Donald Trump’s response to the COVID pandemic and the public outrage against the killing of George Floyd has been tragically narcissistic. He acted like a delusional sociopath who thinks he is an autocrat, inviting criticism from actual totalitarian regimes like China. His actions undermined the democracy of a nation proud of its liberal, democratic legacy.
This has kindled a new conversation globally. Trump, along with Jair Bolsanoro in Brazil, Boris Johnson in Britain, and Narendra Modi in India, who now represents the rise of right-wing politics, are put under one banner. The narcissistic behavior of Trump and the apathy of Bolsonaro towards minorities in Brazil have spilled over to India as well, ideologically. When talking about the grave realities of the world, like protests or pandemic responses, one asks, isn’t India grappling with the same kind of leadership crisis?
There are two components central to this comparison. One, the consolidation of power or trust of the majority on one man, and two, the predominance of right-wing leaders in these countries. When I subscribed to the left perspective, I too used to correlate all right-wing leaders, especially the popular ones, to fascism and one-man rule.
The essential idea was if someone talks about majority identity politics, the rights of the minorities are at stake. If one talks about nationalism and the military, dissent, and freedom of speech are in crisis. If one talks about corporations, public welfare is about to be overturned. Therefore, all right-wing leaders are undemocratic and fascist power-hungry totalitarians.
But, look at the world. Donald Trump, the unproclaimed leader of this kind, has shown his true colors in being a sociopathic crazy man unfit for a democracy like the USA. Bolsonaro has shown his dedication to his people and country during the Amazon forest fires. And he continued to be a selfish arrogant egoist during the pandemic. So the cynic in me asks, is Modi the same? Have I blind-sided myself into thinking that Modi is a good leader despite all the propaganda against him, the stream of thought I once subscribed to.
Rise of the right-wing to power
This analysis of the rise of Trump to power by Sam Harris can be applied to India and the rise of Modi as a national figure as well.
The key points are:
- Islamophobia: the softness and complacency of previous governments towards terrorism in the name of Islamophobia.
- Toxic identity politics: use of minorities as vote banks, appeasing to their demands even at the risk of the majorities’ security. This then led to the consolidation of the majority identity and led to the very undermining of democracy in elections.
- Over-use of trigger points like racism, Islamophobia, feminism, environmentalism, etc. Over-use of activism to the point of predation of the majority. On the other hand, real issues like the backwardness of Muslims, women, low caste, and so on continued unabated.
- Most importantly, the promise of the Right to abate these issues, support the majority, and bring in change.
I won’t explain the first three points here because that’ll further stretch the article. Rather I’ll focus on the fourth one, which is the crux of the issue at hand.
If the right-wing promised security for the majority against multiculturalism, toxic activism, islamophobia, economic stagnation, and corruption, analyzing how the right addressed these issues would give us the answer on how they performed. Or, analyzing if all right-wing leaders in the world follow a pattern in solving these issues would tell us if all of them are undemocratic or not.
As we see, the response of governments in America and Brazil on any of these issues has been catastrophic. Their leaders have become a threat to the long history of democracy and liberalism through their narcissistic and narrow-minded decisions.
And in India?
Modi came to power with a clear manifesto in their hands. One that appeased the majority Hindu community too. So was it pro-development, anti-corruption, and anti-black money; problems persistent or even exacerbated by Congress and the left in the country.
Bill Gates famously applauded Modi’s measures to combat the pandemic spreading across the second-most populous country in the world. Even when this was accompanied by a locust problem and a super cyclone, our Prime Minister stood with the nation, rather than abandoning it. He ushered in support and hope to all affected. This very personal legacy of Narendra Modi shows his compassion and love for the people, far from the egoistic despotic violent mentality famously attributed to him by the Left.
Except for mob lynching incidents and the actual Muslim-phobic racist people emboldened by a right-wing party in power (or majoritarian party), the minorities don’t feel threatened by the state power.
The right-wing has tried and failed for the most part to curb black money through demonetization. In the wake, they’ve succeeded in cracking down counterfeit activities of some industries like real estate and also reducing looting of government officials in civil service. This small success is a big start in the long fight against corruption.
Women still don’t feel safe in this country but more freedom, education, revenue, and self-sustainability are reaching them. This could lead to women empowerment in the future.
The caste system, tribal issues, and poverty are still pressing problems here. But for the first time, the poor are actually getting what they were promised (however little) in food and money through a wide-spreading banking system, Aadhar verification and illusion of financial responsibilities to different sectors of the Civil services (eg: the post offices).
The appeasement of Hindus to the detriment of Muslims
This is the single most important accusation that gave Modi a fascist tag. Ram Mandir, CAA-NRC, even a woman-friendly Anti-Triple Talaq bill were portrayed as Muslim-phobic and ways to persecute Muslims.
Ram Mandir verdict is seen as an infringement on Muslim’s religious rights, a seizing of their land and a piece in the toxic Hindutva propaganda meant simply to threaten Muslims. But in reality, it’s correcting a historic injustice, giving away sacred land to those who worshiped it for at least a thousand years! Why did the left hide the ASI Excavation finding that there were Hindu structures in the site for all these decades? Why did they then lie about India’s past? Why are they mocking Hindus when they talk about the demolishing of a temple when the same people were so enraged by the demolishing of a mosque at the same site (given that both are wrong things to do)?
CAA-NRC is also an issue of fear-mongering. People are protesting on an assumed pretext that Muslims who don’t have papers will be dealt with cruelly. Here, I won’t deny that the government may lack insight into what to do with the illegal migrants once they find them. Where will these humans go? What will happen to them? But again, this is far from the supposed “fascism” and Mulsim-phobia the government is accused of.
So, the right-wing is vindicated of all the evil ideologies?
On the contrary, Hindutva and majoritarian politics have the potential to become non-secular or undemocratic. There are real threats in the party and its fringe elements that could take it there. But that in itself doesn’t prove that BJP is non-secular or undemocratic. Having said that the right should weed out these elements to uphold the basic tenets our nation is built on.
When we conclude geo-politics to analyze what is happening in our country, we must look at the Communist totalitarian governments and Islamic nations. When we uphold Marxism and Islamic religious freedom, the governments of Communist and Islamic countries, who used democratic dissent to protest undemocratically. Once they came to power, they’ve led the countries straight into the hands of totalitarian individuals.
On the other side, countries like Taiwan, the Czech Republic, and Myanmar have broken away from decades of bad rulers and went on to secure their economies through privatization, open trade, and religious reforms.
So, the matter is not so black and white. Right-wing governments can be fair and secular, and the left undemocratic and totalitarian. In the same, dissent can also be democratic and undemocratic. If they are based on lies or ulterior motives, they will only do more harm than good.
