Pundits in the Media in India, US and intellectuals here and there harp on one subject "Minorities are fearing survival under Modi dispensation". There is no tangible evidence shown by them nor any statistics to prove the point. In yet another column in The Hindu by two Indian origin US professors from California University, (teaching Political Science) again write in the same vein with a misleading headline " Electoral Wins or Religious Peace?".
Their main thrust is on "Soft and Hard Hindutva". There are no two Hinduisms in India. It is one. Hinduism is known for tolerance and acceptance of all faiths as equal. As one of the oldest religious faiths in the world, Hinduism treats all neo faithful as their own clan, following different set of guidelines and scriptures. But, as Gita said when the "adharma" spreads to such an extinct that it uproots you and your whole clan, it is time to react. Thus every Hindu fights for his rights. Naming this as hard Hindutva smacks of either ignorance or studying the Hindu mythology wrong.
Post independence, there was only minority appeasement and majority suppression in India under the name of secularism, where State should treat all religions equal. One particular religion in India has a personal law that differs from all other religions. This makes it easier for bigots in the religion to perpetuate child marriage,bigamy, an easy divorce with uttering a word three times and issuance of diktats from religious heads.
Rights of women are suppressed by some therein. We do not call this as soft or hard Islam.
Evangelists of all hues spread through the width and length of India, using funds from outside sources through NGOs, increasingly convert people of one faith to the other. Many NGOs were found by Intelligence Agencies of using these funds for anti national activities, as revealed recently. Restricting activities of these elements too is branded as hard Hindutva!
The very premise on which these two learned professors based their arguments that Church attacks in New Delhi shattered the security perception among minorities is again ignorance of the reality or twisting the facts, that a paper of the stature of The Hindu should have edited. These attacks were proven to be by either disgruntled Christians, one by a jilted lover, many a case of robbery. There was no communal element in any of these attacks. It is clear the agenda of Media through columnists with a bias is clearly to show the non existent demon and create fear among sections of population.
India is a free democracy. Each has a freedom to express views. If these views are anti national or aimed against any other religion or intended to divide people on religious lines there are stringent laws. But it should not be construed that as one religion enjoys separate personal law, there are different set of rules for freedom of speech to them as the Owaisis and Azam Khans, Mansoor Alan or Gelanees think.
The utterances by any Hindu leader crossing legal limits were condemned and they were made to apologise within no time. But the persons mentioned supra never did nor the Congress leaders under whom, the professors profess minorities were safe,neither condemned nor made them apologise. This is called minorityism and not secularism. By appeasing sections of population, using them as vote banks keeping them in perennial poverty was the USP of Congress and the so called pseudo secular parties.
After Modi took over there was paradigm shift. The thrust now is overall growth of economy and equal opportunities for all. A slow change is being brought about where India is no more considered as a land of minorities and majority. If clean India is taken to the village level it includes all. DBTL includes all. Infrastructure development includes all. Thrust on skill development includes all. Make in India is aimed at providing jobs to all. In Varsnasi Muslim artisans were encouraged to weave and export. In Gujarat there is inclusive growth.
After Modi took over incidents of communal strife and mutual intolerance is slowly waning but for a few orchestrated attacks by fringe politicians. Minorities are safer today than at any time post independence in India. It is truth and within a decade, India will see inclusive growth breaking barriers of caste and religion, making it a role model to countries like USA where racial attacks are still order of the day despite loud talk otherwise.
he very comparison of voting patterns in India and USA is based on wrong perception and theory. The authors say Republicans won despite not single Hispanic voting them. In India minorities too voted, though in small number to Modi, as they felt he would take the nation to greater heights. The percentage will only increase as the minorities see real development in their lives by five years, as has happened in .Gujarat.
Moreover, in USA illegal immigrants, non-citizens etc., are not voters in many states. In India the picture is different. Earlier governments used to abet illegal immigration from countries like Bangla Desh, Mayanmar etc., to create vote banks.They were provided ID cards against all set rules so that they turn Indians overnight. If a restriction is placed on such obnoxious practices it cannot be dubbed as creating fear among minorities. Sovereignity of nation is of paramount importance to any nation. Why do you brand this as anti minority policy. Borders are made to secure the nation from lumpen elements taking advantage of appeasement by political parties and create disturbances. Which nation accepts this?
It is high time the intellectuals recognize the fact that India is reuniting again under a dynamic leadership throwing challenge to the hegemony of the so called super powers.
If any nation, any media house, any intellectual groups, evangelists, fatwa wielding bigots feel they can derail the growth engine where people of each religion, faith, caste and creed will operate the growth machine with neither discrimination nor appeasement, they are grossly mistaken. It is time that they too join the mainstream or they remain in a miniscule minority.
Their main thrust is on "Soft and Hard Hindutva". There are no two Hinduisms in India. It is one. Hinduism is known for tolerance and acceptance of all faiths as equal. As one of the oldest religious faiths in the world, Hinduism treats all neo faithful as their own clan, following different set of guidelines and scriptures. But, as Gita said when the "adharma" spreads to such an extinct that it uproots you and your whole clan, it is time to react. Thus every Hindu fights for his rights. Naming this as hard Hindutva smacks of either ignorance or studying the Hindu mythology wrong.
Post independence, there was only minority appeasement and majority suppression in India under the name of secularism, where State should treat all religions equal. One particular religion in India has a personal law that differs from all other religions. This makes it easier for bigots in the religion to perpetuate child marriage,bigamy, an easy divorce with uttering a word three times and issuance of diktats from religious heads.
Rights of women are suppressed by some therein. We do not call this as soft or hard Islam.
Evangelists of all hues spread through the width and length of India, using funds from outside sources through NGOs, increasingly convert people of one faith to the other. Many NGOs were found by Intelligence Agencies of using these funds for anti national activities, as revealed recently. Restricting activities of these elements too is branded as hard Hindutva!
The very premise on which these two learned professors based their arguments that Church attacks in New Delhi shattered the security perception among minorities is again ignorance of the reality or twisting the facts, that a paper of the stature of The Hindu should have edited. These attacks were proven to be by either disgruntled Christians, one by a jilted lover, many a case of robbery. There was no communal element in any of these attacks. It is clear the agenda of Media through columnists with a bias is clearly to show the non existent demon and create fear among sections of population.
India is a free democracy. Each has a freedom to express views. If these views are anti national or aimed against any other religion or intended to divide people on religious lines there are stringent laws. But it should not be construed that as one religion enjoys separate personal law, there are different set of rules for freedom of speech to them as the Owaisis and Azam Khans, Mansoor Alan or Gelanees think.
The utterances by any Hindu leader crossing legal limits were condemned and they were made to apologise within no time. But the persons mentioned supra never did nor the Congress leaders under whom, the professors profess minorities were safe,neither condemned nor made them apologise. This is called minorityism and not secularism. By appeasing sections of population, using them as vote banks keeping them in perennial poverty was the USP of Congress and the so called pseudo secular parties.
After Modi took over there was paradigm shift. The thrust now is overall growth of economy and equal opportunities for all. A slow change is being brought about where India is no more considered as a land of minorities and majority. If clean India is taken to the village level it includes all. DBTL includes all. Infrastructure development includes all. Thrust on skill development includes all. Make in India is aimed at providing jobs to all. In Varsnasi Muslim artisans were encouraged to weave and export. In Gujarat there is inclusive growth.
After Modi took over incidents of communal strife and mutual intolerance is slowly waning but for a few orchestrated attacks by fringe politicians. Minorities are safer today than at any time post independence in India. It is truth and within a decade, India will see inclusive growth breaking barriers of caste and religion, making it a role model to countries like USA where racial attacks are still order of the day despite loud talk otherwise.
he very comparison of voting patterns in India and USA is based on wrong perception and theory. The authors say Republicans won despite not single Hispanic voting them. In India minorities too voted, though in small number to Modi, as they felt he would take the nation to greater heights. The percentage will only increase as the minorities see real development in their lives by five years, as has happened in .Gujarat.
Moreover, in USA illegal immigrants, non-citizens etc., are not voters in many states. In India the picture is different. Earlier governments used to abet illegal immigration from countries like Bangla Desh, Mayanmar etc., to create vote banks.They were provided ID cards against all set rules so that they turn Indians overnight. If a restriction is placed on such obnoxious practices it cannot be dubbed as creating fear among minorities. Sovereignity of nation is of paramount importance to any nation. Why do you brand this as anti minority policy. Borders are made to secure the nation from lumpen elements taking advantage of appeasement by political parties and create disturbances. Which nation accepts this?
It is high time the intellectuals recognize the fact that India is reuniting again under a dynamic leadership throwing challenge to the hegemony of the so called super powers.
If any nation, any media house, any intellectual groups, evangelists, fatwa wielding bigots feel they can derail the growth engine where people of each religion, faith, caste and creed will operate the growth machine with neither discrimination nor appeasement, they are grossly mistaken. It is time that they too join the mainstream or they remain in a miniscule minority.
No comments:
Post a Comment