Most Indians, at least Hindus, joke that Indian secularism is for Hindus in principle and practice and it is never meant to be for Indian Muslims. Islamic faith is exempted from the requirement to commit itself to aspects of secularism. This sarcastic comment is not entirely with out valid reasons. Even Christians in Kerala have found this plausible reality to their detriment. In a notice issued by CDU in Sept. 2010, we find this:
...nobody reacts when the hands and legs of Christians are being chopped off...political parties and the ruling class are hunting the Christians and their institutions. They need vote banks. They want the support of the communities whose population graph shows an upward trend.....population of the Christians came down from 30 percent in 1950 to less than 20 percent in 2010....This is because educationally forward Christian community imbibed the spirit of the family planning program....
This means it is those communities and their ability to influence elections really matter; adhering to values, like family planning and other and secular and progressive concepts, and principles do not matter for our politicians. Is there any politician or any intellectual, Muslim or Non Muslim, who called for family planning among Muslims? Bal Thackeray, definitely not my favorite, did once and Muslims replied that it is against their religious beliefs (or read this); of course this belief will not stop them accusing Non Muslims of discrimination and oppression for their poverty. More importantly, such uncontrolled procreation is part of stealth jihad to establish Islamic rule in India again.
Another typical example implying it is numbers, and not some moral and ethical values, which dictate Indian secularism is Congress(I) apologizing to Muslims for Babri Masjid demolition while it never found it necessary to apologize for massacre of 5000 Sikhs in New Delhi after Indira Gandhi's assasination; we even have a Bharat Ratna laurette (given posthumous) reacting to this massacre by saying, "When a big tree falls, the surrounding earth shakes." which literally amounted to justification of killing of innocents. The reasons are purely political for this dual ethic: Sikhs influence only 12 seats but Muslims influence about100 seats.
Even recently, a stealth Jihadist and an Islamist like Salmaan Khurshid, in a book named 'At Home In India: A restatement of Indian Muslims', blatantly quoted that what Sikhs suffered during 1984 riots was only due to their SINS committed against during 1947 partition. Forget about taking action against him for what he wrote, even with a Sikh PM, but is there any mention of this and honest criticism in our erudite and secular media? When it comes to anything that deals with Islam or Muslims, politicians and media bend their backs to avoid pointing negatively towards Islam even when Muslim mob resorts to mindless violence. But, why?
For politicians, all it matters is about winning elections. Can this political necessity create likes of Digvijay Singh or Mulayam Singh? One has to understand that these people internalize their requirements, despite all the evidence pointing in other direction, as reality: Muslims are victims and others are victimizers. But media has its own reasons ranging from political correctness to influence of left-liberal ideology to myth of presence of Hindu fascism. So, media omits and censors news they think is unworthy or risky. They spit hatred with regard to anything that has to do with Hinduism forgetting same policies with regard to Muslims and Islam. Their self created selective amnesia is astonishing and appears unmistakably as intellectual arrogance.
So, we have TOI reporting that Karnataka govt. is granting Crores of rupees (at the best 120) to various Mutts and temples and implying that it is unconstitutional and against principle of secularism because, under this 'bogus' secularism public money can not be given to religious (Hindu) institutions.
But, did it ever mention and raise its voice against Govt. doling out nearly Rs 900 crores as Hajj subsidy? Or grants to those madrassas in the name of modernization?
Even elementary things are not mentioned like the fact that all the revenues from temples go in to Govt. coffers and it is Govt. that spends these funds often neglecting the basics of maintenance and development of basic needs of these temples and sometimes neglecting even renovation. Very disturbing and prevailing logic is: If public funds go from Govt. coffers to temples then it is illegal! But money going from temples to Govt. is secularism. We have seen the results of this kind of policy in the form of Sabarimalai tragedy (or here)and collapse of gopura of famous Sri Kalahasti temple. Have we seen any kind of outrage in media esp. English media? Much worse, various state Govt.s keep appointing persons of their choice having dubious character to post of chairmanship of various devasthanam boards. A fine example is AP Govt. appointing a liquor baron as chairman of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam board. This Hindu Tirumala temple gets Rs1500 Crores as revenues annually and it is Govt. which decides to spend this money. This is only possible in India.
Similarly, where was this English secular media and its outrage when the government of Jammu and Kashmir was imposing like Jizya like tax on Hindu pilgrims? Where was the outrage of secular and liberal class when various groups in Jammu and Kashmir were calling for restricting and controlling no. of Hindus pilgrims to various places in Kashmir? Any kind of abuse and denigration of Hindus and symbols of Hinduism passes as part and parcel of Indian secular policy; such practice is welcomed and held as virtue by English media which typically tries to copy and reproduce western concepts and culture to gullible masses.
Then, when this nation has accepted that its flag can not be hoisted in some parts like Sri Nagar, it is of no surprise at lack of sensitivity in the TOI reports and lack of public outrage at such reports. Finally, the measure of area where Indian flag can not be hoisted will only keep increasing and such senseless and one sided reports in English media will become more frequent.
Another typical example implying it is numbers, and not some moral and ethical values, which dictate Indian secularism is Congress(I) apologizing to Muslims for Babri Masjid demolition while it never found it necessary to apologize for massacre of 5000 Sikhs in New Delhi after Indira Gandhi's assasination; we even have a Bharat Ratna laurette (given posthumous) reacting to this massacre by saying, "When a big tree falls, the surrounding earth shakes." which literally amounted to justification of killing of innocents. The reasons are purely political for this dual ethic: Sikhs influence only 12 seats but Muslims influence about100 seats.
Even recently, a stealth Jihadist and an Islamist like Salmaan Khurshid, in a book named 'At Home In India: A restatement of Indian Muslims', blatantly quoted that what Sikhs suffered during 1984 riots was only due to their SINS committed against during 1947 partition. Forget about taking action against him for what he wrote, even with a Sikh PM, but is there any mention of this and honest criticism in our erudite and secular media? When it comes to anything that deals with Islam or Muslims, politicians and media bend their backs to avoid pointing negatively towards Islam even when Muslim mob resorts to mindless violence. But, why?
For politicians, all it matters is about winning elections. Can this political necessity create likes of Digvijay Singh or Mulayam Singh? One has to understand that these people internalize their requirements, despite all the evidence pointing in other direction, as reality: Muslims are victims and others are victimizers. But media has its own reasons ranging from political correctness to influence of left-liberal ideology to myth of presence of Hindu fascism. So, media omits and censors news they think is unworthy or risky. They spit hatred with regard to anything that has to do with Hinduism forgetting same policies with regard to Muslims and Islam. Their self created selective amnesia is astonishing and appears unmistakably as intellectual arrogance.
So, we have TOI reporting that Karnataka govt. is granting Crores of rupees (at the best 120) to various Mutts and temples and implying that it is unconstitutional and against principle of secularism because, under this 'bogus' secularism public money can not be given to religious (Hindu) institutions.
But, did it ever mention and raise its voice against Govt. doling out nearly Rs 900 crores as Hajj subsidy? Or grants to those madrassas in the name of modernization?
Even elementary things are not mentioned like the fact that all the revenues from temples go in to Govt. coffers and it is Govt. that spends these funds often neglecting the basics of maintenance and development of basic needs of these temples and sometimes neglecting even renovation. Very disturbing and prevailing logic is: If public funds go from Govt. coffers to temples then it is illegal! But money going from temples to Govt. is secularism. We have seen the results of this kind of policy in the form of Sabarimalai tragedy (or here)and collapse of gopura of famous Sri Kalahasti temple. Have we seen any kind of outrage in media esp. English media? Much worse, various state Govt.s keep appointing persons of their choice having dubious character to post of chairmanship of various devasthanam boards. A fine example is AP Govt. appointing a liquor baron as chairman of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam board. This Hindu Tirumala temple gets Rs1500 Crores as revenues annually and it is Govt. which decides to spend this money. This is only possible in India.
Similarly, where was this English secular media and its outrage when the government of Jammu and Kashmir was imposing like Jizya like tax on Hindu pilgrims? Where was the outrage of secular and liberal class when various groups in Jammu and Kashmir were calling for restricting and controlling no. of Hindus pilgrims to various places in Kashmir? Any kind of abuse and denigration of Hindus and symbols of Hinduism passes as part and parcel of Indian secular policy; such practice is welcomed and held as virtue by English media which typically tries to copy and reproduce western concepts and culture to gullible masses.
Then, when this nation has accepted that its flag can not be hoisted in some parts like Sri Nagar, it is of no surprise at lack of sensitivity in the TOI reports and lack of public outrage at such reports. Finally, the measure of area where Indian flag can not be hoisted will only keep increasing and such senseless and one sided reports in English media will become more frequent.
No comments:
Post a Comment
No abusive language or incitement to violence against any group. Such comments will be immediately deleted.