RSS: No need for secularism in India; colour of flag should be turned saffron as tricolour injects c

[haviZsultan]

My off topic answer was to your off topic comment. Anyway all your comments are off topic. No one ever has opened a thread here about Lucknow, but all your comments are about Lucknow.



Any side you are on is anti-human. In fact you are the biggest galli on the name of humanity.

It is related to the topic. Whereas Pakistan is beyond the parameters of this discussion. The topic is oppression of muslims and the attempt to further Hinduize the country.

 

[Samudra Manthan]

It is related to the topic. Whereas Pakistan is beyond the parameters of this discussion. The topic is oppression of muslims and the attempt to further Hinduize the country.

Yeah so my answer was also related to the topic. I was just presenting the scale of oppression to you spanning Pakistan and India just to give you a comparative picture. Pakistan seems to be oppressing Muslims a lot more than India does. Pakistani Muslims are victims of Pakistani Muslim oppression even without attempt at Hinduising the country. Pakistani Muslims seem to be victims of further Islamizing Pakistan. End result is far more brutal than what happens in a Hinduized country.

 

[danger007]

Exactly. ONE Muslim man out of 175 million in last ..... what..... 2 months .....

This is like 1000 times less than what happens in the Muslim world

every human life is precious be it one or thousands... first learn respecting others... before you rant about religion ....

 

[haviZsultan]

Yeah so my answer was also related to the topic. I was just presenting the scale of oppression to you spanning Pakistan and India just to give you a comparative picture. Pakistan seems to be oppressing Muslims a lot more than India does. Pakistani Muslims are victims of Pakistani Muslim oppression even without attempt at Hinduising the country. Pakistani Muslims seem to be victims of further Islamizing Pakistan. End result is far more brutal than what happens in a Hinduized country.

Lucknow will go to Pakistan one day. You can keep shooting your mouth at Pakistan but it won't change the fact that it is the only hope for sub continent muslims and possibly muslims around the world.

 

[danger007]

Lucknow will go to Pakistan one day. You can keep shooting your mouth at Pakistan but it won't change the fact that it is the only hope for sub continent muslims and possibly muslims around the world.

Lucknow to pakistan... lolz man you are funny...

 

[Joe Shearer]

@Joe Shearer A negative rating for this? My god ..... this is absurd.

You can argue with the fellow. But off late, I have seen you giving negative ratings to Indian members like candies.....

You are a respected member. I hope you know negative ratings are meant for abusive, racist and troll posts. Its his pov. If it is wrong, correct it by replying. Don't dilute the powers given to you, respected sir.

@SarthakGanguly @ranjeet @Star Wars @magudi @Soumitra

Several points.

According to you, a negative rating is meant for abusive, racist and troll posts. Does religious hatred not come into this? Does that post not consist of a religious attack - this is my majoritarian decision, I will impose my will on others who do not belong to my majority and who do not sit quietly by when I say or do outrageous things due to my larger numbers?

Looked at another way, is this not a troll post? Is he not deliberately provoking the minorities?

What is the difference between a point of view and a deliberate attempt to browbeat and dominate the other?

 

[Tridibans]

Several points.

According to you, a negative rating is meant for abusive, racist and troll posts. Does religious hatred not come into this? Does that post not consist of a religious attack - this is my majoritarian decision, I will impose my will on others who do not belong to my majority and who do not sit quietly by when I say or do outrageous things due to my larger numbers?

Looked at another way, is this not a troll post? Is he not deliberately provoking the minorities?

What is the difference between a point of view and a deliberate attempt to browbeat and dominate the other?

No. Period. He did not even mention a religion. Only said for centuries India had a saffron flag (factually wrong) and he wants India to have a saffron flag again (personally I dont agree). His other posts I don't know but the one which I quoted you earlier doesn't even say any bad word for any religion.

 

[Joe Shearer]

@Joe Shearer A negative rating for this? My god ..... this is absurd.

You can argue with the fellow. But off late, I have seen you giving negative ratings to Indian members like candies.....

You are a respected member. I hope you know negative ratings are meant for abusive, racist and troll posts. Its his pov. If it is wrong, correct it by replying. Don't dilute the powers given to you, respected sir.

@SarthakGanguly @ranjeet @Star Wars @magudi @Soumitra

Further, you are impertinent to claim that I give negative ratings to Indian members, implying that these are given to them exclusively, and not, for instance, to Pakistani posters, or to Chinese posters who make objectionable posts. At this moment, the posts are from one direction only, and they are objectionable, so the negative ratings are likely to go in that direction only. If you check with the moderators, I have handed out large numbers of negative ratings to Pakistani posters who have been abusive, racist or have been trolling.

No. Period. He did not even mention a religion. Only said for centuries India had a saffron flag (factually wrong) and he wants India to have a saffron flag again (personally I dont agree). His other posts I don't know but the one which I quoted you earlier doesn't even say any bad word for any religion.

That is a very thin shield behind which to hide. Besides the Khalsa, who else, which other religious persuasion had a saffron flag? Which flag was promoted in the eighteenth century as a symbol of Hindu resurgence? He does not have to mention religion, to be intending to uplift one religion and to denigrate another religion and all its followers.

Is that the best defence that can be found for his action?

You are not understanding my point of contention. Negative ratings are reserved for something which are not only against forum rules (literally) but also unethical, abusive or damaging to the thread decorum by simply provoking others (like the daily Indo-Pak trolling. With you being so generous with these ratings, it surely is losing its importance. Instead of discouraging posters, it has now become "just another rating".

Trust me when I say this, even compared to Donatello or Syed Ali (ask any Indian members how itchy their hands are to award these ratings ), your frequency of rating people negatively are way higher the last couple of weeks.

I mean, being one of the most intelligent and senior most posters, try arguing first. Then present facts. Why directly a negative rating? (Obviously considering that the poster is not abusive or trolling... like in this particular thread).

You think trained for the purpose Sangh Parivar trolls are open to argument? Seriously? And again, I question your judgement that this religious baiting is not trolling.

 

[jamahir]

And how much scientific progressiveness you witness from likes of Libya / Syria / Iraq / Afghanistan?

iraq was quite progressed, despite nato and israeli plotting, and libya became quite developed in among other things, civil engineering, through the "great man made river" project, the biggest water transport system in history.

syria has a big industrial system centered on agriculture, oil/gas and minerals, and i am sure made good output on the scientific front this way.

afghanistan... you should ask the american government why it imposed war on that country in the 80's and did not allow progress.

we should remember ussr's scientific collaboration in each of these countries in many fields, including medicine and pharma.

besides, just before 2011, lot of sensible foreigners were becoming interested in the libyan system and if not for the war, many of the scientific among them would have migrated to libya to contribute to the world through the libyan system.

 

[CorporateAffairs]

PK Defence limited to congress bootlickers false threads.

 

[Joe Shearer]

no one is imposing anything on anyone. first tell me what is your definition of secularism?
in my home rules will be mine. same is for India. we Hindus are sons of this soil. we will decide fate of this land. people who are more loyal to saudi have no right on this land.

i am not against Islam. believe it or not i respect Islam. but i am against muslims of south asia. who are more arabs than arabs. who are loyal to arab land instead of their motherland. muslims have already divided my country i dont want that happen again.
I want India to be Hindu Rashtra where all minorities will have equal rights. that is much better than your fake secularism.

@Joe Shearer why negative rating? if you have any problem with my POV then come and debate. dont be like sissy.(sorry to say but you are acting like one)

The definition of secularism makes a difference to a mind warped by hatred of another set of people?

1. Secularism is the rigorous refusal of the state to take cognisance of any citizen's religious affiliation.
2. "....in my home rules will be mine." Bollocks. The law of the land applies. Any offence against other occupants of 'your' home will be punished under the law. You cannot beat your wife. You cannot have sex with her without her consent. You cannot assault your children. You cannot assault any other person living there. You cannot interfere with their freedom of movement, and detain them unlawfully. You are talking rubbish when you say this preposterous thing.
3. "We Hindus are sons of this soil." So are others; you have no exclusive rights to 'this' soil. Especially not to wide tracts of it which are occupied by those who are not Hindu. There was never any Hindu domination of these, there is unlikely to be any Hindu domination of these. What gives you the right to impose your value system on the residents of these parts, just because you constitute the brute majority overall?
4. "...I respect Islam." I don't; I loathe Islam as a regressive set of practices, and hate it as much as I hate other religions (with some caveats for the original form of Buddhism, not the viciously perverted versions prevalent in some parts of the world, and for the Sikh religion). It is not about hating or loving religion; in fact, if you hated all religion, you would be far more neutral, you would be a far more civic-minded citizen than if you loved religion indiscriminately. Your not hating Islam is not very useful; it allows a religion its unjust imposition on the lives of its traditional practitioners, perpetuating practices that other Muslim nations have abolished or modified far beyond the hopes and expectations of reform-minded Muslims, while allowing you to promote the horrors of your own under the excuse that as you do not hate the religion of others, no one should hate the creepy aspects of yours.
5. About people who love the Saudis. This is vicious propaganda. No Muslim automatically loves the Saudis. Very few do love them. Their own citizens hate that state. Pakistan certainly does not automatically support the Saudis. Its latest actions speak volumes. If your case is against the Salafi/ Wahhabi mindset, that is a completely different matter.

If you were able to talk sense, there would be a point in a discussion with you, and a point in making an attempt to change your mind in a positive direction. Faced with frozen prejudices like yours, there is absolutely no point in engaging in a discussion; it is a waste of time.

no one is imposing anything on anyone. first tell me what is your definition of secularism?
in my home rules will be mine. same is for India. we Hindus are sons of this soil. we will decide fate of this land. people who are more loyal to saudi have no right on this land.

i am not against Islam. believe it or not i respect Islam. but i am against muslims of south asia. who are more arabs than arabs. who are loyal to arab land instead of their motherland. muslims have already divided my country i dont want that happen again.
I want India to be Hindu Rashtra where all minorities will have equal rights. that is much better than your fake secularism.

@Joe Shearer why negative rating? if you have any problem with my POV then come and debate. dont be like sissy.(sorry to say but you are acting like one)

As for being a sissy, I neither need your certificate nor that of anybody else. It does speak for itself when strong members, known to be able to stand up and duke it out with the strongest hostile members, alone or in bunches, ask me to stay on a thread and support them. You might ask the older Indians what I stand for, and whether it has been possible to shift me by mounting a collective attack on me.

 

[Tridibans]

Further, you are impertinent to claim that I give negative ratings to Indian members, implying that these are given to them exclusively, and not, for instance, to Pakistani posters, or to Chinese posters who make objectionable posts. At this moment, the posts are from one direction only, and they are objectionable, so the negative ratings are likely to go in that direction only. If you check with the moderators, I have handed out large numbers of negative ratings to Pakistani posters who have been abusive, racist or have been trolling.



That is a very thin shield behind which to hide. Besides the Khalsa, who else, which other religious persuasion had a saffron flag? Which flag was promoted in the eighteenth century as a symbol of Hindu resurgence? He does not have to mention religion, to be intending to uplift one religion and to denigrate another religion and all its followers.

Is that the best defence that can be found for his action?



You think trained for the purpose Sangh Parivar trolls are open to argument? Seriously? And again, I question your judgement that this religious baiting is not trolling.

The exact points that you just raised... the Khalsa thing and Hindu resurgence.... is what was expected of you IN REPLY TO HIS POST.

What I meant for Indian members is that off late you have been awarding these ratings in Indian threads only. I haven't seen you around on the others threads recently (pro freedom movement in P-OK, Su-35 to Pak, etc) where many negative ratings were given for fun and later reversed by SlavDefence.... Might be a co-incidence or your thread preferences... I will leave it to you.... but this is what I saw and hence I said.... only to Indians (obviously meaning in Indian threads).

Secondly, what you mean by Sangh trained trolls? Are you an IT- Spy or NSA who can track ip's of users to know whether he is Sangh parivar or not? Isn't it highly biased view? You may disagree with the poster... but how can you claim anything personal about him?

Same thing when @gau8av asked you about your professional background (something on those lines) you said you have been given the authority of giving ratings to others hence its your prerogative and will not mind not giving any explanation. ( a polite way of saying... I am the responsible one... you guys are not ). Isn't it a moral high ground unidirectionally taken by you?

Anyways.... lets leave it at that. I agree you are a responsible and knowledgeable poster (hence the 'tag' on you) and I trust your judgement generally....while in this one case I had some reservations which I posted already.

 

[danger007]

PK Defence limited to congress bootlickers false threads.

Congress bootlickers??? you are trying to say those who don't accept What RSS or religious org says are Congress bootlickers in other means sickulers for some people. ..

 

[Spectre]

That is a very thin shield behind which to hide. Besides the Khalsa, who else, which other religious persuasion had a saffron flag? Which flag was promoted in the eighteenth century as a symbol of Hindu resurgence? He does not have to mention religion, to be intending to uplift one religion and to denigrate another religion and all its followers.
.

I am the last person who would take up the case of RSS folks as what the hell I am not even their target audience not being of the religion they pander to but all the same here I go:

The practice of secularism in India is way different from it's intended definition which was separation of Religion and state. The different political parties pander to their respective community - indeed some have their sole identity as community specific party. We don't live in a country we wish for - If people see one community being pandered to then it is inevitable it will lead to some politician pandering the other community thus igniting a race of sorts and when countered the refrain would be They did it first.

Once the Pandora's Box has been opened by Rajiv Gandhi as has been rightly pointed out by @Bang Galore in his posts - this was bound to happen and by this I mean Hindu Resurgence in response to Muslim appeasement. You might as well blame Gravity for the difference it would make.

Now let us get to Specifics - What exactly are RSS and the Bhaks are doing? - How harmful is it to Indian Unity? - Are the fears exaggerated?

RSS as a institution stands for following mission:

The Hindu culture is the life-breath of Hindusthan. It is therefore clear that if Hindusthan is to be protected, we should first nourish the Hindu culture. If the Hindu culture perishes in Hindusthan itself, and if the Hindu society ceases to exist, it will hardly be appropriate to refer to the mere geographical entity that remains as Hindusthan. Mere geographical lumps do not make a nation.The entire society should be in such a vigilant and organized condition that no one would dare to cast an evil eye on any of our points of honour.

Strength, it should be remembered, comes only through organization. It is therefore the duty of every Hindu to do his best to consolidate the Hindu society. The Sangh is just carrying out this supreme task.The present fate of the country cannot be changed unless lakhs of young men dedicate their entire lifetime for that cause. To mould the minds of our youth towards that end is the supreme aim of the Sangh.

Vision and Mission

I agree they speak of Hindu resurgence - but where is the Muslim denigration? Or Sir do you believe one accompanies the other? If that is the case then all Muslim Institutions have been guilty of the same crime.

In practice though - fears stem from what would a Hindu who is conscious of his rights as a equal citizen of India and would not consent to mockery of his religion (slaughter of cows which are equivalent to a goddess) and practices do? This is in sharp contradiction to definition of secularism but not the way it has been practiced in India. This is where the real world and the text book world collide. As long as Muslims were allowed to get away with it - that was fine in the name of protection of Minority rights but allowing Hindus to impose their will would result in chaos and would render many parts of our constitution which protects our basic freedoms.

In short Hindus asserting their will make India a Hindu country not a secular one - this is the fear and to a large extent it is justifiable

Their are two solutions in my humble opinion:

1. Practice Secularism in it's true spirit which entail

a. Scrapping all religion specific laws including various Hindu and Muslim inheritance and Marriage acts. Implementation of Uniform civil code.
b. Ban all religion specific parties
c. Ensure absolute freedom of basic rights which allows anyone to eat anything anywhere - anyone to say anything including things which may be insulting to other religions.
d. No special benefits and affirmative action.

2. Scrap Secularism which would entail

a. All communities have their own laws specific to their religion
b. Every religion specific community has a proportional share of govt resources, jobs, seats in schools and colleges, armed forces etc. No merit system inter-religion.
c. Extensive negative lists banning everything which might offend any community - no rights to privacy, speech, eating etc

Regards

 

[Joe Shearer]

why are you bringing faiths between? i already said i have no problem with islam. i have problem with muslims of south asia. that means i am against particular group of people because of their wrong doing in past. and i want it should not happen in future.

Since you evidently have only a shallow knowledge of history, this is a conclusion that you will find possible. The truth remains, and it is on record, that it was hate-mongers like Savarkar, the gutless toady of the British, and Tilak, a bigot, even as he was a brave patriot and inveterate opponent of the British, as well as a martyr to the cause of freedom, who brought in the Two Nation Theory. Your problems with the Muslims of south Asia are rooted elsewhere , not in them.

Please also do not bother to sell the old, moth-eaten story that the Muslim League wanted partition, or were responsible for partition. If you do not know the facts, you are doing nothing but depending on your anti-Muslim prejudice, which is why you got a negative rating. A deserved one.

I have seen your posts. you are particularly hostile towards Hindus. and you have soft corner for Pakistanis. I suspect you are false flagged Pakistani or traitor.

No.

That is the conclusion of a propaganda-spouting Sangh Parivar apparatchik.

I am against Hindutvavadi, not particularly against Hindus, not any more than I am against Muslims, or Christians, or Jews, or Buddhists, or Jains, or Sikhs. Or whatever.

The exact points that you just raised... the Khalsa thing and Hindu resurgence.... is what was expected of you IN REPLY TO HIS POST.

EXPECTED of me?????

By whom?

Whose orders should I be following, which I have neglected to do?

I am sorry, very sorry, but I DO NOT work to meet the expectations of others. My moral compass is on very steady mountings, thank you very much.

What I meant for Indian members is that off late you have been awarding these ratings in Indian threads only. I haven't seen you around on the others threads recently (pro freedom movement in P-OK, Su-35 to Pak, etc) where many negative ratings were given for fun and later reversed by SlavDefence.... Might be a co-incidence or your thread preferences... I will leave it to you.... but this is what I saw and hence I said.... only to Indians (obviously meaning in Indian threads).

That only shows that you have no clue about what I have been doing, after a very long absence, on this forum. My ratings are reversed, but rarely. I take them seriously. You mentioned thread preferences. It is precisely that. I have no interest in political or social threads, normally, but this one was too crass to be left alone. Otherwise I am normally interested specifically in military history, military developments within the Indian Army and the Pakistani Army and the PLA, in the recent political history of the sub-continent, and in Indian history (in the classical sense of Indian) from Mohenjodaro onwards.

Some of my most pleasant moments, pleasant because instructive, have been on Bangladesh threads. Recently there was a fascinating exchange of ideas on the Bengali - or Bangladeshi - language, and its script. I learnt a lot.

Secondly, what you mean by Sangh trained trolls? Are you an IT- Spy or NSA who can track ip's of users to know whether he is Sangh parivar or not? Isn't it highly biased view? You may disagree with the poster... but how can you claim anything personal about him?

The uniformity of language, the hunting in packs, the uniform vulgarity and propensity to cast aspersions on everyone else's patriotism. I teach nowadays. It isn't difficult to work out plagiarised or homogenised habits.

I have been extremely patient with you. Please watch your language. I have come to the conclusions that I have over several years of participation in on line fora, not just this one. Try, if it does not do you a physical injury, not to tell me what I am entitled to do, or not entitled to do.

Same thing when @gau8av asked you about your professional background (something on those lines) you said you have been given the authority of giving ratings to others hence its your prerogative and will not mind not giving any explanation. ( a polite way of saying... I am the responsible one... you guys are not ). Isn't it a moral high ground unidirectionally taken by you?

None of his business. If the administration of this forum has any doubts or queries, they will talk to me direct.

Anyways.... lets leave it at that. I agree you are a responsible and knowledgeable poster (hence the 'tag' on you) and I trust your judgement generally....while in this one case I had some reservations which I posted already.

It is better left at that.

I am not inclined to justify myself or my actions every time a fresh generation of posters joins PakDef.