Hinduphobia In Secular India

[mishra]

27 minutes ago, Lannister said:

Gandhi followed a pacifist approach, placing emphasis on life rather than freedom. The morality of this perspective is subjective; some argue that freedom holds greater value than anything else, and their perspective is equally valid.

Dont know what you understand about GAndhi. I think he was following Niti in every situation. You may agree with him or not but atleast I agree with him when he asked GoI to give Pakistan share of its kitty was based on Niti. But we all disagree with that act because we can see Problem is that we all know what are reprecursions of that Niti. I e Pakistan was at war with India in Kashmir and has new ideology coming from Jinnah and religion and it was buying arms to continue war, while west was propping up Pakistan so that they ensure that they have a pet dog to fight Russian Imperialism. Moreless Indian followed mostly the Niti , till they had rude awakening in 1961 and 1965. After getting asswhooped on multiple times by different people. POst 1965, Indian geopolitics Rajniti decided to do hell with Niti.

 

As long as there was little chance of Niti to succed, Hindus of India in 1947 accepted Gandhiji (Remember solution proposed in Mahabharata was to give 5 villages to Yudhisthir) and didnt went after blood of Muslims despite knowing that Pakistan was killing Hindus and continued to do so till 1971 and even now to some extent. However we all know , Jinnah was not ready to give anything to Hindus in his Pakistan unless he becomes absolute monarch and restablish Mughalia Sultanate kind of "Muslim Varchasva (Near translation Muslim Domination) " in India.

 

So No: I dont think Gandhi was pacificist. He trully followed the Niti hoping that Niti will automatically solve the issue of Bharat in future ie Unification of India. May be he was right, May be he wasnt. We will never come to know.

Edited January 29 by mishra

[Lannister]

53 minutes ago, mishra said:

What is inconsistent in behaviour of Ram? Even, anecdotal will do. I am like that Angad, will accept your arguement or clarify ur doubts. Mahabharat is different ball game. You have to understand difference which Dr Jaishankar says. Ram means Rule based order ie achieving something on basis of Niti. Mahabharat means what happens if Lokniti and Rajniti  do not follow Niti

Denying education or knowledge for those deemed of low caste by the supposed good guys. No repercussions for engaging in the degradation of humans based on their birth. Also, the treatment of women by the supposed good guys.

Edited January 29 by Lannister

[mishra]

2 hours ago, Lannister said:

Denying education or knowledge for those deemed of low caste by the supposed good guys. No repercussions for engaging in the degradation of humans based on their birth. Also, the treatment of women by the supposed good guys.

 

When you read Ram Charit Maanas, you got to read them in context. There are sections where it says Samvaad- Means statements by characters. And there are Tulasidas narrating story or attempting to say his view. 

 

Where He  mentions of Caste is based on birth? Where he says deny them? If anything He gives important message to all Hindus by eating Berries from Shabari. Not in same plate, but once she had allready tasted it right in front of him?

 

About women:

Quote

अनुज बधू भगिनी सुत नारी। सुनु सठ कन्या सम ए चारी॥
इन्हहि कुदृष्टि बिलोकइ जोई। ताहि बधें कछु पाप न होई॥4॥

 

ढोल गवार शूद्र पशु नारी सकल ताड़ना के अधिकारी!!

 

I know from about 10,000 Chaupayees over 1000 couplets, hundreds of slokas and may more, people like you only pull out this one line. Avadhi is my first language. So give me this that i know meaaning "Tadana" means "figure out". Tulsidas is simply saying that you must first figure out behaviour or such people.  Usage: Chaurahe par ladakiyaa "taadate" pakae gaye (Means caught looking at girls at cross Road, Doesnt mean beating the girls)

 

 So that one Chaupayee means similar as below. Someone who is better at articulating can take over if they find it incorrect

Say if you are a musician, first figure out how dhol is behaving before you go and play it.

If its a female, figure out what she wants, Dont just suppose what she wants because say, once she gave a smile in office canteen and you turn up with roses on valentines day.

If its kshudra (uneducated + poor, people right at bottom of our society or last in the Societies queue), figure out what they want.Since they are not educated wont be able to put across their views in same language as you,  so you will not understand what he really means by checking out. Thats why Gandhiji went on Tour of India (ie whole India is kshudra in eyes of Nehru and Gandhi under British rule) or Rahulji is making "Nyay Yatra" or "Bharat Jodo Yatra".

Pashu means animal, You do not know what a animal wants or how he will behave, So dont just assume . For example jump on back of horse on just because tour guide said so.

 

 

Finally one line Samvaad by Bhagvaan Ram in Ram Charit maanas which probably is mother of all morality. Find meaning of it, You will understand what Dharma means when a Hindu says term Dharma. It also tells "Dhrma" doesnt means in sense you call religion.

 

परहित सरिस धर्म नहीं भाई, परपीड़ा सम नहीं अधमाई'

 

 

 

Edited January 29 by mishra

[Muloghonto]

9 hours ago, Lannister said:

I don't care if you are Hindu or Muslim. Both religions negatively affect society. As an atheist, I prioritize truth claims backed by science and history.

 

Your anti-democratic stance stemming from your religious beliefs is akin to an Islamist viewpoint.

Atheism is also a belief, as any claim requires proof. A claim of No,is also a claim, ergo requring proof. Ergo atheism is also an assumption.
The anti democratic is you - since democracy dictates that majority views be centred, which means hindu views be centred. 

 

 

5 hours ago, Lannister said:

Morality is inconsistently portrayed in Ramayana and Mahabharata; they are not flawless narratives. In the 21st century, I would prefer novels like Harry Potter over them any day. 

Ofcourse, a western gungadeen would prefer a western mediocre author over civilisational works of their own. Thats how self hatred works. Morality isnt a simplistic idea like your western masters think, which is perhaps why they have a lower moral achievement than us, given the history of their behaviour vs ours. Afterall atheists have killed far more people for their beliefs than hindus have. 

 

7 hours ago, Lannister said:

Not true. If you look at any religious society, it's the believers who often engage in serious atrocities, whether it's directed at women, caste-related incidents, or discrimination against homosexuals. Additionally, they often display higher levels of corruption, with a notable portion of the wealthy being religious.

 

Atheism arose as a reaction to religious ideologies, promoting science and reasoning without aligning with any particular faith. Watch Western atheists and their views on Christianity.

 

atheism rose as a reaction to abrahamic religious ideologies, not ours. Hence why atheism is a product of the west and not the east. 

 

[Lannister]

19 hours ago, mishra said:

Ghantaa. Absolutely false. What I mentioned is factual statistical data. There is no supposition. You can check it yourself. The number of Christian and number of athiest in prisons of West are similar to proportion of pupulation they are in Western Society. Muslims are 10 times more likely to be in prison then athiest or Christians. And I made supposition that prisonable ratio is 1:10. ie For ever 10 crime in West, just 1 gets into prison.

 

If I am to guess, People saw problem in Chistianity which ideology was against Science, So they started converting to athiesm. Isalm revised the syllabus and introduced concept of apostasy to stop athiesm.

 Please dont equate these two adavanced religions with way of life of say Red Indians or aborigins or latin Americans as they didnt kill Copernicas or books claiming sun is centre of our solar system. They simply accpeted what Science told them without throwing a single stone at book publisher

Examining Indian prisons, it's likely that the majority of prisoners are followers of Hindutva, frequently involved in violent acts linked to their religious beliefs, as seen in incidents like Gowri. Can the same be said about atheists? Do non-believers resort to violence against those who don't believe in science?

Edited January 30 by Lannister

[Lannister]

18 hours ago, mishra said:

Dont know what you understand about GAndhi. I think he was following Niti in every situation. You may agree with him or not but atleast I agree with him when he asked GoI to give Pakistan share of its kitty was based on Niti. But we all disagree with that act because we can see Problem is that we all know what are reprecursions of that Niti. I e Pakistan was at war with India in Kashmir and has new ideology coming from Jinnah and religion and it was buying arms to continue war, while west was propping up Pakistan so that they ensure that they have a pet dog to fight Russian Imperialism. Moreless Indian followed mostly the Niti , till they had rude awakening in 1961 and 1965. After getting asswhooped on multiple times by different people. POst 1965, Indian geopolitics Rajniti decided to do hell with Niti.

 

As long as there was little chance of Niti to succed, Hindus of India in 1947 accepted Gandhiji (Remember solution proposed in Mahabharata was to give 5 villages to Yudhisthir) and didnt went after blood of Muslims despite knowing that Pakistan was killing Hindus and continued to do so till 1971 and even now to some extent. However we all know , Jinnah was not ready to give anything to Hindus in his Pakistan unless he becomes absolute monarch and restablish Mughalia Sultanate kind of "Muslim Varchasva (Near translation Muslim Domination) " in India.

 

So No: I dont think Gandhi was pacificist. He trully followed the Niti hoping that Niti will automatically solve the issue of Bharat in future ie Unification of India. May be he was right, May be he wasnt. We will never come to know.

How does that relate to democracy, civil rights, and equality?

[Lannister]

17 hours ago, mishra said:

 

When you read Ram Charit Maanas, you got to read them in context. There are sections where it says Samvaad- Means statements by characters. And there are Tulasidas narrating story or attempting to say his view. 

 

Where He  mentions of Caste is based on birth? Where he says deny them? If anything He gives important message to all Hindus by eating Berries from Shabari. Not in same plate, but once she had allready tasted it right in front of him?

 

About women:

 

ढोल गवार शूद्र पशु नारी सकल ताड़ना के अधिकारी!!

 

I know from about 10,000 Chaupayees over 1000 couplets, hundreds of slokas and may more, people like you only pull out this one line. Avadhi is my first language. So give me this that i know meaaning "Tadana" means "figure out". Tulsidas is simply saying that you must first figure out behaviour or such people.  Usage: Chaurahe par ladakiyaa "taadate" pakae gaye (Means caught looking at girls at cross Road, Doesnt mean beating the girls)

 

 So that one Chaupayee means similar as below. Someone who is better at articulating can take over if they find it incorrect

Say if you are a musician, first figure out how dhol is behaving before you go and play it.

If its a female, figure out what she wants, Dont just suppose what she wants because say, once she gave a smile in office canteen and you turn up with roses on valentines day.

If its kshudra (uneducated + poor, people right at bottom of our society or last in the Societies queue), figure out what they want.Since they are not educated wont be able to put across their views in same language as you,  so you will not understand what he really means by checking out. Thats why Gandhiji went on Tour of India (ie whole India is kshudra in eyes of Nehru and Gandhi under British rule) or Rahulji is making "Nyay Yatra" or "Bharat Jodo Yatra".

Pashu means animal, You do not know what a animal wants or how he will behave, So dont just assume . For example jump on back of horse on just because tour guide said so.

 

 

Finally one line Samvaad by Bhagvaan Ram in Ram Charit maanas which probably is mother of all morality. Find meaning of it, You will understand what Dharma means when a Hindu says term Dharma. It also tells "Dhrma" doesnt means in sense you call religion.

 

परहित सरिस धर्म नहीं भाई, परपीड़ा सम नहीं अधमाई'

 

 

 

Your statements don't align with reality; it's religious Hindus who are often involved in caste-related atrocities and inhumane treatment of women.

 

In your Treta Yuga and Dvapara Yuga, was there a democratic system? How were kings chosen?

 

Our modern societies appear more morally advanced than the ones depicted in these stories.

Edited January 30 by Lannister

[mishra]

4 hours ago, Lannister said:

How does that relate to democracy, civil rights, and equality?

Bhai,

I think you are intentinally being ignorant or I am confused. I am talking about geo politics which drove creation of Pakistan on which Indian politicians (as in Indian ones ) had no control. If it wasnt Jinnah, The players would have propped someone else to create Pakistan. Only solution was all Indian leaders at the time to have not accepted British idea. British would not have created Pakistan or propped up communal fault line if their requirement of NOT allowing Russia enter into India once they have left India, Thats where Congress leadership of the time failed. I dont buy the arguement that it was impossible to achieve by Indian leaders.

 

5 hours ago, Lannister said:

Examining Indian prisons, it's likely that the majority of prisoners are followers of Hindutva, frequently involved in violent acts linked to their religious beliefs, as seen in incidents like Gowri. Can the same be said about atheists? Do non-believers resort to violence against those who don't believe in science?

 Ratio of prisoners in India based on religion is more or less similar to ratio of population. Gouri Lankesh and many like her have/had one motto in their life. Denigrate Hindus. Not because they dont know the truth. They are more educated than you and me and smart people. So they know that they are intenally doing it. Why? I dont know, Money Power links blackmail personal experience, influenced, Could be n number of reason.

 

Dont know much about her killing but what I can remember was that she could only see problem of India is Hindus, Hindu leaders or Hindu groups and it took it so far that local politicians became enemy. The politicians went to court and won against her. But if you are enemy of a Politician in modern India, do you think you will survive.

 

Police or Goon, someone will send you closer to god. But for you, this is specific to Hinduism. Let me know if I am wrong?

 

3 hours ago, Lannister said:

Your statements don't align with reality; it's religious Hindus who are often involved in caste-related atrocities and inhumane treatment of women.

 

In your Treta Yuga and Dvapara Yuga, was there a democratic system? How were kings chosen?

 

 

I agree. And I fully support that. But you have to understand that women in India didnt had to go on mass movement to get their rights. In west, they have to fight for their voting right, equal pay and still no quota for women in anything. IN India, People just accepted it. Implementing some concept in Society  different as its family matter and varius nuances of family kicks in.

 

Karpuri Thakurji got Bharat Ratna, Listen to PadamShri Hukumdev Singh  on matter of reservervation and caste. He is dead against caste System and upliftment so backward class. But he also recognises that in modern India,  So called upper class Intellectuals and class as whole has accepted th e fact that caste System needs to be eradicated and have not hidden behind equality and liberty tag and never attempted a mass or political mobilisation against attempts made by Shri Ambedkar or Karpuri Thankur.

Most morally adavanced US or EU or UK, Try introducing reservations for non white or even women Country will burn

3 hours ago, Lannister said:

In your Treta Yuga and Dvapara Yuga, was there a democratic system? How were kings chosen?

But India is ruled till 2014 by Nehru dynasty. IMO, One person, only one person (Not even Atalji , Not considering Shashtriji) who actually wasnt under influence and tried to break Nehury Dynasty in INdia was Shri PV Narsimha Rao Ji. Respect.  But what it tells me is that a ruling Class got created in India in just 70 years of history. You are talking about 7000 year history, why wont people with certain profession wont make it theirs and negate/kill any competetion? Its human psychology.

 

Bhai, You are fully confused here too. whole of Ram Charit manas never says who heads the Bharat of your time. It just says this is how Ram and many other characters behaved. It gives a message that you can be educated Brahmin(See its not Kshatriya who was ruling Lankan kingdom ie caste doesnt mean your profession) . Ravan was present in Sita Swambar along with varoius other rulers of different caste (Inter caste marrieage was allowed even at ruling elite class),Raavan was doing best job as KIng and welfare of his Subjects you may Still be regarded as villain.

 

 

3 hours ago, Lannister said:

Our modern societies appear more morally advanced than the ones depicted in these stories.

Thats your view from which you will find about a billion Indians  disagree in either one or both counts, You cant be more wrong than this as its neither a Story nor morally advanced.

Edited January 30 by mishra

[mishra]

@Lannister Draupadi Swamvar was another example. Arjun didnt disclose he was kshtriya while various kings of various caste tried. Infact it goes to show that not even class was important. It was about ability. Kunti and Draupadi are best examples in modern day context of women empowerment. One had multiple husband, while others had kids from multiple fathers but one husband.

 

Lord  Krishna is Yaduvanshi, the Yadav community. he had so many queens from various caste.

So, If you want to argue against current Caste system or class system, you can easily quote these examples to so called upper caste and Luteyen Class of India

 

Chutiye ham hain. So called Mdern society vaale

Edited January 30 by mishra

[Lannister]

20 hours ago, mishra said:

I think you are intentinally being ignorant or I am confused. I am talking about geo politics which drove creation of Pakistan on which Indian politicians (as in Indian ones ) had no control. If it wasnt Jinnah, The players would have propped someone else to create Pakistan. Only solution was all Indian leaders at the time to have not accepted British idea. British would not have created Pakistan or propped up communal fault line if their requirement of NOT allowing Russia enter into India once they have left India, Thats where Congress leadership of the time failed. I dont buy the arguement that it was impossible to achieve by Indian leaders.

Too much diversity will undermine national unity. The political divide between the south and north within this union has already emerged and is likely to escalate further.

[Lannister]

20 hours ago, mishra said:

Ratio of prisoners in India based on religion is more or less similar to ratio of population. Gouri Lankesh and many like her have/had one motto in their life. Denigrate Hindus. Not because they dont know the truth. They are more educated than you and me and smart people. So they know that they are intenally doing it. Why? I dont know, Money Power links blackmail personal experience, influenced, Could be n number of reason.

 

Dont know much about her killing but what I can remember was that she could only see problem of India is Hindus, Hindu leaders or Hindu groups and it took it so far that local politicians became enemy. The politicians went to court and won against her. But if you are enemy of a Politician in modern India, do you think you will survive.

 

Police or Goon, someone will send you closer to god. But for you, this is specific to Hinduism. Let me know if I am wrong?

Hindutvavadis have shown a willingness to resort to violence to silence opposing views. It's about time society implements strong measures to address these religious fanatics.

Edited January 31 by Lannister

[Lannister]

20 hours ago, mishra said:

But India is ruled till 2014 by Nehru dynasty. IMO, One person, only one person (Not even Atalji , Not considering Shashtriji) who actually wasnt under influence and tried to break Nehury Dynasty in INdia was Shri PV Narsimha Rao Ji. Respect.  But what it tells me is that a ruling Class got created in India in just 70 years of history. You are talking about 7000 year history, why wont people with certain profession wont make it theirs and negate/kill any competetion? Its human psychology.

 

Bhai, You are fully confused here too. whole of Ram Charit manas never says who heads the Bharat of your time. It just says this is how Ram and many other characters behaved. It gives a message that you can be educated Brahmin(See its not Kshatriya who was ruling Lankan kingdom ie caste doesnt mean your profession) . Ravan was present in Sita Swambar along with varoius other rulers of different caste (Inter caste marrieage was allowed even at ruling elite class),Raavan was doing best job as KIng and welfare of his Subjects you may Still be regarded as villain.

Any society without a democratic framework will consistently be morally and structurally inferior.

[diga]

On 1/30/2024 at 9:33 AM, Lannister said:

Examining Indian prisons, it's likely that the majority of prisoners are followers of Hindutva, frequently involved in violent acts linked to their religious beliefs, as seen in incidents like Gowri. Can the same be said about atheists? Do non-believers resort to violence against those who don't believe in science?

You keep harping on Gowri & Hindutva without evidence.. yes, Chinese & Soviet atheists engaged in systematic cleansing of those who dont believe in their ideology. 

[Lannister]

20 hours ago, mishra said:

@Lannister Draupadi Swamvar was another example. Arjun didnt disclose he was kshtriya while various kings of various caste tried. Infact it goes to show that not even class was important. It was about ability. Kunti and Draupadi are best examples in modern day context of women empowerment. One had multiple husband, while others had kids from multiple fathers but one husband.

 

Lord  Krishna is Yaduvanshi, the Yadav community. he had so many queens from various caste.

So, If you want to argue against current Caste system or class system, you can easily quote these examples to so called upper caste and Luteyen Class of India

That's fine, but they remain fictional narratives heavily centered around the concept of god, and some people still believe in them ignorantly.

[Lannister]

1 hour ago, diga said:

You keep harping on Gowri & Hindutva without evidence.. yes, Chinese & Soviet atheists engaged in systematic cleansing of those who dont believe in their ideology. 

Are you referring to their socialist beliefs? How does that relate to atheism?

[mishra]

3 hours ago, Lannister said:

Hindutvavadis have shown a willingness to resort to violence to silence opposing views. It's about time society implements strong measures to address these religious fanatics.

There is a famous quote from Atalji giving interview to Javed Akhtar that Secularism (Which I dont agree as I believe in inclusivity) is only surviving in India beacuse of Hindus.

But, I will take it a step further and say Democracy has survived in India because of Hindutva is ingrained in Indian Society. Our traditions, our culture our belief is all inspiring us to give social justice and make equal Society.

 

I will not write a complet justification butwill let you think over this fact, Take out the map of world and you will find that Democracy project has been either not accepted or has consistently failed are still going through churn in any Society or Nation where there is poverty in modern times.

Now why is it surviving in predominantly EU and West or say Israel. BEcause they are economically prosperous country. Take that prosperity out, They will become, Ukraine Georgio and so on 

 

2 hours ago, Lannister said:

That's fine, but they remain fictional narratives heavily centered around the concept of god, and some people still believe in them ignorantly.

You choose to deny it and pooh pooh as mythology. We choose to believe because not just evidence, Society itself till date inspires same. There is a small saying in our part.

"Sabhi Ram ki tarah Raavan se lade ya na lade, Kintu Sabaki apani apani Ram Kahani hai(Not everyone can fight evil Ravan, but stil every one has a part in their life where they faught like Ram  or whole life of theirs is called Ram Kahani ".

 

3 hours ago, Lannister said:

Too much diversity will undermine national unity. The political divide between the south and north within this union has already emerged and is likely to escalate further.

India has more People, languages, belief, traditions, cuture, gods then All of West combined, Infact West is still dividing.  Our Pakistan divided into 2 in just 75 years and is on verge of further division because it eradicated culture history Hindutva. As long as people of India believe in RAm, they will remain united no matter how many Gouri Lankesh are created to kill Ram. Bhai ant mein Raavan hi marataa hai (brother, its allways Ravan that gets killed aat  the end).

 

2 hours ago, Lannister said:

Any society without a democratic framework will consistently be morally and structurally inferior.

Democracy and morality isnt correalated. West was democracy when it killed aborogines, forced birth to Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela , Martin Luther King because democracy was immoral. Morality and ethics come from culture tradition. Economic Superiority which is direct result of world war 2 outcome is not to be confused with morality. Take modern history, Western ongoing war between so called democracies vs Middle east or say ongoing effing  of Gaza, Armenia, Houthis, Syria and Ukraine isnt justifiable. If understanding that is too much and you consider it purely geo-political, Just take simple case of Covid response. Every economically strong Western country other than India decided not to share vaccines and tried profeetering (geopolitically and financially) without considering lives of people in South. Give credit to Indians

[mishra]

By the way, I firmly believe Hundutva, culture,  traditions among Indian Muslims would have ensured India wont be divided and voice of Jinnah would have been ignored, If British were not in position of Judge where Gandhi Nehru Patel Gaffar Khan, Abul Kalam and Jinnah were arguing the case. Right at last moment, Jinnah was so insecure that he proposed create Pakistan and Hindustan without partitioning with defence foreign affairs strictly in hand of a unified elected representative under Delhi.

Edited January 31 by mishra

[Muloghonto]

11 hours ago, Lannister said:

Are you referring to their socialist beliefs? How does that relate to atheism?

Because they were an atheist nation officially, same as a theocracy. And their performance is bloodier than us hindus, ergo atheists are of lower morality than us. 

Quote

Any society without a democratic framework will consistently be morally and structurally inferior.

 

Then why do you oppose democratic mandate and democratic framework ? The vast majority of people in our country wants Hinducentric laws. So by your own admission, India should make them, as it carries the democratic mandate with it. 

Quote

Too much diversity will undermine national unity. The political divide between the south and north within this union has already emerged and is likely to escalate further.

 

It wont escalate further, because we will get rid of the southern anti-national dravidians. Process is already underway. If the diversity of the south gets in the way of national unity, then the diversity of the south will be deleted via demographic swamping from the hindi-gujju-bengali belt. 

 

Quote

Hindutvavadis have shown a willingness to resort to violence to silence opposing views. It's about time society implements strong measures to address these religious fanatics.

Far less than atheists and left wingers - who need the strong measures we are dishing out to them first. 

Remember, they are more violent than us as a matter of record. 

 

Edited January 31 by Muloghonto

[Lannister]

On 2/1/2024 at 1:20 AM, Muloghonto said:

It wont escalate further, because we will get rid of the southern anti-national dravidians. Process is already underway. If the diversity of the south gets in the way of national unity, then the diversity of the south will be deleted via demographic swamping from the hindi-gujju-bengali belt.

For this to work, your society would need to be superior to ours. However, the reality is that you are inferior to us.

[Lannister]

On 1/31/2024 at 3:13 PM, mishra said:

There is a famous quote from Atalji giving interview to Javed Akhtar that Secularism (Which I dont agree as I believe in inclusivity) is only surviving in India beacuse of Hindus.

But, I will take it a step further and say Democracy has survived in India because of Hindutva is ingrained in Indian Society. Our traditions, our culture our belief is all inspiring us to give social justice and make equal Society.

 

I will not write a complet justification butwill let you think over this fact, Take out the map of world and you will find that Democracy project has been either not accepted or has consistently failed are still going through churn in any Society or Nation where there is poverty in modern times.

Now why is it surviving in predominantly EU and West or say Israel. BEcause they are economically prosperous country. Take that prosperity out, They will become, Ukraine Georgio and so o

Our democratic nature stems from the fact that the majority of us don't subscribe to Hindutva. We don't shape our society based on the whims and desires of religious ideologues.