The more one thinks about it, the more one is inclined to compare Narendra Modi with Indira Gandhi. The original Mrs. G was the last Indian prime minister to create an emotional bond with the public. The crowds at her memorial are far greater than at the Nehru Museum, situated at the other end of Teen Murti Marg. Irrespective of the long-term damage she did to the economy, and however much she fostered corruption, the poor thought she stood for and by them. Narendra Modi is the first prime minister after Mrs. G to have created a comparable bond. Whatever happens in the future, he will always remain the “hriday samraat” for a lot of Hindus who consider him the first Indian prime minister who is truly their own.
As with Mrs. G, the more his critics sound off about him, the stronger will be the bond between Mr. Modi and his public. It happened in Gujarat, and it may be happening now across much of the country north of the Vindhyas. For Mr. Modi stands tall in a way that no one has since Mrs. G. Like her, he can and does reach out directly to voters, without the need for party intermediaries. His party needs him more than he needs it — imagine the BJP’s Bihar campaign without Mr. Modi.
When Mrs. G came to power, she was broadly acceptable to most people. In about three years, though, she had alienated much of the English language press, and a good part of the chattering classes (as they later came to be called). Something not entirely dissimilar has now happened with Mr. Modi. Even those who were willing to give him the chance of a fresh start as prime minister have decided that Mr. Modi is in fact the same as of old. He mostly ignores them and what they say, just as Mrs. G did. Like her, if he responds at all, it is at mass rallies. Like her, he has no regard for the media.
But here’s the thing: the chattering classes play the role sometimes of the canary in the cage, down a mine shaft. When they turn against a political leader, it is a political warning shot. It happened with Rajiv Gandhi and with V. P. Singh: the alienation of the chattering classes marked the beginning of political decline. In Mrs. G’s case, her downfall did not come because of the chattering classes, but she would have avoided crucial mistakes if she had listened to them. She nationalised the wholesale trade in foodgrain in the middle of a drought! Soaring food prices provoked student protests that blossomed into a broader movement against corruption. Her brutal crackdown on the railwaymen’s strike of 1974 alienated yet more people.
The Emergency was the culmination of poor economics, the undermining of institutions and the centralisation of power, and it led to her ouster.
Mr. Modi is the first prime minister after Mrs. G with the power and possibly the intention to change the Indian system. Mrs. G’s bid to perpetuate power carried with it no great economic or social agenda, only a personal one. She overstepped several Laxman Rekhas, and paid the price. Mr. Modi has an agenda that goes beyond himself, and he has decided that he will not rein in those pushing social and intellectual illiberalism. Just as it wasn’t certain at the time whether Mrs. G would succeed in her gambit, we don’t know how far Mr. Modi will go or stop short. The tea leaves suggest that we will see more Dadris, or its equivalents. So Mr. Modi wouldn’t harm himself if he paid some attention to his critics — he won’t get their votes, but they might prevent him from making mistakes.
(Source: Weekend Ruminitions by Mr.T. N. Ninan in Business Standard dated 17-10-2015.)
