Nikhil T wrote:A HUGE hole in the statement that “criticizing BJP is opening a front to attack Hindus” is that many of those criticisms ARE from Hindus. Doesn’t matter what a Hindu’s political beliefs are, it doesn’t make them non-Hindu. Unless, of course, if the Bhagvad Gita requires a particular political belief as a pre-requisite for anyone to become Hindu.
It's worth pointing out the very relevant issue related to the recent 4-month long agitation and rioting - it is built on a sustained and deliberate misstatement of facts.
The CAA has been portrayed as an attack on 'secularism', 'pluralistic ethos' and 'Indian Muslims' in general. In reality it:
a) has nothing to do with any Indian citizen at all, regardless of religion. It is an amendment to citizenship law
, i.e. it only applies to foreigners.
b) it does not discriminate on the basis of religion - it is directed specifically at certain religious groups (of both Indic and foreign religious background) in three countries, who owe that preference to one particular incident that happened in history during 1946-47 - the Partition of India.
Nikhil T wrote:As with any media, some articles are bound to be bad/biased (eg the ISRO cartoon in NYT) and others are bound to be truthful. If you claim that all news coverage by International media is biased, then it’s very likely that you’re the one who’s unwilling to see the truth.
By all means, find and post articles in the Indian and international press that describe the matter for what it is - a rather prosaic change to a citizenship law. In fact, in order for the above assertion to be satisfied, they must be equal in number to those that misstate the matter.
That's the problem with these homilies. They ignore the fact that what is little more than a small tweak to a law that doesn't even impact the citizenry of the country by definition, has been the subject of a 4 month long extraordinary agitation filled with outright nonsense being peddled. Seriously, why ? I can imagine a 4-month agitation over Ayodhya verdict, but CAA ?? Does it not strike you that the whole agitation is like burning down a wing of the house because a common lizard moved across the ceiling ?
And how about the coordinated use of specific language to describe something that doesn't exist - 'Muslim pogrom' ? I remember following the news. It was weeks of Shaheen Bagh, then elections, then some localized disturbances near a Delhi Metro station, and approx 1.5 days later all of a sudden both domestic and internation press scream 'pogrom!' What pogrom ? Hospital data indicates about equal number of rioters from two sides dead, an IB officer brutally murdered, and multiple AAP functionaries of one religion gone absconding, with rather sophisticated street fighting equipment left behind.
The entire agitation is manufactured
. It benefits a demographic whose numbers are a fraction of the population of Dharavi, in real terms. The agitation is massively disproportionate to the cause, which alone delegitimizes it, not to mention the repeated misstatement of the basis.
You demand rationalism, and assert that no one's out to get us. So explain why Triple Talaq involved no protests. Art 370 ? Some handwaving and criticism, a little of it sensible but mostly nonsense from people with no understanding of what they're babbling about. Ayodhya verdict ? Acceptance across the board for the closure on the matter. Then finally, CAA. Practically no one in India knows or cares about citizenship law, other than that the letter of the law has been implemented around certain well understood reasons. But, FOUR MONTHS of agitations, pitched street battles, burning down public property and killing in broad daylight, over a mere citizenship law ? Explain why that happened 'spontaneously'.