Congressi Propaganda: Hindu Majority provinces and Muslim Majority provinces can't live together

[anjaneyashruti]

Are you still under the impression that Kashmiris love India and consider themselves Indian?

Are you saying they re not ?

Since you've made it amply clear that Hinduism is a syncretic religion itself, any problem when one starts to think along the lines of Kshatriyas killed Dalits and Shaivites killed vaishnavites ?

LOL. Kshatriyas duty is to protect the other 3 casts , not kill them

So, any Muslim can only be a jihadist, not just a rebel? If they scream Allah-o-Akbar they're communal and if we scream Jai Maa Kali, we're liberal & 'secular'?

When they scream Allah-o-Akbar and try to kill Hindus because they are Hindus then they are communal ..........so as per you 'Yasin Bhatkal' is a secular Rebel

Time to treat you like a Fool and stop taking you seriously.

What about the Hindus convicted for killing a Christian missionary & his sons in Orissa? How about Bodo terrorists(most Bodos are hindus FYI)? How about Bodoland Liberation Organisation?

Reality is you challenged me to show proof of christian terror and that is exactly what I did. You just cannot handle the truth.

LOL. These are the stated main goals of Bodoland Libration Org:

- Separate itself from the expansionism and occupation of India
- Free Bodoland from the exploitation, oppression, anddomination by colonialists
- Uphold the integrity of a sovereign Bodoland
- Set up a Democratic Socialist Society that promoted Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity
- Change the written language to Roman
- Take part indirectly or directly in the elections in the lower house of parliament

No where do they Should "jai maa kali' and talk about Hindus

What a fool you are. A LIAR and a Hypocrite too.

Why should the society of India mimic Indonesia?? One need not have a Hindu name to proove his allegiance to India. There are plenty of Muslims who even want to join our armed forces, but are rejected by the cynicism of guys like you. One of my neighbours is muslim and we celebrate Holi & Diwali together. This is Bharateeyata, not Hindutva. I don't think you'll ever get it. Stay a hindutva-peddling jerk for all I care!

........This is your own Strawman Argument which was Demolished by me. LOL. You are pathetic.


Now for the last and most serious point. ALL your arguments has been demolished, but in the process I have seen your prejudice and ignorance. There is no reason for me too treat you like and equal or even respect your posts.

Do not waste my time anymore by replying to me. I certainly will not be wasting my time with you. I do not have to suffer fools gladly.

 

[Indischer]

Are you saying they re not ?



LOL. Kshatriyas duty is to protect the other 3 casts , not kill them




When they scream Allah-o-Akbar and try to kill Hindus because they are Hindus then they are communal ..........so as per you 'Yasin Bhatkal' is a secular Rebel

Time to treat you like a Fool and stop taking you seriously.



Reality is you challenged me to show proof of christian terror and that is exactly what I did. You just cannot handle the truth.

LOL. These are the stated main goals of Bodoland Libration Org:

- Separate itself from the expansionism and occupation of India
- Free Bodoland from the exploitation, oppression, anddomination by colonialists
- Uphold the integrity of a sovereign Bodoland
- Set up a Democratic Socialist Society that promoted Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity
- Change the written language to Roman
- Take part indirectly or directly in the elections in the lower house of parliament

No where do they Should "jai maa kali' and talk about Hindus

What a fool you are. A LIAR and a Hypocrite too.



........This is your own Strawman Argument which was Demolished by me. LOL. You are pathetic.


Now for the last and most serious point. ALL your arguments has been demolished, but in the process I have seen your prejudice and ignorance. There is no reason for me too treat you like and equal or even respect your posts.

Do not waste my time anymore by replying to me. I certainly will not be wasting my time with you. I do not have to suffer fools gladly.

Unfortunately/thankfully, the world doesn't work according to your whims and fancies.

Should I educate you about inter-caste violence in India? LOL. Heard of the Ranvir Sena or the likes of Kherlanji killings?

You quote Yasin bhatkal of the Indian Mujahideen. Do you know what their stated goal is? It is to create an Islamic Caliphate across South Asia. Sounds eerily similar to creating a Hindu Rashtra across South Asia, innit? (I won't even touch the likes of Abhinav Bharat, Bajrang Dal etc)

And that's all you could glean about the Bodos? Any ideas who were the perpetrators of the communal violence in Assam this year? Yeah Champ, it was the Bodos. 77 Muslims dead officially.

It's not like I enjoy talking to conceited idiots like you either. But debates are all about presenting your views in a rational manner, often with the likes of people you normally won't hang out with. Your antics are enough for all to see who's prejudiced and who isn't. I don't expect you to change your ideology/outlook, but at least learn some courtesy to talk with civility instead of going overboard with your ridiculous 'demolitions' of 'strawman' arguments!

 

[adwityagrata]

Inter caste killings in India are about Land grabbing and money. Not about religion. What a load of Hubris to link them to Islamic terrorists like Yasim Bhatkal.

India is a Hindustan. That is what partition was all about. Magnanimity and tolerance of the Hindus cannot be and should not be translated as rejection of India as a land for and of the Hindus.

No need to be civil with terrorist sympathizers who call Yasin Bhatka a secular Rebel.

 

[bronxbull]

Man.

Please try to learn from the posters.

If you don't have to say something concrete, why to add half-witted sentences.

Please refrain.

learn from whom?

As the OP u only set the broad framework of discussion,not the direction in which is twists and turns.

The relevance of any post ll be judged at the end of the thread,not meanwhile.

 

[Truth Finder]

@FaujHistorian You are asking a lot of questions. But, tell me one thing

What was the percentage of Muslims in India in the 13 the century when first Muslim dynasty (Slave Dynasty Delhi) was established in North India.(Ans- less than 5%)

What was that percentage in 1947?(Ans- It went upto 25-30%, thanks to conversion)

Then, what happened that forced the Muslim elites to seek for a separate land in spite of increasing rapidly in numbers?

M.J.Akbar writes:

This changed in 1803, when victorious British troops marched into Delhi. The Mughal Emperor, now reduced to an impotent throne in the Red Fort, became a British vassal, and centuries of Muslim confidence began to crumble into a melee of reactions ranging from anger, frustration, bombast, lament and self-pity to insurrection and intellectual enquiry.

Indian Muslims entered an age of insecurity for which they sought a range of answers. Pakistan emerged as the 20th century’s answer to a 19th century defeat. So far, it has merely replaced insecurity with uncertainty.

They lost the confidence with which they came in the 13th century. And, TNT was the alibi.

 

[Indischer]

Inter caste killings in India are about Land grabbing and money. Not about religion. What a load of Hubris to link them to Islamic terrorists like Yasim Bhatkal.

India is a Hindustan. That is what partition was all about. Magnanimity and tolerance of the Hindus cannot be and should not be translated as rejection of India as a land for and of the Hindus.

No need to be civil with terrorist sympathizers who call Yasin Bhatka a secular Rebel.

Nobody is advocating magnanimity and tolerance to wards Muslims here. The question was about the ideology of Hindutva and the legitimacy of it's implementation in India.

How do you justify inter-caste killings in India that are a consequence of Inter-caste marriages? Not as simplistic as land-grabbing and money now, is it? In any case, the rebels in kashmir too are trying to free their land from Indian control. Islamic insurgency in kashmir can also be seen as a fight for land then, if one sees it you said.

I still say that Indian Muslims have not shown any tendency to adopt jihad in numbers that warrant their stereotyping as terrorists. My question is precisely this: How is it that muslim rebels are considered as Religious Extremists? There are subtle differences in their ideologies, which are ignored as it's much more convenient for us to ignore them and paint them all in the same shade.

Yasin Bhatkal no doubt is a Religious Extremist and his organisation has killed scores of Indians. but his stated objectives are so ridiculous & repulsive. Yet, when one sees the parallels in the dreams of a Muslim Khilafat and Hindu Rashtra, those who oppose both are suddenly terrorist sympathisers?? Bravo!

 

[adwityagrata]

Nobody is advocating magnanimity and tolerance to wards Muslims here. The question was about the ideology of Hindutva and the legitimacy of it's implementation in India.

How do you justify inter-caste killings in India that are a consequence of Inter-caste marriages? Not as simplistic as land-grabbing and money now, is it? In any case, the rebels in kashmir too are trying to free their land from Indian control. Islamic insurgency in kashmir can also be seen as a fight for land then, if one sees it you said.

I still say that Indian Muslims have not shown any tendency to adopt jihad in numbers that warrant their stereotyping as terrorists. My question is precisely this: How is it that muslim rebels are considered as Religious Extremists? There are subtle differences in their ideologies, which are ignored as it's much more convenient for us to ignore them and paint them all in the same shade.

Yasin Bhatkal no doubt is a Religious Extremist and his organisation has killed scores of Indians. but his stated objectives are so ridiculous & repulsive. Yet, when one sees the parallels in the dreams of a Muslim Khilafat and Hindu Rashtra, those who oppose both are suddenly terrorist sympathisers?? Bravo!

You are the one with a twisted view of Hindutva and then making a strawman argument about its implementation. Hindutva was always in effect in India which is why parsis got such a warm welcome and thrived in India. There is nothing radical about it. It is Hindutva in India which has allowed other communities like christians and mulims to thrive in India.

You agreeing or disagreeing with this reality will not change the nature of this reality.

No one can question its legitimacy nor can they deny its existence. You abhor to acknowledge this simple reality that Hindutva is the way of life in India. It draws its essence from Hinduism. For you to acknowledge this reality is to become 'communal' so you rather take a Anti-Hindu stand and live in denial. This hypocrisy is what defines you and your position and makes you Anti-Hindu.

Kashmiri's talk of Kashmiriyat which is nothing but the Hindu ethos of fostering understanding and mutual respect. Not tolerance, but Mutual Respect.

If you want to discuss caste and terrorism in kashmir start a different thread. Such red herring is what further exposes your hypocrisy. You would rather throw in caste, kashmir, AIT etc than focus on the real issue which is debated. You are at a loss for anything rational to say on the topic at hand so you drag in such strawmen and red herring and expect people to take you seriously.

Muslim jihad and islamic terrorism is a Fact. SIMI was banned for that particular reason. Those inspired by islam to strike down kafir's are Islamic terrorist. As long as their fight is inspired by Islam and not by the constitution of India, non of the subtle difference matter. They only matter for terrorist sympathizers. That is what you come across as.

Yasin Bhatkal has never spoken about any Khilafat. This is again a Lie that exposes you affinity for half truths and lies to create smoke screens behind which you can take pot shots at Hindutva. He was motivated by hate against the Hindus and a desire to see them suffer and die. Insted of acknowledging this reality, you attempt to link it to a mythical khilafat.

India is Hindustan, a hindu rashtra. That was the fundamental promise made during Partition. Nothing or No one can deny this reality of history. To accuse people who acknowledge this reality and accept Hindutva and equate them with a evil terrorist like Yasin Batkal is what exposes you for what you really are. Someone who is so rabidly Anti-Hindu that you will stoop to any half truths and lies to obfuscate the fact that Hindutva is what makes India what it is, a diverse and rich civilization with mutual respect for all. And that it is nothing like Islamic fundamentalism that seeks to exterminate other religions and establish a totalitarian Islamic rule.

Without you rejecting your prejudice against Hindutva there is no point in discussing further. I am not willing to grapple with half truths and lies just so that you can pretend that is 'secular' and kosher.

 

[Indischer]

You are the one with a twisted view of Hindutva and then making a strawman argument about its implementation. Hindutva was always in effect in India which is why parsis got such a warm welcome and thrived in India. There is nothing radical about it. It is Hindutva in India which has allowed other communities like christians and mulims to thrive in India.

You agreeing or disagreeing with this reality will not change the nature of this reality.

No one can question its legitimacy nor can they deny its existence. You abhor to acknowledge this simple reality that Hindutva is the way of life in India. It draws its essence from Hinduism. For you to acknowledge this reality is to become 'communal' so you rather take a Anti-Hindu stand and live in denial. This hypocrisy is what defines you and your position and makes you Anti-Hindu.

Kashmiri's talk of Kashmiriyat which is nothing but the Hindu ethos of fostering understanding and mutual respect. Not tolerance, but Mutual Respect.

If you want to discuss caste and terrorism in kashmir start a different thread. Such red herring is what further exposes your hypocrisy. You would rather throw in caste, kashmir, AIT etc than focus on the real issue which is debated. You are at a loss for anything rational to say on the topic at hand so you drag in such strawmen and red herring and expect people to take you seriously.

Muslim jihad and islamic terrorism is a Fact. SIMI was banned for that particular reason. Those inspired by islam to strike down kafir's are Islamic terrorist. As long as their fight is inspired by Islam and not by the constitution of India, non of the subtle difference matter. They only matter for terrorist sympathizers. That is what you come across as.

Yasin Bhatkal has never spoken about any Khilafat. This is again a Lie that exposes you affinity for half truths and lies to create smoke screens behind which you can take pot shots at Hindutva. He was motivated by hate against the Hindus and a desire to see them suffer and die. Insted of acknowledging this reality, you attempt to link it to a mythical khilafat.

India is Hindustan, a hindu rashtra. That was the fundamental promise made during Partition. Nothing or No one can deny this reality of history. To accuse people who acknowledge this reality and accept Hindutva and equate them with a evil terrorist like Yasin Batkal is what exposes you for what you really are. Someone who is so rabidly Anti-Hindu that you will stoop to any half truths and lies to obfuscate the fact that Hindutva is what makes India what it is, a diverse and rich civilization with mutual respect for all. And that it is nothing like Islamic fundamentalism that seeks to exterminate other religions and establish a totalitarian Islamic rule.

Without you rejecting your prejudice against Hindutva there is no point in discussing further. I am not willing to grapple with half truths and lies just so that you can pretend that is 'secular' and kosher.

Care to explain to everyone here how Hindutva is different from the present democratic set-up that we have?

So you mean to say the ideology of Hindu Nationalism has existed since the time the Parsis migrated to India. Lovely, go on.

Hindutva is the way of life for Indian Hindus, not all Indians. To prove their stereotype of Muslims, if Hindutva supporters bring in cases of Muslims killing Buddhists in Afghanistan, it's a valid argument?

So, the fight for Hindutva is inspired by the Constitution of India? LOL. Please present the relevant clauses from our Constitution that have inspired Hindutva.

Do you even know the goals of the Indian Mujahideen?? Yasin Bhatkal is an IM operative. Now go figure.

Who made you this 'fundamental' promise during partition that India is a Hindu Rashtra. Again, anything to back your claims ? I wonder who's making strawman arguments here.

I too agree. Without you rejecting your affinity to Hindutva, I too don't see any end to this argument. I am not in favour of granting favours to minorities, neither am I in favour of harassing them under the name of conforming to Hindu cultural values and ethos.

 

[Nair saab]

10-20 years from now i will see pakistanis Blaming failure of Pakistan as a state on Hindus

And the reason that partition happened is Hindus didnt want live with them so Hindus asked a Separate state for them...

And people behind them is Communal Congress and Terrorist Hindu Nationalist...

 

[FaujHistorian]

@FaujHistorian You are asking a lot of questions. But, tell me one thing

What was the percentage of Muslims in India in the 13 the century when first Muslim dynasty (Slave Dynasty Delhi) was established in North India.(Ans- less than 5%)

What was that percentage in 1947?(Ans- It went upto 25-30%, thanks to conversion)

Then, what happened that forced the Muslim elites to seek for a separate land in spite of increasing rapidly in numbers?

M.J.Akbar writes:

They lost the confidence with which they came in the 13th century. And, TNT was the alibi.

My dear TF, you touch upon a lot of issues as:

1. Population rise of Muslims in the Indian subcontinent between 1206 and 1947. Then contrast it to population increase of Hindus and others.


2. Why Muslim majority provinces (MMP) were kicked out (partitioned out) from Hindu Majority Provinces (HMP) by Congress
------ The main thrust of this thread.

3. Was it Savarkar who started TNT or some Muslim Fundoo

4. MJ Akbar's analysis of 1857 era and how he views the state of Muslims in different provinces MMPs and HMPs.


Is that good summary of issues you posed?

Please let me know.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

Contrary to the popular belief the supposed boundaries between Hindus and Muslims was not drawn by Muslim League but the Hindu Obscurantists and a pro-Hindu faction among the Congress,the vanguard of Unified Indian Identity itself,mainly led by Lala Lajpat Rai,who during the 20's wrote numerous articles on why Hindus and Muslims can not live together. This very statement was reiterated by Dr.B R Ambedkar some years later.

The Pre-partition history what we read in our respective countries are merely a selective one according our very own conveniences. We have excluded some extraordinarily important facts, included minor details which were not so special.We have glorified failures,secluded those who really does not deserve such flat criticisms. I am not a very big fan of blind nationalism and still looking for a true Government approach to study our history of Independence from a point of vantage,free from any communal or political prejudice.

I thank @FaujHistorian for bringing this topic again and I would definitely like to be informed more from you on this subject.

I think we are mis-interpreting the entire era. The idea of India- welded into one country from east to west was more thoroughly drilled during the 1920s onwards till 1947 when the Independence Movement brought everyone together. I think Lalaji or even Bal Gangadhar Tilak (whose reviving of the Ganesh Festival in Bomay is actually a right wing nationalist act) we still struggling to define what would come. It was under gandhi that the final principles were agreed upon- 'secularism'- the necessary partiticipation of both Hindus and Muslims- as well as removal of untouchability- participation of large trodden people- was a result of the nature of the movement shifting from elites to a mass based approach.

Please don't add $hitty statements unless you have a reference to back it up.

Thank you

Technically the british did have a policy of making govt jobs more easily available for the kind of education Hindus were taking up. There was an extensive suspicion of the same among the muslim community. Sir Syed Ahmed was among the first to start changing it.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

Care to explain to everyone here how Hindutva is different from the present democratic set-up that we have?

So you mean to say the ideology of Hindu Nationalism has existed since the time the Parsis migrated to India. Lovely, go on.

Hindutva is the way of life for Indian Hindus, not all Indians. To prove their stereotype of Muslims, if Hindutva supporters bring in cases of Muslims killing Buddhists in Afghanistan, it's a valid argument?

So, the fight for Hindutva is inspired by the Constitution of India? LOL. Please present the relevant clauses from our Constitution that have inspired Hindutva.

Do you even know the goals of the Indian Mujahideen?? Yasin Bhatkal is an IM operative. Now go figure.

Who made you this 'fundamental' promise during partition that India is a Hindu Rashtra. Again, anything to back your claims ? I wonder who's making strawman arguments here.

I too agree. Without you rejecting your affinity to Hindutva, I too don't see any end to this argument. I am not in favour of granting favours to minorities, neither am I in favour of harassing them under the name of conforming to Hindu cultural values and ethos.

You know there is a problem with that argument. It is theoretically sound, but as long as faith is an important part of people's lives, 'welfare' will include some sort of accomodation on that front. If people are not willing to live in the purely rationalistic structure you want to give them, favors of some sort will have to be given.

 

[FaujHistorian]

10-20 years from now i will see pakistanis Blaming failure of Pakistan as a state on Hindus

And the reason that partition happened is Hindus didnt want live with them so Hindus asked a Separate state for them...

And people behind them is Communal Congress and Terrorist Hindu Nationalist...

That would be pathetic. Won't it?

NS dear,

if you read OP, no one is blaming the failure or success on Hindus or Muslims.

The thread is about mainstream leaders who advocated kicking out Muslim Majority Provinces (MMPs) from cutting them off from Hindu Majority Provinces (HMPs)


Hope you understand.

 

[KRAIT]

You know there is a problem with that argument. It is theoretically sound, but as long as faith is an important part of people's lives, 'welfare' will include some sort of accomodation on that front. If people are not willing to live in the purely rationalistic structure you want to give them, favors of some sort will have to be given.

Only practical and rational accommodation I see is favors on basis of Economic Status.

I see many SC/ST, OBC people who have enough money to buy cars, taking reservation seats which could have been seat for some general caste poor person or poor person of their own caste.
So, abolishing caste and religion based favor and making it strictly based on Economic status based is right way forward.

 

[funtoosh]

My dear TF, you touch upon a lot of issues as:

1. Population rise of Muslims in the Indian subcontinent between 1206 and 1947. Then contrast it to population increase of Hindus and others.


2. Why Muslim majority provinces (MMP) were kicked out (partitioned out) from Hindu Majority Provinces (HMP) by Congress
------ The main thrust of this thread.

3. Was it Savarkar who started TNT or some Muslim Fundoo

4. MJ Akbar's analysis of 1857 era and how he views the state of Muslims in different provinces MMPs and HMPs.


Is that good summary of issues you posed?

Please let me know.

ok savarkar asked for tnt.. but so many others were against it/ why do muslims obey RSS? are muslims and RS same in thought?