SIPRA
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2019
- Messages
- 13,549
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
So why the inferiority complex? Superior nations wiped the floor with inferior nations routinely until recent history, even up until ww2. No such concept as universal human rights existed until the mid 20th century.
In England, there is no drama about Vikings and Romans even though they brutally occupied and slaughtered their way through these lands. English people are just far too mature to hold entire races and legacies on some eternal pedestal of shame. Do you know what they did to the angles and the Celts??
Still, I don't see people demanding York be stripped of its Viking name and Viking history being erased.
The mughals were one of many many nations who plainly wrecked the inferior feudalistic gold-hoarding animistic societies of the time all over the subcontinent. These city states couldn't mount a reasonable defence against most invaders. Mughals seized an opportunity. If they hadn't, someone else would have. Do you not realise this harsh truth? So why selectively curse the mughals?
Intriguing how you contradict yourself routinely btw, by saying at times you have nothing against the Mughal aspect of your history then almost moments later, spewing drivel about why you clearly have a problem with them.
The whole Hindustani mentality needs a paradigm change.
Hindus wiped out Buddhists from the subcontinent. When mughals came along, it was entirely in keeping with the Hindu concept of karma.
Hindutva complains about Muslims being invaders, as though aryans themselves weren't invaders. As though Hindus in general didn't wage war against one another. As though countless Hindus didn't ally with the Muslim armies against other Hindus. Sometimes Hindus allied with mughals to fight against muslim enemies of both.
It is Hindutva that reduces your history to this bizarre and inaccurate dichotomy, either muslim or Hindu with no room for both.
If you are truly as rational and free from bias as you pretend to be, you should reflect on these matters.
It is compulsion of these elite Hindus, Sanghis and Bhakts to be selective in reading the history. You better strike your head with a thick wall, in place of arguing with them.
To them Sultan Mehmood Ghaznavi and Sultan Shahabuddin Ghori, who were born and brought up in Indus Valley, were "invaders"; but the Aryans, Scythians and the likes, were tourists, who came to this land on proper immigration visas.
Also, if a Maratha General attacks Punjab or Bengal and plays havoc with it, no problem, since he is "son of soil"; but if a Muslim General launches an attack, from Ghazni, on Peshawar, he is an "invader", and a looter and plunderer, as well.
Further, all the Muslims, currently living, in subcontinent are the descendants of those people, who were converted to Islam by force and coercion; but the Hindus are the scions of those Hindus, who adopted Hinduism, when Big Bang happened.
To add, all the ancient and medieval Hindu kings and Rajas were saints and had nothing to do with looting, plundering and destruction of the places of worships. Possibly, they used to collect their revenue, by begging, for running the business of the state.