Which of these TWO different solutions will allow us to achieve hindu-muslim UNITY in the subcontinent?

[Manny_Pacquiao]

The solution to hindu-muslim conflict in the subcontinent SHOULD NOT enable or encourage:

-co-existence

-diversity

-tolerance

 

we are NOT interested in any of these outcomes.

 

the only legitimate solutions are ones that enable UNITY.

 

UNITY IS THE IDEAL OUTCOME. nothing less. UNITY.

 

and to achieve this, there are 2 solutions. and only 2 (in my opinion).

 

1. reform islam.

remove autonomy of islamic institutions and centres. remove personal laws. remove religious schools. mostly importantly, bring teachings of islam under government directive: in other words: no extremist interpretations. teachings that emphasize islamic overlap with dharmic principles. effectively, 're-written' quran.  the assumption is that a reformed islam creates reformed muslims that are capable of UNITING with the majority population.

 

2. reform muslims.

leave islam and its various interpretations alone. dis-incentivize the islamic identity by strengthening the hindu identity. make dharmic principles the norm for morality and moral standards, encourage open and public displays of dharmic faith, reduce or crackdown on muslim rituals. Strengthen the social status of those adopting dharmic faiths in positions of power and authority across various industries. where applicable, use financial inducements, like money or rations to re-convert poorer, more vulnerable muslims. this is also called #gharwapasi...

 

i get the feeling that the 2nd solution is the one preferred by the government. india has no authority on islam, so a reformation of the religion lacks credibility. however, that shouldn't get in the way of making long-term institutional changes as recommended above.

 

@Mariyam ,

which solution is better for achieving hindu-muslim UNITY? and in what proportion?  what would you recommend?

 

alternative solutions welcome!

[maniac]

where is the option for both? I know it’s a generalizing statement and a stereotype and I have to add the mandatory caveat that there are some great Muslims who are more important to the country than some so called Hindus however here is the problem.

 

To reform Islam is in the hands of the clerics who control it and it would never suit their agenda, so that would mean reforming Muslims but how can that be achieved without reforming the religion? It’s a chicken or egg problem

 

I think it should happen organically at both ends but if I had to pick one than it would be option 1

Edited March 13, 2020 by maniac

[rock777]

reform hinduism and hindus 

[Manny_Pacquiao]

7 minutes ago, rock777 said:

reform hinduism and hindus 

how would you do that?

[Manny_Pacquiao]

10 minutes ago, maniac said:

where is the option for both? I know it’s a generalizing statement and a stereotype and I have to add the mandatory caveat that there are some great Muslims who are more important to the country than some so called Hindus however here is the problem.

 

To reform Islam is in the hands of the clerics who control it and it would never suit their agenda, so that would mean reforming Muslims but how can that be achieved without reforming the religion? It’s a chicken or egg problem

 

I think it should happen organically at both ends but if I had to pick one than it would be option 1

i think most of us will agree that we need a combination of both, but the debate is...the ratio.

 

20:80 in favor of solution 2, or 50:50 solution 1? something like that...

 

important thing to remember is that the common muslim in india doesn't really know anything about islam. its more a social status than an identity. so solution 2 could work nicely.

 

very different from hindus, who actually worship (by ritual) a certain form of divinity.

[rock777]

Just now, Manny_Pacquiao said:

how would you do that?

good question

first i will tell them to follow gandhi instead of following modi

vote for congress instead of bjp

shun the hindu cast system

as majority behave like elder brothers with minorities

be moderate

 

 

 

 

[Manny_Pacquiao]

2 minutes ago, rock777 said:

good question

first i will tell them to follow gandhi instead of following modi

vote for congress instead of bjp

shun the hindu cast system

as majority behave like elder brothers with minorities

be moderate

 

 

 

 

i agree about caste. we have to de-politicize caste.

 

 

but gandhi and congress allowed (and even encouraged) hindus to die at the hands of muslims, and muslims refused to live under a congress-ruled india. this is why pakistan currently exists.

 

this doesn't sound like unity to me. this solution was proven to be a failure.

 

reforming hindus and hinduism as a solution achieves tolerance, co-existence, and diversity but never unity. am i wrong?

 

[Vilander]

reforming Islam is the way to go. But its not an option, neither is an option. 

[rock777]

9 minutes ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

i agree about caste. we have to de-politicize caste.

 

 

but gandhi and congress allowed (and even encouraged) hindus to die at the hands of muslims, and muslims refused to live under a congress-ruled india. this is why pakistan currently exists.

 

this doesn't sound like unity to me. this solution was proven to be a failure.

 

reforming hindus and hinduism as a solution achieves tolerance, co-existence, and diversity but never unity. am i wrong?

 

i respect your views

[Mariyam]

I don't have any well thought out answers to such questions.

 

However, since you ask me, here a few points that come to my mind.

 

1) Identity politics, and political Islam especially must be made irrelevant. Muslims should vote based on real life issues and not be reduced to the anti-vote they are today. It does no one any good. 

2) Social media should be monitored a lot more stringently. Any one peddling fake news should be punished. Under our current IT Act, these are barely crimes. Need to revamp these set of rules.

 

[Manny_Pacquiao]

15 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

I don't have any well thought out answers to such questions.

 

However, since you ask me, here a few points that come to my mind.

 

1) Identity politics, and political Islam especially must be made irrelevant. Muslims should vote based on real life issues and not be reduced to the anti-vote they are today. It does no one any good. 

2) Social media should be monitored a lot more stringently. Any one peddling fake news should be punished. Under our current IT Act, these are barely crimes. Need to revamp these set of rules.

 

 

personally, i think all politics is identity politics. even in a society carefully engineered to maintain 'equality' - think scandinavian countries - there are different classes of people.

 

in an environment where we have political hinduism, how can we not have political islam? especially when muslims are made the subject of politics?

frankly, i'm not against political islam.

[someone]

The issue is not about what, but who? Who is gonna lead the change? Many western countries provided education, huge support to Muslims in hope that they would bring internal reforms. Yet, it has not really worked with only limited reforms. The lack of alternative top leaders is critical aspect as today, all power and influence is dictated by mullahs. One would hope woman bring changes, yet they lack voice and independence to do anything....

[Mariyam]

10 minutes ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

personally, i think all politics is identity politics. even in a society carefully engineered to maintain 'equality' - think scandinavian countries - there are different classes of people.

in an environment where we have political hinduism, how can we not have political islam? especially when muslims are made the subject of politics?

frankly, i'm not against political islam.

Political Hinduism is a reaction to Political Islam. Its not the other way around. If you have national parties bringing prehistoric entities like AIMPLB into relevance, there will be a reaction of sorts. Its 2020 and we are still having discussions on the UCC and the Hindu-Muslim divide. This is a result of identity politics.

 

Also, i don't consider class based politics as essentially identity politics. One can move up ( or down) a class. Any politics based on economic division is still acceptable. We need leftists policies even today, especially for such a large country with a huge poor population. Politics on the basis of identities which overlook economic reality is always a bane. 

Edited March 13, 2020 by Mariyam

[Manny_Pacquiao]

5 minutes ago, someone said:

The issue is not about what, but who? Who is gonna lead the change? Many western countries provided education, huge support to Muslims in hope that they would bring internal reforms. Yet, it has not really worked with only limited reforms. The lack of alternative top leaders is critical aspect as today, all power and influence is dictated by mullahs. One would hope woman bring changes, yet they lack voice and independence to do anything....

saudi - the leader of the islamic world - has begun to make changes as part of its 2030 vision. it has also cut back on spreading its wahabbi nonsense around the world.

 

but these are slow changes. you won't see democracy in that part of the world, because of its strategic importance (oil). the need for stability and cohesiveness is greater than the need for individual expression.

 

so reforming islam is extremely difficult. muslims look to saudi and other middle eastern countries as a guide for the true islamic lifestyle.

[panther]

All hindus should accept Islam either willingly or in defeat after Ghazwa e hind.

[someone]

2 minutes ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

saudi - the leader of the islamic world - has begun to make changes as part of its 2030 vision. it has also cut back on spreading its wahabbi nonsense around the world.

 

but these are slow changes. you won't see democracy in that part of the world, because of its strategic importance (oil). the need for stability and cohesiveness is greater than the need for individual expression.

 

so reforming islam is extremely difficult. muslims look to saudi and other middle eastern countries as a guide for the true islamic lifestyle.

I wouldn't be sure about that. They are also a "headquarter" or "sponsors" for plenty of related problems. So it's a double game...

[Manny_Pacquiao]

5 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

Political Hinduism is a reaction to Political Islam. Its not the other way around. If you have national parties bringing prehistoric entities like AIMPLB into relevance, there will be a reaction of sorts. Its 2020 and we are still having discussions on the UCC and the Hindu-Muslim divide. This is a result of identity politics.

 

Also, i don't consider class based politics as essentially identity politics. One can move up ( or down) a class. Any politics based on economic division is still acceptable. We need leftists policies even today, especially for such a large country with a huge poor population. Politics on the basis of identities which over looks economic reality is always a bane. 

 

i agree, the ram janmabhoomi movement was basically political hinduism. and reactionary. no doubt.

 

but its put us in a position that we can't really get out of. UCC and citizenship related laws are long-standing issues that will be resolved, but what i'm referring to is more...ground-level interaction. unity. don't you think that....unless the weaker side, sort of....gives in...it's difficult to achieve.

 

and keep in mind, religion will be linked with prosperity. no matter what. your religion WILL determine your access to housing, education and employment.

 

so in these circumstances, doesn't it make sense to allow muslims a stronger political voice, one that argues for - class-based issues - in an religious context?

 

i don't see this happening, by the way. muslims will never be allowed to break away from the congress party, or the "new" congress...like AAP or whatever may eventually replace it.

[someone]

5 minutes ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

i don't see this happening, by the way. muslims will never be allowed to break away from the congress party, or the "new" congress...like AAP or whatever may eventually replace it.

Congress is just a stop-gap measure. Wherever demographics are in their favor, Muslim leagues type parties are the winner and no Hindu will ever win such constituency. So fake is the secularism. 

[coffee_rules]

30 minutes ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

 

personally, i think all politics is identity politics. even in a society carefully engineered to maintain 'equality' - think scandinavian countries - there are different classes of people.

 

in an environment where we have political hinduism, how can we not have political islam? especially when muslims are made the subject of politics?

frankly, i'm not against political islam.

As pointed out by @Mariyam Hindutva is because of the rise of political Islam, in whatever time we chose (Shivaji, PChauhan, etc.). One of the prominent voices of political Hinduism is about safeguiading it's existence. When we have predatory desert religions that believes in sending us to eternal damnation, it will play out that sentiment to feel victims of a system, where  we are a silent majority. Moreover, the Hindu rashtra is about cultural unity and not religion supremacy.

 

Political Islam is usually about Islamic supremacy or purity, because we are more, we want this region, 15% > 85% in strength, wagaira. In the face of strong opposition, it will turn into a victim and complain about pogroms. So, the two political movements are different to compare and give support to.

Edited March 13, 2020 by coffee_rules

[coffee_rules]

22 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

Also, i don't consider class based politics as essentially identity politics. One can move up ( or down) a class. Any politics based on economic division is still acceptable. We need leftists policies even today, especially for such a large country with a huge poor population. Politics on the basis of identities which overlook economic reality is always a bane. 

I disagree, just like checking Islamic identity politics which causes sedition, the class politics need to be checked too. Communism had failed world over.  It is a flawed ideology. In India, it is only leading to anarchy, naxalism and eventually terrorism (with the nexus from seditional forces like ISIS, PFI, SDPI etc).  Besides, the marxist movement is about bringing a revolution to affect change in the society, they think that the dharmic connection is the real enemy of India and they tend to break it in every opportunity.