Sydney by owner

Are you seriously telling me that the BJP and the Shiv Sena do not have hindutva as a v significant part of their ideology? By your definition, is there any party for hindus in India?

They voted Shiv Sena into power because they felt that they were too weak to protect themselves and that only the Shiv Sena could protect them. Jogeshwari and the general lack of accountability for fundamentalist muslim actions had a big impact.

I understand that. People make such compromises in India: not much choice really. Its okay if someone tells me they felt threatened by muslim goons and took the help of the Shiv Sena/BJP to survive. I’d understand. Similarly muslims might form their own gangs: that’s life in India, kya kijiyega. But to claim victimhood all the the time gets a bit absurd, when things are overall no better for muslims than they are for hindus.

Ah … the hindu god Chatrapatti Shivaji. Funny, I seem to have forgotten my Chatrapatti Shivaji slokas. Oh, I remember then now .. I think it goes “Om … Thane express platfrom chaar par se nikalne wala hai, Harbour Line ki trains dus minute late hain”

Shiv Sena and BJP, and almost every party has non-religion related movements. They are not religious orgainizations. BJP started distancing itself from the RSS after getting power in the center and Shiv Sena’s is not focussed on protecting hinduism. It was founded to protect Maharastrian interests. The Shiv Sena have were thugs before after and during 1993. Everyone in bombay knew that in 1992/93. They voted Shiv Sena into power because they felt that they were too weak to protect themselves and that only the Shiv Sena could protect them. Jogeshwari and the general lack of accountability for fundamentalist muslim actions had a big impact.

Hinduism is being weakened? I don’t think hinduism has ever been so strong over the subcontinent. The hindutvawadis have literally gotten away with murder twice since 1990: the Shiv Sena in the 1993 riots, and the BJP in the Gujarat riots. They prove it again every Valentine’s day by beating up 18 year old kids. Shilpa Shetty still regrets a kiss, and M.F. Hussain dare not return to India. A poor techie recently spent 50 days in jail after being (wrongly) accused of posting obscence photos of Shivaji by them.

You are being too modest, Dizzydesi. But so charm it is, this mix of gundagardi and victimhood.

Kurma, have you lived in India? I dont think it just “some” hindus!

By the way does any one know if Christians get a subsidy to go to the Vatican?

Why this snarkiness? How is the idea of a vactican subsidy any less absurd than the Haj subsidy that is in place?

Kurma. this sense of victimization by the minorities that some Hindus have is simply ridiculous.

If I was being snarky, I could say with ‘this just shows your ignorance of basic Indian Law, Current events, documented political schemes, etc.’ or something like ‘this sense of hatred of that some Hindus have of people who recognize their religion is being systematically weakened is simply ridiculous’

Over the years some some decisions made on the basis on some bad assumptions and theories that had not been thought out through that have affected hinduism adversely. Since many of these assumptions continue to form the basis of public discourse in India it is difficult to see how hinduism.

The next chapter of Guha’s book that is up for discussion deals with the consitution of India. Instead of getting into a needless flamewar here on what is already a charged thread, why not have a less personal discussion there?

Fine, but they have the ballot AFTER THAT.

Kurma, i would be interested to know if you would apply this exact logic to the entire Muslim community , on account of the Muslims who have known to be involved in many communal riots in India even before Godhra happened. Or the killingas that happened during the Partition ?Or does this logic apply only to the Hindus ?

Well, what do you think? Of course, it doesn’t apply to only Hindus. What a stupid thing to ask!

Er Kurma… you dont really seem to understand what a democracy is. When people vote for a particular Government, they do not promise to support EVERY THING that the Govt does in their name. People make a choice that a particular party is more suitable to govern the country but this does not mean that they mortgage their freedom to have opinions to the Govt. It would nt be a democracy then.

I didn’t say they don’t have the freedom. In fact, I’m saying the opposite. They CAN stop the government (although with varying degrees of difficulty) if enough of them really want it. Therefore, the moves of a government are indicators of the will of the people (or their lack of concern). This “evil government” is often a bogeyman. You only really have your fellow citizens to blame.

Many people who voted for Bush in 04 are feeling terrible today for the choice they made back then. More than two thirds of the citizens in the US want the troops to be pulled out of Iraq. This is happening after they re-elected Bush ! Go figure !!

What is there to figure? That two thirds want the troops out NOW doesn’t mean they weren’t for sending the troops in in the first place. They were generally for it. I remember clearly, on 9-12-01, several callers on NPR, in California., asking to bomb them in the Middle East (there were some sane voices too). I can only imagine what it was like on some other radio channels in some other parts of the country. They re-elected Bush even after he did all that crap. Politicians beat the war drums only because they think their electorates want it or because their electorate lets them.

Anyways, this issue is separate from the Gujarat riots. I only put it there to say that in a democracy, the actions of a government, always reflects the will of the majority of the people (or at least their lack of willingness to put in the effort to stop it).

By the way does any one know if Christians get a subsidy to go to the Vatican?

This just shows your ignorance about other segments of Indian society.

Modi won the elections after wards not because the Hindu majority had suddenly turned into hating the Muslims – it won because people were angry that no body seemed to mention or care for the fact that innocent Hindu’s were killed inside a train but there was outright condemnation of the riots alone.

Yeah, right! Lack of condemnation was deemed more important than wholesale butchering. Good thing we had Modi to provide the necessary condemnation.

There’s much in your comment that I haven’t responded to. For most of it, all I have to say that this sense of victimization by the minorities that some Hindus have is simply ridiculous. Enough to drag around Mahmud of Ghazni to explain what’s going on today. Please open your eyes to the realities. Really, don’t you have something else to occupy you?

I’m sorry I didnt read right through your post – it seems way off topic , and triggered just by the name of Nirav Jain ( that I gave skep-on-earth@46 as an example ). I believe there is another thread on SM this could be moved to ?

To the bit towards the end that did address my post @ 48 :

The reason I mentioned other communities like the Jains and the Dantewada tribals ( and not Christians , Parsis , Jews ?! and Buddhists ?! ) is to clarify that the riots were not only Hindu vs. Muslim , but also just about anybody with an agenda / matter to settle . Though maybe I should qualify the Dantewada tribal reference by explaining that they were used more as foot-soldiers to carry out the actual killings ( like the Charras in the Tehelka expose ) – but it stands as an example of the involvement ( active or passive )of communities in the riots that one would not expect to have seen ( Hindu involvement is explained as a reaction to the train massacre – at least initially ) .

I will retract the Marwari reference – as the old saying goes , ‘One Marwari does not a Riot make’ .