The pro and anti brigades

There are three types of people in India – pro-Modi, anti-Modi, and those who don’t care about politics. Let anyone say otherwise, but there is no type that cares about politics and is agnostic with regards to Modi. The man does polarise, though not necessarily in the negative sense that our media and liberal friends would want us to believe.

I will discuss the first two – pro-Modi and anti-Modi. There are zealots on both sides. I will not talk of them for that is moot at best and mental masturbation at worst. What I will talk about are the pro and anti brigade who is not zealous. Yes, they exist – barely in the case of the anti brigade and substantially in the case of the pro brigade. Do re-read. I am saying that most of the pro-brigade is non-zealous while most of the anti-brigade is zealous.

Why do I say that? I say that because the anti brigade brandishes numbers like only 31% of the voters voted for BJP. In some sort of twisted logic it automatically implies that 69% voters did not want the BJP government. Too much it is for them to understand that the NDA got 39% of the votes polled, and Modi was the PM candidate for NDA. Even so, they would say that 61% of the population does not want Modi was their PM. Obviously, no government at the centre has ever had a vote share of over 50%. Are they implying that no one had the mandate to be the PM of this country?

The anti brigade only gets into fault-finding. They don’t see any good in the current administration. They want 60 years of poverty to disappear in one year. They want 10 years of wrongs to be righted in one year. They want everything now. Wonder why they did not want everything instantly for the last 67 years.

Is the pro brigade faultless? Of course not. But is the pro brigade more rational in their support and less blinded by its prejudice? A resounding yes! They criticise Modi when he talks ill of the country abroad. They praise good work done by non-BJP governments. They don’t get into a fault finding exercise. They counter misrepresentation with facts. Yes, they do it vociferously. On that they could be faulted.

However, does the pro brigade have a choice? With newspapers like the Express, news channels like NDTV and websites like Scroll spreading misinformation, lies and manufactured news stories on a daily basis, someone has to shout them down.

The dark ages

The only ages that are dark are those that inhibit thought, especially thought contrary to one's own.

This seems to be tried out as an experiment: http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/rajasthan-government-plans-to-use-cow-urine-as-a-disinfectant-in-hospitals-760777

The pilot project will start with one ward of Jaipur's biggest hospital -- the Sawai Man Singh Hospital. A team of doctors will compare the result with that of another ward where a regular disinfectant has been used.

"I will put a team of doctors there to study for a month and we will then be able to establish how effective is the cow urine and if it really works or not," said the state's health minister Rajendra Rathore...

If a scientific study is being undertaken, should we simply belittle it because the subject of the study seems ridiculous to us? Or doesn't scientific temper warrant us to keep an open mind, and to judge an outcome purely on the basis of empirical evidence? To me, this study appears to be an exercise to find empirical evidence. If evidence is found supporting cow urine's disinfecting properties then one set of people can go around saying "I told you so", and if evidence is not found then the other set of people can go around saying "I told you so". But at least there will be a scientific basis to do so.

Is that a bad thing?