Indian Political Corner | All Updates & Discussions.

[Soumitra]

loyal citizen of India, that breaks no laws

This is the operative part. They should be loyal to the country and break no laws.

what seems to be the problem if you are a Muslim Indian or Indian Muslim?

If you are a Muslim Indian you put religion over the country. This means you may be more supportive of your co-religionists who may be from enemy country.

A very tiny minority of Indian Hindus may consider themselves Hindus first and Indians later. Unfortunately this is not the case with muslims

Support your Indian Muslim over Pakistani Hindu

I will support an Indian Muslim over a Pakistani Hindu any day

 

[Pakistani Fighter]

If you are a Muslim Indian you put religion over the country. This means you may be more supportive of your co-religionists who may be from enemy country.

A very tiny minority of Indian Hindus may consider themselves Hindus first and Indians later. Unfortunately this is not the case with muslims

If you put country above Religion than why ban Beef?

 

[xeuss]

This is the operative part. They should be loyal to the country and break no laws.



If you are a Muslim Indian you put religion over the country. This means you may be more supportive of your co-religionists who may be from enemy country.

A very tiny minority of Indian Hindus may consider themselves Hindus first and Indians later. Unfortunately this is not the case with muslims



I will support an Indian Muslim over a Pakistani Hindu any day

That's the problem you have, you assume that just because a Muslim identifies closely with his religion, they are inherently breaking the law.

For me, and all Muslims from India, there is no difference between Muslim Indian and Indian Muslim. They are a mutually coexisting concept. You can be an Indian and you can be a Muslim. No part of Indian citizenship or Indian law contradicts any principle of Islam.

If you want to fault a Muslim, fault those ones who break the law and punish them accordingly, as per the law, and not the concept of vigilante justice that you espouse.

Much of your hatred is the result of a lot of misconceptions that have been furthered by lies and half-truths.

 

[Soumitra]

If you put country above Religion than why ban Beef?

Article 48 in The Constitution Of India 1949
48. Organisation of agriculture and animal husbandry The State shall endeavour to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and improving the breeds, and prohibiting the slaughter, of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle

This is in directive principles of state policy which means though not legally enforcable the constitution asks govts to make such laws.

Fun Fact. Most of the anti cow slaughter laws were made by congress but were only on paper. When BJP came to power they began to enforce the laws more strictly.

That's the problem you have, you assume that just because a Muslim identifies closely with his religion, they are inherently breaking the law.

For me, and all Muslims from India, there is no difference between Muslim Indian and Indian Muslim. They are a mutually coexisting concept. You can be an Indian and you can be a Muslim. No part of Indian citizenship or Indian law contradicts any principle of Islam.

If you want to fault a Muslim, fault those ones who break the law and punish them accordingly, as per the law, and not the concept of vigilante justice that you espouse.

Much of your hatred is the result of a lot of misconceptions that have been furthered by lies and half-truths.

You and I both know that in all the cities of India there are no-go areas where even the police is afraid to go.

You and I both know that until a few years ago when Pakistan won a match there used to be celebrations in some areas.

I am sure that you are well aware of the demographics of these areas.

 

[xeuss]

You and I both know that in all the cities of India there are no-go areas where even the police is afraid to go.

There is none. Police has stations in all Muslim areas as well.

This is a myth among Hindus. I am full aware that Hindus harbor such misconceptions. It is very difficult to find a hindu rickshaw-wallah or taxi driver to go to a Muslim area.

You and I both know that until a few years ago when Pakistan won a match there used to be celebrations in some areas.

Another myth. May have been true decades ago, but that generation is long dead.

In any case, so *what* if an Indian Muslims supports Pakistan in a cricket match? Is that against the law? If yes, what law is being broken?

Bring me some example where a legal provision is being violated.

 

[Naofumi]

In UP 2019 lok Sabha elections SP, BSP, Congress with their caste combinations could not beat BJP.

Yadav -> SP
Non-Yadav OBC -> BJP
Jatav -> BSP
Non-Jatav SC -> BJP
There's a pattern here, guess what. And it's not to mention the polarisation due to Pulwama and all.

 

[Pakistani Fighter]

Article 48 in The Constitution Of India 1949
48. Organisation of agriculture and animal husbandry The State shall endeavour to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and improving the breeds, and prohibiting the slaughter, of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle

This is in directive principles of state policy which means though not legally enforcable the constitution asks govts to make such laws.

Fun Fact. Most of the anti cow slaughter laws were made by congress but were only on paper. When BJP came to power they began to enforce the laws more strictly.


You and I both know that in all the cities of India there are no-go areas where even the police is afraid to go.

You and I both know that until a few years ago when Pakistan won a match there used to be celebrations in some areas.

I am sure that you are well aware of the demographics of these areas.

See. You put your religion in your constitution

 

[AfrazulMandal]

I am not sure if you are missing this point. There is no Hindu unity. On the other hand, Hindus are united in their hatred of Muslims. If you remove the Muslims, Hindu unity will no longer exist.

My personal opinion is that this won't end until a lot of Muslim blood has been shed, regardless of who is in power. You just can't remove hate from people's hearts. There has to be a revulsion from within, and sadly, that revulsion comes only when blood has been shed (Nazis/Serbia/Rwanda)

I used to hold the view that Hindu unity is artificial. While that may be true, the fact remains that they are a front when 'facing us' (whatever that means). I am kinda reconsidering this view as well - I mean if you look at Jamaican Hindus for instance, even they stick together staunchly. So perhaps there is more to it than meets the eye. What I will not deny is that traditionally Hindu society has remained fragmented because of the inherent social stratification and apartheid system that is built into it.

Now coming to your second point, I doubt anything like that is gonna happen.

1. Nazi Germany was defeated and forced to come to an end. Modi's Hindu Rastra is an ally of major world powers. There is nobody coming to liberate us here.
2. Serbia (I think you meant Bosnia) was lucky to find NATO as its supporter. In the post Cold War period it was an opportunity that the Western Powers did not miss. There was no inherent desire to save the Muslims there - just to prevent Serbia from re-establishing a united Serbia-Bosnia aka Yogoslavia.
3. Rwanda ended simply due to arms embargoes and armed UN action. The fractures still remain on the ground.

I don't know why the Hindu, the average Hindu hates Islam or Muslims. It does not make any sense to me at all. Even when I take a step back. When I try to think rationally and not as a Muslim. Nothing comes to mind.

So I doubt there will be a revulsion in the hearts of Hindu minds when they see genocide of Muslims happening. Just check the conversion of nominal Muslims last week and see the glee on Twitter and every social media. Nobody protested. Not even the liberals uttered a word.

See. You put your religion in your constitution

India's Constitution is inherently Hindu or pro Hindu. There is no doubt about this.

Why do we still pile hate on you for being an Islamic republic?

because hypocrisy is easy.

 

[xeuss]

I used to hold the view that Hindu unity is artificial. While that may be true, the fact remains that they are a front when 'facing us' (whatever that means). I am kinda reconsidering this view as well - I mean if you look at Jamaican Hindus for instance, even they stick together staunchly. So perhaps there is more to it than meets the eye. What I will not deny is that traditionally Hindu society has remained fragmented because of the inherent social stratification and apartheid system that is built into it.

Now coming to your second point, I doubt anything like that is gonna happen.

1. Nazi Germany was defeated and forced to come to an end. Modi's Hindu Rastra is an ally of major world powers. There is nobody coming to liberate us here.
2. Serbia (I think you meant Bosnia) was lucky to find NATO as its supporter. In the post Cold War period it was an opportunity that the Western Powers did not miss. There was no inherent desire to save the Muslims there - just to prevent Serbia from re-establishing a united Serbia-Bosnia aka Yogoslavia.
3. Rwanda ended simply due to arms embargoes and armed UN action. The fractures still remain on the ground.

I don't know why the Hindu, the average Hindu hates Islam or Muslims. It does not make any sense to me at all. Even when I take a step back. When I try to think rationally and not as a Muslim. Nothing comes to mind.

So I doubt there will be a revulsion in the hearts of Hindu minds when they see genocide of Muslims happening. Just check the conversion of nominal Muslims last week and see the glee on Twitter and every social media. Nobody protested. Not even the liberals uttered a word.


India's Constitution is inherently Hindu or pro Hindu. There is no doubt about this.

Why do we still pile hate on you for being an Islamic republic?

because hypocrisy is easy.

Read the three posts together here:
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/raci...posts-by-indians.662070/page-21#post-12262287

Not disagreeing with what you say, but offering you some more reading material to help better understand

 

[AfrazulMandal]

Read the three posts together here:
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/raci...posts-by-indians.662070/page-21#post-12262287

Not disagreeing with what you say, but offering you some more reading material to help better understand

Okay.

But what have brahmins done to gloat about? Creating an apartheid system that has stood the test of time?

And forget about them alone. What about hate from most of the others - from Gujarat to Bengal from Jammu to Bangalore...

Even the Sikhs (okay the foreign Sikhs are waaaay better! dunno why), Buddhists dont care.

Why???

I feel the hatred is irrational and cannot be justified by logic.

 

[Naofumi]

But what have brahmins done to gloat about? Creating an apartheid system that has stood the test of time?

Hindutva is propagated as a potential tool that will end caste system. I have seen many saying that.
What we have to do is to break this myth.
Also, see this

Yadav -> SP
Non-Yadav OBC -> BJP
Jatav -> BSP
Non-Jatav SC -> BJP

It means caste is still strong but people are voting only for their caste, not their caste category.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

Hindutva is propagated as a potential tool that will end caste system. I have seen many saying that.

It IS working unfortunately!!!

Also with increased education, Hindus are moving more and more to the Hindutva camp.

How do we solve that???

 

[Naofumi]

It IS working unfortunately!!!

Also with increased education, Hindus are moving more and more to the Hindutva camp.

How do we solve that???

Show them this :-

Non-UCs are natural allies but we Muslims have to fulfil some conditions too like don't tolerate Waris Pathans, Azam Khan who make stupid speeches. We have to be mature and think realpolitik. Some tactical geniuses are required but the problem is opposition is dead - that's a major problem, a national level face is absent and Gandhis refuse to step down.

 

[Nilgiri]

His family s literally ruling that place since independence, so why does this even matter? If you can't fix something in 6-7 decades then what's your right to be on the throne? My point is even if there's a improvement it's pointless because Muslims failed to catchup to other communities. For e.g. When we say Saudis are backward, we don't say "they've progressed from slavery and tribalism", no - we compare them to others.
On other note, I would agree with you to see the pre-Owaisi (that would be pre-independence Nizami period) to see if Muslims were better or worse than Hindus relatively. I stress on the relative part here because that's what counts, otherwise even the most corrupt and stupid governments can call themselves successful.

I'm just asking what the numbers for this "poverty" measurement is like over the time series for their constituency/hyderabad etc....and the exact same standard applied to a selection of other constituencies/cities for comparison using same standard over same period of time. Context and standards of measurement mean a whole lot to assertion ---> conclusion process.

Simply giving a one off snapshot number today because "63% poor" looks attention grabbing does not pass muster for me.

Then only can we bring in the further argument and analysis as to how specific MPs and MLAs are actually involved (w.r.t grand scheme of things like Chief ministers and Prime ministers etc) in the delivery of anti-poverty + wealth generating + development measures to an area like @Joe Shearer mentioned earlier.

In my estimation (its a limited one though), I feel Owaisi (senior brother) has done a fair enough job with the platform he has inherited/expanded through his oratory and refusal to back down on certain issues. To make it broader platform capable of vying and taking more power (which is needed to influence development pattern monies and so on), @jamahir has pointed out a way to grow it long term....it would be apt for AIMIM to look into such initiatives in India's political climate.

I agree but Owaisi can also influence them if he can (in his view) influence Delhi Muslims, so I won't give him a clean chit even then because he don't give speeches for Hyderabadi Muslims outside of his constituency when he can.

Another point - Muslims vote for him, so I would assume Muslims to be concentrated in his constituency. So taking a rough approximation here for Hyderabadi Muslim as Owaisi voter would be true for our analysis.

That's not what I was getting at. I am simply most interested in creating basis for comparison of the standard robustly to other groups (of equivalence) first....especially over a time series.

Actually lets see what the spread for Hindus in Hyderabad looks like for starters using the 1 L income poverty threshold....or the city as a whole...or state as whole and what the best and worst case range is for the country.

Is this data anywhere or in a headline similarly?

 

[Naofumi]

Is this data anywhere or in a headline similarly?

Got this one
https://www.newindianexpress.com/ci...e-council-for-social-development-1784801.html