The Untruth of an Indian Majority

#126 IJAZGUL

No problem. Provided yours everyone(except ONE-you know who) is mine. No problem.

Mohar sahib,

(What`s wrong with that?.... you pakis have wiped out every other people from pakiland already..... )

You`re completely wrong. Paki Muslims have yet to wipe out Ahmedis, Zikris, Shias, Bohris, Ismailis, Barelvis etc.

Regards

sanjay,
Sarasvati and Maurya are mine. lol

In Pakistan minorities are being treated nicely. Where fair chances are being given to the all religious affiliations.

#123


As for the Mauryan Emipre, call it Indian or whatever to suit inventive nationalism. For me its capital was near Islamabad at Taxila.

Cheerios

No problem. If anything which revive common bonds between two peoples is always welcome.

But it should lead to kiddish talks that whatever is mine cannot be yours and whatever is yours cannot be mine. Till then , no problem.

kaalchakra
I agree.

My MSc Thesis was on Arthashastra and I became its fan. Its all about real politik and Kautilya said it all before others. It was his genius that the Mauryan empire extended right upto central asia and even Egypt paid taxes to Chandra Gupta Maurya. Efcourse this empire excluded South India.

Pathetically, because of his cantekrous reputation, people avoid admiring him and most damage has been done by Indians themselves. He became a comic character and even Nehru in his book, `Discovery of India` does not do full justice to his stature.

As for the Mauryan Emipre, call it Indian or whatever to suit inventive nationalism. For me its capital was near Islamabad at Taxila.

Cheerios

HP:

How interesting that you and I can live in the same country, have a legitimate difference of opinion about a political issue and not bring in religion (because it is immaterial in this country vis a vis affirmative action) or ethnicity (because we are the same group).

Whereas were we to have the same difference of opinion in the US, and had belonged to two different ethnicities, we prolly would have suspected each other`s motives. Same goes for religious differences in South Asia. My point is that in this country there is a history of ethnic conflict, hence the presence of that baggage. India or South Asia has more of an issue of religion, a simple accident of history. The rest of your post makes eminent sense. I agree with your perspective.

Re: # 116
Totally agree with einsteinon Hindi being the defacto lingua francua for the commons. I
was working in Chennai since 2003 and I know that for sure. An interesting thing I
noticed was that tamils who know hindi are either the older generation (like > 55) or the
younger ones ( < 25 ). The middle ones are the ones most unlikely to know Hindi.

It also reminds me a programme that used to come on Doordarshan called ``Surabhi``. In
it, there used to be these ppl who would go around the country and tell their experiences.
It was so sweet to hear Hindi from the common ppl in Mizoram (or was it Meghalaya). Just
reinforces the position of Hindi in this land.

Ijaz_Gul

The phrase `Indian empire` is questionable. The very absence of one centralized, durable Indian politcal/cultural empire is variously quoted as justification for the negation and denial of Indian nationhood prior to 1947.

Arthashastra as a reflection of the Indian Political Mind too is a wild stretch. What kind of reasoning led you to that conclusion?

About Pakistan, to an outsider, HP appears to have the correct understanding. Before 1947, the core leadership of the Muslim League was fairly liberal and, in its own day-to-day quite secular. Yet it used Islam to create a nation for itself. Over the following decades, once again, Pakistan`s core leadership maintained its own liberal and secular existence, while agressively using Islam for political purposes both internally and externally. Internally, to tighten their hold on provinces and to undercut the power and interests of ethnic groups; and externally, to challenge and weaken countries on its east and its west.

Externally, Pakistan has had tremendous success with Islam. Yet the burden of her multiplying internal costs may have left the nation worse off than it would have been without Islam.

This is what Indians, and the majority Hindus, must watch out for. Strong religious identities can bite back in uncontrolled fury.

Bharath

The Indian/Hindu civilzation is many thousand years old, but the self-conscious, separate identity known as the `Hindu`` has emerged fairly recently.

We just did not think of ourselves in those ways.


HP

The problem in India is that religious identity has come to be perceived as a tool of political warfare among groups. Weak religious identity is seen - both in history and in future - as imposing heavy political costs on individuals and groups. The unstated assumption is the same as the one advanced by Rakesh: For a `majority` to be a majority - and not be denied benefits that are its due - it must see itself as one distinct community.

So, Pakistan and India are definitely marching in opposite directions - a historical regression to the mean, of sorts. One hopes that Indians would learn from the mistakes Pakistan made post 47, not repeat them.

Ref HP #104

[The Hindutva-vaadi in India is trying to redefine the Indian nation by declaring religion as the binding force that supersedes the linguistic and ethnic roots. What I tried to show in my previous post was that defining nation based on religion failed in Pakistan and it would fail in India too.]

You clearly are totally clueless.

I suggest a visit to Gaya. It doesn`t matter what time of the year. You will find Hindus from every part of India performing funeral rites for their ancestors there. This predates any RSS, BJP or other ``Hindutva-wadi`` propaganda.

Hinduism IS the binding factor among all Hindus of India.

You can reject it all you want and Rakesh Mani, whi is equally clueless, could ignore it but that is the reality.

Similarly you will find pilgrims from all over India at places like Haridwar, Prayag, Benarasm Rameswaram, etc. All of these as holy sites pre-date the temple at Tirupathi by a millennium and more.

While you deny this reality, you wax poetic about the unity of the Ummah which is truly a mirage.

How pathetic can you get?

Ref avkrishna #115

[DM Ji,

Thanks for that summary. You, more or less, got it right.

Towards the end, you have explained how the minorities can minimize this reactionary Hindutva force.]

The minorities are NOT going to do anything to minimize ``reactionary`` Hindutva forces so long as political parties such as the Congress, the Commies, the DMK, etc., promise reservations for Muslims and Christians on top of the quotas for the Brain-Dead. Nor are Muslims going to modernize themselves unless they are dragged by their balls. Instead, we are giving them subsidies for Haj. Wait till you hear about demands for subsidies for trips to Rome from some idiot.

Muslim men and women should be prevented from wearing distinct garbs like Kemal Ataturk did in Turkey. Most mosques and the churches that have sprung about in the last 20 years with foreign money should be closed. Bishop Davidson, Ezra Sargunam and others who demand reservations for Christians ought to be nailed to the cross as an example to other preachers Flights to Saudi Arabia ought to be banned and travel to Haj should be made as difficult as possible. And anyone says so much as a single word in Arabic ought to be sent to jail.

In about 50 years, we would then have a country where Hindus are respected, nay, even feared, as it should be.

[There are many who believe (wrongly, may I add) that Hindi is the national language. ]

How do you define a national language? You cannot define it as the language of native speakers of that language when their number exceeds 50 percent. But it should be properly be defined as the language which would be understood by majority even though many of them are not native speakers of that language. Most of us who have earned a higher degree in any field in India in English medium can speak very good English even though this English may be full of errors. Among educated class English is lingua franka. Among rest, Hindi is lingua franka. Trust me Hindi *is* national language. Locals may be offended if spoken to in Hindi because of their misplaced insistence that every outsider who comes to their region should learn local language. They may feign ignorance of Hindi but most of non-hindi people understand Hindi.

Re: # 107

DM Ji,

Thanks for that summary. You, more or less, got it right.

Towards the end, you have explained how the minorities can minimize this reactionary Hindutva force.

Can you also share your thoughts on what`s likely to happen ?

Thanks,
Avkrishna

Re: # 113

We dont agree on the topic of Reservations. But on this, I am totally with you,

Rgds,

This pathetic excuse of an article on why Hindus should continue to bend over and take it up the rear from Muslims and Christians can only be written by an NRI who has spent his lifetime outside India and visits India to get reinforcements of his prejudices from the likes of ``The Anti-Hindu``.

Screw the Muslims and the evangelical Christians. If they don`t like a Hindutva India, the first thing they can do is turn off their stupid loudspeakers that disturb everybody`s peace with crapols from the Koran or the Bible. The second thing they can do is to make themselves invisible and not look up to fatwas from mul;lahs or commands from Rome. If not, they could take a hike out of the country and let India be India.

Hey Muslims, take your women out of burqas. And you Christians, shut up about the Saviour. We don`t want to be saved. We are pagans, we intend to have a good time on earth with wine, women and song.