Mourn idea of India, but don’t forget that the idea of people is changing too

[Ajay Ghatak]

Didn't you read about the after-effects of the Delhi riots where the Delhi Police, which is controlled by the Central Home Ministry, putting legal cases upon progressives like Umar Khalid and Sitaram Yechury just because these people voiced against ( or supposedly ) the proposed CAA act and participated in sit-ins ? All this while elements of the central ruling party or those indirectly connected, have been clearly known to incite rioters in the same Delhi riots ?

Muslim terrorists were attacking Hindus in New Delhi. Hindus retaliated and taught a good lesson to Islamic terrorists. The end.

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

The introduction ( preamble ) to India's Constitution declares India to be a Secular and Socialist country so why should any religion in India be given the foremost place ?

You do know the following don't you?

1. The constitution of India was forced on India by a foreign trained person who had a vandetta against Hindus.

2. Secular was forced and inserted during an emergency without no democratic process.

3. While Muslims chose Islam as basis of Pakistan, Hindus never had any representation in deciding what kind of country India will be. Instead power went with foreign trained left leaning secular who fashioned India as a anti Hindu state where Hinduism is relegated to a secondary status and Islam and Christianity were made primary using specific sections to protect and propagate such religions.

4. Ambedkar, the very architect of this unfair and unjust constitution NEVER won a popular election after his vile act.

5. Hindu representing political parties were late to the game. Infact unlike Muslim league, there was no Hindu political party in pre-independence elections of India. Bhartiya Jana Sangh came in picture for the first time in 1950 and lacked any political experience which Congress and Muslim Leage had in abundance.

6. Hindu hence, lacked any political representation like Muslims had in polity of the nation. It was only in late 90s Hindus started to finally get some bare minimum representation.

7. By 2014, Hindus started to vote on religious lines : like Muslims always had. And now they are being accused of dictatorship. No one accuses of Muslims of having a dictatorship in Pakistan. We need a Hindu equivalent of Pakistan.

 

[letsrock]

You do know the following don't you?

1. The constitution of India was forced on India by a foreign trained person who had a vandetta against Hindus.

2. Secular was forced and inserted during an emergency without no democratic process.

3. While Muslims chose Islam as basis of Pakistan, Hindus never had any representation in deciding what kind of country India will be. Instead power went with foreign trained left leaning secular who fashioned India as a anti Hindu state where Hinduism is relegated to a secondary status and Islam and Christianity were made primary using specific sections to protect and propagate such religions.

4. Ambedkar, the very architect of this unfair and unjust constitution NEVER won a popular election after his vile act.

5. Hindu representing political parties were late to the game. Infact unlike Muslim league, there was no Hindu political party in pre-independence elections of India. Bhartiya Jana Sangh came in picture for the first time in 1950 and lacked any political experience which Congress and Muslim Leage had in abundance.

6. Hindu hence, lacked any political representation like Muslims had in polity of the nation. It was only in late 90s Hindus started to finally get some bare minimum representation.

7. By 2014, Hindus started to vote on religious lines : like Muslims always had. And now they are being accused of dictatorship. No one accuses of Muslims of having a dictatorship in Pakistan. We need a Hindu equivalent of Pakistan.

I agree that india and its system was forced. I also agree that "hindus" need a space where their religious system and beleifs reign supreme - where cow is revered and people need to change their eating habits and also where hindus have a right to decide where a structure is a temple or not and others have the duty to surrender their masjids or churches.

But that space is not defined by mcmahon line drawn up by british. Let there be a referendum - infact other than some sections of muslims in the form of seperate electorate in 1930s - no one else got a voice as to how they want to live.

Let there be a referundum on how to tamils want to live - they want their own nation or live under hindi official language india - lets ask nagas and kashmiris too.

Lets finally ask people of india what they want instead of running with british raj.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Indians need to reawaken to their true regional identities. What do Gujaratis have to do with Tamils? Bengalis with Sikhs? Both are simply slaves to some vague notion of a 'central' government that seems unable to deliver either development or civil rights.

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

But that space is not defined by mcmahon line drawn up by british. Let there be a referendum - infact other than some sections of muslims in the form of seperate electorate in 1930s - no one else got a voice as to how they want to live.

First, the line you are groping for was called Radcliffe line. Factual mistake.

Second, India and Pakistan got independence by this act : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Independence_Act_1947

Among others, there was this clause : "division of British India into the two new dominions of India and Pakistan, with effect from 15 August 1947."

After this, there was NO question of any further referendum or bullshit like this. Muslim League which won ALL the muslim seats in 1945-46 election in India got their Pakistan, so Muslims have no business asking for any more space in India. Simple.

If you remove the 20% Muslims from polity of India remaining foreign religion minorities are too small to matter.

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

Let there be a referundum on how to tamils want to live - they want their own nation or live under hindi official language india - lets ask nagas and kashmiris too.

The partition of British India happened on religion basis. If you want to promote regionalism or lingustic divide, feel free. It has been tried for long time and nothing came out of it. That regional or lingustic schism is not even relevant here. India with a federal structure can accomodate diversity of indigenous languages. Its the foreign religions that have no place in India.

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

Lets finally ask people of india what they want instead of running with british raj.

India has always asked that question. It happens in every election. The fact that BJP got majority in parliament as well as has enjoyed a sweeping coverage of almost all the states of India is proof enough that people of India are in line with Hindu nationalism.

India is a union of states, each having its own linguistic identity and unqiue cultural history. Islam and Christianity are foreign to India and have no place in Indian polity as Islam asked for and got its place in Pakistan.

 

[letsrock]

First, the line you are groping for was called Radcliffe line. Factual mistake.

Second, India and Pakistan got independence by this act : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Independence_Act_1947

Among others, there was this clause : "division of British India into the two new dominions of India and Pakistan, with effect from 15 August 1947."

After this, there was NO question of any further referendum or bullshit like this.

So that clause made by a Brit is super sacred to you? then you may consider secular, socialists also as sacred.

Why so scared of asking your own "hindus" whether they want to be with india or their own country?

 

[letsrock]

India has always asked that question. It happens in every election. The fact that BJP got majority in parliament as well as has enjoyed a sweeping coverage of almost all the states of India is proof enough that people of India are in line with Hindu nationalism.

India is a union of states, each having its own linguistic identity and unqiue cultural history. Islam and Christianity are foreign to India and have no place in Indian polity as Islam asked for and got its place in Pakistan.

Was there ever a question of whether you want a separate nation or now ? there was no such question and india till now never had the guts to ask such question despite promises to UN in case of kashmir. BJP or DMK is like pepsi cola or coca cola. No real choice.

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

Why so scared of asking your own "hindus" whether they want to be with india or their own country?

They have been asked this question time and again. And latest when they were asked this question was in 2014 and then 2019. At that time were unanimously in favour with BJP led alliance and even BJP itself. No more proof is needed.

Compare and contrast this with 1945/46 general election when entire Muslim community was completely aligned with Muslim League, religiously.

 

[letsrock]

They have been asked this question time and again. And latest when they were asked this question was in 2014 and then 2019. At that time were unanimously in favour with BJP led alliance and even BJP itself. No more proof is needed.

Compare and contrast this with 1945/46 general election when entire Muslim community was completely aligned with Muslim League, religiously.

hahaha - were they asked the question do you want to be with india or your own nation ?

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

Was there ever a question of whether you want a separate nation or now ? there was no such question and india till now never had the guts to ask such question despite promises to UN in case of kashmir. BJP or DMK is like pepsi cola or coca cola. No real choice.

Was there a demand that a separate nation is needed? Why the hell should rest of the nation ask such stupid question. If any state wants that they ask it. It is negotiated and most of time a separate state has been more than enough to fulfill the need for such regional demands. Chattisgarh, Uttaranchal, Telangana come to mind.

The few time separatism is raised, it was only by few vocal and violents. Most of time, crushing the violents led to stoppage of demand. Punjab being the case.

Kashmir has been an un-integrated part of India due to 370. With 370 gone, it will be assimilated.

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

hahaha - were they asked the question do you want to be with india or your own nation ?

Did those folks ask this question? If you are hungry then you will ask for food. Why the hell rest of the society ask you if you are hungry every now and then.

You are not even applying common sense here.

There were demands of autonomy like Telangana and Uttarakhand becuase of their unique situation. They were totally fine with a separate state within India proving that regional diversity can be well accomodated by federal structure.

Only people who have raised the demand consistently for separate country are few districts of Kashmir Valley. Even there, there is no consensus if they want a separate country or they want to merge with Pakistan. Too small of a population to represent India or Heck Kashmir itself.

 

[letsrock]

Was there a demand that a separate nation is needed? Why the hell should rest of the nation ask such stupid question. If any state wants that they ask it. It is negotiated and most of time a separate state has been more than enough to fulfill the need for such regional demands. Chattisgarh, Uttaranchal, Telangana come to mind.

The few time separatism is raised, it was only by few vocal and violents. Most of time, crushing the violents led to stoppage of demand. Punjab being the case.

Kashmir has been an un-integrated part of India due to 370. With 370 gone, it will be assimilated.

Why speculate like this. You wanted to create an entirely new india with hindu writ running supreme - atleast on principles you should have no problem in asking how "hindus" would like to live. And regarding why - well apart from the fact that india has seen neither peace nor prosperity in last 78 years - with even top classes hoping to emigrate - you yourself are not happy with india - are you not ? a great time to re-orgnizate the entire territory in accordance with people wishes

 

[Ajay Ghatak]

Why speculate like this. You wanted to create an entirely new india with hindu writ running supreme - atleast on principles you should have no problem in asking how "hindus" would like to live. And regarding why - well apart from the fact that india has seen neither peace nor prosperity in last 78 years - with even top classes hoping to emigrate - you yourself are not happy with india - are you not ? a great time to re-orgnizate the entire territory in accordance with people wishes

Sure, first lets remove the foreigners out of Indian polity and then lets see how many Hindus/Sikhs/Buddhists do not want to live in such an India. If they are few they can vote with their feet. If they are numerous, then a referrendum comes. From past 7 years, it seems former is the case.

History has shown that Hindus/Sikhs/Buddhists can coexist. Only foreign religions are the problem.