08-17-2006, 04:20 AM
Prem
BRFite
Joined: 01 Jul 1999
Posts: 428
Location: My Harem in Lahore.
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:07 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Valkan,
Parsis have no complaints, the Non -Indian Christain Missionaries are nuisance at best, Sikhs, Budhists are all from the womb of Mother India and have all the rights and claims... there is no equal equal with islamic forces which are clearly inimical and dangerous to Indian state,ethos and civilization and its material ,spiritual progress.
My contention is , Islamic folks were deprived of their right to move to these 2 Islamic countries for which their forefathers fought for and got in the name of religion. They are part of Ummah and leftover ,legacy of Islam in India. Should not they be asked? Should not BD and PD be forced to share the loot with them. Why should non-muslims share their portion of India with Muslims for whom the fair portion of land was set aside. Its all about religion , no other mumbo jumbo.
Why do u bring Kalam Ji., Prem Ji or Rabinder singh in the equation?
Kalam ji is murtad as per the Islamic elements in India are concerned. Prem ji has made a free choice as he can move any where in the world with his $$ but he remains Indian. Rabinder singh is not a norm but a rare exception. The question is of millions of poor,illiterate millions of Muslims incapable of looking beyond their religion born out of India. Pakistan/BD was / is earned and alloctaed for them .
The consolidation of Indian society, nation is slow and might never happen because of Islamist elements in India. There is no example of their peaceful co-existence or assimilation with non -islamic societies in the last 1400 years or so. Present non- muslim generation of India owe it to their future generation to find the clear cut answer to this Islamic question mark on India and its future : same goes for present day Mulsims in India and their islamic aspirations which can never be fulfilled in non-islamic India.
Think this way, Old genearion was not asked about the issue and the suspicions are still lingering, why not clear the smoke now and march onward into 21st century. BD/PD are party to this and GOI owe this to every well meaning Indian .
There should be a national, public debate on this and issue ought to be part of Indian diplomatic agenda with BD/PD. If this require constitutional amendment , so be it.
Let me ask , What does India loose by raising the issue with these 2 countries . Will wining this issue make India strong or weak?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sroy
BRFite
Joined: 15 Jul 2005
Posts: 704
Location: New Delhi
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:14 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Prem wrote:
The consolidation of Indian society, nation is slow and might never happen becuase of Islamist elements in India. There is no example of their peaceful co-existence or assimilation with non -islamic societies in the last 1400 years or so. Present non- muslim generation of India owe it to their future generation to find the clear cut answer to this Islamic question mark on India and its future and same for present day Mulsims in India and their islamic aspirations.
Thanks, bro for spelling it out clearly putting aside political correctness. This is exactly what I meant by homogenization with respect to consolidation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
S. Valkan
BRFite
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:14 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
sroy wrote:
Seriously, much before Kurus
The dual purpose of their narratives/commentaries on RigVeda and its assorted material including Puranas .... is to refute AIT and on the other hand they document the expansion of ancient Vedic ... culture from centre of area around Indus.
You are comfortably gliding in and out between two rather loosely related terms,- 'civilisation' and 'culture'.
Discussion on AIT and pitching studies of chromosomal Y-haplogroups against the Samhitas and Puranas is way beyond the scope of this thread. I'll skip over it.
All I need from you is a simple answer,- when did the Indic "civilisation" consolidation begin ?
Why is it taking so long to "consolidate" ?
Quote:
By consolidation I also mean recovering lost territories. No nation in the last century has lost as much land as we have.
What do you mean by "lost" ?
There was a democratic referendum, and people inhabiting sections of erstwhile British India decided to go their own way.
What is your justification about "recovery" ?
Quote:
The present state of the Indian Union is not desirable.
Is that your personal opinion, or is it shared by the 'silent majority' ?
Quote:
We have territories that have inhabitants treating us mainstream folks like foriegners, but there are neighbouring countries where you'll feel at home.
The neighbouring countries want to remain apart from the Indian Union, even though YOU may feel at home in them.
What are your options ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prem
BRFite
Joined: 01 Jul 1999
Posts: 428
Location: My Harem in Lahore.
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:20 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Vlkan , read Ramana's post in J&K thread....
"Prof M Mujeeb, the late vice-chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia, later opined in his book, Islamic Influence on Indian Society, that Muslims were overwhelmingly in favour of Pakistan. Soon after the election, the Congress conceded Jinnah's claim to participate in the interim Government which earlier it was not prepared to; its erstwhile demand was for a share of the Muslim seats. In the interim Government, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad had to be given a non-Muslim entitlement.
The interim Government having been formed, the League's obsession for the rest of the year was on an exchange of population whereby all the Muslims should immigrate to Pakistan and all non-Muslims should transfer to Hindustan. Sir Feroze Khan Noon, who later on went to become Prime Minister, on April 8, 1946, told his Bihar legislators that unless there was an exchange of population, the League would re-enact the murderous orgies of Changez Khan and Halaqu Khan.
Ismail Chundrigar, another Prime Minister who hailed from Godhra, had also wanted his fellow religionists to emigrate.
The Qaid-e-Azam, in a press conference held at Karachi on November 25, announced that the authorities should immediately take up the question of population exchange. Mohammad Ismail of Madras and Shaukat Hayat Khan had whole-heartedly supported the idea.
On December 3, Pir Ilahi Bux of Sind and Iftikhar Husain Khan, the Punjab League chief, in separate meetings had reiterated the demand for an exchange."
Valkan, do you deny India was not partitioned on the basis of religion ?
Do you think the land lost by India to a foreign civiization is no loss at all and you are willing to take the risk of loosing some more land and people? Do you think islamic followers in India dont have the aspiration to make it Dar Ul Islam , as required by their islamic religion ,which is nothing but to finish Indian civlization= which might be anything as per your understanding, but is Clearly not a Islamic one.
So the possibilty of migration is still a issue.
Last edited by Prem on 16 Aug 2006 07:29 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
S. Valkan
BRFite
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:23 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Prem wrote:
Rabinder singh is not a norm but a rare exception.
Is that a scientifically provable claim, or have you made it a habit to make sweeping generalisations ?
Of the spies that are at the center of attention in Jaswant's book promotion, how many "rare exceptions" are outside the community of Rabinder Singh ?
Quote:
There should be a national, public debate on this
That's not a problem.
If you have the money, and the time, create a "Conference" like they do on "Kashmir", and hold televised national debates among participants.
If you find and build a consensus, float a party with that agenda on the manifesto ( like "Ram Janambhoomi" for BJP ) and contest the elections.
Quote:
and issue ought to be part of Indian diplomatic agenda with BD/PD.
Not as per the Constitution as it stands now.
Quote:
If this require constitutional amendment , so be it.
That's the spirit!
Now, why don't you work at achieving that amendment first ?
Quote:
Let me ask , What does India loose by raising the issue with these 2 countries . Will wining this issue make India strong or weak?
Whether India loses or gains is not the issue.
India has no constitutional obligation to raise your demand.
That's the key issue.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
S. Valkan
BRFite
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:28 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Prem wrote:
The interim Government having been formed, the League's obsession for the rest of the year was on an exchange of population whereby all the Muslims should immigrate to Pakistan and all non-Muslims should transfer to Hindustan.
In case this escaped your attention, all the above are speaking of a time before the Partition, and the creation of the "secular" Indian Constitution.
The apprehension then was that the future Dominion of India was to be a "Hindu-stan" rather than the secular, democratic republic of India.
Henceforth, please refer to the period AFTER January 26, 1950.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prem
BRFite
Joined: 01 Jul 1999
Posts: 428
Location: My Harem in Lahore.
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:41 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Solution, of course is to change the Indian constitution.
We are debating to find the clear cut solution to the problem which you refuse to admit.
The 1950 is not so sacrosant and written in stone that cannot be changed . The immigration was open till 65. Kashmir issue is still open with same Islamic elements. So raising the public awareness about the dangers is the duty of every well meaning Indian. This is not a personal issue but a national tragedy in making . Indians need to prevent this from happening and clean the mess created by the mistakes of old generation political leaders lacking good strategic foresight in recognising the impending dangers . We ought not to remain hostages of certain old prejudices and inhibitions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sroy
BRFite
Joined: 15 Jul 2005
Posts: 704
Location: New Delhi
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:47 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
S. Valkan wrote:
You are comfortably gliding in and out between two rather loosely related terms,- 'civilisation' and 'culture'.
Rightly so, because civilization is a super entity. An advanced culture beyond a point to beguns to acquire the traits of a civilization. A civilization implicitly incorporates a culture.
S. Valkan wrote:
All I need from you is a simple answer,- when did the Indic "civilisation" consolidation begin ?
Right from the Battle of the Ten Kings in the Rig Veda. Because that established the supremacy of folllowers of the Vedic culture.
S. Valkan wrote:
Why is it taking so long to "consolidate" ?
Always an ongoing process. During Maurya's and Gupta's it was a peak period of consolidation under a single and central power. But the period between these two was marked by fragmentation. Result was failure to stem Shaka and Hun invasions. Incidentally the Gupta's tamed the Huns.
Probably the next phase was under the efforts of Marathas and the Sikhs wherein the Mughal authority was nominal and assorted nawabs were lying low. Indic civilization was reasserting itself.
British intervention put an end to this Islamic rollback process.
The most recent phase is the current one. Goa, Sikkim, Hyderabad, Junagarh etc. etc. Bhutan is already a protectorate and there are was slight inclination on part of Nepal in the 50s.
S. Valkan wrote:
What do you mean by "lost" ?
There was a democratic referendum, and people inhabiting sections of erstwhile British India decided to go their own way.
What is your justification about "recovery" ?
Recovery Smile ? Does PoK and Aksai Chin ring a bell?
Are you sure there was a referendum? My reading of the history tells me Congies agreed under the threat of Direct Action!
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
The present state of the Indian Union is not desirable.
Is that your personal opinion, or is it shared by the 'silent majority' ?
Depends on your definition of 'silent majority'. In BRF itself there has been serious discussion and general agreement to recover the Chittagong hill tracts from BD by hook or crook.
Also, there has been long standing demand from WB to exchange the Indian and BD enclaves. Does this qualify?
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
We have territories that have inhabitants treating us mainstream folks like foriegners, but there are neighbouring countries where you'll feel at home.
The neighbouring countries want to remain apart from the Indian Union, even though YOU may feel at home in them.
What are your options ?
If a neigbouring country shares your culture, sends her sons to defend your motherland, it will need some political tact to bring her around. But it is workable.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Shafqat
BRFite
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 303
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 08:24 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
sroy wrote:
Also, there has been long standing demand from WB to exchange the Indian and BD enclaves. Does this qualify?
The enclaves resulted from the stupid border drawing process of the Brits. The 1973 Border Treaty (signed by Indira and Mujib) was meant to start the exchange of the enclaves. If I remember right, the border treaty was never ratified in India. But that's a different story - what I don't get it how that is related to the state of the union.
sroy wrote:
In BRF itself there has been serious discussion and general agreement to recover the Chittagong hill tracts from BD by hook or crook.
"Recover" CHT? On what grounds? I seriously disagree if there was a "serious discussion" here in BRF about that. A heated exchange maybe - but "let's take CHT" and "let's have tea in Feni" are hardly 'serious' statements. There was a general agreement about that among some, yeah - but not among the 'serious' posters of this forum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
S. Valkan
BRFite
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 08:43 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
sroy wrote:
S. Valkan wrote:
You are comfortably gliding in and out between two rather loosely related terms,- 'civilisation' and 'culture'.
A civilization implicitly incorporates a culture.
Now, given the fact that Indian culture is a heterogeneous composite including elements from Islamic sources, where does that leave your contention that Indian civilisation has nothing to do with Islam ?
Quote:
Always an ongoing process.
In other words, it has no end.
That's what I was looking for.
Quote:
The most recent phase is the current one. Goa, Sikkim, Hyderabad, Junagarh etc. etc.
Is that "consolidation" of civilisation, culture, or merely usurpation of territory ?
Since when is Pork Vindaloo or Hyderabadi Biryani part of the "consolidation" of Vedic culture ?
Quote:
Bhutan is already a protectorate and there are was slight inclination on part of Nepal in the 50s.
Living in the past doesn't help.
Nepal is on its way to become a republic.
Bhutan - the iron grip of Jigme Singye Wangchuk notwithstanding - would slowly go the same way.
And, in any event, Bhutan and Sikkim form a cultural/civilisational continuity with Tibet.
Where have you consolidated "Indic" civilisation ?
S. Valkan wrote:
Does PoK and Aksai Chin ring a bell?
Do you seriously entertain the belief that they WILL be recovered, ever ?
Quote:
Are you sure there was a referendum? My reading of the history tells me Congies agreed under the threat of Direct Action!
Firstly, the sweeping victory for Muslim League in 1946 elections for Muslim seats was a plebiscite.
Secondly, the Muslim League won the Pakistan referendum in provinces like NWFP, where Congress had a nominal victory in the 1946 elections, thanks to Khuda-i-Khidmatgars.
In effect, Pakistan was a product of referendum of Muslim-majority areas.
Quote:
In BRF itself there has been serious discussion and general agreement to recover the Chittagong hill tracts from BD by hook or crook.
Khayali Pulaos may work in internet discussions, not in real life.
The Radcliffe award had a certain logic to it.
The award of Hindu-majority Khulna was made in exchange of Muslim-majority Murshidabad, because of the fear of Pakistan blocking the head waters of the Hoogly flowing through Kolkata.
Similarly, East Pakistan needed to have a land exit point, and was awarded the CHT, while Muslim-majority Gurdaspur was awarded to India to provide land-access to the Jammu and Kashmir state.
What "recovery" would you seek ?
Quote:
If a neigbouring country shares your culture, sends her sons to defend your motherland, it will need some political tact to bring her around. But it is workable.
The French foreign legion employs many foreign mercenaries to defend French soil.
France offers French citizenship to those interested.
What makes you think the situation is any more different for the Gorkhas ?
Don't forget that the British used the Gorkha mercenaries to quell the Sikhs, and put out the last flames of Indian rule.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Johann
BRFite
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 1649
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 09:03 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
I dont think it would be a bad idea at all to make sure that that everyone knew that anyone who didnt think India was a sufficiently Islamic environment has the freedom to make a no-hassle 1-way move to Pakistan or Bangladesh. He should be when the feeling seizes him and the takleef becomes unbearable be able to sell his property and businesses at a fair price, safely transport his family, valuables and cash without undue delays. But it would mean no tourist visas for family members in Pakistan to visit, vetting for those who wish to visit Pakistan, and vetting and perhaps consequences for those who visited it without permission. It would make staying in India and getting along with others, and accomodating the modern world an active choice rather than a passive one.
It would also be just as good (in every sense of the word) an idea to offer asylum to non-Muslim minorities in those countries, as well as Muslim minorities like Ismailis, Ahmediyas, human rights activists, musicians, female victims of 'honour' crimes etc from those countries.
In concert they would act as a useful pressure valve on Islamist sentiment within India, and offer hope to those trapped by such sentiment next door.
On the other hand big, formal 'exchanges' of populations, even mutually agreed ones are usually horrifically violent and destructive. Greece and Turkey in the 1920s, the USSR and Turkey, various conflicts in between minorities in the USSR from 1917-1991, India and Pakistan in the 1940s, etc.
An exchange also means bartering. How many Non-Muslims would Pakistan and Bangladesh have to trade? 20 million tops? (never mind how many would actually survive the savagery of an exchange and make it across the border) Maybe you could include Shias, Ahmediyas, Ismailis, etc and other targets of Sunni hatred and double the figure.
How many Muslims over and above that would Pakistan and Bangladesh be willing to accept without territorial concessions to go with them?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sroy
BRFite
Joined: 15 Jul 2005
Posts: 704
Location: New Delhi
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 09:24 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
S. Valkan wrote:
Now, given the fact that Indian culture is a heterogeneous composite including elements from Islamic sources, where does that leave your contention that Indian civilisation has nothing to do with Islam ?
Islam is the only element that has refused to integrate. And it is the only element that asks for extra-territorial loyalty among its followers. Finally how you define your identity is upto you. A lot of people may not share your identity.
S. Valkan wrote:
Since when is Pork Vindaloo or Hyderabadi Biryani part of the "consolidation" of Vedic culture ?
Since I've tried Chinese cuisine and during my trips to Germany every 2-3 month I'm compelled to try suarkraut, they too are part of our cultural baggage as per your logic.
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
The most recent phase is the current one. Goa, Sikkim, Hyderabad, Junagarh etc. etc.
Is that "consolidation" of civilisation, culture, or merely usurpation of territory ?
Consolidation is indeed usurpation, crudely put. Search for Lebensraum is a legitimate responsibility of a state apparatus. Lets stick to realpolitik.
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
Bhutan is already a protectorate and there are was slight inclination on part of Nepal in the 50s.
Living in the past doesn't help.
Nepal is on its way to become a republic.
Bhutan - the iron grip of Jigme Singye Wangchuk notwithstanding - would slowly go the same way.
Don't forget that the British used the Gorkha mercenaries to quell the Sikhs, and put out the last flames of Indian rule.
This no way refutes what I've said. This just goes to bring out the incompetency of Nehru's Govt. Goa and Sikkim are standing examples of what could have been done.
S. Valkan wrote:
And, in any event, Bhutan and Sikkim form a cultural/civilisational continuity with Tibet.
Where have you consolidated "Indic" civilisation ?
Agreed, to emerge as a true civilizational state these should have been incorporated.
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
Does PoK and Aksai Chin ring a bell?
Do you seriously entertain the belief that they WILL be recovered, ever ?
History and global events cannot be predicted, but states can only plan to minimize improbables.
S. Valkan wrote:
Firstly, the sweeping victory for Muslim League in 1946 elections for Muslim seats was a plebiscite.
Secondly, the Muslim League won the Pakistan referendum in provinces like NWFP, where Congress had a nominal victory in the 1946 elections, thanks to Khuda-i-Khidmatgars.
In effect, Pakistan was a product of referendum of Muslim-majority areas.
You said it Smile, . In that case Pak and BD should be treated as renegade provinces and hence invaded and territories recovered.
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
In BRF itself there has been serious discussion and general agreement to recover the Chittagong hill tracts from BD by hook or crook.
Khayali Pulaos may work in internet discussions, not in real life.
The Radcliffe award had a certain logic to it.
The award of Hindu-majority Khulna was made in exchange of Muslim-majority Murshidabad, because of the fear of Pakistan blocking the head waters of the Hoogly flowing through Kolkata.
Similarly, East Pakistan needed to have a land exit point, and was awarded the CHT, while Muslim-majority Gurdaspur was awarded to India to provide land-access to the Jammu and Kashmir state.
What "recovery" would you seek ?
Have you been to the Eastern Borders? What sane logic allows for foriegn enclaves within each others territory?
As Shafqat has pointed out, the treaty for exchange of enclaves is pending for ratification on India's part.
This is my last post on the topic. To sum up I'll go back to Prem's original suggestion. Certain aspects of consolidation like territiorial recovery may not be possible beyond a point, but cultural homogenization is possible.
The very fact that till 65 war migrations were officially allowed bears the truth that this is possible.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Prem
BRFite
Joined: 01 Jul 1999
Posts: 428
Location: My Harem in Lahore.
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 09:24 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Valkan, the Islamic part and element in present is because of Islamic invasion, nothing else . There is no worthwhile compatiable spiritual contribution toward Indic ethos. In reality, Islam stands for everything contrary to Indian social, cultural and spiritual traditions of India sans some very insignificant simililarites.Islamics claim so and are proud of their exclusiveness and so forth, there is no harm in accepting the reality and recognizing the danger for ignoring it too long.
I think , asking the followers of Islam on Indian sub-continenet to settle the issue is not demanding as much. The consequences of not finding the answer could be terrible and tremendous. Indians deseve to know the answer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sroy
BRFite
Joined: 15 Jul 2005
Posts: 704
Location: New Delhi
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 09:36 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
When referring to civilizational issue I use the term Indic instead of Hindu or Vedic. The later two are cultural aspects.
I request others to use the same terminology, because the first one and the later two are not interchangable.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
S. Valkan
BRFite
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 10:06 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
sroy wrote:
Islam is the only element that has refused to integrate. And it is the only element that asks for extra-territorial loyalty among its followers.
Do you suggest that Hindus in America have allegiance to the Mississippi rather than the Ganga, to Mount Rushmore rather than Mount Kailash and to Lake Superior rather than Manasarovar ?
Quote:
Finally how you define your identity is upto you. A lot of people may not share your identity.
So why do you seek "homogeneity" ?
Quote:
Since I've tried Chinese cuisine and during my trips to Germany every 2-3 month I'm compelled to try suarkraut, they too are part of our cultural baggage as per your logic.
False dichotomy.
If Sauerkraut was served as a regional dish of India, or if Chow Ho Fun was a staple diet of a region of India, you had an analogy.
Pork Vindaloo is Indian food,- it is Goanese cuisine.
So is Hyderabadi Biryani a proudly-proclaimed "authentic" Indian food from Andhra Pradesh.
Yet they have no basis in Vedic culture.
Don't compare apples and oranges.
Quote:
Consolidation is indeed usurpation, crudely put. Search for Lebensraum is a legitimate responsibility of a state apparatus.
So why blame Bangladeshis for searching their own Lebensraum in India ?
Quote:
This no way refutes what I've said.
Nothing would ever refute what you said.
Nepal is a sovereign country, just like Sri Lanka, Bangladesh or Pakistan is.
If that doesn't refute what you said, I don't know what does.
Quote:
Goa and Sikkim are standing examples of what could have been done.
Goa was a colony of the Portuguese, and it was recovered by force, unlike British and French colonies which were recovered peacefully.
It has no parallel.
Sikkim is a different story.
Given a choice between India and an independent Tibet, it would have chosen Tibet.
But, fearful of a Chinese repression, and to keep Tibetan culture alive, they chose India.
Nepal has no such fear.
Your example is flawed.
Quote:
Agreed, to emerge as a true civilizational state these should have been incorporated.
Spoken like a true believer of fascism.
Sudetenland, Danzig corridor, Alsace-Lorraine,- the list goes on.
Quote:
In that case Pak and BD should be treated as renegade provinces and hence invaded and territories recovered.
I don't see the logic in this.
According to your line of thinking, the British should use the same logic to reconquer India.
Quote:
Have you been to the Eastern Borders? What sane logic allows for foriegn enclaves within each others territory?
That's an entirely different question from recovering CHT, which I just showed was an exercise in fertile imagination.
Quote:
but cultural homogenization is possible.
No doubt.
But is it welcome ?
Why should a Tamil give up Thayir Sadam and Sambhar, and agree to eat Dal-Roti, Fish curry and Pork Vindaloo, or give up Bharat Natyam to only dance Bihu just because some free-thinker came up with a brilliant suggestion to "homogenise" Indian culture ?
Quote:
The very fact that till 65 war migrations were officially allowed bears the truth that this is possible.
That was a choice and a voluntary act.
What you seek is a mandatory migration.
Big difference.
Last edited by S. Valkan on 16 Aug 2006 10:10 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
S. Valkan
BRFite
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 10:09 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Prem wrote:
I think , asking the followers of Islam on Indian sub-continenet to settle the issue is not demanding as much.
The issue is a question of identity or identities.
As Johann suggested, allow them make that choice.
Why are you making the choice for them ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prem
BRFite
Joined: 01 Jul 1999
Posts: 428
Location: My Harem in Lahore.
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 10:31 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Valkan,
Hindus did not/ are not demanding the parttion of the country USA , hense your example of loyality to Missisipi is not correct.
If the Islamic claim is based on food and dishes , they should be welcomed to earn the kudos and move on.
The immigration till 65 was voluntary and was stopped by BD/PD . What does that prove, given a choice Islamic folks will prefer to live in Islamic lands > In the case of Indian landmass , BD/PD are Islamic lands allocated to followers of ISLAM. Its all about giving choices.
The agenda of 47 partition is still open and GOI need to press the issue with next door 2 Islamic govts of the land taken from India in the name of Islam. Indian Muslims are entitlled to this right.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sroy
BRFite
Joined: 15 Jul 2005
Posts: 704
Location: New Delhi
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 10:32 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
Consolidation is indeed usurpation, crudely put. Search for Lebensraum is a legitimate responsibility of a state apparatus.
So why blame Bangladeshis for searching their own Lebensraum in India ?
Liberal, psuedo-sec, losers blame BD. From my POV if India and BD / Pak collide for territorial issues, let the mighty one win. Thats the rule of history.
Everybody has the right to land grab, as per their military potentials.
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
Agreed, to emerge as a true civilizational state these should have been incorporated.
Spoken like a true believer of fascism.
Just as you are spouting psuedo-sec and ultra-leftist rhetoric about multi-culturalism.
S. Valkan wrote:
Sudetenland, Danzig corridor, Alsace-Lorraine,- the list goes on.
Indeed, the Third Reich would have had a consolidated German mega state including Austria and Switzerland, if Hitler didn't opt for Barbarossa.
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
but cultural homogenization is possible.
No doubt.
But is it welcome ?
Why should a Tamil give up Thayir Sadam and Sambhar, and agree to eat Dal-Roti, Fish curry and Pork Vindaloo, or give up Bharat Natyam to only dance Bihu just because some free-thinker came up with a brilliant suggestion to "homogenise" Indian culture ?
Get over your fixation about cuisines.
A Tamil and an Assamese already share my cultural beliefs. It is not of my concern how they dance or what they eat.
Last time I checked my Tamil colleagues enjoy Dal-Roti in our cafetaria, and chaste vegetarians relish hamburgers when in Munich.
But Muslims in my office do not share lunch table because they cannot make out whether the chicken curry is halal or jhatka.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Prem
BRFite
Joined: 01 Jul 1999
Posts: 428
Location: My Harem in Lahore.
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 10:40 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
S. Valkan wrote:
Prem wrote:
I think , asking the followers of Islam on Indian sub-continenet to settle the issue is not demanding as much.
The issue is a question of identity or identities.
As Johann suggested, allow them make that choice.
Why are you making the choice for them ?
Valkan, Muslilms living in India cannot make the choice as it was taken from them in 65. They exercised this right to migrate to BD/PD till then.
That is why GOI need to raise the issue with these 2 countires and let Muslims make the choice thus settling the issue of they being willing part of India or not. Right now positive assertion of being Indians cannot be taken for granted 100 % . So allow them by giving them chance and choices.
How long we have to keep looking over shoulder and asking for reassurances . None of the civilized country has this kind of baggage and burden on the shoulder , why should we have this drawback. It has not served us right.
Last edited by Prem on 16 Aug 2006 10:45 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mirajuddin
BRFite -Trainee
Joined: 09 Aug 2006
Posts: 75
Location: plaistow
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 10:42 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
brothers
i am muslim and i would like my options to migrate to either pak or bd to be open who knows what things will look in a few years time
security is always more in numbers
BRFite
Joined: 01 Jul 1999
Posts: 428
Location: My Harem in Lahore.
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:07 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Valkan,
Parsis have no complaints, the Non -Indian Christain Missionaries are nuisance at best, Sikhs, Budhists are all from the womb of Mother India and have all the rights and claims... there is no equal equal with islamic forces which are clearly inimical and dangerous to Indian state,ethos and civilization and its material ,spiritual progress.
My contention is , Islamic folks were deprived of their right to move to these 2 Islamic countries for which their forefathers fought for and got in the name of religion. They are part of Ummah and leftover ,legacy of Islam in India. Should not they be asked? Should not BD and PD be forced to share the loot with them. Why should non-muslims share their portion of India with Muslims for whom the fair portion of land was set aside. Its all about religion , no other mumbo jumbo.
Why do u bring Kalam Ji., Prem Ji or Rabinder singh in the equation?
Kalam ji is murtad as per the Islamic elements in India are concerned. Prem ji has made a free choice as he can move any where in the world with his $$ but he remains Indian. Rabinder singh is not a norm but a rare exception. The question is of millions of poor,illiterate millions of Muslims incapable of looking beyond their religion born out of India. Pakistan/BD was / is earned and alloctaed for them .
The consolidation of Indian society, nation is slow and might never happen because of Islamist elements in India. There is no example of their peaceful co-existence or assimilation with non -islamic societies in the last 1400 years or so. Present non- muslim generation of India owe it to their future generation to find the clear cut answer to this Islamic question mark on India and its future : same goes for present day Mulsims in India and their islamic aspirations which can never be fulfilled in non-islamic India.
Think this way, Old genearion was not asked about the issue and the suspicions are still lingering, why not clear the smoke now and march onward into 21st century. BD/PD are party to this and GOI owe this to every well meaning Indian .
There should be a national, public debate on this and issue ought to be part of Indian diplomatic agenda with BD/PD. If this require constitutional amendment , so be it.
Let me ask , What does India loose by raising the issue with these 2 countries . Will wining this issue make India strong or weak?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sroy
BRFite
Joined: 15 Jul 2005
Posts: 704
Location: New Delhi
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:14 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Prem wrote:
The consolidation of Indian society, nation is slow and might never happen becuase of Islamist elements in India. There is no example of their peaceful co-existence or assimilation with non -islamic societies in the last 1400 years or so. Present non- muslim generation of India owe it to their future generation to find the clear cut answer to this Islamic question mark on India and its future and same for present day Mulsims in India and their islamic aspirations.
Thanks, bro for spelling it out clearly putting aside political correctness. This is exactly what I meant by homogenization with respect to consolidation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
S. Valkan
BRFite
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:14 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
sroy wrote:
Seriously, much before Kurus
The dual purpose of their narratives/commentaries on RigVeda and its assorted material including Puranas .... is to refute AIT and on the other hand they document the expansion of ancient Vedic ... culture from centre of area around Indus.
You are comfortably gliding in and out between two rather loosely related terms,- 'civilisation' and 'culture'.
Discussion on AIT and pitching studies of chromosomal Y-haplogroups against the Samhitas and Puranas is way beyond the scope of this thread. I'll skip over it.
All I need from you is a simple answer,- when did the Indic "civilisation" consolidation begin ?
Why is it taking so long to "consolidate" ?
Quote:
By consolidation I also mean recovering lost territories. No nation in the last century has lost as much land as we have.
What do you mean by "lost" ?
There was a democratic referendum, and people inhabiting sections of erstwhile British India decided to go their own way.
What is your justification about "recovery" ?
Quote:
The present state of the Indian Union is not desirable.
Is that your personal opinion, or is it shared by the 'silent majority' ?
Quote:
We have territories that have inhabitants treating us mainstream folks like foriegners, but there are neighbouring countries where you'll feel at home.
The neighbouring countries want to remain apart from the Indian Union, even though YOU may feel at home in them.
What are your options ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prem
BRFite
Joined: 01 Jul 1999
Posts: 428
Location: My Harem in Lahore.
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:20 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Vlkan , read Ramana's post in J&K thread....
"Prof M Mujeeb, the late vice-chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia, later opined in his book, Islamic Influence on Indian Society, that Muslims were overwhelmingly in favour of Pakistan. Soon after the election, the Congress conceded Jinnah's claim to participate in the interim Government which earlier it was not prepared to; its erstwhile demand was for a share of the Muslim seats. In the interim Government, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad had to be given a non-Muslim entitlement.
The interim Government having been formed, the League's obsession for the rest of the year was on an exchange of population whereby all the Muslims should immigrate to Pakistan and all non-Muslims should transfer to Hindustan. Sir Feroze Khan Noon, who later on went to become Prime Minister, on April 8, 1946, told his Bihar legislators that unless there was an exchange of population, the League would re-enact the murderous orgies of Changez Khan and Halaqu Khan.
Ismail Chundrigar, another Prime Minister who hailed from Godhra, had also wanted his fellow religionists to emigrate.
The Qaid-e-Azam, in a press conference held at Karachi on November 25, announced that the authorities should immediately take up the question of population exchange. Mohammad Ismail of Madras and Shaukat Hayat Khan had whole-heartedly supported the idea.
On December 3, Pir Ilahi Bux of Sind and Iftikhar Husain Khan, the Punjab League chief, in separate meetings had reiterated the demand for an exchange."
Valkan, do you deny India was not partitioned on the basis of religion ?
Do you think the land lost by India to a foreign civiization is no loss at all and you are willing to take the risk of loosing some more land and people? Do you think islamic followers in India dont have the aspiration to make it Dar Ul Islam , as required by their islamic religion ,which is nothing but to finish Indian civlization= which might be anything as per your understanding, but is Clearly not a Islamic one.
So the possibilty of migration is still a issue.
Last edited by Prem on 16 Aug 2006 07:29 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
S. Valkan
BRFite
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:23 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Prem wrote:
Rabinder singh is not a norm but a rare exception.
Is that a scientifically provable claim, or have you made it a habit to make sweeping generalisations ?
Of the spies that are at the center of attention in Jaswant's book promotion, how many "rare exceptions" are outside the community of Rabinder Singh ?
Quote:
There should be a national, public debate on this
That's not a problem.
If you have the money, and the time, create a "Conference" like they do on "Kashmir", and hold televised national debates among participants.
If you find and build a consensus, float a party with that agenda on the manifesto ( like "Ram Janambhoomi" for BJP ) and contest the elections.
Quote:
and issue ought to be part of Indian diplomatic agenda with BD/PD.
Not as per the Constitution as it stands now.
Quote:
If this require constitutional amendment , so be it.
That's the spirit!
Now, why don't you work at achieving that amendment first ?
Quote:
Let me ask , What does India loose by raising the issue with these 2 countries . Will wining this issue make India strong or weak?
Whether India loses or gains is not the issue.
India has no constitutional obligation to raise your demand.
That's the key issue.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
S. Valkan
BRFite
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:28 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Prem wrote:
The interim Government having been formed, the League's obsession for the rest of the year was on an exchange of population whereby all the Muslims should immigrate to Pakistan and all non-Muslims should transfer to Hindustan.
In case this escaped your attention, all the above are speaking of a time before the Partition, and the creation of the "secular" Indian Constitution.
The apprehension then was that the future Dominion of India was to be a "Hindu-stan" rather than the secular, democratic republic of India.
Henceforth, please refer to the period AFTER January 26, 1950.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prem
BRFite
Joined: 01 Jul 1999
Posts: 428
Location: My Harem in Lahore.
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:41 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Solution, of course is to change the Indian constitution.
We are debating to find the clear cut solution to the problem which you refuse to admit.
The 1950 is not so sacrosant and written in stone that cannot be changed . The immigration was open till 65. Kashmir issue is still open with same Islamic elements. So raising the public awareness about the dangers is the duty of every well meaning Indian. This is not a personal issue but a national tragedy in making . Indians need to prevent this from happening and clean the mess created by the mistakes of old generation political leaders lacking good strategic foresight in recognising the impending dangers . We ought not to remain hostages of certain old prejudices and inhibitions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sroy
BRFite
Joined: 15 Jul 2005
Posts: 704
Location: New Delhi
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 07:47 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
S. Valkan wrote:
You are comfortably gliding in and out between two rather loosely related terms,- 'civilisation' and 'culture'.
Rightly so, because civilization is a super entity. An advanced culture beyond a point to beguns to acquire the traits of a civilization. A civilization implicitly incorporates a culture.
S. Valkan wrote:
All I need from you is a simple answer,- when did the Indic "civilisation" consolidation begin ?
Right from the Battle of the Ten Kings in the Rig Veda. Because that established the supremacy of folllowers of the Vedic culture.
S. Valkan wrote:
Why is it taking so long to "consolidate" ?
Always an ongoing process. During Maurya's and Gupta's it was a peak period of consolidation under a single and central power. But the period between these two was marked by fragmentation. Result was failure to stem Shaka and Hun invasions. Incidentally the Gupta's tamed the Huns.
Probably the next phase was under the efforts of Marathas and the Sikhs wherein the Mughal authority was nominal and assorted nawabs were lying low. Indic civilization was reasserting itself.
British intervention put an end to this Islamic rollback process.
The most recent phase is the current one. Goa, Sikkim, Hyderabad, Junagarh etc. etc. Bhutan is already a protectorate and there are was slight inclination on part of Nepal in the 50s.
S. Valkan wrote:
What do you mean by "lost" ?
There was a democratic referendum, and people inhabiting sections of erstwhile British India decided to go their own way.
What is your justification about "recovery" ?
Recovery Smile ? Does PoK and Aksai Chin ring a bell?
Are you sure there was a referendum? My reading of the history tells me Congies agreed under the threat of Direct Action!
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
The present state of the Indian Union is not desirable.
Is that your personal opinion, or is it shared by the 'silent majority' ?
Depends on your definition of 'silent majority'. In BRF itself there has been serious discussion and general agreement to recover the Chittagong hill tracts from BD by hook or crook.
Also, there has been long standing demand from WB to exchange the Indian and BD enclaves. Does this qualify?
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
We have territories that have inhabitants treating us mainstream folks like foriegners, but there are neighbouring countries where you'll feel at home.
The neighbouring countries want to remain apart from the Indian Union, even though YOU may feel at home in them.
What are your options ?
If a neigbouring country shares your culture, sends her sons to defend your motherland, it will need some political tact to bring her around. But it is workable.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Shafqat
BRFite
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 303
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 08:24 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
sroy wrote:
Also, there has been long standing demand from WB to exchange the Indian and BD enclaves. Does this qualify?
The enclaves resulted from the stupid border drawing process of the Brits. The 1973 Border Treaty (signed by Indira and Mujib) was meant to start the exchange of the enclaves. If I remember right, the border treaty was never ratified in India. But that's a different story - what I don't get it how that is related to the state of the union.
sroy wrote:
In BRF itself there has been serious discussion and general agreement to recover the Chittagong hill tracts from BD by hook or crook.
"Recover" CHT? On what grounds? I seriously disagree if there was a "serious discussion" here in BRF about that. A heated exchange maybe - but "let's take CHT" and "let's have tea in Feni" are hardly 'serious' statements. There was a general agreement about that among some, yeah - but not among the 'serious' posters of this forum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
S. Valkan
BRFite
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 08:43 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
sroy wrote:
S. Valkan wrote:
You are comfortably gliding in and out between two rather loosely related terms,- 'civilisation' and 'culture'.
A civilization implicitly incorporates a culture.
Now, given the fact that Indian culture is a heterogeneous composite including elements from Islamic sources, where does that leave your contention that Indian civilisation has nothing to do with Islam ?
Quote:
Always an ongoing process.
In other words, it has no end.
That's what I was looking for.
Quote:
The most recent phase is the current one. Goa, Sikkim, Hyderabad, Junagarh etc. etc.
Is that "consolidation" of civilisation, culture, or merely usurpation of territory ?
Since when is Pork Vindaloo or Hyderabadi Biryani part of the "consolidation" of Vedic culture ?
Quote:
Bhutan is already a protectorate and there are was slight inclination on part of Nepal in the 50s.
Living in the past doesn't help.
Nepal is on its way to become a republic.
Bhutan - the iron grip of Jigme Singye Wangchuk notwithstanding - would slowly go the same way.
And, in any event, Bhutan and Sikkim form a cultural/civilisational continuity with Tibet.
Where have you consolidated "Indic" civilisation ?
S. Valkan wrote:
Does PoK and Aksai Chin ring a bell?
Do you seriously entertain the belief that they WILL be recovered, ever ?
Quote:
Are you sure there was a referendum? My reading of the history tells me Congies agreed under the threat of Direct Action!
Firstly, the sweeping victory for Muslim League in 1946 elections for Muslim seats was a plebiscite.
Secondly, the Muslim League won the Pakistan referendum in provinces like NWFP, where Congress had a nominal victory in the 1946 elections, thanks to Khuda-i-Khidmatgars.
In effect, Pakistan was a product of referendum of Muslim-majority areas.
Quote:
In BRF itself there has been serious discussion and general agreement to recover the Chittagong hill tracts from BD by hook or crook.
Khayali Pulaos may work in internet discussions, not in real life.
The Radcliffe award had a certain logic to it.
The award of Hindu-majority Khulna was made in exchange of Muslim-majority Murshidabad, because of the fear of Pakistan blocking the head waters of the Hoogly flowing through Kolkata.
Similarly, East Pakistan needed to have a land exit point, and was awarded the CHT, while Muslim-majority Gurdaspur was awarded to India to provide land-access to the Jammu and Kashmir state.
What "recovery" would you seek ?
Quote:
If a neigbouring country shares your culture, sends her sons to defend your motherland, it will need some political tact to bring her around. But it is workable.
The French foreign legion employs many foreign mercenaries to defend French soil.
France offers French citizenship to those interested.
What makes you think the situation is any more different for the Gorkhas ?
Don't forget that the British used the Gorkha mercenaries to quell the Sikhs, and put out the last flames of Indian rule.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Johann
BRFite
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 1649
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 09:03 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
I dont think it would be a bad idea at all to make sure that that everyone knew that anyone who didnt think India was a sufficiently Islamic environment has the freedom to make a no-hassle 1-way move to Pakistan or Bangladesh. He should be when the feeling seizes him and the takleef becomes unbearable be able to sell his property and businesses at a fair price, safely transport his family, valuables and cash without undue delays. But it would mean no tourist visas for family members in Pakistan to visit, vetting for those who wish to visit Pakistan, and vetting and perhaps consequences for those who visited it without permission. It would make staying in India and getting along with others, and accomodating the modern world an active choice rather than a passive one.
It would also be just as good (in every sense of the word) an idea to offer asylum to non-Muslim minorities in those countries, as well as Muslim minorities like Ismailis, Ahmediyas, human rights activists, musicians, female victims of 'honour' crimes etc from those countries.
In concert they would act as a useful pressure valve on Islamist sentiment within India, and offer hope to those trapped by such sentiment next door.
On the other hand big, formal 'exchanges' of populations, even mutually agreed ones are usually horrifically violent and destructive. Greece and Turkey in the 1920s, the USSR and Turkey, various conflicts in between minorities in the USSR from 1917-1991, India and Pakistan in the 1940s, etc.
An exchange also means bartering. How many Non-Muslims would Pakistan and Bangladesh have to trade? 20 million tops? (never mind how many would actually survive the savagery of an exchange and make it across the border) Maybe you could include Shias, Ahmediyas, Ismailis, etc and other targets of Sunni hatred and double the figure.
How many Muslims over and above that would Pakistan and Bangladesh be willing to accept without territorial concessions to go with them?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sroy
BRFite
Joined: 15 Jul 2005
Posts: 704
Location: New Delhi
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 09:24 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
S. Valkan wrote:
Now, given the fact that Indian culture is a heterogeneous composite including elements from Islamic sources, where does that leave your contention that Indian civilisation has nothing to do with Islam ?
Islam is the only element that has refused to integrate. And it is the only element that asks for extra-territorial loyalty among its followers. Finally how you define your identity is upto you. A lot of people may not share your identity.
S. Valkan wrote:
Since when is Pork Vindaloo or Hyderabadi Biryani part of the "consolidation" of Vedic culture ?
Since I've tried Chinese cuisine and during my trips to Germany every 2-3 month I'm compelled to try suarkraut, they too are part of our cultural baggage as per your logic.
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
The most recent phase is the current one. Goa, Sikkim, Hyderabad, Junagarh etc. etc.
Is that "consolidation" of civilisation, culture, or merely usurpation of territory ?
Consolidation is indeed usurpation, crudely put. Search for Lebensraum is a legitimate responsibility of a state apparatus. Lets stick to realpolitik.
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
Bhutan is already a protectorate and there are was slight inclination on part of Nepal in the 50s.
Living in the past doesn't help.
Nepal is on its way to become a republic.
Bhutan - the iron grip of Jigme Singye Wangchuk notwithstanding - would slowly go the same way.
Don't forget that the British used the Gorkha mercenaries to quell the Sikhs, and put out the last flames of Indian rule.
This no way refutes what I've said. This just goes to bring out the incompetency of Nehru's Govt. Goa and Sikkim are standing examples of what could have been done.
S. Valkan wrote:
And, in any event, Bhutan and Sikkim form a cultural/civilisational continuity with Tibet.
Where have you consolidated "Indic" civilisation ?
Agreed, to emerge as a true civilizational state these should have been incorporated.
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
Does PoK and Aksai Chin ring a bell?
Do you seriously entertain the belief that they WILL be recovered, ever ?
History and global events cannot be predicted, but states can only plan to minimize improbables.
S. Valkan wrote:
Firstly, the sweeping victory for Muslim League in 1946 elections for Muslim seats was a plebiscite.
Secondly, the Muslim League won the Pakistan referendum in provinces like NWFP, where Congress had a nominal victory in the 1946 elections, thanks to Khuda-i-Khidmatgars.
In effect, Pakistan was a product of referendum of Muslim-majority areas.
You said it Smile, . In that case Pak and BD should be treated as renegade provinces and hence invaded and territories recovered.
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
In BRF itself there has been serious discussion and general agreement to recover the Chittagong hill tracts from BD by hook or crook.
Khayali Pulaos may work in internet discussions, not in real life.
The Radcliffe award had a certain logic to it.
The award of Hindu-majority Khulna was made in exchange of Muslim-majority Murshidabad, because of the fear of Pakistan blocking the head waters of the Hoogly flowing through Kolkata.
Similarly, East Pakistan needed to have a land exit point, and was awarded the CHT, while Muslim-majority Gurdaspur was awarded to India to provide land-access to the Jammu and Kashmir state.
What "recovery" would you seek ?
Have you been to the Eastern Borders? What sane logic allows for foriegn enclaves within each others territory?
As Shafqat has pointed out, the treaty for exchange of enclaves is pending for ratification on India's part.
This is my last post on the topic. To sum up I'll go back to Prem's original suggestion. Certain aspects of consolidation like territiorial recovery may not be possible beyond a point, but cultural homogenization is possible.
The very fact that till 65 war migrations were officially allowed bears the truth that this is possible.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Prem
BRFite
Joined: 01 Jul 1999
Posts: 428
Location: My Harem in Lahore.
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 09:24 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Valkan, the Islamic part and element in present is because of Islamic invasion, nothing else . There is no worthwhile compatiable spiritual contribution toward Indic ethos. In reality, Islam stands for everything contrary to Indian social, cultural and spiritual traditions of India sans some very insignificant simililarites.Islamics claim so and are proud of their exclusiveness and so forth, there is no harm in accepting the reality and recognizing the danger for ignoring it too long.
I think , asking the followers of Islam on Indian sub-continenet to settle the issue is not demanding as much. The consequences of not finding the answer could be terrible and tremendous. Indians deseve to know the answer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sroy
BRFite
Joined: 15 Jul 2005
Posts: 704
Location: New Delhi
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 09:36 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
When referring to civilizational issue I use the term Indic instead of Hindu or Vedic. The later two are cultural aspects.
I request others to use the same terminology, because the first one and the later two are not interchangable.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
S. Valkan
BRFite
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 10:06 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
sroy wrote:
Islam is the only element that has refused to integrate. And it is the only element that asks for extra-territorial loyalty among its followers.
Do you suggest that Hindus in America have allegiance to the Mississippi rather than the Ganga, to Mount Rushmore rather than Mount Kailash and to Lake Superior rather than Manasarovar ?
Quote:
Finally how you define your identity is upto you. A lot of people may not share your identity.
So why do you seek "homogeneity" ?
Quote:
Since I've tried Chinese cuisine and during my trips to Germany every 2-3 month I'm compelled to try suarkraut, they too are part of our cultural baggage as per your logic.
False dichotomy.
If Sauerkraut was served as a regional dish of India, or if Chow Ho Fun was a staple diet of a region of India, you had an analogy.
Pork Vindaloo is Indian food,- it is Goanese cuisine.
So is Hyderabadi Biryani a proudly-proclaimed "authentic" Indian food from Andhra Pradesh.
Yet they have no basis in Vedic culture.
Don't compare apples and oranges.
Quote:
Consolidation is indeed usurpation, crudely put. Search for Lebensraum is a legitimate responsibility of a state apparatus.
So why blame Bangladeshis for searching their own Lebensraum in India ?
Quote:
This no way refutes what I've said.
Nothing would ever refute what you said.
Nepal is a sovereign country, just like Sri Lanka, Bangladesh or Pakistan is.
If that doesn't refute what you said, I don't know what does.
Quote:
Goa and Sikkim are standing examples of what could have been done.
Goa was a colony of the Portuguese, and it was recovered by force, unlike British and French colonies which were recovered peacefully.
It has no parallel.
Sikkim is a different story.
Given a choice between India and an independent Tibet, it would have chosen Tibet.
But, fearful of a Chinese repression, and to keep Tibetan culture alive, they chose India.
Nepal has no such fear.
Your example is flawed.
Quote:
Agreed, to emerge as a true civilizational state these should have been incorporated.
Spoken like a true believer of fascism.
Sudetenland, Danzig corridor, Alsace-Lorraine,- the list goes on.
Quote:
In that case Pak and BD should be treated as renegade provinces and hence invaded and territories recovered.
I don't see the logic in this.
According to your line of thinking, the British should use the same logic to reconquer India.
Quote:
Have you been to the Eastern Borders? What sane logic allows for foriegn enclaves within each others territory?
That's an entirely different question from recovering CHT, which I just showed was an exercise in fertile imagination.
Quote:
but cultural homogenization is possible.
No doubt.
But is it welcome ?
Why should a Tamil give up Thayir Sadam and Sambhar, and agree to eat Dal-Roti, Fish curry and Pork Vindaloo, or give up Bharat Natyam to only dance Bihu just because some free-thinker came up with a brilliant suggestion to "homogenise" Indian culture ?
Quote:
The very fact that till 65 war migrations were officially allowed bears the truth that this is possible.
That was a choice and a voluntary act.
What you seek is a mandatory migration.
Big difference.
Last edited by S. Valkan on 16 Aug 2006 10:10 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
S. Valkan
BRFite
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 10:09 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Prem wrote:
I think , asking the followers of Islam on Indian sub-continenet to settle the issue is not demanding as much.
The issue is a question of identity or identities.
As Johann suggested, allow them make that choice.
Why are you making the choice for them ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prem
BRFite
Joined: 01 Jul 1999
Posts: 428
Location: My Harem in Lahore.
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 10:31 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Valkan,
Hindus did not/ are not demanding the parttion of the country USA , hense your example of loyality to Missisipi is not correct.
If the Islamic claim is based on food and dishes , they should be welcomed to earn the kudos and move on.
The immigration till 65 was voluntary and was stopped by BD/PD . What does that prove, given a choice Islamic folks will prefer to live in Islamic lands > In the case of Indian landmass , BD/PD are Islamic lands allocated to followers of ISLAM. Its all about giving choices.
The agenda of 47 partition is still open and GOI need to press the issue with next door 2 Islamic govts of the land taken from India in the name of Islam. Indian Muslims are entitlled to this right.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sroy
BRFite
Joined: 15 Jul 2005
Posts: 704
Location: New Delhi
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 10:32 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
Consolidation is indeed usurpation, crudely put. Search for Lebensraum is a legitimate responsibility of a state apparatus.
So why blame Bangladeshis for searching their own Lebensraum in India ?
Liberal, psuedo-sec, losers blame BD. From my POV if India and BD / Pak collide for territorial issues, let the mighty one win. Thats the rule of history.
Everybody has the right to land grab, as per their military potentials.
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
Agreed, to emerge as a true civilizational state these should have been incorporated.
Spoken like a true believer of fascism.
Just as you are spouting psuedo-sec and ultra-leftist rhetoric about multi-culturalism.
S. Valkan wrote:
Sudetenland, Danzig corridor, Alsace-Lorraine,- the list goes on.
Indeed, the Third Reich would have had a consolidated German mega state including Austria and Switzerland, if Hitler didn't opt for Barbarossa.
S. Valkan wrote:
Quote:
but cultural homogenization is possible.
No doubt.
But is it welcome ?
Why should a Tamil give up Thayir Sadam and Sambhar, and agree to eat Dal-Roti, Fish curry and Pork Vindaloo, or give up Bharat Natyam to only dance Bihu just because some free-thinker came up with a brilliant suggestion to "homogenise" Indian culture ?
Get over your fixation about cuisines.
A Tamil and an Assamese already share my cultural beliefs. It is not of my concern how they dance or what they eat.
Last time I checked my Tamil colleagues enjoy Dal-Roti in our cafetaria, and chaste vegetarians relish hamburgers when in Munich.
But Muslims in my office do not share lunch table because they cannot make out whether the chicken curry is halal or jhatka.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Prem
BRFite
Joined: 01 Jul 1999
Posts: 428
Location: My Harem in Lahore.
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 10:40 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
S. Valkan wrote:
Prem wrote:
I think , asking the followers of Islam on Indian sub-continenet to settle the issue is not demanding as much.
The issue is a question of identity or identities.
As Johann suggested, allow them make that choice.
Why are you making the choice for them ?
Valkan, Muslilms living in India cannot make the choice as it was taken from them in 65. They exercised this right to migrate to BD/PD till then.
That is why GOI need to raise the issue with these 2 countires and let Muslims make the choice thus settling the issue of they being willing part of India or not. Right now positive assertion of being Indians cannot be taken for granted 100 % . So allow them by giving them chance and choices.
How long we have to keep looking over shoulder and asking for reassurances . None of the civilized country has this kind of baggage and burden on the shoulder , why should we have this drawback. It has not served us right.
Last edited by Prem on 16 Aug 2006 10:45 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mirajuddin
BRFite -Trainee
Joined: 09 Aug 2006
Posts: 75
Location: plaistow
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2006 10:42 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
brothers
i am muslim and i would like my options to migrate to either pak or bd to be open who knows what things will look in a few years time
security is always more in numbers