Home Media In opposing Narendra Modi, progressives at Washington Post reveal they are a mirror image of the 'AltRight'

In opposing Narendra Modi, progressives at Washington Post reveal they are a mirror image of the ‘AltRight’

It's understandable that progressives don't like Narendra Modi. He is an antithesis to everything they claim to believe in.

I am afraid the Western Progressives are at it again. This time, they are protesting against the decision of Gates Foundation to present Narendra Modi with an award for the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan. They are in staunch opposition of the decision to abrogate Article 370 and also the NRC and are accusing Narendra Modi of committing gross human rights violations.

Suchitra Vijayan and Arjun Singh Sethi, writing for the Washington Post, argue that the Indian Prime Minister’s “Hindu nationalist party has incited violence against minorities, silenced dissent and curtailed freedom of expression.” They add, “In light of Modi’s record, including promoting repressive policies in the past month in Kashmir and the northeastern state of Assam, he should not be given the award.”

It’s a broken record we have been hearing over and over again. But liberals appear to have made it a habit to charge full speed at an issue they have very little clue about. It’s quite obvious that despite their considerable work in the area of ‘human rights’, they hardly have any idea about the complexities of Kashmir and Assam.

- Ad - - article resumes -

The authors state, “India has imposed an unprecedented communication blockade on Kashmir. Landlines, mobile phones and the Internet have been suspended. Many Kashmiris remain cut off from their families, and a strict curfew is still in place in many areas. In the days leading up to the blockade, 38,000 troops were moved into the Kashmir Valley, putting the total troop count at more than 500,000 in what was already one of the world’s most militarized regions.”

They further assert, “The reports that have emerged from Kashmir since the blackout are frightening. Thousands of Kashmiris, including human rights advocates, elected officials and even young students, have reportedly been arrested in raids. The local prisons are full, according to a local magistrate, and many detainees have been flown out of the region. Family members wait in anguish, fearing that their loved ones may be forcibly disappeared, as an estimated 8,000 Kashmiris were before them. There have been reports of torture and police violence. Compounding this is a humanitarian crisis, as patients in Kashmir can’t access medicine and life-saving treatment.”

It appears that the authors have absolutely no knowledge about the Radical Islamic nature of the Kashmiri separatist movement. The authors have refused to address the giant elephant in the room despite its many trumpets. On that note, if they had spent more time actually listening to POTUS Donald Trump instead of yelling at him all the time, perhaps they could have learned a thing or two about the Kashmir issue.

Progressives claim to hate ethnonationalism, that is, nationalism based on one’s ethnicity. That is the very reason why they claim to hate the so-called ‘AltRight’ or ‘White Nationalism’ and yet, when it comes to Kashmir, they support the very ideology they claim to hate when in America. Kashmiri Nationalism is nothing more than a racist toxic ideology along the lines of German Fascism that needs to be utterly crushed. And yet, like the AltRight they claim to hate, Progressives love ethnonationalism when it comes to Kashmiris.

It is not a secret that the Kashmir issue is driven by the same ideology that inspires ISIS to commit the most horrific atrocities. It’s not a surprise that ISIS flags are regularly spotted in Kashmir. And yet, progressives support this very ideology without any shame or guilt. It’s for a reason that Ilhan Omar and Linda Sarsour are so popular among progressives, they are in love with Radical Islam.

When it comes to Assam, they take the polar opposite stand with respect to Kashmir. Quite clearly, their arbitrary stance changes frequently depending upon the religion of the population concerned. For progressives, Kashmiri Muslims have an undisputed claim to Jammu & Kashmir despite the fact that the demographic advantage was acquired through genocide but the Hindus in the Northeast don’t have such a right merely because they are Hindus and not Muslims.

Illegal Immigrants are running over Assam and changing the demography of the state at a remarkable pace. The duty of the Indian state is primarily towards its own citizens. Progressives may not believe in borders when its convenient for them but Indians do and they voted accordingly in the recently held General Elections. The sole duty of the Indian state is to protect its own citizens. The interests of Indians come first.

It might be difficult to understand for Americans whose leaders tend to do precisely the opposite they promised to do during their campaigns but this is how Democracy is meant to function. If the party promised something during elections based on the concerns of the citizens of this country, then it’s their duty to fulfil their promises when in power. The current Indian government is trying to do the same in Assam.

It’s perfectly legitimate to demand that our homeland is not overrun by illegal immigrants. It’s the duty of the Indian state to protect its citizens against a demographic invasion. Security of our countrymen is the government’s foremost duty and it’s this duty the administration is trying to fulfil both in Kashmir and in Assam. Progressives in America may not like it but this is precisely how a rational state acts.

The authors also raise the Gujarat bogey. They claim that Modi as Chief Minister “failed to protect” minorities and even went on to say that “reports suggest that he might have even been complicit.” They conveniently forget to mention the fact that the Indian Judiciary cleared Narendra Modi of all accusations. The authors do not permit all the evidence contrary to their claims to get in the way of their narrative.

Most amusingly, the authors accuse Narendra Modi of the very sin they are committing. It is, once again, a classic case of projection. They say, “When Modi was elected, many chose to overlook his murky past — but India’s vulnerable could not. He has used both state power and the bully pulpit to further his ethnonationalist agenda.” Narendra Mod has always emphasized on the agenda of ‘Vikas’ (Development). It is the authors who are supporting the Jihadist ethnonationalism of Kashmir. And yet, they accuse the Indian Prime Minister, and by extension, the millions of Indians who elected him to that position.

In their article, the authors also came out in support of the arrested ‘Urban Naxals’. The same ones who are accused of inciting violence at Koregaon Bhima and are alleged to have been involved in an assassination plot to murder the Prime Minister. It’s not surprising considering the fact that the authors already support Jihad.

The authors conclude their propaganda article with the lines, “Giving the award to Modi would betray that promise and everyone who has suffered under his rule.” It appears the authors live in la-la land. India is not a perfect country and Narendra Modi is not perfect. They have relied on propaganda peddled by Modi’s enemies here in India, some of whom are rabidly communal like Rana Ayyub, to further their own preferred narrative.

It’s understandable that progressives don’t like Narendra Modi. He is an antithesis to everything they claim to believe in. And that’s alright but relying on Fake News propaganda and supporting Jihadists in the process while shaming Indians for believing in national borders is rather nauseating to put it blindly. The authors, quite clearly, have no stakes in the matters they are meddling in and they do not have adequate knowledge about ground realities either.

It’s only because they are completely aware that they shall not suffer the consequences of their advocacy that they continue to advocate such crazy ideas without any hesitation. It also demonstrates that progressives do not care much about values or virtues. All they care about is power. They could go to any extent to accumulate more power, even supporting Jihadist ethnonationalism.

Help Opindia Reach Every Indian. Share This Post
Support OpIndia by making a monetary contribution

Big Story

The Central government has taken the decision to assign Z plus security to Judge S Abdul Nazeer who was a part of the bench that delivered the historic verdict in the Ram Janmabhoomi, Ayodhya case.

Don't miss these

2019 World Cup Is Here!

Catch the latest on Cricket World Cup as it unfolds, special coverage by Opindia

Latest articles

Connect with us

187,261FansLike
195,675FollowersFollow
121,000SubscribersSubscribe
Advertisements
Help Opindia Reach Every Indian. Share This Post