See once again you just assumed that we are ignorant, must you always take such a condescending tone? What makes you say that we don't know what secularism is? Infact anyone who knows what secularism means will tell you straight away that what goes on in India in the name of secularism is anything but! There is a difference between secularism and minority appeasement.
When I was talking about the difference between secular and pseudo-secular, I was referring to your use of it in the phrase, "
we are just countering the ideas that you represent, the pseudo secular, conveniently liberal intelligentsia that you represent.
Source:
"Forced to hang my head in shame": Former Navy chief writes open letter to President Mukherjee, PM M | Page 20
".
Those are emphatically not the ideas I represent.
In your anxiety to settle scores with the Congress and similarly minded manipulators of religious differences, you have not bothered to figure out that a Congress-hating person would not have much interest in "representing" the Congress.
A secular India would not have banned the Satanic Verses, in a secular India a Taslima Nasreen would not have been hounded out of Kolkata, a secular India would not have banned the Da Vinci code, just like how a secular India should not have banned Wendy Doniger's book. The problem with your kind is that you guys don't have any issues when the "secular" India bans books and movies to pacify the minority Christians or minority Muslims, no outrage over the throttling of free speech, hardly a whimper if any. But the moment government takes a similar step to pacify the Hindus, you guys cry foul! If this is not pseudo secularism and being conveniently liberal then I don't know what is!
Right, explicit enough.
Point to a single paragraph, a single phrase where I have supported Taslima Nasreen's victimisation - even within the last fortnight, I used that as an example of intolerance - or the banning of the Da Vince Code (I did not even know the book was banned) .
Would you mind explaining why, without understanding my position at all, you coolly assume it to be something that you have seen elsewhere, and start attacking me on that basis? Who gave you the right to put ideas into my mind that were never there, to put words and expressions into my mouth that I never uttered?
It is precisely this kind of careless, sloppy reading that I deplore, and will continue to deplore. If you cannot take the trouble to figure out what I have said, and that leads to your making attacks on me which are totally not justified, would I be justified in calling you out on that?
Take the media for instance. Whenever reporting a "communal" violence or riot, they ll never forget to mention the name of the instigators if they happen to be Hindus, but they' ll always say " people from a certain minority" if the Muslims are at fault! Why such double standards? Its this "secular" and one sided political correctness that people are fed up of.
Can we make it simple? I'll do it by numbers:
- I am not the media;
- Don't split your infinitives.
Right wingers would be more than happy about a proper secular country, a country with uniform civil code, a country where there is freedom of speech for critics of all religions and not just Hinduism.
Great, terrific, good for the right wingers in question, whoever "represents" them. How does that virtuous position have anything to do with my views, and what you made gross mistakes in figuring out, and thereafter attacked without understanding it?
What India has in place right now is an ad hoc system, meant to look after the sensitivities of every religion there is and partly meant for vote bank politics. Think of it as a secular-conservative system if there is such a thing! But as I mentioned earlier, the problem arises when pseudo-seculars only show their outrage when their right to criticize and mock Hinduism is curtailed.
Not in one place, but in dozens, I have criticised every religion, including Islam.
Is it then my fault that you have carelessly overlooked those, and think, wrongly, that I am solely anti-Hindu?
You are an Indian, not a Pakistani, not a Chinese, not a Bangladeshi, not an American. You know Indian society and Indian people better than any outsider right? Indian society is inherently very tolerant and the people inherently docile, you leave them alone they ll leave you alone.
Yes, I am an Indian. Yes, I understand Indian society very well, better than any outsider, better than many insiders.
I AM NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF LEAVING INDIAN SOCIETY AND ITS RESIDENTS ALONE.
I believe that it is urgently necessary for Indian society, and for Indians who are typical members of that society, and of those thought processes and social positions, to change. Not TOWARDS a racial stereotype from another society, but towards an ideal of enlightenment and progressive thinking.
Why should I think in a negative way and let the sludge remain?
What irks me the most is when the left leaning Indian intellectuals like you.....
Your assessment of my views and my position are disastrously wrong, badly mistaken. Do you at least understand this? Do you get that I am not the left leaning Indian intellectual stereotype that you have been apparently looking for?
, join this bandwagon of hysteria that is being created by the outsiders and the vested interests. This doomsday scenario where Hindu fundamentalists are killing the minorities by thousands and reveling in their blood type of scenario. If you were an outsider, a foreigner, an adversary, a Pakistani, I would get it, but you are an Indian!
Where, when and how did I, Joe Shearer, do this?
Get real. You are fighting someone else, and putting my name in front.
Its all about creating a perception, a negative perception and you are becoming a party to it, knowingly!
Has it dawned on you yet that you have been talking utter rubbish, mischievous rubbish, about views of mine which are non-existent?
Are you telling me you are not aware of the pressure tactics of the American right wing and their Church? Are you telling me you can't see the relationship between this sudden upsurge of "India being a intolerant country" narrative in the western media and the curb on overt evangelical activities by the current government of India? You seem to be pretty well read, am sure you can see this angle from a mile away, yet you willingly partake in this hysteria?
This is amazing.
Where did you get me participating in this hysteria?
Second, that is not because I believe that this weird conspiracy theory of yours, about American right wing and "their" Church (as if there is a single church that all Americans belong to) being behind pressure on the government of India. I don't believe conspiracy theories unless there is a thread of evidence.
Excuse me for refusing to belong to either side on this preposterous issue.
Just because your party is not in the power
And which party have you selected for me? Did you even check this thread, where someone asked me which party I supported? Why don't you take a look? I agree finding out how wrong you are might make you cringe, but then, what is to be done?
or your ideology has been sidelined
Again, what ideology have you selected for me?
doesn't mean you sell you country out and become a willing fifth columnist.
When and where did you get that? Facts please, not your confused false impressions.
This is what irks me and people like me, call us the modern right wingers if you may. Calling us illiterate sanghis who has just come back from his local sakha might make you feel better about yourself, but it doesn't change the ground reality. India is changing alright, but its changing for good.
Modern? What's modern about libel? You are not a modern right winger, whatever that self-glorifying epithet might mean. You are just a sad, confused being who has just been guilty of libel (look it up).
People are not going to buy the leftist narrative anymore, especially given where it has taken us in the last 6 and a half decades. You guys had your shot, failed, failed miserably, now its our turn.
LOL.
Did no one tell you about the birds and bees? Or about the difference between left and liberal?
Needless to say, don't take this personally.
Of course not!
You imagine me saying things I didn't, thinking things I didn't, belonging to a party that I haven't, owning an ideology that you have identified for me, and then, after all these manipulations, you think that your mistakes can be covered by adding that stock phrase which is so meaningless?
much better
