Pak Tea House » Opinion » An Australian takes issue over skewed article on Pakistan by Time Magazine
An Australian takes issue over skewed article on Pakistan by Time Magazine
I recently returned from a charitable trip to Pakistan, whereby I visited both Karachi and Islamabad. I spoke with several universities, key businesses, prominent business leaders and several religious people from all generations….On the day I returned to the office, someone had placed your magazine (January 16, 2012), on my desk. I read with interest your article on Karachi and the city in doom. For a person to have just returned from the very same place that your magazine described was somewhat bizarre, so I read with great detail your writer (Andrew Marshall’s) account.
Let me begin by saying that I often flick through your magazine and find the articles of great interest, but on this particular day and this particular article, I found certain comments to be both one sided and indeed very negative. I say that because I saw a different Pakistan to what was portrayed in your article. I do not and will not comment on the political or religious problems that the country faces, but I will go so far as to say that not everything is as bad as the image that your magazine paints.
Sure there are deaths in the cities. Please show me a city in the world, that is free from political fighting and unrest.
Sure there are differences in the political party opinions. Please show me a country in the world where the political parties agree.
Sure the innocent are suffering. Please show me a country in the world where wealth and power is equal and the innocent don’t suffer.
Sure corruption is in Pakistan. Please show me a country in the world that is corruption free.
My list could go on, but my point is that Pakistan does have problems…but so does every other country in the world in some way or another. However, in the case of ALL other nations, there are often good things to report and the media goes out of its way to promote these good things across the globe, whenever possible. The ridiculous amount of shootings in the USA are balanced off by the success of Google, Microsoft and Apple. The financial dilemmas of Greece are lost in the marketing of the Greek Islands as a holiday destination of choice. The child slave industry of India, is brushed under the carpet in favour of the nation’s growth in the global software boom. What I am trying to say, is that someone needs to look further into Pakistan and see that there are millions of great stories to write about, which would portray the country in a different light, to that what is being portrayed by your article.
When I was in Pakistan, I visited a towel manufacturing company (Alkaram Towels). They produced some $60million in export in 2011 and are aiming at $85million in 2012. A substantial increase in sales…in a recession I would remind you. The company was started by the current Chairman, Mr. Mehtab Chawla, at the tender age of nine, after his father passed away. Today the very man employs 3000 staff. Now that’s a story.
I visited universities of NED, Hamdard, Karachi, Szabist and NUST. The students are unbelievably intelligent. They spend their spare time developing APPS for android and apple. They are involved in cutting edge technology and no one in the world knows this. Why not send a reporter to Pakistan to look into this. Why not research good things in this nation, rather than just the bad things. At NUST (National Institution for Science and Technology – Islamabad)) there were 38,000 applications for medicine. There are only 83 seats for the medicine course on offer. The competition is unbelievable. In short it pushes the best to be even better. But the world doesn’t know this. Why ? Because no one wants to report on it, or no one knows about it…or both !!
Please do not get me wrong. I understand that news is news, but it is high time that the western world stopped promoting these terrorists and political wars in Pakistan and started to write something that would help the nation. Something positive. If we really care about global partnerships and economic growth, then I suggest we try and give Pakistan a helping hand. There are 180 million people in Pakistan, 65% are under the age of 25. The youth of Pakistan is its strength.. it is like a sleeping giant. If you think that India is a booming nation. I suggest you stop a second and look at Pakistan. Given a little help from the western world, Pakistan can become a dominant economy. She doesn’t want aid and she doesn’t need money… she just wants the chance to be seen in a different light. I believe we have a fundamental obligation to assist. The only question is, who will reach out first.
Warmest regards,
Tony Lazaro
To read the Time article, please click here for a pdf version
Filed under: Opinion · Tags: article, issue, Pakistan, Time Magazine
139 Responses to "An Australian takes issue over skewed article on Pakistan by Time Magazine"
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- MilesToGo
said http://youtu.be/7IoMrxMmVSs - Fingolfin
said Mythbuster
another very very significant probl... - Fingolfin said if this were Facebook i would have 'liked' Rex Min...
- PMA
said It is not hard to understand why Manto wrote what... - RajTOO
said Rex Minor,
India after Independence and even earl... - Rex Minor said @Tajender,
Remember my earlier post about the w...
- Rex Minor said One must clean the front of ones own house, before...
- Mythbuster
said "I thought that the educated and intelligent India... - Rex Minor said Why talk abut slavery in Islam, or in the USA and...
- ahem
said to rex
Muslims cannot be part of India and indi...
@Raj
If you can keep your head when all about you are loosing theirs and blaming it on you, but make allownce for their doubting too.
If you can wait and not be tired of waiting or being lied about do’nt deal in lies or being hated, do’nt give way to hating and do’nt look good, nor talk too wise.
…………….. Not bad from Kippling. It looks they are getting too personal and ready for the kill. Indian democracy or the mob rule? at what point they start lynching the individual?
Rex Minor
Mental too
No that was in response to your even earlier post where you lectured me also on jati varna etc. Don’t go around lecturing, the fact remains that nobody cares hair-splitting.
My post had nothing to do with what you wrote to BM. Stop pesting.
Bade Miyan wrote:
Many Indians travel far. No big deal!
Read the post again. I said, that collective punishment is permissible under certain conditions. Krishna himself makes clear that if people support those doing Adharma, they are just as culpable.
‘
It is no secret that Brahmans and Kshatriyas all failed to protect India’s national interests. Brahmans failed to study the changing world and keep up with the technological progress elsewhere and to maintain their own edge. Kshatriyas failed to kick the butts of the Muslims invaders. Their main culpability is that they could not main cordiality among themselves and allowed Bharatvarsha to become politically fragmented. The Vaisyas allowed the Brits to capture their own markets and failed to finance the resistance. Today all these “upper caste” jAtis have been compromised and are peddling Anglo-Americans interests on the one hand and selling India’s long-term stability by propping up Islamist networks in India. So yes they have all failed despite the privilege to serve Bharat and the resources at their disposal.
You misunderstand something. I AM COMING from that direction towards my current worldview.
Much of the western construct of individualism is built on a direct relation between the state and the citizen, especially in matters of social security, schooling, health plans, etc. Many of the support functions of the family have been transferred to the state. It is debatable how long the Western countries can keep up with this responsibility. Also family as an institution has taken a heavy beating in the West. Family members don’t feel they are that responsible for each other. So individualism has come at some price.
‘
I however fully support the concept of every individual trying to pursue his maximum potential, but not forgetting his responsibility to his family on the way!
‘
What many Indians awed by the West however do not realize is that Dharmic traditions have long been based on individualism. Every individual is responsible for his own Karma. Every individual is responsible for his own Moksha, in fact for finding his own path to Moksha even. That is something revolutionary from the perspective of Western intellectualism on individuality.
‘
It is not the West that has any authority to teach Indians about individualism, but rather it is India that can teach the West about individualism. I think here you make an error in judgment, perhaps due to your conditioning.
It has been your wish to put me in the Hindutva camp. I have never had any dealings with any of them.
‘
Hindutva camp is just one view espousing Hindu resurgence. In many ways I respect them, but in other ways I find them “shoddy”!
‘
They have been intellectually lazy! There is hardly much thoroughness in their analysis of our challenges. As Rajiv Malhotra puts it, they haven’t done much poorva paksha of the others. Instead of doing deeper analysis of the processes of conversion and its context, they are using crude methodology of Anti-Conversion Laws. Though in absence of an intellectual challenge to conversions, that is an acceptable temporary measure. Neither have they sufficiently analyzed secularism, or tried to define it. It is all ad-hoc and it is all knee-jerk with them! Still in other ways they themselves are too conscious of their image, and are not radical enough for my taste. So I am neither too awed by them nor do I condemn them.
It is a question, how one defines “forcefully”! I am saying within the current democratic parameters, it is possible to unseat those vested interests. Sometimes para-democratic strength too needs to be shown! But it is not in anybody’s interest to use violent force! Big changes require some time. The “upper-caste” jAtis also require some time to adjust, and they should also get that time!
This is where you don’t understand the concept of Dharma. If Hindus had been in possession of mosques, Dharma would have demanded that those lands be returned. India is the land of Dharma, and Dharma allows Muslims too to have their mosques!
‘
You see, temple land is land which belongs to the deity once it has been offered. It does not belong to any person or to the state. That land is not negotiable. It does not matter how much time passes. Dharma needs to be done! If it was just some palaces or something that the Islamists had taken over, that would have been different. That one could have simply ascribed to the tides of time. But on the issue of temples, time stands still. For time to flow again, Adharma has to be pulled out of the spokes of Time’s wheels.
‘
It is not a question of wishing to humiliate some community. It is not a question of revenge. It is not even a question of Muslims returning Hindu lands here. It is a question of returning lands which belonged to the Hindu deities! Dharma requires that the right of every individual or community to follow its faith needs to be respected. Disrespect was shown from the Islamists. That needs to be corrected.
‘
If it were a case of some temple being built over some mosque or church forcefully, again Dharma would have required a return to the original use, and I would have spoken in its favor.
‘
As I said it is not primarily an issue of punishing the “upper-caste” jAtis, but rather an issue of correcting the situation both as soon as possible but also without causing the upper-castes any trauma! Revenge is pointless.
‘
Many “upper-caste” individuals who acted adharmically with the “lower-caste” individuals are already dead. They would answer to their karmic accountability, perhaps in their next births, (should one believe in them)! Those who are alive and still act adharmically they would have to mend their ways or move aside one way or another.
‘
The issue is of correcting the system. The Reservation System can be considered as a means of compensation. The historically under-privileged jAtis can now avail of these quotas and get a faster track to upward mobility and means to live to their potential.
‘
So in case of both issues – temples and oppressed jAtis, the motive is to correct the system and not to punish anybody, neither the “upper-caste” jAtis nor the Indian Muslims, but each would experience a loss.
Raj,
This is perhaps an extended topic so I will write about it at length, but just a few comments:
“As I said it is not primarily an issue of punishing the “upper-caste” jAtis”
I don’t see how a demand for reparation can be considered as “revenge”. Personally, I think it’s a very fair demand. So, on one issue, you recommend reservations as a means of “going forward” but on the other, you see turning back the clock as the only means to go forward.
In fact, as a dalit individual, I’d be on a very strong ground to demand reparation for my current plight, which is a net result of the degradation suffered over centuries. I don’t care what Gita or other dharmic text say.
“temple land is land which belongs to the deity once it has been offered. It does not belong to any person or to the state.”
That is quite amazing. We live in a modern secular republic. The state defined by the constitution reigns supreme (as defined by Dr. Ambedkar). There is no space for such pocket states as temple or mosque or whatever.
“I said, that collective punishment is permissible under certain conditions. Krishna himself makes clear that if people support those doing Adharma”
Again, the state is not morally obliged to follow Krishna. You and I may think so, but the constitution is not based on that.
When I said forcefully, I meant using language in the strongest possible terms. I didn’t mean violence.
“Many “upper-caste” individuals who acted adharmically with the “lower-caste” individuals are already dead. They would answer to their karmic accountability, perhaps in their next births”
Absolutely true! In that case why punish the muslims in India today for the sins of their forefathers?
If we follow your logic, the whole system of globalization would collapse. In fact, one can argue, that living in germany, you are probably taking someone’s job and probably living in a house which was built on a pagan site and, therefore, guilty of perpetuating that injustice.
I feel pain when I visit Nalanda, but I also feel sorrow when I visit Agra fort and the Red fort. There is no sense in asking the british for reparations or the kohinoor diamond.
rex minor wrote:
Well the gentlemen here have had a lot of Western Koolaid to drink in their lives! They are sold out on the notion that the West gave us culture and civilization.
‘
It is self-hate mentality and trying to latch on to the West to make themselves look better.
‘
As such there is nothing wrong in accepting all that is better with others, except in order to appreciate what is better with others, one first needs to understand, what one’s own civilization has revealed; and as long as one is not willing to trade one’s culture and identity for the alien.
‘
Many Indians, especially the elite, the upper middle class are completely sold out to the Western worldview and bought in into all their propaganda about how they are superior.
‘
rex minor,
here is something you would like:
http://zcommunications.org/benedicts-maledicts-by-c-k-raju
@Raj TOO
Is this your article? I have not read the complete but a very narrative with references. A lot of work.
Rex Minor
PS
What makes Indian Govt. not ask for the return of the diamond?
Bade Miyan wrote:
Okay go ahead and tell me how this reparation thing works! Who exactly is going to pay and how much? Is there any central authority for any jAti? Does some jAti have any leadership? Who is going to be doing the collecting of this reparation? In what form would this compensation be – Gold, Land, Cash, Cattle?
‘
What are you going to tell a Rajput? Why did he not make an individual from an underprivileged jAti a soldier instead of himself?
‘
You must understand that in India, the systems are decentralized and self-organized. Only individuals and ideologies can be held responsible, and not arbitrary number of people who simply share an identity, say of jAti.
‘
Whatever you are saying, is not going to hold up in any court of law, and even if some judge can nail it down, the only one who can make the payment is the state, but then the Indian State was hardly responsible for the 12,000 years of history.
‘
Actually the amazing thing is that you think, that just because a state comes up somewhere, all past history becomes blank. A new state simply takes up all the old judicial cases.
‘
If two neighbors Ivanov and Sascha were having some property dispute in the Soviet Union, after its break up, do you think their dispute is gone in the new Russia? No! The new state inherits the old disputes.
‘
The Constitution of India has not debarred the old disputes. Having disputes is not unconstitutional.
The context was “strategic prudence” of a course of action, i.e. of collective punishment. Krishna gave an opinion on that.
‘
How is that relevant to the Constitution! There is no relevance!
‘
It is like my grandfather tells me to buy my car when I can pay the credit; and you tell me, the Constitution does not need to follow the advice of your grandfather!
Who said that Hindus want to punish Muslims for the sins of their ancestors? When is the return of illegitimately acquired property a punishment?
‘
That it is a punishment is a political spin on it! But logically thinking that is no punishment.
‘
In Germany, after the reunification, old land owners returned to East Germany and their lands too were returned, irrespective of its use at the time.
‘
In the case of return of temple lands, it is far easier for it does not affect the daily lives of the Muslims even. They are not being thrown out of their homes or anything. Simply that their mosques would be relocated and after some waiting instead of going to address X to pray, they will go to address Y to pray! That is minimum discomfort. The only casualty would be the pride of some hardcore fundamentalists, but then why is their pride more important than justice and the pride of Hindus?
These are meaningless and very weak analogies.
‘
If I see a pagan crying outside my window, I’ll deal with it sympathetically.
rex minor,
No, that is not my article!
‘
I consider the author a genius from what I’ve read about him so far!
rex minor,
the man is out to break the legs on which West stands, and I think he knows how!
rex minor,
here is a lecture he held in Teheran on 1 May, 2010!
http://multiworldindia.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/ckr-Tehran-talk-on-academic-imperialism.pdf
That is his blueprint to finish off West’s superiority! His main claim is that West’s main claim to superiority is that science is Western, and willingly or unwillingly, convinced or grudgingly, everybody in the world acknowledges that, but that is based on complete falsehood.
This man can rip up the West’s best suit!
Raj,
“Only individuals and ideologies can be held responsible, and not arbitrary number of people who simply share an identity, say of jAti.”
Do you see the contradiction in your arguments? Why don’t you give the same latitude to Muslims as well. Why should Muslims be thought as a collective unit and suffer punishment as such?
“if some judge can nail it down, the only one who can make the payment is the state, but then the Indian State was hardly responsible for the 12,000 years of history.”
and
“because a state comes up somewhere, all past history becomes blank. A new state simply takes up all the old judicial cases.”
So the new state can take old judicial cases but cannot fix responsibilities! So how will it assign mosques to ultra devout hindus?
“In the case of return of temple lands, it is far easier for it does not affect the daily lives of the Muslims even. ”
It seems strange to favor one course of action not because it is right but because it is easy to implement(I don’t know how). Reparations have happened before, eg.: Germany vs Israel.
I urge you not to have a tunnel vision but think about all possible ramifications. “These are meaningless and very weak analogies.”
It may not be so weak after all.
And what is punishment and what is not, is highly subjective.
Bade Miyan,
I thought I was clear but perhaps not so. I had said.
Now let’s use the template for Muslims. In what case would Indian Muslims be deemed eligible for collective punishment.
1) If they provide moral and logistical backup to Islamic terrorists or organized crime, and the state finds it difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff.
2) If there is a pattern in the whole community to act using intimidation of peaceful non-Muslim neighbors; acting violently if somebody uses his fundamental right of freedom of speech (“blasphemy” cases); not allowing others to enter their ghettos, thus constraining the freedom of movement within the country; speaking of separatism; etc. then yes the community is behaving in a adharmic and unconstitutional manner, and even if laws do not allow it, strategy would call for collective punishment in order to teach lessons. This however should not constitute any call for culling or anything.
3) If their rhetoric and behavior is excessively aggressive towards others for no particular reason other than to show some form of dominance!
All this is however predicated on the current behavior of the community and is NOT based on past historical behavior. The Muslims of that era are gone and what they did belonged to their karma!
If however the past actions were due to a certain mindset, a certain ideology then that ideology needs to be fought tooth and nail, until its last vestiges vanish.
So there is a certain method of looking for culpability in individual, community and ideology! The criteria are different.
What the pseudo-secularists of today fail to appreciate is that
a) The ideology which ensured the abuse of the rights of the inhabitants of this land for the last millenium is still alive and prospering, and they are just encouraging it.
‘
b) A correction of past injustices where possible need not be seen as punishing any community. Transfer of land from mosques to temples, where the mosques were built on temples which were demolished to humiliate the natives, is a MUST. That is justice. That is Dharma. The Hindus are not asking for reparations, or an eye for an eye, or revenge, but just correction.
‘
c) The Truth needs to be told about what happened. The truth is not for the reason of provoking the majority community, the Hindus, to do retribution on the Muslims, but it should be told in order to acknowledge the injustice done, as well as to kick-start a self-introspection among the Indian Muslims about their ideology and to undertake reforms so that it does not repeat.
As I said, I don’t consider the present generations of alive Indian Muslims responsible for the heinous acts of the past. I am not holding them responsible. I do however consider the ideology culpable.
‘
Neither would I know whose “upper-caste” individual’s collar I could squeeze and hold him responsible for the subjugation of the underprivileged jAtis of the past. I don’t know how to assign responsibility. If you have a formula, out with it!
‘
Those Hindus who either have lived in the neighborhood of the desecrated temple, or Hindus who have had a history with that desecrated temple, or Hindus who have devotion for the deity whose temple was destroyed would come forward, build an organizing committee and the court can return the desecrated temple land into their custody, AFTER the mosque has been translocated elsewhere. The ulema of the mosque and other Muslims can look for a suitable alternative place.
‘
As I said, the INTENTION here is NOT Punishment, Retribution, Reparation, Teaching Lessons, or even Assigning Responsibility. This issue is one of making Corrections for past Injustice. In the case of these DESECRATED and DESTROYED TEMPLES, a CORRECTION is possible. Not all past injustices can be corrected.
‘
Although it NOT Punishment, even if the Indian Muslims construe it as Punishment, it is completely irrelevant, because the priority is not about feelings of someone but about doing what is right!
Muslims continue to commit demographic aggression against non-muslims. What about this ongoing injustice against non-muslims? Temple and temple land are minor issues. Their attitude is: sooner or later we will overpower you anyway. Non-muslims have to look into this aggression by muslims very seriously before it is too late. Not only in India but in all non-muslim lands. A heinous book called holy book is behind all this. This book gives the muslim the instigation to be reckless, dishonest, aggressive, shameless, insulting to the non-muslims, arrogant and scheming.
Raj,
Please go through your arguments and give it some thought as to how it can be argued in a court of law. There are so many logical inconsistencies that it would never get beyond a lower court.
Don’t construct your arguments by pre-assigning blame and then looking for reasons. It can only be argued case by case basis.
Bade Miyan,
‘
You still have not told me how a Reparations from the “Upper-Castes” jAtis can be implemented in practice!
‘
Just because you are having trouble following the logic, does not mean that what I said is inconsistent. You have not been able to say, what is inconsistent. Here a summary again for your benefit!
‘
a) Cases of “Return of land of previously desecrated and demolished temples currently occupied by some Muslim structures” and “Reparations from ‘Upper-Caste’ jAtis for their historic oppression of historically underprivileged jAtis” cannot be equated.
‘
b) “Return of Temple Land” is a correction of past injustice which does not imply punishment of the individuals of the Muslim community for the past crimes of gone-by Muslim generations. “Reparations for Oppression of Historically Underprivileged jAtis” does constitute punishment of individuals of the “Upper-Caste” jAtis for the past discriminatory system upheld by gone-by “Upper-Caste” generations.
‘
c) “Return of Temple Land” is a understandable and implementable process. The steps are clear. “Reparations for Past Oppression” is a completely vague undefined knee-jerk idea without any details.
d) “Return of Temple Land” is however a process that has been frozen with the accompanied injustice unresolved. No Correction is being undertaken. “Reparations for Past Oppression” is a process that is ongoing is several ways, most prominent way being the “Reservations for certain jAtis”! Here wheels are moving. Here Correction is being undertaken.
‘
So much for your logic and analogy!
‘
Destroying a temple in the name of some religion, smashing the murtis of the deities, appropriating the land, then building some mosque on top of it, and humiliating the Hindus, is not simply a blame, it is recorded history. Other than that for the mosques in question, their history can be researched through archaeological and historical research. There are courts to weigh in on the matter in case the Muslims are not cooperative. Sure it is on case by case basis but the historical phenomenon of temple demolitions is a known fact, and there is no reason to be chary about assigning blame here.
‘
Bade Miyan,
the problem is not in the logic. The problem lies in your ideological orientation which has understood secularism from the viewpoint of Western liberals that it is on the one hand about separation from church and state, and on the other hand about protecting the “rights of the religious minorities”!
‘
The first secularism requirement you interpret as instituting a program in the state and government which tries to distance itself completely from culture and customs of the dominating culture. So every little custom which has its origin in the Hindu history has to be fully distanced from. In fact it needs to be negated where possible in order to show one’s determination to uphold secularism. This is just so much bunkum. What is being tried is to distance Republic of India from the Indian Civilization. The thing is you are all overdoing it and there is going to be then a strong reaction.
The second secularism requirement is fulfilled by going on a minority appeasement program, giving Hajj travel subsidies, Wakf salaries and what not! The Hindus don’t get anything like that! Moreover ideologically it is considered that the majority community is always the demon, the oppressor! This is taken for granted religiously by the liberals without regard to any history, any ideological dogma, any social meme analysis. So whether it is true or not, for you the Hindus are evil, and if it were not for you guys, the Hindus would go and chew the poor Muslims up. On the other hand in order to keep up the pretense that this position is correct you are willing to overlook every crime that the Islamists do or every trick that the Christian missionaries do!
‘
Instead a lavish ideology would be produced based on some past truths of caste discrimination, and that is to be used to blacken out every other social issue. If the Islamists in India are becoming aggressive or doing some injustice or not showing regret for their past injustices, and one tries to bring this to your notice, what do you do? You start screaming aloud about caste oppression! What the hell has one got to do with the other?
‘
What has “Return of Temple Land” got to do with “Past Oppression of underprivileged jAtis”? NOTHING. But still you wanted to make a connection! Because you are ideologically programmed to react like that!
‘
So if you want to restore some credibility to your position, you can start by telling me how do you propose to implement this “Reparations” program!
Raj,
If you can get over your obsession with name-calling, it would save a lot of space and it’s unnecessarily distracting.
*
I brought about reparations only because of your fixation with returning mosques to temples. That is just a start. There are hundreds of such cases waiting to uncover, if we go on that route. From all your accounts, it seems that we should favor one course simply because it’s more expedient. Imagine a day where cases are going to be heard based on expediency! That would be the end of civilization, as we know it.
*
Let me state this very clearly: I am not in favor of reparations. But, if there is a case for return of mosques to temples, I am fully in favor of reparations. Before we go about discussing the ***way*** to do it, let’s discuss the relative merit of the cases themselves. Implementation can come later. Besides, there have been examples of how to do it: native Americans, jews, native Australians, etc.
*
Let’s go to the post: January 28, 2012 at 4:08 pm
*
All those three reasons that you have cited as a qualification for terming a community as culpable can be applied to Hindutvavadis. But even then, I would have to ask you:
*
Where did you get that idea that ‘All or substantial’ number of Muslims in India are in favor of terrorism? If that were the case, India would be a hellhole. Remember, you have to prove this statement in the court of law.
*
“All this is however predicated on the current behavior of the community and is NOT based on past historical behavior. ”
*
I didn’t get your point. So you want to “correct” a historical mistake based on the current behavior of Muslims (?), but you don’t blame the current Muslims for the mistakes of their ancestors, some of who committed those criminal acts! This is quite an argument. I mean you have to choose a plaintiff and the guilty. In this particular case, for example, you readily take Muslims as a collective group to be assigned a guilty party but you are not ready to take Hindu as a group in another case of setting right a historical mistake. The law can only punish a criminal act; it cannot place blame on a specific ideology and pass a judgment.
*
Now going back to the case of the abominable treatment of the lower caste, I think that is a much clearer case of assigning blame. Muslims can rightly claim that though there were despicable acts of temple demolishing, but as rulers (if we are assigning muslim and hindu rulers) their record of treatment of their Hindu subjects is far better than the record of Hindu rulers’ treatment for their lower caste subjects. As you may well know, even under Aurangzeb, there were numerous Hindus employed as generals and governors. In fact, the crux of battle hardened veterans of the Mughal army was composed of Rajputs who were trusted more than their fellow muslims. I don’t remember any such record of treatment accorded to lower caste by the same Rajput rulers. Why, even now, we hear daily of some horrendous treatment of the dalits by the upper castes. So, if we are in the business of punishing a particular community for the sins of their ancestors, this, my friend, is a cut-and-dried case.
*
With regard to your point about “corrections” and such, as I said, that is a subjective point of view. Jews believe Israel was a historical correction; Arabs and a substantial portion of the world don’t think so. Even the, let us take your view and term this as correction. To take away a place of worship, which has been a mosque for centuries, is inflicting trauma on a community. What is the guarantee that tomorrow some x,y, and z would not cook up some similar historical fantasy and take away my residential place. You cannot say that it wouldn’t happen. In fact, you don’t even have to look far: In the land of the pure, the blasphemy law has been used for the most scurrilous purpose. Besides, there are hundreds of mosques that have been used as residential places in Punjab and Haryana after the Partition. That would have to be cleared as well.
*
Even here, let me give you the concession and assume that the court do pass such a judgment. Wouldn’t it fall foul of the tenancy laws?
*
You haven’t answered the question I asked a few posts earlier:
“So the new state can take old judicial cases but cannot fix responsibilities! So how will it assign mosques to ultra devout hindus?”
If the State decides, however, to take those cases, it has a slew of other cases to dispose of too. Just for starters, Muslims can rightfully ask for the ownership of Red Fort and sundry other monuments. Why, they can even ask for a major stake in the government because historically the British took that away from them. Of course, this would trigger our Hindu brothers to ask for another correction, which will encourage the aborigines to correct grievous harm done to them over the centuries. The real question is how far in the past are you willing to go.
*
“The problem lies in your ideological orientation which has understood secularism from the viewpoint of Western liberals”
The rest of your post is just a distraction. If that is my problem, then it’s a problem of our constitution as well. There are far greater personalities to take that blame, including the framers of our constitution. Instead of howling at the moon, you are better advised to focus on what can be done and look towards the future. You are allowing certain events in history to cloud your judgment.
*
“You start screaming aloud about caste oppression! What the hell has one got to do with the other?”
*
That again is a subjective point of view. I see it as interconnected and frankly, I don’t care two hoots for the mosques or temples. Reparation is more important to me and it should be taken care of asap.
Bade Miyan wrote:
Reparations to Israel by Germany were based on costs that Israel had to bear in order to settle European Jews in Israel, and as compensation for the all the property that was stolen from the Jews, as well as pensions to the survivors of the Holocaust. Israel never demanded nor received any monetary compensation for either the treatment of the Jews nor for the Holocaust. That is because this is based on the principle that whereas individuals can sue a state for their unjust treatment, when it comes to barbarity at the level of Holocaust, causing untold suffering to millions of people, the misery and suffering can not be measured in money!
Compensation to the Native Americans and Aboriginal Australians have been sketchy also been chiefly about return of traditional lands.
‘
Furthermore in the case of native Americans and aboriginal Australians, we are talking about such small minorities that they are considered almost museum civilizations. The Governments of USA and Australia can behave as if they represent those who divested them of their lands, freedom and lives. Because the majority in USA and Australians are the descendants of those immigrants of old.
‘
Native Americans and Aboriginal Australians are not going to be playing any major role either in the politics of the country or in the economy as a community. Their small numbers and limited resources don’t really make much of an impact. They were given some reparations because promising them a share of the political and economic pie of the land was not going to be a credible offer. Monetary compensation was the best alternative.
‘
So what do we learn?
1) Property is returned which was taken away illegally and criminally. So the issue becomes what property have the “Upper-Caste” jAtis taken away from the historically underprivileged jAtis. In the case of temples, it is clear what property is being claimed.
‘
2) For the suffering of whole communities, there has been no reparation claim formulated as such! The argument is that such a level of suffering can never be compensated by cash. The only way this can be compensated to some extent is through a) Exposing the Truth of the Oppression/Genocide; b) Teaching the coming generations of the atrocities; c) Remorse by the Perpetrators of these Atrocities.
‘
Regarding the oppression by “Upper-Caste” jAtis, some Truth has been told, much more needs to be done! This Adharma needs to told over generations so that it is not repeated! Also the “Upper-Caste” jAtis need to feel remorse about it as well as shame because of it! The right lessons need to be learned that Casteism is bad!
‘
In the case of Islam’s atrocities in India, there is dead silence. There Truth has been gagged. There is absolutely no Remorse among the Indian Muslims for the atrocities of Islamic invaders. But then the Indian Muslims are not necessarily the progeny of the Islamic invaders. The problem is that Ideology which caused those atrocities is still live and kicking. And that is not acceptable.
‘
3) However when the previously Oppressor and the previously Oppressed have to share a common Lebensraum, then there are some limits to where one can push it. If however the two are separated, then there is no limits as is the case with Germany and Israel, or even in the case of native Americans where they live sometimes in their own reservations. But within a closely knit society, the focus of the effort should be more on social equality.
‘
Besides affirmative action for the Oppressed is much more appreciated than punitive action for the Oppressor. The first is Correction, the second is Retaliation.
‘
In the case of caste, historically underprivileged jAtis have received reservations. In the case of Islam, what have the Hindus received till date? NOTHING! An Affirmative Action would have been to teach Indian Muslims about the greatness of the Indian/Hindu Civilization, so that they do not think of destroying it again! Nothing of the sort is happening! And Secularists are to blame!
Summary: If you go by your own examples, old property must be returned. In our context, the temples.
You do seem to be having difficulty understanding plain language.
1) I said IF. If the Indian Muslim community is seen to be …
2) There is no such thing as any law which prescribes “Collective Punishment”. So obviously, when I speak of “Collective Punishment”, I speak in terms of an imperative without prescribing how that punishment should be carried out. There are means outside that of normal court of law.
‘
So your whole objections are based on a wrong premise of what I meant.
You are interpreting it in a very skewed way.
a) I want to correct a historical injustice and not a mistake.
b) It has got nothing to do with current behavior of Muslims.
c) The historical injustice was committed by Muslims who are long dead.
d) The issue is one of making a correction. Mosque get relocated from a piece of historical temple land. A temple gets built there. If nobody has an objection it can be done right away. If somebody has an objection then there will be a court case.
e) If there is a case, then of course the historicity of the land would naturally be discussed and blame would be accorded to who so ever destroyed the temple.
f) Here the aim however is NOT TO APPORTION BLAME but to RECLAIM TEMPLE LAND.
g) The only role Muslims play here is as one party in a court case wishing to stop the transfer of historical temple land to the Hindus, and in the historicity of the dispute (but those were other Muslims long dead).
‘
So your whole objections are based on a wrong premise of what I meant.
‘
That is what happens when one grows up on doles of NCERT history books and communist propaganda! You really have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA OF HISTORY. Go brush up on your history first and then we will talk.
‘
And this time go read what the Hindutva Brigade has been writing, and then go and recheck all their claims against historical documents, just to be sure!
‘
Fernand Braudel wrote in A History of Civilizations (Penguin 1988/1963, p.232-236), Islamic rule in India as a “colonial experiment” was “extremely violent”, and “the Muslims could not rule the country except by systematic terror. Cruelty was the norm — burnings, summary executions, crucifixions or impalements, inventive tortures. Hindu temples were destroyed to make way for mosques. On occasion there were forced conversions. If ever there were an uprising, it was instantly and savagely repressed: houses were burned, the countryside was laid waste, men were slaughtered and women were taken as slaves.”
‘
Testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like “punishing” the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty. The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526).
‘
In comparison, the treatment of the “Upper-Caste” jAtis towards underprivileged jAtis was less about slaughter, rape, slavery, as was the case of Muslim treatment of Hindus, and more about discrimination, separation, humiliation and serfdom.
I think, you have not understood the principle. This is not about land one empire lost to another empire, or one king lost to another king.
‘
Even in pre-Islamic India there were wars and political boundaries kept on changing. But when a new Raja came, he hardly used to touch private property, and if yes, then usually that of the previous royalty and their chamchas. More importantly he NEVER used to touch temples or any other places of worship and meditation.
‘
When Islamists invaded India, they were more than eager not just to plunder the temples, which one could understand as a form of a very base character and greed, but they also went further than just desecration – they demolished those temples, appropriated the land and on it built mosques. Injustice was done! It was not simply a case of someone extending his empire, but also a case of civilizational aggression.
‘
So your example of Red Fort is really moot. That is a political structure and thus changes hands with the political sovereign.
There is nothing wrong with the Constitution. Those who framed it were convinced they were infusing Indic values into it, even if the terminology was Western, something natural, because the Document is in English.
‘
It is your Western liberalism (and I use the word derogatorily) which does not see the Constitution as an Indian Document imbibing Indian values, but rather from the Western definitions of those words and in Western political context.
You see, there is no way around Dharma. Hindus are not looking for retribution, but a correction of an historical injustice. If the present guardians of the state can deliver on that justice, something the Constitution itself promises its citizenry, then all is fine.
If not those same guardians of the state would be considered illegitimate and massacred on the open roads.
‘
You like to use the word “Hindu Terror” easily even though nowhere there is any! But if Dharma is not given what it demands, there will be a Dharmayudh, and the Pseudo-Secularists would be finished off with their heads hanging from a pole!
‘
You may think you have all the reins in hand and Hindus have been checked! You are mistaken!
‘
It is not the Muslims that would suffer that Dharmayudh but rather the traitors with Hindu names!
‘
So it is up to the pseudo-secularists. If they want peace, they have to provide justice!
Raj,
The problem with your posts is that you write too much and with commentary that have nothing to do with the things we are discussing:
*
“You like to use the word “Hindu Terror” easily even though nowhere there is any! But if Dharma is not given what it demands, there will be a Dharmayudh, and the Pseudo-Secularists would be finished off with their heads hanging from a pole!”
*
What’s up with that stuff? The anonymity of the Internet provides you a cushion to express such fantasies but they are really quite silly, and a person of your age (I assume you are in your 40s) should be a little temperate in such matters.
*
As I said before, and I repeat that again, your arguments in large part rests on the expediency of your claims. You seem to believe that mosque-vacating business is straightforward (actually, it’s not) so it should be done but the much larger issue of dehumanization of lower castes should be left on expression of moral regret or penitence on behalf of upper castes. Quite a few of us have problems with that sort of argument. One can always find a way to do it.
*
“There Truth has been gagged. There is absolutely no Remorse among the Indian Muslims for the atrocities of Islamic invaders. But then the Indian Muslims are not necessarily the progeny of the Islamic invaders. The problem is that Ideology which caused those atrocities is still live and kicking.”
*
That is a strange argument. If you accept that Indian Muslims are not necessarily the progeny of the Islamic invaders, then why should they express remorse? Plus, your argument will carry more weight if you convincingly prove that it was only Hindus who suffered losses. Except the initial Ghaznavi raids, Muslims suffered equal if not more losses.
*
“In comparison, the treatment of the “Upper-Caste” jAtis towards underprivileged jAtis was less about slaughter, rape, slavery, as was the case of Muslim treatment of Hindus”
*
Hmm..well, at least after ’47, we know for sure that that is not true at all. I can assure you that till very recently the practice of untouchability was very much alive in my village too. I remember how the ‘mehtar’ who came to clean our toilet was studiously avoided and we had strict instructions not to touch him. I remember vividly one holi when as a kid feeling envious of the ‘dom’ kids playing holi with gay abandon I joined them and when I came home I was roundly thrashed. Mercifully, that stuff ended with the death of my grandma. I am just giving you an idea. Now, we may differ as to what humiliation is but if I were a dalit living in Mughal times, I wouldn’t have minded if those high caste duffers got their butts kicked every now and then. That is also the reason why the converts turned out to be the most ruthless destroyers of temples. Malik Kafur was a convert and he was quite relentless in demolishing temples. I would do the same. I don’t freaking care for a place of worship where I am not allowed to enter.
*
“I speak in terms of an imperative without prescribing how that punishment should be carried out. There are means outside that of normal court of law.”
*
And what are those means, pray tell me. We aspire to a modern power. Unfortunately, your options are restricted in a modern state. The constitution and the rule of law reign supreme. Sorry to disappoint you.
*
“Mosque get relocated from a piece of historical temple land. A temple gets built there. If nobody has an objection it can be done right away. If somebody has an objection then there will be a court case.
e) If there is a case, then of course the historicity of the land would naturally be discussed and blame would be accorded to who so ever destroyed the temple.”
*
Oh trust me bro, there would be lot of people with such objections. So, it seems that it boils down to whose version of history should be accepted. Now, I don’t know what circles in Germany you find yourself, but historians like Sita ram goel and such are not really considered academically authentic. I wish you luck however. Remember also that there are a lot of temples that were Buddhist viharas.
*
“he hardly used to touch private property, and if yes, then usually that of the previous royalty and their chamchas. More importantly he NEVER used to touch temples or any other places of worship and meditation.”
*
Actually, that is not true. Nalanda was destroyed multiple times. It’s just that Muslims did a complete job of it.
*
“So your example of Red Fort is really moot. That is a political structure and thus changes hands with the political sovereign.”
*
That is not totally true. The Mughal king also took the title of “defender of the faith” so Muslims can rightfully claim that he was also a religious and political head. And, to be fair, a lot of hindu kings were also viewed as such. Till recently, the king of Nepal was considered an avatar of Vishnu, or something like that. Of course, the most recent king turned out to be such a nutcase that even the most devout Nepalese hindus could not stomach it without committing blasphemy, and , therefore, they got rid of that nonsense.
*
“If not those same guardians of the state would be considered illegitimate and massacred on the open roads.”
*
Again, not very nice of you. Why dirty the open roads? Why this Kolaveri di?
*
“But if Dharma is not given what it demands, there will be a Dharmayudh”
*
Lage raho Bhisma pitamah. I wish you all the luck but I hope you carry your aim with clear head.
*
Just an advice, Fernand Braudel is not considered an authority on Indian civilization. For example: among tortures practiced, impalement and crucifixion were not known in Muslim India. I hope you come back with cogent arguments about how you are going to argue your case in the court of law. I am watching Aus open and so decided to write an extended reply otherwise it’s a waste of time, mate.
Bade Miyan,
‘
Reparations in principle are only as good as Reparations in practice. The thing is I don’t really believe you give a damn about the oppression that the underprivileged jAtis had to face. It is simply a tool you use to “sabotage” any talk of justice for the Hindus regarding return of desecrated temple land.
‘
If you give two hoots about the whole “Upper-Caste” oppression of the others, you would have offered a plan for those reparations!
‘
Without a solid plan of implementation which takes all ethical considerations into account, you’re simply offering the underprivileged jAtis a whole lot of hollow rhetoric, which is all the more humiliating because again the issue of their oppression at the hands of the “upper-caste” jAtis is being used only as political football. I don’t think you will impress many with your fake concern and fake sympathy. In fact you yourself have said, that you would take up the issue of reparations ONLY IF the issue of temples is taken up. So obviously it is fake.
It doesn’t matter what they call themselves. Structures and Places still have their different use. Political-security constructions such as forts, palaces, etc. belong in the political domain, whereas mosques belong in the religious domain. Political domain would always be contested and such contests are taken as acceptable.
‘
Violating the religious domain is however a violation of a fundamental right of the human – his religious freedom!
‘
Get your logic straight!
You may aspire to be whatever you want, but you still have to look at whether people are getting their justice. It is because the pseudo-seculars had created an impression that Hindus will not get justice that Godhra happened. The rule of law reigns supreme only as long as the law is working to provide justice. If not society takes its own actions.
‘
Actually it is the pseudo-secularists who are undermining Indian Constitution and Law by preventing the provision of justice on the issue of temples, and instead saying that looking for justice is akin to howling at the moon! By saying that the Hindus cannot get their justice within the confines of Law in India, you yourself are pushing the Hindus to go beyond the Law to look for justice. So who is the bigger culprit? Of course, the Pseudo-Secularists!
‘
So in order to assert their Anti-Hindu stance, they are willing to destroy the Indian State!
‘
Bade Miyan,
it seems you still have to work on presenting cogent and logical arguments; a faculty that requires some serious attention.
‘
The power of the pseudo-secular is built upon trying to hide the Truth of Islamic rule in India, and trying to talk the Indian into believing that he lacks the raw strength of the Islamics and the intellect of the West!
‘
This project is deemed for failure! The Indian Growth Story and the Internet, something you thought would work for you, is giving the Indians both the Confidence and the Information, a deadly cocktail, which can bring down all your carefully built narratives full of smoke and mirrors.
‘
You of course are simply a victim of that smoke and mirrors and those NCERT books!
‘
Over and Out!
I wonder what Tony Marshal thinks abour aborigenies welcome to the Prime Minister?
Rex Minor
Bade Miyan writes:
“I don’t freaking care for a place of worship where I am not allowed to enter.”
So what about Makkah?
Is Makkah at all a holy city?
In Indian subcontinent muslims are representatives of aggression and their rights have to be less.
@Raj
Hav you ever visited Bdapistß They do not have mosques but only cathedras and church buildings. Surprised that the Ottomans ruled there for centuries. They used the church buildings for prayers as well and vacated them when they left. Those who invaded the Indian land should have followed the same strategy. The one thing your discussion does not show that those who worshiptoday in Indian mosques were previously hindus and prayed in the same house and place. They probably renovated and restructured the building to facilitate the removal of man made figures from the buildings. In otherwards they are the genuine owners of yesterday temples and todays mosques. Perhaps todays hindus should be allowed to say their prayers along the old walls of the building like the jews of Jerusalem do. Many christian churches have closed down in Germany because of lack of congregation. Perhaps Hindus could over these buidings, since the church authorities do not allow these buildings to be handed over to muslims.
Nothing personal, just to make sure that all those who want to worship God should be supported. Buildings are not important.
@Observ
There are no temples or churches in Mecca since there are no non muslim communities living in Mecca.
Rex Minor
rex minor,
that is simply a lot of speculation and very little history!
‘
The large majority of Hindus who converted were either the underprivileged jAtis and in some few places the landed gentry. Where the landed gentry converted, those areas are today mostly in Pakistan and Bangladesh.
‘
The underprivileged jAtis were anyway not in charge of the temples.
‘
So even the speculation you have gone into has extremely weak logical foundations. I am not saying that may not be the case here and there, but on the whole that was a rarity.
‘
Furthermore once a temple has been constructed it belongs to the deity. Even the 22 billion USD treasure lately found in a temple in Kerala belongs to the deity and temple. Nobody has ownership over it. Not individuals, not any groups, and certainly not the state.
‘
So in the rare case, it is not even up to those who use the temple to decide its demolition and conversion into some mosque, should they convert.
‘
Under Indian Law, a deity and thus the temple, is entitled to own property.
‘
As I said, Hindus respect the right of Muslims to have their mosques. We are in fact against the notion of any destruction to those places of worship. That is why Hindus have offered full support in the translocation of the concerned mosques.
Now, coming to your points. I assure you I have genuine sympathy for the plights of Dalits because unlike a lot of commentators around, I have witnessed it first hand from my time in my village. I agree with you that reparations are not the way to go, but if the court decides in your favor when it comes to temples, I’ll be the first to file a PIL for the reparation issue. It’s a question of fairness. You may, however, gnash you teeth and speculate about my motives. That is allowed under your right to freedom of thought.
*
There is a larger point here. You have to decide what template are you going to use for your arguments. You can’t have it both ways. You want to define Mughal Empire by modern definition of nation states where there is strict distinction between a church and the state but you want to circumvent modern laws to settle a primarily tribal dispute from 500 years ago. I have asked you before: Who is going to be the plaintiff and who is the guilty? If the plaintiff is the deity then where is the guilty party? By your own admission, the Muslims of today cannot be blamed for the wrongs committed by the Islamic invaders, so who is going to stand in the court for the other party.
“Violating the religious domain is however a violation of a fundamental right of the human – his religious freedom!”
*
hmm but by doing what you are suggesting, you would be doing exactly what you are criticizing.
There is no point in advocating violent means and stuff.
*
The rest of your post quickly degenerates into unfounded insults and deserve no comments, but thank you very much. Like you I could say that you really don’t have interests of the Hindus at heart. You are more driven by your hatred of the Muslims who you see as a soft target for the temple-mosque stuff.
Bade Miyan wrote:
All you have done is to say that if A happens, you will do B. You have however failed to make a case of
1) What is their connection. An injustice stands on its own. A and B do not have the same parties involved, so it does not really constitute a “counter-claim”. Two totally different sets of plaintiffs and defendants.
2) You have failed to build a case in B, as to who you hold responsible – the past generation, the current generation, the men, the women, the children, certain individuals, certain organizations of the “Upper-Caste” jAtis. Which one? Is your grandma responsible? Does that mean you too are responsible? You have completely failed to single out the defendant, which can stand trial, which can be held responsible, and which can pay the reparations.
3) The issue is not that you are in favor or against reparations and under what conditions! You simply have failed to define the context of those reparations! It does not exist as something tangible, as an option on the table. So what are you speaking of? Reparations means absolutely NOTHING if one doesn’t define its parameters.
My response was to your query about the separation of political structures and places of worship in the context of a monarch considering himself a protector of the faith. It was NOT MY TEMPLATE for my arguments.
‘
I’ve said before, the distinction between these two type of structures – political-security structures and places of worship are NOT DEPENDENT on the form of government – “Divine Monarch”, “Protector-of-the-Faith Monarch”, “Republican”, “Democracy”, “Theocracy”, etc. The Distinction comes from the PURPOSE of the building – is it for political-security purposes or for religious purposes. Such are the SEMANTICS.
I answered this question very clearly earlier. I’ll try again.
The issue is not formulated as who is guilty! The issue is formulated as “there is a status quo, which a party feels is based on injustice, and needs to be rectified”. Under these circumstances a party (the Hindus) feel their right to freedom of religion has been violated. They are the plaintiffs.
‘
Then there are those who disagree with this move to change the status quo. They want to keep it the way it is. They are the defendants.
‘
There is no search for guilty party, except for the internal purposes of researching the background of the issue.
‘
You already have a template (and “partial” precedence) with the Ram Janambhoomi Court Case. I am not telling you about any complicated hypothetical situations, which are difficult to comprehend.
You yourself have spoken about the rights of the individual and even said that is a Western concept
, but you seem to have failed to appreciate the essence of that.
‘
The freedom of somebody is never built on the denial of the same freedom to somebody else.
‘
How can those “mosques” constitute the freedom of religion for Muslims, when they are built upon temples which were demolished, which constitutes the denial of that freedom to the Hindus. Besides it is a property dispute.
Actually without your knowledge you are still doing the same kind of discrimination.
‘
The crux of your cognitive dissonance is that the “Upper-Castes” jAtis OWNED Dharma and Hinduism, that those temples were A Baap ka Maal of these “Upper-Caste” jAtis! So for their mistreatment of the historically underprivileged jAtis, it is all well if something that BELONGED to them, namely those temples, were desecrated and destroyed. This is nothing different than those “Upper-Caste” jAtis not allowing those jAtis, they have pronounced as lower jAtis, any entry into certain temples.
‘
Well the point is that no jAti has a right to consider itself as more privileged in the eyes of Dharma, and thus having more ownership to any temples, or a monopoly over certain professions, or exclusive access to certain spiritual or temporal knowledge.
‘
You still have not broken out of that mentality. Those temples which were desecrated and demolished were not the property of the “Upper-Caste” jAtis! And they have/had no right to consider it so! Period!
‘
Just because you or your family or your jAti consider themselves Brahmins, does not make them Brahmins. It just makes you all pretenders to that varna, and monopolizers of certain opportunities. A Brahmin’s Dharma is to preserve, expand and propagate existing knowledge – both spiritual and temporal. A person from ANY JATI can fit the bill, if allowed the opportunity and resources. A father may be a Brahmin and the son may be a Shudra or vice versa, depending on one’s aptitute, intellect and profession. Think about it!
‘
The Hindu Civilization belongs to all Hindus, but some were not allowed their rights under the previous adharmic power dispensations of “Upper-Caste” jAtis. That is changing. It is a new ball game!
Bade Miyan,
continuing from above post, here is my diagnosis of Marxist “so-called” Hindus.
‘
When they as members of the “Upper-Caste” jAtis, noticed that in India, their age old grip over Hindu institutions and Hindu dogma would slip away, as India moves to a democratic and modern society, in their small-mindedness they decided to destroy Hinduism, rather than share it with those jAtis, they had pronounced as “Lower-Castes”.
‘
That was the level of their hate and jealousy. So they joined up with the Marxists, and the Pseudo-Secularists. Here they could pretend they were a Dalit-Lover, and destroy Hinduism at the same time, so that the Dalits don’t get it! You just invented a more sophisticated casteism.
BAde Miyan,
continuing from my above post, here is some more diagnosis of Marxist “so-called” Hindus.
‘
As members of the “Upper-Caste” jAtis, they have had just one goal – “to prevent historically underprivileged jAtis to take over the work of Brahmins”. They are willing to use any argument for their purpose, use any trick and destroy anything in their path in order to secure this goal.
They have been telling the “Dalits” just one thing, “Don’t embrace Hinduism, because it is not worth it”! So they have went on a Crusade to give Hinduism a bad name in public, whereas in private they continue to have contacts with their kin who consider themselves pure Brahmins.
‘
They are willing to push Dalits into the arms of any other religion – Islam or Christianity or Buddhism, just as long as Dalits don’t take over rituals that Brahmins monopolized earlier.
‘
In fact, the hereditary so-called Brahmins (the Marxist ones) have been unwavering in their public bile at Brahmins (calling it Brahminism), so that no Dalit should ever aspire to be a Brahmin.
‘
These hereditary so-called Brahmins are willing to destroy India, delivering it on a platter to Islam or Christian missionaries or making whole India Godless, just so that their kith and kin “Brahmins” can continue doing their rituals in the dark corners of India, unchallenged and unopposed by the Dalits.
‘
Theirs is a much deeper seated casteism and hate towards the Dalits, and these so-called Brahmins as insidious as they come.
‘
Earlier no-communal made this mentality more than clear when he let his mask slip.
‘
I can’t say whether you belong in this group or not, but your stance does give me reason to think. Or maybe you have started drinking your own Koolaid.
to rex
Why are there no non-muslim communities in Makkah? Exterminated? Why can a muslim make missionary propaganda for his totalitarian arab-imperialist ideology in non-muslim areas but the non-muslim can not convey his religion in muslim areas? This is an example of islamic fascism.
—
The kuran tells the muslims:
“Do not be afraid to have children. Allah will take care of them.”
This implies:
1)
that the kuran does not come from god because the word allah comes in the grammatical third person (in many othere sentences in the kuran also).
2)
The kuran is a very irresponsible book.
3)
The kuran had and has no idea of the problems faced by mankind in the 21st century.
4)
It is kuran’s intention to let loose a demographic aggression by muslims against non-muslims.
@Observ
How come that the secretary of Defence in the USA is of jewish descent?And how come that the CIA chief is also Jewish? Shall I go on? One cannot use the word Why in the area where science is not needed and only speculation can be utilised.
I guess that there are no non muslims in Mecca, since people decided to accept God’s commandments and stopped worshipping man made statues! The fact that Indians, tibetans and the Buddhists still do it is their business. No one can help them when the Thais regard their elephants holy and the nonbuddhists kill them to sell their tusks and genitals and make money from them.
The most important things is what you guys learn from your Gods and books of some sort and what the believers learn from theirs. Try and find a way to tell your children that they must not tell lies? It would seem that there are none. THis is what one learns in Europe from the documentry film from India?
Yours is a free fo all society, keeping more than four mistresses and not calling them wives since the new Indian law prohibits it is not a great enterprise. The mormons in the USA do the same!
Rex Minor
Raj,
First of all, I am neither a Brahmin nor a marxist, so you are really wasting space with your gibberish and tilting at the windmills. It’s true that I cannot really fathom the extent of humiliation suffered by dalits and as such, any expression of regret or remorse is likely to come off as patronizing, which is why I had apologized to start with. In any case, I repeat my apology for any such subliminal hurt caused by my statements.
I am a farmer’s son, and I can empathize somewhat with your situation because when I moved to Delhi for my high school studies, I did receive a cultural shock.
“What is their connection. An injustice stands on its own. A and B do not have the same parties involved, so it does not really constitute a “counter-claim”. ”
It’s true that an injustice stands on its own. I was just putting forth a likely scenario that would arise. You don’t see a connection; I see a very relevant connection. Both are cases of overturning history, no matter how you put it. I mean, at least, in case of reparations, we have a ***modern*** precedent. Can you quote a modern precedent in your case in a functioning democracy. This is important. Because you do claim it on basis of democratic rights.
*
Now, with regard to the Babri Masjod episode, that case is still in the court. We don’t have the last word on that matter. In case you didn’t know, a new law has been introduced since then to forbid any such mischief in the future. So, I am not sure how your case is going to unfold. Now, with regard to the defendant, let me rephrase, the defendant is going to the Waqf board in charge of the respective structures. They also have the relevant documents of ownership in possession. Going by the modern laws, I am not sure how you can carry your case. Plus, as you said:
“Besides it is a property dispute”. You have to explain to me how you are going to argue your case. Just parroting these incessant claims of this and that ideology, dharma, etc., is not going to help.
*
The rest of your post is probably directed to someone else.
Raj Too
I apologize if I came across as casteist and insulting. Let me just clarify that I am neither of those and I hope you accept the apology. I actually quite enjoyed some of your recent posts to BM, but do not share the view that India will explode in a Dharmayuddh if the Hindutva brigade’s demands remain unfulfilled.
rex minor wrote:
“I guess that there are no non muslims in Mecca, since people decided to accept God’s commandments and stopped worshipping man made statues!”
Why do you guess?
You conveniently wish to ignore the genocides caused by islam and the threats, violence and fascism emanating from islam.
Who made this documentary in europe that hindus are taught to lie? How do you believe european propaganda when you otherwise are so full of hate and detestment towards europeans?
You have to learn to direct your criticism at the responsible people and not at me.
no-communal,
it is useless to direct your apologies at me. Neither can casteist behavior hurt me nor do I require assuaging. Nor do I see myself as some contact point to receive confessions or to grant absolutions.
‘
All casteist remarks do is, they reflects on your thinking. One’s current thinking is however not written in stone.
‘
Your efforts at reconciliation are appreciated, but I don’t tend to save on my ammo when it comes to Marxists and their Paki-loving ways!
‘
Just some food for thought! When you say “we upper-castes oppressed you lower castes for thousands of years. Where is your rage?”, you are making here several statements besides the obvious casteist pronominal juxtaposition.
‘
First you are claiming that you are “upper-castes”! That is in itself absurd and adharmic. The caste construct comes from the Portuguese and was further grafted on India by the English.
‘
Hinduism does have the concept of ‘Varna’, but that cannot be equated with jAti. A jAti cannot appropriate a ‘Varna’, or enforce a ‘Varna’ on another jAti.
‘
So when you claim an “upper-caste” and thus a particular ‘Varna’ considered as privileged in Hinduism, for your jAti, it is adharmic. One can by birth belong to a particular jAti but one does not by birth belong to a particular Varna. The Varna should only be used in context of a single individual and that too once the individual has reached maturity and made his aptitude, his intellect, his skills and his profession clear. So even the individual’s “Varna” becomes known post-facto.
‘
But many wish to underline their hereditary “upper-caste” status so much. against all norms of Dharma, and underline that their whole jAti as being “upper-caste”, that they are willing to do it through a negative construct of oppression towards others.
‘
This goes something like this. All publicity is good publicity. One is encouraging the historically underprivileged jAtis to adopt for themselves and thus to define themselves in perpetuity through their victimization, and to base their victimization on them being “lower castes”! What this politics does is, it gives you exactly what you wanted – an acknowledgement by the historically underprivileged jAtis that they are indeed of “lower Varna” and you are indeed of “higher Varna” through the de-facto signing of this “Oppression – Victimization” Document! So you give them a “Victimization Political Platform” in return for a universally acknowledged “higher Varna” pedigree.
‘
It would be a different issue, if you were stating that the oppression of the historically underprivileged jAtis was of a different nature. The true oppression was that you as a jAti appropriated a certain “Varna” illegitimately, even though no jAti can do so, and that your jAtis discrimination towards others did not allow individuals of other jAtis to attain professional expertise which your jAti protected jealously. A jAti considering itself as “Brahmin” did not do its job of preserving, expanding and propagating his knowledge to the others. A jAti considering itself as “Kshatriya” did not do its job of looking for strength and bravery across jAtis and teaching individuals of other jAtis the martial arts, knowledge of weaponry or statecraft and leadership. A jAti considering itself as “Vaisya” did not give other jAtis the chance to build up their own shops and trade to increase their own prosperity. The main oppression was their monopolization of the professions, considering it their birthright to a certain “Varna”.
‘
But instead, the only focus of yours is the abuse and humiliation to the historically underprivileged jAtis. By concentrating only on this fact, you are negating the validity of the other two historical wrongs – the monopolization and the “Varna” misappropriation.
‘
Not much different than what the Islamists too crave with their stories, though true, that they ruled over India and subjugated and killed how many Hindus. All those Indians who try to educate others about the barbarity of Islamic rule in fact just gladden the hearts of Islamists by playing up their past power.
‘
With the “upper-castes” Marxists, there is however still an additional issue. When you say “we, upper castes oppressed you”, and secondly you are on a course of perpetual criticism and abuse of Brahmins and Kshatriyas, you are doing the latter another favor. You are telling the Dalits, that even as they play victims, thus underscoring the past power and privilege of the upper-castes, the Dalits are also to stay away from Hinduism. This is so that the Dalits do not develop a taste or come to the idea of contesting the “upper-castes” their traditional roles, by themselves opting for Brahmin, or Kshatriya or Vaisya roles, and not to identify themselves with such roles. Thus one wants to perpetuate the monopoly of the “upper-caste” jAtis over certain Hindu rituals for example.
‘
So your question was sinister on so many levels! Where in all this am I supposed to find any ‘rage’?
Every society has its caste system. It may have a different names.
Imagine a christian who eats pork and drinks alcohol wants to live in a buidling belonging to a muslim and where mostly muslims live. Imagine a muslim girl marries a hindu and their children are raised as hindus. This will tell you that the muslims have a caste understanding also.
Humans are neither equal nor equal-valued. All religions and ideologies de facto accept this as a fact. Only brahmins havd and have the courage to be honest in this matter. Missionary ideologies/religions like islam have to be dishonest in this matter.
All anti-caste people have their own private lives wherein they accept the caste-like apartheid. Has any muslim leader (even this Mohammad) ever married his son or daughter to a person living in the slums or cleaning latrines?
Develop the intelligence to be honest – and to recognize honesty and to reward honesty. Don’t be carried away by sentimental and false propaganda made by muslim quislings of arab imperialism. These quilsings are spat upon by the arabs and the quislings think it is the rain of nectar. Islam and honesty are never together.
no-communal,
continuing from my post earlier, some clarification.
‘
The reason why I do not like the use of ‘caste’ is not simply because it is alien in origin, but because it blurs the distinction between ‘jAti’ and ‘varna’, thus giving more credence to the position that certain jAtis have some divine right to consider themselves of a certain varna, and thus have the right to be considered higher in the Hindu pecking order, something which is adharmic.
‘
That is why one should use the terminology ‘jAti’ and ‘varna’ instead of caste!
You people have way too much time on your hands. Get a job.
I am a proud Aussie and I dont like Indians because of the dual personality. Pakistanis are way better than Indians atleast Pakistanis are trust worthy and honest.
INDIA LOST ALL THE TEST MATCHES AGAINST AUSTRALIA — ENJOY INDIA —
INDIAN ARE FAILURE AT EVERYTHING NOT JUST CRICKET.
“Steve,”
Why are Pakis such lousy actors!