An article published in London-headquartered publication The Economist questioning the electoral choices of India's "elite" in favouring a "populist" like Prime Minister Narendra Modi over others has triggered a strong backlash in the country.
The Economist piece, published last week, opined that Modi has bucked the global trend, where "elites" usually didn't support a "populist" leader.
The British publication used the word "elite" for anyone with a university degree. Additionally, it also clubbed the "upper-middle class", a section of population concentrated primarily in cities, under the elite bracket.
Drawing its conclusions about Modi's popularity, the Economist cited three factors behind the Indian leader's approval ratings - "class politics, economics, and elite admiration for strongman rule".
'Highly Objectionable to Call Modi a Populist or a Strongman': BJP Spokesman
"The choice of words is wrong. Modi is not a populist leader, but rather a popular and a loved leader. Further, the choice of words used by the Economist, including class and caste, have previously been used by separatist anti-India forces, such as the Naxal movement," Binay Kumar Singh, a co-author of book 'BBC's True Lies' and a BJP state spokesman, told Sputnik India.
He stressed that Modi wasn't only popular in India, but commanded a massive fan base following across the world.
Singh noted that Modi had become the most-decorated Indian leader in history, being conferred upon the top-notch civilian honours across the world, including in the Middle-East, Russia and even the US.
"The western media is out of touch not only with ground realities of India, but in their own countries too. Before publishing such propaganda-driven pieces, the western media should seek an opinion of Modi in their own countries. He has a global fan following and attracts crowds wherever he travels, a fact which western media due to its own vested interests, tend to overlook each time," the BJP state spokesperson asserted.
He said that propagating such "biased and fake" narratives against Modi would be rejected by the Indian electorate, be it from any caste, community, religion or region.
"The article seems more of a propaganda piece rather than being informative and balanced. It is part of a sustained campaign by western media to demean and denigrate PM Modi's image ahead of the election. But, the western media are waging a losing fight. Because the image and popularity of Prime Minister Modi wasn't created overnight. It was 30 years in the making," Singh further underlined.
'The Economist Has Demeaned Indian Voters'
Singh said that more problematic was the fact that the Economist had resorted to "demeaning" the Indian voters for their electoral choices, noting that western media had already been running a "motivated campaign" against the BJP and PM Modi.
"They are questioning the might of the Indian electorate and Indian democracy. So, this western media campaign targets not only Prime Minister Modi, but also India as a nation," he reckoned.
Singh explained that by describing "class" as a factor driving Modi's domestic ratings, the Economist was attempting to whip up "faultiness" in Indian society.
Since their inception, the BJP and its allies have been working towards the cause of eradicating caste faultliness among Hindus, which form nearly 80 percent of Indian population.
Singh also pointed out that western perception of "elites" was different from who constituted "elites" in India.
"Western definition of elite doesn't apply to India. Even in a village in India, you have well-off people with a university degree. But they won't be your typical elite in the western sense of the word, where elites are known to back woke theories," concluded Singh.