The issue is becoming more and more relevant as the days go. What was not so prominently discussed about is now made to gain a significant presence by Political parties in India who display a pseudo-secularism to a nauseating level.
The author has argued well about the issue on individual basis as welll as on governmental level. The arguments may have touched some issues like Sati in some parts of Hindu regions, which are really not so prominant in larger context of Hindu religion. But obviously such issues are thrown in only to make a point. I fully agree that people like V P Singh caused more harm to the secular social fabric of Indian society than any fanatical groups together did. Otherwise, Indian society is a wonderful example of religious tolerance and co-existence. Even to-day, barring havocs caused by political interferences, the religious harmony is promninently visible in most parts of India, particularly in its southern regions.
On the whole, I appreciate the views expressed by Mr. Sengupta as it sounds so practical.
I am fully in agreement with Mr. Sengupta that nobody is secular and if any body says that he is secular then he has some ulterior motive behind that and sadly our politicians irrespective of party are champions. You take my world if it is not political or vote bank compulsion then no politicians will ever say that he is secular whether it is congress, cpm, samajwadi or any body else for that matter. I am also in agreement with Mr. Sengupta that Mr. V. P. Singh has devided the country on cast lines and should be punished by law and by public also. Reservation should be given only to poorer & backwards in educational level and when it comes to specialize job only merit should be considered. I wonder how these politicians at any level becomes so reach & wealthy with in a short period of time. No marks for guessing, it is known to every body including Central / State Government and Govt. departments under them. Even then nothing is being done to check these menance. I think & believe that all these powerful people are contributing generously to loot the hard earned money of the public and country also. I trust that you also agree with that.
ur revolutionary ideas can really bring abt change in the whole system...they r gud enough to tear apart a democratic system.democracy nd political equality means "ONE MAN -ONE VOTE, ONE VOTE -ONE VALUE"....suppose that industrialits say tht u r foolish nd donn know much abt macromanagement of country nd they start preaching that only they should get the right to vote peob with each having a weightage of 10000000(they r the highest tax payer as well) so wht will democracy be..
for god sake stop cribbing..India is on of the finest democracies in the world..no democratic country has progressed so much in such a short span of time..there r problems but not ingrained in system but in the minds of the people, in their attitude their behaviour their thoughts nd finally reflected in their working..the selfish trait of human being..which leads to corruption...
democracy is not to b blamed...nd one more thning..even an animal knows wht is gud or wht is bad for him..
we can atleast expect human beings(tht too adults) to know wht they want...nd u r living in a bygone era..people r far ahead now..they know wht to do nd wht not to do nd who is to b beleived nd who is not to b.
RE:Secular means appeasment of minority
by Kaushik das on Aug 27, 2005 08:03 PM Permalink
Rational, singhal's suggestion is actually considerable. What he is pointing at is the unintellectualism of the masses that lets politicians fool them. a recent example: the UP - Noida land scam case.
Mulayam made two arguments: 1. Who said officials and relatives of ministers cannot get land according to the rule? 2. Aaj tak has also got land in Noida for its studio.
Now, if mulayam chooses, he can prove the two statements of his easily. What he has not mentioned is that aaj tak bid for and won a rejected piece of land in auction and that the problem was the realtives getting the land by unfair means.
But what will the unintelligent guy think: Oh, aaj tak also has land there. That's the biggest one.
Now, do you see what wonders basic 10th class education can do to prevent this?
The biggest problem in our country is our politicians who couldn't have been better in view of our Constitution. Even if you don't qualify for a post of peon, you can be our honourable minister. The only qualification needed to be an M.P. or M.L.A. is minimum age of 25 years and Indian nationality.
The second problem is adult franchise system. We are getting representatives elected by illiterates. Most of the educated people don't exercise their right to vote. When a candidate knows that he has a vote bank of illiterates, he finds ways to keep his vote bank in good humour even if it means pursuing policies detrimental to the overall interest of the society and nation. There should be a little amendment in the adult franchise system. For example, one vote of graduate can be given the weightage of 10 or 20 votes of illiterate people. In the same way, one vote of a tax payer should be equal to 100 votes of non-tax payers. If this is made to happen, we will find all of a sudden a sea change in the quality of our politicians and their electioneering strategies.
But the problem is that we have made the ridiculous provisions of our Constitution a sacred cow.
RE:What is the root cause of India's problems?
by esskaydas on Aug 29, 2005 02:34 AM Permalink
Thanks for your views. I would like to add that stringent measures should be taken against those who donot vote and enjoy the election day as a holiday. The intelligentsia must vote
Hi all, Why it is so that Brahmins are targetted, whenever there comes such a discussion. I have never seen Brahmins going on streets for strikes, I have not seen Brahmins demanding anything, they are peacefully progressing. But, I do not understand why people refer to those who are silent, work for their selves, and thereby to development of the country.
The hatred towrds Brahmins, should be eradicated, as Brahmins of this century are different and very broadminded.
On reading this article I get the impression that the writer is an extremely fickle person incapable of coherent thought and has attempted to make a straight-forward issues as complex. While a person may have one way of looking at an issue like secularism anyone can grasp the essence of secular ideas. He himself has made such heavy weather about it and knows what it is not but CANNOT HIMSELF DEFINE it.
So what is the big idea in claiming people to be liars when he in his wisdom cannot set any benchmark or standard or image to show why he is right and seculars are liars. Or in other words muddy the water to obsure the issue - how brilliant.
Minority term and definition?? The man is overboard again if a simple issue where the earlier government in its inherent fundamental nature made those of other faiths in minor numbers fair game not just during their tenure but also in their majority ruled states. It is the cowardly who prey on the weak and therefore the mandate of all sensible people to stand up to these bigots. They do come in different hues and pursue different and hidden agendas but like all bad trees only put out inedible and bad fruit.
the best article that I have read.The writer has the guts to call a spade a spade.The political parties have created this humbug of secularism to get muslim votes.Nehru stared it.VP Singh destroyed Hindu society by mandal.Can history ever forgive him?
