My blog

Tag: Ram Mandir

  • The ‘Peaceful Indian Muslim’ Conundrum- Part II

    The 'Peaceful Indian Muslim' Conundrum- Part II
    Part II of II — ← Read Part I

    The myth of “Peaceful Indian Muslim” is carefully nurtured and sustained by the fake secularism practised in India. Whenever there is an attempt by anyone to uncover this veil, there are liberals who come up with fancy theories like Islamophobia to prevent the enlightenment of Muslim masses. What can be more sad than even a well-read, intelligent person feeling that telling this truth amounts to “making Muslims feel persecuted.” Well, if a person holds wrong ideas he needs to be confronted one day or the other. Would you also say that arresting rapists is incorrect because it amounts to singling them out? As a civilized society there is a red line that no one is allowed to cross. Gloating over the massacre of kafirs is not a civilized idea to espouse, and people need to confront those who do it instead of finding excuses.

    Unless Indian history textbooks tell their students about the atrocities perpetuated by Muslims on Dharmics, they will continue to look at that atrocious period as their “glorious past” — and the more they romanticize it, the more difficult they will find it to come to terms with contemporary realities. It is THIS dissonance which leads to terrorism. The killing of Hindus by Muslim invaders was not a glorious act and those who romanticize it are not civilized people.

    So how to fight against this ideological terrorism? The answer is education — and not just school education but political education of the masses. The idea should be propagated on all information channels until it becomes common parlance. The reason Muslims take to terrorism is because they feel they lived a glorious past where they could kill Hindus, in contrast to the lacklustre life they are living now where they have to abide by the rules of the land instead of being rulers. Unless there is a concerted effort to challenge and defeat this idea, India will always face an existential threat from Muslims. Admission of Muslim atrocities should become the mainstream quintessential Indian thought. There are so many museums in Germany and Japan depicting the atrocities committed by their ancestors on innocent people. Every year Hollywood comes out with half a dozen movies showing how bad the Holocaust was. This is the template that India should follow. There should be museums depicting the atrocities instead of making Bollywood movies and books that eulogize Akbar and Tipu Sultan.

    What ordinary Indians want is not something extraordinary. They simply want closure similar to the one that Germans and Japanese got when they admitted their mistakes. You can sing a thousand songs in the praise of moderate Indian Muslims, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

    The very fact that Hindus aren’t allowed to claim Ram Mandir is a testimony to the fact that Indian Muslims don’t adhere to a more evolved and tolerant form of Islam. Ram Janmabhoomi is to Hindus what Mecca is to Muslims — there can be no negotiation on this. Hindus have already forgotten the demolition of 40,000 temples by Muslims, but if they cannot budge on even one temple then there is no chance for reconciliation. If a case is being made that Indian Muslims are more reconciliatory in nature, where is the evidence?

    Celebrating that Indian Muslims are better than the rest of their ilk is a relative and subjective benchmark. From time to time we must ask ourselves whether this “relatively good” is “good enough.” A woman journalist in Mumbai was hounded into exile by the same peaceful Muslims for reposting the Charlie Hebdo cartoon while reporting about it. Now, this act might be committed by a group of 5,000 people but the thought process is not an outlier. Same goes for the thousands — 15,000 people — who thronged the funeral of their “martyr” Yakoob Memon.

    The deeper you go into the rabbit hole of Muslim extremist nexus, sooner or later you will realize that it is mainstream Islam — not a fringe, not a sect, not a twisted individual — but mainstream Islam which is responsible for all problems. One can draw artificial lines to separate them into moderates and extremists virtually speaking, but the crux of the matter is that until you are willing to admit that an ideology which at its core preaches that “everyone who disagrees with us is an enemy,” this problem will never be solved.

    Like the Afghan intel chief Amarullah Saleh once said: “You will keep killing the guys in the outer circle for years and patting yourself on the back but the problem won’t be solved until you have the resolve to confront the guys in the inner circle who are running the show.” He was taunting the US for killing low-level commanders in Afghanistan but not confronting Saudi Arabia. Fake seculars are doing the same by drawing a dichotomy between gun-wielding terrorists and non-gun-wielding “peaceful chaps.” Terrorism is not about weapons — it is about ideology.

    Being ruthless and killing people is not the recommended path. It is actually the “head in the sand” syndrome of fake liberals which will lead India into a civil war by not acknowledging the problem. A better way is to give closure on the atrocity issue. Include lessons of anti-Hindu atrocities in history books so that both Hindus and Muslims become aware of it and have a sense of national context instead of building their own personal victimhood narratives. Muslims claim that the Babri incident was wrong, but don’t want to concede that their co-religionist invaders captured and destroyed Hindu temples. This intellectual subversion is unacceptable. There is a need to have a frank discussion where people can put everything on the table so that everyone knows each other’s history and empathizes with the other before pointing fingers.

    The more the rights of Hindus the state curtails, the more Hindu anger it will fuel — the eruption of which will lead to incidents of violence, which will lead to further radicalization and polarization on both sides. The constitution mentions secularism; it is about time that Hindus taste it too. Hindus have only been smelling it from afar while Muslims relished the entire cake of secularism.

    To put it in short: India needs to take concrete steps to trash the Hindu narrative and Muslim narrative and adopt a common and reconciliatory national narrative which is acceptable to both parties — only then can people find closure and achieve peace. Otherwise these issues will keep flaring up.

    There is a beautiful thesis about the fundamental difference between India and Pakistan which can be summarized in one line: “the story of Pakistan is the story of the state of Pakistan, and the story of India is the story of the people of India.” It holds true for the modus operandi of all Muslim states. The moment its citizens ask for some human rights or even basic things like water and schools, the state says “the nation is under threat and you are asking for things? You are not a true Muslim!” That is how Muslim states keep the dreams of their population suppressed. The very definition of a “true Muslim” has been fundamentally crafted in such a way that the individual is supposed to selflessly sacrifice for the survival of the Ummah dream — and because of this feudal definition, the individual will never have any rights for himself. This feudal system will eventually collapse, no doubt about it. But will the Indian state ever tell this real story to Indian Muslims and aid them in bursting this bubble?

  • Hindu Man’s Burden

    Hindu Man's Burden

    Exhibit A: A bunch of Naxals were going to have a screening of anti-national propaganda — the institute didn’t allow them to do so. When they tried to cause trouble, the institute put their foot down and asked them to vacate the premises. This is the best way to solve the problem — nip it in the bud before it becomes a full-fledged anti-national lobby group like Jamia and JNU. The Central government is going to take away the minority status of Jamia and AMU. There is no need for taxpayer money to be spent on Jihadi institutions so they could indulge in their little anti-national circlejerks. If minorities want to run minority institutions, let them fund it with their own money. India is a secular nation and it cannot be seen as favouring any particular religion. Next, India should stop paying Haj subsidies — why? Because India is a secular nation. The state has already stopped pampering the FTII Naxals and they have been asked to collect their leaving certificates and stop being a burden on the taxpayer. Taxpayer-funded institutions cannot be used for anti-national purposes.

    The solution to these types of problems: stop treating anti-nationals with kid gloves.

    The same treatment should be meted out to all communities, especially those who fraudulently claim to be peaceful. The reason they love sickularism is because it allows them to be a parasite on Hindu tax money. If India starts following the French model of secularism, these hypocrites will get straightened within no time. No Burqa, no Haj subsidies and no reservations.

    Welcome to Secularism ver. 2.0

    Secularism cannot be a Hindu burden alone under this version. Hindu secularism must be reciprocal and proportional to Muslim secularism. It should not be compared with “ideal secularism” but should be compared with how much ground Muslims have ceded in the secularism department.

    Many people will like to see India becoming a truly secular nation, which it clearly isn’t right now. At the moment, there are a lot of core issues which will continue to give acidity to Hindus unless the status quo is changed. For example:

    1. Muslims are given autonomy over their religious institutions and donations. On the other hand, Hindu temples are usurped by the government.
    2. Haj is given subsidy while Amarnath Yatra is taxed.
    3. Ram Mandir is being presented as a petty real estate dispute despite it being the holiest place in Hinduism. Ram Mandir is to Hindus what Mecca is to Muslims.

    The pettiness shows in the fact that Muslims are contesting that land tooth and nail despite that land being of no significance to them religiously — this is being done just to spite Hindus. One can understand if the quarrel was about a piece of property which was religiously significant for both religions, like the Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem. But this is not the case here. Ram Mandir was, in fact, one of the 40,000 temples which Muslim invaders destroyed to persecute the native Hindu population. The Hindu community holds no grudges against them for those 40,000 temples and have forgiven them unilaterally in the interest of peaceful co-existence — despite Muslims never having expressed remorse for the atrocities committed against Hindus. Instead of taking into consideration all those steps taken by Hindus in the direction of reconciliation, if Muslims show their petty-mindedness by not wanting to budge on even one temple, then many Hindus will legitimately re-evaluate whether Muslims genuinely do want peaceful coexistence at all.

    Reconciliation cannot be a one-way street where Hindus keep making sacrifices while Muslims keep gnawing at their core interests and lecture them on secularism. This gives rise to a legitimate resentment against secularism as it is being practised, to the detriment of Hindus. Unfortunately Muslims in India still have that Mughal mindset where they think that secularism is a tax that only Hindus have to unilaterally pay towards Muslims — i.e. Jizya-2 — and Muslims have to do nothing except relish the fruits of Hindu secularism. Muslims think secularism is an exclusively Hindu burden, which is evident from their various stances ranging from refusal to sing national songs to saluting the flag based on religious doctrine. They must realize that both communities have to take one step each to work towards a secular nation — it is not an exclusively Hindu burden.

    The longer Muslims feign ignorance about these issues, the more incidents like Babri will occur when Hindu anger will inevitably erupt. No one wants to live as a second-class citizen in their own country, humiliated by a minority which shamelessly proclaims that secularism is against Islam and claims to have no obligation to abide by secular values. Remember how Kashmiri Pandits were slaughtered as all those champions of secularism conveniently kept quiet while common Hindus helplessly watched in horror. The longer India ignores this problem, the more Hindus will walk over the fence and join the extreme right.

    In 2002, sixty innocent Hindu saints were burnt alive in a train and the resulting riot resulted in the death of 250 more Hindus — still the secular media calls it an “anti-Muslim riot,” completely ignoring the deaths of Hindus. Hindus cannot be expected to never respond when provoked. Fact is Hindus can’t keep playing the role of a punching bag to get a secularism certificate from Muslims or the so-called intelligentsia.

    If the government doesn’t protect their interests then Hindus will have no option left but to arm themselves to keep their families safe. Hindus have been killed with impunity since the Mughal era and it cannot continue forever. Nowhere does it say in the constitution that Hindus have to be secular. Secularism is the responsibility of the state towards its subjects, not that of Hindus towards other faiths. For too long Hindus have been paying this unilaterally enforced Jizya under the twisted secularism that is followed in India. But no more!

    This unilateral imposition of sickularism on Hindus is nothing but a forced manifestation of the white man’s burden (aka Joshua Project) contextualized for the Indian sub-continent.

  • The ‘Peaceful Indian Muslim’ Conundrum- Part I

    The 'Peaceful Indian Muslim' Conundrum- Part I
    Part I of II — Read Part II →

    The peaceful Indian Muslim myth is a fairytale that has been perpetuated by elitist Hindu liberals. It is one of those myths which is bought wholesale by both the left and the right. But sadly like any other fairytale, it is not based on any facts. Look at the nature of political Islam from 1920 to 2016 and you will find that nowhere has it been more treacherous and lethal than in the Indian subcontinent. There are Islamic political movements in the Middle East too — there was the Baath party in Iraq, Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and various other groups — but none of them led to the treacherous partition of a nation the way it did in India. In fact, claiming that Muslims of the subcontinent are peaceful is the Hindu way to hide the shameful past of being pounded by the Muslims.

    The worst assumption one could make is that Indian Muslims are different from their Pakistani counterparts. Why so? Do they follow a different book? Obviously not. Go to any foreign nation and observe — the moment a Muslim from the subcontinent sets his foot on foreign land, he immediately severs his cultural roots and gets connected to the global Islamic political movements there. Just to give a small example, there are many Change.org petitions about protecting Indian interests — how many Indian Muslims do you see participating in those? How many NRI Muslims do you see walking in rallies on the streets of the US or UK to speak in favour of India? None. The moment they go there, they immediately connect their roots with the Ummah — and subsequently you will find many Indian Muslims walking in rallies for Palestine, Lebanon and Kashmir. They whole-heartedly support anti-west, anti-Israel and anti-India (basically anti-kafir) coalitions.

    The Ummah mentality of the Muslims of the subcontinent has not gone away — in fact, it has only strengthened with the onset of the internet and other communication channels. Wherever there are Muslims, there is always a problem. Don’t give more credit to someone just because they happened to be born in a certain geographical part of the world. They themselves don’t care about this geography, because they believe that international borders are artificial barriers which stop Muslims from linking to form a united Ummah. Islam is not a race — it is an ideology, and unless you are making a claim that Indian Muslims have a different Quran than other Muslims (which they obviously don’t), the peaceful Indian Muslim argument holds no water.

    An ideology at whose core lies antagonism against non-believers cannot be an inclusive one, no matter how much PR spin you try to give it. A lot of those who claim Indian Muslims to be more peaceful than the rest of the world are subconsciously linking it with Sufism. Even Akbar, who was under the influence of Sufi saints, killed 6 lakh Hindus. In fact, all the Muslim rulers who committed atrocities on Hindus had Sufis in their cabinet. And still some people think that Sufism is peaceful Islam.

    The very fact that Hindus aren’t allowed to claim Ram Mandir is a testimony to the fact that Indian Muslims don’t adhere to a more evolved and tolerant form of Islam claimed by many. The thought process is the same as that of the invaders. Ram Mandir issue is not a real estate dispute and cannot be looked at from that angle. It is a much deeper issue of constitutional violation of the religious rights of Hindus in an allegedly secular nation which allegedly guarantees religious freedom. Ram Janmabhoomi is to Hindus what Mecca is to Muslims — there can be no negotiation on this. The fact that we are stuck in negotiations reflects that Indian Muslims have in fact NOT given up their ideological terrorism which stems from their need to dominate and persecute Hindus wherever they can. Reconciliation is a two-way street where both parties agree to walk one step each and meet in the middle. The iconoclasm of Indian Muslims is written all over the Ayodhya issue and is impossible to ignore.

    Then there is another pet theory peddled around by Islam apologists according to which economic progress will lead to less radicalization — implying by corollary that poverty leads to terrorism. This has been categorically proved to be false. A lot of people involved in Jihadi activities are upper middle class, educated people. Take a look at the Indian boys who went to fight for ISIS. They were working in MNCs with a salary of 12 lakh per annum — more than what an average Indian earns. An average ISIS fighter earns a salary of 800$ a month. If money was the motivating factor to become a terrorist, surely many poor people would have agreed to join these groups for even 80$ a month, given that 60% of the world lives in poverty. Why didn’t all those poor people join them? Because people with a sane moral compass stay away from such ideologies even in the face of abject poverty.

    Osama bin Laden was a billionaire. But that did not stop him from taking to extremism. Extremism is a political ideology — an idea which transcends social and economic class barriers. Shah Rukh and Amir Khan have no shortage of money, but they still indulge in Jihadi propaganda. How much money do you think the government needs to give them to stop propagating those ideas? How much money do you think would Hafiz Saeed take so that he magically stops being a terrorist?

    Money is orthogonal to the issue of terrorism — it is a facilitator but not the driving force. The problem of ideological extremism is not going to go away by just throwing money at it. It is like throwing food at a wolf and expecting him to magically start behaving like a domesticated dog. He will eat the food but still continue to remain a wolf and your life is still under threat because you haven’t solved the core problem. The core problem is that unlike other fascist ideologies like Nazism and other forms of imperialism, Islam never underwent any reform because no one ever dared to tell them that. Germans today acknowledge Nazism was evil because their history books told them about the horrors it perpetuated. Islam has never been told that the atrocities it perpetuated were wrong — so instead of undergoing reform, it continues to live in its own merry world assuming that period to be “glorious.”

    So Hindus should stop patting themselves on the back and giving a peaceful certificate to sub-continental Muslims. The history of Indian Muslims is far from peaceful. Even if one forgets pre-independence riots, in the post-independence period Muslims have already shown what they are capable of by throwing out Kashmiri Pandits from the valley — which was anything but peaceful. They were able to achieve this ethnic cleansing while fighting against the might of the Indian state machinery. The only hurdle in the achievement of this goal of dar-ul-Islam in the rest of the country is the fact that Hindus still have demographic majority, which is slowly but steadily slipping away in many regions. The ethnic cleansing of minorities in Pakistan and Bangladesh should be a wake-up call for all those who comfortably prefer to ignore this demographic reality.

    What is then the solution to this problem? The solution can be found — but the first step is to acknowledge that there is no such entity called “Peaceful Indian Muslim.” Once most Hindus acknowledge the existence of this problem, only then can solutions be found.