Very well-written and well-argued! Though I have a few differences in opinion, I still admire the article. Extremely well-articulated. And the bit on VP Singh was absolutely true!!!
Mr Sengupta is a nothing but a bigoted person and away from reality of this country. Its just fashionable to criticize secularism and he is towing the same line. Why this tirade against V.P. Singh? He is a courageous person who is truely secular. He tried to bring in revolution in this country by enpowering the masses which were dominated by upper caste minority. Mr. Sengupta please note that every citizen needs a stake in the resources and wealth of this country. Every community has aspirations to grow and have fare share in higher education, well paying jobs and high standard of living. Don't play the game of merit. The upper caste people had reservation on resources and wealth of this country for 3000 years. If they had merit the Steam Engine would have first run in India not in Britain. This country was divided in more than 6000 castes 3000 years before Mandal commission. Mr Sengupta is out of his mind when he says that V.P. Singh give strength to caste system. This propoganda is done by people who think only they have right to better life and education than others.
RE:Secularism
by sid on Aug 29, 2005 04:56 PM Permalink
Subbaraman,
please go and read history books and if you have time read Manusmriti. And look around you. Go visit the villages. And then you talk about reservations. I totally agree on merit. However there needs to be a proper definition of merit. So called merit in India is based on false premise and a education system that is partial to the people who have resources. You so called merit is nothing but law of jungle where the lower castes are only preys for you. You don't have or don't want to ackowledge the ground realities of this country.
All the technology we use today was invented outside borders of India. We should recongize this fact when we talk about merit.
RE:Secularism
by Kaushik das on Aug 27, 2005 08:11 PM Permalink
Well, he never opposed secularism as a concept; he just opposed its current practice. VP singh is secular? So, then, why did he leavbe the 'secular' congress and make a government with the support of BJP who had many things on their agenda that were not called secular. Masses? upper caste minority? Talk sense. Well, i believe he did say that reservations should be there for those who need it. Isn't that exactly what you want? reservations based on castes has helped only those who were well-off anyway.
RE:Secularism
by subbaraman on Aug 28, 2005 07:09 PM Permalink
Sid seems to be suffering from ignorance of facts. The minority "upper"castes did not have "reservations" for 3000 years: not even for one day. I agree that the national resources should benefit every section of the people, that does not mean that the wealth should be equally distributed among the people, irrespective of their performance. Every person should be made to "earn" and "merit" the share which is his legitimate due.
I agree with Mr. Ram to an extent where he says that all religions must be treated equally but felt that he was contradicting his own statement when he said that it is something like perfection which can be worked for but never achieved. The term 'secularism' has been literally abused in our country by power mongers in order to secure their 'seats'. In the so called developed nations minority communities do enjoy most of the rights but not at the cost of the majority's interests because that would mean negation of democracy, the essence of which is 'what majority wants'. It is in the best interest of the nation to have multi-cultural society but at the same time respect for the majority's sentiments and feelings cannot be and should not be ignored and that is the essence of democracy.
VP singh would have divided India in as many pieces as he could had he continued.It was our good luck that he was kicked out.After all what else you can expect froma descendant of Jaichand who first invited Mir kassim to invade India.
Mr. Sengupta's sentiments are to be wholeheartedly supported. However, the statement that state is secular and individuals have faith/religion, is disingenuous. State is for, by and of the people. 'Religion' as apart from faith is a political party by another means- it is a structure like state striving to give its follower's(citizens) equality in this world and in another world. This all to consciously oppose the movement of 'natural' forces that markout all as unequal and perpetuates inequality. Religion and political party are thus practical shape of the ideology of equality against natural inequality. Secular state thus is an ideal that is attempted by each according to the understanding of the people, by and for those people. Indian Secularism is as different ideology (religion) as that of any other 'people'. Please let us follow our people's aspirations and understanding and stop this unnecessary intellectualism.
