What's new

Not so secular India

What, you can change your caste just like that?

What about all those Dalits who were burned to death by mobs? Couldn't they just say "OK now I am higher caste" and thus save their own lives?

You can worry about the 30 million Hans killed by Mao.

And another 50 million who couldn't make it across the great leap.

And the 350 million who were not even allowed to be born.

Can they change their ethnicity from "Han" and escape that fate?
 
And then Indians always claim that Budda was an Indian, despite the well-known fact that Buddha was born in Nepal. :lol:

And not to mention the fact that India did not even exist back then.

They love to claims things like the Indus Valley Civilization despite it being located in modern day Pakistan, and Buddha even though he was born in Nepal. They always seem to forget that India was created in 1947.

Granted India did not exist then. but did Nepal and Pakistan exist at that time ?

Conclusion - neither India,Nepal or Pakistan existed at that time. It was just Bharat and as the inheritors of that legacy, that culture we have the rightful claim over them. Ofcourse modern day Nepalese too can share that heritage as they too have maintained their ancient culture.

p.s.; I always see Chinese members post links about their sooper dooper IQ...I am starting to doubt those researches when I see posts like these.
 
Just related. Meaning it 'influences' certain cultural practises. Not all. I though you were intelligent enough to understand that, My mistake, should have been more clear.

And the dance continues...
Your words, and the logical inference, was crystal clear.

You even went so far as to say Indian Muslims should accept the new reality and adjust their behavior accordingly.

So what about the usual line parroted by you guys - that Islam in India was spread peacefully by the Sufis and all the bloodshed is a humbug by Hindutva forces ? ;)

Again this is not the first time you self-contradict yourself. I accept your apology.

Try reading again. Your comment and my response was about 'welcoming' foreign arrivals, not the conversion of local folks. Or 'converts' as you guys contemptuously refer to them.

I still can't figure out why being a 'convert' is such a dirty thing for you guys. Perhaps it's yet another sign of Hindutva's legendary 'tolerance'.


Modern myth popularised by Marxist historians.

Oh dear. The secularists, the communalists, and the Marxists, are all intent on distorting the true glorious history as told by Hindutva.
 
And then Indians always claim that Budda was an Indian, despite the well-known fact that Buddha was born in Nepal. :lol:

And not to mention the fact that India did not even exist back then.

They love to claims things like the Indus Valley Civilization despite it being located in modern day Pakistan, and Buddha even though he was born in Nepal. They always seem to forget that India was created in 1947.

You and your emotional tantrums..
india is a geographical entity but as a historical entity we have similarities across borders both East and West..
Himalayas acted as a natural boundary and the oceans acted as boundary in the south.
within this geography (including Pakistan) we have a lot of cultural similarities and shared history
I can call Buddha as my own as much as a Nepali can
Coming back to your biased geographical understanding
Let me consider from your biased viewpoint as a geographical entity
Buddha was born as Siddhartha in Nepal but did you know where Buddhism was born ? Where Buddha got awakeining

Do you the culutral similarities, the language similarities etc etc between Buddhism and other religions ?

did you know about the great Buddhist empires in India ?

Did you know who propagated Buddhism to China, Sril lanka and the ASEAN region ?

You and your emotional biased entity will keep on dividing history and perceive every Indian as calling you by your physical appearance..

Remain in your own world.. Carry on with your own perception ...
 
There are many others videos of hindu extremists but i just post this video to let him him know that extremist are there in hinduism as well because he heard from mullah that hindu are idol worshipper which they are any ways..:p

It ain't a mud-slinging fest brah.There's this myth on this forum that "minorities"(I don't know who in their right minds would term Indian Muslims as a minority considering their demographics)are silenced in India or aren't allowed to preach or follow proselytization.To the contrary,they are not only free to preach but apply far worse tactics like denouncing Hinduism which in my personal opinion is in bad taste.

For the simple minded folks,it amounts as an affront worthy of retaliation.Notice the chain of events and you would realize that if there was no needling by minorities ,these saffron idiots wouldn't have anything to blabber about in the first place.

I am yet to visit a single temple that dishes garbage on other religions to prove their point.Neither do temples sell booklets and CDs poking fun of minority religions and nor do Hindu representatives knock on your door asking "Have you heard about the good book of Bhagawat Gita?".I hope you do realize that the rehearsed act is for public consumption with Hindu supremacist sentiments;nowhere near the level of institutionalized hatred propagated by the other side.
 
See, these carefully crafted speeches about "tolerance" fall flat in the face of reality and the sentiments expressed right here by you guys about Islam, Christianity, etc.

You are not taking it in the correct spirit. I just wanted to convey that people look at things differently based on where they are coming from.

Just as you "did not understand" some aspects of how people "can be Hindu" without following a common set of rituals etc., many of us "do not understand" some of the things with other faith systems.

Doesn't mean we have to be intolerant of them.

Not to mention that pesky little detail of Buddhism being almost wiped out from India by these oh-so-tolerant Hindus.

Never mind.
 
I know you can't resist your tendency to launch into stock soapbox rants, but this discussion is not about Pakistan.

It was not even about the treatment of Muslims in India.

And not about the higher proportion of Muslims in the ME compared to other parts.

This is just the flow of the debate!

Why throw a hissy fit just on the mention of Pakistan?

You know why? Because you know your own reality better than others. What you demand from others, you just don't deliver in your own societies.

If you have nothing to contribute, but want to post anyway, try finding another thread which is about Pakistan and where you can continue with your Pakistan bashing while collecting thanks from fellow Indians.

I am frankly puzzled by many of you people's obsession with these virtual thanks. They don't really matter as far as I am, concerned.

When a topic is started, many times drawing parallels is only natural. No need to throw a hissy fit or cry "off topic" as many of you cry every time your own reality is mentioned.

Why afraid of critically examining yourself when you want to do it to others?

It's all about relationship management and whether Indian businesses overdo it to the amusement of their clients.

It is all about your prejudices and that of your fellow countrymen who can't keep perspective about these things.


We buy oil from them. That is the bulk of it. They get paid hard cash for it.

No one is doing any favors to the other.

Here we go again. Yet another off-topic soapbox speech.

I know. No talk of your own reality.

That tends to offend you.

Even though it is you who brought in the Arabs needlessly. That was apparently "on topic", their own treatment of minorities is "off topic"!

Ajab teri maya, ajab tere khel
Chachhunder ke sar me, chameli ka tel. ;)
 
It was not even about the treatment of Muslims in India.

And not about the higher proportion of Muslims in the ME compared to other parts.

This is just the flow of the debate!

The topic is Indian secularism. There is no "flow" into Pakistan unless you divert the "flow" yourself.

Why throw a hissy fit just on the mention of Pakistan?

"hissy fit"? Funny!

I am frankly puzzled by many of you people's obsession with these virtual thanks. They don't really matter as far as I am, concerned.

Because it shows you are more interested in playing to the gallery with off-topic soapbox speeches than in addressing the topic itself.

No need to throw a hissy fit or cry "off topic" as many of you cry every time your own reality is mentioned.

"hissy fit" again? Is that your favorite new phrase that you will try to squeze in everywhere now?

Why afraid of critically examining yourself when you want to do it to others?

Nobody's afraid of anything. The only way to discuss something is to stay focussed on the topic.

If you want to discuss Pakistan or Arabs, there are always plenty of threads for that.

It is all about your prejudices and that of your fellow countrymen who can't keep perspective about these things.

We buy oil from them. That is the bulk of it. They get paid hard cash for it.

No one is doing any favors to the other.

Like I wrote earlier, it is about "relationship management".

India receives 45% of its international remittance from GCC countries | TwoCircles.net

I know. No talk of your own reality.

That tends to offend you.

Even though it is you who brought in the Arabs needlessly. That was apparently "on topic", their own treatment of minorities is "off topic"!

Reality check: it was KS who posted the link talking about Indians in GCC.
 
The topic is Indian secularism. There is no "flow" into Pakistan unless you divert the "flow" yourself.

"hissy fit"? Funny!

Because it shows you are more interested in playing to the gallery with off-topic soapbox speeches than in addressing the topic itself.

"hissy fit" again? Is that your favorite new phrase that you will try to squeze in everywhere now?

Nobody's afraid of anything. The only way to discuss something is to stay focussed on the topic.

If you want to discuss Pakistan or Arabs, there are always plenty of threads for that.

Like I wrote earlier, it is about "relationship management".

India receives 45% of its international remittance from GCC countries | TwoCircles.net

You need to look at the context and not fly off the handle at the mere mention of Pakistan or Arabs.

Like you claim that India wants to convince Arabs of minority treatment? Really!

Do they need to be convinced when their own record is the worst?

Do we care for them so much? Are they such political powerhouse? Don't we see their performance against the tiny Israel?

Indians (and Pakistanis and other Asians) are building their country and doing things those lazy arses can't do themselves. They will be likely riding camels as soon as the oil runs out (or even earlier).

They are not doing any favors by paying a fraction of what they pay to the whites or any other nationality to the immigrant workers who are building and running their countries.

Reality check: it was KS who posted the link talking about Indians in GCC.

I am talking about your mental gymnastics here with the imagination running wild about even individual Indian companies decision making progress.

And the inability to understand the basic facts about immigration and diaspora and the factors driving them.

Its not that the basic IQ is lacking to understand it. It is the prejudice that prevents being objective about issues.
 
Maybe we will have democracy in a few decades time. Wen Jiabao has already said that political reform is inevitable, it is just a matter of timing.

That doesn't mean we're going to start burning Dalits alive though like they do in India, we'll be a democracy like those in East Asia.

Hans (even the semi cooked or uncooked ones) have never been about democracy or free thought.

You are used to blindly follow orders, even when (especially when?) you don't understand why they were given in the first place.

Even thousands of years back, you were forced to send one member from each family to build that pathetic "great wall". Two hundreds of you cooked and semi cooked and uncooked ones died for every Kilometer of that pathetic wall that didn't work when it was most needed.

Your ancestors spent generations building that wall far away from all civilization. They would get one messenger per generation or so to convey a new order from a new emperor.

They didn't know what they were doing, why it was required and why the orders kept on changing.

They just did because they were told to do it.

A perfect description of a CCP zombie.

And a generation of those spoilt forced single kids who don't know anything else.

An illuminating tale of how the world of the Han works.

The cosmic mystery of the Great Wall

On a recent visit to the Great Wall of China, I was reminded of a short story by Kafka which is an allegorical account about the building of this monumental barrier whose purpose, supposedly, was to keep out the 'barbarians from the North'. In Kafka's story, the construction of the Wall had begun many years previously. Generations of workers, men and women, had toiled to build the barricade. Situated in a remote region, they formed a community cut off from contact from the rest of the world. Born on the construction site, the members of this isolated population grew into adulthood, reached old age, and died there, being replaced by their children, and their children after them.

Every now and then, generally after a gap of a generation or two, a messenger from the outside world would reach them on horseback. These infrequent messengers claimed to be part of a long relay chain through which the orders of the emperor, sitting in his palace in the distant imperial city, reached them. So far away was the emperor and his palace, that no single messenger could traverse the distance between the capital city and the site of the Wall. The imperial commands had to be relayed through a series of couriers.

The commands were never in writing, but always oral. The workers on the Wall had no assurance as to whether the self-proclaimed messenger was in fact in the employ of the emperor or an imposter. Even if he were not an imposter, the orally issued orders, passed on from mouth to mouth, could easily have got hopelessly garbled in transit. Furthermore, the distance that the messengers had to travel was so great, and took so much time to cover, that the emperor who had issued the latest set of orders may well be dead, replaced by a successor who could well want something entirely different from what his predecessor had in mind.

What were the workers on the Wall to do? Unquestioningly obey the instructions given to them by the latest messenger, even if they contradicted all previous commands? Ignore all commands and follow their own inclinations in pursuing their lifelong task, even at the risk of inviting imperial retribution if not on themselves then on their descendants? There were no ready-made and reliable answers to these and other questions. The only reality the workers knew was that of the Wall, and that it had to be built. Or did it? What if on that immeasurably distant throne now sat an emperor who required that the Wall no longer be built, that instead it be demolished? What then?

As in the case of the other questions, there was no answer to this. So the workers continued to do what they'd always done: carry on building the Wall, following the instructions given to them by the messengers, and hoping that they were doing the right thing. If indeed there were a right thing, as opposed to a wrong thing, to do in their self-enclosed universe.


Kafka's parable about the Wall, like his other writings, has been interpreted to imply the inscrutability of the powers that shape our existence. Who are we? What are we doing here and why? What is the purpose and meaning of everything, if at all there are such things as purpose and meaning?

Every now and then, messengers in the form of messiahs, godmen, saints, gurus, come to us with instructions from an infinitely far-off Emperor telling us what we should do, and why. Like Kafka's workers, we are given no assurances about the authenticity or otherwise of these messengers. We do not know if an Emperor exists, or if he does, that he is aware of us and of our insignificant doings.

Like Kafka's workers we are left with a lot of unanswerable questions. And a job at hand, to build each our own Wall: to lead our lives as best we can, taking full responsibility for what we do. We can't pass the buck for our mistakes - the wrongs that we do to ourselves and to each other - to a messenger, or an Emperor who may or may not be real.

The only thing that's real is the next decision to make, the next block of stone you place on the Wall. Careful now. Don't drop it. On your own toes, or on mine.
 
So your above claim is baseless and illogical.

The "above claim" was pathetic!

Exactly. So you agree that companies try to put forward candidates that will "form a bridge" with the client. That was my point also.

Indian businesses in the Gulf deliberately put forward this image of Muslims being proportionally integrated in mainstream Indian society, even though Sachar gave the lie to this nonsense. The Indian companies skew the number of Muslims only in work groups destined for the Gulf. There is no similar representation of Muslims in Indian diaspora in Europe, the Americas or elsewhere. In other words, the Indian diaspora in the Gulf is specifically tailored to give a false impression to Arab clients.

If anyone thinks that the above two quotes are "exactly" the same, he needs to go see a shrink.

Real fast! ;)
 
Whatever level they are, they don't just pick up and leave by themselves. They have to be sponsored by a company, Indian or foreign.

I guess even you can't deny that the vast majority go abroad on their own volition, not on "deputation".

So yes, they leave by themselves and find a job where they can. Same as for Pakistanis.

So how does it prove the absurdities that you claimed earlier?

But baham ka ilaaz to hakim Lukmaan ke pass bhi nahi tha.
 
The only minorities you 'welcomed' were those too weak to pose any threat to native Hinduism.

Ever given a thought that this "you" included probably "you" as well?

That is the difference between "you" and "us".

And it is irreconcilable.

You think conversion changed your history.

---------- Post added at 10:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:46 PM ----------

Oh please, religion is just one angle. When we send account reps to Africa, we don't make sure to send black guys.

Yes, it was a Ganesh figure, but the Indian Christians I was talking about were the three who were assigned to be on-site at our location and they happened to be the only Christians in the entire company back home (at least 200+ people).

I have never seen any customer being concerned about the religion of the people sent in to do his work.

Not in the West and from what I hear, not even in the gulf.

So as usual you are hallucinating.
 
I still can't figure out why being a 'convert' is such a dirty thing for you guys. Perhaps it's yet another sign of Hindutva's legendary 'tolerance'.

If I may?

It is because of this:

The only minorities you 'welcomed' were those too weak to pose any threat to native Hinduism.

This "you" is the cause of my contempt. Not the change in the way one worships God.
 
Back
Top Bottom