After Balasaheb Thackeray, Modi becomes lone Hindu voice

Balasaheb Thackeray and Narendra Modi

The two sides of Balasaheb Thackeray and the limited appeal of his aggressive Hindutva notwithstanding, none can deny the fact that the Shiv Sena supremo was one of the last in Indian politics to forcefully and precisely voice the anger and anguish of a section of Hindu majority at the politics of minority appeasement being unabashedly practiced in the country right from the day India got Independence. Whether it was religion-based reservation or attempts to compromise with national security by diluting the anti-terror laws with an eye on minority votes or the inordinate delay in the capital punishment to Afzal Guru or the need for a common civil code for a truly secular polity, Thackeray spoke unabashedly on these issues projecting the Hindu view which is: What is the ground for practicing such appeasement of a religious minority after having conceded a part of undivided India to a section of the same minority in the name of religion in 1947 ?

Thackeray’s wild Hindutva reaction to some of the provocative acts of the minority community members did trigger mindless violence in which innocents from both communities became victims but many of the things he spoke on minority appeasement was the precisely the stuff a vast section of Hindus wanted to hear in an unending age of vote-bank politics. So, the question now is that with Thackeray gone and not many BJP leaders having the nerve or the capacity to reflect this strong Hindu sentiment as forcefully as the majority would want who will fill this space left behind by the Shiv Sena supremo’s demise ?

Most eyes are naturally turning towards Narendra Modi who has tried to change at least his outward track by singing his new tune of   "development" with a new buzzword, "Sadbhavna".  Modi believes his slogan of development without appeasement has the strength to bridge the Hindu-Muslim divide. But does his strategy take care of appeasement of minority being practiced all around which a section of majority feels should be emphatically opposed?

Significantly, while singing the Sadbavna tune Modi has struck to his "no appeasement" agenda as he demonstrated recently when his Government opposed special scholarship to minority students mooted by the UPA Government, saying such differentiation at the student-level violates the country’s secular Constitution and then got a very favourable observation on his stand from the Gujarat High Court when the issue went to court. Modi’s supporters say his idea of Hindutva isn’t the communal rabble-rousing sort but concrete steps to remove all kinds of appeasement including religious appeasement.
 
Modi might find his strategy right but there will be increasing pressure on him now from his core constituency to be more aggressive on minority appeasement-related issues. Incidentally, on the very day the Shiv Sena leader died the need for Thackeray the lion was felt when the Shahi Imam of Delhi’s Jama Masjid, Ahmed Bukhari, in a chillingly communal statement said: "A strong Government is never fruitful for Muslims in the country. So, they need weak Governments at the helm so that they can get their work done." The statement hit at the very root of the idea of a strong and united India as desired by crores of Indians. Who will give riposte to the Bukharis now that Thackeray is gone? And, therefore, the focus on Modi in an era without Thackeray.

source : IT