India's bridge, China's bunker block road to detente on LAC

[rott]

So I am not me but India and you are not you but China. How stupid are you?

Fact check : Not as stupid as you are.

 

[Protest_again]

Fact check : Not as stupid as you are.

Lol. That settles it then you are an imbecile.

 

[rott]

Lol. That settles it then you are an imbecile.

It must true because YOU said it.
Seriously, you're THE DUMBEST INDIAN I've ever met.

 

[Joe Shearer]

That was a good read. I felt the first section of the past was not all that relevant to the present as its length would suggest.

Personally I feel it is the narrative of history rather than actual history that makes us behave in the way we do. And the control over the narrative has shifted in India over the last decade.

True; it has gone out of the hands of professional historians into the hands of propagandists. Now we have the likes of Shrikant Talageri and David Frawley, or Trojan horses like Sanyal, telling us what our history SHOULD have been.

That is why we find idiots doing the following:

1. Claiming that everything originated in India (the Out Of India theory, promoted very busily by - what else? - every unemployed busybody in town, including Koenraad Elst);
2. Claiming that the Maurya Empire was three hundreds earlier than it was;
3. Claiming that all Islamic presence in India was due to the sword (so much for Kerala and for Chittagong);
4. Claiming that the Maratha Empire was a viable replacement for the Mughals;
5. Claiming that the Congress was a failure, and the RSS was involved in any way, as a group or as individuals, in the freedom struggle;
6. Denying the palpable unease and discomfort of Muslims, specifically the educated, professional class among them, with the undertones of Hindu primacy that emerged from the broad-based Congress;
7. Denying the viability of Pakistan and the inevitable nature of partition given the strains of the times, and building a myth of Akhand Bharat

and going on from there to create a totally mythical historical, political, social and communal environment that is entirely synthetic to justify their bid for political power.

Precisely. The narrative has changed and so has the country. Or is it vice versa?

Vice versa. Without any doubt. It was the failure of the governing classes to intervene in the rural areas and bring education there into modern, bias-free, scientific and progressive lines of progress that ruined us as a country. Undoing the damage done due to that neglect will take decades, if not centuries.

 

[xeuss]

Vice versa. Without any doubt. It was the failure of the governing classes to intervene in the rural areas and bring education there into modern, bias-free, scientific and progressive lines of progress that ruined us as a country. Undoing the damage done due to that neglect will take decades, if not centuries.

Do you mean stuff like this?

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...r-ramayana-incidents/articleshow/76364933.cms

 

[Joe Shearer]

Do you mean stuff like this?

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...r-ramayana-incidents/articleshow/76364933.cms

Please try not to actively depress me. Reading that article made me feel really depressed. Accepting the cultural diaspora is one thing; weaponising it is another.

 

[Robbie]

There are as always, kernels of truth in the stuff you posted, to make these fanciful stories all the more believable. At the heart of all this is prejudice that permeates society, that makes all these half truths believable and more palatable.

Take the example of what you stated that Muslims are allowed to run their own mosques while Hindus are unable to run their own temples, as government has involvement in the trusts.

Both have some element of truth in it, but the reality is very different. Most of the mosques that were built before 1947 fall under the authority of the Waqf board (state delineated). The Waqf Board of Muslims does have government oversight and the president of the board is usually a government appointee. They manage the properties (rent/buy/sell) controlled by the board and the income generated from them goes towards the upkeep of the mosques. Sometimes, salaries of mosque imams are also paid by the board.

Some of the larger Muslim shrines, like Ajmer Sharif, are run entirely by a government appointed board, separate from the Waqf board. Some newer mosques do not fall under the ambit of the Waqf board and are run by the own trustees, without involvement of the government.

A similar practice exists among the temples of India. Most pre-1947 temples were controlled by the principalities that they fell under. After 1947, the government of India became the sovereign inheritor of the these temples, and created a trust to run them. There were other reasons for the government to take control, most notably to end the caste discrimination, and wrest control of these temples from the mismanagement of trusts. Not all temples fall under this ambit, but I believe some states have provisions in the law that allow for the state to take over in the event of mismanagement or infighting.

Now is this the best practice - that can be debated. I can say for sure that in the case of Muslims, the political appointee of the Waqf board usually indulges in heavy corruption where Waqf land is sold. The Ambani residence in Mumbai is a prime example where Waqf land was illegaly sold to the Ambanis.

You stated:
"All major Hindu temples are controlled by the Government but Mosques and Churches are not controlled by the Government"

As evidenced, your statement is does contain some elements of truth, but is stated as such to imply that Muslims are receiving a perceived benefit that is being denied to the Hindus.

The complaint invites further ridicule when in some states in India, the supposed pro-Hindu BJP government has been ruling for 20-30 years, but has made no attempt to alter the situation. In fact in the state of Gujarat, where Modi has made an ideal Hindu state, no attempt has been ever made to change this situation. In fact, both Narendra Modi and Amit Shah sit on the board of trustees of Somnath Temple, appointed by the government of Gujarat of course.

Thanks for this. Is there any other point you found incorrect?

 

[xeuss]

Thanks for this. Is there any other point you found incorrect?

All the points listed under Legal had the same script. There were kernels of truth that were scripted to promote a narrative. A narrative that appeals to the prejudices of the Sanghi ecosystem.

Items listed under National Security and Development are issues that again are skewed towards a narrative. I am not too bothered about that, because some of it depends on what direction each party values and current economic/security conditions. For example, national security policy would evolve under any party, and only glaring errors often find critics, and that too, much later.

Take for example the topic at hand, in the very thread, that is being discussed. The government policy on China/Ladakh has been one of public silence. It has not acknowledged the Chinese incursions, and has not denied them either. Similar events happened during the Congress rule, and the approach was similar. So is the policy of this government much different from the previous regime?

 

[Pakistan Space Agency]

JUST THE OTHER DAY YOU WERE SAYING:


- PRTP GWD

Yes, but China has now decided to go for a bigger piece of the cake since its being "offerred" so willingly by india.

I heard 3 Indian soldiers were killed today by Chinese Army, is that true?