India's Confused Nationalism

[SarthakGanguly]

.

This is what he said about his pan Hindu language. This is among thousand other errors he wanted to make Indians belief. A system which stood upon an apparently secular Ideology in its outer garb but immensely communal in its core.Not only Savarkar,the assumption made by other leaders like Lala Lajpat Rai were extremely ridiculous if we read them today. On the context of Bengal Muslim Pact in 1923, he wrote to C R Das that " I am not afraid of the seven crore Mussalmans,but I think the seven crore in Hindusthan,plus the armed hosts of Afghanistan,Central Asia, Arabia,Mesopotamia and Turkey will be irresistible"

Now see who were these leaders fearing of? This sense of fear influenced Congress's doctrine and slowly and gradually alienated Muslim educated class who were fighting for an Unified India. There is an excellent post made by @Azlan Haider in the thread State of Confusion II and you can see how the Mullahs became puppets in the hands of the British for the Great Game of Central Asia. Our fanatics led by Mr.Savarkar and their ilk just strengthen the hands of those Mullahs and played in the hand of British. And what steel Savarkar was made of can be understood when we read about his apologetic letter to the British for mercy which he wrote from Andaman Jail. My point is their ideologies might seem flawless on paper but on ground these ideals were far from implementations and proved catalysts for the events quite opposite to what these guys proclaimed to be.

I expected you to refute my points But never mind

1. India also tried initially to make Hindi a pan Indian language.

2. 'thousand other errors' - What were the other 999 errors? Besides how is Hindi 'communal to the core'? Imposing it can be ridiculous but never communal.

3. As for the fear of a Moslem invasion - now it may seem ridiculous. But similar invasions did happen from the lands that ravaged this land.

4. There is enough doubt whether the educated Muslims of India really wanted for an United India, especially after the formation of the Muslim League. Right from the Nineteenth century stalwarts like Sir Syed etc propagated an exclusivist approach for the Muslims.True, there were exceptions, but just that.

5. Savarkar was no man of steel, he never claimed to be one. That was Stalin Besides, he spent years in jail, unlike the tours that Gandhi did. He got two lifetimes as a sentence. He did what he could to get out. Much better than Gandhi's refusal to seek mercy on behalf of Bhagat Singh, Sukh and Rajguru in my honest opinion.

6. No ideology is flawless. Take the Dhimmi concept for example. Is it bad? It is bad for non Muslims, good for Muslims. Every ideology has its benefactors. Savarkar was honest, his strong views bare his steely convictions

I am aware of some Hindu centric history and I am no taker of that if not true but an environment had been establishment that if you challenge the established version of Marxist history, you will bran ded as hindu extremists. Remember those history were written during colonial period to allow Europeans to make cultural theft from Hindu scriptures to prove white man's superiority against cultural voidness of ancient North European babaric history and the British imperial interests in India.

Precisely. The Indian history had completely been hijacked by the powers that be. Only in the last decade or so, with the popularization of the Internet and other means, have other alternative schools of thought been appreciated. Call me a fanatic but Sitaram Goel's books (especially Hindu Temples – What Happened to Them ) are excellent scholarly works.
Also do read Arun Shourie's 'Eminent Historians'.

 

[scorpionx]

@SarthakGanguly
I have to leave for few hours. I will address every point of your post when I come back.

 

[INDIC]

Precisely. The Indian history had completely been hijacked by the powers that be. Only in the last decade or so, with the popularization of the Internet and other means, have other alternative schools of thought been appreciated.

Yes, the internet did a great work,I was extremely surprised by the way people try to defend Aryan Invasion Theory, some even branded me as Hindu extremist when I showed them genetic studies. I had a discussion with a guy who was claiming Sapta Sindhu can be anywhere outside India but not in India and he tried the neglect the reality that Sapta Sindhu of Rigveda and Hapta Hendu of Avesta are the same geographic location because it goes against AIT bullcrap. Because of internet I came to know that Vedic culture was the continuation of IVC while Rigveda was the part of Indus valley civilization itself(Cemetery H culture of Localization era of IVC). Yes, most baffling thing is those tom, dick and Harry who think that they are more Aryan than Indian when the same word Aryan was taken from Hindu scriptures.

 

[scorpionx]

1. "systematic efforts of rewriting Indian History have been made" - The History that is taught to us is extremely flawed. According to our history books, Bhagat Singh becomes a terrorist, Shivaji etc are misguided heroes and Shah Jahan becomes a loving husband! There should be a serious examination of the history taught to us.

To be honest I have never come across such remarkably senseless piece of Historical work piece which calls Shivaji a misguided hero. If it had been done any where this is beyond condemnation and a state sponsored crime.

2. ""The Deciphered Indus Script" authored by Natwar Jha and N.S Rajaram claimed that they have deciphered a script in Indus valley which they attributed to mid-forth millennium BCE, to put the history back for another one thousand years.Claims were made that one of the tablet even mentions river Saraswati of Rg Veda." - Claims have been made from almost the very beginning. A claim can be made and then it is discussed. You can't refute a claim that's not made. So, I would welcome any research into it. Certainly if mention of any river is found, I would consider it a welcome sign as well. Just because a particular discovery speaks of a Hindu past does not mean it's not true.

I agree. Every research should be welcomed with a broad heart irrespective of the section it comes from. But this effort to reinvent History becomes a subject to condemnation when the author's intention is result specific. For example, the authors I quoted produced a picture of a terracotta seal with a picture of horse on it. Previously any kind of linkage between IVC and Horse was unknown. But certainly this shocking discovery proved identity of IVC was compulsorily a Vedic one. But in due course of time it was proved that there was no decipherment of any IVC script and the picture of the seal was a computer generated distorted image of a unicorn bull.I certainly question here the intention of the Sangh activists here. If they were really honest about a model state there was infact no need to distort NCERT books to such level.Education system of a modern nation state does not necessarily has to seek support from such frauds.

3. "Indus Valley Civilization an essentially Sanskritized civilization" - not at all. Sanskrit was nowhere in the scene, in the form we know it as at least. Not sure if he said that.

It was not said by Savarkar actually, but this is a famous propaganda piece often come out from Sangh quarter.

4. "you can imagine how hollow actually this ideology" - What is the ideology? I don't see anything wrong with a closer re-examination of Indian history. The discourse has been entirely dominated by Irfan Habib and co. While I admit they portray one picture of the past, it is essential we see the other pictures as well. Western historians have been far more objective in dealing with history in the subcontinent. Especially post independence that is.

If you carefully read the Sangh's own version of history you would know about it. History should be written without any faint hint of bias but Historians like Irfan Habib's have still been broadly unchallenged by the revisionist historians. AIT theory might be wrong but surely you can not define the Hindutvawadi theory by the ilk like Natwar Jha or N S Rajaram.

5. "Savarkar's other statements like Hindi was used as a common dialect before advent of Islam surely questions his intellectual merit" - Please quote him, not sure if he said that. If he did, he was wrong. He was no prophet. I would consider that his mistake.

I might have given the actual verbatim in another post.

6. "constitution still fails to guarantee the economic prosperity of its minorities and Lower caste Hindus" - Ideally the constitution should not have made a difference. This is called reverse discrimination. It's like punishing someone for their ancestor's crimes. By that yardstick one would be correct in arresting the Muslims of Mysore for the forceful subjugation and conversion of Moplahs (among other groups)
Say the reservations for example. - Had there been enough opportunities for all, reservations would have been unnecessary.

There was never an equal opportunity. Even lower class Hindus were harshly discriminated. The example of Birendra Nath Sasmal would be much appropriate here. If Hindus like him were discriminated like this you can imagine why reservation for Muslims which Sangh was opposing was an urgent need of time.

7. 'Savarkar was preaching of Austia and Turkey as ideal state' - Austria and Turkey of which time. I was a great admirer of Kemalist Turkey. Now it is history though.

Savarkar was dreaming of two states which had already become History.Both the Austro Hungarian empire ruled by the house of Hubsburg and the Ottomans which Savarkar was a great admirer of disintegrated after First World war. Strangely he was trying to incorporate the ideas of these two nation states in India.Such an Irony that this great lover of History failed every time to draw a logical conclusion of his own theory.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

To be honest I have never come across such remarkably senseless piece of Historical work piece which calls Shivaji a misguided hero. If it had been done any where this is beyond condemnation and a state sponsored crime.

I agree. Every research should be welcomed with a broad heart irrespective of the section it comes from. But this effort to reinvent History becomes a subject to condemnation when the author's intention is result specific. For example, the authors I quoted produced a picture of a terracotta seal with a picture of horse on it. Previously any kind of linkage between IVC and Horse was unknown. But certainly this shocking discovery proved identity of IVC was compulsorily a Vedic one. But in due course of time it was proved that there was no decipherment of any IVC script and the picture of the seal was a computer generated distorted image of a unicorn bull.I certainly question here the intention of the Sangh activists here. If they were really honest about a model state there was infact no need to distort NCERT books to such level.Education system of a modern nation state does not necessarily has to seek support from such frauds.

It was not said by Savarkar actually, but this is a famous propaganda piece often come out from Sangh quarter.

If you carefully read the Sangh's own version of history you would know about it. History should be written without any faint hint of bias but Historians like Irfan Habib's have still been broadly unchallenged by the revisionist historians. AIT theory might be wrong but surely you can not define the Hindutvawadi theory by the ilk like Natwar Jha or N S Rajaram.

I might have given the actual verbatim in another post.

There was never an equal opportunity. Even lower class Hindus were harshly discriminated. The example of Birendra Nath Sasmal would be much appropriate here. If Hindus like him were discriminated like this you can imagine why reservation for Muslims which Sangh was opposing was an urgent need of time.

Savarkar was dreaming of two states which had already become History.Both the Austro Hungarian empire ruled by the house of Hubsburg and the Ottomans which Savarkar was a great admirer of disintegrated after First World war. Strangely he was trying to incorporate the ideas of these two nation states in India.Such an Irony.

Your points have almost merged with my ideas, albeit with considerable moderation - something I often welcome

"There was never an equal opportunity" - True. But we responded by denying the opportunity to one group at the expense of another. Not smart Even then if reservation has to be provided in the short run, it should be limited according to economical standards alone.

The horse seal was 'refuted' by Amartya Sen among others. I don't consider Amartya Sen anyone in the field of Indology. I would take Romilla Thapar more seriously Besides, the seal was not a computerized fraud. It was a unicorn without the head. Though the premise of the horse was proved wrong, it does not mean the error was malicious in intent. Besides, horses may as well be found. An unicorn is close as well

But NCERT textbook history is skewed in a goody way. The harsh reality of Medieval India is hidden from the youth. This needs to be fixed. We are scared that teaching the fact of Nalanda's destruction as opposed to it being 'abandoned' (!) might trigger riots. We need a national reconciliation, something like the one in Kemalist Turkey.

I would recommend you read Eminent Historians by Arun Shourie - a really good work. I believe apologists like Irfan Habib are not unnecessary. But an alternative voice has long been stifled.

Savarkar's idea about Austria Hungary etc is too confusing for me India is too unique to be modelled on another state.

 

[INDIC]

@scorpionx Do to know about the discovery of horse's bone in Surkotada site of Indus Valley civilization in Gujarat and IVC toys even far as Daimabad shows the use of chariot like carts. I have already explained, I am no taker of Hindu-centric history if its not true but the colonial crap that was enforced on us need lots of cleansing.

 

[Chronos]

But NCERT textbook history is skewed in a goody way. The harsh reality of Medieval India is hidden from the youth. This needs to be fixed. We are scared that teaching the fact of Nalanda's destruction as opposed to it being 'abandoned' (!) might trigger riots. We need a national reconciliation, something like the one in Kemalist Turkey.

I would recommend you read Eminent Historians by Arun Shourie - a really good work. I believe apologists like Irfan Habib are not unnecessary. But an alternative voice has long been stifled.

Savarkar's idea about Austria Hungary etc is too confusing for me India is too unique to be modelled on another state.

Uhhh, the Turks might disagree on this.

Especially since Kemal's westernisation caused a cultural trauma when he ruled. And he was certainly authoritarian.

In an indirect way, Erdogan represents the reaction to Kemalism.

 

[Indischer]

@scorpionx You wrote this article? An excellent write-up Babumoshay!

 

[scorpionx]

@scorpionx You wrote this article? An excellent write-up Babumoshay!

Yes, the absurd sense of nationalism then and its modified version today opened the floodgate of emotions.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Uhhh, the Turks might disagree on this.
Especially since Kemal's westernisation caused a cultural trauma when he ruled. And he was certainly authoritarian.
In an indirect way, Erdogan represents the reaction to Kemalism.

Very true, but excessive religious zeal is dangerous. That is one aspect of Kemal that I greatly admire. And Erdogan's rise was a foregone conclusion. In fact the Turks must be congratulated that they resisted such thought for such a long period of time.

 

[bronxbull]

By "Encouraging Separatism" Mr. Sen is not necessarily talking about any political organization which tends to "break" India. BJP is a political party and it is committed to constitutional democracy.What Mr.Sen is talking about here is the movement led by Sangh Parivar to be particular,whose idea of a nation desperately hinges upon a "Hindu India", out rightly ignoring the vast Muslim,Sikh and Christian diaspora around.This ridiculous sense of Indianness, according to Sen goes against the spirit of Indian Unity by its blatant attempt to alienate India's rich cultural heritage and plurality from its history.

Mr.Sen talks shit as usual,there is no truth in his words and no reality.

Dharmic religions are a part of Hinduism and no dharmic folks are complaining about hindutva,Sikhs & Buddhists support BJP wherever they are.

How do people who do revisionist false history talk of respecting India's cultural heritage?

This is a very interesting aspect of this whole discussion and thank you for pointing it out. Savarkar, the proponent of Hindu Chauvinism was an agnostic person. Influenced by the Stuart Mill,James Mill, Herbert Spencer and their idea of a liberal society with sense of individual liberty his view about a modern world was quite impressive.
But the way he interpreted Vedanta with its "world and life negation" instigated him to adopt the most irrational way to view everything.His idea about the role of Non-Hindus living in India was simple but he failed to perceive that Indian Muslims and Christians have adopted the "Hindu way" of life long ago. What paradoxical is the rigidness he introduced in Indian politics ended up in parting Muslims more and more away from the idea of United India.

Pakistan happened due to reasons far removed from Savarkar or Jinnah.

If Britian decided to keep India as one,it could have happened.


Basically parties like the congress which pussyfoot on every single decision are often waiting for some idea to fail,so that they ll find someone to blame.

I am so happy that I am so well understood.

Their so-called work for the country does nothing to nullify their work against the country. Their actions to permanently alienate nearly 60% of the population, Dalit + Muslim + religious identities other than majoritarian Hindu, is truly a threat. No amount of grandstand posturing diminishes that threat.

That's a myth some people like you try to propogate,

Only muslims largely have an issue with it and that's because their masters dont like it.

I still agree to that decision because there was extreme ideological difference between Indian National Congress and Muslim League about how to run post-Independence India from constituent Assembly to autonomy of princely states, Kaamchalau government wasn't going to work as India seemed very fragile at that moment of time. Don't you think agreeing to the concession which Muslim League was asking for would have sent wrong messages and would have paved the way for the rise of Right wingers. Although partition needed more time and planning to be executed.

I believe all this started with the Hindi-Urdu divide in UP-Bihar in 1837.British knew what they were doing, giving the feeling among Muslims that Hindus rejected Urdu language while Hindus feeling how can their language be written in Arabic script, which also affected the Muslims of Punjab.

yeah and that's normal,thats when Hindus became a united political force instead of being divided amongst many states.

Partition was highly necessary to have a buffer state on the north west and have stability in the mainland.

Thank you @SarthakGanguly for raising so many vital points. I am privileged to post the course of discussion here.


Savarkar's design of "Hindustan" was fundamentally weak and looks utterly fragile to its core.For example, he acknowledges that Hindus and Muslims indeed are two nations. This is a debatable statement. Ordinary Muslims in India, by far and large are entirely detached from their Arabic,Persian or any other Middle Eastern counterpart. In fact a South Indian Muslim, in his customs,culture or language was more akin to a South Indian Hindu than to a Muslim living in UP or Bihar. If you notice the Shia custom during Muharram or the rituals followed by upper echelon Muslim nobles when a baby is born, you will see how Muslims for the last thousand years have been imbibed into Hindu culture and essentially Hindu way of performing rituals.By describing entire Muslim community as a distinct separate nation is a flawed concept.Also his idea of a subservient Muslim community living under a powerful Hindu dominance violates every essence of a liberal society;Something definitely conforms with a Ram Rajya after all.
Secondly, according to Savarkar Sanskrit is an essentially "Hindu" language and Hindi should be the Pan Hindu National Language. But how hollow this claim is? Classical Sanskrit is a codified version of Vedic Sanskrit which belong to Indo-European language group. Vedic Sanskrit had direct derivative Prakrita from which Ardha Magadhi and later from which Hindi and Urdu had originated. So, by Savarkar's own argument Urdu becomes an essentially "Hindu" language too!!

I really do not know how much Savarkar was hated by Nehru.There were ample evidences against him. Like the testimony Digambar Bagde gave which was quite comprehensive. But some how Savarkar escaped the wrath of Judicial system. I have no idea what saved him,but there is every chance of a powerful lobby within the ruling party was behind his acquittal.

Not at all,Almost all Muslims,even the guy who converted yesterday after 2 generations ll do the usual things

1.What's wrong with kashmiris wanting independence?

2.Palestine should be liberated from Israel.

3.Urdu is my mother tongue.

Hindi is already the pan Indian language and people in TN also largely know and accept that.

You think a dalaal like Nehru has auqaat to touch veer savarkar?

 

[bronxbull]

1.Whether Abrahamic religion is repelling others and Dharmic religions are assimilating, infact is a matter of debate.Medieval India, in its 700 years rule under variety of Afghan and Turko Mongol rulers was able to keep their religio-social structure intact.The guilt of few tyrannical Muslim Rulers can not be transmitted to the fate of 160 Million Muslims.On the other hand, Modern Sri Lanka being an essentially Buddhist state failed to secure the rights of its ethnic Tamils.Record of Myanmar,another Buddhist state too has not been too prospectous.On the other hand,Turkey or US,being an emblem of modern secular nation state had quite been successful to keep its diverse ethincs united.America in its 1770's constitution was extremely vocal about the protection of rights of its minorities.So, this is in fact not a proved theorem that Faiths other than Dharmic ones have not been able to attract its minorities.

2.This is what Savarkar had to say about national language.



At one point he emphasizes that Hindi being derived from Sanskrit should be spoken as a common language all over India, at the same time he states that Sanskrit must be indispensable constituent of classical course of Hindu youths to be particular. What would have been his suggestion for a Pashto or Urdu speaking Muslim is an enigma as both of these language are derivative of the same Indo European Language group.

3. Savarkar and his ilk were staunchly against giving any extra reservation to the minorities. Now this is a smart move for two reasons. First, after 1857, it is an wide known fact that Muslims were scantily represented in all Government services. Rejecting any sort of reservation at least for a short period of time was Hindu mahasabha's hard rigidness to give away an inch of land to others. Secondly, In their 14th session in Delhi,September'1932 this very Hindu Mahasabha leaders are demanding better representation for Hindus in Muslim Princely states like Bhawalpur,Bhopal,Rampur and Hyderabad.Two very contradictory demands in a single manifesto!!
And following is the criticism Dr.B R Ambedkar made about Savarkar,



Sources: Pakistan or the Partition of Hindustan by Dr. B R Ambedkar

if Hindus are 80% of the population,they ll bargain aggressively.

just plain pragmatism this.

This has been proved to be a hollow promise in later years to come.When Sangh and their political allies were in power of India, systematic efforts of rewriting Indian History have been made.Historians had to burn their midnight oil to find out newest theories which could support the Hindutvawadi theories(According to Dayananda Saraswati, Aryans originated in the Tibetan Plateau for instance).In the year 2000, the much published book "The Deciphered Indus Script" authored by Natwar Jha and N.S Rajaram claimed that they have deciphered a script in Indus valley which they attributed to mid-forth millennium BCE, to put the history back for another one thousand years.Claims were made that one of the tablet even mentions river Saraswati of Rg Veda. Unholy attempts started sprouting to make Indus Valley Civilization an essentially Sanskritized civilization.So, you can imagine how hollow actually this ideology is when it fails to implement itself when opportunity existed.

Secondly, most of Savarkar's other statements like Hindi was used as a common dialect before advent of Islam surely questions his intellectual merit.So I am against forming my opinion about this man just hinging upon his vague idea of an ideal nation state. India, although tried to follow a mostly secular path while writing its constitution still fails to guarantee the economic prosperity of its minorities and Lower caste Hindus.So, when Savarkar speaks of equal rights almost 90 years from now you can imagine how unpractical it would have been if we did not secure minority rights in our Constitution. This right has been abused with a great degree I agree but when Savarkar was preaching of Austia and Turkey as ideal state, India needed this security most.

Do you live in a cave brother?

Do you know the extent of reservation given to lower caste people?

And do you know how sanskrit was adsorbed in south indian languages?

the percentage of India unconnected with hindi is very very less and malik kafur came and attacked till madurai.

1. "systematic efforts of rewriting Indian History have been made" - The History that is taught to us is extremely flawed. According to our history books, Bhagat Singh becomes a terrorist, Shivaji etc are misguided heroes and Shah Jahan becomes a loving husband! There should be a serious examination of the history taught to us.

2. ""The Deciphered Indus Script" authored by Natwar Jha and N.S Rajaram claimed that they have deciphered a script in Indus valley which they attributed to mid-forth millennium BCE, to put the history back for another one thousand years.Claims were made that one of the tablet even mentions river Saraswati of Rg Veda." - Claims have been made from almost the very beginning. A claim can be made and then it is discussed. You can't refute a claim that's not made. So, I would welcome any research into it. Certainly if mention of any river is found, I would consider it a welcome sign as well. Just because a particular discovery speaks of a Hindu past does not mean it's not true.

3. "Indus Valley Civilization an essentially Sanskritized civilization" - not at all. Sanskrit was nowhere in the scene, in the form we know it as at least. Not sure if he said that.

4. "you can imagine how hollow actually this ideology" - What is the ideology? I don't see anything wrong with a closer re-examination of Indian history. The discourse has been entirely dominated by Irfan Habib and co. While I admit they portray one picture of the past, it is essential we see the other pictures as well. Western historians have been far more objective in dealing with history in the subcontinent. Especially post independence that is.

5. "Savarkar's other statements like Hindi was used as a common dialect before advent of Islam surely questions his intellectual merit" - Please quote him, not sure if he said that. If he did, he was wrong. He was no prophet. I would consider that his mistake.

6. "constitution still fails to guarantee the economic prosperity of its minorities and Lower caste Hindus" - Ideally the constitution should not have made a difference. This is called reverse discrimination. It's like punishing someone for their ancestor's crimes. By that yardstick one would be correct in arresting the Muslims of Mysore for the forceful subjugation and conversion of Moplahs (among other groups)
Say the reservations for example. - Had there been enough opportunities for all, reservations would have been unnecessary.

7. 'Savarkar was preaching of Austia and Turkey as ideal state' - Austria and Turkey of which time. I was a great admirer of Kemalist Turkey. Now it is history though.

marxist history is based on theories and super imposition of the historian's own bias,not time travel.

Such solemn truths built on thin ice can also be challenged by counter theories,just tit for tat.

I see it fair game.

India's nationalism is a great success amidst failure of much more homogenous federations like yugoslavia and i see no confusion,i only see confusion amongst people whose theories have failed the test of time.

Very true, but excessive religious zeal is dangerous. That is one aspect of Kemal that I greatly admire. And Erdogan's rise was a foregone conclusion. In fact the Turks must be congratulated that they resisted such thought for such a long period of time.

Most of Orhan Pamuk's books talk of such a mahol existing in Turkey.

 

[INDIC]

yeah and that's normal,thats when Hindus became a united political force instead of being divided amongst many states.

Partition was highly necessary to have a buffer state on the north west and have stability in the mainland.

It was much more than Hindu-Muslim issue. Foremost issue was the constituent Assembly, the Muslim League was creating extreme hurdles in the constituent of Constituent Assembly that was going to frame the constitution for India. Second was the princely states, the Muslim League was against princely states losing their autonomy/independence that means they had no wish for a strong India. Also, the policy of Muslims league wasn't cleared about feudalism, in Bengal they supported the anti-feudal movement because the landlords were Hindus while in Punjab-Sindh they were pro-feudals because the landlords were Muslims. You may find it interesting that the first constituent assembly of Pakistan was incompetent and failed to write a constitution which was widely criticized across Pakistan.

 

[bronxbull]

I see no surprise in that,The Hindu Mahasabha & the Congress knew that very well.

The hindu mahasabha represented the elite of india prior to british rule & the congress the new clerks of the company.

regardless,it was very obvious,the intentions of the muslim league.

But for the funniest part is our indian pseudos coming with random logic to defend their choices.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

With their exclusionary philosophy and practices.
I have never made a secret of the fact that I consider the Sangh Parivar the single biggest threat to India.

I consider the Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains etc to be the single biggest threat to you.