I am not @jamahir. He will be the first to inform you that while I defend him as an underdog under constant attack, I do not share his political views.
Yes you defend me while not agreeing on all of my political views.
@Markandeya
Also, I am an undercat not an underdog.
He was right in his centralising impulse at that point of time, but it has become a burden around our necks over the years. I bet - no factual response this, just a bow drawn at a venture - that fully 70% of the bureaucracy in Delhi can be transferred to the districts and states if we were to go strictly by the constitution.
In reasonable decentralization I agree with you. The entire political arrangement should be changed so that we have a party-less system where the citizens should be able to discuss issues of local, national and global nature directly at neighborhood level committees without the societal divisions, power play and corruption created by party politics, and those discussions be transmitted to the national level management people's committee and ideas from that committee be transmitted down to regional level citizens' committees and neighborhood level citizens' committees. Direct democracy. Simple idea. No need of a complicated and duplicating non-democratic structure of president, prime minister, vice president, governors, chief ministers, deputy chief ministers ( sometimes multiple because of demands by alliance parties to have their own person ), chief executive, district magistrate, mayor ( party-based ) and perhaps many more. Life should be as simple as possible and that includes the political system we are surrounded by and there is no need for all the violence, aggression, infighting, disappointments, betrayals, needless effort, crossovers, candidate poaching, money-based roadshow drama and media false propaganda, demagoguery, the big drama of five-yearly elections, the illusion of the citizen holding influence via the vote and so on that multi-party non-democracy political systems like India, Pakistan, USA, Britain etc have or even single party political systems like North Korea and China have. The party system is not democracy, it is anti-democracy. It should be for the people to discuss on issues directly and implement without the intermediary of a party and power structure just like there should be no need for the existence of a priest as an agent of God because the human should directly be able to venerate and take solace from God ( this is for those who believe in God ). The party and the prime minister are priests, no need for them. Such a simple political system existed in pre-2011 Libya and now is being implement in Venezuela. Please read on how the current Indian political system can adapt to it in
this post of mine.
@jamahir is another poster who is born before the time. He is at another level, with his patience to write so much. Kya khata hai Jamahir....but he is a true dreamer...no harm there.
As the Bengalis would say, ami chai khabi.
And I just write simple ideas, those my own and those of other individuals, movements and societies.
and yet modi wins in landslide elections....
if there do exist fair minded people they clearly have no impact.. it is like saying Iraqi airforce has good pilots.... but did it make any impact?
Please read the above text on elections and such. They are a futile exercise. If in India they fair-minded people are to achieve governance and guide the society towards true advancement and harmony their method then of achieving governance should be different. A million people who do three religious pilgrimages every five years, spending financial resources to get divine points selfishly for themselves while their neighbor suffers and that neighbor could do with diversion of the pilgrimage money to set up a business and prosper, if the pilgrim cannot be convinced to abandon his needless regular pilgrimage for the common good of his own society, there's no point in a progressive movement participating in elections trying to convince irrational people. The method then will have to be another.
i dont need to write a thesis to explain my self
My english is fine and words are concise .. may be if you read the Quran with understanding you would able understand things better?
What were these words of yours that were concise ? Did you even write a simple description of Islam that I did in the post you quote ?
Clearly you need understanding on Islam.. there is no such thing as "certain aspects" of progressive islam.. The entre religion is progressive , lest you understand it.
"Entire" would be untruth, like not including and elaborating direct democracy and tolerance of slave system. We should acknowledge that most of the Islamic system is progressive and some not and some is just ritualist like adoption by the early Muslims of various ritualist elements like five time prayer from Zarthusti religion ( Zoroastrianism ). Please scan through
this research. Actually years ago there was a post on PDF from maybe an Iranian member or perhaps the former account of our Parsi member
@padamchen and was a retort by the Iranian Zoroastrian king who was delivered the message of Islam or it was the last Zoroastrian king. He says the ( early ) Muslims ask him to pray three times to The One God but he and his religion have been praying to The One God for centuries before Islam and they pray five times a day. So let us celebrate what is truly novel and progressive in Islam and not say that the entirety of it is progressive. Let us speak for melding those progressive parts in the future political and socio-economic systems of humanity.
and you there you go .. you have answered your own confusion... ie why you cant understand what i state... with such limited knowledge you will struggle to understand
BTW ...That must have been an incredible feat for you... 10 whole pages!
Ten pages of the introduction. I simply wasn't in the frame of mind to read the book but as I said, the book won't contradict my thinking and those of the Islamic scholars from a 100 years ago in the Nadeem Paracha article. As another example, there was a consultation in the Indian courts system recently about the misinformed and misguided desire of some Indian school and college girls to have the right to wear the burqa ( and these girls not having the voice heard to demand the real human rights not delivered in Indian society ) and the courts consulted Abdullah Yusuf Ali's translation of the Quran and found no mention at all of the burqa. That is why I say that any rational and progressive understanding of Islam by me and others will not contradict if we read the Quran. And the Quran is mostly enough. A peasant in India or Africa or the Caucasus suffering under a feudal or a king would not have care for some Muslim cleric coming along and saying in manner of European Christian missionaries that do ritual, do regular prayers and God will provide succor. No, the simple and justice-spreading ideas of the real aspects of Islam are what attracted that peasant, the rituals being a side-show and having a formal community-building language later.
Balkanisation of India is the only solution and Modi's anti muslim hate policy is a big force multiplier for us
On the contrary in
this solution of mine for Kashmir I speak of India, Pakistan and rest of South Asia having a common progressive political system ( that long text of mine on democracy above to Joe ) which will eliminate all the political issues in the region. Add that with
a progressive socio-economic system.
.
