The Ayatollahs of Secularism - The Truth of India

Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by afako, Aug 4, 2012.

  1. afako

    afako Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Messages:
    882
    Likes Received:
    654
    Indira Gandhi introduced the term secularism in the preamble to the Constitution with the 42nd Constitution Amendment Act, 1976, during the draconian Emergency.

    Twenty-six years earlier, in 1950, the framers of our Constitution, led by Babasaheb Ambedkar, had not felt it necessary to include the word – despite the recent horrors of communal riots following Partition.

    Ever since, the Congress has used secularism and socialism (a term also introduced into the Constitution by Mrs. Gandhi during the Emergency) to define itself as the party of the aam admi.

    So how has the aam admi fared in over 53 years of Congress governments, 36 of them under Indira and Rajiv Gandhi and their appointed CEO-Prime Ministers, P.V.Narasimha Rao and Manmohan Singh?

    Badly. Poverty remains endemic. India is placed 134th on the Human Development Index (HDI). Over 14,000 farmers across India commited suicide in 2011. Malnutrition persists. The Naandi Foundation released a report in January this year – at the hands of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh – on widespread child malnutrition

    In an edit page piece in The Economic Times, I wrote how, even as children and farmers die, politicians have become ever-wealthier.

    Who is to blame? Obviously, the Congress. It has run India for roughly 81% of independent India’s history. The Opposition, especially in the states, must share some responsibility for the Congress’ failure. But make no mistake: the responsibility for the poverty and malnutrition India suffers from 65 years after independence lies squarely at the doorstep of the Congress.

    It has misused the term socialism to enshrine poverty, not eradicate it. The poorer the voter, the easier it is to win his vote without bothering about real development issues.

    The second Emergency-origin term the Congress has misused is secularism. The word for “secular” in Hindi is panthnirpeksha. In 1977, when Mrs. Gandhi’s government was voted out soon after the Emergency was revoked, the new Janata Party government introduced a Constitutional Amendment Bill. The word “secular” was sought to be defined in the Constitution as “equal respect for all religions”.

    The Bill was passed in the Lok Sabha where the Janata Party held a majority. But it was defeated in the Rajya Sabha where the Congress had a majority. Why did the Congress reject 35 years ago the 1977-79 Lok Sabha’s definition of secularism – “equal respect for all religions”?


    Consider now what UPA Chairperson Sonia Gandhi said during a lecture at the Nexus Institute in the Hague on June 9, 2007: “India is a secular country. The term means equal respect for all religions.”

    How does Sonia’s definition of secularism differ from Narendra Modi’s? Who is really more secular? Modi? Or Sonia? Or Nitish, Digvijay, Lalu, Paswan, Mulayam, Karunanidhi, Omar Abdullah and Owaisi?

    On a cool spring day over 60 years ago in California, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, a tall, angular man of 22, was in a garrulous mood. He told my father: “Ah, Pakistan. See what we will do with my wonderful new country.”

    My father, like young Bhutto, a student at the University of California, Berkeley, was unimpressed. “A country founded on theocracy,” he told Bhutto, “will never work.” My mother, among the first Indian women-students on the Berkeley campus, agreed. Bhutto walked away in a huff.

    Those were heady days after independence. Bhutto went on to become Pakistan’s youngest Cabinet Minister, at 30, in 1958. My parents returned to India after four years at Berkeley and got married. My father took charge of the family’s petrochemicals business which, thankfully, he was later liberal enough never to coerce me to join.

    The difference between Pakistan and India today is the story of how a great religion, Islam, has been distorted by those entrusted to protect its liberal ethos. Pakistan and several countries in the Middle-East have used Islam not to liberate but imprison their people. But it is in “secular” India that the damage has been most insidious.

    Jawaharlal Nehru was a secular man.:rofl: He would have been mortified at what passes off as secularism in modern India. In its purest, most classical sense, secularism requires treating religion as a private matter. It must not enter the public domain. Pray in public or pray in private. But keep your faith at home.

    Politicians who have little to offer by way of development – 24-hour electricity, water, housing, sanitation, roads, infrastructure, jobs – will use religion to divert the attention of the common man. According to the latest National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO), over 60% of Indians consume less than Rs. 66 a day in cities and less than Rs. 25 a day in villages.

    These form the poor whose grandparents were promised Garibi Hatao by Indira Gandhi during her victorious 1971 Lok Sabha election campaign. It should shame the Congress that, 41 years later, the constituency Feroze Gandhi – Indira’s husband – first entered the Lok Sabha from in 1952, Rae Bareli, and from where succeeding generations of Gandhis, including Indira and Sonia, have been elected, is one of the most backward in India. Over 70% of children below the age of 5 in Rae Bareli, for example, are moderately or severely stunted due to malnutrition.

    But secularism, not development, has been an article of faith for the Gandhis. The poor and the Muslims – the Muslims in particular – have been entrapped into a fear psychosis that warns them: vote for “the other” and you will not be safe.

    The riots in Gujarat on February 28, March 1 and March 2, 2002 following the burning of kar sevaks on February 27, 2002, have come especially handy in deepening this paranoia.

    Muslims from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, from Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh, are in effect given this false choice: do you want to be with a “secular” party like the Congress that can guarantee your physical safety but not one square meal a day? Or do you want to be with a party where you must forever live in fear though you will have 24-hour electricity, good housing, roads, jobs and a reasonable standard of living?

    Rich electoral dividends have flowed from such fear mongering. In the process, over the decades, regional parties have grasped the fraudulent secular baton from the Congress: the Samajwadi Party (SP) may be the most notorious of these but others like the Telegu Desam Party (TDP) and the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) have all dealt the duplicitous Muslim card.

    Just as they eagerly copied Indira Gandhi’s destructive dynastic politics to enrich their future generations while impoverishing India’s, regional parties have effortlessly morphed into “secular” family firms engaged in exploiting Muslims by cocooning them.

    * * *

    My daughter, a budding designer, often visits areas in Mumbai to source raw materials for her work and commission artisans. Most of these artisans are Muslims. Most are very poor. Most live in buildings which could collapse any moment. She asked me: “Why doesn’t the Congress-NCP government in Maharashtra, which wins elections based on votes from poor Muslims, do anything to improve their lives?”

    The answer: because poor Muslims who have no time to think beyond the next meal will not have time to think of governance and development and how both have been sacrificed at the altar of secularism.

    But then of course this isn’t secularism. It’s communalism, masquerading as secularism. What really can be more communal than keeping nearly an entire community of 175 million people in poverty for over six decades?

    Theocratic countries like Pakistan have more liberal laws for their Muslim citizens than India has for its Muslims. Turkey, Malaysia and Indonesia have also reformed medieval Islamic canons.

    Why not India? Because the Congress and its regional copycats fear the true liberation of the Muslim mind. That liberation could set off unintended consequences.

    Electoral defeat haunts the Congress and its allies more than issues of governance and development – or even justice. That is why it has moved glacially to deliver justice to the victims of the 1984 Sikh pogrom in which over 3,000 Sikhs were killed by Congress-led hooligan-politicians.

    At the same time, po-faced, Congress uses the 750-plus Muslims killed in Gujarat in 2002 in a riot (not a one-sided pogrom), where over 250 of the dead were Hindus, to extract cynical political advantage with the help of its NGO cottage industry.

    Muslim leaders have been willing accomplices in this tragedy. Mullahs issue regressive fatwas against Muslim women and edicts against sensible civil laws. Instead of condemning such fatwas, the government maintains a studied silence, tacitly encouraging extremism and keeping ordinary Muslims stuck in a time warp.

    The two real enemies of the Muslim – communal politicians masquerading as secular politicians to win votes and Mullahs deliberately misinterpreting the holy book to retain power over their flock – form a natural alliance. Together they have enriched themselves but impoverished India’s Muslims, materially and intellectually, in the name of secularism. These are the Ayatollahs of secularism.

    * * *

    That brings us to the third angle in this infamous triangle: the liberal, secular Hindu. Where does he stand in all this? He is naturally secular in the truest sense of the word: religion is a private matter, he rightly believes. It has no place in politics.

    But he is also swayed by the plight of his fellow-Indians who happen to be Muslims: impoverished, illiterate, ghettoized, discriminated against. For every Azim Premji and Aamir Khan there are millions of weavers in UP and spot boys in Mumbai who have no place in corporate India’s organized labour force.

    Liberal, well-meaning Hindus ask why. And the answer they come up with is: communal discrimination. Yet the liberal Hindu doesn’t dig deeper. The more politicians sequester Muslims into vote silos, the more the middle-class Hindu (not the liberal, well-meaning, Stephanian Hindu) resents them. Discrimination, petty or large, mounts.

    The real culprits – communal politicians dressed up as secular politicians – get away scot-free in this narrative. The liberal, secular Hindu’s anger against anti-Muslim communalism is therefore misdirected – far away from these real culprits.

    The liberal, secular Hindu meanwhile points to “Hindutva” as the real fount of communalism. Is he right? This is how the Supreme Court defined Hindutva when specifically asked to do so in December 1995:

    Considering the terms Hinduism or Hindutva per se as depicting hostility, enmity or intolerance towards other religious faiths or professing communalism, proceeds from an improper appreciation and perception of the true meaning of these expressions. These terms (Hinduism or Hindutva) are indicative more of a way of life of the Indian people and are not confined merely to describe persons practicing the Hindu religion as a faith.”

    * * *

    Today it costs a candidate between Rs. 10 crore and Rs. 50 crore to fight a Lok Sabha election. Over the next 18 months, political parties will need to raise over Rs. 20,000 crore to contest 543 Lok Sabha seats. The potential from future scams has shrunk. Corporate cash donations have been hit – ironically – by the government’s own economic paralysis. Team Anna's decision to fight elections has introduced a new political calculus.

    For "secular" parties, 2014 is an election in which they will now have to rely more than ever on raising a fear psychosis against leaders like Narendra Modi who threaten their hold on power – and the financial pipeline that accompanies it but never finds its way into developmental projects, especially for Muslims. After all, they matter only once every five years.

    * * *

    Influential sections of especially the electronic media, suffused with hearts bleeding from the wrong ventricle, are part of this great fraud played on India’s poor Muslims: communalism dressed up as secularism. The token Muslim is lionized – from business to literature – but the common Muslim languishes in his 65-year-old ghetto. It is from such ghettos that raw recruits to SIMI and IM are most easily found.

    Sixty years ago on that Berkeley campus my father told Zulfikar Ali Bhutto why Pakistan would fail as a state. Today, my daughter, as she visits Muslim-dominated ghettos for sourcing her raw materials, sees how Muslim India too has failed. The single biggest cause: communalism – but in quite the opposite way the Congress, SP and other “secular” parties define it.

    Head On : Minhaz Merchant's blog-The Times Of India

    Head On : Minhaz Merchant's blog-The Times Of India
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2012
    maomao, Galaxy, ani82v and 2 others like this.
  2.  
  3. afako

    afako Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Messages:
    882
    Likes Received:
    654
    A Very Good Comment:

    The Mistake in both the above write ups are that they don't understand that Both the Congress (A Political Extension of Marxist Academia) and the Mohmmedian Ideology both are Stealthy Silent Partners and are getting washed up in the game play defending one and blaming another!
     
    maomao, parijataka, Galaxy and 2 others like this.
  4. natarajan

    natarajan Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    2,592
    Likes Received:
    750
    This is too hot for our secular members to handle ,so we declare this thread as communal :taunt:
     
    maomao, Galaxy, ani82v and 4 others like this.
  5. devgupt

    devgupt Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    Messages:
    576
    Likes Received:
    261
    Location:
    Salt Lake City, Utah, US
    If the secular leaders had followed true secularism and not used it as as cover for minority appeasement (for vote banks) and hindu bashing (to keep them divided so that they can build vote banks from divided hindus) Sangh Parivar would not have got the space needed to grow.
    Pseudo secularism sucks and so are its followers.Better being labelled as 'communal' or 'right winger' than to support leaders who pay lip service to secularism and are really communal.

    Awesome article BTW.
     
    maomao likes this.
  6. blank_quest

    blank_quest Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2012
    Messages:
    2,128
    Likes Received:
    927
    our leaders should be named as sick-u-troll:rofl:
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2012
  7. The Messiah

    The Messiah Bow Before Me! Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,788
    Likes Received:
    4,552
    pseudo/fake-secularism is the same thing as communalism...end result is the same ie division of society.

    a murderer who takes pride in murdering someone isn't somehow better than another murderer who doesn't shout from the rooftops that he murdered someone.

    and bashing secularism because of pseudo-seculars doesn't make sense! its like bashing people who tell truth because some people tell lies but claim to speak the truth.
     
  8. devgupt

    devgupt Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    Messages:
    576
    Likes Received:
    261
    Location:
    Salt Lake City, Utah, US
    Thanks and I believe you have said it before.

    Well lets put it in this way.
    BJP did pay a price for not building the Ram Temple when in power - those for whom it was a core issue , became disillusioned with it.

    So my contention is that 'true secular' people should take to task their leaders who have secularism on their lips, but practise pseudo -secularism.
    Why is that Bangladeshi migration has been taken up by right wing forces?Shouldn't secular nationalist people raise it and question their leaders?It's not a new issue. Ditto for Sikh riots.How can a person vote for Jagdish Tytler and call himself secular?

    I am not saying dont vote for Congress or other parties who claim to be secular, but question them and question them hard on their practise of Secularism.
    If true Secularism is followed, right wingers will remain in fringe.This is the only remedy if one wants to stop the growth of right wing.
     
    maomao, parijataka, KS and 4 others like this.
  9. natarajan

    natarajan Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    2,592
    Likes Received:
    750
    If secular word has proper definition then it is good but not phrased by people tuned to their future ambition.Secular is equal rights to all people irrespective of religion and we cannot accept if someone frames it and change from time to time and not agreeing to equal rights then i dont find difference between pakistan and us
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2012
  10. natarajan

    natarajan Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    2,592
    Likes Received:
    750
  11. ashdoc

    ashdoc Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,768
    Likes Received:
    965
    pseudo-secularism succeeds because the hindus eat vegetarian food . because the hindus eat vegetarian food they cannot shed blood . because they are scared to shed blood they cannot defend themselves when attacked . Most of the political parties feel that hindus dont have the courage to defend injustices heaped upon them while muslims do . so most political parties pamper the muslims . hindus are viewed as weak and timid .

    my prescription to negate pesudosecularism---start eating nonveg food !!!
     
  12. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Is this thread on Digvijay Singh?

    He is a Messiah to bring misery to all religious groups of India the First Prophet of Doom and Gloom!

    Sometimes he is a champion of Muslims and then when it suits him when he sees the tide changing, he becomes a devout Hindu and so on.

    He is a devout opportunist and a sycophant of the Gandhis - the latest edition, that is.
     
    maomao and amitkriit like this.
  13. Galaxy

    Galaxy Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,093
    Likes Received:
    3,895
    Location:
    Delhi
    Secularism has failed in India. That's why right-wing will continue to grow. The onus is on "secularist" if they really want to stop RW.
     
    maomao likes this.
  14. KS

    KS Bye bye DFI Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    5,718
    Location:
    irrelevant
    Pseudo-secularism IS communalism of the worst order.Because it feeds majority communalism which when reaches a critical mass will be impossible to stop.
     
    afako and maomao like this.
  15. Raj30

    Raj30 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,327
    Likes Received:
    1,603
    Business Line : Opinion : Face the facts on riots
     
    maomao likes this.

Share This Page