I agree with you,india stays secular because of the broad mind of the hindus and indias culture...........India was always a mix of culture........India want it to stay Secular and diverse.
Political parties has always try to divide people for vote........They play caste & religion base politics to hold on to power
Congress-Anti-sikh riot
BJP -Babri Masjid & gujrat riot
Congress party was at center during babri masjid case during Babri masjid incident.......They didnt take any action to prevent incidenteven with intelligence warning.......
They tried to make profit out of it and turned a blind eye......But things went opposite direction and they never truely did have any influence in UP after the incident.......
So no parties are truely saint..but atleast we can maake sure the key minister & PM to be good ........Lets keep the tainted people from power......
Your fallacy, a fallacy shared by both BJP and Congress supporters, for obvious reasons, is that we have a zero-sum game between Congress and BJP, and no alternatives. Certainly, all sane political opinion will discount the communist left, which has displayed its complete readiness to abandon the interests of common citiznes for the sake of some obscure doctrinaire principle; people sense the innate contempt that the communists have for the common man, the individual, and they reciprocate it in hearty measure. Kerala has already learnt how to manage these creatures; Bengal is learning.
But beyond political parties per se, there is a possibility of an opinion and a political way of thinking beyond the traps of either pseudo-secularism or of crypto-fascism, which has a tendency to become open whenever an opportunity to rule is granted. This is the liberal option. It is an option which can be exercised by individuals without forming a separate political party, and it is one which is available irrespective of the symbol that one selects in national or in state elections. A liberal need not commit himself or herself to either of the two mainstream parties listed, but may reserve his allegiance and exercise it according to circumstances, in order to preserve and further the liberal idea of politics in the most advantageous manner.
This is also the least tainted of the ideologies, of either the pseudo-secular, 'single-nation', ideology of the Congress, which insists on clubbing all religious sections together, and of acknowledging each and every one in each and every act of public life, with disastrous results to the secular spirit; or of the non-secular, openly majoritarian, equally 'single-nation' ideology of the Sangh Parivar, interpreted politically by the BJP, which acknowledges only one religion and seeks to further it at the cost of every minority, on simplistic grounds which leave its apologists floundering for logical support on every occasion. A liberal essentially understands India as being multi-identity, with each individual taking on an identity in different contexts; so that the same person may act as a Parsi, as a Mumbaikar, or as an Indian, depending on the context. A liberal also believes that these identities are to be ignored in the course of public action and governance, and that all Indian citizens are to be treated uniformly, with exceptions for cases of those who have suffered visible and sustained disenfranchisement for centuries, and who are therefore given counter-vailing privileges and rights to set right these denials of opportunity. Apart from this exception, no consideration of religion, culture, language or ethnicity will determine the treatment accorded to any citizen.
Where does leave us vis-a-vis parties and politicians? Exactly where we are today, with the difference that we are now informed to seek among these politicians and parties those who are closest to liberal ideals, and to back them by whatever means are available. Recent events in India should have shown that the reservoir of liberal opinion is not totally helpless, and has active political options. Civil society per se is a weak and watery alternative to political organisation; however, faced as we are by political parties which are abject vehicles of their members' cupidity and greed, rather than instruments for realising the hopes and aspirations of citizens, there is no harm - there is every justification - to take advantage of the combination of civil society and of contemporary methods of mobilisation of public opinion to put tremendous and sustained pressure on the politicians. At all times, not just at election time. This is not a substitute for the political system, it is an adjunct, an additional, a supplementary measure, intended to keep the normal machinery of government and administration cleansed and working as it should. It is a necessary condition, but not sufficient; other measures will also be required, and these are not known yet; they are likely to be discovered as the discussion on our governance continues.
