Indian Muslims

Re: aslam44 # 417

Aslam,
Are you familiar with Zoya Hassans work? It is interesting read although her solutions in my opinion are presented to start a debate. I don’t think reverse discrimination is a solution to discrimination. We have followed a similar policy towards dalits in India, they are not much better of than they were.
African Americans had institutionalized discrimination, there is nothing like that in the Indian context. Nothing prevents a Indian Muslim to succeed in India, but you have to work your butt off like everyone else.
Indian Muslim middle class is conspicuous by its absence. We have the Muslim elite and the Muslim poor. That explains the statistics you have presented. To move up in India you have to get educated. As soon as the Indian Muslim poor understand that they will start moving up in life.

Regards,


Faruk

Re: sadna # 409
I tend to agree. The problems and challenges faced by the Indian Muslim poor are no different than other Indians in the same income bracket. The Indian electorate is best served by representatives who cater to their need irrespective of religion.

Regards,

Faruk

Just the latest count of hits on these two websites:

Indian Muslims by Aparna Pande hits: 12889 interacts: 441

---

The Massacre at Bajaur by S. Farooq Hasnat hits: 12454 interacts: 576

---

Why more hits on the Indian Muslims site (but less interacts) than on the Bajaur massacre site?

It is just plain and simple. Hindoos interact on the other site, just to show their hatred towards Pakistan, plain and simple. On this board, they can not defend the shenanigans of their own Hindoo Land.

PS (to tahmed: I`d say that when some like Gandhi declares the greatest crime of the South Africans against Indians was that they were made to ride in trains with Africans, to me that constitute a qualitatively different proposition than Gandhi`s decision to marry off his own children according to his own wishes. When the same person speaks of the inherent superiority of the ``Indo-Germanic`` and ``Indo-Aryan`` stocks, one is reminded of another person who one Indian described in jest as the ``Aryan Mahatma``.

Re: # 429

Dear Tahmed,

Please look at the post again. I did not agree with Gandhi being nonviolent etc. I said that is not what I am arguing about. I have already explained that to me his ``public stances`` about non-violence means nothing to me.

Since you took issue with my comments about Gandhi, which were entirely about his ``concepts`` on race and caste, you are the one who is introducing ``additional issues``.

Instead of respecting my right to opine, you are trying to define the discussion in your own framework. But I am pleased to note that you wrote the following:

A ``champion of liberal causes`` would be someone who would have campaigned for liberal causes the world over - and everyone understands as well as you that Gandhi`s focus was ``merely`` on the sub-continent.

My issue is with those who make him into such a champion.

418, 420 and 437,

It is amazing how one Indian craps, and others gather around to rehash that crap as something edible.

Look ... we ``evil Pakistanis`` have not had anything to do with India since 1947... so it would be much better if you accepted responsibility for the plight of your minorities instead of always looking for the bogeyman, fall guy etc etc.

From 1857 to 1900, the British deliberately adopted a hostile policy to the Muslims ... especially those that had been the votaries of power .... when Lord Curzon set about to favor Muslims in 1905 ... it was a response to a historic wrong. It must be remembered that the Hindu majority was a direct beneficiary of ``divide and rule`` politics of the British. No wonder the great ``Indian Nationalist`` treatise Anand Math actually praises the British as liberators from evil Muslim rule. Even a reformer like Ranade chose figures like Shivaji, whose struggle was not against the British but a Mughal Emperor, as the ``national hero`` ... thus encouraged by the British, Hindus, to whom the difference between Farsi/Urdu and English was simply a change of alphabet, were soon able to create a progressive bourgeoisie.

In Muslims, the educational reform came through the efforts of the pro-West Islamic Modernist Sir Syed Ahmed Khan. He was, it must be remembered, viciously against the idea of Muslims joining the Hindus in Congress and he gave several reasons for it. While most Muslims stayed away from the Congress, there were several like Tyabji and Jinnah who were ardent Congressmen and Indians before they were Muslims. So what happened? It is easy to make a scapegoat out of one man or a few people ...

The real force that was at work was what I have often described as the Dispossessed Gupta Syndrome. The best articulation of the Dispossessed Gupta Syndrome was in form of Anand Math then, but one only needs to revisit Sadna`s illustrious 7 year career on this website to see how deeply ingrained this syndrome is in her psyche. It is the continuation of the same mistrust that plagued the Congress and the same mistrust that isolated the most gungho of Indian nationalists into going their own way. It is a syndrome that balks at the idea of an indianness that is not rooted in ``Hindu Cultural Life`` ... and therefore it cannot accept any non-Hindu minority to seek an identity that contradicts their own narrow cultural nationalism. Gandhiism, Hindutva and Thackereyism are only kinds of this ailment .... but it is the product of the same mindset that continously isolates and repulses others. As usual it has nothing to do with religion... Hinduism is not all bad certainly... but this millenial victimhood is certainly unique to Indian Hindu bourgeoisie.

#415 by HisExcellency

Since old ideas and policies have failed to solve the IM economic and human rights problem, Indian Hindus will either have to offer ``new ideas`` (judging by their stale stand on Kashmir, I find that unlikely)... or ultimately accept whatever solution the IMs propose.

Pakis preaching to Indians on how to treat their minorities is like a whore preaching the virtues of virginity. After having converted/exterminated most of the minorities, Pakis now have resorted to kidnapping Hindu girls, converting them to Islam and then marrying them off to Muslim men. If Yousuf Youhana, a popular celebrity, had to convert to Islam under pressure from his teammates, one can only imagine the plight of no-name minorities living in the towns and villages with an overwhelming Muslim majority.

Like I said in post #414, the status quo is not sustainable.

No one asked you for your opinion, because you are irrelevant to what India does in India.

Re: # 418 & 414,

Sadna,

Let me congratulate u for that post 418. If any Pakistani with his brain in place and his history known wud be hurt by the post. Since they dont believe in history but mythology it doesnt matter to them;).

I wish I wrote something like ur 418.

Her Excellency,

What about Bangladesh II, Bangladesh III & IV to do justice to the oppressed Sindhis, Balochis and Pakhtoons? I think that wud be a fairer solution to the oppression of non-Punjabis in Pakistan??

What abt the change of ethnic profile of Kashmir under ur control? What abt Punjabification of K`shmeer under ur control? They dont even had their K`shmeeri language but they became Punjabis in time by now!! How audacious it is on ur part to give such BS all in the name of religion?

Anil ji,

(Only Indians on this board get riled up. It is best for Indians on this board to move on too, and wish him best. )

Precisely. It is time Indians and Pakistanis moved beyond MAJ (pbuh), MKG, TNT, DAD and all such three letter words and concentrate their energy on how to get better, as individuals, societies and nations, economically, socially and otherwise.

But there is nothing so entertaining as MAJ-MKG/Indo-Pak/Hindu-Muslim-Ahmedi slugfests on chowk, particularly when Manto mian and Harish bhai get into the act.

Regards

#426 by HisExcellency

Funny that you say that, especially when just 4 months ago just 12 guys brought India`s financial center to a standstill. Now that wasn`t happening 10 years ago was it??

For how long? Years? Months? Weeks? Days? The fact that trains were running jam-packed the very next day, just a few hours after the blasts, blows holes into your deluded assertions.

#427 by HisExcellency

Who wants to amputate a patient that`s dying from internal bleeding anyway??

This statement would have been more credible if it had come before the 47-48 ``tribal`` invasion and the Kargil war. Now you look like the pathetic fox that said the grapes were sour just because it couldn`t reach them.

#428 by HisExcellency

[ Unlike India, Americans don`t use extremism of the few as a pretext for collective punishment. ]

Ever heard of the Patriot act? Your phone is being tapped even as we speak...

And rightfully so.

India should follow America`s example and revive POTA at the very least, even if they don`t go so far as to keep tabs on each end every Muslim (as they do in America).

#426 by HisExcellency

[Funny that you say that, especially when just 4 months ago just 12 guys brought India`s financial center to a standstill. Now that wasn`t happening 10 years ago was it?? ]

Jehadi wet dreams will remain wet dreams. No houris or ghilmans really exist, BTW. What really exists is the Sensex - that is breaking records every day.

But keep dreaming your jehadi dreams....

:)

#427 by HisExcellency

[Who wants to amputate a patient that`s dying from internal bleeding anyway?? ]

I do. I think POK, Balochisthan and Sindh should be amputated from the haemorrhaging body of Pakiland.

To begin with.

NWFP will be amputated later.

Re: # 429

Well said, Tahmad sahib. This is a great read not only for Yasser.

Anil

Mantolives #383 I think there are basically two issues here:

1. You consider Gandhi to be a racist/casteist: The quotes you provide certainly indicate his resentment at Indians in South Africa being considered at part with the Africans whom he considered savages. So, agreed that Gandhi would probably not have approved his daughter getting married to an African. How many Pakistanis do you know who would approve of a similar deal? Or even marriage outside their religion? Or even marriage to a non-Pakistani? Does this disqualify them from being considered worthy of being principled people?

Furhtermore, to repeat what I have said and you have ignored - we are all entitled to our views. If Gandhi had taken a gun and shot a black guy who was minding his own business - then he would have gone beyond his entitlement. This is what the concept of individual freedom is all about. How are you contributing to the promotion of individual freedom in Pakistan by focussing on a man`s views rather than his actions?

And why are you wasting so much energy on an individual - rather than focussing on the the great concept of non-violence with which he is associated?? as they say, small minds discuss personalities, big minds discuss concepts. Do yourself a favor and move out of this rut of Gandhi and Jinnah and what not. Focus on the concepts they stood for rather than their personalities.

I brought your focus on personalities rather than concepts to your attention a few years ago on chowk as well, btw. but never fear, I wont stop harping on this and will remind you again in a few years perhaps if all of us and chowk are are still around. :-)


2. On non-violence: You seem to agree (albeit reluctantly) on this point when you say ``please appreciate that Gandhi`s public stances of nonviolence (when in reality every single one of his movements turned violent) is hardly the point of disagreement here.``

That is good. You have the integrity to acknowledge the truth (which is more than can be said for many others on chowk).

3. You say, The point of disagreement is when this person is presented as a champion of liberal causes, which he never championed but infact vehemently opposed.``

It is on the above two issues I have been discussing. So dont raise additional issues and say that I am disagreeing.

Now that you have mentioned it, let me ask you to write more carefully. A ``champion of liberal causes`` would be someone who would have campaigned for liberal causes the world over - and everyone understands as well as you that Gandhi`s focus was ``merely`` on the sub-continent.