Army General GD Bakshi's speech equated to 'hate-mongering' by IIT-Madras student

[Stephen Cohen]

Major General Bakshi is well Known in India

The ONLY person who has benefitted out of this manufactured controversy
is one Mr Abhinav Surya

 

[Joe Shearer]

Tell me what is wrong in this? In one of the threads @hellfire was trying to defend you by saying that you always speak on facts.

is it NOT a fact that we broke Pakistan into 2 peices ? We trained and helped Mukti Bahni and then had a 13 day war with Pakistan at the end of which an independent nation of Bangladesh was born. this is a fact and a matter of historical record. Do you deny this?

Yes. I deny this. It was not the Indian intention to wage war with Pakistan, not until the impact of 10 million refugees fell upon us, along with the possibility of a disaster of major proportions. Every thing that happened thereafter was forced upon us. It was not, as jingos like you proclaim, a triumphant vindication of the RSS thinking about Pakistan.

You were never supporters of Indira Gandhi. For your political faction to insert your subsequent justification and an imaginary justification of the actions that someone who bitterly opposed you, and to pretend that this was your policy being played out is bizarre.

Regarding the proposal to break Pakistan into 4 pieces. Do you serously want to nurture Pakistan? A nation which for the last 70 years has done nothing but needle us and try to break us up. Kashmir, Punjab insurgency, 26/11, Numerous other terrorist plots, '48 , '65, '71, '99. If after all this you still want to nurture Pakistan then I am sorry the word jaic***d which was used against you in another thread was 100% correct.

Noted.

 

[livingdead]

Sorry but I disagree, you can pfft it as intolerance of intolerance. but is is not. It exactly is just intolerance of freedom of speech? same as intolerance of calling for disintegration of India into smaller states vehemently defended by intolrance brigade.
Tarek Fatah, who has been calling for disintegration of Pakistan can deliver a speech in IIT Bombay, No eybrows raised, but an ex-military guy calls for the same with a different tone and tenor, and he should not be invited by IIT Madras?

If LUMS invites hafeez sayeed and he proceeds to exhort the students to break up India... and one student writes a strongly worded letter to LUMS admin calling it hate speech, will it be intolerance?
the right thing to do for IIT admin is to dissociate themselves from what the honorable gentleman said... if a student says it, its different, its part of different voices in the campus... a guest of honour saying it seems to be an official endorsement(which it is not am sure).

 

[Joe Shearer]

@MilSpec what are you referring to is nothing new, novel or even surprising

Media for as long as i remember - which is post 60s has always had a liberal/left bias in almost all countries where it is relatively free like US, UK, Europe and to an extent India outside of DD

Just look at coverage of trump vs hillary, Kennedy vs Nixon, modi vs rahul gandhi - you can go as far back as you wish or just read todays newspaper to have a look at the bias. Ofcourse in opposition to mainstream bias certain counter bias will occur like in Fox news, Times Now, The sun

Now that we are done with bias confirmation, lets look at the reason for this bias -

Left/Liberal ideal stands for appeasement of weak at expense of strong - not necessarily majority vs minority politics as it is today. Such causes are often eyeball grabbing just like Poverty **** is. The other thing is that those who are strong are often content with status quo where as weak would like to change it thus giving them a cause. Cause is always exciting - unlike the humdum of right wing politics.

Politics as a calculus of probabilities?

Quite a rational model, except that it is heartless. It could have been articulated only by members of certain section of Indian society, in this particular instance.

I acknowledge the viability of the explanation, while I contest the validity of it.

Sorry but I disagree, you can pfft it as intolerance of intolerance. but is is not. It exactly is just intolerance of freedom of speech? same as intolerance of calling for disintegration of India into smaller states vehemently defended by intolrance brigade.
Tarek Fatah, who has been calling for disintegration of Pakistan can deliver a speech in IIT Bombay, No eybrows raised, but an ex-military guy calls for the same with a different tone and tenor, and he should not be invited by IIT Madras?

One of the problems that I face is of being placed within an amorphous mass and having my views identified with those of that mass, if indeed it can be said to have cogent views.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

IIT Madras should NOW invite Kanhaiya kumar and Umar Khalid

 

[AKD]

IIT Madras should NOW invite Kanhaiya kumar and Umar Khalid

And Barkha Dutt and Shobha De too

 

[Soumitra]

Yes. I deny this. It was not the Indian intention to wage war with Pakistan, not until the impact of 10 million refugees fell upon us, along with the possibility of a disaster of major proportions. Every thing that happened thereafter was forced upon us. It was not, as jingos like you proclaim, a triumphant vindication of the RSS thinking about Pakistan.

It is not whether we intended or it was forced upon us.
In hindi there is a saying "Chaku kharbuj pe gire ya Kharbuja Chaku pe nuksaan kharbuje ko hi hota hai"
It is a fact that we broke Pakistan into 2 pieces. That is what the general said

You were never supporters of Indira Gandhi. For your political faction to insert your subsequent justification and an imaginary justification of the actions that someone who bitterly opposed you, and to pretend that this was your policy being played out is bizarre.

It is true that we have opposed congress and Nehru Gandhi family . however the action of breaking up Pakistan and creation of Bangladesh was supported by us. It is also reported that Atal bihari Vajpayee called Indira Gandhi as Durga for her actions

 

[MilSpec]

There are lots of points of disagreement, then. Let us take them one at a time.

(1) 'Anti-national' and 'fascist' are not the same thing; in fact, calling a fascist 'anti-national' totally contradicts the ideology.

True and I absolutely understand that that. But the problem is not the term but the act of classification which if I recall correctly was the contention of intolerance.

(2) Before clarifying this, let me ask you a preliminary question: are you saying that these are my views?

Just the part of labelling his views as fascists based on his view of security paradigm.

(3) No. It is what he is, judging by his views. Unless his views are divergent from the ideology of fascism, and he has nevertheless been accused of being a fascist, it can hardly be 'intolerance' to call him a fascist.
It would be sound, however, if someone holding fascist views were called fascist, and then, a call is made to hang all fascists due to their holding views that happen to be fascist.

How ? no where in is past rhetoric has he suggested a martial government composed of the members of the governing totalitarian one-party state—to forge national unity and maintain a stable and orderly society. That is the fundamental philosophy of Fascism. At best he is has an opinion on tackling Pakistan, it may be wrong, but he has the right to express his opinion. And his views are divergent to the philosophy of fascism, this man has served all his life under the command of the president on the Indian democracy. His actions speak louder than his words towards his conviction to the constitution of the Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic. Solet me ask you, would labeling Gen Bakshi - as a fascist constitute as slander?

(4) Disagreeing with someone's views and defining them as hate speech are two different things. Why can they not be applied to the same statement? If they fit logically?

And that doesn't apply to JNU, I don't recall you ever calling it as hate speech though.

(5) Apply this to your next point, about Sehla Rashid, and about some of the JNU views (there are as many as I disagree with as there are views that I agree with). Disagreeing with someone and liking the expression of those views are different things. They may occur together; they did occur together.

You do Disagree with those but do not classify them as hate speech, which is inconsistent with your previous point?

Is this a little easier to understand?

not really.

It still feels like different yard stick to me.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

It is true that we have opposed congress and Nehru Gandhi family . however the action of breaking up Pakistan and creation of Bangladesh was supported by us. It is also reported that Atal bihari Vajpayee called Indira Gandhi as Durga for her actions

Atal Bihari Vajpayee said TWO things about Indira Gandhi

One he called her Durga

Second thing is more interesting

He said " Madam you have NOT only created HISTORY but ALSO CHANGED
GEOGRAPHY "

 

[Joe Shearer]

It is not whether we intended or it was forced upon us.
In hindi there is a saying "Chaku kharbuj pe gire ya Kharbuja Chaku pe nuksaan kharbuje ko hi hota hai"
It is a fact that we broke Pakistan into 2 pieces. That is what the general said

The general said it with the same mischievous intent as he said the following, to break Pakistan into four pieces. The point is not that Pakistan fell apart; that 'kharbuja chaku par' happened. He was plainly projecting it as deliberate policy.

Both his misinterpretation and your glossing over it are disingenuous.

It is true that we have opposed congress and Nehru Gandhi family . however the action of breaking up Pakistan and creation of Bangladesh was supported by us. It is also reported that Atal bihari Vajpayee called Indira Gandhi as Durga for her actions

Other than standing on the sidelines and cheering on the parade, what did you do? What did Vajpayee contribute besides hastily jumping onto someone else's bandwagon?

 

[Stephen Cohen]

Other than standing on the sidelines and cheering on the parade, what did you do? What did Vajpayee contribute besides hastily jumping onto someone else's bandwagon?

The SAME bloody Congress was criticising the Vajpayee Government for Kargil

That was just opportunistic politics

And even TODAY it is the Congress which believes in APPEASING PAKISTAN

That is what Manmohan Singh did and for which he would always be rememered

 

[Joe Shearer]

There are lots of points of disagreement, then. Let us take them one at a time.

(1) 'Anti-national' and 'fascist' are not the same thing; in fact, calling a fascist 'anti-national' totally contradicts the ideology.

True and I absolutely understand that that. But the problem is not the term but the act of classification which if I recall correctly was the contention of intolerance.

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/army-gen...it-madras-student.443827/page-5#ixzz4H8vCdAvq

I fail to understand how classifying someone as a fascist is an act of intolerance. Unless, in your opinion and assessment, fascist is a term of abuse, rather than a political category. Is that what it is? If not, there is nothing intolerant about calling a fascist a fascist.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

@Joe Shearer

As far as Kashmir's integration with India is concerned
Indira Gandhi did a lot of work in Diluting the Article 370 and Kashmiri autonomy

And today instead of supporting the Government
The Congress party is playing VOTE BANK POLITICS by asking for Autonomy for Kashmir

I fail to understand how classifying someone as a fascist is an act of intolerance. Unless, in your opinion and assessment, fascist is a term of abuse, rather than a political category. Is that what it is? If not, there is nothing intolerant about calling a fascist a fascist.

ALL those who support Abhinav Surya are ANTI nationals

 

[Soumitra]

The general said it with the same mischievous intent as he said the following, to break Pakistan into four pieces. The point is not that Pakistan fell apart; that 'kharbuja chaku par' happened. He was plainly projecting it as deliberate policy.

Both his misinterpretation and your glossing over it are disingenuous.

This time also it will be Kharbuja Chaku par. We dont have any bad intentions against pakistan. but since they continue to needle us we will be "forced" to take the action

Other than standing on the sidelines and cheering on the parade, what did you do? What did Vajpayee contribute besides hastily jumping onto some else's bandwagon?

Your contention was that we opposed Inidira Gandhi. I told that yes we opposed most of her actions and policies but we supported her actions against Pakistan. Now you are shifting the goal post by saying that we were just cheerleading

 

[Joe Shearer]

(2) Before clarifying this, let me ask you a preliminary question: are you saying that these are my views?

Just the part of labelling his views as fascists based on his view of security paradigm.

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/army-gen...it-madras-student.443827/page-5#ixzz4H8x1lXdE

Sorry. Wrong address. These are not my views. And I cannot understand what security 'paradigm' you are speaking about if you do not agree with his definition as a fascist. If his view of national security is not an extreme nationalist one, what is it? And if extreme nationalism is not a feature of fascism among other features, what else is fascism?