News Indians Are Worse Off Under Modi

[Shajida Khan]

I mildly disagree with your line of analysis. His conclusions are dreadfully wrong, but what is more regrettable is that his premises are worse. He goes from mistake and prejudiced, jaundiced misunderstanding to horrible conclusions.

Just one small clarification. When I say India, I mean modern India. There is a hell lot of history behind any nation, however for India, our history as a modern and present day republic democratic nation begins only in 1947. Which is what I use as a reference point.

 

[randomradio]

Greeks had religion similar to Hinduism. While Islamic invaders had a monotheistic religion. Monotheistic religions have more unity and can exploit the divisions in Hinduism like caste and class.

It's the exact opposite.

Monotheistic religions are an international failure. And Abrahamic religions are the worst in terms of religious bigotry.

And the infighting in Islam in particular is legendary.

 

[bonobashi]

Just one small clarification. When I say India, I mean modern India. There is a hell lot of history behind any nation, however for India, our history as a modern and present day republic democratic nation begins only in 1947. Which is what I use as a reference point.

I got that, and agree with it. My complaint was about the atrocious quality of the other post.

A fundamental issue with the definition of India that you have used is that it is the only useful one to define India: a land whose citizens have decided voluntarily to live together as a nation. Other 'justifications', whether based on history, or proto-history, or pre-history, or simply fable, are puerile; they do not deserve attention or time.

Ironically, it is the same justification for the newly-coined state of Pakistan.

 

[STEPHEN COHEN]

Other 'justifications', whether based on history, or proto-history, or pre-history, or simply fable, are puerile; they do not deserve attention or time.

India as a LAND did not Begin in 1947

As a Leftist You are Not Interested in India's History But there are Hundreds of Millions of HINDUS who are interested and are proud of the Good and Positive Periods AND
would always REMEMBER the bad Periods

As they say " Those who forget their History are DOOMED to Repeat It "

You Leftists always had and still HAVE a problem with India's History

 

[Shajida Khan]

I got that, and agree with it. My complaint was about the atrocious quality of the other post.

A fundamental issue with the definition of India that you have used is that it is the only useful one to define India: a land whose citizens have decided voluntarily to live together as a nation. Other 'justifications', whether based on history, or proto-history, or pre-history, or simply fable, are puerile; they do not deserve attention or time.

Ironically, it is the same justification for the newly-coined state of Pakistan.

Well, for the purpose of refuting a pure religious identity as that was being put forward in that post this much is apt. India and Indian is not and cannot be a simple single dimensional definition. Its a damn complicated and convoluted country with a diversity that can give EU + US a run for its money.

As far as Pakistan goes, we are way too similar to them, more than what most of us will be comfortable in agreeing. Pakistani society, for better or for worse, is a muslim India -- give or take few decades.

 

[Aravind]

Yes I have a plan, but it might need some polish.

Foreign policy of a country is actually the attitude and behavior of its majority population. (In this case it is us Hindus) (We Hindus as a society will have to learn to be more mature) (We can't go back in time, we have to look forward)

Pakistan's majority religion is Islam, which has a monotheistic nature. While our religion Hinduism has predominant polytheistic nature. Majority of the world religions have monotheistic nature.

In Hinduism, the Vedas have lots of Monotheistic aspect.

Verily He is one
Single, indivisible, supreme reality.
- Atharva Veda 13/4/20

He is the sole sovereign
Of the universe.
- Rig Veda 6/36/4

God has no image.
- Yajur Veda 32/3

If Hindu society is given incentive to gravitate towards higher forms of worship, Then Hindu society is actually giving positive incentive(enticement) to others(monotheistic cultures, which exhibit a genuine aversion to polytheistic nature), then people of other monotheistic religion will slowly gravitate towards us Hindus(return). This is just like chosing to dress smartly for work, making yourself more likable. The puritanical sects like Salafis will have less reason to complain, and their space will get marginalized, they gain strength by spooking Muslims about us Hindus. They play a role similar to VHP.

Pakistan is fixated on Kashmir, because of religious reasons and river water that originates in Kashmir. Pakistan's majority population and culture is Punjabi, which is agrarian, which holds majority sway over its foreign policy. Pakistan is facing acute water scarcity.

We will have to give some incentives to Pakistan(investment), loosen our hold on Kashmir a little()... joint administration. On the condition that it will stop all its subversive activities. Pakistan will open up more towards us, Markets access for investment. (Return)(As a larger country we will have to be more mature and endure a little) Once we capture their markets, and give access to our own markets, its economy will become more dependent on Indian economy. (Be more generous than China). We are actually loosening our hold on Kashmir a little, to entice whole of Pakistan towards India. Be more generous in water sharing agreements, invest in irrigation projects in Pakistan, teach them drip water irrigation, a huge positive incentive to agrarian Punjabi population. We will get access to Land route to Central Asia, and Iranian Oil and Gas. We can utilize Paskitan to catalyze our growth.

Once Pakistan gets more strategic space, there is a high probability that its relationship with China will start loosening...

This had not worked for 70 years. Earlier after Partition people would shuttle normally across borders in 50's It was only after wars it came to a end. If it didnt happen then, when there was amicable people, leaders on both sides of border who knew each other, then there is no way this will happen now, as this generation doesn't feel Nostalgic or harbor any dreams of going back past 1947.


What you are asking us is to give up Kashmir, which is a vital strategic point of India in defence, River flow, glaciers etc. What makes you think Pakistan will stop at just Kashmir?
Don't forget the Ghazwa-E-Hind and the Islamic rule Pakistan dreams of over India.

China didn't give up any land to get over Tibetians,Uighurs, nor did it give any Land to Pakistan to win it over.
No country gives up its land to win over a hostile neighbor unless it was a total surrender in war.
Get down from clouds back to earth.

 

[Aravind]

Here is the problem with this narrative. When India became a modern country in 1947-52, it declared that it is a country in which government will not favor any religion or interfere in any religious activity unless it is against public good. Heck, even in early 1949 drafts of constitution, there is no mention of India being a Hindu nation. Further in 65s or so Indra Gandhi inserted secular socialist into the pre-emble of the constitution.

Now when you harp about Hindu Rashtra, you are doing bait and switch with about 15-20% of your population including Muslims, Skikhs, Christians, Parsees etc. You enticed them with religiously neutral and later secular nation and then you switched it with a Hindu national identity. That is unjust and deceiving.

I think India's relationship with Hinduism is much similar to US relationship with Christianity. Its the religion of majority, it has molded their lingual, cultural and social identity but it is not the law of the land or part of national symbol or national attribute or national identity for that matter. I mean even, as a Sikh or Muslim or Christian, an Indian's language, social outlook, culture, food habits etc are way too close to his or her Hindu counterpart than say a Christian Irish guy/gal or a Muslim Saudi person. This IMHO is what an Indian is. Common identity outside of faith. And this identity is majorly molded by Hindu religion/thought; which is what Hinduism is to Hindustan.

We did no enticement to win or ask people to stay over.
It was clear in Partition as per British, India for Hindus, Pakistan for Muslims. We didn't stop Muslims from going over to Pakistan.They stayed back after killing 1 million people for creation of a Islamic Nation. Was it our fault ?
Now you ask us to give up our identity, religion,culture, way of life to appease people who stayed back? for what? What do 'we' get out of all this drama? Nothing , while you get Appeasement, Quotas, riots, to destroy our way of life., encroach our Holy places, stop us from building temples in our holiest land to appease people who didn't want to live with Kafir Hindus, Love Jihad and what not?

Even B.R. Ambedkar wanted total Migration.

Why should Hindus be Secular, but Muslims can ask for Islamic Pakistan? what do we get out of being Secular, we are taken advantage of by every Minority.
The laws,symbols are all Hindu even in Constitution and The Dharma chakra in Indian flag is a Hindu Symbol.
The Constitution makers wanted Ram Rajya not Secular American Raj.
This Secular facade will bring Hindus no good but our death and misery, while others mock and take away our way of life.
This Secular idea some got in their heads is going to be redundant soon. External and Internal factors are favorable for it.
Bharat will eventually reclaim its Soul, Hindu Rasthra is its soul. You cannot stop the rise of it.

'Just list out the benefits Hindus will get by being Secular?'

 

[Shajida Khan]

We did no enticement to win or ask people to stay over.
It was clear in Partition as per British, India for Hindus, Pakistan for Muslims. We didn't stop Muslims from going over to Pakistan.They stayed back after killing 1 million people for creation of a Islamic Nation. Was it our fault ?
Now you ask us to give up our identity, religion,culture, way of life to appease people who stayed back? for what? What do 'we' get out of all this drama? Nothing , while you get Appeasement, Quotas, riots, to destroy our way of life., encroach our Holy places, stop us from building temples in our holiest land to appease people who didn't want to live with Kafir Hindus, Love Jihad and what not?

Even B.R. Ambedkar wanted total Migration.

Why should Hindus be Secular, but Muslims can ask for Islamic Pakistan? what do we get out of being Secular, we are taken advantage of by every Minority.
The laws,symbols are all Hindu even in Constitution and The Dharma chakra in Indian flag is a Hindu Symbol.
The Constitution makers wanted Ram Rajya not Secular American Raj.
This Secular facade will bring Hindus no good but our death and misery, while others mock and take away our way of life.
This Secular idea some got in their heads is going to be redundant soon. External and Internal factors are favorable for it.
Bharat will eventually reclaim its Soul, Hindu Rasthra is its soul. You cannot stop the rise of it.

'Just list out the benefits Hindus will get by being Secular?'

There is just one simple question I would ask you, after British if Indians wanted to become a Hindu-religion defined nation; why didn't our constitution called that out in 1949. Instead it called just the opposite. Also, why then successive Indian governments did the exact opposite -- adding 'secular' in Indian constitution preamble.

BTW here are relevant portions of 1949 era laws :

Article 25 in The Constitution Of India 1949

Article 25 in The Constitution Of India 1949
25. Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion

Article 26 in The Constitution Of India 1949

Article 26 in The Constitution Of India 1949
26. Freedom to manage religious affairs Subject to public order, morality and health, every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right
(a) to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes;
(b) to manage its own affairs in matters of religion;
(c) to own and acquire movable and immovable property; and
(d) to administer such property in accordance with law

Article 27 in The Constitution Of India 1949

Article 27 in The Constitution Of India 1949
27. Freedom as to payment of taxes for promotion of any particular religion No person shall be compelled to pay any taxes, the proceeds of which are specifically appropriated in payment of expenses for the promotion or maintenance of any particular religion or religions denomination

It is amply clear. India as a republic chose religious freedom in its very inception and later upgraded it to secularism.

And its not just Muslims. India also has Sikhs, Christians and Buddhists and Parsi as well. What about them? Did they get their own country?

As for benefits to Hindus, the biggest benefit is that it keeps India one country. Otherwise, there will be a Khalistan -- which is often clamoured, a Buddhist nation and a Christian nation.

Also lets look at the biggest industries started in India.

Tata : The very quintessential Indian company which provided India with almost everything it needed from Salt to Iron & Steel and almost anything and everything in between. Who started it? A Parsi! NOT a Hindu. BTW the biggest working group in this company will be Hindus, the majority of India for simply they have the greatest number. If you remove this one major conglomerate, India's GDP will almost fall by 20% atleast.

Wipro : Another mass employer to modern India and since 1990s. Who is the founder? A Shia Muslim. Remember, its companies like Infosys and TCS and Wipro that laid the foundation of IT revolution in India.

Godrej? Bajaj? Who started it? Hindus? It was Parsis!

Who own the largests number of businesses in Delhi? Sikhs and Punjabis!

Which state is called bread-basket of India? Punjab! And which religious group is the biggest contributor to the massive green revolution which feeds the nation till date? Sikhs!

Who was responsible for India's nuclear programme? Homi Jahangeer Bhabha! A Parsi! Again!

Point here is simple! Religious minorities --especially Parsis-- have been disproportional in contributing to the nation. If this is not the benefit enough, then devil knows what benefit you are seeking.

BTW it happens on the other side of the border as well. Ahmediyya who have produced nobel laurate and responsible for their nuclear program are derided and called un-islamic and un-patriotic. I find it really amusing how stupid people of our subcontinent can get!

In conclusion if any moron wants to raise a pure-Hindu-Nation theory, then they should be ready to forgo Tata and the progress done by Parsi scientists, employment provided by like of Wipro, Food provided by Sikhs and Punjab etc. Sure you can do it, but it will put Hindu-India back by about 40-50 years. India didn't turn out to be a Hindu-Pakistan and thats a good thing.

 

[Aravind]

There is just one simple question I would ask you, after British if Indians wanted to become a Hindu-religion defined nation; why didn't our constitution called that out in 1949. Instead it called just the opposite. Also, why then successive Indian governments did the exact opposite -- adding 'secular' in Indian constitution preamble.

BTW here are relevant portions of 1949 era laws :

Article 25 in The Constitution Of India 1949


Article 26 in The Constitution Of India 1949


Article 27 in The Constitution Of India 1949


It is amply clear. India as a republic chose religious freedom in its very inception and later upgraded it to secularism.

And its not just Muslims. India also has Sikhs, Christians and Buddhists and Parsi as well. What about them? Did they get their own country?

As for benefits to Hindus, the biggest benefit is that it keeps India one country. Otherwise, there will be a Khalistan -- which is often clamoured, a Buddhist nation and a Christian nation.

Also lets look at the biggest industries started in India.

Tata : The very quintessential Indian company which provided India with almost everything it needed from Salt to Iron & Steel and almost anything and everything in between. Who started it? A Parsi! NOT a Hindu. BTW the biggest working group in this company will be Hindus, the majority of India for simply they have the greatest number. If you remove this one major conglomerate, India's GDP will almost fall by 20% atleast.

Wipro : Another mass employer to modern India and since 1990s. Who is the founder? A Shia Muslim. Remember, its companies like Infosys and TCS and Wipro that laid the foundation of IT revolution in India.

Godrej? Bajaj? Who started it? Hindus? It was Parsis!

Who own the largests number of businesses in Delhi? Sikhs and Punjabis!

Which state is called bread-basket of India? Punjab! And which religious group is the biggest contributor to the massive green revolution which feeds the nation till date? Sikhs!

Who was responsible for India's nuclear programme? Homi Jahangeer Bhabha! A Parsi! Again!

Point here is simple! Religious minorities --especially Parsis-- have been disproportional in contributing to the nation. If this is not the benefit enough, then devil knows what benefit you are seeking.

BTW it happens on the other side of the border as well. Ahmediyya who have produced nobel laurate and responsible for their nuclear program are derided and called un-islamic and un-patriotic. I find it really amusing how stupid people of our subcontinent can get!

In conclusion if any moron wants to raise a pure-Hindu-Nation theory, then they should be ready to forgo Tata and the progress done by Parsi scientists, employment provided by like of Wipro, Food provided by Sikhs and Punjab etc. Sure you can do it, but it will put Hindu-India back by about 40-50 years. India didn't turn out to be a Hindu-Pakistan and thats a good thing.

There was no mention of Secularism in Preamble firstly.
Hindus didnt have a say in the constitution hijacked by Gandhi and Nehru ( self hindu haters)

It was sikhs who were most killed during Partition , you think they wanted to live in Pakistan? Where will Buddhists go? this is the land of Buddha all Dharmic religions are welcome.

Oh so you think 2% Christians will get a new nation this christian demand started after 1947 when under name of Secularism Missionaries started Converting N=E.
Khalistan was pet idea of Indira Gandhis protege and it died.
Look at the situation all Dharmics have in Pakistan. Ahmediyyas etc. who cares all these lot fought for Pakistan let them settle their issues,not our problem.

Hindus would have managed well without these mix, we been doing well for 5000+ years. Dont tell us we cant do it. We were leading before your lot appeared 1000 years ago.
I know you would come to TATA, BATA ETC.
It was we who gave these Parsis refuge or there would be no Parsis left in world.
Besides, TATA's are who they are because we let them develop and let them sell products to us, it is not exactly a favor.
Tell TATA To uproot its company and settle in IRAN, if they can. We would go without a hitch.
Wipro? Same goes for him too, let Azim premji take out his company.We will do fine.
Your minorities are rich because of us, not the other way around.
Ever seen a Hindu Billionaire in Pakistan? You will get your answer.

LoL, was Homi bhaba the only Nuke scientist, rest all Hindus were idiots? who couldnt come up with nukes, LOL
Even North Korea managed well without such Parsi scientists, Any country will to do it will come up with technology themselves.
In our timeline of inventions you are a blip. 40-50 years LOL, do it first and tell us how backward we will become. I am sure you won't be missed at all.

Whatever your Minorities are it is due to our good will,not because you did us a favor or Country runs due to Minorities.
I am sure many Hindus can replace them .You come to our country as refugees and you now teach us morals? on our way of life, religion,culture, drive us out of our own land like Kashmiri Hindus, kerala, West bengal.
We dont need such headaches for future. Take them and go, Pakistan was created for these Minorities wasn't it?

Now tell me again 'What are the benefits Hindus will get by being Secular'?
Don't tell me country will be united, We were a country even before your Nation states idea came to fore. Maybe some blood will flow, but the country will stay.

 

[smestarz]

HINDUISM itself terms secularism Else we would not have worked and lived together with so many different religions
When the Parsees came to india were there any riots? Rather they were welcomed and accepted part of our society.
And here we are looking at religion of peace. Parsees were not submissive to say, but they maintained an excellent ideal. They practiced their religion privately, built their fire temple, celebrated their festivals. The respected the other religions (Hinduism) and were respected in return,
The Parsees did not come to india to expand their religion but to preserve it, How many parsees in Pakistan?

Hinduism adjusts to other religions so that they can co-exist with harmony, but when other religions try to provoke us by doing something contrary to our beliefs we are supposed to keep quiet in name of Secularism???

Hindusm is secularism, and to ask more of it is stupidity, rather the previous congress govts have been asking the majority to be silent and submissive and nothing can be worse than statement of the puppet MMS when he said ".. the muslims have first right on our national resources ..." Honestly I have no clue where MMS got it out from, surely his mouth was not moving ..

We did no enticement to win or ask people to stay over.
It was clear in Partition as per British, India for Hindus, Pakistan for Muslims. We didn't stop Muslims from going over to Pakistan.They stayed back after killing 1 million people for creation of a Islamic Nation. Was it our fault ?
Now you ask us to give up our identity, religion,culture, way of life to appease people who stayed back? for what? What do 'we' get out of all this drama? Nothing , while you get Appeasement, Quotas, riots, to destroy our way of life., encroach our Holy places, stop us from building temples in our holiest land to appease people who didn't want to live with Kafir Hindus, Love Jihad and what not?

Even B.R. Ambedkar wanted total Migration.

Why should Hindus be Secular, but Muslims can ask for Islamic Pakistan? what do we get out of being Secular, we are taken advantage of by every Minority.
The laws,symbols are all Hindu even in Constitution and The Dharma chakra in Indian flag is a Hindu Symbol.
The Constitution makers wanted Ram Rajya not Secular American Raj.
This Secular facade will bring Hindus no good but our death and misery, while others mock and take away our way of life.
This Secular idea some got in their heads is going to be redundant soon. External and Internal factors are favorable for it.
Bharat will eventually reclaim its Soul, Hindu Rasthra is its soul. You cannot stop the rise of it.

'Just list out the benefits Hindus will get by being Secular?'

 

[Shajida Khan]

HINDUISM itself terms secularism Else we would not have worked and lived together with so many different religions
When the Parsees came to india were there any riots? Rather they were welcomed and accepted part of our society.
And here we are looking at religion of peace. Parsees were not submissive to say, but they maintained an excellent ideal. They practiced their religion privately, built their fire temple, celebrated their festivals. The respected the other religions (Hinduism) and were respected in return,
The Parsees did not come to india to expand their religion but to preserve it, How many parsees in Pakistan?

Hinduism adjusts to other religions so that they can co-exist with harmony, but when other religions try to provoke us by doing something contrary to our beliefs we are supposed to keep quiet in name of Secularism???

Hindusm is secularism, and to ask more of it is stupidity, rather the previous congress govts have been asking the majority to be silent and submissive and nothing can be worse than statement of the puppet MMS when he said ".. the muslims have first right on our national resources ..." Honestly I have no clue where MMS got it out from, surely his mouth was not moving ..

I have a better idea, separate policy from Religion as much as possible. Make the country secular in true sense. Secular really means giving no shit to religion. Apparently it is taught wrong to us. It is taught something like respecting all religions. Constitution and state laws roughly try to tip-toe to all religions, obviously it creates situations which are messed up. It should not pay any respect to any religion at all! So demand for that! No policy can be religiously motivated. Yes, that should include personal law as well. Religion is a personal thing, let it be there only.

 

[Shajida Khan]

There was no mention of Secularism in Preamble firstly.
Hindus didnt have a say in the constitution hijacked by Gandhi and Nehru ( self hindu haters)

It was sikhs who were most killed during Partition , you think they wanted to live in Pakistan? Where will Buddhists go? this is the land of Buddha all Dharmic religions are welcome.

Oh so you think 2% Christians will get a new nation this christian demand started after 1947 when under name of Secularism Missionaries started Converting N=E.
Khalistan was pet idea of Indira Gandhis protege and it died.
Look at the situation all Dharmics have in Pakistan. Ahmediyyas etc. who cares all these lot fought for Pakistan let them settle their issues,not our problem.

Hindus would have managed well without these mix, we been doing well for 5000+ years. Dont tell us we cant do it. We were leading before your lot appeared 1000 years ago.
I know you would come to TATA, BATA ETC.
It was we who gave these Parsis refuge or there would be no Parsis left in world.
Besides, TATA's are who they are because we let them develop and let them sell products to us, it is not exactly a favor.
Tell TATA To uproot its company and settle in IRAN, if they can. We would go without a hitch.
Wipro? Same goes for him too, let Azim premji take out his company.We will do fine.
Your minorities are rich because of us, not the other way around.
Ever seen a Hindu Billionaire in Pakistan? You will get your answer.

LoL, was Homi bhaba the only Nuke scientist, rest all Hindus were idiots? who couldnt come up with nukes, LOL
Even North Korea managed well without such Parsi scientists, Any country will to do it will come up with technology themselves.
In our timeline of inventions you are a blip. 40-50 years LOL, do it first and tell us how backward we will become. I am sure you won't be missed at all.

Whatever your Minorities are it is due to our good will,not because you did us a favor or Country runs due to Minorities.
I am sure many Hindus can replace them .You come to our country as refugees and you now teach us morals? on our way of life, religion,culture, drive us out of our own land like Kashmiri Hindus, kerala, West bengal.
We dont need such headaches for future. Take them and go, Pakistan was created for these Minorities wasn't it?

Now tell me again 'What are the benefits Hindus will get by being Secular'?
Don't tell me country will be united, We were a country even before your Nation states idea came to fore. Maybe some blood will flow, but the country will stay.

You are the poster child of believing in belief. Your issue here is that you not only believe that minorities have not contributed much to India and have no benefit to offer to Hindu majority. It is actually belief in belief. It is much similar to how people believe in superstition even though you show them it is incorrect. Such thinking is impervious to all facts, because it does not need any facts. Its merely something you hold close to your heart mostly for no reasons.

 

[bonobashi]

You are the poster child of believing in belief. Your issue here is that you not only believe that minorities have not contributed much to India and have no benefit to offer to Hindu majority. It is actually belief in belief. It is much similar to how people believe in superstition even though you show them it is incorrect. Such thinking is impervious to all facts, because it does not need any facts. Its merely something you hold close to your heart mostly for no reasons.

<Ahem!>

Why use a paragraph with five sentences when a single word would do?

prejudice

ˈprɛdʒʊdɪs/

noun

1. 1.
   preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience.
   "English prejudice against foreigners"synonymsreconceived idea, preconception, preconceived notion;
   prejudgement
   "male prejudices about women"

 

[Shajida Khan]

<Ahem!>

Why use a paragraph with five sentences when a single word would do?

prejudice

ˈprɛdʒʊdɪs/

noun

1. 1.
   preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience.
   "English prejudice against foreigners"synonymsreconceived idea, preconception, preconceived notion;
   prejudgement
   "male prejudices about women"

I am not sure if that single word can carry that idea correctly. For all you know it can just be taken as calling names or a derogatory comment while losing its real meaning. Once you think someone is abusing you, you stop bothering what they are saying.

 

[bonobashi]

I am not sure if that single word can carry that idea correctly. For all you know it can just be taken as calling names or a derogatory comment while losing its real meaning. Once you think someone is abusing you, you stop bothering what they are saying.

that's the difference between your patience and my impatience.

 

[smestarz]

It would be difficult since for past 7 decades votebank politics have ensured that religion and castes are cultivated as votebanks
BSP : Dalits,
AIMIM : Muslims
Republican party: dalits

These are parties based on religion or caste base, and hence difficult to take them out, the moment its as you say, these parties become extinct,
and in order to make it a law, it has to pass the parliment, Most parties will oppose it.

No matter how you do it, it wont be easy, First step might be to take out religion or caste from birth certificate and school certificate. But also some communities have a unique name so there will always be something to distinguish.

Naming withs with nos like they have in STAR WARS might be interesting...

People should celebrate their religion but privately, I am opposed to people digging road and putting the Stage in middle of road, its inconvenience to everyone.

I have a better idea, separate policy from Religion as much as possible. Make the country secular in true sense. Secular really means giving no shit to religion. Apparently it is taught wrong to us. It is taught something like respecting all religions. Constitution and state laws roughly try to tip-toe to all religions, obviously it creates situations which are messed up. It should not pay any respect to any religion at all! So demand for that! No policy can be religiously motivated. Yes, that should include personal law as well. Religion is a personal thing, let it be there only.

 

[smestarz]

You can add more, Shapoorji Pallonji, Bombay Dyeing,

BTW, Bajaj is not Parsi company but Marwari, Jamnalal Bajaj was the founder, Birlas are Marwaris too .

There is just one simple question I would ask you, after British if Indians wanted to become a Hindu-religion defined nation; why didn't our constitution called that out in 1949. Instead it called just the opposite. Also, why then successive Indian governments did the exact opposite -- adding 'secular' in Indian constitution preamble.

BTW here are relevant portions of 1949 era laws :

Article 25 in The Constitution Of India 1949


Article 26 in The Constitution Of India 1949


Article 27 in The Constitution Of India 1949


It is amply clear. India as a republic chose religious freedom in its very inception and later upgraded it to secularism.

And its not just Muslims. India also has Sikhs, Christians and Buddhists and Parsi as well. What about them? Did they get their own country?

As for benefits to Hindus, the biggest benefit is that it keeps India one country. Otherwise, there will be a Khalistan -- which is often clamoured, a Buddhist nation and a Christian nation.

Also lets look at the biggest industries started in India.

Tata : The very quintessential Indian company which provided India with almost everything it needed from Salt to Iron & Steel and almost anything and everything in between. Who started it? A Parsi! NOT a Hindu. BTW the biggest working group in this company will be Hindus, the majority of India for simply they have the greatest number. If you remove this one major conglomerate, India's GDP will almost fall by 20% atleast.

Wipro : Another mass employer to modern India and since 1990s. Who is the founder? A Shia Muslim. Remember, its companies like Infosys and TCS and Wipro that laid the foundation of IT revolution in India.

Godrej? Bajaj? Who started it? Hindus? It was Parsis!

Who own the largests number of businesses in Delhi? Sikhs and Punjabis!

Which state is called bread-basket of India? Punjab! And which religious group is the biggest contributor to the massive green revolution which feeds the nation till date? Sikhs!

Who was responsible for India's nuclear programme? Homi Jahangeer Bhabha! A Parsi! Again!

Point here is simple! Religious minorities --especially Parsis-- have been disproportional in contributing to the nation. If this is not the benefit enough, then devil knows what benefit you are seeking.

BTW it happens on the other side of the border as well. Ahmediyya who have produced nobel laurate and responsible for their nuclear program are derided and called un-islamic and un-patriotic. I find it really amusing how stupid people of our subcontinent can get!

In conclusion if any moron wants to raise a pure-Hindu-Nation theory, then they should be ready to forgo Tata and the progress done by Parsi scientists, employment provided by like of Wipro, Food provided by Sikhs and Punjab etc. Sure you can do it, but it will put Hindu-India back by about 40-50 years. India didn't turn out to be a Hindu-Pakistan and thats a good thing.

 

[bonobashi]

And thats the difference between normal person @Shajida Khan and a commie,, like you

No personal abuse, please.

 

[_Anonymous_]

No personal abuse, please.

Since when is calling someone a commie an abuse? You can come clean by declaring your political allegiance and affiliations , aside from your political objectives .

 

[smestarz]

Now you say that Commie is a bad word? Imagine those jokers being part of the govt for 10 years !!!

No personal abuse, please.