the election results ...

[vivekam.vairagyam]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

here is a link to my post on the recent election results ...

http://www.lkadvani.in/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5453

 

[sapr333]

Vivekam, thats indeed an impressive blog. Couldnt control my laughter,while admiring your creative thinking.. I mean I had a long pause in the line 'Average age, 193 Years"....

This is an interesting article I read in the next day's T.O.I

It may be difficult to deal with defeat, but the regret of a drowned dream is quickly

overtaken by the compulsions of survival. Both the BJP
and the Left now face an
existential dilemma, and will require honesty to pare away that part of the dogma that has checked the growth of one and undermined the success of the other.

The BJP might want to consider a fundamental fact about our country. India is not a secular nation because Indian Muslims want it to be secular. India is a secular nation because Indian Hindus want it to be secular.

It would be wrong to dismiss everyone in the BJP as communal. But L K Advani's efforts to sustain the inclusive image fashioned by Atal Behari Vajpayee were constantly undermined by the rhetoric of leaders who did not understand that the language of conflict had passed its sell-by date. The turning point came with Varun Gandhi's immature speech. The BJP condemned it but did not disown it completely, for fear of losing the extreme in its search for the centre. What seems obvious now did not seem so clear then. Varun Gandhi should have been dropped as a candidate. Worse, Varun Gandhi fell in love with his new pseudo-aggressive image, and projected it in statements and pictures that went into every home through television. This young Gandhi even began to fantasise a future as chief minister of Uttar Pradesh. It is interesting that regional BJP leaders understood that this was toxic. The Madhya Pradesh party bluntly told Varun Gandhi he was not needed while the Bihar unit was relieved when Nitish Kumar refused hospitality to both Narendra Modi and Varun Gandhi.

The national ethos is shaped by one predominant desire: the hunger for a better life. Prosperity is impossible without peace, so the passions of sectarian politics, whether based on community or caste, have been replaced by the clear understanding that peace is non-negotiable. Prosperity, on the other hand, has always been negotiable, since it has never been a universal fact. India remains a poor country with rich people rather than the other way around. The poor want to be part of the India Rising story.

It is odd that the Marxists should have missed this. They lost the Muslim vote in rural Bengal, not because of Islam but because of poverty. The message from Nandigram and Singur was that land was being taken away from the poor in order to create jobs for the middle class. Nitish Kumar has won because he created peace, and took his promise of prosperity to those at the very bottom of the top-heavy caste ladder. He will be the envy of his peers at the next meeting of the nation's chief ministers.

It might be even odder if one draws a potential parallel between Bengal and Gujarat, but Narendra Modi's industrialization just might become a problem if he does not take corrective action. Taking the Nano that Bengal lost is only one chapter of a more complicated story. The poor are sensing that this cosy relationship between politicians and industrialists is benefiting either the rich or the middle class. The landless and peasants could turn against Modi if he does not resurrect rural Gujarat with the high-profile vigour he has offered industry. The DMK survived in Tamil Nadu because it gave the poor cheap rice and free entertainment. Buy shares in television companies. Every political party is soon going to hand out free television sets to voters.

The Berlin Wall has been breached in Kolkata. Is it only a matter of time before the Communist bloc collapses? Are Prakash Karat and Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee the problem or the solution? Is there any alternative chief minister in Bengal who can fashion correctives and implement them with a hammer? The CPI(M) politburo meeting on May 18 was meant to be a celebratory event in the game of thrust and parry that was supposed to follow the results. It will now have the excitement of a dirge. Prakash Karat summed up this election pithily when he said, "We failed". It was not an individual's failure, since Marxist decisions are collective.

It is easy to sneer at the defeated, but a paradox needs to be noted. The Left may not be missed in Kerala and Bengal, but it will be missed in Delhi, since it injected serious debate into economic and foreign policies. It is not important that the Left was right or wrong. What is important is that it generated a debate.

It is obvious that governance is being rewarded, and Naveen Patnaik's vindication is sufficient evidence. But there is also a model profile for a politician that has emerged. The voter wants three qualities in his leader: honesty, competence and modesty. This is what he saw in Dr Manmohan Singh. Rahul Gandhi added the flavour of the future to the Congress offer. He has won his place in power through this election. In all likelihood there will be a transition within the foreseeable future, particularly since the Congress has silenced its allies as effectively as it has neutered the Opposition.

Chief ministers like Nitish Kumar, Naveen Patnaik, Shivraj Singh Chauhan and Raman Singh delivered on all three qualities respected by the voter. Others got by on two, but they should not confuse reprieve with victory.

The dangers of success are more dramatic than the perils of failure. Complacence is an easy trap. Arrogance is seductive. Dr Manmohan Singh has been given freedom to govern, but his first watch has to be on a slippage by colleagues. By giving him freedom, the Indian voter has denied him an excuse.

 

[vivekam.vairagyam]

thnx 4 ur comments ... yes things are much more dynamic now .. u cannot hope to make do with one-policy-fits-all attitude ....
the bjp needs to get rid of the opposition mentality , its job is to provide a viable ALTERNATIVE for all indians , and not an opposition, if it wants to form the government ....

 

[happyhindu]

VV-ji,

That was awesome. Enjoyed reading it.

Yep truly all the Senas need to be given some other means of living rather than attacking pubs and talibanizing india.

The mandate of the voting masses appears rather clear. Pro-caste, Pro-religion, Pro-dalit, Pro-LTTE, Left, Pro-Left have been done away with. Jobless people looking to get voted based on "caste" or "cause", rather than solving existing probs, are better off looking to manage themselves rather than being a trouble to others with their rubbish castes and causes.

 

[vivekam.vairagyam]

thnk u hh-ji ...

here are the updates in that post ...

as for the EVM s …. i will hold the bjp responsible if they lost coz of evm rigging ….. hey , welcome to the real world … no one is gonna hand-over the power to rule a billion people on a platter ,not least the current group of people u r fighting against …. so if u were not prepared to counter potential EVM and /or other election frauds , may be u dont deserve to win …. which only means that all ur trumpetting of the sanatana dharma and all is empty noise and u havent learnt anything from how krishna met deceit with deceit …. learn to get the job done with flair and style instead of having to crib like a helpless kid …… we dont live in a perfect world , if u didnt already know that ….

 

[hariharan1972]

The mandate of the voting masses appears rather clear. Pro-caste, Pro-religion, Pro-dalit, Pro-LTTE, Left, Pro-Left have been done away with. Jobless people looking to get voted based on "caste" or "cause", rather than solving existing probs, are better off looking to manage themselves rather than being a trouble to others with their rubbish castes and causes.

HH-Ji,

Sorry for throwing in a spoiler. I am not certain that this mandate is not about caste. I concur with you that the "Left" has been left behind and it is a vote for pursuing the development agenda. But i dont think that Caste has been pushed into oblivion in these elections. Net yet.

One look at the candidates will give reveal the arithmetic behind the nominations. I am not begruding any particular party because every party wants to maximise the number of winnable seats.

As much as Nitish has been rewarded for his performance his victory is also due to the clever social engineering he did by pitting the MBCs against OBCs.

Be it as it may be, a Govt without the strappings of the Left should theoretically be good for India. The only pain in the neck is the flagrantly corrupt DMK but India's GDP should be able to take care of that.

As regards BJP it should stop hankering for power based on it's Mandir agenda and make itself more socially relevant. As much as i am a believer, i am no great believer in rewriting history.

Bringing Modi to justice for whatever he did and also rebuilding Babri masjid would go a long way in ensuring the Muslims of India about the genuineness of Indian Secularism.

The need of the hour is to balance equity with scope for fast track growth. Wiser and Sharper minds should be nurtured and have their lung space for growth and not get stifled in Equity. At the same time, those less fortunate should be able to make a living for themselves. This is the India that will win.

 

[vivekam.vairagyam]

we cannot deny the fact that past forms of piece-meal struggles will not work today just as they never did in the past …

we may be worlds better than our neighbors , we still are not a democracy in its true sense … u can still become a pm / president without being directly chosen by the people , none of the cities/states are run by one mayor/governor elected directly by the people … this in itself proves the fact that we simply live in an oligarchy ( at best) clothed as a democracy … individuals cannot achieve much in such settings , that is why those groups that organise and stand together achieve better for themselves , for the same reason hindus dont do well ,they have an illusion they are extremely intelligent and so dont need to partner with other hindus ,

we need to realise that we lack a comprehensive response to any challenge thrown at us by our detractors ….

a comprehensive response to any/every problem , right from govt unfairly withdrawing funds to religious persecution, should include atleast ..

1) mainstream media power - the ability to communicate and reach a wider audience
2) continuing education of every memeber of the community about their rights, responsibilities and challenges
3) ability to address injustice / impropreity thru legal and media trials till the situation is redressed
4) support groups that interact with every family to help them acheive prosperity thru better education , health and jobs , no matter the resistance from the rest of the society
5) learn from the jews as to how they r handling some not so obvious assaults on their survival by their semitic counterparts
6) when ur response to any situation loses the ability to surprise ur competition , u r bound to repond with cliched approaches which can only fail
7) u need the to ability to engage ur adversaires in dialogue to get things done , jus shouting only makes u a laughing stalk , simultaneously u need to be able to execute other counter measures …
to the extent the bjp can promise and achieve these objectives , to that extent they will draw more constituents into their fold , people need to see that it is worth being in this association … wht is needed is a grassroots movt from villages to the universities and board rooms that will first consolidate the memebrship and activity base a la obama … with the ego clashes of the intellectuals in the party , is it a surprise that people like gurumurthy /arun shourie / prof vaidyanathan / tarun vijay/ m r venkatesh are not the face of the intellectual side of the movement execpt when a carefully constructed dissent/repartee needs to be presented so that it will clear the path for the “political manipulators” to get on with their infighting on their way to power … the day the organisation will give importance to merit and people who have a successful life outside politics and can work as team instead of for personal and/or political vendetta … that day the organisation will achieve for all people as the scriptures say , “loka samastha sukino bhavanthu ” … till then things will keep going in circles , forward movement will only be in dreams …..

 

[vivekam.vairagyam]

hh1972 ...

gimme a brk .. we r trying to re-build a ram temple in ayodhya not mecca ... dont confuse magnanimity with minority appeasement for votebank politics ..

and as krishna did , if ur fair rights are denied u need to take up meansures to secure them ...

the lazy , scared , couch potato talk of let them do whtever they want attitude has already done us and the world enuf harm ....

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri VV Ji,
My thoughts are in 'blue':

hh1972 ...

gimme a brk .. we r trying to re-build a ram temple in ayodhya not mecca ... dont confuse magnanimity with minority appeasement for votebank politics ..
Sir, the problem with this is that some of us are trying to build a temple on the same grounds where a mosque is standing. I thought we are living in a 'secular socialist' country where building something in a place where a different religion has a building is prohibited by the law. Am I wrong?

and as krishna did , if ur fair rights are denied u need to take up meansures to secure them ...
So, what are the 'existing rights' in the republic are denied to the people you are speaking about? So can these measures be 'ad-hoc' and outside of the law of a republic?

the lazy , scared , couch potato talk of let them do whtever they want attitude has already done us and the world enuf harm ....
So, does India today belong only to the Hindus? If so, why?

 

[vivekam.vairagyam]

first up , the mosque was standing on a temple .. it is this sort of special child treatment to muslims that has spoiled them , by ur own statement why do muslims deserve any haj money when hindus dont get money for religious travels ,, ? why is there no uniform civil code that treats all citizens equally? why are some more equal ? how rt is it to let them marry more than one wife and multiply against the rts of other communities ? india is secular bcoz of the tolerant hindus here ,left to themselves the christians and muslims wuld have divided this country into a christian and muslim half and wuld still be fighting for more of each other's land ...

 

[vivekam.vairagyam]

two quotes that speak to these issues. The first speaks to the issue of the usurped shrines.

"Mosques built after destroying temples are the sign of slavery and Muslims should hand over the same to Hindu Society" - Mahatma Gandhi in 'Navjeevan' dated July 17, 1937. ​

The second quote tells us what the other side thinks of us, precisely because of our refusal to stand up for what is sacred to us.

"Hindus profess secularism because they are cowards and are afraid of Muslim countries." - Syed Shahabuddin - Convenor of Babri Masjid Coordination Committee (BMCC) in 'Sunday' dated March 20, 1983.


read these two blogs to get a sense of the kind of people u r dealing with

the six destrcutions of the somnath temple

http://dharmaveer.blogspot.com/2009/02/islams-six-destructions-of-somnath.html

ayodhya a primer ...

http://dharmaveer.blogspot.com/2009/02/ram-janmabhoomi-issue-revisited_07.html

and btw , krs-ji u r politically very correct , i gotta give that to u !


​

 

[kunjuppu]

vivekam,

i am not so sure about the way that you are planning to execute, will eventually reach its purpose.

maybe we can take the issues one at a time?

first up , the mosque was standing on a temple .. there may be doubts about the authenticity of this one. the issue cropped up only some years ago based on questionable assumptions. even if it be true, this is but one of the punishments of a victor over the defeated. the hindus were equally merciless when it came to destruction of budhist and jain viharas. even among the hindus themselves... vatapi was burned including the temples by the pallavas. much as we don't like it, it is difficult to selectively rewrite history

it is this sort of special child treatment to muslims that has spoiled them , by ur own statement why do muslims deserve any haj money when hindus dont get money for religious travels ,, ? not sure about the origins of this one. i think this was one of those practices we inherited at the time of independence. the amount involved is a small percentage compared to our overall budget. at the time of independence, we could have overhauled some of the practices. right now it is a political untouchable issue, i think. even if one government reverses it, the next will reinstate it. best to leave it as is, without increasing or decreasing the money involved.


why is there no uniform civil code that treats all citizens equally? why are some more equal ? again this was a lost chance at the time of independence. rajiv gandhi tried to revive this. but there is no political support from either the muslims. most of the hindus, i think don't care.

how rt is it to let them marry more than one wife and multiply against the rts of other communities ? i think hindus used to marry multiple wives too. re large families, it has been proved that access to education and upward mobility is the shortest and surest method to small families. maybe, we should revisit the issue of providing more opportunities for muslims. i don't mean it in a 'quota' sense, and more as a sure way, to protect ourselves and for the overall prosperity of the country. inspite of the favouritism of the governments (central, tamil nadu), barring the few merchant class, i think, the majority of the muslims are poor and have no access to upward mobility. hence their being swayed by the mullahs and the retro elements. i think so anyway.

india is secular bcoz of the tolerant hindus here ,left to themselves the christians and muslims wuld have divided this country into a christian and muslim half and wuld still be fighting for more of each other's land ... sir, i think much water has flowed since india was entirely hindu, if it ever was. since the advent of budhism, jainism both of whose popularity was extensive, hindus have been on the accommodating or being 'forced to accommodate' mode. for over 700 years it was muslim hegemony, followed by the british. the exit of the british provided an opening for the hindus to share power, something that has been absent for over a millenium. i emphasise 'sharing' here, only because, the india of today, is in ways, geographically different from the ancient hindu india, in its composition and characterestics. it is far too large and complex, to be labelled to one religion or language. any imposition of any type will only lead to resentment. the beauty of our democracy, is that in most cases, we have converted malcontents into the ruling class. thus in many instances, blunting the appeal of fissiporous tendencies. main exception is kashmir.

i think a strong bjp is a good check/balance to the congress. your thoughts on rejuvenating bjp made sense in many instances. however, i beg to disagree on your further thinking, of fostering the sense of entitlement for the hindus to the extent of alienating our minorities. They too are Indian. We cannot be at war against ourselves. See what happened in sri lanka.

after all, we are a nation of minorities - religion, language, caste and creed, divide us more than what we can imagine. any appearance of hegemony of one group, will unite other disparate groups due to fear.

i think, a good scenario, is constant, steady economic growth, which provides increased education in our villages, so that the women are ultimately recognized as humans and not chattel.

after all, we only have to look at our community, about 100 years ago - large families, ill treatment of widows and bowing to all the ills of orthodoxy to such an extent, as to practice untouchability.

if we can, over a few generations, come to the stage that we are today, i am quite sure, given time the others would too. after all, is it not the fact that the others are trying to emulate the examples of our community, which is causing our current angst re quotas in schools and colleges?

we realized that the path to upward mobility is through the universities and colleges, long ago. it is that fact, that has given us enough tools, that we have, by and large, been immune to social policies introduced by various governments towards inclusivity of other communities into the world of learning and erudtion.

one sure way to even further mitigate any legislated shortcomings, is to enlarge the pie. may we all wish for a long sustained prosperity, under the new government.

not because i like congress. but because, i think, given the circumstances, this is the best thing that has happened to the country.

thank you.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri vivekam.vairagyam,

I totally understand that the invaders in the past, especially muslims have destroyed many of our temples. I am sure some of them were very important, perhaps standing on some punya bhoomi and mosques were deliberately built over them. This was then.

But in 1947 we declared our nation as a republic, granted everyone equal citizenship, adopted secularism, Indian way. So, we are all Indians and in this set up we need to follow the constitution and the law and can not have mob rule, whetever the inequities in the past might have been. Once you start asking for redress based on past atrocities, every person in this world will be shown as having forefathers who did something wrong. Because mores change over time and what was acceptable then is not acceptable today.

So, in this context, we have no option but to live peacefully with other minorities. Unfortunately the majority of the muslims who chose to stay in India were generally not very well educated and looking back, mistakes were made in terms of keeping different civil codes for different communities, as well as forming states along the linguistic lines. These have not contributed to a strong sense of nation building - which is necessary if India has to be able to grow more prosperous.

All the issues you have cited are real. But they need to be resolved politically, not by mob action where the majority terrorizes the minority trying to show that the Hindus are not cowards. This type of behaviour by the 'majority' in a country of minorities will only end up in untold tragedy.

Sri Kunjuppu has posted a very thoughtful response to this issue and I agree with him fully.

By the way, can you please tell me how am I 'politically correct?'.

Regards,
KRS

But then

two quotes that speak to these issues. The first speaks to the issue of the usurped shrines.

"Mosques built after destroying temples are the sign of slavery and Muslims should hand over the same to Hindu Society" - Mahatma Gandhi in 'Navjeevan' dated July 17, 1937.
​

The second quote tells us what the other side thinks of us, precisely because of our refusal to stand up for what is sacred to us.

"Hindus profess secularism because they are cowards and are afraid of Muslim countries." - Syed Shahabuddin - Convenor of Babri Masjid Coordination Committee (BMCC) in 'Sunday' dated March 20, 1983.


read these two blogs to get a sense of the kind of people u r dealing with

the six destrcutions of the somnath temple

http://dharmaveer.blogspot.com/2009/02/islams-six-destructions-of-somnath.html

ayodhya a primer ...

http://dharmaveer.blogspot.com/2009/02/ram-janmabhoomi-issue-revisited_07.html

and btw , krs-ji u r politically very correct , i gotta give that to u !


​

 

[vivekam.vairagyam]

kunjuppu-ji ...

wow .. jus coz u sed u r doubtful abt the mosque standing on a temple doesnt make it any less true .. sir , ur ignorance of a fact doesnt make the fact non-existent , u are more than welcome to read any of the many works authored/co-authored by arun shourie on this subject ....

as regards the uniform civil code , haj and ploygamy ... all ur statements simply point to the lack of courage and conviction to do wht is right .... u might want to take a look at how muslim demographics is affecting europe , jus coz u talk sweet and soft , doesnt mean that it is the right way out , muslims got more than their fair share of land during independence , did they stop after that? for some reason or other , they want more of india ... kashmir , kalistan and wht not ... a cat is more than welcome to close its eyes and think all the world has gone dark ... whtever was proposed in my post wuld in no way affect anyone who is indian first ...

as reagrds the buddist and jain viharas ,i suggest u to go and read ur history first , it was violence , black magic cult and authoritarianism against hindus that resulted in those backlashes , most of the times ,and even after that hindus were always ready for a debate on the truth behind buddhist beliefs .... if there are genuine instances of wrong , no matter who we atleast need to learn wht happened and why and where and start taking remedial steps .... the problem comes when religion and state are not separate , when these religions start influencing unfair policy approaches and sell secular equality as a lip service ... but that is exactly wht the media in india is becoming with evangelical organisations owning pretty much large stakes in ndtv and the hindu newspaper ... does it even cross ur mind that such ownership wuld be using its stake to further its interests and may be already doing that?

can u give me one vaild reason as to why the lotus and sun in the ncert emblem culd be considered redundant and needed to be changed to a cross and crescent ?

i am all for a country where religion and state are separate and one's religion cannot be allowed to dictate formation of govt or policy .... but that is not wht is happening ... so to counteract the one-sided , unfair pull of chirstian and muslim vested interests , the hindus need to pull the opposite side so that the needle can stay in the middle ...

 

[Seshadri Subramaniam]

shri kunjuppu,

--> mosque vs temple: history is full of such questionable assumptions; one could then selectively choose to suit one's argument, isn't it? indians, as a majority, tend to look at the written history of the westerners as the 'ultimate charter' of the history of mankind... it is where the fallacy springs up... do we have no history at all that we have to be told by an outsider? there is ample evidence to show that many existing mosques were constructed by either demolishing temples or by superimposing on them... as the law lends the hand to the victorious, it established itself over a period of time (where the 'hindus' were the vanquished)...

again it does not do justice to point out the aggression between saivaites vs. vaishnavites or vs. jains/buddhists... are we trying to justify the demolition of temples here? just because there is an earlier history of saivites prosecuting jains??

going by your logic, we need not celebrate independence day itself - independence from what? whom? why did we not think the british to be our people just as you purport the muslims to be?

--> special treatment to muslims: it IS a fact... no doubt about it; in fact manmohan singh went overboard stating that the first right to the nation's resources were to the minority!!! again the justification mentality.... aargh... can any hindu do that kind of justification to his community and get away with it?

i think your religious tolerance is going out of bounds to lean over to endanger the 'hindu' majority in india...

--> marriage: it is a laugh that having many wives is a way to upward mobility! yes, it is good that it remains your opinion only...

--> secularism: yes, india, the country we know now is vastly different, both geographically and in spirit, from the nation of yore...

your points would be valid if we speak of all people, of all religions, having similar sentiments and tendencies towards one another... you write as if the other religions have lost opportunities just because of their being a minority! and that too with all the tolerance and kinsmanship with hindus... christians and muslims are still trying to gain control over india... albeit you may not agree with this statement...

the more i see your posts, the more i think that you have a victimised mentality that pours itself against the existing practices... we are all victims and victors in this game of life, but please do not extrapolate this to undermine our 'hindu' practices...

politics, today, is all about appeasing separate group identities... and in this race, minority appeasement has taken the edge... it is done in fervour, rather... and the argument of 'one nation-one people' and 'equal treatment' has been handed out so long conveniently ignoring the ground reality...

why do we have to think about 'hindus' persecuting jains or buddhists when the question is about muslims/christians and 'hindus'?

why do we have to degrade ourselves by quoting our past history when the question is about our rights and lost heritage?

upward mobility, education etc (of the society as a whole) are possible only when there is unity - where religion is deep rooted, there can be no such unity... you may not like this statement, but it is a fact...

bjp, this time around, has got its cards wrong... i agree with vv in most of his points... they have to stop thinking from a defensive and aggressive viewpoint and work with a positive mindset and to help the society... rhetorics wont work anymore...

congress is already announced that rahul could be the future pm of india... they have shown a young face... there are quite a number of youngsters in the congress now (although they are riding on their family names)... this way, it has shown its outward intent to promise a stable period of growth combined with youth...

bjp seems to have regressed itself over the past couple of years, and with time running short for the senior members, it became a desparate attemp to vie for power... and that is where its tactics failed...

i dont want to see another party come to power just because it says it champions the cause of the 'hindus'... rather it should work at the grassroot level all over india with a genuine intent to do social justice...

congress can, perhaps, never do that with its background and character...

bjp at best can start now, if it has to come near anywhere of gaining respect at the next polls...

regards,

 

[vivekam.vairagyam]

Dear Sri vivekam.vairagyam,

I totally understand that the invaders in the past, especially muslims have destroyed many of our temples. I am sure some of them were very important, perhaps standing on some punya bhoomi and mosques were deliberately built over them. This was then.

But in 1947 we declared our nation as a republic, granted everyone equal citizenship, adopted secularism, Indian way. So, we are all Indians and in this set up we need to follow the constitution and the law and can not have mob rule, whetever the inequities in the past might have been. Once you start asking for redress based on past atrocities, every person in this world will be shown as having forefathers who did something wrong. Because mores change over time and what was acceptable then is not acceptable today.

So, in this context, we have no option but to live peacefully with other minorities. Unfortunately the majority of the muslims who chose to stay in India were generally not very well educated and looking back, mistakes were made in terms of keeping different civil codes for different communities, as well as forming states along the linguistic lines. These have not contributed to a strong sense of nation building - which is necessary if India has to be able to grow more prosperous.

All the issues you have cited are real. But they need to be resolved politically, not by mob action where the majority terrorizes the minority trying to show that the Hindus are not cowards. This type of behaviour by the 'majority' in a country of minorities will only end up in untold tragedy.

Sri Kunjuppu has posted a very thoughtful response to this issue and I agree with him fully.

By the way, can you please tell me how am I 'politically correct?'.

Regards,
KRS

But then

krs-ji

where in my post did i ever suggest mob action to redress past wrongs ? ur suggestion to that effect is inaccurate , rt?
when u agree that we are all indians , ..... simple ,treat everyone as indian , but if minorities want special rights in running institutions , polygamy , religious travel and wht not .. it is a clear cut case of defeating the equality clause esp if they are not willing to give up those unfair previleges in the national interest , this then proves that they do not think they are indian first ... never are hindus aggressive first-up, even in godhra the violence started after 56 innocent hindus including women and children were burnt alive , do u know they have not even had one hearing in our courts after more than 6 yrs ?

u r able to say we r all indians , but u r fine to let some indians enjoy unfair priveleges jus coz they have chosen a different god ... wuld u say that is not politically correct?

 

[Seshadri Subramaniam]

But in 1947 we declared our nation as a republic, granted everyone equal citizenship, adopted secularism, Indian way. So, we are all Indians and in this set up we need to follow the constitution and the law and can not have mob rule, whetever the inequities in the past might have been. Once you start asking for redress based on past atrocities, every person in this world will be shown as having forefathers who did something wrong. Because mores change over time and what was acceptable then is not acceptable today.

shri krs, just so, a bunch of people constituted the framework of our country, do we have to shift our ideologies? i mean, if there were to be a landslide victory for bjp in the next elections and if the constitution were changed to read 'hindu country', would you agree with the set up?

just curious coz you seem to point out that just because it has been framed so, we have to do so, ignoring all other aspects...

regards,

 

[GopalaswamyShridharan]

vivekam.vairagyam :-

Whatever Gandhiji said should be done,i think.As he was very wise and got us independance in a relatively non-violent way.

Today the UPA has got majority and Congress has won splendidly.I think peoples verdict is very clear.Dr.Manmohan Singh,has earned this verdict,i think.

As the temple issue has been mentioned,maybe congress will themselves build it as they were the party in rule when it was demolished,i think.

gopal.

 

[KRS]

My response is in 'blue':

krs-ji

where in my post did i ever suggest mob action to redress past wrongs ? ur suggestion to that effect is inaccurate , rt?
I was talking about the Babri Masjid incident. That was mob action, correct?
when u agree that we are all indians , ..... simple ,treat everyone as indian , but if minorities want special rights in running institutions , polygamy , religious travel and wht not .. it is a clear cut case of defeating the equality clause esp if they are not willing to give up those unfair previleges in the national interest , this then proves that they do not think they are indian first ... never are hindus aggressive first-up, even in godhra the violence started after 56 innocent hindus including women and children were burnt alive , do u know they have not even had one hearing in our courts after more than 6 yrs ?
The minority issues can only be solved through consensus building. Thank god we have a uniform criminal code instead of seperate ones (one forthem as Sharia and one for the rest). They agreed to this because of long, patient negotiations. Godhra shows that violence does not pay on either side.

u r able to say we r all indians , but u r fine to let some indians enjoy unfair priveleges jus coz they have chosen a different god ... wuld u say that is not politically correct?
It is not I who let them have those 'privileges'. By the way, do you know that Indian Govt. subsidizes yatra to Kailash? But the # of people allowed is small and so the money is small.

There is also a miscoception that the Govt. is spending a lot on Haj. I did look in to the math and because Indian Govt. forces them to travel on Air India, my inkling is that the subsidy is a wash or may be even profitable. This is why the Haj Board does not want the Govt. to run this. By the way what do you think is the percentage of Indian muslims having multiple wives?


NDA was in power - they did not do anything to curb all these 'privileges', did they? Again, these can only be changed through consensus of everyone.


If this makes me 'politically correct' so be it.

Regards,
KRS

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri SS Ji,
My personal view is that India will never become a 'Hindu' country, because of the deep divisions within our religion. At least not in my life time.

But in the unlikely event that BJP comes to power with a huge mandate and the people want India to be declared a 'Hindu Nation', why not? That's what democracy is all about.

One has to work within the system to legally alter it. Otherwise one would be sabotaging the country's framework.

Regards,
KRS

shri krs, just so, a bunch of people constituted the framework of our country, do we have to shift our ideologies? i mean, if there were to be a landslide victory for bjp in the next elections and if the constitution were changed to read 'hindu country', would you agree with the set up?

just curious coz you seem to point out that just because it has been framed so, we have to do so, ignoring all other aspects...

regards,

 

[happyhindu]

Shri VV-ji ,

1) Please let me know in what way wud you say that the present day Ayodhya is the one mentioned in Ramayana? And if it is the same Ayodhya, then in what way can one come to understand that the Ram temple there signifies the exact brith place of Ram? Did it exist 1.7 million years ago?

2) In what way is building a Ram temple going to help / solve the current lack or pace of development, infrastructure and otherwise, of the country?

3) If Gandhiji had lived for 20 years more after independence, he probably wud have said something else. Ram janma bhoomi issue did not exist in his time. Do we need to hold on to specific sayings of specific individuals and apply it to specific situations (that meet our individual ideas) ?

4) Since you speak of the uniform civil code, pray, let me know what is called uniform in this world.

5) A muslim cannot take a second wife without the consent of the first wife. If the man and the (first) wife are educated, instances of polygamy are highly rare, if not impossible. Muslim women i know have chosen to abort unplanned pregnancies, irrespective of what their religion says. Nobody has more than 2 kids these days. According to someone who supervised family planning surgeries for a long time, there are hindus in villages who have 2 or more wives even today. According to her, it is very difficult to create awareness in them to stop producing children. So there is nothing stopping a hindu from producing children either. Only education helps.

SS,

again it does not do justice to point out the aggression between saivaites vs. vaishnavites or vs. jains/buddhists... are we trying to justify the demolition of temples here? just because there is an earlier history of saivites prosecuting jains??

going by your logic, we need not celebrate independence day itself - independence from what? whom? why did we not think the british to be our people just as you purport the muslims to be?

Is there any reason to think that Kunjuppu-ji 'pointed out' aggression b/w saiviaites-vaishnavites or jain-hindus to justify anything or justify demolition of any temple? And in what way is this connected to any independence day celebration? Are you possibly equating muslims to english? The British fattened their coffers back in the UK looting india. The muslims on the other hand lived here. Indian muslims are of indian ethnicity.

Every single community has its share of stuff that can fall into the purview of "socially-unacceptable" in the current time. If a hindu wants to seek justification from a muslim now, then a dalit can very well seek to demolish brahmanism as means to his betterment. In both cases, the ideology can come across as factually incorrect, because both come from screwed up selective history.
--

i prefer a prosperous peaceful india rather than a hindu india.

 

[Seshadri Subramaniam]

hh, you have not properly read or understood the posts...

shri kunjuppu justifies the building of a mosque over a temple citing the aggression of hindus over jains... so, am saying that if muslim aggression is accepted coz hindus had did it before, then why did we revolt against the british... british too lived here, and also in england... most of the modernization came from the british...

british and muslims had similar activities in our country - conversion and subjugation... through hook or crook or through torture...

The muslims on the other hand lived here. Indian muslims are of indian ethnicity.

you should read about how the moslems tortured hindus and killed them under threat of conversion... how their laws were and the status of hindus... your statement is a shocking piece of 'stockholm syndrome' effect...

'dalit', itself is a new word coined up.... all these anti-brahminism was initiated up by invading groups... but that is what i meant - whenever we try to recover something from our past, that is genuine, the justification mentality sets in...

if it is to be secular india, then everyone has to be treated equal; failing which the only viable alternative is a hindu india...

 

[happyhindu]

ss,

hh, you have not properly read or understood the posts...

Shri kunjuppu justifies the building of a mosque over a temple citing the aggression of hindus over jains... So, am saying that if muslim aggression is accepted coz hindus had did it before, then why did we revolt against the british... British too lived here, and also in england... Most of the modernization came from the british...

from my end, this is what i understood abt shri kunjuppu-ji's posts: That it is pointless to hound people based on caste / religion since each community has its share of past history of involvement in stuff that is currently socially-unacceptable. He did not mean to say that building a temple over mosque or building a mosque over a temple is justified. However, it is best that shri kunjuppu-ji clarifies this to you (sir, please do reply on this).

The british developed the country according to their vision because in all probability they did not expect to be shown their way back. They thot they wud rule india forever. They looted the country and sent it all back to the queen's coffers. The 'development' was a part of the vision to get better returns. Am told that some muslim rulers like babur looted and sent back the loot to afghanistan, but most others like tipu sultan sent back stuff nowhere; since they were either indians or had nativised their offspring here thru marriages.

Nowhere did i say that that the past muslim aggression is acceptable. But why are we singling out muslims alone for agression instead of looking into the fact that hindu history too is filled with aggression. Why not shivaites and vaishnavites also seek redressal by seeking whatever is this revenge now in the current time? Why not hindus and jains also seek redressel over that same stance of aggression? There are hindu temples in south india that were formerly jain. Why not hindus return those temples to jains? So many southie yadavas, esp those of south karnataka, were formerly jain. No one know how and when did they move to hinduism.

british and muslims had similar activities in our country - conversion and subjugation... Through hook or crook or through torture...

so, seeking revenge now will help? How?

you should read about how the moslems tortured hindus and killed them under threat of conversion... How their laws were and the status of hindus... Your statement is a shocking piece of 'stockholm syndrome' effect...

am amused at the use of 'stockholm syndrome'. According to you if someone seeks revenge now, then he / she does not have stockholm syndrome?

'dalit', itself is a new word coined up.... All these anti-brahminism was initiated up by invading groups... But that is what i meant - whenever we try to recover something from our past, that is genuine, the justification mentality sets in...

why was the word dalit coined up. Can we point our fingers and seek revenge from some of those people who worked in british survey offices in the colonial times for propagating one-sided history, can we go in search of their descendents and seek revenge now? am sure you wud agree that for those who are 'dalits' now, but were soilders formerly, trying to recover their past in this manner should also be justifiable..

if it is to be secular india, then everyone has to be treated equal; failing which the only viable alternative is a hindu india...

all are already treated equal (minus reservations). The concept of hindu india, as much as i like it, is a pipedream.

 

[happyhindu]

Three more reasons why BJP lost:

1) Its members portray the party as a pro-hindu in an age when people all over the country over give a damn for the politics of religion.
Note: John Dayal, secretary general of the All India Christian Council (AICC), said the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) was “defeated not by Christians or Muslims, but by secular Hindus.” From: http://compassdirect.org/en/display.php?page=breaking&lang=en&length=long&idelement=5933

2) Its brahmin cadidates wear their caste on the sleeve and seek votes based on caste. This is despite the fact that neither LK Advani, Narendra Modi, Venkiah Naidu, Rajnath Singh, the party's 6 spokespersons or others in the top brass ever wear their caste on their sleeve. In this way it is equated to the likes of others who seek votes based on caste / no-caste like DMK and BSP.

3) The senas beating up people going to pubs in mangalore must have set off alarm bells for other metros where the young and the secular indians wud certainly not have liked for such things to happen.

BJP, is more of a reactionary org for the likes of these fundamentalists: http://www.kashmirwatch.com/showexc...hive=&start_from=&ucat=15&var1news=value1news (a crazy guy thinks 'global state terrorism' is out to get islamic nations..wow :der: )

 

[hariharan1972]

shri krs, just so, a bunch of people constituted the framework of our country, do we have to shift our ideologies? i mean, if there were to be a landslide victory for bjp in the next elections and if the constitution were changed to read 'hindu country', would you agree with the set up?

just curious coz you seem to point out that just because it has been framed so, we have to do so, ignoring all other aspects...

regards,

Seshji,

The matter (of establishing the veracity of the temple) is sub-judice.

If the decision of the SC is in favour of the Hindus, How would you then look at it ? Would it be a decision of 'bunch of people' ? What if the decision is adverse ?

Whatever be it, I am certain that the victor will hail the verdict as victory of justice and the vanquished will indulge in pillory.

Please dont get me wrong. I am as devoted to Lord Ram as anyone else but i am of the view that we neednt be so pedantic about the location of the temple. Let us build a grand temple at Ayodhya at some other place.

There is some credence to the theory of the P-Secs (pseudo-seculars) that the razing down of the Mosque was the immediate flashpoint for Jihadi terrorism. I dont believe that if the Mosque stood where it was, India would have been peaceful. Nevertheless, what has happened has happened and it is time for all of us to put the past behind.

Ram Mandir was a good vehicle for the BJP to come to national mainstream and it struck a chord with people and found resonance for a while. If you do a dispassionate analysis of the cause of BJP's defeat, it is to do with the fact that people dont think of it as necessarily a better alternative to Congress.

Be that as it may be, I think it is a good opportunity for India to show to the world that Muslims of India dont need godfathers from the Islamic world.

It is shameful that a country that is bursting at the seams in terms of population and 800 million surviving on less than Rs.20 per day should engage itself with matters concerning alteration of history.

A grand temple for Lord Ram built on the precincts of where the babri stood earlier would make no difference to the lives of millions which includes Hindus.

The way i see this, a great opportunity to give an inch (of right) and take a mile. (of credibility and goodwill)