The Untruth of an Indian Majority

Viewpoint of Pukis, Muslims, Congress and communists (Rakesh Mani & company) =
Hindus are supposed to beg for peace all the time.
Hindus should run away from demanding their rights.
Hindus should act like older brother and `give` all the time....

Try telling them, that we want to live in peace (Holy fcuk- that is the reason we became
secular !), but no arguement works. They are convined that Hindus must remain
subservient - if they exist at all !

For us - there is only 1 way left. If we go down; make sure every paedophile follower
goes down with us. 0 left. I hope the Americans and Israelis can finish off the rest. ( They
are not doing a bad job, by the way :).

Just wanted to solicit your opinions on the following:

What do people think about a potential two/three/four-party Presidential form of government in India? Do you think it can rid us of communal strife by eliminating the dependence of political parties on ``religionism`` and regionalism? Thus, can a veritable separation of ``politics and church`` be achieved?

Ref. My example on a Tamil Hindu and a Tamil Muslim sharing more in common than a Tamil Hindu and a Punjabi Hindu... for example.

Because you have repeated this twice, I have to show you other scenarios. It is true that people living in the same region and speaking the same language have more in common than with people of a different region though following the same religion. But that`s where the commonalities end. That`s when ``gods/ stories and holy places`` kick in. While for a Hindu irrespective of the region, the holy places for pilgrimage lie in Kashi / Haridwar / Rameswaram, for a Muslim it is Arabia. Religions are basically what bunch of stories you believe in..

Inspite of speaking the same language and living in the same region, Tamil Muslims in Srilanka think they are different than the Tamil Hindus/Christians who fight against the Sinhala govt.. They get ``arabised`` and claim they are different. You have to learn more about this ``arab`` cult..

Re: # 79

Masanamuthu,

Thanks for your post. Let me tell you that I appreciate the civilised manner in which you convey your opinions, albeit much different from my own. Perhaps a lot of other interactors have much they can learn from you.

Let me ask you this..

Granted that they all share the same ``holy stories`` and ``holy pilgrimage spots`` Just because Hindus all consider Haridwar or Tirupati holy... does that bind them closer together over and above their ethnic differences?

Also.. I`d really appreciate your respected views on #78

Best.

Rakesh -- my salute to you for this column -- you represent the REAL India and the real LOTUS of contemporary Indian thought process -- amidst the mud of Islamist imitating Hindutva garbage.......

Your defining of Indian identity is 100 % on the target -- let me bring a portion of my post from Gopalakrishnan forum about what is Identity --


``that we are not who we claim we are -- at all times -- except for that moment when we say who and what we are..

it is inaccurate to consider that -- an individual has only ONE identity -- and of all things RELIGION defines it --

an individual is not an island -- an individual doesn`t exist in a vacuum -- he/she has many strings of identity attached to him or her that pull in various direction....

...as part of the family, clan, religion, ethnicity, politics, city, district, province, region, country, continent, and finally the world...the individual is pulled in every other direction

in fact I had mentioned on Chowk some years ago that our identities are like -- a closet full of various garments -- that we wear one at a time depending upon the occasion, need, mood, and the WEATHER.

yes of course if we get a suit or a saree (or a shalwar) that we really love and adore -- we may like to wear it EVERYDAY -- like Islam of the Hijabis -- but that is poor fashion and in poor taste.......

it also means that among the various garbs of possible identities of ours -- Religion occupies only I/12th fraction of space.......`` (nasah)


btw despite mishra ji`s protestation Rakesh you do need to >>pontificate on ``hindus`` <<< once a while -- besides us Muslims pontificating on Muslims all the time....:)

if nothing then for a change of flavor or a for different masala dish.......or may be for a little diversity -- or may be simply to break the Islamist monotony ....or may be for some balance of recipes -- in a Farzana run kitchen place like Chowk..........:)

Re: # 80
rakesh:
does that bind them closer together over and above their ethnic differences?
Yes, in the case of collective threat if there is a common enemy (say pakistan). Also i believe people in India are more united now than say in the last few hundred years. And I`m afraid to say (you may not like it) that Hinduism does play a role..

Regarding your question #78, I think the presidential form is not suitable for a diverse country like India. Coalition governments of ``regional parties`` with a ``national outlook`` is the best bet..

#78 rakeshmani, the fool writes:

[quote]
What do people think about a potential two/three/four-party Presidential form of government in India? Do you think it can rid us of communal strife by eliminating the dependence of political parties on ``religionism`` and regionalism? Thus, can a veritable separation of ``politics and church`` be achieved?
[quote]

Oh, yes, yes, this is sooooo brilliant. All problems can be solved by some small change like this. Of course, why didnt we think of this.

Thank you for giving us bigots some intellectual topic to discuss. Now we feel in the presence of a master intellect.

You are such a great thinker. So profound.

Shooo, I think my 12 year-old has better ideas about reforming india that this nonsense.

Though India is incredible and a miracle from a certain point of view, most of the kanjarpana is spewed by a few selfish hinjras illegitimate spawn of hijras.....most common Indians are OK

though this article is Wahizaat bukwas

Re: # 81

``it is inaccurate to consider that -- an individual has only ONE identity -- and of all things RELIGION defines it --

an individual is not an island -- an individual doesn`t exist in a vacuum -- he/she has many strings of identity attached to him or her that pull in various direction....as part of the family, clan, religion, ethnicity, politics, city, district, province, region, country, continent, and finally the world...the individual is pulled in every other direction``

Nasah,

That`s true. Mirza Ghalib expressed a similar sentiment about the pull from opposing tendencies, when he wrote:

Imaan mujhay rokay hain, jo kheechay hai mujhay kufr
Kaaba meray peechay, kalisaa meray aagay

Re: # 79 rakesh
[....My example on a Tamil Hindu and a Tamil Muslim sharing more in common than a Tamil Hindu and a Punjabi Hindu...]

That used to be the case - People of various ``tongues`` used to be isolated from each other before - but not any more.... this ``identity`` thing has changed a lot - thanks to media, bollywood, population migration, education..... and that`s not a bad thing at all - because this emerging identity is more inclusive and unifying....

A big part of this emerging identity derives from hinduism, naturally.... so your thesis that ``hindu identity is weak`` goes directly against what is happening on the ground.... that`s what people here are protesting about....

Post-independence Hindu identity was never weak..... and you don`t want it to be weak - because that`s what holds this country together, that`s what give this country a secular and pluralistic ethos - this new ``identity`` is what makes it all tick...... without that, this country will break up into thousand pieces .... if, as you say, tamil hindu shares nothing with the punjabi one - then why the heck would stay together...... and yet they do - a thousand tongues and million other fault lines - but this country stays together and gets stronger by the day....

So there is nothing ``untrue`` about indian majority identity.... it`s manifesting and unfolding right before your eyes.... but you are too stupid to see it even when it hits your right in the face :)

Re: # 83

Learn something from your 12 year-old brother then instead of gargling nonsense all day long.

Re: # 84

With all due respect.. you make no sense

Re: # 86 to rakesh

PS: And Your charge of ``semitizing the faith`` is equally false and dishonest... I guess you are refering to islam here... islam have never had strong ``collective identity``, despite the rhetoric, rituals and constant bullsh!t .... actually they have been trying have this elusive ``collective identity`` so for a long time, but the Ummah wet-dream has never come true and has no chance of coming tru.....

You can see that in this neighborhood - pakistan broke up within 25 years, the rest of pakistan is never at peace with itself - sectarianism worse than ever before and threatening the cohesion of that country.... iraqis killing each other since ages... iraq-iran chemical bombed each other to silliness.... billion strong muslims are as fractured and weak as ever....

On the otherhand - without fanfare - the almost billion strong diverse hindus have unified themselves, raised millions of them out of poverty and are poised to be next ``superpower`` [ as being trumpted by all and sundry]..... And the ties to the diaspora is much stronger - indians[and hindus] world over are coming together on a single platform - the ``global indian`` is not some dream - it`s a reality..... The hindu ummah is already here.....

Like I said - you are too stupid to see the reality even when it hits you in the face... that`s kind of a tragedy - because being ``born and bred in abu dhabi``[that`s from your profile] and having international exposure - you should have known better.....

Re: # 86

``That used to be the case - People of various ``tongues`` used to be isolated from each other before - but not any more.... this ``identity`` thing has changed a lot - thanks to media, bollywood, population migration, education..... and that`s not a bad thing at all - because this emerging identity is more inclusive and unifying``

A more inclusive and unifying Indian identity is highly desirable. The more Indians understand more about each other`s lives and cultures, the better for us all. Unfortunately, India only seems to truly unite in times of adversity.

``A big part of this emerging identity derives from hinduism, naturally.... so your thesis that ``hindu identity is weak`` goes directly against what is happening on the ground.... that`s what people here are protesting about``

You see.. That`s part of the problem. The emerging identity is not Indian, but Hindu - to the detriment of the minorities. Hindu collective identity has historically been weak, but is being strengthened by the saffronites for selfish political motives.

``Post-independence Hindu identity was never weak..... and you don`t want it to be weak - because that`s what holds this country together, that`s what give this country a secular and pluralistic ethos - this new ``identity`` is what makes it all tick``

This ``new identity`` which is all Hindu threatens to mitigate the historic pluralistic and secular ethos of the country, in my opinion, not preserve it.

``If, as you say, tamil hindu shares nothing with the punjabi one - then why the heck would stay together...... and yet they do - a thousand tongues and million other fault lines - but this country stays together and gets stronger by the day``

They would, and should, stay together because of a common Indian identity.. not one based on religion, of all things.

``but you are too stupid to see it even when it hits your right in the face :)``

Hahaha.. Sir, I see it and in fact, am reeling from the blow to my face. I`m trying to point out the dangers that this Hindu identity you`re talking about will have on our time-honored and much-valued principle of secularism and peaceful co-existence.

Re: # 89

Please see #90

Re: # 90
Whose political motives are not selfish? Is it Communist or BSP or Mulayam or Sonia? BJP tries to unite group of Indians then it is selfish and detrimental to India. Is it as detrimental as Godhra or Karad or Akshardham or Varanasi or Delhi or Mumbai?
As someone pointed out before there are many aspects of identity. It can be Indian or Hindu or Gujarati but nowhere it needs to exclusive. Group of people can bind with each other as Hindu and the same group can also bind as Indian and as well as as BBB (Bharat se Bhaga hua Bharatiya).
There has never been any group of individuals as historically pluralistic and secular than Hindus but you decided to ignore that.