surajmal Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Yep. But BJP taking orders from a bunch of BS-peddling superstitious idiots in the form of VHP is a clear cut 'no go zone' for a secular like me. Not that congress are actually secular (they are pro-muslim rather than secular) but i still find them more palatable than the psuedo-hindu-nazis of the VHP and RSS. Palatable?! You can't even vote. Anyways, classic case of deracination if I ever saw one. Tends to happen with most PIOs but Bongs are another level ahead in their transformation with their history of commie nautanki.
Muloghonto Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Palatable?! You can't even vote. Fair enough. I could until 7 years ago. Still never voted BJP. Anyways, classic case of deracination if I ever saw one. Tends to happen with most PIOs but Bongs are another level ahead in their transformation with their history of commie nautanki. whats deracination ? Bongs may be politically commies, but for better part of 200 years we've been the most liberal and forward thinking of the desis. It was a Bong who got the rest of India to stop burning their wives at the stake, it was a Bong who proposed equal rights to women and men in India. We are to India what London is to Britain: atleast a century ahead in liberalism.
surajmal Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 whats deracination ? Bongs may be politically commies, but for better part of 200 years we've been the most liberal and forward thinking of the desis. It was a Bong who got the rest of India to stop burning their wives at the stake, it was a Bong who proposed equal rights to women and men in India. We are to India what London is to Britain: atleast a century ahead in liberalism. First VHP plays has little standing in BJP. Read enough nonsense from you attacking the Hindu right (and I even submit that a lot of things they propose are anachronistic). But do you actually think, the move towards modernism could have happened if the hindus didn't agree to it? Especially considering all the reforms prescribed in the constitution are directed towards Hindus (while abrahamics are left alone to go merry).
adi B Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Bongs may be politically commies, but for better part of 200 years we've been the most liberal and forward thinking of the desis. It was a Bong who got the rest of India to stop burning their wives at the stake, it was a Bong who proposed equal rights to women and men in India. We are to India what London is to Britain: atleast a century ahead in liberalism. agree with this part..but they sometimes think too politically and historically particularly the natives in WB rather than acclimatizing with the mood of the nation
Muloghonto Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 First VHP plays has little standing in BJP. Officially they are affiliated. Unofficially, they make broad policy input. That is enough in my books to be considered a religiously affiliated party. Read enough nonsense from you attacking the Hindu right (and I even submit that a lot of things they propose are anachronistic). But do you actually think, the move towards modernism could have happened if the hindus didn't agree to it? Especially considering all the reforms prescribed in the constitution are directed towards Hindus (while abrahamics are left alone to go merry). The move towards modernism by asking hindus (the majority) to accept a slightly compromised position came from INC stalwarts like Vallabhai Patel, who was more legalist than Hindu. The hinduvta is a backlash against the very tenets of secularism, which IMO happened inspite of hindu conservatives rather than due to their backing of it.
Muloghonto Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 agree with this part..but they sometimes think too politically and historically particularly the natives in WB rather than acclimatizing with the mood of the nation the mood of the nation, compared to the mood of Kolkata is a medeival cesspit of distilled BS peddled as religion dominating views.
surajmal Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Officially they are affiliated. Unofficially' date=' they make broad policy input. That is enough in my books to be considered a religiously affiliated party.[/quote'] No they don't. There is a reason VHP opposed Modi in december elections. Hindutva is a backlash to the Islamists running around like rabid dogs not secularism because there is no proverbial "Church" for Hindus.
ravishingravi Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Officially they are affiliated. Unofficially, they make broad policy input. That is enough in my books to be considered a religiously affiliated party. The move towards modernism by asking hindus (the majority) to accept a slightly compromised position came from INC stalwarts like Vallabhai Patel, who was more legalist than Hindu. The hinduvta is a backlash against the very tenets of secularism, which IMO happened inspite of hindu conservatives rather than due to their backing of it. Thats a rather contentious statement. We have to go at the every root of both secularism and Hindutva including how secularism is defined in India which is vague at best and perverse at worst. Hindutva was more of counterpoint. Not opposite to idea of secularism.
adi B Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 the mood of the nation' date=' compared to the mood of Kolkata is a medeival cesspit of distilled BS peddled as religion dominating views.[/quote'] thats the problem,kolkata is not the whole of bengal..WB will remain as a state in sh1thole ,mind u i am myself a bengali
Muloghonto Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 No they don't. There is a reason VHP opposed Modi in december elections. VHP is not the king-maker of BJP. But they do have direct input into BJP policies. Sometimes their nominee gets in (Advani) sometime someone else does (Modi). It doesnt change the fact that VHP is linked to the BJP- both officially and in de facto nature. Hindutva is a backlash to the Islamists running around like rabid dogs, not secularism because there is no proverbial "Church" for Hindus. The backlash to islamic skullduggery is to promote hindu skullduggery ? The backlash to Islamists going 'we are going to try and run the country based on hocus pocus laws invented by an illiterate man from 1500 years ago' is for Hindus to go 'we are going to run the country based on hocus pocus laws invented by dimwits from 3000 years ago' ? Sorry, that is adding more fuel to the fire, not putting out the fire. Its an age-old phenomenon for religious nutbars justifying their nutbar-ism on the basis of 'our rival religious nutbars are gaining power and they must be stopped' but its a poorly concealed argument to promote their version of unsubstantiated BS aka religion. It should be kept in mind that the governments that deal most efficiently with Islamist BS are not those who cater to 'opposing religious principles' but commies such as the Chinese or the Soviets. Under them, Islamism was crushed. That is because you dont fight one form of religious psychobabble with another form, you fight it with total rejection of religion, period.
surajmal Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 VHP is not the king-maker of BJP. But they do have direct input into BJP policies. Sometimes their nominee gets in (Advani) sometime someone else does (Modi). It doesnt change the fact that VHP is linked to the BJP- both officially and in de facto nature. More BS. Your perception doesn't mesh with the reality. The backlash to islamic skullduggery is to promote hindu skullduggery ? The backlash to Islamists going 'we are going to try and run the country based on hocus pocus laws invented by an illiterate man from 1500 years ago' is for Hindus to go 'we are going to run the country based on hocus pocus laws invented by dimwits from 3000 years ago' ? Sorry, that is adding more fuel to the fire, not putting out the fire. Its an age-old phenomenon for religious nutbars justifying their nutbar-ism on the basis of 'our rival religious nutbars are gaining power and they must be stopped' but its a poorly concealed argument to promote their version of unsubstantiated BS aka religion. It should be kept in mind that the governments that deal most efficiently with Islamist BS are not those who cater to 'opposing religious principles' but commies such as the Chinese or the Soviets. Under them, Islamism was crushed. That is because you dont fight one form of religious psychobabble with another form, you fight it with total rejection of religion, period. Another tangent. Lots of words but little said. Again, a hindu, in theory, should have no problem with secularism. Because there isn't a church or Ulema in a power struggle with the state. God damn. Go read up on what the primary intentions of a secular state are.
Muloghonto Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Thats a rather contentious statement. We have to go at the every root of both secularism and Hindutva including how secularism is defined in India which is vague at best and perverse at worst. Indeed and i agree with the latter part. That secularism is poorly defined in Indian constitution and Indian society. Indian society thinks that a 'perfect secular' is someone who respects ALL religions equally, lets ALL religious communities go about their business equally, etc etc. When in reality, all that the word 'secular' means is someone who stands for seperation of church and state- ie, state is not hostage to made-up BS stories peddled as 'directly from God/avatar of God'. Ie, secular can be someone like Sardar Patel, who was tolerant of all religions so long as they did not interfere with the policies of the nation or a secular could be someone like Stalin who smashed every religious organization to bits and totally intolerant of any religion. Hindutva was more of counterpoint. Not opposite to idea of secularism. It is not a mirror opposite of secularism but the idea of a hindu nation runs counter to the idea of secular nation at the very basis of nationhood. Hinduvtas want a nation governed by hindu principles. That is, fundamentally, anti-secular, not to mention, ultimately peddling a BS story(entire body of hindu scriptures) as the basis of legalism.
surajmal Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Hinduvtas want a nation governed by hindu principles. That is, fundamentally, anti-secular, not to mention, ultimately peddling a BS story(entire body of hindu scriptures) as the basis of legalism. Hindutva (from wiki) - the way of life of the Indian people and the Indian culture or ethos. I don't see a mention of Scriptures.
adi B Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 VHP is not the king-maker of BJP. But they do have direct input into BJP policies. Sometimes their nominee gets in (Advani) sometime someone else does (Modi). It doesnt change the fact that VHP is linked to the BJP- both officially and in de facto nature. total BS mate..they just support the roots of hinduism
Muloghonto Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 More BS. Your perception doesn't mesh with the reality. What BS ? they are officially aligned with the BJP, they have in the past made input into BJP policies. Those are facts. Another tangent. Lots of words but little said. Again, a hindu, in theory, should have no problem with secularism. Because there isn't a church or Ulema in a power struggle with the state. God damn. Go read up on what the primary intentions of a secular state are. 1. Primary intention of secularism is to seperate church from state. 2. Hindus not having a unified monolithic church does not mean Hindus do not have a 'hindu moral and ethical code' as dictated by hindu scriptures. There is no place for such in a secular nation. We dont care what some half-naked half-wit who didnt even know basic worldly geography told us about the meaning of life. He was either lying or ignorant. Therefore, what he/she said has no place in modern society, where a grade 8 student has more knowledge than this Valmiki or Shankaracharya had.
Muloghonto Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Hindutva (from wiki) - the way of life of the Indian people and the Indian culture or ethos. I don't see a mention of Scriptures. the basis of this so-called way of life and ethos are scriptures.
Muloghonto Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 total BS mate..they just support the roots of hinduism Are they formally affiliated with the BJP or not ?
adi B Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Are they formally affiliated with the BJP or not ? how does affiliation with BJP directly means they influence policy making?
Muloghonto Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 how does affiliation with BJP directly means they influence policy making? Because not only are they affiliated with the BJP but have contributed members who've sat on BJP internal committee, indicating policy role of the VHP.
Recommended Posts