Home Blog Page 338

Two nation theory after independence

Anurag Johari
-
0
Two nation theory after independence

Sir Syed Ahmad Khan had declared in 1875 AD Hindus and Muslims as separate nations and having different and conflicting socio-political interests. Much later, on 22 March 1940 during Muslim League’s discussion on Lahore resolution on Pakistan, Jinnah explained the Two Nation theory,

“The Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs, litterateurs. They neither intermarry nor interdine together and, indeed, they belong to two different civilizations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspect on life and of life are different. It is quite clear that Hindus and Muslims derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes, and different episodes. Very often the hero of one is a foe of the other and, likewise, their victories and defeats overlap.”

This excerpt of his speech is available on the website of Nazaria-E-Pakistan Foundation’s website. In contrast to that Gandhi supported for Hindu Muslim unity throughout the freedom struggle. For that he gave undue importance to Muslim League and unilaterally conceded many unreasonable demands of Muslims. But, Muslim community failed to reciprocate his goodwill and faith in the community. For example, there are various instances where he insisted on Qu’ran recital in the temple but he could not make Muslims to allow Hindus singing devotional song in any mosque or make them to give up cow slaughtering.

Post Independence

After independence, it was reasonably expected that the Indian Muslims will discard the Two Nation Theory and they will assimilate with rest of the society with equal rights. But after partition, Maulana Azad wanted the reservation for Muslims in the Legislature. Similarly, Nehru insisted for using Urdu as official language for Delhi and United Province, but seeing the stiff resistance from G.B.Pant, Nehru did not insist. The contemporary renowned journalist Durga Das has detailed this incident in his book, India from Curzon to Nehru and After.

Even after independence, there are many instances confirming that many Muslims continued to subscribe the Two Nation Theory as explained by Jinnah in 1940, they continued to revere different heroes, different source of inspirations and glorification of different victories. Their such stubborn approach was inconsistent with the thesis that these are the nationalistic attributes and not the personal beliefs, traditions, religious literature. The political patronage of their vote bank and appeasement politics made them to publicly insult the national attributes and violate the law. They opposed the Tiranga Yatra, refused to sing national song or utter Vande Mataram, showed disrespect to the national song and national anthem violating the code, raising pro Pakistan and Anti India slogans like ‘Bharat Tere Tukde Honge’ while challenging the sovereignty and integrity of India, demanding public display of Jinnah’s portrait in Aligarh Muslim university, publicly supporting cow slaughtering, violating the law and supporting Pakistan during cricket matches. These are not any aberrations but the normal trends which can be easily seen by ordinary people all around. After many decades of independence, it has reached to the level where they started promoting each and every thing that shows India in poor light and disliking everything that could be remotely linked to the Indian traditions or culture.

Appeasement Politics

The above incidents are being repeated without any fear for law or deterrent due to protective wings of the politicians as a part appeasement politics under camouflage of secularism. This is a classic model based on Nehruvian politics. This political model of confusion and chaos where on contentious issues, no side has any clarity or visibility about the position of the leaders and the party. However, this confusion worked as camouflage for Muslim appeasement. This type of politics encourages politicians to take better dividend while avoiding to take a clear stand on certain burning issues and defer the decision making, with the hope that the appropriate decision will be taken at favorable time.

Because of this model of politics, many issues cropped up immediately after independence on which Nehru government did not take any decisive stand. It started with Ayodhya dispute where the main issue was that whether Mosque was built after demolishing a temple which was at the birthplace of Lord Ram or not. In December 1949, the statues of Lord Ram and Sita were placed by some Hindu activists, inside the structure. Muslims filed civil suits in local court. After this, Nehru and the Congress did not take any clear and decisive position on the issue. In 1986, to contain the Hindu reaction to nullify the Supreme Court’s ruling in Shah Bano case, the Congress government only enabled the local court to open the lock. Till the time the issue was finally decided by the Supreme Court in November 2019, the Congress guided by Nehruvian model of politics did not take any decisive and clear stand on the issue.

Kashmir was another problem that India encountered immediately after independence. Later, it became a chronic problem due to appeasement politics flourishing on the Nehruvian model. The ruler of Kashmir Maharaja Hari Singh decided to stay independent because he expected that the State’s Muslims would be unhappy with accession to India, and the Hindus and Sikhs would become vulnerable if he joined Pakistan. But, Jinnah’s fanatic followers were hell bent on taking Kashmir. Pakistani army disguised as tribal invaded Kashmir which was defended by Indian army when the Maharaja signed the instrument of accession with India.

Nehru took the matter to the United Nations and also promised plebiscite. At Nehru’s insistence, Article 370 was incorporated in the Constitution conferring the special status. Because of this special status only, in 1990 Kashmir valley was made free from Hindus by Pakistan backed Kashmiri terrorists causing exodus of Kashmiri Pandits. One year before, on 5th August 2019 Modi government abolished the special status of Jammu and Kashmir. Technically, Kashmir problem was a state level issue in which Pakistan was interested. Surprisingly, many Muslims at pan India level, were opposed to withdrawal of special status of Jammu and Kashmir state. This was contrary to popular demand of Indians across all sections.

Two Nation Theory was never given up because when Uniform Civil Code was being discussed in the Constituent Assembly Muslim members like Muhammad Ismail (Madras), Naziruddin Ahmad (West Bengal), Mahboob Ali Baig (Madras) opposed the same and suggested to retain the personal law based on the religion. However, the tough position taken by the K.M. Munshi and Ambedkar, with the support of other members of the Constituent Assembly, ensured that the Uniform Civil Code is included in the Constitution without any condition attached.

Later, Nehru government brought in Hindu Code Bill, which highly opposed with Congress and also in the Parliament. Many of them did see it against the spirit of the Uniform Civil Code as desired under Article 44 of the Constitution. The main objection was that, if the reforms are important to ensure the justice to women then why to categorize Hindus as separate group and it must be implemented across all religions. Nehru was apprehensive about potential risk of Muslim dissidence in accepting the Uniform Civil Code and he did not want to offend them. Due to appeasement politics, Uniform Civil Code is still not enacted. Later, this gave a cue to Muslims about the political thinking that in future they could show resentment on the pretext of their religious doctrines. 

Aligarh Muslim University(AMU) is a master piece of appeasement politics nourishing the Two Nation Theory. It was founded by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan and guided by his Two Nation Theory, became the incubator of separatist Pakistan Movement. After independence, in a legal case the Supreme Court of India decided in 1968 that AMU was not any minority institution. In 1981, the Congress government in which Sheela Kaul was the Education Minister, brought an amendment in the law to do away the technicalities restricting in making AMU a minority institution. In February 2005, the Congress government in which Arjun Singh was the HRD Minister issued a notification permitting AMU, as a minority institution, to reserve 50 per cent seats for Muslim students during admissions. This was stuck down by Allahabad High Court and the matter is currently pending with the Supreme Court.

Need Corrective Measures

Thus, we have seen that even after seven decades of independence, the Two Nation Theory has been flourishing with appeasement politics. The appeasement politics in short term, may be fetching dividend for some political parties but effectively its posing a grave threat to the nation, society and culture of India. There is a need that the government monitor and regulate the institutions like AMU, Deoband, Barelvi and Tablighi etc; which harbinger the sentiments nourishing this secessionist ideology and cultural alienation. To avoid the misuse of the word minority and minority rights, as enshrined in the Constitution, the government must clearly define the definition of minority and the scope of such rights which should not infringe the safety of the citizens, security and sovereignty of the state.

The third way

blazeofglory231
-
0
The third way

The Movement

Since the global financial crisis of 2008, a right wing populist movement has simmered, gathered steam and exploded all over the world. Capitalism has been on the brink ever since bankers decided to gamble with the future of millions (a loss of 4.05 trillion dollars: IMF), while their respective governments bailed them out, jailed exactly one and received fines and settlements through their shareholders. These naked acts of greed, venality and injustice infuriated and exasperated the silent majority. This has been the decade of the working class. Whether it’s Viktor Orban in Hungary, Matteo Salvini in Italy, Marine Le Pen in France, Jorg Muthen in Germany, Boris Johnson in the UK, Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, Donald Trump in the US or Narendra Modi in India; the rise of populist leaders has been the one constant of this decade. The deplorables, growing tired, frustrated and resentful over financial transgressions, deindustrialisation, unemployment, immigration, outsourcing, stagnation and inflation have been the driving force behind these movements. Detesting rising inequality, a rapacious China and the incompetence of the Left, the silent majority have spurred change all over the world and are finally speaking out and being heard.

The other constant in this decade has been the rise of ‘Economic Nationalism’. Economists unanimously will tell you, it is an ignorant and flawed philosophy that will lead to the collapse of the world economic order. Except, they fail to mention China that has practiced economic nationalism since the 1970s and have slowly risen to the top of the pyramid. China’s ascent is both undeniable and remarkable; a country that could not feed or clothe itself in the ‘60s, now has 14.14 trillion dollars as their GDP, second only to the USA. Today, India’s upsurge rests on ‘Aatmanirbhar Bharat’, a program based on economic nationalism.

I’ve been meaning to understand the economic policy of the government of the Bharatiya Janta Party ever since its colossal rise in 2014. What is it based on? Who are they getting their advice from? How is it different from the Congress’? Why is it different from the Congress’? What is the ambition? What do they want to accomplish?

India Circa 2014

The Indian economy isn’t moving. It is paralysed and falling under its own weight. This is confounding and incomprehensible. Half a decade earlier, the economist Prime Minister won a huge mandate for his Party on the basis of the welfare state (MGNREGA), financial inclusion (Swabhiman/Swavlamban), inclusive growth (social security schemes) and a juggernaut economy that wasn’t relenting even during a global meltdown. The development model of Amartya Sen and Joseph Stiglitz was running wild and free; it looked like India was on track to be an economic giant. Except, this bliss did not last. Like any Keynesian model (the State invests money in the economy), the welfare state of India started collapsing. People began to reel under the pressure of inflation and unemployment, while the multiple scams (2G, CWG, Augusta Westland) perpetrated right under Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s nose did not help.

India was on the verge of going to elections again. This time, the challenge was not from an experienced warhorse, but a dynamic leader who had transformed his state of Gujarat and projected it as a symbol of efficiency and competence; everything India wasn’t.

The Gujarat Engine

In 2013, Columbia professor, Jagdish Bhagwati released a book titled ‘Why Growth Matters’. Not only, did Bhagwati criticise Sen & Stiglitz of being intellectually lazy but also questioned them for not learning from the mistakes of the Nehruvian past. He advocated trusting market forces, liberalising the economy, trade and labour reforms and restructuring redistributive programs. Bhagwati’s thesis couldn’t have come at a worse time for a Prime Minister whose legacy as a reformer was beginning to corrode. ‘Why Growth Matters’ wasn’t just a seething condemnation of the UPA II’s economic policies, it was also a vindication for the Gujarat model. For the last 13 years, the chief minister of Gujarat, through policies specified by the Columbia economist, mutated Gujarat into a state with a growth rate consistently above India’s. This growth alleviated most of the state from poverty, bettered human development indicators by an impressive margin and led to overall prosperity. The book and the state were blueprints and execution plans respectively; India was immensely excited and looking forward to their ‘Achhe Din’.

When Narendra Modi came to power in 2014, the Prime Minister began to implement the Gujarat model nationally. He liberalised all the major sectors to foreign direct investment. FDI grew from 28 billion dollars in 2013 to 1 trillion dollars in 2019. The Finance Ministry under his directions also moved away from red-tapism and made it easier for businesses to prosper, which is reflected in the World Bank’s ‘Ease of Doing Business Report’ (India was ranked 134 in 2013 and is ranked 63 today). Modi recognised the welfare state of the Congress for the faltering and inefficient giant it was, and called to get rid of it. Acknowledging the need for decisiveness and reforms, Modi went ahead with the radical reforms of demonetization and the Goods & Service Tax.

Soon, though Modi recognised that the ‘free trade model’ that worked sublimely in Gujarat wouldn’t propel India. Income inequality and unemployment were increasing despite his liberal policies. India wasn’t Gujarat. India was an amalgamation of diverse states, disparate cultures, dissimilar regions, divergent economics, different societies and discrete people. He needed to find another paradigm that would suit India. And so, the Prime Minister looked at his parent organisation’s intellectual milieu.

The Prophet

The name Dattopant Thengadi might not mean much to the average Indian, but in Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh circles, it assumes a messianic form. A lawyer, a sociologist, a political philosopher, an ideologue, an organiser and an economist, Thengadi is credited to be one of the primary orchestrators of the Hindu nationalist movement. In a luminous career spanning half a century, he founded India’s largest trade union organisation (the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh), India’s largest farmer organisation (Bharatiya Kisan Sangh), the economic think tank, the Swadeshi Jagaran Manch and also helped birth the student organisation, the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad.

As an ideal Swayamsevak, he was famous for being uncompromising over ideology as well as being a boisterous supporter of internal dissent (he organised a workers rally in 2001 criticising the Vajpayee government’s disinvestment policy which led to the resignation of Yashwant Sinha as Finance Minister). As a prescient political economist, he predicted the dissolution of the Soviet Union and foresaw a crisis in capitalism. As a prolific writer, he authored an impressive array of 50 books on diverse subjects in various languages; the most popular of which is ‘The Third Way’, written in 1995.

In ‘The Third Way’, Thengadi postulated an alternative from capitalism and communism, theorizing that Western economics would not work in India, simply because it was socio-culturally distinct from the rest of the world. He formulated ‘Hindu Economics’ as a paradigm, rejecting existing theories and borrowing from ancient Indian traditions. ‘The Third Way’ called for promotion of ‘Swadeshi’, while also advocating for a patron state, encouraging the MSME sector (Micro, Small & Medium enterprises), protecting the traditional informal sector (93% of India’s workforce), imploring radical labour industry reforms and supporting ecologically conscientious growth and technologically responsible growth.

Dattopant Thengadi passed away in 2004, but his legacy lives on through the Prime Minister’s economic program.

Collision

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s economic policy of India rests on two discordant philosophies that are constantly on a collision course with each other. This intellectual discourse has two champions, Professor Jagdish Bhagwati, an economist whose satirical wit and academic brilliance have earned him universal acclaim and Subramaniam Gurumurthy, the premier apprentice of Thengadi, whose cerebral prowess and moral crusade (the character of R Madhavan in the film ‘Guru’ was based on him) have placed him in the higher echelons of India’s economic circles. The two haven’t always gotten along and sometimes their scholastic duels have become personal; regardless, they have unambiguously supported the government’s economic policies.

Contending with this confrontation of styles, doctrines, ideologies and methodologies; the BJP government has carried out a program that has harmonized them. The social security programs are a fine example of this affiliation. The Prime Minister hasn’t done away with them like he initially suggested, instead; he has made them more efficient by freeing them of leakage and corruption. The middle man has disappeared; the poor are now benefitted directly, whether it is building a toilet or securing an LPG cylinder. You can see shades of the patron state (and Reaganomics) in the Prime Minister’s “Government is not the solution to the problem, it is the problem” speech as well as the redistributive reforms prescribed in ‘Why Growth Matters’. The FDI policy has also witnessed a change, while earlier investment was emphatically encouraged; today it is supported through partnerships with domestic firms.

The Balancing Act

The economic policy of the Bharatiya Janta Party today is a compatible accord that gives equal parity to two contradictory philosophies. ‘Aatmanirbhar Bharat’, ‘Make in India’, ‘Skill India’, the Mudra loans, the promotion of the MSME sector and the informal economy, decentralisation of village economics and even ‘Swachh Bharat’ have all been prescribed in ‘The Third way’. On the other hand, reforms in labour & bankruptcy laws, boosting FDI through local partnership (an amalgamation of the two paradigms), disinvestment, the GST and reformed welfare-ism are strategies proposed in ‘Why Growth Matters’.

The recent pivot to ‘Aatmanirbhar Bharat’ has been recommended not just by Thengadi but by the RSS since the ‘70s. Sceptics castigate it as protectionism and belittle it by calling it uninformed and uneconomic; I’m not sure if they are right or wrong, however, I am sure that ‘economic nationalism’ is the absolute moral thing to do. How do you justify security blankets to immigrants when our rural hinterland suffers in abject poverty and hunger? How do you defend jobs and income to other nationalities when our youth is rotting in unemployment? How do you favour the free flow of imported goods when our artisans and craftsmen are dying slow deaths? How do you explain unsupervised foreign investment when our entrepreneurs are struggling? How do you condone a globalised economic order when it leads to economic imperialism? ‘Aatmanirbhar Bharat’ is not just about self reliance and self sufficiency; it is going to be the lasting legacy of the Modi government.

“Communism has collapsed and Capitalism is on the decline, but its demise is being delayed. The search for a third alternative has begun.”
-Dattopant Thengadi

Challenges and opportunities for the higher education system: Co-existing with COVID-19

adityajnu13
-
0
Challenges and opportunities for the higher education system: Co-existing with COVID-19

The sudden outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on every single entity across the globe. Not just trade, tourism and healthcare, the spread of the deadly pandemic has posed serious challenges for education mechanisms globally, and India is no exception. Various schools and educational institutions across the country were closed down in mid-march, much prior to the announcement of country-wide lockdown. While the first phase of lockdown saw complete halt to educational and academic activities, the second phase experienced significant growth in virtual learning. Online platforms such as Zoom, Team link, YouTube live, Skype, Google meets/hangout, Google classroom etc. which were merely restricted for professional use became household names in the country. Private universities across the nation, especially those offering technical and professional courses were swift to commence online classes. Key central universities like Delhi University and Jawaharlal Nehru University also advised the faculty members to teach online.

Though the shift was rather smooth for the private universities given the fact that majority of students there come from economically sound backgrounds, the scenario was completely different in the government universities. For an institution like Jawaharlal Nehru University which caters largely to the deprived and remote populations, it was challenging for the students and faculty alike to ensure smooth conduction of online classes. The major chunk of students who had returned to their native places after the lockdown of the university, faced problems like unavailability of sound internet connection, economic burden and anxiety etc. 

Many were also devoid of technological assets like laptop or smartphone which are quintessential for virtual education. Although conventional courses such as International Relations, Social Sciences etc. were boosted by frequent ‘webinars’, for non-conventional courses such as language studies, online teaching failed to serve the purpose. A language as tricky to learn like Mandarin, which involves thorough rectification of tones and pronunciation to attain fluency, is difficult to be learnt online. It is for the very same reason that the majority of online classes had feeble attendance and received mixed responses from the students. 

However, it would be unfair to snub the efforts by university administrations and the government machineries to beef up the current online education structure and bring in gradual reforms. The Ministry of Human Resource Development launched a series of web-based programs to push e-learning. To name a few, SWAYAM which is a free online education venture, is aimed at bridging the digital divide between the developed and under-developed students of the country. It provides video lectures, specially designed study materials and self-assessment tests through state of the art technology; the National Digital Library of India (NDLI) which is a single window search facility contains educational materials ranging over plethora of subjects available in all major regional languages; another platform Shodhganga enables research scholars to deposit their Ph.D. theses and make it available to the entire scholarly community in open access. 

Pioneer educational institutions like Jawaharlal Nehru University and Delhi University also made efforts to facilitate e-learning. Jawaharlal Nehru University provided a proxy access to its e-library and various other educational platforms subscribed by it to the students, enabling them to access research materials from anywhere. The Special Centre of E-Learning, which was founded two years back in the university, has organized various online workshops and faculty development programmes on themes such as “Design, Development & Delivery of Online Courses” and “COVID -19 New Age Teaching Pedagogy: Innovative Tools, Techniques and Research Methods for Efficient Business Management Teaching in Digital Era” in the past few months. The university also organized an online fitness training program to create awareness regarding physical and mental health amongst the students. Another peer institution, Delhi University, also undertook similar steps where remote access of the library resources was provided to the students. The university also launched a virtual learning environment (VLE) web portal to provide digital support to students and teachers. 

While one needs to applaud such efforts, we also need to brace and prepare for the upcoming future. Without the availability of any potential vaccine, COVID-19 is here to stay and might become a part of our daily life in the longer run. Study by Morgan Stanley projected India’s 670 million internet users to rise to 914 million by 2027. While this may seem as a boost for e-learning, ensuring penetration of proper internet connection in rural areas remains a big challenge. Also, Indian universities like Jawaharlal Nehru University, IITs and IIMs are known for their “free learning environment” where education doesn’t merely imply to lectures in the classroom, debates and discussion with peers and faculties and extra-curricular activities play a vital role in grooming the intellect of the students and filling this void in higher education will definitely be a herculean task. 

Collaboration with various ed-tech startups such as BYJU’S, Unacademy and Vedantu etc. can be a way ahead for the government to ensure quality, relevance and agility of e-education. Lessons can also be drawn from China where the central government collaborated with e-education platforms like iCourse, Mosoink and Neuedu etc. to provide online classes in more than 1400 universities. Creating a robust faculty training mechanism for e-teaching and creating a conducive environment to ensure learning is not stressful is also the way ahead for higher education.

#COVID19 India : Active cases growth rate declining, recoveries increasing

utkarshvashistha22
-
0
#COVID19 India : Active cases growth rate declining, recoveries increasing

India has crossed 2 Million confirmed COVID19 cases mark as per the data by Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Governmet Of India. India’s sample positivity rate is quite high and up above the WHO (World Health Organization) benchmark.

There are many positives for India which shows that timely decision taken by PM Narendra Modi led Govt of India has strengthened India’s fight against COVID19.

•As per Graph by Prof Shamika Ravi, India’s Active Cases Growth Rate has declined to 1.1% and now active cases are doubling in 64 days & the situation is further improving.


•The Actual Caseload on India i.e. the Active Cases is 6,06,390 Cases as per MoHFW,GoI data.

•India’s Recovery rate at all time high of 68%, Almost 50,000 + Recoveries Daily Now & further increasing

•India’s case fatality rate is at all time low of 2.05% & futher declining

•India is testing Almost 6.5Lakh Samples Daily Now, So India moving forward with Test-Trace-Treat strategy.

There are some points to worry in densely populated India but situation is improving. We need to be cautious and continue #FightAgainstCorona.

#WearMask #SocialDistancing #WashHands #Unlock3

‘The Appealing’ vs ‘The Appalling’

PRATIKSHA MISHRA
-
0
‘The Appealing’ vs ‘The Appalling’

The entire nation is aware of the ongoing conflict between The centre and The State over the decision of conducting examination for the final year students. Keeping the present scenario in the epicentre, one can vividly figure who stands as the Appealing and who stands as the Appalling.

It has been a month, when some states announced termination of the final year examinations in view of the extant Pandemic. Weeks later UGC unveils its new guidelines, mandating final year examination. Now the centre and the state seem to be at loggerheads, sabotaging even the nethermost opportunities in this heaving competitive world.

This ongoing pandemic has not only brought ailments to health and economy but also dungeon of darkness by ceasing employment opportunities for students who are still striving every nerve to get a job. Amidst such mayhem among students, parents; UGC still stands tall over its decision justifying, conducting examination will have significant impact on the academic performance of the students. The students are in dire need of their certificates to advance in their respective lives but all at stake now! Such is the mental fragmentation, students cannot even decide whether to gear themselves up for final term or devote their time to other competitive exams. During these wee hours, where the entire world is battling and uniting itself against the dreadful virus, our nation is leaving no stones unturned concentrating on all the squalid stuffs and thereby wrecking our lives. Are they really preparing us for our examination day or dooms day?

No doubt, UGC is justifying its frivolous decision on the egalitarian approach but is this even required considering the havoc this pandemic has created in the world? I fear it may turn into a fiasco. How can the final year examination decide the academic performance of all the students? I am just not able to process the thought behind such a sneaky decision. Our fate is still at the behest of the supreme court. Sincere thanks to all the students, parents, academicians for their humongous efforts in reprobating UGC’s revised guidelines and raising this concern to The Supreme court. Justice is much awaited. Best of luck to all the students out there. Batch of 2020 don’t worry we are going to sail through it.

Secularism

jigar
-
0
Secularism

Being Secular in today’s time:

One of the problems with the English language is words change meaning based on how people use them. Sometimes very quickly and in one’s lifetime multiple time over, in every book I had read literally, meant literal – exactly, not exaggeratedly but people started using literally as hyperbole, I literally died when she told me that so that now the meaning of literally is, literally and figuratively. This is an overused example but not a bad one to establish the base.

The problem starts when we assign morality to word and then the meaning of words change, it is going to leave a lot of people very confused and spare no way to actually have a real conversation because now connotation with the word no longer matches the meaning of the word. So what in turn happens is, we end up changing our moral barometer and thinking that new meaning of the word is bad and that should be shunned and it should not happen.

Let’s take secularism, for instance, now this word has not changed meaning in all parts of India but at least in India, it has, and not for good because it has taken away the ability to have a conversation on it.

Being Secular originally meant not having anything to do with religion. So it made sense for country and country’s constitution to be secular, so to say they do not derive their laws from religious dogmas. It was not usually applied to people but only countries and organization. However, now it’s being applied to individual and if one were to just extend the logic to individual it should be that for an individual to be secular he should not have anything to do with religion. That would basically make any secular individual as an atheist or at least not practicing in any religion. But since the large majority of people in India and in most are countries are religious, that would make a lot of people nonsecular and that falls on the bad side of the moral graph. So very sneakily definition of secularism seems to have gone from nothing to do with religion to respect all religions equally.

On the face of it, it sounds sort of ok. But it’s not, firstly, it seems almost like an inherent contradiction. If I am a religious person and follow one particular religion, I, by, the very definition of religion text think your God is not true or lesser than my God so I cannot respect it the same as mine, I can only claim to. So then any religious person claiming to be secular is just kind of encouraged to lie about his position.

Now you may say, there are few religions like Hinduism and maybe Buddhism which are very open can actually respect other religions so they may actually be secular. But that just means that I respect your religion but not same as mine because other religion would have in them saying that all other God except ours and all other religion except our is wrong so then you cannot respect them without disrespecting your religion. If the religions themselves diss on each other and do not respect we cannot go about respecting them without inherent contradiction.

That covers religious people, so maybe the only way to respect all religions equally is to be an atheist but then if I am an atheist I don’t think any religion is true and my respect for them should be tending towards 0, so then the only way to respect all religions would be to not respect any of them at all, which I don’t think matches current perception also.

Leaving aside the fact that it doesn’t make any sense and it would virtually make everyone nonsecular, it’s just morally wrong. As Sam Harris often says, that if a religion asked that every third boy should be sacrificed and killed we cannot cannot say that’s a good thing and we should not respect that religion. Now the problem if, everyone has agreed that to be secular is morally good, and by a new definition of secular, we would need to support this morally reprehensible act to be secular. So people end up supporting morally bad things to be labeled morally good. So the definition of secular respecting and treating all religions equally is absolute nonsense.

For now, I’ll stick with the old definition of secular, of not having anything to do with religion, by that definition am I a secular, no? Because I do go to temples some of my actions are dictated by religion.  Does that make me a morally bad person, I don’t think so? I am not saying I am fundamentally good and not bad, but that fact alone should not put me on the wrong side of the moral line.

Ram Mandir and the fallacy of the Indian National Congress

abhaypratap018
-
0
Ram Mandir and the fallacy of the Indian National Congress

Celebrations and moments of joy were seen across the globe specially by the people, organization and party who were actively involved in Ram Janmabhoomi Movement. Leaders across the party line welcomed and applauded the foundation laying ceremony.

After 500 years of struggle the dreams of crores of Rambhakts turned into reality on 5th August 2020, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi laid the foundation stone of Ram Mandir at the birth place of Lord Shri Ram in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh.

But what came more surprising was the deliberate struggle and longing by the top leadership of the Indian National Congress to get itself involved in these celebrations. Yes, the same Indian National Congress which institutionalised Minority appeasement since independence and always kept the interests of the Majority at bay. The same party which never missed a chance to humiliate and persecute the participants of Ram Janmabhoomi Movement. The same Congress party which dismissed elected governments of four BJP Ruled states in the year 1992 after the demolition of disputed structure in Ayodhya.

The Congress party which must be fully credited of promoting the narrative and historians who glorified barbarian mughals who plundered and destroyed thousands of Hindu Temples. The party which still promotes the left liberal agenda of Minority appeasement is today struggling hard to find it’s way into the hearts and minds of Hindus through welcoming the decision of Ram Janmabhumi Temple construction.

Today, in order to politicise the foundation laying ceremony and temple construction, the Congress Party is busy in creating a false narrative that it was during the time of Rajeev Gandhi government in 1986 when the locks of the temple were opened for worship.But the truth says that the locks were opened on orders of Faizabad Dstrict Court. The Rajeev Gandhi government which was then busy in appeasing the minority community through reversing the Supreme Court’s judgement of Shah Bano case, saw this as an opportunity to appease Hindus but failed drastically.

Moreover, it was during this time when the Congress party government once agreed to the demands of Muslims petetioners to shift the temple from the real birth place.

Today, after seeing the statements and desperation of various Congress leaders including Rahul Gandhi, Priyanka Vadra, Kamalnath, Shashi Tharur etc, who would believe that it’s the same Congress party whose UPA government in 2007 filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court of India to call Lord Shri Ram as Fictional and Ramayana as a story with no historical proofs. Who would say it’s the party in which chanting ‘Jai Shree Ram’ was forbidden and most importantly, who would believe it’s the same congress party whose leader had to run from his ancestral constituency Amethi to Wayanad, Kerala in order secure a seat in Lok Sabha with the help of Muslim League in 2019.

But even after showing such passive attitude towards Hindu sentiments throughout it’s existence, the Congress party and it’s leaders who never talked about Ayodhya, Ram Janmbhumi or even Lord Ram are today issuing statements, celebrating Janmbhumi Pooja, dancing to the tunes of Bhajans in front of cameras. These instances clearly prove that there is a desperation and longing in the Congress party to secure it’s place in the Hindu spectrum. Though it clearly seems that it’s temporary Ram Bhakti is centred only towards gaining it’s lost ground in view of upcoming by-polls in Madhya Pradesh and Legislative polls in Bihar and UP. The people are well aware of Congress’ politics of deception and are paying minimum heed to it’s actions today, because the actions of the party are completely opposite to what their history says.It’s the fallacy of the Congress party to believe that this gesture would bring them their lost ground, moreover it will surely drift a section of appeased minorities away from them.
Today the longing of Congress and it’s leaders to portray themselves as Ram Bhakts, proves Veer Savarkar’s prophecy of 10th July 1943 which said, “The day Hindus unite, Congress leaders will wear janeu over the coat”.

Amidst this desperate struggle and longing of the Congress party to find it’s way into the sentiments of Ram Bhakts, the common Indian knows that the credit of this centuries old struggle goes only to the Karsevaks, People, Leaders, Organizations and The Political Party which never hesitated in saying ‘Mandir Wahin Banayenge‘ . In short, all credit goes to the real Rambhakts.

India needs to work like a manufacturing powerhouse like China, says corporate lobbyist Deepak Talwar

deepaktalwar
-
0
India needs to work like a manufacturing powerhouse like China, says corporate lobbyist Deepak Talwar

Indian diplomats and ministries have been engaged in a behind-the-scene power struggle with China ever since the LAC standoff. What started out as a classic case of ‘backstabbing’ on the borders has transformed into a war on political and economic fronts. Although India’s strong move of banning 59 Chinese apps including TikTok and timely intervention of National Security Advisor Ajit Doval with Chinese delegates has managed to de-escalate the tension, it is time that India focuses towards decreasing dependency and catalyze indigenous efforts. 

Corporate Lobbyist Deepak Talwar said, “India needs to work like a manufacturing powerhouse like China and become an integral part of the Asian supply chain. Indian companies must showcase their competence, their transparency to the world.” According to Money Control, China constitutes of 9 percent Indian export and 18 percent import, which constitutes of 70 percent electronic components, 20 percent automobile components, and chemical raw materials. This created a favorable ecosystem for India to manage the functioning of various industries, but simultaneously established a dependency which laid foundations of the Chinese dream of Asia domination. However, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the helm, India has set the wheel in motion for a new ecosystem.

In July, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced the new Digital Indian AtmaNirbhar Bharat App Innovation Challenge, which is a collaborative effort from Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Niti Aayog, and Atal Innovation Mission. This challenge has two tracks. Track 1 focuses on identifying apps which are already in the market, but have immense potential to go commercial. On the other hand, Track 2 is dedicated to hand-pick entrepreneurs or startup ventures that can build new apps. In each category, government is offering up to Rs 20 lakh to the prospect apps and startups as an aid for research, development, and marketing.

While this latest move is expected to fill the void created by the Chinese app ban, India also announced two major decisions in early March with reference to Pharma and Electronic industries. Union Cabinet approved production associated incentives worth Rs 40,995 crore for electronic manufacturing companies. “The scheme shall extend an incentive of 4% to 6% on incremental sales (over base year) of goods manufactured in India,” expressed Union Communications Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad. These schemes will target the 70 percent electronic component dependency on China as it focuses on promoting local manufacturers in assembly, testing, manufacturing, and other branches.

These developments echo the stance of India towards its economy and market in the Asia and global scenario. However, it is important to understand that developing a ‘China-independent’ market will take at least a decade and the same requires a balance of indigenous manufacturers and other international players. India can look towards USA, Australia, and New Zealand as potential partners to amp up trade.

India is on the right path to become a manufacturing process with a continued government support and national players meeting the standards of quality and quantity across industries. It is imperative the country realizes the gravity of the situation and joins hands so as to tip the power scales in favor of India despite the disruption caused by COVID-19 situation.

The history of India – a story of distortion by marxists

sourav1995
-
0
The history of India – a story of distortion by marxists

The history of India that is widespread and accepted by academia is a history decribed through Marxist lens. Marxian thought did bring a new perspective but the main folly in it that it does not consider the basic human psychology. As a result it bereft of the actual reason of a historical incident and never could touch the ethos of that historical era and in consequence of that they draw an erroneous picture of modern day India which is absolutely alien to common man. But the bigotry lies in here that those historians knew it well that they were not representing a wholesome clear picture but still they did that because they believe in a religion called Marxism. It is a shame for India that millions of student learned and still learning their cultural history in a twisted form.

There are several instances where they succeed in channeling their story as history of India. Such an instance is the idea of the synthetic culture. It was no doubt that in Medieval era and aftermath a composite culture was built but not in the way Marxist has described it. The idea of India in distorted form is this that the whole history of medieval era is an era of sultans and Mughals others don’t play any essential roles. But on ground and the based on the evidences available to us it is clear that those “others” played the most significant role in forming the synthetic culture. It is vehement protest of Rajputas that led to their acceptance in Mughal administration. There is no instance in the history of Islam where entire culture was not wiped out by Islamic invasion, on the contrary Hindus are the only cultural clan who survived the onslaught. Marxist historians shows it as the benevolence of Muslim ruler and gave arguments that if Kings were determined to proselytising then India would have been a Muslim state by now. Many such attempts had been taken to convert and two neighbouring states are prime example of that those who survived only because of fierce battle done by them and the mentality of not to surrender.

Invasions of Muslims in India described by Marxist intellectuals as “coming of Islams” and they described Aryan civilization based on a false Aryan INVASION Theory. But the sources tell the other story: the first holy war of Ghazwa in 644 A.D. is a result of declaration of “jihad” on Sindh by caliph. Surely it is not a “coming” but a religious onslaught. In perspective of Islam non-Muslim has no place, either they have to convert or perish and those who led to such incidents hailed as ghazi of Allah.The destruction caused by sultan Mahmud in Dwarka, Mathura and most infamously Somnath temple are prime example of that. Will Durant calls the Muslim conquest of India “probably the bloodiest story of history”. These are some examples from numerous happenings.Hindus continually fought against those atrocities under various regional leaders whether it was Raja Prataditya of Bengal or Lachit Borphukan of Ahom kingdom. The protest of Rajput, Vijaynagar kingdom and Sikhs and Shivaji forced Mughals to accept their credibility and these struggles are the main reason behind the creation of synthetic culture.

Apart from twisted information their another approach to tell history is through lies. When Hindus demanded the history of their temples which were destroyed by Muslim invaders instead of telling the truth these Marxist historians put up an argument that Buddhist temples were also destroyed by same way, which is nothing but a myth. In the course of history there are instances where Buddhist temples were attacked by Hindus but not like the destruction that Islam brought. But on the other side the whole Buddhist population of modern day Kashmir and Afghanistan was wiped out by Islamic invasion. The myth propounded by Marxist intellectuals were busted by Sitaram Goel when he sent a questionnaire to Romila Thapar which asked her to show historical documents like epigraphs, literary sources, name of the kings who destroyed the Buddhist temples, name of those Buddhist temples and places which are destroyed, name of those Hindu temples where she thinks a Buddhist temple was situated. Thapar didn’t answer any of those questions directly.

Another way to demean the history of India was by putting communal tag on other historians whose views are in contradiction to them. It is a tool used by most liberals to attack the Hindu psyche.
Marxist interpretation of history is a part of historical incidents not the whole picture. By interpreting history only on the basis of economic monopoly can not eradicate the wrongdoings which were done based on religion. A secular history is that which addresses the historical incidents as it was happened not by propounding lies and creating Nazi culture in academic circle and of course not by demeaning a culture in the name of establishing harmony.

Democracy has stung Communism big time in Galwan

Ankit Shah
-
0
Democracy has stung Communism big time in Galwan

It was clear since May that China wanted Mr. Ajit Doval or S. Jaishankar to pick up the phone and dial Wang Yi. China wanted a quid pro quo for the backlash on its role in corona spread all over the World. Shockingly, it was Wang Yi who had to dial the phone. The Chinese view of the World is blurred by its fast-economic growth in the last three decades. While it’s true that economic-might translates into defence might, it is also true that war is a dead-end for healthy economics. It is understandable that it’s not Delhi which is a threat to China and Pakistan. But it is Delhi’s democratic set up which is a threat to Chinese Communist party & Pakistan army.

Under the Nuclear Umbrella it is very clear that big, economy-serious nations cannot have prolonged traditional wars. In the concept of hybrid warfare, Information warfare is just one component. Entities like Chinese communist party and Pakistan army are experts in this warfare. The establishment in China and Pakistan are scared of the possibility of their citizens learning about democratic rights and freedoms elsewhere. While they make sure no democracy can maintain in-depth people to people contact with their citizens, they have a free run in all democratic countries from buying out media portals, spying through technology, money laundering, hostile investments and what not.

Why Wuhan?

Wuhan is an education hub. Off late, it has attracted foreign students from all over the World. College campuses are well-known for revolutionary ideas and demands of rights from the state. Foreign students must have shared a lot of freedom-rights’ insights to the local Chinese people with respect to freedoms in their democratic countries. Many Chinese students and people must have been shocked at these stories. Corona chapter could might as well be to press the possibilities of any revolutionary thought at its very point of origin. There are also allegations that the current floods in several parts of China too are manufactured.

Chinese Premier Li Keqiang is suspiciously silent since few months. There are no international calls or talks from his end despite frequent retorts on China from several nations. The last time he publicly spoke in May, it was a jibe on Jinping under the pretext of highlighting poverty. All is not well in Beijing. Mostly when you are troubled at home you behave madly with outsiders. China has spoiled relations with entire neighbourhood and well beyond its capacity to manage. The fool cards like BRI, blank cheque diplomacy and the debt-traps can buy few leaders of poor countries for short-term, but turn people of these nations into long-term enemies as well. Contrary to this, India enjoys friendly ties by gifting schools, hospitals, bridges, libraries, dams, medicines and roads to poor countries. With 184 out of 192 votes in UNSC, Delhi’s global acceptability stands unbeatable.

Beijing-Delhi tango

India is a vibrant democracy slated to grow to higher economic ranks in the coming decades. US gave up the strategy of negative intent partnership with Pakistan to slow down India’s growth. China has fallen into the same strategy trap now. The propped-up buffer safety state of Pakistan is now no longer a big prick that it used to be for India. This, rattled China into self-actions like Doklam and then this current standoff. Chinese leadership also follows a pattern of meeting every Indian leader outside or in India with a salami slicing attempt in the North for decades. If China wants a war with India, it should know that this Indian leadership is ready for it. China has lost the opportunity of any winnable military aggression during earlier Indian regimes. It should introspect about what India’s shift from non-alignment to strategic partnership with both US & Russia means.  

Galwan Debacle

India needs to know that the previous governments’ rule of not allowing forces to respond inculcated the habit of salami slicing in China. Post-2014, China got a first of a kind experience about free hand to Indian forces in Doklam. Immediately after Doklam issue was solved at the 19th Congress, General Zhao Zongqi who had a major role in Doklam was picked as PLA delegate by Xi Jinping. The same General is alleged to be behind Galwan incident too. And this time being Indian territory, they came well-prepared. Galwan incident is a confirmation to Beijing about the change in India’s behaviour. It’s a Doklam plus experience this time for China. The actions of the armed forces are always an extension of the ideology sitting in the PMO in India.

The denial of the legitimate state funerals, non-declaration of martyred PLA men and the subsequent withdrawal at three points of intrusion is a bitter pill to swallow. Imagine the morale of the Chinese army which consists about 70% as the only child of their parents and 100% Communist party membership. Beijing’s policy of shaming the slow growth and democratic side-effects of India in its media machinery to please its people fell flat on its face after Galwan clash. The old Chinese media narrative of ‘Indian democracy is ineffective and a failure’ changed to a so-called aggressive nationalistic behaviour of Indians overnight.

Chinese PLA never attacks a prepared enemy, be it 1962, 1967, Doklam or Galwan. It is well known for deception. Trust is not the word any Indian would ever attach with China. The very fact that the PLA followed the ‘no-weapon use’ policy at Galwan like the Indian forces shows that it’s the leaders in Beijing which breach agreements, not the PLA. The habit of breaking agreements will cost China dear when the World will follow the suit by breaking trade commitments. With Galwan incident, China has poisoned 6-7 future generations of India with animosity. It has also lost a huge consumer market with massive future potential of economic collaborations.

India’s Response

Besides the jaw-breaking fight at Galwan, Indians took a lead in the World by banning some Chinese applications. Through applications like tiktok, China had an access to a massive less-literate population of a country which can be mobilised into believing any anti-government fake information and could have played havoc. Imagine what one lac mis-guided crowd per city can do. Imagine the marketing asset pool China can create with the emotional – social profiling of such a big population size of what they like, feel, prefer and think. The ability of talking to the enemy’s population directly, by-passing the enemy’s leadership is a lethal weapon of information warfare. India plugged a major part of that loop-hole. The ban had everything to do with security rather than just money.

Besides the indirect warning by the QUAD actions and exercises, it will have no major role to play in ending the current stand-off with China. China can stretch the disengagement talks for few more days or weeks to sense the extent to which Indian forces can be aggressive and find out if India attacks a prepared enemy or not. China doesn’t. It may also want to see how far India copies-follows western anti-China diplomatic moves coming soon as the US election is near. It wants to use the standoff as bargaining chip to not let India follow those actions. China is also measuring the extent of political will to let loose the forces, economic pain India can inflict and probing which section of nationalistic voices within India is active. This prepares them well for upcoming 50 Doklams until the real battlefield at the only ocean named after a country, the Indian ocean gets ready.

3 End-Scenarios of the Ladakh Standoff –

  1. A short military conflict in some other theaters like Arunachal or Sikkim. This can fast-track the slow negotiations going on for dis-engagement. This option gives China a face-saver because all reports point at higher casualties of PLA at Galwan. This is a risky alternative as on-ground response can escalate quickly with all the lethal material already deployed by both sides.
  2. China can stretch the disengagement talks for few more days or weeks and then complete roll-back well up to the Indian Independence Day. A bitter Independence Day celebration can invite another round of anti-China action by the government. China can completely withdraw after series of new confidence-building agreements and ask for a quid pro quo in return for this or later on also insist on a high-level visit to India.
  3. China may completely go back based on only the military level talks and without any formal deal or new or amended agreements just like it wrapped up in Doklam. Going back without any new, written, agreed upon formula means they leave space for sudden, future intrusions again anytime they want as per their time-table.

The way Doklam issue ended without any formal or renewed arrangement for border management allowed the current standoff to happen. The effectiveness of unpredictability lies in being a bit predictable at the end of the show. This is a slow poison to the victim to slip into carelessness again.

1...337338339...889Page 338 of 889