PERCEIVED MAJORITARIANISM
The tribal state in a small area of modern day Turkey was expanded by the King Osman-i to one of the widespread kingdoms which started in Asia minor and spread to many parts of modern day Europe. This came to be known as the Ottoman Empire. The Young Turk revolution and the collapsing of the government of Enver Pasha paved the way for the dissolution of Ottoman empire. Though the armistice brought the fighting between allies and the Ottoman armies to a halt, it could not bring stability; hence to avoid a re-run of fighting with Britain, a caliphate of Ottoman was set up with Istanbul as the center. But with the end of world war I, many areas of the empire were liberated to form separate countries. However, the caliphate continued its hold on many areas. within Turkey. A pro western secular nationalist movement arose within Turkey. Mustafa Kemal Ataturk lead the Turkish revolutionaries to fight for independence. A treaty at Lausanne was signed and the modern Republic of Turkey was born. This paved the way for the abolition of the Caliphate within Turkey and transfer of its powers to the Grand National Assembly of Turkey.
A few leaders who professed their loyalty to the Ottoman empire and the caliphate sent emissaries to Indian Muslims for their support to stop the British from dismantling the Caliphate. Thus the Khilafat movement began in India. M K Gandhi supported the Khilafat movement and also went on indefinite fast in support of continuation of the Caliphate; effectively the Khilafat movement had nothing to do with Indian independence struggle. Some of the leaders felt that the support to Khilafat movement would bring lasting peace among the two major religious communities and prominent Hindu members included B C Pal of the famed Lal Bal and Pal trio. They also felt that with the support to the continuation of the Caliphate, India would escape the vivisection which was being demanded by a section of the Muslims under the aegis of Muslim League. As these tall leaders were the originators of the Indian independence movement and early members of the Indian National Congress, the support to the minorities had become a bye-word for later day leaders even post independence.
A few leaders who professed their loyalty to the Ottoman empire and the caliphate sent emissaries to Indian Muslims for their support to stop the British from dismantling the Caliphate. Thus the Khilafat movement began in India. M K Gandhi supported the Khilafat movement and also went on indefinite fast in support of continuation of the Caliphate; effectively the Khilafat movement had nothing to do with Indian independence struggle. Some of the leaders felt that the support to Khilafat movement would bring lasting peace among the two major religious communities and prominent Hindu members included B C Pal of the famed Lal Bal and Pal trio. They also felt that with the support to the continuation of the Caliphate, India would escape the vivisection which was being demanded by a section of the Muslims under the aegis of Muslim League. As these tall leaders were the originators of the Indian independence movement and early members of the Indian National Congress, the support to the minorities had become a bye-word for later day leaders even post independence.
Jawaharlal Nehru, the first prime minister of India was quoted as saying that he was a Hindu by accident of birth. His rational approach gave rise to a thinking that anything related to HIndu beliefs and practices are dogmatic and superstitious. But, he, being from the school of M K Gandhi, had not denounced practices in other religions especially Islam as superstitious. This created a climate for the successive governments to embark upon similar approach to their policy and governing the country. The successive governments had set an agenda of what and how of the history of the past will be taught in the schools to impress the young minds. Thus started the indiscriminate left ideologists and historians bringing out tomes on the various aspects of history relating to the movement of independence in the country. Some of the tall leaders who fought for the independence were slowly obliterated from the memory of the public though some of them went onto occupy many important positions in the post independence successive governments.
The advent of Indira Gandhi as the first woman prime minister of the country and her overtures to the then USSR made the left leaning historians and writers brazen enough to present their version of anything of history as the correct version. The political tilt towards USSR knowingly or unknowingly made the country slip away from its neutral non aligned status that it was maintaining earlier. The later day political alignment was more towards the left and the appeasement of minoroties. This created a social imbalance in that there was a feeling of alienation of the majority by the successive governments. The actions of many successive governments even at state level have given an impression to many that the majority is being sidelined. The recent actions in the last couple of years by a state government curtailing or restricting the famous religious festival in the state on the grounds that it clashes with a festival of a minorities, had raised the cackles of many both within and without the state.
Given this background, when there is a course correction in setting right the direction of the outlook of the government from left leaning to neutral and appeasement of minorities to secular, the earlier beneficiaries of such tilt feel afraid that their importance is getting reduced or lost. The Prime Minister is not afraid to show that he is a staunch Hindu and visits the famous temples in the places he visits. He does not put on a show of aping the customs of the minorities to appease them when many leaders within that society themselves do not adopt such practices or customs. He had been able to boldly, though not in so many words, but in his actions proclaim that he is a staunch Hindu who believes in Sanathana Dharma; but his religious views do not obfuscate his actions in discharging his duties as the Prime Minister of the country.
When the former POTUS, Barrack Obama was a practicing christian, or the present President Donald Trump a practicing christian, no one from the religious minority in the USA feels threatened by that. But in India, on seeing the present Prime Minister being a practicing HIndu, the leaders, both socio-political and religious, of the minorities feel threatened. In their minds they have a feeling that with ascendancy of such a practicing Hindu might spell doom to their welfare; contrarily the actions of the governments in the last three years since coming to power had been exemplary and extremely neutral and secular, which these leaders do not want to acknowledge nor take to their masses fearing they may lose their vote bank. A few aberrations have been happening in the country on religious grounds in some or other corner on a daily basis, not only in the past three years but earlier also under many successive governments. There had not been any increase in such happenings either in frequency or in numbers in the last three years as compared to the previous thirty or forty years. But these leaders and the vested media had been going to town on these petty issues, blaming the central government for all such happenings forgetting the Law & Order is a state subject.
Whatever actions that have been initiated by the governments in the past in cases of such religious disturbances is being done now also if there is any such religious clashes. Still the government is always put on scanner as the vested media and the socio-political and religious leaders of minorities and the self anointed saviors of the minorities would derive political mileage out of such false propaganda that the government is tilting to the far right and minorities are in danger.
One of the persons from TN made a speech at UNCHR, Geneva and he thanked the Tamil student groups in Paris for making that possible. The speech was against the alleged right wing resurgence who determine what to wear and what to speak. He was also referring to the arrested professor of JNU Saibaba who has sympathies for the Maoist leanings and who is alleged to have supported the Maoists cause in Chattisgargh. The question is that when the speaker was ranting about curtail of freedom, he failed to appreciate one thing: that he has the freedom to go to Geneva and address the UNCHR alleging various atrocities against the government of the day in the country. Such myopic views and thinking when there is a course correction from some of the persons from the majority community speaks volumes about the leftist propaganda in the country.
The advent of Indira Gandhi as the first woman prime minister of the country and her overtures to the then USSR made the left leaning historians and writers brazen enough to present their version of anything of history as the correct version. The political tilt towards USSR knowingly or unknowingly made the country slip away from its neutral non aligned status that it was maintaining earlier. The later day political alignment was more towards the left and the appeasement of minoroties. This created a social imbalance in that there was a feeling of alienation of the majority by the successive governments. The actions of many successive governments even at state level have given an impression to many that the majority is being sidelined. The recent actions in the last couple of years by a state government curtailing or restricting the famous religious festival in the state on the grounds that it clashes with a festival of a minorities, had raised the cackles of many both within and without the state.
Given this background, when there is a course correction in setting right the direction of the outlook of the government from left leaning to neutral and appeasement of minorities to secular, the earlier beneficiaries of such tilt feel afraid that their importance is getting reduced or lost. The Prime Minister is not afraid to show that he is a staunch Hindu and visits the famous temples in the places he visits. He does not put on a show of aping the customs of the minorities to appease them when many leaders within that society themselves do not adopt such practices or customs. He had been able to boldly, though not in so many words, but in his actions proclaim that he is a staunch Hindu who believes in Sanathana Dharma; but his religious views do not obfuscate his actions in discharging his duties as the Prime Minister of the country.
When the former POTUS, Barrack Obama was a practicing christian, or the present President Donald Trump a practicing christian, no one from the religious minority in the USA feels threatened by that. But in India, on seeing the present Prime Minister being a practicing HIndu, the leaders, both socio-political and religious, of the minorities feel threatened. In their minds they have a feeling that with ascendancy of such a practicing Hindu might spell doom to their welfare; contrarily the actions of the governments in the last three years since coming to power had been exemplary and extremely neutral and secular, which these leaders do not want to acknowledge nor take to their masses fearing they may lose their vote bank. A few aberrations have been happening in the country on religious grounds in some or other corner on a daily basis, not only in the past three years but earlier also under many successive governments. There had not been any increase in such happenings either in frequency or in numbers in the last three years as compared to the previous thirty or forty years. But these leaders and the vested media had been going to town on these petty issues, blaming the central government for all such happenings forgetting the Law & Order is a state subject.
Whatever actions that have been initiated by the governments in the past in cases of such religious disturbances is being done now also if there is any such religious clashes. Still the government is always put on scanner as the vested media and the socio-political and religious leaders of minorities and the self anointed saviors of the minorities would derive political mileage out of such false propaganda that the government is tilting to the far right and minorities are in danger.
One of the persons from TN made a speech at UNCHR, Geneva and he thanked the Tamil student groups in Paris for making that possible. The speech was against the alleged right wing resurgence who determine what to wear and what to speak. He was also referring to the arrested professor of JNU Saibaba who has sympathies for the Maoist leanings and who is alleged to have supported the Maoists cause in Chattisgargh. The question is that when the speaker was ranting about curtail of freedom, he failed to appreciate one thing: that he has the freedom to go to Geneva and address the UNCHR alleging various atrocities against the government of the day in the country. Such myopic views and thinking when there is a course correction from some of the persons from the majority community speaks volumes about the leftist propaganda in the country.
Comments
Post a Comment