An opinion piece titled "India's South Rejects Modi — And Why It Matters.", which carries significant divisiveness and inherent ignorance, was recently published by Bloomberg Media. The article, written by Andy Mukherjee, sets off by contrasting the states of North and South India, criticizing the former and applauding the latter for what is purported to be its superiority.
As per him, the states that support Prime Minister Narendra Modi, including as Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, are impoverished and underdeveloped, whereas states in the South thrive because they oppose Modi's leadership. Mukherjee also takes issue with how the current government has handled Hindutva and the building of the Ram Mandir.
He also drew attention to the situation of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, highlighting his detention and the political hold of CPI-M, DMK and Congress in the states: Kerala, Tamilnadu and Karnataka respectively. The article attempts to instill a divisive idea and sow strife between North and South India while looking down on North India.
The columnist used data from five states Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan collectively as North Indian states in contrast with Tamilnadu, Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Telangana as South Indian states. At instances he also used data points of Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat individually.
The columnist of the said article, Andy Mukherjee projects philosophies like Periyarism and Marxism, in a benign light.
Mukherjee goes so far as to say that individuals in North India who support the Bharatiya Janata Party are portrayed as poor, illiterate, and uncivilized, whilst those in the South who oppose Modi are shown as cognitively superior and succeeding in many human development indicators.Each statement from the article is disputable and can be countered with facts, figures, and proper analysis.
Here are major declarations made by the Author Andy Mukherjee, followed by a categorical retort to them all one by one:
Assertion 1: Uttar Pradesh is poorer than Sub-Saharan Africa
The article's comparison of Uttar Pradesh to Sub-Saharan Africa calls into doubt the author's comprehension of both regions' economic realities.
As a native of North India, the author is likely familiar with places such as Noida, Lucknow, Varanasi, and Prayagraj, each with its own level of development and infrastructure.
While UP suffers its own set of developmental issues, such as poverty and infrastructure shortages, comparing its economic situation to that of cities in Sub-Saharan Africa may ignore significant differences.
Under the direction of the current Chief Minister, the state administration wants to increase UP’s state Gross Domestic Product (SGDP) from $313 billion to a trillion dollar economy.
Uttar Pradesh's economic prominence is more noticeable when compared to the GDP figures of numerous sub-Saharan African nations, including Angola, Botswana, Kenya, and Liberia.
The GDPs of Angola, Botswana, Kenya, and Liberia (PPP) are $135.558 billion, $61 billion, $113.42 billion, and $8 billion, respectively. Nigeria's $477 billion GDP makes it stand out among African nations.
Although it is evident that UP has faced developmental impediments under past political governments, drawing comparisons between the state's economic situation and that of sub-Saharan African nations may oversimplify the complex issues involved.
It is crucial to recognize the strides being made in Uttar Pradesh's economic development and growth, as well as the ongoing obstacles and the measures the present administration is doing to overcome them.
Even while comparing the per capita GDP of the states and overall state GDP a different story emerges which thrashes the false narrative of Bloomberg’s article.
In overall state GDP Tamilnadu and Gujarat stands next to each other. Gujarat ruled by Narendra Modi himself as the CM for 12 years.
Now the argument that economic development under PM Modi is not possible therefore Southern states don’t elect him, doesn’t hold water here.
More complexities and issues are involved when it comes to parliamentary politics in a democracy like India, which can’t be ruled out while assessing such topics. The oversimplification made the arguments in the articles flawed to its core
Assertion 2: The current government’s handling of the Ram Mandir construction was unnecessary
Historical evidence suggest that Mughal Emperor Babur’s commander Mir Baqi destructed Ram Temple at Ayodhya and erected a mosque back in 1528-29 CE. The temple site was believed to be the birthplace of lord Ram thus called as Ram Janmbhoomi. The presence of a temple at the site, below the mosque was substantiated through ASI’s (Archeological survey of India) survey.
In November, 2019, the Supreme Court gave verdict in the Ram Janmbhoomi title suit and it was handed over to a trust to be formed by the government. Following the given ruling of the apex court, the government formed a trust to oversee the temple construction which is going to be consecrated on January 22, 2024.
Furthermore, the article presents arguments that what a temple would do.
Ever since the foundation of a temple is laid, hundreds of people get their livelihood till the construction is complete. After the temple is constructed, several persons’ livelihood such as those of priests, security guard, flower vendors, servants doing cleaning and maintenance work in temple, guards, staff in the offices of temples etc. depend on the day-to-day activities in the temple.
There are several things such as auxiliary businesses associated with the temple. The production and business in all these things keep thousands of traders and Stores busy. A temple is backbone of all these economic activities. If a temple is there, there would be worship. Now consider the people involved with activities of various worships -the priest, the musicians, the singers, the garland maker etc. — these also can be added to the list of beneficiaries. If a temple disappears, all these economic activities also would disappear.
A boom in spiritual/religious/temple/pilgrimage tourism is gathering strength in India. The Union tourism ministry data shows over 60% of tourism in India is in the religious and spiritual tourism category. Ministry data also suggests that economies surrounding places of worship in India raked in close to Rs 1.3 lakh crore in 2022, doubling up from Rs 65,070 crore in 2021.
After the renovation of Kashi Vishwanath Corridor, Varanasi has experienced it well. Hospitality industry is flocking to Ayodhya now, as the religious tourism in India witnesses accelerated growth and the upcoming Ram Temple is adding another attraction to the historical site.
Ayodhya, which hosted the historic Ram Temple inauguration on January 22, 2024 undergoing a major shift which sends waves all across. The churning of historical facts and political ambitions manifested into a Temple which is standing tall to cater to an ocean of faith. Ram Temple in Ayodhya as been opened for the devotees and whole of India celebrated the occasion with great fervor.
Uttar Pradesh will get a major boost in its state GDP and the target of achieving $1 trillion might be achieved having Ayodhya as the growth engine of it. The Temple will boost the economy through the in-bound tourism therefore the arrangements are being made to bridge the linguistic differences through employment of linguists. This will promote cultural unity amongst Indians as one.
It is essential to understand that temple runs the engine of economy with the devotion being the fuel of it. UP will grab this huge opportunity provided with the Ayodhya Temple opening to achieve the mark on economic front which it aspired. Therefore, it can be said that temple is necessary for economic growth and that makes government’s role much important.
h
Assertion 3: During Modi's time as prime minister, the divide between North and South India has grown
Andy Mukherjee's thesis appears to match emotions commonly expressed by opposition parties in India, but a deeper look uncovers various problems in the reasoning he presented.
Recent initiatives, like the Union government's construction of the Thalaserry-Mahe Bypass in Kerala and the launch of 12 Vande Bharat trains linking cities in Southern India, show the government's dedication to infrastructure development throughout the nation, regardless of regional differences.
 |  |
Furthermore, government's efforts to close any perceived divide between North and South India are demonstrated by the significant investments in development money and infrastructure projects given to states like Tamil Nadu. Programs such as the Kashi Tamil Sangamam serve to emphasize the cultural exchanges and ties that the government promotes.
Mukherjee's viewpoint, nonetheless, might be influenced by current disputes over funding distribution between the Union government and the Southern Indian states.
It's crucial to remember that the Finance Commission, as mandated by Article 280 of the Indian Constitution, decides allocations based on a number of factors, including population, income distance, and budgetary initiatives, rather than political factors.
The arguments seems to reinforce polarizing myths rather than provide a sophisticated analysis of the nuances at play. It's critical to approach talks on regional differences with factual clarity and a dedication to promoting development and unity throughout India.
Assertion 4: Kerala had the best COVID-19 management record in the country
Kerala was criticized for how it handled the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and for how it responded to the outbreak.
As of April 10, 2024, Kerala had reported 72,105 COVID-19-related deaths, compared to 23,724 in Uttar Pradesh. Given Kerala's population of roughly 4 crore and Uttar Pradesh's population of 24 crore, it might be claimed that Uttar Pradesh fared better throughout the pandemic.
Kerala was the state with the second highest number of COVID-19 deaths, after only Maharashtra.
Assertion 5: South India is advancing because, in contrast to the states of North India, it values inclusion and tolerance
While the development of Indian states is encouraging, it is unfair to minimize others in the process.
At India Today conclave BJP’s Tamilnadu state president K. Annamalai pointed out that because of imagined threats from China and Pakistan, Jawaharlal Nehru oversaw the construction of numerous public sector businesses, educational institutions, and research centers in South India after independence. The region's expansion was supported by this calculated move as well as the movement of important central government institutions to Bangalore and Chennai.
In addition, the 1952 introduction of the Freight Equalization Policy (FEP) subsidized the long-distance freight transportation of necessary goods with the goal of advancing industrial justice. But in the process, mineral-rich eastern states like Bihar, Jharkhand, and others were unintentionally hurt by FEP, which undermined their economic opportunities.
FEP has come under fire for escalating regional inequality from academics like as Professor Stuart Corbridge and former president Pranab Mukherjee.
Combining the historical background of the concentration of central institutions in South India with the unforeseen results of FEP, it is clear how these variables contribute to the region's relative progress and significant contribution to the nation's GDP when compared to North Indian states.
Assertion 6: People in North India, who are known as "labharthi," support Modi because he gives them money and food
It's important to note that the BJP, under Narendra Modi, won the 2014 general elections without using any kind of food or money distribution strategies.
The term "labharthi" is often used to describe to recipients. Without taking such actions, subsequent state assembly elections were also won.
The provision of free rations was not started by the Union administration until the COVID-19 pandemic started. In reference to other central government programs, although housing plans catering to the impoverished were already in place before PM Modi took office, notable advancements in their execution were achieved during his direction. Together, commitments were fulfilled with the construction of about 4 crore dwellings in rural and urban areas.
Importantly, these government projects reach out to people all around the country, not just in the north. Farmers in Allahabad and Alappuzha get annual direct transfers of ₹6000 into their bank accounts, ensuring fair distribution of benefits regardless of caste, creed, or religion.
Assertion 7: The north, which is mostly controlled by Modi's BJP, has a far lower per capita GDP than the south, where no state has any of his party's influence
Notably absent from Andy Mukherjee's argument were the important states of Gujarat and Haryana, both of which are led by the BJP.
Gujarat is in western India, but Mukherjee used its poverty statistics to compare it to states in the south. Comparing Gujarat's per capita income to that of the southern states is therefore only fair.
According to recent data from 2021–2022, in comparison to Gujarat and Haryana, the majority of southern states, except Karnataka, have lower per capita incomes.
Assertion 8: More women are entering the workforce thanks to a Karnataka Congress government program that offers free rides to women
The claim lacks empirical data and is based primarily on assumptions.
For example, the author ignores the significant contributions of women to the workforce in states such as Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Ladakh, Dadar and Nagar Haveli, Sikkim, Meghalaya, Madhya Pradesh, and Karnataka, where women contribute significantly to economic activity despite receiving no preferential treatment.
A variety of socioeconomic models, including variations in educational possibilities and job patterns, can be used to explain the differing rates of women's engagement in the workforce amongst states.
 |  |
This phenomena is clarified by research done by groups such as the Observer Research Foundation. Structural changes in the economy are driving a diminishing gender gap in employment trends, according to reports like the State of Working India Report 2023. These changes include the admission of younger women with higher educational attainment into the workforce and the departure of older, less educated women from it.
In addition, the shift in women from wage labor performed for informal wages to salaried jobs and the decrease in the percentage of women working in agriculture highlight changing trends in the participation of women in the workforce.
Recognizing women's important but frequently underappreciated contributions to unpaid economic work, such as family businesses and housework, is also essential. Giving women free rides may seem altruistic, but it ignores the institutional underpinnings that lead to gender differences in the workforce. These differences are mostly caused by cultural conventions that limit women to domestic responsibilities and thus undervalue their economic efforts. Comprehensive policy interventions that attempt to change societal attitudes and provide equal opportunities for women in the workforce are necessary to address these deeply ingrained difficulties.
Assertion 9: Significant representation from South India is absent from Indian politics
It’s misleading to claim that South India lacks representation in Indian politics, as politicians from the region have consistently held prominent positions regardless of the ruling party at the center.
For instance, key ministerial portfolios in the current Union government are held by individuals from South India: Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, Minister of External Affairs S Jaishankar, and Minister of Culture and Tourism G Kishan Reddy.
Additionally, several Ministers of State hail from South India, such as V. Muraleedharan, Abbiah Narayanaswamy, Shobha Karandlaje, L Murugan, Bhagwanth Khuba, and Rajeev Chandrashekhar.
South India, which consists of five states, has about 130 seats in the Lok Sabha, or more than 23 percent of all the seats. Even if this percentage seems reasonable, it's crucial to remember that Uttar Pradesh—with its substantial population—accounts for the majority of seats, with 80.
However, in an attempt to meet the many demands and worries of Southern states, the Modi administration has appointed ministers from the region in an attempt to guarantee sufficient representation from South India.
Assertion 10: The Bharatiya Janata Party, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has been rejected by South India
The statement is untrue; the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is well-represented in Southern India, as seen by the large number of MPs who are from the region.
The BJP holds 29 of the 130 MP seats in the South, demonstrating its substantial representation. The BJP is clearly felt in places like Karnataka, where it is the main opposition, and in Puducherry, Union territory, where the ruling party supports the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance.
Comentários