In favor of Hindutva; by a Pakistani muslim

[xeuss]

The SC said that Hinduism and Hindutva is the same.

In the other threads, you have been claiming that the justice system in India cannot be trusted. I agree with you on that.

 

[Jackdaws]

The SC said that Hinduism and Hindutva is the same.



You were discussing "Hindutva", not India.

Before claiming to know "deep down in my heart", why don't you tell us who this 'Hindutva leadership" is ?

When?

 

[Gadkari]

When?

The famous SC ruling on Hindutva.

In the other threads, you have been claiming that the justice system in India cannot be trusted. I agree with you on that.

You never trusted it anyway. Judiciary is like a Referee. What good is a Referee if the Rules of the game is not Fair ?

 

[HalfMoon]

The SC said that Hinduism and Hindutva is the same.

SC is wrong. Even veer Savarkar will agree with me that Hindutva and Hinduism are not the same.

Hindutva is not the same as Hinduism said Savarkar

https://www.telegraphindia.com/india/hindutva-is-not-the-same-as-hinduism-said-savarkar/cid/1699550

 

[xeuss]

See, we gave a fair chance to Jamatudawa and Jaish e Muhammad, because people wanted that. And why you think we succeeded against TTP? Because people complained against them in first place.

So you are suggesting that the thousands who died in the TTP attacks were justified in the name of "fair chance"? I question your moral compass.

 

[Gadkari]

SC is wrong. Even veer Savarkar will agree with me that Hindutva and Hinduism are not the same.

I have already said Hindutva is political response to threat to Hinduism.

So SC was wrong. But back then Hindutva meant something else. It was in support of Ram Temple in Ayodhya so by that argument, it was the same.

 

[Trango Towers]

Well, I may sound crazy, but yes, I fully support the idea of constitution of a Hindu national country in our neighborhood.
At the time of partition, muslims were 24% of the total population, yet they demanded a separate country. My forefathers supported that idea, I also stick to it.
However, Hindus were 85 percent, and even today, they are 80% in India. And yet they are not allowed to declare India as a Hindu country.

My question is why not?

If USA can write : In god(christian god) we trust, why can't a Hindu do the same? If top leadership in USA and Germany and even in Russia today declares themselves Christians, Pakistan and Iran can use the name Islamic republic, why only Hindu is pushed to declare themselves as secular? Why can't Hindus also write Hindu republic or Sanatana Republic?

I kick this bigotry and superlative hypocrisy. In my humble opinion, Hindus reserve full right to declare India as Hindus Rashtra.

Individual thoughts please.
@Joe Shearer dont kill me for my thoughts, but I really think that Hindus are victim here.
@Nilgiri @pothead @Soumitra @jamahir

Thank God you are and will remain a person of no consequence. Supporting right wing fascists is what you propose simply because your forefathers did something is barmy

 

[HalfMoon]

I have already said Hindutva is political response to threat to Hinduism.

So SC was wrong. But back then Hindutva meant something else. It was in support of Ram Temple in Ayodhya so by that argument, it was the same.

Well you can use the definition as you like to suit your politics but my point was only on the truth.

 

[xeuss]

When?

I believe he is referring to a 1995 ruling. That ruling itself can be interpreted in many ways, but its immediate effect was the justification of the use of Hindutva for political mileage.

 

[Gadkari]

Well you can use the definition as you like to suit your politics but my point was only on the truth.

LOL. What truth ?

Hindutva existed BEFORE Savarkar.

It was coined by Shivaji in 1645.

He called it "Hindavi swaraj" or Hindu self rule.

Then there was the Sannyasi rebellion or Sannyasi Revolt (1770-1820) which was the inspiration for the 1857 First war for Independence.

It has a LONG history and comes from the soul of India. Only those who have sold their soul are unable to hear it.

 

[xeuss]

I have already said Hindutva is political response to threat to Hinduism.

So SC was wrong. But back then Hindutva meant something else. It was in support of Ram Temple in Ayodhya so by that argument, it was the same.

Hahaha....80% Hindu country and "Hindu Khatrey main hai"

 

[HalfMoon]

LOL. What truth ?

Hindutva existed BEFORE Savarkar.

It was coined by Shivaji in 1645.

He called it "Hindavi swaraj" or Hindu self rule.

Then there was the Sannyasi rebellion or Sannyasi Revolt (1770-1820) which was the inspiration for the 1857 First war for Independence.

It has a LONG history and comes from the soul of India. Only those who have sold their soul are unable to hear it.

The fact is Hinduism existed even before the advent of Islam and Christianity in India. Hindutva took birth as a political slogan only after Islam and Christianity came to India.

Marathas themselves worked with the British to defeat Tipu who was supported by the French.

 

[Gadkari]

Hahaha....80% Hindu country and "Hindu Khatrey main hai"

There are bomb blasts and killings in Kashmir Because we are 80% Hindu country.

Same with killings in Bengal and Assam and Nagaland and Kerala.

Those killings ARE because we are a 80% Hindu country.

So yes, Hinduism khatrey mai hai. Only a fool will refuse to acknowledge this.

 

[HalfMoon]

Hahaha....80% Hindu country and "Hindu Khatrey main hai"

80% of power is owned by 20% people - Pareto principle

 

[Gadkari]

The fact is Hinduism existed even before the advent of Islam and Christianity in India. Hindutva took birth as a political slogan only after Islam and Christianity came to India.

Marathas themselves worked with the British to defeat Tipu who was supported by the French.

Ins't that what I said ?

That Hindutva was a POLITICAL RESPONSE to threat to Hinduism ? Those threats came in the form of "islam" and "christianity" and later in the form of Communism.

Today India works with christian US to contain communist China supported by muslim pakistan. Marathas did the same. I don't see the problem.

80% of power is owned by 20% people - Pareto principle

Tho mei kya karu ? Job chod du ?