Indian Politics (Number ? Has there been a thread on this topic before?)

[The Iceman of the North]

I remember it being in the news at the time, but it disappeared as soon as the violence abated.

I guess it somewhat similar to the ongoing* pogroms of Muslims in Myanmar/Burma. Nobody seems to care.

* Actually, I don't know if they are ongoing as it's rarely mentioned in the media here.

[naz]

To be honest, I was living in the US at the time and despite being Indian (and part-Gujarati) and hearing about it when it happened, I also don't remember it being in the news in very much detail. I followed up on it much later. In those days, you were always hearing about atrocities happening everywhere. The US was in Afghanistan at the time, and much of the talk on the news was about Iraq and WMD's and whatnot. There was shit going down all over the place back then. It's understandable that an American living in the US in 2002 might not be aware of what was going on in India, especially if it involved Muslims. In those days, the word "Muslim" was on the news just about every 20 seconds.

[Sci-2]

While Modi sounds terrible for India, I find that more due to his possible Hindu Nationalism than any proof he orchestrated pogroms.

But there's tons of stuff happening in South Asia that you won't hear about as a Westerner. I was impressed though when Lieberman sent my dad a letter promising Hindus forced to wear yellow stars by the Taliban wouldn't be sent to a Holocaust on his watch.

eta: Still a big problem actually.

[Shryke]

Don't remember this incident at all either. Might have been on the news at the time, but if it was, it didn't stick around in anything I watched/read and it faded from my memory.

In general, there's so many terrible fucking things happening around the world, no person or media can keep track of it all.

[Stan the Man Baratheon]

While Modi sounds terrible for India, I find that more due to his possible Hindu Nationalism than any proof he orchestrated pogroms.

Well actually he hasn't propagated either of his Hindu Nationalistic ideas in his rallies, so far he has focused on the motto of Development and he has been breaking away from RSS and has broken/evicted down the rotten core of BJP. He is cleaning his house.

[naz]

Indeed. He would be incredibly stupid to push any hint of a Hindutva agenda right now, even if he feels it important somewhere in the back of his mind. He has achieved some very good, very tangible things in Gujarat in the last ten years (even if it's partly due to a tyrannical managerial style) and he is smartly riding on that the whole way to the PM-ship.

Here's a pretty good recent blog entry that accurately (and fairly neutrally) describes both his appeal and his challenges on a national level.

What's also becoming increasingly likely is that the BJP is probably not going to get the outright majority that they were expecting before the emergence of the third front in the form of the Aam Aadmi Party, which is going to play a spoiler in this election in a big way, if the predictions turn out true. So, without a clear majority, they will have to form alliances which will likely force them to tone down their Hindutva rhetoric.

Again, while I'm not totally in favor of Modi winning, I'm also not as worried about something like Gujarat 2002 happening again under his watch. At least, not attributable directly to him. The corporate forces that are largely thrusting him into power (the Ambanis, etc.) themselves would not tolerate pogroms happening again. In simple terms, pogroms not good for business, and since big business is essentially driving this election, I'm less worried about it. I am, however, worried about everything else that implies. The poor are essentially going to be shat upon. Again.

[KAH]

Yes again he assumed in 2001 which I said as well. He was not FULLY elected as the chief minister, he merely replaced Keshubhai Patel which means he was emergency Chief Minister. He was FULLY elected as the chief minister in 2002 after the riots.

Hell after the riots he won 127 seats out of 182, which to this date is one of the best perfomances ever in the Gandhinagar Vidhan Sabha.

Stan;

How restricted are the Powers of the emergency Chief Minister? Can he sack anyone, for instance, or is that restricted to those who have been elected?

In any case, statements like these:

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction

during a riot, is completely irresponsible from someone who has a position like that, elected or not.

I'm not saying that he said that (first time I hear about it), but if he did, I'd say it makes him unfit to hold office. That goes far beyond slightly incompetent...although, I guess everything is relative.

I confess, I'm not familiar with what kind of standards Indian politicians in office are being measured against.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

I made an Indian Politics thread a few weeks ago.

[naz]

I confess, I'm not familiar with what kind of standards Indian politicians in office are being measured against.

Very low ones. Last week, the father of the current Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh (the largest state in India) who was also the Chief Minister before the last one (and who is effectively the real CM, for all intents) said this about the recent incidents of gang rape: "Boys will be boys". Another politician said that women who have premarital sex should be hanged.

The Tea Party's got nothing on these guys.

[Stan the Man Baratheon]

Indeed. He would be incredibly stupid to push any hint of a Hindutva agenda right now, even if he feels it important somewhere in the back of his mind. He has achieved some very good, very tangible things in Gujarat in the last ten years (even if it's partly due to a tyrannical managerial style) and he is smartly riding on that the whole way to the PM-ship.

I agree.

Here's a pretty good recent blog entry that accurately (and fairly neutrally) describes both his appeal and his challenges on a national level.

Funny you linked this article. I read this article yesterday. I found myself agreeing and disagreeing with it's content. Quite divided on that one.

What's also becoming increasingly likely is that the BJP is probably not going to get the outright majority that they were expecting before the emergence of the third front in the form of the Aam Aadmi Party, which is going to play a spoiler in this election in a big way, if the predictions turn out true. So, without a clear majority, they will have to form alliances which will likely force them to tone down their Hindutva rhetoric.

Again, while I'm not totally in favor of Modi winning, I'm also not as worried about something like Gujarat 2002 happening again under his watch. At least, not attributable directly to him. The corporate forces that are largely thrusting him into power (the Ambanis, etc.) themselves would not tolerate pogroms happening again. In simple terms, pogroms not good for business, and since big business is essentially driving this election, I'm less worried about it. I am, however, worried about everything else that implies. The poor are essentially going to be shat upon. Again.

A curious question, who would you like to get the PM office from the current options?

Stan;

How restricted are the Powers of the emergency Chief Minister? Can he sack anyone, for instance, or is that restricted to those who have been elected?

The emergency chief minister as far as my knowledge goes, replaces the incumbent chief minister, thus inherits his ministers, but since he/she is elected from the party and not in a formal election, cannot sack anyone. He/she can sack someone only if it is approved by the Vidhan Sabha. So it kind of restricted to those elected.

In any case, statements like these:

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction

I don't think he said that. Because if he did we would never hear the end of it from Congress.

[Stan the Man Baratheon]

Very low ones. Last week, the father of the current Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh (the largest state in India) who was also the Chief Minister before the last one (and who is effectively the real CM, for all intents) said this about the recent incidents of gang rape: "Boys will be boys". Another politician said that women who have premarital sex should be hanged.

The Tea Party's got nothing on these guys.

They are true rotten ones. I sincerely hope SP gets wiped out in this election.

[Hereward]

I don't think he said that. Because if he did we would never hear the end of it from Congress.

Oh, he said it alright. The Special Imvestigations Team confirmed it in its report to the Supreme Court. It was broadcast on Zee TV. He claims he was talking specifically about the murder of a Muslim MP (and a dozen other people) after it was claimed he fired at a crowd surrounding his house, rather than about the wider pogrom. YMMV on whether that's any better.

[Stan the Man Baratheon]

The Special Imvestigations Team confirmed it in its report to the Supreme Court.

Do you have a link to that?

[Hereward]

I have the transcript of the Zee TV interview, which I unfortunately can't share. But there's this report:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-18031124

[naz]

A curious question, who would you like to get the PM office from the current options?

A good question, and one that I thankfully don't have to answer, since I can't legally vote here. I honestly am torn. As a friend on Facebook mentioned on the day that Delhi was voting... Do I vote with my head or my heart? When I answered him, I felt that I made a decision myself in some way. I said that in an election where the outcome was likely foregone anyway, you might as well vote with your heart so that you could sleep well at night.

So, if it came down to it, I'd probably vote AAP, despite Kejriwal's all-bluster, no-muster 45-day run as CM. I feel that, in order to put someone like Modi in power, I'd have to vote for some real disgusting BJP guys in my district, and they would cause more net harm against the potential good that Modi could accomplish as PM. I'm against BJP in principle. I'm against any kind of Hindu nationalist agenda, and can't abide by people who openly discriminate (at the very least) against people of other religions or creeds. Not to mention, I'm not a fan of the BJP's right-wing economic policies either; they criticize AAP and other populist parties for handing out doles, but ultimately the right-wingers have been handing out doles to big business, which to me is much, much worse.

I'd vote AAP because the more votes they get - even if they don't win, and even if they don't really know how to govern - is more of a mandate for change than a vote to either of the other status-quo parties. At least they've gotten people talking again. They've gotten young people interested in politics for a change. I'd hate to see that fizzle out because of the realities of the electorate. I'd like AAP to at least be a force in the opposition, where they'd probably be more effective than in power, at least for now.

[Stan the Man Baratheon]

I have the transcript of the Zee TV interview, which I unfortunately can't share. But there's this report:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-18031124

Thanks. Again at the end of the day SIT gave him a clean chit, which means he was misquoted or something else, otherwise i am sure SIT would have charged him with something due to the ongoing political pressure from Congress.

So, if it came down to it, I'd probably vote AAP, despite Kejriwal's all-bluster, no-muster 45-day run as CM. I feel that, in order to put someone like Modi in power, I'd have to vote for some real disgusting BJP guys in my district, and they would cause more net harm against the potential good that Modi could accomplish as PM. I'm against BJP in principle. I'm against any kind of Hindu nationalist agenda, and can't abide by people who openly discriminate (at the very least) against people of other religions or creeds. Not to mention, I'm not a fan of the BJP's right-wing economic policies either; they criticize AAP and other populist parties for handing out doles, but ultimately the right-wingers have been handing out doles to big business, which to me is much, much worse.

AAP however as admitted by Kejriwal has stretched itself thin by participating in Lok Sabha elections. AAP is going to thrashed by BJP and Congress as per every opinion poll. They will at best win 5 seats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Indian_general_election,_2014

Check out the state by state one for detailed information.

I'd vote AAP because the more votes they get - even if they don't win, and even if they don't really know how to govern - is more of a mandate for change than a vote to either of the other status-quo parties. At least they've gotten people talking again. They've gotten young people interested in politics for a change. I'd hate to see that fizzle out because of the realities of the electorate. I'd like AAP to at least be a force in the opposition, where they'd probably be more effective than in power, at least for now.

The youth actually tends to favour Narendra Modi by a large margin over AAP.

Kiran Bedi one of the core members of Anna Hazare's mini-revolution has more or less joined BJP and will fight against kejriwal for Delhi re-elections.

She has been attracting a lot of support from Kejriwal's party towards BJP.

Anna Hazare, Kejriwal's "mentor" is a BJP sympathizer and has repeatedly taken out on AAP. This has caused the interest in AAP to drop since majority of AAP supporters followed Anna in his revolution and they tend to have Anna in higher regards then Kejriwal.

[naz]

The youth actually tends to favour Narendra Modi by a large margin over AAP.

Kiran Bedi one of the core members of Anna Hazare's mini-revolution has more or less joined BJP and will fight against kejriwal for Delhi re-elections.

She has been attracting a lot of support from Kejriwal's party towards BJP.

Anna Hazare, Kejriwal's "mentor" is a BJP sympathizer and has repeatedly taken out on AAP. This has caused the interest in AAP to drop since majority of AAP supporters followed Anna in his revolution and they tend to have Anna in higher regards then Kejriwal.

Yes, now they do. I didn't say that the AAP will get young people to vote for them. I said it's gotten them interested in politics. (I did mention something about the realities of the electorate, you know.) While there was a surge of young voters voting for AAP in Delhi, and admittedly, many of them have shifted to BJP after being disillusioned by Kejriwal's tenure, they are still probably voting in large numbers because of the rise in AAP's stature from basically nothing a year ago.

I admit I may be biased because I live in Delhi and that's what I've been seeing here. And I also admit that the surge in political interest for the youth isn't just attributed to AAP but also to Hazare's movement.

I still wouldn't vote for the BJP though.

eta: Sorry, eric, but we seemed to have gotten carried away in this thread. I don't know, maybe the threads should be merged? They are closely related, after all. I don't mind shifting the discussion over to your Indian politics thread, but then again, I'm not sure I have the appetite to keep discussing this much longer.

[Lord Nightstalker]

I found the comment section of the Economist article linked above to be quite illuminating as to the state of Indian politics.

It's a tough choice though, and I do not envy the Indian's their dilema. Support a clearly inefficient and corrupt regime or vote for a person who is not corrupt and has a seemingly strong economic record, but whom might be a half a stumble away from facism.

It is no dilemma actually.He is sweeping the polls.And besides, he has been exonerated by the courts.

[Lord Nightstalker]

Anything from a Hindu/Modi supporter point of view? These are the same people that brought us Srebrenica and the Kosovo Genocide so I am a little skeptical of their spin on things

Modi has been exonerated by the courts of any role in the riots.

[The Marquis de Leech]

sci, the rome statute is inter alia a codification of the nuremberg principles. states that have not joined the ICC are accordingly scum, as they apparently approve of the crimes punished by the IMT or wish to evade enforcement of the law against similar crimes. states that have joined it may be scum, but for other reasons.

by my reckoning, the seychelles and iceland are non-scum. i am open to suggestions otherwise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ICC_member_states.svg

Green = non-scum

Yellow = scum who have signed but not ratified

Red = scum who haven't signed