Readers’ comments: History will not be kind to Modi for his style of divisive politics

How precisely encapsulated (Ramachandra Guha: Five ways in which Narendra Modi is weakening Indian federalism). The man (Prime Minister Narendra Modi) is so enveloped in his megalomania that the intense damage heaped upon the polity is unseen by him. Polarising the demography, adding to real poverty in the country, destruction of centres of learning, installing a harsh constabulary, grabbing power and distortion of history to perverse limits are the immediate footprints of the ruling dispensation that harbours the vicious narrative so penetratively illuminated by Ramachandra Guha. Professor Rahul Tripathi of the Goa University has remarked with great depth, that “Politics must be kind to history”. This assumes significance in the manner and mien with which Modi attacks Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi. Modi is going to be weighed in the same measure as he does his predecessors today. Conversely, history will not be kind to Modi for his style of divisive politics. – Vishwas Patankar

***

People of India are not bothered about leftist, self-acclaimed intellectuals. Keep trying. – Sukriti Ranjan Bhattacharjee

***

He (Ramchandra Guha) is a pakka Congress supporter. How can he talk good about BJP government when he was very happy with all the wrongdoings of the Congress party? – Shivakumar TK

***

Did Ramchandra Guha not find any developmental activities done by the Modi government in the past seven years? In his eyes, the people of India are foolish for electing Modi twice. Acceptance by people is itself a sign of great democracy. – Manoj Kumar

***

No Prime Minister in the past has ruled India so badly. Each day has become a nightmare for many citizens. Our minds are disturbed and befogged as each day brings new difficulties. At one time it is hate speeches heaped on Muslims, at another time it is the Hijab issue or beef ban. Modi is diverting attention towards chasing Muslims exclusively. One thing is for certain, Modi does not have any competency to run the country and the country is in a bad shape. – Nisaruddin Ahmed Jeddy

***

Ramchandra Guha should not forget that many state governments were dislodged by the Congress party during their heydays. – Inder Bhayana

***

The author is known for his anti-Modi bias in all his writings. First of all, India is defined as a Union of states in Constitution, and not a federation. Secondly, no elected state government has been dismissed by the BJP-led government unlike Nehru and Indira Gandhi who did it over 50 times. Jammu and Kashmir government never prevented the genocide and exile of Kashmiri Pandit from 1990 onwards. Successive elected governments in Jammu and Kashmir treated Kashmiri Pandits virtually like second-class citizens and terrorism became the norm. People like Guha are happy to allow dynastic politicians to rule the roost at the cost of Indian lives. – Sham Kamat

Auroville controversy

I am writing to you about the Mongabay article on Auroville (In Auroville, a contentious development plan has stoked anger and dissension) republished on Scroll.in.

As a member of Auroville’s current Working Committee, I wish to address the misrepresentation of facts and the other insinuations that have been harming Auroville over the past months, due to the tactics of some who have even taken Auroville to court.

It is equally regrettable to see wrong statements by a member of the Working Committee and former member of the Town Development Council. Auroville was created for unity and to avert war, unfortunately the opposite seems to be pushed with belligerence at this crucial time for the world.

Let me list some:

1) A swath of forested land created by human effort: The Crown is Auroville’s Urban Commons defined since 1968 and part of the Master Plan, blocked since 1985 by the same set of people. It is not the place to unnecessarily exert human effort and most trees there are self-propagating neem and work trees.

2) In the dead of night: This trauma storyline peddled since day one is nothing but police asked to cordon off the area to allow the clearing work without protestors climbing on JCBs again. JCBs are routinely used by foresters and have been used against people they don’t like.

3) 900 trees razed: The recorded number 134.

4) Tejaswini Mistry Kapoor left the Town Development Council in February 2020, and not as stated, and is part of a group that has blocked Detailed Development Plans for years and the New Town Development Authority that is needed alongside in favour of development priorities to acquire government of India funds for their own projects. The Galaxy plan is Auroville’s master plan model, not a concept.

4) Contested project /Environmental Impact Assessment: An Environmental Impact Assessment is usually done before starting a project. In 1968 it did not exist and nor was Auroville a declared forest. Architects protesting now have built along the Crown with government funds without calling for an Environmental Impact Assessment.

5) 3,500 residents to 50,000: Auroville is not a vague utopia but an experiment at many levels that needs a minimum critical mass representative of all the people and types of the world to live and work together. Not for a third of the 3,500 current population to lord over all the land which is unsustainable by any standard.

6) Governing Board only behind the development work: The current Governing Board is only taking forward the work started by previous Governing Boards, which despite funds and assurances have not happened and can no longer be delayed as outside speculators are closing in as we sit back. Members of the community have sought the Governing Board’s help. Behind the attacks is an agenda to settle points with the new secretary who has not sat back and let the status quo of inaction continue but has reached out with dialogue while not turning a blind eye on irregularities.

7) High tension cables: Everyone benefits from electricity, yet high tension cables bought with government and donor funds had languished for in the rain and sun for two years and obstructed and the electrical service prevented from working. Only 300 remain to be laid to close the circle and make it operational for the whole town

8) Violating National Green Tribunal stay: An attempt to influence the National Green judgement.

9) “Its forests being the most advanced pioneering experiment”: The Auroville experiment, its aim, research and achievements have been erased and obfuscated to advance the tropical forest theory to justify takeover of land and prevent its urban gowth and creativity to develop in tandem with the environment.

10) Infrastucture for 50,000 when only 3,500 can reside: Infrastructure will help a planned, economical and phased growth now sadly lacking to help more people join Auroville easily.

Much more needs to be corrected but I understand the limitation for letters. – Anu Majumdar

Sarosh Bana responds:

Without belabouring the issue, my article presents the versions and arguments of both the contesting sides. Clearly, there will be dissatisfaction from one or both the affected sides on some of the aspects, but that is the very reason the issue has come before the National Green Tribunal for arbitration.

Wildlife act

This refers to Alok Hisarwala’s counterview in which he has tried to correct me on my understanding of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. (Response: The proposed amendment to the Wildlife Act will create loopholes for elephant trade). My brief response to his comments is as follows:

1. Section 40: In his original article, Hisarwala had claimed that “Elephants are the only wild animals that can be legally owned by a private individual”. This is a sweeping statement as he is referring to all the wild animals irrespective of their listing under the Schedules of the Act. Now, he has referred to Section 40 to defend his statement. Section 40 applies only to the species covered under Schedule I and Schedule II (Part II) and wild animals covered by other Schedules are not affected by it. Moreover, Section 40 does not affect the ownership certificates issued before 2003 in respect of the wild animals covered by Schedule I and Schedule II (Part II). So, there is nothing wrong with the explanation given by me.
2. Section 49B: Hisarwala has claimed that “Section 49B of the Wildlife Protection Act only prohibits trade in articles/parts of an animal body, not the living animal itself. It does not apply to the captive elephant trade and is hence an incorrect reference.” Let me quote the relevant part of the Section 49B: “49 (B) (1) Subject to the other provisions of this section, on and after the specified date, no person shall (a) commence or carry on the business as... (iv) a dealer in any captive animal being scheduled animal; or...”

Elephant is a scheduled animal as defined in Section 49A. So my reference is not wrong.

I have no problem with Hisarwala propagating his views as an animal rights activist, but he need not misquote the law to support his views. – SS Bist