Citizenship Amendment Act – the straw that broke the camel’s back

By GauravL 141 Comments

Since the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, which culminated in the demolition of the Babri Masjid, nothing has polarized Indian politics and society as much the Citizenship Amendment Act. On its own, its fair to assume that CAA is not  a particularly insidious piece of legislature, but when it gets combined with National Register of Citizens (NRC) as explained by Amit Shah below, it becomes some to be vary of.

As Amit Shah stated, CAB(A) will be applied before carrying out the process of NRC. In his own words, the refugees(non Muslim migrants) will be granted citizenship and the infiltrators (Muslim migrants – he also referred to them as termites at one instance) will be thrown out or prosecuted (there was some talk of throwing them into the Bay of Bengal).

Its clear to conclude that by refugees – he means Bangladeshi Muslims who reside illegally in India as almost no Muslims from Pakistan and Afghanistan come to India illegally with an intention a  better life. (When they do cross the LOC illegally, they’re treated as enemy combatants or terrorists)

The ACT: 

The instrumental part of the act reads

any person belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian community from Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan, who entered into India on or before the 31st day of December, 2014 and who has been exempted by the Central Government by or under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 or from the application of the provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946 or any rule or order made thereunder, shall not be treated as illegal migrant for the purposes of this Act

While this amendment to the ACT is seen as problematic, one must point out that large portions of the existing ACT are also extremely problematic – most of which were added after 1955 under various governments at various times. In particular the 1986 amendment (under Rajiv Gandhi) – which meant children born to both illegal immigrants wouldn’t get citizenship. This is seen as a contradiction with the Birthright naturalization (Jus soli ) principle of the Constitution. The 2003 amendment (under Vajpayee) further restricted citizenship to children, when either of their parents is an illegal immigrant.

The 2003 amendment also prevented illegal immigrants from claiming naturalization by some other legal means. So in short with the CAA 2019, this particular amendment (2003) has been annulled for Non Muslims who have come to Indian sovereign land from Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan.

In other words, the CAA facilitates the imagination of India as the natural homeland of subcontinental Non-Muslims (but not a Hindu Rashtra or Hindu State).

Objective Reasons for opposing the CAA:

  1. The CAA 2019 doesn’t include the word “persecuted minorities” which has been the first line of defense from the government when asked to explain the logic of the Act.
  2. The communities like Ahmadiyas & Hazaras are not protected in the Act. One can argue reasonably that Ahmadiyas are as persecuted in Pakistan as Hindus or Christians. The insincere defense presented by the government to this question is utterly unconvincing. (that Indian state recognizes these groups as Muslims). Additionally no one can deny that Atheists(Apostates) and Shia are also considered anathema in some fundamentalist Sunni cultures (in Pakistan/ Bangladesh), hence a humanitarian act would protect the persecuted among these too.
  3. Sri lankan Tamils (Hindus, Christians & some Muslims) and Tibetan Buddhists are not included in the act. Tibetan Buddhists who have fled the Chinese communist state in the 50s and 60s are yet not naturalized citizens of India.
  4. The cut off date of 31 December 2014 appears arbitrary. If the aim of the act is humanitarian as it claims, why have a cutoff date in first place ? Surely these communities continue to be persecuted even after 2014.
  5. If the aim of the act was truly humanitarian, naturalization could have been accelerated for these communities without the ACT. Till date under 32000 people have taken refugee under this act.

Subjective fear-induced reasons for opposing the CAA:

  1. This ACT is the last straw that has broken the metaphorical camel’s back. The 5 years of first Modi government, which were seen as a highly polarized time, concluded with an even more polarizing Election campaign. Ticket to Sadhvi Pragya, divisive speeches by the BJP president and others, almost Zero tickets  given to Muslim candidates outside the Kashmir Valley – all had pushed the Anti BJP sentiment to a new high. The introduction of CAA, the violence in JNU/Jamia, the Liberal media outrage all pushed the opponents of Modi government & BJP (including considerable number of non political Muslims) to see the CAA-NRC protests as their last stand.
  2. The opponents of the act say that act was meant as a bandage of the badly executed NRC in Assam. Its claimed that more than 50% of the 11 lac exclusions from the Assam NRC (i am unsure of the latest numbers) are Hindus.  BJP cant afford to throw these under the bus (large reason for growing voteshare of BJP in north east are these migrants), while wanting to exclude the Bangladeshi Muslims from the franchise.
  3. Given the pathetic state of affairs in India state, its fair to assume that an exercise like NRC will lead to significant collateral damage. Even if innocent Indians citizens (particularly Muslims) are not disenfranchised, they will surely will have to suffer the Kafkaesque bureaucracy. When dealing with populations of crores, even a error of the magnitude of 0.0001% will lead to thousands of personal tragedies. While its logically coherent to assume no state could take such a rash decision, examples like Demonetization and Covid Lockdown migrant fiasco remind us something else.
  4. There is a fear among some of the Anti Hindutva folks (largely misguided imho) that CAA-NRA will be used perniciously by the state to disenfranchise all those  who oppose the Hindutva ideology (Particularly Dalits and Tribals). (Intelligent and articulate politicians like Prakash Ambedkar, public figures like Varun Grover, Javed Akhtar and many others are guilty of stoking these unsubstantiated fears.). There has been an end justify means (dishonest ) attack on CAA-NRC from the left which  is largely counterproductive imho.
  5. And last but not the least  – CAA-NRC is largely seen by a section of liberal  india as the next Ram Mandir for the BJP. Shekhar Gupta makes this very point in the following video.
  6. Many see this as an Inflection point for India – as the conception of Homeland of Muslims was for Pakistan. The pettiness with which the BJP has handled  the Aatish Taseer case has raised serious questions in minds of many. Its not hysterical to  assume that citizenship could be thus weaponized for petty politics.

Why CAA – NRC remains popular ?

Link to article:

  1. The fear the ten year religious census evoke in the non Muslim communities by and large cannot be understated. This is true for Christians in Northeast/ Goa/ Kerala too – not just Hindutva folks. Assam/W.Bengal & Kerala have crossed the threshold of comfort for most non Muslims (Kerala Christians are turning to RSS). The logical explanation for the disproportionate growth of Muslims is a long-winded and difficult to appreciate for most people (who are already driven by fear). Unless we get a charismatic lefty figure (Gandhi-like figure) who can calm the fears- i am afraid support for exclusionary CAA-NRC laws will continue in the silent majority. The Liberal side would do well to address these fears instead of dismissing them as fears of bigots. Its important to distinguish fear at rise of Muslims vs Christians. Most ordinary Hindus who have a life don’t care if Christians rise as a % of population (including coercive conversions) no matter how much Hindutvavadis scream about it. Hence despite being monotheistic, Christianity doesn’t evoke similar fear as Islam owing to a range of past and present problems.
  2. A significant section of Hindus (idelogical RSS/BJP) people have long espoused an explicitly Hindu Rashtra (not state). This thought is by no means a majority even among Hindus, but a significant minority nonetheless.
  3. Indians by and large are under the charm and propaganda influence of the Cult of Modi.  When he says jump – they ask how high ? no matter their previous or personal ideological beliefs.

Why i oppose CAA-NRC ?

  1. I second all the objective critiques of CAA mentioned above.
  2. I do not trust the BJP government under Modi and especially Amit Shah to be fair.
  3. The Kafkaesque state of India is likely to do more collateral damage than good with the NRC.
  4. I am extremely apprehensive of the dog-whistling and polarization which is a natural outcome (maybe desired by the BJP) of pursuing the policy of CAA-NRC.
  5. If i were a born Muslim – i would’ve have been uncomfortable with the CAA.
  6. While i grant the Hindutva folks the argument  – most the opposition to CAA is due to the fact that BJP has brought that in. Yes that is indeed true – most of even my opposition to CAA stems from the subjective unease than concrete/objective criticisms.
  7. I feel the CAA dilutes India’s moral claim on Kashmir. I feel its akin to accepting the Two nation theory.

The argument often made by Hindutva folks is that even if India becomes a Hindu Pakistan it wouldn’t be even be half as bad as Pakistan –

  • largely due to fundamental differences Hinduism & Islam
  • large size & diversity of India
  • integrated service economy which will prevent worst forms of majoritarianism (i am a bit skeptical of this argument)
  • democratic spirit which has percolated to certain extend in the franchise.

While i grant some of these arguments as I am just unwilling to take the risk. 

The Dharmic Rashtra i wouldnt oppose: (thought not fully SUPPORT)

  • An imagination of India as the civilization which is predominantly Hindu or Dharmic and hence plural is something i can support to a certain extent. If such conception leads a state like Great Britain or Denmark (where these countries are concretely Christian – yet in application there is often very negligible discrimination) it could help assuage some of the identity concerns of Hindus without necessarily ruffling other communities.
  • As a person who identifies as a Hindu Atheist – i wouldn’t mind it if Indian Islam & Christianity come under the Wider Dharmic umbrella as other sects did before the Brits interfered (Stable equilibrium). This appears as wishful thinking nonetheless and hence i am skeptical of the Hindutva project.
  • What would be more realistic to hope is  a neutral yet tolerant equilibrium where these monotheisms act as Zoroastrianism and Judaism in India. It can be argued that these 2 denominations are too tiny to be successful models of integration for large and particularly uncompromising monotheisms. (Neutral equilibrium)
  • Both these outcomes would be a marked positive over the current Unstable & Unequal equilibrium. 
This crude analogy offers some insights in my understanding the interactions of various religions (for a lack of better word) with the Dharmic/Indic world.

Post Script:

I have not addressed the concerns of people of the North east in this piece. None of the critique above justifies the apparent encouragement of illegal immigration (Muslim) done by the Congress and other left parties over the years. The accusation that Trinamool have actively encouraged illegal immigration in West Bengal appears to have some truth to it. Whether the NRC is implemented in West Bengal or not – i foresee some bloody years  ahead for land of the Bhadraloks.

I must make it clear that i have no sympathy for violent demonstrations and even Chakka Jams (Road blocks). If the opposition to CAA is serious, their time and energy would be better spend in traversing the width and length of the country and starting a Liberal movement rooted in ground realities (a mirror to RSS). It takes hard and long work to bring about desired change in politics & society (ask the RSS). The CAA passed through both houses & truly represents the will of the people – the road to annul it must begin from the people on ground and not Courts or demonstrations (any such intervention from blackmail will be detrimental to the liberal cause in long run).

As this is a highly consequential debate, i welcome all feedback short of abuse.

Post Post Script:

CAA doesn’t grant ASYLUM to oppressed minorities in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan. It grants Citizenship (including voting rights) above residence to those who have crossed over before January 2015.

IMO – ASYLUM >> CITIZENSHIP on priorities

 

2+

141 Replies to “Citizenship Amendment Act – the straw that broke the camel’s back”

  1. \While i grant some of these arguments as I am just unwilling to take the risk. \
    BJP Shah-Modi combine’s good faith may be suspect. OTOH, any alliance of opposition are not willing to take any action. I am unwilling to take the risk of no-action and policy drift and political apathy. Good or nearly good actions taken by ‘bad people’ is better than pious sentiments of ‘good’ people.
    CAA has other benefits. It just includes the Christian/Sikh/Hindus persecuted in south Asia. Fine
    Now that that is in place, nothing prevents the next regime to include Uyghurs, Pak Atheists , Rohingyas and others in that order.
    The only possibly good objection to CAA I have heard is that the same could be done with the present set of laws. I don’t know about that ; if that is the case why it was not done earlier. I prefer a silent , no fuss and no hackles appraoch in all these matters. As Churchill said, diplomacy is one when if you ask someone to goto hell, he will ask for directions

    Basically any functionaing and strong state needs to know who it’s citizens are . Most countries have Citizen ID cards , whether it is pakistan or France. India does not has that. Without good information database of citizens , state capacity will be limited – as it has beeen proved by India’s response to COVID- contrast with China

    1. Any state needs a strong database – ofcourse. But do they need to do it at the end of the barrel – knowing what we know of the efficiency of the state ? the Mohammed Sana Ullah (even if he was an illegal immigrant) is a shameful incident for me to digest
      If purpose is to grant asylum – no one would make this much noise; the weaponization of citizenship as apparent from Amit Shah’s speeches is the main sticking point – along with other inconsistencies in the act itself

      1. If ‘strong database – ofcourse’ it is better the GoI do it and do it now
        You must separate Amit Shah’s alleged deviousness and bad intentions from whether it is good or bad. If the proposals are good , who is going to do it and how and when . Politics of total confrontation and zero sum politics on this matter is very counter productive

        1. a lot of ground work will need to be done even before a talk of NRC can be taken seriously.
          Do u deny that if implemented hastily it would lead to large scale catastrophe ?
          And given the record of the Indian state & BJP government on Demo / Lock-down – wouldn’t it be naive to expect they can do this effectively ?

          European countries which have such registers are 10times rich; significantly more efficient & less than 10% size and diversity of india.

  2. The article is well written from a liberal view point but you I think you haven’t spent enough time trying to understand the views of those who support the CAA. Since the article and the overall debate are too long I won’t mention all the points I disagree with or which I feel you have missed, allow me to point out the most important ones,

    1) This act has to be seen in the backdrop of the Indian partition. Pakistan and Bangladesh have a terrible record of treating their Hindus and some other minorities as well and these people belong to the Indian civilization. The reason why this is important to the Dharmik wing is that this act goes beyond 1947 in extending the meaning of India and states that those who suffered the consequences of Islamic bigotry post 47 have a right to India. We believe that by allowing these minorities to get Indian citizenship we are giving them what should be the birthright of everyone who comes from the Indian civilization. This is why giving citizenship to these refugees, even if they are only a few, is very important.

    2) As far as Bangladesh and Pakistan are concerned, there is a huge difference between their Muslims and non-Muslims from an Indian perspective. These were nations carved out by people who, in their own words, did not want to live alongside Hindus in a Hindu majority state. The non-Muslims in these countries are primarily people who were too poor to immigrate to India and were thus trapped in these Muslims states, as majority of people who’ll benefit from CAA are suspected to be Dalits. Also, this is what separates Indian Muslims from Bangladeshi and Pakistani Muslims. Indian Muslims were those who chose to stay back in India while Pakistan was bargained by remaining Muslims after organizing multiple riots. Letting those very people back into the country is not just morally wrong but also poses a huge security threat. Tomorrow when many of these economic migrants become economically well off will their loyalties still stay with India or will they start another secessionist campaign demanding that the regions in which they are in majority be separated from India because they don’t want to be ruled by Hindus. I would also like to remind you that the partition was the bloodiest event in the history of our land and any step which makes the recurrence of such an event more likely should be strictly avoided. The objection to this argument, from a liberal perspective, is going to be along the lines of human rights. However, human rights are not some some god given entities. They are created and enforced by a state. Making concessions along the lines of human rights for those who harm the security of state and cannot be trusted to uphold the integrity is a bad idea. I would be willing to concede them Indian citizenship if they give a declaration stating “We regret the actions of our ancestors that partitioned India. We do not believe in the two nation theory and don’t believe in supremacy of Muslims over Hindus. Our citizenship is conditional on us never being associated with any secessionist movement.”

    1. i dont agree with the Sins of the parents – on to the children narrative at all. (in case of Ahmadis)
      Human beings are products of their environment; and it takes a very brave man to accept the sins of their ancestors.
      There continue to be Savarna folks in India who have not accepted the sins of their genetic ancestors.
      If the aim is humanitarian – it can be under such circumstances imo.

      1. i dont agree with the Sins of the parents – on to the children narrative at all. (in case of Ahmadis)

        I tried to preempt this argument by alluding to the point about human rights. I’m not concerned with the moral argument, whether these kids are guilty for the sins of their parents or not. By the way, I agree with you that they are not. But that is not the point and is largely irrelevant. Even if they haven’t inherited any sins of their ancestors, the fact remains that they were brought up by them. They were given similar moral values by their parents and by the larger society. Usually, schools can make a difference. However, in the case of Pakistan, the schooling is likely to make a kid hate Hindus even if the parents don’t harbor any such feelings. I don’t know about the schooling in Bangladesh but doubt that a society which persecutes its Hindus would really be teaching its kids much different. This is all that matters. How those “kids” are today is all that matters when India is considering making them citizens. Their history is of secondary importance. This is especially the case because a substantial number of these “kids” will have anti-Hindu sentiments and might well start working against the territorial integrity of India once they become the majority in a region.

        Human beings are products of their environment; and it takes a very brave man to accept the sins of their ancestors.

        Every country is picky about the immigrants it accepts. India shouldn’t accept those immigrants from Pakistan and Bangladesh who aren’t brave enough to accept the sins of their ancestors. They will be harmful to India and that is all that matters when a country grants citizenship to immigrants.

        There continue to be Savarna folks in India who have not accepted the sins of their genetic ancestors.

        That is true but the democratic setup ensures that Dalits also get a proportional voting right because of which their condition has been steadily improving in the country. The Savarnas have no interest in threatening the territorial integrity of India. I agree their attitude is a problem for us. However, over the past 73 years we have developed mechanisms like reservation to address this and the situation is improving. Just because we have a problem in our country doesn’t mean we go on importing problems from other countries, that too those problems to which we have found no effective solutions. You can solve this problem by convincingly addressing the matter of demographics. In Assam and West Bengal the Muslim population is around 30%. If tomorrow it increases to say 50% and these Muslims demand a separate country, what solution do you propose? Should we create another Kashmir with a land under perpetual AFSPA? If not that, should we just secede these lands to another Muslim country. What if they demand a separate country only for the parts of Assam and Bengal where they are already in majority? What is your solution to that?

        Ultimately moral arguments breakdown when the topic of interest is the integrity of the state. The only reason any amount of morality can be imposed in a society is because of the existence of the state. We cannot be tolerant of that which is intolerant of our state or we end up threatening everything. Refer to Karl Popper’s work on this for a deeper insight, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance.

        1. I would largely grant significant portion of your points. Demographics terrify the shit out of normal people when they face them – easy for someone like me to dismiss those fears having grown up in Pune* – hence i dont dismiss those fears
          -But i dont support this response. I firmly believe seeds of further problems will rise from this action.

          I guess that is the core argument between Me and most Liberal people to slightly my RIGHT

          1. -But i dont support this response. I firmly believe seeds of further problems will rise from this action.
            I guess that is the core argument between Me and most Liberal people to slightly my RIGHT

            Ok, so how do we go about tackling this problem of demography, especially in Assam and WB because they border Bangladesh? For me, this is one of the most important long term concerns for India. We have allowed way too many Bangladeshis to settle in these two states and now the liberals don’t want the government to treat the illegals the way constitution mandates it. Fine. But at least propose another solution. What I see happening from the left is denying that there is any problem. Tomorrow when this problem really starts manifesting, they’ll come up with the usual excuses like no one could have foreseen it. You accept that there is a problem but don’t want the state to treat India with the required medicine!

          2. Firstly i am unsure of what the BJP has in mind if they do proceed with NRC.
            Lets assume for Arguments sake that there are 10Lac illegal Bangladeshi muslims in the country (a conservative estimate) – If they are marked non citizens in NRC what next ?
            is the Government going to deport 10 lac people who have stayed in the country for we dont know how much ?
            is this government going to send them to Detention centers ? Who bears the cost of this ? Even if a fraction of those found are to be sent to Detention centers that would be financially and image wise catastrophic (not to forget morally).
            Or is the government just disenfranchise them and equate them to a residents ? – even thats not clear.

            I am partial to the economic argument that says – immigration from BDesh has slowed down (or reduced to Zero) since 2005-06 when BDesh started growing. It makes logical sense that last 10-15 years there might not have been major immigration from Bdesh – but from WBengal/ Bihar to ROI.

            Talk of disenfranchising a set of people whose parents or grandparents crossed over during the dark days of BDesh – post 1976 seems wrong – i cant stomach it – maybe in future i maybe able to.

            On the other had if there is intelligence that their may be threat of terrorism or even radicalism/separatism – i would condone deporting case by case.

            And now we have the technology to man the borders (IR imaging – drones – satellite) – we can and must take further steps to ensure the problem doesnt escalate with every tragedy in Bangladesh – i believe borders have a function – i dont subscribe to the John Lennon worldview.

      2. My limited points in support of CAA:-

        1) At a simplistic level, CAA by default gives a faster path to Indian citizenship to the persecuted religious minorities in these neighbouring Islamic countries.

        Muslims of these countries if they wish, still have a path to Indian citizenship like anybody else in the world but they can’t by default have a faster path as they are not persecuted in their home countries for just being muslims.

        2) India doesn’t owe anything to the religious majority from Pakistan and Bangladesh, as their ancestors opted for a ‘land of pure’, to be fair economically well-off people wouldn’t want to migrate to India either.

        If in the unlikely scenario anyone want to migrate to India for his/her respect towards Indian historical heritage it can be granted on a case by case basis under the existing laws

  3. Your otherwise through analysis is missing a critical piece of context ie the partition and a massive population transfer that took place.

    My grandfather was studying in Karachi and came back to India half way through because of the partition. He along with millions of other non- Muslims made the journey to the newly formed republic of India to find safe haven.

    They tended to be relatively privileged compared to the people that were left behind. Today the less privileged lot that was left behind is being further persecuted.

    India has a certain shared history with Pakistan and Bangladesh that it doesn’t have with China and Sri Lanka.

    1. yes. i grant that Pakistan & Bangladesh are remnants of British India.
      Then why add Afghanistan ? if its just undoing omissions of partition.

      Its the clear to any observer – that the choice of 3 Islamic countries is deliberate so that they can omit anyone touched by Islam (Ahmadis, Hazaras).

      I would truly on board with CAA (with all its inadequacies) had i got the feeling that its purpose is humanitarian. But no matter how much i try – i cant shake of the ulterior motives (which are well articulated by the most powerful man in the country – Amit shah).

      1. Then why add Afghanistan ? if its just undoing omissions of partition.

        Would you support CAA if it omitted Afghanistan ?

        (Afghan sikhs and non-muslims are a vanishingly small group and also facing a more serious threat of violence than any religious minority group in south asia.)

        1. again as i have also written in the blog – my core argument against CAA is subjective;
          Yes i would have still opposed CAA, if Congress had brought it on these very selective points – but i wont have opposed it enough to write a long post or spend hours arguing with it.

          There is opposition and OPPOSITION

          1. Thanks for clarifying.

            Do you not feel any subjective compassion towards the persecuted non-Muslims in Pakistan and Afghanistan ?

            What if you were born a poor Hindu dalit in the Sindh? Or an Afghan Sikh in Kabul ?

            Would you be willing to sacrifice yourself and your family at the alter of India’s imagined secularism ?

            You can make an objective argument that they aren’t Indian citizens etc.

            But the objective reality is the the majority of Indian citizens, and their democratically elected government support granting these people asylum.

            You and more broadly the Indian left are entitled to your views.

            I just find this particular one to be objectively incoherent, subjectively callus towards human suffering, and morally reprehensible.

          2. i would ever say that my compassion runs dry for these people who are extremely unfortunate. Again i wouldnt mind a tiny bit if everyone of those are granted indian citizenship yesterday – my point is – IS CAA needed for that ?
            Or more is the deliberate Polarization accompanying CAA needed for granted those people Asylum ?

            Again CAA doesnt granted these oppressed minorities ASYLUM but citizenship to those who are already here (includes voting) – on my priority list saving those left behind IS MUCH HIGHER than granting Voting privileges to those who are already within India.
            Let me remind you of the arbitrary 2014 cutoff – how is that helping the oppressed now ?
            Additionally the CAA makes no effort to distinguish between economical migrants (mostly BDesh) & oppressed refugees (All 3 countries) – the distinction it totally rejects for any community touched with Islam.

            But just that this compassion also extends to millions of Muslims who are directly affected by the polarization of accompanying CAA (Amit shahs rhetoric — Did he really need to stress on all Religions a million times ? this rhetoric matters more than plain vanilla legislature imo).

          3. Again i wouldnt mind a tiny bit if everyone of those are granted indian citizenship yesterday – my point is – IS CAA needed for that ?
            Or more is the deliberate Polarization accompanying CAA needed for granted those people Asylum ?

            Well I think we are in agreement then.

            CAA is imperfect, and you are correct in that it is very modest in its scope. But it is directionally correct.

            If even such a modest legislation faces tremendous pushback what chance does a more ambitious legislation have.

            You are also correct in that anti-Muslim sentiment is unfortunate, and I think it is potentially very dangerous. Also the complete lack of Muslim representation in the BJP is a problem.

            The rhetoric surrounding Muslims from Amit Shah is also inexcusable and completely disgusting on the part of the BJP.

            The thing is if congress had passed this sort of legislation, and done a couple of other sensible things then perhaps the Hindu identitarians like Modi wouldn’t have come to power.

            The 2 nation theory won on August 14 1947. The one nation was a noble ideal but it lost. There is no Hindu rashtra, but modern India is an amalgamation of leftovers from the successful creation of a Muslim rashtra.

            It is very pragmatic to give non-Muslim minorities from Pakistan and Bangladesh a path to citizenship, given the circumstances.

            This doesn’t have to involve hurting the religious sentiments or rights of Indian Muslims or even Pakistanis / Bangladeshis for that matter.

          4. Sumit; i reckon you would agree with the point i make in the final section
            “The Dharmic Rashtra i wouldnt oppose: (thought not fully SUPPORT)”

  4. “The reason why this is important to the Dharmik wing is that this act goes beyond 1947 in extending the meaning of India and states that those who suffered the consequences of Islamic bigotry post 47 have a right to India. We believe that by allowing these minorities to get Indian citizenship we are giving them what should be the birthright of everyone who comes from the Indian civilization.”
    This argument fails unless oppressed Muslim minorities (Ahmadis and Shia) are also allowed in. Considering how Islamic terrorism is almost entirely a Sunni phenomenon, and how far this would go to defuse criticisms of CAA, the fact that this wasn’t done is the best proof that there is some anti-Muslim animus involved.

    1. The reason why Muslim minorities should not be given the benefits that the non-Muslim minorities are getting is answered in my second point which is the security concern associated with Muslim refugees from these countries. The security concern is not just limited to terrorism but extends to the territorial integrity of India.

      the fact that this wasn’t done is the best proof that there is some anti-Muslim animus involved.

      Again read my second point. Of course there is an anti-Muslim animus against the Muslims of Pakistan and Bangladesh because they partitioned India, one of the worst, if not the worst, events in Indian history. They voluntarily left India to be part of a new nation state. The Indian left keeps raising the point about there being an Indian version of Islam but forgets that its definition comes from the partition and is limited to those Muslims who chose India over Pakistan.

      Let me give you an analogy. Think of a family. The wife wants a divorce and the husband opposes it. Ultimately she goes ahead with it and they both are given custody for one kid each. 10 years down the line, the kid that was raised by the wife wants to establish relations with the father. Great! However, when the wife approaches the man asking to bury the hatchet and getting married again, he has every right to say no. Why? Because the woman cannot be trusted.

      1. Not all Ahmadis & Shias left from India to Pakistan – many were already within the confines of what was to become Pakistan.

        If we are to play the Sins of Parents game – why not include the Nuristani Kaffirs ? – theyre a clear cut case of forced conversions in well documented and recorded history.
        Additionally this act would also omit Hindus who converted to Islam (Post partition) after years of coercion & low level threat.
        How is letting those people tied to their fates moral ?

  5. India didn’t care about dalits left behind in Sindh. Being dalits played major role

    “Many (Pakistani) Dalits who migrated (whether at the time of partition or subsequently) faced humiliation and discrimination at the hands of caste Hindus in India after Partition. In some cases, they were taken by separate ships or trains. Tillo Jethmalani, who was subsequently posted as camp commandant at Marwar Junction, recalls how one goods train filled with Dalit refugees from Sindh arrived in the middle of Rajasthan winter night, with Dalits lying freezing and semi-conscious inside the goods wagons. Even in refugee camps in India, Dalits were given separate living quarters and dining areas, thus maintaining the status quo of ghettoization.”

    This meant that not many bothered to migrate despite living in border district, Tharparkar. The Karachi hindus fate was different. Many of those who didn’t want to migrate were forced out by muhajirs coming from UP and Bihar. Even now by limiting citizenship to those who migrated to India before 2014 mean that only few thousand Pakistani hindus will get if at all. Now CAA is important for for millions of Bangladeshi hindus who migrated to India post 1947 or 1971.

    CAA looks more like trying to win over Bangladeshi hindus who can play important role in state election. West bengal is one of few states where BJP doesn’t do well in elections.

    1. Oldies were stupid but Sanghis (and others) now do deeply care about Dalits.

      Muslims bring up UC-Dalit schism to conveniently hide their own misdeeds. It is my hope that Hindus will get rid of caste-ism much earlier than Indian Muslims (of all the three countries) who in addition to caste have overt sense of racial-superiority.

      1. Sanghis care about dalits? Looking at lynchings of dalits in last 5 years, I don’t think so. There is no caste system in Pakistan so good luck getting rid of hindu caste system before Pakistan.

        Tharparkar is like poorest district of Pakistan historically. Majority of its population dalit. It doesn’t take genius to figure out why they have not migrated in 74 years despite being on border. For one they will not be humiliated by going to temple in India.

        “Pakistani Hindus who migrated to India number in thousands, a tiny fraction of Hindu population of over 8 million in Pakistan. Those who were lured by the media coverage painting India as a Hindu paradise have been deeply disappointed. Many of them are low-caste Hindus who have faced discrimination by upper caste Hindus in India. They are barred from temples and assaulted for drinking from community wells.”

        1. Raz;
          Modi gets 2.9/4 among Dalits versus 3/4 in Upper Caste.
          Dalits are firmly with the BJP at this moment – they see BJP as the least Casteist party (if thats a way to put it).
          INC CPI & other caste parties are way more casteist than BJP/RSS.

        2. I did spend time on statistics for lynching (cow-related ones). Maybe I was biased in looking at numbers but from my vantage point there is nothing new in the trend to be seen. The ones that do take place are heinous crimes but there has not been any significant uptick in violence as a matter of fact communal-ism related casualties/losses have been steadily going down.

          I am certain that Dalits at the moment are firmly behind BJP.

          I don’t agree with the assertion that there is no caste discrimination in Pakistan. But I am not in the shaming business, the more you guys lie and don’t improve the better it is for me.

          If there are some statistics to back up your claim I will change my views. In the meantime have a look:

          https://twitter.com/johnaustin47?lang=en

          Like always, give me evidence or point out real flaws about India and I will change my views.

        3. On Modi’s approval in various groups

          https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/india/story/20200817-mood-of-the-nation-pm-modi-still-king-of-indian-politics-with-78-per-cent-approval-rating-1708943-2020-08-07

          “However, when if one analyses the data according to caste groups, PM Modi is most popular among the OBC/MBC community (3.08) followed by the SC/ST community (3.01) and the upper castes (2.99) respectively.”

          Very clear where does Modi real support comes from.

          1. Somehow the left becomes uncomfortable when truth diverts from their “Intellectually robust, well articulated narratives”
            In India they simply cant adapt changing realities.

            Eg: I had a twitter argument with Conrad B that whether or not Dabholkar was popular in considerable sections of MH RW. He couldnt believe or wouldnt believe it.

          2. Conrad is hardly alone. Know a bunch of Bhadraloks who don’t know the politics of their ‘padas’ but hold forth on ‘Idea of India’.

            One of Bhadralok friend actually thought that Shiv Sena after split frm BJP, should branch out in places like MP,Karnataka (considerable Marathi pops) and under cut Hindutva so that Congress could win. Of course he thinks that somehow SS can still swing Hindutva votes. He doesn;t know there are ‘Hindus’ and there are ‘Hindus’ (he thinks all UCs of all areas are same), and there exists a ethnic hierarchy in Hindu-dom, just like Islam.

            Unsurprisingly SS after split quickly turned out more ‘woke’ than even twitter wokesters, since they know their place (and their politics) .

          3. LOL – about SS going out of MH into MP, KNT – SS should first get out of Mumbai/Konkan/Aurangabad then try other states.

            I foresee SS coming back to BJP before this term ends. Already its fair to assume Shah and Fadanvis have laid some traps and r quietly waiting for them to explode.
            But I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if this split is final.

            What is funny is BJP is made to disown things Golwalkar said 50 years ago and SS is given a free pass on what Raut said 1 year ago 😛

          4. “I had a twitter argument with Conrad B that whether or not Dabholkar was popular in considerable sections of MH RW.”

            He seems to be a well intentioned liberal who is out of touch with ground realities. Happens if you live in the UK.

            I had a twitter argument with him some months back on grade inflation in TN board (which is rampant) and Kejriwal’s statement that we need to normalise scores for DU admissions. He wouldn’t budge from his view that AK was being racist even when shown the exam data. Not a good look for an economist.

          5. At current rate SS should first consolidate their votes in their strongholds first. If one sees their average ground worker, it would be really hard for them to even understand their woke view points let alone agreeing to them. (Need to talk to some people to understand current mood)

            If they know what they are doing they need to swerve as hard as possible, hope for full term and create alternate votes for next election. In which case they will be cut into congress votes.

            Uddhav was always a misfit(being too soft) in a party that relies on street power. Now with his son he is trying to make ultimate switch like US republican/ democratic one.

          6. ” Now with his son he is trying to make ultimate switch like US republican/ democratic one.”

            If u look like a Penguin, but wanna bang Disha Patani, but ur competition is Tiger Shroff and Aditya Roy Kapoor, even u would have done the same 😛

          7. In that case it is a big price to pay for small gain. Look with whom actresses have ended up with once out of limelight. Penguin suddenly looks not that bad.

            On more serious note, becoming the soft hindutva + nativist opposition for BJP seems like good strategy. But political acumen of this father-son duo is seriously questionable . At the moment they are neither here nor there.

    2. Raz
      “CAA looks more like trying to win over Bangladeshi hindus who can play important role in state election. West bengal is one of few states where BJP doesn’t do well in elections.”
      Yes many on the Indian left believe this to be the primary motive – but we cant tell whats in someones hear but it seems logical and consistent

  6. . They voluntarily left India to be part of a new nation state.

    this is not really true of Bangladesh. the muslims who came were biharis and most of those have left for Pakistan (some are around, though lots are assimilating and won’t be around soon). the migration was one-way, of hindus out of east pak/bangladesh.

    am i misunderstanding your comment?

    1. That was poorly worded. I would modify that sentence to:
      “They voluntarily left the Indian nation state to be part of a new nation state.” I’m also referring to those Muslims who didn’t migrate, stayed put and became a part of Pakistan and Bangladesh.

  7. Good article that seeks to separate trivial political hit-jobs from the real liberal objections on the grounds of a humane approach.

    But the real question to Indian liberals is, how they intend to respond effectively – Are they assuming India to be some kind of a constitutional republic (like the US is) and expect some sort of higher intervention (from the courts – which they cannot)? “It should start from the people” should not merely limited to imposing opinions on people, which is in fact the Indian Liberal order of the day.

    Starting from denying the pain of at least 3 million people who could not emigrate, to obscuring the nation-less character of 80K people who have already emigrated – the Indian Liberal is an ostrich who only likes to preen his feathers in public.

    I am loathe to bring varna into this – but this is classic “neti-neti” of the highest Brahminical order. Shall we do that then? Neti Neti…..then this? Neti Neti…..then that? Neti Neti.

    The full blown tragedy of this entire episode is that the people the CAA seeks to succor are the lowest of the lowest – sweepers, landless labourers, migrant artisans – the Dalits who are now twice invisible – firstly to the harsh Islamic govts of our neighborhood and then to the enlightened Indian Liberal who has chosen not to see them until the CAA was passed.

    The Indian Liberal must continue to oppose the CAA/NRC in forums and public life – they will conclusively prove the bankruptcy of their cause while simultaneously pruning the flaws in the CAA, wherever they might be.

  8. this is classic “neti-neti” of the highest Brahminical order.

    This made me laugh but is not entirely correct. Manmohan Singh made a speech in the parliament in his first term to bring a legislation that allows the religious minorities of Pakistan and Bangladesh into India. In fact, even the communist government of Bengal made a promise to bring them to India. I think it’s more a case of hypocrisy and political opportunism. They see this as an effective strategy to counter BJP and are happy to sacrifice Dalits living in these regions as well as their older stance on this.

  9. I think the only way India will be peaceful and prosperous is if it embraces pluralism. You can have a Muslim high culture, a Hindu high culture, and a composite Hindu-Muslim high culture all co-existing side-by-side in one country provided that there are measures to make things harmonious (e.g., no need for loudspeaker calls to prayer).

    Within these high cultures, the government should encourage / nudge people to embrace views that are inclusive and workable in a pluralistic society. So Muslims following a Muslim high culture should be nudged to think favorably of Akbar rather than Aurangzeb; Hindus following a Hindu high culture should be nudged to think favorably of Dharmic tolerance rather than an exclusionary belief that subjugates minorities; and so on.

    I sympathize with the Hindu right in its efforts to build, promote, and preserve a Hindu high culture. Too many Hindus are ashamed of their heritage. A robust Hindu identity, not rooted in otherizing Muslims and insecurities about the past, is a good, healthy thing for the Hindu community. But Muslims should be allowed to have / keep the same.

    There are other pluralistic countries where people do their own thing and can still co-exist. Canada to some extent does this with an Anglophone high culture, Francophone high culture, and a bilingual high culture, granted the comparison is perhaps more reasonable if India was not partitioned (and Pakistan and Bangladesh become ‘Quebecs’).

    1. “Too many Hindus are ashamed of their heritage. A robust Hindu identity, not rooted in otherizing Muslims and insecurities about the past, is a good, healthy thing for the Hindu community. ”

      I dont know about muslims, but Hindu shame is not a bad thing

      https://www.livemint.com/opinion/columns/opinion-why-we-need-not-be-paranoid-about-nationalism-1560101572994.html

      “The most underrated quality of national pride is that it is a precursor to national shame. A newly and immensely proud society will soon demonstrate collective shame. For its flaws, its bad air quality, its poor roads, its filth, its corruption and its castes. Nationalism may not make Indians pay their taxes honestly, but it will inspire them to do many other useful things.”

  10. Sooner or later, when a state becomes richer, it has to provide more services to its citizens and there is incentive for citizens of neighboring states to jump. It would be a different thing to not have NRC if India is surrounded by friendly countries like Nepal or Tibet. However, given the historical baggage, it is unfair and borderline cruel for citizens of Pak and B’desh to “immigrate” to India.

    In any case, there is already an agreement with Bangladesh that India will not deport B’desh citizens who are illegally living in India. India will (and probably should) be very careful about illegal Pak citizens living in India and deport them if possible. The whole exercise about CAA-NRC, support, opposition, legality, illegality is just moot and mere intellectual masturbation.

    NRC will be an eventual reality (should be). The early we do it, the better. Congress and other left governments have given me enough taste of reality that I trust them that 1) they won’t make country richer, 2) they won’t improve state capacity, 3) they will never bring in NRC. Given that no b’desh citizen will be deported and pak citizens could be, I fully support CAA-NRC.

    1. i dont hold a view against permanent NRC. It is essential as seen during catastrophes like Migrant lockdown crisis.
      But does the state have capacity to carry it out – if not it will just be a bigger catastrophe as seen in Assam. Infrastructure building for 5-6 years is required where all the citizens can get registered and get documents.But the rhetoric suggests otherwise

      1. \Infrastructure building for 5-6 years is required where all the citizens can get registered and get documents.\

        This is more positive thoughts on the modalities of NRC. Let it take 10 years for a proper , fair and efficent system which reduces human and systemic errors to the least. The main problem in India is many people , nothing to do with religion – don’t have records birth, etc. That is where citizens must be helped. Govt has already biometric , Adhar card, and other information . To that extent NRC work is reduced. NRC must strive to incorporate the present data the Govt has on people so that the work load is reduced to that extent instead of starting from scratch.

        Opposition parties instead of scare mongering must make the system workable in a fair way so that when they come power some day they can use it for administration

    1. There was a time right after the liberation of Bangladesh when there was indeed an open border with India. I know a (Hindu) friend from Calcutta who decided to travel to his ancestral village near Khulna. When he knocked on the door of their old home, the current owner and resident was very suspicious and not at all welcoming. In Bangladesh at that time, there was a distrust of the Indian Army and the Indian political establishment, in spite of the fact that the Indian Army (aided by the Mukti Bahini) had just secured the surrender of the Pakistani military in East Pakistan.

      I know of a family member who used to visit Bangladesh in the aftermath of liberation and used to hear about how the Mukti Bahini was primarily responsible for Bangladesh gaining freedom. I guess every nation state needs its own creation mythology.

      One of the smartest decisions made by Indira Gandhi was to leave Bangladesh to its own devices after Mujeeb came to power.

  11. I don’t mind either way because things would not have changed any way even after NRC {i have full confidence in Indian state’s incompetence} Just look at North East where nothing has changed since NRC till now.

    I support the move tactically. Hindus & other non Islamic minorities need to create pressure on Muslim states to force them to change their path & India’s middle of the way has only further compounded the situation since subcontinent’s partition but by allowing faster citizenship available to non Muslims Indian state would have been able to accomplish following things –

    1. Highlight the plight of non-Islamic communities in Islamic nations in the region {Just recently last Sikhs & Hindus have flown from Afghanistan to India}

    2. Would have allowed India to provide proof of minority persecution at international forums which continued unabetted since subcontinent’s division

    3. Would have helped in weeding out illegal migrants.

    4. Would have forced neighboring nations into making moves {even if just for aesthetics} favorable towards minorities in their regions.

    5. Decreased number of minorities means more resources available to govt. per individual to spend on them.

    6. Eased Hindus anxiety regarding demographic impact & thus might have even receded Hindutva march to some extent.

    Last but not least considering the potential numbers no. govt. would have been able to completely disenfranchise NRC offenders & most if not all sides would have wanted to use them to gain political power {thus the issue would have changed but realities would have remained more or less the same on ground}.

    // If such conception leads a state like Great Britain or Denmark (where these countries are concretely Christian – yet in application there is often very negligible discrimination //

    The major issue overlooked here is that Christendom regions forged it’s solutions based on their experience & termed it secularism. I support the agency for Indians to do the same i.e. forge the laws in agreement with minorities but in case of major differences the majority can take a call with regards to the ‘minority rights’ i.e. if rights remain separated along identity lines & there are no uniform laws.

    // i wouldn’t mind it if Indian Islam & Christianity come under the Wider Dharmic umbrella //

    Not going to happen anymore, Indians seriously tried to do this for years {look at the movies where religious shrines always had all Gods of major faiths, ever wondered why it went out of fashion} yet Wahabi influence continuously increased in India & missionary activities have only intensified since Mother Teresa Missionary position & since Indian state was not able to stand up for Indian civilization Indians have chosen an Indic political umbrella identity to respond to these challenges.

    // Birthright naturalization (Jus soli ) principle of the Constitution //

    Constitutional functioning & vision can not overlook the people it is supposed to govern & as i mentioned before there is also the issue of agency which should be granted to Indians & they should be allowed to frame the law based upon their experience.

    https://www.loc.gov/law/help/birthright-citizenship/birthright-citizenship-map.jpg
    Source – https://www.loc.gov/law/help/birthright-citizenship/global.php#india

    Response to “Objective Reasons for opposing the CAA”

    1. CAA Act is to fast track citizenship of ‘persecuted minorities’ already present in India hence cutoff date not for persecuted minorities from neighboring region till eternity.

    2. Govt. is well within it’s rights to consider whom it considers worthy of citizenship & thus the claims that persecuted Islamic groups were not mentioned in the act as persecuted is nitpicking & govt has not stopped these communities from obtaining citizenship as they can still obtain Indian citizenship through naturalization process but govt. has not allowed them the ‘fast track’ of CAA.

    3. 2nd point applies to Tamil point too W.R.T Tibetans if govt. makes then Indian citizens it delegitimizes Tibbetan freedom struggle & hurts India’s bargaining power against China.

    4. Cutoff, no cutoff or Huminitarian law etc.One can question politics of it but govt. is well within it’s rights to frame the law as it sees fit.

    5. Just because the law does not conform to your standards does not mean it is not Humanitarian {go & ask those who benefit from it}

    I am not responding to the rest of the article since the rest of the arguments are mostly ideological & political and not substantive as you have yourself mentioned in some of the points.

  12. *Ever since 1947, CAA has been the defacto policy of the Indian state , while not de-jure. Meaning there was strong barriers to entry into India of muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh. This was started by Nehru , just made more open by CAA

    *Ahmedi were in the forefront of Partition riots and sent in Al-Fuqran brigade to invade JK in October 1947 – what is happening to Ahmedis is seen as Karma

    *If you look at the 0-4 age bracket from 2011 census, Muslims are 17.2% of India and 45% in Assam and 35% in Kerala and West Bengal. Assam is on the verge of becoming a Muslim majority state. Going by the Kashmir experience and 1947, there will be an islamic secession attempt in Assam by Bengali muslims

    *CAA also is meant to discourage future influx of muslims from Bangladesh ( rising sea levels due to global warming ) and from Pakistan ( economic collapse )

    *At the street level, nobody , no Hindu, Jain, Sikh, Christian , Buddhist wants to live in a muslim locality. Last week in Bangalore, in a muslim enclave, Muslims rioted and set fire to Police station over supposed insult to Prophet. At the street level , 2 nation theory is valid and Police fear to enter no-go Muslim areas

    *Everyone recognises that in 1947, if Muslims had been say 18% and not 24%, there would not have been a partition. Indian muslims voted for Jinnah, rioted for Jinnah ( Direct Action Day, Kolkata ) and are temperorily secular and waiting for demographics to change . Migration of muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh will increase Indian muslim % to the tipping point and re-create 1947 partition type violence

    *The hope is CAA will allow Hindus, Christians etc to migrate from Pakistan and dilute Indian Muslim % below critical mass in several border districts

    *Yes, Islam is viewed as a threat by all Indian non-muslims, after seeing what Muslims do to their kafir neighbors in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Kashmir Valley and all other Islamic countries

    *Indian liberals usually dont live near Muslim enclaves and can afford to indulge in theoretical discussion about composite culture

  13. What is the Shia population of Pakistan? I can’t find any hard data but estimates between 15-30% range.

    Even at the lower band, 15% of ~200+ million being eligible for expedited citizenship/refugee status in India is a no go for communal and just pure overpopulation reasons.

    While I feel bad for Ahmadis, their role in partition doesn’t seem to be forgotten amongst a significant portion of the Indian populace and BJP electorate.

  14. I dont buy the sins of the parents arguments – if there is strong evidence that Ahmadis/Shias harbor extremist tendencies – by all means reject those on that grounds – but to deny them oppressed minority tag is plain wrong imo.

    On the whole- i think people voicing support for NRC might be harboring a naive view of how Indian state bureaucracy works. On a very good day – its worse than most countries. When you try something on the Indian scale, the magnification of collateral damage would truly be catastrophic. Dont forget these people singled out by the inefficiencies will spend years at the mercy of sluggish courts & expensive lawyers.

    The Core opposition to CAA is subjective (based on logical distrust) and not on nitpicks with the legislature & its aim of granting asylum to particular oppressed minorities (though that also has strong critiques).

    Finally this argument comes down to the demographic fear/unease in the non muslim community – especially in districts in W.Bengal , Assam & Kerala. Those concerns are not to be taken lightly. A bigger crisis is cooking up due to those ground realities. The recent case of Bangalore is not a exception but more in line with norm. Its very reasonable to assume that if this can happen in a BJP state, with a Muscular BJP at center, what could happen without BJP/Hindutva movement in ascendancy. We know the answer – Azad Maidan

    1. So? State inefficiency shouldn’t be a reason to stop bringing about reforms. There were greater inefficiencies in voter registration system itself. That didn’t stop universal suffrage at the time of independence.

      It could be a very easy argument to make that there is no state capacity to prevent illegal voting or voter registration in certain regions, and so prevent them from voting at all. Poor voter registration was norm for decades. Are we going to argue that all those past congress governments were illegal?

      Everybody knows it takes years to get anything done. Bureaucracy can work it’s own way irrespective of the government. It seems the entire argument hinges on hidden intentions of a government that can’t realistically be implemented anyway without substantial bureaucratic support.
      And can also be legally contested if needed.

      1. NRC is not reform – Have you followed how NRC was implemented in a small state which supported NRC (Assam) ?
        Is that a doable exercise for the entire country in your view in current system? Yes 5-10 years done the line with steps government has taken including Aadhar & others it may be done reasonably well – not today imo.

        Any decision has cost-benefit analysis –
        Adult franchise & what it gives vastly outdoes the problems of implementation.
        Do you think potential benefit of even an Un-polarised NRC will outweigh the cost ? I firmly dont at this time in our history.

        Though i would support laying the ground work for future NCR – like the NPR – though in the current atmosphere BJP will find it tough to convince its detractors of the need of NPR

  15. I think this is a very theoretical exercise. As far as most Hindus (rural, small town, where English is not the main language, mostly Hindi belt), are concerned, they are already living inModi’s Hindu Rashtra. You cannot put a lid back on this now. True or false, past Hindu glory, real or imagined sufferings at the hands of Muslims has become the rallying point for Hindus.
    This Hindu unity has been achieved by Othering the Muslims in India. I fear we will see more of cow vigilante-ism etc. I believe Yadav’s in UP want to ride on Kashi, Mathura temple wave to capture back some of hindu votes. This will continue in the next few years to come. So, what is the way out? Either Muslims in India remain on boiling edge as they have been in the past- J&K, CAA type of protests etc. This only leads to further consolidation of the Hindu vote or Modi 3, 4… etc. In my opinion the only thing that can work is that Muslims try and prevent this Othering. They start their own reforms be it their own civil laws, understand that being part of Hindu culture and Muslim religion can go hand in hand. They might even have to accept the sacredness of the cow over their dietary freedom. Nobody goes around eating dogs in US. It is just the majority ethos that we respect. More akin to Indonesia. Once, this is set in motion, it will alleviate Hindu fear to a large extent. We might even have true secularism in the sense that a Muslim may represent a Hindu constituency. Is it possible? I don’t know.

    1. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/elections/lok-sabha/india/polls-2019-a-view-on-15-muslim-majority-lok-sabha-constituencies/articleshow/68756816.cms?from=mdr

      **************

      http://muslimmirror.com/eng/list-of-27-muslim-mps-who-were-elected-for-lok-sabha/

      Quiet a few who are Muslims but elected from a Hindu majority seat. Don’t understand why you said this
      “We might even have true secularism in the sense that a Muslim may represent a Hindu constituency. Is it possible? I don’t know.”

      1. @Bhimrao,
        It was only in 4 or 5 seats in WB/TMC that Muslims won in Hindu majority constituency. I do not know why. Must be some peculiarity, not the norm. I did a spot check for Burdhman-Durgapur, 2014, Muslim(TMC) candidate against Muslim (CPI). 2019, BJP (Hindu) got the seat.

        1. Lok Sabha is as big as it gets in India, every single MP in the lower house has worked, licked, lied, tricked, schemed, and in most cases murdered, kidnapped or rioted his way to success.

          People/Parties who make emotional/PC decisions don’t win elections and a Lok Sabha seat will never be served on a platter to anyone. If someone is astute, hardworking, and committed(in all sorts of ways) I don’t see why a Muslim candidate cannot scheme (like everyone else) her way into Lok Sabha. My position is that the game is completely fair, win first corporator/gram-panchayat election by your 30th birthday, first state legislature MLA election by 45th, first national MP by 60th. If someone is lucky they might make it into minister of state position by 80. Game over-You won. Everyone has to do the same, just like JEE, or NDA or Civil services.

          1. “People/Parties who make emotional/PC decisions don’t win elections and a Lok Sabha seat will never be served on a platter to anyone.”

            I know one Wayanad seat that got served to someone on platter. LOL!

        2. On muslim representing Hindus, many muslims MP/MLA used to win from regions which were overall Hindu majority. Around 4 or 5 states in India have had muslim CMs , states with Hindu majority. Currently a christian leads a state of Hindu majority.

          The reverse is never true. No state in India with a non Hindu majority (North East, Punjab,Kashmir) has had a Hindu CM in the last 70 years.

  16. @Rohini

    Arif Mohammed Khan has repeatedly won with lacs of votes from Hindu majority seats, beating Hindu candidates
    Arif Mohammed Khan is respected as a secular person by Hindus
    On the other hand, he is effectively hated by the Muslim community since he opposed mullah appeasement on Shah Bano

    We have to be realistic , the slowly increasing Muslim demographics will lead to constant Bangalore / Azad Maidan type riots , thats the inevitable fact of a 15% and rising Muslim population

    What we have to understand is that the BJP is a reaction to Muslim street thuggery, which is linked to rising Muslim demographics

    After Partition, Muslim % fell drastically from 24% to 10% and the reduced % , reduced Muslim street thuggery and gave a false sense of Nehruvian secularism – we all seem to forget that the same Nehruvian secularism failed pre-partition, with 24% Muslim population

    Even worse, there is already low grade ethnic cleansing of Hindus from border districts of West Bengal and Assam , which means a Kashmir type Indian army deployment will happen , with constant curfews and permanent low grade violence

    1. That is exactly what I said that unless Muslims decided to be with the mainstream, this will continue. Are they capable of doing it? Are they not in sync with majority populations in US or UK? Or is it because they have not reached the critical mass where they decide to push for political change in US/UK? Another thing that could help would be strengthening of institutions. If you do not perceive discrimination, then you are less likely to nurse grievances. Majority (Hindu) stops feeling the victim-hood as well. UCC then makes much more sense. A lot of moral & philosophical debates ignore the reality on the ground. In that sense, I consider Modi-Shah quite pragmatic. Maybe because both of them trained as administrators first. For ideology, they depend on RSS.

      1. “That is exactly what I said that unless Muslims decided to be with the mainstream, this will continue. Are they capable of doing it?”

        Extremely unlikely unless the Ummah itself changes and still very doubtful even then.

        It is instructive to read Ambedkar who had described Indian Muslims as being even more backward than Hindus.
        (and he wasn’t at all charitable to Hindus)

        In that time Hinduism has been drastically reformed while nothing at all has happened to Islam. It has gone backwards in some cases as in Shah Bano.

        People like Arif Mohammad Khan are ostracised and called ex-Muslims or whatever. And leftists/progressives whose duty it should be to question social evils side with the most conservative elements in the Muslim community in some game of 4-D chess.

        There’s no salvation for or from Indian Muslims as thing stands now.

        1. And leftists/progressives whose duty it should be to question social evils side with the most conservative elements in the Muslim community in some game of 4-D chess.

          This is indisputably true. But on the flipside, shouldn’t the right try to exalt and promote the more liberal elements of the Muslim community? And not just the odd Arif Mohammad Khan. But they aren’t doing that, are they? In the podcast with Gaurav, it was mentioned how much shit Razib gets for having the last name “Khan”, despite the fact that he writes critically about Islam. But he writes in a very clear-headed manner about Hinduism too, which rankles our right wingers (someone like Aatish Taseer has been banished for related reasons).

          So what I’m saying is: “ek haath se taali nahin bajti”. If our currently dominant right truly wishes to get the Muslim community to reform itself, they need to be encouraging liberalism. But they, at their core, hate liberalism as much as the Mullahs, so how would they do that?

          1. So what I’m saying is: “ek haath se taali nahin bajti”. If our currently dominant right truly wishes to get the Muslim community to reform itself, they need to be encouraging liberalism. But they, at their core, hate liberalism as much as the Mullahs, so how would they do that?

            Most Hindus had been under the impression that appeasing Muslims will gradually bring them into the fold. Gandhi and Nehru tried it and failed. Indira and Rajiv didn’t even try to encourage liberalism but rather encouraged the Muslim conservative elements. Manmohan was the same. All the while, there was comparatively little opposition from the Hindu masses. What you see now is the realization among Hindus that the problems in the Muslim community run very deep and that they don’t even see them as problems. The so called moderate Muslim is not a liberal. But is rather an apologist of conservative Islam while only criticizing acts of terrorism. Liberals like Arif Mohammed Khan and Razib are very few. Unfortunately, the Hindus today generalize very quickly. However, that is in large part the doing of Muslims. Now we have reached the stage where the Hindus believe that only some amount of coercion will work with the Muslims.

            Since you raised Aatish Taseer, it’s good that he’s banished because according to the laws he was in India illegally. A man who writes books and is the son of a journalist shouldn’t be lying on his official forms. Lying on the immigration forms of any country will get you banished from that country.

          2. “But on the flipside, shouldn’t the right try to exalt and promote the more liberal elements of the Muslim community?”

            They do that. MJ Akbar was a minister before his scandalous exit. I do not think too many liberal Muslims even exist and among the few who do, a large number of them are liberals of convenience who will shit on Hinduism but won’t raise a squeak when it comes to their own community.

            We can see that in the example of Shehla Rashid, who pretends to be a progressive feminist when in Delhi but starts covering her head in Kashmir. If she can’t stand up to her own people then what’s the point?

            IMO the relative number of Hindus who criticise Hinduism is two-three orders of magnitude more than corresponding number for Muslims. This is in addition to all the criticism Hindus receive from Muslims/west.

            Ashok Swain who shits on the right constantly is a self-avowed temple going Hindu. How many equivalents of him do we have among Indian Muslims?

            “But he writes in a very clear-headed manner about Hinduism too, which rankles our right wingers (someone like Aatish Taseer has been banished for related reasons).”

            It rankles low level Twitter thugs who have developed a habit of picketing content they don’t like. Has that stopped people from criticising Hinduism?

            It’s only had the reverse effect of giving air time to people like Audrey Trushke. Aatish Taseer has become a much bigger voice now than he ever was.

            Even the right leaning people on Twitter are critical of aspects of Hinduism – Abhijeet Iyer-Mitra, Harsh Gupta, Kushal etc

            Do we see such debate amongst the Muslim right?

            “If our currently dominant right truly wishes to get the Muslim community to reform itself, they need to be encouraging liberalism.”

            I don’t think this is a good take. If the champions of liberalism today so blatantly show double standards, why do you think it’s a good idea for the right to promote their ideology?

            I also don’t think the right cares about reforming the Muslims community. Why should it when the community itself doesn’t want to and any attempt is met by stiff opposition?

            “But they, at their core, hate liberalism as much as the Mullahs, so how would they do that?”

            The right doesn’t hate liberalism. It hates the elitism, deracination, and duplicity of people who claim to be ‘liberals’.

            Hindutva itself is a radical progressive movement which is overhauling things it perceived as defects with the Hindu society such as those related to caste and gender. And it’s doing that at a rate that’s concerning to sections of conservatives.

            IMO one of the reasons the leftists and liberals are so rankled by the rise of Hindutva is because Hindutva tramples on its territory of social justice. And does it much more effectively.

            None of this is to say that Indian right doesn’t have problems or that I don’t wish they become more civil. But it’s not their job to reform Islam. They do enough by criticising Islam. Now it’s upto Indian Muslims to listen to that criticism and act on it.

            All the usual caveats apply in all the claims. There’ll always be exceptions.

            Here’s a really good article by a Muslim IPS officer, which I wish more people read:

            https://theprint.in/opinion/indian-muslims-must-rewrite-their-victim-mindset-to-be-indispensable-in-indias-rise/483132/

          3. i am more on Numinous’s view here;
            But even in Rights criticism of Islam – i see problems – Lot of good intentioned Hindus from the Right (especially olden times) are rarely critical of Islam as a set of belief system but Anti-Muslim (particularly subcontinental muslims).
            They still hold the naive Hindu view that all belief systems are equivalent. Either that or they also try to be PC

          4. I talk to a highly educated Muslim friend who is very politically conscious. She comes from a cosmopolitan background (Mumbai). She is a very modern and a non practicing muslim. I asked her to give me a book that will give me a Muslim perspective- she suggested Audrey Truschke. She referred me to somebody’s PHD thesis that said that only 16 temples got destroyed by Mughals. She is very sweet otherwise and I did not want to take it further. Only line that struck me was – “ordinary/moderate muslims want to live normal lives. They do not want to mess with the clergy with very dangerous outcomes”. This suggests that somehow we have enabled the orthodox muslims. That is what right can do- disable the orthodox clergy. If the moderate muslim is no longer scared of orthodox, maybe they can be more in sync with rest of India. How does AIMPB get so much power anyways?

          5. Rohini,
            I totally understand how a liberal in would be afraid of the radicals and the Ulema – thats natural – people have personal aims and life – they just cant afford to fight these risky battles.

            Audrey’s is just 1 (highly contested) narrative among many. (Maybe you can ask her to read counter views and then make her mind instead of relying solely on some authors ?)
            If thats taken as a single authority without looking yourself at letters/dairies and stuff – it would bound to create friction.
            As was case with Romila Thapars claims of their being no Hindu temple below the Mosque in Ayodhya -as well as her assertions of Somnath as retrospective hurt brought on Hindu community by Colonial historians.

            Havent read Audrey’s book – but reading other accounts of Aurangzeb (currently reading Uday Kulkarni’s Bajirao) – yes their is often more nuance than some Hindutva folks believe – but the overarching Islamist thought (or zealotry) cannot simply be brushed off. Every letter these warriors wrote invoked Allah and cursed the Kaffirs. Almost every. Even when they’re neutral towards Hindus the tone is very demeaning.

          6. @GauravL

            “Audrey’s is just 1 (highly contested) narrative among many. (Maybe you can ask her to read counter views and then make her mind instead of relying solely on some authors ?)”

            What I have seen of liberals is – they have their favorite authors- Ramchandra Guha, Shashi Tharoor, Arundhati Roy etc. They do not move beyond that. They are very far from the language of the ordinary people in India. One told me that with Modi, all woman will go into ghunghat. Do I want that? Another said that Indian judiciary has turned Right because of Temple judgement etc. One calls herself progressive because she does not follow any religious practices. Most don’t do any reading but just want to hold liberal opinion to sound cool. There is a huge sense of righteousness (Like liberals in the west). It is a pointless exercise. They are definitely baffled by Right winning of course. They justify it as an international trend of He-Men winnings and countries turning nationalistic. They do not see the dissimilarities between Erdogan and Modi.

            I have suggested that she read- RSS- Brotherhood in Saffron as she wanted to understand why Modi from Gujarat became PM while Nitish Kumar from Bihar does not enjoy that clout.

        2. “One told me that with Modi, all woman will go into ghunghat.” – thats truly hilarious

          “Most don’t do any reading but just want to hold liberal opinion to sound cool. There is a huge sense of righteousness (Like liberals in the west). It is a pointless exercise.”
          True – i often feel people – especially urban elites take a liberal view because liberals in India are exceptionally more polished looking & sounding (NDTV / Quint / Wire) – than the Right – though this is changing. could still be the colonial legacy

          How is brotherhood in Saffron ?

          1. @GauravL,

            “How is brotherhood in Saffron ?”

            It is worth a read. It seems to be well researched but I haven’t gone and checked the references. It stops before RSS starts figuring on the national scene. Sometime in 70’s. After that is part 2. I have not read that yet.

    2. @Prats,

      “Even worse, there is already low grade ethnic cleansing of Hindus from border districts of West Bengal and Assam , which means a Kashmir type Indian army deployment will happen , with constant curfews and permanent low grade violence”

      I see this….but BJP has steadily been making inroads. Somehow ghetto’ization of Muslims has to stop. Only 1 voice reaches them right now.. Maybe look to US as role model. The 2nd generation here is integrated and cares more about BLM, abortion etc. Center need to strengthen institutions. They should give a thought to what happens when they are not in power.

  17. As long as we are honest about actual intentions of hindutva sanghis on CAA. Cut off date 2014 mean that hardly any Pakistani hindu will take advantage of it. Pakistani dalit hindus also had many decades to migrate but they didn’t because of caste discrimination.

    CAA is to win over Bangladeshi hindus who have already migrated in millions to India. They can play important role in politics of west bengal. Their low caste status doesn’t mean anything politically for RSS. Even if higher ups in RSS will never eat in same plate as dalits. Bangladesh population of hindus have been reduced from 20% to 10% in 30 years. Pakistani hindu population have only increased even if slightly since 1951, from 1.3% to 1.6%. TBH this is no small feat considering high population growth of Pakistani muslims.

  18. https://m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/trumps-free-pass-to-modi-on-home-agenda-shivshankar-menon/amp_articleshow/77645907.cms?__twitter_impression=true

    “Former national security adviser (NSA) Shivshankar Menon has alleged that US President Donald Trump has given “the Modi government a free pass on its controversial domestic agenda” and that this has drawn sharp reactions from the Democrats, threatening the bipartisanship consensus in the US on strengthening ties with India.

    In an article written in American magazine Foreign Affairs ahead of the US presidential election, Menon wrote, “Under Modi, India has excluded Muslim immigrants from the path to citizenship and limited the autonomy of the Muslim-majority Jammu and Kashmir region. Uninterested in human rights and democracy, Trump has given the Modi government a free pass on its controversial domestic agenda.”

    “Non Interventionist” India’s own ex NSA (of Mumbai 9-11 fame) bemoans the fact that American president didn’t interfere in the domestic polices of India. No wonder this country was ruled by foreigners for so long.

    As i have said earlier with friends like this…..

    1. Mallus are the new Sindhis Hindus (or maybe Kashmiri Pandits) too over-smart for their own good. These donkeys must be thinking they are playing some awesome game of politics. Fucking idiot.

      Why are they like this? What is it that this idiot knows that we don’t? What is his world beating plan?

      1. Agreed, they are too smart. Maybe if you malnourish enough of them like UPites they’ll be dumb enough to support Hindutva.

        1. Better malnourished than retarded. Keep justifying Mallu invitation to foreigners to interfere in domestic issues, next time you guys will loose elections with an even larger margin.

          1. When Northern-Right-Wing Field Marshal Saurav sa’ab was not replying I interpreted it as a hint that Cadet Bhimrao had the entire field to himself.

          2. “Better malnourished than retarded. Keep justifying Mallu invitation to foreigners to interfere in domestic issues, next time you guys will loose elections with an even larger margin.”

            1. One Mallu does something.
            2. Now it’s a “Mallu” thing.

            Hindutva logic.

            And it’s rarely better to be malnourished, at least for the ones who are actually suffering from it as opposed to those on blogs. It can also impair mental abilities.

    2. “Shivshankar Menon has alleged that US President Donald Trump has given “the Modi government a free pass on its controversial domestic agenda” ”

      This guy Menon was an unworthy NSA when he can say that a US President has a right to interfer in India’s internal affairs. Trump or any foreign head of state can goto hell if they have intentions about commenting the domestic agenda of the India govt

  19. Hindutvas being scared of growing muslim population in Assam, Kerala and west bengal isn’t surprising. Using old islamophobic troops while ignoring current reality on ground. They know there will be push back against bigoted Hindutva regime, especially in states where muslims have good numbers.

      1. Kashmiri pundits exodus from valley was political. 1 pundit killed by militants didn’t justify exodus with million Indian soldiers in valley. Sikhs killed thousands of hindus in punjab.

        1. Typical Muslim.

          Never speak the truth, always some conspiracy theories and some vague meaningless equivalence. Always. And this is when the mosque announcements are on tape. Give it 30 years it will be mah narrative, 70 years a lawn-dress wearing, fluent English speaking petite snake like Ayesha Jalal will write BS about ‘contingent reasons’ , 100 years complete land grab and extermination like Nuristanis and 200 year later ‘it was because of sati, female foeticide, caste oppression which are forbidden in Quran’…

          Typical. Not that I care but lying is the core reason for so much bloodshed in Middle East. Even if everyone leaves them alone or if entire world converts to Islam there will never be peace in Islamosphere because of the agency that continuous lying and misrepresentation holds in Islam. Children learn to justify BS when they justify a warlord-slaver-pedo as a prophet. Lying lying and more lying. Every act of barbarity has a justification, every injustice has contingent reason, no morality, no truth just narratives, nazariya. In some sense I genuinely feel Muslims will outlive us all because of ritual training at bare faced lying.

          India will not produce great scientists for a long long time for a lot of reasons but (practicing) Muslim countries will never produce any original ideas as the foundation itself is rotten, commitment to truth is absent.

          I got carried away, somewhat disappointed that no principled discussion is possible. You can go ahead and shit on India and Hindus, I am done. Sorry if it sounded like a personal attack. Didn’t mean to.

          1. Looks like my comment about push back against bigoted hindutva regime in Assam, Kerala and west bengal didn’t go well with you. Sorry if I offended you with crude reality on ground.

            Kashmir is disputed region where people were promised plebiscite, insurgency for freedom was natural. Your islamophobic rants will not change the fact that hindutva regime is killing indigenous muslims. Justifying it by going back to medieval foreign turks-afghans rule and how bad they were with hindus. Central asians who ruled south asia for last 3500 years anyway.

          2. @Bhimrao
            This guy Raz is a known bullshitter. He was peddling inflated Pakistani HDI stats in a previous post.

        2. In the Indian subcontinent, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Kashmir tell us how Muslims treat non-Muslims whenever they are in majority. How Muslims historically treated Hindus and Buddhists in all of these lands as well parts of central asia is well known. In Iran, Muslims were completely intolerant of Zoroastrians and wiped them out. In large parts of Arabia, the Muslims wiped out all the pagans starting from Mohammed himself and are still busy harassing the Yezidis.

          We are not prejudiced against Muslims/Islam because we are not prejudging them. We are judging them. You can call it Islamophobia but we don’t care. It really makes sense to not trust a religion which tries to wipe out everything else wherever it lands. I see it as a parasite or a disease. The disease first infects Muslims and then they become the carriers of this disease and try to spread it everywhere. I am as much Islamophobic as you are Coronaphobic.

          1. Don’t confuse Hindu weakness with Hindu tolerance. Upper caste Hindus have treated Dalits, tribals, and members of other religions, especially Islam, with great contempt. They just had no power to act on it. Now they have it and we see the mask falling off. The religion that prides itself on tolerance going all out to make a minority community feel hopeless.

          2. Dalits and (most) Tribals are also Hindus. How do they treat Muslims? And more importantly how do Muslims treat all of them?

          3. In Iran, Muslims were completely intolerant of Zoroastrians and wiped them out. In large parts of Arabia, the Muslims wiped out all the pagans starting from Mohammed himself and are still busy harassing the Yezidis.

            your overall point is valid and has a lot of truth, especially for recent periods. but a lot of these older events are 1) not true 2) made up by muslims

            – arabia wasn’t really pagan https://www.gnxp.com/WordPress/2020/04/28/the-myth-of-arabian-paganism-and-the-jewish-christian-origins-of-the-umayyads/

            – zoroastrianism was the dominant religion in Iran until the 900s. the muslims weren’t really intolerant, they were ‘tolerant’ in the premodern sense. they accept zoroastrians as a second-class religion, and zoroastrianism remained the dominant religion until the gentry began to convert in very large numbers in the 9th century, removing elite patronage (the last zoroastrian kings of northern Iran were only conquered around 850)

            In the Indian subcontinent, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Kashmir tell us how Muslims treat non-Muslims whenever they are in majority

            majority is the key clause. when muslims were in the minority as a ruling caste religion they tolerated other religions and extracted tax. a lot of the ‘intolerance’ is the same you saw with late roman paganism/early Christianity, where the center simply cut off resources. in the 800s the nestorian patriarch and the senior zoroastrian priests were still prominent figures that the Muslim rulers had to deal with. the true intolerance comes when non-muslims are a small enough minority that they can be crushed with coercion with no reprecussion. though oftentimes there was a context to the instance of persecution. for example, judaism, zoroastrianism and Christianity in Iran suffered A LOT after the conversion of the mongol il-khannate to Islam because there had been decades of tolerance and favoritism to the minority religions by the mongols (hulegu’s mother was a Christian and the mongols mostly patronized tibetan Buddhism, which had undergone a resurgence in persia)

    1. It’s pretext for imposing Kashmir-style draconian measures on Kerala, Assam, Bengal, and any other region that doesn’t enthusiastically support Hindutva en masse.

      1. What are the Kashmir type draconian measures?

        The situation festered and rotted, (a large number of) Kashmiri Muslims chased out the Hindus and wanted to secede. Now either you can partition the country again or you had to bring this to an end. What the NDA government has done is the lesser of two evils. Even if you get down to dirty mathematics of counting the dead bodies, the last year has been more peaceful. What confused people like you wanted was the stone-pelting to continue as legit forms of ‘protest’, cross border terrorism to continue, let it fester so that you may go on and on about winning hearts and minds, ‘aman ki asha’ which did not work for well over 30 years. All such naivety shows is a lack of will to act and improve things.

        It was a ugly choice, the government chose what it thought was the best for at least medium term peace. For the rest of us Kashmiris are not special, not after how they have conducted themselves for so long. They have to behave and live under same rules just like everyone else.

  20. central asians ruled S Asia for last 3500 years? What distinction point are you using in history when these geographic ethnographies became solidified? I think the red line is pretty subjective. One can say Africans have ruled over the world since humans first left the continent. This seems more an attempt to shame people into thinking they were under the yoke of foreigners forever and thus a subsect celebrating a later group of foreign rulers vs. an earlier isn’t a big deal. The reality is that the first group integrated quite a bit more and time of syncretism did take place. Hence why a Tamil Brahmin and a UP Brahmin have the same genetic distance more or less as a Gujarati Vania and a UP Brahmin. But a modern day Uzbek, closest proxy to a Mughal, is pretty freaking far from major Indian groups.

    Hard to say what is Central Asian too btw. Central Asia looks a lot different now than it did 3500 years. Way more E Eurasian genes there now. Your point again seems to be one of convenience to excuse S Asian Muslim sometimes illogical degree of reverence for blood thirsty conquerors who at worst converted by the sword and at best used coercive means like jihazya w/ the occasional sufi saint thrown in.

    1. Even if Islam was not the factor they will continue to invade. You will likely find more central asian genes in hindus then Indian muslims. Blaming past invasions on Indian muslim who for the must part are like dalits anyway is oxymoron. It doesn’t make sense and only exposes hypocrisy of hindutva. Its good for RSS politics but thats about it.

      And for the 100th time again, stop blaming Islamic central asian invasions on indigenous Indian muslims. By killing and subjugating Indian muslims you are not taking revenge, only showing historical insecurity.

      1. . You will likely find more central asian genes in hindus then Indian muslims. Blaming past invasions on Indian muslim who for the must part are like dalits anyway is oxymoron

        this is all false. there is plenty of data and i blogged on this. if you repeat this again i will ban you. if you respond to this comment i will ban you. i don’t know who you are, but you are operating in bad faith or just very stupid

  21. Congress I led by Kashmiri Klux Klan is plenty casteist and also has enough communal blood on its hands
    Caste is fundamental to S Asia. The majority of brides sold in Pak and trafficked to China were low caste Christian converts.
    Pak was literally founded as a state for mostly upper caste hindu converts to Islam to keep playing their Jamindar games from a distance from “dark hindoos”

    I think if partition was more complete. more peace

  22. Raz,

    Let’s agree in principle that there is Hindutva regime that is islamophobic in Assam, WB, and Kerala. What exactly does that got to do with CAA?

    It is the nature of democracies that majority wishes become rules.

    If there are no peaceful protests, then it doesn’t matter how many are killed, the government is justified to use state-sanctioned violence. (Isn’t government definition is to have legal authority to impose violence to achieve law and order? Isn’t it what’s happening with BLM?)

    Cross-culturally US government builds a wall to prevent Mexican immigration (and no northern border wall) and that seems to be justified for its citizens. How come Indian government can’t exercise selective inclusion/exclusion right to its citizenship as per wishes of the majority of its citizens?

    Why should anybody give citizenship to a random Muslim from another country?
    I don’t see a good argument for that. Every country has their own criteria for granting refugee status even on humanitarian grounds.

    There is xenophobia all across the world (if not, what is the purpose of international borders?). Hindus can have them too about foreign Muslims. In fact, they should actively develop such xenophobia given the 3500 years of rule from central Asians.

    Is the argument that foreign Muslims and Indian Muslims are interchangeable? If so, why argue at all, all Muslims can go to any choice of Muslim country, no? Why focus on India?

    There are several examples across the world where Indian citizens can’t get citizenship even if they were born there and lived for decades (e.g., Germany). Again, it isn’t clear why should Indian government make exceptions for a foreign citizen on any criteria.

    If we agree on few principles (e.g., democratic norms, international borders, right to grant entry/citizenship by democratically elected government of a republic ), then we can have a good discussion on the details.

    It doesn’t matter who ruled whom centuries past. What matters is who has legal authority to enact rules. Indian government clearly has authority in bringing about the rules that are desired by majority of its citizens.

    1. By declaring millions of Indian muslims foreigners, making them stateless and putting them in concentration camps under the guise of CAA. Meanwhile millions of foreign Bangladeshi hindus can get citizenship under same law. And then also expecting them to not push back like jews in nazi regime.

      Hindutva may get inspiration from nazi regime but Indian muslims will not get inspiration from jews. Blaming Islam and old islamophobic rants can only go so far.

      1. It’s too late. Hindutva people have deployed their mass social media propaganda against a largely uneducated and barely literate (and certainly zero digital literacy) population. Muslims have been dehumanized, and any bad act by any one Muslim (of course with 200 million there will be bad people like in any other population) will be ascribed to the whole population. They’ve also of course dehumanized many other groups that they ostensibly care about, like Bengalis, Assamese, Tamils, and Malayalis.

        The only reason why most Western countries are not accepting Indian Muslims as refugees on an expedited basis right now is because they can still relocate internally to places like the South. But as Hindutva gains popularity in some of these areas, and as Hindutva leaders impose Kashmir-style draconian measures against these non-Hindutva areas, these oases of religious tolerance will soon become hellholes, as well.

        At least the Muslim community is global and has wealthy pockets. The best bet would probably be to organize and facilitate the sponsorship of Indian Muslim refugees in the near future when they become widely recognized by the West as a persecuted minority in need of expedited processing.

        There is no hope for religious minorities in India or Pakistan. An even worse fate awaits the liberal Hindus and Muslims, respectively, of these two countries.

        1. Hoju:
          Are you trying to play reverse Saurav?
          Do you live in India? I was in India in September in the heart of Hindutva India in Mumbai and heard azaans blaring everywhere, in 10% Muslim population areas; skullcaps,burqas and hijabs openly mingling with others. I didn’t see any of what you are alluding to here.
          Dehumanizing of Tamils, Mallus, Bengalis? Just based on what you see on Twitter by a few extreme accounts? By that measure Dravidian nationalists like the DMK have been dehumanizing Hindus, upper castes, Hindi speakers, Tamil Brahmins for decades and have in fact legislated discrimination against these groups (especially upper castes).

          1. @JAL
            He is high. When BP people discuss Hindu/Hindutva I zone out, they just have no clue what they are talking about.

            Migration ! LoL! What is going on here!

          2. Hoju is Yang to my Yin 🙂

            “By that measure Dravidian nationalists like the DMK have been dehumanizing Hindus, upper castes, Hindi speakers, Tamil Brahmins for decades”

            Say whaaat! Aren’t Dravidian Hindus? Aren’t Tam Brahms , brothers in arms of Dravidians…. Well thats what i have been told so on the Blog

          3. “Do you live in India? I was in India in September in the heart of Hindutva India in Mumbai and heard azaans blaring everywhere, in 10% Muslim population areas; skullcaps,burqas and hijabs openly mingling with others. I didn’t see any of what you are alluding to here.”

            I support removing loudspeaker calls to prayer.

            “Dehumanizing of Tamils, Mallus, Bengalis? Just based on what you see on Twitter by a few extreme accounts? By that measure Dravidian nationalists like the DMK have been dehumanizing Hindus, upper castes, Hindi speakers, Tamil Brahmins for decades and have in fact legislated discrimination against these groups (especially upper castes).”

            This is just willful ignorance. There are strong and virulent strains of anti Malayali and especially anti Bengali thought in many proponents of Hindutva, enough to the point where I feel like it’s a “thing” worth noting. Likely started off as mere political differences but then became bigoted quickly, with I think potentially significant real world implications down the line.

            DMK is a separate issue. I’m not a big fan of them either. Just because I criticize Hindutva doesn’t mean I support communists, DMK, this or that or whatever else.

            Although FWIW, I think DMK has a more just cause in its anti-Brahmin rhetoric than Hindutva does in its anti-Muslim rhetoric.

          4. “there are 200 million indian muslims. there is no way that migration is an option.”

            It’s not the ultimate answer but it makes a big difference to the few who do get rescued. It matters for their lives and the lives of their loved ones. It’s something that individual wealthy Muslims should consider in the near future (sponsoring Indian Muslim refugees).

          5. Give me ten cases of Indian Muslims asking for refugee status in the west due to systemic persecution. Just ten in the last year.

            Discussions without facts, opinions without substance. ‘Migration’, ‘refugees’, ‘rescued’ wtf are you guys talking about? This ain’t Pakistan and we aren’t shameless like the Muslims (when in majority).

          6. @Bhimrao

            Literally 6,000+ Indian nationals sought refugee status in Canada just in 2019. There are statistics on this. Please look them up. I’m not sure what the religious composition is, but I guarantee you that more than 10 are Muslim and I would wager that it is overall disproportionately religious minorities who seek refuge (whether from India or elsewhere).

        2. @Hoju

          “At least the Muslim community is global and has wealthy pockets. The best bet would probably be to organize and facilitate the sponsorship of Indian Muslim refugees in the near future when they become widely recognized by the West as a persecuted minority in need of expedited processing”

          I agree. It is a shame that they haven’t done it so far. All that the wealthy Muslims in Gulf countries do is get cheap servants from South Asian Countries. Once Covid happened in these countries, special flights had to be deployed to get Desi Muslims back. Incidentally, meanwhile read what is happening in US.

          https://swarajyamag.com/news-brief/now-bill-in-congress-to-resettle-endangered-afghan-sikhs-hindus-in-us-its-religious-freedom-body-hit-out-at-caa-as-measure-to-protect-hindus

    2. Why do they want to live in India if it so bad to Muslims anyways? Plenty of Muslim countries to go to. Except even other muslims shit on pakis and bangladeshis.

      1. Why do Hindus want to live in Kashmir if it is so bad to Hindus anyways? Plenty of Hindu states to go to.

      2. Radical Islam at its core promotes conquest of the minds of others and conversion to its idealogy. Aggressive means are promoted when in majority. When in minority, under guise of taqquiya, more passive but thinly veiled forms of coercion are used aka Halal Haleem Owaisi.

        Jai Shree Ameen

        1. i have never heard sunni muslims ever talk about taquiya. it’s a big shia thing for various historical reasons. so is think the second part of your comment is pretty much bullshit and you are projecting

          1. taqquiya part sure. But Ghwaz Hind is still a pretty strong concept. Many do feel they have a duty to try and “take over.” This manifests with state condoned violence to a degree and frequency not comparable to India’s, when in majority like Pak. But more vote bank stuff and strategic riots when in minority or just ghettoization no go zones like the UK and parts of India too.

            Nonetheless, some good news

            https://www.cato.org/blog/rapid-us-muslim-assimilation-continues-alongside-rapid-muslim-immigration

          2. Lol. I was confused first time I heard this word in different context
            You can lay on it or lie with it

  23. is the Government going to deport 10 lac people who have stayed in the country for we dont know how much ?
    is this government going to send them to Detention centers ?
    Or is the government just disenfranchise them and equate them to a residents ? – even thats not clear.

    I believe it will be a combination of the three. In the most obvious cases wherein it can be proved that someone is Bangladeshi citizen they must be deported. If they are not in the NRC and it can’t be proved that they are a Bangladeshi citizen, then it must depend on their prior record. If there is a criminal record then they’ll most likely go to detention centers. If not, and this will be the vast majority of illegals, then they get disenfranchised.

    I am partial to the economic argument that says – immigration from BDesh has slowed down (or reduced to Zero) since 2005-06 when BDesh started growing. It makes logical sense that last 10-15 years there might not have been major immigration from Bdesh – but from WBengal/ Bihar to ROI.

    I agree. Bangladesh is growing faster than India and this problem will not grow with time. However, some 20 million illegals are already in India and they cannot get the right to vote.

    Talk of disenfranchising a set of people whose parents or grandparents crossed over during the dark days of BDesh – post 1976 seems wrong – i cant stomach it – maybe in future i maybe able to.

    At times one has to cold blooded and do what will be good for the society at large. These kids are quite likely to think like their parents and have secessionist ideas. Tomorrow if they partition India, then the small humanitarian aid will have disastrous consequences for everyone.

    The alternative to disenfranchisement is an education system that can do the job. If the schools get into not just the history of partition but in the morality of it and start teaching kids that the partition was an evil idea. That the two nation theory is evil. If they can stamp out the supremacist ideas that many Muslims have through education and teach them explicitly that they are distinct from the Turkic rulers of the past. That they are the descendants of Hindus, many of whom were forcibly converted to Islam. That the portions of Islam which teach violence against polytheists are bad and have produced horrible results in many parts of the world, but specifically in India. If they can do that, then every kid that comes out of such an education system can become a citizen. But not the other illegals.

  24. Nothing is gonna happen, all fears and wishes alike, for deportation by NRC are far fetched. At most, Assam will have a domicile type structure for ‘Assamese’ . All India NRC is a non starter, the BJP knows when to step back. Bengal election will come and go , and after that Assam. And we will find out all this was just election rhetoric.

    On CAA, again its more of a rhetoric and election ( with dubious electoral returns , in my view) tool than giving refuge to Hindus. No non Hindu refugee will come to India, even if they are Ahmedis. Now on Hindu refugees, Pak Hindus have been trickling into India b4 CAA , and there has been no upsurge of Hindus refugee after CAA. On the Eastern border CAA cannot be implemented in Assam, and in Bengal its not needed, since both Hindu and muslim Bangladeshis already have other docs to prove citizenship and don’t need CAA

    Too much time spent on discussing imaginary scenarios.

  25. Late to the party, but will opine like all, for fun.

    On CAA – you know Indians are the most useless people in the region because they spend 95% of their energy discussing the nuances of CAA, rather than why there was a need to have CAA in the first place. This is a sad bug of human behavior.

    On NRC – yes it will be botched up because the end beneficiary of this (every citizen) isn’t convinced of why this needs to be done. So I believe it should be parked right now. If they do go ahead, and find a lot of illegals, most should actually get naturalized citizenship through a waiver. Point of the exercise is you have you start somewhere if you eventually plan on providing healthcare and benefits.

    On cow lynchings – No its not going to increase over time, but you will see headlines increase in 2023-24. Focus on overall law and order, rather than specifics. Increase bulk statistics and don’t get caught up in politics. Invest in criminologists who gather field data rather than activists. Then you can hold whichever government is in power accountable. I’ve come to a point where anytime someone says cow lynching, I don’t really hear anything they say afterward. I just smile stupidly and continue drinking my beer.

  26. The same big brain takes on BP.

    The Aryans did not assimilate into India. They assimilated India. If after the Turkic conquest of India, the entirety of the region had converted to Islam and adopted Persian as their mother tongue, we would not say the Turks had assimilated into India.

    The regions near Bangladesh that Hindus are worried about becoming secessionist due to high Muslim populations were traditionally Muslim majority anyway. They were unfairly given to India in partition, its only fair India has to deal with the headache that comes along with that.

    As for “racial superiority” yes Muslims (like all peoples) have it. Hindus have it as well, they just can’t show it much because they find themselves at the bottom of the racial hierarchy (that such a dynamic exists is unfortunate).

    Its funny to see Hindus actually believe that Muslims forcibly converted significant amounts of people. Similar to OIT, this myth endures not because there’s evidence for it, but because it helps the Hindu conjure up some amount of self respect from a very “challenging” history (to put it as nicely as possible).

    1. “Indus people” is back ??

      For someone of a non Indian background u seem mighty intrested of what history indians come up with. Strange considering Indians don’t concern themselves on what history Pakistanis are taught.

      Wait a mt, did I just say Pakistan and history in the same sentence…. my bad ?

    2. Of course you believe that your ancestors were such spineless creatures that they threw away their local culture at the first opportunity. That would explain you and your quam’s retarded nature.

  27. I must say , GauravL’s language is a bit stilted. With titles like ‘To be or not to be’ , “the straw that broke the camel’s back” looks like trying to do what english educated Indians do to show their erudition. These are neither appropriate . After all India is not waging life or death struggle with Pakistan and neither Pakistan is . More ironical language or titles is what I prefer.

  28. https://swarajyamag.com/politics/caa-shocker-in-2010-upa-gave-special-concession-in-granting-long-term-visas-to-pakistani-muslim-males-living-in-kerala
    1.Congress had already passed discriminatory law.
    2.Citizenship is a privilege and not a right.
    3.Every country gets to select which people or groups it wishes to allow in.
    4.In case of pakistan,bangladesh and even afghanistan( there was floating population back then,myanmar doesnt count, as they supported jinnah), the religious minorities on whom choice was forced upon them by Indian muslims of 1947 are the ones who are being given a deserved help not merely as an act of charity, but infact because they were abandoned by the Indian political leadership i.e. congress at 1946/47 in collusion with muslim league.Their rights,dignitiy,property has been thrown out. Hence Nehru had signed Nehru liaqat ali khan pact. Who are the minorities is clear given that it was muslims who chose for partition. They were the ones to force their choices on others. As for responsibility being put on successive generations. Here too there is precedence. Enemy properties act. And also, the positive discrimination India constitutionally provides on basis of caste. India has political responsibility to these people as they were abandoned during partition. Hence Nehru Liaqat ali Khan pact can be invoked by them that they are not being treated fairly. While the act applies only till 2015, it can be further changed over time. And this is not discrimination, as everyone can legitimately apply for Indian citizenship. But not for this particular case. Next, is the issue of political responsibility. Liberals and many others might very well say they dont believe the next generation is obliged to suffer the consequences of the previous generation. This is redundant argument, its not about next generation or anything else. It is an empirical study that can change with time and also a political accountability. Which hinges on trust. Country is not a charity shop. You can happily go any where to go and indulge in as much charity as you wish. I wonder why liberals and left who feel that the people everywhere are same dont put their skin in the game to do that and actually change their citizenship.We are here to safeguard our political ship. This is the ship we have and we are entitled to decide who gets in. End of story. As for NRC. Once again, Every country is entitled to have so. There are various statements by chidambaram on bangladeshis and supporting NRC. To end this story, If pakistan, afghanistan, bangladesh actually developed to the point that our fears are addressed, we wouldnt be talking about this. No one is worried about german invasion in europe.
    And if you disagree, please vote and elect a govt that passes the legislation.

  29. Hindus and Muslims aren’t diff races in S Asia. Muslims think they are better because of lies they have been fed about their ancestry. Bottom of racial hierarchy? That’s S Asians in the West in general in the “coolness” game, pretty narrow aspect of hierarchy but let’s play the game. The pedo dominated gang of no go zones can’t even have Zayn Malik save them at this point. A terrorist is still considered bad ass by some clowns. But brown chavs raping little girls in gangs isn’t cool to anyone.

    Now we can talk about general Pak Sunni Punjabi supremacism that led to death and rapes of millions of Bengalis. Yes that is true. Some real racism and genocide there.

  30. Pakistanis in the West have one of three reputations
    1. Terrorist sympathizers who harbored Bin Landen and practice an extreme form of Islam (USA)
    2. Same as Indians
    3. Pedo rape gang fiends (UK)
    They generally love to LARP as #2 for safety and professional benefits aka 9/11 taxi drivers and Pak medical residents I meet who say “same people” hit in public, with a significant minority talking trash in private.
    I suppose in a night club, #1 is better or maybe emphasize drug dealer aspects of #3. Granted, I’ve known some who are lighter skinned and just lie and say they are “Persian.”

    The Pakistanis who join Indian college dance teams and Frats tend to be more normal and have less vitriol. The uber religious are less racist. The hardcore revisionist history nerd Pak Punjabi ethnonationalists on the interwebz tend to be the most hateful.

Comments are closed.