[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

apology needed from Mr Vajpayee for betraying his Oath of Office



---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr. Ramachandran,

>Why is there such a convoluted debate about the Ayodhya issue on IPI? >It 
>seems reasonably clear what Ayodhya was about: Hindu 
> >fundamentalism,needing to take its view of history to a tangible and 
>visible level,destroyed the mosque.

The reason for the allegedly 'convoluted' dabate is inherent in your 
statements above which are designed to obfuscate not inform.  The real 
reason the mosque was torn down is the same reason why humans have the 
fundamental concept of justice.  Perhaps you have heard of it?

>To them, this was an act of 'correcting history'.The question then is 
> >about the feasibility of a principle of 'correcting history'.

I think this question has been answered conclusively.  It was for the reason 
of 'correcting history' that the Pope recently apologized to a multitude of 
faith groups in the middle east; it is for the reason of 'correcting 
history' that present day Germans apologised and paid reparations to the 
Jews; it is for the reasons of  'correcting history' that Japan apologised 
and paid reparations to Korea; it for the reason of 'correcting history' 
that America gave grants of land to its own natives; it for the reason of 
'correcting history' that natives in central and south america are demanding 
apology/ reparations from Spain and Portugal; it for the reasons of 
'correcting history' that Canada apologized/ paid reparations to Japanese 
Canadians; it was for the reasons of 'correcting history' that Canadian 
Sikhs are demanding an apology/ reparations from Canada.

This is just a small list - I could go on indefinitely but I think this 
adequately conveys current and modern thinking on the (non) issue you 
raised.  Hindus are actually among the very last to make such demand because 
we do not indulge in self serving victimology.  Why, among all other ethnic 
and faith groups on earth, should Hindus NOT be allowed to demand 
'correction of history' is irrational and discriminatory.

>Secondly, in a diverse society, majority sentiment cannot be given 
> >absolute rights. This seems fairly straightforward as well: a >numerical 
>majority should not find the answer to an >intellectual/philosophical 
>question, especially when the issue is >about majorities and minorities.

Agreed.  But if a group, majority or minority, does something wrong against 
another group, then does your worldview also include the concept of justice? 
'correction of history?'

>Finally, i don't quite see why secularism is equated with the negation >of 
>spirituality. As far as i know, spirituality has always meant >acceptance 
>of a plurality of faiths - the same as pluralism.


Total agreement here.



Sanjay Garg



>From: Kartik Ramachandran <ramachan@grinnell.edu>
>Reply-To: debate@indiapolicy.org
>To: debate@indiapolicy.org
>Subject: RE: apology needed from Mr Vajpayee for betraying his Oath of 
>Office
>Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 06:44:57 -0800 (PST)
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Why is there such a convoluted debate about the Ayodhya issue on IPI?
>
>It seems reasonably clear what Ayodhya was about: Hindu fundamentalism,
>needing to take its view of history to a tangible and visible level,
>destroyed
>the mosque. To them, this was an act of 'correcting history'.
>
>The question then is about the feasibility of a principle of 'correcting
>history'.
>
>Secondly, in a diverse society, majority sentiment cannot be given absolute
>rights. This seems fairly straightforward as well: a numerical majority
>should
>not find the answer to an intellectual/philosophical question, especially
>when
>the issue is about majorities and minorities.
>
>Finally, i don't quite see why secularism is equated with the negation of
>spirituality. As far as i know, spirituality has always meant acceptance of 
>a
>plurality of faiths - the same as pluralism.
>
>KR
>
>
> >===== Original Message From debate@indiapolicy.org =====
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >Dear Krishnan,
> >
> >You have not answered my question asking you to define secularism and
> >communalism.  The problem that I have with secularism is that it negates
> >(rather than affirming) the role of spirituality as the center of 
>society.
> >Recently, a new concept, called "Pluralism" has started gaining 
>popularity
> >in Academic circles in America.  This idea not only permits the peaceful
> >coexistence of diverse spiritual belief systems but it also affirms the
> >central role or spirituality in man's existence.
> >
> >I don't think that the concept of Secularism should be implemented in 
>India,
> >because unlike other countries that have implemented this idea, Indian
> >spiritual belief systems are not based on the concept of exclusivity.
> >
> >
> >>From: "Krishnan Kandasamy" <nkandasamy@hotmail.com>
> >>Reply-To: debate@indiapolicy.org
> >>To: debate@indiapolicy.org
> >>Subject: Re: apology needed from Mr Vajpayee for betraying his Oath of
> >>Office
> >>Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 13:09:23 -0800 (PST)
> >>
> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>Mr. Krishnan,
> >> >
> >> >It is the height of audacity for you to claim that NRIs somehow do not
> >> >represent the 'grass roots' of India.  All NRIs have parents, sisters,
> >>
> >>Fine!, Do you still want your relatives to live in a sharply divided
> >>society, filled with religious fanatics while your relatives become 
>hapless
> >>victims of economic, and social problems?. May be you think that 
>buliding
> >>that temple will solve Indian people's situation.
> >>
> >> >
> >>"You claim that 'the people' want cleanliness, sanitation etc.  Are 
>these
> >>the same people who indiscriminately throw household garbage out on the
> >>streets? are these the same people who think it their god given right to
> >>relieve themselves in public?"
> >>
> >>FYI Mr.Sam several millions in India don't have a toilet in the house,
> >>where
> >>else will they go?. It not a god given right, but a natural necessity,
> >>Build
> >>them clean toilets, bulid a school that educates common people about
> >>sanitation. Don't assume that Indian people want to live in dirty
> >>conditions.
> >>
> >>I also sure you can find it in your heart to believe that given the 
>right
> >>conditions and proper education, people in India can and will maintain a
> >>clean society.
> >>
> >>Attack the problem not the symptom, Poverty is the disease,attack it.
> >>
> >>
> >> >The essence of Hinduism is that it means different things to every 
>Hindu.
> >> >Please do not attempt to impose your definition of Hinduism on me and
> >>other
> >> >NRIs.
> >>
> >>I wouldn't  even try too. But there has been no such thing as militant
> >>hinduism, sad that these organistions are stamping that honor.
> >>
> >>
> >> >If the majority in ANY country decides to do anything, who will stop 
>it?
> >> >by what universal standard will you judge whether this something is
> >>'right'
> >> >or not?  You give the example of slavery - it has been considered 
>'right'
> >> >in many societies thru history and is still practiced in various parts 
>of
> >> >the world even today.
> >>
> >>Sam: What an great argument, Holocast of Jews, Slavery is all right
> >>accoding
> >>to you.  There is no universal standard for right or wrong, but slavery 
>of
> >>Humans is/was always wrong. Killing people for belonging to a particular
> >>religion is/was always wrong.
> >>
> >>Hope you don't teach your views to your childern.
> >>
> >> > >The problems in India can't be solved by buliding a temple or by
> >> > >replacing every mosque with a temple, nor by treating people of 
>other
> >> > >religion with suspecion and hatred.
> >> >Why is it that Jews, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, atheists and myriad 
>other
> >> >faith groups have been able to live and flourish in India for 
>millenia?
> >> >Because these are not virulently exclusivistic idealogies which
> >>cannibalize
> >> >its own host to ensure its survival.
> >>
> >>Hinduism can't be destroyed by Islam or by Cristianity if that is what 
>you
> >>meant, The organistion that you support are preaching exclusivisity and
> >>that
> >>is wrong. We CAN act civilised and take civilised steps to deal with
> >>religious problems. Resorting to short cut meathods like BJP/RSS/ and 
>other
> >>will only lead to greater division of India, and I am sure you don't 
>want
> >>that.
> >>
> >>Yes there are problem of intolerance in religions like Islam and
> >>Christianity, but how do you solve it by you also being intolerant? we 
>need
> >>social education , greater understanding, to deal with such problems.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>_________________________________________________________________
> >>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
> >>
> >>
> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>This is the National Debate on System Reform.       
>debate@indiapolicy.org
> >>Rules, Procedures, Archives:            
>http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
> >>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
> >
> >
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >This is the National Debate on System Reform.       
>debate@indiapolicy.org
> >Rules, Procedures, Archives:            
>http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
>Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------