BloodBath in India Mob Lynch 2 Hindu Saints #IkWariFirModi

[Areesh]

@That Guy Don't become a puppet for these Hindus against your countrymen. It will take another Feb 27 and you will see their real face. Just like we did before.

Pakistan and Islam come first always.

let these guys remain under delusions. Time would shove reality on their face
Just like it did with Sheikh Abdullah. Or Indian muslims in general

 

[Ultima Thule]

@seven0seven Look at the gall of this @Gadkari coming on a Pakistani forum to question us about Islam. Look at his support. You will see the reality.

@That Guy Don't become a puppet for these Hindus against your countrymen. It will take another Feb 27 and you will see their real face. Just like we did before.

Pakistan and Islam come first always.

What reality he see and what support he want and sorry sir i didn't understand you what are you explaining to to me
@Gadkari always contradict him self say he loves Muslims and hate Muslims its doesn't make any sense to me sir

 

[Areesh]

What reality he see and what support he want and sorry sir i didn't understand you what are you explaining to to me
@Gadkari always contradict him self say he loves Muslims and hate Muslims its doesn't make any sense to me sir

Thank you for liking post of that pajeet Nilgiri against Pakistan

Sahi ja rahai ho. Shabash

 

[Ultima Thule]

Thank you for liking post of that pajeet Nilgiri against Pakistan

Sahi ja rahai ho. Shabash

Sorry by mistake bro

 

[Joe Shearer]

And ask it to Dr zakir niak he was the former Hindu and did RESEARCH on vdeas and Hindu religion
And we are not eating any rotten meats but always fresh meat

Please get your facts correct; he was born a Muslim.

 

[Joe Shearer]

...and now its extended to claiming some blanket-assertion of "having no right to criticize" was said (by me?) ... all from calling particular threads "echo chambers" (its merely an opinion and directed toward certain Indian members engagement likely being futile)

Yup a natural intelligent progression...no false equivalency at all....definitely no chip on shoulder.

@Joe Shearer @That Guy

I. The past, in two sections.

I wish you hadn't tagged me, @Nilgiri; this is the kind of thread that I like to observe from a great distance. There are only a handful of members on PDF worth conversing with, and the people involved here are mostly - mostly - not among them.

So what do I make of this?

Simply this: "I TOLD YOU SO".

For whatever I say next, I am specifically excluding you, @Nilgiri, not for the sake of sentiment or any inbuilt bias, but for the simple reason that I see you as being both conservative, in the Minoo Masani, Piloo Mody, Chakravarthy Rajagopalachariar vein, and simultaneously an iconoclast, not inclined to give sacred cows even a farthing of support. With that exception, and also with the honourable exception of @Kaniska and @Jackdaws, @Krptonite and several others, I am addressing all those who then and now think that Modi and the far broader movement that he represents is in any degree, at any time, in any manner tolerable in decent civilised society.

Let me make it clear: I am addressing Indians, not Pakistanis and not Bangladeshis, certainly not the Chinese. Those nations have their own issues and moral hazards, their own clear and present dangers to the ship of state; none of them is in a position to criticise us as a national of those nations, nor are Indians fit to criticise them as Indians. Individuals, with their own points of view, do not come under this rubric of the forbidden degrees of refusal. But it is a problem that faces India that we are concerned with.

It is not a Pakistani fan-boy illusion that India as a nation is afflicted with a virus, a social and ideological virus - not theological, what the disarrangement of normal thought and behaviour that this virus entails has nothing to do with religion, everything to do with religiosity, a very different thing altogether. This virus was created in a laboratory, but was not unique; it was derived from other, earlier strains, whose clumsy beginnings go far before these latest experiments. There is no doubt that Indian society in north India, distinct from Indian society in south India, or Indian society in west India or east India, was an oppressive society; one where members of one religion dominated the others, far larger than them in number, with their grip over the levers of state power, one where it could pass into social practice, never into law, that the highest point of one sort of religious structure was never to exceed the highest point of another; one where a suitable defence against a felony was conversion; one where forced conversion was so frequent that it passed without mention; one where the privilege of rule was restricted to that dominant religion; one where the tenets of that religion governing the relations with minorities, or with those with different beliefs was violated daily.

I mention this because in Indian history, such as it is, riddled with a propensity to dispense with the written record on one side that continues to this day, left to us solely (until recent times and innovative scholarship came into the picture) through the written record of one segment of society and therefore redolent of bias and prejudice, the narrative of the Gangetic Plain was the dominant narrative. At that time, the dominant religion and its practitioners still had no desperate need to prove their identity and to establish it in space and time; the glorious Indus Plain was left to a later day and age, to an Aitzaz Ahsan ably backed up by no lesser than a PDF member. So it was what was done and what happened in the Gangetic Plain that determined social structure and social thinking.

It was with this rooted problem of the Gangetic Plain that the latest invader had to deal when he found he had to take administrative decisions. Understanding as they did nothing of the complexity of Indian society, north, south, east or west, they applied their rulers and compasses and straightened things out to their own satisfaction. This found many expressions; my blood brothers and hostile interlocutors from across the border make much of a particular dialect in Bengali having been elevated above all others, at the cost of the rich cultural tapestry that had been developed around other dialects in other parts of the region, and this was one of the expressions, one that had painful consequences many years later. One of the straightening measures that the new rulers applied was to distinguish between the religions in explicit terms; what was always part of the background and never dragged out for surgical dismemberment and organic analysis now became the subject matter of one devastating report after another. The Hunter Commission Report was the first;it was not the last, and it spawned a whole family of dangerous, tendentious studies, including studies of the caste system, that mired Indian society in a thousand little debates, arguments, quarrels, and pitched battles.

Besides these sociological experiments and analyses, we also find two insertions that have had potent repercussions in later days. One was the discarding of the existing judicial system, that had been inserted into Indian society in bits and pieces, and by the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, had taken firm root; again, we are concentrated on the Gangetic Plain, matters were radically different in other parts of India. In its place, and in the place of the Persian that was the administrative language, were injected English Common Law, and the English language. A great reversal of fortunes followed this one step, but worse was to come.

The second massive intervention was the imposition in miniature of the English system of education. It is on record that the education system of the Punjab, for instance, was considerably superior to what was imposed in its place, after the British victory over the remnants of the Lahore Durbar; we do not have sufficient investigation of the equivalent in other parts of India to judge what happened there. Suffice it to say that visiting American intellectuals were staggered to find that the British budget for education for the whole of India was a fraction of the budget for schooling in one district of Massachusetts.

There was a direct impact on Indian society due to these two disastrous steps, far more damaging than even a mellifluous Shashi Tharoor has ever dared to project. First, the so-called rule of law that was introduced was the introduction of a particular kind of law in place of what had earlier been the law at least in the cities; in the villages, it had always been the decision of the panchayat that had determined a matter of adjudication, and this, more or less, prevailed even under the superficial British system of jurisprudence. The result, as eminent sociologists such as Bernard Cohn (he actually called himself an anthropologist) have pointed out, was a divided system of law and adjudication; the proceedings in the British courts were the tip of the iceberg, and even in that tip, the decision was often made outside the court proceedings, and matters dressed to suit that outcome.

So the people of India learnt that the rule of law was nothing but the decision of the social leadership, suitably disguised to placate an unpredictable foreign overlord.

Second, in the sphere of learning, there was a thin film of educated people, educated in the sense of that infamous Minute by Macaulay, and an enormous bulk of those educated in other ways, very many not even notionally literate, not even capable of signing their names, able only to 'make their cross', as the English put it to cover their own shameful record in their own home countries. The consequences are what we see in play today, and what has triggered this thread. The absence of any formal education left us with a village, and also largely an urban society with no structure, no framework with which to measure the workings of the world and of the universe. These were left at the mercy of prevailing prejudices, and led to such developments as the institution of a goddess whose only religious root was a popular film. It is this unthinking prejudice and adoption of the wildest nonsense that afflicts us today, in spite of the veneer given to it by training that masquerades as education.

As long as the British held us all under an iron fist, seldom distorted by the intervention of anything as effete as a velvet glove, especially after 1857, all was well. The master whipped the slave; the slave cringed and crept away. Nothing disturbed the illusion of a peaceful administration, except the periodic famines that ravaged the land, famines of a sort that had never been seen before, and famines that the British continue, to this day, to deny. Oh, there was one exception to this; various members of the British royal family, who were titular emperors wholly separated from anything to do with brute reality in India other than to serve as a convenient fons et origo for the honours system, came to India,as Princes of Wales, or even as Emperors, and were severely disillusioned about the rank racism that prevailed. As they were titular rulers only, their discomfort found expression in favouring Indian servants, and that was promptly branded as sexual misdemeanour, at the very least, if not downright sexual felony. So much for that.

And then came Surendranath Bannerjee.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

What reality he see and what support he want and sorry sir i didn't understand you what are you explaining to to me
@Gadkari always contradict him self say he loves Muslims and hate Muslims its doesn't make any sense to me sir

It is always the fault of Muslims, Christians, Afghans, Arabs, Turks, British, Communists, Dalits, Sikhs, Pakistanis, BDs, and never the fault of Indian Hindus.

Indian Hindus can never do any wrong.

 

[Gadkari]

It is always the fault of Muslims, Christians, Afghans, Arabs, Turks, British, Communists, Dalits, Sikhs, Pakistanis, BDs, and never the fault of Indian Hindus.

Indian Hindus can never do any wrong.

There are those who give and then there are those who take.

 

[Joe Shearer]

II. The past, the second of two sections.

There is a reason to mention Surendranath Bannerjee, rather than anyone else, or anything else; it was the first time that civil society in India was agitated about an issue. The agitation was not Bengal-centric, it found expression in Lahore and in what is today called Mumbai as well. It was spread throughout the north of India, and it encompassed all races and religions. That was the start of an opening up of Indian society to joint action, and the start of a thinking that was truly national in character, although it was still at that very early time, in the 1880s, restricted to the Gangetic Plain. From this trigger point, matters moved on, first, through petition-based representations to the overlords, gradually accelerating until the original humble petitions became more and more self-assertive in tone. It was only with Gandhi, however, that polite representations, however assertive, crossed over to mass-based agitations. It was also with Gandhi that any Indian political leader addressed the question of where and how Indian society stood, and what might be done to ensure a healthy, efficient social system. He did not succeed, not entirely; he made awful errors, putting his own brand of Hindu pietism at the centre of his religious orientation, not considering other religions on their own rights, but as necessary objects of a determined tolerance by Hindus. He was himself a lawyer, and stood for the rule of law to the point of ridiculousness, offering himself for judicial punishment when he believed that he had broken the law, refusing to defend a Bhagat Singh for the brutally candid reason that he considered ALL terrorism wrong, including terror in the service of the struggle for freedom. When today we are asked to justify our criticism of terrorism against our country while defending the terrorism of Bhagat Singh and the Bengali revolutionaries, this is the only possible logical answer: terrorism is terrorism, no matter how noble the terrorist in personal character and in personal integrity. These difficult and soul-searching struggles while all the while organising his people, across all parts of India to break the economic bonds of empire while staying within the limits of the law, as he construed it, a far more devastating action against the Empire. As the Shashi Tharoors of this day and age love to point out, the Empire was essentially an economic machine for pumping wealth out of India and into the United Kingdom, and the racism and prejudice were merely icing on the cake.

For all the rest, Gandhi stood for a unitary India, an India united consciously, deliberately, against the grain of our natural tendencies to split apart into religion, into races, into ethnicities, into languages; he was vehemently opposed to divisiveness, to the extent where he supported sectoral passions for the sake of keeping everybody together, a support that earned him a stinging rebuke from one of the tallest leaders of the previous generation of Indian political development.

So what does this have to do with today's crisis?

Everything.

Against this enforced unified India, a nation-state with no regard to race, religion, creed, or language, there was the opposed vision of an India constituted of 'nations' that were ethnic and cultural and religious unities, that were not disparate, that could point to a single thread binding them together. On the one hand, there was the school that held that Indians were Indians only if they failed to have extra-terrestrial loyalties, only if their objects of worship were within South Asia itself, and that all others who had originally such loyalties, or even who acquired such loyalties, were not part of the new India that would come forth after the overlords had been driven out. On the other hand, there was the thought that religion was a binding force, and was, in fact, the only relevant binding force and subsumed all other identity markers. It was with these two differing ideologies that Gandhi's single nation vision had to contend. The outcome was determined rather easily; one of the two opposing schools had the support of the administration, initially with the cynical purpose of driving a wedge between the ranks of the activists for freedom. The other did not, and remained a submerged element until many decades after independence. So the favoured party fought on, against seemingly insuperable odds, all the time with the ear of the rulers, until finally, it was an essential factor of the British attitude towards granting independence that this divisive two-nation point of view had to be considered and accommodated. Self-fulfilling prophecy at its very best.

It was the aftermath of independence that concerns us. The roots of today's situation have been identified; there was prolific growth after that, and it was in that growth that we can find the toxic fruit that we have to eat today.

At the time of independence, we were in India 330 million people, divided between the countryside and the cities in the proportion of 80:20, very roughly; these are not numbers correct to the second or fifteenth decimal place, but facts marshalled to support an argument. That would be 264 million in the rural areas, 66 in the urban. Today the figures are 60:40 on a population base of 1,300 million; about 780 million in the villages, about 520 in the cities. So the rural population has gone up from 264 million to 780 million, the urban population from 66 million to 520 million. The overall growth was nearly four times, 3.94 to be exact; this measures 1,056 million in the rural areas, if all had stayed in place, 264 million in the cities. Instead we have 780 million in place of 1,056 million, and 520 million instead of 264. Rural India has lost 276 million, while urban India has gained 256 million over the 'natural' growth. As those looking at the numbers will already have noticed, multiplying by 4 rather than 3.94 leads to a discrepancy in the numbers between those seen to have been lost and those seen to have been gained. Please ignore this; the logic remains the same, and is unaffected.

It is this that is one founding stream of our malaise. This vast tsunami of people shifting brought in an overwhelming number of people with the original prejudices and bigotry of their village homes into the learning-rich and job-rich environment of the cities. These rural folk were now transformed into the 'educated', by all prevailing indicators, and that 'education' got them entry into jobs beyond their dreams. The Indian miracle had happened. Along with it was a vast, gaping pit into which we have fallen.

 

[Nilgiri]

I wish you hadn't tagged me, @Nilgiri; this is the kind of thread that I like to observe from a great distance. There are only a handful of members on PDF worth conversing with, and the people involved here are mostly - mostly - not among them.

So what do I make of this?

Simply this: "I TOLD YOU SO".

For whatever I say next, I am specifically excluding you, @Nilgiri, not for the sake of sentiment or any inbuilt bias, but for the simple reason that I see you as being both conservative, in the Minoo Masani, Piloo Mody, Chakravarthy Rajagopalachariar vein, and simultaneously an iconoclast, not inclined to give sacred cows even a farthing of support. With that exception, and also with the honourable exception of @Kaniska and @Jackdaws, @Krptonite and several others, I am addressing all those who then and now think that Modi and the far broader movement that he represents is in any degree, at any time, in any manner tolerable in decent civilised society.

Let me make it clear: I am addressing Indians, not Pakistanis and not Bangladeshis, certainly not the Chinese. Those nations have their own issues and moral hazards, their own clear and present dangers to the ship of state; none of them is in a position to criticise us as a national of those nations, nor are Indians fit to criticise them as Indians. Individuals, with their own points of view, do not come under this rubric of the forbidden degrees of refusal. But it is a problem that faces India that we are concerned with.

It is not a Pakistani fan-boy illusion that India as a nation is afflicted with a virus, a social and ideological virus - not theological, what the disarrangement of normal thought and behaviour that this virus entails has nothing to do with religion, everything to do with religiosity, a very different thing altogether. This virus was created in a laboratory, but was not unique; it was derived from other, earlier strains, whose clumsy beginnings go far before these latest experiments. There is no doubt that Indian society in north India, distinct from Indian society in south India, or Indian society in west India or east India, was an oppressive society; one where members of one religion dominated the others, far larger than them in number, with their grip over the levers of state power, one where it could pass into social practice, never into law, that the highest point of one sort of religious structure was never to exceed the highest point of another; one where a suitable defence against a felony was conversion; one where forced conversion was so frequent that it passed without mention; one where the privilege of rule was restricted to that dominant religion; one where the tenets of that religion governing the relations with minorities, or with those with different beliefs was violated daily.

I mention this because in Indian history, such as it is, riddled with a propensity to dispense with the written record on one side that continues to this day, left to us solely (until recent times and innovative scholarship came into the picture) through the written record of one segment of society and therefore redolent of bias and prejudice, the narrative of the Gangetic Plain was the dominant narrative. At that time, the dominant religion and its practitioners still had no desperate need to prove their identity and to establish it in space and time; the glorious Indus Plain was left to a later day and age, to an Aitzaz Ahsan ably backed up by no lesser than a PDF member. So it was what was done and what happened in the Gangetic Plain that determined social structure and social thinking.

It was with this rooted problem of the Gangetic Plain that the latest invader had to deal when he found he had to take administrative decisions. Understanding as they did nothing of the complexity of Indian society, north, south, east or west, they applied their rulers and compasses and straightened things out to their own satisfaction. This found many expressions; my blood brothers and hostile interlocutors from across the border make much of a particular dialect in Bengali having been elevated above all others, at the cost of the rich cultural tapestry that had been developed around other dialects in other parts of the region, and this was one of the expressions, one that had painful consequences many years later. One of the straightening measures that the new rulers applied was to distinguish between the religions in explicit terms; what was always part of the background and never dragged out for surgical dismemberment and organic analysis now became the subject matter of one devastating report after another. The Hunter Commission Report was the first;it was not the last, and it spawned a whole family of dangerous, tendentious studies, including studies of the caste system, that mired Indian society in a thousand little debates, arguments, quarrels, and pitched battles.

Besides these sociological experiments and analyses, we also find two insertions that have had potent repercussions in later days. One was the discarding of the existing judicial system, that had been inserted into Indian society in bits and pieces, and by the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, had taken firm root; again, we are concentrated on the Gangetic Plain, matters were radically different in other parts of India. In its place, and in the place of the Persian that was the administrative language, were injected English Common Law, and the English language. A great reversal of fortunes followed this one step, but worse was to come.

The second massive intervention was the imposition in miniature of the English system of education. It is on record that the education system of the Punjab, for instance, was considerably superior to what was imposed in its place, after the British victory over the remnants of the Lahore Durbar; we do not have sufficient investigation of the equivalent in other parts of India to judge what happened there. Suffice it to say that visiting American intellectuals were staggered to find that the British budget for education for the whole of India was a fraction of the budget for schooling in one district of Massachusetts.

There was a direct impact on Indian society due to these two disastrous steps, far more damaging than even a mellifluous Shashi Tharoor has ever dared to project. First, the so-called rule of law that was introduced was the introduction of a particular kind of law in place of what had earlier been the law at least in the cities; in the villages, it had always been the decision of the panchayat that had determined a matter of adjudication, and this, more or less, prevailed even under the superficial British system of jurisprudence. The result, as eminent sociologists such as Bernard Cohn (he actually called himself an anthropologist) have pointed out, was a divided system of law and adjudication; the proceedings in the British courts were the tip of the iceberg, and even in that tip, the decision was often made outside the court proceedings, and matters dressed to suit that outcome.

So the people of India learnt that the rule of law was nothing but the decision of the social leadership, suitably disguised to placate an unpredictable foreign overlord.

Second, in the sphere of learning, there was a thin film of educated people, educated in the sense of that infamous Minute by Macaulay, and an enormous bulk of those educated in other ways, very many not even notionally literate, not even capable of signing their names, able only to 'make their cross', as the English put it to cover their own shameful record in their own home countries. The consequences are what we see in play today, and what has triggered this thread. The absence of any formal education left us with a village, and also largely an urban society with no structure, no framework with which to measure the workings of the world and of the universe. These were left at the mercy of prevailing prejudices, and led to such developments as the institution of a goddess whose only religious root was a popular film. It is this unthinking prejudice and adoption of the wildest nonsense that afflicts us today, in spite of the veneer given to it by training that masquerades as education.

As long as the British held us all under an iron fist, seldom distorted by the intervention of anything as effete as a velvet glove, especially after 1857, all was well. The master whipped the slave; the slave cringed and crept away. Nothing disturbed the illusion of a peaceful administration, except the periodic famines that ravaged the land, famines of a sort that had never been seen before, and famines that the British continue, to this day, to deny. Oh, there was one exception to this; various members of the British royal family, who were titular emperors wholly separated from anything to do with brute reality in India other than to serve as a convenient fons et origo for the honours system, came to India,as Princes of Wales, or even as Emperors, and were severely disillusioned about the rank racism that prevailed. As they were titular rulers only, their discomfort found expression in favouring Indian servants, and that was promptly branded as sexual misdemeanour, at the very least, if not downright sexual felony. So much for that.

And then came Surendranath Bannerjee.

You would have found it pretty interesting to be a fly on the wall, when I first interacted deeply with (shall we say seriously invested on the "issue") North "belt" Indians on various matters governing this....must have been near 18 years back...and I finally got a broader realisation maybe 12 years ago.

But one of them did relatively early empathise with my awkwardness on the matter (while we sojourned on a quest to acquire a part for a 1st year university project here in Canada).

Being much more studious of the matter's (perceived) root, he simply started to list to me each of the well known temples of the south (one of the few northies I know that knew that many)...and at the end (my mouth agape) concluded there is no equal footing on this matter between us. You have them, you have them ingrained permanently in continuous history....and can go to them any day....we have lost so many...too many! and he hinted at the great void filled with sorrow and anger...and from that a seething grinding need for revenge and redemption.

Then its simply a matter of (as you have) realising it must have been there somewhat intrinsically always (for various reasons that can be an extremely long conversation) since the bronze/iron age laying the broadest cultural contours, ready to be harnessed boldly at any calling.

It simply doesnt exist at same scale for us southerners...not even close I feel, but I cannot know it of course. Our sensibilities just seem to be differently aligned in priority. But others are also similarly less attuned to the issues us southerners have too.

I was a novice to how different the psychology was, it was only hinted to me by my father quite vaguely at various times (he came at it from a limited angle too)...so I was really not prepared for later. But its no longer the case and your post definitely further solidifies my realisation on it.

I have since moved onto psycho-analysing even more groups of people and societies....none so far really compares in depth, colour and nuance to the one back in my homeland. Further exacerbated by the "taping over the raw wound instead of healing it" + later subjugations, extreme dissonance and colonialism etc (all described about as well as can be in your reply, I have nothing to add)...that lead to further internal visceral polarisation and final crystallisation of the extreme identity-politics mob nature downstream.

But as always with all broad-brushstroke stuff.... I have met and befriended my fair share of some wonderful even fairly numerous exceptions that I am truly thankful for, that keep me hopeful for the future. I can only hope and pray in the end, set an example myself, give a guiding principle (with as much context as possible) when I can and a listening ear and shoulder to cry on when thats more relevant.

Pointing out evil should be obvious (I find increasingly)....you do it with grown-ups that tolerate or even indulge in it (one hopes only whimsically), they often think you are patronizing them or treating them as a child...and they double down on it even further....and shut out your efforts.

Human ego is one of the move immovable things I have found....its placement and formation thus is so important.

I told you at some point people need to have it in their hearts to forgive and move on...and focus on the truth that is becoming the maximum good you can be as a person.

But its the hardest thing to do, people convince themselves its the weakest thing to do....when its actually the strongest thing one can do. Much easier to hold a feud forever, the feud gives you an excuse for any shortcoming you have you see. It reduces the scope of responsibility you can claim and thus be accountable for...thats just very appealing for most sadly.....for you can just exist and follow rather than excel and lead.

 

[mmr]

Begging for attention of Pakistanis on a Pakistani forum.



So Pakistanis have no right to criticize India because... BD separated from us?

How much sense does that make?

I guess he does have a point, if you think Pakistan cannot criticize India ever.

We have moved on from 1971. What say you guys @mmr @UKBengali @Atlas @Saiful Islam @Bengal71

Pakistan BD bhai bhai.

Stay on topic and stop derailing this thread.



Really, you don't see anyrhing wrong with harassing, raping, and murdering Muslims in your own country?

Now you are exporting it to Arab countries, what did you expect?

How long did you think Arabs would throw flowers at your feet when you abuse their religion, women, and their culture?



In the end, they all feed off of each other. You can observe even in this thread.

Some try to hide it, but the venom oozes out.. Observe the above obsessive personalities targetting individual Pakistanis, Indian Muslims, or BDs.

We are all Muslim to them, hence the enemy.

1971 is just a political tool for hasina. Normal ppl dont give shit.

Hasina and her gundas use 1971 for personal gain and score political points.

As for ppl to ppl and in general view bd and pak have lot of respect for each other. Strong Pakistan is good for Bangladesh. Most Bangladeshi will agree on that.

 

[Gadkari]

Here is a doze of reality among the intellectual masturbation.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1252653360076988422

https://www.lokmat.com/vasai-virar/...ises-fear-her-life-palghar-massacred-village/

Palghar mob lynching: Relatives of those arrested threaten to kill BJP sarpanch on the suspicion of colluding with the police

Days after the horrific incident of mob lynching that claimed the lives of 3 men, including 2 sadhus, in Gadchinchle village of Palghar district, relatives of those arrested in the case have reportedly threatened BJP sarpanch Chitra Choudhary of dire consequences for colluding with the police. The relatives suspect that it was the sarpanch of the village who released the details of the murderers to the police.

As per the Lokmat report, the relatives of those arrested have threatened the BJP sarpanch of killing her, her two children as well as her husband for the leaking the identities of the murders of the three men to the police.

 

[Joe Shearer]

You would have found it pretty interesting to be a fly on the wall, when I first interacted deeply with (shall we say seriously invested on the "issue") North "belt" Indians on various matters governing this....must have been near 18 years back...and I finally got a broader realisation maybe 12 years ago.

But one of them did relatively early empathise with my awkwardness on the matter (while we sojourned on a quest to acquire a part for a 1st year university project here in Canada).

Being much more studious of the matter's (perceived) root, he simply started to list to me each of the well known temples of the south (one of the few northies I know that knew that many)...and at the end (my mouth agape) concluded there is no equal footing on this matter between us. You have them, you have them ingrained permanently in continuous history....and can go to them any day....we have lost so many...too many! and he hinted at the great void filled with sorrow and anger...and from that a seething grinding need for revenge and redemption.

Then its simply a matter of (as you have) realising it must have been there somewhat intrinsically always (for various reasons that can be an extremely long conversation) since the bronze/iron age laying the broadest cultural contours, ready to be harnessed boldly at any calling.

It simply doesnt exist at same scale for us southerners...not even close I feel, but I cannot know it of course. Our sensibilities just seem to be differently aligned in priority. But others are also similarly less attuned to the issues us southerners have too.

I was a novice to how different the psychology was, it was only hinted to me by my father quite vaguely at various times (he came at it from a limited angle too)...so I was really not prepared for later. But its no longer the case and your post definitely further solidifies my realisation on it.

I have since moved onto psycho-analysing even more groups of people and societies....none so far really compares in depth, colour and nuance to the one back in my homeland. Further exacerbated by the "taping over the raw wound instead of healing it" + later subjugations, extreme dissonance and colonialism etc (all described about as well as can be in your reply, I have nothing to add)...that lead to further internal visceral polarisation and final crystallisation of the extreme identity-politics mob nature downstream.

But as always with all broad-brushstroke stuff.... I have met and befriended my fair share of some wonderful even fairly numerous exceptions that I am truly thankful for, that keep me hopeful for the future. I can only hope and pray in the end, set an example myself, give a guiding principle (with as much context as possible) when I can and a listening ear and shoulder to cry on when thats more relevant.

Pointing out evil should be obvious (I find increasingly)....you do it with grown-ups that tolerate or even indulge in it (one hopes only whimsically), they often think you are patronizing them or treating them as a child...and they double down on it even further....and shut out your efforts.

Human ego is one of the move immovable things I have found....its placement and formation thus is so important.

I told you at some point people need to have it in their hearts to forgive and move on...and focus on the truth that is becoming the maximum good you can be as a person.

But its the hardest thing to do, people convince themselves its the weakest thing to do....when its actually the strongest thing one can do. Much easier to hold a feud forever, the feud gives you an excuse for any shortcoming you have you see. It reduces the scope of responsibility you can claim and thus be accountable for...thats just very appealing for most sadly.....for you can just exist and follow rather than excel and lead.

I suspect I have told you before of travelling with my wife's family, brother-in-law, Iyer (shudder!) brother-in-law's wife, sister-in-law and husband (also from the same village) to their ancestral home in Nuggehalli, one of the four locations to which they had fled into Mysore taking refuge from Kulothunga Chola around the year 1000 AD. There was their family temple, a beautiful little pearl on Hoysala lines, an exquisite miniature of those that you find at Belur and Halebidu; it is called the Lakshminarasimha Temple and has the deities Keshava and Venugopala within, as, of course, Lakshminarasimha.

So here it was, built in 1246, still a living temple. The vadyar's wife had prepared a traditional Hebbar Iyengar lunch for us (with no concessions to the Sassenachs travelling with the party, but fortunately, I was house-broken by then). Then the crowning part of the afternoon: the little structure where the family tree was depicted for more than thirty generations, where my brother-in-law's name, and his son's name figured. Naturally, no women.

The point being that I have nothing to show for my heritage, although my mother's family has traditions of holding land in that part of the world for well over twenty generations. It was riparine land, subject to the travails of nature, and nothing was permanent, everything was liable to be washed away by the next great flood.

That is the essential difference between 'you' and 'us'; in the upper part of the Gangetic Plain, Goyal lists an interminable list of temples destroyed or taken over. They have that additional trauma to deal with.

At the end of it, we have to decide for ourselves; move on, or stay mired in the past. Gadkari has decided, quite clearly; it is ironic, but those breaking spears with him are no better, and have chosen voluntarily to jump into the same cesspool and swim around with him in that.

 

[Gadkari]

I suspect I have told you before of travelling with my wife's family, brother-in-law, Iyer (shudder!) brother-in-law's wife, sister-in-law and husband (also from the same village) to their ancestral home in Nuggehalli, one of the four locations to which they had fled into Mysore taking refuge from Kulothunga Chola around the year 1000 AD. There was their family temple, a beautiful little pearl on Hoysala lines, an exquisite miniature of those that you find at Belur and Halebidu; it is called the Lakshminarasimha Temple and has the deities Keshava and Venugopala within, as, of course, Lakshminarasimha.

So here it was, built in 1246, still a living temple. The vadyar's wife had prepared a traditional Hebbar Iyengar lunch for us (with no concessions to the Sassenachs travelling with the party, but fortunately, I was house-broken by then). Then the crowning part of the afternoon: the little structure where the family tree was depicted for more than thirty generations, where my brother-in-law's name, and his son's name figured. Naturally, no women.

The point being that I have nothing to show for my heritage, although my mother's family has traditions of holding land in that part of the world for well over twenty generations. It was riparine land, subject to the travails of nature, and nothing was permanent, everything was liable to be washed away by the next great flood.

That is the essential difference between 'you' and 'us'; in the upper part of the Gangetic Plain, Goyal lists an interminable list of temples destroyed or taken over. They have that additional trauma to deal with.

At the end of it, we have to decide for ourselves; move on, or stay mired in the past. Gadkari has decided, quite clearly; it is ironic, but those breaking spears with him are no better, and have chosen voluntarily to jump into the same cesspool and swim around with him in that.

Too bad you named me.

You have promoted contempt for Hindus and hate for Hindutva every since I have known you in pdf and now when that hate has inspired action you blame the british, the past, the preset and everybody else except yourself in promoting that Hinduphobia

PDF's very own Pradip Prabhu a.k.a Peter D'Mello.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

1971 is just a political tool for hasina. Normal ppl dont give shit.

Hasina and her gundas use 1971 for personal gain and score political points.

As for ppl to ppl and in general view bd and pak have lot of respect for each other. Strong Pakistan is good for Bangladesh. Most Bangladeshi will agree on that.

Likewise, I am quite glad that the people of BD and Pakistan are more united than ever before, in the holy cause to rid the blight on humanity which is Modi's fascist regime, the personification of everything wrong with the idea of India.

A great era of friendship and cooperation is upon us, finally 1971 has been buried by Modi and again we are back to the same communal forces which our forefathers saw when they demanded a separate homeland for Muslims.

We Pakistanis have long left any relationship with Indians. We are charting our destiny separately from the time we earned freedom from Britain. At long last Afghanistan has come under our influence again and the future is ripe for expansion of our state.

I wish the same for BD and the future inevitable Indian Muslim state. We need to grab our own destiny with our own two hands.

Sorry by mistake bro

All of us Pakistanis need to be on the same page. We need to be unified.

There is simply no other option anymore. I don't mean only this forum, but in all walks of life Pakistaniyat must come first.