Reporter Calls for Subcontinent Reunification

[lookieloo]

India's press council head calls for unification

The head of India's Press Council has suggested India, Pakistan and Bangladesh unite to form one secular country to avoid the excesses of nationalism...

 

[The Messiah]

India's press council head calls for unification

The head of India's Press Council has suggested India, Pakistan and Bangladesh unite to form one secular country to avoid the excesses of nationalism.

Markandey Katju made his comment in a lecture he was delivering in the central Indian city of Nagpur on the role of media in promoting secularism, organized by the Lokmat group of newspapers, the Times of India reported.

People should refrain from falling prey to religious nationalist politics, Katju, a former Supreme Court judge, said in his lecture.

"We must not be a Hindu nationalist or even Muslim, Sikh or Christian nationalist," he said.

"We must all be Indian nationalists. India is a country of diverse people and couldn't be run for a single day without secularism."

Katju said Pakistan is an example of a non-secular state that becomes mired in violence after independence.

British colonial rule over the Indian subcontinent officially ended at midnight on Aug. 15, 1947.

But there followed mass migrations, often accompanied by widespread violence, as Hindus in Pakistan and Muslims in India moved across the new boundaries, which often split the old Imperial provinces and states between the two new countries.

Subcontinent independence movements and the region's subsequent division were described in the 1965 book "Freedom at Midnight" by U.S. Newsweek journalist Larry Collins and French political author Dominique Lapierre.

"Look at the state of affairs in Pakistan," Katju said. "They wanted to have an Islamic state but it has turned into a 'Jurassic Park.'

"There are schisms between Punjab, Sindh or Balochistan provinces. Sometimes I feel it is not a country at all but just a creation of the British to divide Hindus and Muslims. India, Pakistan and Bangladesh should be reunited into one secular country," Katju said.

The dominant religion in India is Hinduism followed by Islam with around 13 percent of the population, amounting to more than 160 million people, 2001 census figures indicate.

India's media also must share blame for promoting nationalism and labeling all Muslims as terrorists, which alienates them from mainstream Indian society.

Too many news organizations accept the validity of text messages on phones and emails allegedly from terrorist organizations such as the Muslim group Jaish-e-Mohammed or the Indian Mujahedin claiming responsibility for bomb blasts.

"This demonizes the entire Muslim community," he said.

"An email or SMS can be sent by any mischievous element. In fact, 99 percent of people in all communities are generally good."

But reality is the majority of Indians remain uneducated and steeped in communalism, leading them to vote on the basis of caste or religion, he said.

Katju is a former labor lawyer and was noted as one the country's fastest, at one time disposing of more than 100 cases in a week, a report by India Today in 2011 said.

Katju, 66, also is no stranger to controversy, despite his anti-nationalist and anti-violence stance.

In December, he said the vast majority of Indians are "idiots" who are easily led, ZeeNews reported.

"I say 90 percent of Indians are idiots.You people don't have brains in your heads. ... It is so easy to take you for a ride," he said at a seminar in New Delhi.

A simple mischievous gesture of disrespect toward a place of worship and people of different religions start fighting each other, he said.

"You mad people will start fighting among yourselves not realizing that some agent provocateur is behind this," he said.

Katju's latest comments come as the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party recently chose the controversial and polarizing leader Narendra Modi to head its campaign in federal elections.

BJP, a major Indian political party at state and federal levels, was set up in 1980 to protect the rights of the majority Hindu religious group.

Modi is also chief minister of the western state of Gujarat and is popular among upwardly mobile, urban middle-class Indians.

But his critics accuse him of not doing enough to quell religious violence when it breaks out.

Human rights groups accuse Modi of not making an effort to stop mobs from targeting Muslims in reprisal attacks after 58 Hindu pilgrims and activists died in a 2002 train fire that Muslims were suspected of starting. More than 1,000 people, mostly Muslims, died in the violence.

Earlier this month, a senior member of the BJP in Tamil Nadu state was hacked to death inside the compound of his home in Salem, a city in the southeastern state.

The leadership of the BJP in Tamil Nadu claimed police haven't been taking seriously their calls for protection in the face of targeted attacks.

 

[Singh]

Let me play the Devil's Advocate

1. Linguistically most of the people of the Subcontinent speak Indo-European Language.
2. Culturally the traits of the Subcontinent are similar.
3. Genetically the Subcontinent people form a cluster.
4. Politically all these countries want democracy
5. All these countries were founded on the basis of Secularism and Rule of Law.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Let me play the Devil's Advocate

1. Linguistically most of the people of the Subcontinent speak Indo-European Language.
2. Culturally the traits of the Subcontinent are similar.
3. Genetically the Subcontinent people form a cluster.
4. Politically all these countries want democracy
5. All these countries were founded on the basis of Secularism and Rule of Law.

Is DA arguing for or against unification?

 

[The Messiah]

Replace the word unification with occupation

 

[Singh]

Is DA arguing for or against unification?

For.

Because my sane self doesn't want it.

 

[Known_Unknown]

Let me play the Devil's Advocate

1. Linguistically most of the people of the Subcontinent speak Indo-European Language.
2. Culturally the traits of the Subcontinent are similar.
3. Genetically the Subcontinent people form a cluster.
4. Politically all these countries want democracy
5. All these countries were founded on the basis of Secularism and Rule of Law.

That could be an argument for Europe becoming a country.....or East Asia or Africa or South/Latin America.

In fact if we generalize a bit, that argument could apply to the whole world becoming one country.

 

[Singh]

That could be an argument for Europe becoming a country.....or East Asia or Africa or South/Latin America.

In fact if we generalize a bit, that argument could apply to the whole world becoming one country.

Europe is already a unified bloc. Unlike Europe or Southa America or East Asia,

1. India was "partitioned"
2. The two entities partitioned wanted the same thing (secular democracy) except there was distrust/apprehension
3. For sometime pre-independence, some thought (Jinnah) Muslim Pakistan and Hindu Hindustan would be autonomous and together would be collectively called India
4. For many centuries this land has been united
5. The subcontinent is unique from other regions, and hence is a subcontinent.
6. Historically, the original inhabitants treat the entire subcontinent to be their "motherland"

 

[Known_Unknown]

Europe is already a unified bloc. Unlike Europe or Southa America or East Asia,

1. India was "partitioned"
2. The two entities partitioned wanted the same thing (secular democracy) except there was distrust/apprehension
3. For sometime pre-independence, some thought (Jinnah) Muslim Pakistan and Hindu Hindustan would be autonomous and together would be collectively called India
4. For many centuries this land has been united
5. The subcontinent is unique from other regions, and hence is a subcontinent.
6. Historically, the original inhabitants treat the entire subcontinent to be their "motherland"

Europe is not a country, however much of an economic bloc it may be.

1. British India was partitioned. There was no nation state by the name of India, what were partitioned were British territories. Just 10 years before the "Partition", British India had already been partitioned to break off Myanmar, so really, the "Partition" was the 2nd partition.
2. It was not the same thing. Jinnah & the ML believed the Muslims were a separate nation unto themselves, so there was no question of co-existence with the Hindu nation within any sort of meaningful union.
3. That was because having called themselves "Pakistan", they had no pre-partition identity if the country next door claimed to be India (with all its historical, geographical and cultural connotations).
4. The subcontinent has been divided for the vast majority of recorded history.
5. As mentioned above, every region is unique from other regions merely due to geographical proximity and the effect it has on the evolution of civilization.
6. Who are these "original" inhabitants?

 

[Dovah]

Hate to attack the person rather than the article but when it comes to Katju normal rules don't apply.

Here's an article for those not familiar with Katju to put things into perspective.

If one really wish to assess the faces who has been in headlines since last time, he may come across a lot of names in his mind, but when it comes doing this in a very personal capacity- he will be none other than Mr. Katju. A self-claimed all-rounder of every possible subject on this earth. Professionally he is the chairman of Press Council of India, an ex-judge of Supreme Court. He is a man who tries to do everything other than what his duty is, a man who loves to be in headlines very consistently. Right now he is much in air due to his self-kicked campaign for clemency of Sanjay Dutt. As much has been written on Mr. Sanjay Dutt already regarding his case better would be to focus on Mr. Katju of this Katju-Dutt duo.

Mr. Katju is a man who is much hyped for his so-called social understanding, being well read of, scientific knowledge and legal & constitutional expertise. At the same time he is also well known of his constant argue to portray himself a perfectionist while others fool as his many remarks suggests: "90% of Indian are fool" is one of them.

So let's have a ride to his all self-claimed & media-hyped qualities as above mentioned.

As far as social understanding of Mr. Katju is concerned, his understanding really comes to be a rare and different one as reflected by his judgments as a HC & SC judge. Like in a judgment as SC judge (link) he lets off the prime accuse of a gang rape case when he promises to compensate victim monetarily. So much is his understanding of a social crime like gang-rape. A perfect glimpse of his social understanding.

Now let's come to much hype of his being very well read of. In a recent TV studio session (his favorite job) he quotes a "Doha" - "क्षमा बडन को चाहिए, छोटन को उत्पात" in support of his pardon campaign for Sanjay Dutt. A very popular doha of famous poet of medieval age, Abdul Rahim Khan Khana However in a surprising way he gives credit of this couplet to Saint Tulsidas- Another famous poet of almost same regime. Well to err is to human. But when one start to claim himself a perfectionist, a superhuman and criticize mercilessly others for small mistakes ; he voluntarily puts himself outside the boundary of such human errors and makes himself well entitled of same degree of merciless critic & scrutiny.

Now his great scientific knowledge comes next. If you really want to get a view of his scientific knowledge, you must know of his 'historic judgment' where he refuses to grant any relief to a teacher in his service related case because he finds the teacher unfit for his profession i.e. teaching. Now, how Justice Katju arrives to this conclusion, this is very interesting and may be shocking for some. As per is habit to test intelligence of others, while hearing the case he asks the mathematics lecturer how much it is when one is divided by zero. Teacher replies it is infinity. Katju finds it wrong because as per him it is indefinite. So rejecting all outcomes of limit theory of calculus mathematics and putting himself above of work of all top mathematicians, Katju declares in his court room that one divided by zero happens to be indefinite & not infinity. He does not stop himself here only. He immediately rejects the plea of that teacher due to lack of his professional knowledge & declares him unfit for the job. It is really worthless to comment who is right & who is wrong. Even a class 9th student knows that 1/0 is infinity and it is ∞/∞ or 0 to the power ∞ like formats which are considered indefinite. In fact worth-full will be to think of that teacher here. It is really pitiful to think that how he could regain his respect to judiciary & judges onwards after this incident.

Now at last but not least. Let's talk on his legal & constitutional expertise, a subject very much related to his own professional field. For this one need not to go much back. Let's take this latest Sanjay Dutt pardon episode. Almost before every camera of media & in every single media studio, Katju kept saying that Governor can pardon him. However even a law student knows that for central acts like Arms Act (Under which Sanjay Dutt is booked), POTA, TADA etc, it is only President of India who can consider a pardon. Governors are entitled to give pardon only to those cases where one is convicted under a state-assembly framed law. All law & constitution experts kept suggesting same but Katju remained adamant. However later for clemency of Mr. Dutt he himself wrote to President instead of Governor on advice of a SC lawyer. Such knowledge he enjoys in a field where he has been professionally for years.

Now if a teacher can be deprived of his due in promotion due to lack of knowledge in his profession, what about a judge (following the same logic)? Should one not demand to review all judgments delivered by him as a judge? Justice demands same Justice Katju. Your mathematics seems to be weak as your "one upon zero is equal to indefinite" verdict suggests, so let me tell you that set-theory of mathematics implicates you too to that 90% of people whom you call fools. It is the real side of a man called Markandey Katju who tries to do everything other than what his duty is, who is un-logically hyped in media. Mr. Katju doesn't try to put your feet in shoes bigger than your size. You look laughable while doing so. It is hoped that you will realize your shortcomings and will try to behave in a normal way. One more thing Mr. Katju, have I left any stone unturned in your glory above then request to pardon me.

Justice Katju: Retired Genius or Retarded Genius?

 

[IBSA]

Let me play the Devil's Advocate

1. Linguistically most of the people of the Subcontinent speak Indo-European Language.
2. Culturally the traits of the Subcontinent are similar.
3. Genetically the Subcontinent people form a cluster.
4. Politically all these countries want democracy
5. All these countries were founded on the basis of Secularism and Rule of Law.

6. And until 70 years ago they had lived in an one single country: the British India Empire

 

[Bhadra]

6. And until 70 years ago they had lived in an one single country: the British India Empire

Hindus and Muslims can be slaves of a third Party but not of each other...... there seems to be a fault line which Pakistan has constantly exploited

 

[Singh]

Europe is not a country, however much of an economic bloc it may be.

1. British India was partitioned. There was no nation state by the name of India, what were partitioned were British territories. Just 10 years before the "Partition", British India had already been partitioned to break off Myanmar, so really, the "Partition" was the 2nd partition.
2. It was not the same thing. Jinnah & the ML believed the Muslims were a separate nation unto themselves, so there was no question of co-existence with the Hindu nation within any sort of meaningful union.
3. That was because having called themselves "Pakistan", they had no pre-partition identity if the country next door claimed to be India (with all its historical, geographical and cultural connotations).
4. The subcontinent has been divided for the vast majority of recorded history.
5. As mentioned above, every region is unique from other regions merely due to geographical proximity and the effect it has on the evolution of civilization.
6. Who are these "original" inhabitants?

1. There was no nation prior to French Revolution.
2. Jinnah wanted what Nehru wanted, literally and figuratively. Even the Muhajirs, the muslims who left India for Pakistan; and the Islamic clergy has said that Pakistan/Partition was a folly with hindsight.
3. Jinnah believed that this muslim dominated region would be under him, and hindu dominated under Nehru and together they would be joint PMs of India (putting it simplistically)
4. Because no nations existed at the time. Yet by geographic, cultural, genetic, historical, mythological, linguistic(mostly), religious metrics this is one unified land.
5. Refer to 4.
6. The one's who passed on ASI+ANI genes to us and the ones who wrote down ancient texts. refer to point 4.

 

[Singh]

Hindus and Muslims can be slaves of a third Party but not of each other...... there seems to be a fault line which Pakistan has constantly exploited

Appoint a neutral third party how about Italian origin Sonia Gandhi ? :taunt1:

 

[civfanatic]

1. There was no nation prior to French Revolution.
4. Because no nations existed at the time. Yet by geographic, cultural, genetic, historical, mythological, linguistic(mostly), religious metrics this is one unified land.

You mean nation-states. Nations have existed for millennia.

 

[Singh]

You mean nation-states. Nations have existed for millennia.

Yes...........

 

[Ray]

If it is Marthandya katju, then it is another bogus idea.

When a pacifist like Gandhi failed to keep the subcontinent together as one, it would be very surprising if the Lotus Eaters masquerading as politicians and leaders of the three countries would able to lead, guide and stitch and keep the heart and soul of these three countries together!

Asking for another Holocaust once again!

Having parted, at best, we should be good friends.

Has Marthandya Katju, having read the 2014 tea leaves, switched allegiance from the Congress to the VHP and espousing the concept of Akhand Bharat in a rather sneaky way?

 

[Tronic]

Europe is already a unified bloc. Unlike Europe or Southa America or East Asia,

1. India was "partitioned"
2. The two entities partitioned wanted the same thing (secular democracy) except there was distrust/apprehension
3. For sometime pre-independence, some thought (Jinnah) Muslim Pakistan and Hindu Hindustan would be autonomous and together would be collectively called India
4. For many centuries this land has been united
5. The subcontinent is unique from other regions, and hence is a subcontinent.
6. Historically, the original inhabitants treat the entire subcontinent to be their "motherland"

I totally agree with everything you have posted, Singh. The only problem is that you cannot undo the disaster of a social experiment which has been carried out in Pakistan. The Pakistani masses are a very paranoid, confused and a lost cause. I would play it totally hands off, as far as the Pakistanis are concerned. Whenever India becomes politically and economically dominant on a global scale, and the Middle East collapses after the oil, the Pakistanis will themselves clamour for a South Asian union, if not full integration. I know Pakistanis on a very close and personal level to guarantee this much.

 

[Ray]

The concept of Nation States is open to interpretation.

That is what I learnt in school, though I would not know of the modern research on the issue.

It is basically the identification of a group of people with similarities to a polity.

Take the case of Athens and Sparta.

They are basically two city states, but played a role in spawning the Greek civilisation that came about to be Greece.

Why were they city states initially?

Because geography did not allow ease of movement.

And yet they were of a people who had identity through similarity and polity as city states, and when there was greater interoperability, they became a Nation.

 

[Decklander]

This idea of unification is the most absurd idea and will eventually completely destroy India. We are better off compared to Pak & BD only bcoz all these war mongers and darpoks went to these countries now brininging them back is like giving them the fruits of our own labour and convert this nation into another Pakistan.There will be daily bloodbaths on streets in India if it happened.