On: India's Battle to Control the Democracy Narrative

[pm90]

The BJP is certainly authoritarian and fascistic, this is not contested. The country itself though probably isn’t. They failed to get an outright majority in the recent elections, and perhaps the main reason they still win is the opposition is completely incapable of reform (like the OP said they keep putting up members of the Gandhi family despite them losing elections repeatedly).

[mmooss → pm90]

> The country itself though probably isn’t.

It's hard to define that - on average? In the long run? What would a Indian who is Muslim say - 'well, it's ok because on average or in the long run, it's ok'?

[shipp02 → pm90]

Has there been an Indian government that will be viewed favorably through western lenses?

- Pt. Nehru wanted Socialism and State Control.

- Indira Gandhi brought the Emergency and all that came with that

- PM Vajpayee conducted the nuclear test

- PM Modi is viewed as an authoritarian and fascist

I think these cover the most influential leaders over the last 75 years. Only PM Manmohan Singh stands up to such scrutiny.

[whatshisface → shipp02]

What's a western lens? Borris Johnson looked good through a "western lens."

[throwaway7783 → whatshisface]

It is India's close ties to USSR/Russia.

That's the western lens.

[whatshisface → throwaway7783]

India didn't have close ties, it successfully took advantage of its neutrality to benefit from both sides of the cold war.

[throwaway7783 → whatshisface]

I mean, if you look back in 70s/80s (even now), it is pretty clear India had/has better ties with Russia than most western blocks.

[mmooss → shipp02]

Every leader in the world gets criticized to some degree. It's nonsense to compare criticism of Vajpayee over nuclear tests with Modi or Gandhi rolling back freedom and democracy, and killing and brutalizing people.