You must Sign In to post a response.
  • Category: Miscellaneous

    Why is that Indians are not realizing the dangers to secularism?

    From time immemorial, we have had a history of secular values. Today, everyone talks about the Emergency. Even the former late PM of India, who was an iron lady, was at least ten times more powerful and more result-oriented than the present PM, never made any speech that was remotely anti-minorities during her lifetime. There were excellent economic reforms like the Nationalization of banks. But for such a drastic step, every single bank in India would be controlled by the Adanis and the Ambanis.

    Yet, since Congress lacks such a leader, the present ineffective and most corrupt lot of leaders get away will all sorts of nonsense. They openly support, or silently approve calls to butcher the minorities. The so-called saffron party is totally absent in most of South India, with Karnataka being an exception, where communal cancer has spread.

    Even within the same BJP, there are saner voices of reason; for example, in Karnataka, two BJP MLAs have cried foul against the act of the State Government to sort of make life miserable for the Muslims to operate businesses. By this single act of highhandedness, the BJP is sowing the seeds of hatred. Such disastrous policies can mean so much to the secular fabric of the nation and will destroy the country.

    Will the PM do something, at least now? In the meanwhile, those who know something about secularism should protest in whatever means possible to stop this decline in values.
  • #754590
    Not a single day pass by not mentioning or accusing PM Modi, Adani and Ambani by the author and this thread also mentions the same. If Emergency was praised by the author for the courage of Indira Gandhi, and she never uttered anything against the Minorities because she was basking with the votes of minorities and how can she tell something against them. By appeasing particular religion, are the Congress not anti secularism. When they hate Hindus and praise Muslims that is their way of living. But why the same minorities has left the Congress in lurch today. Is that mean they came to know the real colors of the Congress. If the govt does something wrong the judiciary is watchful and nags the govt for sure. What the author has been blaming for no reason and finding fault with a majority party is uncalled for.
    K Mohan
    'Idhuvum Kadandhu Pogum "
    Even this challenging situation would ease

  • #754595
    I thank Sivakumar Sir for bringing a very important issue for discussion in this platform. However, I feel that presently Indian people are fully aware that true secularism is very important and so they are exposing the factors/communities/people who are detrimental to secularism in India.

    The film 'The Kashmir Files' exposes the community which is detrimental to the concept of secularism. The recent controversy relating to dress code in schools in Karnataka shows that the people are deeply concerned and feel that some dresses are not in conformity with the concept of secularism. So, the demand is to ban such dress detrimental to the concept.

    Finally, voters of UP, irrespective of their religious belief, have elected that political party which believes in true secularism.

    All these events give us hope that now people of India understand the importance of true secularism!

    “Khamosh rahoon toh mushkil hain, keh doon toh shikayat hoti hain" (It is difficult to remain silent; But if I speak, they complain.) --------- Saba Afghani

  • #754605
    [Response removed by Admin. Read forum policies.]

  • #754615
    Can the author define what is the meaning of secularism? Can he help me by telling me the basis for calling a community a minority community? This minority level can be decided at the country level or state level? As the author is having a full understanding of these points he can educate other members on the basics instead of accusing the Central government or BJP every day in his threads on ISC.

    The author may be correct and the people of India may be wrong in selecting this party. But how these threads are going to create awareness among the people? The same question I asked earlier once but I have not received any reply. If the author is really serious about removing the BJP party from Indian politics and he wanted some other party to rule India, why can't he think of something that will give results in his favour? This is a genuine feeling I am getting whenever I read his postings.

    drrao
    always confident

  • #754617
    AB Sivakumar,

    By all means, express your views, but stop over-using dramatic adjectives with reference to parties and leaders. Equally important- do not make personal remarks about other members (like the one in the last part of response #754605), no matter which leader/party they support. Stick to the topic of the thread.

    When you make a commitment, you create hope. When you keep a commitment you create trust! ~ John C. Maxwell

  • #754628
    Mr.Siva Kumar, I can understand your agony. Your thoughts and writings are coming from your heart. I want you to use a little bit of polished language. Many people get away with polished language while making personal comments.

    India is a polarized country now. The people are not in a position to understand the danger to the secular fabric of India. Saner voices are always there but they are afraid to speak out loud. The Constitution of India defines secularism clearly and there is no need for further explanation on this issue. It is there for everyone to read and understand. In Karnataka, Muslims are restricted from doing business near temples by some people. The government should have taken some action. One or two elected members of the BJP voiced their concern against restricting Muslims from doing business.

    Time and again, some members pointed out that minority communities received undue preference from previous governments. I want to know from them what undue favors these minority communities received?

    " Be Good and Do Good "

  • #754637
    "I want to know from them what undue favors these minority communities received?"------Friends! Can you try to wake up a person who pretends to be asleep?
    “Khamosh rahoon toh mushkil hain, keh doon toh shikayat hoti hain" (It is difficult to remain silent; But if I speak, they complain.) --------- Saba Afghani

  • #754641
    There are some misconceptions in the minds of the people about the word minority. As per the UN policies and basic understanding in this matter any community which is less than around 2% of the total population can be treated as a minority community in a secular and democratic system. Unfortunately in our country this was not followed and some wrong notions were adopted which only created the appeasement of so called minority communities and we had a very strange and sad scenario for the last 70 or so years. Now the time has come to correct all those aberrations and mistakes done in the past and hopefully we would be true secular nation in near future.
    Knowledge is power.

  • #754642
    Umesh Sir has very rightly pointed out that as per the UN policy, any community which is less than around 2% of the total population can be treated as a minority community in a secular and democratic system. According to this definition, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Jews are religious minorities in India.
    “Khamosh rahoon toh mushkil hain, keh doon toh shikayat hoti hain" (It is difficult to remain silent; But if I speak, they complain.) --------- Saba Afghani

  • #754645
    Mr.Umesh @ 754641: "As per the UN policies and basic understanding in this matter any community which is less than around 2% of the total population can be treated as a minority community in a secular and democratic system."

    Can you give the reference for the same?

    The Government of India alone has the authority to declare minority status.

    " Be Good and Do Good "

  • #754646
    Partha Sir, You have not answered my question. Give a direct reply. What are the benefits provided to minorities by the Indian Government?
    " Be Good and Do Good "

  • #754649
    The National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992 has notified Buddhists, Jains, Muslims, Christians, Zoroastrians and Sikhs as religious minority communities in India. This notification is based on the census at the national level. But the Supreme Court has on many occasions reiterated that linguistic or religious minorities has to be determined state-wise by the states. The minority position will vary from state to state and so it is for the states to decide which all communities should stand benefited. It is also to be noted that it is not just the numbers that is to be considered while deciding whether a community should be accorded minority status. There are many other factors that have been enumerated under the Act mentioned herein. And, so, there is no point in trying to zero in on the Muslim community alone whenever a mention about minority is made. There are states where the Hindus are in minority and so on.

    Secularism is equal treatment of all religions, freedom to profess a religion of one's choice and separation of religion from the government and its policies. No government can, legally, interfere with the freedom to choose and practice a religion and the rituals and traditions connected with it. Whether a government tries to deviate from the accepted norm which has legal backing is debatable and each one has the freedom to express his opinion logically and convincingly.

    ***Participating members are advised to keep in mind that the instruction given by Vandana ma'am at #754617 is applicable to all and for all threads and responses.

    "In three words I can sum up everything I've learned about life: it goes on." -Robert Frost

  • #754650
    When a member by mistake or intentionally gives wrong information, it is only natural to seek clarification from that particular member.
    " Be Good and Do Good "

  • #754651
    Yes, it is true. Mutual interdependence was the basis of the traditional or historical relationship that developed between religion and political authority in our country during the pre-independence period. All Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, and Sikh rulers tried to gain recognition of the religion. In the ancient Hindu tradition, the place of religion was far above political leadership. But many religions developed between 1500 and 500 BC. As a result, political support for religion also became necessary. When religious conflicts began to take the form of political conflicts, state support was needed to protect religious leaders and places of worship. But in order to achieve that, religion did not have to merge with the state, nor did the ruling party side with religion. But religious and political institutions adapted to the need for protection. But in the face of the diversity of the caste system, that mania has affected secularism also. After that, the partition of the country further fueled the religious divisions. A secular country has just been formed but there is latent violence in the minds of the people. Political belief works as an advertisement to come out that anger. In recent times, especially in the last few decades, the notion of religious identity has become more conservative and intolerant among the various communities of Indian society. This applies to all Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs. So in a country like ours, if we want to keep secularism, the people have to wake up.
    Believe in the existence of God the superpower.
    Regards
    Dhruba

  • #754667
    KVRR, what we discourage is personal attacks and that does not include seeking meaningful clarifications.
    "In three words I can sum up everything I've learned about life: it goes on." -Robert Frost

  • #754676
    #754646:

    If I start writing the instances of appeasement of two special communities (no, they are not minorities) in India since independence and partition, it will take the entire night. Even then I wouldn't be able to complete.

    So, I give only two instances.

    (a) Introduction of Article 370 and Article 35A is an instance of appeasement by Great Nehru-ji.
    (b) Nehru-ji passed four Hindu code bills in 1955–56: the Hindu Marriage Act, Hindu Succession Act, Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, and Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, and did not change the personal law of the privileged community. This is another instance of appeasement.

    I do know that some very learned people won't be satisfied, but more than 90% of Hindus accept these two instances as appeasement of privileged communities in India.

    “Khamosh rahoon toh mushkil hain, keh doon toh shikayat hoti hain" (It is difficult to remain silent; But if I speak, they complain.) --------- Saba Afghani

  • #754691
    Article 370 was introduced out of necessity. The ruler of Kashmir gave an accession letter to India with conditions. To honor those conditions and to bring Jammu&Kashmir under the Constitution of India, Article 370 was introduced.
    The minority communities all have their personal laws as per their faiths. Why do the personal laws of Muslims need to be singled out? These are not appeasements. The Constitution of India gives the right to practice their faiths and follow their personal laws.

    " Be Good and Do Good "

  • #754693
    As I always say.............

    How can appeasement be the necessity? If it is true, then it indicates that there is basic flaw in the original policy.

    To keep the Uniform Civil Code in the Directive Principles of the Constitution, and then fighting tooth and nail to continue with the regressive personal laws of one-two privileged communities for the sake of vote bank politics, is nothing but a sure sign of intellectual and moral decadence.

    I have given another instance of how the privileged community is appeased, in another Forum post. Members interested in this issue may go through it.

    “Khamosh rahoon toh mushkil hain, keh doon toh shikayat hoti hain" (It is difficult to remain silent; But if I speak, they complain.) --------- Saba Afghani


  • Sign In to post your comments