Congress hypocrisy: PM Narendra Modi made a responsible appeal to citizens. He urged them to reduce gold purchases, cut petrol and diesel consumption, and use less cooking oil. India faces global economic headwinds. The advice was prudent and statesmanlike.
Congress smelt blood. Their ecosystem immediately declared India’s economy was in ruins. Their narrative: PM Modi’s appeal proved India’s forex reserves were in crisis. The charge was loud. It was also breathtaking in its hypocrisy.
Every appeal Congress mocks today, their own leaders made with far greater urgency. They just made it worse for ordinary people.
PART I: GOLD
1962: Nehru Asked Indians to Donate Their Gold
India went to war with China. The economy was under pressure. Jawaharlal Nehru did not merely appeal to citizens to reduce gold purchases. He launched a nationwide campaign asking Indians to physically donate their gold jewellery to the national war chest.
Women across India surrendered their ornaments. Their mangalsutras. Their bangles. Their inheritance. The government ran this as a patriotic campaign. Congress celebrated this sacrifice for decades.
More than 220 million US dollars were collected in cash alone through the Defence of India Fund. This was not a gentle appeal. This was a mass mobilisation of personal wealth during national crisis.
PM Modi asked citizens to voluntarily reduce gold purchases. Nehru asked them to physically give up their gold. Congress praised Nehru and attacks PM Modi. Let that register.
1962 to 1968: Congress Government’s Gold Crackdown
This is where the government stopped appealing and started commanding. The Gold Control Act of 1962 imposed sweeping restrictions on gold ownership and trade. Banks were ordered to recall gold loans, and forward trading in gold was banned outright.
By 1963, producing jewellery above 14 carat fineness was a criminal act. In 1965, a gold bond scheme was launched with tax immunity for unaccounted wealth. It yielded nothing of substance.
Then came 1968. The Gold Control Act was reissued with total force. Citizens were legally prohibited from owning gold bars or coins. Not discouraged. Prohibited. Goldsmiths could hold no more than 100 grams at any time. Licensed dealers were banned from trading with each other.
Congress criminalised gold ownership. PM Modi asked for voluntary restraint. Congress has the audacity to attack him.
1966: Indira Gandhi Took It to Parliament
Indira Gandhi did not merely issue a public appeal. She declared war on gold in Parliament itself. In September 1966, she told the House directly that fiscal policy and public education would both be weaponised to break India’s gold habit.
She did not mince words.
She called gold purchases a drain on foreign exchange at a time when every available resource was needed for national development. This was not a Prime Minister navigating global uncertainty. This was a Prime Minister admitting that her government’s finances were under severe strain and blaming citizen behaviour for it.
“Fiscal policies as well as public education will be directed towards weaning people away from the gold habit which costs us large amounts of foreign exchange at a time when we are required to mobilise all available resources to finance our development.”
A few days later, she took the same message directly to the nation. In a Prime Minister’s Person to Person broadcast, she went further. She did not just ask for restraint. She called gold socially corrupting.
“Gold control is a long-term measure of social and economic reform. The inflated social value attached to gold has encouraged ostentatious display, smuggling and the piling up of useless hoards. Let us not be slaves to gold.”
Congress celebrated this. They framed it as bold, reformist leadership. Indira Gandhi attacked the gold habit from the floor of Parliament and then repeated it on national radio. Two statements in days. Both about gold. Both driven by a forex crisis her government created.
PM Modi asked citizens to voluntarily reduce gold purchases while managing global headwinds from a position of strength. Congress attacks him for it. The same party whose Prime Minister called Indians slaves to gold.
The same party. The same logic. Seventy years apart. Zero self-awareness.
2013: Chidambaram’s Four Desperate Gold Appeals
Finance Minister P Chidambaram under PM Manmohan Singh made not one but four separate appeals to Indians to stop buying gold. India’s current account deficit had hit a record 5.4 per cent of GDP. Gold imports were a primary driver.
The first appeal came in March 2013, the day after the Union Budget. Chidambaram went on television and appealed directly to citizens to reduce gold purchases to control imports.
“I’m hoping that the people of India will heed my appeal and will not demand so much gold.”
The second came in May 2013. Chidambaram stated plainly that India’s passion for gold was burning a hole in the current account. He explicitly linked citizen behaviour to national economic damage.
The third appeal followed in June 2013. Chidambaram went further. He urged banks to actively advise their branches not to encourage customers to invest in gold.
“I would urge all banks to please advise their branches that they should not encourage their customers to invest or buy gold.”
The fourth appeal in June 2013 was the most remarkable. Chidambaram asked Indians to imagine a full year without gold imports. He called for six months of near-zero gold imports to rescue the current account.
“People who want to buy gold must realise that every ounce of gold is imported… You think you’re buying gold in rupees, but actually you’re buying gold in dollars.”
Four appeals in three months. A Finance Minister pleading with the public on television, repeatedly, to save his government’s economic position. That was the Congress economy in 2013.
Under Manmohan Singh, India’s Finance Minister made four desperate gold appeals in three months. Under PM Modi, one responsible appeal from a position of strength becomes a “crisis.” The hypocrisy is staggering.
PART II: COOKING OIL AND FOOD HABITS
The Nehru Legacy: Telling Indians What to Eat
Congress has a long tradition of instructing citizens on their consumption habits. It did not start with cooking oil. It started with food itself.
In the early 1950s, India faced severe food shortages. Supply chains were broken. Grain reserves were low. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru issued a public appeal asking citizens to change their eating habits fundamentally.
“In view of the emergency, old habits and tastes have to be subordinated. People, especially in the northern States, who are accustomed to wheat, should refrain completely from rice so that others may get it.”
Nehru was not asking citizens to use slightly less cooking oil. He was asking them to abandon their staple grain. This was the Congress approach to national challenge. Sacrifice more. Get less. And be grateful.
Lal Bahadur Shastri: Miss a Meal for India
During the 1965 war with Pakistan, Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri asked every Indian to skip one meal every Monday. This was not about reducing cooking oil. This was about reducing food intake entirely to manage national food security.
Shastri was a man of immense personal integrity. He led by example with quiet dignity. He asked, and Indians responded. But the ask itself tells a story. India was in such food distress under Congress that the Prime Minister had to request hunger as a civic duty.
India’s food situation was so dire under Congress that Shastri had to request citizens to go hungry on Mondays. PM Modi asks for reduced cooking oil use. Congress calls this a crisis.
PART III: PETROL AND DIESEL CONSUMPTION
Manmohan Singh’s ‘Money Does Not Grow on Trees’ Moment
Congress loves to quote PM Modi’s appeal to reduce petrol and diesel consumption as evidence of economic weakness. Here is what their own Prime Minister said when fuel subsidies threatened to blow up the fiscal deficit.
Under PM Manmohan Singh, the UPA government struggled to contain the subsidy burden on petroleum products. Fuel prices were politically sensitive. The fiscal deficit was unsustainable. And then Singh spoke.
“World fuel prices are going up; we have tried to insulate you. Subsidies on fuel are very large, though, and the subsidy bill would have shot up to more than 2 lakh crores. Where will we find the money for this? Money does not grow on trees.”
Here was a Congress Prime Minister admitting on the record that the government could not afford to continue subsidising fuel. He told citizens directly. He framed it as fiscal reality. He was right to do so.
But note the difference. Manmohan Singh’s appeal came from economic desperation. The UPA government had failed to manage public finances. It had borrowed and subsidised beyond its means. Singh’s appeal was a cry for help dressed as economic education.
Manmohan Singh said money does not grow on trees when India’s fiscal deficit was out of control. PM Modi’s appeal came from prudence in a strong economy navigating global turbulence. Congress sees crisis in PM Modi. They saw nothing under themselves.
Congress’ Real Problem
Congress does not actually believe India is in crisis. Their ecosystem knows the facts. The concern is different. A confident, self-reliant India is Congress’ greatest political nightmare.
When citizens are asked to be partners in national progress, they develop ownership of India’s story. They identify with the nation’s strength. They stop looking to Congress as the saviour from manufactured crises.
Congress built its political economy on dependency. On subsidy. On the narrative that only they could protect ordinary Indians from an uncaring state. PM Modi’s India disrupts that model at its foundation.
The narrative about forex crisis is not a sincere economic critique. It is a political survival instinct dressed up as journalism and activism.
CONCLUSION
The record is now before the public. Congress presided over genuine economic distress for decades. They responded with coercion, restriction, and desperate appeals. They asked citizens to donate jewellery, give up staple grains, and go hungry on Mondays.
They are now targeting PM Modi for asking citizens to voluntarily exercise prudence during a period of global uncertainty. The charge would be absurd if it were not so cynically crafted.
India remembers. The Gold Control Act that criminalised ownership. The four Chidambaram appeals in three months. The Manmohan Singh admission that money does not grow on trees.
India also remembers Indira Gandhi standing in Parliament and calling gold a national burden. It remembers her going on national radio days later and telling Indians they were slaves to gold. Two statements in one week. From the highest office in the land. Driven by a forex crisis her own government manufactured.
Congress celebrated that as visionary leadership. They put it in history books. They named airports after her.
Now PM Modi asks for voluntary restraint while managing external pressures from a position of genuine economic strength. And the same party calls it a crisis signal.
These were never moments of national greatness. They were admissions of economic weakness and governance failure. Congress is now attempting to project that legacy onto a government that has earned the credibility to ask citizens to act as partners in national resilience.
The Congress ecosystem thrives on the assumption that public memory is short. But they forget one thing — history has a long memory, and so do the people of India.
Also Read: Conviction can rest on testimony of solitary reliable witness: SC
