Not so secular India

[Kazhugu]

BJP exploits religious bigotry by telling majority Hindus ("us") that Congress panders to Muslims and Christians ("them").

they are telling the truth....

actually if the congress had done something better for the muslims as a part of their pandering..i would have excused them as i believe ends justify means...but all they have done is ingrain the victimhood complex so deep in the muslim psyche that the community is left stagnating at all levels... and also there is just one hindu party (as you call it) but there are a multitude of muslim parties that you forgot - mim, pdp, aiudf-badrudeen, pfi etc....just reminding...

 

[Developereo]

I don't really understand where you want to go with this "secular individuals" stuff. Individuals are mostly liberal or conservative & cannot real be described as secular, which is more of an attribute of a state. The point is not whether individuals are communal or whether a community lags behind due to a number of factors & not even whether a part of that lagging is caused by discrimination by individuals or groups but whether the state itself is a direct party to that discrimination & whether such treatment is sanctioned under law. There is only so much any state can do, communal people exist everywhere. What you must appreciate is what Nehru said - "the greatest challenge is to create a secular state in a deeply religious country". If you look at India dispassionately, you will be forced to admit that whatever the failures & I have no doubt that there are many, a framework for a better future does exist & is profoundly secular.Sometimes, it is necessary to credit the intention even if the facts don't always reflect that.

By "secular individuals", I mean individuals who believe in, and are committed to, a secular India. Even the constitution is not written in stone. I don't know the details of the Indian process, but most democratic constitutions can be amended given a sufficient majority. Already there are Indians who badmouth Gandhi and Nehru -- there is no guarantee their principles will be respected as time goes on.

So, yes, secularism may be popular right now, and government institutions committed to defending it, but the debate is about the rise of Hindu nationalism coinciding with the rise of India's power and whether secularism is in for a fight.

 

[Roybot]

What makes you think that there is increase in Hindu nationalism? Its lower than before if anything.

You only get to hear about these things lot more these days, cause of advancement of media and internet.

 

[Developereo]

huh...then blame the parents who dont send their children to study....how can the state be responsible for them....rhe state gives various incentives to all...but its ultimately left to the parents to enroll the children in school....

now let ,me tell what the problem with many muslim families...they bear six to seven children when they are barely able to raise two..because their local mullah told hem that children are allah's gift...now unable to concentrate on all of them ...they send them to work instead to school...while comparitively in christian,hindu jain families its mosly 2 children and if they are well off three...so they are able to afford education and this cycle continues...

It is accepted that Muslim communities themselves also bear responsibility for their condition. The article about West Bengal claimed that public infrastructure like schools and bus services were less developed in Muslim majority villages. Sachar took these factors into account and the government made recommendations to redress the balance. Once the government improved the infrastructure, the Muslim condition improved markedly. In fact, a follow up article claims West Bengali Muslims now fare better than their Gujarati counterparts.

So what can we take away from this West Bengal example of dramatic improvement for Muslims?

Did the large Muslim families magically shrink in less than a decade? Did their supposed culture of 'victimhood' change? The answer, of course, is that the major change was in the government actually implementing reforms to correct infrastructure deficiencies and institutional discrimination, per Sachar's recommendations. In other words, given half a helping hand from the state, Muslims are more than willing to lift themselves out of poverty.

finally....sachar is not holy god that all he said is correct..

Of course not, but his study was a professional, objective study that took many factors into account, including historical and cultural influences. It is one of the most comprehensive studies on the subject that I know of.

they are telling the truth....

actually if the congress had done something better for the muslims as a part of their pandering..i would have excused them as i believe ends justify means...but all they have done is ingrain the victimhood complex so deep in the muslim psyche that the community is left stagnating at all levels... and also there is just one hindu party (as you call it) but there are a multitude of muslim parties that you forgot - mim, pdp, aiudf-badrudeen, pfi etc....just reminding...

I never called BJP a 'Hindu party'; any more than Congress is a 'Muslim party'. I said they pander to Hindu nationalism and promote a divisive attitude of victimhood in the Hindu community at the expense of the minorities.

---------- Post added at 03:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:14 PM ----------

What makes you think that there is increase in Hindu nationalism? Its lower than before if anything.

You only get to hear about these things lot more these days, cause of advancement of media and internet.

Google tells otherwise. Do you have any objective evidence to support your claim that it is on the decline?

 

[Roybot]

Google tells otherwise. Do you have any objective evidence to support your claim that it is on the decline?

Google is also media.

Do you have any objective evidence to support your claim that it is on the rise? And no, news articles won't do.

Look at number of seats won by Shiv Sena in India's General elections,

2009- Shiv Sena -11 seats- -0.26%

2004- Shiv Sena -12 seats- -0.2%

1999- Shiv Sena -15 seats- -0.21%

 

[Developereo]

Google is also media.

Do you have any objective evidence to support your claim that it is on the rise? And no, news articles won't do.

Look at number of seats won by Shiv Sena in India's General elections,

2009- Shiv Sena -11 seats- -0.26%

2004- Shiv Sena -12 seats- -0.2%

1999- Shiv Sena -15 seats- -0.21%

Shiv Sena is only one of a group of Hindu nationalist parties and third parties are notoriously irrelevant in most democracies.
List of Hindu political parties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

RSS claims to be recruiting 100000 youths/year -- not a big number by itself, but significant in terms of percentage growth.

The BJP and Modi in particular are gaining popularity despite Congress' excellent record in India's economic growth.

Also, here's an apropos thread:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/141420-ramayana-row-divides-india.html

 

[ashokdeiva]

Ive been to UP mostly, lucknow, Agra.. and a small stopover in Dehli..
It was open, there was little communal problem.. except that you found no beef...Muslims bought from Muslims, and Hindus dealth with Hindus.. the newer generation seemed to be mixing it up.. but not that much.
There were still cases of me having to identify myself as a muslim at a chai stop near rae bareli so I could be given tea in the disposable cup...instead of the glass one(thank god I did not mention I was Pakistani)..
Saw some saffron wrapped jogi or whatever preaching dharmatma(or something to do with your asambhav..cant recall) in front of a mosque and I distinctly heard him get very upset at the mosque's fairly small speaker calling the Azaan.
I have relatives there, compared to them.. the side of the family that is in Pakistan is literally bathing in gold.
These people are very patriotic, they love India.. but do mumble it out about the time they needed to run away from a Hindu superiority gang that happened some time ago

well let me tell you brother not only the little speaker in the mosqse, but the ones in the temples that chant mantras too irritame Hindus like me. If a puja or prayer is performed let the God and the people in the temple/mosque alone hear it rather than showing off to the world that some one is performing this. It is really a noice polution to every section of society, its a problem for the elderly people, its problem for the studying students, its a problem for bed riden patience that this noice pollution is causing.

 

[Bang Galore]

By "secular individuals", I mean individuals who believe in, and are committed to, a secular India. Even the constitution is not written in stone. I don't know the details of the Indian process, but most democratic constitutions can be amended given a sufficient majority. Already there are Indians who badmouth Gandhi and Nehru -- there is no guarantee their principles will be respected as time goes on.

So, yes, secularism may be popular right now, and government institutions committed to defending it, but the debate is about the rise of Hindu nationalism coinciding with the rise of India's power and whether secularism is in for a fight.

The basic principles of the Indian constitution, including the secular character of India cannot be altered by anyone, regardless of who is in power or what majority they command, The Supreme Court of India has held that parliament cannot make any amendments that fundamentally alter the nature of the constitution ruling that the basic principles of the constitution are inviolate.

ON April 24, 1973, a Special Bench comprising 13 Judges of the Supreme Court of India ruled by a majority of 7-6, that Article 368 of the Constitution "does not enable Parliament to alter the basic structure or framework of the Constitution" (Kesavananda Bharati vs. The State of Kerala; AIR 1973 S.C. 1461, (1973) 4 SCC 225). 6).......

Instead, the court propounded what has come to be known as "the basic structure" doctrine. Any part of the Constitution may be amended by following the procedure prescribed in Article 368. But no part may be so amended as to "alter the basic structure" of the Constitution. It is unamendable.

Basic Features of the Constitution according to the Kesavanada verdict each judge laid out separately, what he thought were the basic or essential features of the Constitution.

Sikri, C.J. explained that the concept of basic structure included:
# Supremacy of the Constitution
# Republican and democratic form of government
# Secular character of the Constitution
# Separation of powers between the legislature, executive and the judiciary
# Federal character of the Constitution

Shelat, J. and Grover, J. added three more basic features to this list:
# The mandate to build a welfare state contained in the Directive Principles of State Policy
# Unity and integrity of the nation
# Sovereignty of the country.

Unegde, J. and Mukherjea, J. identified a separate and shorter list of basic features:
# Sovereignty of India
# Democratic character of the polity
# Unity of the country
# Essential features of the individual freedoms secured to the citizens
# Mandate to build a welfare state

Jaganmohan Reddy, J. stated that elements of the basic features were to be found in the Preamble Of the Constitution and the provisions into which they translated such as:
# Sovereign democratic republic
# Justice - social, economic and political
# Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship
# Equality of status and the opportunity.

He said that the Constitution would not be itself without the fundamental freedoms and the directive principles. [7]

Former Chief Justice K. Subba Rao in an article on the two judgments Golaknath and Kesavananda Bharati, expressed the view:

"The existence of a remote judicial control may only act as a brake against hasty and unreasonable legislative and executive action and as a form of guarantee to the public against instability. The stability of the Constitution stabilizes the State."[8]

Basic Structure concept reaffirmed- the Indira Gandhi Election case In Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narayan[9] the Supreme Court applied the theory of basic structure and struck down cl.(4) of article 329-A,which was inserted by the 39th Amendment in 1975 on the ground that it was beyond the amending power of the parliament as it destroyed the ? basic feature? of the constitution. The amendment was made to the jurisdiction of all courts including SC, over disputes relating to elections involving the Prime Minister of India.

Basic Features of the Constitution according to the Election case verdict Again, each judge expressed views about what amounts to the basic structure of the Constitution: Justice Y.V. Chandrachud listed four basic features which he considered unamendable:
# Sovereign democratic republic status
# Equality of status and opportunity of an individual
# Secularism and freedom of conscience and religion
# 'government of laws and not of men' i.e. the rule of law

Justice H.R. Khanna- democracy is a basic feature of the Constitution and includes free and fair elections.
Basic structure doctrine reaffirmed - the Minerva Mills

 

[Kazhugu]

It is accepted that Muslim communities themselves also bear responsibility for their condition.

they bear the sole responsibility.if they give their child an education then they did a good thing.,,if not they did a bad thing....responsibility starts and ends with them...

The article about West Bengal claimed that public infrastructure like schools and bus services were less developed in Muslim majority villages.

o man..if you had been to west bengal you would know that pi's are less developed in all villages outside big cities like kolkata,haldia etc..there is nothin like muslim majority suffering from lack of pi's and hindu majority villages having abundant facilities...and once again if you know the demography of bengal there is no overwhelming majority of muslims in any districts..its either hindu majority or combined with muslims in a majority like 55-65% with signinficant hindu population...so all this talk about muslim majoriity villages being ignored is bs....it means the rest 45-35% hindus are also ignored..now you would not call it discrimiantion against hindus..would ya ?

Sachar took these factors into account and the government made recommendations to redress the balance. Once the government improved the infrastructure, the Muslim condition improved markedly. In fact, a follow up article claims West Bengali Muslims now fare better than their Gujarati counterparts.

west bengali muslims better than gujrati muslims...roflmao..

Literacy level of Muslims in Gujarat stands at 73.5% which is higher than the national average of 59.1%. Against a national average of 60.9%, 74.9% Muslims of Gujarat have attained primary education. An urban Muslim of Gujarat on an average earns Rs. 875 a month whereas their per capita income is Rs. 662 in Uttar Pradesh and Rs. 748 in West Bengal. Even more surprising is the fact that Gujarati Muslims occupy 5.4% share of government workforce against 2.1% of West Bengal, 3.2% of Delhi or 4.4% of Maharashtra

...click

Did the large Muslim families magically shrink in less than a decade? Did their supposed culture of 'victimhood' change? The answer, of course, is that the major change was in the government actually implementing reforms to correct infrastructure deficiencies and institutional discrimination, per Sachar's recommendations. In other words, given half a helping hand from the state, Muslims are more than willing to lift themselves out of poverty.

govt has done jackshit in this.....sachar report is still not accepted....we alll know how effectively our govt functions....i would say the change comes from the need to emulate others in their success....their sucess lies in knowing that no one will door-delivery govt jobs at their doorstep just because they are muslims...the willingness to partake in a growing economy.....if they are improving i'm the most happiest....but what i said before still stands....and i will be happy when what i said is replaced in the future with what these muslim families are doing...assimilating into the mainstream...thats the only thing we want of the..just improve yourselves individually so tat we improve as a nation collectively....

Of course not, but his study was a professional, objective study that took many factors into account, including historical and cultural influences. It is one of the most comprehensive studies on the subject that I know of.

i would not call his study objective.....

I never called BJP a 'Hindu party'; any more than Congress is a 'Muslim party'. I said they pander to Hindu nationalism and promote a divisive attitude of victimhood in the Hindu community at the expense of the minorities

still it does not chnage the fact that there are dozens of muslim parties working in india...and bjp stands for nationalism...the hindu part is a figment of your paranoid imaginations....

btw let not this incurable obsession with india damage your mental stability....

 

[Kazhugu]

BTW i would like to ask one thing to all crying heart pakistanis...if you feel so bad for your muslim bros slugging it out in the hindutva badlands why did you leave them (mostly poor and illiterate muslims) back in 1947 to fend for themselves ? was it not your responsibility...your qaid's responsibility to take them with you and take care all of them...or was everythin just a quest for power by the rich lucknow and aligarh muslims using the masses as pawns in their power game and deserting them when it was achieved?


so you (islamic nation) rejected them and we (hindutva nation) accepted them....so better not talk **** here and shed crocodile tears...

 

[Roybot]

Shiv Sena is only one of a group of Hindu nationalist parties and third parties are notoriously irrelevant in most democracies.
List of Hindu political parties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

RSS claims to be recruiting 100000 youths/year -- not a big number by itself, but significant in terms of percentage growth.

The BJP and Modi in particular are gaining popularity despite Congress' excellent record in India's economic growth.

Also, here's an apropos thread:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/141420-ramayana-row-divides-india.html

RSS didn't win a single seat in the elections. That means they are getting popular right? Ditto with the other so called parties in the list.

BJP is not Hindu Nationalist party, neither is Modi a Hindu nationalist. His growing popularity has got nothing to do with Hindu nationalism, its more to do with development and governance in Gujarat.

And what has the Ramayana issues got to do with this? If VHP thinks the version being taught is not right, then so be it.

Secularism doesn't mean that the majority group should shut its mouth about religious issues. Secularism is about taking care of every groups grievances, including the majority.

If tomorrow they start teaching some weird form of Quran in Delhi Univeristy, there will be protests for that too, and government will have to pull it off.

As simple as that.

 

[Kazhugu]

The BJP and Modi in particular are gaining popularity despite Congress' excellent record in India's economic growth.

btw this cracked me up....

somebody is comparing modi's administration in gujarat with upa govt....

 

[LaBong]

In West Bengal's context, lack of Muslims in administrative jobs has nothing to do with secularism, in fact WB is as secular as it gets. It has historical reasons, Bengali Muslims, being an emotional lot, traditionally shunned western education, while their pragmatic north and western Indian brethren took it to their heart behind their Islamic outlook.

 

[Developereo]

The basic principles of the Indian constitution, including the secular character of India cannot be altered by anyone, regardless of who is in power or what majority they command, The Supreme Court of India has held that parliament cannot make any amendments that fundamentally alter the nature of the constitution ruling that the basic principles of the constitution are inviolate.

By 'majority' I didn't mean Federal Parliament. In the US at least, the process doesn't stop with Congress in DC -- a constitutional amendment has to be ratified by a majority of states, or a majority in each state (I don't remember which, off the top of my head). The margin has to be significant, i.e. 2/3rd or something, not a simple majority. So the process is necessarily involved, but not impossible.

In any case, coming back to India, the SC ruling was very close, 7-6. I don't know the process of picking SC judges in India, but in the US again, this is a hugely partisan affair and every administration that gets the chance tries to stack the bench with ideologically favorable judges.

Basically, what I am saying is that the game is very complex and the matter simply gets ratcheted up one level to manipulating the SC itself.

 

[Kazhugu]

By 'majority' I didn't mean Federal Parliament. In the US at least, the process doesn't stop with Congress in DC -- a constitutional amendment has to be ratified by a majority of states, or a majority in each state (I don't remember which, off the top of my head). The margin has to be significant, i.e. 2/3rd or something, not a simple majority. So the process is necessarily involved, but not impossible.

In any case, coming back to India, the SC ruling was very close, 7-6. I don't know the process of picking SC judges in India, but in the US again, this is a hugely partisan affair and every administration that gets the chance tries to stack the bench with ideologically favorable judges.

Basically, what I am saying is that the game is very complex and the matter simply gets ratcheted up one level to manipulating the SC itself.

basically what the sc judgement said is "basic structure of constitution is immutable"...period....does not matter if its 7-6 or 13-0.no ifs and buts...

and see this post shows your approach right from beginning...you dont know about india..but you know a bit about US/some other... you then superimpose what you know about the US on whatever little you know about india and talk as if you know everything.....