What Modi wants to hide from Indians

[ashok321]

https://twitter.com/x/status/960357972206481408

 

[ashok321]

 

[Joe Shearer]

View attachment 451828

I think 'Achhe din' are really around the corner, and I think that the bubble is burst or about to burst. Let us hope.

 

[rambro]

Hey malaysia is there, am damn proud LEL

 

[Sine Nomine]

I think 'Achhe din' are really around the corner, and I think that the bubble is burst or about to burst. Let us hope.

There was nothing different Modi and BJP clan did,he was just more loud mouth,then other typical South Asian Politicans.He has a second life though,citing the fact that how Hard,he is fanning Indo-Pak agony and trying to Show Indians that he is ultimate messiah for them against Terrorist Pakistanis and Muslims.

 

[newb3e]

modi ko jay hoo!!

 

[madooxno9]

Well India's external debt is mostly long term around ~80 % and mere 20 % is short term. To cover any short term debt we have a massive foreign reserve. So I guess article proves nothing. Actually in 2017 we did quite well in termsvod debts and lowering down USD denomited debts by few % points.

 

[Sh@msu]

just vote him for more terms and then make baldy yogi PM,and enjoy the fun

 

[AndrewJin]

Conglatulation Modiji!

 

[Joe Shearer]

There was nothing different Modi and BJP clan did,he was just more loud mouth,then other typical South Asian Politicans.He has a second life though,citing the fact that how Hard,he is fanning Indo-Pak agony and trying to Show Indians that he is ultimate messiah for them against Terrorist Pakistanis and Muslims.

How are you, Sir? One member whose name means that I look forward to reading a post, a rarity these days.

On topic: I respectfully disagree. If you recall, our two nations were founded on two radically different concepts: one was based on all the citizens being equal, and all their regional, linguistic, ethnic and religious peculiarities (in the sense of particular variant) being equal and brought into equal prominence. The other was based on the religious protection of a set, to ensure that their religion, and consequently their culture, was not submerged in a huge tidal wave constituting a majority in any joint entity. These are quoted with neutrality as regards their relevance.

For any country set up on the principle of equality of all citizens, it is critical that there should be physical and psychological equality for all citizens, among each other, first, and in the eyes of administrators, political leaders and decision-makers, second. To some extent, in India, we did achieve a part of that equality. It was compromised by the defective ideas regarding secularism that prevailed; we should have straightaway excluded religion from any public role, but failed to do it because of the deeply religious cast of mind of our tallest leader, Gandhi. It was also compromised in practical terms due to the aftermath of a bloody partition; what had been exasperation, irritation earlier transmuted itself into suspicion and dislike of the minority, in the face of the bloody massacres that marked partition, and in the face of the departure of a significant segment of the leadership elements of that community, that felt like a rejection. This sense of rejection caused a sourness towards those who stayed behind.

However, the national stream of thinking was to ensure that, minor blemishes apart, all should be treated alike. This was particularly prominent in the first few years, but became less pronounced and more of a routine way of thinking subsequently. The first challenge came from a set of politicians and social reformers, who based their politics and their social reforms alike on raising the power of the majority, and disparaging the minorities. This challenge was miniscule at first; it gradually gained more and more steam, even as the majority party in Parliament weakened.

It is this alternative way of thinking that has come to power now. Their creed is a mirror opposite of the Two Nation Theory; it follows the same principles and merely reverses almost every concept. Unfortunately, one of the concepts reversed means that

• They think that India was created for the majority community, because Pakistan claims (some Pakistanis claim) that the country was created for Muslims;
• They think that minorities should be suitably meek and humble, and should not interfere with their sensibilities;
• They think that their social norms should prevail, their dietary habits should prevail; no burkha, no beef.

That is what Modi represents, a culture of hate and exclusion.

 

[ashok321]

Stupid Hindutva line:

BJP govt is trying to create divide between Hindus and Muslims: Akhilesh:

Modi govt not a gamechanger but only a namechanger, says Ghulam Nabi Azad:

 

[Sine Nomine]

How are you, Sir?

I am very fine Sir.
How are you Sir?

On topic: I respectfully disagree. If you recall, our two nations were founded on two radically different concepts: one was based on all the citizens being equal, and all their regional, linguistic, ethnic and religious peculiarities (in the sense of particular variant) being equal and brought into equal prominence. The other was based on the religious protection of a set, to ensure that their religion, and consequently their culture, was not submerged in a huge tidal wave constituting a majority in any joint entity. These are quoted with neutrality as regards their relevance.

For any country set up on the principle of equality of all citizens, it is critical that there should be physical and psychological equality for all citizens, among each other, first, and in the eyes of administrators, political leaders and decision-makers, second. To some extent, in India, we did achieve a part of that equality. It was compromised by the defective ideas regarding secularism that prevailed; we should have straightaway excluded religion from any public role, but failed to do it because of the deeply religious cast of mind of our tallest leader, Gandhi. It was also compromised in practical terms due to the aftermath of a bloody partition; what had been exasperation, irritation earlier transmuted itself into suspicion and dislike of the minority, in the face of the bloody massacres that marked partition, and in the face of the departure of a significant segment of the leadership elements of that community, that felt like a rejection. This sense of rejection caused a sourness towards those who stayed behind.

However, the national stream of thinking was to ensure that, minor blemishes apart, all should be treated alike. This was particularly prominent in the first few years, but became less pronounced and more of a routine way of thinking subsequently. The first challenge came from a set of politicians and social reformers, who based their politics and their social reforms alike on raising the power of the majority, and disparaging the minorities. This challenge was miniscule at first; it gradually gained more and more steam, even as the majority party in Parliament weakened.

It is this alternative way of thinking that has come to power now. Their creed is a mirror opposite of the Two Nation Theory; it follows the same principles and merely reverses almost every concept. Unfortunately, one of the concepts reversed means that

• They think that India was created for the majority community, because Pakistan claims (some Pakistanis claim) that the country was created for Muslims;
• They think that minorities should be suitably meek and humble, and should not interfere with their sensibilities;
• They think that their social norms should prevail, their dietary habits should prevail; no burkha, no beef.

That is what Modi represents, a culture of hate and exclusion.

I agree with your Opinion excluding the bold and underlined part,
1-Pakistan without doubt was based on two nation theory but,i would say Pakistani leadership as a whole in start and especially Jinnah Sir,were very tolerant and neutral towards citizens of other faiths.That was around 1973,when Bhutto employed Religion and Religious Guys for holding vote bank,he used Religion a lot to gain foot hold among Religious Guys.
Next,in line came his Blue eyed General Zia,who used Religion blatantly in asymmetric warfare and Politics,unfortuneately by that time Pakistan's Alignment was getting out of desired position and after that we witnessed rise of Religious thugs.
It must be noted that,both Bhutto and Zia were interested in religion as much Modi is,at personal level.
2-Modi is doing same,everything was already present in India,Modi Clan is just using everything for vote bank tactics.You know Sir,peoples in South Asia are concerned about religion more then anything,no matter they are practising it or not.
In short what Bhutto brought for Pakistan,Modi is doing same for India just by gap of 45 years.Religious Fanatics are on rise in India.
That's just my humble opinion.

 

[ashok321]

Ministers' stature has diminished in NDA: Shatrughan:
Firing yet another salvo at his party, BJP MP Shatrughan Sinha said today the stature of Union ministers has diminished, and the perception is that the government is a "one-man show and the party a two-man army".

"Not only us. You and many others feel that a 'one-man show and a two-man army' is at work. We (the party and the government) should be taking collective decisions," he told a press conference when asked if the BJP has become a "two-man army", with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and party chief Amit Shah calling the shots.

"The ministers' stature has diminished considerably. Many people might not be even knowing 80 per cent of the (Union) ministers. Even if they know them, they might be finding these ministers worthless," Sinha said.

With Yashwant Sinha by his side, the actor-politician said, "Collective decision should prevail. Atal Bihari Vajpayee's was a great government, and we (ministers under Vajpayee) had our identity."

 

[Joe Shearer]

I am very fine Sir.
How are you Sir?

I agree with your Opinion excluding the bold and underlined part,
1-Pakistan without doubt was based on two nation theory but,i would say Pakistani leadership as a whole in start and especially Jinnah Sir,were very tolerant and neutral towards citizens of other faiths.That was around 1973,when Bhutto employed Religion and Religious Guys for holding vote bank,he used Religion a lot to gain foot hold among Religious Guys.
Next,in line came his Blue eyed General Zia,who used Religion blatantly in asymmetric warfare and Politics,unfortuneately by that time Pakistan's Alignment was getting out of desired position and after that we witnessed rise of Religious thugs.
It must be noted that,both Bhutto and Zia were interested in religion as much Modi is,at personal level.
2-Modi is doing same,everything was already present in India,Modi Clan is just using everything for vote bank tactics.You know Sir,peoples in South Asia are concerned about religion more then anything,no matter they are practising it or not.
In short what Bhutto brought for Pakistan,Modi is doing same for India just by gap of 45 years.Religious Fanatics are on rise in India.
That's just my humble opinion.

I am well, Sir, and glad to hear you are doing well.

Nothing to disagree, Sir, with your initial points in your analysis, except that I would point to the abandonment of Jinnah's dream, immediately after his unfortunately very early demise, in terms of the Objectives Resolution. Apart from this hiccup, it does seem that Pakistan was mercifully free from internecine strife, right until what you have mentioned as an inflection point, the rise to power of Bhutto. Pakistan became Islamic in intent and purpose as well as in name. It has been suggested that this arose out of the sense of vulnerability after 1971, and it has been expressed as seeking closer proximity with nearby Muslim nations.

Zia's paradigm was, as you have pointed out, a further refinement and enlargement of Bhutto's actions and methods.

As you have said correctly, people in south Asia are far more religious, or, to use your exact wording, "...are concerned about religion more than anything, no matter whether they are practising it or not..."

Coming to the points where we apparently differ, it appears that it is your impression that :

1. The attitude of the Indian masses claiming India to be a Hindu nation was not a reaction to the Pakistani people expressing faith in the Two Nation Theory. To you, I presume, this attitude was present throughout, and found expression only on the arrival of the conductor of the orchestra, Narendra Modi;
2. It did not seem to you, also, that Modi represents a culture of hate and exclusion; rather, he represents the inflection point in Pakistani politics created by Bhutto 45 years ago, an invocaton of religion in order to mobilise the inherent religiosity - not genuine religious feeling, but the feeling that one OUGHT to be feeling religious - of the Indian population.

Interesting points, rather subtle and easy to miss initially.

On the first point, you are right insofar as that insularity represents the bulk of Indians, those who lived at close quarters with each other, and normally did not kill each other, except from time to time, fairly rarely, when a spark set the whole thing on fire.

I was referring to the political and ideological, to some extent, intellectual leadership of the country, never numbering more than a fraction of the population who supplied the political class with new members, and who could aspire to rise to ministerial rank if luck favoured them. This was, given the number of Members of Parliament, Members of state legislatures, elected representatives in municipalities and later, in panchayats, all kinds of representatives of the people, never more than 1% of 1% of the population; say, about 33,000 in 1947. By and large, whether from the centre - the Indian National Congress - or the left - the Communist Party of India, the Communist Party of India (Marxist), the Janata Party, other similar, there was not only no resistance to the One Nation principle, there was active promotion.

This permissive, even supportive atmosphere was dispelled only when the BJP/RSS combination came to power. It was at this juncture that the sane secular practices and formulations prevailing were rudely overthrown, and the right-wing ideologues in India claimed that Pakistan's promoting of her legacy and heritage should be the justification for a similar application of the hitherto-rejected Two Nation Theory to India.

If you see the passages in PDF itself, you will find that this trend began to be seen in the writings of members of that extreme right-wing persuasion from around 2012 to 2013.

On the second, take the situation as it was as the new political set-up inherited it. The institutions, the Reserve Bank, the Supreme Court and the other courts, the intelligence services, whether internal, the Intelligence Bureau, or external, the Research and Analysis Wing, most important, the military, Army, Navy and Air Force, the civil service and the police, the other administrative services, even, largely, the press, were neutral in intent. There had to be great force applied to bring them all to allow this 'native' tendency towards religious feeling, this religiosity, to express itself. It was this force that I am referring to.

This 'force' manifested itself clearly and visibly. We were left in no doubt about it. Speeches from the great leader and from the sub-great_leaders set the tone; ugly and hostile towards the minorities. Then the fringe elements took over, and there have been incidents, more incidents, yet more incidents, and increasing provocation. The response of the administration in the states run by the extremists was significant and definitive; they did not intervene, they allowed the gangs to rule. If it was the inherent will of the people to be religious, this kind of corruption of the institutions would not have been necessary.

I have already taken up a lot of space to explain two points that aroused your scepticism, and do not want to waste your time or other members' time any further. Please consider what I have argued as justification, and please also note that I acknowledge that the truth is somewhere between our stated positions, that it is not clearly, in my humble opinion, entirely as I have stated it to be, nor entirely as I read you to be thinking.

Thank you for the opportunity to explain what seems to have stricken my country.

 

[ashok321]

MODI'S HIDDEN HAND BEHIND ALL THIS:


Each GOI institution tries to save Ambanis no matter how.

CCI not to probe cartelisation charge against telcos until Supreme Court takes a call