27% Reservation for OBCs in Allotment of Retail Outlets (Petrol Pumps)

[pmaitra]

No sir by the end of this year most paper currencies will lose their value, you can quote me on it.

Probably not by year-end, but in general what you are saying is correct.

Any currency that involves mathematically void theories, such as, but not limited to, Fiat Currency, Quantitative Easing, Fractional Reserve; are bound to crash sooner or later.

What is happening is that once one currency is devalued, other countries follow suit, in order to protect their exports. This causes a ripple effect that spreads all over most of the the world. It is like a wild rat race - who can inflate their currency faster.

 

[Mad Indian]

you are confusing nature of work with economic status. How about changing the equation and asking who is more respected, a brahmin corporation worker or a dalit priest?

I would call this point an own goal. Here is why, If there is something called as Dalit priests

That said, how about a Poor Dalit priest(hypothetically to infinity, if at all this bigotten rotten society accepts the Dalits as Priests), vs a Poor Brahmin priest? Provided all parameters being same(Money and Land)

most people prefer to marry among their caste, it's not they purposely discriminate against dalits but they prefer their own.

Err, no. FC marrying a fellow FC will face less resistance than the the FC marrying a Dalit.

Dont say other wise because it will be non-sense. My extended family has seen three inter-caste inter-religion marriages, with two among OBC-OBC and the other with OBC-SC. I know which marriage faced the most resistence from the family and society

Declared dead by the UP govt, man files nomination for the race to Raisina Hill to show he's alive : North, News - India Today
Singh waged a battle to get back his 12.1 acre-land in Chittoni village, Varanasi district, of UP that was allegedly usurped by his cousins after they claimed he had died.

There is the real problem, would the marriage be a problem if he was from a town or city? Think about it.

Another own goal. India has 70% villages "right now". So till India has majority Towns/Cities, with no discrimination against the dalits, Reservation has to continue.

But if you are still gonna argue for the sake of argument, this may be my last reply for you

 

[Predator]

I would call this point an own goal. Here is why, If there is something called as Dalit priests

What there are no dalit priests? Ever heard of lakshmanananda saraswati Swami Lakshmanananda - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Even TTD teaches dalit priests puja rites The Hindu : Andhra Pradesh / Tirupati News : Dalits all set to become priests

That said, how about a Poor Dalit priest(hypothetically to infinity, if at all this bigotten rotten society accepts the Dalits as Priests), vs a Poor Brahmin priest? Provided all parameters being same(Money and Land)

If you are a priest whether brahmin or dalit you are required at all ocassions, whether birth, naming ceremony or death. This provides him money while a corporation workers of any caste only gets a stipulated month salary. Now who is richer, the priest or a govt naukar?

Err, no. FC marrying a fellow FC will face less resistance than the the FC marrying a Dalit.

no, even intercaste marriages between so-called FC's face opposition, remember the nitish katara case which ended in murder?

Dont say other wise because it will be non-sense. My extended family has seen three inter-caste inter-religion marriages, with two among OBC-OBC and the other with OBC-SC. I know which marriage faced the most resistence from the family and society

maybe true in your case but not always, even ambedkar being a dalit married a brahmin without being killed.

Another own goal. India has 70% villages "right now". So till India has majority Towns/Cities, with no discrimination against the dalits, Reservation has to continue.

That's not what i meant, access to better education will lead to end of discrimination, which are not available in far flung villages. Even after 60 years of reservations didn't solve discrimination problem, then how can you say more reservations are needed?

 

[ejazr]

Just to clarify again, because of the subsidies that govt provides and the control of petrol / diesel pricing that govt. has in India, it becomes unprofitable for private sector companies to come into the fuel distribution business. The quota system is only implementation of the govt. quota law for OBCs

It would be best to reduce the amount of govt jobs and let the private sector grow and that way, in efficient reservations for things like petrol pumps would not be an issue. There is no need for GoI to be running directly or indirectly petrol pumps. But this can happen only if fuel prices are de-controlled

 

[Daredevil]

I think private players won't enter these petrol pump business unless govt. deregulates the fuel prices. Haven't we seen how a behemoth like Reliance bit the dust in this business. Its also disingenuous of govt. to bring reservations in to this for the fact that these petrol pumps establishment requires a lot of capital and therefore mostly the rich are operating in this field be it OBC, SC,ST or FC. I don't see any reason to bring social justice into this. But again everyone knows this is another vote bank politics.

Tomorrow, I will not be surprised if this govt. brings reservation in private sector as well which they already did with RTE (Right to education) bill.

 

[Singh]

Let us not bury our heads under sand like Ostrich, let us eat the bitter pill like any brave person would. Division in the Hindu community on the basis of Caste is a reality, and the gap is too huge to be bridged so quickly.

I agree with this, although some of your other posts seem to suggest that Hindus were infact a monolith.

In fact the gap is so big that Non-Hindu siculars try to take advantage of it from time-to-time to further their own agenda.

I would say "sickulars" irresp try to "exploit" this huge deep division in hindu society. (And by sickulars, I hope you mean those folks who encourage minority "appeasement" and "votebank" politics not those who are secular ? 'cause this is what achauhanji told me)

Hypothetically speaking, and please don't misconstrue the ensuing arguments, isn't it that the majority of hindus belong to lower castes and for centuries they have been subjugated by the minority upper castes ?

And you have been tirelessly saying that if the majority ie hindus feel unsafe/subjugated by the minorities/not given equal rights as minorities, they will send the minorities back to Afghanistan and Pakistan, and that India should be a Hindu nation ?

Now, just a few questions,

1. Why should not the lower castes rise up against upper castes ie minorities and send them to some other country if they feel that they are not safe around this upper caste minority, or if they are subjugated by the minority or if there is minority appeasement ?

2. Should low castes support a return to a "system" which due to whatever reason kept them in subjugation for centuries ?

We have let us get exploited by the power hungry people because caste system exists in our society. This divide cannot be bridged by economic measures alone, what we need is a radical change in our thought process. Now one question remains, suppose we manage to get united and start treating each others as equals, will not that destroy the career of the Dalit activists? Will not that hurt the political prospect of our shrewd politicians?


Had caste system been a myth, Rahul G could not find himself on the front-page of the English Newspapers just by eating and staying the house of a Dalit.

That is a good point. Radical change in our thought process.
Why don't we get an even more radical change in our thought process and treat every human being as a human being ?

Why don't we treat someone as an enemy just because of the religion or country they were "born" into ?

You obviously didn't chose to be an upper caste hindu or did you ? Why should we focus on the negative and not see the positive ? Why should we bay for the blood of our consanguineous countrymen, and not help them ?

 

[Singh]

1. For me a Hindu is a Hindu, FULL STOP.
2. High-Caste, Low-Caste affair is a domestic one, others do not need to poke their nose, particularly when their intent is suspect.

I don't care what you think. You are yet to answer the questions. Don't be politically correct.

Now, do the lower castes who are in a majority have a right to kick out upper castes who are in a minority, if the "hindu" a mythical monolith for the present has a right to kick out "nonhindus" from this country ?

Reality is that lower castes are being discriminated against, and the upper castes don't consider them one of their own. A fact which you yourself have alluded to. So don't give me the bs.

3. I am not an idealist, emotional fool, and I won't accept any radical change which will convert me into one. Tears do not drop from my eyes when someone shows extra generosity, I always care more about the rot inside.
And yes if it comes to survival during an internal conflict, I will prefer Hindus over all others, because I can identify more with this particular community.

if it comes to a choice between upper caste and lower caste hindus you'll chose an upper caste ? and if comes a choice between a hindi speaking upper caste over a malayali speaking upper caste, you'll chose the hindi speaking one ?

So I presume you are an emotional fool when you think you can dissolve caste barriers, but not an emotional fool when you think you can't demolish religious barriers ?

I will give you an example
I used to have a Sikh friend in real life. We interacted in real and virtual world. Then a few Khalistanis started to write bullshit over my page (without provocation), and he defended me whenever he visited my page, although his weakness for his fellow beings was clearly visible in his soft tone. Then one day I decided enough is enough and I responded in a similar language, and things changed.
Now read the reason carefully
Reason being even though he was against the ideology of the Khalistanis, he still identified them as one of his own, and could digest their abuses because those were being thrown at a "Hindu" who was not a "Sikh", although he clearly disagreed with them (no doubt about it). But when it was my turn, his world shook because by attacking them I had mounted an indirect attack on him and he advised me to stop or else........and then I said !@#$. This is called NATURE, Tribalism is a reality.

I gave this example for one purpose, you could feel and understand it in a better way. I am sure you can

And iirc you have always been rather dismissive of folks who have tried to talk about the sensitivities and issues of non upper caste Hindus, choosing to be caustic and acerbic rather than understanding.

You have given this and similar examples atleast half a dozen times about how you were abused by people belonging to minority religions online (and how you started hating them and started adopting tribalism thereafter)

And let me also say this without being politically correct, you were bullied and humiliated on the internet and you are trying to return the favour.

PS: This is not how tribalism works, people are divided on political, cultural, linguistic, regional, ethnic, caste lines etc.

 

[amitkriit]

I don't care what you think. You are yet to answer the questions. Don't be politically correct.

Now, do the lower castes who are in a majority have a right to kick out upper castes who are in a minority, if the "hindu" a mythical monolith for the present has a right to kick out "nonhindus" from this country ?

Reality is that lower castes are being discriminated against, and the upper castes don't consider them one of their own. A fact which you yourself have alluded to. So don't give me the bs.



if it comes to a choice between upper caste and lower caste hindus you'll chose an upper caste ? and if comes a choice between a hindi speaking upper caste over a malayali speaking upper caste, you'll chose the hindi speaking one ?

So I presume you are an emotional fool when you think you can dissolve caste barriers, but not an emotional fool when you think you can't demolish religious barriers ?



And iirc you have always been rather dismissive of folks who have tried to talk about the sensitivities and issues of non upper caste Hindus, choosing to be caustic and acerbic rather than understanding.

You have given this and similar examples atleast half a dozen times about how you were abused by people belonging to minority religions online (and how you started hating them and started adopting tribalism thereafter)

And let me also say this without being politically correct, you were bullied and humiliated on the internet and you are trying to return the favour.

PS: This is not how tribalism works, people are divided on political, cultural, linguistic, regional, ethnic, caste lines etc.

1. I think I made my point extremely clear in my earl posts. I hate the division and discrimination within the Hindu community, and this is in fact a reality which needs to be addressed for the sake of well-being of our own people. What did you infer from my "Burying our head in sand" comment?

2. Every aggrieved group has the right to fight against injustice, particularly when the perpetrator cannot be corrected, or the situation becomes hopeless. If Free Will is not respected, if values are imposed then even violence is justified.

3. I believe it is easier to break the caste barrier than convincing the "Chosen Ones" that Hindus aren't coward just because they believe in million gods, we won't go to hell just because of our religious beliefs, and this world wasn't created for them alone.

4. I had just given you an example of what TRIBALISM means, when you put forward a question on my "PRIORITIES". I was just telling you that even the "Politically Correct" people aren't untouched by Tribalism even if they try to pretend otherwise. The last few paras were not meant to provide you a "Background" of things, but to present an example which you could clearly understand.

 

[amitkriit]

^^^ Oh I forgot to add, I will support the fight of the lower caste against the discrimination from the Upper caste, but the fight must "not" take the form of Mindless Jihad, or because GOD TOLD THEM, it must be fought for a cause and it must end when the objective is achieved.

 

[Galaxy]

I don't care what you think. You are yet to answer the questions. Don't be politically correct.

Now, do the lower castes who are in a majority have a right to kick out upper castes who are in a minority, if the "hindu" a mythical monolith for the present has a right to kick out "nonhindus" from this country ?

Reality is that lower castes are being discriminated against, and the upper castes don't consider them one of their own. A fact which you yourself have alluded to. So don't give me the bs.

I am sure, you are referring caste system in Hindu only?

First of all, OBC are not lower caste. OBC controls half of the country. Politically. Socially or economically. No, I am not talking about BIMARU states but even Gujarat or Tamil Nadu or AP or Karnataka or Haryana.

Harijans and Adviasi are only 20%. OBC+ FC Hindus are 62%.

Yes, SC faced discrimination. That's why they need special privilege and there is consensus on that. Things are changing slowly and gradually. In 1947, 95% SC were BPL, Today, 40%. (Gov. figure)

BTW, caste system exist in every religion. More SC are in SIkhs than Hindus %wise. Check Punjab demographic. 90% Christians ancestors were SC/ST. Caste system is much more rigid in Christianity. Even in many cases, they have different cremation ground and Church. Beside Caste system, Sectarian division also exist in Abrahmic religion. Shias and Sunnis have different colonies. Go and figure in Lucknow. Ahmediyas, Ismalies and 20's of more sects. They have diffident mosque and have different way of thinking. UC and dominating caste of Muslims/Christian/Sikhs are dominating politics.

Why so much noise or unique about Hinduism ? In fact, SC are only 15% compare with 67% Non-harijan Hindus. Due to historical discrimation, They are getting special privilege and even more needed IMO. No one has issue on that. This is payback!!

if it comes to a choice between upper caste and lower caste hindus you'll chose an upper caste ? and if comes a choice between a hindi speaking upper caste over a malayali speaking upper caste, you'll chose the hindi speaking one ?

Same thing about any religion.

What is common between Bohra Muslim of Gujarat and Bengali Muslim ? Even Gachi Muslims of Godhra and Bohra/Konkani Muslims of Gujarat are not same.
Dalit Christian of Tamil Nadu and Tribal Christian of Mizoram ? From Church to Language, Custom to food - all are different.
Ravidasi of Punjab and Sikhs of Meerut or Pune are not same.

India is a multicultural, Multi languages and multi religion country.

Godhra riot was initiated by Muslims of Godhra. In retaliation, Advasi Hindus of south Gujarat and OBC Patel participated. Rajputs didn't participated (because they are concentrated in those areas where riot didn't took place). That was because of religion and region.

Hindus and every religion is divided on linguistic, region, caste, ethnic and so on. However, Religion unites majority of people when needed. It happened in past and will happen in future.

 

[Singh]

I am sure, you are referring caste system in Hindu only?
First of all, OBC are not lower caste. OBC controls half of the country. Politically or economically. No, I am not talking of BIMARU states but even Gujarat or Tamil Nadu or AP or Karnataka or Haryana.

Harijans and Adviasi are only 20%. OBC+ FC Hindus are 62%.

Yes, SC faced discrimination. That's why they need special privilege and there is consensus on that. Things are changing slowly and gradually. In 1947, 95% SC were BPL, Today, 40%. (Gov. figure)

BTW, caste system exist in every religion. More SC are in SIkhs than Hindus. Check Punjab demographic. 90% Christians ancestors were SC/ST. Caste system is much more rigid in Christianity. Even in many cases, they have different cremation ground and Church. Beside Caste system, Sectarian division also exist in Abrahmic religion. Shias and Sunnis have different colonies. Go and figure in Lucknow. Ahmediyas, Islamlies and 10's of more sects.

What's so much fuzz or unique about Hinduism ? In fact, SC are 15% compare with 67% Non-harijan Hindus. Due to historical discrimation, They are getting special privileged and even more needed IMO. No one has issue on that.

Let me reproduce my post

I don't care what you think. You are yet to answer the questions. Don't be politically correct.

Now, do the lower castes who are in a majority have a right to kick out upper castes who are in a minority, if the "hindu" a mythical monolith for the present has a right to kick out "nonhindus" from this country ?

Reality is that lower castes are being discriminated against, and the upper castes don't consider them one of their own. A fact which you yourself have alluded to. So don't give me the bs.

The issue was simple, if Hindus who are in a majority have a right to kick out to Non Hindus if they so desire, then do not lower castes have a right to kick out upper caste hindus if they so desire ?

I don't see you disagreeing with amit's logic, so I will presume that you support this line of reasoning as you have do so in the past as well.

==

So without side stepping the issue, you are saying

1. Advisasis (indigenous people) and harijans (untouchables) make up ~20% (of hindus or indians?)
2. OBC + FC make up ~60% (of hindus or indians?)

ergo, SC/ST cannot evict uppercastes out of India but they can be kicked out ?

==
Now, that we have established this fact, lets dispute the numbers and some of your assertions

Let us establish first that OBC are not a monolith

We have a list of OBC here National Commission for Backward Classes , as you can go through the list of various obc, you can see for yourself how disparate and numerous they are, and too think of them as a single bloc is a feat of unbridled imagination.

Further, OBC make up 40-50% of Indian population. So this means that fc are just 10-20% of hindu population.

So, how can 10-20% of FC dictate how minorities should be treated or not ?

I think this whole argument/logic of amit, and which you support, falls on its feet. We already know that hindus are not a monolith, and a small section of upper caste hindus shouldn't try to be thekedars.

===

Same thing about any religion.

What is common between Bohra Muslim of Gujarat and Bengali Muslim ?
Dalit Christian of Tamil Nadu and Tribal Christian of Mizoram ? From Church to Language, Custom to food - all are different.
Ravidasi of Punjab and Sikhs of Meerut or Pune are not same.

India is a multicultural, Multi languages and multi religion country. This includes all religion.

During Godhra riot, Muslims of Godhra imitated. In retaliation, ST Hindus of south Gujarat and OBC Patel participated. That was because of religion.

Hindus and every religion is divided on linguistic, region, caste and so on. However, Religion unites majority of people.

Without obfuscating the issue and derailing the topic at hand

I said

if it comes to a choice between upper caste and lower caste hindus you'll chose an upper caste ? and if comes a choice between a hindi speaking upper caste over a malayali speaking upper caste, you'll chose the hindi speaking one ?

in an attempt to justify that religious communities in India are not a monolith.

And your arguments seem to support my assertion, so thank you.

====

 

[Galaxy]

Let me reproduce my post

So without side stepping the issue, you are saying

1. Advisasis (indigenous people) and harijans (untouchables) make up ~20% (of hindus or indians?)
2. OBC + FC make up ~60% (of hindus or indians?)

ergo, SC/ST cannot evict uppercastes out of India but they can be kicked out ?

That Harijan or Advasi will decide not you or me. I have not heard any such thing from them and i know many.

They got special privilege because of historical mistake. They need it. It's payback.

As i said, This is nothing unique.

Many SC/ST converted to other religion. They are facing much more problem than their ancestral religion. So what they should do ? Kick UC/OBC/Dominating caste/sect of Non-Hindus ? or they should return back to Hinduism ? This is social problem and not religion specific.

Now, that we have established this fact, lets dispute the numbers and some of your assertions

Let us establish first that OBC are not a monolith

We have a list of OBC here National Commission for Backward Classes , as you can go through the list of various obc, you can see for yourself how disparate and numerous they are, and too think of them as a single bloc is a feat of unbridled imagination.

Further, OBC make up 40-50% of Indian population. So this means that fc are just 10-20% of hindu population.

So, how can 10-20% of FC dictate how minorities should be treated or not ?

I think this whole argument/logic of amit, and which you support, falls on its feet. We already know that hindus are not a monolith, and a small section of upper caste hindus shouldn't try to be thekedars.

===

Without obfuscating the issue and derailing the topic at hand

I said

in an attempt to justify that religious communities in India are not a monolith.

And your arguments seem to support my assertion, so thank you.

====

AFAIK , UC Hindus are around 20%, OBC Hindus are around 42% (Indians). ( In Hinduism, 25%-50%-25% UC-OBC-SC/ST). ( My personal and general assumption). % could change +/- few % as there is no exact figure as there is no caste based census since 1931.


I don't understand what's your point ?

Hindus are not homogeneous.
Muslims, Christians and Sikhs are also not homogeneous.

16% Gujarat population is Patel
10% Bihar and UP Population is Kurmi-Koeri.
Both are not same even when Patel are considered as Kurmi of Gujarat.

I don't think anyone will deny this fact. Every religion is divided between Caste, Region, Linguistic, Ethnic and so on.

No, FC will not decide anything or everything. Don't mislead by putting words in my mouth. I know your tactis.

Hindutva is an ideology which is neither Hinduism nor Anti-Minority. Anyone can support such ideology. Most of the supporters are actually OBC. Most of the Saffronist leaders also come from OBC. There are many ST/SC also who are staunch followers e.g. South Gujarat, MP, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, North Odissa,etc.. Of course, Some UC Hindus also support.

Most of the Anti-Hindutva folks are actually UC. Most of the Congress/Marxist and their paid journalist are Brahmin. I can also say Brahmins are Anti-Hindutva and Hindutava is OBC dominated ideology.

Hindutva is supported by many Hindus irrespective of caste and region. Don't live in denial.

 

[amitkriit]

@Singh the logic is simple if it ever comes to us v.s. them, if ever a polarisation on the basis of religion takes place, it must be clear in everybody's mind that secularism will be the least of concern on either side. Basic instinct of Self-Preservation will kick in.

The "majority" cannot remain secular if the "minority" doesn't believe in it and wishes to divide/conquer the land and subjugate the "coward" majority. There cannot be different yard-sticks, genuine grievances of all communities must be addressed and Hindus feel aggravated.

If a political front having elements like PFI can be considered as secular, then BJP and RSS are secular as well.

The burden of preserving the unity, integrity of India doesn't lie on the shoulder of Hindus alone, if the "minority" wishes to share this nation with us, then it must learn the art of Co-Existence as well.

Now back on topic, What does Congress want to achieve by announcing such sweeteners? I seriously suspect their intent.

 

[Singh]

1. I think I made my point extremely clear in my earl posts. I hate the division and discrimination within the Hindu community, and this is in fact a reality which needs to be addressed for the sake of well-being of our own people. What did you infer from my "Burying our head in sand" comment?

I'll assume you are acquiescing to my point that if religious minorities can get kicked out of India, then so can upper castes minorities be kicked out of India because as you yourself prove that hindus are not a monolith and severely divided. It would be in your interest to ensure that such wanton majoritarianism doesn't prevail.

2. Every aggrieved group has the right to fight against injustice, particularly when the perpetrator cannot be corrected, or the situation becomes hopeless.If Free Will is not respected, if values are imposed then even violence is justified.

You just said that we need a radical change in the thought process if the inhumane discrimination against lower castes is to end. And at the same time you are alluding to fact that lower castes are justified in picking up arms against upper castes.

Similarly depending on one's pov you are exhorting some hindus and some muslims to resort to violence. Mixed signals much ?

3. I believe it is easier to break the caste barrier than convincing the "Chosen Ones" that Hindus aren't coward just because they believe in million gods, we won't go to hell just because of our religious beliefs, and this world wasn't created for them alone.

Separate arguments.

1. You believe it is easy to break down the caste barrier amongst Hindus. Going by the past, and looking at the present I think you are being unrealistic.

2. I don't understand why do you feel the need to impress upon Muslims esp the one's who abused you online that you are brave, won't goto hell or are a part of this universe ?

3. How do you conflate these two issues ?

4. I had just given you an example of what TRIBALISM means, when you put forward a question on my "PRIORITIES". I was just telling you that even the "Politically Correct" people aren't untouched by Tribalism even if they try to pretend otherwise. The last few paras were not meant to provide you a "Background" of things, but to present an example which you could clearly understand.

Yes you gave an example where you were bullied on the internet, but I don't understand how does this mean that tribalism affect everyone ? Your "hyper"tribalism was a response to bullying.

"a way of thinking or behaving in which people are more loyal to their tribe than to their friends, their country, or any other social group"

I am more loyal to my friends that to my own cousins. I prefer the company of fellow Delhites over those of my ancestral town. I like to befriend people with whom my wavelength matches rather than because they belong to my tribe.

 

[Singh]

That Harijan or Advasi will decide not you or me. I have not heard any such thing from them and i know many.

They got special privilege because of historical mistake. They need it. It's payback.

As i said, This is nothing unique.

Many SC/ST converted to other religion. They are facing much more problem than their ancestral religion. So what they should do ? Kick UC/OBC/Dominating caste/sect of Non-Hindus ? or they should return back to Hinduism ? This is social problem and not religion specific.




AFAIK , UC Hindus are around 20%, OBC Hindus are around 42% (Indians). ( In Hinduism, 25%-50%-25% UC-OBC-SC/ST). ( My personal and general assumption). % could change +/- few % as there is no exact figure as there is no caste based census since 1931.


I don't understand what's your point ?

Hindus are not homogeneous.
Muslims, Christians and Sikhs are also not homogeneous.

16% Gujarat population is Patel
10% Bihar and UP Population is Kurmi-Koeri.
Both are not same even when Patel are considered as Kurmi of Gujarat.

I don't think anyone will deny this fact. Every religion is divided between Caste, Region, Linguistic, Ethnic and so on.

No, FC will not decide anything or everything. Don't mislead by putting words in my mouth. I know your tactis.

Hindutva is an ideology which is neither Hinduism nor Anti-Minority. Anyone can support such ideology. Most of the supporters are actually OBC. Most of the Saffronist leaders also come from OBC. There are many ST/SC also who are staunch followers e.g. South Gujarat, MP, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, North Odissa,etc.. Of course, Some UC Hindus also support.

Most of the Anti-Hindutva folks are actually UC. Most of the Congress/Marxist and their paid journalist are Brahmin. I can also say Brahmins are Anti-Hindutva and Hindutava is OBC dominated ideology.

Hindutva is supported by many Hindus irrespective of caste and region. Don't live in denial.

Galaxy rather than advising me to not live in denial and calling me names, may I request you to take your time to go through my posts.

You are misconstruing, misunderstanding and misrepresenting my posts and derailing the thread.

My interest is not to sidestep the discussion that I am already having.

 

[Galaxy]

Galaxy rather than advising me to not live in denial and calling me names, may I request you to take your time to go through my posts.

You are misconstruing, misunderstanding and misrepresenting my posts and derailing the thread.

My interest is not to sidestep the discussion that I am already having.

I read many posts of yours. Many times, you post wrong info when it's about Hindus to mislead others. Your point changes when it comes to any other religion. I don't think you do it unintentionally but deliberately post such thing for some strategy.

1) You are talking about caste system in Hinduism. Very specifically. This is not unique. Every religion has same problem. In fact, other religions have much more issue due to sectarian and more % of SC/ST. Why don't you talk of other religion ? If minority can gang-up against a section of Hindus. Make no mistake, Hindus will also do the same. Caste would be the least important factor. Already 20% Hindus are united irrespective of caste/region. Hindus also have the right to do the same.

2> You always use UC Hindutva. Congress/Marxist/Minority always use such tactics. It's too late now. Hindus irrespective of caste and region support this ideology. You may say a section but cannot say UC which is not true at all. Why you use UC when majority of Pro-Hindutva are actually OBC. Many Jains, Non-Hindus and ST/SC are also supporting religiously but according to you, they are different. Do you think, It will make any difference ? So, why to live in denial ?

 

[amitkriit]

I'll assume you are acquiescing to my point that if religious minorities can get kicked out of India, then so can upper castes minorities be kicked out of India because as you yourself prove that hindus are not a monolith and severely divided. It would be in your interest to ensure that such wanton majoritarianism doesn't prevail.


You just said that we need a radical change in the thought process if the inhumane discrimination against lower castes is to end. And at the same time you are alluding to fact that lower castes are justified in picking up arms against upper castes.

Similarly depending on one's pov you are exhorting some hindus and some muslims to resort to violence. Mixed signals much ?

I had said "If Hindus cannot feel safe in India...then........." if the Indian system can provide remedy to the existing problems, then fair enough. Otherwise people will fight for their genuine grievance, and the violence will be completely justifiable. This will be a struggle to protect our right, and in worst case our existence. If this land doesn't belong to us then it doesn't belong to "them" either. Picking up arms is justified in case all other alternatives are exhausted. Muslims might have their reason, we will have ours.

Separate arguments.

1. You believe it is easy to break down the caste barrier amongst Hindus. Going by the past, and looking at the present I think you are being unrealistic.
Not really, caste barriers are actually crumbling down. But the religious divide has increased.
2. I don't understand why do you feel the need to impress upon Muslims esp the one's who abused you online that you are brave, won't goto hell or are a part of this universe ?
You took my example too literally. Some communities in our world have a infallible belief in the theory that "They are the Chosen-Ones", and can go to any extent to cleanse this Earth from the miserable people like me.

3. How do you conflate these two issues ?



Yes you gave an example where you were bullied on the internet, but I don't understand how does this mean that tribalism affect everyone ? Your "hyper"tribalism was a response to bullying.

"a way of thinking or behaving in which people are more loyal to their tribe than to their friends, their country, or any other social group"

I am more loyal to my friends that to my own cousins. I prefer the company of fellow Delhites over those of my ancestral town. I like to befriend people with whom my wavelength matches rather than because they belong to my tribe.
May be you were not the one who had declared that the murder of Lala Jagat Nath is Justifiable. May be that was not Tribalism, and something else because it is a voice of Minority.

^
|
| My response in red.

 

[Singh]

I read many posts of yours. Many times, you post wrong info when it's about Hindus to mislead others. Your point changes when it comes to any other religion. I don't think you do it unintentionally but deliberately post such thing for some strategy.

1) You are talking about caste system in Hinduism. Very specifically. This is not unique. Every religion has same problem. In fact, other religions have much more issue due to sectarian and more % of SC/ST. Why don't you talk of other religion ? If minority can gang-up against a section of Hindus. Make no mistake, Hindus will also do the same. Caste would be the least important factor. Already 20% Hindus are united irrespective of caste/region. Hindus also have the right to do the same.

2> You always use UC Hindutva. Congress/Marxist/Minority always use such tactics. It's too late now. Hindus irrespective of caste and region support this ideology. You may say a section but cannot say UC which is not true at all. Why you use UC when majority of Pro-Hindutva are actually OBC. Many Jains, Non-Hindus and ST/SC are also supporting religiously but according to you, they are different. Do you think, It will make any difference ? So, why to live in denial ?

I don't use this site as a personal platform nor is it my intention to either mislead or educate others. Ymmv as it has.
It is sad that the irony is lost on you and further sad that explaining to you the humour in your accusation shall fall on deaf ears.

I am talking about Caste system because amitkriit talked about it. I believe it is my right as a member of this forum to raise and discuss various topics as is your right to not discuss topics which you are uncomfortable with.

And it is clear from your arguments that you are giving further credence to my point that no one is a monolith and to see them as a monolith is futile. However, in your eagerness to refute my point, and to perhaps win some imaginary internet publicity points, you are overlooking the same.

I hope I am clear ?

 

[Singh]

@Singh the logic is simple if it ever comes to us v.s. them, if ever a polarisation on the basis of religion takes place, it must be clear in everybody's mind that secularism will be the least of concern on either side. Basic instinct of Self-Preservation will kick in.

You are stating the obvious.

The "majority" cannot remain secular if the "minority" doesn't believe in it and wishes to divide/conquer the land and subjugate the "coward" majority.

I don't see any evidence of this imagined takeover and subjugation. I think you are confusing what some Islamic scholars "believe" in vs what is actually happening on the ground.

"Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices." - Voltaire

There cannot be different yard-sticks, genuine grievances of all communities must be addressed

within reason, yes.

and Hindus feel aggravated.

I think so it is rich coming from you, a person who belongs to one of the most pampered and "appeased" community of India ie UCs.

what are you aggravated about ?

Everyone has some concerns, and fears. When it comes to muslim their backwardness, their population growth, their increasing radicalization etc. is a cause of concern.

However, I know for one thing the answer to this is not to assert your dominance and to seek to subjugate them, if one wishes for India to endure in its present form. Such petty thinking doesn't behoove the descendants of the great leaders of mankind.

If a political front having elements like PFI can be considered as secular, then BJP and RSS are secular as well.

It is quite clear that no one considers PFI or RSS as secular.
However, BJP is trying hard to project a secular face. And I would like to see BJP become a mostly secular party.

The burden of preserving the unity, integrity of India doesn't lie on the shoulder of Hindus alone, if the "minority" wishes to share this nation with us, then it must learn the art of Co-Existence as well.

Obviously

Now back on topic, What does Congress want to achieve by announcing such sweeteners? I seriously suspect their intent.

Their intent is simple.

 

[Singh]

I had said "If Hindus cannot feel safe in India...then........." if the Indian system can provide remedy to the existing problems, then fair enough. Otherwise people will fight for their genuine grievance, and the violence will be completely justifiable. This will be a struggle to protect our right, and in worst case our existence. If this land doesn't belong to us then it doesn't belong to "them" either. Picking up arms is justified in case all other alternatives are exhausted. Muslims might have their reason, we will have ours.

If you mean this hypothetically or matter of factly then fair enough.

However, I think it is wholly disingenuous of you if you think the ground situation is against the Hindus. The state, the establishment, the administration, the police, the armed forces, the political class, the rich class, the intelligentsia, the business class, the trader class, the worker class, the foreign service, the media, the judiciary is dominated and overwhelmingly represented by the Hindus.


===

Not really, caste barriers are actually crumbling down. But the religious divide has increased.

Fair enough.

===

You took my example too literally. Some communities in our world have a infallible belief in the theory that "They are the Chosen-Ones", and can go to any extent to cleanse this Earth from the miserable people like me.

I was seeing the interview of a leader of VHP and also of the Sadhu Samaj in Satyamev Jayate. He said he doesn't believe in the Indian constitution, he believes that dalits shouldn't be touched, he believed that brahmins are the most superior of all etc. I don't subscribe to what he believes in or preaches because I have an understanding of Hinduism and I believe he is wrong.

You must study Islam, to understand what Islam actually says and not rely on some dimwit who for whatever reason believes in bs. (I think so this process is called purvapaksha). And the simplest place for you to start would be to read what saints, scholars of your sampradaya have said about Islam.

If you hate muslims for what a few of them say online etc then don't you think you are just finding out an excuse to hate them ?

===

May be you were not the one who had declared that the murder of Lala Jagat Nath is Justifiable. May be that was not Tribalism, and something else because it is a voice of Minority.

I am not advocating it. Justifying an act, or able to see the justification from another person's pov or having empathy is not advocacy. This is a very nuanced point.

I can justify why some sikhs picked up arms against the state, I can justify why the state went into the golden temple etc.

I have also said previously I can also see justify why some religious texts call for burkha, sati etc whether I am convinced or believe it or advocate it, is an entirely different matter.