Mourn idea of India, but don’t forget that the idea of people is changing too

[Arulmozhi Varman]

Did you mean 1945/46 General and Provincial election?

Nope. 1951 elections.

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

Nope. 1951 elections.

That was POST the fact that a secular constitution was forced on unknowing and unwilling Hindus. Indian constitution went into force in 1950. Besides, this was a fact that once it went into force, its fundamental structure cannot be changed. There were too many hurdles to amend it.

The political question changed post 1950. It was no longer what kind of nation we want to be -- that was forced on Indians by western trained useful slave-minded idiots. It was now how to grab a political piece of power within the framework of that constitution. This led to breaking of political landscape of India and especially Hindus into castes, language and regionalism. This remained broken till 2014 when Hindus for the first time voted as a common group.

 

[Arulmozhi Varman]

That was POST the fact that a secular constitution was forced on unknowing and unwilling Hindus. Indian constitution went into force in 1950.

Yes and then opposition parties were vociferously against the'secular' constitution. If people had wanted they could have defeated the Congress and could have voted Jana Sangh in 51'. They could have changed the constitutional as per their wish. But they didn't.

India as an civilisation has never been an closed one. A reason why we are still standing even after withstanding various onslaughts from various barbaric invaders from the west and the north. Some people here even Indian Muslims would identify more with them than their own ilks. That's what I am against and not against their religion or them. But for that, there is no need to imply Hindu Rastra. Cos there had never been one before. Even Nepal was a titular Hindu state but the laws weren't Hindu. Just cos if PM or President post is reserved for a Hindu, the ground situation isn't going to change. See Pakistan.

If you do want Hindu Rastra, what are the laws of the so called Hindu Rastra. Who will frame it? Who will integrate various schools of thought within various Dharmic sects. My family has a family deity to whom we sacrifice animals. Do you folks even understand the religious significance of these? When animal sacrifice ban law was bought before 2004 on the behest of RSS, BJP was nearly wiped in South India. Such was the cultural sentiment of people back then. Gays were accepted in our society back then but now they were happy holding hands with Islamic and Christian groups when our courts outlawed that article and were against that ruling. Parties like DMK, INC forced me to BJP by trying to destroy or badmouth my cultural heritage. By asking for an Hindu Rastra you are indirectly asking for one without you realising it.

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

If people had wanted they could have defeated the Congress and could have voted Jana Sangh in 51'.

Bhartiya Jana Sangh at that point of time was only 2 year old party. It lacked any political experience that INC had due to its aeons of existence. It was their first election. To be fair, in 1940s, Hindus had NO political representation. There was NO political party based on Hindu nation ideology. As I said, this was the greatest folly of Hindus. They never fashioned their needs and desires in a political front till very late. Compare this with Muslims who always had a nation wide party supporting their agenda even in 1935-47.

BTW, since you brought up 1951-52 election, did you know BR Ambedkar LOST it? The architect of constitution lost the election! Hows that for popular mandate on the constitution he fashioned? Heck, he lost Lok Sabha poll AGAIN in 1954 bypoll. Infact, he NEVER ever won a popular vote based election after his misdeed of fashioning a constitution that denied Hindus any political agency for a very very very long time.

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

They could have changed the constitutional as per their wish. But they didn't.

Do you know, that by constitution, NO political party can change the fundamental structure of constitution? It took Indira Gandhi an emergency to insert the word secular -- though Indian constitution and laws were always imposed secularism on Hindus.

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

If you do want Hindu Rastra, what are the laws of the so called Hindu Rastra.

The fundametal idea behind Hindu Rashtra IMHO is this : The political power lies purely or majorly in the hands of Hindus and Sikh. You cann't have any meaningful political power if you are no Hindu or Sikh. You cann't profess secularism and have any political agency. You cann't criticize Hinduism or Sikhi and still expect to be protected by freedom of speech. You cann't fashion laws that disproportionately put Hindus or Sikhs at disadvantage and advantage Muslim or Christians. Take a look at Pakistan and learn. Thats what you need to be.

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

India as an civilisation has never been an closed one. A reason why we are still standing even after withstanding various onslaughts from various barbaric invaders from the west and the north. Some people here even Indian Muslims would identify more with them than their own ilks. That's what I am against and not against their religion or them. But for that, there is no need to imply Hindu Rastra. Cos there had never been one before. Even Nepal was a titular Hindu state but the laws weren't Hindu. Just cos if PM or President post is reserved for a Hindu, the ground situation isn't going to change. See Pakistan.

Oh dear!
Do you really believe that Hindus are still standing? Hindus have LOST their homeland to Muslims and "enlightened" seculars. There is NO homeland for Hindus anywhere. Hinduism can be crushed all over world with absolutely no repercussion. There is a secular country called India but there is NO Hindustan or Aryavart what so ever. Hindus as a political power are dead.

 

[letsrock]

Nope cos you couldn't talk Tamil when you so called tagging me on Tamil related threads. Bug off.

i couldnt talk tamil because i am not a tamil. duh. I dont really understand you - you guys are such primitive racists and the joke is your own govt within india hardly has any respect for you.

 

[letsrock]

The fundametal idea behind Hindu Rashtra IMHO is this : The political power lies purely or majorly in the hands of Hindus and Sikh. You cann't have any meaningful political power if you are no Hindu or Sikh. You cann't profess secularism and have any political agency. You cann't criticize Hinduism or Sikhi and still expect to be protected by freedom of speech. You cann't fashion laws that disproportionately put Hindus or Sikhs at disadvantage and advantage Muslim or Christians. Take a look at Pakistan and learn. Thats what you need to be.

Yea the lesson from pakistan is that bengalis wanted a seperate nation and got their own. There are far more unifying factors than religion - especially hinduism.

 

[letsrock]

You are getting me wrong. Its not the uprooting and killings that is what is the end goal. The end goal is a Hindu nation. A homeland for Hindus because there is none. A nation which does not forces Hindus to give up their religion to align with secular agenda of elites, like it happens in India. Such a nation is not possible unless Hindus are sole holder of political power. Like it is in Pakistan. Like it is in B'desh.

Pakistan is the true example of this : You need to be Muslim to hold any meaningful political power in the nation. You cann't go against Islam and expect yourself to hold any political or administrative post. Heck, god have mercy on you if you do so. It is such kind of nation Hindus also need for themselves.

Hindu's folly has been to remain detached from reality. Reality is this : unless you consolidate your political power, you will remain powerless. In India, "Hindu - Pakistan" is a term which was derided while thats exactly what Hindus needed. Most likely Hindus and Sikhs can co-exist in such a political entity but surely a nation where 20-25% of political power is in hands of Muslims is not going to be good of Hindus. Time of reckoning is near and unless Hindus fashion a Hindu homeland out of current secular mess of India, they will cease to exist.

Jinnah was absolutely right on this. Muslim needed their homeland in 1947... and so did and still do Hindus and Sikhs, likely together.

Muslims are 13 percent of india - what political power do they have ? they barely have any representation in lok sabha - not even one cabinet minister at center.

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

Yea the lesson from pakistan is that bengalis wanted a seperate nation and got their own. There are far more unifying factors than religion - especially hinduism.

The real lesson was that religion ALONE is not enough to keep a nation together.

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

Muslims are 13 percent of india - what political power do they have ? they barely have any representation in lok sabha - not even one cabinet minister at center.

The biggest power off Muslims is that they vote as a united front. They did that before independence, Muslim league got almost ALL the seats reserved for Muslims. In face of a divided Hindu vote, they are a potent political power. Hindus have voted as a combined block only recently in 2014 and 19. Muslims have ALWAYS voted as a single combined block, even before independence

The second part is, Muslims are the fastest growing population in India. They have rejected the secular's call for limiting the family size. They have a young population and they will soon become the largest population in India. No population control policy can be implemented on Muslims till India remains secular with democratic.

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

If you do want Hindu Rastra, what are the laws of the so called Hindu Rastra. Who will frame it? Who will integrate various schools of thought within various Dharmic sects. My family has a family deity to whom we sacrifice animals. Do you folks even understand the religious significance of these? When animal sacrifice ban law was bought before 2004 on the behest of RSS, BJP was nearly wiped in South India. Such was the cultural sentiment of people back then. Gays were accepted in our society back then but now they were happy holding hands with Islamic and Christian groups when our courts outlawed that article and were against that ruling. Parties like DMK, INC forced me to BJP by trying to destroy or badmouth my cultural heritage. By asking for an Hindu Rastra you are indirectly asking for one without you realising it.

There is no need to impose one set of laws to ALL Hindus. State level laws can deal with difference in regional variances on such matters. The differentiator with Muslims and Christians is that they can NEVER have a common understanding with Hindus because they have pledged loyalty towards a religion foreign to India. They will ALWAYS look towards outside India for filial and religious community ties. Such kind of people cannot be allowed to have political power in a nation which is homeland for Hindus and Sikhs.

Fortunately for Hindus, variances are tolerated and even revered. There is no single one book of truth in Hinduism. Nor one single god and no one single authority on what is divine. Variances among Hindus can be reconciled because Hindus do not expand by converting each others to their faith. They usually want to be left to their devices -- unlike Christians and Muslims. This tolerance of variances have been used to push this f'ed up secular agenda.

If you look at it, Sikhs also do not actively try to convert others into their faiths. They have in past asked for political identity but a peaceful co-existence with them is very much possible for Hindus. Besides they don't have the "increase the tribe" agenda of Muslims in India or save the souls agenda of Christians. Like variances of Hinduism, they want to be left alone to their devices and possibly a political identity. A compromise based on autonomy and political representation can work with Sikhs and Hindus. No such thing is ever possible with muslims or christians.

 

[xeuss]

Indeed! Muslims have Pakistan and Bangladesh in subcontinent. Hindus are practically homeless! They don't have a single country they can call their home land which can accepts them. India forces them to quit their religion and accept secularism. There is NO country for 1 billion Hindus, they have to take control of the only country in which they have majority and fashion it to be their home land.

What Hindus needed is a Hindu equivalent of Jinnah who consolidates their political power. Modi comes close but even he is not what it will take.

Curious....when did India force you to quit Hinduism? Do you have any personal examples to share?

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

Curious....when did India force you to quit Hinduism? Do you have any personal examples to share?

Indian constitution is anti-Hindu.

Muslim personal law is based on Sharia but Hindu law has nothing to do with Hinduism.