[EXPOSED]: Hindu Groups Fuel Hatred of Muslims and Pakistan in United Kingdom

[Areesh]

No he's right. Liberal and religious Hindus are always on same page regarding minorities specially Muslims. Remember it was liberal secular congress which bombed the holiest place of Sikhs

https://twitter.com/x/status/1493396217770184706

https://twitter.com/x/status/1491000101032312834

Take this hijab issue as an example

Hindus say that they just want to impose uniform on muslim girls and that is why they are against hijab or burqa

But the reality is that they just want to put Muslims in their place (auqat)

We all have seen those videos where Muslim women (not students) were forced to remove their hijabs and burqas. Those videos are enough for BJP to win any coming elections

The fact that they managed to make muslim women remove their piece of clothing in front of everyone is reason enough for BJP to win again and again

Hindus maybe indifferent to the plight of Muslims, but hate is a very strong emotion. Upper castes are indifferent to the plight of lower castes, rich are indifferent to the plight of poor. Unfortunately that's how most societies are.

Hindus are a very divided lot, but may unite when they feel their religion is under assault, and sometimes not even then. If we were so full of hate, we wouldn't have waited 70 odd years to get extremists in government. The NDA got 43% of the vote in last election. Out of these 43% not all support extremism. Some vote for the BJP because they feel that other parties indulge in minority appeasement. Some vote for the BJP because they hate the Congress, and hate the communists even more. Some vote for the BJP because they thought MMS government was remote controlled by a dynasty.

I am sure all these grey areas exist in Pakistani politics also. Yes, in all this, the Muslims get a raw deal. But to say that this government has been elected out of hate for Muslims is stretching it. If their vote share slides by 5-6% in the elections, they might just lose power and we will all hail it as a great defeat of communalism, whereas that too will be stretching it because electoral arithmetic is very unforgiving

Hindus can give all the reasons in the world for voting Modi

But deep down we all know the one common reason why he got elected. Gujarat 2002. That unites all hindus

Even after the fact Modi government grossly mismanaged the covid crisis BJP would still win elections easily. And the reason this time again would be the same

 

[SIPRA]

Sir jee please define elite. Do you mean the rich, the well educated, the wise, the sophisticated (real or pretentious), well connected? These are often used interchangeably by those who don't consider themselves to be elite.

You have yourself defined it. I meant the same. By "elite", I imply people of societal influence. The source of influence can be wealth, intellect, education, position (political, official, private), religious/spiritual stature etc. etc. etc. I differentiate "elite" from the commoner, because I believe that, at least, in our part of the world, commoners are generally either indifferent or mere followers of the elite class, owing to certain degree of psychological subjugation.

Many elites are agnostic or non-religious and couldn't care less about most religions. The right wing accuses Hindu elite of pandering to Muslims. Many upper castes, by virtue of having access to better education are open minded and can see through fundamentalist tendencies. It is no surprise that many journalists and thinkers in the media who dislike Hindu extremism are caste Brahmins.

That is why, I have differentiated between "disliking" and "hatred", in my post. My idea, based upon my own experience, is that education, again, at least, in our part of the world, generally fails to overcome very fundamental prejudices, particularly those ingrained during childhood indoctrination. That applies to even those people, who become atheists, skeptics, agnostics, and likes. I have noticed that even a Muslim agnostic remains somewhat different than a Hindu agnostic.

Further, I feel that psychological conflict between Hindus and Muslims is not of religious nature per se; it is social/cultural, which arises out of grossly different reading of the post-Muslim history of the Subcontinent.

In any case, Hinduism itself is a whole buffet of creeds, including agnosticism, atheism, pantheism, and what not. So, a Hindu agnostic or atheist can still retain the psychological baggage of the medieval history.

Exceptions, of course, are there; but we are bound to make our ideas, based upon predominant collective attitudes and leanings.

 

[Paitoo]

You have yourself defined it. I meant the same. By "elite", I imply people of societal influence. The source of influence can be wealth, intellect, education, position (political, official, private), religious/spiritual stature etc. etc. etc. I differentiate "elite" from the commoner, because I believe that, at least, in our part of the world, commoners are generally either indifferent or mere followers of the elite class, owing to certain degree of psychological subjugation.



That is why, I have differentiated between "disliking" and "hatred", in my post. My idea, based upon my own experience, is that education, again, at least, in our part of the world, generally fails to overcome very fundamental prejudices, particularly those ingrained during childhood indoctrination. That applies to even those people, who become atheists, skeptics, agnostics, and likes. I have noticed that even a Muslim agnostic remains somewhat different than a Hindu agnostic.

Further, I feel that psychological conflict between Hindus and Muslims is not of religious nature per se; it is social/cultural, which arises out of grossly different reading of the post-Muslim history of the Subcontinent.

In any case, Hinduism itself is a whole buffet of creeds, including agnosticism, atheism, pantheism, and what not. So, a Hindu agnostic or atheist can still retain the psychological baggage of the medieval history.

Exceptions, of course, are there; but we are bound to make our ideas, based upon predominant collective attitudes and leanings.

Excellent analysis as usual. I will respond a little later as my brain cells need recharging and I am slacking at work. Need some chai and biskoot.

 

[Novus ordu seclorum]

Most of the elite Hindus naturally dislike Islam and Muslims, owing to a very peculiar reading of the medieval history, and its inadvertent impact on their collective psyche; but "hatred" perhaps is a very intense word, for that emotion.

You are forgetting British divide and rule policy. Prior to 1857 there was no significant intercommunal violence in India.

The Partition: The British game of ‘divide and rule’

Before leaving India, the British made sure a united India would not be possible.

www.aljazeera.com

"The British had been horrified, during the Revolt of 1857, to see Hindus and Muslims fighting side by side and under each other’s command against the foreign oppressor. They vowed this would not happen again. “Divide et impera was an old Roman maxim, and it shall be ours”, wrote Lord Elphinstone. A systematic policy of fomenting separate consciousness among the two communities was launched, with overt British sponsorship."

Divide and rule - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

"Indian jurist Markandey Katju wrote in The Nation:[20]

Up to 1857, there were no communal problems in India; all communal riots and animosity began after 1857. No doubt even before 1857, there were differences between Hindus and Muslims, the Hindus going to temples and the Muslims going to mosques, but there was no animosity. In fact, the Hindus and Muslims used to help each other; Hindus used to participate in Eid celebrations, and Muslims in Holi and Diwali. The Muslim rulers like the Mughals, Nawab of Awadh and Murshidabad, Tipu Sultan, etc were totally secular; they organised Ramlilas, participated in Holi, Diwali, etc. Ghalib's affectionate letters to his Hindu friends like Munshi Shiv Naraln Aram, Har Gopal Tofta, etc attest to the affection between Hindus and Muslims at that time. In 1857, the ‘Great Mutiny’ broke out in which the Hindus and Muslims jointly fought against the British. This shocked the British government so much that after suppressing the Mutiny, they decided to start the policy of divide and rule (see online “History in the Service of Imperialism” by B.N. Pande). All communal riots began after 1857, artificially engineered by the British authorities. The British collector would secretly call the Hindu Pandit, pay him money, and tell him to speak against Muslims, and similarly he would secretly call the Maulvi, pay him money, and tell him to speak against Hindus. This communal poison was injected into our body politic year after year and decade after decade.[20]"

 

[SIPRA]

Need some chai and biskoot.

Add some "samosa", "kachori" and "pakorha", as well,

 

[Joe Shearer]

Just like Hindus as a nation are not homogenous same is the case with their hatred for Muslims

Some are outright genocidal just like that Yogi who was giving genocidal speeches few weeks ago. The likes of him don't care what the world thinks while they are committing genocide

Some are genocidal but are also apprehensive about the negative perception it would bring about them

Some are not in favor of genocide. They are happy with periodic pogroms like that in Gujarat 2002

Some don't want pogroms but want to keep muslims in their "place"

Some just want Hindus to keep ruling the way they ruled under Congress with giving some small token perks to muslims to look good

So there is no one homogenous form of hatred that exists among Hindus for muslims. There are various kinds of it

but all in all these hindus work in tandem to keep the cycle of oppression going without any hindrance

Your friends might fall in anyone of these categories or they might have their own new category but that is the reality of hindu society today

I'm glad you took the trouble of writing this detailed response. I can say, with my hand on my heart, that I have PLENTY of friends who do not fall in any of these categories.

Clarification - we are talking about my Hindu friends. I also have Sikh friends, Christian friends and - don't fall down in a faint - Muslim friends.

If you send me mail - my e-mail is in my signature - you can ring them up and check for yourself. I hope you will not want to check the views of my Pakistani friends; if you do, their numbers or e-mail ids are also available.

Do you have the heart to accept my challenge?

Yup

Lets assume Pakistan officially accepts India's occupation of Kashmir. Stops meddling inside India in anyways. The hatred for Pakistan won't end.

Pakistan doesn't accept Indian administration of part of Kashmir. Pakistan sometimes tries to interfere inside India, not as much as some dumb Sanghi clucks claim, not as little as you think, but somewhere in between. Even then, not only do I not hate Pakistan, I wish Pakistan and Pakistanis will do well.

After all Pakistan is muslim too and founded on Islam. An epitome of all evils.

It simply doesn't work like that. Only a minority section of Indians think Pakistan is an epitome of all evils. Why did I cross out a word like that? Because on thinking about what I wrote, I realised that is not so simple.

1. A majority of Indians DON'T think about Pakistan at all (normally).
2. Sadly, I have to admit that of that minority of Indians who DO think about Pakistan, the majority fear - not hate, fear - Pakistan.

Remember that an individual like me came to these forums, All Things Pakistan, at first, then to PakTeaHouse, and finally here, AFTER the Bombay terrorist attack of 2008. So that means, I hope you are paying attention, that people like me were opposed to the BJP LONG before Pakistan became a word filled with horror. For me, personally, that horror has worn off, as I realised who in Pakistan had planned and executed that horrifying incident; for some, it lasts.

So you are to understand that it is not as simple as you seem to think it is.

Here again hatred won't be homogenous. Some might want to remove Pakistan completely wiped away from the world map. Some might like it in existence but completely weak and completely relied on India

Again, you are looking at that which you want to see. There are many Indians who do not want anything for Pakistan but for her to exist in peace and prosperity PROVIDED it is not a source of harm for us and our fellow-citizens. Is that an act of enmity? Or does it show hatred?

This is the situation of hindu society and in fact always. The situation is just more exposed today thanks to internet and social media

No, thanks to Internet and social media, there is much more discussion on this, and there are many more who are seen and heard. The numbers haven't changed hugely - they have a little, due to the constant repetition of fear factors by some, but not as much as we fear - they have just begun to be heard far more.

Ask yourself one last question.

Do you think anyone would spend time trying to explain these things to you if he hated you or your country?

 

[Paitoo]

Add some "samosa", "kachori" and "pakorha", as well,

Again you are rubbing it in, like you did after describing Mian sahab's meal that day. Cholestrol charha hua hai. Biwi is allowing me only 2 oatmeal biscuits with slimmed milk tea. Meh.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Most of the elite Hindus naturally dislike Islam and Muslims, owing to a very peculiar reading of the medieval history, and its inadvertent impact on their collective psyche; but "hatred" perhaps is a very intense word, for that emotion.

It is flat out untrue - I am referring to hatred.

I hope you will consider me an elite Hindu; I qualify in many respects, other than money, and I am also a student of history. For the matter of Islam and of Muslims, I respect Muslims as fellow citizens of my country, when we are talking of Muslim Indians, and I wish to see legislation that will make gibes about their citizenship punishable under law, just as gibes about scheduled caste citizens are already jail-worthy offences in Indian law. For Muslims of other countries, I think of them as just another citizen of the world, to be befriended if the occasion is suitable, to be left alone if they act hostile or unfriendly. For religion, if I were to abandon mine, I would choose to be a Buddhist, perhaps a Sikh, but one unwilling to torture my depleted head of hair to adopt their styles of uncut hair.

Hatred - no, other than for terrorists, including Hindu extremists who use terror to bully minorities.

Sir jee please define elite. Do you mean the rich, the well educated, the wise, the sophisticated (real or pretentious), well connected? These are often used interchangeably by those who don't consider themselves to be elite.

Many elites are agnostic or non-religious and couldn't care less about most religions. The right wing accuses Hindu elite of pandering to Muslims. Many upper castes, by virtue of having access to better education are open minded and can see through fundamentalist tendencies. It is no surprise that many journalists and thinkers in the media who dislike Hindu extremism are caste Brahmins.

That is very accurate.

Although I have an innate prejudice against those Brahmins who have made a living out of their desire to go back to a mythical past, I am married to one, and my daughter is married to one. It is almost a joke that the strongest stands against Hindu extremism is by precisely Brahmins.

 

[SIPRA]

It is flat out untrue - I am referring to hatred.

I hope you will consider me an elite Hindu; I qualify in many respects, other than money, and I am also a student of history.

Sir Jee: You have totally misread my post, or perhaps I have failed to communicate.

1) I said "disliking", and not "hatred". I differentiate between them.
2) There are always exceptions, and I think that you, @DrJekyll, and surely many others would fall under that category.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Take this hijab issue as an example

Hindus say that they just want to impose uniform on muslim girls and that is why they are against hijab or burqa

But the reality is that they just want to put Muslims in their place (auqat)

We all have seen those videos where Muslim women (not students) were forced to remove their hijabs and burqas. Those videos are enough for BJP to win any coming elections

The fact that they managed to make muslim women remove their piece of clothing in front of everyone is reason enough for BJP to win again and again

I agree, you are right, BUT that is true of the BJP and of the Sangh Parivar, NOT of Hindus. If you were to substitute Sangh Parivar for Hindu above, you would be precisely right.

You are also right in predicting that the BJP will get votes doing this kind of thing.

You are wrong when you think this helps the BJP to WIN elections. The BJP also loses elections. Oppressing Muslims is NOT an automatic key to electoral success. Want to count?

NOT BJP - 15 out of 26

1. Kerala
2. Tamil Nadu
3. Andhra Pradesh
4. Telangana
5. Maharashtra
6. Rajasthan
7. Punjab
8. West Bengal
9. Odisha
10. Jharkhand
11. Chhatisgarh
12. Sikkim
13. Meghalaya
14. Nagaland
15. Mizoram

Hindus can give all the reasons in the world for voting Modi

But deep down we all know the one common reason why he got elected. Gujarat 2002. That unites all hindus

Look at the figures. Modi won because he won the moronic cowbelt and Gujarat. NOT because Hindus all voted for him. You can't shut your eyes, Areesh.

Even after the fact Modi government grossly mismanaged the covid crisis BJP would still win elections easily. And the reason this time again would be the same

Let us wait for March 10. You will find that people have lost faith in him. He may still win in UP; the BJP and the Sangh Parivar are very strong there. But his glory days are over. You have seen the count of non-BJP states above; I hope that tells you a story, of how more than half the Indian states are against the BJP.

You can check all this easily, Areesh.

 

[SIPRA]

Again you are rubbing it in, like you did after describing Mian sahab's meal that day. Cholestrol charha hua hai. Biwi is allowing me only 2 oatmeal biscuits with slimmed milk tea. Meh.

My late father had very high cholesterol, and he was also very fond of good food, including eggs, butter, mutton, desi chicken etc. etc. He used to take anti-cholesterol medicine. Whenever me, or some of my close doctor friends, asked him to control his food; he used to say that then for what the hell these medicines are?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Sir Jee: You have totally misread my post, or perhaps I have failed to communicate.

1) I said "disliking", and not "hatred". I differentiate between them.
2) There are always exceptions, and I think that you, @DrJekyll, and surely many others would fall under that category.

I am grateful that you realise our position, and I hope you will include even 'dislike' as being alien to my feelings (actually, I took a quick count in my head, and my brother and sister are equally strongly against Muslim-haters); I am convinced, from the little I have read his posts, that @DrJekyll is of that opinion, too.

 

[SIPRA]

I am grateful that you realise our position, and I hope you will include even 'dislike' as being alien to my feelings (actually, I took a quick count in my head, and my brother and sister are equally strongly against Muslim-haters); I am convinced, from the little I have read his posts, that @DrJekyll is of that opinion, too.

In my original post, I said "most", not "all". My assessment is that you and @DrJekyll belong to a small minority; but this is a matter of statistics, which perhaps is difficult to settle.

 

[Paitoo]

NOT BJP - 15 out of 26

Make that 17 out of 26 non BJP states. They won in Karnataka and one more state (not sure Goa or MP) by shameless buying of MLAs. A murder of democracy.

Not that it would matter to anyone.

 

[Joe Shearer]

You have yourself defined it. I meant the same. By "elite", I imply people of societal influence. The source of influence can be wealth, intellect, education, position (political, official, private), religious/spiritual stature etc. etc. etc. I differentiate "elite" from the commoner, because I believe that, at least, in our part of the world, commoners are generally either indifferent or mere followers of the elite class, owing to certain degree of psychological subjugation.



That is why, I have differentiated between "disliking" and "hatred", in my post. My idea, based upon my own experience, is that education, again, at least, in our part of the world, generally fails to overcome very fundamental prejudices, particularly those ingrained during childhood indoctrination. That applies to even those people, who become atheists, skeptics, agnostics, and likes. I have noticed that even a Muslim agnostic remains somewhat different than a Hindu agnostic.

Further, I feel that psychological conflict between Hindus and Muslims is not of religious nature per se; it is social/cultural, which arises out of grossly different reading of the post-Muslim history of the Subcontinent.

In any case, Hinduism itself is a whole buffet of creeds, including agnosticism, atheism, pantheism, and what not. So, a Hindu agnostic or atheist can still retain the psychological baggage of the medieval history.

Exceptions, of course, are there; but we are bound to make our ideas, based upon predominant collective attitudes and leanings.

I am very sorry, I have JUST read this post, that explains a lot, but have read it just now, last of all.

In my original post, I said "most", not "all". My assessment is that you and @DrJekyll belong to a small minority; but this is a matter of statistics, which perhaps is difficult to settle.

At school, these things never occurred to us. I used to hang out after school in the house of my friend Zaff, and no one ever bothered about it. If I were to land up at his doorstep today, I am sure of receiving the same welcome as I used to get 45 years ago. So, too, with Joe Verghese, or with the famous Dr. Behram Pardiwalla, whose vocabulary even then would have melted a sailor's ear-wax.

We are not actually that small a minority, but you are right, enumerating and calculating it is almost impossible. A recent PEW Survey defines the position rather better than I can.

Make that 17 out of 26 non BJP states. They won in Karnataka and one more state (not sure Goa or MP) by shameless buying of MLAs. A murder of democracy.

Not that it would matter to anyone.

Actually, I deliberately left out Karnataka, that I consider my home state, being a rootless refugee in the territory of the Union of India, and Goa and MP, in all of which they won by horse-trading of the worst variety.