The following article was written for Niti Central. Pasting it here for reference.
Within the BJP, if Modi is India then Chouhan is decidedly Bharat.
This amazing assertion by deputy editor of CNN-IBN in her long rant on the RSS, BJP and Modi merely reconfirms how distant her ilk is, from reality on the ground.
She arrives at this conclusion, by citing a few examples of how Mr. Modi is very pro-industralist and how Mr. Chouhan is "rooted" to RSS (and therefore introduced Surya Namaskar etc). Sagarika Ghose and most of her ilk, have steadfastly refused to accept or even look at Mr. Modi's achievements outside the the "Vibrat Gujarat Summit".
In Gujarat, there is a Krishi Mahotsav held every year. Would this come under India or Bharat Ms. Sagarika? There is 24/7 three phase power supply to villages in Gujarat. Is this benefitting India or Bharat, Ms. Sagarika? Gujarat focusses a lot of women empowerment, girl child etc - again, where do these beneficiaries belong to? India or Bharat? Most importantly, those who voted for Narendra Modi - are they from India or Bharat?
Not to miss another point - this naive story of "two Indias" that is being peddled needs to be stopped urgently. How is it even possible to reduce the multi-faceted complexity of India to just two points? And even while splitting it up as India and Bharat, why does this ilk look down upon "India" as if this people are not their citizens?
A personality cult threatens to overturn the sangh’s prized principle of “collective leadership” and later she says that the 1998 and 1999 victories "have been hard for the sangh to stomach but which it was forced to accept."
I am totally confused - the BJP as a political party has to be led by a person. It at all it endorses, the Sangh will have to endorse a "personality" to lead the elections in 2014. So why does this ilk keep bringing up this personality cult issue again and again into the picture?
"Chouhan does not project himself in social media, or through rock concerts, or at FICCI, but is far more ostensibly committed to sangh ideology "
What does "projecting" in social media have to do anything with Sangh ideology? If a Chief Minister is invited by FICCI, he should refuse saying he believes in "Sangh Ideology"? And Modi never projected himself through rock concerts - another mis-leading comment by Ms. Ghose. How does Chouhan become better than Modi (or vice versa) because of the above three mentioned points?
An endorsement of Modi would also mean that the sangh swallow its ideological commitments on hindutva, for more innocuous slogans of “development”, “nationalist progress” and secularism defined as “India first.”
Is she suggesting that the Sangh's ideology prioritizes hindutva over others? How does she know this? Has she attended their Shakhas? Or any of their other gatherings? Or does she have an insight into their thought process through magical powers of telepathy?
Forces loosely allied to the sangh have engaged in moral policing actions against women visiting bars in coastal Karnataka.
Sri Ram Sene is loosely allied to the Sangh? How does Sagarika Ghose get away with such open lies in today's day and age?
In fact, it is the undertow of the sangh that has prevented the BJP from developing a modern approach to Muslims,
A "modern approach" to Muslims?? Would a slogan like "Sabka saath sabka vikaas" constitute a "modern approach”? Why should there be a "special positive agenda" towards Muslims? Because the Congress party screwed them up? If so, what is stopping this ilk from demanding answers from Congress? Instead, they eulogize congress for being pro-minority! And why fetish for a special approach towards Muslims only? What about the other sections that come under the classification of minorities? It still beats how “equal” importance to all citizens tantamounts to discrimination against minority groups!
Most of the article meanders around such sundry arguments. At times, the Sangh is criticized; at times, the BJP is criticized; and at times, Mr Modi is criticized. Sagarika Ghose's perpetual hatred towards the Sangh is well known, given her rants on twitter.
It is still unclear as to what the agenda of this ilk is - what else explains their reluctance to discuss the social work of the RSS? What else explains their reluctance to view Narendra Modi's governance in totality? Why cherry pick points that suit your slant? The article is a repetitive rant to just further their agenda of stopping Narendra Modi at any cost, and asserting that the Sangh has lost it's relevance (we have been hearing this from the past 60 years). If that involves spreading mis-information or half information, so be it.