What we want
To tell the truth, we, the bourgeois care two hoots for the morality and ethical responsibility that secular liberals preach, as also for the intangible sense of pride that vhp thugs are offering us. Hindu pride lies not in the pallufication of our women, nor does it lie in some Thakur exercising his so-called 'god-given' right to oppress Mallaahs.
What we want is something that can be experienced and passed on to subsequent generations as history without feeling shame or regret. We dont want the truth. Isn't the fact that Bollywood still manages to pull in money clearly illustrative of this state of affairs?
In summation, communal strife has to be ended, and not by the suppression of a particular community. The message should be loud and clear. "There are no individuals, there are only Indians. We are a collective. We are a nation. There is only one perspective, the Indian one. A Hindu, Muslim or a Kashmiri perspective has no place in the scheme of things." So be it, and so it will.
Wednesday, January 01, 2003
Tuesday, December 31, 2002
Read this.
It is quite interesting how the Pakistani media attributes every single civilian murder in Kashmir to the Indian Army, isn't it? Do we want peace with these people? Too bad we can't move away, isn't it?
It is quite interesting how the Pakistani media attributes every single civilian murder in Kashmir to the Indian Army, isn't it? Do we want peace with these people? Too bad we can't move away, isn't it?
Sunday, December 29, 2002
I do not understand what is it with Indians, there seems to be this pressing need for guys to "prove" their bravery and courage via violence. This seems more prominent in the north, where hunting for 'pleasure' is still prevalent, even though it crosses the legal line. Poaching is rampant in the south, but it is always a matter of business, hardly ever sport, at least to my knowledge.
I read The germination of insecurity and I was a little miffed. It would be absurd to assume that Savarkar had nothing to do with the Gandhi assassination. After all, he is supposed to have said, "Zaa, Yashasvi houun yaa" [Go, and return successful]. But this ad hominem that his ideology is flawed because he did not take to arms is totally uncalled for. Sun Tsu said, keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. In my opinion, Gandhi's ideals, though commendable, led to actions akin to a child's tantrum. One thing that Gandhi forgot was that the British weren't our parents. India, when the British left, after all the ballyhoo, was largely jettisoned. It wasn't like Nehru releasing a bird into the air [I always remember Nehru in that scene, setting a dove free], it was more like the British leaving us behind on a marooned island because they could not afford us on the ship anymore.
I find nothing unjustified about the want to carve out a nationalistic hindu state a la what israel did with judaism. A 27% muslim population let to the creation of Pakistan. If, god forbid, 73% of the population had been muslim, I doubt if we would have a democratic republic on our hands. One look at Pakistan and Bangladesh, both of who started off with 25-30% Hindu populations, and have now reduced the figures to 1.5% and 9% respectively, that too, in just 5 decades, gives us a glimpse of what is growing in India's womb.
People say that Hindus in India are victims of insecurity, which is created by and fed upon as well by the Hindu Nazi. But is this insecurity unjustified? Apart for some metropolitan areas, in most of India, the Muslim community chooses to be segregated, some choose to take spouses from Pakistan. These are just some of the reasons why a Hindu in India might feel that a Muslim in India is not different from a Muslim in Pakistan. An average Tamil Muslim is closer to a Tamil Hindu rather than a Pakistani Muslim., or so I have been told by friends from Chennai. This closeness disappears as one travels northward, finally culminating in Kashmir where many Muslims do not associate with Hindus as Indians at all. One might observe that the Hindu-Muslim friction is lesser in South India than in the North, but then again, Hindutva does not have a presence in the South, so we have insufficient paramters to reach a conclusion. Any inputs?
I read The germination of insecurity and I was a little miffed. It would be absurd to assume that Savarkar had nothing to do with the Gandhi assassination. After all, he is supposed to have said, "Zaa, Yashasvi houun yaa" [Go, and return successful]. But this ad hominem that his ideology is flawed because he did not take to arms is totally uncalled for. Sun Tsu said, keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. In my opinion, Gandhi's ideals, though commendable, led to actions akin to a child's tantrum. One thing that Gandhi forgot was that the British weren't our parents. India, when the British left, after all the ballyhoo, was largely jettisoned. It wasn't like Nehru releasing a bird into the air [I always remember Nehru in that scene, setting a dove free], it was more like the British leaving us behind on a marooned island because they could not afford us on the ship anymore.
I find nothing unjustified about the want to carve out a nationalistic hindu state a la what israel did with judaism. A 27% muslim population let to the creation of Pakistan. If, god forbid, 73% of the population had been muslim, I doubt if we would have a democratic republic on our hands. One look at Pakistan and Bangladesh, both of who started off with 25-30% Hindu populations, and have now reduced the figures to 1.5% and 9% respectively, that too, in just 5 decades, gives us a glimpse of what is growing in India's womb.
People say that Hindus in India are victims of insecurity, which is created by and fed upon as well by the Hindu Nazi. But is this insecurity unjustified? Apart for some metropolitan areas, in most of India, the Muslim community chooses to be segregated, some choose to take spouses from Pakistan. These are just some of the reasons why a Hindu in India might feel that a Muslim in India is not different from a Muslim in Pakistan. An average Tamil Muslim is closer to a Tamil Hindu rather than a Pakistani Muslim., or so I have been told by friends from Chennai. This closeness disappears as one travels northward, finally culminating in Kashmir where many Muslims do not associate with Hindus as Indians at all. One might observe that the Hindu-Muslim friction is lesser in South India than in the North, but then again, Hindutva does not have a presence in the South, so we have insufficient paramters to reach a conclusion. Any inputs?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)