SECULARISM- "India Style"

[Wounded-Monk]

@Nalwa

Hmm here you are again making an exceptional case....i guess secularism (uniform civil code in particular), are exactly in the reverse direction to what you are talking about....

And trust me either being majority is no good feeling in our country.....

PS. I will be more careful in future in dealing with religious ideas of sikhs in particular....I thank you for putting your views here.......

 

[Nalwa]

See the 1992 Mosque demolition can't be seen in isolation of just that day -Dec 6.

Many factors culminated into that fateful day starting with the intransigence of the Muslim leaders to the decades of peaceful overtures by the Hidu leaders for building a Ram Temple. The Shah Bano case which was an open,brazen attempt at appeasing the Muslims , then subsequently the Opening of the Shilanyas in Ayodhya, the fateful insurgency in Kashmir and the horror stories of the treatment of Hindu Pandits by Pak-backed radicals everything played a role.

I agree that the mosque should not have been destroyed the way it was, though it is my firm conviction that the place should have a Ram Temple as it is one of our most sacred sites and ASI excavations have already proved that there was indeed ruins of a temple beneath the mosque.

The Muslim leaders if they have voluntarily agreed to have given the site, there would have been a huge huge rapprochement in Hindu-Muslim relations given the bitter history and our genuine bitterness in having our temples plundered,burnt,demolished through out history. But unfortunately it was not to be and this combined with various other events that time led to that demolition.

Even now it not all lost - Both communities agreeing to the Allahabad court verdict (which was fair and equitable in my opinion), building a Ram Temple at the proposed site and simultaneously punishing those responsible for the demolitions on Dec 6 1992 , thus giving a sense of justice to both Hindus and Muslims can solve this issue.

Will better sense prevail ?



What you say is true for those that are dug recently.Maybe Kashi or Mathura.

Ayodhya issue was never let off and was constantly in debate for all those 4 centuries and that is why even the constitution recognized it as a disputed issue.

It needs a closure.

Kartic, all I gather from your post is that the Hindu right-wing's (hope you'd allow me the use of this term) hands were forced by political intransigence by Congress and by the Muslims. But is that the only way to look at it? Why didnt they wait for the courts to decide? Why did they pre-empt the court's judgement? Surely, if they had 20 more years (not a long time given that the conflict was centuries old) they had come out as the better off as the SC judgement proved.

Here's what I see - BJP needed a plank to come to power. There was of course some disaffection in the Hindu community at minority (mainly Muslim) appeasement and the Hindu right-wing used it efficiently. Where BJP lost the plot was when it allowed its extremist splinter groups to take control of the situation and carry out a violent act.

 

[Lala_Peace]

Who decides what is hypocrisy?
Can you decide and define it for me?
Do you really believe that Indians like me need assistant from people like you to form opinion? After all we are a democracy and we can dream till we realize the same through the power of democratic process.

 

[Lala_Peace]

Hypocrisy.. isn't it?

Who decides what is hypocrisy?
Can you decide and define it for me?
Do you really believe that Indians like me need assistant from people like you to form opinion? After all we are a democracy and we can dream till we realize the same through the power of democratic process.

 

[Lala_Peace]

If an experienced and respected writer like CHO form his opinion on Indian secularism based on Sonia, then that is just a write up for a stand up show in the Laughter Circus in Sony.

He has probably lost the touch of realism in writing.

 

[KS]

Karthic, all I gather from your post is that the Hindu right-wing's (hope you'd allow me the use of this term) hands were forced by political intransigence by Congress and by the Muslims. But is that the only way to look at it? Why didnt they wait for the courts to decide? Why did they pre-empt the court's judgement? Surely, if they had 20 more years (not a long time given that the conflict was centuries old) they had come out as the better off as the SC judgement proved.

That is not the right question mate - because you can't accuse anyone of failing to correctly predict what will happen 20 years down the line.

The political and the politically motivated religious environment of those years were like that due to a variety of reasons which I pointed out in the previous post. Hindus were feeling alienated in their country and Muslims were feeling a siege mentality due to some ill-timed political moves.

Here's what I see - BJP needed a plank to come to power. There was of course some disaffection in the Hindu community at minority (mainly Muslim) appeasement and the Hindu right-wing used it efficiently. Where BJP lost the plot was when it allowed its extremist splinter groups to take control of the situation and carry out a violent act.

I'll just say the correct word was "lost control" instead of the word "allowed". Emotions (right/wrong) got the better of level headed thinking that fateful day.Rest I agree.

 

[Nalwa]

@Nalwa

Hmm here you are again making an exceptional case....i guess secularism (uniform civil code in particular), are exactly in the reverse direction to what you are talking about....

And trust me either being majority is no good feeling in our country.....

PS. I will be more careful in future in dealing with religious ideas of sikhs in particular....I thank you for putting your views here.......

I can only give you my perspective. I do not know how folks of other religions feel. I guess Muslims, Christians would have some other issue with the Hindutva concept.

And I thank you for making an effort to understand my point. Please also understand that I didnt mean to direct my post at you personally. I hope you understand that I was just trying to convey what I felt about it.

 

[KS]

I can only give you my perspective. I do not know how folks of other religions feel. I guess Muslims, Christians would have some other issue with the Hindutva concept.

And I thank you for making an effort to understand my point. Please also understand that I didnt mean to direct my post at you personally. I hope you understand that I was just trying to convey what I felt about it.

Let me clarify that the word "Hindutva" today as used in our media is just as misused as the word "Jihad".

Totally mis-represented and distorted of its original meaning to convey an entirely different concept.

 

[Nalwa]

That is not the right question mate - because you can't accuse anyone of failing to correctly predict what will happen 20 years down the line.

The political and the politically motivated religious environment of those years were like that due to a variety of reasons which I pointed out in the previous post. Hindus were feeling alienated in their country and Muslims were feeling a siege mentality due to some ill-times political moves.



I'll just say the correct word was "lost control" instead of the word "allowed". Emotions (right/wrong) got the better of level headed thinking that fateful day.

That just about sums it. Hope better sense prevails.

 

[Lala_Peace]

@Nalwa

Hmm here you are again making an exceptional case....i guess secularism (uniform civil code in particular), are exactly in the reverse direction to what you are talking about....

And trust me either being majority is no good feeling in our country.....

PS. I will be more careful in future in dealing with religious ideas of sikhs in particular....I thank you for putting your views here.......

Here goes....the real secularism is achieved when a majority does not feel as superior or different from minority.

Our constitution has allowed that to happen.

Now minorities, particularly Muslim also need not feel that their backwardness is not entirely for the lack of Govt. initiatives, but largely because their illusion of being discriminated.

Then only we will have real secularism.

Look at Sikhs, Christians and Parsis. Even Sikhs were forced to think otherwise, but they did not whine. They proved that with this small percentage how much indispensable they are to the unity of the nation.

 

[Nalwa]

Let me clarify that the word "Hindutva" today as used in our media is just as misused as the word "Jihad".

Totally mis-represented and distorted of its original meaning to convey an entirely different concept.

I agree. I refer to the right-wing's use of the term to forward their communal agenda.

 

[alphamale]

I'll just say the correct word was "lost control" instead of the word "allowed". Emotions (right/wrong) got the better of level headed thinking that fateful day.

but many ppl don't believe that esp minorities, plus i think BJP is not doing enough to attract minorities toward them. this is one of the reason BJP is out of power for many yrs now. india has 20% minority population & it is hard to come to power when straightaway 20% ppl are against a party. BJP need more to do so that minorities can have faith in it.

out of topic ques but karthic i want to know that why BJP has very less or no ground in south india politics.

 

[Nalwa]

Here goes....the real secularism is achieved when a majority does not feel as superior or different from minority.

Our constitution has allowed that to happen.

Now minorities, particularly Muslim also need not feel that their backwardness is not entirely for the lack of Govt. initiatives, but largely because their illusion of being discriminated.

Then only we will have real secularism.

Look at Sikhs and Parsis. Even Sikhs were forced to think otherwise, but they did not whine. They proved that with this small percentage how much indispensable they are to the unity of the nation.

I actually do sometimes feel that the Muslim community is to be blamed as much as our pseudo-secular politics. Forgive me but - where are the intelligentsia of the community? Why are they busy making television appearances? Why do they allow the ultras to be the public face of their community? Can we only blame the govt. for the Muslim community coming in at the bottom of all our social and economic indicators?

I seriously believe the Muslim community lacks idols to look upto. Apart from Bollywood stars and a few cricketers they need industrialists, inventors and LEADERS in the real sense.

 

[Lala_Peace]

I think they have the leadership to look for. They are generally quite hard working and creative.

The problem they face is because of the ghetto they live in.

Look at Sikhs, after 1984 they spread to many unchartered territory and live among people where they should have the biggest fear.

If you go to some small towns in Odisha, you will find them as the richest and most respected business man.

They just need to understand the secular values in the ordinary Hindu Indians is ingrained to such an extent that they think it is the real Hindusim. They don't need to feel unsafe among ordinary hindus. The main danger is from their monotony of ghetto life.

The Hinduism the Sanghis talk are based on agenda and fortunately they are fringe.

 

[KS]

Here goes....the real secularism is achieved when a majority does not feel as superior or different from minority. <.....>

Wrong - Real Secularism happens only when neither community feels superior or constitutionally dis-advantaged as opposed to the one way street you are proposing.

I agree. I refer to the right-wing's use of the term to forward their communal agenda.

All the Right wing,the English media, a select group of human rights activists like Teesta and our self declared 'secular' politicians like Lalu,Dig Vijay.

The blame lies on all in varying proportions.