Should India reform its attitudes to multiculturalism we see it failing in Europe?

busesaway

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
370
Likes
173
Germany's interior minister - and remember that youth and sexual minorities are happily voting right-wing in Continental Europe - recently proposed that the government imposes the concept of Leitkultur on the people of Germany, which would force the migrants to assimilate into local culture.

The idea is that since a lot of Muslims have historically failed at integration (and in Asia, Muslims are often self-identified as separate ethnicities), these people need to be forced to integrate or otherwise the continent will keep seeing serious problems from them (social conservatism, anti-social behavior, poor socioeconomic demographics, etc...).

http://www.goethe.de/en/kul/ges/20721837.html


The French have a tradition of secularism called Laicite, which means that people should be forced to separate their religious views from their daily life. They do not practice multiculturalism in the sense that the Anglosaxon world practices it, but rather people are forced to assimilate into local customs as much as possible; in reality, due to social pressures, the concept of multiculturalism only allows those people who grew up in 'ethnic ghettos' to retain their culture.

In reality, it's predominantly the "foriegn religions" that suffer the most, in particular Islam, because the boundary between religion and culture can be very vague - is Christmas not a Christian holiday?

http://www.normandyvision.org/article12030701.php

It's widely accepted that multiculturalism has failed throughout Europe. It's of note that only something like 30% of British youth was willing to accept more migrants from Syria, which collapsed when other Islamic countries were concerned; the UK agreed to accept the least migrants of any western country on earth, and it hasn't even accepted the amount that it agreed to!

The far-right in Europe have support from ethnic minorities (Jews, Indians, and East Asians), sexual minorities, youth, women, and a lot of left-wing voters are also displeased with the migrants too. It's an angry backlash after the migrant crisis broke the camel's back.

Should India, which adopted the current political concept of multiculturalism and secularism from British university educated scholars, reform its system so that Muslims are considered to be a separate ethnocultural group, and that people are forced to make allowances Hindus?
 

sthf

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2016
Messages
2,271
Likes
5,302
Country flag
Nope. European stuff doesn't translate well to Indian conditions. The supposed "multiculturalism" should have had been nipped in the bud at the time of the partition.

Because that didn't happen, that train has left the station. Either you put up with it as best as possible or start a civil war.

Even though I am as much a badass on the internet as the next guy, I'll pick the former.
 
Last edited:

busesaway

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
370
Likes
173
Nope. European stuff doesn't translate well to Indian conditions. The supposed "multiculturalism" should have had been nipped in the bud at the time of the partition.

Because that didn't happen, that train has left the station. Either you put up with it as best as possible or start a civil war.

Even though I am as much a badass on the internet as the next guy, I'll pick the former.
I wonder if we could refine it better to create a more harmonious environment:
  • Buddhists and Sikhs should be considered "wings" of Hinduism; obviously not the core of Hinduism, but culture quirks that are an integral part of Hinduism.
  • The western religions should be considered to be foriegn imports into India; since Muslims have generally had trouble integrating throughout the earth, and since many countries consider Muslims to be a separate ethnicity, I think we should employ a form of multiculturalism that requires Muslims to integrate.
  • But Christians should be considered recent converts and not be lumped in with the "western religions", because they essentially kept the traditional culture within the constraints of Christianity's regulations.

We should adopt the mantra that's used by the European Union: "unity in diversity". We should provide allowances for linguistic and ethnic divisions, and allow more decentralization and localism - but we should remain a strong alliance that is able to defend itself and grow economically.
 

Mahakaal

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2015
Messages
129
Likes
121
I wonder if we could refine it better to create a more harmonious environment:
  • Buddhists and Sikhs should be considered "wings" of Hinduism; obviously not the core of Hinduism, but culture quirks that are an integral part of Hinduism.
  • The western religions should be considered to be foriegn imports into India; since Muslims have generally had trouble integrating throughout the earth, and since many countries consider Muslims to be a separate ethnicity, I think we should employ a form of multiculturalism that requires Muslims to integrate.
  • But Christians should be considered recent converts and not be lumped in with the "western religions", because they essentially kept the traditional culture within the constraints of Christianity's regulations.

We should adopt the mantra that's used by the European Union: "unity in diversity". We should provide allowances for linguistic and ethnic divisions, and allow more decentralization and localism - but we should remain a strong alliance that is able to defend itself and grow economically.
1)Sikhism is not Wing of Hinduism, its a different Religion. and 5th largest one.

2) Foreign Cults have no place here. be it Judaism or Recent Converts of xtinity.
 

busesaway

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
370
Likes
173
1)Sikhism is not Wing of Hinduism, its a different Religion. and 5th largest one.

2) Foreign Cults have no place here. be it Judaism or Recent Converts of xtinity.
Are you SIkh? I like to think of Sikhism as being on the edge of Indian culture. It's not an integral core aspect of Hinduism like Buddhism or Jainism, but it's still tolerable under the concept of "Hindu Democracy". I think Sikhs would need to integrate ever so slightly since they've been heavily influenced by Islamism, but other than that they are welcome to take part in India thoroughly.

I think foriegn cultures should be allowed but only under the concept of a conservative version of multiculturalism; the Muslims need to make allowances for the rest of us, and I think Muslims should be considered to be a separate ethnicity like Hispanics are in the US.

Christians were all recent converts. They essentially kept the traditional culture but they tried to keep within the rules and regulations provided for by Christianity. They aren't as "foriegn" as Muslims.
 

Mahakaal

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2015
Messages
129
Likes
121
Are you SIkh? I like to think of Sikhism as being on the edge of Indian culture. It's not an integral core aspect of Hinduism like Buddhism or Sikhism, but it's still tolerable under the concept of "Hindu Democracy". I think Sikhs would need to integrate ever so slightly since they've been heavily influenced by Islamism, but other than that they are welcome to take part in India thoroughly.

I think foriegn cultures should be allowed but only under the concept of a conservative version of multiculturalism; the Muslims need to make allowances for the rest of us, and I think Muslims should be considered to be a separate ethnicity like Hispanics are in the US.

Christians were all recent converts. They essentially kept the traditional culture but they tried to keep within the rules and regulations provided for by Christianity. They aren't as "foriegn" as Muslims.
Thankfully No. Sikhism is considered Dharmic Religion, but it's losing it's Dharmicness since 1980s.

i dont want multiculturalism in India, we are already far to diverse.how much more culture and diversity you want now ?
 

Mahakaal

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2015
Messages
129
Likes
121
one more thing, Xtians and Muslims are sons of Soil, just their culture and Religion is from Outside..
 

busesaway

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
370
Likes
173
Thankfully No. Sikhism is considered Dharmic Religion, but it's losing it's Dharmicness since 1980s.

i dont want multiculturalism in India, we are already far to diverse.how much more culture and diversity you want now ?
I like Sikhs. They're generally good people. They haven't had the problems with integration, anti-social behavior, poverty and educational attainment, and other problems causing agony for westerners. They're literally like Hindus in terms of educational values and niceness.

I think that there might be some problems with Sikhs' relations with Islam and Muslims. If anything, we could try to use Sikhs as a barrier between us and the Islamic world.

And I do not support multiculturalism (or that worse shit they've got in the United States). I think that Muslims should be identified as a separate ethnicity (in-line with many other countries in Asia) and that we should force Muslims to make allowances for Non-Muslims. We shouldn't tolerate the shit like Europe has done.
 

Hiranyaksha

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2017
Messages
2,061
Likes
4,311
Country flag
India should define multiculturalism in Indian Context, i.e. limited to religions and cultures which originated exclusively in India.
 

busesaway

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
370
Likes
173
one more thing, Xtians and Muslims are sons of Soil, just their culture and Religion is from Outside..
It depends on which Muslims you're talking about. I would at least categorize Muslims as a separate ethnocultural group (I'm gay) because their simply too culturally different - they haven't integrated in Europe, India, or across most of Asia.

I think the region around North-West India is really bizarre and murkey. I can't work out who are racially Middle Eastern and who are Indian. I think media organizations should be more thoughtful of using North-West Indians to represent South Asians.

Pakistan isn't a South Asian country and Pakistanis should be considered South Asian or Indian.
 

Hiranyaksha

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2017
Messages
2,061
Likes
4,311
Country flag
one more thing, Xtians and Muslims are sons of Soil, just their culture and Religion is from Outside..
Dehyphenation between Religion and Culture must happen. Being Xtian or Muzzie, is adopting to different religion, not different identity or culture, doesn't mean that they should forget Indian Culture.

Further None of them is son of this soil if they don't own the culture of this soil announcing themselves as the Indian first, anything else second .
Else they are just pest to this soil not its son.
 

busesaway

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
370
Likes
173
Dehyphenation between Religion and Culture must happen. Being Xtian or Muzzie, is adopting to different religion, not different identity or culture, doesn't mean that they should forget Indian Culture.

Further None of them is son of this soil if they don't own the culture of this soil announcing themselves as the Indian first, anything else second .
Else they are just pest to this soil not its son.
Muslims have historically self-identified as a separate ethnocultural group in countries throughout Asia. I think there's something about Islam/Muslims that makes them not integrate into the external culture around them, and therefore I think it's only right that Muslims are considered to be their own ethnocultural group in order to fight racism better.

Christians are all recent converts. They essentially kept the traditional culture but 'overlaid' it with the religious constraints provided for by Christianity. It's also even less of a culture class thanks to westernization.
 

Mahakaal

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2015
Messages
129
Likes
121
It depends on which Muslims you're talking about. I would at least categorize Muslims as a separate ethnocultural group (I'm gay) because their simply too culturally different - they haven't integrated in Europe, India, or across most of Asia.

I think the region around North-West India is really bizarre and murkey. I can't work out who are racially Middle Eastern and who are Indian. I think media organizations should be more thoughtful of using North-West Indians to represent South Asians.

Pakistan isn't a South Asian country and Pakistanis should be considered South Asian or Indian.
Muslim is not a Race, Muslims from Turkey are different from Muslims from arabia, Muslim Persians are different from Paki muslim, pakis are different from indian muslims, even in India North indian Muslims are different from South Indian Muslims. dont confuse Race with Religion.

North West India is 50% West Asian(Middle Eastern), 25% ANI and 25% South Indian). frankly people from Punjab, Paharis,Kashmiri look very different from Average Indian. you can see this stark differance when you cross in to UP, Rajasthan, MP from Haryana or Punjab.

half of Porkistan is persian and other hlaf is North west Indian. and they are mixing, kicking our "Indian" worlds and influence from their language and completely forgotten their Hindu past. as they have adopted more and more Persian and Arabic culture, it's safe to say that they are now Middle Easter.
 

Mahakaal

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2015
Messages
129
Likes
121
Dehyphenation between Religion and Culture must happen. Being Xtian or Muzzie, is adopting to different religion, not different identity or culture, doesn't mean that they should forget Indian Culture.

Further None of them is son of this soil if they don't own the culture of this soil announcing themselves as the Indian first, anything else second .
Else they are just pest to this soil not its son.
1) it's their Choice, hamare pass koi right nahi hain unko rokneka. even majority of Hindus are now using Islamic names such as Ayasha, rehaan etc etc.

there is no such thing as an Indian culture. India is divided in to 3 different Cultures and Races. Indo-Aryan, Drividian and North Eastern. and all 3 have too little in common with each other beside some religious practices.

we can find differences even in these families fr example Punjabi culture is different from UP Culture, Kashmiri culture is different from Punjabi Culture, Gujarati Culture is different from Marathi culture etc etc.

IVC > Vedic India > Puranic India > Islamic India > British India > Modern India > ?
Culture changes with time...

2) again it's their choice.
 

busesaway

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
370
Likes
173
Muslim is not a Race, Muslims from Turkey are different from Muslims from arabia, Muslim Persians are different from Paki muslim, pakis are different from indian muslims, even in India North indian Muslims are different from South Indian Muslims. dont confuse Race with Religion.

North West India is 50% West Asian(Middle Eastern), 25% ANI and 25% South Indian). frankly people from Punjab, Paharis,Kashmiri look very different from Average Indian. you can see this stark differance when you cross in to UP, Rajasthan, MP from Haryana or Punjab.

half of Porkistan is persian and other hlaf is North west Indian. and they are mixing, kicking our "Indian" worlds and influence from their language and completely forgotten their Hindu past. as they have adopted more and more Persian and Arabic culture, it's safe to say that they are now Middle Easter.
Muslims as an ethnicity
The problem with Islam is that it creates a sort of "subculture" reminiscent of the USA's concept of "Hispanics". I think it's best to separate Muslims from Non-Muslims because it would help fight racism better - I am increasingly finding that Non-Muslims are being ignored/overlooked in terms of charity/support because the organizations use Muslims to represent South Asians and then scream "Islamophobia".

Europe and the Commonwealth Realms all have serious problems limited to their Muslims, and most of Asia (and maybe even Africa) have separate self-identified ethnicities for Muslims too.

North West India aren't really Indian
I don't consider them to be stereotypical Indians. I think this matters for things like scientific research, racism in the media, and sexual racism.

Pakistanis, looking even less 'Indian' than North-West Indians, and resembling Middle Easterners in many aspects, should not be considered South Asian at the least.

I think this is incredibly important since Pakistanis are getting a lot of media airtime and charitable support in western culture, and people need to be made aware that Pakistanis do not racially represent South Asians.
 

Hiranyaksha

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2017
Messages
2,061
Likes
4,311
Country flag
1) it's their Choice, hamare pass koi right nahi hain unko rokneka. even majority of Hindus are now using Islamic names such as Ayasha, rehaan etc etc.

there is no such thing as an Indian culture. India is divided in to 3 different Cultures and Races. Indo-Aryan, Drividian and North Eastern. and all 3 have too little in common with each other beside some religious practices.

we can find differences even in these families fr example Punjabi culture is different from UP Culture, Kashmiri culture is different from Punjabi Culture, Gujarati Culture is different from Marathi culture etc etc.

IVC > Vedic India > Puranic India > Islamic India > British India > Modern India > ?
Culture changes with time...

2) again it's their choice.
Aryan Dravidian Theory has been debunked. So your argument that Indian is based on 3 "exclusive independent "cultures is false. Further when it comes to different races, After DNA test of people of the subcontinent it has been proved that all are same. So even your race argument is false.

Culture being different from each other does not mean that it is exclusive and independent. Kashmiri Pandits cultures and Tamil Brahmins are not so different.

There was no Islamic India, It was islamic invasion on Indian subcontinent. So was British invasion and colonization of India. During "British India" not all of us become "British" so was the case during "Islamic India".


Choices are given in free country, which is granted by the constitution adopted by majority of this country. But these "minorities" have now challenged constitution by demanding Sharia governance. So Let us see about how long "Choices " will sustain.
 

sthf

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2016
Messages
2,271
Likes
5,302
Country flag
@busesaway Western "multiculturalism" has been an epic disaster. As for India, the only way forward is better assimilation of Muslims. This assimilation rests more on Muslims & less on Hindus. As long as Muslims remain a "vote bank" that is not going to happen.

Things have changed in the past 10-15 years and have changed at an unprecedented levels in the past 3 years. Parties like Congres, CPI, TMC etc. have deliberately kept Muslims down with token appeasement to their vote bank intact.

Now that Muslim vote bank is fast losing its relevance, the community will be forced to go under some much needed reforms.

As for Buddhists & Sikhs, this is their country, always has been and assimilation was never an issue.
 

OneGrimPilgrim

Senior Member
Joined
May 18, 2015
Messages
5,238
Likes
6,786
Country flag
all discussing & arguing notwithstanding, the nation's gonna see build-up to 1946-like situation again eventually. can be seen in pockets. wide array effect will take some more time/decades.
 

IndiaRising

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
2,664
Likes
9,060
Country flag
multiculturalism only works if there is an agreement on certain basic human rights that can never be abrogated. the fact that india still has a separate civil law for different religions shows that there is much more progress to be made.
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top