be it. Its better than protracted bleeding (factional shenanigans) that will impact BJP perception
in the minds of its prospective voters. A rapid strike also helps set the rules of the game – cut down factionalism. Events
if allowed to drift can impact credibility of Sangh.
One way to effect quick transition is through BJP’s own version of Kamaraj Plan. BJP can of course can call it “Vajpayee
Plan” or “Advani Plan”. More than semantics what is important is person/team arbitrating the plan execution should be
competent and perceived by most sections as genuinely neutral. People holding central party leadership positions, should be
asked to quit.
Let redeployments be representative, based primarily on capabilities/performance rather than solely on loyalties/Sangh
legacy. While importance of loyalty/trust cant be underplayed, deployments should be based primarily on potential for showing
positive results.
(This section making a pitch for re-susticating BJP is part of an extensive analysis that was done earlier post 2009 LS
Elections; addressing both strategic and tactical aspects)

BJP/RSS is showing poor understanding of how perceptions are formed, credibility built. Perceptions are important in democratic polity. BJP should know that it is operating in a hostile environment where its positive points will be under reported and its weaknesses amplified.

Perceptions over a period of time shape credibilty and credibility is a key ingredient in electoral market place.

The way in which Vasu’s resignation was played out shows that either or both LKA/MB are making serious errors of judgement.

But for backing from LKA/MB, it seems unlikely that adhoc and arbitrary decisions’ll be continuously taken. Sangh cant wash its hands off from the events as they unfold. It appears Mohan Bhagwat’s message on transition is being undermined.

Despite Vasu’s mistakes, it is not untrue that the likes of Jaswant Singh undermined Vasu during her tenure. Vasu’s accusations are a mere paraphrasing of what Arun Shourie highlighted in an even more damning terms – existence of double standards. Vasu/Gen Khanduri might have failed to deliver. But so did Arun Jaitley(AJ)/Raj Nath Singh(RNS) in UP.

While failure in itself should not be a disqualification, as failures often result in learning key lessons, repeated failures, is a disqualification. From this perspective, Raj Nath Singh much more than Vasu/Khanduri should have been asked to resign first.  The argument that RNS is anyway on the way out is specious. Buck rests at the top.

Bleed an enemy by thousand cuts is something delivered on hostile elements. Not on oneself. Protracted bleeding that is being manifest in BJP’s transition, and they reflect serious mistakes that BJP/RSS leadership appear to be making.

When drastic changes to the organization are being carried out, it is better if it is done fast as a surgical strike. If there is a bloodbath, so be it. Such a course is better than protracted bleeding (factional shenanigans) that will impact BJP perception in the minds of its prospective voter base. A rapid strike also helps set the rules of the game – cut down factionalism. Events if allowed to drift can impact credibility of Sangh.

One way to effect quick transition is through BJP’s own version of Kamaraj Plan. BJP can of course can call it “Vajpayee Plan” or “Advani Plan”. More than semantics what is important is person/team arbitrating the plan execution should be competent and perceived by most sections as genuinely neutral. People holding central party leadership positions, should be asked to quit.

Let redeployments be representative, based primarily on capabilities/performance rather than solely on loyalty/Sangh legacy. While importance of loyalty/trust cant be underplayed, deployments should be based primarily on potential for showing, sustaining positive results.

(This section making a pitch for re-susticating BJP is part of an extensive analysis that was done earlier post 2009 LS Elections; addressing both strategic and tactical aspects)

Tailpiece: Post this blogpost, Sarsangchalak of RSS, Shri MB openly alluded to serious nature of BJP’s problems. Contrary to inspired media leaks, central problem seems to lie with the BJP top brass.


Ram Punyani’s Clever By Half Cunningness in Muslim India

October 21, 2009

Rogue professor Ram Punyani is back with his Goebellsian lies and shibboleths fittingly this time in Muslim India

Punyani cites what he calls Hindu mal-treatment of women. Censors the fact that in native Hinduism alone feminine as divine is accepted and celebrated, so unlike islam. 

It is indeed laughable that Punyani’s vehicle for feminst stand is an islamic medium. In every sense Hindu women in India are better empowered than islamic women. 

Punyani pretends as if in islam, Talibs alone are anti-women. Typical of leftist deceit, he censors islam’s position on women: quran/mohummad institutionalized inferior status of women. Quran, Verse 4:34 howsoever muslims spin it, is quite categorical on this count. Watch the video below for elaboration on quran’s position on status of woman – property of man, fit to be beaten up.

Native Indian beliefs are essentially non dogmatic. Manu Smriti hardly has the dogmatic perception Hindu’s mind unlike the position koran has in a common muslim’s. Punyani of course tries to do better than Don Quixote. He regurgates the nonsense on slavery of Shudras. He surely cant be ignorant of the historical fact that Shudras like Shivaji, Narendrabhai Modi, Sanghi have been in the fore front defending native Indians and their traditions. And the so called upper caste Hindus never have any problem being led by Shudra leaders like NaMo, Shivraj Chauhan. 

Contrast this with institutionalised tribal heirarchies and approval of tribal incompatibility as valid reason for divorce in islamic law – shariah. Islamic equality indeed! Far from equality, Inequality is institutionalised in islam. 

With their chosen red fundamentalist friends like Ram Punyani, muslim Indians dont need enemies. After working to undermine native Indians, their beliefs, their unity, muslim victimhood cries will be hollow, if their actions similar to the ones in Godhra, result in hostile native responses.  Muslim hypocritical cries will be rejected with the disdain with which native Indian Gujaratis have been rejecting them.

Some Gyaan for Ram Puniyani and fundoos of muslim India: 

  • Rashtriya Sevika Samiti is an autonomous organisation with a separate charter which includes inculcating leadership in women. Sangh does not micromanage it. 
  • Unlike muslims and communists, Sanghis worship Indian Nation as a Feminine Manifestation, Bharat Mata. 
  • Sangh Recently awarded Guruji Award to Ms Kom, India’s boxing champion. 

Smt Kom

Ms. Kom India’s Boxing Champion being Feted by Sangh’s Guruji Award


Indian Secularism is Sick

October 19, 2009

Congress I (islami-isai) supported by communist elements have foisted an ugly perversion of secularism on native Indians.

Secularism in the West was conceived to keep in check totalitarian dogmatic church, a known institution of deceit and perversion. Since Islam too is dogmatic and totalitarian, Secularism in India would have made sense if it helps keep these beliefs under check.

On account of perversion by Congress I (islami-isai) and communists, secularism was used to undermine native Hinduism, a decentralised faith, a faith where experience is central, skepticism is integral, belief voluntary and text subservient. Foreign concept of secularism makes sense, only if it is applied on dogmatic foreign beliefs, which it was created to keep in check – Beliefs like xianity, islam.

Articles 25 to 30 of India constitution have been used to empower totalitarian xianity/islam. In India, we have a situation wherein all the rights, privileges and prerogatives belong to the minorities and the native Indians are left holding the duties, responsibilities and obligations.

Natives as we know in India cant set up education institutions to propagate their values/heritage. And native places of worship alone get regulated by the hostile government, their resources abused/looted.

All this happens while followers of totalitarian dogmas propagate their hateful beliefs unrestrained and actively encouraged by government and corrupt media. Further islamic and christian groups are networked with global networks, which support their co-religious groups in India with cash and kind. Apart from subverting harmony in India, many of the global networks fester hate towards native ethos.

In India’s perverse electoral environment native icons/beliefs can be abused without any costs while totalitarian beliefs and their idols get nothing but eulogies. And the forced eulogy of totalitarian beliefs are underwritten by violence. All hell breaks lose when xian/muslim idols like jesus/koran get are critically examined.

Moral equivalence between  Native Indian Hinduism, a decentralised faith, a faith where experience is central, skepticism is integral, belief voluntary and text subservient and dogmatic totalitarian foreign beliefs like islam and christianity remains an egregious error. Islam and christianity remain beliefs pushing its followers towards medieval dark ages and barbarianism. This perversion of secularism can be rightly called as sickularism.

One such example of this perversion is presented below as a Congress candidate argues Hinduon Ka Shahr Se Naamon Nishaan Mitaanaa Hai:

T_SUN06 congress is islami isai

Congress leader Syed Abdul Quadir Amir (Quadir Maulana) candidate for Aurangabad during elections, extorts that native Indians/their parties should be obliterated and Aurangabad islamised. When caught in their overt hate acts, sickulars revert with convenient denials. Sickos and their isai/islami collaborators have perpetrated hate similar to what is captured above, both covertly and overtly, for far too long, tearing the national fabric. Fundamental islamic/isai  hostility to native weltanschuang is a persisting reality. For well being of all Indians, constitutional safeguards to stop the intolerance of totalitarian  hate mongering beliefs – islam, xianity are essential.

Native Indians have been historically naive and charitable towards followers foreign totalitarian beliefs that seek to uproot native Indian heritage and culture using all possible means. It is time to call their bluff.

Related:


Dharma Cola and Gurcharan Das

October 6, 2009

Ex Proctor and Gamble Executive Shri Gurcharan Das these days has been evangelizing (and pontificating) on Dharma and Mahabharat(MB) a lot. He has authored a book  ‘The Difficulty of Being Good: On the Subtle Art of Dharma’. Either his  father’s native spirit’s calling was tough for Gurcharan to resist or he could not resist an opportunity using PR and his networking links to position his undeserving self as an authority on MB.

This post an outcome of two responses to his blog posts, acts as a reality check – both on the merit of his recent work and its relevance.

On September 27, Gurcharan blogged: Is the middle path the way to peace with Pakistan?”. In the blog Gurcharan wrote MB would advocate middle path of negotiation”. The following responses are not limited to his blog posts but the  wider positions he has taken elsewhere as well.

Gurcharan

Mahabharat as we native Indians know is an engaging text. So any synthesis/analysis based
on it is bound to be interesting.
There are errors in your allegorical references to Mahabharat. You have tried retro
fitting Yudhishtr within cages of your contrived conception. Such an effort howsoever
interesting it might sound is unlikely to be an effective vehicle for propogation of
Dharma. One needs to be careful that they dont end up violating Taittriopanishad’s basic
Dharmic dictum – ‘Satyam Vada’.
Dice game in Sabha Parv was not rigged. MB explicitly points Yudhishtr’s love for game of
dice and his competence in the game (Shakuni of course was better. As an aside ignorant
folks will be surprised to realise that in Vyasa’s MB, Shakuni was not in favor of
Duryodan’s dispossessing Yudhishtr. When first consulted he in fact recommends harmonious
coexistence)
In MB Yudishtr manifests the intent to be anointed Chakravarthin (Some might call this
intent Greed). Hence his Raja Suya Yagn. He voluntarily enters the game and one of his
motivation is he can win Duryodhan’s assets (again some might call this motivation
greed). On these considerations, it is tough to blame either Yudhishtr or for that matter
Duryodhan for his intent to dispossess Yudhishtr of his kingdom considering the
conception of kshatriya dharma. One cant blame China for wanting to be the middle
kingdom, nor US for formulating strategic containment of China.
You have referred to Yudhishtra’s deploying his commitment to “Vaak” as to why he should
not immediately fight it out. In the Yudhishra-Draupadi-Pandav Sambhashan in Vana Parv,
one of the reasons Yudhishtar does not immediately opt for war is because of the strength
of Duriyodan’s mobilisation potential. It was not just the word. He was wanting to build
capability. And as we know in Dron Parv, Yudhishtr and Bhim indeed short sell Dharma.
Pandits have their own reasons why Yudhishtr was not the right person for receiving
Gitacharya’s message. There in lies your possible mistake in depicting Yudhishtr as hero
for voicing realist position.
In the Udyog Parv when confabulations happen on sending emissary to Duryodhan’s court,
Balaram takes the position “Once Yudhishtr has gambled away his assets, he cant demand
them back by right, or by coerceive threat of violence”. So neither the case for war nor
the outcome can be interpreted in digital terms. Duryodhan’s last General ensured Pandav
victory was pyrrihic.
Interpreting native concepts from a western perspective is not a crime. But usually the
spirit of the work is better carried and reflected when the perspective is inside out;
Paul Brunton and Edwin Arnold worked from the inside-out perspective. The outside in
perspective from the likes of Stuart Mill, Macaulay, Nehru introduced Vishama into the
native soceity. It makes me think you could have saved yourself and the reader time, and
delivered superior output by investing a bit of your time by learning what makes Dharma
from native Indian sources. While skepticism on assertions by natives is not necessarily
an error, bypassing them possibly is a serious mistake considering the nature of subject
-Dharma.
Check out the outcome of an effort which strikes heart of the matter and provides far
superior guidelines on practicing art of Dharma than the otherwise engaging effort from
you.
<a href=”http://website.com”>Linked Site</a>
Your amateurish effort articulating Dharma can be a stepping stone for interested readers
towards understanding Dharma. You/reveiwers should desist from presenting your work on
Dharma from an authoritative perspective. It can at best be a kindergarten’s source for
learning about Dharma – work in progress understanding Dharma. Your penchant to
articulate “Mahabharata/Bhisham Pitamaha says do this…do that”..is best avoided on
account of your clear inadequate acquaintance on the subject, lack of subject matter
expertise. There in lie concerns about your book,its narrative.
This is not to denigrate your amateur’s effort. ZIM believes that while there are serious
shortcomings in your narration, by affirming the current relevance of native Indian
tradition and alluding to its superiority over dogmatic totalitarian ones, and by
connecting your corporate experience to Yudhishtra’s challenges, you seem to have made
your book relevant.
ZIM
Food for mind on your blog post: Just as Hastinapur/Indraprasth/Gandhara shenanigans was
fixed by someone from Dwaraka, should Indians again need to look at Gujarat for solution
as Ratan Tata, other nationalist Indians assert?

Mahabharat as we native Indians know is an engaging text. So any synthesis/analysis based on it is bound to be interesting.

There are errors in your allegorical references to Mahabharat. You have tried retro fitting Yudhishtr within cages of your contrived conception as the prima donna of MB. Such an effort howsoever interesting it might sound is unlikely to be an effective vehicle for propogation of Dharma. One needs to be careful that they dont end up violating Taittriopanishad’s basic Dharmic dictum – ‘Satyam Vada’.

Dice game in Sabha Parv was not rigged. MB explicitly points Yudhishtr’s love for game of dice and his competence in the game (Shakuni of course was better. As an aside MB naive folks will be surprised to realise that in Vyasa’s MB, Shakuni was not in favor of Duryodhan’s dispossessing Yudhishtr. When first consulted he in fact recommends to Duryodhan harmonious coexistence)

In MB Yudishtr manifests the intent to be anointed Chakravarthin (Some might call this intent Greed). Hence his motive to do Raja Suya Yagn. He subsequently voluntarily enters the dice game and one of his motivations is he can win Duryodhan’s assets (again some might call this motivation greed). On these considerations, it is tough to blame either Yudhishtr or for that matter Duryodhan for his intent to dispossess Yudhishtr of his kingdom considering the conception of kshatriya dharma. One cant blame China for wanting to be the middle kingdom, nor US for formulating strategic containment of China.

You have referred to Yudhishtra’s deploying his commitment to “Vaak” as to why he should not immediately fight it out. In the Yudhishra-Draupadi-Pandav Sambhashan in Van Parv, one of the reasons Yudhishtar does not immediately opt for war is because of the strength of Duriyodan’s mobilisation potential. It was not just the word. He wanted to build capability. And as we know in Dron Parv, Yudhishtr and Bhim indeed short sell Dharma.

Pandits have their own reasons why Yudhishtr was not the right person for receiving Gitacharya’s message. There in lies your mistake in depicting Yudhishtr as hero for voicing pragmatic position.

In the Udyog Parv when confabulations happen on sending emissary to Duryodhan’s court, Balaram takes the position “Once Yudhishtr has gambled away his assets, he cant demand them back by right, or by coerceive threat of violence”. So neither the case for war nor the outcome can be interpreted in binary terms. Duryodhan’s last General ensured Pandav victory was pyrrihic.

Interpreting native concepts from a western perspective is not a crime. But usually the spirit of the work is better carried and reflected when the perspective is inside out; Rajaji et al. worked from the inside-out perspective and made meaningful contributions. The outside in perspective from the likes of Stuart Mill, Macaulay, Nehru introduced Vishama into the native soceity. It makes one think you could have saved yourself and the reader time, and delivered superior output by investing a bit of your time by learning what makes Dharma from native Indian sources. While skepticism on assertions by natives is not necessarily an error, bypassing them is a serious mistake especially considering the nature of subject -Dharma. Tendency to interpret native texts for non natives usually necessitates confirming to one sine qua non – thorough understanding of native traditions on the text. Pretentious smattering of Sanskrit words can never be a substitute for poor research and ignorance.

Check out the outcome of an effort based on native traditions which strikes the heart of the matter and provides  superior guidelines on practicing art of Dharma than your verbose and shoddy effort.

Your amateurish effort articulating Dharma can be a stepping stone for interested readers towards understanding Dharma. For that to happen, you/reveiwers of your book should desist from presenting your work on Dharma from an authoritative perspective. It can at best be a kindergarten’s source for learning Dharma. Your penchant to articulate “Mahabharata/Bhisham Pitamaha says do this…do that”..is best avoided on account of your clear inadequate acquaintance on the subject, lack of subject matter expertise. Therein lie concerns about your book, its narrative.

This is not to denigrate your amateur’s effort. ZIM believes that while there are serious shortcomings in your narration, by affirming the current relevance of native Indian tradition and alluding to its superiority over dogmatic totalitarian ones, and by connecting your corporate experience to Yudhishtr’s challenges, you seem to have made your rather ordinary book a bit relevant.

ZIM

Food for thought on your blog post: Just as Hastinapur/Indraprasth/Gandhara shenanigans was fixed by someone from Dwaraka, should Indians again need to look at Gujarat for solution asnationalist Indians assert?

Gurcharan also blogged on what he called The Dilemma of a liberal Hindu

ZIM’s response is provided below.

Gurcharan

Namaskar

(BTW There are people offended by this innocuous word Namaskaar, especially the ones that believe Diwali is pollution causing wastage of resources while xmas is celebration of greatest thing that ever happened)

This is an outcome of the xian/islamic civilisational assault that goes on against native Indian beliefs under the garb of secularism. You are perceptive enough to understand that the above assertion is not untrue. Indian Government’s selective targeting of temple control, temple property, attack on Karnataka priests at Pashupatinath temple by communists in Nepal are some of the manifestations of this assault.

When someone equivocates between seculars and Hindutvavadis, s/he is probably guilty of the 1/4th sin that Mahabharat apportions to the silent accomplice to the crime that cites “Hamaam Mein Sab Nange Hain” and refuses to take a Dharmic position. The blog post on Radha Krishna speaks out why the costs of absence of moral clarity on this issue will remain high.

Common natives instinctively seem to understand the moral position and ground realities better than the intellectuals. There are chowkidars of apartments that see with perspicacity, RSS is one force standing between complete islamiisaisation of India/undermining India’s native traditions. Though of course RSS has its short comings.

Heart of the issue in India is that Dharma has a higher chance of success with RSS/BJP on the reins rather than Congress I, which is today a preferred vehicle for isai and islami agendas. Even some business people and leaders like E Sreedharan instinctively seem to grasp this as they publically bat for NaMo, BJP though many do not get it.


Nirbal Se Ladayee Balwaan Ki! Ye Itihaas Hai Diye Ki Aur Toofaan Ki

September 10, 2009

This post has its genesis in RSS Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat’s visit to Ahmedabad.

Sarsanghchalak divided Indians into four types.  He said the following: There are four classes of Indians.

  • One: those who are proud of the fact that they are Hindu,
  • two: those who are ashamed to say they are Hindu,
  • three:those who know they are Hindu and
  • four:those who don’t know they are Hindu.

Sarsanghchalak highlighted that fourth class of Indians (converted muslims/christians, their progeny) create trouble in India.

From a nationalist perspective key question is how can the disharmonious class 4 Indians, that seek to undermine native Indians can be accommodated into national body short of coercive means. It is clear, in the minimum Articles 25-30 of Indian Constitution need to be booted out as they enable takeover of nation by undesirable totalitarian dogma folllowing sections.

RSS/BJP wud do well to get clarity on strategy, goals, objectives on harmonizing type 1 Indians, type 3 indians on type 1 platform. Type 2 and Type 4 Indians that seek to undermine native Indian ethos would need to be convincingly defeated. A stalemate is not an option as those that follow totalitarian dogmas never hesitate to take advantage when the times are propitious for them. In the minimum objective should be to abrogate Articles 25-30 from Indian constitution. These Articles 25-30 that empower totalitarian monstrosities were an outcome of lack of moral clarity.

This battle is not an easy one. The fight is for the soul of India which totalitarian trinity axis – islamists, christianists, communists seek to subjugate using all foul means.

Mohan Bhagwat and his men are alligned on the side of Dharma. Each native Indian would do well to marshall and manifest his/her kshatriya/khalsa spirit for Dharma and against dogma based totalitarian evil.

Enemy is extremely powerful and wicked with hugh money power, propoganda skills and field global level deceit, violence and lies.  Congress I (islami-isai) is their primary vehicle and they are going for native Indian jugular.  Their aim is nothing less than complete subjugation of natives, their beliefs, their way of life.

It is only the truthful nature of native Indian cause, God’s support for truth rather than dogma, and dedicated efforts from native Indians that can stall the danger.

Magnitude of challenge represented by islami/isai/communist totalitarian dogma and the motivation required to fight this Clear and Present Resident Evil can be perceived from the allegorical videos appended below. Fight between the true light of Hindu DiyaVersus Islami/Isai dogmagtic imperialist Toofan. (Diya incidentally was the electoral symbol of BJP progenitor Jan Sangh, a party which evolved as Janata Party and dethroned Congress I (Islami-Isai) for the first time in 1977)