zen Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 TBF, there are jokers in every party. No party is perfect. Many of Ind's politicians, irrespective of which party they belong to, appear to be a generation behind in their thinking. When they open their mouth, you are often left wondering if you have not gone back in time by stepping in to a time machine. In the current scenario, what should matter for Indians is which leader is capable and has the vision to make Ind benefit from the opportunities and address the challenges that the 21st century presents. Ind needs someone at the center who can guide, inspire positive changes and set the right tone for the 21st century.
diga Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 Isn't that what I meant as an equally bad alternative? Do keep in mind, not many nations have suffered because they gave extra rights to minority. US has given rights to blacks, jews, gays. However whenever majority have ganged against minorities, there have been very small term gains followed by complete anarchy. Nazis and current Pakistan are prime examples Minority..??? Infact they are the second largest group in India.. There are many more who fall into the minority groups.Its time Muslims came out of that mentality
Crookbond Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 Err, sorry you are off the mark here. Nazis did spout false propaganda because there was nothing in the German constitution or rights that gave the Jews any sort of unique or previledged position. In the case of Indian constitution, it is absolutely clear, without a shadow of doubt, that Muslims are given a unique position and arguably, a priviledged position. This supposition can be factually substantiated: The Indian constitution makes Muslim laws of inheretence and muslim-to-muslim relations, based on Muslim theological beleifs. A Hindu to hindu interaction is not subject to hindu theological concept overriding legal consensus established by the laws of the land. This establishes the case of unique position afforded to a minority in modern India that the Weimacht Republic did not make an exception to. Thus, while Hitler's assessment that Jews were 'unique' in Germany is false, it establishes the fact that Muslims are unique. Wait - don't we have "Hindu" laws as well. Hindu Marriage Act etc. etc.?
ravishingravi Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 Wait - don't we have "Hindu" laws as well. Hindu Marriage Act etc. etc.? Do we want Hindu marriage act ? Another thing, with diversity among Hindus, it is unfair to meanest intelligence to have one single act for all Hindus.
ravishingravi Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 TBF' date=' there are jokers in every party. No party is perfect. Many of Ind's politicians, irrespective of which party they belong to, appear to be a generation behind in their thinking. When they open their mouth, you are often left wondering if you have not gone back in time by stepping in to a time machine. In the current scenario, what should matter for Indians is which leader is capable and has the vision to make Ind benefit from the opportunities and address the challenges that the 21st century presents. Ind needs someone at the center who can guide, inspire positive changes and set the right tone for the 21st century.[/quote'] Woh kaun leader hai.
Muloghonto Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 Wait - don't we have "Hindu" laws as well. Hindu Marriage Act etc. etc.? The Hindu marriage act is not a hindu law, it is a law FOR hindus getting married. Look at the law. It has no mention of being subject to Hindu religious interpretations ( as the Muslim law states) and it is not based on any religious interpretation of hinduism. For eg., Hindu law, as followed by centuries amongst most hindu communities stated that property passes to males on preferential basis: the daughter can inherit property only if the father has no sons, the son is beholden for his mother's wellbeing but the mother of the recepient (aka the wife of the deceased) does not directly get property according to hindu customs. But the Hindu marriage act specifies it so. Further, Hinduism does not allow divorce unless extenuating circumstances are presented, the Hindu marriage act allows divorce on the basis of 'mutually consentual reasons of any nature' and only makes the plaintiff present 'reasonable extenuating circumstances' when one party wants divorce and the other does not.
zen Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 Woh kaun leader hai. Based on the performance in the last decade, I do have someone in mind amongst the options available. But I don't want to indulge in to political lobbying and also because I am not that up-to-date with Ind politics
Muloghonto Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 TBF' date=' there are jokers in every party. No party is perfect. Many of Ind's politicians, irrespective of which party they belong to, appear to be a generation behind in their thinking. When they open their mouth, you are often left wondering if you have not gone back in time by stepping in to a time machine. In the current scenario, what should matter for Indians is which leader is capable and has the vision to make Ind benefit from the opportunities and address the challenges that the 21st century presents. Ind needs someone at the center who can guide, inspire positive changes and set the right tone for the 21st century.[/quote'] They are a generation behind because 'social liberalization of India' is a phenomenon that was conceived in the 1980s and really did not take off till the 1990s. By social liberalization, i mean the break from traditional codes of behaviour displayed by a vast number of urban Indian youths. When I was a teen, it was the early 80s and it was not considered proper at all-even amongst your peers- to have a girlfriend. As such, there is a distinct disconnect between Indian youth and the older generation from which the politicians hail from. India's political machinery is geared towards 'rewarding the long-serving stalwarts for their service with posts in the government', not 'best candidate to resonate with the voters'. As such, it tends to favour a system where politicians at the dusk of teir careers end up running the country. This is actually Modi's key asset- he is a significantly young politician by Indian standards ( isnt he in his late 50s/early 60s?) and significantly more competent than his congress rival, Rahul Gandhi. But if Rahul starts to resonate with the younger generation, Modi is gonna get boned because Modi already has the veneer of a conservative hindu but not a particularly staunch one. India is basically at the stage where America was in the early 1960s. A distinct generational gap and a social disconnect between the older and younger generations. This is what propelled an early 40s-something Kennedy to power over the 'old antiquated farts who did not understand the youth'. A competent politician who can resonate with the largest demographic in India (which is not incidentally, hindus or even the muslims if they voted as one block, its the youth. the 18-35 crowd), he will be the next great herald of Indian politics, since he would be able to win a distinct majority in the biggest demographic group in India- perhaps even leading to the first time in over 20 years when one party had functional majority in the Lok Sabha.
zen Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 They are a generation behind because 'social liberalization of India' is a phenomenon that was conceived in the 1980s and really did not take off till the 1990s. By social liberalization, i mean the break from traditional codes of behaviour displayed by a vast number of urban Indian youths. When I was a teen, it was the early 80s and it was not considered proper at all-even amongst your peers- to have a girlfriend. As such, there is a distinct disconnect between Indian youth and the older generation from which the politicians hail from. India's political machinery is geared towards 'rewarding the long-serving stalwarts for their service with posts in the government', not 'best candidate to resonate with the voters'. As such, it tends to favour a system where politicians at the dusk of teir careers end up running the country. This is actually Modi's key asset- he is a significantly young politician by Indian standards ( isnt he in his late 50s/early 60s?) and significantly more competent than his congress rival, Rahul Gandhi. But if Rahul starts to resonate with the younger generation, Modi is gonna get boned because Modi already has the veneer of a conservative hindu but not a particularly staunch one. India is basically at the stage where America was in the early 1960s. A distinct generational gap and a social disconnect between the older and younger generations. This is what propelled an early 40s-something Kennedy to power over the 'old antiquated farts who did not understand the youth'. A competent politician who can resonate with the largest demographic in India (which is not incidentally, hindus or even the muslims if they voted as one block, its the youth. the 18-35 crowd), he will be the next great herald of Indian politics, since he would be able to win a distinct majority in the biggest demographic group in India- perhaps even leading to the first time in over 20 years when one party had functional majority in the Lok Sabha. Some excellent points :good:
Recommended Posts