#BJP leaders protest
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
Text
MLA Saryu Roy's Development Project Halted in Sidhgora Surya Mandir Area
Temple committee and locals protest against Saryu Roy’s beautification plans Jamshedpur witnesses tension as Surya Mandir Committee blocks MLA-funded work at Shankh Maidan, citing disruption to religious activities. JAMSHEDPUR – A development project initiated by MLA Saryu Roy at Shankh Maidan near Sidhgora Surya Mandir faced strong opposition from the temple committee and local residents on…
View On WordPress
#जनजीवन#BJP leaders protest#community resistance to changes#Jamshedpur local politics#Jamshedpur temple committee protest#JNAC Jamshedpur#Life#MLA Saryu Roy development project#religious site development issues#Shankh Maidan beautification#Sidhgora community tensions#Sidhgora Surya Mandir controversy
0 notes
Text
राहुल गांधी के खिलाफ प्रदर्शन कर रहे भाजपाइयों पर भारी पड़ा बेरोजगार युवक, मुंह छुपाकर भागे नेता
राहुल गांधी के खिलाफ प्रदर्शन कर रहे भाजपाइयों पर भारी पड़ा बेरोजगार युवक, मुंह छुपाकर भागे नेता #News #BreakingNews #ViralNews #Update #Trending #Info #HindiNews #CurrentAffrairs #NewsUpdate #RightNewsIndia #RightNews
Uttar Pradesh News: भाजपा के कार्यकर्ता राहुल गांधी के खिलाफ विरोध प्रदर्शन कर रहे थे, जब वहां अचानक एक बीएड और MSc डिग्रीधारी बेरोजगार युवक भड़क उठा। इस घटना का वीडियो सोशल मीडिया पर तेजी से वायरल हो रहा है, जिसमें देखा जा सकता है कि भाजपा कार्यकर्ताओं को हड़बड़ाहट में मुँह छुपाकर वहां से भागना पड़ा। मिली जानकारी के अनुसार, युवक ने भाजपा के नेताओं पर बेरोजगारी की समस्या को नजरअंदाज करने का आरोप…
0 notes
Text
Mukesh Shukla: Capturing a moment of collaboration and progress with the Minister of Rural Development of India.
#giriraj singh#giriraj singh bjp#giriraj singh news#giriraj singh latest news#union minister giriraj singh#g#iriraj singh interview#giriraj singh begusarai#giriraj singh on rahul gandhi#bjp mp giriraj singh#giriraj singh on modi#giriraj singh speech#giriraj singh (person)#giriraj singh latest speech#giriraj singh mp#will bjp sack senior bjp leader giriraj singh#protest against giriraj singh#giriraj singh tweet#giriraj singh latest#ca mukesh shukla#iid mukesh shukla#mukesh shukla hindi#mukesh shukla podcast#story of mukesh shukla#ca mukesh shukla ashutosh pratihast#podcast with mukesh shukla#mukesh shukla podcast hindi#arvind arora with mukesh shukla#mukesh shukla#mukesh shukla on the rich
0 notes
Text
Rahul Gandhi | Rahul Gandhi news| congress | Black Dress Protest | Priyanka Gandhi | BJP | Congress leader
Congress did ‘Black Dress Protest’, BJP bid – now they are going to go to black magic Criticizing Rahul Gandhi, Thakur said that Rahul Gandhi has insulted the backward and has so much arrogance that he is not apologizing and now the court Not even accepting the order. Congress MPs today protested against the cancellation of Rahul Gandhi’s Lok Sabha membership। While sarcasm, Central Information…
View On WordPress
0 notes
Text
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is, by some measures, the most popular leader in the world. Prior to the 2024 election, his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) held an outright majority in the Lok Sabha (India’s Parliament) — one that was widely projected to grow after the vote count. The party regularly boasted that it would win 400 Lok Sabha seats, easily enough to amend India’s constitution along the party's preferred Hindu nationalist lines.
But when the results were announced on Tuesday, the BJP held just 240 seats. They not only underperformed expectations, they actually lost their parliamentary majority. While Modi will remain prime minister, he will do so at the helm of a coalition government — meaning that he will depend on other parties to stay in office, making it harder to continue his ongoing assault on Indian democracy.
So what happened? Why did Indian voters deal a devastating blow to a prime minister who, by all measures, they mostly seem to like?
India is a massive country — the most populous in the world — and one of the most diverse, making its internal politics exceedingly complicated. A definitive assessment of the election would require granular data on voter breakdown across caste, class, linguistic, religious, age, and gender divides. At present, those numbers don’t exist in sufficient detail.
But after looking at the information that is available and speaking with several leading experts on Indian politics, there are at least three conclusions that I’m comfortable drawing.
First, voters punished Modi for putting his Hindu nationalist agenda ahead of fixing India’s unequal economy. Second, Indian voters had some real concerns about the decline of liberal democracy under BJP rule. Third, the opposition parties waged a smart campaign that took advantage of Modi’s vulnerabilities on the economy and democracy.
Understanding these factors isn’t just important for Indians. The country’s election has some universal lessons for how to beat a would-be authoritarian — ones that Americans especially might want to heed heading into its election in November.
-via Vox, June 7, 2024. Article continues below.
A new (and unequal) economy
Modi’s biggest and most surprising losses came in India’s two most populous states: Uttar Pradesh in the north and Maharashtra in the west. Both states had previously been BJP strongholds — places where the party’s core tactic of pitting the Hindu majority against the Muslim minority had seemingly cemented Hindu support for Modi and his allies.
One prominent Indian analyst, Yogendra Yadav, saw the cracks in advance. Swimming against the tide of Indian media, he correctly predicted that the BJP would fall short of a governing majority.
Traveling through the country, but especially rural Uttar Pradesh, he prophesied “the return of normal politics”: that Indian voters were no longer held spellbound by Modi’s charismatic nationalist appeals and were instead starting to worry about the way politics was affecting their lives.
Yadav’s conclusions derived in no small part from hearing voters’ concerns about the economy. The issue wasn’t GDP growth — India’s is the fastest-growing economy in the world — but rather the distribution of growth’s fruits. While some of Modi’s top allies struck it rich, many ordinary Indians suffered. Nearly half of all Indians between 20 and 24 are unemployed; Indian farmers have repeatedly protested Modi policies that they felt hurt their livelihoods.
“Everyone was talking about price rise, unemployment, the state of public services, the plight of farmers, [and] the struggles of labor,” Yadav wrote...
“We know for sure that Modi’s strongman image and brassy self-confidence were not as popular with voters as the BJP assumed,” says Sadanand Dhume, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who studies India.
The lesson here isn’t that the pocketbook concerns trump identity-based appeals everywhere; recent evidence in wealthier democracies suggests the opposite is true. Rather, it’s that even entrenched reputations of populist leaders are not unshakeable. When they make errors, even some time ago, it’s possible to get voters to remember these mistakes and prioritize them over whatever culture war the populist is peddling at the moment.
Liberalism strikes back
The Indian constitution is a liberal document: It guarantees equality of all citizens and enshrines measures designed to enshrine said equality into law. The signature goal of Modi’s time in power has been to rip this liberal edifice down and replace it with a Hindu nationalist model that pushes non-Hindus to the social margins. In pursuit of this agenda, the BJP has concentrated power in Modi’s hands and undermined key pillars of Indian democracy (like a free press and independent judiciary).
Prior to the election, there was a sense that Indian voters either didn’t much care about the assault on liberal democracy or mostly agreed with it. But the BJP’s surprising underperformance suggests otherwise.
The Hindu, a leading Indian newspaper, published an essential post-election data analysis breaking down what we know about the results. One of the more striking findings is that the opposition parties surged in parliamentary seats reserved for members of “scheduled castes” — the legal term for Dalits, the lowest caste grouping in the Hindu hierarchy.
Caste has long been an essential cleavage in Indian politics, with Dalits typically favoring the left-wing Congress party over the BJP (long seen as an upper-caste party). Under Modi, the BJP had seemingly tamped down on the salience of class by elevating all Hindus — including Dalits — over Muslims. Yet now it’s looking like Dalits were flocking back to Congress and its allies. Why?
According to experts, Dalit voters feared the consequences of a BJP landslide. If Modi’s party achieved its 400-seat target, they’d have more than enough votes to amend India’s constitution. Since the constitution contains several protections designed to promote Dalit equality — including a first-in-the-world affirmative action system — that seemed like a serious threat to the community. It seems, at least based on preliminary data, that they voted accordingly.
The Dalit vote is but one example of the ways in which Modi’s brazen willingness to assail Indian institutions likely alienated voters.
Uttar Pradesh (UP), India’s largest and most electorally important state, was the site of a major BJP anti-Muslim campaign. It unofficially kicked off its campaign in the UP city of Ayodhya earlier this year, during a ceremony celebrating one of Modi’s crowning achievements: the construction of a Hindu temple on the site of a former mosque that had been torn down by Hindu nationalists in 1992.
Yet not only did the BJP lose UP, it specifically lost the constituency — the city of Faizabad — in which the Ayodhya temple is located. It’s as direct an electoral rebuke to BJP ideology as one can imagine.
In Maharashtra, the second largest state, the BJP made a tactical alliance with a local politician, Ajit Pawar, facing serious corruption charges. Voters seemingly punished Modi’s party for turning a blind eye to Pawar’s offenses against the public trust. Across the country, Muslim voters turned out for the opposition to defend their rights against Modi’s attacks.
The global lesson here is clear: Even popular authoritarians can overreach.
By turning “400 seats” into a campaign slogan, an all-but-open signal that he intended to remake the Indian state in his illiberal image, Modi practically rang an alarm bell for constituencies worried about the consequences. So they turned out to stop him en masse.
The BJP’s electoral underperformance is, in no small part, the direct result of their leader’s zealotry going too far.
Return of the Gandhis?
Of course, Modi’s mistakes might not have mattered had his rivals failed to capitalize. The Indian opposition, however, was far more effective than most observers anticipated.
Perhaps most importantly, the many opposition parties coordinated with each other. Forming a united bloc called INDIA (Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance), they worked to make sure they weren’t stealing votes from each other in critical constituencies, positioning INDIA coalition candidates to win straight fights against BJP rivals.
The leading party in the opposition bloc — Congress — was also more put together than people thought. Its most prominent leader, Rahul Gandhi, was widely dismissed as a dilettante nepo baby: a pale imitation of his father Rajiv and grandmother Indira, both former Congress prime ministers. Now his critics are rethinking things.
“I owe Rahul Gandhi an apology because I seriously underestimated him,” says Manjari Miller, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Miller singled out Gandhi’s yatras (marches) across India as a particularly canny tactic. These physically grueling voyages across the length and breadth of India showed that he wasn’t just a privileged son of Indian political royalty, but a politician willing to take risks and meet ordinary Indians where they were. During the yatras, he would meet directly with voters from marginalized groups and rail against Modi’s politics of hate.
“The persona he’s developed — as somebody kind, caring, inclusive, [and] resolute in the face of bullying — has really worked and captured the imagination of younger India,” says Suryanarayan. “If you’ve spent any time on Instagram Reels, [you’ll see] an entire generation now waking up to Rahul Gandhi’s very appealing videos.”
This, too, has a lesson for the rest of the world: Tactical innovation from the opposition matters even in an unfair electoral context.
There is no doubt that, in the past 10 years, the BJP stacked the political deck against its opponents. They consolidated control over large chunks of the national media, changed campaign finance law to favor themselves, suborned the famously independent Indian Electoral Commission, and even intimidated the Supreme Court into letting them get away with it.
The opposition, though, managed to find ways to compete even under unfair circumstances. Strategic coordination between them helped consolidate resources and ameliorate the BJP cash advantage. Direct voter outreach like the yatra helped circumvent BJP dominance in the national media.
To be clear, the opposition still did not win a majority. Modi will have a third term in office, likely thanks in large part to the ways he rigged the system in his favor.
Yet there is no doubt that the opposition deserves to celebrate. Modi’s power has been constrained and the myth of his invincibility wounded, perhaps mortally. Indian voters, like those in Brazil and Poland before them, have dealt a major blow to their homegrown authoritarian faction.
And that is something worth celebrating.
-via Vox, June 7, 2024.
#india#narendra modi#pm modi#modi#bjp#lok sabha elections#rahul gandhi#democracy#2024 elections#authoritarianism#anti authoritarian#good news#hope
738 notes
·
View notes
Text
Seldom before has there been so much joy in the shadow of defeat. But as the results of the 2024 Lok Sabha elections began to trickle in on Tuesday morning, the smiles and good cheer began to heat up an already sultry day. Not since the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act in 2019 has India allowed itself what former US President Barack Obama described as the audacity of hope.
Of course, even though the Bharatiya Janata Party has fallen short of a majority, Narendra Modi has taken it close enough to the halfway mark to form the new government. However, in its enfeebled state, propped up by allies who know the precise cost of their support, the new BJP administration will be forced to temper its bluster and contain its malevolence against those it considers its enemies. Among those the BJP has considered its adversaries are independent journalists, several of whom have been jailed and prosecuted simply for doing their jobs.
This result will undoubtedly trigger a tectonic shift in the BJP. There is no telling how the pieces will fall. As long-supressed aspirations in the Hindutva party shoot to the surface, perhaps even more hardline leaders will assume prominence.
But as reports from the ground have pointed out, this mandate is a rejection of the illiberal agenda, both social and economic, that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has advanced over the past decade. By ignoring Modi’s provocations of mangalsutras, machli and mujras, Indian voters – especially the most marginalised – have decisively rallied to the defence of the Constitution.
The battle to reclaim the idea of an equitable India is far from being won. But as Tuesday demonstrated, there are many who dream of reinforcing the foundations of a Republic based on the values of justice, liberty, equality and fraternity. For now, India can breathe again.
— The Audacity of Hope, Scroll Editor's Note.
69 notes
·
View notes
Text
Bharatiya Janata Party after it began an aggressive campaign in 2015 to bring in amendments to India’s Citizenship Act that would allow undocumented migrants from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh who had entered India before December 31, 2014, to become Indian citizens – as long as they were not Muslim.
The contentious proposals were seen as discriminatory towards Muslims and sparked widespread protests across the country, many of them led by Muslim women. In Delhi, communal riots broke out as a backlash to the protests, and the state cracked down on several Muslim activists – many of whom are still in prison.
But five years after the Citizenship Amendment Act was passed on December 11, 2019, the law has not been of much use to those like Biswas.
“We were happy when the CAA was passed,” Biswas told Scroll. “We are thankful to the Prime Minister for making the law. But the documents needed under the CAA rules make it harder to apply for citizenship.”
8 notes
·
View notes
Text
"After the crucial second round of talks with the government failed to make any headway, the protesting farmers carried on with their Delhi Chalo march on Tuesday. There were reports of chaos on the Punjab-Haryana Shambhu border as the Haryana police fired teargas shells as farmers tried to break the erected barricades. Drones have been deployed to keep track of farmers’ movements, most of whom are on tractors.
Delhi has imposed Section 144 throughout the city for 30 days, erected barricades and iron spikes on the borders to prevent the farmers from entering the Capital.
Internet and bulk SMS services were suspended for Tuesday in seven districts of Haryana- Ambala, Kurukshetra, Kaithal, Jind, Hisar, Fatehabad and Sirsa. Several farmer leaders’ social media accounts were also reportedly blocked the previous day.
The farmers’ protest, being led by the Samyukta Kisan Morcha (Non-Political) and the Kisan Mazdoor Morcha, has been demanding legal guarantee for Minimum Support Price (MSP) for crops, as promised by the BJP-led government at the Centre, among other demands like loan waiver and implementation of the MS Swaminathan Commission’s recommendations. The farmers participating in the protest are mainly from Punjab and Haryana."
20 notes
·
View notes
Text
Col Rajyavardhan Rathore Calls for Congress to Clarify Its Stand on Article 370
The political landscape of India is often shaped by powerful discussions that touch upon sensitive and pivotal issues. One such issue that has remained in the national spotlight is Article 370 of the Indian Constitution — a provision that grants special status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Recently, Col Rajyavardhan Rathore, the Member of Parliament and prominent leader from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), called on the Congress Party to clarify its position on Article 370. Rathore’s statement has sparked a wave of political debates and discussions across the country.
Understanding Article 370: A Historical Context
Article 370 was originally included in the Indian Constitution to provide special autonomy to the state of Jammu and Kashmir. The provision, drafted in 1949, gave the state a certain degree of independence in its governance. It allowed Jammu and Kashmir to have its own Constitution and significant powers to make laws on most matters except defense, foreign affairs, finance, and communications.
This provision was meant to recognize the unique circumstances under which Jammu and Kashmir had acceded to India post-independence, following the partition. While this article was intended to safeguard the cultural identity, autonomy, and distinctiveness of the region, over the years, its application has been controversial.
The Repeal of Article 370: A Turning Point in Indian Politics
On August 5, 2019, the BJP-led government, under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, made a historic decision to revoke Article 370. This move effectively revoked Jammu and Kashmir’s special status and bifurcated the state into two Union Territories: Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh. The government’s action was backed by the belief that this would lead to greater integration of Jammu and Kashmir with the rest of India and promote economic development and security in the region.
This bold step, however, led to widespread protests and opposition from several political parties, including the Indian National Congress (INC). While the BJP and its supporters hailed the move as a necessary step for national unity, opposition parties, particularly the Congress, raised concerns about the constitutional propriety and the potential for escalating tensions in the region.
Rajyavardhan Rathore’s Statement: The Call for Congress to Clarify Its Stand
In the wake of this ongoing debate, Col Rajyavardhan Rathore took to social media and public forums to demand clarity from the Congress Party regarding its position on Article 370. Rathore, who is known for his vocal support for the BJP’s stance on national security and Jammu and Kashmir, questioned why the Congress Party had not taken a definitive stand on the issue after the revocation of Article 370.
The former Olympic medalist turned politician pointed out that Congress had historically maintained a position of favoring autonomy for Jammu and Kashmir, but with the revocation of Article 370, the party’s silence was no longer acceptable. According to Rathore, Congress needed to either support the government’s decision or present a well-thought-out alternative.
Political Implications of Rathore’s Statement
Rathore’s remarks highlight the divisive nature of the debate surrounding Article 370. On one side, the BJP and its allies have staunchly supported the revocation, arguing that it was a necessary step to ensure that Jammu and Kashmir is treated as an integral part of India. On the other side, opposition parties, led by Congress, have been more cautious in their response. They argue that the move violated constitutional norms and undermined the democratic process by bypassing the local legislative assembly in Jammu and Kashmir.
For Congress, this issue presents a political conundrum. The party has traditionally supported the concept of Jammu and Kashmir’s autonomy, but it must balance this with its broader political agenda. The demand for clarification by Rajyavardhan Rathore places pressure on Congress to decide whether it will continue to oppose the government’s decision or if it will reassess its stance.
Congress Party’s Position: Supporters and Critics
Proponents of Autonomy: Congress’ Historical Stance
The Congress Party has long been associated with advocating for a special status for Jammu and Kashmir. During its tenure in power, Congress often sought to maintain the status quo of Article 370, viewing it as a pillar of the region’s autonomy. The Congress leadership, especially under Jawaharlal Nehru and later Indira Gandhi, viewed the provision as a means to protect the unique cultural and religious identity of Jammu and Kashmir.
However, in the years following the 1990s insurgency and the rise of militancy in the state, Congress’s position on Article 370 became more nuanced. Some within the party advocated for reforms, while others continued to support the idea of maintaining the special status.
Critics of Congress’ Stance on Article 370
The critics of Congress argue that the party’s hesitation to take a firm stand on the revocation of Article 370 is a sign of political inconsistency. They point out that Congress, while in power, never took bold steps to address the issue and allowed Kashmir to remain an unresolved political challenge. According to these critics, Congress’ lack of clarity in the post-revocation period only complicates the political discourse around Jammu and Kashmir and hinders efforts at national integration.
What Does Clarity from Congress Mean for India?
The demand for clarity on Article 370 is not merely a matter of political rhetoric. The issue directly impacts the future of Jammu and Kashmir and its people. The region has been a flashpoint for political tension, and the revocation of Article 370 was viewed by many as an opportunity to bring economic development, political stability, and security to the state.
However, the situation remains highly sensitive, and any further delay in addressing the concerns of the people of Jammu and Kashmir could exacerbate tensions. Clarity from Congress could play a key role in bridging divides, and it would be important for the party to present a constructive and pragmatic approach to Jammu and Kashmir’s future.
The Role of Political Leadership in Shaping National Policy
Rajyavardhan Rathore’s call for Congress to take a clear stance highlights the role of political leadership in shaping national policy. It underscores the need for transparent, decisive leadership on critical issues that affect India’s democratic and constitutional fabric. While Congress continues to deliberate on its position, the public’s expectations from political leaders, across party lines, are clear: they want clarity, transparency, and a vision for a united and prosperous India.
Conclusion
The issue of Article 370 remains one of the most consequential matters in India’s political discourse. With the revocation of this provision in 2019, the question of Jammu and Kashmir’s future remains at the forefront of national debate. Col Rajyavardhan Rathore’s call for Congress to clarify its stance on the matter adds another layer to this ongoing discussion.
As India continues to evolve, it is essential for political parties, especially Congress, to take a stand that reflects the aspirations of the people of Jammu and Kashmir while upholding the values of national unity and constitutional integrity. Only through clarity, dialogue, and a commitment to democratic principles can India hope to navigate the challenges that lie ahead.
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
Bharat Bandh Live Updates Today: Bharat Bandh Today As Opposition, Dalit Groups Protest Top Court's Quota Order
Congress leader Tika Ram Jully, Rajasthan's Leader of the Opposition, has accused the ruling BJP of trying to "weaken" the reservation system.
Bharat Bandh Live Updates Today: A 'Bharat bandh' to protest the Supreme Court's 'quota within a quota' decision about reservations in state government jobs and colleges for SC and ST candidates was held in parts of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, and other states on Wednesday.
Bharat Bandh Live Updates Today: The strike was called by two dozen Dalit and Adivasi groups - including the Reservation Bachao Sangharsh Samiti - and backed by political parties, including Bihar's Rashtriya Janata Dal and the Bahujan Samaj Party in Madhya Pradesh.
#bharat bandh#bharatbandhtoday#bharatbandhlive#bharatbandhliveupdate#bharat bandh today#bharat bandh live#bharat bandh live update
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-blocks-purdue-pharma-bankruptcy-settlement-2024-06-27/
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
BJP Youth Wing Protest in Ranchi Meets Police Force
Tear gas, water cannons used as BJYM workers breach barricades near CM’s house Police used tear gas and water cannons to disperse BJP youth wing protesters in Ranchi during a rally against the Hemant Soren government. RANCHI – Jharkhand Police deployed tear gas and water cannons against Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha (BJYM) workers who breached barricades during a protest in Ranchi. The BJYM rally,…
#मुख्य#BJP leaders sit-in#BJP youth wing rally#Featured#Hemant Soren government criticism#Jharkhand opposition movement#Jharkhand political tensions#Morabadi Ground demonstration#police tear gas use#police-protester clash#Ranchi BJYM protest#Section 163 BNSS implementation
0 notes
Text
In 2010, Indian actor Shah Rukh Khan starred in a film called My Name Is Khan that served as a critique of Islamophobia in the United States in the post-9/11 era. In the movie, Khan goes on a journey to the United States to meet the American president and tell him that having an Islamic last name doesn’t make him a terrorist. In real life, however, his name has made him a target at home.
A year after Narendra Modi became India’s prime minister in 2014, Khan said there was a climate of intolerance in the country that “will take us to the dark ages.” Two days later, a senior leader of the governing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and an acolyte of Modi, Yogi Adityanath, said Khan spoke the language of terrorists and equated him to the mastermind of the 2008 Mumbai terrorism attacks. Adityanath threatened Khan, saying he would be out of business if a “huge mass” of Indians, implying Hindus, boycotted his films. Since then, fringe political outfits linked to the BJP—and even some BJP leaders—have repeatedly attacked Khan.
The latest attack began when the trailer of Khan’s latest film, Pathaan, was released last month. Hindu nationalists of the BJP and those linked to the party expressed three major objections. First, that actress Deepika Padukone should not have worn a saffron-hued bikini in a song titled “Besharam Rang” because saffron is a sacred color in Hinduism. Second, the bikini was a few centimeters too revealing to be approved by the far right’s cultural police. And third, and more tellingly perhaps, they slandered Khan for his fitness, questioning whether the 57-year-old’s chiseled “six-pack” abdomen could possibly be real.
The charges were ludicrous. Bollywood actresses have worn saffron in sensuous songs before, but it’s never been so controversial. Moreover, Padukone wore a green skirt and several other colors in the song. The attack didn’t make sense, but it was nonetheless vicious. One protester on air, who was later revealed to be an actor himself, dared Khan to dress his daughter in a green bikini instead of Padukone, a Hindu actress. Green is a sacred color in Islam, and Khan’s wife is also Hindu.
“Had Deepika worn a saffron bikini opposite a Hindu actor, there would have been no controversy,” Hartosh Singh Bal, political editor of the Caravan, told Foreign Policy from Delhi in a phone interview. “It is all because [Khan] is a Muslim.” Several male Indian actors have flaunted abs before, and rare have they met with such ridicule.
Many people believe that the insidious campaign to discredit Khan emerges out of Hindu nationalists’ broader effort to humiliate minorities into accepting their secondary status in a country they want to claim for themselves. There have been frequent calls by the BJP to turn India into a theocratic state—a Hindu rashtra or a country predominantly of and for Hindus. As part of that bid, they hope to control Bollywood itself, the country’s biggest cultural force and its most effective messenger.
After #BoycottPathaan trended on Twitter, #BoycottBollywood soon followed. There were several well-crafted tweets, as if coordinated with one another, calling on directors to change their scripts and fall in line—or risk a total boycott. But this was not the first time Bollywood came under attack. Scholars who studied the trend between August 1 and September 12 discovered thousands of ghost accounts created over these months that solely tweeted with the hashtag #BoycottBollywood. More than 300 accounts each tweeted over 1,000 tweets on Bollywood over that nearly month and a half, “suggesting organized behavior,” said Joyojeet Pal, an assistant professor at the University of Michigan who conducted the study. Junior politicians of the BJP and of its affiliates were also discovered to be pushing the content.
Outrage on social media was to a large extent manufactured, but it is hard to say how many Indians genuinely approved of the sentiment. An investigation by news website the Wire revealed that many of the news stories that defamed Khan and called for Pathaan’s boycott reflected the views of political partisans rather than genuine protesters. Meanwhile, Pathaan has enjoyed enormous ticket sales, a resounding rejection of the calls to boycott Khan’s movies and Bollywood more generally.
Fans thronged cinemas in cities across India and at screenings abroad to see Khan return to the screen after a four-year hiatus. The controversies instigated around him—including outright falsehoods about how he had supposedly donated millions of dollars to Pakistan and was caught spitting at the funeral of Indian singer Lata Mangeshkar—did little to dampen public enthusiasm for his movie.
As Khan hopped between buildings, dived off planes, and walked on the facade of a skyscraper, all to save India from a terrorist attack, Indians across faiths seemed proud that Bollywood could also produce its own version of Mission Impossible and were eager to applaud Khan’s reinvention from romantic heartthrob to action hero. Even Indians abroad, who are arguably among the biggest believers in Hindu nationalism, rushed to screenings in the United Arab Emirates, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany. The movie has reportedly smashed box office records in India, and in the first 16 days since its release, it earned nearly $10 million.
Meera Rizvi, a professional scriptwriter whose maternal ancestors were ethnic Pashtuns like Khan’s, said she had little interest in watching the movie but attended a screening as an act of resistance to bullying from Hindu nationalists. “Bullies have been empowered by the right-wing government, and they think they can do whatever they want,” Rizvi said. “I went to see the movie to stand up against the bullying Khan has been subjected to.” Many others said they believed it was all a useless controversy. Anju Dhawan, an interior designer, said she didn’t understand why there was controversy at all. “Shah Rukh is an actor. Hindu, Muslim has nothing to do with it,” she told Foreign Policy from Karnal, India.
The crowds, however, did not indicate a rejection of political polarization. At least two highly educated professionals FP spoke to believe in Hindu nationalist propaganda, making unsubstantiated allegations against Khan. Political analysts told FP that Pathaan’s success did not indicate a change of mood in a nation still in thrall of Modi and the BJP’s broader political agenda. “It showed that Hindu nationalists still do not have the ability to wipe out the appeal of a celebrity who is a Muslim, just like Indians would cheer a Muslim cricketer,” Bal said. “It didn’t mean the mood of the country has gone a certain way.”
Last week, Indian press reported that Modi called on his ministers to refrain from making unnecessary comments that overshadow the government’s developmental work. But that message has come far too late to rein in the mob, said filmmaker Anurag Kashyap. “It was about controlling their own people. Things have gone out of hand now,” Kashyap said. “When you stay silent, you empower prejudice and you empower hatred. It has now got so much empowered that it is a power in itself. The mob is out of control now.”
42 notes
·
View notes
Text
Mukesh Shukla: Capturing a moment of collaboration and progress with the Minister of Rural Development of India.
#giriraj singh#giriraj singh bjp#giriraj singh news#giriraj singh latest news#union minister giriraj singh#g#iriraj singh interview#giriraj singh begusarai#giriraj singh on rahul gandhi#bjp mp giriraj singh#giriraj singh on modi#giriraj singh speech#giriraj singh (person)#giriraj singh latest speech#giriraj singh mp#will bjp sack senior bjp leader giriraj singh#protest against giriraj singh#giriraj singh tweet#giriraj singh latest#ca mukesh shukla#iid mukesh shukla#mukesh shukla hindi#mukesh shukla podcast#story of mukesh shukla#ca mukesh shukla ashutosh pratihast#podcast with mukesh shukla#mukesh shukla podcast hindi#arvind arora with mukesh shukla#mukesh shukla#mukesh shukla on the rich
0 notes
Text
How social media is being used to build political communities.
Building political communities has benefited greatly from the use of social media. Regardless of where they live, it enables people to connect with others who share their political opinions. Additionally, it makes it simpler for people to band together and support political issues.
Social media is being utilised in a variety of ways to create political communities. Using groups and forums is one popular method. People may organise events, share information, and discuss politics in these groups and forums. For instance, there are Facebook groups for people who support certain political issues as well as groups for fans of each of the main political parties.
Utilising hashtags is just another way that social media is being utilised to create political communities. People may use hashtags to search for and connect with others who are discussing similar political concerns. For instance, the #MeToo hashtag has been utilised to create a community of those who have been the victims of sexual harassment or assault.
Social media is also being used to create political communities by giving political figures and activists a forum to communicate with their followers. Political leaders may mobilise their fans, offer their opinions, and make announcements on social media. Social media may be used by activists to organise protests, gather money, and spread awareness of vital topics.
The development and organisation of political communities has been significantly impacted by social media. It has made it simpler for individuals to interact with political leaders and activists, organise and mobilise around political issues, and connect with those who share their political beliefs.
Here are some concrete instances of how political communities are being formed through the usage of social media:
Social media has been utilised by the Black Lives Matter movement in the US to create a network of activists opposing racial injustice. The campaign spreads awareness of police brutality and violence against Black people using hashtags like #BlackLivesMatter and #SayHerName. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in India has amassed a sizable following among young people thanks to social media. The party mobilises its members through social media to propagate its message of Hindu nationalism. The Workers' Party (PT) in Brazil has reached out to its followers in rural regions through social media. The party posts information about its initiatives on social media and also share information about its programs.
Benefits of building political communities on social media
Building political networks on social media has several advantages. First, social media facilitates communication amongst people who hold similar political beliefs. People may feel less alone and more a part of a larger community as a result of this.
Second, social media facilitates the organisation and mobilisation of individuals behind political issues. This is so that individuals may more quickly exchange information, plan activities, and find supporters thanks to social media networks.
Third, social media gives political figures and activists a way to communicate with their followers. This might encourage people to take action and raise public knowledge of political concerns.
Challenges of building political communities on social media
Even while there are numerous advantages, creating political communities on social media has certain drawbacks. The transmission of false information and disinformation via social media is a problem. This can lead to polarisation and conflict within political communities and make it difficult for individuals to determine which information to believe.
The potential for echo chambers in social media is another issue. People in this situation are only given information and viewpoints that support their preexisting ideas. This may cause people to solidify their opinions and become less receptive to novel concepts.
#mda2009#politics#socialmedia#spotify#soundcloud#drbertha_supremacy#facebook#twitter#week_5#mda20009
8 notes
·
View notes
Text
As Sikhs settled into their new lives abroad, the Khalistani cause went quiet until a new generation of activists —whose leaders included Pannun and Nijjar — sought to rekindle the movement with unofficial referendums on Sikh statehood and with protests that at times have seemed to glorify violence. A parade in Canada last year included a float depicting Indira Gandhi’s assassination, and Khalistan supporters have stormed and defaced Indian diplomatic facilities in Western cities. The effort has seemed to gain little traction beyond a minority within the diaspora community. Even so, it has been portrayed as a resurgent menace by Modi and his Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party. Indian officials have accused Canada and the United States of harboring Sikh separatists who they say have plotted attacks and smuggled weapons into India. Ajai Sahni, executive director of the Institute for Conflict Management in New Delhi and an expert on the insurgency in Punjab, said BJP depictions of the Sikh threat are “far in excess of what actually exists.” Officials have political incentive to exaggerate, he said, “because it is useful to polarize and to keep a threat alive so the state can present itself as a guarantor of security to 80 percent of the country — the Hindus — who are supposedly in danger.”
Yeah I was wondering how much of a threat "Sikh extremists" are right now to the government of India
5 notes
·
View notes