No, this isn’t the 1930s – but yes, this is fascism

November 17, 2016

The spread of fascism in the 1920s was significantly aided by the fact that liberals and mainstream conservatives failed to take it seriously. Instead, they accommodated and normalised it.

Image: PA/Roman Pilipey

The centre right is doing the same today. Brexit, Trump and the far right ascendant across Europe indicate that talk of a right-wing revolutionary moment is not exaggerated. And the French presidential election could be next on the calendar.

The shock felt by status-quo liberals and the anguish experienced on the left are matched only by the satisfaction of those on the extreme right that finally they are winning. The so-called “mature” liberal democracies have long managed to marginalise them. They have long seen themselves as vilified for speaking the common man’s unpalatable truths to out-of-touch elites. Now their champions are taking the political mainstream by storm.

The signs are there if you look for them. EPA

And amid the disbelief, heartbreak, and protest, centre-right politicians and commentators seek to normalise and reassure. They dismiss “whingers” and “moaners”. They tell us to “get over it” and brush off talk of a new fascism as unfounded scaremongering.

Even among historians, apparently – as the conservative British writer Niall Ferguson condescended to tell Greek economist Yanis Varoufakis – analogies with the 1930s are made only by the easily confused.

The circumstances of society, the economy and geopolitics are so different, we are told, that today’s right-wing populism cannot be called a fascistic revival. The mainstream centre right assures us that all will be well in the wake of Trump’s election. It did the same after the UK’s EU referendum, even as hate crime figures skyrocketed. Conservative politicians continue to insist that the real news is about the wonderful opportunities ahead.

But that is precisely where the real analogy with Europe in the 1920s and 1930s lies. The circumstances of 2016 are indeed very different to those against which militarised party shock troops fought street battles, and monarchists looked for a strong man to capture popular grievances and save them from Bolshevik revolution.

But historical circumstances, like individuals, are always unique and unrepeatable. The point of comparison is not to suggest that we are living though the 1930s redux. It is to recognise the very strong family resemblance in ideas shared by the early 20th century far right and its mimics today.

Mussolini in 1922. Wikimedia Commons

Discussion of fascism suffers from an excess of definition. That often, ironically, allows far-right groups and their apologists to disavow the label because of some tick-box characteristic which they can be said to lack. But just as we can usefully talk about socialism as a recognisable political tradition without assuming that all socialisms since the 1840s have been cut from one mould, so we can speak of a recognisably fascist style of politics in Europe, the US, Russia and elsewhere. It is united by its espousal of a set of core ideas.

The theatrical machismo, the man or woman “of the people” image, and the deliberately provocative, demagogic sloganeering that impatiently sweeps aside rational, evidence-based argument and the rule-bound negotiation of different perspectives – the substance of democracy, in other words – is only the outward form that this style of politics takes.

More important are its characteristic memes. Fascism brings a masculinist, xenophobic nationalism that claims to “put the people first” while turning them against one another. That is complemented by anti-cosmopolitanism and anti-intellectualism. It denounces global capitalism, blaming ordinary people’s woes on an alien “plutocracy” in a language that is both implicitly anti-Semitic and explicitly anti-immigrant, while offering no real alternative economics. In the US, that was perfectly exemplified in Trump’s closing campaign ad.

Trump’s view of the world.
A view of the world is presented that is centred on fears of “national suicide” and civilisational decline, in which whites are demographically overwhelmed by “inferior” peoples, minorities and immigrants. Today, this is the French far-right’s paranoid fantasy of le grand remplacement. Geopolitics are defined by latent religio-racial war. In the 1930s, this meant a death struggle with communism. Today, it looks to, and feeds abundantly on, Islamist extremism and Islamic State, abusively identified with “Islam” as a whole.

This is a new fascism, or at least near-fascism, and the centre right is dangerously underestimating its potential, exactly as it did 80 years ago. Then, it was conservative anti-communists who believed they could tame and control the extremist fringe. Now, it is mainstream conservatives, facing little electoral challenge from a left in disarray. They fear the drift of their own voters to more muscular, anti-immigrant demagogues on the right. They accordingly espouse the right’s priorities and accommodate its hate speech. They reassure everyone that they have things under control even as the post-Cold War neoliberal order, like the war-damaged bourgeois golden age last century, sinks under them.

The risk, at least for the West, is not a new world war, but merely a poisoned public life, a democracy reduced to the tyranny of tiny majorities who find emotional satisfaction in a violent, resentful rhetoric while their narrowly-elected leaders strip away their rights and persecute their neighbours. That might be quite bad enough.

This article was first published on The Conversation

Demonetisation: The grandest of blunders made by anyone in Indian political history?

November 17, 2016

Poorly planned and implemented it is likely to prove disastrous not only for the country’s economy but – ironically enough,– for the BJP’s own electoral fortune

The abrupt demonetisation of 500 and 1000 rupee notes by the Narendra Modi regime is a drastic move that is staggering in its scale, ambition and repurcussions. The only other figures in modern history one can think of, devious or stupid enough to attempt something similar, are the likes of Marcos, Suharto, Idi Amin and Pol Pot.

Artists protest against the demonetization of Rs 1000 and 500 notes through a street play in Kolkata. (Photo courtesy – PTI)

For all its audacity however, the decision could go down also as the grandest of blunders made by anyone in Indian political history. Poorly planned and implemented it is likely to prove disastrous not only for the country’s economy but – ironically enough,– for the BJP’s own electoral fortunes.

The abolition of the two currency notes – that make up 86% of all cash in circulation in the Indian economy – has affected almost every family in the second most populous nation on the planet. The harassment of the common citizen – particularly from the ranks of the urban and rural poor- through denial of access to income, savings and livelihood will not be forgotten anytime soon.

The Modi government’s supporters have termed demonetisation a ‘surgical strike’ against black money, calling it a ‘bold’ , ‘necessary’ and ‘well intentioned’ step. A more rabid section of his fans see all complaints as coming from those who benefited from black money, mainly the BJP’s political opponents. The Prime Minister himself has called upon the nation to ‘make sacrifices’ and put up with hardship for 50 days in this battle against corruption.

However, growing consensus among economists both within and outside the country is that demonetisation is a foolish measure and will hurt the Indian economy badly – especially farmers, small businesses, labour and anyone part of the country’s informal sector – and operates on a daily basis through cash transaction. The informal sector constitutes over 30 % of the Indian economy in value and 92% in terms of workforce employed[1].

Since the drastic policy was announced on November 8, all these have come to a complete standstill, leaving millions without livelihood or means to buy basic goods. As one respected economist has pointed out demonetisation may have permanently damaged India’s informal sector[2].

A severe deflation is predicted over the next six months to a year or even longer, as spending power disappears or goes down for millions of Indians and businesses shut down. There is also the concern that, with government issued currency losing credibility through demonetisation, more and more people will keep their money in unproductive but safe assets like gold and property.

So, why would the government take such a high risk step ? What was Mr Modi really trying to do when he announced a measure that directly affects almost every single family in the second most populous nation on the planet? Who are the real beneficiaries of this drastic policy? Will it really stop black money from circulating in the economy and end corruption from the country?

Despite all this propaganda it is quite clear now that demonetisation has nothing really to do with black money, that constitutes a sizeable 20 % of the Indian economy, of which only 6% is hoarded in cash, the rest being stashed away in gold, real estate and foreign accounts. If the government was serious about hurting the beneficiaries of black money they would have started by prosecuting those who keep such ill-gotten wealth in non-cash assets. Also, given the large-scale collusion of the Indian political class and bureaucracy in corruption the Modi regime should have first gone after its own ministers and government officials (particularly from the tax and revenue collection departments) to set a public example.

At its core, demonetisation is essentially an an attempt at economic and social engineering – on behalf of corporate banking and financial elites – the new paymasters Modi genuflects to after having ditched the small and medium mercantile lobbies the BJP represented for long. The Indian middle-classes, both real and aspirational, are rooting for the policy as they see a consolidation of their own power and future benefits in it.

With one stone, the policy’s architects have tried to slaughter many birds: recapitalise public banks burdened with bad loans; lend out new deposits to cronies in the corporate sector; enrich new entrants into the digital banking business, give the government extra funds to spend on its pet projects and steal a march over political rivals.

1.Rebooting troubled Indian banks: The bad loans or Non Performing Assets (NPAs) in the Indian banking sector, stood at nearly 6 lakh crore rupees by end of March 2016[3]. Over 90 per cent of this is on the books of public-sector banks, with the State Bank of India accounting for the highest amount. Even this sum, stunning as it may be, is considered a gross underestimation and if loans that face the risk of being declared NPAs are also taken into account, the overall stressed advances of Indian banks will double[4]. A bulk of the NPAs are in turn due to default on interest payments by the corporate sector, which has been milking the banking system through its political patrons.

The increase in deposits of banks expected due to the crackdown on black money is expected to help banks get into better health, lower interest rates and enable them to resume lending to Indian businesses again. In other words, demonetisation is a way of saving many Indian public sector banks while also providing corporates with fresh loans, a very dubious strategy given those in power seem to have no real will to recover money from their defaulter cronies.

2.Increasing the government’s cash flow: One of the justifications being given now for demonetisation is that an estimated Rs.16 lakh crores circulating in the Indian economy as cash, mostly in the form of 500 and 1000 rupee notes, will all get accounted for as they will be forced to go through the banking system. Assuming that a significant portion of the cash held in high denomination notes is ‘black money’ – it is argued that a significant percentage of this black money will not come back at all due to fear of penalties and prosecution and becomes useless. This will reduce the overall liability of the Researve Bank of India by anywhere between 2-4 lakh crore rupees, providing a windfall to the state exchequer. This calculation has been challenged by several economists but even if it were right, the moot question is what the government plans to spend all this extra money on, given its extremely poor record of spending on health, education and infrastructure for the welfare of the population? What is the guarantee that it will not all end up in the pockets of ruling party politicians and their businessmen friends?

3.Boosting the digital cash economy: In July this year a new study by Google and Boston Consulting Group[5] predicted an exponential increase in digital payments, estimated to grow by 10 times to touch US$500 billion by 2020 – or around 15% of the Indian GDP by that time. A bulk of these payments, the study said, will be micro-transactions, with over 50% of person-to-merchant business expected to be under 100.

The biggest barrier to this prediction coming true however is supposed to be the fact that a vast majority of Indians prefer to use cash over digital money. Cash, as a percentage of total consumer payments in India, is around 98%, compared with 55% in the US and 48% in the UK, according to report by Payments Council of India released in 2015[6].

In one sweeping stroke, the Modi regime has changed all that and through demonetisation is about to force millions of Indians into the waiting arms of around a dozen private ‘payment banks’ given licences to operate by the Reserve Bank of India in 2015. Among the big non-banking sector corporate grabbing these licenses are Reliance Industries, Airtel, Aditya Birla group, Vodafone, Paytm and Tech Mahindra. The fact that Paytm[7] saw more than five-fold rise in overall traffic in less than 18 hours of the demonetization is an indication that ‘achche din’ have really arrived for the BJP’s cronies in the new banking sector.

Ironically (or maybe not so ironically) the total black money stored in digital form in foreign banks and in benami names in domestic banks and in shares, bonds and other financial instruments is much bigger than that in hard cash. In the absence of a honest political ruling class, bureaucracy or police the shift to a digital economy will only make it easier to store black money while making companies in the banking sector rich.

4.Cutting political opponents to size: Apart from all these dubious motives behind demonetisation there seems to be something even more devious at work. There are serious allegations of a scam – that BJP insiders changed their hoards of black money into white in various ways in the run up to the new policy. While these charges need further investigation, the Indian media has already reported a suspicious surge in bank deposits in the months just prior to demonetisaion and even produced evidence of the BJP’s West Bengal unit depositing large sums of cash[8] into its account just hours before the announcement was made. Given the widespread use of black money in cash by all political parties during elections demonetisation is calculated to hit the BJP’s opponents in the upcoming Punjab and Uttar Pradesh elections. Public discontent over the policy could however negate any such gains.

Looking at the demonetisation policy from a more long-term political perspective the portents under the current regime are scary. What Narendra Modi is really proving is that he is capable of playing a very high-risk game in order to boost his own stature, ram through policies that benefit his corporate cronies and care two hoots for the welfare of the Indian masses (despite being a chaiwallah’s son himself!). It is a display of high confidence, even arrogance, on part of the BJP ‘strongman’ that is extraordinary even by his previous record and standards.

The other point to note is that the Indian right wing, represented by the BJP and the Sangh Parivar, is not at all hesitatnt about turning the entire country or even the Indian Constitution upside down in pursuit of whatever objectives they deem worthwhile. In that sense the idea of ‘revolution’ or overthrow of the state and current social order, rhetorically championed for long by leftists, is being implemented in practice by the right-wing. The Sangh Parivar has become the only effective insurrectionary force in the country today- with truly frightening possibilities in future, including a political emergency to accompany the financial one.

This is not to say at all they will necessarily succeed in their plans. Fortunately for Indian democracy, those espousing fascist control also seem to be cocksure and foolish – as undoubtedly Modi and his men have been with the demonetisation decision –a truly spectacular self-goal on their part.

With public anger against the policy growing steadily this is perhaps the right time for opponents of the Parivar’s various, draconian gameplans to get their act together and mobilise the Indian people. How seriously they carry out this mission will determine whether it is the Parivar or its opponents who finally go out of circulation – like the recently abolished currencies.

Satya Sagar is a journalist and public health worker who can be reached sagarnama@gmail.com

This article was first published on Kafila.online

[1] Indian Informal Sector: an Analysis Dr. Muna Kalyani. International Journal of Managerial Studies and Research (IJMSR) Volume 4, Issue 1, January 2016, PP 78-85. https://www.arcjournals.org/pdfs/ijmsr/v4-i1/9.pdf
[2] http://thewire.in/80564/modis-demonetisation-move-may-have-permanently-damaged-indias-informal-sector/
[3]http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/51078318.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
[4] http://www.dnaindia.com/money/report-indian-banks-stressed-loans-pile-set-to-top-rs-13-lakh-crore-2211890
[5] http://www.livemint.com/Industry/M6SPyd4vUcC7QIQRnjBqaO/Digital-payments-in-India-seen-touching-500-billion-by-2020.html
[6] https://www.saddahaq.com/digital-india-epayments-and-online-transactions-upset-the-traditional-paper-payment-apple-cart-incentives-for-epayments-could-be-offered-in-the-budget
[7] http://www.livemint.com/Companies/iHcFkPVVuATAjxCD5zK4QJ/Digital-payment-platforms-record-surge-in-transactions-after.html
[8] http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/bengal-bjp-deposits-money-just-hours-before-currency-ban-announcement-cpm-alleges-tip-off/articleshow/55372157.cms

Demonetisation: Another Failure of the Modi Government?

November 17, 2016

Amid woes of customers hit by cash crunch, 25 people have reportedly died while waiting in queue to exchange their currency notes. In Midst of this chaos, one needs to ask who this policy is really affecting. According to the income tax data, the demonetization of Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 banknotes is unlikely to help the government suck out black money from the economy as hoarders keep a tiny portion of their ill-gotten wealth in hard cash. The end result that seems to be coming out, is that the corrupt are unaffected by this scheme while the poor suffer. While the Prime Minister romanticizes the entire situation, the common man starves on the road. Demonetization seems to have no silver lining.

Newclick spoke to C.P. Chandrasekhar, Professor CESP JNU. He talks about the concept of black wealth and how the people with most of the black wealth will not be affected by this scheme. He also speaks about the consequences of this move as it is economically not structured well. The introduction of 2000 rupee notes is useless as the smaller denomination notes are not available in the market. Watch the interview for more.

Interview with C.P. Chandrasekhar

Courtesy: Newsclick.in

Why Modi must go beyond saying state should not interfere with media

November 17, 2016

Prime Minister Narendra Modi affirmed on Wednesday something that might be unexpected coming from him or a leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party: The need for government to stay out of media matters. Speaking at the golden jubilee celebrations of the Press Council of India, Modi spoke of the danger of government interfering in the workings of news organisations.

Image credit: Twitter/MEA

“Mahatma Gandhi had said uncontrolled writing can create huge problems but he had also said that external interference would wreak havoc. Controlling it [media] externally cannot be imagined,” he said. “The government should not do any interference. It is true that self-introspection is not easy… It is the responsibility of the PCI and those associated with the press to see to it that what appropriate changes you can make with time. Things do not change from external control.”

Just days earlier, the Information and Broadcasting Ministry was being criticised for singling out NDTV India’s coverage of the Pathankot attacks and imposing a one-day ban on the channel for allegedly violating programme code provisions. That decision was later stayed after a general outcry and a discussion between the channel and the minister.

But that isn’t the only time the I&B minister has questioned the operations of news organisations. The Modi government has also mutely witnessed some truly problematic developments, such as the banning of a newspaper in Kashmir, the state’s hounding of journalists in Chhattisgarh and even attacks on journalists by goons yelling patriotic slogans inside a Delhi court complex.

Modi’s statements on Wednesday, including his condemnation of murdered journalists, are important signals that the government at least feels the need to say that it supports a free press. This is significant because the state has also helped build an atmosphere where any dissent or questioning, such as demanding evidence of the Army’s surgical strikes or reporting on the unhappiness caused by demonetisation, has been vilified as “anti-national”.

Simply saying that he stands against interference in the operations of news organisations is not enough. Modi needs to do much more to remind his colleagues and his fellow party leaders that a media which is free to ask questions and air dissent is more likely to make India safer and stronger than one that is cowed down and does not reflect the truth.

Courtesy: Scroll.in

Opposition Leaders Slam De-monetization, Point by Point

November 16, 2016

BSP Supremo Mayawati and General Secretary CPIM Sitaram Yechury speak in the Rajya Sabha

Courtesy: Rajya Sabha TV

Secularism in Bangladesh is Just a Facade

November 16, 2016

A revaluation of our institutions is in order

Photo Credit: Rajib Dhar/Dhaka Tribune

Let’s give it to the urban elite: We have yet again survived another crisis without having to resort to a much needed debate on democratic norms and institutions.

Some houses and temples have again been burned. People have again been victimised. It’s not a very surprising routine, really; these things happen once in a while in our country.

I could blame it all on the usual suspects, but I won’t. I could play the pity card and pretend that I know the suffering of the Bangladeshi minorities inside and out, but I won’t do that either.

For one, I have never been a minority. I have never been treated as such.

So frankly, I don’t understand the “calling yourself a malaun” trend among some urban secular Bengali Muslims (yeah, the labels are intentional).

We’ve enjoyed the perks of being an ethnic and religious majority for so long, and now when one political leader uses the M word, all of a sudden we try to own it?

But as Bengali Muslims, we can’t own it. Our houses and temples weren’t burned.

We really can’t equate ourselves with the minorities here, when the treatment is so unabashedly unequal. The duty for all Bangladeshis now is to acknowledge these crises.

Instead, this sudden embrace of a label that’s not even imposed on us is a terrible patronisation.

It’s a sad attempt at diverting guilt by pretending to be helpless.

This solution lies, as I’ve said before, in a much needed debate on democratic norms and institutions.

How is this debate related to solving communalism?

The answer to that is complex, one which I haven’t figured out completely.

What I have realised is that the assimilative nature of Bengali nationalism as had been formulated in the 60s and 70s is at odds with its self-professed secular outlook.

This is because our ethnic identity is very intricately tied to our religious one, and so, our vision of secular nationalism is an assimilative process where for Hindu, Buddhist, or Christian lives to have value, they have to be assimilated into the Bengali Muslim identity.

This is visible in the slogan “Banglar Hindu, Banglar Bouddho, Banglar Christian, Banglar Musolman, amra shobai Bangalee.”

With all its graces, this slogan inevitably implies that Hindu, Buddhist, and Christian lives are worth something because they are equal to Muslim lives. That for everyone’s lives to carry value, they had to be forged into a national identity.

All cultural differences that are present due to spiritual differences will have to be put aside, or at least, downplayed.

The hypocrisy behind this slogan is that, despite its calls for a national identity, it lets us know that we belong to certain groups.

In fact, it never lets us forget it. And whenever a crisis arises, we see for ourselves that, despite our glorified national identity, the different sects of the population get treated differently based on their ethnic and religious identity.

This fuels a vicious brand of ethno-centrism among all segments of the population. From there, communalism is only a short distance away; though only the majority has the resources to walk that path.

I won’t talk about why and how the minorities feel marginalised in this country: The fire in Brahmanbaria hasn’t died yet

As for Bangladeshi secularism, my feelings towards it are similar to that of Ashis Nandy on Indian secularism.

And on the question of national ideology, I somewhat agree with Pervez Hoodbhoy; it’s not mandatory for a nation-state to have one.

There are countries out there that don’t promote a national identity and are getting along just fine.

Why should Bangladesh make the same mistake India and Pakistan ended up making, by trying to amalgamate all its citizens into a monolithic image?

In ardent contrast to the one-nation and two-nation theory, Bangladesh could have promoted a much healthier alternative of multi-culturalism.

It still can.

But before that, we have to examine why a considerable portion of the majority in this country feels marginalised.

In recent times, there have been a few reports of authority targeting people who appear to be conservative Muslims. I care for my own life enough to speak only about a hypothetical scenario where a few law enforcement officials “may” have been running extortion racketeers by arresting innocent people and threatening to frame them. While it’s not near the scale of how minorities get targeted, it’s still notable.

This is, however, a limited answer.

The greater picture is that, to a considerable portion of Bengali Muslims, the assimilative nature of Bengali nationalism expresses itself in a different way: They end up feeling that their religious identity has to be discarded, or at least downplayed, for the sake of a national identity, and consequently, they feel marginalised.

Those in the political right are quick to make advantage of this, and the left-leaning intelligentsia often makes it worse by labelling each and every conservative as a Razakar/jongi (face it, how many of our TV and movie villains happen to wear a tupi and sport a beard?).

While I can’t in good faith deny the existence of a self-righteous puritanical religious right in this country, this sort of demeaning characterisation makes it easier for that right to prove that secularism is merely a façade for anti-religious agenda.

I won’t talk about why and how the minorities feel marginalised in this country: The fire in Brahmanbaria hasn’t died yet. The one in Ramu is only four years old. And I won’t cry either, or say that my sympathies go out for those people.

Neither of these things happens to be affirmative action. If the Bangladeshi political culture continues on its un-democratic path, nobody will really be safe in this country, though some will be at a lesser risk than others.
It is only democratic institutions that can subdue communalism. A revaluation of the principles underlying our constitution and the entire political process has become almost mandatory.

(Fardin Hasin is a freelance writer).

Republished with permission from Dhaka Tribune.

आदित्य बिरला ग्रुप के अध्यक्ष शुभेंदु अमिताभ के ईमेल से रिश्वतखोरी में फंसे पीएम मोदी

November 16, 2016

नई दिल्ली। दिल्ली के मुख्यमंत्री अरविंद केजरीवाल ने मंगलवार को दिल्ली विधानसभा का विशेष सत्र बुलाकर प्रधानमंत्री नरेंद्र मोदी पर रिश्वतखोरी का बड़ा आरोप लगाया। अरविन्द केजरीवाल ने कहा कि जो खुद भ्रष्ट है वह भ्रष्टाचार मिटाने की बात कर देश की जनता को गुमराह कर रहा है। केजरीवाल ने कहा कि मोदी जब गुजरात के मुख्यमंत्री थे तब उन्होंने "आदित्य बिड़ला ग्रुप" से 25 करोड़ रुपये रिश्वत के रूप में लिए थे।

केजरीवाल ने सीधा आरोप लगाया कि जब प्रधानमंत्री मोदी, गुजरात के मुख्यमंत्री थे तो उन्होंने आदित्य बिड़ला ग्रुप फर्म से 25 करोड़ रुपए की घूस ली थी। केजरीवाल ने दस्तावेज का हवाला देते हए कहा कि 15 अक्टूबर 2013 को आयकर विभाग ने शुभेंदु अमिताभ के घर रेड की। वो आदित्य बिड़ला ग्रुप के अध्यक्ष थे। उनका ब्लैकबेरी फोन, लैपटॉप और हर चीज पूरी तरह से चेक की गई। उनके लैपटॉप में 16 नवंबर 2012 की तारीख में एक लेजर इंट्री मिली कि गुजरात मुख्यमंत्री 25 करोड़ रुपए दिए गए।

केजरीवाल ने दिल्ली सरकार के प्रस्ताव में राष्ट्रपति प्रणब मुखर्जी से अनुरोध किया कि वह केंद्र सरकार को नोटबंदी की कठोर पहल को तुरंत वापस लेने का निर्देश दें। उन्होंने कहा कि केंद्र सरकार द्वारा धन्ना सेठों का कालाधन ठिकाने लगवाने के बाद दिखावे के लिए नोटबंदी कर देश के लोगों को परेशान किया जा रहा है।

केजरीवाल ने आरोप लगाया, "2013 में आयकर विभाग ने आदित्य बिड़ला ग्रुप के दफ्तरों में छापेमारी की थी, जिसमें 25 करोड़ रुपये बरामद हुए थे।" उन्होंने कहा कि अधिकारियों ने दस्तावेज, खाता-बही, कंप्यूटर रिकॉर्ड और कंपनी के एक वरिष्ठ अधिकारी का लैपटॉप जब्त किया था, जिसमें संदेश था, "गुजरात के मुख्यमंत्री-25 करोड़ (12 करोड़ अदा, शेष?)।"

केजरीवाल ने दावा किया, "यह स्पष्ट रूप से इशारा करता है कि गुजरात के तत्कालीन मुख्यमंत्री को 12 करोड़ रुपये का भुगतान किया गया।" केजरीवाल ने सदन से प्रधानमंत्री मोदी के खिलाफ आरोपों को प्रस्ताव में जोड़ने का अनुरोध किया और राष्ट्रपति प्रणब मुखर्जी से इस मामले में सर्वोच्च न्यायालय की निगरानी में जांच का आदेश देने का अनुरोध किया। विधानसभा ने ध्वनिमत से प्रस्ताव को स्वीकार कर लिया।

दरअसल नोटबंदी के मसले पर बहस के लिए दिल्‍ली सरकार ने विधानसभा का विशेष सत्र बुलाया था। इस संबंध में बिरला ग्रुप ने मामला अदालत में विचाराधीन होने की बात कहकर कोई टिप्‍पणी करने से इन्कार कर दिया।

This Article was first published on National Dastak

शादी के जश्न में हिंदू महासभा की राष्ट्रीय उपाध्यक्ष साध्वी देवा ठाकुर ने चलाई गोलियां, एक की मौत, 3 घायल

November 16, 2016

हरियाणा के करनाल में एक सगाई समारोह के दौरान लोगों की खुशी अचानक ही मातम में बदल गई। दरअसल, इस समारोह में शिरकत करने आई अखिल भारतीय हिंदू महासभा की राष्ट्रीय उपाध्यक्ष साध्वी देवा ठाकुर और उसके सुरक्षाकर्मियों ने हवा में गोलियां चलाईं, लेकिन इस फायरिंग में एक महिला की मौत हो गई और तीन लोग घायल हो गए। घटना के बाद घायलों को अस्पताल ले जाया गया जहाँ 50 वर्षीय महिला सुमन की मौत हो गई।

हादसे के बाद साध्वी देवा ठाकुर अपने साथियों के साथ मौके से फरार हो गई। पुलिस ने साध्वी देवा ठाकुर व उनके गनमैन के खिलाफ मामला दर्ज कर लिया है। पुलिस ने कई स्थानों पर रेड मारी लेकिन अभी तक किसी की गिरफ्तारी नहीं हो पाई है।

कौन है साध्वी देवा ठाकुर:
हत्या की आरोपी 26 साल की देवा ठाकुर करनाल में ही अपना आश्रम चलाती है। सोशल मीडिया पर साध्वी देवा की कई ऐसी तस्वीरें हैं जिसमें वो बंदूकों के साथ नजर आ रही है। यही नहीं उसे सोने के गहनों और लक्जरी गाड़ियों का भी शौक है।

खबरों के मुताबिक इससे पहले वो कई बार अपने कुछ बयानों को लेकर चर्चा में रह चुकी हैं लेकिन अब हत्या के आरोप में फंसने के बाद वो अपने साथियों के साथ फरार है।

गौरतलब है कि इससे पहले 2015 में साध्वी देवा ठाकुर ने विवादित बयान देते हुए कहा था कि मुस्लिम और ईसाईयों की जनसंख्या देश में लगातार बढ़ रही है। इसको रोकने के लिए सरकार को कड़े कदम उठाने होंगे। इसके लिए जरूरी है कि मुसलमानों और ईसाईयों की जबरन नसबंदी कराई जाए। जिससे उनकी जनसंख्या नहीं बढ़ सके।

Courtesy: Janta ka Reporter

1...2,3672,3682,369...2,697 Page 2,368 of 2,697

No, this isn’t the 1930s – but yes, this is fascism

The spread of fascism in the 1920s was significantly aided by the fact that liberals and mainstream conservatives failed to take it seriously. Instead, they accommodated and normalised it.

Demonetisation: The grandest of blunders made by anyone in Indian political history?

Poorly planned and implemented it is likely to prove disastrous not only for the country’s economy but – ironically enough,– for the BJP’s own electoral fortune

Demonetisation: Another Failure of the Modi Government?

Why Modi must go beyond saying state should not interfere with media

Opposition Leaders Slam De-monetization, Point by Point

BSP Supremo Mayawati and General Secretary CPIM Sitaram Yechury speak in the Rajya Sabha

Secularism in Bangladesh is Just a Facade

A revaluation of our institutions is in order

आदित्य बिरला ग्रुप के अध्यक्ष शुभेंदु अमिताभ के ईमेल से रिश्वतखोरी में फंसे पीएम मोदी

शादी के जश्न में हिंदू महासभा की राष्ट्रीय उपाध्यक्ष साध्वी देवा ठाकुर ने चलाई गोलियां, एक की मौत, 3 घायल

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

Important Links

Other Links

CONNECT