If Jesus had a wife, would that change anything?

[bldysabba]

@PhillyGuy

It’s what you must suspect.

Modi is portrayed in Western media as as divisive Hindu nationalist. He was banned from traveling to the UK for many years, and still is banned from the US due to “severe violations of religious freedom.” I’m somewhat open to being convinced this is all unfair, and I do think it should be reversed if he becomes PM. But it doesn’t look good to me.

Modi is portrayed wrongly. There is a definite anti Modi slant among certain sections of Indian intelligentsia, but to a neutral observer it doesn’t make sense. Not only has his complicity in the riots never been established, an Indian supreme court special investigation team recently concluded

The Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team, headed by former CBI director R K Raghavan, to probe the 2002 Gujarat riots has concluded in its 541-page closure report that Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi took all possible steps to control the 2002 post-Godhra riots

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/how-sit-report-on-gujarat-riots-exonerates-modi-the-highlights/256848-3.html

There’s a detailed list of steps taken by his government to quell the riots compiled by a Delhi academic here -

http://www.manushi.in/articles.php?articleId=1688&ptype=&pgno=2#.U0tI2lVdXa5

I have myself seen a number of public statements made by Modi at the time to maintain peace, here’s one with English subtitles

Narendra Modi speech after Godhra incident 2002 - the so called 'Riot period' -must see

I have seen a number of statements by him in interviews that maintain that riots and violence are a stain on civilised society and should not happen at any cost. I can link to them if you’re interested. His entire campaign to be PM, and his governance for the last 12 years in Gujarat has focused on development, not on being ‘divisive’. He rejects claims of being a religious nationalist, independently accepting both apellations, in that he is religious, and he is a nationalist, but he puts the country’s development before all else. He has gone to the extent of making the statement that ‘toilets are more important than temples’, which is not one I would expect from someone who gives primacy to religion.
As for the bans placed on him by foreign countries, the UK and Europe have recently reversed their ‘bans’, and the US ambassador too went to meet him last month. This is probably motivated by political expedience though. Not that the ban was made through any considered investigation either. Read this article if you’re interested in seeing how it came about

http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/u-s-evangelicals-indian-expats-teamed-up-to-push-through-modi-visa-ban/

It was a politically convenient ‘judgement from afar’, without any actual evidence.

To me, the most compelling evidence lies in his performance since the riots. In Gujarat, which has had Hindu Muslim riots every decade since independence (including worse ones under the opposition party Congress - where many more people died) there have been none in the last 12 years under Modi’s rule. The only one that happened was 5 months into Modi’s Chief Ministership, when he was new to the job. In the latest assembly and municipal elections in the state, his party won from constituencies where Muslims are in the majority. That last fact is what convinces me more than any other that he is portrayed wrongly.