Republic of India to Republic of Hindutva

August 1947 was a watershed moment in the history of the Indian sub-continent. India – the jewel in the British crown – became an independent nation as it broke away from its imperial past of over 200 years. The joyful moment however was short-lived as independence unfortunately came at a heavy price in the form of partition of the subcontinent. Millions of people lost their lives in the ensuing migration between borders. In those blood thirsty times when neighbours and fellow-countrymen became enemies overnight due, the leaders of independent India led by Mahatma Gandhi, Sardar Patel and Pandit Nehru among others chose to establish a secular, modern, democratic and plural nation. Independent India was created as a nation where people of all faiths, all communities, castes and sects were given equal rights and citizenship. Some of the finest moments of independent India also came during the ghastly post-partition riots on its western and eastern borders where mob fury ran amok amidst mayhem and violence. Noakhali in then East-Pakistan was witness to one such moment when Mahatma Gandhi’s moral authority, courage and commitment to peace and secular ideals forced the seething and rampaging Muslim mobs to lay down arms and stop the slaughter of the minority Hindu community. Similarly, in the national capital of Delhi and Indian Punjab it was Sardar Patel and Pandit Nehru who courageously stopped blood thirsty crowds of Hindus and Sikhs from killing Muslims. These poignant moments were a tribute to the spirit of secularism which independent India and its people embodied. Unfortunately Gandhiji’s life was taken by the very same radical and violent ideas which he fought against all his life. Mahatma Gandhi’s vision and dream however was kept alive by his successors. Republic of India survived the scars of partition because of the liberal outlook of its elected leaders and most importantly the commitment of the people of India to create a pluralistic, liberal and secular society. After all it was “We, the people of India…” who created that majestic and visionary social policy doctrine called the Constitution. India survived and grew because the state did not sanction violence, hate crimes, superstition and irrational practices. In times when India was identified as the land of snake charmers, its leaders pursued a vision of creating rural and urban infrastructure in the form of large dams, mega electrification projects, education institutions like the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) and Indian Institute of Management (IIMs), space missions and job creation by domestic investments. On the other hand India’s break-away brother Pakistan fell into an abyss in which it continues to suffer. The passing away of Jinnah followed by the United States’ pursuit of the cold-war doctrine which used Pakistan as a proxy to counter the Soviet Union created a monster in the form of the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) and a powerful rouge Army that could overrule civilian authority. India’s leaders on the other hand had the vision and courage to not follow a binary approach of raising a military state to counter another one. As India invested in creating social and physical infrastructure, Pakistan invested in weapons, training of mujahedeen and madrasas that preached radical Islam. India chose to look forward to a better future for all sections of society while Pakistan continued to look back into a bloody past and invested its energy and resources in creating an atmosphere of fear, hate and perceived insecurity over the existence of its Islamic identity.

Over the ensuing decades India’s democracy and pluralist outlook survived an emergency in the mid-70s and the scars of communal polarization. Resentment towards minorities continued to fester since partition and manifest itself through periodic incidents of  riots but the wedge only grew deeper after the Ram Janmabhoomi movement launched by the RSS-BJP combine under L K Advani’s leadership. Pakistan could never really recover from the martial law and Islamization imposed by the General Zia Ul Haq regime in the 70s. Radicalization swept through its society. Science, rationality, justice, law and order, intellectualism and reasoning were all cast aside and replaced by violence, mob vigilantism, bigotry, extremism and a culture of fear and hate. Indian politics and social harmony too underwent a major churning with the rise of the Sangh Parivar forces on the political landscape. Riding on the crest of madness and mayhem created by the Rath Yatra a surging BJP occupied the political void created by a weakened Congress party. Gujarat 2002 marked the creation of a new Hindutva hero for the gullible Hindu voters who were systematically brainwashed into believing that supposed minority appeasement was the root cause of all their economic woes. Since 2007 the phoenix like portrayal of Narendra Modi by corporate India and a subservient media created a messiah like image of a man who could do no wrong. The image of a strong and incorruptible leader was created with clever manipulation of fake news stories, paid news and the increasing penetration of social media. The mythical Gujarat Model was sold as the magic pill for all economic ills. The mishandling of the economy and the inability to control the fallout of scams during UPA-2 by a bungling Congress party was the final nail in the coffin. The Modi wave of 2014 not only swept aside the opposition but also any semblance of reasoning, secular ideals, justice and moral compass among the India’s increasingly polarized electorate. State after state that went to polls in the largely Hindi heartland of north India fell into the BJP’s lap as a clueless Congress did little to change tactics or institute internal reforms to revamp the party. The onset of RSS controlled BJP governments in different states has also co-incided with a systematic rise of vigilantism in guise of gau-rakshaks, anti-romeo squads and love-jihad warriors. Any opinion or idea that is opposed to the RSS view is now branded as anti-national. Food choices, linguistic choices and even cultural practices are now increasingly being dictated by the Sangh Parivar forces. The beautiful Urdu language too has not been spared of this state sanctioned madness. In 2001 it was George Bush who threatened elected governments with his “Either you are with us or against us” comment. In New India it is the gau-rakshaks who treat every opposing voice with the same contempt without any fear of retribution. The Indian state has found its equivalent of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws in the form of cow slaughter bans. Mahatma Gandhi is no longer the hero of independent India. Godse is. Men like Shambhulal Regar are a symbol of that sense of lost pride and chauvinist heroism for New India. Present day India is in an unseemly hurry to abandon its rich legacy of tolerance, social harmony, diversity and communal amity to follow the radical ideas of Hindutva espoused by the RSS since the 1930s. The forces which sided with the British empire during the freedom struggle have now gained significant acceptance in Indian society and control of government machinery. Vigilantism by mobs in the name of cow protection is becoming the new normal. Debates on prime time television channels are no longer about condemning such acts in unequivocal or bi-partism terms. These are instead boiling down to whataboutery and accusations of supposed selective outrage insinuated by ruling party spokespersons and instigated by a sycophantic, sold out media. The ordinary Indian citizen too has now bought into the hogwash and is divided. Take a look around. Our next door neighbours, our office colleagues, relatives on whatsapp groups and facebook friends list invariably support this hooliganism with a “serves them right” kind of argument or a “See what they are doing to (Hindu) minorities in Pakistan” comment. Our childhood acquaintances or friends have now become the “other”. Many from within our own circle are now coming out and openly voicing their prejudiced views. There unfortunately is a Shambhulal Regar in varying degrees within many of us. Move over Pakistan. Anything you do, India can do better. Much better. Nothing showcases it better than the Hindutva Republic.


Posted in Politics | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Book review- The Shock Doctrine

Certain books outlive their prime years not only due to their authors’ brilliance (which in this case was never in doubt), but also due to the core issues they analyze and address. The Shock Doctrine, currently in its 10th year of publication since its release in September 2007, falls in that category. Although yet to achieve the status of a timeless classic, it certainly is a must-read for the general audience, academics, students, politicians and policy makers. Written in a trademark documentary, investigative journalism style that Klein has mastered over the years, the book delves deeply into the consequences of the onslaught of globalization, free trade agreements and unbridled corporate power witnessed across the world since the advent of “Reaganomics” and “Thatcherism” in the 80s.

The Shock Doctrine seeks to draw parallels between the concept of medical shock therapies and economic shock therapies that were first introduced in the Chicago School of Economics by Milton Friedman, the modern-day guru for classical economists, conservative politicians and big corporates across the world. While these parallels might appear to be exaggerated in some instances, the book clearly brings to light how policy makers and politicians across the world have used natural disasters and man-made disasters to privatize crucial sectors of the public space to profit-making enterprises who today enjoy unbridled power. Analyzing the impact of the pure version of Chicago school doctrine in Chile during General Augusto Pinochet’s dictatorship and later on in Russia, China, US and most recently in post-war Iraq, Klein provides a brilliant post-mortem of the destructive implications of globalization and neo-liberalism. Choosing to call this model “corporatism”, Klein argues how governments across the globe either under the garb of democracy (like Reagan and Thatcher) or during times of wars, natural and man-made disasters (Bush-era, the Communist Party in China, Soviet Union’s sell-off of public assets, or Iraq’s own sell-off of national assets to global corporations) have stripped down government functions to a bare minimal and thereby outsourced their basic functions and responsibilities towards citizens to profit seeking corporates who rake in hundreds of billions of dollars during every humanitarian crises. The rise of unbridled corporate power that began with the onset of globalization in the 80s and 90s, has today given birth to an altogether new sector called the “disaster-capitalism” complex, represented by firms like Halliburton and Blackwater besides the established biggies like Lockheed Martin and Boeing. This in Klein’s view is the advanced form of the “military-industrial” complex that former US President Dwight Eisenhower had warned against before stepping down from Presidency.

If the fall of Soviet Union in the early 90s, allowed the US to impose its version of liberalisation and deregulation under the garb of World Trade Organization and Free Trade Agreements, the post 9/11 era allowed military power to be used with sheer impunity to turn war-time and humanitarian crises into profit-making opportunities. This conclusion is brilliantly backed by the numerous examples Klein highlights and dissects  – Iraq after the war, New Orleans after hurricane Katrina, Sri Lanka after the Tsunami, South Africa after the end of Apartheid and China after Tiananmen Square massacre – all of which were turned into “opportunities” for business enterprises to take over the ever shrinking public sphere. Even military functions like maintaining jails, military barrack construction or post disaster government responsibilities such as rehabilitation and resettlement are handed over to private players who make whopping profits at the expense of tax payers’ money. Klein brilliantly unmasks the dubious plans and policies of these corporations and lobbyists who very smoothly slide between the public space as politicians of ruling parties (the Neoconservatives like Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney) or as industry lobbyists after retirement.

Written in a typical Klein style, backed by hard-hitting facts and ground level research from post-war Iraq, Argentina (interviews with workers of its shut-down factories), Sri-Lanka and New Orleans, The Shock Doctrine is certainly a brave book that presents a horrifying and sadly true picture of the after-effects of the imposition of an extreme form of capitalism that is the norm today. Although Klein does not articulate an alternate view which in her opinion could replace this disaster stimulated growth model, she advocates a return to the Keynes model of the New Deal that would allow the public space to thrive along with private interests. In order to absolve herself of any possible biases, she also rightly criticizes the excesses of the authoritarian left and communist philosophies implemented by Stalin, Mao and Polpot. The book at times might come across as an over-simplification of the link between the rise of corporatism and crises, but it certainly does justice in highlighting the outcomes and human misery imposed on citizens to whom basic services and functions such as health, education and housing are now sold as commodities and not basic human rights.

The beauty of the book lies in its simple and free-flowing style, easy to understand examples and finely nuanced conclusions drawn by Klein to explain some very highly complicated policy decisions. Doing an impact analysis of any policy decision usually is a mundane read for the layman. Klein’s success lies in avoiding this very mundane storytelling style and instead relying on in-depth research through extensive reading and bringing to the fore hard facts from ground zero of war-zones. This book is difficult to put down after the initial few pages –  a cracker, and a very brave attempt at taking on the powers that be. But Naomi Klein is no ordinary person, so the book’s tone, tenor and thrilling pace comes as no surprise. Over the years she has developed a fearless persona with her hard-hitting articles on climate change and her social activism on issues of civil rights and climate justice. The Shock Doctrine is as relevant today as it was 10 years ago, and with the rise of right-wing forces across the world accompanied by the rise in Islamophobia it will remain a reminder of the downward slide the world has got itself engulfed in with its blind embrace of neoliberalism that thrives on a platform of toxic mix of radicalism and a monolithic form of nationalism.

Posted in Books, Development, Politics | Tagged | 1 Comment

Picture diary – Basic Mountaineering Course


#Being Crazy somewhere between Yuksom and Dzongri La



Sherpa Tenzing Norgay’s samadhi in Himalayan Mountaineering Institute


Chowrikang base camp, Sikkim


Chowrikang base camp, Sikkim


Dudh Pokhari lake, Sikkim


Glacier training @Rathong Glacier, Sikkim



Around Chowrikang Base camp, Sikkim


Somewhere close to Dzongri La, Sikkim


@Tenzing Norgay Sherpa’s samadhi in Himalayan Mountaineering Institute


Himalayan Mountaineering Institute (HMI), Darjeeling

Posted in Adventure, Travel | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

A Long Trek Through The Woods


Trekking can be a wonderfully rewarding activity. When undertaken in a UNESCO designated World Heritage site like the Great Himalayan National Park (GHNP), the experience becomes even more exceptional. Situated in Himachal Pradesh, GHNP is home to a variety of flora and fauna. The entry point to the GHNP is a hamlet called Gusheini, about 60 kms from the famous hill-station of Kullu. The village continues to remain a largely unknown place, as tourists continue to throng the better known places like  Dharamshala, Manali, Simla, and McLeod Ganj. This relatively anonymous gem Gusheini is GHNP’s biggest asset. The landscape of the hamlet and GHNP are clean, the air is pollution free providing an astounding sight of countless stars in the night sky, while the free-flowing river provides a pure source of drinking water for flora-fauna and humans alike.

The GHNP covers an area of more than 700 sq km, so a trek through the National Park can extend from a day to a week or beyond depending on the route. There are different routes within the National Park which trekkers and guides take. The difficulty level ranges from easy to moderate and even difficult for the longer distances which comprise of steep inclines and continuous climbing. The two main three-day treks are the Gusheini – Rolla – Chalocha or Gusheini – Rolla – Shilt Hut routes. Both of these cover a distance of around 15-18 kms (one way) and can be done over a three days (including return journey). Some of the longer treks upto Tirthan valley  or the Sainj valley extend beyond 80 kms over 5-8 days. Distance however, is rarely a determining factor for undertaking a particular route. Physical fitness of the trekkers, availability of time on hand and the desire to travel farther into the woods determines the path to be undertaken.


While walking through the steep curves, narrow ridges, wooden bridges and crossing the rivulets of cold water, destination is seldom a goal for trekkers. The beauty of a trek is the journey. The excursion is a humbling experience in itself, especially for us city folks. While a walk through the city streets takes us through crowded roads, noisy streets and pollution filled air; a trek through the forests takes us through a “road” less travelled, filled with the sounds of birds, flowing water and bristling trees. The aromatic smell of Cedar (Deodar) trees has an energizing effect on the mind and body in contrast to the pollution filled air of our cities.



While a trek can be undertaken on different terrains, forest areas provide splendid views and drastically different weather between daytime and night time. Walking over narrow ledges, slippery rocks, creaking wooden bridges and thorny shrubs on an endless ‘path’ is a  thrilling experience. The journey is not just a test of physical stamina but mental strength as well. Living with the basic minimal necessities, basic first-aid and medicines, making do with simple food, limited set of clothes and a back-pack is a life-long learning experience. It is a refreshing disconnect from our mundane lifestyle back in the cities. These treks also bring us a step closer to nature and ourselves.


This article is also available on –

Posted in Travel | Tagged | Leave a comment

“Stranded” assets, economic models and their linkage to the climate crisis

Despite the Conference of Parties (COP) at Paris ending on a perceived “no-winners or losers” note in December 2015, the world continues to grapple with the challenge of rising emissions and deep divisions over allocations of the remaining carbon budget to limit the rise in global average temperature by the end 2100 to the 2 degree C target agreed upon in Copenhagen in 2010. It is no secret that with current emission rates and the complete lack of leadership displayed by the biggest historical emitters – the US and other western countries, the remaining carbon budget could well be exhausted by around 2035.[1]

Given the scientific data available, most of which ironically comes from the west, what exactly is holding back the much required strong political action at the global scale to cut back emissions? A lot of the blame is pinned on the lack of a “strong political will” on the part of the developed (Annex I) and developing countries (non-Annex I). While this may be true to an extent, it fails to address the processes and economic systems in place which have created the environment of weak political action.

The notion of stranded assets that has dominated discussions pertaining to the available carbon stock has played a big role in the failure to shift away from fossil fuels.[2] In looking at these valuable natural resources as financial assets alone, their importance is only partly accounted for in economic value or exchange value in the short-term. The other important aspect of these assets – their intrinsic natural value and environmental attributes(forests and vegetation under which a large chunk of these resources lie)including their value as natural “carbon sinks” are disregarded completely.A not too visible outcome of considering the unused stock of fossil fuels as investments or stranded assets that need to be utilized is the manner in which the lives of future generations are discounted.[3] By choosing short-term financial and economic benefits over adverse long-term climate change impacts, the higher discount rates applied by staying invested in fossil fuels disregards the principles of inter-generational equity and climate justice.[4] Favouring short-term profits over long-term public investments and mitigation measures, goes against the goals of the climate agreement.

This tendency to seek market-based solutions – Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and emissions trading schemes (ETS) and market-driven interest rates among others – to alone deliver meaningful and effective results downplays the seriousness of the crisis. The author of the landmark Stern review on climate change, Lord Nicholas Stern, has called climate change a result of the greatest market failure that the world has seen.If markets have played a significant role in the crisis, is it then right to seek solutions within that framework alone to deliver the results needed to curb temperature rise below 2 degree C by 2100? If corporations’ current market values and balance sheets have already accounted for these stranded assets, any effective and meaningful emissions cuts will result in a significant impact on these valuations that also account for expected future consumption and use.[5] Therein lies the problem. This notion of stranded assets, balance-sheet valuations and market interest rates only accounts for the financial assets – profits, capex and financial returns. It does not account for the severe social impacts, environmental impacts and other negative externalities which will hit the planet and affect the poorest and marginalized the most. Ironically, a majority of those affected will continue to remain non-market participants. While the hardest impact will be felt by the poor, the well-off sections of society too will face the consequences of increasing heat waves,intense storms, water shortages and other unforeseen events expected in the latter half of the century. The severity of the climate crisis requires solutions which have never been sought before. A crisis of such proportions which threatens the existence of civilization on the planet cannot be addressed without undertaking radical reforms and solutions.

We should certainly strive to mitigate and minimize the impact of climate change on investments and assets by undertaking all possible measures (including market based solutions).The economic assets created today will also play an important role in the mitigation and adaptation strategies of the future generations. But looking at these economic assets from a short-term,consumption oriented view alone goes against the stated goal to limit temperature rise below 2 degrees C. This goal cannot be achieved by allowing such asset bubbles (carbon bubbles in this case) to remain on paper and diverts the risk impacts entirely on the future generations.Disregarding the ethical aspects of the debate and searching for financial opportunities alone in this planetary crisis will only dig civilization into a deeper hole.


Continue reading

Posted in Development, Environment | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

A response to ET’s blog by Sriram Ramakrishnan taunting “Left-liberals”

A recent article by The Economic Times’ resident editor, Mr Sriram Ramakrishnan, titled “Left-liberals in India completely unaware of despotic regimes“, came across as one of the most blatantly biased and factually incorrect opinion piece from an editor in recent times.  You will hopefully excuse my choice of words. Mr Ramakrishnan does not leave me any choice other than reverting back with a strongly worded retort.

The first thing he does is label all the Sahitya Akademi award winners who chose to return their awards in protest as “left-liberals/leftists” or “pseudo-secularists”.  The contempt with which he throws these labels at the protestors seems to imply that he considers “secularism” and “liberalism” as negative concepts and an affront to the nation. A second point he raises (which all other die-hard BJP/RSS supporters also raise like a parrot whenever the party is criticized for communal polarization) is the exodus of Kashmiri Pandits from Kashmir in the late 80s and early 90s. Let me remind him that the exodus of Pandits from the valley too was a painful incident which people across the Left and Right of the spectrum opposed. In fact, barring the hardline Hurriyat at that time, even the common Kashmiri Muslim, who until the exodus, was a next door neighbor of the Pandits, too had tried to stop the Pandits from leaving. Unfortunately, circumstances in the valley at the time, along with Pakistani support for Kashmiri separatists who were gunning for the Pandits, left them with no choice but to leave the state. Did the Indian government fail in its duty to protect its citizens? Of course, it did. No one can deny culpability of our own government in handling the extremist violence in Kashmir. Also, let me remind you that it was not just Pandits who suffered. Even Muslims were killed in the ensuing phase of terrorism and continue to die even today. In the interim period, we have had a BJP led government twice at the centre (1998-2004 and the current Modi led dispensation since May 2014). We also have an alliance government in Kashmir comprising of BJP supporting a (hold your breath) pro-separatist PDP led government. What genuine efforts have been made by the BJP so far to ensure the return of Pandits to the valley, other than gaining political mileage from the issue? Wonder what he has to say about this volte-face by the BJP when it chose to support a known hardline CM – Mufti Sayeed, who in 1989 was responsible for the release of five militants in exchange for the release of his daughter. Whatever happened to “nationalism” and non-negotiable stance of the party on J&K ? Has the BJP taken any steps at all to bring back the Kashmiri Pandits to the valley? You may recollect the famous statement of Dr Shayama Prasad Mukherjee – “Ek desh mein do Vidhan, do Pradhan aur Do Nishan nahi chalenge”. One wonders what he would have had to say about this tie-up with the PDP.

Another point he raised in his article is the “butchering” of hundreds in the Mumbai train bombings. He should be reminded that bombings do not result in selective “butchering” of victims. They rip apart everyone in the way (irrespective of religion, caste and class), which is what happened in the serial train blasts of Mumbai. The blasts killed innocents of different communities and religions.  Mr Sriram, what makes you say these blasts were not opposed by the “left-liberals” and “pseudo-secularists” you wish to condemn? Which secular, progressive and right thinking citizen has opposed the verdict given by the courts against the blasts accused? If you wish to count some fringe extremist or hardline Muslim organizations that have opposed the verdict as a part of “us” (read “left-liberal”, “pseduo-secular” in your own words), then I have nothing much to say.

He also mentions in his article about the killings of members of the Hindu community. Yes, these things certainly happen and are equally vehemently opposed especially by the Left parties. What he conveniently chooses to not highlight here is that the killings of these Hindus generally pertains to the killings of the lower caste Hindus (Dalits, adivasis) by the so-called upper caste. Why is it that the RSS/BJP and its bandwagon of supporters chooses to remain largely silent over these caste-related killings? On the question of NGO-funding, he already seems to have made up his mind about the government’s “noble” intentions of bringing in transparency in the way NGO’s function. Therefore, there is no point in debating over it. In order to defend 2002 riots, as is the case with all BJP/RSS spokespersons and supporters, Mr Sriram too mentions 1984 riots. The misfortune of this country is that innocent citizens (whether in 1984 or 2002) have been killed time and again over politics. It is only the label (Congress in 1984, BJP in 2002) that has changed. The difference in both the cases is that while 1984 happened (unfortunately) in the backdrop of the then PM’s killing amidst a raging pro-Khalistan insurgency in Punjab, 2002 was part of a much larger experiment – Hindutva carried out due to the ruling government’s complicity and tacit support. Two wrongs do not make a right. Those guilty of 1984 riots need to be brought to justice. Period. Likewise, with 2002.

His charge regarding people blaming the majority community of having turned against the minority community after PM Modi took over, borders on deliberate misinformation. This is a classic case of  deliberately misconstruing and misinterpreting statements and facts. No one has ever said that the “majority” community has turned against the minority. In fact people have said the exact reverse – a majoritarian government is allowing its support base to go on a rampage against the minorities while turning a blind eye to incidents in western UP, Karnataka, Maharashtra and other parts of the country. The PM is right when he states that the centre has no role in incidents such as the one that happened in Dadri and it is largely a failure of the state government. In fact a lot of the “so-called intellectuals and pseudo-secularists” he chooses to taunt have precisely been saying the same thing about Gujarat in 2002. Coming back to the current scenario, people have criticized the central government primarily over its lack of action against its own ministers, MPs and MLAs who have made the most derogatory statements and tried to inflame passions further. Remember what the central government Minister Dr Manish Sharma said – “You must also consider that there was also a 17-year-old daughter in that home. Kisi ne usey ungli nahin lagaayi,” after the Dadri incident as he indirectly condoned the attack. Mr Sriram conveniently chooses to not mention Sangeet Som and his statements or for that matter utterances of Sakshi Maharaj, Sadhvi Prachi and others who time and again have vitiated the atmosphere.

Lastly, he has chosen to highlight the virtues of the current government which has been “tolerant” to all sorts of criticism and has not resorted to throwing in jail all those who have criticized it over various issues. We certainly are “grateful” to this government for its bigheartedness and supposed tolerance to divergent opinions and viewpoints. The last I remember, right to dissent and freedom of expression were guaranteed to us by the Indian constitution and not bestowed upon us by “tolerant” governments. Only 2 years ago, the current ruling party, then in opposition, was out on the streets lampooning the PM as well as the government over serious corruption charges as well as frivolous charges such as diminishing of the PM’s prestige. Did the UPA government throw all the protestors in jail? What is so unique about this government if it has been “tolerant” to criticism? Germany did not become a fascist state overnight. Hitler was in the political mainstream of German since the late 20s and by the mid 30s he had captured the entire state apparatus. By the mid 30s the Nazi’s had effectively taken control of all public institutions in Germany which then enabled them to impose their version of the most brutal form of dictatorship. What we are witnessing in India currently is nothing different. The RSS has publicly proclaimed its admiration for Nazi Germany and Hitler’s version of “nationalism”. Towards the end of the article he wonders over the “strange reason” for Hitler’s autobiography -Mein Kampf, continuing to have high sales. No prizes for guessing why !!


Posted in Politics | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment