Indian Interests

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Locked
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Interests

Post by svinayak »

They will keep trying but they are being exposed now. It is not about religion anymore but about the geo political goals of the western group backed by the western govt.
Once this is exposed to Indians then see the transformation.
devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: Indian Interests

Post by devesh »

not just US opening consulate in Hyd. the Islamics are opening a mega Sufi center in Hyd. expect these Sufi guys to keep up a steady stream of appearances in Hyd, which miraculously attract lakhs of visitors too....there is something big being planned for Hyd/Deccan, and I'm afraid we might see it happen sooner than later. Hindus might be a majority, but considering that most development is centered in and around Hyd, the Hindus here might simply have to accept whatever happens, if they wish to keep the spoils of their investments. for better or worse, I suspect that most Hindus will not agree to this. they will want to put up a fight, but the business tycoons and the elites might not allow that. it will be a good opportunity to highlight who is ready to sell out and who is not. the time of reckoning for Hyd is fast approaching.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Interests

Post by ramana »

My complaint is why are Sardars protrayed as comic figures in Bollywood?

Guru Nanak rolled back Islam in Punjab region and Ranjit Singh conquered the Pashtun lands. During the Freedom Struggle many died in Punjab: Jallianwala bagh and so on. Bhagat Singh and oters were leaders of revolutionary movement.

After Independence, the sardars fanned out all over India and established businesses and prospered not demanding handouts. They made Punjab the granary of India in one decade after 1947.

So why does Bollywood sterotype Sardars? Is it to appease the Pakjabis who also make scik jokes?
Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4832
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

Re: Indian Interests

Post by Yayavar »

Ramanaji: one stereotype in your note -- Punjab was made a granary of India by Punjabis. Not all are "Sardars" though a majority of Punjabis are so. The same stereotype might feed into the idea of a simpleton since the 'city' folks always consider the rural/village folks as simpletons. Also a large proportion were soldiers and often, across the cultures, there are jokes at the expense of soldiers. There are similar jokes about the bhaiya from UP, or someone from rural haryana though prob. not as often. In any way I dont this it has anything with appeasing Pakjabis. Has it not reduced in recent times?
Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Interests

Post by Pranav »

Another vicious outpouring of hatred:

The communal bandwagon rolls on by Madanjeet Singh - http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/a ... 999349.ece

Who is this Madanjeet Singh and what are his sources of income?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madanjeet_Singh
D Roy
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 17:28

Re: Indian Interests

Post by D Roy »

Punjab was made a granary of India by Punjabis and Biharis and other Poorbiyas.


As also by the MS Swaminathan's and assorted other peninsular Indians who worked in the IADP.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Interests

Post by Singha »

delicious rant by Rajdeep sardesai - I though he was a regime loyalist huh?
http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/rajdeepsard ... ahuls.html

That's where though, I am afraid, the comparisons between the two Rahuls might end. Dravid, after all, represents a triumph of middle class India blessed with solid old-fashioned values of hard work and determination. He did not arrive on the cricket scene with a silver spoon or with a famous surname. It is often forgotten that Dravid had to play almost half a dozen years in the Ranji Trophy for Karnataka before he was picked for the country for the sheer weight of his runs. Cricket is the ultimate meritocracy where talent, and not lineage, matters.

By contrast, in politics, especially the Congress party, only family appears to matter. Sriprakash Jaiswal (this government's foot-in-the-mouth prize-winner) revealed the sycophantic Congress mindset when he claimed that Rahul Gandhi could be Prime Minister if he wanted so even at midnight. Defeats like UP are, to that extent, only minor blips in Rahul's political career since for the average Congressman, the Gandhi family is preordained to rule India.

Rahul Dravid had to prove himself in Karnataka before he could aspire to play for India. Rahul Gandhi, it seems, faces no such similar 'shop floor' test. What is true of the Gandhis at the Centre is true to a lesser or greater degree in most states and political parties except the Left and the BJP. Even the latest political posterboy, Akhilesh Yadav, would not be the UP chief minister at 38 if he were not Mulayam Singh Yadav's son.

Rahul Dravid's career also represents the ultimate triumph of placing the team above the individual. Whether be it his brave decision to declare an innings when the mighty Tendulkar was batting on 194 in a Test match, or taking on the unfamiliar role of a wicket-keeper, Dravid always put his team first. By contrast, the Uttar Pradesh election became more about Brand Rahul when it really should have been structured around Team Congress. It would be unfair to blame Rahul Gandhi for this but the fact is the era of an Indira-like politician with a cross-class, cross-caste appeal is truly over. Individual charisma alone will not win you an election; a strong grassroots organisation will give you a distinct edge in a competitive election space.

..............

Rahul Dravid's greatness can also be measured by the fact that he did not resort to theatrics at any stage in his long career which explains why he is so universally respected in the cricket world. Rahul Gandhi, by contrast, has shown a proclivity for political theatre. Be it staying in a Dalit's home for a night or tearing up the Samajwadi Party manifesto at a public meeting, there is a touch of histrionics in his politics that can be self-defeating
................
By contrast, Rahul Gandhi still hasn't been able to take his politics to the next level, quite simply because we still don't know who the real Rahul is, despite him being in public life now for almost a decade. Encircled by security and a small coterie of advisers, he hasn't really opened himself up for scrutiny. Yes, his Hindi and oratorical skills have shown a staggering improvement and his acceptance of personal responsibility for the UP defeat was a step in the right direction. But we still don't have a clear idea where he stands on most critical issues of national importance. Even his one intervention during the Lokpal debate was a prepared speech rather than a spontaneous expression of his political beliefs. At 41, he still seems somehow stuck in the image of a youth leader, still discovering India rather than one ready to lead it.

Rahul Dravid spent most of his career under the shadow of the great Tendulkar. But he never let that overawe him. Rather, he used the opportunity to carve out an independent identity for himself, emerging as Indian cricket's man for all seasons. Like 'The Wall,' who went on to become the country's finest ever number three batsman. Rahul too has grown up in the shadows, in a way, of the Indira-Rajiv-Sonia triumvirate. It's time now for him to break free and become his own man. In cricketing terms, he needs to raise his game before it's too late. :rotfl:
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Interests

Post by Singha »

Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4832
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

Re: Indian Interests

Post by Yayavar »

D Roy wrote:Punjab was made a granary of India by Punjabis and Biharis and other Poorbiyas.


As also by the MS Swaminathan's and assorted other peninsular Indians who worked in the IADP.
Good point.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Interests

Post by ramana »

Accepted. Can we go back to why does Bollywood Sterotype Sikhs which is my original question?


Meanwhile X-post from GDF. India already suffers from many misperceptions from Partition that we dont need more oil in the fire.

Please read and the writer can provided detailed numbers to rebut this fearmongering...
muraliravi wrote:Bakwaas article and bakwaas logic. the muslim population percentage in uttar pradesh has more or less stayed the same since independece (of course it will be lesser before 2002 since uttarakhand was part of UP). UP is one of the states in india where fertility gap between hindus and muslims is minimal. so this logic of mr. gautier is dumb
Jarita wrote:The real reason SP swept Uttar Pradesh
Francois Gautier | Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Comments: 1 | Post a comment | Share this article | Print | Email

Most of the political comments about the Samajwadi Party’s victory in the Uttar Pradesh elections miss some very important points.

One commentator wrote that ‘our UP Muslims somehow put their anti-Americanism above their nationalism and issues like bijli-sadak-paani, jobs, what kind of schools their children go to and whether there are any doctors or medicines in their hospitals or not.’

Is it so? The truth is that the SP outbid everybody in terms of sops to the Muslims of UP. Just read their election manifesto: ‘All students who have passed class 12 will be given a laptop, while other students of schools would get tablets for free. Education would be free for girls till graduation. Schools and colleges will be set up in backward Muslim areas. Students would be given free books till class 8. The SP will also pressurise the Centre to implement recommendations of the Ranganath Mishra and Rajinder Sachar committees on reservations for Muslims. It also promises that Muslims would be given reservation at par with scheduled caste in UP, though experts say that’s a promise that can’t be delivered because it is not feasible under the Constitution. Even Salman Kurshid was furious. ‘I will keep speaking about 4.5% minority reservation for Muslims,’ he said.
Article continues below the advertisement...

‘Why don’t you ask Mulayam Singh? He promised 18%.’
Technical education in madrasas, Urdu medium schools and colleges, and minority participation in each government board for Muslims also find place in the SP pledge. Bundelkhand and eastern UP found special mention in the manifesto. Loans would be provided to farmers at 4%. All farmers above 65 years will get pension. On top of that, the manifesto says that Muslims who have been falsely implicated in terror-related cases would be released.

They would be adequately compensated and the concerned officials would be punished. This has to do with the Batla House encounter, which even the Congress said was not fake. It played an extremely important role in the shift of the Muslim vote away from the Congress and Mayawati towards the SP.

Who will pay? The UPites themselves, of course, including the Muslims. For where will Mulayam Singh and his son find the money to redeem their extravagant promises?

The BJP is also in its own delusions. It keeps trying to reach out to the Muslim voters, and in the process loses its Hindu identity, which alone separates it from the Congress. But the truth is that Muslims will never vote for the BJP. Advani and Gadkari should just reconcile themselves to this fact. The only thing they can do if they come to power at the Centre is to rule justly and give Muslims education, water, electricity and prosperity, as Narendra Modi has done in Gujarat. Only then a few of them might start voting for the BJP.

Another aspect, which has been missed out by the media is that Mulayam Singh is a very sick man and that is why Akilesh, who has become popular on the strength of his youthful face and supposedly computer savvy ways, is being made the CM. But will he be different from his father? What skills does he bring to governing the largest state in India? Will he bring prosperity to those who voted for him? On the contrary, it is quite possible that UP may sink more in bankruptcy and lawlessness.

The truth is that the Muslim population keeps growing and thus its electoral clout keeps increasing. Look at the statistics in UP: there are around 140 constituencies where Muslims are around 30% of the population. While in 73 assembly seats the community is between 20-29% of the population, its population is over 30% in 67 constituencies. This is why the SP won in 72 constituencies with a Muslim majority.

Mulayam Singh, Mamata Banerjee, the Congress, of course, and even the BJP occasionally, have come to the conclusion that if they want to be elected they can do it by pandering to the Muslim vote; you then just need a few Dalits, Christians and disgruntled Hindus to get a majority or near majority.

This is a tragic mistake; for not only it is at the cost of the large silent majority of India, the Hindus, but this cynical calculation has never benefited the Muslim community economically.

India needs courageous politicians who will ask everybody to vote Indian in the interest of the larger Indian nation, and will tell the Muslim community that their first afflation is to their country India, which gives them freedom and equal opportunity, which Hindus neither get in Pakistan, Bangladesh or the Gulf countries.

The author is the editor in chief of the Paris-based La Revue de l'Inde and the author of The Guru of Joy
l francoisgautier26gmail.com
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Indian Interests

Post by brihaspati »

ramana wrote:Accepted. Can we go back to why does Bollywood Sterotype Sikhs which is my original question?


Meanwhile X-post from GDF. India already suffers from many misperceptions from Partition that we dont need more oil in the fire.

Please read and the writer can provided detailed numbers to rebut this fearmongering...
muraliravi wrote:Bakwaas article and bakwaas logic. the muslim population percentage in uttar pradesh has more or less stayed the same since independece (of course it will be lesser before 2002 since uttarakhand was part of UP). UP is one of the states in india where fertility gap between hindus and muslims is minimal. so this logic of mr. gautier is dumb



The truth is that the Muslim population keeps growing and thus its electoral clout keeps increasing. Look at the statistics in UP: there are around 140 constituencies where Muslims are around 30% of the population. While in 73 assembly seats the community is between 20-29% of the population, its population is over 30% in 67 constituencies. This is why the SP won in 72 constituencies with a Muslim majority.
[Gautier]

I am interested in the statement of "rate" "more or less" remained the "same". How did muraliravi ji test this "sameness"?

http://www.islaminindia.org/states-with ... -growth-50

Uttar Pradesh, Delhi, Haryana

We consider these states together since the high Muslim growth areas of Delhi and Haryana are contiguous with North Western areas of Uttar Pradesh. In Uttar Pradesh there has been an appreciable increase in certain regions as seen below.

India UP North West North East Rest of UP

% Muslims

1951 10.43 14.28 24.24 17.28 10.30

1961 10.69 14.63 24.77 18.46 10.45

1971 11.21 15.48 25.64 20.70 10.98

1981 11.76 15.93 26.40 21.63 11.19

1991 12.59 17.33 29.00 23.22 12.05

% Decadal Increase

1951-61 0.26 0.35 0.53 1.18 0.15

1961-71 0.52 0.85 0.87 2.24 0.53

1971-81 0.55 0.45 0.76 0.93 0.21

1981-91 0.83 1.40 2.60 1.59 0.86

Note : North-West and North-East UP have been defined Table 6.10

1. It will readily be seen that the growth of Muslim population in UP is much higher than the All India growth (except 1971-81 decade) although UP is not a border state

2. Within UP, North West and North East regions have grown much faster. The rest of the state has a growth similar or lower than the All India growth

3. In 1951-61 decade, growth in the state is only slightly higher than the Indian growth. But the North West and particularly North East has grown quite rapidly

4. The 1961-71 decade shows accelerated growth in the state. The North East has again grown quite rapidly.

5. In the 1971-81 decade, the state and all India growth are similar. But yet these two regions have grown far above the state average (refer discussions in Chapter 5).

6. The 1981-91 decade is high for all regions. The growth in North West is now explosive and closer to the growth in North Kerala. Even the ‘Rest’ category of the state has grown appreciably, its decadal growth being similar to the 1951-81 period put together. Table C-T4 and Map 6.1 indicate the districts in which this growth has taken place.

If we look at the map we find that these two regions along with the districts in Bihar enclose Nepal. There are reports that all along this border Muslim dominated regions have been recently formed in Nepal also. No wonder that terrorist organisations like ISI can easily operate and infiltrate in the country from here.

The North Western region is also contiguous with similar regions in Haryana and also Delhi and is close to the North Eastern region of Rajasthan. In fact we see an almost contiguous belt of high Muslim growth region from Pakistan to Bangladesh and beyond. It is for the experts to determine the reasons and significance of such selective growth. This becomes important since in districts like Agra, Sitapur, Lucknow, Fatehpur, Unnao, Sultanpur, Deoria (9.25% growth between 1961-81) and Ghazipur, the growth has been negative in the 1981-91 decade. Many of these districts are in Central and Estern UP. In this movement only due to job opportunities?

In the following districts of Uttar Pradesh not covered by the above regions and included in the ‘Rest’ category in Table C-4, the Muslim growth in the 1981-91 decade has been significantly high :

Mathura (1.73%), Kheri (1.58%), Hardoi (1.75%), Farukkabad (1.53%), Pratapgarh (2.31%), Varanasi (2.40%), Nainital (2.32%), Aligarh (1.46%) and Jaunpur (1.40%. These areas have been marked on the map and it will be seen that many of them are close to the high growth regions and will eventually make both of them contiguous. Dehradun has only a slightly lower growth at 1.30%.

Delhi presents an interesting case. Before Independence Muslims constituted about 30% of the population. In 1951 it had come down to 5.73% and was steadly until 1961. Afterwards it has increased by 3.62% between 1961 and 1991, the growth being as high as 1.70% in the 1981-91 decade. Being a metropolitan area and the national capital, the population in general of Delhi has grown very rapidly. But the Muslims gave grown much faster than the HINDUS in this period. It is generally conceded that Bangladeshi Muslim immigrants have settled down in Delhi in a big way.

Indian Punjab have over 30% Muslims in the pre-Independence period. They migrated to Pakistan during partition except from the district to Gurgaon which had16.91% Muslims in 1951. This district is contiguous with Delhi and now a part of Haryana. Faridabad district was carved out of it in the 1971-81 decade. Along with Delhi its Muslim population has also grown by 3.83% from 1951 to 1991. In the present district of Gurgaon it is 34.41% in 1991, with its rural areas being as hiigh as 42%.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Interests

Post by shiv »

cross post of a topic that is OT in the deterrence thread
devesh wrote:one single "political power" which is declared as Islamic, and uses Islam as a tool to attain and hold power, establishing itself as the most powerful force in ME. all other smaller powers in ME will follow in that power's lead on promises of looted wealth from kafirs. this is consolidation of ME under Islam.

JMTP's.

that is how I imagine it will be. doesn't mean it is the only variety of "Islamic consolidation of ME" that's possible.
Ignoring minor Islamic divisions it appears to me that the main division in west Asia is an Arab sunni versus Persian shia. But both are united in their opposition to Israel. Arab sunnis have tied up with the west, and Iran too was right in there until Khomeini. Iran remains bad boy because of its opposition to the US.

It is the US that is playing a dangerous game here - but the danger is to Israel, not to the US.

As is openly declared and documented, the US seeks to play "balancer". Israel's destruction would kill off the US's game so that cannot happen. But an undue strengthening of either the sunni ME or the shia forces would also upset the stability of the ring. So while the US protects the stakeholders in this game it does not seek to see any of them totally destroyed, although it would like to see all of them beholden to the US. In turn the US would like to see each of these entities supportive of US power. In the ideal "world order" US power and influence is supported by other nations, while the US supports other nations in their disputes with each other. That is how the US supplies weapons to KSA, Israel and Egypt while hosting peace talks. The US opposes only those who are out and out anti-US and do not accept US "aid". Saddam, Gadhafi and Iran were in that genre.

A country that accepts US aid and depends on US power for its survival and can be depended upon to promote US power and interests is all that the US is interested in to maintain "world order". Every country is helped to either fight or hold talks with its adversaries, but permanent peace is dangerous to the US.

Muslim nations have a history of bestial violence which we keep talking about on here, but they are also phenomenally stupid in the way that they are unable to unite to topple forces like the USA. On the other hand I have heard people say on BRF that Islam is extremely dangerous and should be considered as something that will automatically and inevitably endanger India if "allowed to unite".

Either islamic nations are too stupid to see this or they are being prevented from uniting by something. It seems to me that "something" is the USA which has taken over the job of keeping the ummah fractured from imperial Britain which originally fractured the ummah.

Many Islamists have realised that and these include Osama, Zawahiri and even Lashkar e Toiba. The current "world order" requires the USA to keep Islamism fractured. The USA keeps islamism fractured by keeping Islamic disputes going. Oddly enough the only Islamic dispute that is "settled" and does not seem to raise its head is the Islam versus Christianism dispute. But the USA is complicit in keeping the Muslim-Jew and the Muslim-Hindu disputes going by helping both sides but never allowing any side to dominate.

If India were to support this state of affairs and help keep the current world order intact India must support the USA and never settle any dispute with Pakistan. I believe we have to accept the Kashmir dispute as a permanent affair because it is the Kashmir dispute that gives the US a handle on Pakistan, and from Pakistan a grip on the sunni world.

In my view this permanent need for India to suck up to the US and keep US interests protected so the US keeps islamism fractured using India and Israel as "balancing tools" is unacceptable in the long term. It will never allow India the strategic space to do what is in Indian interests

The other issue here is what if the US loses its power? The best statement I have seen in this regard is "the US is not about to lose its power anytime soon" That is a "high hopes" statement. There are many countries who can read the US game. A few realignments can significantly degrade US primacy and the US actively suppresses such realignments. However, as I see it when enough groups in the world read the US game, the realignments will occur anyway and the US-led "world order" will fall.

It is necessary for India to be ready to fill any gaps and try and ensure that the US's fall does not mean war for India. The US of course will be happy to see war anywhere outside of the US if push comes to shove.
Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3512
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: Indian Interests

Post by Rony »

Highlights from the Shuddhi event held in Kolkata on Jan 29, 2012 where 75 enlightened souls embraced Vedic Dharma/ Hinduism and became Brahmins. The homecoming of our Muslim brothers and sisters was a seemingly impossible feat due to unfriendly political environment and law & order. But it was made possible to due relentless efforts of selfless volunteers. After all why should 'universal peace' bow down to any selfish or fanatic pressures?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... kjlAZ2qjHU#!
Supratik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6470
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 10:21
Location: USA

Re: Indian Interests

Post by Supratik »

Moved to GDF.
Last edited by Supratik on 19 Mar 2012 00:06, edited 1 time in total.
Samudragupta
BRFite
Posts: 625
Joined: 12 Nov 2010 23:49
Location: Some place in the sphere

Re: Indian Interests

Post by Samudragupta »

I somehow feel the above post may not be suitable for this thread....better to put it in the Burqa forum....
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Indian Interests

Post by brihaspati »

The US is going down definitely and sooner than anticipated. However those who read the US game are primarily themselves imperialists - religious and or territorial. With the exception of perhaps Russia, these game readers also want India out and thinks of its land and peoples easy prey, or at least a juicy target.

So while celebrating US fall, it should be kept in mind that the benfiters from that fall also have India on their sights. The fronts are maintained by the three - who are also allies in various ways - almost every Muslim imperialist ambition and China and to an extent also UK.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Interests

Post by ramana »

This is terrible. Especially there are filters for arsenic that can be implemented. Shame on the govts in WB that let this fester.
narmad wrote:Bengal youth have brittle bones, army stops staffing

Bone deformities due to arsenic poisoning are rampant among youth in Bengal, the Indian army has found. Less than 100 youths among the 2,000 who turned up for an army recruitment drive in February, passed the physical test.

The recruitment was not for fighting ranks but for technical positions — aviation, ammunition and nursing.

"We found out most of the candidates came from arsenic affected regions of Bengal, and drink water from hand pumps," he said. Hand pumps — used rampantly in the state — are the most widespread source of arsenic poisoning.
Arsenic contamination in Bengal was detected more than 30 years ago, said Niyogi.
Since the early eighties, arsenic related skin diseases were detected in Malda, Murshidabad, Nadia, North-24-Parganas, South-24-Parganas, Burdwan, Howrah, Hooghly and Kolkata by Kolkata's School of Tropical Medicine and the All India Institute of Hygiene and Public Health.
Following a 20-year study, the School of Environmental Studies of Jadavpur University, categorised those districts as severely affected areas
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Indian Interests

Post by brihaspati »

^^^They had money sanctioned from various sources. The utilization was so delayed that part of the money was returned - and the other vanished into political taxes.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Interests

Post by shiv »

devesh wrote:
shiv wrote: So what is it about islam that makes you so certain that if it consolidates, India will be a pushover? I don't even think it can consolidate.
India is a pushover mainly for this reason: when you have an enemy who is motivated by scripture-sourced hatred against you, you have to realize it. you have to actually understand and acknowledge this truth, that the hatred you are getting is not superficial or "economic/financial", but actually unconditional religious hatred. this is how, you will realize the source of the enemy's hatred and be able to combat it. it is not enough, in such cases, to have soldiers stationed at the border. especially when there is a huge contingent of followers of that religion inside the borders.

India lacks this awareness, primarily because the elites in power have deemed it necessary to whitewash the record of the enemy. by doing this, and by effectively banning any public discourse of the truth of past atrocities committed by the enemy, the elites have ensured that the people do not understand the source of enemy's hatred.
<snip>
that is the level of dhimminess of Indians. this is why India will be a pushover. when there is a renewed call of the Ummah, the Indian army at the border will be helpless b/c they were never trained to fight against this enemy.

entire swaths of Indian territory will become "no go" zones, if the call for Jihad is announced and put into action. I hope I am wrong, but my brain tells me I might not be.
I post this OT post from the Islamism thread here because I believe it is relevant.

The viewpoint expressed by Devesh expresses fear that Indians are not aware of any threat and that because of lack of awareness India is bound to be a pushover for radical Islamism.

One of the key points Devesh expresses is his belief that Muslims in India constitute an internal enemy
it is not enough, in such cases, to have soldiers stationed at the border. especially when there is a huge contingent of followers of that religion inside the borders.
Of course these sentiments have come up repeatedly on BRF as long as I can recall. The idea that Muslims in India are a "Trojan Horse" and those who do not worry about the Trojan Horse Muslims within India do not understand the danger, hence India is in danger.

It follows that if any Indian acknowledges that Indian Muslims constitute a Trojan Horse to take over India then he understands the problem as viewed by Deveshji, and "be able to combat it"

How? If I declare now that Indian Muslims are a danger to India how can I combat it as you suggest?
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Indian Interests

Post by brihaspati »

Devesh ji,
would you like to clarify what you mean by "danger from Indian Muslims"? Do you mean the whole of Islamic community - or sections, and levels? For example do you consider the danger in the institutional mechanisms by which mullahcracy keeps its hold on the flock or the functionaries?

Do you mean existing/running/concurrent dangers or potential for danger in the future? That Islamism can be and has been a source of danger is supportable by the Kashmir and Kerala experiences, or even the border area incidents in WB on which we see thundering silence from those who deny the danger. That the danger is compounded by denial policy from those in mainstream politics and supporting voices from "civil society" of professionals and intellectuals or activists is also recognizable - by tracking the history of voices and opinions of denial in the lead up to the Kashmir Valley Islamism or rise of Dawood [who took up the Islamist mantle smoothly and served trans-national Islamism] or Madani and the Hyderabadi Islamists.

But it might be better if you move away from the simplistic categorizations. Otherwise it will only help the denial agenda.
devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: Indian Interests

Post by devesh »

I will try to respond about what I mean by "internal danger".

I have grown up with the same set of beliefs as every other Indian, when it comes to Indian muslims. let me say, right now, that I don't believe that the 18 crore muslims will all turn into sword wielding Ghazis. having stated that, now let me explain what makes me paranoid that Indian muslims will either directly or indirectly become a part of any future Jihad on Hindus. one of the most prevalent ideas among India "educated class" is that "education" and "development" is a cure for everything, including religious fanaticism. the popular theory is that "education and economic development" will make sure that Muslims don't become radicalized. I have seen first hand that this theory is completely wrong. I have Muslim "friends" in US who are from the subcontinent, who were either born in US, or moved here when they were still small kids. Most of those I know are "educated" college grads with professional degrees. several are from the top colleges in US and 2 of the people I know are even Doctors in massa. Let me assure all of you that all the "education" and "development" has not changed their fundamental Ghazi like attitude.

as an example, one guy who studying medicine right now, whose father studied Medicine is Osmania (Hyderabad), once told me that in case of any way between India and Pak, he would support Pak b/c it is an "Islamic" state. I reminded him that India has more muslims. He told me "it doesn't matter". Pak is "declared" Islamic, and that's what matters.

another Bangladeshi woman, who is also studying medicine right now, has expressly stated to me many times that the Muslims of the subcontinent need to become united "to deal with India". when I talk to these people, usually, I approach from the angle of "naive Hindu". and I constantly paint myself in comedic terms, and stay away from being a "serious Hindu". this usually has the effect of the Islamics showing their "pity" at my naivete. which is perfectly fine with me. during her pre-med days, she also majored in Arabic studies. In one discussion, she stated that Arabic was much more "beautiful" than Bengali and she hoped that her fellow countrymen become "wise" to this fact and start more actively learning Arabic.

another of my neighbors, this one who was born and brought up in Hyderabad, moved to US after finishing his master's in India. he has a master's in Engineering. if "education" was supposed to "de-radicalize", then it clearly failed with this guy. over a period of several months, I developed enough "pity" in him for me, that one day he blurted out that he feels "liberated" after coming to US. here, the culture is "individualistic" and "nobody cares about anybody else", and "I no longer have to hide my identity as a *good muslim*". In my acquaintance with him, I have come to know that he wishes "muslims in India could also become liberated" and "no longer need to be *CAREFUL* about their identity". these are all direct paraphrased quotes from him.

Another pair of Indian muslim sisters once told me that "muslims were a separate race". when probed further, they felt that the "common agreement with GOD" gave them a unique "right" for "rulership" and therefore, this "common pact" made them a "separate race".

the examples are too many to count. all of them "educated", "developed", and first generation immigrants. except for the BD woman I told about, most of the "radical" things I here from Muslims come from Indian muslims.

I started with anecdotal stories simply because it is the easiest way to know what's going on "on the ground". I wish I had "contacts" who gave me info on actual Islamist networks in India, but I don't. so I won't claim to know what's going on in that arena. Most of what I believe is based on my personal experiences, past experiences passed on from family stories, and what info I can and do gather from family who are in India. and last but not the least, open source media.
SRoy
BRFite
Posts: 1938
Joined: 15 Jul 2005 06:45
Location: Kolkata
Contact:

Re: Indian Interests

Post by SRoy »

^^

Yep, the so called "educated" ones are more articulate and vocal. My personal experience too, unfortunately in professionally setting and had a difficult time preventing fist fights breaking out. The comment was commie citadel "not secular enough". I used to be in NCR then, but I used to have team members in Kolkata. The comment was made when the whole team was overseas. Thankfully, certain 'bhadraloks' had the education of their lives.

The "experts" here professing to know otherwise are either lying or afraid to say so.
Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Interests

Post by Pranav »

devesh wrote: I started with anecdotal stories simply because it is the easiest way to know what's going on "on the ground".
Interesting anecdotes.

It's important not to tar everybody with the same brush. There are also many well adjusted individuals.

The way forward is to delegitimize the ideology in the minds of its adherents; they should feel an intense sense of shame, guilt and loathing for the ideology.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Indian Interests

Post by brihaspati »

Pranav wrote:
devesh wrote: I started with anecdotal stories simply because it is the easiest way to know what's going on "on the ground".
Interesting anecdotes.

It's important not to tar everybody with the same brush. There are also many well adjusted individuals.

The way forward is to delegitimize the ideology in the minds of its adherents; they should feel an intense sense of shame, guilt and loathing for the ideology.
Those who think otherwise - that there are well adjusted individuals too - are speaking the truth too : but again it is based on their own anecdotal experience.. If someone has seen more apparently well-adjusted individuals from a particular faith he will tend to form his opinion based on those few anecdotes. If someone has come across more apparently non-adjusted individuals he will form his opinion based on that.

Either way - both deniers and non-deniers - are basing their conclusions on their personal anecdotal experience if at all their opinions are based on first-hand experiences.

The question that is never explored is that - what are the social realities through which one gains such anecdotal experience? How many non-Muslims have long-term exposure to the inner workings of Muslim society? How many of the deniers are in such great confidence of mullahcracy and the mullahcracy's networks into Muslim society - that what is not meant for non-Muslim eyes and ears - are actually exposed to the deniers?

Actually, and ironically, its abroad in more "liberal" "west" that Indian non-muslims may come into direct contact with a freer expression of inner Islamic thought from fellow subcontinental Islamics. It is not that Muslims are not free to express their thoughts about India and non-Muslims back in India. But the Islamic mindset is trained to look at the whole world as being divided into mutually hostile and inevitably genocidic armed camps. In India they are constantly being told that the majority is against them - and only the grace of certain secualr parties protects them. Combined with the tactical line taught - of deception when militarily weaker - this prevents real feelings to come out.

The pseudo-secular parties have contributed to this mindset for their own benefits to keep the Islamic population politically at the edge and dependent. They have already started reaping the eventual long term rewards of such tactics - for when the mullahcracy feels or sense that they are entrenched enough - or that more than one faction of non-Muslims will compete for their favour, and hence they can bargain - they will shift gradually to support more regional and locally strong but nationally/centrally weaker pseudo-seculars vying for their attention.

By doing this they can gradually free themselves from the dependence on centrally powerful Islamo-philia pretending parties and weaken the central hold on the nation at the same time. By experience they know that progress and advent of Islam took place in the absence of centralized powers. Correctly or wrongly, they think in very classical terms where military and political conquests are concerned.

For most so-called xexperts who deny the potential danger of the conditioing - they have little or no real exposure to the inside of Muslim life. For this one has to come across as pseudo-secular or from one such label and even pretend great admiration and potential willingness to convert. One has to live, eat and sleep [seriously meant and not in any obscene sense in case anyone is tempted here to crack that way] with them. One can do a simple network analysis exercise : denial experts simply map their contacts in Islamic society and the mediating environment [the connecting edge of the graph - describing the nature/context of the connection]. You will quickly see how disconnected you are, and how likely it is that these connections are not showing the real sentiments.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Indian Interests

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Image

Image
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Interests

Post by shiv »

Anecdotes from America are fine. I have anecdotes from India where Muslims behave like other Indians. I have a whole lot of friends and colleagues who are perfectly Indian.

I have found that posting that on BRF invites the accusation that
1. This is part of the Hindu ignorance of how the Muslim is a traitor within and that he would hardly show his real colors in India
2. Muslims in India are doing Taqiya till the time is ripe

Of course I also know locals who are married to Pakistanis, some of the latter live locally. i have no idea what flags they wave at cricket matches. Ultimately - for many Indians like me in India who live in mixed and peaceful neighbourhoods, there is no option other than living peacefully with people whom one deals with every day.

Dealing with every day in India means festivals, weddings, birthday parties, local residents association meetings, voting, milk booths etc. My life model is clearly very different from the BRFite who said on BRF about a decade go that he was afraid to venture into Muslim areas he used to live in when he was in India. Clearly everyone's experience is different.

I reported Devesh's post to admins yesterday because I want to know how it is OK for an Indian sitting in America who does not have to make a life in india can make post saying that Muslims in India are internal enemies against whom the Indian army at the borders would be useless as Islam takes over an India where Indians do not understand the danger of Islam from within and without. I recall that Shri Devesh ji was greatly upset when i pointed out that there can be a different viewpoint about life and the world if one lives in America, as opposed to living in India. I was gently cautioned against "targeting NRI's" but there seems to be no public word about a person who clearly posts anecdotes about Muslims from America after a public warning on the forum that Muslims in India pose a danger to India.

In fact the future of India is going to have to be with Muslims and non Muslims in India living in peace and harmony, making space for each other. if someone who thinks he has read the Quran tells me that it does not allow that - I really don't care. India is going to have to do that. if Muslims in India are an internal danger to India they are hardly more of an internal danger than Indians constantly encouraging other Indians to view all Indian Muslims with suspicion.

After having spent a decade on BRF encouraging the discussion about truth about Islam on BRF and not doing much to protect the viewpoints of anyone who wanted harmony with Muslims or allow anyone to say anything good, I find that this forum has not moved beyond the same old cliches, and actually appears to be losing touch with reality of what is happening inside India.

Reality in India may be anything. It may be that there is harmony. It may be that india is already occupied by islamists. Whatever the reality in India it is not being reflected in forum discussions. Indian Muslims and non Muslims are going to have to live in harmony and work together for the future. In areas this is already happening. We are doing no one a favor by discussing only the areas where this does not happen. Clearly the latter only helps people say how all indian Muslims are a threat to India. That is rubbish.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Interests

Post by shiv »

brihaspati wrote:
Actually, and ironically, its abroad in more "liberal" "west" that Indian non-muslims may come into direct contact with a freer expression of inner Islamic thought from fellow subcontinental Islamics. It is not that Muslims are not free to express their thoughts about India and non-Muslims back in India. But the Islamic mindset is trained to look at the whole world as being divided into mutually hostile and inevitably genocidic armed camps. In India they are constantly being told that the majority is against them - and only the grace of certain secualr parties protects them. Combined with the tactical line taught - of deception when militarily weaker - this prevents real feelings to come out.
Correct.

But the same applies to Hindus too. It is easy for a Hindu sitting in America to tell Indians that Muslims are a danger and that the Indian in India is ignorant of this danger.

The Indian in India might know this, but may be restrained by the situation to not say it out loud. This is interpreted by the Hindu in America as "Ignorance that will ensure that India will be a pushover"

Your argument applies to Muslims and non Muslims. People in India are not as stupid as educated Indians think they are.

Most Hindus are well aware from family anecdotes and public material that there is a problem. Muslims too are well aware of that. It is totally absurd to imagine that Indians in India don't know about India things that are obvious to someone sitting in America. The only difference is that the person in America is released from the restrictions of India and say it out loud. The Muslims whom Devesh spoke too were as "free" to speak in America as Devesh is to express his reservations about Indian Muslims. Both are speaking from America with the same access/lack of access to Indian reality.

it is not lack of awareness in India and a special awareness and honesty from America, but an ability to say politically incorrect things openly on teh internet. It was not for nothing that I have repeatedly brought up the topic of how any Indian in America would not dare say a word about harming the US president. It is easy in India to do that. However that does not mean that every Indian in America is in love with the US president. He can't curse openly, that's all. He can make "politically correct" statements.

Communal relations in India are not based on ignorance as has been alleged. They are based on the reality of having to make a country work. People have to work, eat and survive. Communal disharmony just does not cut it. It is, in my view total stupidity to make a general assumption that people in India do not know what they are dealing with as regards communal harmony and tensions. Someone is well behind the curve about life in India and its definitely not the people within India.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Indian Interests

Post by brihaspati »

Is the forum being filled with one-sided experiences onlee? Perhaps. It is so fortunate that the WB-BD frontier [and deeper inside] villages of one community have no internet savvy, peacefully co-existing with other communities, realizers of the danger of talking about potential dangers of Islamism.

Hyderabad had once tried its hand at Islamism sitting inside a ring of majority community. It was unfortunate that Hyderabad was not contiguous with the areas the then Delhite power wanted to shed as contaminated regions, and there was no hesitation in using armed forces against the Hyderabadi Razakars. The lesson learned, Islamists behaved for a long long time in the south and slowly waited to recoup their strength. Now they have shown what they want in Kerala, and slowly and surely have taken steps under Owaisi in Hyderabad.

But that great peaceful interlude lent wind to the sails of those who sit in one corner of India - protected by geography and past unhesitatingly coercive rashtryia intervention - to delude themselves that what they see in their small geographical cocoon, holds for all of India. Can someone sitting in Mysore really understand what is going on in Azamgarh or Bhagalpur or Deganga? Or vice versa?

Are two distant geograhpical points in India really that close to each other in a psychological sense? Are they really closer than some NRI in USA and one of those two compared to the other? If the NRI speaking about subregions in India is the arrogance of distance how is demanding that whole of India is modeled under one's local optimistic cocoon not a case of equal if not greater arrogance?

I had requested Surasena ji not to post too much about frontier populations in WB, because it may bring retribution. I think we should understand the psychological drive that brings in such retribution. Perhaps its a reflection of the very same demand that only one subregional view and dogma should be established over all others under exactly the same argument. The interregional disconnect is so entrenched that there is a total ignorance of the situation in regions that contradict our pet theories.

It may be worthwhile to consider from now on - the territorial extent, frequency, and nature of both apparent Islamist dangers and Islamist peacefulness. Unfortunately it will be dominated by the GV experiences -because it still concentrates a much larger number of humans than the south-west.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Interests

Post by shiv »

brihaspati wrote:Is the forum being filled with one-sided experiences onlee? Perhaps. It is so fortunate that the WB-BD frontier [and deeper inside] villages of one community have no internet savvy, peacefully co-existing with other communities, realizers of the danger of talking about potential dangers of Islamism.
The forum is not only being filled with one sided experiences, it is being filled predominantly by the one sided experiences of people who have the most time and resources to state opinions on the internet. Long ago I had conducted a poll of the origins of people who post on BRF. The poll showed a very definite trend about the origins and backgrounds of people who took part in the poll. as you state, place of residence does matter, be it Mysore, Bhagalpur, border districts of West Bengal, America or Europe. Could we all be honest enough to admit that place of residence introduces a bias?

Bias is a given.

What concerns me specifically is that certain types of bias have ot been given enough of an airing on BRF. The bias that islam is dangerous is well known on BRF. As long as one says that on BRF there are NO concerns expressed by anyone that there is any bias.

I now want to see the effect of posting an opposite bias. If one bias is that islam is danger, the opposite bias is that it is not a danger.

Where on BRF has anyone said that islam is not a danger? Who has said it? You are dead right that the discussions are one sided. Why not make it less one sided, since you have yourself expressed concern about one sided opinions?
Last edited by shiv on 20 Mar 2012 07:38, edited 1 time in total.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Indian Interests

Post by brihaspati »

shiv wrote:
brihaspati wrote:
Actually, and ironically, its abroad in more "liberal" "west" that Indian non-muslims may come into direct contact with a freer expression of inner Islamic thought from fellow subcontinental Islamics. It is not that Muslims are not free to express their thoughts about India and non-Muslims back in India. But the Islamic mindset is trained to look at the whole world as being divided into mutually hostile and inevitably genocidic armed camps. In India they are constantly being told that the majority is against them - and only the grace of certain secualr parties protects them. Combined with the tactical line taught - of deception when militarily weaker - this prevents real feelings to come out.
Correct.

But the same applies to Hindus too. It is easy for a Hindu sitting in America to tell Indians that Muslims are a danger and that the Indian in India is ignorant of this danger.

The Indian in India might know this, but may be restrained by the situation to not say it out loud. This is interpreted by the Hindu in America as "Ignorance that will ensure that India will be a pushover"

Your argument applies to Muslims and non Muslims. People in India are not as stupid as educated Indians think they are.

Most Hindus are well aware from family anecdotes and public material that there is a problem. Muslims too are well aware of that. It is totally absurd to imagine that Indians in India don't know about India things that are obvious to someone sitting in America. The only difference is that the person in America is released from the restrictions of India and say it out loud. The Muslims whom Devesh spoke too were as "free" to speak in America as Devesh is to express his reservations about Indian Muslims. Both are speaking from America with the same access/lack of access to Indian reality.

it is not lack of awareness in India and a special awareness and honesty from America, but an ability to say politically incorrect things openly on teh internet. It was not for nothing that I have repeatedly brought up the topic of how any Indian in America would not dare say a word about harming the US president. It is easy in India to do that. However that does not mean that every Indian in America is in love with the US president. He can't curse openly, that's all. He can make "politically correct" statements.

Communal relations in India are not based on ignorance as has been alleged. They are based on the reality of having to make a country work. People have to work, eat and survive. Communal disharmony just does not cut it. It is, in my view total stupidity to make a general assumption that people in India do not know what they are dealing with as regards communal harmony and tensions. Someone is well behind the curve about life in India and its definitely not the people within India.
I have been suggesting to people who think they know Islamism in India like the palm of their hands to do a simple sociological experiment - just take pen and paper, and write down the Muslims they know and the context and nature of the connection with them.

How well are you socially connected to Muslim society? What is the nature and strength of that connection that gives you access to the small inner groups which meet under some theologian or assistant? How many days have you spent living with them in their families? What socio-economic level of Muslim society have you lived with? Have you worked on some local organization within the Islamic dominated area - political or community - for a long time?

Most of the time - like my childhood elite society around me - Hindus get around with equally educated, wealthy, propertied Muslims. Even there the straw comes out of the clay idol over long years of rubbing. Based on that elite and narrow connection- ideas are formed of entire Muslim society of many levels, and usually almost completely away from the political and socially coercive face of mullahcracy. Even maulanas "known" would eb the sufi/liberal/gentle/kindhearted and forever peaceloving faces.

Hindu elite in India about whom we discuss here as having suddenly found their voiuce in USA - actually have little or no insider connections to Muslim society - back when they were in deah. Having one through the Nehruvian education processes, sometimes in "missionary" schools - they already are trained to look at even hints or stories of negativity from Islamism as bunkum and propaganda.

So it is incorrect to say that Hindu elite who migrate to USA know already about Islamism from desh. Actually, most of them probably only were shocked for their life to see the open expression of hostility and Islamic aggression from fellow subcontinental muslims in western lands. Many start searching for the real history only after facing such incidents.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Interests

Post by shiv »

brihaspati wrote: So it is incorrect to say that Hindu elite who migrate to USA know already about Islamism from desh. Actually, most of them probably only were shocked for their life to see the open expression of hostility and Islamic aggression from fellow subcontinental muslims in western lands. Many start searching for the real history only after facing such incidents.
Your bias based on your experiences. My experience gives me a different bias.
Last edited by shiv on 20 Mar 2012 07:42, edited 1 time in total.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Indian Interests

Post by abhishek_sharma »

And what makes you think that you know the absolute truth?
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Interests

Post by shiv »

abhishek_sharma wrote:And what makes you think that you know the absolute truth?
Who said that he knows the absolute truth? Where?

What I have done is to question statements made on here as not necessarily being the absolute truth, but based on one's personal experiences, place of residence and other biases. My statements certainly have a bias, but so do those of others.

But all discussions on BRF have centered around the idea that Islam is dangerous. is that the absolute truth?
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Indian Interests

Post by abhishek_sharma »

I think it is fair to say that we don't have sufficient statistics to make any claim about all Indian Muslims.

By the way, why were Kashmiri Pandits driven out of J&K? The majority community could have saved them.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Interests

Post by shiv »

brihaspati wrote: But that great peaceful interlude lent wind to the sails of those who sit in one corner of India - protected by geography and past unhesitatingly coercive rashtryia intervention - to delude themselves that what they see in their small geographical cocoon, holds for all of India. Can someone sitting in Mysore really understand what is going on in Azamgarh or Bhagalpur or Deganga? Or vice versa?

Are two distant geograhpical points in India really that close to each other in a psychological sense? Are they really closer than some NRI in USA and one of those two compared to the other? If the NRI speaking about subregions in India is the arrogance of distance how is demanding that whole of India is modeled under one's local optimistic cocoon not a case of equal if not greater arrogance?
Brihaspatiji. I beg your indulgence. You are using words like "greater arrogance". You would prefer lesser arrogance I presume. The arrogance is clear and you have brought it up yourself.

Place of residence does introduce a bias. You say so yourself. If my saying the same thing constitutes "greater arrogance" that is your viewpoint for you to hold. Just as you cannot speak for me and I cannot speak for you, neither you nor I can speak for all Hindus and accuse them of being ignorant or of being a pushover. At best that is a bias. At worst it is arrogance. The degree of arrogance, greater or lesser is up to you to decide. Either way the degree of arrogance is irrelevant.
Last edited by shiv on 20 Mar 2012 07:57, edited 1 time in total.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Interests

Post by shiv »

abhishek_sharma wrote:I think it is fair to say that we don't have sufficient statistics to make any claim about all Indian Muslims.

By the way, why were Kashmiri Pandits driven out of J&K? The majority community could have saved them.
Since this is the Indian interests thread, i want to point out that the Christianism sponsored "Dravidianism" has forced Tamilian Brahmins out of Tamil Nadu. But yes, let's talk about Islam. It was the majority "community" that drove them out.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Indian Interests

Post by abhishek_sharma »

I said they did not do enough to save them.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Indian Interests

Post by brihaspati »

shiv wrote:
brihaspati wrote:Is the forum being filled with one-sided experiences onlee? Perhaps. It is so fortunate that the WB-BD frontier [and deeper inside] villages of one community have no internet savvy, peacefully co-existing with other communities, realizers of the danger of talking about potential dangers of Islamism.
The forum is not only being filled with one sided experiences, it is being filled predominantly by the one sided experiences of people who have the most time and resources to state opinions on the internet. Long ago I had conducted a poll of the origins of people who post on BRF. The poll showed a very definite trend about the origins and backgrounds of people who took part in the poll. as you state, place of residence does matter, be it Mysore, Bhagalpur, border districts of West Bengal, America or Europe. Could we all be honest enough to admit that place of residence introduces a bias?

Bias is a given.

What concerns me specifically is that certain types of bias have ot been given enough of an airing on BRF. The bias that islam is dangerous is well known on BRF. As long as one says that on BRF there are NO concerns expressed by anyone that there is any bias.

I now want to see the effect of posting an opposite bias. If one bias is that islam is danger, the opposite bias is that it is not a danger.

Where on BRF has anyone said that islam is not a danger? Who has said it? You are dead right that the discussions are one sided. Why not make it less one sided, since you have yourself expressed concern about one sided opinions?

I have long ago posted my experiences about Islamism. I spent all my life in desh in touch with Islamism one way or the other - and not from the safety of most of the southern peninsula - but in the most actively hostile and organized areas of GV.

I have clearly disntinguished between the common follower and the institutional form of islamism. You know very well my immense respect and regards for Muslim women and I clearly mentioned the context. I have tried to pay my debt by providing some shelter to the needy and the discarded among women from that faith too. My closest aides and right-hand men during my student politics days were composed of Sikhs and Muslims - although I still cringe in having to mention them by their birth-faiths.

If you are expecting me to say anything positive about any aspect of mullahcracy - any of Islams organizing and mobilizing institutions - you will not hear a single positive word from me, simply because each and every encounter with them I remember from the age of 7 - is negative. I have many positive encounters with the individual common follower. But every situation when it became a matter of collective choice and the institutions/mullahcracy got involved - those individuals failed to stand up to the mullahcracy and against the collective , publicly.

So in my analytical framework, there can be excellent individual Muslims, but they are never strong enough to counter the organized theological mobilization, and this weakness is not merely a matter of personal cowardice. It is deeply and intimately linked to the tehological conditioning that paralyzes them when it comes to choosing between what the mullah/"theology" says and what a non-Muslim says - over crucial aspects of concern to the non-Muslim. I have told on the forum how a slightly drunk long-time Muslim friend of my dad once blurted out at my question - that even though enslavement is unfortunate, but it is a necessary part of the treatment that the lord demanded on the resisting qaffir.

So, for me as long as mullahcracy and the institutional means of preserving the textual aspirations continue - when it becomes a matter of active resistance to jihad on the kafir - I will not expect any contribution from the excellent individuals. At best they will remain paralyzed while the jihadis manage the criminal elements and increasing proportion of vacillators on their side. The theological conditioing prevents active resistance. They can become free of that only if the mullahcracy and the institutions and the texts are deligitimized or removed from any social presence.

It is not a simple case of one good story against a bad story. The crucial paralysis or inclination to side with the mullah on core questions of concern to the non-Muslim - is the real danger, and it extends to all of the society.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Interests

Post by shiv »

brihaspati wrote: have long ago posted my experiences about Islamism. I spent all my life in desh in touch with Islamism one way or the other - and not from the safety of most of the southern peninsula - but in the most actively hostile and organized areas of GV.

I have clearly disntinguished between the common follower and the institutional form of islamism. You know very well my immense respect and regards for Muslim women and I clearly mentioned the context. I have tried to pay my debt by providing some shelter to the needy and the discarded among women from that faith too. My closest aides and right-hand men during my student politics days were composed of Sikhs and Muslims - although I still cringe in having to mention them by their birth-faiths.

If you are expecting me to say anything positive about any aspect of mullahcracy - any of Islams organizing and mobilizing institutions - you will not hear a single positive word from me, simply because each and every encounter with them I remember from the age of 7 - is negative. I have many positive encounters with the individual common follower. But every situation when it became a matter of collective choice and the institutions/mullahcracy got involved - those individuals failed to stand up to the mullahcracy and against the collective , publicly.

So in my analytical framework, there can be excellent individual Muslims, but they are never strong enough to counter the organized theological mobilization, and this weakness is not merely a matter of personal cowardice. It is deeply and intimately linked to the tehological conditioning that paralyzes them when it comes to choosing between what the mullah/"theology" says and what a non-Muslim says - over crucial aspects of concern to the non-Muslim. I have told on the forum how a slightly drunk long-time Muslim friend of my dad once blurted out at my question - that even though enslavement is unfortunate, but it is a necessary part of the treatment that the lord demanded on the resisting qaffir.

So, for me as long as mullahcracy and the institutional means of preserving the textual aspirations continue - when it becomes a matter of active resistance to jihad on the kafir - I will not expect any contribution from the excellent individuals. At best they will remain paralyzed while the jihadis manage the criminal elements and increasing proportion of vacillators on their side. The theological conditioing prevents active resistance. They can become free of that only if the mullahcracy and the institutions and the texts are deligitimized or removed from any social presence.

It is not a simple case of one good story against a bad story. The crucial paralysis or inclination to side with the mullah on core questions of concern to the non-Muslim - is the real danger, and it extends to all of the society.
Brihaspati - to me personally what you have written about Mullahs and islamism is well known. You have no idea of my experiences and i would be grateful if you would resist the temptation to reach conclusions about me as part of your flowery sentence construct which are otherwise lucid and informative.

My basic complaint is that the facts you lay down are well known on BRF

The rant that Indians do not know but they should know is also an old one on BRF - a mere repetition of what I have seen on here for over a decade.

The rant that the elite are "like this or like that" or that the pseudosecular/Congress politicians have done this or have done that is also old hat on BRF.

None of these things has made a whit of s difference in India. The forum used to be hot air when these opinions were first aired. It is now lukewarm air because it is all well known but changes nothing.

i will not even bother asking the question asked a thousand times on BRF - "What can you do about it" - because I know you can do nothing more than express your opinions and views based on your experiences. After another decade, if BRF exists there will be a new person saying the same things with the same fervor. And if anyone survives on BRF for two decades he will likely find that after 20 years nothing has changed.

in fact a lot of the things that people on BRF have warned are the "greatest danger to India" are all continuing to happen merrily. That could possibly mean one or more of a number of things. it could mean that the warnings were all correct but India has been lost without a battle. It could also mean that the warnings were all hype. In the short term we will not know.

Given that this is fundamentally a pointless hot air forum for people to express their personal biases that make no difference to ground reality in India I think it is informative, if nothing else to hear what different types of people have to say and where they are coming from.

Among Indians there is a viewpoint that there are moderate aspects to Islam and moderate Muslims. That is an assertion that is not allowed on BRF on the premise that it is wrong. Would it be arrogance to assert that it is wrong?
Locked