• Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

I have been called "sickular"

prasad1

Well-known member
I know it is not a term of endearment.
But if you want to insult me please do in a language and words that I can find the meaning.

What is the purpose of cursing someone in Panjabi in Italy, that too with a smile?

So I did some googling.


[FONT=&quot]Be scared, very scared even if you are a Hindu on the moderate side, which for troll purposes comes under the ‘sickular’ brand name these days.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]You deal with the nameless, faceless fringe elements — who believe only they uphold Hinduism — by ignoring them, but how do you escape when the same voices come from the mainstream.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Prime Minister Narendra Modi may have appealed for a communal violence-free India, but there are people in his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) who seem intent on dealing in provocative speeches that tear into India’s secular fabric, which the Constitution bestows on us.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/comment/hindu-by-birth-sickular-by-choice/story-wRGsg6D1TmXn8LKmO7sG4N.html

Yesterday somebody called me Liberal, I thought that was good word till I googled that word in Google India.

[FONT=open_sanslight]I am what the Bhakts call a Sickular (Pseudo Secular) Libtard (Liberal + Retard) and so naturally I spent last weekend trying to raise some reasonable points.

So now I am being called a pseudo-secular (that is not even a word).

[/FONT][/FONT]

Secularism as practiced in India, with its marked differences with Western practice of secularism, is a controversial topic in India. Supporters of the Indian concept of secularism claim it respects. Supporters of this form of secularism claim that any attempt to introduce a uniform civil code, that is equal laws for every citizen irrespective of his or her religion, would impose majoritarian Hindu sensibilities and ideals. Opponents argue that India's acceptance of Sharia and religious laws violates the principle of Equality before the law.

I do not know Sharia law, I thought the Indian constitution supersedes all religious law except in some social situation.



[FONT=&quot][FONT=open_sanslight]

I would like to know what is the charges against me.

I want India and ALL Indians to prosper if that is secularism, I will accept that mantle.[/FONT][/FONT]
 

zebra16

Well-known member

[FONT=open_sanslight]I am what the Bhakts call a Sickular (Pseudo Secular) Libtard (Liberal + Retard) and so naturally I spent last weekend trying to raise some reasonable points.

So now I am being called a pseudo-secular (that is not even a word).
[/FONT]
[FONT=open_sanslight].[/FONT]
Very funny (or rather unfunny) that you start a thread to call out the issue of name calling, but you effortlessly label or call
some unidentified members as Bhakts !!!. Wonder if you did googling of the word "bhakt" and believe me in the current political
context in India it is not complimentary either.
 

prasad1

Well-known member
Zebraji,

Thanks for a backhanded compliment (or not).
I never said that I do not poke fun at others, that is YOUR interpretation.
I did not insult you, but if you want to wear that mantle, that is your progrative.

My op was not a complaint, I can handle people who attack me, Thank you.
My issue was that I had to google it.

Bhakt:
[FONT=q_serif]It is a sanskrit word and also used in hindi . It mean a person who believe or faith on some body he follows .[/FONT]
[FONT=q_serif]As far as Indian political scenario is considered , this tERM is coined by Mr. Digvijay singh and usually used for Modi supporters .[/FONT]
[FONT=q_serif]See modi ji and BJP has UNPAID SOCIAL MEDIA ARMY and group of these people is known as BHAKTS . and yes it deserve the same .[/FONT]
[FONT=q_serif]A supporter is some one who support a personality when he/ she is right and condemn his/her work for wrong but for BHAKTS every thing that bjp did is perfect { not almost perfect , there is 0% no probablity{ ie no chance} for getting an error } . For them what Modi ji said ia like order of God { Pseudo God } , for them defending any action of BJP or modi ji is like PILGRIMAGE .


I did not find anywhere it says that it is a derogatory word.

If it means :

A bhakt is a devotee. Such a person makes it his/her policy to steadfastly support each & every word, deed and action of the party he is a devotee of. It never crosses his mind that his deity party (and/or its leaders) could err at all. His firm belief is - my deity can never be wrong. This allegiance extends to all that deity stands for or supposed to stand for. For example, in case of BJP bhakts, they take exception to critical comments on BJP, its leaders, gaurakshaks, cow-slaughter, Hinduism at large and India also.[/FONT]

[FONT=q_serif]Also, a bhakt makes it his 2nd policy to ignore any opinion or comment that is critical of his deity. He may even become aggressive and doesn’t mind resorting to personal attacks (verbally, of course) on the detractors. Say, you make a comment critical of the deity, you may be even accused of being a foreigner mascarading as Indian. It happened.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-meaning-of-Bhakt-in-Indian-political-scenario

I did mean that in my post, And I stand by that.
I spoke with people in India, they did not think it to be derogatory. Some Modi fans even owned it as a badge of honor.

[/FONT]
[FONT=q_serif]I like Modiji, and he is a capable leader, but a human with fallacies and failures. I am not a Modi-Bhakt.
[/FONT]
[FONT=q_serif]
Maybe it is derogatory to the people who think that they are the rational thinker, but got caught being a closet BJP supporter.

A lot of BJP supporters are single issue voter, they are anti-.

It is like the Middle age white Republican, who support Trump, but did not want to accept that they are closet Racist.
[/FONT]
 
Last edited:
Very funny (or rather unfunny) that you start a thread to call out the issue of name calling, but you effortlessly label or call
some unidentified members as Bhakts !!!. Wonder if you did googling of the word "bhakt" and believe me in the current political
context in India it is not complimentary either.
Haha.

This behavior is not out of ordinary though. It is very common for many people to do this. They lament about other people "name-calling" but they do it themselves.

In the indian context, secularism has come to mean favoring muslims/christians and discriminating against hindus. I mean it is all out in the open. If you don't call this out, you are actually doing a disservice to the secular discourse. The right word, of course, is communalism but hyphenated words such as "pseudo-secularism" or "fake- secularism" conveys more appropriately what is going on. That is, one pretends to stand for the cause of secularism but one, in reality, is not. One is fake!

"Pseudo-liberal" conveys a similar meaning. A liberal who supports FOE or FOS in one context but opposes the same in another, but very similar, context. The hyphenated word again conveys a meaning. There are closet jihadis as there can be closet racists. May be i have given another excuse for googling, but, in truth, it is not all that difficult to understand.

In the end it is all point-of-views.
 

prasad1

Well-known member
The usual suspects are coming out of the woodwork, and the daggers are out.
Mr. Bharavanji,

I am For India, I do not wear caste, religion, or other badges.

Your interpretation of Secular is not in any dictionary, or in the English language.
You have chosen a Good word like "bhabhi" and twisted it to mean something totally vulgar, and probably it resonates in your crowd.

I truly wish India to progress, which means all Indians.
You are selective in who should suffer more. We are approaching from two different sides, but you are also facing the wrong direction.

Yes, in the end, it is a point of view. I have the luxury of being out of the woods, whereas some of you are deep in the woods, and can not see the forest as you are surrounded by dense trees.
 

prasad1

Well-known member
I would like to edit the previous post but it would not let me do it.
I meant so Say Bhairawanji.
 
Your interpretation of Secular is not in any dictionary, or in the English language.
You have chosen a Good word like "bhabhi" and twisted it to mean something totally vulgar, and probably it resonates in your crowd.
"Coming out of the woodwork" is not particularly a nice thing to say to anyone but that is not totally unexpected from this poster. There are many reasons why people choose to be inactive. One need not enter into all arguments. There are instances where it is wiser to keep quiet as arguing with a fool will make one look like a fool!

I actually did not interpret the word "secular" in a different way or gave it a twisted meaning. I am merely observing the fact that the self-styled secular people have already twisted it and I am calling it "pseudo-secularism" and "fake-secularism"; some others call it "sickularism". The very reason to use a different word is to protect what the original word meant.
 

zebra16

Well-known member
"Coming out of the woodwork" is not particularly a nice thing to say to anyone but that is not totally unexpected from this poster. There are many reasons why people choose to be inactive. One need not enter into all arguments. There are instances where it is wiser to keep quiet as arguing with a fool will make one look like a fool!
Ye Yea little termite do not come out of the little wood stump. The mighty woodpecker is still at work
 

a-TB

Active member
Hinduism as I see it has all kinds of practices. We accept all of them as valid, meaning no one tries to go and tell someone what they are doing is wrong (provided they do not hurt others). That is the Hinduism I know which also lives and let lives Christians and Muslims.

Even in this forum everyone is welcome to be a member.

So Hinduism to me with my understanding is already truly secular.

There are people who are narrow minded in all religions but teaching of Hinduism is acceptance (I think and I can be corrected)
 

prasad1

Well-known member
Hinduism as I see it has all kinds of practices. We accept all of them as valid, meaning no one tries to go and tell someone what they are doing is wrong (provided they do not hurt others). That is the Hinduism I know which also lives and let lives Christians and Muslims.

Even in this forum everyone is welcome to be a member.

So Hinduism to me with my understanding is already truly secular.

There are people who are narrow minded in all religions but teaching of Hinduism is acceptance (I think and I can be corrected)

I agree with that principle. To me, you are a Hindu till you deny it.
There are some basic principles that you have to accept, but that is about it,
 

renuka

Well-known member
Prasad Ji....this sounds totally like you!



[video=youtube_share;330hPz8iLi4]https://youtu.be/330hPz8iLi4[/video]
 

prasad1

Well-known member
Prasad Ji....this sounds totally like you!



[video=youtube_share;330hPz8iLi4]https://youtu.be/330hPz8iLi4[/video]

But to Hindu fundamentalist, and those who do not understand Hinduism Tharoor is an ultimate "liberal" elite.

But the same people will claim to know Hinduism and declare themselves as protector of Hinduism. Sometimes they also confuse themselves and assume India is a Hindu (whatever it means) nation.
 

renuka

Well-known member
But to Hindu fundamentalist, and those who do not understand Hinduism Tharoor is an ultimate "liberal" elite.

But the same people will claim to know Hinduism and declare themselves as protector of Hinduism. Sometimes they also confuse themselves and assume India is a Hindu (whatever it means) nation.
Tharoor is both good looking and intelligent yet many feel looks and brains do not go hand in hand! Lol
 

prasad1

Well-known member
Tharoor is both good looking and intelligent yet many feel looks and brains do not go hand in hand! Lol
Now do not get enamored by his good looks, his wife died a horrible death, he was involved in some shady deals.
But he is a wonderful speaker. He can charm any crowd.
 

renuka

Well-known member
Now do not get enamored by his good looks, his wife died a horrible death, he was involved in some shady deals.
But he is a wonderful speaker. He can charm any crowd.
Well...we cant deny he is a killer looker with killer intellect even if he is suspected of killing his wife.

I can surely admire some shades of him.
 

KRN

Active member
But to Hindu fundamentalist, and those who do not understand Hinduism Tharoor is an ultimate "liberal" elite.

But the same people will claim to know Hinduism and declare themselves as protector of Hinduism. Sometimes they also confuse themselves and assume India is a Hindu (whatever it means) nation.
Hindus actually like the way Tharoor is positioning himself, because he is taking the ground away from those who had hitherto positioned themselves the "liberal" elite, ie the comrades. Tharoor takes pride in Vedanta, in Sankaracharya, in Vivekananda and in most other things Hindu. He is a genuine scholar, softspoken, he doesn't support the killing of political opponents, like the comrades do, and precisely due to the danger posed by him, the maximum mudslinging on him has been done by the comrades, who are now pushed to third place (humiliating to them, in this most prestigious constituency) in the last elections.
 
Last edited:
Hindus actually like the way Tharoor is positioning himself, because he is taking the ground away from those who had hitherto positioned themselves the "liberal" elite, ie the comrades. Tharoor takes pride in Vedanta, in Sankaracharya, in Vivekananda and in most other things Hindu. He is a genuine scholar, softspoken, he doesn't support the killing of political opponents, like the comrades do, and precisely due to the danger posed by him, the maximum mudslinging on him has been done by the comrades, who are now pushed to third place (humiliating to them, in this most prestigious constituency) in the last elections.
KRNji, You may be correct that Tharoor may not be advocating violence against political opponents (in this case hindutva) as opposed to the comrades. But don't fall for his tricks. I am not sure if you got the opportunity to read his book completely. There are so many contradictions that it is easy to pick apart his main line of argument. Actually the observation made here is correct that one sees very similar arguments here. One of the constant refrains of the so called "liberal" Hindus is that they accuse hindutva or political Hinduism of destroying the pluralistic nature of Hinduism and enforcing their view of Hinduism on all the hindu people. But here is the deal. By saying why he is "The" Hindu, he stands guilty of the same crime. The whole book is about him positioning Hinduism vs Hindutva. Considering he belongs to the political party which is the opponent of Hindutva, it was only simply a self-serving exercise. He does not even give the Hindus the same concessions he gives to the Sikhs. He acknowledges Mughal persecution of Sikhs but tries to whitewash Aurangazeb's atrocities against Hindus, for example. After all Sikhs are declared minorities and that is kosher for him and his party. That political Hinduism became a necessity precisely because his own party never missed an opportunity to downgrade Hindus to second class citizens vis-a-vis minorities through various legislation and laws when it was in power is something that he cleverly hides. His flowery language is just a technique to fool hindus in meekly accepting their fate at the hands of his own hinduphobic party.
 

KRN

Active member
KRNji, You may be correct that Tharoor may not be advocating violence against political opponents (in this case hindutva) as opposed to the comrades. But don't fall for his tricks. I am not sure if you got the opportunity to read his book completely. There are so many contradictions that it is easy to pick apart his main line of argument. Actually the observation made here is correct that one sees very similar arguments here. One of the constant refrains of the so called "liberal" Hindus is that they accuse hindutva or political Hinduism of destroying the pluralistic nature of Hinduism and enforcing their view of Hinduism on all the hindu people. But here is the deal. By saying why he is "The" Hindu, he stands guilty of the same crime. The whole book is about him positioning Hinduism vs Hindutva. Considering he belongs to the political party which is the opponent of Hindutva, it was only simply a self-serving exercise. He does not even give the Hindus the same concessions he gives to the Sikhs. He acknowledges Mughal persecution of Sikhs but tries to whitewash Aurangazeb's atrocities against Hindus, for example. After all Sikhs are declared minorities and that is kosher for him and his party. That political Hinduism became a necessity precisely because his own party never missed an opportunity to downgrade Hindus to second class citizens vis-a-vis minorities through various legislation and laws when it was in power is something that he cleverly hides. His flowery language is just a technique to fool hindus in meekly accepting their fate at the hands of his own hinduphobic party.
KBji,
I have not read his book. My post was based on some of his articles that I read online. So you may be right. I referred to his scholarship in the context of his efforts at highlighting the impact of British plunder on colonial India. One thing I liked about him is the way he initially appreciated Modi and some of his initiatives at the beginning of his tenure. That showed political naivete but a very refreshing attitude of appreciating the goodness in the opponent. Especially since Tharoor had only just then narrowly won his seat after a huge three cornered fight involving unimaginable mudslinging from all sides (I am from his constituency, btw).

Of course, belonging to this party, he has many limitations in supporting the Hindus vis-a-vis other religions.
But in the specific context of Kerala, the party that Tharoor represents is seen by all, supporters and opponents alike, to be prostrate at the feet of powerful communal allies like the Muslim league & the Mani Christian Congress. This impression has gathered ground for decades, and many see the recent Rajya Sabha elections as the last straw. Some Hindu MLAs have openly threatened to resign, while non-Hindu leaders like PJ Kurien expressed heartburn and wondered where the party is going to. While Tharoor was always seen as an outsider who is imposed on them at the fancy of Rahul Gandhi. So when someone like Tharoor makes occasional anti-BJP headlines, or expresses his views on cliched topics like Hinduism vs Hindutva etc, it is naturally seen as one of those common attempts at political survival. Kerala has seen such pseudo intellectual chatter from the comrades for long, so nobody is really fooled. What this does is to make the situation nicely poised for the next elections. Because it will be a do or die fight for survival (at the national level) for the comrades too. In Kerala, RSS is quite strong, but BJP leaders have not had much impact among the masses, so there is a thinking that it would be suicidal for the disenchanted hindu MLAs of the Cong to join BJP. But all the same, they are waiting for the right moment. If the BJP central leadership play their cards well, there could be an exodus of Hindu leaders from the Congress to the BJP in the near future. In fact, I believe that, but for his proximity to Rahul, and but for his relative inexperience in the party, Tharoor would have been seen joining hands with these MLAs. But no matter what headlines his statements may garner nationally, his political future is by no means certain.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Top