The video shows a person coming into the frame and Danve kicking him with his right leg, asking him to move aside.

Maharashtra Congress president Nana Patole has stirred controversy after he questioned OBC voters in Akola district if they would vote for the BJP, which he alleged calls them "kutta" (dog). Patole, while addressing a public meeting in Akola, accused the BJP of arrogance and said it was time to make them "kutta" (dog). The statement has drawn criticism from the BJP and sparked a political row in the state.

In Delhi, the total number of coronavirus cases has risen to 6,923 with 381 new cases reported in the last 24 hours. 2069 people have recovered, and 73 people died, according to the data published in the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare website.

Earlier this week, all of us woke up to a nightmare - to the horrific news of 17, at last count, migrant workers being run over by a goods train in Aurangabad. They were walking home, hundreds of...

It is unclear whether Kishor will stay on in the state. Some Trinamool leaders and an advertising agency owner perceive him as a threat.

The state BJP unit claimed the West Bengal government is only interested in bringing back people from a "particular community".

The central government headed by Narendra Modi is committed to protect the rights of SCs and STs, he said and expressed support to the demand of the states SC and ST MLAs to include "reservation" meant for them in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution so that they cannot be challenged in courts.

Dubbing Congress' criticism of the central government's handling of COVID-19 crisis as "absurd", the BJP on Saturday said the opposition party is weakening the country's fight against COVID-19 instead of extending cooperation. BJP's national media incharge Anil Baluni said Congress leaders, on a regular basis, are making "absurd statements on the behest of their party president Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi, to remain relevant in news". Baluni said the BJP-led government at the Centre welcomes Opposition's constructive suggestions in the battle against COVID-19, but "the opposition party should not do politics" over the pandemic. "Rather than becoming a part of the battle against COVID-19, the Congress is unfortunately resorting to politics and its leaders are trying to weaken the fight by making absurd statements, Baluni said. Underscoring that India has done relatively well than other countries and has been praised for effectively handling the coronavirus, Baluni said the Congress ..

Bihar Deputy Chief Minister Sushil Kumar Modi on Saturday said the BJP is in favour of reservation in promotion and against introducing the creamy layer provision for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe categories. The central government headed by Narendra Modi is committed to protect the rights of SCs and STs, he said and expressed support to the demand of the states SC and ST MLAs to include "reservation" meant for them in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution so that they cannot be challenged in courts. The demand of the legislators belonging to SC and ST categories from all parties came in the wake of the recent Supreme Court order asking the Centre to revise the list of reserved categories for providing quotas so that benefits trickle down to the needy. The MLAs said the apex court judgment virtually advocated for implementing the provision of creamy layer in the reservation meant for SCs and STs. Sushil Modi said, When two Constitution benches ruled in ...

The ruling TMC in West Bengal and opposition BJP on Saturday traded barbs over ferrying migrant labourers, after Union Home Minister Amit Shah flagged the issue of "non-cooperation" by the state government, leaving the Mamata Banerjee-led party fuming, which accused him of spreading lies. In what is certain to escalate tension between the state government and the Centre, Shah, in a letter alleged that West Bengal was not allowing trains with migrant workers to reach and termed it as an "injustice" to these labourers. The state BJP unit claimed the West Bengal government is only interested in bringing back people from a "particular community". TMC leader and nephew of the chief minister, Abhishek Banerjee, earlier in the day tweeted: "A HM failing to discharge his duties during this crisis speaks after weeks of silence, only to mislead people with a bundle of lies! Ironically he's talking about the very ppl who've been literally left to fate by his own Govt. Mr @AmitShah, prove your ...

The deputy chief minister said that the BJP-led government at the Centre has strengthened provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 through an amendment bill which was passed by Parliament.

The ruling TMC in West Bengal and opposition BJP on Saturday traded barbs over ferrying migrant labourers, after Union Home Minister Amit Shah flagged the issue of "non-cooperation" by the state government, leaving the Mamata Banerjee-led party fuming, which accused him of spreading lies.

The central government headed by Narendra Modi is committed to protect the rights of SCs and STs, he said

Former Union minister and controversial Bharatiya Janata Party MP Anantkumar Hegde has once again stoked a row by calling the freedom struggle led by Mahatma Gandhi a "drama".However, this is not the first time a leader from the ruling party has insulted the Father of the Nation.Here are other instances when BJP leaders took a swipe at Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.

The AAP chief said the BJP had tried to polarise the assembly polls and that they hadn't cleared the Shaheen Bagh road because of the elections.

The AAP won in 62 with a total vote share of 53.58 per cent.The BJP recorded victory in eight seats, receiving 38.49 per cent of the total votes.The Congress could not even manage a single seat and ended with 4.27 per cent vote share.

Scindia has been named as the BJP's Rajya Sabha candidate from Madhya Pradesh.

The sugarcane growers have expressed their indignation over the proposal of the government to shut down the Sanjivani sugar factory at Dharbandora.

BJP functionaries fight over ration distribution

It follows letter seeking reimbursement

‘State government has failed to protect the people of Delhi from the virus’

BJP MLAs will meet CM Arvind Kejriwal on Monday and submit a memorandum to draw his attention to increasing cases of COVID-19, the alleged poor condit

Unlike the other Bharatiya Janata Party-led governments, Assam has not proposed doing away with most labour laws for a certain number of years. Instead it has proposed introducing fixed-term employment to help both workers and industries, and seeks to take more firms out of the ambit of laws governing factories and contract workers.

Delhi BJP president Manoj Tiwari on Saturday expressed concern over reports of "underreporting" of deaths due to Covid-19 in Delhi and asked Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal to clear the air about it.

SD Mishra, DCP (Rohini): Bullets fired in air outside BJP MP Hans Raj Hans' Rohini office. The person has been identified. Further investigation underway. Hans Raj Hans is an Indian singer turned politician. He is a member of Bharatiya Janata Party and a recipient of the civilian honour of Padma

BJP leader Pankaja Munde has said that she was not upset over not being nominated by the party for the upcoming Legislative Council election.

BJP spokesperson Shahnawaz Hussain asserts the protest in Shaheen Bagh is backed by the Opposition, says the Centre has given citizenship to more than 500 Muslims from Pakistan since 2014, and argues it is wrong to say that there are no Muslims with the BJP

The 11-member high-level BJP delegation led by general secretary Arun Singh also urged China to take measures to increase imports from India so that the $57.86 billion trade deficit could be brought down.

In a letter to the Mayor, BJP leader Sanjay Waghule alleged that there was no transparency in the civic body's COVID-19 relief activities.

Tajinder Pal Singh Bagga, who debuts as a BJP candidate for the February Delhi election, is one of the ruling party's most prominent faces on social media. On the flip-side, he has been accused by his...

A decade after joining politics, Manoj Tiwari is seen as one of the contenders for the top post in Delhi if the BJP wins Saturday's assembly elections -- at least by Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal.

This is the 18th installment of The Rationalist, my column for the Times of India.

The man who gave us our national anthem, Rabindranath Tagore, once wrote that nationalism was “a great menace.” He went on to say, “It is the particular thing which for years has been at the bottom of India’s troubles.”

Not just India’s, but the world’s: In his book The Open Society and its Enemies, published in 1945 as Adolf Hitler was defeated, Karl Popper ripped into nationalism, with all its “appeals to our tribal instincts, to passion and to prejudice, and to our nostalgic desire to be relieved from the strain of individual responsibility which it attempts to replace by a collective or group responsibility.”

Nationalism is resurgent today, stomping across the globe hand-in-hand with populism. In India, too, it is tearing us apart. But must nationalism always be a bad thing? A provocative new book by the Israeli thinker Yael Tamir argues otherwise.

In her book Why Nationalism, Tamir makes the following arguments. One, nation-states are here to stay. Two, the state needs the nation to be viable. Three, people need nationalism for the sense of community and belonging it gives them. Four, therefore, we need to build a better nationalism, which brings people together instead of driving them apart.

The first point needs no elaboration. We are a globalised world, but we are also trapped by geography and circumstance. “Only 3.3 percent of the world’s population,” Tamir points out, “lives outside their country of birth.” Nutopia, the borderless state dreamed up by John Lennon and Yoko Ono, is not happening anytime soon.

If the only thing that citizens of a state have in common is geographical circumstance, it is not enough. If the state is a necessary construct, a nation is its necessary justification. “Political institutions crave to form long-term political bonding,” writes Tamir, “and for that matter they must create a community that is neither momentary nor meaningless.” Nationalism, she says, “endows the state with intimate feelings linking the past, the present, and the future.”

More pertinently, Tamir argues, people need nationalism. I am a humanist with a belief in individual rights, but Tamir says that this is not enough. “The term ‘human’ is a far too thin mode of delineation,” she writes. “Individuals need to rely on ‘thick identities’ to make their lives meaningful.” This involves a shared past, a common culture and distinctive values.

Tamir also points out that there is a “strong correlation between social class and political preferences.” The privileged elites can afford to be globalists, but those less well off are inevitably drawn to other narratives that enrich their lives. “Rather than seeing nationalism as the last refuge of the scoundrel,” writes Tamir, “we should start thinking of nationalism as the last hope of the needy.”

Tamir’s book bases its arguments on the West, but the argument holds in India as well. In a country with so much poverty, is it any wonder that nationalism is on the rise? The cosmopolitan, globe-trotting elites don’t have daily realities to escape, but how are those less fortunate to find meaning in their lives?

I have one question, though. Why is our nationalism so exclusionary when our nation is so inclusive?

In the nationalism that our ruling party promotes, there are some communities who belong here, and others who don’t. (And even among those who ‘belong’, they exploit divisions.) In their us-vs-them vision of the world, some religions are foreign, some values are foreign, even some culinary traditions are foreign – and therefore frowned upon. But the India I know and love is just the opposite of that.

We embrace influences from all over. Our language, our food, our clothes, our music, our cinema have absorbed so many diverse influences that to pretend they come from a single legit source is absurd. (Even the elegant churidar-kurtas our prime minister wears have an Islamic origin.) As an example, take the recent film Gully Boy: its style of music, the clothes its protagonists wear, even the attitudes in the film would have seemed alien to us a few decades ago. And yet, could there be a truer portrait of young India?

This inclusiveness, this joyous khichdi that we are, is what makes our nation a model for the rest of the world. No nation embraces all other nations as ours does. My India celebrates differences, and I do as well. I wear my kurta with jeans, I listen to ghazals, I eat dhansak and kababs, and I dream in the Indian language called English. This is my nationalism.

Those who try to divide us, therefore, are the true anti-nationals. We must reclaim nationalism from them.

© 2007 IndiaUncut.com. All rights reserved.
India Uncut * The IU Blog * Rave Out * Extrowords * Workoutable * Linkastic

This is the 20th installment of The Rationalist, my column for the Times of India.

Amit Shah’s induction into the union cabinet is such an interesting moment. Even partisans who oppose the BJP, as I do, would admit that Shah is a political genius. Under his leadership, the BJP has become an electoral behemoth in the most complicated political landscape in the world. The big question that now arises is this: can Shah do for India what he did for the BJP?

This raises a perplexing question: in the last five years, as the BJP has flourished, India has languished. And yet, the leadership of both the party and the nation are more or less the same. Then why hasn’t the ability to manage the party translated to governing the country?

I would argue that there are two reasons for this. One, the skills required in those two tasks are different. Two, so are the incentives in play.

Let’s look at the skills first. Managing a party like the BJP is, in some ways, like managing a large multinational company. Shah is a master at top-down planning and micro-management. How he went about winning the 2014 elections, described in detail in Prashant Jha’s book How the BJP Wins, should be a Harvard Business School case study. The book describes how he fixed the BJP’s ground game in Uttar Pradesh, picking teams for 147,000 booths in Uttar Pradesh, monitoring them, and keeping them accountable.

Shah looked at the market segmentation in UP, and hit upon his now famous “60% formula”. He realised he could not deliver the votes of Muslims, Yadavs and Jatavs, who were 40% of the population. So he focussed on wooing the other 60%, including non-Yadav OBCs and non-Jatav Dalits. He carried out versions of these caste reconfigurations across states, and according to Jha, covered “over 5 lakh kilometres” between 2014 and 2017, consolidating market share in every state in this country. He nurtured “a pool of a thousand new OBC and Dalit leaders”, going well beyond the posturing of other parties.

That so many Dalits and OBCs voted for the BJP in 2019 is astonishing. Shah went past Mandal politics, managing to subsume previously antagonistic castes and sub-castes into a broad Hindutva identity. And as the BJP increased its depth, it expanded its breadth as well. What it has done in West Bengal, wiping out the Left and weakening Mamata Banerjee, is jaw-dropping. With hindsight, it may one day seem inevitable, but only a madman could have conceived it, and only a genius could have executed it.

Good man to be Home Minister then, eh? Not quite. A country is not like a large company or even a political party. It is much too complex to be managed from the top down, and a control freak is bound to flounder. The approach needed is very different.

Some tasks of governance, it is true, are tailor-made for efficient managers. Building infrastructure, taking care of roads and power, building toilets (even without an underlying drainage system) and PR campaigns can all be executed by good managers. But the deeper tasks of making an economy flourish require a different approach. They need a light touch, not a heavy hand.

The 20th century is full of cautionary tales that show that economies cannot be centrally planned from the top down. Examples of that ‘fatal conceit’, to use my hero Friedrich Hayek’s term, include the Soviet Union, Mao’s China, and even the lady Modi most reminds me of, Indira Gandhi.

The task of the state, when it comes to the economy, is to administer a strong rule of law, and to make sure it is applied equally. No special favours to cronies or special interest groups. Just unleash the natural creativity of the people, and don’t try to micro-manage.

Sadly, the BJP’s impulse, like that of most governments of the past, is a statist one. India should have a small state that does a few things well. Instead, we have a large state that does many things badly, and acts as a parasite on its people.

As it happens, the few things that we should do well are all right up Shah’s managerial alley. For example, the rule of law is effectively absent in India today, especially for the poor. As Home Minister, Shah could fix this if he applied the same zeal to governing India as he did to growing the BJP. But will he?

And here we come to the question of incentives. What drives Amit Shah: maximising power, or serving the nation? What is good for the country will often coincide with what is good for the party – but not always. When they diverge, which path will Shah choose? So much rests on that.

© 2007 IndiaUncut.com. All rights reserved.
India Uncut * The IU Blog * Rave Out * Extrowords * Workoutable * Linkastic

This is the 18th installment of The Rationalist, my column for the Times of India.

The man who gave us our national anthem, Rabindranath Tagore, once wrote that nationalism was “a great menace.” He went on to say, “It is the particular thing which for years has been at the bottom of India’s troubles.”

Not just India’s, but the world’s: In his book The Open Society and its Enemies, published in 1945 as Adolf Hitler was defeated, Karl Popper ripped into nationalism, with all its “appeals to our tribal instincts, to passion and to prejudice, and to our nostalgic desire to be relieved from the strain of individual responsibility which it attempts to replace by a collective or group responsibility.”

Nationalism is resurgent today, stomping across the globe hand-in-hand with populism. In India, too, it is tearing us apart. But must nationalism always be a bad thing? A provocative new book by the Israeli thinker Yael Tamir argues otherwise.

In her book Why Nationalism, Tamir makes the following arguments. One, nation-states are here to stay. Two, the state needs the nation to be viable. Three, people need nationalism for the sense of community and belonging it gives them. Four, therefore, we need to build a better nationalism, which brings people together instead of driving them apart.

The first point needs no elaboration. We are a globalised world, but we are also trapped by geography and circumstance. “Only 3.3 percent of the world’s population,” Tamir points out, “lives outside their country of birth.” Nutopia, the borderless state dreamed up by John Lennon and Yoko Ono, is not happening anytime soon.

If the only thing that citizens of a state have in common is geographical circumstance, it is not enough. If the state is a necessary construct, a nation is its necessary justification. “Political institutions crave to form long-term political bonding,” writes Tamir, “and for that matter they must create a community that is neither momentary nor meaningless.” Nationalism, she says, “endows the state with intimate feelings linking the past, the present, and the future.”

More pertinently, Tamir argues, people need nationalism. I am a humanist with a belief in individual rights, but Tamir says that this is not enough. “The term ‘human’ is a far too thin mode of delineation,” she writes. “Individuals need to rely on ‘thick identities’ to make their lives meaningful.” This involves a shared past, a common culture and distinctive values.

Tamir also points out that there is a “strong correlation between social class and political preferences.” The privileged elites can afford to be globalists, but those less well off are inevitably drawn to other narratives that enrich their lives. “Rather than seeing nationalism as the last refuge of the scoundrel,” writes Tamir, “we should start thinking of nationalism as the last hope of the needy.”

Tamir’s book bases its arguments on the West, but the argument holds in India as well. In a country with so much poverty, is it any wonder that nationalism is on the rise? The cosmopolitan, globe-trotting elites don’t have daily realities to escape, but how are those less fortunate to find meaning in their lives?

I have one question, though. Why is our nationalism so exclusionary when our nation is so inclusive?

In the nationalism that our ruling party promotes, there are some communities who belong here, and others who don’t. (And even among those who ‘belong’, they exploit divisions.) In their us-vs-them vision of the world, some religions are foreign, some values are foreign, even some culinary traditions are foreign – and therefore frowned upon. But the India I know and love is just the opposite of that.

We embrace influences from all over. Our language, our food, our clothes, our music, our cinema have absorbed so many diverse influences that to pretend they come from a single legit source is absurd. (Even the elegant churidar-kurtas our prime minister wears have an Islamic origin.) As an example, take the recent film Gully Boy: its style of music, the clothes its protagonists wear, even the attitudes in the film would have seemed alien to us a few decades ago. And yet, could there be a truer portrait of young India?

This inclusiveness, this joyous khichdi that we are, is what makes our nation a model for the rest of the world. No nation embraces all other nations as ours does. My India celebrates differences, and I do as well. I wear my kurta with jeans, I listen to ghazals, I eat dhansak and kababs, and I dream in the Indian language called English. This is my nationalism.

Those who try to divide us, therefore, are the true anti-nationals. We must reclaim nationalism from them.

The India Uncut Blog © 2010 Amit Varma. All rights reserved.
Follow me on Twitter.

This is the 20th installment of The Rationalist, my column for the Times of India.

Amit Shah’s induction into the union cabinet is such an interesting moment. Even partisans who oppose the BJP, as I do, would admit that Shah is a political genius. Under his leadership, the BJP has become an electoral behemoth in the most complicated political landscape in the world. The big question that now arises is this: can Shah do for India what he did for the BJP?

This raises a perplexing question: in the last five years, as the BJP has flourished, India has languished. And yet, the leadership of both the party and the nation are more or less the same. Then why hasn’t the ability to manage the party translated to governing the country?

I would argue that there are two reasons for this. One, the skills required in those two tasks are different. Two, so are the incentives in play.

Let’s look at the skills first. Managing a party like the BJP is, in some ways, like managing a large multinational company. Shah is a master at top-down planning and micro-management. How he went about winning the 2014 elections, described in detail in Prashant Jha’s book How the BJP Wins, should be a Harvard Business School case study. The book describes how he fixed the BJP’s ground game in Uttar Pradesh, picking teams for 147,000 booths in Uttar Pradesh, monitoring them, and keeping them accountable.

Shah looked at the market segmentation in UP, and hit upon his now famous “60% formula”. He realised he could not deliver the votes of Muslims, Yadavs and Jatavs, who were 40% of the population. So he focussed on wooing the other 60%, including non-Yadav OBCs and non-Jatav Dalits. He carried out versions of these caste reconfigurations across states, and according to Jha, covered “over 5 lakh kilometres” between 2014 and 2017, consolidating market share in every state in this country. He nurtured “a pool of a thousand new OBC and Dalit leaders”, going well beyond the posturing of other parties.

That so many Dalits and OBCs voted for the BJP in 2019 is astonishing. Shah went past Mandal politics, managing to subsume previously antagonistic castes and sub-castes into a broad Hindutva identity. And as the BJP increased its depth, it expanded its breadth as well. What it has done in West Bengal, wiping out the Left and weakening Mamata Banerjee, is jaw-dropping. With hindsight, it may one day seem inevitable, but only a madman could have conceived it, and only a genius could have executed it.

Good man to be Home Minister then, eh? Not quite. A country is not like a large company or even a political party. It is much too complex to be managed from the top down, and a control freak is bound to flounder. The approach needed is very different.

Some tasks of governance, it is true, are tailor-made for efficient managers. Building infrastructure, taking care of roads and power, building toilets (even without an underlying drainage system) and PR campaigns can all be executed by good managers. But the deeper tasks of making an economy flourish require a different approach. They need a light touch, not a heavy hand.

The 20th century is full of cautionary tales that show that economies cannot be centrally planned from the top down. Examples of that ‘fatal conceit’, to use my hero Friedrich Hayek’s term, include the Soviet Union, Mao’s China, and even the lady Modi most reminds me of, Indira Gandhi.

The task of the state, when it comes to the economy, is to administer a strong rule of law, and to make sure it is applied equally. No special favours to cronies or special interest groups. Just unleash the natural creativity of the people, and don’t try to micro-manage.

Sadly, the BJP’s impulse, like that of most governments of the past, is a statist one. India should have a small state that does a few things well. Instead, we have a large state that does many things badly, and acts as a parasite on its people.

As it happens, the few things that we should do well are all right up Shah’s managerial alley. For example, the rule of law is effectively absent in India today, especially for the poor. As Home Minister, Shah could fix this if he applied the same zeal to governing India as he did to growing the BJP. But will he?

And here we come to the question of incentives. What drives Amit Shah: maximising power, or serving the nation? What is good for the country will often coincide with what is good for the party – but not always. When they diverge, which path will Shah choose? So much rests on that.

The India Uncut Blog © 2010 Amit Varma. All rights reserved.
Follow me on Twitter.

ભાજપના રાષ્ટ્રીય અધ્યક્ષ અમિત શાહ ગુજરાતની મુલાકાતે આવ્યાં છે, ત્યારે તેઓએ વડોદરાની મુલાકાત પણ લીધી હતી. ભાજપના બીજીવાર રાષ્ટ્રીય અધ્યક્ષ બન્યા બાદ અમિત શાહ પ્રથમ વાર વડોદરાની મુલાકાતે આવ્યા હતા