Tackling Islamic Extremism in India - 2

vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Postby vsudhir » 24 Dec 2007 18:45

B Raman: Why Modi appeals to Hindus (Rediff)

If these self-styled secularists had only visited the Web sites, discussion groups and blogspots of members of the Hindu community not only in India, but also in other countries of the world -- particularly in the US -- they would have noticed something, which might have given them cause for introspection.

They would have noticed that Modi is becoming the icon of a growing number of Hindus not only in India, but also in the Hindu Diaspora spread across the world. The support for him is not confined only to the Gujarati-speaking Hindus of the world. It is spread right across the Hindu spectrum -- whatever be the language or ethnicity or place of origin of the Hindus concerned.

They would have noticed that in the Hindu Diaspora in the West, more young people admire Modi than grown-ups. Many of his young admirers in the US were born and brought up there and had the benefit of the best of secular education. In spite of this, there is a sense of pride in them that the Hindu community has at long last produced a leader of the calibre of Modi.

What is it they see in him?


But there is one factor, which is more important than these and which has not found mention in the analyses.

That is, for large sections of the Hindus -- young and old, even more among the young than among the old -- he gave them a sense of pride in their identity as Hindus.

They feel that he removed from their minds long habits of defensiveness as Hindus carefully nurtured by the self-styled secularists.

As if to proclaim one's Hindu identity and to assert one's rights as Hindus in their own homeland in which they are in a vast majority (80 per cent of the population) is to be communal, is to become an ugly Indian.

For these self-styled secularists, a pretty Indian is a Hindu, who is all the time on the defensive, fights shy of proclaiming his Hindu personality and asserting his rights as a member of the majority community.

These self-styled secularists would not address their sermons of secularism to the Islamic countries, where for a Muslim to convert a non-Muslim into Islam is an act blessed by Allah, but for a non-Muslim to convert a Muslim into his religion is a crime calling for the death penalty.

For them, secularism is a virtue which a Hindu should practise towards others, but not others towards him.

It is Modi's rejection of this hypocrisy of the self-styled secularists, which makes him stand apart as a Hindu leader with a difference in the eyes of his admirers.

Bharathiyar, the Tamil poet who inspired millions of Tamil youth to join the independence struggle under Mahatma Gandhi [Images], wrote: Tamizhanenru Chollada, Talai Nimirndhu Nillada (Say You Are a Tamil, Hold Your Head High).

The growing legion of Modi's admirers in the Hindu community all over the world are saying: Hindu Enru Chollada, Talai Nimirndu Nillada (Say You Are A Hindu, Hold Your Head High).

They are no longer prepared to be defensive in proclaiming their Hindu idenity, in asserting their rights as Hindus.

They are secular in the genuine sense of the word, but for them secularism does not mean developing a guilt complex about being a Hindu and all the time conceding the rights of others. They do not accept the argument that a Hindu, who asserts his rights, ceases to be a secularist.


Word's getting out.

But will Dhimmedia and the psec elite choose to listen? If they're genuinely well-meaning people, there's a chance they can be awakened to the threat brewing.

But if they're pretending to be asleep, then there's no hope they can ever be 'woken' up. In this latter category I put marxists, maoists and the jholawalas - beyond hope of redemption.

Is the dhimmedia a part of the pretend group? Thats the $64k question.

sanjaychoudhry
BRFite
Posts: 756
Joined: 13 Jul 2007 00:39
Location: La La Land

Postby sanjaychoudhry » 24 Dec 2007 18:49

Very good analysis Shiv. Beautifully put.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 24 Dec 2007 19:06

vsudhir wrote:B Raman: Why Modi appeals to Hindus (Rediff)

As if to proclaim one's Hindu identity and to assert one's rights as Hindus in their own homeland in which they are in a vast majority (80 per cent of the population) is to be communal, is to become an ugly Indian.

For these self-styled secularists, a pretty Indian is a Hindu, who is all the time on the defensive, fights shy of proclaiming his Hindu personality and asserting his rights as a member of the majority community.

These self-styled secularists would not address their sermons of secularism to the Islamic countries, where for a Muslim to convert a non-Muslim into Islam is an act blessed by Allah, but for a non-Muslim to convert a Muslim into his religion is a crime calling for the death penalty.

For them, secularism is a virtue which a Hindu should practise towards others, but not others towards him.


Wah Wah Raman saab! A series of quotable quotes.

May your article get a hundred million hits. Please cross post anywhere and everywhere.

After all, do you... or do you not believe that truth must be told? Satyameva Jayate.

Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Johann » 25 Dec 2007 00:05

surinder wrote:
Johann wrote:I've said it here a number of times - Pakistan was an act of pessimism and retreat, a recognition that democracy in the *long term* would not allow for the survival of dar-ul-Islam within India.


Johann:

Your statement caught my interest and I have been thinking about it. I must say that partly I see what you mean, but I cannot connect all the dots and make sense of it completely.


There is both fear *and* ambition.

On the one hand there is the dread fear that dar-ul-Islam will be rolled back across the subcontinent.

At the same time hope and the ambition that Pakistan will be the refuge which enables the repeated historical model of 'pure' Islam sweeping down to the Indian plains from the North-West.

Pakistan seems to me a pessimism because Islam could not get back *all* of India. But it is also a victory because it got 1/3 of India on a platter with very little price. They have a saying amongst the Muslims of India: "Hans key liya hai Pakistan, larh ke lengey Hindustan". If you do not know Hindi, it means "We took Pakistan with a laugh, we will take Hindustan with a fight." Bottom line, it refers to the easy with Pakistan was wrested from an unwilling India. That indicates victory ... a resounding one at that.

Pakistan seems like a victory where the Islamic rule over India has been preserved. It also appears to be a successor state of Mughals.


The Pakistanis did not gain partition cheaply - the trains of the dead went in both directions. The psychological impact was proportionately much greater in Pakistan, the smaller, weaker entity.

Pakistani belief in the martial prowess of Pathans and Punjabis over the majority of Hindus from the plains is offset by real fear that the Indians of some sort or another will come and finish them off

The INC leadership when confronted with the choice of partition or delayed independence chose partition.

That was a one-time deal - all further attempts at partition within India have been violently opposed by the state.

Many 'Hawks' as well as 'doves' in India underestimate the kind of fear the country and its peoples inspire within Pakistan. I tend to agree with those who suggest that such fear is an important part of why Pakjabis and establishment Mohajirs tend to take refuge in historical fantasies which in turn lead to catastrophic miscalculations when dealing with India.

Then there is another bizzarre outcome of Partition: Punjabi Mussalman had no history worth mentioning in Indian history. But Pakistan has been basically a Punjabi Mussalman Empire. They are the most unlikely source of an empire, but reality is that they control some very very vital things in the world. It is bizzarre because Punjabi Mussalman's have been conspicous in Indian history by their unremarkableness. They now control a vast territory. They control the resources of Baluchistan, the sea ports of Sind, and the population of Pashtuns. They control access to Central Asia. Only thing they do not control are the head waters of the Sub-continent rivers.


While Punjabis are the most privileged single group in Pakistan, Pakistan's ruling class has generally been bigger and more diverse than a Punjabi elite.

How many Punjabi COASs, how many Punjabi prime ministers? Where is an official status for Punjabi equivalent to Urdu?

Pakistani Punjab must either give up on the idea of Pakistan, or it must accept a situation it is the junior partner in ruling Pakistan.

To make an analogy, Yugoslavia did not collapse until the Serbians got fed up with the whole thing in the 1980s, despite or perhaps because of their great, but not dominant power in the system.

Pakjab has its own greviences against the Pan-Pakistani elite, however much they pale in comparison to Baluchistan, Sindh and Northern Areas. There are plausible conditions under which Pakjabi unhappiness could spill over in to a crisis that actually destroyed Pakistan as a single entity.

The Pakistani narrative (to me) seems like a parallel tale of many contradictory, bizzarre & often unconnected stories. I am not able to resolve all this and make a unified theory of Pakistan.


Like genetics, historical processes dont move in straight lines. You can inherit several traits, but particular traits may manifest themselves in alternate generations. Sometimes they appear in uncles or nieces rather than a straight paternal or maternal line. Some traits are recessive appearing only when reinforced, others dominant.
Last edited by Johann on 25 Dec 2007 00:22, edited 1 time in total.

pradeepe
BRFite
Posts: 741
Joined: 27 Aug 2006 20:46
Location: Our culture is different and we cannot live together - who said that?

Postby pradeepe » 25 Dec 2007 00:18

shiv wrote:
vsudhir wrote:B Raman: Why Modi appeals to Hindus (Rediff)

As if to proclaim one's Hindu identity and to assert one's rights as Hindus in their own homeland in which they are in a vast majority (80 per cent of the population) is to be communal, is to become an ugly Indian.

For these self-styled secularists, a pretty Indian is a Hindu, who is all the time on the defensive, fights shy of proclaiming his Hindu personality and asserting his rights as a member of the majority community.

These self-styled secularists would not address their sermons of secularism to the Islamic countries, where for a Muslim to convert a non-Muslim into Islam is an act blessed by Allah, but for a non-Muslim to convert a Muslim into his religion is a crime calling for the death penalty.

For them, secularism is a virtue which a Hindu should practise towards others, but not others towards him.


Wah Wah Raman saab! A series of quotable quotes.

May your article get a hundred million hits. Please cross post anywhere and everywhere.

After all, do you... or do you not believe that truth must be told? Satyameva Jayate.


This is a response to Seema Bhen's last diatribe.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16448
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: woh log gawad hai, unpad hai !
Contact:

Postby Rahul M » 25 Dec 2007 01:33

This particular thread generates some of the best thought processes, debates, dialogues & information on a very very important issue (which sometimes goes beyond the title) that may well decide our civilizational future.

some of BRF's very best have posted much thought over and researched posts both in this version and its last avatar. Many of the posts (which are articles in their own right) are outright gems and deserve to be preserved.

Could this thread and the previous one be preserved in BRF archive ??

This is a really heartfelt appeal !!

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7533
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 25 Dec 2007 02:28

2005 article by B.Raman

Modi's visa denial: Who did it?

If Modi is guilty of violation of human rights of religious minorities, as alleged by the US, so were Narasimha Rao, Rajiv Gandhi, Indira Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, D P Mishra, and Kamaraj. Why did the US, in its hypocrisy, choose to act against Modi, and never in the past against the others? There are several reasons for this.

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1228
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Postby Sumeet » 25 Dec 2007 03:26

shiv wrote:
vsudhir wrote:B Raman: Why Modi appeals to Hindus (Rediff)

As if to proclaim one's Hindu identity and to assert one's rights as Hindus in their own homeland in which they are in a vast majority (80 per cent of the population) is to be communal, is to become an ugly Indian.


On the other hand they were easily dismissing him as a

For these self-styled secularists, a pretty Indian is a Hindu, who is all the time on the defensive, fights shy of proclaiming his Hindu personality and asserting his rights as a member of the majority community.



You know what, many analyst came on TV shows on NDTV, CNN IBN and not one person raised this point. Even Swapan didn't raise this point. I wish B Raman could say this face to face to Rajdeep, Sagarika or Vikram or Barkha. This is the biggest fall out of this win. I just hope BJP capitalize on this in the national elections that are not too far.


These self-styled secularists would not address their sermons of secularism to the Islamic countries, where for a Muslim to convert a non-Muslim into Islam is an act blessed by Allah, but for a non-Muslim to convert a Muslim into his religion is a crime calling for the death penalty.

For them, secularism is a virtue which a Hindu should practice towards others, but not others towards him.



Well for this kind of accusation they already have an answer, do you want us to become like them ? We should think about ourselves and not bother about others.

Remember even the likes of MIM issued statements on Taslima saying "She should understand that this is not pakistan or bangladesh, we respect sentiments of all communities".

Even recently that indianmuslim.info article written by some NRI muslim who said do we want to compare with pakistan or bangladesh or some muslim country or we should look up to established nations with strong democratic traditions etc.. This is the same article that Rye and Theo took apart.

In their minds they have already resolved that question, and this is how:

We will choose a model nation of course NOT from one amongst other muslim nations and then point the gun at hindus in this country and tell them look at them and thats the ideal, or we will come up with some twisted definition of secularism nehruvian type and then point the gun at hindus and be like this is what you should be like. Otherwise you are not secular. Since we already know that way and are showing you the ideal we are already secular. Please listen and change otherwise we will be throwing barrage of allegations at you in your current situation where we have you back against the wall.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16448
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: woh log gawad hai, unpad hai !
Contact:

Postby Rahul M » 25 Dec 2007 05:08

I really hope others would support me in my efforts to archive one of the finest ever threads on BRF.

the articles that precede this post really mark a watershed in the analysis of the Indian psyche.
Do hope this thread and the one before it is preserved.

C'mon fellow BRFites support me !!

Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Postby Rye » 25 Dec 2007 05:19

Rahul M, you can archive it in your hard drive in one file by clicking on the printer icon next to the "post reply" button.

vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Postby vsudhir » 25 Dec 2007 05:23

Rahul M,

The thread will in all likelihood be archived. In any case, pls take it down on your local hard drive, just in case. I plan to do the same.

That B Raman article from 2005 was an eye opener. Brought out history of communal riots in India (the Jabalpur ones, for instance, I had no clue about). Verily our history - both modern and mediviel - has been hijacked. Has Ramachandra Guha in his "India after Gandhi" covered these incidents? Has he whitewashed them too??

:evil:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 25 Dec 2007 05:23

Rahul M wrote:
Could this thread and the previous one be preserved in BRF archive ??

This is a really heartfelt appeal !!


This is a reasonable request and I have moved the old thread from the Trashcan to the Strategic Issues archive.

But a note of caution. Topics have done and still do vanish without a trace and without any plausible explanation from BR archives.

If there is anything anywhere on BRF that anyone values, it is always a good idea to make a personal HDD back-up in addition.

Remember this note of caution if this particular thread vanishes.

Rishirishi
BRFite
Posts: 1015
Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30

Postby Rishirishi » 25 Dec 2007 05:28

Shiv.

I understand your position Shiv: If you cross a certain undefined, Nehruvian hindu/muslim bhai bhai limit, you and your thinking become irrelavent.
Namely because the inteligensia already has decided that ONLY solutions that lead to the Bhai/Bhai shangrila, are realistic.
I agree with your thinking.

MY position is: if more and more people will cross the undefined limit, people may acutally start to question the limits.
For the record I do not consider my self a part of Siv sena, RSS or any Hindutva force. I have been a bhai/bhai myopic thinker all my life, until i started to do some reserch my self.

Rishirishi
BRFite
Posts: 1015
Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30

Postby Rishirishi » 25 Dec 2007 05:47

India is heading up a dangerous path - but like I said the danger will not touch me - I am Hindu. I would rather not see this situation develop. A political admission that there is a problem and that Hindus should not be hit on their heads and told to "heel and behave" for saying so has to dawn on the secular groups of India.

Mullahs and Muslims are being led up a dangerous path by "Hindu seculars" and being made to believe that the fault is all with extremist Hindu groups and that Islam is innocent. It will be the Muslism who feel the brunt of the retribution if they do not realise that they are being had, and that they are being misled into not seeing Hindu anger by "secular" Hindus who think they can get away forever by cursing other Hindus and hoping for the best.

I hope for the sake of my country that these idiots will see the light.


Sorry if I am a late commer to the thread and duplicating what others have said.

We should be careful not to underestimate the powerful mullas. The Jamat i islami hind (indian section), broke of its alliance with its Pakistani sister, because it understod that it could not officially keep the same stance. The same goes for Deoband and Barelvis. The leadership understands that it can't fight a war against the Hindus, becasue the Muslims will be outnumbered.
So they have changed the strategy to encorage birth rates, and will take the fight only once they have the sufficent numbers. If it takes 50, 100 or 300 years it not a problem for them. Until they get the numbers, they are focusing on keeping the Muslim community insulated from the rest of the society.

So we are not going to see any large scale massive "jehad" in India, in the near future. But make no mistake, the ultimate goal for Islamists are an Islamic India.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 25 Dec 2007 06:49

Rishirishi wrote:So we are not going to see any large scale massive "jehad" in India, in the near future. But make no mistake, the ultimate goal for Islamists are an Islamic India.


Why do you think Babri masjid happened?

Why do you think the post Godhra riots happened.

Do you think Hindus are going to sit back and swallow what you say will occur. More Islamist terror attacks will surely lead to retribution against Muslims.

But once again you are showing disregard by failing to follow the gist of this thread and repeating well known gyan about Islamists as though you are making some new revelation.

The people who are allowing Mullas and Islamists to have their way are a particular subset of Hindus whom we have characterized in this thread as "macaulay-dhimmis" - who also include what you call psecs and lefties.

Unfortunately Macaulay dhimmis/psecs etc control the media and airwaves. The minute people like you start talking ("undiplomatically") about Hindus they will smear you and call you an extremist and your voice will not be heard. Yet you do not learn and keep repeating the same words "undiplomatically" imagining that shouting the same things will somehow make them heard.

You say you "understand my position" but you obviously don't.

Everyone knows that Islam has a problem. Please stop repeating that as you have done. But in India you cannot attack Islam directly without first attacking the Hindu psec dhimmis who protect Islamists.

The only way to make a Hindu stand clear is to point out that secularism is a game that everyone must play. If Mullahs and their supporters are not going to be secular, Hindus will not continue to be secular.

This is a point that Hindu seculars (or psec-dhimmi-Macaulayites) do not understand, and their words are always aimed at calling Hindus as murderous extremists while not saying anything about blatant islamist actions by Mullahs.

Do you think you can somehow eliminate all these psec Hindu dhimmis or would you prefer to make them irrelevant? Your "undiplomatic" and blunt words are having no effect on them. And your constant repetition of "make no mistake, the ultimate goal for Islamists are an Islamic" is also having no effect on them.

Do you think Hindus will sit back and wait for new words to convince psecs while they continue to insult Hindus? Kindly do not imagine that all Hindus are blind to the Mullah threat. Those who are not blind will use violence where necessary - after all this is a Hindu majority state. This is something that the Macaulay psec dhimmis see as coming, but they do not understand why this anger is welling up. The anger is welling up because they choose to describe Hindus as merchants of death when the real merchants of death, Islamic extremists have been killing Indians for decades and they do not want to address that problem.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5218
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Dec 2007 06:52

Johann wrote:On the one hand there is the dread fear that dar-ul-Islam will be rolled back across the subcontinent.
This fear should be kept alive and the Indian state should take measure to roll back dar-ul-Islam in the region, starting with acts to do so, within the territory, in its control. It is the only way forward. Co-existence with Islamists is futile.

At the same time hope and the ambition that Pakistan will be the refuge which enables the repeated historical model of 'pure' Islam sweeping down to the Indian plains from the North-West.
A certain reality, if the Indian state continues on its fool hardy mission, of despising, what it should cherish.

The Pakistanis did not gain partition cheaply -
Strange, How does one define the cost of a lost life or land and its peoples and culture? How does one quantify on these issues? The only way to determine some context and say if it the war for the state of Pakistan was cheap or not, can only be done in the historical context of the nation, in question. How many years, decades, did it take for the Islamist to capture Sindh and Punjab and Bengal, starting from 711 AD? Compared to that, they got the new state, damn cheap and at warp speed. Thanks in part to the British, but mostly dhimmis.


Many 'Hawks' as well as 'doves' in India underestimate the kind of fear the country and its peoples inspire within Pakistan. I tend to agree with those who suggest that such fear is an important part of why Pakjabis and establishment Mohajirs tend to take refuge in historical fantasies which in turn lead to catastrophic miscalculations when dealing with India.


They underestimate it becuase very few Hindus understand the issue. The Indian state is still not reconciled to the fact that it was not just the will of the people of the lands, which ceded but the entire continent of Indian muslims, responsible for the creation of Pakistan. We are still taught that it was the act of a few misguided evil leaders, such as Jinnah, responsible for Pakistan. The history of the people, who supported these leaders is white washed.

Until, this history is not taught, Hindus will continue to score self goals and wonder, but why do they hate us? Why did they let a Kargil happen? Why do they want to Nuke us, etc.

Let them keep on miscalculating for all I can hope is that enough dhimmis turn to hawks by introspecting and asking, what the hell happenned and why? I only hope, these attacks do not cripple us and conditioned to being attacked.

Pakjab has its own greviences against the Pan-Pakistani elite, however much they pale in comparison to Baluchistan, Sindh and Northern Areas. There are plausible conditions under which Pakjabi unhappiness could spill over in to a crisis that actually destroyed Pakistan as a single entity.
Doubtful, as the Pakjab is in contol of over 60% of its resources in human and capital/productivity. The Pakjab also controls, over 75% of its armed forces. The various identities within Pakistan may quarrel with each other, weakening their own state, but when it comes to India, they are all united, againt her. The entire raisond'etre for Pakistan's existence.

Pakistan will collapse, if outside powers are made to lay their hands off and a hawkish Indian state, willing to step up and do something to protect their interests.


Like genetics, historical processes dont move in straight lines. You can inherit several traits, but particular traits may manifest themselves in alternate generations. Sometimes they appear in uncles or nieces rather than a straight paternal or maternal line. Some traits are recessive appearing only when reinforced, others dominant.
Also, if one follows the concepts of dar-ul-Islam, the fact of Pakistan's formation and how they behave against India, should not be a mystery to anyone.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50616
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 25 Dec 2007 07:26

Folks a gentle reminder. there is the TSP threads to discuss that issue. please limit discussion in this thread to India only.

Thanks, ramana

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 25 Dec 2007 09:03

Sumeet wrote:
These self-styled secularists would not address their sermons of secularism to the Islamic countries, where for a Muslim to convert a non-Muslim into Islam is an act blessed by Allah, but for a non-Muslim to convert a Muslim into his religion is a crime calling for the death penalty.

For them, secularism is a virtue which a Hindu should practice towards others, but not others towards him.



Well for this kind of accusation they already have an answer, do you want us to become like them ? We should think about ourselves and not bother about others.

Remember even the likes of MIM issued statements on Taslima saying "She should understand that this is not pakistan or bangladesh, we respect sentiments of all communities".


The funny thing is that this is a new type of statement coming from Indian Secular Intellectuals A couple of decades ago, when islam had not yet revealed what pure Islam would do in Pakistan, Indian secular intellectuals were afraid to say such things.

The fault does not lie in the concept of secularism, which if applied fairly and evenly, may still have some life. The fault lies within the thought process of the Hindu Indian Secular Intellectual. (HISI)

For the purpose of this thread I will leave out the thought process of those who describe themselves as Indian Secular Muslims and Indian Secular Christians because the Secular Hindus form the vast majority of people expressing the "anti-right-wing Hindu" opinions of the Indian Secular Intellectual.

The Hindu Indian Secular Intellectual makes the following assumptions:

1) I am a Hindu.
2) I know that Hindus are non violent, tolerant and secular, like me.
3) I am secular. An attack on me is an attack on secularism.


I would like to dissect these three assumptions that make up the mindset if Indian Secular Intellectuals.



1) I am a Hindu.


I have no dispute with this, The Hindu Indian Secular Intellectual (HISI) is Hndu alright and does not need my certificate.

2) I know that Hindus are non violent, tolerant and secular, like me.

Here the Hindu Indian Secular Intellectual is wrong.

Hindus are not non violent. If fighting is required for dharma, they will fight. If killing is required, they will kill.

Hindus are not "tolerant". They are accepting of other thoughts, to a degree. The word equivalent to "tolerance" does not exist within Hindu practice. "Acceptance", "empathy" and "compassion" do exist within Hindu thought. Not "tolerance" of something that could otherwise be intolerable. If something is intolerable, the Hindu is not required to be tolerant. He is allowed to be intolerant of the intolerable.

Hindus are not secular either. They are pluralistic. And they are non adversarial. They do not dispute the concept that there may be other Gods and other beliefs as distinct from theirs. They do not insist that there is only one right way or one God.

3) I am secular. An attack on me is an attack on secularism.


The Hindu Indian Secular Intellectual has appropriated the word "secular" to describe himself and his behavior. He has appropriated the word in exactly the same manner that Islam grabbed and appropriated the word "peace". Islam is not peaceful, and the Hindu Indian Secular Intellectual is not secular.

An attack on the words and thoughts of the Hindu Indian Secular Intellectual is NOT an attack on secularism.

Secularism may grow and work better and more dharmically and in a less one-sided manner in the absence of the Hindu Indian Secular Intellectual who seeks to define Hindu behavior in a particular way, and describes any deviation from that as extremism, and an atack on secularism.

The Hindu Indian Secular Intellectual (HISI) is least interested in getting any secular behavior from Muslims or Christians. Their behavior is not to be discussed, let alone questioned. His sole interest is to pretend that all Hindus are what he says he is and that any deviation from that is Hindu extremism.

prashanth
BRFite
Posts: 511
Joined: 04 Sep 2007 16:50
Location: Barad- dyr

Postby prashanth » 25 Dec 2007 09:26

The anger is welling up because they choose to describe Hindus as merchants of death when the real merchants of death, Islamic extremists have been killing Indians for decades and they do not want to address that problem.


Had those terrests succeeded in kidnaping RG the macaulay dhimmi referred here would'nt have made such a statement. Thank god such a thing did not happen.

Dr.Shiv , IMHO even the 'secular hindus' or macaulay dhimmis are opportunistic. It does not take a lot of effort on their part to relax in an easychair and make scathing remarks on self defending hindus. But when the same problem burns their fingers, they will show their true colours.
Votebank politics is just an eyewash for the time being.
However their indifference towards the victims of terror is to be condemned.

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1441
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Postby Pulikeshi » 25 Dec 2007 12:20

shiv wrote:Secularism may grow and work better and more dharmically and in a less one-sided manner in the absence of the Hindu Indian Secular Intellectual who seeks to define Hindu behavior in a particular way, and describes any deviation from that as extremism, and an atack on secularism.


Secularism is a European creation to let Natural law coexist in peace with Divine Christian law.
Hinduism suffers from no such need to keep the political and religious forces separate.

Indeed, if anything, Dharmic thought process allows for a “constructive-chaosâ€

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 25 Dec 2007 13:29

[quote="Pulikeshi"]

Even so most educated Hindus consider a “common secular spaceâ€

Rishirishi
BRFite
Posts: 1015
Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30

Postby Rishirishi » 25 Dec 2007 14:52

The only way to make a Hindu stand clear is to point out that secularism is a game that everyone must play. If Mullahs and their supporters are not going to be secular, Hindus will not continue to be secular.


I fear that the Mullas understand this very well. That is why they officially take an secular standpoint. "community leaders" will all come out and shed crocodile tears and the hearts of the secularists melt with the bhai bhai crap.
Babri masjid and Godra just strengthen this paradigme. The Muslims did not fight back in any meaningful way, because they would loose, in stead they used crocodile tears as weapons.

The question is not how to keep the islamists quiet, but how to bring them out with their entire cavelery. The only time they will do that, is when they think they can win (like they have done in JK).

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Postby Sanjay M » 25 Dec 2007 20:04

Modi has shown that the way to confront the Red-Green Leftist-Islamist axis is not to turn the other cheek and keep a submissive, docile face. The way to do it is to be forthright, plain-spoken, and to not shirk confrontation. The meek don't inherit the earth.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50616
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 25 Dec 2007 22:07

Shiv, there are two Telugu words for tolerance and am sure cognates occur in all other Prakrits.

Sahanam and oorpu.

vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Postby vsudhir » 25 Dec 2007 22:32

ramana wrote:Shiv, there are two Telugu words for tolerance and am sure cognates occur in all other Prakrits.

Sahanam and oorpu.


How about bharinchadam?

Paddington
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 7
Joined: 21 Jun 2007 02:10
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA

Postby Paddington » 25 Dec 2007 23:46

Very few Western countries are actually secular. Among them you can count America, France, and perhaps a few others. The rest all have official state religions, with taxation and funding of a certain church or churches.

JwalaMukhi
BRFite
Posts: 1635
Joined: 28 Mar 2007 18:27

Postby JwalaMukhi » 25 Dec 2007 23:47

ramana wrote:Shiv, there are two Telugu words for tolerance and am sure cognates occur in all other Prakrits.

Sahanam and oorpu.

JMT:
sAhana in sanskrit usually refers to endurance or forbearance.
There are many instances of display of endurance in puranas (which is mostly to willingly accept or actively go through the process) such as Karna and bee, Vanavasa of Rama or of pandavas. Bhishma's vrtha (which is beyond mere endurance) or Bhagirth's pryathna.
In case of tolerance, IMVHO, it is case of unwillingly undergoing through the process.

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1228
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Postby Sumeet » 26 Dec 2007 05:36

shiv i think you and others who have shown substantial insight into the matter should consolidate & compile your thoughts in more definitive articles and use either wikipedia or even better wikiislam to archive and propagate it. Wikiislam gets internet users from all over world. Do consider this. Check it out.

http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/Main_Page


Infact they have a superb page on India. One stop for all historical Islamic nonsense in India.

http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/History_of_India_Links

Also, once we have those articles ready, we can simply post link to them in a customary introduction post. Just like we have for TSP.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50616
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 26 Dec 2007 06:17

Received by E-mail:

Can you please post this in the IM extremism thread

http://www.indiareacts.com/archivefeatu ... p?recno=94

Interview with Maloy Krishna Dhar ex-IB head

Moreover, more than fifty per cent Muslims living in India want one
more Muslim state (carved) out of India.
If (in regard to
counter-terrorism) we take serious action against Indian Muslims, Pakistan will
exploit them in a more planned manner and encourage them for a
separate homeland

nkumar
BRFite
Posts: 233
Joined: 06 Jul 2007 02:14

Postby nkumar » 26 Dec 2007 06:38

Sumeet, I agree with you totally.

www.wikiislam.com is maintained by Ali Sina's www.faithfreedom.org IMO, faithfreedom.org is the most comprehensive site on Islam. Check out this online library on Islam, which has many online books related with India too: http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index. ... =38&page=1 We must have wikiislam type page or enter our important articles on wikiislam, where information is easily available in just one click. With thread type approach, important ideas and posts are easily lost over time.

Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Postby Rye » 26 Dec 2007 06:44

deleted. OT
Last edited by Rye on 26 Dec 2007 08:59, edited 2 times in total.

vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Postby vsudhir » 26 Dec 2007 06:46

UP perhaps. IMHO Assam and WB as the next flashpoints where the overt demand for muslim secession will first be raised.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20886
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Postby Prem » 26 Dec 2007 07:45

Rye wrote:
Moreover, more than fifty per cent Muslims living in India want one
more Muslim state (carved) out of India.


The primary candidate for such a state has to be UP -- there is no other state that is proximate to Pakistan and has the necessary numbers of pro-jihadis influenced by the Dar-ul-uloom deoband.


I hope it is UP . This will settle the issue for good.

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1228
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Postby Sumeet » 26 Dec 2007 08:07

Went to that site and read the whole interview. Here is the complete answer from which only an excerpt you got in the e-mail.

Q: What is the West successfully doing to counter terrorism that we are not?

A: You cannot compare India to the West. India has the world’s third largest Muslim population. In the West, Muslims are in very small numbers. Moreover, more than fifty per cent Muslims living in India want one more Muslim state (carved) out of India. { 1 } If (in regard to counter-terrorism) we take serious action against Indian Muslims, Pakistan will exploit them in a more planned manner and encourage them for a separate homeland. We are the victim of history and we cannot take actions against Muslims like America has done because of our geographical position.

On the other hand, a majority of Indian Muslims are not concerned about jihad. They want to live peacefully. { 2 }The problem arises when Pakistan enters our territory and creates (terrorist) cells in our localities. Out of fear of their own people, these Indian Muslims are unable to cooperate with the government.


Ramana and others how are statements 1 & 2 consistent with each other ?

satyarthi
BRFite
Posts: 179
Joined: 21 Aug 2006 08:50

Postby satyarthi » 26 Dec 2007 08:14

Sumeet,

A possible reconciliation:

1. More than 50% Indian muslims want Kashmir to be separated from India.

2. A majority of Indian muslims are not concerned about Jihad. They want to live peacefully in India. (But want Kashmiris to have their cake and eat it too).

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5218
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 26 Dec 2007 08:26

Sumeet wrote:Went to that site and read the whole interview. Here is the complete answer from which only an excerpt you got in the e-mail.

Q: What is the West successfully doing to counter terrorism that we are not?

A: You cannot compare India to the West. India has the world’s third largest Muslim population. In the West, Muslims are in very small numbers. Moreover, more than fifty per cent Muslims living in India want one more Muslim state (carved) out of India. { 1 } If (in regard to counter-terrorism) we take serious action against Indian Muslims, Pakistan will exploit them in a more planned manner and encourage them for a separate homeland. We are the victim of history and we cannot take actions against Muslims like America has done because of our geographical position.

On the other hand, a majority of Indian Muslims are not concerned about jihad. They want to live peacefully. { 2 }The problem arises when Pakistan enters our territory and creates (terrorist) cells in our localities. Out of fear of their own people, these Indian Muslims are unable to cooperate with the government.


Ramana and others how are statements 1 & 2 consistent with each other ?
The principles of dar-ul-Islam and Taquiya, working hand in hand.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 26 Dec 2007 08:31

Excuse me.

At a conservative estimate, the number of Muslims in India is 140 million. Someone please show me how a significant sample of Muslims were polled to say that 50% want another state.

It is a personal opinion. 50% is a good round figure that can be used in many ways. If tweaked to say "55%" it can be used against Muslims in one way. If tweaked the other way - it can be used to indicate something else.

i would be cautious before throwing such figures around. I can use these figures to reach all sorts of conclusions useful to my viewpoint or for that matter several opposing viewpoints. And that is exactly what is being done with the statistic on this thread too.

The Intel officer may be right about some things, but I am sure there are some things about which he can hardly be "spot on".

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 26 Dec 2007 08:52

Once again - I have a request to make. I am trying to focus minds in a different direction - sometimes successfully and sometimes less so.

We spend inordinate amounts of mental energy calculating what Muslims or islamists will do.
We say "They will do this" or "They will do that" and we tend to end up referring to Islamic action like a game of golf where the hole is stationary and the player's success or failure is totally dependent on his actions.

But in reality, Muslim opinion and action in India is dependent on and is modified by action by the Hindu majority. It is not a game of golf, but more like a game of football in which one team has 2 players and the other team 8. A point to remember that the team with 8 players has 4 players who sometims play for their own team and sometimes play for the opposite team. And the two member team has players who play well in one way or the other, not necessarily beneficial to their own team.

All Islamic action in India, and all action against Islamist extremism in India has to be analysed in the light of how the Hindu majority might react. The Hindu majority do not represent static holes in the ground like in Golf, but moving active players.

If we are merely going to restrict ourselves to "Oh the Muslims will do this and that" then we can close this thread down and continue on the existing Islamism thread.

But reality is a dynamic. And unless we think in terms of dynamics we are only going to rehash what we have rehashed dozens of times in the past.

The Hindu behavior dynamic is modified by the information that the majority Hindus get about Muslims. If most of the information is negative - the reaction is likely to be one way. If most of the information is positive the reaction will be of a different type.

And even the information that Hindus get can be either true or false, and the Hindu reaction to that information (whether true or false) can vary depending on whether the Hindu hearing the information is a Macaulay-dhimmi/psec, or a Hindu with a grievance.

A forum thread cannot solve problems, but at the very least we can educate ourselves about various factors that come into play in religion and politics of extremism and learn to sift the wheat from the chaff. That has been our strength on the forum, and I would like to see that aim furthered.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 26 Dec 2007 09:05

MK Dhar:

Q: It is commonly said that there is no political will to fight terrorism.

A: No political party will dare to (upset) Muslim sentiments...We must understand that India is a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-lingual country (what a lot of words to say dhimmi!). What we can do is to encourage Muslims (to accept) that they are a part of India. (yup, keep bending over backwards create an islamic state, and then they will accept it for sure?!) Concrete steps should be taken to remove Muslim backwardness. (more sops, more reservation, more quotas for making islamic sense of entitlement stronger!) Strong Hindu sentiments against Muslims and strong Muslim sentiments against Hindus will not work. (yup, dhimmitude will certainly work!) Muslims (should be integrated) otherwise there will be riots. why? is india going to succumb to this blackmail throughout? Muslims are at fault too. Political parties and common misunderstandings (impede the integration of) Muslims into India. [The United States has no such problem. Muslims are in such small numbers there that they cannot strike against Christians on a large scale. (finally he admits the problem


...even this Dhar is full of dhimmitude. 80% majority is not enough for India to seize the moment and do what needs to be done, and we wonder why we came to this present state of affairs. Frankly these entire bunch of GOI officials, their hangers on and follow on coterie are lost. They first created this menace by disuniting the Hindu society on purpose, and now they justify that using all sorts of weasel words because they cant admit they messed up.

Not one establishment man has the guts to stand up and say that in a true secular India appeasement to fundamentalist Islam is unacceptable. A pox on all the Nehruvians who led India to this path. I shudder to think what would have happened if partition had not occurred. Hindus, Sikhs and Christians would have been wiped out both demographically and representation wise in so called united India. With such pathetic dhimmi leaders that we have had, its been an absolute miracle that we are still around.

Speaks more for the cussed courage of our security forces who have bled dry in holding the line in state after state while these secularists kept rotting the state from within. We grew up in an environment where to be a Hindu was reason for embarassment. And these buggers created that environment in their enlightened moderation.

JwalaMukhi
BRFite
Posts: 1635
Joined: 28 Mar 2007 18:27

Postby JwalaMukhi » 26 Dec 2007 16:10

The Hindu Indian Secular Intellectual (HISH) is primarily handicapped because of inadequate connection to his roots.
Unless one is fairly literate (fluently speaking ability could alone qualify) in classical languages viz., Sanskrit, Tamil (etc.,) or in any of its derivatives one cannot connect adequately to Indic roots. Exceptions are possible, but extra efforts are needed.
The Seculars are handicapped because they anchor their ideas on western articulation. The inadequacy creeps in because wrong tools or
wrong metrics are used in the measurement and analysis of Indic society.

Western articulation in the media has deliberately two distinct techniques. One on local reporting, the second on foreign reporting. The foreign reporting is most of the times condescending and intellectually shallow. Seculars lazily copy the articulation techniques of foreign reporting. This leads to damaging and absurd articulation of Indian scene.

For instance, even the idea of India as a nation is articulated from western perspective. This wrong usage of metric leads to erroneous conclusions that India did not exist before Brits. Mountains and mountains of evidence to the contrary is undetectable with their wrong tool/metric. Adi Shankaracharya traversing the breadth of the country in those times is phenomenal. Students travelling 400 km plus to get to Nalanda to get enlightenment in Indic thought process are some immediate examples. Conduct of ashvamedha yagnas and acceptance of Chakravarthy status throughout the breadth of India are also pointers. Be that as it may, the attempt to confine heroes to local kingdoms such as Shivaji who resonate in many Indians, is no small trick. Those are futile attempts to restrict and compartmentalize as local phenomena the underlying threads and connections that Indians base their emotions on.

This brings back to the Seculars who need to upgrade their metrics and unfortunately look at incorrect source to upgrade them. This necessitates burning of midnight oil to connect to Indic roots. When it is lot easier to gyrate under laser lights which secular is interested in burning midnight oil? The seculars can score points only when foreign articulation techniques score. So seculars compete in the realm of mediocrity at best. To counter this trend of Jholliwalla brigades, the bar has to be raised higher and the gradient of competition to be skewed away from mediocrity. Perhaps, then the Seculars will be forced to upgrade or wither away.

Seculars will have crossed the dhimmi threshold barrier, if:
When a mullah deems it is his right to pontificate that all women especially kafir ones should be covered in potato sacks, the seculars remind the mullah about women's rights (not only for kafirs) but also deems it a fair game to question women's rights for who are unfortunately already under burqa.
Even then, Seculars will be hamstrung to be below mediocrity threshold barrier, until they upgrade.


Return to “Strategic & Security Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests