Hindutva Idiocy and calling non Hindutva believers "psecs", "macaulites"
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 1:54 pm
Desi;175542It is a lame excuse that followers of Modi dish out. Hindutva is 80 years old and the activities have been there since then.
[/quote]
It's not a lame excuse if you read the entire paragraph or post instead of nit picking. Reproducing the key sentence from the original paragraphtejasvee;175520Thus Hindutva came into mainstream during 70's and 80's, culminating in propelling a party that supported that to power in late 90's. [/quote]
If Hindutva was well accepted by mainstream prior to 70's or 80's, how come Jan Sangh was not having 300 members in parliament in early days?
Hint: The word "secularism" (along with 'socialistic") was added to constitution of India from backdoor during the undemocratic emergency period by CON lady Indira Gandhi.
What is a truly lame excuse is when someone blames Hindutva as a cause of 'secular' IT (Islamic Terrorism) activities in India. :emthdown: India has always been a secular society because majority of population are Hindus and majority of that section of society are truly secular. It's not a rocket science, but a very simple reality of Indian society, well expressed by MJ Akbar.
================================pixelshrek;175682Misconstrued Hindutwa [/quote]
Should have been "Ignorant understanding of Hindutva"pixelshrek;175682 However term Hindu itself is nothing to do with religion but derived from Indus i.e.name for Sindhu river delta people named by Persian as Hindu where S from Sindhu pronounced as H and becomes Hindu. [/quote]
Then how come the same Persians don't say Hamosa for Samosa (Dish), Hikandar for Sikandar (Name), Hurma for Surma (Cosmetic), Hikaar for Shikaar (Prey), Hipahi for Sipahi (soldier) or Harod for Sarod (instrument)? Why did they nitpick only Hindu for Sindhu?pixelshrek;175682 No wonder after Moghuls invasion all these down trodden people became Muslims and their ranks grew. Before Moghul invasion there were no Muslim religion or people. [/quote]
Pure BS. :emsmilep: A quick read of whom Babar the grand daddy of Mughal empire fought during his war in 1526 will help. Islam was in Indian subcontinent for well over 6 centuries before Mughals.
Hint: Ibrahim Lodhi was not a Hindu Brahmin as far as I know. I don't know which history book you have read to display this unabashed ignorance.pixelshrek;175682 It was classic Vedic class system drove them out of Hindu fold. So blame lies with them. These Vedic Brahmins couldn’t protect people so Sikhs created their own religion of warriors. [/quote]
Hindu societies were divided based on occupation. Those in charge of wars or carrying arms in defense were not Brahmins. A bit of reading would help.pixelshrek;175682 Secular ideology will survive even if it is tented one. Hindutwa will never succeed if you want peace and prosperity and violence will never lead a great nation,.. [/quote]
India is secular because majority Hindus are secular.
Hindutva has wide array of meanings and one of them means 'being a Hindu'. It's similar to Muslims claiming Islamiyat.
Modern day Hindutva is a direct reaction to pampering of Muslims & Christians in India by subsequent 'secular' CON & other governments. When minorityism dies, Hindutva will have no reason to exist. A reaction will have no meaning when the triggering action disappears.
An analogy would be that of the identity 'a'theist. If the concept of God disappears overnight, what would be the identity of an 'a'theist? :emsmile: