Why Internet Hindus love Modi

Narendra Modi’s popularity among the internet population is well known. Various surveys and the cult like personality that is revered in the social media are good indicators of this fact. But why do Internet savvy Hindus disproportionately support Modi. What is that they find in his personality that makes them so vocal and aggressive in their support of Modi.

Various intellectuals (Libtards) have delved on this topic and have concluded on a variety of reasons for Modi’s popularity. But most of them according to me have missed understanding the driving factor for his huge support base among this specific population.

They quote, Modi’s no nonsense approach, his “quality of governance” and the “results of his work” (hypothetical in their opinion) is what attracts the young to him, youth who are always attracted to leaders who can take decisive actions and solve issues with a firm hand. Though there might be share of the young population who are attracted to Modi because of this, it doesn’t reflect the drive behind his hard core supporters. There are/were many CM’s and leaders who have delivered good governance, who took firm decisions, but none of them, resonate with the young as much as Modi does. There support base is definitely restricted to their respective states and rarely reaches out to a pan India audience.

Now the so called intellectuals argue that it is Modi’s effective PR machine that has enabled him to capitalize his “good governance” and “quality of governance” in reaching out to a wider audience. Thus he has been able to leverage his strengths to the hilt unlike the other CM’s who may have similar track records. This argument, I find is bordering on the ludicrous. Majority of the Internet Hindu population are keenly aware of their surroundings, they are well informed about global issues and their implications. Surely any effective PR machine cannot hoodwink this segment into making them follow Modi. Besides, CM’s like Chandra Babu Naidu and S.M Krishna have equally enjoyed/employed similar PR machinery to propagate their image as forward looking no nonsense technocrats, but do you find any pan India support or fan base for the same. Let alone winning elections, they might not be able to garner more than 10,000 followers on twitter. Therefore I can conclusively say that the so called “PR” reason is BS. I will concede that PR does help in reaching out effectively to the audience but never in winning over them.

Then finally there is the perverse reason spelled out by the more retarded segment of the intellectual population that Modi enjoys huge popularity with the Right oriented youth in India because he according to them was responsible for killing of thousands and hundreds of thousands of Muslims. What happened in Gujarat in 2002 is highly deplorable, and I am sure that except few marginal extremists, no rational person will support Modi, because they think he was responsible for the death of hundreds of people in the Gujarat riots of 2002. This is just a very sick and perverse argument that one gets into as a last resort especially by  intellectuals who have nothing else left to counter with.

Now after going through the reasons put forth by our intelligent brethren, let me put out my own humble reason for the tremendous popularity Modi enjoys across the country among the Internet savvy Hindu population (or according to Sagarika Ghose of CNN IBN, the Internet Hindus).

In my previous blog, I had elaborated on how a certain section of the population has a disproportionate control in setting the agenda for the country. These set of individuals who according to popular theory emanate from the great institutes of Delhi like the JNU, colleges like St. Stephens subscribe mostly to a retarded version of communist liberal ideology. They according to them represent and guard the idea of India. These are the same set of people who “are always thinking about the nation” while having no ***** clue about it. But this doesn’t stop them forcibly gulping down their stupid agenda on the nation (To get a better idea of how the Indian story has been shaped by such Individuals, I recommend reading “Durbar” by Tavleen Singh). And my hypothesis is that, these are the same people who are indirectly responsible for Modi’s rise in popularity.

These people claim to be morally and intellectually superior to the common man and their guidance in all matters must be religiously followed upon. They consider anyone outside their network to be fanatics, extremists and people who need to be condemned and suppressed from the onset. This is deeply insulting to any self respecting individual who is outside this so called network. And this is what drives the Internet Hindus to support Modi.

Modi is the anti thesis of everything that the retarded set of people believes in. He believes in Hinduism, he is proud of our ancient heritage, customs and practices. He doesn’t feel the need to mindlessly ape the western customs and traditions. He is confident about himself and also the potential of this Nation. He firmly believes that India could one day become the first nation among other developed nations.

This exactly what the left liberals despise of. They are anti Hindu, ashamed of our culture and believe that our customs and practices need to be abolished to oblivion. They would like India to become European in nature (remember how, these same people keep fretting on why BJP is not true centre right party). They are definitely not confident of the potential of the country and believe that salvation lies in becoming a third grade third world nation.

Therefore they have relentlessly targeted the Modi and his visions and ideology. This is the bone of contention between the Internet Hindus and the Intellectual population.

Internet Hindus like Modi and unlike the retarded intellectuals believe in our proud ancestry and firmly believe in the infinite potential in this country that can be harnessed to make India a progressive developed nation. Therefore when they see these intellectuals lampoon this idea of India and try to propagate their idiotic vision of India, they feel the need to counter this intellectual ideocracy. But sadly, they do not have similar power or hold over the governing mechanism of the country or have the required space in the main stream media to propagate their alternate vision.

Hence they have turned to Modi to become their proxy in their fight against the Libtard intellectuals. Modi who is the only person in the current context who has dared to take on the collective might of the intellectual society. Thus they have found the one leader who can take the battle to the enemy’s camp and win by playing according to his own ball game. They support Modi in order to demonstrate that their idea of India is the one the country needs. The more the intellectuals oppose Modi, the more vigorous the support for him grows. The more the intellectuals lampoon the Internet Hindus’ ideas and philosophies, the more they feel the need to prove them otherwise. The years of helplessness in listening to the BS dished out in the mainstream media and the slights on their intelligence by the people in power have resulted in making them overly aggressive in hitting back. This is what drives Internet Hindus to support Modi, because his victory means the victory for their idea.

PS – I still remember the distance of the some of the intellectual people with the rest of the nation. In college, in one of the campus presentations, a recent recruit was recounting his/her experience in a village orientation program. The person realized the importance of having power 24x7 and (believe me this is true) that people can leave without having access to Coffee days and Pizza Huts. I was extremely appalled at this person’s ignorance of the country. These are the same people who see 2 India’s while for most of us commoners there is only one.

Libtards and their logical fallacies

Libtards is portmanteau of two words “Liberal” and “Retards”. The word broadly defines a political species that dominates the opinion making establishment in the country. Even though this species has nothing remotely to do with Liberalism, it still propagates Retarded behavior in the name of liberalism. Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. Liberalism by definition stands for as Wikipedia quotes below

Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property

But as I will show below, the species of Libtards don’t truly believe in any of the ideas that are commonly considered liberal by philosophy but their behavior on the other hand can completely be explained by the retarded nature of their thinking.

Let us start with the freedom of religion, Libtards do not really believe in freedom of religion. Their philosophy towards religion is that anything is fine except for Hinduism. In fact, they display maniacal hatred towards Hinduism or anything that is remotely associated with Hinduism. They will not let go of any opportunity to demean and condemn the religion. I personally have no issues with people criticizing Hinduism as long it is logical and sensible. I believe without an intelligent discussion, Hinduism will never be able to progress further. And here in lies the crucial difference between Liberals and Libtards, Liberals criticize the Neanderthalic  practices that some practitioners of Hinduism still follow, which is by all means sensible and understandable, but the ways in which Libtards criticize Hinduism and the logical reasoning they follow demonstrates how completely retarded they are in their thinking process.

Let me illustrate this, recently when the Delhi gang rape had occurred and there were huge protests and demonstrations in Delhi. One of the “Liberals” managed to find a way to criticize Hinduism for being responsible for the gang rape. You may ask how?

The “Liberal” argued that the main reason for the occurrence of the Delhi gang rape and other rape cases in India was solely because of Vivekananda. He/she goes on further and states that it is in fact the masculine pose of Vivekananda that was responsible for all the ills in the society. Yes, I know such reasoning is beyond my understanding or the limited analytical capabilities that my mind possesses.  The argument that one religion is solely responsible for the deterioration of public safety is laughable. Rapes occur everywhere, in all countries with all possible religious followers and also in communist countries where there are no followers of any religion. Surely, it is a law and order problem, the failure of which in the Indian case squarely lies on the present governmental disposition that is ruling us, but Libtards who believe in freedom of religion could not miss an opportunity to demonstrate the same.

Going to the next topic that Libtards are supposed to believe in is freedom of speech. But the Libtards definition of freedom of speech goes something like this “I have all the freedom to criticize any god damn thing in the world, but anyone else criticizing me or my beliefs is either a terrorist, hate monger, etc and should be immediately locked up in Jail.” Let me demonstrate this, one of the leading anchors (so he/she thinks) of one of the prime time English news channels (so they think) doesn’t miss an opportunity to fight for the cause of freedom of speech. Whether it is defending M.F.Hussain, or some of the leading Libtards figures who believe that the nation should either be run by Pakistan or by the communists from china, this leading anchor is in the forefront of the battle for one of the cherished fundamental right.

So what do you think would happen if someone were to criticize her work? The champion of freedom of speech would accept his/her critic’s freedom of speech and would either react by furnishing his/her side of the argument or ignore the whole thing. But NO, this anchor went all the way and brought out a defamation case on a common blogger who dared to criticize his/her handling of 26/11 coverage. The blog post was forcibly removed and the author was forced to tender an apology. And in reality, the entire blog was about shoddy journalism in general, but this anchor took it personally and decided to “champion” the freedom of speech of this commoner.

Now let’s get to free and fair elections, Liberals by philosophy support free and fair elections and respect the mandate of such elections. Though they might criticize the elected government, they would never question the legitimacy of the same. But Libtards in India only believe in free and fair elections when a similar party with Libtardian disposition forms the government. Any other government is treated like an enemy of the state which needs to be removed as first opportunity arises. There are enough evidences in the internet about what I am speaking about, so I will not delve much into the topic. All I will state is that Libtards believe in totalitarianism that masquerades as democratic ones. They would prefer Hitler/ Iranian/ East German elections where the same ruling government is elected time, time and again. No wonder all the communist halves of divided country had the word Democratic attached to it, (this fact was illustrated humorously in Yes minister Watch after 3:20).

Finally coming to last topic, free trade and private property, Libtards do not believe in free markets. The only thing they believe is in Hippy style community based societies, they dream of making India a big NGO where they and similar minded people are in charge. They despise capitalists and entrepreneurs and disdain wealth creation for they are evil and should be eliminated in initial stage itself. The only good thing that wealth can be used for is redistribution, equity and so and so forth. Sadly they don’t realize that without any creation there won’t be any wealth to redistribute. They are also under the misconception that growth and equity are two things that need to be balanced. Their Fundamentals of economics are idiotic to say the least. Except a few, most of them do not understand the basics of commerce, trade and economics work. A regular columnist in one of his article quoted that one of the founder of NGO when asked where the money will come for implementation of the food subsidy bill replied that government can create any amount of money required. This kind of illiteracy combined with need for grandiose schemes has been detrimental to the country. I have in my previous blog, how such hair brained schemes designed by the esteemed members of NAC has resulted in rampant inflation, hurting the salaried class and has made India extremely vulnerable to global headwinds.  They are against industrialization, modernization but keep on speaking about progressiveness of the society. They believe in subsistence economy and government dole outs are the ideal solution for the elevation of poverty. They will oppose development in the name of environment, farmers, tribal and so and so forth without understanding the damage they are doing for the same populace that they are protecting.

I clearly remember, once a prominent writer had written an article describing about the poverty in Orissa and the existence of starvation in the region. The writer than goes on to blames the middle class for not being sympathetic towards such people and condemned their ignorance and apathy towards the same. The article goes on further and ridicules the materialistic life, which the middle class follows, too much interested in their own selfish interests. Interestingly in the next article, the writer writes about her trips to Turkey, Greece on vacation where she enjoyed all the material comforts the world can offer. Surely this hypocrisy at the best, for writing one article doesn’t amount actually helping those people whom you were purporting to help. One cannot claim moral high ground just by condemning others and accusing them of ignorance. It is my belief that the common man is more sympathetic towards the downtrodden in our society then these celebrities who fake their concern and claim moral superiority based on the same.

These celebrities are the same who travel in SUVs everywhere and turn up to run in green marathons and protest felling up of trees, damming of rivers and so on and so forth. They need to practice what they preach and should learn from one of their icons Gandhi about following up with actions rather than speaking endlessly on the same topic. They talk about helping the poor, but have no qualms being associated with people who drunk drive on hapless pedestrians and kill them or who go and hunt wild bucks for fun. The same people are invited for promoting worthy causes while in fact such people should be behind bars. Hypocrisy is the tell tale sign of a Libtard species.

Hence Libtards are never liberal from any perspective but are complete retards from every perspective. They propagate communist, narcissist and anarchistic ideologies in the guise of liberalism. Retards exists in the entire range of political spectrum from right wing extremists to left wing loonies, but these retards are distinctive due to their control over the main stream media and their prominence in setting up agenda for the nation and in the development of “idea of India”.

When you see a Libtard, proceed with care. You will never defeat them in an argument since they do not believe in logical reasoning. They will use circuitous and cyclical arguments to win their case and utilize firepower to establish dominance. They are the believers of Goebbels (though all Libtards hate him) that a lie repeated hundred times becomes the truth.

The only way to defeat a Libtard is to be first aware of the species and next to completely ignore them. Hence it is imperative for every one of us to spread awareness about this vicious species so that we can collectively banish them from the corridors of power. This is the only viable solution for this cancerous problem. Therefore I request each and every one to create awareness so that we can finally end their dominance.

How NREGA won UPA its Second Term

Now ever since UPA won the 2009 elections, A lot of political commentators have speculated on the possible reasons that would have persuaded the electorate to vote them back to power. Everything from Rahul’s new paradigm in politics to matured leadership of Manmohan Singh was perceived to be the main factor behind UPA’s re-election in 2009.But one of the major contributing factor for congress victory that most political observers agreed was NREGA scheme.

In this short post, I try to rationally analyze whether NREGA indeed help UPA in the pro-incumbency wave seen in the election. 2009 national elections was in-fact not a single issue based election and multiple issues interplayed at both regional and local level to effect the outcome of the election. Hence it is very difficult to single out an issue and extract the impact of that issue on the final voting preference of the electorate. Hence it would be very difficult to analyze the impact of NREGA scheme on 2009 elections at India level analytically. Therefore I have tried to take a sample state which ideally would be bereft of any local or regional issue during the 2009 elections.  

Starting from the 28 states in India, we can easily rule out the smaller states of Goa, North East, since electorally they are relatively insignificant. Ideally we would want a state which is a bipolar contest between BJP and Congress (the two national parties, since these would relatively have lesser prominence to local issues). Among the states where there is a straight contest between BJP and congress, Madhya Pradesh stands out. In 2008 assembly elections BJP had just won a 2^nd term to rule the state with near 2/3 majority 143 out of 230 seats.^[1] So BJP was expected to win a majority of the parliamentary seats in 2009.^[2] Most opinion and exit polls predicted a BJP sweep of around 20-25 seats out of the 29 seats in total. But surprisingly Congress managed to win 12 seats with BJP winning 16 seats and BSP the remaining seat.^[3] This was surprising and almost a matched performance by the Congress especially with the fact that the same party had got a thrashing in the assembly elections held just 6 months back.^[1] In the case of the other states where elections were held along with that of Madhya Pradesh in 2008, the results in 2009 parliamentary elections broadly followed the assembly elections results. In Delhi and Rajasthan Congress swept the states with 7/7 and 20/25 seats respectively and in Chhattisgarh BJP won resoundingly 10/11 seats in the state^[4]. Hence when all these states are considered, Madhya Pradesh clearly stands out.

So how was Congress able to win so many seats in Madhya Pradesh? In 2009 elections there were not many dominant local issues that dominated the discussion. Hence it is safe to assume that National issues with local bearings had major role to play. Now the question arises, which ones? Was it the matured leadership of the PM that enabled to the voters to trust Congress or was it Rahul’s magic?.

So when we deep dive into the 2009 results, we can clearly see a pattern that when taken in context explains the underlying factor behind congress better than expected performance.  I was able to procure assembly level voting shares for each of the party in 2009 elections from the election commissioner website. ^[5] I correlated this with the no of blocks in each of the assembly segments designated as Rural or urban by the election commission. By broadly using the share of polling booths classified as Rural vs. Urban and with an assumption that each of the polling booth would cater to nearly equal number of voting population. I was able to approximate the share of Rural and Urban electoral population in each of the assembly segment. Refer the link below for reference.

When the assembly seat population characteristics are correlated with the voting pattern in 2009 elections, a clear trend emerges. Rural segments have voted fairly evenly between Congress and BJP while the urban segments have in majority of the cases voted decisively for the BJP.

The below table illustrates the voting pattern that emerges

Rural Share	INC	BJP	Total Votes cast	Weights	No of assembly segments	BJP	INC	BSP
95-100%	40.1%	39.7%	5551853	29%	63	27	32	4
90-95%	40.4%	41.9%	4303994	22%	52	27	23	2
80-90%	39.8%	43.9%	3891963	20%	47	25	21	1
70-80%	36.8%	46.4%	1624213	8%	20	11	9	0
50-70%	42.7%	47.8%	1378412	7%	16	9	7	0
25-50%	43.3%	43.6%	924128	5%	11	8	3	0
0-25%	40.1%	51.9%	1796309	9%	21	16	5	0
Total	40.2%	43.5%	19470872	100%	230	123	100	7

As we can see from the above table, Congress has in fact performed better than BJP in predominantly rural seats (95-100% share of rural polling booths) with a total vote share of 40.1% against 39.7% of the BJP. In terms of assembly segments, Congress had leads in 32 out of a total of 63 seats with predominance of rural population as against 27 for the BJP. As we go further into urbanized assembly segments we find BJP’s vote share difference vis a vis Congress improving and eventually dominating. At a broad level the Voting share of Congress and BJP in seats with more than 70% rural population stands at ~40% and ~42% respectively. At an assembly seat level this translates into 85 and 90 seats in which the respective parties had leads out of 182 seats in this category. In seats with significant urban population (30-50% of Urban polling booth share), we can clearly see BJP having a significant advantage with ~48% vote share as against ~43% of the Congress. In terms of assembly segments BJP lead in 16 seats as against 9 seats by the Congress out of a total of 25 seats. And finally in Urban majority seats, BJP is the clear winner with whopping 8% lead in vote share with ~49% as against voter share of ~41% for the congress. BJP had leads in 24 of the 32 assembly segments vis a vis 8 for the congress.

Clearly the major reason for the better than expected of the Congress is due to its on par performance in the rural segments of the Madhya Pradesh state. It is here that NREGA comes into picture. NREGA has been reported to have been successfully implemented in Madhya Pradesh. NREGA is rural focused scheme and benefits only the rural population by guaranteeing 100 days of work for eligible adults. The successful implementation would have resulted in the creation of enormous goodwill among its beneficiaries which could have resulted in proportionate impact on the voting trends of the beneficiaries in 2009 elections. We can clearly state that NREGA indeed had a positive impact on the electoral prospect of the UPA government. The on par performance of UPA in rural segments can only be attributed to the NREGA scheme and nothing else, since there existed no anti incumbency against the state government; there were no regional parties and also no significant regional issues that were course of the discussion. And significantly Congress performed equally well across the state with wins coming from both East, West, South and Northern parts of Madhya Pradesh and hence negating the possibility of local cluster level issues or performance linked to pockets of influence of leaders. With the elimination of most of the issues that could have had a broad level impact across the state, clearly NREGA is the only factor left and hence NREGA is the winning factor by elimination.

What will be the implication of this analysis on 2013/14 elections. Rural voters are still significant even if there is a growing clout of urban neo middle class. So even though after the recent protests in Delhi, everyone seems to talking about these new segments, the rural population cannot be ignored. Therefore the politics of handouts and giveaways will still compete in the near future. Also significantly Congress and the UPA have an edge over this segment which always has been the traditional vote constituency of the congress. Even though the electoral impact of the Direct cash scheme is questionable as I have argued in the previous post. Still, the many other schemes of the present regime will create favorable dispensation. But there is also the drought that has affected India in 2012 coupled with stagnation in the Market prices for farmers and the growing input costs of labor and other farm inputs could create adverse opinion. And finally for the BJP and especially Narendra Modi, they have to come up with a credible idea that would entice this voting segment. Development and Industrialization cannot be easily sold to this segment unlike the technology savvy neo middle class. Also for Modi especially communicating his vision to this segment will be the most challenging prospect if he were to promote himself as the PM candidate from the BJP. The way the vision is articulated and communicated is crucial. But the growing reach of Television and Mobile phone connectivity with nearly 25-35% (33.4% at all India level) of the rural population across the states with access to TV and 50-60% (55% at all India level) with access to Telephone network can be the critical enablers for the above communication.

Therefore the analysis clearly indicates the importance of this important electoral segment which no party or PM candidate can ignore or take it for granted and the key to winning 2014 would crucially lie with the party or candidate who can gain significant share of this huge electoral pie. But the crucial challenge will remain in connecting and communicating one’s vision to this key segment.

PS -
For the detailed Data and analysis
Please refer to
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvxmEFR9ZNZKdEdSUDZvNzIwTWlDYXRtZTdPci04anc#gid=1