United States of Hindu Empire
- May 29, 2009
This is a correct theory in theory but not in practise. No one knows how to apply it.I agree to all your points except one i.e there is only one nation theory and that is of Hindus the mlecchas(muzziesfascistsand christiannazis) are illegal occupiers of hindu land from Khyber to Kanyakumari and from attock to Cuttack.It is the fundamental duty of every hindu to remove mleccha authority from the land of bharat under mleccha sanghar doctrine.Hinduism is the solution rest are all illusion had team india did mahaarti instead of knee down while Pak mlecchas did namaz we would have slayed the mlecchas.
Going through many such theories and that too very well written in last few years I have reached to a conclusion that Hindus can only talk, not walk the talk.
Even I have a very controversial book in mind that it can only be a highly controlled book given to only select people. But then it will just become yet another rant without anything done on the ground.
I remember writing on a once very hot thread about definition of a Hindu or Hinduism. I perhaps wrote similar definition that the one who defends and expands the borders of Jambudweep is a Hindu.
Added later: A Hindu is who is dug in his heels to defend, own, fight and rule the land that is a stretch from the Himalayas to the Indian Ocean and beyond.
Having said that when I talked about failure of Hindus for not having proper response to two-nation theory which should have also launched on the ground my proposition is very subtle and non-violent but firm.
When India got independence we had two challenges as a ethno-religeous Hindu group. I am talking about Hindu response.
The two challenges were 1. Muslim fanaticism and their proclamation to subdue Hindu order. They after getting their separate nation made their intention very clear to repeat what they have just done.
The second challenge was the prevalent Hindu disunity due to malignant discrimination aka Caste system.
Our constitutional democracy model addressed the later and presumably thought that on Muslim fanatasim we will cross the bridge when we will reach there.
I am infering this after reading likes of Dr Ambedkar and few other leaders. The kind of ambiance our constitution carried tells a lot about how our nation’s Hindu ethos were advanced.
Coming back to failure and our response. The failure of Hindus was not to see that the constitutional democracy is an opportunity to unify Hindus and to break this pyramid of caste system. At the same time after promptly unifying having a good reason of recent memories we should have started converting remaining Muslims back to Hinduism.
The signalling was missed like always. Later on when we totally left that space to enjoy comforts of no-religious activism, caste bigotry. Then the state infiltrated secularism into the constitution in the dark of night. We left both the challenges unattended pre and post this constitutional adulteration. We had no response against it because we were not united as a firm religious consciousness.
When I say ‘united’ we do not need all Hindus united but a institution that speaks for all Hindus and have good enough strength on street. May just 5% Hindus united.
Still the time is in our hands for a decades at least to work on both the challenges.
Unify and Ghar Wapsi.