Meenakshi

#19 by FarzanaVersey on May 5, 2004 11:42am PT


[But the fact that even today the PM says that had Godhra not happened, then Gujarat would not have taken place]

Unbelievable.

And we thought, Bush`s WMD joke was in bad taste.

SoulKeeper

Dost Mitter

I did not answer your querries because of my personal convictions. It might surprise you to know that I myself am convinced that Muslims are terrorists and inspiration for this terrorism is through Qura`n. I was just trying to get another perspective on the same point through you.

veeresh #48 Starting with your last point (mainly because I followed that), they say that comparisons are odious, and I dont think it makes sense to start comparing such broad-based things. Thus, while I will agree with you that in some ways India is better for muslims than Pakistan (religious fanatics dont shoot you in mosques in India because they dont like your sect, e.g., as they do in Pakistan) but in other ways it is not (they dont have people doubting your national loyalties, e.g.). Similarly, while you have this wipro man who is a dollar billionaire i believe, on the other hand, i understand that muslims are kept down in the indian military (correct me if i am wrong). Thus, my point is that comparisons often dont mean anything, since we are just measuring apples and oranges.

I dont understand why you feel the need to explain Godhra-Gujerat. How can anyone ever explain the murder of innocent people? Those incidents dont represent India anymore than jehadis represent Pakistan. Why shouldnt ordinary indians and pakistanis join hands and condemn those in their midst who commit murders, rather than try to protect them?

This is a sloppy piece of writing that relies on the tail-piece by peppering it with Gujarat Godhra ET all and the screeners oblige by publishing it. The whole idea is sickening!! Pick up the uninspiring, mundane and routine part of anyone’s life - a kid, a young man/woman, garroulous aunts or politics-infested uncles. Put it in the most humdrum of ways possible, never bothering about the quality of emotions or even sensitivity of situations, but you`ll be promised your space as long as you know how to treat the stinking meat with masalas.

Although I`m baffled by the churlish chattering of bored individuals who don`t spare a chance to display their `keen` sense of understanding about `religion`, one thought is worth the mention in this unfettered prattle - I liked Urstruly`s idea. If anyway you want to connect to Gujarat, how about using a Muslim name? Unless you are so gullible as to point out that you were depicting the lifestyle of a Muslim family who had `chutnified` in the great melting pot of Indian sub-continent so much that they were leading Brahmin lifestyle before their world was torn apart by riots.

I’m itching to write one myself – I know what to sprinkle to grab attention.

tahmed32 # 51 . . . sirji!!

1) The uniformed services in India, as well as the non-uniformed civil services, as well as the intelligence agencies . . . and the rest including the secret ones too . . . do not differentiate on grounds of religion. Please understand and appreciate that. Ofcourse there shall be heartburn on the part of those left behind in the race for promotions, and the easiest factor to blame is religion. I do not want to go into names and numbers on Muslims who have made it to the top, or to sensitive positions therein, these are open domain now and have been thrashed on chowk.com before. I mean, the top-cop in a ``sensitive`` state like Indian Punjab is a Muslim today, Siddique, and no big deal.

2) I continue to explain Godhra/Gujarat as one more aberration, which we in India shall endeavour to repair. Gets my goat when I have it thrown on my face by people who still continue to deny Bangladesh . . .

3) What I do wish you would understand is that religious riots have a rather well documented way of evolving into economic warfare within a day, maximum 2. For those who really sat and investigated the Godhra/Gujarat issues post-facto without the baggage of pre-determined positions, it was clear that there were as many problems within communities and religions as there were amongst them. I do think I understand why I can not explain this to people from a declared mono-culture society. But I do think you should also grant me the wisdom to understand that internecine strife between Muslim sects in Pakistan has more to do with economic battles than with murder in the name of religion.

Dear Urstruly:
Your sarcasm is misplaced! I only wish that you were as persuasive in your interacts as you are in your artilces, from which I always learn something.

#19
`` But the fact that even today the PM says that had Godhra not happened, then Gujarat would not have taken place.``

He shouldnot have said that. He is clearly taking sides with the rioters with that statement. As PM he respresents not only those who rioted afterward, but those who burnt the train before. He is as responsible for the situation with the Muslims of Signal Falia as he is for the situation with the rioting others(this goes for Modi too, as CM but try telling him).

As PM, what Vajpayee was required to say was, ``both episodes are humongous national tragedies. The only way forward for all Indians is for us to stop politicising communal violence of this sort and bring to light the roots of both episodes to understand how to pre-empt them in future``.

Even if Vajpayee had to toe the party line on `fifth columnists`, he could have said, while fifth columnists are a threat to the country, the large scale breakdown of public order and atrocities committed by populations on each other is as much an open invitation to fifth columnists and threat to India as any foreign-state backed terrorism.

It was not beyond Vajpayee`s capabilities to say all this and show the gumption to follow through on this POV in realpolitick terms. He would have become the next Nehru had he done so. He has shown similar gumption combined with real politic in the case of seeking peace with Pakistan.

Vajpayee couldnot do so because he is a party animal who decided not to go against the unprincipled BJP party line which stands behind every two-bit or four-bit neighbourhood goonda and criminal as along as they shout Jai Sri Ram during their goonda gardi.

#51 by tahmed32
``Similarly, while you have this wipro man who is a dollar billionaire i believe, on the other hand, i understand that muslims are kept down in the indian military (correct me if i am wrong). ``

heh heh, why do you toss these softballs?

On rest of your post, i think jihadis do represent a facet of pakistan and godhra-gujrat do represent a facet of india and we must embrace it as a reality, dont deny. Joining hands and condemning these murders is going to do little, accepting the responsibility is the first step.

sadna#56:
Good post. It`s at times like this that even I start missing Nehru. He may had his weaknesses but no Modi could survive under him.

re - Sadna #56

Excellent post. It helped me correct a part of my own thinking. Thanks.

Sadna #56,

Very appropriate, but most people completely circumvent it. I once had an argument
with our beloved Angana Chatterjee on this issue. She did her little impassioned piece
on how non-secular Modi is, and how to restrain him. My simple counter was that before
anything else, Gujarat was a law and order problem (actually, more order than law)
and we should haul Modi over the coals for completely failing there. Far easier to do
than make him sit through Tolerance 101.

Her smirky response to this was ``whose law and whose order?`` - the sheer callousness
of this statement was astounding. Narcissism is the core problem with many self-
proclaimed academic leftists like her.

Anyway, you and Dost should try and catch this Gujarat documentary ``Final solution``
by Rakesh Sharma. Very vivid, I hear - watching it tonight myself.

jang #55 I agree with you that jehadis are a facet of Pakistan just as godhra-gujerat are a facet of india. What I am saying is that there is other facets to Pakistan just as there other facets to india. In other words, we are both saying the saying thing.

veeresh #53

On 1. i think you are saying that there is muslims do indeed rise to high ranks in the military services in India. Fair enough.

On 2. i think you are being unduly defensive. the fact is that the Gujerat electorate rewarded Modi with a re-election. On the basis of this fact, i beg to differ with you on the point of this aberration being fixed. I dont think anything has been done about it.

On 3. of course there are underlying reasons of all kinds - economic, human psychology - behind lawless activity. However, the basis for civilized society is respect for certain basic norms, respect for the life of all individuals being one of them, and punishment for those that violate those norms. Sectarian killings in Pakistan are just as much murder as communal killings in India, and so I beg to differ when you say they are explainable by similar economic reasons. If we, the supposedly educated types of the subcontinent dont understand this fundamental point, then who in God`s name will?

Tahmed32 #60,

I guess we have discussed this before, but it is certainly worth revisiting. I agree
with Jang on this point. Verbally condemning Godhra-Gujarat/Jehadis and just
relegating them to the category of ``fringe elements murdering innocents`` dilutes
the core issue. These aren`t random acts of violence, these are actually an integral
part of a political philosophy that is gaining credence - a far more sinister creature.

Whether or not there are other facets to India or Pakistan is completely irrelevant
to this discussion - we need to own up to this beast in our midst.

#48 by veeresh

“And yes, after coming back from Pakistan, I am even more convinced that India is a better place for Muslims than Pakistan. That is a simple true fact.”

Veeresh Sahib,
I was wondering, in your zest to argue and prove your point, you may have written some thing that probably does not have much ground to base your judgement on.

Making such an over-generalization based on a few days stay is simply preposterous! Clearly, your subjective analysis is based on the quality of “Religious” life that you encountered in a few days of stay in Pakistan and compared it to a lifetime of observation in India. With such a lopsided sampling an error of judgment is evidently possible.

If I were to assume that you based your judgment on the overall quality of life in India and compared it to overall quality of life in Pakistan, based on your short stay there, your statement would still not be a “True Fact” and would remain subjective.

However, I tend to believe that overall quality of life and experience may be better in India for all Indian and that includes Muslims too. But I find it hard to accept that based on religion alone India is a better place for Muslims.

When we compare Indian Muslims and Pakistani Muslims we run into several factors that would tend to NOT favor your argument. Muslims in Pakistan are a majority community and their attitude about Islam would tend to be aggressive compared to Muslims that are a minority community and somewhat have to rely on the support of the majority community to even fulfill their basic religious rites. Please don’t get me wrong I am not even remotely suggesting that there are religious restrictions in India. However, minority communities tend to be more conservative and often look at the majority community with suspicion.

Being a majority community in Pakistan often results in Pak-Muslims accepting much more aggressive interpretation of the religion than the minority community Muslims would ever do in India.
For example, Jihad means the same thing to all Muslims but jihad’s interpretations in Pakistan would be much more aggressive than it would ever be in India. There can be many examples of that but my point is that the mindset of any majority community would be different than a minority community pretty much anywhere in the world.

A minority community would in most cases accept a narrower view of the social life and would tend to be more like “looking after each other” rather than a majority community that would show much more divergence of views based on a broader perception.

I can say that the quality of life for American Black is much better then the quality of life for Nigerian Black or for that matter any African Black but the attitude of the Nigerian black would always be different than the American black as the American black has to deal with a majority white community that he/she would inherently look at with suspicion. This may not be a very good example but certainly one can draw some parallels.

The freedom to practice religion exits in India, still the air of freedom for Muslims exits in Pakistan. I think a change of perception often influences/determines the quality of life much more than a few days of observation.

plats #61 I didnt use that phrase in quotes ``fringe elements murdering innocents``. Far from using a santized phrase like ``fringe elements`` I have always referred to the perpetrators as murderers. If anyone needs convincing on this point, it would be veeresh in his post #53 whom i also addressed in that post on this very point.

We certainly need to own up to this beast in our midst. Jang also refers to taking responsibility. I think to hold an entire nation responsible for a murder is to trivialize the concept of responsibilty. It is better to be honest and simply acknowledge evil done in the name of one`s country or religion or whatever, and to do what one can to fight that evil. My late father wrote a whole book in the late 1990`s titled ``Quranic vs Non-Quranic Islam`` as his attempt to separate the mullah philosophy of violence from the peaceful message of Islam. This was his way of trying to fight this evil on the battlefield where he thought it was best fought: in the battlefield of ideas. Perhaps someday someone in India will challenge the hindutva ideology and separate their violent philosophy from the peaceful message of Hinduism. Perhaps someone in India has already written such a book.

It is time we - the ordinary people of India and Pakistan - recognized the real beast - who, as you correctly say, is in our midst. But let us not let the beast off the hook by trivializing the concept of responsibility by spreading it across an entire nation.

dost-mittar #57, AOH #59
Glad that we agree.

plats8#58
I suspect many armchair or jhola Leftists are quite as unprincipled in supporting two-bit goondas perpetuating violence, as long as they do so in the name of Marxism. In addition said Leftists appear to harbor a deep antipathy towards the Indian state CONCEPTUALLY(as distinct from opposing the Indian state`s various actions, which is fine by me), not sure why.


Jang and Urstruly talked of reasons for Hindu violence.

For whatever it is worth, what Dr. Ambedkar said in his book Pakistan( Chapter IX, 1945). He argues in many places in the book that at that time, the way Muslims viewed/practiced politics was heavily influenced by their feeling of being menaced as a minority among majority Hindus. One of his related points :

`The third thing that is noticeable is the adoption by the Muslims of the gangster`s method in politics. The riots are a sufficient indication that gangsterism has become a settled part of their strategy in politics. They seem to be consciously and deliberately imitating the Sudeten Germans in the means employed by them against the Czechs. 44[f.44] So long as the Muslims were the aggressors, the Hindus were passive, and in the conflict they suffered more than the Muslims did. But this is no longer true. The Hindus have learned to retaliate and no longer feel any compunction in knifing a Musalman. This spirit of retaliation bids fair to produce the ugly spectacle of gangsterism against gangsterism.

How to meet this problem must exercise the minds of all concerned. There are the simple-minded Hindu Maha Sabha patriots who believe that the Hindus have only to make up their minds to wipe[out some] the(sic) Musalmans and they will be brought to their senses.. ``


(And Dr. Ambedkar goes on to say ``...The Hindu Maha Sabha plan is no way to unity. On the contrary, it is a sure block to progress. The slogan of the Hindu Maha Sabha President— Hindustan for Hindus— is not merely arrogant but is arrant nonsense.``)


My comment:
That was the Hindu Maha Sabha attitude when the British were in charge and various groups were jockeying for a share of power in the future.

Now in independent India, the descendants of Hindu Mahasabha ideologues are THE power in government and hold responsibility for all of India - and still hold the same attitudes.

I have heard/read not only BJP elected officials/lay supporters voice the above view but also ordinary Indians - namely that what SOME communal Muslims need is a good thrashing, that unless such thrashing is administered, Muslims who are communally aggressive will continue to consider Hindus to be weaklings and cowards who can be attacked as and when such Muslims please.

To the extent we are talking of predominant PAKISTANI official/unoffical discourse and policy, this assessment could well be true.

On the other hand, it is absolute nonsense/criminally irresponsible to suggest that Indians killing/attacking fellow Indians can be in any way be good for India or Indians.

Unfortunately this attitude appears to have currency. And unfortunately, though BJP/VHP(the standard bearer of this attitude on the Indian side) and the Pakistani side are clearly `made for each other` combatants, they are not fighting directly with each other at the front lines.

Rather, both sides have put Indian Muslims, Indians and the Indian state in-between as proxies/proxy enemies and Indian Muslims get the worst of it from all sides.