And what is that supposed to mean? What is the JNU, and why does it appear in the argument? How does it apply to me, or my point of view? What, for that matter, is nihilist idealism? Do you understand either term, or does it just sound nice? If you don't understand what something means, why use it? Why not stick to things you do understand?
The same goes for your views. Those are your views. I have my views, which I have expressed. If the electorate wants reform, nobody and nothing stops it from seeking reform. There is a political process and that is under the Constitution that someone quoted at me, as the Directive Principle seeking a Uniform Civil Code. So if you think that the matter is so important, why not get voters to say so, to elect a government that brings it in? If the voters don't say so, if they aren't convinced, if a government that wants to bring it in isn't elected, then, your point of view remains just that. A point of view. Don't expect anybody to stand up and salute your own perfect round thing with glass on the outers and crystal ball on the inside (your wording, btw, I don't write things like 'on the inside'). And remember, now and for always, a very wise thing: You are just another atomic particle in the whole piece and whether you like it or not, you have to co-exist within. So stop complaining and maintain the rule of law.
Meaningless gibberish. The topic is "Turning Point in the History of Indian Sub-continent". What argument validates this topic? The drift towards bigotry that some readers detected? How does a drift towards bigotry in the discussion validate the topic?
