This thread - Often multiple threads are diverted or moral-policed saying some view/strategy is not secular; making the basic definition of secularism an oxymoron. If secularism itself has some dos and donts then how can it be a social or political equiliser? More over the "idea of India" is defined as secular and then democratic structure of our society, everything else be damned. If secularism is so important then it is necessary for Bharatiyas to understand what exactly it is and what its value proposition is.
I agree, all this discussion can be bundled into Bharatiya thread. But I realized that often a certain sections of posters/thoughts are not entering in certain threads to give the impression that there is a wall between Hindu identity of India and the Idea of India, making those Bharatiya threads a "hindu narrow-streets" if you will. I would like to remove this mental block for posters so they can freely express their thoughts.
Yes I do think that the Bharatiya thread can be intimidating for some!
Secularism is of course a category imposed by sickularists so let's see them defend it. I agree they would feel more in their element here. But even here I fear that they would not be forthcoming. You see fudging everything in their interest. Clarity is what cooks their goose.
Instead of defending "secularism" what they rather indulge in is some everything hunky-dory Kumbaya talk.
They can't even define "religion", not to speak of "secularism"! What the secularists are doing is not banning Hindu religions from public discourse, they are dissuading and trying to kill our whole civilization terming it as religion.
For example the Epics thread became some "purana kalakshepam" than the Bharatiya history that it truly is. The moment someone talks about Hindu world-view w.r.t any topic sighting the huge Hindu philosophical repertoire, they are gently asked to use the Epics thread as if the whole forum must use only western worldview and memes and everything else is religious discussion.
Yes I have noticed that. The problem is that their version of "Idea of India" is based on solely external influences and historical narratives defined by others. So they can't openly say, which civilization does the Indian State represent! In fact they would try to bury the whole notion of a state representing a civilization and restrict it only to the idea of providing services to the people who live there, which is nonsense.
As soon as the state defines the education syllabus, the national language, the criteria for state jobs, state ethics, state-citizen relations, it is intervening in a civilizational matter. So state cannot plead neutrality in this question.
However some like to see Republic of India devoid of any civilizational considerations.
The problem is that India is perhaps one of the few countries, whose many "well-wishers" see it as independent of any civilizational foundation. All Western countries, all Islamic countries, China, etc. see themselves as representing some civilization. "Modern" Indians don't want to think in terms of civilization.
And they use "secularism" as a convenient way not only to throw out "Hinduism" but to sideline the whole Bharatiya Sabhyata!
In foreign affairs especially, we need to bring in civilization! Without it one would have Khur-shit trying to suck up to the Chinese and sell our land for free!