Electoral Politics: BJP and Bihar

Bihar is an interesting battleground for BJP. The importance of the cow-belt is clear from the way Mr Modi has been berating Nitish Kumar lately. There is a bitterness from a friendship that went sour. There is also a battle of ideologies. And an attempt to lend credibility to ideology by showing correlation to economic performance. Mr Modi mocks Nitish Kumar 's claims to having done a better job in Bihar - than Mr Modi has done in Gujarat. 

State of affairs: Gujarat is obviously a prosperous state. Poverty trends in the states is an interesting table to look at.  Credit-Deposit Ratio (CDR) maybe an interesting measure of confidence banking sector has in a region's growth prospects. It is an indicator of readily available cash/aid that can be used to fuel further growth. There does seem to be a trend of higher CDRs in more prosperous regions in the nation. 

Growth rates: The data is quite interesting. The two chief ministers have different problems when they try to showcase their work. Gujarat is a prosperous state. Bihar is trying to reinvent itself after the division from Jharkhand - at the same time it is recovering from some ill-considered political choices that the people made in 90s. There are many interesting questions in this discussion. Is it easier to build on an already solid base ? Is it harder to show great growth rate when you are already doing well ? Is it harder to dig yourself out of a hole ? i.e. to jump start a dead economy ?  

Here are documents from planning commission of India website - growth rate in agricultural (and allied) sector and growth rate in industrial sector. Reflect on the data for yourself - you can see that both of the chief-ministers have been doing good work. Which one has done a better job though ? [ You can see more data/tables at the planning commission website. ]

It is heartening that the debate is being elevated to these levels - it is not often that economic performance becomes a basis for credibility in the Indian elections.

On Wisdom: from "Chanakya Neeti"

यस्य नास्ति स्वयं प्रज्ञा   शास्त्रां तस्य करोति किम्  । 

लोचनाभ्यां विहीनस्य    दर्पणम् किं  करिष्यति ॥ 

What can scriptures do for a person devoid of his own wisdom ? 

What use has a mirror for a blind man ?

अन्तः सारविहीनानां    उपदेशो न जायते । 

मलयाचल  संसर्पात्     न वेणुः चन्दानायते ॥ 

All sermons are wasted on a person devoid of wisdom. 

Bamboo does not become sandalwood - even if grown in Malayaachal.

 (Malaya + Achal - sandal mountains - an area abounding with sandal trees).

On Wendy Doniger's "The Hindus"

This is a partial review of Wendy Doniger's book "The Hindus: An alternative history". The book had generated a lot of activity on my FB stream. Which meant there was quite enough disquiet in me to warrant a read. I am onto chapter 6 now. I decided to write a partial-review because of the furor the book has lately created in India. You must have read about the controversy around this book and Wendy Doniger's relationship with the Hindutva brigade. The author's politics - and her treatment of Hindu texts - have been at odds with the more conservative Hindutva elements for a long time now. Well. In the preface itself the author castigates BJP/RSS/VHP/ABVP. I point this out so that you have enough of background in the politics behind the outrage - and the banning of the book.

IMHO, the book is decidedly worth reading - even if only to get an erudite outsider's point of view. Personally, I find the book informative and insightful - even entertaining. The language is quite accessible. Though her analogies are colorful and somewhat irreverent at times. So, even outside of that confrontational section in the preface - I can see that this book will be offensive to some.

An aside: While reading The Hindus I was reminded of  Khattar Kaka series by Harimohan Jha. (If you can read संस्कृत परिनिष्ठित  Hindi, you should give these books a try.) 

Back to the The Hindus: The author has an agenda. And she outlines her intent at the beginning of the book. She wants to present her theories about myths that have (or may have) been altered - where the victors seem to have edited out women and other disadvantaged classes of the society. She wants to examine alternative narratives. She invites us to examine the dominant interpretations of the myths in a different light. She alerts us to her suspicions of revisionism. She dishes out a lot of 'What-Ifs'.  Some of these are quite unsettling. Some of these are merely far-fetched propositions. In any case, it is a call-to-arms to defend the liberal aspects in the Hindu culture. And the author tries to establish that there has always been a liberal narrative in the Hindu culture.  

The book begins with the prehistoric and Harrappan times. Various geo-racial-linguistic theories pertaining to this region have been popular at different times. The book critiques - and elaborates upon - these theories. (I benefitted a lot from patiently checking out wikipedia and references that the author alludes to.) Her comparative analyses are often punctuated with pithy asides. Mostly insightful. Sometimes 'irreverent'. Well. The book is about considering alternative interpretations - and the author, being an outsider, is well placed to do that. Given the background, I did not find the book insensitive or offensive. It may be because I was brought up by a sociologist - who often had several liberal-leaning visitors (of the JNU kind).  For example, I do remember the discussions around the following controversial lines from Tulasidas's Ramacharitmanas - and whether the hyphenation lessens the insults. 

 ढोर गंवार सूद पशु-नारी, ये सब ताड़न के अधिकारी |

I found the said discussion deeply disturbing at the time - I used to do a सुन्दरकाण्ड पाठ (chants from the chapter that had this line) every week in those days. Truth be told, it is a little bit hard to wiggle your way around such issues. It is what it is. Ancient social commentary cannot be held to current norms of PC-ness. Trying to defend such mores in a modern liberal society is not a viable strategy. We should be cognizant of the need to make appropriate changes in (projection of) religious and social belief systems to maintain the universal appeal our culture has enjoyed.

I understand that the pride one takes in one's culture is essential to the sense of identity. OTOH, it is also important to steer away from jingoism  - it is good to remind ourselves of the principle of global kinship, वसुधैव कुटुंबकम. We should include the varied points of view in the cultural discourse.

So far, I think the book has been a good read. Many of us NRI Hindus can benefit from reading this book - it is not (yet) a banned book in the USofA.