By Deepa Majumdar
There is something uncanny about the way the far right simulates the perennial ascetic principles. Almost a taunt against the left, which defies them openly, the right flouts these surreptitiously … by combining religiosity with materialism and sexual conservatism with lust. There is in the ideologies of the far right, world-wide, a strange mix of God and mammon that belies altogether, the universal virtue of renunciation that lies at the heart of religion. It mocks the stark choice Jesus gave mankind (Matthew, 6:24): “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.” The truth lies beyond left and right in a righteousness that encompasses both social ethics and personal ethics. But until we reach this acme, we look to the left or the right for guidance.
So long as we have poverty, it is understandable that economic development will be our highest priority. It does not make sense to preach the ascetic values and virtues to people with empty stomachs. Nor does it make sense to alienate the business world, which produces jobs. Yet, the free enterprise model, unless checked by law, compassion for the poor, and renunciation for the rich, degrades itself to a volatile mix of income inequality and affluenza, forged by jungle capitalism. If we go by election promises, Narendra Modi has come to deliver a new prosperous India … but at what cost?
Unfortunately, the packaging of Modi is as eerie as the man himself. The fact that BJP won indicates not only a shocking dearth of leadership, but also a basic flaw in our civilization. Notwithstanding the spiritual grandeur of India, the fact remains, that there is in this same civilization, a streak of cruel pragmatism … shaped by a heartless consequentialist ethics. Anything is OK so long as the job gets done. How it is done or who suffers a result, does not matter. We value actions by results, not by the means used for the ends reached.
The “Modi phenomenon” is in its facade a careful simulation of a twenty-first century politically-correct-yet- nuanced version of Hindu ideals. Replete with all classic tropes, this mirror image impresses with its exactitude … Yet, these tropes … the mother-son relationship, celibacy, caste mobility, respect-our-mothers-and-sisters variety of feminism, and unbridled materialism … distort the ascetic heart of Hindu mysticism. Add to this witches brew, the ethically neutral utilitarian power of Technology and you have a seeming alternative to good and evil. We see the same in America where President Obama entered the political stage with the apparently neutral flag of Technology.
In the case of Modi, this witches brew of an unethical (not ethically neutral) pragmatism takes on a new hue … that of our current phase of world History. At this threshold of the twenty-first century, the pendulum of History has swung from the desire-laden idealism of the left to the brutal pragmatism of the right, leading to this cusp of two ages. It is indeed an irony of History that in India, it is a sexagenarian “leader” … not a young man … who rides the crest of this wave of Technocracy … a historical age that should belong to the young. Why does Modi sound like the youth? Why does he merely echo the times? Why does he not bring with him the wisdom that someone his age should possess? Is it Modi himself … a quasi cult-leader … who has enchanted the mobs to vote for him … or is it a wave of History that has washed him ashore to the helm? How has this “Modi phenomenon” simulated the universal virtues that lie at the heart of religion? A scrutiny of the classic tropes of his facade might help answer these questions.
For one, there is the mother-son relationship so hailed in our ancient civilization. This principle, drawn from the ascetic virtues of self-control and chastity, is meant to demonstrate the most uplifting human relationship ever … that between the hallowed mother, who sacrifices her body and life to give birth to and raise her children … and her son (not daughter). Ideally, the eros between heterosexual femininity and masculinity is wholly sublimated in this highest of all relationships. But in the real world this relationship is of course fraught with problems (pampered sons, authoritarian mothers, etc.). We have seen touching photos of a nonagenarian Hiraben putting a vermillion mark of auspiciousness on the forehead of her smiling son. How odd … that this devoted son yet had no compunction pouring vitriol on the mother-son duo, Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi.
Then there is Modi’s celibacy, which can sound touching in a world where the lives of political leaders are fraught with infidelity and worse. If we are naive, we will take pride in the fact that Narendra Modi is no Francois Hollande. But this too can be misleading, for the state of celibacy, although better than promiscuity, can never measure up to the hallowed state of true chastity. Where the latter demands a chaste mind, the former requires mere refraining from the carnal act. Often a celibate person, who has not actively sublimated the passions, will be very violent as a result of prematurely withdrawing his libido from the external world. Here we might remember Ashish Nandy’s assessment of Modi in the 1990’s: “I still remember the cool, measured tone in which he [Modi] elaborated a theory of cosmic conspiracy against India that painted every Muslim as a suspected traitor and a potential terrorist. I came out of the interview shaken and told [his companion] Yagnik that, for the first time, I had met a textbook case of a fascist and a prospective killer, perhaps even a future mass murderer.”
Then there is his calmness in the face of victory. We are told that Modi was by himself, in the chief minister’s residence in Gandhinagar, Gujarat, watching the election results come in. In the words of one aide, “He [Modi] took no calls, just made a few around the country to key people. That’s his way of doing things, very calm, very focused.” Calmness we know is a classic trope in the Indian consciousness. We admire quietude in the face of jubilation and turmoil. Yet, as the philosopher Immanuel Kant points out, the virtues are good only when backed by a good will. As a supporting example, Kant points to the coolness of a villain. We would be naive to conclude that Modi’s apparent calmness indicates the self-control that comes from the virtues. After all, the criminal and the saint both control their emotions and speech, but for different purposes.
Then there is the question of authenticity. Like many former colonies, India yearns for redemption before the critical eye of the west … not through authenticity alone, but respectable authenticity. The caste system is a source of shame. It is rigid. But class or power can efface the caste marker. When power rescues caste through upward mobility, we have a seeming redemption … perhaps the most insidious aspect of the Modi simulation. For Mr. Modi stands not only for authenticity … or upward mobility … but for the most spectacular upward mobility ever imaginable … Like the log cabin to White House tale of Abraham Lincoln, Modi’s story starts at the pitiable level of not just the worker, but the child worker. Not only is he from the Ghanchi caste, but he has risen from a tea selling child worker to chief minister, now on his way to becoming prime minister. Add to this the fact that he is not comfortable speaking English. How much more authentic could we get? At last we have a leader who is a son of the soil … not a western-educated toff, nor a dysfunctional revolutionary. He might need a translator to help him communicate with world leaders.
Then there is his panache before western leaders … On the boycott by senior US officials, Modi said, “… let them come to me. They will.” Such élan, which is nothing but fluff … a hollow, compensatory postcolonial egotism in some third world leaders … can never win the west or the world. For India to stand tall before the west and the world, revealing her innate spiritual grandeur through mundane reality, she must possess a squeaky clean, corruption-free government, stellar human rights records, and the basics of justice (economic and otherwise). Or perhaps, Mr. Modi is astute enough to have understood that the wheels of History have turned away from the west (led by America) and towards China.
No doubt, the corrupt government inherited from the prior administration calls for a firm hand. Then there are the real dangers of Islamist terrorism. India has already suffered one too many terrorist attacks. We therefore need a hawk for a prime minister. But the greatest of hawks also know how to be doves. For firmness, as Gandhiji pointed out, arises from love. The real world runs by a mix of democratic and autocratic principles … but even autocracy should be forged on the anvil of love. Only a loving leader can afford to be strict … not an authoritarian dictator. It is this confusion of authoritarianism with strictness … of the autocrat with the leader… that contributes yet another classic trope to this Modi simulation.
Finally, there is his admiration for Swami Vivekananda … a veneration that might make Swamiji turn in his grave … It is not uncommon for violent organizations like the RSS to despise meekness as weakness. Thus it is hardly surprising that they prefer Swamiji to Gandhiji. But they forget that Swamiji would have greatly admired Gandhiji. They forget as well that the mark of a great personality is malleability … For Swamiji who could thunder at his western audiences, yet had the discipline to accept with exemplary meekness, the inevitable racism and colonial insults hurled at him. In short, he could be a hawk and a dove. Of all the tropes listed thus far, it is perhaps Mr. Modi’s admiration for Swami Vivekananda that disturbs us the most … a diabolical sophistry that puts the final touch of sanctity and respectability on his facade. To think that Swamiji, who would have seen nothing but holiness in any being … who saw pure divinity in the greatest evil … who would not have known Hindu from Muslim, seeing the divine in both … is admired by a man under whose watch the horrific Gujarat pogrom of February-March 2002 took place, is more than most of us could bear.
This election, which Sunil Khilnani, described as a “genuinely revolutionary moment … a democratic asteroid” speaks of the despair of the Indian people, fed up with an incompetent, corrupt incumbent government. One can only hope that Mr. Modi will be restrained by the same people who voted him in. In a mature democracy voters express contrition for the wrongs committed by their elected officials. We in India cannot, as yet, hope for as much. We can only hope that the people of India will sublimate the fascist possibilities in Mr. Modi. Only time will tell … and the prayers of great mystics like Swami Vivekananda and Ramana Maharshi … princes of peace who meditated for India’s well-being and that of the world. They watch over this nation (and the world), whose greatness lies in spiritual grandeur … not technocracy.