Politics around renaming Aurangzeb road

[Number]

Sahi bola.

Lol at the edit. Had to read it again.

[Tiger80]

Irrespective of whether Aurangzeb was a tyrant or not' date=' which he actually was going by all accounts available, this is another attempt at eking out an Hindu identity for country. Funny that around all concerns on economy and security, Government keeps itself busy with most "critical" issues at the moment.[/quote'] there is something called pride.can you expect any nation dominated by jews accept Hitler road in future?

[Raghav_12]

Khalifa Kejri appreciated the move and announced it himself... Didn't knew Dr. Kalam was a Hindu...

Didn't know that there is quota system for religions in roads. If you had to name a road after Dr.Kalam it had to be in place of another Muslim only. Sadly this govt keeps making religion more and more prominent in public life. When you make line of division, which religion is, so prominent, eventually it will lead to disharmony. Efforts should be to subdue religion, not to establish quota system on religions in naming roads.

[Raghav_12]

there is something called pride.can you expect any nation dominated by jews accept Hitler road in future?

You restore your pride by refusing to accept the history as it happened? There remains so many sites, memorials in the name of various britishers who came India only with sole purpose of looting it and pillarage it, but no question on those. Where is the pride in being part of Commonwealth which is an open and prideful admission of our (past) subservience to britishers. There is hardly any doubt that Aurangeb was a tyrant and eventually ended up sowing seeds of downfall of Mughal Empire. But you can't deny the fact that he was born in this very India, ruled here and died here. He commanded probably largest ever territorial span in history of Inda and probably for longest period of time (1655 to 1707). It is difficult to hodwink people in believing that move has nothing to do with religion. This is part of BJP's communal agenda which believes in regular stirring of pot of religion to draw political extract.

[seedhi]

You restore your pride by refusing to accept the history as it happened? There remains so many sites, memorials in the name of various britishers who came India only with sole purpose of looting it and pillarage it, but no question on those. Where is the pride in being part of Commonwealth which is an open and prideful admission of our (past) subservience to britishers. There is hardly any doubt that Aurangeb was a tyrant and eventually ended up sowing seeds of downfall of Mughal Empire. But you can't deny the fact that he was born in this very India, ruled here and died here. He commanded probably largest ever territorial span in history of Inda and probably for longest period of time (1655 to 1707). It is difficult to hodwink people in believing that move has nothing to do with religion. This is part of BJP's communal agenda which believes in regular stirring of pot of religion to draw political extract.

Renaming a road does not mean disowning or forgetting history. It is astounding to claim that due to this renaming, Indians will forget who Aurangzeb was and what he did. Hitler and the Nazi party are also part of German history, but the symbols associated with Nazism are banned in Germany and many structures which resembled the Swastika were destroyed/redesigned after WWII. But that does not mean the Hitler was forgotten or the Holocaust was "disowned" (whatever that means) by the Germans. By the way, the now renamed Aurangzeb road was named after him by the British.

[Raghav_12]

Yeah right Aurangazeb an ******* who imprisoned his own father and killed his brothers was for some reason very compassionate towards other religions and a true beacon of Secular governance.....whatta role model.

Shivaji's son Sambhaji had got his own (step) mother killed by poison and her family trampled over by elephants. Now some of the right wingies who are leading campaign to erase Aurangzeb's name take pride in Sambhaji and name their youth wings with name of Sambhaji. There was all out war of succession between two brothers Sambhaji and Rajaram Idea is not to say who was more brutal or less but to say when you touch skelton of history there is dirt everywhere. I wouldn't have bothered to "correct" the history to make it look more favourable to us.

[seedhi]

Shivaji's son Sambhaji had got his own (step) mother killed by poison and her family trampled over by elephants. Now some of the right wingies who are leading campaign to erase Aurangzeb's name take pride in Sambhaji and name their youth wings with name of Sambhaji. There was all out war of succession between two brothers Sambhaji and Rajaram Idea is not to say who was more brutal or less but to say when you touch skelton of history there is dirt everywhere. I wouldn't have bothered to "correct" the history to make it look more favourable to us.

Is Arvind Kejriwal also a "right wingie"? And I cannot fathom why it is difficult to understand that renaming a road is not about rewriting history. It is more about righting a wrong committed by the British by naming a road after a tyrant. Simple.

[Clarke]

Renaming Aurangzeb road with a hindu name => Hindooo fascist govt Renaming Aurangzeb road with the Mahatma of our generation => Govt is bringing religion into everything, quota system for muslim named roads blah blah. There's often not a problem with these trivial things unless ur hell bent on looking for one.

[Yoda-esque]

Why would any country want to remember it's darkest period ? Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[rageaddict]

Pakistanis name their Missiles, Cities and Roads after their Murderers , Rapists and looters , India is doing the same . Atleast Pakistanis have a sort of crazy religious affiliation with their oppressors but what do we have ?

[mishra]

Why would any country want to remember it's darkest period ? Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

It more like glorify the rules and rulers of darkest period

[Tiger80]

You restore your pride by refusing to accept the history as it happened? There remains so many sites, memorials in the name of various britishers who came India only with sole purpose of looting it and pillarage it, but no question on those. Where is the pride in being part of Commonwealth which is an open and prideful admission of our (past) subservience to britishers. There is hardly any doubt that Aurangeb was a tyrant and eventually ended up sowing seeds of downfall of Mughal Empire. But you can't deny the fact that he was born in this very India, ruled here and died here. He commanded probably largest ever territorial span in history of Inda and probably for longest period of time (1655 to 1707). It is difficult to hodwink people in believing that move has nothing to do with religion. This is part of BJP's communal agenda which believes in regular stirring of pot of religion to draw political extract.

British names are systematically phased out and never ever you hear any christian protesting , why? Aurangzeb was symbol extreme fanatic islam , name whatever muslim king or history you want to , but why Aurangzeb.

[RedFever]

The justification that is pouring opposing the renaming of a road based on a Mass murderer emperor Aurangzeb may be an indicator how bad situation is becoming in India.

[Yoda-esque]

The justification that is pouring opposing the renaming of a road based on a Mass murderer emperor Aurangzeb may be an indicator how bad situation is becoming in India.

Litmus test fail

[The Outsider]

Another one of those RSS bogeys that I used to buy into like the Hindu population of Pakistan till reading contemporary accounts and peer reviewed articles on him. Aurangzeb like all other kings of those and earlier times was a king driven by politics and expansion of his kingdom. Sure, he destroyed Hindu temples but he also patronized them according to his political expedience. Yeah, he imposed jizya but so did the Marathas impose a Muslim only tax. He was by no means a benevolent King and was in fact quite cruel in some of his deeds, but his actions were in no way different from other kings in principle. Shivaji was an ally of Aurangzeb for a while. It's stupid to apply modern, democratic standards retrospectively because by those standards the venerated Ashoka is a genocidal maniac and mass murderer. This is another attempt by the sanghis to distort history and because the notion of Aurangzeb being the devil incarnate has become so ingrained it is an anathema to oppose it. I know the khaki chaddhi wale have been brainwashed beyond help, but others should read contemporary accounts and peer reviewed articles on him to get the true picture. Moreover, it just robs the area of New Delhi of its context where roads have been named after emperors from ancient and medieval India to suddenly have an out of context Kalam road. Whatever Aurangzeb was he ruled over one of the largest kingdoms in Indian history (which he well and truly fecked up that it disintegrated after his death). And that was the context in which roads in New Delhi were named, not in a ranking of the most benevolent people.

[Yoda-esque]

To people thinking that Alamgir was equal to other rulers of his time. I would suggest that they read the works of Abraham Eraly, a non partisan account of the life and times of Mughals Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[surajmal]

To people thinking that Alamgir was equal to other rulers of his time. I would suggest that they read the works of Abraham Eraly, a non partisan account of the life and times of Mughals Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

+1 This jihadi was no different than other jihadis before him. Small, dispersed Hindu rebellions that had been going for centuries prior to him reached a fever pitch (due to him overreaching in his goal to wipe hindus off the face of the map) towards the end of his reign and his successors couldn't keep the kingdom together thereafter.

[maniac]

Another one of those RSS bogeys that I used to buy into like the Hindu population of Pakistan till reading contemporary accounts and peer reviewed articles on him. Aurangzeb like all other kings of those and earlier times was a king driven by politics and expansion of his kingdom. Sure' date=' he destroyed Hindu temples but he also patronized them according to his political expedience. Yeah, he imposed jizya but so did the Marathas impose a Muslim only tax. He was by no means a benevolent King and was in fact quite cruel in some of his deeds, but his actions were in no way different from other kings in principle. [b']Shivaji was an ally of Aurangzeb for a while. It's stupid to apply modern, democratic standards retrospectively because by those standards the venerated Ashoka is a genocidal maniac and mass murderer. This is another attempt by the sanghis to distort history and because the notion of Aurangzeb being the devil incarnate has become so ingrained it is an anathema to oppose it. I know the khaki chaddhi wale have been brainwashed beyond help, but others should read contemporary accounts and peer reviewed articles on him to get the true picture. Moreover, it just robs the area of New Delhi of its context where roads have been named after emperors from ancient and medieval India to suddenly have an out of context Kalam road. Whatever Aurangzeb was he ruled over one of the largest kingdoms in Indian history (which he well and truly fecked up that it disintegrated after his death). And that was the context in which roads in New Delhi were named, not in a ranking of the most benevolent people.

So by that logic,US was ok with Hitler during his early rise to power as well and today the guy is the symbol of evil for obvious reasons. Before you jump into RSS Propoganda and all that bs,there is stuff going around about Akbar and Shah Jahan too,true or not is a different debate but the fact is atleast the let us say for now "the neutral" historians were able to turn them into great rulers for the common public no matter what actually happened. With Aurangazeb even the most extreme left wingers are only able to rationalize this genocidal maniac's policies at best,which means it is generally accepted he was a tyrant. The fact is Akbar etc. did not have blood of their own family on their hands atleast from the general history that most of us are aware of it is not spoken about,here is a blood thirsty bastard killing and torturing his own family. Do we want such a polarizing figure in our history to be recognized.....what next General Dyer was just following orders and was a great soldier?

[Yoda-esque]

So by that logic,US was ok with Hitler during his early rise to power as well and today the guy is the symbol of evil for obvious reasons. Before you jump into RSS Propoganda and all that bs,there is stuff going around about Akbar and Shah Jahan too,true or not is a different debate but the fact is atleast the let us say for now "the neutral" historians were able to turn them into great rulers for the common public no matter what actually happened. With Aurangazeb even the most extreme left wingers are only able to rationalize this genocidal maniac's policies at best,which means it is generally accepted he was a tyrant. The fact is Akbar etc. did not have blood of their own family on their hands atleast from the general history that most of us are aware of it is not spoken about,here is a blood thirsty bastard killing and torturing his own family. Do we want such a polarizing figure in our history to be recognized.....what next General Dyer was just following orders and was a great soldier?

If one can defend Aurangzeb , one can defend all and any evil .....except except except....hold your breath ....Jaahils

[RedFever]

Another one of those RSS bogeys that I used to buy into like the Hindu population of Pakistan till reading contemporary accounts and peer reviewed articles on him. Aurangzeb like all other kings of those and earlier times was a king driven by politics and expansion of his kingdom. Sure, he destroyed Hindu temples but he also patronized them according to his political expedience. Yeah, he imposed jizya but so did the Marathas impose a Muslim only tax. He was by no means a benevolent King and was in fact quite cruel in some of his deeds, but his actions were in no way different from other kings in principle. Shivaji was an ally of Aurangzeb for a while. It's stupid to apply modern, democratic standards retrospectively because by those standards the venerated Ashoka is a genocidal maniac and mass murderer. This is another attempt by the sanghis to distort history and because the notion of Aurangzeb being the devil incarnate has become so ingrained it is an anathema to oppose it. I know the khaki chaddhi wale have been brainwashed beyond help, but others should read contemporary accounts and peer reviewed articles on him to get the true picture. Moreover, it just robs the area of New Delhi of its context where roads have been named after emperors from ancient and medieval India to suddenly have an out of context Kalam road. Whatever Aurangzeb was he ruled over one of the largest kingdoms in Indian history (which he well and truly fecked up that it disintegrated after his death). And that was the context in which roads in New Delhi were named, not in a ranking of the most benevolent people.

blah blah blah blah...