RSS has moved on: Shashi Tharoor on Rahul Gandhi's remark that RSS prefers Manusmriti to Constitution
Rahul Gandhi criticized the RSS, claiming they favor Manusmriti over the Constitution after Dattatreya Hosabale suggested reviewing 'socialist' and 'secular' in the preamble. Shashi Tharoor acknowledged Gandhi's historical accuracy regarding past RSS stances. However, Tharoor believes the RSS has evolved since then, suggesting they should clarify their current views.
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
After Congress leader Rahul Gandhi hit back at RSS for Dattatreya Hosabale's call for a review of the words 'socialist' and 'secular' in the preamble by stating that RSS preferred the Manusmriti to the Constitution, CWC member Shashi Tharoor said while Gandhi's statement was accurate in stating what the then Sangh leader MS Golwalkar and others stated at the time of Independence, he (Tharoor) felt "RSS has moved on from those days"."Historically, he's (Gandhi) referring to the fact that it was a criticism expressed at the time of the adoption of the Constitution... But I think the RSS itself has moved on from those days. So, as a historical statement, it's accurate, whether it's a reflection of how they feel today, RSS should be in the best position to answer," he said in Ahmedabad in response to media queries on Gan- dhi's comment.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
34 minutes ago
- Mint
Big, beautiful budgets: not just an American problem
LAST YEAR America ran a budget deficit of 7% of GDP. It may soon be even bigger. President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act, now working its way through Congress, permanently extends tax cuts introduced in 2017, offers more to hospitality workers and old folk, and boosts payments to poor children. The proposed legislation amounts to trillions of dollars of extra borrowing over the next decade. Mr Trump's showmanship attracts attention—but America is not alone. Governments across the rich world are increasingly profligate (see chart 1). This year France will run a deficit worth 6% of GDP; Britain's will be only a little smaller. The German government will borrow the equivalent of 3% of GDP. Canada's budget balance is also moving into the red. Jean-Baptiste Colbert, a bureaucrat under Louis XIV, remarked that the essence of tax policy involved 'plucking as many feathers from the goose with the least hissing". Today's governments do not pluck the goose. Like producers of foie gras, they stuff it. Governments have long run deficits. France, the land of foie gras, has not seen a surplus since 1974. And a government can simultaneously borrow money and become less indebted, if the economy grows faster than debt accumulates. What is happening today, however, is unprecedented. Deficit levels would not be unusual if the economy were in recession. In fact, rich-world GDP is growing decently. The unemployment rate is near an all-time low. Corporations' profit growth is healthy. Meanwhile, borrowing costs have jumped. The average rich-world government, weighted by GDP, now borrows for ten years at a 3.7% annual interest rate, up from 1% during the covid-19 pandemic. In these circumstances, many textbooks would advise, at the very least, cutting your deficit. Today's governments prefer to double down. Many are promising to raise defence spending. Although that may be unavoidable, the same is not true of other decisions. In Japan political parties are offering fiscal sweeteners, ranging from cash handouts to consumption-tax cuts, ahead of an election to the upper house of parliament. The British government recently undid cash-saving measures it had imposed only a few months before, restoring payments to old people to help with energy bills. South Korea is cutting inheritance tax. Australia is cutting income tax. Even once-prudent countries are getting in on the act. The German government is planning to borrow €800bn ($940bn) to invest in defence and infrastructure. 'By German standards, this truly is 'whatever it takes' fiscal policy," say analysts at Deutsche Bank. Switzerland, which before the pandemic ran a large budget surplus, now has a small one. Next year the country will introduce a 13th month of state-pension payments. The silver-haireds enjoying a late lunch on the banks of the Rhine do not appear to be on the breadline. These days, though, everyone gets a handout. Why are governments so spendthrift? During the pandemic politicians developed a habit of bailing out businesses and households. High inflation then spurred demands for payments to alleviate a 'cost-of-living crisis". Today many incumbents hope to ward off populists by throwing around money. When a politician suggests a cut, 24-hour news and social media ensure that everyone hears a sob story. Fiscal responsibility is more toxic than ever before. Until recently, it was painless for governments to run loose fiscal policy. In 2021-23 nominal GDP was growing reasonably fast, inflation was high and interest rates were low. Under these conditions, the average rich-world government could run sizeable primary deficits (ie, before interest payments) and still cut their debt load. Some countries, such as Japan, could reduce their debt-to-GDP ratio even if they ran a primary deficit of 12% of GDP. As such, two-thirds of rich-world governments are less indebted today than five years ago. Japan's debt-to-GDP ratio has fallen by 24 percentage points. Greece's has fallen by 68 points. Today growth and inflation are down, and interest rates are up. We calculate that, for the average rich country to cut its debt, it must now balance its primary budget. For some, the fiscal arithmetic has radically altered. Italy's debt-reducing primary balance has swung from a deficit of 3.1% of GDP in 2023 to a surplus of 1.3% of GDP. The Italians are shrinking their budget deficit, but not by enough. With many other governments making even less progress, and a trade war promising a growth slowdown, rich-world public debt is likely to start rising (see chart 2). This is bad timing. Demographers have known for decades that the mid-2020s would be the point at which baby-boomers would begin to retire in droves, prompting demand for health care and pensions to surge. In 2015 Britain's Office for Budget Responsibility, a watchdog, suggested that even under benign conditions, now was the point at which the government would struggle to avoid accumulating debt. A demographic crunch and free-spending fiscal policies are therefore about to interact in unpleasant ways. No one can predict if or when investors will lose patience, forcing interest rates much higher. Yet there must be a limit to the debt binge. As any lover of foie gras knows, overfeeding even the greediest goose can cause its liver to explode.
India Today
37 minutes ago
- India Today
Desperate stunt: BJP, Congress slam Kejriwal over slum demolition protest
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Congress launched attacks on former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on Sunday, accusing him of hypocrisy and political theatrics over his protest at Jantar Mantar against slum to the Aam Aadmi Party's 'Ghar Rozgar Bachao Andolan', Delhi BJP president Virender Sachdeva called the campaign a 'desperate stunt' aimed at diverting attention from AAP's governance failures. 'Kejriwal owes the people an answer — how many houses has his government actually given to slum dwellers in the last 10 years?' he left the Narela flats in ruins because of his stubbornness. Today's event, held in the name of jhuggi residents, had no clear direction till 11 am It was purely political theatre,' Sachdeva added. Earlier, while addressing the protest at Jantar Mantar, Kejriwal accused Prime Minister Modi of breaking promises made to slum dwellers. "Prime Minister Narendra Modi had said 'Jahan Jhuggi, Wahan Makan', but what he meant was 'Jahan Jhuggi, Wahan Maidan'. His promises are false, and I urge you not to fall for them in future,' the AAP chief also took a sharp personal swipe at the Prime Minister, calling him a 'liar' and urged slum dwellers not to vote for the BJP or Congress. AAP leader Saurabh Bharadwaj echoed the attack, saying, 'If the BJP is hurt by the word 'jhootha', we'll call it 'asatya' instead — but the truth doesn't change.'advertisementHe alleged that the Rekha Gupta-led Delhi government had 'ruined' the city in just five months. 'We had left a perfectly fine Delhi. But these people have ruined it. There are long power cuts, school fees have been hiked, and their ministers and MLAs are busy looting Delhi,' he to Kejriwal' statements, Sachdeva accused him of trying to 'rewrite history' and claimed that it was BJP workers who stepped up during the Covid crisis. 'While BJP workers were arranging food and shelter for slum dwellers, the AAP government was trying to evict them. Now Kejriwal wants to act like their savior, the people of Delhi are not fool,' he BJP chief also condemned the language used by Kejriwal and senior AAP leader Gopal Rai against Prime Minister Narendra Modi. 'The kind of words they are using for the Prime Minister reflects their Naxalite mindset. No civil society can accept this kind of behavior. Delhi has already rejected this 'kattar beimaan' (hardcore dishonest) and chaos-spreading Kejriwal.'Sachdeva rejected the AAP's accusations of slum demolitions under the BJP and said it was, in fact, Kejriwal's government that failed to rehabilitate slum dwellers. 'If courts had not stepped in, the condition of these people would have been even worse today,' he said, asserting BJP's commitment to providing permanent housing under the 'Jahan Jhuggi, Wahan Makan' the Congress also dismissed Kejriwal's protest as a show of 'crocodile tears' and questioned his credibility on the issue of slum dwellers. Delhi Congress president Devender Yadav posed ten pointed questions to Kejriwal via social media, highlighting AAP's own actions against slums during its the key questions, Yadav asked: 'Is it not true that in 2021, Kejriwal approved the 'Jhuggi Hatao' scheme as Chief Minister? Why is he now pretending to stand with slum dwellers?'He further alleged that former minister Satyendar Jain had announced the closure of the 'Jahan Jhuggi, Wahan Makan' scheme in September 202. 'Now Kejriwal is shedding crocodile tears. Why?' Yadav Kejriwal's use of public funds, the Congress asked, 'Did Kejriwal not use the votes of slum dwellers to build his grand 'Sheesh Mahal'? Now that slum residents are becoming homeless, why is he protesting?'Yadav also slammed the AAP for failing to fight for slum dwellers in the Supreme Court and not passing any resolution in the Delhi Assembly to protect them. 'When Congress fought in the Supreme Court, where was the AAP? Under whose pressure was this silence?' he Congress accused Kejriwal of 'hypocrisy' and claimed that his tenure as Chief Minister contradicts his current stance as a supporter of the urban poor.- EndsMust Watch IN THIS STORY#Delhi#AAM AADMI PARTY#Bharatiya Janta Party#Indian National Congress
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Indira Gandhi endgame: What impelled her to call elections?
Prodipto Ghosh has vivid recollection of the evening of January 18, 1977. He was listening to the radio when he heard Indira Gandhi announce that fresh general elections will be held in March that year. The then 28-year-old additional district magistrate (ADM) in South Delhi, Ghosh had gone through a tumultuous period during the Emergency, uneasy about several detentions he had to carry out. That evening's broadcast came as a huge relief to him – also as a surprise, since at the local administration level, no one had any inkling of Mrs Gandhi's move. In the higher echelons of power though, the buzz of the Emergency being relaxed had been doing the rounds. Kuldip Nayar, who was then an editor with The Indian Express, had just two days ago broken a story in the paper, published under the headline 'Lok Sabha elections likely in March'. 'The Indian Express took a massive risk by publishing it,' remembers Devsagar Singh, 76, who was the university beat reporter at the Express at that time. Nayar, who had got a tip-off from a Punjab Police officer, was aware of the consequence – that he might be again sent to jail. Once Mrs Gandhi called the Lok Sabha polls, Devsagar recalls, the Express newsroom rejoiced. Like Ghosh, even 50 years later, a crucial mystery remains as to why Mrs Gandhi called the elections when she did. Over the years, several scholars have proposed various theories. Historian Srinath Raghavan, who recently came out with the book Indira Gandhi and the years that transformed India, points to two assessment reports prepared for Mrs Gandhi between June and October 1976 outlining the Emergency's impact during the previous year. 'The thrust of both these reports was to suggest that the first year of the (Emergency's) anniversary has gone off well – popular unrest and protests have come to a halt, economy has been stabilised, inflation is kept in check, the 20 point programme has given hope to the poor in rural India, and that political opposition continues to remain in disarray,' says Raghavan. However, the reports also suggested that the benefits of the Emergency might be tapering off due to some of its more coercive programmes such as the forced sterilisation campaign. The October 1976 report in particular, , Raghavan says, flagged that the Congress was losing support in Uttar Pradesh among its traditional voters, including the poor and minorities, due to the sterilisation drive. 'In the broader context of things, the Prime Minister had come to internalise that the benefits of the Emergency might be slowly wearing off and, before things turned adverse, it was better to go into elections,' Raghavan states. Others suggest that the only reason Mrs Gandhi declared fresh elections was because she was confident she would win. In his book India after Gandhi, historian Ramachandra Guha notes that the gossip in Delhi coffee houses then was that the PM's intelligence chief had assured her of being re-elected with a clear majority. Guha also cites the criticism Mrs Gandhi drew from western observers as a reason. What particularly stung was criticism by those who had known her father Jawaharlal Nehru, and made comparisons between the two. British socialist politician Fenner Brockaway, for instance, writing in The Times, deplored the conversion of 'the world's greatest democracy' into 'a repressive dictatorship'. He appealed to Mrs Gandhi to end the denial of freedom and liberty in memory of her father. Another British writer, John Grigg, recalled Nehru's commitment to free press and elections. 'Nehru's tryst with destiny seems to have been turned into a tryst with despotism – and by his own daughter,' he wrote in The Spectator. Raghavan also says Mrs Gandhi was disturbed by the negative reportage in the international press. In his book, he cites a letter that she wrote to the Indian High Commissioner in London, in which she rebuked the British press for 'maligning' her and her son Sanjay Gandhi. However, Raghavan doesn't believe the negative press affected her much. 'The objective fact is that neither the British government nor the American government actually put any pressure on her to end the Emergency.' Historian Gyan Prakash, however, believes that Mrs Gandhi was conscious of her international image. 'The Emergency had broken many of the ties she had, including friendship with American writer Dorothy Norman, as one can see from their exchange of letters,' he says. Mrs Gandhi's secretary P N Dhar, writing several years later, offered another explanation — that, being the PM, she had started yearning for the public connect she had established. 'She was nostalgic about the way people reacted to her in the 1971 campaign and she longed again to hear the applause of the multitudes,' Dhar wrote. Arguing along similar lines, Prakash says: 'Indira Gandhi, in the end, wanted legitimacy to her role and thought that the elections would legitimise her power, including the Emergency… If one thinks of Indira Gandhi's long career, it is true that the way she had ruled was to try and secure popular support for her power. She was not prepared to rule as an authoritarian figure in the long run.' Given that Gandhi's private papers have yet to be made accessible, there is no conclusive way to know what persuaded her to begin the process of ending the Emergency. However, as she spoke on the radio on January 18, 1977, her opponents were being released from jails across the country. The following day, the leaders of four Opposition parties — Morarji Desai's Congress (O), Jana Sangh, Bharatiya Lok Dal and Socialist Party — met at Desai's residence in Delhi. The next day Desai announced to the press that they would fight the elections under a common party and its symbol. On January 23, the Janata (People's) Party was launched in the presence of Jayaprakash Narayan or JP. The speed with which the Opposition parties merged to form the Janata Party stunned Mrs Gandhi. She had calculated that there would not be sufficient time for these parties to fulfill legal and technical requirements meant for creation of a new party. 'JP had been trying to bring everyone together since 1974 itself,' says Abhishek Choudhary, who authored the book Vajpayee: the Ascent of the Hindu Right 1924-1977. In 1977, however, they were desperate, and scared that unless they presented themselves as a united force, they would be defeated. Choudhary states that despite being united, the Opposition was far from sure of victory. What shifted the mood in the Opposition camp was the resignation of Jagjivan Ram from the Congress. One of the country's tallest Dalit leaders, Jagjivan, popularly known as 'Babuji', was a Congress stalwart whose defection dealt a blow to the party and boosted the Opposition's morale. The newspapers called it the moment when the 'J-bomb' exploded. Much has been written about the election rallies that turned increasingly fiery and eventful in the ensuing days. So was the day of the results. Journalist Coomi Kapoor, who was a reporter at the Express at the time, recalls, in her memoir on The Emergency, the evening of March 20, 1977, when the poll results started pouring in. Outside the Express office, she notes, there was a billboard where the latest results were put up manually. Each time a fresh Janata Party win was shown on the board, wild cheers erupted. Coins were showered on the man updating the results. 'Some people were doing the bhangra, while others were laughing and joking, 'Mummy meri car gayi', 'Beta meri sarkaar gayi',' writes Kapoor. By late evening, when the Express announced that Gandhi was trailing in her Rae Bareli constituency, the crowd burst firecrackers. 'Old-timers said they had not witnessed such public exuberance since Independence Day in 1947,' Kapoor adds. The election outcome saw the Janata Party emerging as the victor, which set the stage for the formation of the country's first non-Congress government. Most of the ministers lost their seats. Next day, at an early-morning Cabinet meeting held by Mrs Gandhi, the Emergency was revoked. Adrija Roychowdhury leads the research section at She writes long features on history, culture and politics. She uses a unique form of journalism to make academic research available and appealing to a wide audience. She has mastered skills of archival research, conducting interviews with historians and social scientists, oral history interviews and secondary research. During her free time she loves to read, especially historical fiction. ... Read More
