The writer is a columnist. He is also a former editor of the Mumbai-based English newspaper Mid Day and the Gujarati paper Divya Bhaskar
aakar.patel@tribune.com.pk
It is easy to demonstrate this. During the period of its rise, its three policy thrusts were all negative. They were the Babri Masjid issue (Muslims should not keep their mosque), implementation of a Uniform Civil Code (Muslims should not keep their personal law) and removing Article 370 in Kashmir (Muslims should not keep their constitutional autonomy).
Hindutva is defined by its negative aspects, by what others should not have or not do. It isn’t really an ideology in that sense so much as an expression of resentment.
The rise of the BJP came 20 years ago, when it eclipsed the Janata Dal to become, it now seems permanently, India’s second-biggest political party. This rise came because of two things. The first was its appeal to urban voters, who supported the demolition of the Babri Masjid and were angry over such things as the Shah Bano case, which they saw as appeasement. The second, in my opinion just as important, was that it gave the upper and dominant castes and middle class of various states the opportunity to gather as a political force, opposed to the Congress’s appeal to “weaker sections”.
This, as much as Hindutva, has ensured the BJP’s rise in states such as Gujarat, Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Rajasthan and Karnataka. After it took power in Delhi, the BJP deliberately de-emphasised the first aspect of its appeal, and rode on the second. This was to appease its allies more than from a change of heart or a letting go of an ideology.
The result of this switch was the demotion of LK Advani, the real hero of the party’s popularity, in favour of Atal Bihari Vajpayee. This demotion came not because of merit but pragmatism. The BJP, under Vajpayee, seemed little different from the Congress, and that made it palatable. After the loss of 2004, however, the instinct of the party on Hindutva has reasserted itself through the grass roots. The 2002 riots in Gujarat again polarised India in the way the Babri Masjid issue had. It would not be incorrect to say that those who saw the BJP’s point of view subscribed in both instances to the “they started it” theory and blamed Muslims for events in which they were ultimately victims. The riots also gave the cadre a new figure, Narendra Modi, in place of Advani, as their champion. Modi’s elevation on merit as the man to lead the 2014 campaign officially discards the BJP’s Vajpayee compromise and returns the party to its angry identity.
In effect, Modi’s taking charge has brought the BJP back to the stage of 20 years ago. In a parallel, but not unrelated development, the isolation of the BJP has also returned. The party has, since 2004, lost its allies in Andhra Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Orissa, Bengal and Bihar. It is now left only with its fellow communalists, the Sikh Shiromani Akali Dal and the Marathi chauvinists of the Shiv Sena, who have no problem with or agree with the BJP on those original issues.
Today, it is unclear to outsiders what the BJP’s current position on those three issues is. But clarity is not needed for its supporters. In his person, Modi represents those negative thrusts and this is why he refuses to climb down from his insistence that he did no wrong during the communal violence that took place on his watch. This stubbornness is not off-putting to either the regular or the prospective BJP voter. Modi knows this and has deliberately left the riots unresolved (for instance, by not commenting on his minister’s conviction for the killing of 95 Gujaratis). There is not much gain for him in softening his or his party’s appeal because what he needs is consolidation along the early 1990s model.
We must not be surprised at the fact that even after taking the national role, Modi has not let go of the issues that make many people wary of him. His comments in speeches and interviews are laced with material to get him headlines but because of his resentful, Hindutva side rather than his developmental side. This is quite deliberate and we must expect more of this as his strategy reveals itself.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 21st, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (90)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@1984: I agree with your definition of Secular. On another note: May be inimical is better than indifferent. Every Pakistani who poses a question, criticises, even condemns India is a potential friend of India. At least he cares enough to carp. Imagine the alternative:indifference! Only the hecklers of both side are a pain.
@Lala Gee:
III
Why don't we have the same right to try and learn from our experience, a right you accord to India in unlimited way.......
Good one! Of course you have the right, perhaps duty to introspect to improve. It would be rude for others to intrude unless one can make a good suggestion.. Please address yourself to the person/s who questions that right or ignore those that behave boorishly.. Reg Hypocrisy, the less either says of the other is better. It is really not for me to tell a Pakistani how far his State has he failed even in staying true to being an Islamic Republic. Pakistani columnists are intelligent enough to audit themselves.
(2) Well you have your "strategy" to deal with people. I only meant with your talents & knowledge you can make serious contribution in explaining Pak pov. I understand though. Indo-Pak dialogues are never easy.. I never take personal affront or compliment on an anonymous forum too seriously & love a good debate. On that score I am happy with my conversations with you & with kindness of ET. You are a good sport. Thank you for the tete-a-tete.
@Rakib: Leave it...Looks like Lala Gee has a different version of secularism...
According to his version of secularism,all the citizens should be lobotomized so that no riots like 1984,1992,2002 will occur...
Secularism means that the govt will never favor one religion and discriminate another religion....I think that law is still in place in India...Rise of Hindutva doesnt mean that secularism has died...because thats just an ideology,not a law...
@Lala Gee: II
There are so many points that I might miss a few but will try to make up for it later. If I don''t it may well mean I don't know what to say..
India is not a "truly capitalist state". Only parts of India are so. It is not that easy to put India in to convenient compartments. Total Capitalism will strain India beyond words.That is a separate debate anyway.
I am amazed that you even have to mention Security being responsibility of State. So who is denying it? But what that has to do with Preamble? Or, can only Preamble, (& not Home Security Laws) ensure Security? Fundamental Rights, and now Right to Education & Right to Information are also included but they ALL don't reflect in Preamble. So what? They still exist. Failures & lapses in Admin are what they are: failures. Show me a single country in the world that " can legitimately claim fulfilling all her constitutional duties/obligations truly and completely". Are you setting yet another honey trap by asking me that India does not maintain security because the word doesn't appear in Preamble! (kidding!)
All those Laws are in Constitution & I speak not from Wiki but from the Tome itself. If there is a Law, it is bound to be broken by somebody. Failure in any endeavour doesn't mean need to abandon that endeavour. If we are not Secular enough we shall become Secular enough! Manzil mile ya na mile,iska koi gham nahin// Manzil ki justaju mein mera kaarvaan to hai!
@Lala Gee: I
I appreciate your effort in providing a textbook-like definition of Preamble, which is interesting. Pettifogging by me on that is unnecessary. What is the point anyway! You gave the impression elsewhere that since India has failed in Secularism Socialism etc it must change the Preamble (or may be you mean Constitution too). It is like a "believer" saying that since the Commandments have been practiced more in breach they must be scrapped. One shouldn't give up that easily. It is work-in-progress & India has to keep trying:
Let me provide an example: My folks & I survived the 1969 H & M riots of Ahmedabad in Gujarat by the skin of our teeth. Some of my friends were not that lucky. I am not hung up on ghoulish statistics but marginally more died in the City (both H & M ) during that riot than in 2002.. It was under Congress rule both at Guj & at Delhi (Indira G.) & Modi was still in teens.
Now comes the twist. There was nothing in Preamble to say we were Secular or Socialist, though all knew it! The words Secular & Socialist were added to Preamble 7 years after that terrible riot (there was no causal link between the two) but just before the national election to strengthen Congress credentials. It did not help Indira & she lost.. Did that addition mean any changes in the Laws under the Constitution of 1949-50? No. The Secular Laws were already there in full glory without ever being called by the name Secular. So much for the Preamble. That's the reason, methinks, the SC took the position it took giving greater importance to main body of Constitution rather than Preamble. When the Laws already nurture a Secular character despite gross failures, a nomenclature is not of great importance. Look at UK. They don't even bother about a Constitution, Preamble is a far cry. Rose is a rose even without a name....
@Rakib:
(Part 3 of 3)
"How far has it come true in its search is a subject of introspection, a function that India has not outsourced to Pakistanis whose expertise on the subject, esp Secularism, is nebulous at best. India has tried, failed, learnt, will learn & will try again. Pak hasn’t attempted even."
Neither did Pakistan outsourced. Then why so much hue and cry and criticism from Indians on some parts of the Pakistani Constitution. Why don't we have the same right to try and learn from our experience, a right you accord to India in unlimited way. Moreover, Pakistani Constitution -- without going into debate whether it is right or wrong, as I myself don't agree with some of its parts -- clearly states it is an Islamic Republic -- like many other Muslim majority countries -- unlike India who claim to be a Secular state, but hypocritically allows such parties and their fanatics to rule the country whose sole purpose of existence is to propagate and implement extremist ideology of Hindutva -- especially when they have already proved themselves through various acts and pogroms how evil and bigoted they are -- an ideology directly at cross with Secularism. In the whole history of Pakistan, never ever any extremist religious party was able to fetch more than 5% the popular vote.
"Why damage credibility by inviting incredulity?"
I have already explained this in point #7 in the 2nd part above. However, I would further add that you don't always talk in the same manner with every person. You consider the type/level/abilities/background of the person you are conversing with, and adjust accordingly. Also the context of the earlier conversations is equally important, which a new entrant to the discussion may not be fully aware of. The person I was communicating with was certainly not you, you just chose to join in. Nothing wrong in it, but then you were not the intended recipient.
@Rakib:
(Part 2 of 3)
5- The Indian constitution defines 3 core guiding principles, "1. Socialist, 2. Secular, 3. Democratic", on which the rest of the constitutional provisions/procedures/laws should be based. Any provision, law, or regulation going against these 3 guiding principles cannot be, and should not be, promulgated by the law makers, unless the whole purpose of the Preamble, and its tenets/principles, is an eye-wash.
6- India has already drifted away from its first defining principle/ideology, i.e., "Socialist" Republic, by becoming a truly Capitalist state. The Capitalists and Capitalism were allowed, rather helped, by the government and the protectors of the constitution to successfully and completely take over the whole Indian state and its economy, without any resistance offered from public or judiciary. Its second tenet/ideology, "Secular", is imminently under threat from "Hindutva" ideology and its fanatic proponents. Though these fanatics succeeded in forming the government once in the past, they were not able to implement their Hindutva agenda/ideology for reasons you have accurately depicted in your comment. But who knows what happens next time.
7- The most fundamental duty/function of any government/state is to provide protection and safety to her citizens against any threat to their life and property, whether specifically mentioned in the preamble of the constitution or not. In case of Indian Constitution, this guarantee is provided in the Preamble through the 4 broad principles of "1- Justice, 2- Liberty, 3- Equality, 4- Fraternity", and more specifically through relevant encompassing provisions of the constitution and the laws enacted to fulfill the requirements of these 4 guiding principles. I wonder if any Indian government can legitimately claim fulfilling all her constitutional duties/obligations truly and completely without providing security to her citizens by saying that "providing security to citizens" was not mentioned in the Preamble. This point was the "honey-trap" I was talking about, and was left open for someone far below than your intellectual level. There was nothing insidious in it. Strangely though, you fell for it.
@Rakib:
(Part 1 of 3)
Perhaps we have come to a point where only scholastic squabbles are left, which I was trying to avoid since the start. I would now wrap-up this debate from my side with the following. However you're welcome to give your point of view.
1- Preamble is the true spirit/essence/intent of a Constitution which provides the direction by mentioning its defining principles/tenets/ideologies on which the rest of the constitutional structure would be erected. In the absence of these defining principles described in the Preamble, the constitution would be more or less like a blind-folded directionless monkey.
2- Preamble, merely by its nature, cannot cover each and every clause, law, and procedure of the constitution. However, all the clauses/laws/procedures, usually organized in chapters, articles, clauses, and sub-clauses in the following part of the document, must follow the direction/principles/tenets/ideologies set-forth in the Preamble.
3- In any discussion related to constitution, the Preamble, and its defining principles, cannot be taken out. You cannot ignore/underemphasis the contents of the Preamble when it does not suit to your argument, and take full benefit of it when it is convenient. Both the Preamble part and the following detailed part makes the document a complete constitution, and that is the reason they are always put together in the same binder. Hence any reference to constitution means Preamble as well as its describing detailed part. I know, you have already mentioned two different interpretations of the Indian Supreme Court on whether Preamble is part of the constitution or not. While ISC differs in opinion on the same issue, they also gave the world this amazing new doctrine of "The collective conscience of the society will be satisfied only if ....".
4- Enacting and implementation of the constitution are two different things/phases. Enactment of the core part shouldn't take long once you set the objectives and principles. Then the details and modalities can be worked out easily, The fine tuning, of course, will always be a work in progress, and is part of the implementation phase. However, fine tuning does not mean changing/setting aside the core principles, rather it is a mechanism to achieve the objectives of the core principles in the changing dynamics on ground.
@Lala Gee: (Aren’t you missing the most important function of a state. ..etc)
No I am not missing something. There is nothing about Security in the Preamble & you had quoted Preamble & not relevant Section of the Constitution.Without getting in to the debate on Preamble being part of Constitution you can't arrive at whether India was envisaged as a Secular, Socialist, Democratic Republic. How far has it come true in its search is a subject of introspection, a function that India has not outsourced to Pakistanis whose expertise on the subject, esp Secularism, is nebulous at best. India has tried, failed, learnt, will learn & will try again. Pak hasn't attempted even.
You are confusing a road to be the destination & a road map to be the chauffeur! If your logic of failure to achieve perfection as cause for suspending a country's system is universally applied the perfectness of very official name of your country would be open to question (assuming you are a Pak citizen) & US will have to tear up its Preamble! I am now not so certain whether you understand the basics of Constitution or what Preamble of any such document in the world really is.
(Sorry, I never expected you’d fall in this ‘honey-trap’, which I intentionally left open for somebody else to prove my point.)
Why damage credibility by inviting incredulity? Setting traps is your choice but IMO you may then eventually attract only jeerers & not serious interlocutors.
@Rakib:
"You have misinterpreted the operative word “Secure”.You have misinterpreted the operative word “Secure”. Read the entire Preamble once again with punctuation mark & you will know that here the phrase “To Secure” means: to obtain, to make certain; ensure or guarantee. And to Secure what? Justice, Liberty, Equality & Fraternity."
Aren't you missing the most important function of a state. Providing protection and safety to life and property of her citizens?
Without going into lengthy debate, whether Preamble is part of the constitution or not, or even important or not, I would ask you one simple question. Do these 3 defining principles -- 1. Socialist, 2. Secular, 3. Democratic -- set in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution were purposeless and mere lofty daydreaming, as I get some hint from your rebuttal. And if these were purposely put in the Preamble, are they still acceptable and sacrosanct to the Indian people? If yes, then you must follow these principles in letter and spirit, on which the whole constitutional structure is supposed to be erected, and if not, then the Indian Constitution is proved to be defective and needs replacement.
"Generally a Preamble is an Intent. It is not the whole content."
I would rather say, in case of a Constitutional Document, it is the essence than mere intent of the whole content, unlike a dishonest intent of some fraudulent business.
P.S.: Sorry, I never expected you'd fall in this 'honey-trap', which I intentionally left open for somebody else to prove my point. Be careful, I do this sometime to further the argument. Believe me, I spent some time pondering over this "secure" point before posting my comment. Do you seriously think that I don't even understand this much simple and plain English, and I wouldn't have read a few more lines of the Preamble.
@BruteForce: {The same response from @Rakib and I’ve asked him to name a few laws and policy decisions ,from the BJP, which is un-secular, to which he has no answer.}
I had explained it all to you in simple language. Now I realise it was all a wasted effort. I am reminded of the great Kalidas who in a different context once wrote thus: (to save space I am not providing the original Sanskrit)
Condemn me O Creator// To any punishment you see fit// For all the sins I've committed// But the torture of reciting poetry// To those who have no understanding of it// Not that, Lord, not that!
@Lala Gee: It is BruteForce's call but lemme jump in regardless:
You have misinterpreted the operative word "Secure". Read the entire Preamble once again with punctuation mark & you will know that here the phrase "To Secure" means: to obtain, to make certain; ensure or guarantee. And to Secure what? Justice, Liberty, Equality & Fraternity.
It is "Solemnly Resolved", it is not something already done to perfection. What really matters are the Laws. Do they discriminate or violate the Rights? That is the test; not the Preamble. Does failure to comply any or all of the guiding principles in Preamble tantamount to failure of the Legislature/Executive & of Judiciary? Answer is NO. To my knowledge, US Preamble even after couple of hundred years has never been brought under judicial scrutiny. Supreme Court of India has given two opinions. As per one Constitutional Bench the Preamble is NOT an integral part of Constitution & it can't be enforced thru Courts. As per another Bench Preamble is an integral part only insofar as an additional input while interpreting a Constitutional provision. Generally a Preamble is an Intent. It is not the whole content. The lofty words are an inspiration for now & for future but do not denote achievement of perfection. If perfection is ever achieved the promise ceases to be a promise & becomes redundant.
@Lala Gee:
The same response from @Rakib and I've asked him to name a few laws and policy decisions ,from the BJP, which is un-secular, to which he has no answer.
"As if you are a jurist at Hague. "
I never claimed I a Jurist, but I've specified that I've read about Pakistani Courts using Indian judgements. Its common to any layman what that means.
My point remains, if you think ill of the Indian Constitution first petition your courts to not use them, and you can put in your arguments to me in that petition. Until that happens you are trying to troll and dishonest with us and yourself.
So when are you planning to do that?
@BruteForce:
"Dude if you are not a jurist, why are you acting like one?"
As if you are a jurist at Hague. By the way, how much expertise in jurisprudence are required to understand this simple "Preamble of the Indian Constitution".
"WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:"
Out of the three guiding ideologies/principles, the first "Socialist" is already gone by converting India into a pure Capitalist state, the second "Secular" is being challenged nowadays by 'Hindutva' ideology, and it won't take long then when the third would also be thrown out of window. Lastly, regarding the last part "and to secure to all its citizens", how much "security" was provided to its citizens has been seen during the Sikh's massacre of 1984 and pogroms of Muslims of Ayodhya, Bombay, and Gujarat in 1991, 1992, and 2002 respectively.
"For me its so easy to Google news that I’ve read previously. Do you think I’d ask you something without knowing what your reply might look like?"
LOLZ! Big ego, small ..............? Isn't this what you said in "How big is your Phone?". Or perhaps not, as Sigmund Freud said that, and you were just using else's hard work. One just wonders what possible reason could be behind your huge ego?
P.S. There is really no cure for "CDS". Now use your Googling expertise to search this 'thingy', and prove me wrong.
@Reality Check: People want to get rid of corruption, get rid of fake fear mongering and bring in true secularism in the form of uniform civil code and finally people like Mamata and CPIM who are the 2 ther non corrupt parties also do not have a track record of good governance. So options are really limited.
@Naveen: Please Check Congress results in those very same states in the most recent state elections. Significantly worse than BJP. BJP may or may nor win but some of these issues are legitimate issues. Also not everyone buys into Congress fear mongering. Many people are completely turned out by the open loot and poor governance. We shall see what happens. The issue will be decide in ballot boxes not by Internet warriors.
@1984:
"Please note that there are many ardent admirer for the original Lala Gee’s rangeen sapne and love to argue with him just to rile him up…..In fact,one of them is the Moderator who allows the circus to continue to provide entertainment……."
LOL. I will allow you this. I understand, your frustration. You also have feelings like your dog with whom you claim to play chess - perhaps nobody else does. Cheer-up, this is your day.
So the butcher of minorities might be Prime Minister of India?
Atleast none of the extremists on this end ever got a real shot at the top seat.
@Naveen: You may be quite right in your assessment. However, after 2014, the shelf life of any government formed by the Congress is limited. Modi and BJP will make it impossible for them to govern. Modi may be unpopular in some states. However, if you have to consider the popular vote, Modi will win hands down. Simply means, whether Congress wins or not, they have no chances of implementing an agenda to appease minorities. The vast majority of us want policies that will address us the majority going forward. Mr. Patel will be seeking a Pakistani permanent status.
@BruteForce: 1.You asked to be shown a law enacted by BJP & I mentioned it couldn't have since it never ruled. Now you ask show the (proposed) law! There is a logical fallacy here. Besides, since when Manifestos started providing draft Laws or strategy to legislate? But if you don't know BJP's views on RJB, UCC & 370 that Patel mentioned what are we doing here? 2. Since when the State Assembly got the powers to amend the Constitution? And if the Hindutva States did not make policy decisions violating the Constitution it was purely due to fear of being challenged in Supreme Court. 3. I appreciate your desire for India to be compared with Pakistan rather than with other bigger & more mature democracies but If you want to discuss Pakistani parties please await an appropriate Op-ed; here we are talking of "India's Party of Anger". Anger appears to extend to its supporters too. 4.I agree with you that Nehru was great. So were Gandhi & Patel. They were noble Hindus & non-Hindutva. A Hindutva man killed Gandhi. And no wonder Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, founder of Jan Sangh the precursor to BJP left Nehru & Patel's Congress..5.I have never accused Hindus or Muslims or Sikhs of being Communalists. Sins of a few do not extend to all.
In the craze for an intolerant ideology of Hindutva some have forgotten quintessential Hinduness. Gujarat has produced many greats. One such was Narsinh Mehta of 1450s, Gandhi's favourite poet. He described an Empathetic Hindu thus: A Vaishnav (Hindu) is one,//Who feels another's pain //Who shares another's sorrow, //And pride he does disdain. Tears of which Riot victim-H & M both-did "Hindu" Modi of BJP wipe? Is he a human being I wonder! Which refugee colony did he care for to show solidarity with a fellow Gujarati of another Faith? What example did he set for the young & impressionable & future generations? Hindus in overwhelming majority ought to fight for the underdog (and most do) unless he is a Hindu Nationalist Modi & then he implies an entire people to be lower than a pup.
@Rakib:
Well, you are entitled to your opinion but please try to base them on facts.
Rajiv Gandhi won not because of the anti sikh riots but because of the sympathy wave that was generated by the assassination of a tall leader who was also the serving PM at that point. This phenomenon was not unique but was repeated in 1991 when Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated by LTTE operatives. In pakistan PPP rode a similar sympathy votes in the election post Benazir's killing.
Bala Saheb was rewarded not just for anti muslim stance. His initial rise can safely be attributed to the anti migrants and 'sons of the soil' politics. But the divisive strategies can take you this far and to this day shiv sena remains a regional and marginal player in Indian politics.
On the rise of BJP I would request you to check the facts again and not write things based on hearsay. Certainly Hindutva ideology and Ayodhya temple movement was one of the main reasons behind the rise but not the demolition of Babri mosque. For the benefit of the readers, BJP won 2, 85, 120 and 161 lok shabha seats in 1984, '89, '91 and '96 elections. And the demolition of Babri mosque took place in 1992. So even if we assume, for arguments sake, babri demolition had led to increased tally of BJP seats, from 120 in 1991 to 161 in 1996, to infer that BJP was a marginal player with handful of seats before Babri demolition is pure nonsense. With the 'demolition' in 1992, BJP was 'successful' in increasing its vote share by a mere 0.18%, from 20.11% in '91 to 20.29% in '96 elections. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BharatiyaJanataParty)
Narendra modi is still an open debate. Someone will say it is due to the communal polarisation in Gujarat and other will say able governance. While you and me in personal capacity can never unravel the truth behind the Godhara and subsequent Gujarat riots, one thing we can't deny is the development that has taken place in the state under his leadership and also the communal peace that has prevailed in last 11 years. I don't disagree with the fact that his re-election in 2002 as chief minister could have been due to the result of extreme polarisation of electorate in the immediate aftermath of Gujarat riots, but his success in winning the next election in 2007 and subsequently in 2013 with thumping majority cannot be associated solely with religion based politics. My belief (which can be biased in your view) is he won because he fought the elections on the agenda of development and not religion.
In short what i want to emphasize is that communal politics can polarize votes in India but with relatively matured electorate that polarization will not lead to victory. Violence against minorities might pay but the dividends from such actions won't be enough to win elections in India. Period.
@Rakib:
"BJP did not make such laws because it could not, and because BJP never ruled India on its own "
OK, like? Can you quote some of the laws from the BJP manifesto?
First you say BJP is not secular, but when I point out that BJP has not made a single law against the principles of secularism, you say it would have had it been all-powerful.
But, don't you realise the loopholes in your argument? In some States BJP has been all-powerful, like in Karnataka and Gujarat,etc. They have not made any policy decisions which violates the Constitution of India.
Compare this to 2 largest Pakistani parties, one is supposedly very secular. PPP claims secular-ness yet it was the one which made Ahmadis non-Muslims as per law!
Has any major(BJP, Congress, Janata Dal,etc.) party in India done such things? Never!
Your Jinnah too accused Nehru of being biased, just like you are accusing BJP. Nehru turned out to be the most wonderful of man. He protected Muslims and even today his grandchildren ask for Muslim votes in his name.
So you suspecting India's secular credentials is not new, nor you being wrong in every aspect new. Since, the 40s Communalists have accused India and Hindus of practicing Communalism to justify their own existence. You are no different.
@Water Bottle:
I will suggest you two options. 1) Give Kashmir to Pakistan and wash your hands off it.or
2) Treat it like a part of India and repeal article 370.what you would like to repeal article 370, just because 1. our spineless Nehru took this issue to UN? 2. to please J&K population 3. Is really Pakistan is acting as per UN resolution, the common resolution says that no citizen other then Kashmiri should own the property inside unified Kashmir. 4. As per the rule it also states that entire Indian / Pakistani should back off from the occupancy before going for people resolution.
You alway keep on bashing both sides, but are you having any state of mind to present your thoughts rather bashing which come out with your views. it might help people to acknowledge your view.
{BJP during its 5 year rule did not make a single law nor take any decision, which can be proved in court, that violates the secular principles.} @BruteForce
Not as reference to the burden of the argument but to be correct: BJP did not make such laws because it could not, and because BJP never ruled India on its own (perhaps it never will). There were more than a dozen other parties in coalition NDA, including a few Secular ones, which were a civilising influence & prevented a second subversion of spirit of Constitution..
@Lala Gee:
http://www.bangaloremirror.com/index.aspx?page=article§id=10&contentid=20130117201301170800303315e05c1f4
Pakistan Supreme Court used 11 Indian Judgements in the past year alone on one single case.
That means by accepting them at face value Pakistani Supreme Court the highest authority in Pakistan, the one Institution you people like and respect, validates the primacy and strength of Indian Judicial system. That also means you being a citizen of Pakistan also have to abide by Indian Judgements, making you indirectly a party to Pakistani Supreme Court's reliance and belief in Indian Judiciary and its system. Indian Judiciary draws its powers directly from the Constitution and hence, you and the Supreme Court of Pakistan, validate the Indian Constitution just like it is.
So you are ruled by Indian Judgements, basically a fruit of the Indian Constitution and its powers.
You have the gall to call it names and discredit it. Why don't you petition your own Supreme Court to not use Indian judgements, which directly derives its power from its Constitution?
This is what happens when people butt into things they have no idea of.
@Lala Gee:
"...any party established on different/opposing ideology – if Hindutva is an ideology, at all – can be allowed to participate in elections held under the Indian constitution..."
A Party can claim to represent Wizards and Witches and still be registered as a Political Party in India. Indian Constitution that the state will not make laws and make rules favouring any single community over the other. If the Constitution goes on to tell what a person should represent and what he should not how is it different from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia and Iran? Indian Constitution is not the Sharia, Sir!
BJP during its 5 year rule did not make a single law nor take any decision, which can be proved in court, that violates the secular principles. Nor can any party bring out say, a law, which says so and so community is not Muslim or not Hindu or some rubbish like its done in Pakistan.
"So it is not truly Indians creation."
Why fix something which isn't broke?
Any law which violates the Constitution is struck down by the Supreme Court. The Court struck down a law which had made Homosexuality illegal. But, its still prevalent in Pakistan and will be forever. That is the difference between India and Pakistan. We chucked out the laws which we thought were regressive and did not represent us.
"..credit goes to the Britishers. "
Its like you have started reading news only in the last 2 or 3 years. Pakistani courts cite even the recent Indian court rulings, which were derived from the Constitution, not from British era laws.
I'll quote you a Pakistani jurist - YLH.
http://pakteahouse.net/2010/03/30/basic-structure-theory-and-our-constitutional-crisis/
"The answer to that ofcourse is the Supreme Court- using persuasive precedents from India and its own judgments in the Judges Cases I, II and III."
Pakistani Supreme Court recently cited Indian Supreme Court's Basic Structure theory, based on the Constitution, not the British era laws.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Pakistan-apex-court-cites-Indian-Supreme-Court-to-justify-order/Article1-990849.aspx
"It is well settled that normally in exercise of powers of judicial review courts do not scrutinize policy decisions as was also decided by India's Supreme Court in 2002 in the case of BALCO Employees Vs Union of India, which made it clear that this will apply only in cases where government decisions are bonafide and not for any other consideration," the Pakistan's top court stated.
Dude if you are not a jurist, why are you acting like one? For me its so easy to Google news that I've read previously. Do you think I'd ask you something without knowing what your reply might look like?
Pakistani courts have been using Indian court judgements since long, which validates the Indian Constitution and its system. If you feel differently about it, petition your own courts to not use them. Why are you fighting with us Indians in our Constitutional matters. First convince your courts that Indian Constitution is bad and do not follow it. Then, when it accepts and stops using Indian judgements, THEN come back to us.
Without that, you look like a phoney.
@Alok: { If someone feels that Modi is a threat to this identity, please let me assure you that even if he becomes PM he won’t be able to get away so easily with any injustice done to any minority group}
Not true. Indian voters reward injustice to minorities. Modi will get away as all have got away right since the day Indira Gandhi & her boy Sanjay got away with Turkman Gate despite a temporary chastisement. After Sikh massacre in Delhi for which hardly anybody has been punished, Indian voters rewarded Rajiv Gandhi with the kind of majority that neither his grandfather/mother ever enjoyed nor any other PM in near future is likely to command. Bal Thakre of Bombay saw his Party coming to power & being rewarded handsomely by Maharashtrians for his anti-Muslim invective. After breaking Babri mosque, BJP which never had more than a handful of seats in Lok Sabha, managed to increase its tally in such a way that in due course not only it formed the Govt but made the chief instigator of anti-Babri movement the Home Minister & Dy. PM, who ironically swore to preserve & protect the "secular" Constitution of India. Yet another to take such an oath was Narendra Modi & after 2002 carnage grateful Gujaratis elected him twice more as their beloved CM. Violence, extreme violence against minorities pays!
@SM: You dont know about sharia.
@Naveen: i don't think the outcome of 2014 general election will depend on your bhavishyavaani. But it will certainly depend on your vote. So, give your betting a break and try to cast your vote to the party you want in the centre.It's your vote which will decide which party will come to the centre. I hope you will decide best for your self and for your country which party or person should come to the centre. Remember Voting is just not your right but also your responsibility.Use your right wisely. Peace out.
" Tribune.com.pk aims to nurture a vibrant online community by giving our readers maximum flexibility and freedom in expressing their thoughts and ideas. Our goal is to encourage debate and make our site an engaging and informative web space, rich with discussion and user-led dialogue about news and issues explored by The Express Tribune "
REALLY? Then why is it that so many miasmic pro-Indian replies are given a free hand to talk all sorts of brainless antagonistic nonsense here without so much as a check and balance by ET Editors on these reply pages?
Come on ET, please stop accepting payments from DOORDARSHAN! : - {{ It's about time ET open some space to well thought out and objective Pro- Pakistani replies!
@Naveen: The scam tainted UPA is on the way out.People are fed up with two terms of the Congress Goverment.The party who is most likely to get voted in are regional parties and BJP.If BJP under Modi does not win decisively then one realizes that Modi mania is only hype
@Water Bottle: Mr Patel will conveniently lie and sleep because if he dares to raise such issues some extremist mullah will give fatwas and ask him to be put to permanent sleep.
@abdussamad: You say that Modi has got a good shot at the PM post to which most would agree. My question is why should the Muslims not join the BJP and try to 'moderate' it from within. I am a Hindu and I believe the secular identity of our nation is paramount. If someone feels that Modi is a threat to this identity, please let me assure you that even if he becomes PM he won't be able to get away so easily with any injustice done to any minority group. I think as a nation India has become become more secular in its identity than it was in 2002 and with a strong media / civil society / judiciary he will not dare to do injustice even if he wishes to.
@Reality Check
@Babloo: Why do you indians want to vote a hindu religious fundamentalist nazi party like BJP……Why BJP is your preference, why not secular parties ….. I really feel pity on indians here praising a hindu nazi party BJP, this just shows their communal mindset. It is like pakistanis voting religous fundamentalist party of maulana Fazal ur rehman or Jamat islami …. There could be a long answer to your questions, but that might tax the patience of the readers and the moderator as well. So I will keep it short. Pakistanis do not have to vote for religious fundamentalist parties anymore. They have done that sixty five years ago when they voted for Muslim league and got a country for the Muslims of India. Indian Hindus for lack of alternatives and being guided by their leaders (who I must say were of noble ideas) voted for a secular Congress. As a result they didn’t get a country that they could claim as exclusively for themselves. In short they didn’t get a Hindu Republic of India as against an Islamic Republic of Pakistan, which going by the logic of two nation theory they should have got. You are right in feeling pity on Indians, but for wrong reason. You should feel pity on them for taking sixty five years to realize what the Pakistanis under enlightened guidance from Muslim league and it’s leaders realized it so long ago; that followers of every religion need a country of their own where they can do as they please. Indians took it longer to see the light of truth. Better late than never. .
Party of imminent DANGER (CONgress) is bigger than party of ANGER (BJP).
Most of Indian voters are angry on loot-khasoot UPA misrule under Sonia, the real PM, Raul Khan (son of Rajiv who was son of Firoz Khan) and puppet PM Mauni baba.
Akbar Ahmed, have you or any other pseudo-secularist journalist seen an OPEN press conference or a one-to-one interview of Sonia, Raul or Mauni baba MMS?
Please enlighten us on Raul Kahn or Sonia as they are the real rulers of India.
@FactCheck: It seems you are out of scope first you should only research on PML, PPP, PTI, MQM parties.you should know how they made country as a failed state. Don't explain indian politics from your view, because definition of politics is different for you peoples.
@Babloo:
If indian population is so much against the corruption done by current congress led government and want to punish it in the next elections, they can vote many parties present in india like mamta banerjee, Left parties, janta dal factions etc., all of them have good reputation in terms of transparency. Why do you indians want to vote a hindu religious fundamentalist party like BJP just because you resent congress government. Why a hindu religious fundamentalist nazi party BJP is your preference, why not secular parties like left parties, janta dal factions, mamta banerjee party etc. I really feel pity on indians here praising a hindu nazi party BJP, this just shows their communal mindset. It is like pakistanis voting religous fundamentalist party of maulana Fazal ur rehman or Jamat islami because we resented our last super corrupt PPP government.
@lalagee: @Lala Gee: Wow,now there are 2 Lala Gee's.....
Dear Fake Lala Gee, Please note that there are many ardent admirer for the original Lala Gee's rangeen sapne and love to argue with him just to rile him up.....In fact,one of them is the Moderator who allows the circus to continue to provide entertainment.......
I would kindly advise you not to insult the original Lala Gee by making sense in your arguments..
Why not BJP and Congress debate on issues of national interest such as development, education, infrastructure, poverty alleviation, etc., instead Hindu vs. Muslim.
I do believe painting BJP as a Hindutva party is ploy not to discuss real issues facing India and to dumb down the electorate which is exactly what is taking place all over the world. BJP should use the opposing strategy and start pounding on important national issues. Lord knows India has plenty like all other nations.
What actually give me chuckle is when the media Indian and Western calls BJP and Nationalistic party! What should a national party should be? Foreignistic ( I know it is not a real word)?
Parties like Congress is not nationalistic, then they should not be allowed to participate in elections. I don’t believe Indians want to sell India to others any more than congress has already done.
Secularism only comes into real existence when masses are lifted up from poverty and illiteracy, period; which require development and uncorrupt government which Modi has shown, he can do.
@Author The country where army overwhelms prime minister and dominate over ministry, country where everyday 100 people die by blast, country where male escort mandatory for female whenever she outside of home, country where no children education, country which is depend on aid/ loan, country where minorities are going to absolute, country which is declared as a failed state better to write for this country. concentrate to pakistan politics because lot of things are not handled, not expressed, not written your whole life will take to cover all these.
why you cracking your head for other country, if you don't have any political knowledge, if you don't political idea don't write story. don't do anything for money.
@lalagee:
"I also knows from UK newspapers which comes to my house daily………that they are using the names south asians in newspapers for rape and crimes commited by arab soldiers of pakistan………."
LOLZ! I am sure then you also know these facts as well. Taken from this Wikipedia entry "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#India". I am sure no nation on planet Earth can beat Indian soldiers in this regard.
1- Rape cases in India have doubled between 1990 and 2008
2- India is a destination for child sex tourism, as laws are rarely enforced in such cases.
3- 20% of men admitting to forcing their wives or partners to have sex against their will.
4- Closely knit family life in India masks an alarming amount of sexual abuse of children and teenage girls by family members.
5- Delhi based organization RAHI says 76% of respondents to its survey had been abused when they were children - 40% of those by a family member.
"we are holding a big rally in coming days in UK to stop calling crimnal muslims pakistanis as south asians…."
Being a person of a nation whose 76% respondents of a survey say they were abused in childhood, no one deserves better than you to hold rallies against rapists.
@SM: Agree with you. In secular democracy, divisive laws should not exist. Secular constitution must be applied to all and a select few should no have their own laws which is used for discrimination and Fatwas. Neither have place in a modern society.
Opinion maker (I hate to call the likes of Aakar Patel journalists) writes to create controversy without any concern for truth.
@Rakib:
"There are 10 more States under Special Category for different reasons & purposes & BJP can’t remove any from the list."
Fully agree with your whole comment. Here is a truncated list of various communities and states given special status or allocated special provisions under the Indian Constitution quite to the contrary, as portrayed here by Indian (Hindu) commentators, as if it is only a Muslim and J&K specific issue. Hope this will dispel the misinformation spread by Indian commentators.
PART XVI SPECIAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO CERTAIN CLASSES
330- Reservation of seats for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the House of the People. 331- Representation of the Anglo-Indian community in the House of the People. 332- Reservation of seats for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the Legislative Assemblies of the States. 333- Representation of the Anglo-Indian community in the Legislative Assemblies of the States. 335- Claims of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes to services and posts. 336- Special provision for Anglo-Indian community in certain services. 337- Special provision with respect to educational grants for the benefit of Anglo-Indian Community. 339- Control of the Union over the Administration of Scheduled Areas and the welfare of Scheduled Tribes. 340- Appointment of a Commission to investigate the conditions of backward classes.
PART XXI TEMPORARY, TRANSITIONAL AND SPECIAL PROVISIONS
370- Temporary provisions with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir. 371- Special provision with respect to the States of Maharashtra and Gujarat. 371A- Special provision with respect to the State of Nagaland. 371B- Special provision with respect to the State of Assam. 371C- Special provision with respect to the State of Manipur. 371D. Special provisions with respect to the State of Andhra Pradesh. 371E- Establishment of Central University in Andhra Pradesh. 371F- Special provisions with respect to the State of Sikkim. 371G- Special provision with respect to the State of Mizoram. 371H- Special provision with respect to the State of Arunachal Pradesh. 371I- Special provision with respect to the State of Goa. 378A- Special provision as to duration of Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly.
Mr. Aakar I would suggest you to start reading newspapers, internet articles, talking to people and most importantly using ur brain....Also sit with a dictionary whenver u start reading..... Are you a journalist or some chhut-bhaiya neta....Why are u so far from facts.....Which school did u go for learning journalism or did u ever go to any school....What r u talking about Mr. Aakar....
@Xeta: Why bother. Very frankly, Mullah Omar has a better shot at Islamabad than Modi has at Delhi. Modi has been trolling around in all states without having any noticeable impact on BJP's poll tally in state polls (though he did manage to rile up some of BJP's most crucial regional partners). How he'll be able to swing BJP's fortune all alone in national elections is beyond me.
Aakar is a smart Gujarati and knows exactly what sells in Pakistan. He is writing exactly that. No one will buy his crap in India or elsewhere. Pakistani readers are being duped.
@Razi: @Sohrab Karboy: I agree with you.. I was just wondering if Aakar Patel realizes that, as most of his columns are negative. But instead his columns have a reverse effect on readers,may be because of something called reverse psychology & it has helped BJP/Modi cause.
@BruteForce:
"You seem to be an expert on the Indian Constitution, can you please quote which part of the Constitution is violated please, if say, a party professes to represent a particular community?"
I will be extremely succinct due to shortage of time at my disposal. As I know in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution, Secularism has been declared as the ideology/guiding philosophy of the Indian state. Also, as I know, Indian Supreme Court has already passed judgement that Secularism is the core part of the Indian Constitution which cannot be changed even through constitutional amendments. Now, if that is true, then how in the presence of these guarantees, any party established on different/opposing ideology - if Hindutva is an ideology, at all - can be allowed to participate in elections held under the Indian constitution, as they won't be able to act any different than any other Secular party? That is why I say they are defrauding their voters just to lure their votes on fake pretext of Hindutva because they won't be able to, or even may not be allowed to, if they try, fulfill their voters expectations. Let me explain a little further. Would you allow some Islamic, Communist, or Totalitarian ideological parties to take over India? My guess is, your answer would be a resounding "NO".
"My second query is if it is such a fraud, why are Pakistani courts using Indian court judgements as if its their own?"
1- Indian Constitution and it encompassing laws are nothing but mostly the Indian Act of 1935 created by the Britishers. So it is not truly Indians creation. 2- Indian Common Laws have nothing to do with the constitutional provisions of Secularism, and if Pakistani lawyers/courts quote those laws of the Indian Act 1935, that credit goes to the Britishers. As both Indian and Pakistan inherited the same laws, there is no harm in quoting the Indian courts decisions in the presence of identical laws covering the similar situations. Moreover, Pakistani courts as well as lawyers don't confine themselves to Indian courts' decisions only. They also quote British and American laws and decisions as well.
Simple example for Lala Gee - Turkey is secular, the ruling party is Islamist. The ruling party's Islamist leanings are not violating Turkey's constitution. Clear ?
@Rashid: Don't go to India times. It is the fox news of India. It largely plays on passions (be it hate,anger,lust) of its readers and is renowned for low journalistic standards.
'The Hindu' is a much better and credible non-governmental source of what is actually happening in India and what logical Indians & official policy makers (including Ministries) follow for.
@Lala Gee: ".....the Hindutva parties are fraud and defrauding their voters.........."
IMO, you are closer to truth than you realise but then that's how politics is played out in this corner of the world. Congress is no less fraudulent, in some other ways! Some people get fooled since they desperately want to get fooled. Aakar Patel is correct that it is a Party of anger. Also, IMO it is more anti-Muslim than pro-Hindu. BJP is not serious about anything other than coming to power with help of Allies & serving its benefactors, India Inc. faithfully.
It is all Smoke & Mirrors stuff, like:-BJP has no intention to build a Temple lest it dilute the Hindu grouse. There is pleasure immeasurable in exquisite pain of masochism; why apply salve to it? It has no intention to introduce UCC (it has never suggested even a Draft UCC even during its rule or decades of being in opposition) lest some powerful Hindu "Khap Panchayats" (quasi-judicial union of villagers based on ancient customs) & traditional Hindu clans withdraw their support in North India and finally, it is fooling its Hindu Vote Bank by talking of removing special status of Kashmir. It just doesn't have the clout, credibility or stature to withstand intense international pressure even if it so much as introduces an Amendment to the Article 370. There are 10 more States under Special Category for different reasons & purposes & BJP can't remove any from the list.
@Xeta:
"So many right wing hindutva xenophobic BJP supporters trolling around here.
Where are the liberal progressive logical Indians to counter their nonsense trolling around here?"
They are all in hiding because these hindutva xenophobic BJP trolls are as smart as humans come in this world.
Don't be surprised if many of these 'trolls' are succesful engineers/doctors/scientists/researchers/retired bureaucrats (Yes, there is a retired diplomat, an ex Indian ambassador to Pakistan. I know him.) among these trolls. Some of the best minds in the world are here among these 'troll's.
There is absolutely nothing to refute with what these 'trolls' are saying.
The Xeta's of the world just need a brain to understand logic.
ONE uniform civil code does not mean being based on Hindu Law, Mohammedan Law or personal law of any particular religious Group or community. most of coded laws have been enacted only to make law clear and less amorphous. the other reason is to improve the plight of women. let scholars of law sit together and draft a law which they consider is good. TWO, if people (irrespective of being Hindus or Muslims) living in Europe and America are ready to abide by a uniform law, why such an objection to UCC in India.
@BruteForce:
I can't believe that you provided links to Lala Gee.
Lala Gee is a funny guy, making a lot of jokes here. Like Zaid Hamid.
Just relax and enjoy his jokes just like you enjoy Zaid Hamid.
@Author: You seem to have lost your mind atleast on 2 things -- 1) Uniform civil code is a progressive idea which guarantees equality under to law to all women (including muslim women). No progressive (muslim) country have sharia laws for women. 2) article 370 : is not constitutional autonomy for Muslims!! Its constitutional autonomy for the subjects of the state of J&K - which includes 30-40% non-muslims. Moreover only a small percentage of Indian Muslims are Kashmiris. So how can article 370 be constitutional autonomy for "Muslims" ?
@Lala Gee:
"arty other than the Secular parties could even be allowed to participate in elections in open violation of the Indian Constitution "
You seem to be an expert on the Indian Constitution, can you please quote which part of the Constitution is violated please, if say, a party professes to represent a particular community?
I'll help you..
http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/welcome.html
http://lawmin.nic.in/coi/coiason29july08.pdf
My second query is if it is such a fraud, why are Pakistani courts using Indian court judgements as if its their own? Why are Pakistani Jurists like YLH actually say Indian Constitution is worth preserving?
So you think you the Constitution of India better than them? Lets see what you come up with..
@Lalagee:
*"@aakar…….U in ur mind and heart knows that if BJP comes it will never try to make india a hindu rashtra..they will remain secular…u know this mate….".
The above post is not from me. Some Indian is masquerading my moniker. Indians will be Indians, of course. What else can be expected of them after all.
This is what [I wrote in another article a few days ago]]1.
"I simply fail to understand how any party other than the Secular parties could even be allowed to participate in elections in open violation of the Indian Constitution which guarantees Secularism would be the only way of governance. Either the Hindutva parties are fraud and defrauding their voters, or the Indian Constitution is a fraud and a cover-up. It is just like Taliban declare themselves Secular, or the Pakistan government declare herself Secular government in the presence of discriminatory laws."
So many right wing hindutva xenophobic BJP supporters trolling around here.
Where are the liberal progressive logical Indians to counter their nonsense trolling around here?
@aakar.......U in ur mind and heart knows that if BJP comes it will never try to make india a hindu rashtra..they will remain secular...u know this mate...........just try to put urself in the shoes of common indian's rather than a half brainwashed muslim....and u will know ur beloved CON-gress or KHAN-gress has done little better for this country......Modi id here to stay .....we dont want the BURQA of secularism......we want development of country........He may be a hindu nationalist..similarly muslims leaders of bjp may be a muslim nationalist...but at the end of the day u know that indians are indians ..............not some hindu/muslim/sikh/isai..........we are not pakis...remember that
ET:DONT sensor and edit as i am replying to my fellow indian man and u have no right to come in between.........
@Author: This rise came because of two things. The first was its appeal to urban voters, who supported the demolition of the Babri Masjid and were angry over such things as the Shah Bano case, which they saw as appeasement. The second, in my opinion just as important, was that it gave the upper and dominant castes and middle class of various states the opportunity to gather as a political force, opposed to the Congress’s appeal to “weaker sections”. . However I think you missed the primary reason. The BJP's rise in the 80s and 90s came primarily due to its pan-Indian identity (which later included parts of the South) at a time when people had to suffer the Congress as there was no viable alternative from within a fractured opposition. Their rise began at a time when all opposition leaders were regional satraps much like how it is today with the exception of the BJP. . The Janata Dal was an amalgam, a hotch potch, of political parties without a national leader and had appeal only in certain pockets of the country.
what is your grouse with BJP?
@SM:
You are wasting your time on Aakar.
I don't know who you are. You say an Indian admirer, which automatically is deduced as a foreigner.
Why don't you reveal yourself and write articles? I'm sure it will be better than these bigots under the garb of half baked journalists.
Dear Mr. Patel, Article 44 of the Directive Principles (part IV of the Indian Constitution intended to guide the state in framing laws) encourages the State to secure a uniform civil code for all citizens, by eliminating discrepancies between various personal laws currently in force in the country. It is a travesty that those who support the constitution are branded as communal and parties which violate it in spirit and letter (read Shah Bano case, setting up now of Muslim universities etc) are hailed as the last refuge of secularism. Further, I find this line of yours most interesting - ... removing Article 370 in Kashmir (Muslims should not keep their constitutional autonomy). How is Kashmir a Muslim state when the word muslim (or Islam) finds no mention in the constitution of J&K? If it is merely by majority of population, then isn't India a Hindu state? Do tell.
BJP is more of party of fear mongers spreading negativity in order to get communal votes. . All those who hate India should pray for BJP's success!
@SM:
"Art. 370 gives special status to Kashmir, which it does not deserves. It should be treated as any other State and any Indian should have as much rights in J&K"
Yes.
I will suggest you two options.
1) Give Kashmir to Pakistan and wash your hands off it.
or
2) Treat it like a part of India and repeal article 370.
I want to add one more point to my previous write up.
It's a little personal question. But nothing offensive.
Dear Aakar, I wonder how you sleep at night?
You raise all these questions against BJP. Which is fine. You should.
You are a journalist who is supposed to be unbiased.
You never seem to care about the rights of muslim women being trampled by the Congress government by what they did to Shah Bano. Don't you feel guilty by not writing about such issues which have basically rendered about 70 million Indian muslim women so weak and oppressed.
How do you sleep at night, man?
Please don't tell me that the lumps of stacks of cash in your mattress give you good sleep.
Such blatant lies and ignorance that any bourgeois Indian can show your true face.
"implementation of a Uniform Civil Code (Muslims should not keep their personal law)"
How can you lie like this?
Uniform Civil Code means, all the people of India can come under one single law. It's as much applicable to Christian/Hindus/Sikhs/Jains/Buddhists/Jews/Zorostrians/Atheists/Bahaiis and I don't know which other faith exists on earth, as much as it applies to Muslims.
Also, how come none of you leftist pseudo-secular journalists never raise the issue of population control?
Population of this country is exploding and is the main reason for all the ills of this country. Not one single party raises this issue lest they lose Muslim votes.
And why don't you bigoted journalists ever write about the Shahbano case and show to our Pakistani brothers the true secular face of the Congress government?
I think, like some people say Kaliyuga has really arrived where liars, bigots and propagandists get more media space than honest journalists.
I'm sick and tired of people like Akar Patel and their strings of bigoted writing.
Aakar is back to Modi bashing. Uniform civil code will also make Hindus loose their laws . Aaakar conveniently ignores it . the principle is one country , one law and this is stated in our constitution.
Aakar has cleverly skirted the Sha bano issue. What were the facts? A old indigent woman was thrown to the street by her husband with no compensation in the name of Islam. No civilized society including an Islamic society can tolerate it. When Courts rightly held that compensation is payable Congress overturned the law which grants protection to indigent women. Aaakar, Do you support what Rajiv Gandhi did in Sha bano case?
Nathan
Kaun banega Crorepati?
Mr Patel Modi's popularity ,and consequently the BJP's, is not because of hindutva but because of the mega corruption scandals at the center under the Congress and the policy paralysis because of which the GDP growth has come down from 8% to 4% , the rupee from 44 to the$ has gone up to 60 and inflation is hitting the roof. Contrast this with Modi who has been CM for 12yrs and he has no corruption charge against him (not because of the lack of trying by the CBI ), provides 24hr power, good governance and among the fastest growth rates in GDP in the country . The youth needs JOBS which are not possible without growth .Your headline should have been "The angry youth of India''
@SM
You can try to dismiss a particular religious law by your negative comment (in fact that's the exact negativity that Aakar has written about, so naturally you must be a supporter of BJP), and paint BJP as a "progressive" party (wow!) but you are only deluding yourself. Try avoiding complex subjects like Islamic law and legal theory, coz you... (you get my drift here?)
@thor
Ever heard of negative publicity?
From what I've gathered Modi is now a really really big fish in India. He is a strong contender for the PM slot. This does not bode well for Muslims in India.
I'd like to see more articles like this about India. Mr. Patel should continue to write about politics, power and life in India.
Unfortunately we don't have any India watchers from our own lot who write this stuff. I have to go to the india times website for this sort of thing. And I am like the only Pakistani there. Compare that to the many Indians who frequent this site and you realise that Pakistanis are quite insular.
I am not a supported of BJP - but this premise above is ridiculous!! I have no opinion on the first - which I think should have a real secular solution. But the Second and the Third are a sticking dagger on Indian Democracy and Secularism's side - they have to go BJP or No-BJP.!!
@SM: You have signed off as "An Indian admirer" of Mr. Aakar Patel. I would say 'with admirers like that who would need the bashers?' You seem to be replete with the "anger" Mr. Patel is referring to.
@thor: What's wrong for Mr. Patel to give "more publicity to BJP/Modi than anyone else?" BJP is after all the "second-biggest political party." I, as a Pakistani, will like to see two, or more, strong political parties emerge in India that will give the Indian voters a viable choice to elect a party based on dedication to progressive ideas and commitment to develop India as a great country it should be. It does not give me any pleasure to see one party dominating the political scene in India, sometimes by playing the communal card, but mired with corruption and mental stagnation. I believe India deserves better.
We, despite being two nations, are genetically and historically same people with same roots and tastes in cultural and social mores. Unfortunately, we are even genetically pre-disposed to be prone to the same diseases (such as diabetes.) Both our people deserve to break the shackles of poverty, illiteracy, malnutrition, and underdevelopment to give our people a high standard of living, freedom, and above all happiness. One small way towards achieving that is for us to spend less of our resources on petty squabbles and childish shenanigans. I, for one, has the proclivity towards seeing BJP in power, if it can run and develop India better, but with love and respect towards all minorities, not only Muslims.
If the majority of Indians want Modi so be it. It's better than military takeover. Moreover, India does not follow a presidential system like US. Modi as PM can't have his way throughout India as many states will not have a BJP govt.
@thor, Actually the author is obsessed with Modi. May be he's suffering from 'NaMonia' like other pseudo-secularists.
To make a point , Mr Patel exaggerates so grossly , that it becomes a lie. Most people voted for BJP because of corruption in Congress and not for the issues he mentions.
Whether one likes it or not, Congress and allies are returning to power in 2014. BJP under Modi is an outcaste in some of most populous states- UP, Bihar and West Bengal. In South, only Karnataka may fetch some seats to it. Communists (likely to be the third or fourth biggest block) anywhere in the country are anyway rabidly Anti- BJP .
All in all, BJP in my view is already a dead horse. On its own it may win seats comparable to Congress but it will not be able to fetch allies needed to cross the halfway mark.
This is my Bhavishyavaani. Dated 20 July 2013. Anyone can choose to disagree but do cite reasons for the same.
And, since we are on the subject, “they started it” is not just a "theory", but it is a fact established in a court of justice in India. You know in real world people depends on a simple concept called "evidence" to establish what is reality. I know its a bit difficult to grasp for someone not trained in any form of hard science, and I really dont mean social science, because in the words of Sheldon Copper, they are just "hokum". Back to the point, in 2002 what happened in Gujarat resulted in the conviction of Muslim mobs that planned an attack on Sabarmati Express and burnt a few train cabins for which 11 people are on death row and another 20 are on life sentence. Now, as long as this is not refuted by a higher court, with a basis on evidence that can conclusively prove otherwise, my dear friend Aakar, that's where the simple truth of Godhra stands as of today. Additionally, its not the first time that Muslims in India has initiated a riot. In his book, Ishtiaq Ahmed, the Swedish professor of Pakistani origin, who studied the 1947 partition, and critically analyzing the critical question of "who started the riots", has this to conclude, in his own words --- "The conclusion I reached from my research is that in March 1947 the Muslims started large-scale violence, mainly against Sikhs but also against Hindus, in the Muslim-majority districts of northern Punjab. Yet at the end of that year more Muslims had been killed in East Punjab than Hindus and Sikhs together in West Punjab. How and why that happened is for the first time presented in this book of mine." Therefore, in my conclusion, if we live in a intertempotal world, where an event happens in a time series, wherein there is a cause and an effect, then the question of "who started it" is not just an academic question, but it becomes a matter of life and death. But of course, for that you have to believe in the basic construct of intertemporal world that we all inhabit.
Why Aakar Patel is so angry with Modi and BJP? Angry man talks of angry party always.. Chill down..
Mate I really need to know what you are smoking. 1. Article 370 is applied to the former princely state of J&K. Islam is one of the religion of the state why make muslims the sole representative of J&K are Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhist, Christians children of lesser god that makes you equate 370 = Muslims. 2. UCC is a goal that every democratic progresive state should aspire, many countries in the west have adopted it over a period of time and India will be no exception. No one is saying that UCC shold be adopted & applied tomorrow but it is a noble idea that is worth pursuing. We as a nation state are not there yet but with time the society(irrespective of religion/caste/race) will reach a level of development & maturity where it will adopt UCC. 3. Appeasement is a real issue in india be it of majority, minority, castes, union workers, organized farmers, naxals & etc(list is long). Indians are angry at this appeasement policy as it has kept the nation hostage to these power cliques as they resort to violence & blackmail of the state. It is obvious that such a group of angry indians organize themselves politically to get their voice heard which is their constitutional right. 4. Modis popularity fake or real can be debated. Plz don't mix modi with the issues mentioned above. Modi or no Modi, Bjp or no Bjp these issues are real and indians will address them irrespective of who is the flavor of the day or which party is in power or opposition. Issues matter not people or party.
Informative, no nonsense, another great piece.
You have to be careful not cause a Modi fatigue syndrome......in politics that's a bad thing.
@Aakar Patel Not sure if you yourself realize this.. You have given more publicity to BJP/Modi than anyone else..
Dear Aakar, It might be news for you but Uniform Civil Code and removal of Art. 370 are actually progressive ideas, not the other way round. Uniform Civil Code means Muslim women of India will be treated like any other citizen of India who is a women, and not as an inferior being which Sharia makes her to be, where she can be randomly divorced and she cant ask for any alimony. Art. 370 gives special status to Kashmir, which it does not deserves. It should be treated as any other State and any Indian should have as much rights in J&K as he enjoys in any other place. Only in India these ideas of equality becomes a cause for left liberals to beat the population with and create divisions and then act as if they are the ones who are secular. You get my drift here? BTW, why dont you write about caste system of Kashmiri Muslims, I think your inputs will be more informed there, given that's where you have real expertise. Try avoiding complex subjects like equality, economics of human right, coz you dont seem to have an handle on it.
Best wishes, An Indian admirer.