Inviting comments from 'Indians'..
Now those who know me know that it is not easy to piss me off, but a discussion I had yesterday with a uhm..friend managed that quite handily. In fact, even afterwards I couldn't stop thinking about the words we had exchanged. Perhaps I am making a bit too much of this, but I would like to get some more perspectives on this:
Below, I have reprinted the full exchange we had on a popular online social networking forum - unedited except for the names of the participants:
A Initiator, posted the link to the news-article in IHT along with the first comment, which provoked the reaction from B, starting off the whole diatribe.
B The other main participant
C
I will identify myself as B. Further, to clarify things said later in the discussion, B and C both were born into a 'minority' group (Christian to be specific). I leave it up to A and C to identify themselves, if they are aware of this blog and choose to do so.
Now I have not been blogging much in the past, but this is one issue that I feel a bit strongly about. I would really like to hear from people on some specific issues mentioned in the discussion - 'Indianness', & minority-majority community relations in India, and whether you agree with A or B or have your own take on the issue. Of course, you are free to talk about other things mentioned, or whatever else you can find relevant. I think Blogger allows anonymous comments.
:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-
Hindus, but not Muslims, end Kashmir protests - International Herald Tribune
Below, I have reprinted the full exchange we had on a popular online social networking forum - unedited except for the names of the participants:
A Initiator, posted the link to the news-article in IHT along with the first comment, which provoked the reaction from B, starting off the whole diatribe.
B The other main participant
C
I will identify myself as B. Further, to clarify things said later in the discussion, B and C both were born into a 'minority' group (Christian to be specific). I leave it up to A and C to identify themselves, if they are aware of this blog and choose to do so.
Now I have not been blogging much in the past, but this is one issue that I feel a bit strongly about. I would really like to hear from people on some specific issues mentioned in the discussion - 'Indianness', & minority-majority community relations in India, and whether you agree with A or B or have your own take on the issue. Of course, you are free to talk about other things mentioned, or whatever else you can find relevant. I think Blogger allows anonymous comments.
:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-
Hindus, but not Muslims, end Kashmir protests - International Herald Tribune
Source: www.iht.com
Hindus, but not Muslims, end Kashmir protests
Report Item
A at 2:25am Sep 1
A at 2:25am Sep 1
Only in India does the majority always make compromises for the minorities in a democratic way.
B at 9:51am Sep 1
Always? So what is it that goes on in Orissa now?
A at 1:15pm Sep 1
Orissa huh? Tell me, had they killed a prominent leader for investigating illegal activity like this in another country what would happened? Certainly, a few buildings wouldn't have been burned by mobs with the leaders telling people to calm down, rather the leaders would have assigned armies and taken down the places with bombs. The US took out a whole country with war for taking out two buildings in a 9/11 incident. Perhaps, India should do the same then as otherwise some terrorists don't seem to understand, for these minorities have killed Indian leaders and ruled India for many years, simply due to the fact that Indian majority has consistently be trying to maintain peace.
A at 1:15pm Sep 1
If the minorities cannot adjust to the majority they should feel free to leave because democracy isn't about minorities making the decisions. The issue was not instigated by burning of buildings, it was instigated by a brutal killing of the Swami who demanded a high level probe into illegal beef trading in Kandhamal. You are not proposing that the majority leaders should be killed, and the majority should sit and watch them all get killed and be ruled by the minority again like it has been for hundreds of years in the past are you?
B at 1:55pm Sep 1
1. No reason to get all passionate about something where you don't know all the details. Given the scant and partisan reports we have access to from Orissa, imho it would be best to refrain from finger-pointing before a governmental inquiry into the matter.
2. And why drag in religion, community etc at all here? There are no signs that what we have here are the signs of some grand conspiracy aimed at decapitating the majority leadership., so that they can '.. be ruled by the minority again..'. Fear mongering of that sort is entirely unjustified. More likely someone acted out some grudge against the orphanage's proprietors, using the controversy around the Swami's death to their advantage. Something that happens regrettably on a routine basis allover in India.
2. And why drag in religion, community etc at all here? There are no signs that what we have here are the signs of some grand conspiracy aimed at decapitating the majority leadership., so that they can '.. be ruled by the minority again..'. Fear mongering of that sort is entirely unjustified. More likely someone acted out some grudge against the orphanage's proprietors, using the controversy around the Swami's death to their advantage. Something that happens regrettably on a routine basis allover in India.
B at 1:56pm Sep 1
In almost any other country, tensions would remain local, limited to the directly concerned parties. Things wouldn't snowball into existential conflict between the communities at large.
3. 'If the minorities cannot adjust to the majority they should feel free to leave...' Really? Where to? You seem to be confusing Indian-ness with belonging to some majority community, which is a fairly stupid and indefensible position to take.
4. Democracy isn't about minority communities being told what to do by the majority community. It is about reaching a compromise that is equally acceptable (or disliked) by all affected parties.
4. You missed the point I was trying to make to begin with. No community as a whole can be absolved of blame in toto, as members can always be found who abuse their status of affiliation to suit their own purposes. In the end, a Hindu majority mob is no better than a Christian or Muslim majority mob - they destroy and kill just the same.
3. 'If the minorities cannot adjust to the majority they should feel free to leave...' Really? Where to? You seem to be confusing Indian-ness with belonging to some majority community, which is a fairly stupid and indefensible position to take.
4. Democracy isn't about minority communities being told what to do by the majority community. It is about reaching a compromise that is equally acceptable (or disliked) by all affected parties.
4. You missed the point I was trying to make to begin with. No community as a whole can be absolved of blame in toto, as members can always be found who abuse their status of affiliation to suit their own purposes. In the end, a Hindu majority mob is no better than a Christian or Muslim majority mob - they destroy and kill just the same.
A at 1:57pm Sep 1
Well, you are right about that man, sadly :(
A at 1:58pm Sep 1
Believe me I don't agree with any of what these people are doing, am all for peace and prosperity, and peaceful cohabitance...
A at 2:08pm Sep 1
No I really didn't mean any hateful stuff towards you or any community as a whole, the article was posted as taking pride in the fact that the Hindu community ended the protest, not as a hate article toward another, you do believe that Kashmir belongs to India don't you?
B at 2:15pm Sep 1
I think Kashmir belongs to the Kashmiris. And I think it would be best for them if they are a part of India. A separate nation is simply not tenable in the existing situation there - it would become a puppet-state at best.
I would be happy if everyone can settle on the LoC as the permanent boundary between Pakistan and India. This constant conflict over some symbolic issues of ownership/nationhood is simply not worth the price in human lives and livelihoods.
I would be happy if everyone can settle on the LoC as the permanent boundary between Pakistan and India. This constant conflict over some symbolic issues of ownership/nationhood is simply not worth the price in human lives and livelihoods.
A at 2:16pm Sep 1
I recognize the fact that there are differences between people and there are often conflicts of interest, and never do I think physical fighting is the way to resolve it, but in this world it does happen. Instead of blaming the parties which are fighting, I believe in providing credit to the party which brings the fight to an end, because I believe that is the path to peace.
A at 2:20pm Sep 1
On the Kashmir issue, I don't think it is so simple, because some people are bound by nature to always create and maintain conflict, one way or another. Even if you settle this issue by making the LoC a permanent boundary, it won't necessarily keep some people from trying to again move the boundary further into India or breaking it into more pieces. What is now Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, was all once India.
A at 2:25pm Sep 1
Really C? So, what is a Hindu? What is Hindustan? As far as I know Indians were known as Hindus because there is a Indus/Hindu/Sindhu river that flows through current Pakistan and the people of India were called Hindus. Kashmir was the land of Kashmiri Pandits who over time have been mass murdered, so I don't know what you even mean by it belongs to India and not Hindus. Really who are Hindus if not Indians? Certainly, people from any other land outside India were not Hindus.
B 2:28pm Sep 1
Quibbling over who gets credit for stopping after the damage is done is pointless. The 'majority' community which you claim initiated the path to peace most likely stopped for entirely pragmatic reasons (like being outnumbered, or for economic reasons), so I don't agree with ascribing virtue to the overall community of which they claim membership. On the ground, it is the people who build bridges, and usually for entirely practical reasons.
Enough. You need to get back to rethinking some things, and I have to get back to work.
Enough. You need to get back to rethinking some things, and I have to get back to work.
A at 2:32pm Sep 1
It is not pointless to give credit to the person making the peace, and if you think it is pointless, maybe then it is okay to show it by power instead, because then you are simply failing to appreciate the fact that one side is constantly striving to achieve peace and then there will be no peace.
A at 2:59pm Sep 1
Also, C tell me why is it that Kashmir belongs to India but not Hindus, when all the Gods Hindus pray to are from India while you call yourself Indian and we let you, while the God you pray to is not from India? God is one and the same right? So, why is it that your one God was born in some foreign land? What kind of Indian are you there? Perhaps you should also call yourself an Indian but salute to the flag of some other nation instead?
:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-
:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-
posted by life is like that only.... @ 3:35 AM
4 Comments:
Ok, I was wrong - no anonymous comments are allowed.
Really can't think of a way around that, but perhaps that wouldn't deter readers?
Anonymous comments must be enabled by you. See settings in your Blogger dashboard.
And what the hell do you want me to comment about! The topics jump all over the place from J&K to Orissa to 9/11 and what not!!
My two cents -
1. The IHT article just mentioned facts. Two weeks earlier, it might have said the opposite when the valley was peaceful and Hindus were protesting. Now the Shrine board has access to the land and they have stopped the protests. Wouldn't hav been the case otherwise, would it?
2. The Orissa story has too many conspiracy angles to it. But then, almost always, even in the Amarnath issue, there is a political angle involved. Be it 'Hindutva' or 'minority appeasement', its just ensuring you can get on the assembly/parliament seats. Sad.
3. I am not surprised that there exist people who think India is for the Hindus and everyone else can 'go out if they dont like it'. How else do some parties get votes! What am surprised is that you are friends with such people! :-P
Personally, I think religion does more harm to the world at large than any good.
4. It takes all kinds to make the world. Unfortunately. So you will have religious fanatics, parochialists, racists .... u get the idea. But I still believe that this is a small fraction of the world and have some residual faith in humanity.
I was just quite disappointed that I had such among my friends...I wanted to know if such views were more common.
And I only asked for comments on the minority-majority issue :)
aah well .... guess i ramble on for quite a bit once i start! ;-)
Post a Comment
<< Home