Politics around renaming Aurangzeb road

[Tiger80]

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.

This point was raised in debate on TV and RSS spokesman replied to it that Ashoka later had change of heart .He embraced Budhism and became peace loving.In the case of Aurangzeb no such thing happened

[adi B]

Some aapies will shamelessly defend their master kejriwal without even thinking twice on the issue which they are defending him. Aap is nothing but a version 2 of the congress,will preach sickularism (without actually giving two hoots about it)

[coffee_rules]

This point was raised in debate on TV and RSS spokesman replied to it that Ashoka later had change of heart .He embraced Budhism and became peace loving.In the case of Aurangzeb no such thing happened

This what what most people here will read and stop.

[Yoda-esque]

+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.

This is but a drop in the ocean.

[The Outsider]

This point was raised in debate on TV and RSS spokesman replied to it that Ashoka later had change of heart .He embraced Budhism and became peace loving.In the case of Aurangzeb no such thing happened

I am assuming you agree with the RSS spokesman. If Dawood were to start chanting Buddham Sharanam Gacchami and embrace Buddhism, should India plaster his mustache on the national flag? Do you see the inappropriateness of applying modern, democratic standards to ancient and medieval monarchies? Moreover, the crucial point is that the road was not named after Aurangzeb because of his benevolence or lack of. It was simply named after him because he was a king who ruled over a vast Indian kingdom just like other roads in the area for example Akbar, Man Singh, Ashoka, Shahjahan etc. Putting Kalam road in that midst robs the naming convention of its historical context. There are so many other ways to honor him.

[Smiling Creed]

The name should not be changed.... it should act as reminder for generations to come ... either act and get united or be slave of foreigners. Sent from my LG-H502 using Tapatalk

[maniac]

I am assuming you agree with the RSS spokesman. If Dawood were to start chanting Buddham Sharanam Gacchami and embrace Buddhism, should India plaster his mustache on the national flag? Do you see the inappropriateness of applying modern, democratic standards to ancient and medieval monarchies? Moreover, the crucial point is that the road was not named after Aurangzeb because of his benevolence or lack of. It was simply named after him because he was a king who ruled over a vast Indian kingdom just like other roads in the area for example Akbar, Man Singh, Ashoka, Shahjahan etc. Putting Kalam road in that midst robs the naming convention of its historical context. There are so many other ways to honor him.

So did the British, I don't see a big deal being made when Victoria terminus was renamed....Infact British have a lot more reasons to be aggravated as they built the damn thing. There were causalities of war under Asoka and Alexander and causalities of war under Hitler and Mussolini.....Is it the same thing? The difference being there was no Ethinic cleansing or religious bigotry.....India is a secular country and a guy who is a polarizing figure on that aspect,should not be honored,simple as that....Read my previous response to you...as I said no one is protesting on roads named after Akbar and other "secular" kings.

[zen]

Germany actually changed the name of many (probably all) streets named after Hitler .... In Ind, people still debate on such issues :giggle:

[maniac]

Germany actually changed the name of many (probably all) streets named after Hitler .... In Ind' date=' people still debate on such issues :giggle:[/quote'] I am sure there are a lot of "seculars" in Germany who were still ok with Hitler's policies....there are a few here in the US as well :giggle: Thankfully they are in the minority.

[Kalia_Test]

Someone rename Hyderabad International Airport from "Rajiv Gandhi International Airport " to something else What the heck did Rajiv Gandhi do for Hyderabad? :mad: Even cricket Stadium is Rajiv Gandhi International Stadium :banghead: . In fact our tax payer money was used by Govt to pay 'Visakha Industries' - the ones that built it to rename it from 'Visakha International Cricket Stadium' to the Rajiv Gandhi one.

[Number]

Jai Aurangzeb. #Secular

[mishra]

I am assuming you agree with the RSS spokesman. If Dawood were to start chanting Buddham Sharanam Gacchami and embrace Buddhism, should India plaster his mustache on the national flag? Do you see the inappropriateness of applying modern, democratic standards to ancient and medieval monarchies? .

There are various levels of plundering and treatment by victors at the end of war. For once, we forget to recognize the difference between various methods of killing a opponent soldier post war or captured one during war. Its, what they did to their subjects, their culture, their land, their property, their children, their society during the time of peace and their rule. And all in the name of religion. Also go check how many Indians/Sri Lungans/Japs/Thai/Combodians/Tebettan/Chinese/Burmese, Ashoka attacked and killed in name of religion. After all, Asoka and Aurgazeb, they both were kings with powers and motives.

[maniac]

Someone rename Hyderabad International Airport from "Rajiv Gandhi International Airport " to something else What the heck did Rajiv Gandhi do for Hyderabad? :mad: Even cricket Stadium is Rajiv Gandhi International Stadium :banghead: . In fact our tax payer money was used by Govt to pay 'Visakha Industries' - the ones that built it to rename it from 'Visakha International Cricket Stadium' to the Rajiv Gandhi one.

Yeah seriously :banghead: Actually Visakha initially refused to budge but they were really strong armed into giving in

[mishra]

The name should not be changed.... it should act as reminder for generations to come ... either act and get united or be slave of foreigners. Sent from my LG-H502 using Tapatalk

Internet age has advantages and disadvantages when discussing such things. Till this Road renaming saga, I used to believe Anarkali was a lover to Salim. Now I know that she was favorite concubine of Akbar who happen to have one sexual encounter with Salim. Meena Baazar was a place where Akbar used to go to check out young girls and if he liked one, recruited her to his Concubine Harem. And all this details are not from Indian authors or books published in India.

[Tiger80]

I am assuming you agree with the RSS spokesman. If Dawood were to start chanting Buddham Sharanam Gacchami and embrace Buddhism, should India plaster his mustache on the national flag? Do you see the inappropriateness of applying modern, democratic standards to ancient and medieval monarchies? Moreover, the crucial point is that the road was not named after Aurangzeb because of his benevolence or lack of. It was simply named after him because he was a king who ruled over a vast Indian kingdom just like other roads in the area for example Akbar, Man Singh, Ashoka, Shahjahan etc. Putting Kalam road in that midst robs the naming convention of its historical context. There are so many other ways to honor him.

I don't fully agree with him.We all know that communitties tries to glorify their kings and the lesser they are the more one tries to glorify them.but still in a secular nation you have to maintain balance If any of your king had bad past with other religion or communitties then it is in best interest of harmony not to glorify him.Muslims don't have shortage of Kings and nawabs , they can glorify whatever they want Also how much accurate history of Asoka we have? his only story that is most poplar is Kalinga war and change of heart. Also if Hindu's don't remember Asoka then blame will be he embraced Budhism that's why he is not remembered.If dawood have change of heart and he do something wextraordinary good that hardly any terrorist do and his bad things do get erased from the memories of people then after 2000 years people can glorify him

[Raghav_12]

Internet age has advantages and disadvantages when discussing such things. Till this Road renaming saga, I used to believe Anarkali was a lover to Salim. Now I know that she was favorite concubine of Akbar who happen to have one sexual encounter with Salim. Meena Baazar was a place where Akbar used to go to check out young girls and if he liked one, recruited her to his Concubine Harem. And all this details are not from Indian authors or books published in India.

Internet is full of both the versions and if you looking for conclusive evidences on internet you wouldn't find any. The examples you gave in your post may not have any veracity as these stories have long been part of RSS's propoganda campaign and have heard enough in my childhood. Difficult to believe what is available there. All Indian history books are full of praise of Marathas. You would be made to believe that they are best thing to happen to India since Ram rajya. I was hugely influenced by Marathas history, partially as a result of attempts of indoctrination by RSS surroundings. However some of things that indian history books never told about marathas. 1. Great Shivaji's son, Sambhaji got Shivaji's wife (own step mother) killed in war of succession with own brother Rajaram. 2. There are lot of stories of Maratha's brutalities on other contemporaries Indian emperors particularly Rajputs. There is book written by some Kalyan Thakur with title of Maratha's genocide of Rajputs which mentions some of the credible sources to highlight sad incidents of exploitation and plundering that Maratha's carried out on Rajputs, partially to punish Rajputs of their alignment with Mughals, From this book

Part of his agenda was to create a Greater Maharashtra. To this effect, > he aimed at the ethnic cleansing of neighbouring regions, with the > Marathicization of the survivors. The most notorious example was his > ethnic cleansing of parts of Gujarat. His successors then carried the > Maratha tyranny all over India, plundering and slaughtering their way > through the country. They then envisioned Rajasthan as part of the > Greater Maharashtra, and hence set about to exterminate the Rajputs. > Added to the hatred of the Marathas was the support the Rajputs had > given to the Islamic Empire of Delhi for several centuries. > > > Half of Rajastan Exterminated > > The barbaric invasions and exterminations of Marathas were not limited > to the helpless Gujaratis. The Marathas also devastated Rajastan, > severely persecuting the Indo-Scythic (Rajput) races. The first Maratha > invasion of Rajastan occurred in 1736 AD [ Met.351 ]. Strife and > spoilation continued till the treaty of 1817 AD. Eyewitness > descriptions amply illustrate the devastation and destruction caused by > the Vaishnavite-Ganapatiya Marathas and the suffering of the Saura > Rajputs. Baron Metcalfe, English ambassador to many of the Rajput > courts, was an eye-witness to the holocaust

reading this, me a rajput should develop hatred of marathas? I don't think so. Also, this text seems to me a very exaggerated version of facts and not very credibel. History is best left with as history. There is no need to assign too much pride or zingoism around that. It is futile to assess kings and queens of that time from today's prism. These are used as gimmicks by politicians or leaders to get common man behind them.

[veer]

Aurangzeb must be laughing at us idiots..

[Tiger80]

Internet is full of both the versions and if you looking for conclusive evidences on internet you wouldn't find any. The examples you gave in your post may not have any veracity as these stories have long been part of RSS's propoganda campaign and have heard enough in my childhood. Difficult to believe what is available there. All Indian history books are full of praise of Marathas. You would be made to believe that they are best thing to happen to India since Ram rajya. I was hugely influenced by Marathas history, partially as a result of attempts of indoctrination by RSS surroundings. However some of things that indian history books never told about marathas. 1. Great Shivaji's son, Sambhaji got Shivaji's wife (own step mother) killed in war of succession with own brother Rajaram. 2. There are lot of stories of Maratha's brutalities on other contemporaries Indian emperors particularly Rajputs. There is book written by some Kalyan Thakur with title of Maratha's genocide of Rajputs which mentions some of the credible sources to highlight sad incidents of exploitation and plundering that Maratha's carried out on Rajputs, partially to punish Rajputs of their alignment with Mughals, From this book reading this, me a rajput should develop hatred of marathas? I don't think so. Also, this text seems to me a very exaggerated version of facts and not very credibel. History is best left with as history. There is no need to assign too much pride or zingoism around that. It is futile to assess kings and queens of that time from today's prism. These are used as gimmicks by politicians or leaders to get common man behind them.

You have completely missed the point . All the kings had done something which seem cruel by today's standard , but some did become symbol. Aurangzeb is the symbol of demolishing temples , converting Hindu's and sikhs, even 9th sikh guru which hold very high position for sikhs was killed by him. If there was particular Maratha general who was considered as symbol of killing Rajputs and Gujarati's yet stubborn marathi of today want to name road in rajput area then I don't think you would have been supporting them , then why bending your back for muslims

[Yoda-esque]

So clowns, question : what qualifies as bad here? And I mean really bad ..because reading through the parameters(laughable), it seems that nobody is bad ..

[The Outsider]

So did the British, I don't see a big deal being made when Victoria terminus was renamed....Infact British have a lot more reasons to be aggravated as they built the damn thing. There were causalities of war under Asoka and Alexander and causalities of war under Hitler and Mussolini.....Is it the same thing? The difference being there was no Ethinic cleansing or religious bigotry.....India is a secular country and a guy who is a polarizing figure on that aspect,should not be honored,simple as that....Read my previous response to you...as I said no one is protesting on roads named after Akbar and other "secular" kings.

I can't answer for a big deal being made out of it, but can speak only for myself and I was not in favor of renaming of VT either, nor Bombay etc. my view is that if names change organically that is fine but forcing a change shouldn't be done. About the Kalinga war, it is one of the better documented events from that era by Ashoka himself. There are clear mentions of villages being razed and plundered and deportations. How is that not ethnic cleansing? I don't see any honoring of Aurangzeb. The name was given by the British who were by no means friendly with the Mughals in a certain historical context referring to past rulers of India regardless of their benevolence. I can't see any reason why British would want to honor Aurangzeb. After independence I can't recall any honoring of Aurangzeb. In fact, Indian Muslims purposely avoid naming their children as Aurangzeb in general. What this event has triggered is some MLA actually honoring Aurangzeb by naming a road after him in retaliation because a section of Muslims now see this as an attempt to marginalize their history.

I don't fully agree with him.We all know that communitties tries to glorify their kings and the lesser they are the more one tries to glorify them.but still in a secular nation you have to maintain balance If any of your king had bad past with other religion or communitties then it is in best interest of harmony not to glorify him.Muslims don't have shortage of Kings and nawabs , they can glorify whatever they want Also how much accurate history of Asoka we have? his only story that is most poplar is Kalinga war and change of heart. Also if Hindu's don't remember Asoka then blame will be he embraced Budhism that's why he is not remembered.If dawood have change of heart and he do something wextraordinary good that hardly any terrorist do and his bad things do get erased from the memories of people then after 2000 years people can glorify him

Kalinga war is pretty well documented by Ashoka himself with accounts of villages being plundered and mass deportations. Your point about Dawood is facetious because if he is captured he will be jailed and hanged. As I wrote above there are no attempts made to glorify Aurangzeb. This road was named by the British. By needlessly raking up the issue, the effect has been that of glorification by a certain section because they see it as an attempt to erase Islamic history. Again, as I stated above it will be very rare to find Indian Muslims naming their child as Aurangzeb or Taimur for example. In no modern dialogue by Muslims in India is Aurangzeb hinted as being some benevolent monarch. But by deliberately erasing a name whose premise is historical rather than glorification conveys the impression of erasing history to suit parochial agendas.