satyam1729 Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Britain's decision to bar an influential Muslim cleric from entering the country underscores the failure of Indian secularism http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704365204575317833268479268.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopBucket
yoda Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 BS Article. Most of what he has written apply to all secular countries not just India.
bharathh Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Yup.. agree that this can apply pretty much anywhere. In the USA, black people can get away with any kind of racist statements. Whereas a white person is censured heavily for saying anything that is not politically correct.
seedhi Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Has anyone noticed the RESOUNDING SILENCE of the Indian English news media on this issue. The cowards at NDTV, CNN-IBN have wilfully ignored the obscurantism of this idiot Zakir Naik which has led him to be banned from UK. This person advocates death for homosexuality, apostasy and inhumane shariah punishment and instead of exposing him our biased media sucks up to him. IS IT OF NO CONCERN TO THE MEDIA THAT A PERSON WHO ADVOCATES MURDER OF APOSTATES HAS A HUGE FOLLOWING AMONGST INDIAN MUSLIMS?!!
Guest Gunner Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 BS Article. Most of what he has written apply to all secular countries not just India. That is simply not true and you know it. In other secular countries all religious ideologies come under equal criticism whereas in India only hinduism is subject to criticism, cynical comments, snide remarks and overall sarcasm. The french model is cited in the article is an excellent example of secularism.
Lurker Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Has anyone noticed the RESOUNDING SILENCE of the Indian English news media on this issue. The cowards at NDTV, CNN-IBN have wilfully ignored the obscurantism of this idiot Zakir Naik which has led him to be banned from UK. This person advocates death for homosexuality, apostasy and inhumane shariah punishment and instead of exposing him our biased media sucks up to him. Alternately it can also be understood as mainstream media not particularly interested in Mr. Naik. Of course that concept is hard to understand for right wingers like you who insist on everything being a conspiracy. Personally I had no idea about Mr. Naik until I read about it on non-Indian websites. The hilarious aspect is that if an Indian does not know about Zakir Naik he is being ignorant(or in your words - resounding silence), and if he does know about Zakir Naik he is celebrating him. :giggle: xxx
Guest Gunner Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Yup.. agree that this can apply pretty much anywhere. In the USA' date=' black people can get away with any kind of racist statements. Whereas a white person is censured heavily for saying anything that is not politically correct.[/quote'] Completely irrational analogy. There is a sense of guilt among the white population of America towards the african-american people leading to that situation. There is no grounds whatsoever for the nonsense which goes on in India. How would you like to compare the European countries with India in relation to secularism?
Guest Gunner Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Alternately it can also be understood as mainstream media not particularly interested in Mr. Naik. Of course that concept is hard to understand for right wingers like you who insist on everything being a conspiracy. Personally I had no idea about Mr. Naik until I read about it on non-Indian websites. The hilarious aspect is that if an Indian does not know about Zakir Naik he is being ignorant(or in your words - resounding silence), and if he does know about Zakir Naik he is celebrating him. :giggle: xxx Actually I quite agree with what you say. I would rather prefer the media not to give much attention to this incident or to the dubious Dr. Naik. This is actually the best way of dealing with him. Giving this incident attention would actually amount to celebrating him.
triam Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 The problem with secularism in India is that it is really not secularism. Secularism is defined as the indifference or the rejection of religion and religious considerations. What India does(officially atleast) is give or atleast try to give equal importance to all religions and all religious considerations. So the whole article is off the target.
seedhi Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Alternately it can also be understood as mainstream media not particularly interested in Mr. Naik. Of course that concept is hard to understand for right wingers like you who insist on everything being a conspiracy.Oh come on! He has been rated amongst the most influential people in India' date=' he has his own TV channel where he pours out his filth. Shekhar Gupta interviewed him on Walk the Talk, but did not expose him or his nutty beliefs. Our media does not ignore him, it just ignores his filthy views.Personally I had no idea about Mr. Naik until I read about it on non-Indian websites. The hilarious aspect is that if an Indian does not know about Zakir Naik he is being ignorant(or in your words - resounding silence), and if he does know about Zakir Naik he is celebrating him. :giggle: xxxThe denial of this UK visa is a very much noteworthy event. I wish the English media had analyzed why UK has denied him a visa. I mean if, let us say, Sri Ravishankar had been denied a UK visa for some views of his - would it not have made the news in a prominent way, and would his offending views (if any) not be dissected? By the way Sadanand Dhume does not seem to be a "rightwinger" and he is pretty much saying the same thing in the WSJ article.
yoda Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Provide relevant examples where a religious figure with such a fundamentalist outlook gets so much leverage in mainstream media. Guess you are not familiar with the right wing in the US who have bombed abortion clinics and hold a very very bigoted view towards homosexuals and people who are not Christian. Also you have clerics proclaiming shariah laws in the UK. I believe one of them was stopped recently, but there was a period when there was no action against him. I am not defending this moron or everything we do in the name of secularism, but calling us a failed secular state because of morons like this is a slap in the face on the rest of us.
Lurker Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Oh come on! He has been rated amongst the most influential people in India, he has his own TV channel where he pours out his filth. And which average Indian really cares about these list put together? Even though you invoke it if I had to ask who was number 1-5 in that list? I bet you wouldnt know unless you googled it. Heck Aishwarya Rai and Chetan Bhagat were considered by TIME to be amongst most influential! Really??? That too TIME? Stop using a nameless list that nobody cares for. Shekhar Gupta interviewed him on Walk the Talk, but did not expose him or his nutty beliefs. Our media does not ignore him, it just ignores his filthy views.The denial of this UK visa is a very much noteworthy event. I wish the English media had analyzed why UK has denied him a visa. I mean if, let us say, Sri Ravishankar had been denied a UK visa for some views of his - would it not have made the news in a prominent way, and would his offending views (if any) not be dissected? Doesnt surprise me one bit about Shekhar Gupta. I like the guy, but he is hardly confrontational. It would be insane to think just because Shekhar Gupta didnt criticize him Mr. Naik is being celebrated by media! I bet someone like Shourie or Karan Thapar wouldnt do it. Why dont you dig up some journalists who actually ask pointed questions??? By the way Sadanand Dhume does not seem to be a "rightwinger" and he is pretty much saying the same thing in the WSJ article. I dont know about Mr. Dhume and unlike right wingers I dont go after the man instead of the article. My point was largely about you suggesting a whole conspiracy theory, which you usually do, and I pointed out the fallacy in there. Simple. xxx
Guest Gunner Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 The problem with secularism in India is that it is really not secularism. Secularism is defined as the indifference or the rejection of religion and religious considerations. What India does(officially atleast) is give or atleast try to give equal importance to all religions and all religious considerations. So the whole article is off the target. Ergo the example of France, probably the only really secular country in the world. India is like the UK trying to pander to everybody and completely bottling it.
yoda Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Ergo the example of France, probably the only really secular country in the world. India is like the UK trying to pander to everybody and completely bottling it. Good point, all the more reason why this article singling out "Indian Secularism" is BS.
seedhi Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 The problem with secularism in India is that it is really not secularism. Secularism is defined as the indifference or the rejection of religion and religious considerations. What India does(officially atleast) is give or atleast try to give equal importance to all religions and all religious considerations. So the whole article is off the target.The article is not about the official policy of the government, but about the attitude of the media, civil society etc. The problem with Indian secularism is that somehow any criticism of persons like Zakir Naik has become equated with minority bashing. So while critics of RSS, VHP, Praveen Togadia are ubiquitous in the media, universities etc, there is hardly any mainstream criticism of the obscurantist views of people like Zakir Naik. That space has been willfully abandoned in a perverse zero sum game where criticizing Muslim fundamentalism aligns you with the RSS/BJP unless (perhaps) you happen to be a Muslim yourself.
bharathh Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Completely irrational analogy. There is a sense of guilt among the white population of America towards the african-american people leading to that situation. There is no grounds whatsoever for the nonsense which goes on in India. How would you like to compare the European countries with India in relation to secularism? London has been called Londonistan for a reason.
Lurker Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 The problem with Indian secularism is that somehow any criticism of persons like Zakir Naik has become equated with minority bashing. So while critics of RSS, VHP, Praveen Togadia are ubiquitous in the media, universities etc, there is hardly any mainstream criticism of the obscurantist views of people like Zakir Naik. That space has been willfully abandoned in a perverse zero sum game where criticizing Muslim fundamentalism aligns you with the RSS/BJP unless (perhaps) you happen to be a Muslim yourself. Thinks you. For starters RSS,VHP and Togadias Zakir Naik. The latter is an evangelist, the former are all political in nature. So obvious formers get criticized more. In India Televangelists dont merit any TRP, quite correctly, in my opinion. So no reason why he should get any coverage in the first place. The hilarious aspect is how right wingers, like you, are ready to explode on visa being rejected when only sometime back Modi was denied the same by United States. I kinda remember having this debate back then with you, and likes of you, right here and it was all - Oh so United States is the Judge, Jury and yada yada... what a difference a year makes :haha:
yoda Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 The article is not about the official policy of the government, but about the attitude of the media, civil society etc. The problem with Indian secularism is that somehow any criticism of persons like Zakir Naik has become equated with minority bashing. So while critics of RSS, VHP, Praveen Togadia are ubiquitous in the media, universities etc, there is hardly any mainstream criticism of the obscurantist views of people like Zakir Naik. That space has been willfully abandoned in a perverse zero sum game where criticizing Muslim fundamentalism aligns you with the RSS/BJP unless (perhaps) you happen to be a Muslim yourself. So who is stopping someone from criticizing Zakir Naik?
bharathh Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 The laws by themselves cannot be blamed - they are generally free of religious overtones. It's the culture of appeasement that has seeped into our political class and the sense of entitlement that has been stoked amongst various communities since 1947. Political exigencies make sure that rodents like Naik will, far from being ostracized, will continue to flourish. The culture of appeasement has nothing to do with the ideology of secularism. It has more to do with vote bank politics. If you really want to assign blame to appeasement... vote bank politics should be your target ... not the concept of secularism.
Recommended Posts