Modi launches campaign blitzkrieg in Karnataka; resorts to personal attack against Rahul

Like most of the political phenomenon, even the practice of Nationalism is not a static one. It changes with the changing political equations of the political forces and assumes the expressions which are very diverse. As such the phenomenon of Nationalism has a long journey and various state policies in particular have used it for purposes which relate more to the power of the state ‘vis a vis’ its people, power of the state ‘vis a vis’ the neighboring countries among others.

In India there has been a certain change in the practices of the state which have transformed the meaning of Nationalism during last few years. Particularly with BJP, the Hindu Nationalist outfit gaining simple majority, it has unfolded the policies where one can discern the drastic change in the meaning and application of Nationalism in regard to its citizens, particularly those belonging to minority community, with regard to those who are liberal, and with those who stand with the concept of Human rights.

Our former Prime Minister of Dr. Manmohan Singh hit the nail on the head when he said that “Nationalism and the "Bharat Mata Ki Jai" slogan are being misused to construct a "militant and purely emotional" idea of India that excludes millions of residents and citizens. Former Prime Minister recently stated this in an apparent attack on the BJP.” The occasion was the release of a book, ‘Who is Bharat Mata’, edited by Purushottam Agarwal and Radhakrishna. This is a compilation of significant extracts from writings of Nehru, and important assessments of and contributions of Nehru by prominent personalities.

Dr. Singh went on to add "With an inimitable style…Nehru laid the foundation of the universities, academies and cultural institutions of Modern India. But for Nehru's leadership, independent India would not have become what it is today," This statement of Dr. Singh has great importance in contemporary times, as Nehru is being denigrated by Hindu nationalists for all the problems which India is facing today and attempts are on to undermine his role and glorifying Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel. This is also significant as it gives us the glimpses of what Nationalism meant for Nehru.

As Singh’s statement captures the present nationalism being practiced by BJP and company, the Hindu nationalists, immediately shot back saying that Dr. Singh is supporting the anti India activities at JNU and Jamia and his party is supporting the anti India nationalists. They asked whether Singh likes the nationalism of the likes of Shashi Tharoor or Manishankar Ayer who are provoking the Shaheen Bagh protest rather than making the protestors quiet. Whether he likes the anti national protests which go on at JNU or Jamia? As per them there is no Nationalism in Congress. One more example being cited is the private visit of Shatrughan Sinha who talked to Pakistani President during his visit there recently!

Most of the arguments being used to oppose Dr. Singh are very superficial. What is being referred to; is not opposition to Indian nationalism and its central values which were the core of anti colonial struggles. While ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ may not be acceptable to a section of population, even the book he was releasing has the title ‘Who is Bharat Mata’. What is being stated by Singh is the twist which slogan ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ has been used by Hindu nationalists to frighten the religious minorities.

Indian nation came into being on the values, which later were the foundation of Indian Constitution. Indian Constitution carefully picked up the terminology which was away from the concepts of Hindu or Muslim nationalism. That’s how the country came to be called as ‘India that is Bharat’. The freedom of expression which was the hallmark of freedom movement and it was given a pride of place in our Constitution. It respected the diversity and formulated rules where the nation was not based on particular culture, as Hindu nationalists will like us to believe, but cultural diversity was centrally recognized in the Constitution. In addition promoting good relations with neighbors and other countries of the World was also part of our principles.

JNU, Jamia and AMU are being demonized as most institutions so far regard the freedom of expression as a core part of Indian democracy. These institutions have been thriving on discussions and debates which have base in liberalism. Deliberately some slogans have been constructed to defame these institutions. While Constitution mandates good relations with neighbors, creation of ‘Anti Pakistan hysteria’ is the prime motive of many a channels and sections of other media, which are servile to the ideology of ruling Government. They also violate most of the norms of ethical journalism, where the criticism of the ruling party is an important factor to keep the ruling dispensation in toes.

A stifling atmosphere has been created during last six years. In this the Prime Minster can take a detour, land in Pakistan to have a cup of tea with Pakistan PM, but a Congress leader talking to Pakistani President is a sign of being anti National. Students taking out a march while reading the preamble of Indian Constitution are labeled as anti-national; and are stopped while those openly wielding guns near Jamia or Shaheen Bagh roam freely.

Nationalism should promote amity and love of the people; it should pave the way for growth and development. Currently the nationalism which is dominant and stalking the streets has weakened the very fraternity, which is one of the pillars of our democracy. Nehru did explain that Bharat Mata is not just our mountains, rivers and land but primarily the people who inhabit the land. Which nationalism to follow was settled during the freedom movement when Muslim nationalism and Hindu nationalism were rejected by the majority of people of India in favor of the Nationalism of Gandhi, Nehru, Patel and Maulana Azad, where minorities are equal citizens, deserving affirmative action. In today’s scenario the Hindu nationalists cannot accept any criticism of their policies.

Mumbai, May 30: Former Bollywood actress Zaira Wasim has deleted her Twitter and Instagram accounts after being heavily trolled for quoting from the Quran while talking about locust attacks.

"So We sent upon them the flood and locusts and lice and frogs and blood: Signs openly self explained: but they were steeped in arrogance -- a people given to sin. --Qur'an 7:133," Zaira had tweeted.

Soon, she started receiving hateful comments from netizens who interpreted her post as a justification of the locust attacks. They felt that Zaira was suggesting that the incident is God's way of expressing wrath.

Shortly after being deluged with such comments, Zaira Wasim deleted her Twitter and Instagram accounts.

However, a section of netizens continue to attack Zaira on her Facebook page, where she put up the same post.

Commenting on the post, a user wrote: "Lady you must have taken into account of those people of JK, Kerala and elsewhere who are also suffering from the virus. Moreover the crops which are damaged by locust had no name as to who will consume them. In this hours of crisis please post something which is positive and reflects your education."

Another user shared: "So according to you, with all due respect every year on the same time period, Allah send locust to India to destroy the crops of poor farmers who are not even involve in the industrial rise, who don't use vehicle to destroy the nature, and Allah send locust only to harm the poor farmers and not the rich one who actually destroy nature."

"So those farmers who lost there fields of crops and will probably go into debt and may also commit suicide, those farmers who feed the nation, who feed you and every one, are sinners?" asked yet another user.

However, there were a few on social media who felt Zaira had done nothing wrong.

"Quoting Quranic Verse is not a crime... Why is every Indian abusing @ZairaWasimmm. She didn't mention any particular nation or religion. I request everyone please stand with #ZairaWasim. She needs our support. #ISupportZairaWasim," goes a tweet.

Bengaluru, Mar 19: Karnataka High Court on Wednesday rejected the plea by Congress leader Digvijay Singh seeking directions to the police to allow him to meet rebel Madhya Pradesh Congress MLAs who are lodged in Bengaluru.

Earlier in the day, Singh said at a press conference, "I have filed a plea in the Karnataka High Court, seeking permission to meet Madhya Pradesh Congress MLAs who are putting up at Bengaluru. I have decided to be on fast and shall take a call on that after the decision of the Supreme Court and the High Court," Singh said at a press conference here earlier.

Singh said, "The BJP is busy in toppling duly-elected governments. We had successfully thwarted their plans to destabilise the MP government but we were let down by Jyotiraditya Scindia who had a very successful career in Congress."

"We never expected that he would ditch us and join hands with the BJP," he added.

The Congress leader also said that the BJP government had become insecure since the Kamal Nath-led government started tightening the laws on mining.

"Chief Minister Kamal Nath drafted a new mining policy for the sand under which the mines were allotted through auction. All this was unpalatable to the BJP and from Day 1 they started offering money to our Congress legislators," he said.

"In BJP, the Atal Bihari Vajpayee's kind of leadership no longer exists. The leadership which controls the BJP now includes people who have joined hands to do all kinds of unscrupulous things which has led to a stage in India where the banks are collapsing, non-performing assets and unemployment are growing," he added.

Earlier today, he was put under preventive arrest after he sat on a dharna near Ramada Hotel here allegedly for not being allowed to meet the 21 rebel Congress MLAs lodged in the hotel.