Shiv, I haven't read through completely, and am about to climb onto yet another vermin-laden mofussil bus.
Just to say that I most emphatically do not think you are targeting me or anyone else personally. If anything, the boot is on the other foot; I have in the past, and in my last two posts, taken some liberties which I might not have taken in the case of absolute strangers. I have strong views about your opinions; nothing but respect for you. IG More this evening, if there is Internet access, telephone communications, and power, in that sequence, where I am heading. --- On Tue, 19/5/09, ss <[email protected]> wrote: > From: ss <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [silk] Why have Indian exit polls been so off lately? > To: [email protected] > Date: Tuesday, 19 May, 2009, 9:55 AM > On Monday 18 May 2009 10:14:56 pm > Bonobashi wrote: > > there is nothing hypocritical in my condemnation > of the Gujarat massacres, > > and that you can use this only against a specific > party and specific > > individuals from that party and from elsewhere who > have actually > > demonstrated the hypocrisy that you have rightly > pilloried. > > > > The point? Not everybody falls within your > classification, and it does not > > seem logical to use arguments which depend on these > categories as universal > > categories. > > > > Now it would be interesting for you to state those > other issues which are > > being suppressed under the Modi smoke-screen. Please > go ahead and list > > them, and see how secularism or its absence affects > those issues. Or our > > responses to those issues. > > IG I will try and address the following issues in my reply > (and will hopefully > answer your questions as well). > > 1) I will try and illustrate why the use of what I term as > a "torn shirt > versus open fly" argument leads inexorably into a "slippery > slope" where > anything can be connected up with anything else leading to > irreconcilable > argument without the ability to see some important > issues. > > 2) I will also try and show why the views you have > expressed, while being > valid, still count as "pseudosecular" in their ability to > obfuscate and > suppress certain opinions. > > 3) How the suppression of certain inconvenient viewpoints > has a negative > effect on Indian society today. > > if you felt personally targeted by my comments, I must > admit that my > comments (while not targeted at you personallly) were meant > to hurt anyone > who counters what is seen as a "Hindutva" argument with a > reminder that Modi > represents genocide. > > i don't think any one of us on this list needs a reminder > that Modi stands > accused of representing genocide. I don't think anyone on > this list is a > supporter or abettor of murder. > > Let me merely point out how you have fallen into the > standard Hindutva trap by > raising the "Modi is a killer" card as soon as your > "Hindutva detection > meter" sounds a warning. But you will have to listen to a > fundamntalist Hindu > viewpoint that I will state here because this is exactly > what is said (and > let me point out that is is another egregious example of > torn shirt versus > open fly - where one fact does not make another irrelevant > or false) > > Al Beruni has documented the murder of Hindus in the past. > There are records > of other massacres of Hindus including that of 500 brahmins > in Melkote. > Despite this, I will explain why would it be wrong for a > "Hindutvadi" to call > all Muslims murderers on the basis of documented history. > > No matter who committed murder in the past there are two > incontrovertible > facts: > > 1) All Muslims are not murderers and do not support or abet > murder > 2) For all the murder that was commited by some people, a > lot of innocent > people are being smeared merely for representing a > different viewpoint > > Now apply that to "Hindutva and BJP" > > 1) All Hindutvadis and BJP supporters are not murderers and > do not support or > abet murder > 2) For all the murders commited by Modi and his goons, a > lot of innocent > people are being smeared merely for representing a > different viewpoint. > > The pseudosecular argument is as follows: > > "You represent Hindutva. Modi represents Hindutva. Modi is > a murderer, and > therefore your opinions coincide with that of a murderer. > No decent human > would agree wth you. You need to shut up" > > The counter argument made by "Hindutvadis" is similar: > > "Islam is a murderous religion. Muslim opinions represent a > murderous > religion. And your support to them represents support of > murder and Hindu > genocide. You do not represent real secularism when you > fail to criticize > genocide by Muslims in the past, while you criticize murder > by Hindus more > recently. You are pseudosecular. You need to shut up > yourself" > > This is the "slippery slope" that you are getting into when > you use Modis > guilt to suppress an opinion expressed by somenone else - > in this case Bharat > Shetty. > > How does all this impact Indian society? How is > "pseudosecularism" as damaging > to society as a misrepresentation of all Muslims as > fundamentalists? > > You and me and everyone else on this list, as "decent, > secular" people claim > to fully understand the angst of "religious minorities" in > India such as > Muslims and Christians. But what does not get expressed so > often is that > the "majority community" of Hindus have their own reasons > for dissatisfaction > and angst. > > In a "secular and democratic" country such as India, if we > must go to great > lengths to reduce the angst and suffering of the "religious > minorities' it > also means that we have to be willing to recognize and > assuage the angst of > the majority too, which exists, whether one wants to admit > it or not. There > is a problem and the Hindu majority are making sure that > the problem > translates into action whether or not "decent, secular" > Indians allow them to > have their say. > > I will try and explain how "Hindu majority angst" has > a practical impact on > the treatment of Muslims in india. (But the opinions are > mine and I take > responsibility for them) > > If you look at the Sachar committee report and look at the > few articles > published about th Muslim community in India you find that > there is an urgent > need to take Indian Muslims as "our own" and treat them as > our own, for they > are our own. Idiotic sops to Muslm communities and > kowtowing to > fundamentalist demands need to be replaced by proactive > action to get Muslim > children into schools to study side by side with others > while Muslims get > jobs (and houses) like anyone else. > > Why is this not happening? > > It is not happening because there is resistance to such > action from the > majority Hindu community. I put it to you that you cannot > do anything good > for Muslims in India until you get Hindus on your side > because they are an > ovewhelming majority. Getting Hindus on your side means > that you have to be > able to listen to a Hindu side of the story. If you spend > your time talking > down to Hindus as if they are all representative of > murderers you will not > get Hindu cooperation. The absence of Hindu cooperation > with ensure that > Muslims remain in the dumps in India. If that makes a few > of them radical - > it will only "prove a Hindu point" about Muslims in > general. > > Do you see where I am going? > > Hindus too have a viewpoint. They also happen to be in a > majority. These are > two "inconvenient facts". Pretending that a Hindu > view represents the view > of murderers, reactionaries and other undesirables is wrong > because it is > untrue. By connecting all that is "Hindu" with extremism > and expressing shame > and horror and recalling Hitler and genocide whenever a > Hindu viewpoint is > expressed plays a role in pushing Hindu resentment below > the surface - where > they will resist anything positive that genuinely needs to > be done for > minorities in india. That is EXACTLY what has happened for > 6 decades and is > still happening. > > I think parties like the Congress and the BJP understand > what I have written > perfectly well. They learn from each other's > mistakes. It is only > when "decent secular" people like us fall into the > political rhetoric trap > (as has occurred on this list) that we tie ourselves > up in knots by > classifying one or the other as "Hindutvadi" and > "pseudosecular" > > I hope I have made my stand clear and will be happy to > clarify anything that > needs clarification within the limits of my ability to do > that. > > shiv > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Own a website.Get an unlimited package.Pay next to nothing.*Go to http://in.business.yahoo.com/
