The Doll’s House

re: this crap called Farzana
Whenever i read Farzanabibi`s posts, i am reminded of the reason why India was partitioned. The guy who called for a seperate state was not a diehard Islamist (most Deobandis and Ulemas of the time i believe did not want Paksitan) but was a whisky sipping, pork eating western educated elite, much like this piece of SH...
Thank God, there is democrazy in India and people like Farzana are a passe`.
Sridhar

#425 by hindvi

thanks for the economic angle. some points:

- i would like to treat chechneya (history of czarist domination) separately than indian union experiment.
- i dont think indian budget is financed mostly by income taxes. its mostly financed by consumption taxes like sales, excise, customs etc. In current budget, 50 crore out of 317 is planned for by income taxes. This is relatively higher than previous decades.
- american civil war was about economics. southern economy was based on plantations, and northern was on industries. clearly, the south envisaged a separate future.
- indian separatist movement of punjab was inspite of much higher standard of living and plenty participation in national life (e.g. military).

while agreeing with you on theoretical premise of your post regarding devolution of power (which was a favorite topics of home-minister-wanting-to-be-prime-minister advani), i dont see the separatist movements really articulate such views.

in first analysis they seem to be violent, tribalistic, communal emotional outbursts. they almost always seem to be dominated by extremist and corrupt leaders.

while the unionist democracies are full of opportunist of all colors, what i fail to understand is why a special soft-corner for the separatist? you are articuating a nice-nice agenda for the sepratist, while selectively ignoring well-articulated nationalist efforts, and focusing only on the brutal opressive reactions. i dont see the separatist movements themselves articulating agendas like devolution of power.

the way i see is, its a struggle of ideas, and therfore a fair game. i see nothing special that nobel prize for physics or peace should be awarded to the separatists.

Hindvi

Post #426, and the previous on the subject.

To reply to your posts properly, and given the type of subject it is, it may require thesis/full fledged paper..Don`t worry, I won`t do it ..:) So what I would say now is more as broadline and specifics we can come to later, should you/we desire..

Most of what has been written in those posts of yours is good from theoratical, academician`s pov but when it comes to hard realties, then it may not go that far. Before I come to India, let us start from US itself...

To say that American Civil War was about abolition of slavery in US would be grossly misreading and misunderstanding the history of that time. That is more of a myth like many other myths of similar nature. American Civil War was more about Union, keeping the territory and Economy, and survival of USA. And of course, making the Center more strong. Aboliton of slavery and all those sort of pious reasons are after thoughts, add ons.

It may surprise some to know that when some sothern states sceeded (spl?) from the Union, it was not the first time that they considered doing it. It had become kind of a routine. It is only when Lincoln became President and it became more clear that North wanted South to subsidise and finance industrialisation of North, some of the southern states declared secession from the Union. Even Income Tax in US was introduced around that time, if I am not mistaken.

If southern states (Confedrates) wanted to retain slaves, they could have done more so by being part of the Union. And then, Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 is about abolishing slavery only in southern states and does not say anything about other states. As a matter of fact many northern states did have slaves at that time. So Civil War did not have much to do with the abolition of slavery and this should become more clear from some speeches of Lincoln or quotes from his supposed correspondence . For example only, here are couple..

``If I could save the Union without freeing any slaves, I would do it.`` - To Horace Greeley

``I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery.`` - First Inaugural Address

Southern States could have seceded from the Union legally and that is what they did (in the case of some states, before joining the Union, in their ratification address, there are words to the effect that their merger is on the basis of trial and they will see how things go...). But, to keep the territorial integrity of US Lincoln even acted illegally in many ways. He went to extent of suspending habeas corpus (Laws like TADA/POTA are only bachhas/kids in comparison). That meant, anyone could have been arrested even without having been charged with specific crime.

``Arrests,`` wrote President Lincoln to that Albany committee of Democrats, ``are not made so much for what has been done as for what might be done. The man who stands by and says nothing when the peril of his Government is discussed cannot be misunderstood. If not hindered (by arrest, imprisonment, or death) he is sure to help the enemy.``

``Much more, if a man talks ambiguously, talks with `buts` and `ifs` and `ands` he cannot be misunderstood. If not hindered (by imprisonment or death) this man will actively commit treason. Arbitrary arrests are not made for the treason defined in the Constitution, but to prevent treason.``


It may further suprise some to know that even this very day/today, there still is movement going on in US to go back to Confedracy days and restore Confedration. I do not see anyone saying that US should listen to champions of Confedracy and let those states secede from the Union. Few years ago, CNN started discussion on this topic too in one of their forums on the internet.


It has to be understood that barring some exceptions here and there, whenever it comes to territory, no country will act in any different manner. And they do not. Theories apart. Faced with the threat of secession, generally, a state would throw its full might to crush the rebellion. Especially when it happens to armed rebellion. Whether a state will be sucessful or not, is a different matter. Secession is an anathema to a state.

Indian leaders could have had been anyting but they were not stupid. US`s example was right there in front of them. And in India`s case, as said earlier, many Indias were in making. It needed a strong center. A weak Center is/was a sure recipe of disintegration all the way.

Indian Constitution is perhaps one of the most long and comprehensive and liberal Constitution around. Center State relations is a pretty big topic and is covered in the Constitution itself.

As to the power of raising taxes, states do have authority of raising and levying their own taxes. Law and Order is a state subject and Center cannot intervene at its own whim.

Before independence, literacy figures were under 30% in India. Now it is around 65%. India has long way to go ahead but it also has come a long way from those days. I do not have the exact figures presently but as I understand, in increase literacy in India, if a state allocates Rs100 from its budget, Center provides at least equal amount to the state. However, barring a state here and there, most of the states have not provided even Rs100 on education and Center has been providing more and more on this.

In one of the NE states, total income cannot be more than Rs500 crores but Center sends over Rs7000 crores a year.

These are only couple of examples to show that upliftment has been taking place because of strong center.

Another thing that has to be kept in mind is that it is not a case of one shoe fits all. Whatever is suitable for US has to work in India too is not the correct way of looking at things. Even when Hindi film industry copies Hollywood or western movies, they have to be Indianised. It has to be understood that India still is a poor country. Medicine applied in a rich country like US may not be applicable in the case of India.

More on this, later/some other time..

On the causes of Civil War in US, if there is some interest I can give link to an interesting debate which took place among americans themselves....that way, one can see both sides of the arguement ...

isphahani sahab aap se ek iltija hai,

aap khuda ke vaastey ek post urdu mein likhdijia

Dost Mittar

Post # 434

Quote:

``For instance, the Indian govt. gives back to Kashmir far more than it collects in revenues whereas the opposite is the case in places like Maharashtra and Gujerat where there are no separatist movements.``

In the last few years things have changed in/for Maharashtra too. Now it takes/receives more money from Center, if I am not mistaken.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Hmm...Now I know how the interacts number increases.C`mmon FV post the same comment few more times.
NJOY!!!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Pardon me for the digression, but our Paki friends who cry rivers for Kashmiris shed nary a tear for their brethren the Northern Areas. Here`s a letter from today`s Daily Times describing their plight.

Northern Areas and human rights

Excerpts:

``The region has no High Court and the people cannot invoke the jurisdiction of any other High Court of Pakistan.``

``Elections for a Northern Areas Council are scheduled for October 12, 2004. However, this council will have less power vested in it than a district assembly. Furthermore, the council will not have the right to elect its leader.``

``And on a final note, I would like to know why human rights groups and the international community are so silent on this issue. I would like to know why they have ignored the fact that the people of the Northern Areas have had their fundamental rights violated for the last 57 years. Those who profess themselves the champions of human rights ought for feel ashamed of themselves.``

#432 by FarzanaVersey

[Apartments blocks do not readily sell/let out flats to Muslims for this reason.]

Well, they do not sell/let out flats to meat-eating Hindus too. So I fail to see a point here.

[..who is accused of being sensational and unscholarly, is getting a pat on the back only because she is talking about one community living in Canada and leading an elite life.]

Not very unlike you. Only, you`re talking about the community that you do not belong to.

[The Hindus will now choose who is the right kind of reformer in Islam too.]

And that is only because you have proved incapable of choosing one yourselves. As hamidm2`s post succintly conveys, any Muslim trying to even talk of reform is promptly labelled a heretic/apostate, or worse, fatwa-ed.

farzana
//... that the Indian Muslim has not bloody right to comment on Hindus (who we live with) and India (our country)...//

Take it easy man - don`t go ballistic on a non-issue. Nobody questioned your rights to comment - on hindus or whoever else. Gosh - you have been ``commenting`` for since ever. India has guranteed your free speech - so you can keep commenting till cows come home. Or goats come home, lest you feel I am trying to mainstream you :))

At the same time - it`s my right and duty to respond to your diatribe which I consider communal and goes against reconciliation between hindus and muslims. It goes against ``mainstreaming`` of the muslim community, which I considered essential. You seek sweep the backward ways of muslim community under the carpet - I have to counter that.

++++

//...Hindus will now choose who is the right kind of reformer in Islam too. Bravo! ...//

I wish I can choose some reformer for Islam. Actually - there is nothing to choose from.

Like I said - Manji and You: Apple and Pine-Apple. Manji is out reforming her community, but you, on the other hand, are an apologist. You tilt at wind-mills and blame everyody else for self-created problems of muslim community. Your ideas work directly against the long-term interests of your community.

farzana

Come to think of it, you are already mainstream - Rs80 coffee, fashionable dresses and what not!

So why are you against others becoming part of mainstream? Actually you should be gung-ho about it. You should be thanking hindu media for their attempt to mainstreaming the muslims.

Marhabba!!
I was hoping that someone more knowledgeable would explain this term. Nobody did so let me take a stab. I believe that it is a term of encouragement, something like `bravo!` (not to be confused with mar-be-hayya;)

tahmed#430:
The ``saad-gi`` (naivety) part referred to you and not to islam;-) And yes all muslims, including perhaps OBL, think that islam is a religion of peace.
I agree with your observations about the Pakistani abdul and the fact that he didn`t care much about maulvi who he made fun of. But we are talking of simpler times and not the gloabl village in which we live today. Now, what a mufti of al-azhar or the ayotallah in Qom says is immediately broadcast on TV and reaches the remotest village with access to the tv. This is equally true of what Togodia or Thakray says in India. Who says there are no negative aspects to globalization?

hindvi:
``I cannot talk authoritatively about other areas of state rights but having studied economics I know that in India states cannot impose any income taxes. all your income taxes go to the centre which then decides how they will be allocated, In the US you must have noticed you pay income taxes to the state and the center.``

I agree and have said something similar in my earlier post. However, the Indian Finance Commission, has addressed this issue to a certain extent. But separatism in Kashmir or elsewhere has little to do with this aspect. For instance, the Indian govt. gives back to Kashmir far more than it collects in revenues whereas the opposite is the case in places like Maharashtra and Gujerat where there are no separatist movements.

rajsinghi1:

You are right about the literal meaning of subhanallah, but it is used often as just praise of anything...the lines you quoted for harimau may need to be translated!
-- -
#429 by harimau:

So now you are saying that at least a couple of Islamic sects believe in the ``literal word``, as opposed to the blanket statement earlier...

Re. Jain businessman selling beef to Indian Army in Delhi and he being fored into Muslim mainstream of Delhi, you do realise you are being facetious, don`t you?? Btw, the RSS hauled up a Hindu (right-winger, incidentally) because he spoke glowingly about the protein content in cow meat and he seriously believes it gives Muslims a physical advantage...

Re. the Aga Khan, and the progressiveness of the Ismaili community (you do flatter me!), it has to do with economics and a rather hands-off approach to hard-core religious affairs. Although not quite the same, the Sufis, Bhaktis and Brahmo Samajis would follow a similar principle.

Your driver being unable to afford mutton is economic constraint (do you know any other Muslim at all?!), but you are aware that increasingly there is subtle pressure among certain groups to alienate meat-eaters and it is seen as essentially a Muslim thing. Apartments blocks do not readily sell/let out flats to Muslims for this reason. And if you are a Muslim and a vegetarian (my mother) or a mostly-veg person (me) then you are considered unusual and I always notice that the faces glow when they say it...

[One doesn`t have to like you to agree with you. The three Pakistanis I mentioned are regulars on Chowk who catch on to your writings as proof that Hindutva-wadis like me are inflicting untold torture on Indian Muslims.]

I know that people who do not agree with me like me immensely :) And just why is the Pakistani response so important?
- - -

Just watch the hypocrisy...

[#191 by mohar11...on this board:
See what we horrible hindoos would have to put up with ??? I mean - can you even imagine a hindu woman or ahmedi woman dare say things like this in pakiland?? I am telling you man - you are much better without this democracy thingy :))) We Indians would have put up with this ``hapless`` muslim woman day in and day out - her disgusting communal diatribes are sickening ... But what can you do - freedom of speech and all that, you know.]

and

[#13 by mohar11...elsewhere:
Manji`s ``caustic attitude and tone`` - as pointed out by this author. That tone, the author complains, is driving the muslim youth away. But a ``caustic tone`` is minimum that the reformer must use - because there may not be any ``nice`` way to pass the message.

So whether you indulge or castigate the reformers - that`s upto you. Whether you give them your qualified support or un-quallified support - that`s your decision. But let me tell you from the outset: If the ``caustic tone`` or a mis-spelled verse, or criticism of koran bothers you - then reformation is not your cup of tea. Because the way things stand right now - there is no nice you to say ``Folks - you are screw!d up - it`s time to shape up``.]

A reformer, who is accused of being sensational and unscholarly, is getting a pat on the back only because she is talking about one community while living in Canada and leading an elite life. (So don`t talk about my Rs. 80 coffee) But I cannot ask anyone to shape up, according to these people, and by saying so they only prove their devious little mental blocks -- that the Indian Muslim has no bloody right to comment on Hindus (who we live with) and India (our country).

The Hindus will now choose who is the right kind of reformer in Islam too. Bravo!

rajsinghi1:

You are right about the literal meaning of subhanallah, but it is used often as just praise of anything...the lines you quoted for harimau may need to be translated!
-- -
#429 by harimau:

So now you are saying that at least a couple of Islamic sects believe in the ``literal word``, as opposed to the blanket statement earlier...

Re. Jain businessman selling beef to Indian Army in Delhi and he being fored into Muslim mainstream of Delhi, you do realise you are being facetious, don`t you?? Btw, the RSS hauled up a Hindu (right-winger, incidentally) because he spoke glowingly about the protein content in cow meat and he seriously believes it gives Muslims a physical advantage...

Re. the Aga Khan, and the progressiveness of the Ismaili community (you do flatter me!), it has to do with economics and a rather hands-off approach to hard-core religious affairs. Although not quite the same, the Sufis, Bhaktis and Brahmo Samajis would follow a similar principle.

Your driver being unable to afford mutton is economic constraint (do you know any other Muslim at all?!), but you are aware that increasingly there is subtle pressure among certain groups to alienate meat-eaters and it is seen as essentially a Muslim thing. Apartments blocks do not readily sell/let out flats to Muslims for this reason. And if you are a Muslim and a vegetarian (my mother) or a mostly-veg person (me) then you are considered unusual and I always notice that the faces glow when they say it...

[One doesn`t have to like you to agree with you. The three Pakistanis I mentioned are regulars on Chowk who catch on to your writings as proof that Hindutva-wadis like me are inflicting untold torture on Indian Muslims.]

I know that people who do not agree with me like me immensely :) And just why is the Pakistani response so important?
- - -

Just watch the hypocrisy...

[#191 by mohar11...on this board:
See what we horrible hindoos would have to put up with ??? I mean - can you even imagine a hindu woman or ahmedi woman dare say things like this in pakiland?? I am telling you man - you are much better without this democracy thingy :))) We Indians would have put up with this ``hapless`` muslim woman day in and day out - her disgusting communal diatribes are sickening ... But what can you do - freedom of speech and all that, you know.]

and

[#13 by mohar11...elsewhere:
Manji`s ``caustic attitude and tone`` - as pointed out by this author. That tone, the author complains, is driving the muslim youth away. But a ``caustic tone`` is minimum that the reformer must use - because there may not be any ``nice`` way to pass the message.

So whether you indulge or castigate the reformers - that`s upto you. Whether you give them your qualified support or un-quallified support - that`s your decision. But let me tell you from the outset: If the ``caustic tone`` or a mis-spelled verse, or criticism of koran bothers you - then reformation is not your cup of tea. Because the way things stand right now - there is no nice you to say ``Folks - you are screw!d up - it`s time to shape up``.]

A reformer, who is accused of being sensational and unscholarly, is getting a pat on the back only because she is talking about one community living in Canada and leading an elite life. I cannot ask anyone to shape up, according to these people, and by saying so they only prove their devious little mental blocks -- that the Indian Muslim has not bloody right to comment on Hindus (who we live with) and India (our country).

The Hindus will now choose who is the right kind of reformer in Islam too. Bravo!

dost mittar: You have an unrealistically negative view of Abdul my friend.

The only time I can recall poor Abdul getting really excited by something was when Bhutto promised him ``roti, kapra, or makaan`` back in the 1960`s. Religious ideologies are the game of those with full stomachs and/or empty heads (of the kind we see on chowk all too often). I dont know where you got this image of the poor in Pakistan taking instruction from the maulvi, but I dont think it is correct. The maulvi is useful for organizing prayers, but is hardly a role model for the average Pakistani (who is more interested in improving his lot in life like anyone else).

And indeed (contrary to what you think), I am by no means alone in saying that Islam is religion of peace - The vast majority of the one billion muslims of the world dont get up every day planning a jihad. Nor do muslim societies have a monopoly on violent individuals by any means.

Indeed, the average Abdul in pakistan is among the most ghairat-mund (self-respecting) individual i have met anywhere in the world. He will invite you to share his meal with him even if this is his first meal of the day. Earlier this year, 15000 indian fans were surprised to see this to the point of reporting in the indian press about the hospitality with which the average Pakistani demonstrated to them (cab drivers refusing fare even though they live hand to mouth themselves and used expensive gas to carry these visitors around; visitors reported being treated in a more friendly and polite manner by pakistani cops than by their own police in india; and as our own chowkie veeresh reported, the entire lahore stadium applauded indian as well as pakistani players while giving a healthy cold shoulder to local politicians). In real life, I have yet to meet an indian who has visited pakistan and not been struck by the warmth of the people there - contrary to years of negative propaganda by both the indian and the pakistan government.

btw, while on the subject of this Dr. Jekyll or Mr. Hyde aspect of islam (as is true for any religion, i may add), it is interesting to note that the son of Syed Qutb (the man who started the islamic brotherhood in egypt which was the forerunner of today`s fanatics including al qaeda, and who was hanged by nasser in 1966) has written a book only a couple of months ago and which was highly praised as representing the peaceful vision of islam in an article in the Washington Post. I dont want to belittle the problems caused by the politicization of islam, but nevertheless I have no doubt that the maulvis will prove to be a mere footnote in history (like bandits and thugs anywhere), since they have nothing constructive to offer.

So, the ``saadghi`` of islam (by which i assume you refer to my mentioning that the Quran does not represent islam as having a monopoly on goodness, and in fact calling for respect for all faiths) that i presented is indeed not only the true spirit of islam, it is also one that is accepted by ordinary muslims the world over. Let us not tar them with the same brush that is correctly applied to the fanatics.