The Hidden Agenda of Modi: Not So Hidden

The BJP led alliance victory has at least assured one thing. No longer can Muslim Indians be accused of living off a policy of official favoritism and appeasement. The Hindu nationalists had always relied on this issue in their electoral strategy. Now they are in power and they can easily stop all such schemes and programs they felt were created to appease Muslims. Moreover, with a clear majority of its parliamentarians, the Modi government is in a position to do what it had always asked the Congress governments to do, i.e., implement universal civil code, amend article 370, and abolish special privileges given to minority institutions. Above all, the Hindu nationalist lawmakers have the ability to take care of anti-nationalists, non-patriotic foreign agents and traitors from places their leadership had described as bastions of terrorism. As the prime minister of the country, Modi now has the privilege to learn firsthand about those Muslims who he always thought believed in the division of the world into Darul Harb and Darul Aman with India being defined as the former.

No doubt development would be the priority. But behind this screen, there is a three-tier agenda that the Modi government would likely to implement as the whispers from RSS and hardcore BJP inner circles suggest.  Through social media forums, internal memos and literature distributed during and after the election as well as speeches delivered to homes and smaller gatherings away from the glamour of the media, one can easily figure out the social engineering that is likely to take place in the next five years under Modi, if the government survives its tenure.

RSS and BJP views of Hindus and India interchangeable. They are inclusive. Others that exist in India may be Indians, but their status is less than those who profess Hinduism as their dharma (way of life). Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism can be defined as part of Hindu society as they are indigenous. Islam and Christianity are imported religions and they cannot be considered part of Hindu civilization unless their adherents renounce their faith.

So when Modi government talks of national development or national policy, we must understand it as referring to Hindu development and policies favoring Hindus.  During the next five years, the BJP would ensure that such policies are formed and implemented in the name of Indian nationalism. India has always allowed a section of people living outside the periphery of mainstream culture as the plight of Dalits suggest and if Muslims replace them as neo-Dalits, no one is going to shed tears.

The real strength of the BJP is over 5 million RSS workers who are disciplined, and loyal. These workers would ensure that the Modi government policies are popularized in public and projected as the best in the interest of the nation.

Public Positions

The main task that the Modi government would start implementing from day one is the appointment of RSS and BJP supporters of non-competitive places in various departments of the public sector. This would mean appointments of individuals considered loyal to RSS and BJP in film censor board, higher, secondary and elementary education boards, bureaucracy, law enforcement agencies, intelligence agencies, research institutes, universities, courts, etc. In a span of five years, all those who may be considered liberal or secular or supportive of a plural society would find their way out, replaced by those who may still use the same clichés but serve the interests of their ideology. They may find their way in various echelons of government under the façade of secularism. Thus from textbook writings to film production to university and college curriculum, things would notice slow but steady changes.

Development

Through legislation and public funds, companies, and corporations supportive of BJP and RSS would have opportunities to maximize their financial gains. They would determine the labor laws, minimum wages, working conditions and the pace of development. They would develop policies of hiring and firing and decide who would move up from those sections of society who support RSS and BJP agenda. In states where non-BJP government rules, through economic incentives, their opposition would be minimized and climate for an economic alliance would be created.

Hindutva

The RSS and BJP would implement its Hindutva agenda very meticulously avoiding the publicity. Before touching the Rama Mandir issue, the party workers would focus on rural areas, especially in places where minorities are in insignificant numbers. With law enforcement agencies turning blind eyes, many of these communities would be lured back into Hinduism thus changing the demographics of these areas. After all, RSS and its supporters believe that Muslims and Christians were Hindus forcibly converted to their new religion and it is the duty of every Hindu to ensure that the lost sheep are returned to their flock. This would happen in a subtle and organized manner. None of these two communities are organized to even have data about their scattered folks in rural areas. Very few of these communities have actually been approached by Muslim groups in the past 66 years of independence. The majority of them are not even aware of the true dimensions of their faith. All they know is that they were born in Muslim families without realizing the meaning of being a Muslim.

How to combat the Modi Agenda

RSS and BJP are organizations created by people and strong leadership. Muslims can also create strong organizations and leadership. Their leadership must have a vision, a vision of the whole of India not of their party, or community or sect. This vision must be based on the concept of human dignity, of each and everyone and not on the notion of Muslim superiority or supremacy.

The vision must be backed by a grassroots organization, an organization that reaches to the last Muslim living even in the remotest area.

The vision must be popularized through education, an education that does not make a distinction between religious studies and social and natural sciences. An education that is value-based on preparing Muslims to serve humanity through improving their own living conditions. A vision that promotes peace and harmony and that inspires Muslims to forward-thinking.

The education should be imparted through improving existing educational institutions that can adopt a new curriculum based on objective analysis rather than historical claims to subjective negative thinking.

There should be grassroots education movement starting from angan wadi (pre KG schools) and elementary to institutions of higher learning.

Resources

Indian Muslims have tremendous human and material resources. The community runs over a million grassroots madrasas and other similar institutions through its own resources. It also has a strong ally in Muslims, of Indian origin who have settled overseas. Through the combined resources of indigenous and overseas Muslims of Indian origin, Muslims of India can certainly create a new path for them.  But they would need a leadership that is sincere and dedicated to India and the community and those values of Islam that promote peace, human progress, fellowship and human dignity. There is no point in trying to settle issues pertaining to factional and sectarian differences. They are worldwide issues and Muslim Indians alone cannot solve them overnight. What they can do is to ensure that even the weakest of their community is given an opportunity to live with dignity.

The time to act is now, otherwise, it would be too late to respond to the new challenges that would emerge in the next few years. There are many Muslim groups in India and each is busy doing something. But, in general, their program is not beneficial to either Muslims or the country. With the exception in southern and eastern India, especially in Assam, Muslim Indians, by and large, have not created a vision for themselves of India. All they have are some emotional slogans and historical clichés. But a nation does not rise on the basis of clichés and slogans. It rises on the strength of its own will to change it.

Boko Haramis! Who are they?

Boko Haram has created a humanitarian disaster by abducting over 200 girls with the intention to sell them as slaves. It is a group that claims to be Islamic, yet in the eyes of most Muslims, it has nothing to do with Islam. It claims to be a saved sect blessed by God and it believes in the supremacy of the Sharia under the domination of men only authority. Who are Boko Haramis? What are their ideas? Have a look at the article.

In the Northeast Nigerian city of Maiduguri, one year after the September 2001 al-Qaeda attack in the US, Mohammad Yusuf, who has been part of a group known as Shabaab since 1995 with Mallam Lawal as its leader formed what in the local Hausa language now is known Boko Haram, the Congregation of the People of Tradition for Proselytism and Jihad or Jamāʻat Ahl as-Sunnah lid-daʻwa wal-Jihād. Yusuf was later killed in a fight with the Nigerian army. Baku supporters accuse that he was captured alive, but tortured to death by the soldiers.

Since its establishment, the group has claimed responsibility for killing over 10,000 people, Muslims and non-Muslims alike. It now has three splinter groups that are active in Borno, Adamawa, Kaduna, Bauchi, Yobe, and Kano.

The ideas of the leadership are influenced by a deceased Nigerian preacher Mohammed Marwa (died 1980), best known by his nickname Maitatsine, a Hausa word meaning "the one who damns" and refers to his curse-laden public speeches against the Nigerian state.

Maitatsine  was originally from Mawra in northeastern Nigeria at one time part of Cameroon. He moved to Kano, Nigeria in about 1945, where he became known for his controversial teachings on the Qur'an. He claimed to be a prophet and a Mujaddid in the image of Sheikh Usman dan Fodio.  He rejected the hadith and the Sunnah and regarded the reading of any other book but the Quran as kufr. He rejected Prophet Muhammad and projected himself as a prophet. He spoke again the use of modern electronic gadgets as well as means of transportation such as bicycle etc.

Boko Haramis want to establish a sharia state in Nigeria. It wants to eliminate the influence of the Western world in the country and the region. The group does not interact with other Muslims in general and are ready to kill anyone who is opposed to them.  The group believes that it is a saved sect. As a privileged group, it is prohibited to study western education. It is against the establishment of schools, especially girls’ schools. Even though the group is opposed to Saudi Arabia for its westernization, it accepts the edicts of scholars such as Ibn Taymiyyah to promote their use of violence. Salafis are opposed to the group.

Little is known about the group’s finances. Who gives them resources to buy arms and ammunition? Who supports them financially? Why are able to use modern electronic gadgets to communicate with different groups in the world? What is the literature they circulate among them and who prints them?

What is clear is that their understanding of Islam is built on two notions: self-religious superiority and male chauvinism. Since they believe that they are already a saved sect, they can do whatever they want without being questioned by the divine either here or on the Day of Judgment. They believe that non-Muslims have no rights, and they deserve to be killed for preaching their faith. They believe that modernization is, in fact, westernization and both are bad for Muslims. They want to live in a world where they as men can dictate their terms upon all others and where women and children serve as their slaves. They describe all other Muslim sects as either kafir or murtad (apostates) whose murder is part of their religious duty. They believe in slavery, the subjugation of woman, destruction of places of worship belonging to non-Muslims as well as Muslim deviant sects. They believe in having multiple wives and concubines. In their view, such women can be obtained through armed jihad against deviant Muslim groups. They believe in marrying their daughters at an early age. They quote the verses of the Quran and ahadith to justify their position on slavery, the status of women, rejection of modern education and the use of violence.

Obviously, their understanding of Islam is based on an ideology that has tribal as well as juristic roots. It relies on an understanding of the Quran that calls for perpetual armed struggle against those who think differently from the group claiming to be a saved sect.

Even though the group does not admit to being ignorant of the message and meanings of the Quran, its ideas are not different than what was practiced in Arabia in pre-Islamic times. The group has revived all pre-Islamic ideas while using Islamic terminology.

Boko Haram is not the only Muslim group in the world that can be identified for having such ideas. There are many who view the Quran and Sunnah as a license to promote violence and terror to achieve their goals. How to convince such people that Islam does not promote violence and terror is where the real challenge lies in Muslim intellect.  Obviously, the existence of such groups demonstrates the failure of Muslim intellectuals to meet the challenge effectively, yet the efforts must continue at all levels, political, military, social and more importantly the theological.

Why are Hindus Voting for Modi?

Dinesh Narayanan writing in the May issue of http://www.caravanmagazine.in/reportage/rss-30?page=0,7 Reveals the following.

“In January, I went to meet Shyam Pandharipande, a former journalist who grew up in an RSS family, at his sixth-floor apartment in Nagpur. “I joined the RSS before I joined the school and I completed my RSS training before I graduated from college,” Pandharipande told me. He recalled a revealing episode from his third year of the Sangh’s officer-training camp, in 1970, the last step in becoming a full-time RSS worker. During a question-and-answer session, a volunteer asked Yadavrao Joshi, then the head of Sangh workers across all of south India, “We say RSS is a Hindu organization. We say we are a Hindu nation, India belongs to Hindus. We also say in the same breath that Muslims and Christians are welcome to follow their faith, and that they are welcome to remain as they are so long as they love this country. Why do we have to give this concession? Why don’t we be very clear that they have no place if we are a Hindu country?” According to Pandharipande, Joshi replied: “As of now, RSS and Hindu society are not strong enough to say clearly to Muslims and Christians that if you want to live in India, convert to Hinduism. Either convert or perish. But when the Hindu society and RSS will become strong enough, we will tell them that if you want to live in India and if you love this country, you accept that some generations earlier you were Hindus and come back to the Hindu fold.”

The Hindutva candidate, Narendra Modi is confident of his victory. He is certain to cross the electoral finish line to bag more than 272 seats to form the next Indian government. There are still many unknown factors in the election and the victory is not as certain as Modi and the media wants everyone else to believe. However, one thing is certain. Modi's election as prime minister of the country may not have serious implications for India, but it certainly has serious implications for the minorities especially Muslims and Christians. The world does not care if India is a Hindu nationalist or secular state as long as the world and those who manipulate it get a piece in the development pie of India. To India's majority, secularism is not the issue as long as their national pride is in high spirit. The national pride, no matter what one may say, is built on Brahmanical ethos a culture presented in the name of Hinduism. There is a constituency of secular Indians who are concerned about the rise of Modi and they would speak loudly, but fascist forces have the ability to silence them one way or the other. India under Modi should be prepared to witness this.

But the brunt of Modi's presence in the national government would be borne by Muslims and Christians mainly. Probably, the Christian community might get some reprieve because of the growing influence of the American dollar. American Christian evangelists would play a part in standing up for the dignity of their Christian community. But Muslims would not find much support in the world for the ordeal they might go through. The strategy of Modi would be simple. Declare Muslims as terrorists and deal with them as terrorists and no one would come to their rescue. Amnesty and human rights watch might issue a few statements but who cares. It is the community at the grassroots level that would suffer from discrimination. Of course, everything would be done in a legal way. There would be poster Muslim men and women who would sing the praise of Modi, but the majority of the community would suffer because not only Modi but those who support him have a vision of an India where Muslims must be marginalized at all cost. 
Modi has mobilized his partisan crowd, more motivated than ever before to cast their votes for him or his party candidates. Why?

Is Modi charismatic? No, he does not possess the quality of a leader who can make people laugh or cry and make them change their perspectives.

Is he a great orator?  NO, he does not have the skills of an orator. His facts are wrong, his delivery is poor and his choice of words is lousy.

Is he a great scholar? No, he does not even know the basics of even Indian history. If he were contesting the election in any European or North American country, he would have already become a laughing stock among people.

Is he a development guru? No, The development he is talking is what any municipal corporations or city council can do.

Is hi anti-corruption? No, he is reeking in corruption as he is the poster boy of multinational corporations and big businesses who know how to legalize corruption.

Is he pro-people? No, it was in his state that the people belonging to a religion than his own faced the worst violence in independent India and the members of the Modi government were involved in the genocide.

Then, why he is pulling big crowds? Why does the media talk of a Modi wave and why a good number of people are voting for him?

1. He represents an ideology that on the basis of its hatred towards Muslims, Christians and other minorities want to create a nation that gives priority to those who believe in this ideology.

2. He represents an organization that is the most organized and the most disciplined in the world today and that has a cadre to bring out its supporter in the street at a short notice.

3. He presents the face of a leader who is willing to do anything to fulfill the ideological dreams of his supporters.

A substantial number of people are supporting him because they believe that

1. Modi is the only guy who can stop the so-called appeasement of Muslims. It is an irony that some 30 percent of India's jobs and political offices are reserved for people who are identified as scheduled castes and scheduled tribes who are listed by the Hindu religious hierarchy as Hindus. They do not talk about appeasing Hindus. Rather, they refer to Muslim appeasement on the basis of a myth that they themselves have created.

2. Modi is seen as the only one who can engineer the genocide of a people and can get away by manipulating evidence and coercing and suppressing witnesses.

3. Modi is seen as the only guy who has the capability to use violence in the name of maintaining law and order to teach minorities a lesson.

4. Modi is seen as the only politicians who can bring back the old Brahmanical domination by reintroducing Hindus laws in a secular way within the constitutional framework.

5. Modi is a religious fanatic and he wants to create a Hindu Rashtriya based on the notion of RSS and his supporters feel that India can only prosper when it asserts its Brahmin identity.

6. His supporters view Muslims as anti-India. They consider Muslims traitors and enemies of Hinduism politically and socially. They think they have the best chance to get even with Muslims if they elect Modi.

But one must also remember, that history is not often dictated by the known, but by the unknown. Modi and his supporters might have their plans, but the history is capable of unfolding many unknown factors that might pose new challenges to India.

Facts Sheet: India elections

India has a parliamentary system of government with two chambers: Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. Lok Sabha members are elected by the people while Rajya Sabha members are elected primarily by elected representatives in various assemblies.

Total Number of Parliamentary Constituency, for Lok Sabha:       543 (79 are reserved for scheduled Castes and 41 for Scheduled Tribes)

Total Number of voters:                                                                   814.5 millions

Total Number of Parties:                                                                  1622 (6 national parties, 23 state parties, and 1593 registered unrecognized parties)

Total Polling Stations:                                                                      935,000

Total Poll Workers:                                                                           8 millions

Amount of Money each candidate is allowed to spend:                   $118,000

Total expenses of the Election Commission:                                    $600 millions

Number of Election Symbols used by parties                                   87

The parliamentary constituency with the largest number of electors -         3368399 (Outer Delhi)

The parliamentary constituency with the lowest number of electors -         39033 (Lakshadweep)

The parliamentary constituency with the largest Area - Ladakh (J&K)-     173266.37 sq. km

The Parliamentary constituency with the smallest Area - Chandni Chowk (Delhi)- 10.59 sq. km

Maximum contestants in a parliamentary constituency -               35 (Madras south)

A polling station with least number of electors: Only ONE voter in Polling station No. - 29;(Dharampur) in Miao Assembly segment of Arunachal East parliamentary constituency

Maximum Women contestants in a state -                                        61 (UP)

Minimum women contestants in a state -                                          1 (Goa)

Maximum age of the candidate-                                                        94 years (Ramchandra Veerappa in Bidar, Karnataka)

Minimum age of the candidate -                                                        25 years (Many).

Maximum age of the winning candidate-                                          94 years (Ramchandra Veerappa in Bidar, Karnataka)

Minimum age of the winning candidate-                                            26 years Sachin Pilot in Dausa (Rajasthan)

Maximum votes secured -                                                                   Sajjan Kumar outer Delhi - 855543

Minimum votes secured - Ashok Kumar                                            Chandni Chowk- 45

Minimum votes secured by a winner - Dr. P. Pookunhikoya,            15597 votes (Lakshadweep).

Maximum margin, Arambagh PC of West Bengal                              592502 votes.

Minimum margin, Lakshadweep,                                                        71 Votes

Average age of the elected MPs is                                                       52.63 Years.

Whom did Muslims vote in General Elections: (percentage)

Party	1996	1998	1999	2004	2009
Congress	32	32	40	36	36
BJP	2	5	6	7	3

46 constituencies with more than 30% Muslim population

States	Number of constituencies	Names
West Bengal	11	RAIGANJ (47.36%), MALDA UTTAR (49.73%), MALDA DAKSHIN (53.46) JANGIPUR (63.67%), MURSHIDABAD (58.31%), Baharampur (63.67%), DIAMOND HARBOUR (33.24%), BIRBHUM (35.08%) , Jadavpur (33.24%), Joynagar (33.24%),,  Mathurapur (33.24%)
Uttar Pradesh	13	BIJNOR (38.33%), AMROHA (37.50%), MORADABAD (44.78%), RAMPUR (49.14%), MEERUT (30.86%), MUZAFFARNAGAR (36.94%), KAIRANA (38.53%), SAHARANPUR (39.11%), SAMBHAL (45.54%), NAGINA (41.71), Bahraich (34.83%), BAREILLY (33.89%), Shrawasti (31.34%)
Jammu & Kashmir	5	BARAMULLA (97%), SRINAGAR (90%), ANANTNAG (95%), LADAKH (46%), UDHAMPUR (31%)
Assam	4	KARIMGANJ (45%), DHUBRI (56%), BARPETA (39%), NAGAON (33%)
Kerala	6	KASARAGOD (32.54), KOZHIKODE (37.47), MALLAPURAM (68.53%), PONNANI (64%) Wayanad (57.98%), Vadakara (34.70%)
Bihar	4	ARARIA (41.14%), KISHANGANJ (56.66%), KATIHAR (42.53%), Purnia (37.65%)
Andhra Pradesh	2	HYDERABAD (41.17%)%), Secundrabad (41.17%)
Lakshadweep	1	LAKSHADWEEP (95.47%)

 Muslim Member of Parliament since 1952

	Year of polls	Number of MPs	%
1	1952	11	2
2	1957	19	4
3	1962	20	4
4	1967	25	5
5	1971	28	6
6	1977	34	7
7	1980	49	10
8	1984	42	8
9	1989	27	6
10	1991	25	5
11	1996	29	6
12	1998	28	6
13	1999	31	6
14	2004	34	7
15	2009	30	6

India:  From Democracy to Modocracy:

The Greatest Show of People's will on earth

The big show of democracy in the world is taking place in India. 814.5 million voters will elect 543 members  of India’s lower house, Lok Sabha on May 16 through a process of election in five phases. On the one hand, is the Indian National Congress and its allies and on the other is the Bhartiya Janata Party and its allies. There are other groups in the fray, yet the main contest is between these major parties. The Congress and its allies claim to represent people espousing secular, and pluralistic values while the BJP represent people believing in the ideology of Hindutva, meaning that India is primarily a Hindu nation and its Hindu identity must never be negated. The Congress is pitching Rahul Gandhi, the great-grandson of India’s first prime minister, Jawahar Lal Nehru, while the BJP has fielded Narendra Modi, a 63-year-old man who until fairly recently was denied the US visa for presiding over the genocide of Muslims in 2002 in the State of Gujarat he ran as Chief Minister for over 12 years.

The issue is simple. What kind of India will emerge after May 16, an India run by secularists or an India run by the champions of Hindutva. It is this issue that overrides all other issues, including the development and employment in the coming years.  The BJP is trying to create a secular image for itself by declaring that it believes in one nation, and in one person. But the one nation theory in the BJP does not refer to Indians, rather to Hindus and Hindus of upper castes or those who in religious terms are described as twice-born. Indian politics are primarily dominated by these so-called twice-born leaders during the last 66 years under different names and pretexts and this election cycle it is not different in substance. It is based on deception with a few exceptions here and there

Deception is the act of making someone believe something that is not true. The latest statement of Modi, BJP candidate for the Indian Prime-ministerial position, describing Muslims as brothers is a cacophony in deception. The glibness in this is well evident. Once he called the same "brothers" puppies and once he wanted to teach them a lesson, but now they are his brothers because he wants to create an image of a compassionate leader ready to govern the world's largest democracy. It is nothing but a sham and an exercise in deceit. Even though politics itself is a deceptive art, but one has to coin a new term to describe what Modi has been saying and doing. We can call it Modocracy, a process to take control of the government through a web of lies and deceptions.
The real agenda of BJP is dictated by the Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh (RSS) an organization created on the pattern of the Nazi party. Its agenda is to create a Hindu Rashtra (nation) run by the teachings of its religious scriptures. This Rashtra must reflect the Hindu social structure where people are accorded a stagnant position by birth, where purity and profanity are dependent on one's birth to his or her caste and where certain castes are most favored by the society and the creator because they were born in a state of purity. RSS believes in an India has little room for non-Hindus. Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, even Jains and Jews must succumb to Hindu social structure and the laws and accept the superiority of the upper castes because they are malich or untouchables. The emergence of Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, the three indigenous religions of India clearly speaks of the religious protests against upper-caste lead Hinduism in the past.
RSS and BJP have already succeeded in infiltrating India’s schools, military, bureaucracy, and law enforcement agencies as well as the media and judiciary. They are promoting their ideals in these vital institutions creating hatred. RSS and BJP leaders are threatening people who are opposed to their style of leadership of dire consequences and they are inciting Hindus to ostracize Muslims in their colonies. They are reminding Hindus to get ready to take revenge from Muslims for the wrongs their forefathers committed against Hindus.
RSS believes that violence can be used to reconvert Muslims and Christians to Hinduism and the future conversion to Islam and Christianity can be stopped through legal means. RSS believes that once in power, it can change the constitution to serve its political agenda. So in a Modi-led government, discrimination and injustices would be given a constitutional framework, the same strategy followed by Hitler's Germany when the holocaust was approved by the will of the people within a legal framework.
Congress Party and its allies are burdened with the accusations of corruption, hence they are unable to match the rhetoric of the BJP. Regional parties might pose challenges to the BJP and a new player may cause tremors in Indian politics. The new player is Aam Admi (common people) Party (AAP). It is running at close to 400 Lok Sabha seats. No one knows how it would fare. Its fate is as its name suggests in the hands of common voters. If the common voters are convinced with the integrity and style of the AAP, it may provide the biggest shock in Indian politics. It is possible that it might but nothing can be predicted about it because of the role of money and propaganda as well as caste and religion in Indian politics. Can an average non-aligned voter take a decision based on the strength of his convictions for a clean political system? This election might provide a clue to it.
Muslims in India are bewildered with the political drama unfolding in front of their eyes. Divided into political camps, castes, classes, and clans and on sectarian and religious lines, they are looking at everyone to save them from Modi or RSS. Some have opted to join the RSS and BJP and Modi bandwagon believing that if they cannot beat them, they can join them. Those who have joined BJP are fully aware of RSS agenda and Modi murders, yet political expediency seems to be more relevant to them than the bitter truth.
Politics of deception that is being played in independent India is manifesting itself fully in this election. Politicians, in general, do not tell the truth but speak lies and that too loudly.  Non-Indian groups have been inducted into this election campaign. Image makers, policy creators, message broadcasters from the US, Japan, Britain, Israel, and other places are hired by political parties to deceive voters so that victory could be achieved. Megacorporations see a big opportunity in these elections to use their money to win as many mercenaries through ballots as they can. Indian democracy is in one heck of a mess.
Democracy is transforming itself into Modocracy with little regard to pluralistic values and human dignity that it was initially introduced for.

How to Combat Extremism?

The Muslim Public Affairs Council, a national Muslim organization, recently came up with a solution to the problem of violent extremism or extremism among Muslims. Its executive summary reads that “Imams and community leaders have the ability to address theological, social, and familial issues much more effectively than law enforcement,” and Muslim efforts should be “intended to proactively prevent acts of violent extremism from being born inside our community institutions.” It concludes that if all efforts fail to contain extremists only as last resort, should eviction from a community occurs, charging communities with working “toward safely removing that individual from the congregation and contacting law enforcement.”  

It is a document that has good intentions and genuine concerns as well as good suggestions. But, it leaves many questions unanswered as part of the analysis is seemingly weak or naïve at times. However, as a preliminary step towards the ultimate goal of developing a genuine understanding of extremism in Islam as it should be appreciated. As far as the suggestions to combat extremism are concerned, they are simply suggestions and many more can be offered by the community members if involved in the discussion.

The document makes several assumptions that need to be substantiated and suggests several solutions that deserve to be critically examined. Some of the underlying assumptions are:

1.     The American Muslim community has a substantial number of extremists.

2.     Many of these stealth extremists may become violent.

3.     Imams and community leaders are more effective in dealing with violent extremists than law enforcement agencies.

4.     Muslim imams should police their own communities and engage those who are extremists in order to help them change their perspectives.

5.     If they fail to contain the extremists, they should then excommunicate such members and inform the police.

Extremism

Extremism is an elusive political term and in general sense considered to be far outside the mainstream attitudes of a community or a society. Or it is also defined as a set of ideas that violate the common moral standards  
In the context of Islam, extremism is used as a set of ideas that is based on the extremely conservative view of Islam that may not necessarily promote violence or the use of extreme violent tactics for achieving perceived religious objectives. But these are arbitrary abstract definitions and can be applied to define any group extremist. For instance, in the view of many Zionist organizations in this country, MPAC or Council of American Muslim Relations (CAIR) are two extremist organizations.
If this set of definitions is applied to define Muslim communities, then probably every Muslim group can categorize others as extremist or violent extremist. So, before we really talk about it, we need to develop an objective and realistic definition of extremism. Currently, our existing definitions of extremism are subjective and politically motivated. We have no consensus. The FBI has a different set of definitions, the CIA has different. The Republicans and Democrats have contradictory definitions and the Islamophobes have their own set of ideas. So the first thing that should be our priority is to define extremism from our sociological, theological perspective.
The responsibility of defining extremism within the Muslim community rests with Muslim intellectuals and religious scholars. We never had the debate to understand it and define it in our social and political context. Hence each is relying on a subjective definition and that does not serve any purpose. In Islamic literature, one can easily find examples where every Muslim sect and group has been defined as extremist by fellow Muslim groups. Moreover, in the absence of an objective definition, we rely on a definition that serves the purpose of some special interest groups.
Lack of Data

Even if we use a subjective definition of extremism, there are no data to prove that the American Muslim community has extremism widely prevalent in its ranks. There is no survey and no study that suggests that. On the contrary, several studies conducted by Muslims and others have suggested that the bulk of the Muslim community rarely visits Islamic institutions established to serve them One such study suggests that only 20 percent Muslims attend the Friday congregational prayers. Las Vegas seems to have a Muslim population of 15,000 to 18,000. The total number of people who offer Friday prayers in five of the city’s masjid regularly is about 1300 including women, That is less than 10 percent of the population. A similar pattern is visible in Arizona, Utah, and California as well as other states. So before one talks about the problem one should study its dimensions and scope.

The Imam and community leaders

Of over 3,000 masjids in the US, some 80 percent have imams who are trained in foreign countries with little understanding of English, the constitution of the US, the history of Muslims in America and the social and political realities of the country. They may be well versed in Islamic jurisprudence but have no idea of the legal system of this country. In fact, their knowledge of Islam mainly comes from their sectarian upbringing. A Shia mosque has a Shia scholar coming from established Shia communities in different parts of the world and a Sunni mosque has a Sunni Imam in representing a particular school of thought. Each is strict in his own traditions and often unwilling to accommodate the differences of opinion.  How could such Imam who has no clue of existing conditions of their own larger communities play an effective role in combating extremism? In fact, many of them may easily be described as extremists by the subjective definitions, arbitrarily used by many. The curriculum prepared by some institutions to train Imam lack any reference to the times and social matrix of the society we all are living.

Most community leaders are non-representational of their communities. They are not elected and in many cases elected through manipulations. They may represent a particular ideological perspective without revealing that. Obviously, they do not carry lots of weight within their own communities. For instance, many Muslim community leaders still owe their allegiance to either the Jamat Islami, Pakistan, Bangladesh or India or Ikhwanul Muslimeen of Egypt or Hizb Tahrir of Jordan, or Tablighi Jamat or other similar Islamic groups

Policing the Community

In a free society, each is entitled to freedom of ideas and expression. The US allows even extremists the freedom to flourish. Amish people are considered extreme by many modernists, yet they have full rights to live the way they want to live as long as they owe oath of allegiance to the constitution and maintain law and order.  No one can police the thought process of the other. It is dangerous and amounts to vigilante. If we allow this within our community, why do we, then, object to others when they do the same to us.

Having extremist ideas is not a crime in this country. Acting on ideas that defy the constitution of the country is. KKK still exists and several groups owing allegiance to Hitler are also active in this country. Several hate groups are active without being prosecuted. 

As a citizen or a community, it is within our legal right to seek restrictive orders for an individual we do not like to be part of our congregation.  But to hand him over to the police for his ideas would be against the spirit of freedom of ideas that our religion and this country promote. I should not call the FBI if I find that a member of my community believes that women should not be allowed in the masjid for some extreme reasons. Or I should not invite the police to arrest a man because he is reading a verse of the Quran that is translated by many that “Jews and Christians should be taken as friends,” I can give him my perspective on the verse but cannot force him to change his perspective. Even if he insists on an extremist definition, I have no business to report him to the FBI and the Police. Who would guarantee that the Imams or leaders who themselves are representing a particular sect or faction would always have a fair play.

If Imam and community leaders want to be informants, paid or unpaid, they have every right to do so. But to expect the community to spy on each other for his or her ideas is not feasible, especially when we have a different understanding of extremism.

Some Proposals

Following are some of the concrete proposals that might help us handle the problem of extremism effectively.

1.     Define what extremism and especially Muslim extremism is? Such a definition should be sociologically and theologically founded on strong grounds.

2.     Have a national survey of extremism within the Muslim community based on the agreed-upon definition.

3.     Have a survey of masajds and their imams and their ideas on issues identified as extremism.

4.     Effectively engage in dialogue with law enforcement agencies in efforts to prevent incidents of violence.

5.     Commission books and position papers on issues that have often been used by groups to promote extremism.

6.     Help develop a democratic culture in Islamic institutions.

7.     Let women and youth occupy 75 percent of the board positions in masajids and Islamic institutions.

8.     Involve people in the decision making-process of Islamic institutions so that more and more people can understand the social and political environment they live in.

9.     Provide civic education to people so that they can understand their civic responsibilities and rights.
10. Organize a conference of Imams and community leaders to discuss the issue and strategies to combat extremism.

The Conspirators in the Demolition of the Babri Masjid

What was always feared has now been confirmed. The Babari Masjid was not demolished by the fringe of a hateful, fanatic and crazy mob, but by a well trained, militant group of terrorists who were coached by none other than former members of the Indian army, police, and intelligence. The sting operation that revealed this best-known secret for over two decades concludes that the culprits behind the destruction were the Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh, Shiv Sena, the BJP, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and all other constituents of Hindutva in India and USA. It was a plot that was carried out with precision with the knowledge of the chief minister of the state of Uttar Pradesh and the Prime Minister of India. India's intelligence agencies knew about it, and the military intelligence was aware of it. Yet none could act in defense of India's constitution that guarantees the protection of places of worship of all faiths.

The story of the demolition of the Babri masjid is the story of a group of terrorists who under the garb of religion, wearing the cloak of Hindu nationalism promotes fascism. It is this group that is now knocking at the gates of India's parliament and is aspirated to lead the country in the future. Those who plotted or were part of the demolition are among those who are contesting as candidates for India's highest legislative body under the cloak of secularism and development.

Who knows how many more plots these groups and individuals have been involved in since the independence of India from British Raj? Who knows how far these outfits have penetrated in India's political, bureaucratic, educational, financial and technology sectors? Who knows how many intelligence officers and military personnel and political officials owe their loyalty to these groups. The RSS has a network of over 100,000 relief organizations and over thousands of militant boot camps and no one knows with precision how many of its members have become part of India's law enforcement agencies.

The sting operation revelation also gives us a sad picture of India's law enforcement agencies that failed miserably either to investigate the criminals and conspirators or to bring out charges against them. It also speaks volumes of the hateful ideology that RSS has used to poison the minds of its members about Islam, Christianity and other faiths. The RSS is founded on the notion that without subduing Islam and making Muslims and Christians ineffective, Hindu upper castes cannot fulfill their dream to establish a kingdom of gods on earth that would ensure their domination in all aspects of Indian life. Muslims and Christians, in the analysis of RSS, were bad for the Hinduism. They both forced millions of Hindus to convert to their faith, they both were responsible for the murder and rape of Hindu men and women. They both engaged in a systematic annihilation of Hindu civilization. The Hindutva forces believe that in order to reassert its identity, the Muslims have to be systematically uprooted from places where they have created their own pockets of influence. 

In order to gain ascendency in India's politics, the Hindu nationalist forces are inciting Hindu masses and creating conditions that provoke ordinary members of their community against Muslims and Christians. During the planning for the demolition of the Babri Masjid, the leadership of the Hindutva was unanimous in creating conditions that would inflict pain and death upon Hindus leading to their strong retaliation against Muslims. Who knows if the so-called fake encounters the police has plotted were cooked in the BJP and RSS kitchen? Who knows if the so-called Indian Mujahideen have the blessings of the RSS or other Hindu groups? Who knows how many more plots are being hatched?

The response of Muslim leadership to this and many similar challenges like these is that of an intellectually challenged person. Unable to identify their objectives and defend their interests, their leaders act in a sectarian, factional and selfish manner, ignoring the basic principles of stewardship. Like a rudderless ship, they are floating at the mercy of the waves without defining their own interests. Their leadership probably thinks that by raising a few emotional slogans here and there they would be able to overcome the challenges. What they do not realize is that they are confronted with a group that is organized, dynamic and constantly planning for the annihilation of Muslims. So myopic is the Muslim intellectual leadership that many of its stalwarts have already accepted the leadership of the Hindutva forces without looking at the implications of their action for their community and the country.

The response of Muslim intellectuals is even more painful. They argue that the BJP does not offer that big of a danger that people perceive it to offer. These people refuse to learn from history. The BJP is not only a political organization, but a political wing of the world's best organized, and the dangerous ideological group that believes in the racial superiority, religious purity and social ascendency of a group of people bound together with a 5,000-year-old history. The demolition of the Babri Masjid and the emerging details of the conspiracy to demolish it proves that once again and offers a clear warning to Muslims and India that if not checked and controlled, this group is capable of causing the the worst holocaust that humans have yet to witness.