Bjp are a joke.
As someone very opposed to animal slaughter: this is insane. To do it in Mumbai
Also, this is from the party that is supposedly right-wing economically...
Indian Politics
- Thread starter The Man Himself
- Start date
As someone very opposed to animal slaughter: this is insane. To do it in Mumbai
Also, this is from the party that is supposedly right-wing economically...
I don't see how they will enforce it.
There was some report,I forgot which channel it was in,might be CNN-IBN.. But they mentioned this has been happening for the last 10 years? Is this true?
Anyway don't see why such things are forced on us.. Even on Gandhi jayanthi meat shops are closed.. We should be allowed to eat what we want..
Anyway don't see why such things are forced on us.. Even on Gandhi jayanthi meat shops are closed.. We should be allowed to eat what we want..
The Congress Govt in 1994 passed this order banning meat for 2 days but it was never supposedly enforced. Now BJP tried to extend it to 8 days but that was shot down to 4 and municipals controlled by them have passed an order to enforce it. Even Sena has spoken against this.
This makes so little sense.
Therefore, its not surprising to see it happen at all.
Therefore, its not surprising to see it happen at all.
They should now ban alcohol in mumbai 
Why are these not being made popular? Such a public stance should make news!
This isn't the first time
No terror please, say 6,000 Muslim clerics
Nearly 6,000 senior Islamic clerics from around the country endorsed a fatwa (edict) against terror issued on May 31 by influential Islamic seminary Darul Uloom, Deoband. On Sunday, 50,000 more are expected to put their signatures on it, making it the biggest and clearest rejection of terror by Muslims. The fatwa had made headlines around the world and was first reported by HT.
Darul Uloom, some 100 km north of Delhi, is one of Islam’s two most-revered theological schools — the other being Al-Azhar in Cairo — and is often charged with propagating a radical version of the religion.
On the first day of the 29th annual convention of Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind here on Saturday, clerics endorsed the fatwa, which was issued under the seal of Darul’s grand mufti Habibur Rehman. The fatwa was ratified by three other Darul clerics, as required.
On Sunday, the open session of the convention, comprising of 50,000 clerics and community leaders will endorse the fatwa. “We did not have a chance to endorse the fatwa when it was issued because people like me stay far away. I am happy to be part of the campaign now,” Syed Ahmed, a tribal cleric from the Northeast.
Rajya Sabha MP Mahmood Madni, who had posed a query on whether terror was allowed in Islam, said: “Today’s campaign is a step to implement the seminary's edict against terrorism and a step towards national integration.”
Earlier, the working committee of the Jamiat decided to oppose both Muslim and Hindu organisations for trying to incite communal passion in the wake of bomb blasts in several cities. “It’s easy to cry hoarse and allege persecution but it takes a long time to ease communal tension," Madni said.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india...say-6-000-muslim-clerics/article1-350212.aspx
India 'covering up abuses' in Kashmir: report
Kashmiri rights group documents structure of impunity and violence, including killings and enforced disappearances.
The Indian government has covered up hundreds of cases of human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings, torture and enforced disappearances in the disputed territory of Kashmir, a new report has alleged.
Khurram Parvez, programme coordinator of Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society, told Al Jazeera on the release of the report, titled Structures of Violence: The Indian State in Jammu and Kashmir, that the Indian government had allowed systemic violence to take root in the Himalayan region hit by more than two decades of conflict.
Parvez, co-author of the mammoth 800-page report, released on Wednesday, said the International Peoples' Tribunal and the Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons had documented more than 1,080 extrajudicial killings and 172 enforced disappearances, as well as cases of sexual violence that go back to the early 1990s. The report took two years to compile.
We acknowledge that these are individuals forming part of a structure of violence and impunity that allows a massive institutional cover-up here in the valley.
Khurram Parvez, Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society
The document details 333 case studies of human rights violations and names some 972 alleged perpetrators responsible for the crimes. These include 464 army personnel, 161 paramilitary personnel, 158 Jammu and Kashmir Police personnel and 189 "government gunmen".
"These crimes were happening with the full knowledge of higher level officers in the Indian government ... they must be all held accountable by international law," Parvez said.
'Structure of violence and impunity'
The allegations detailed in the report are supported by official records and testimonies and Parvez said that prosecution should not be limited to the individuals.
"We acknowledge that these are individuals forming part of a structure of violence and impunity that allows a massive institutional cover-up here in the valley," he said.
The report calls for the UN Human Rights Council to appoint a Special Rapporteur to investigate the crimes and appeals to the UN Security Council (UNSC) to exercise its power to refer the cases to the International Criminal Court (ICC). India is not a signatory to the ICC but the UNSC has the power to refer situations to the court.
Waheed-Ur-Rehman, spokesperson for the ruling Peoples Democratic Party in Jammu and Kashmir, said his party was looking into the claims made in the report.
"There have been some human rights violations in Kashmir ... and it is a fact [that] mistakes have been made on both sides and ultimately Kashmiris have suffered," Rehman told Al Jazeera.
"We are trying our level best to provide justice to the people who have suffered in the past. Justice can never be anti-state, people will get justice," he said.
But Gautum Navalkha, a human rights activist and editorial consultant to the Economic and Political Weekly magazine in New Delhi, described justice as "a rarity" in the disputed region.
"Because of the militancy, Jammu and Kashmir is considered a 'disturbed area' [...] and there are two types of laws: one for common Indians and another for the 'disturbed areas'."
"There is no possibility of justice in Kashmir under these circumstances," Navalkha told Al Jazeera.
Indian-administered Kashmir has seen an increase in violence over the past two months, prompting UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to raise concernsin August at rising tensions along the de-facto border between India and Pakistan.
At the time, the UN chief urged India and Pakistan to exercise restraint and take all steps to ensure the protection of civilians who continue to bear the brunt of hostilities between the two nations over their claims to Kashmir.
'Serious abuses'
Kashmir has been divided between India and Pakistan since both countries gained independence in 1947. Both nations claim the Himalayan territory in its entirety, with Kashmiris still staking a claim to self-determination. Since 1988, the Indian military has deployed hundreds of thousands of security forces to quell an insurgency against Indian rule.
In July, Amnesty International accused the Indian government of refusing to prosecute perpetrators of human rights abuses in the region.
According to Amnesty, more than 96 percent of all allegations of human rights violations pitted against India's personnel in the disputed territory have been declared as "false or baseless".
"Till now, not a single member of the security forces deployed in the state has been tried for human rights violations in a civilian court. This lack of accountability has in turn facilitated other serious abuses," Minar Pimple, a senior director of global operations at Amnesty said.
In a rare deviation from the norm, a military court sentenced five Indian soldiers to life imprisonment for the murder of three Kashmiri men in 2010. Omar Abdullah, the then chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir, described it as a "watershed moment".
Amnesty welcomed the move but cautioned that "for justice to be consistently delivered, security force personnel accused of human rights violations should be prosecuted in civilian courts".
Both Lieutenant Colonel N N Joshi, India's army spokesperson in Srinagar and Colonel Rohan Anand, India's army spokesperson in New Delhi, told Al Jazeera they had yet to see the new report and were therefore unable to comment.
Over the past two decades more than 60,000 people have been killed in the insurgency, and the dispute remains a perilous red herring in India-Pakistan relations.
Kashmiri rights group documents structure of impunity and violence, including killings and enforced disappearances.
The Indian government has covered up hundreds of cases of human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings, torture and enforced disappearances in the disputed territory of Kashmir, a new report has alleged.
Khurram Parvez, programme coordinator of Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society, told Al Jazeera on the release of the report, titled Structures of Violence: The Indian State in Jammu and Kashmir, that the Indian government had allowed systemic violence to take root in the Himalayan region hit by more than two decades of conflict.
Parvez, co-author of the mammoth 800-page report, released on Wednesday, said the International Peoples' Tribunal and the Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons had documented more than 1,080 extrajudicial killings and 172 enforced disappearances, as well as cases of sexual violence that go back to the early 1990s. The report took two years to compile.
We acknowledge that these are individuals forming part of a structure of violence and impunity that allows a massive institutional cover-up here in the valley.
Khurram Parvez, Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society
The document details 333 case studies of human rights violations and names some 972 alleged perpetrators responsible for the crimes. These include 464 army personnel, 161 paramilitary personnel, 158 Jammu and Kashmir Police personnel and 189 "government gunmen".
"These crimes were happening with the full knowledge of higher level officers in the Indian government ... they must be all held accountable by international law," Parvez said.
'Structure of violence and impunity'
The allegations detailed in the report are supported by official records and testimonies and Parvez said that prosecution should not be limited to the individuals.
"We acknowledge that these are individuals forming part of a structure of violence and impunity that allows a massive institutional cover-up here in the valley," he said.
The report calls for the UN Human Rights Council to appoint a Special Rapporteur to investigate the crimes and appeals to the UN Security Council (UNSC) to exercise its power to refer the cases to the International Criminal Court (ICC). India is not a signatory to the ICC but the UNSC has the power to refer situations to the court.
Waheed-Ur-Rehman, spokesperson for the ruling Peoples Democratic Party in Jammu and Kashmir, said his party was looking into the claims made in the report.
"There have been some human rights violations in Kashmir ... and it is a fact [that] mistakes have been made on both sides and ultimately Kashmiris have suffered," Rehman told Al Jazeera.
"We are trying our level best to provide justice to the people who have suffered in the past. Justice can never be anti-state, people will get justice," he said.
But Gautum Navalkha, a human rights activist and editorial consultant to the Economic and Political Weekly magazine in New Delhi, described justice as "a rarity" in the disputed region.
"Because of the militancy, Jammu and Kashmir is considered a 'disturbed area' [...] and there are two types of laws: one for common Indians and another for the 'disturbed areas'."
"There is no possibility of justice in Kashmir under these circumstances," Navalkha told Al Jazeera.
Indian-administered Kashmir has seen an increase in violence over the past two months, prompting UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to raise concernsin August at rising tensions along the de-facto border between India and Pakistan.
At the time, the UN chief urged India and Pakistan to exercise restraint and take all steps to ensure the protection of civilians who continue to bear the brunt of hostilities between the two nations over their claims to Kashmir.
'Serious abuses'
Kashmir has been divided between India and Pakistan since both countries gained independence in 1947. Both nations claim the Himalayan territory in its entirety, with Kashmiris still staking a claim to self-determination. Since 1988, the Indian military has deployed hundreds of thousands of security forces to quell an insurgency against Indian rule.
In July, Amnesty International accused the Indian government of refusing to prosecute perpetrators of human rights abuses in the region.
According to Amnesty, more than 96 percent of all allegations of human rights violations pitted against India's personnel in the disputed territory have been declared as "false or baseless".
"Till now, not a single member of the security forces deployed in the state has been tried for human rights violations in a civilian court. This lack of accountability has in turn facilitated other serious abuses," Minar Pimple, a senior director of global operations at Amnesty said.
In a rare deviation from the norm, a military court sentenced five Indian soldiers to life imprisonment for the murder of three Kashmiri men in 2010. Omar Abdullah, the then chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir, described it as a "watershed moment".
Amnesty welcomed the move but cautioned that "for justice to be consistently delivered, security force personnel accused of human rights violations should be prosecuted in civilian courts".
Both Lieutenant Colonel N N Joshi, India's army spokesperson in Srinagar and Colonel Rohan Anand, India's army spokesperson in New Delhi, told Al Jazeera they had yet to see the new report and were therefore unable to comment.
Over the past two decades more than 60,000 people have been killed in the insurgency, and the dispute remains a perilous red herring in India-Pakistan relations.
This govt's whole conservative Banning business, cultural revisionism in education, appointing dodgy heads of institutions with pre historic thoughts due to RSS links is damn irritating.
Now they want to rid us of all western culture.
Man, some priorities do they have. Was hearing this Culture and tourism minister speak on TV earlier and it's like he has time travelled from 100 years back.
Well. This is called diversion tactics. When people start questioning what is happening with your X and Y promises, you create nonsense decisions and make people discuss that instead.
As far as Maharashtra is concerned, the farmer suicides are just brushed under the carpet by making such ridiculous decisions. Did I forget the murder case which not even one guy from the public is interested about.
As far as Maharashtra is concerned, the farmer suicides are just brushed under the carpet by making such ridiculous decisions. Did I forget the murder case which not even one guy from the public is interested about.
Home ministry clears controversial Gujarat anti-terror bill, but concerns over 'draconian' provisions persist
https://twitter.com/share?url=http:...rer=http://a.msn.com/01/en-in/AAeLJ1Z?ocid=st
A controversial anti-terror bill in Gujarat, giving stronger powers of arrest and investigation to authorities, has been cleared by the home ministry, the The Economic Times has reported.
The report states that the bill titled 'Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime Bill' had been pending since 2001, when Narendra Modi was the chief minister of the state. According to the report, while the home ministry had some reservations about the bill, Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh cleared it as he felt that there had been delay in bringing about a law giving more powers to Gujarat to combat terrorism. With the clearance from the home ministry, it can now become a law if it receives the approval of the President.
The bill had been returned to the state legislature twice in 2004 and 2008 by then Presidents APJ Abdul Kalam and Pratibha Patil, The Hindu reported. The report quoted an activist as saying that the bill amounted to an "undeclared emergency" and that it was draconian in its nature.
As reported by Firstpost in April, the bill allows for a confession to be admissible in court if it is recorded before a police official of the rank of Superintendent of Police. It also allows intercepted communication to be used as evidence. Further, it allows for a period of 180 days for the police to complete its investigation in a terror case. At present, under the Code of Criminal Procedure, if the police does not file a chargesheet in 90 days in serious offences, the accused is entitled to bail.
According to The Hindu report, the proposed law also gives immunity to the state government from legal action, stating that no legal proceeding can be filed if an act was done 'in good faith.' The report quotes an activist as saying that the proposed law effectively means that a person can be detained for up to 180 days on the basis of phone records.
https://twitter.com/share?url=http:...rer=http://a.msn.com/01/en-in/AAeLJ1Z?ocid=st
A controversial anti-terror bill in Gujarat, giving stronger powers of arrest and investigation to authorities, has been cleared by the home ministry, the The Economic Times has reported.
The report states that the bill titled 'Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime Bill' had been pending since 2001, when Narendra Modi was the chief minister of the state. According to the report, while the home ministry had some reservations about the bill, Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh cleared it as he felt that there had been delay in bringing about a law giving more powers to Gujarat to combat terrorism. With the clearance from the home ministry, it can now become a law if it receives the approval of the President.
The bill had been returned to the state legislature twice in 2004 and 2008 by then Presidents APJ Abdul Kalam and Pratibha Patil, The Hindu reported. The report quoted an activist as saying that the bill amounted to an "undeclared emergency" and that it was draconian in its nature.
As reported by Firstpost in April, the bill allows for a confession to be admissible in court if it is recorded before a police official of the rank of Superintendent of Police. It also allows intercepted communication to be used as evidence. Further, it allows for a period of 180 days for the police to complete its investigation in a terror case. At present, under the Code of Criminal Procedure, if the police does not file a chargesheet in 90 days in serious offences, the accused is entitled to bail.
According to The Hindu report, the proposed law also gives immunity to the state government from legal action, stating that no legal proceeding can be filed if an act was done 'in good faith.' The report quotes an activist as saying that the proposed law effectively means that a person can be detained for up to 180 days on the basis of phone records.
Muslim organizations launch campaigns against 'un-Islamic' ISIS
NEW DELHI: Slamming ISIS for "un-Islamic" acts and "undermining the basic tenets" of the faith, several Indian Muslim organizations in the country have launched campaigns against the terror group, saying it was trying to justify its violence by distorting Islamic symbols and history.
Muslim organizations have held meetings in places like Delhi, Jodhpur, Kozhikode and Lucknow to urge Muslim youths to refrain from associating with ISIS, which they said was involved in un-Islamic activities resulting in the killing of thousands of innocent victims.
According to a home ministry report, in Kerala, Ittehadul Subhanil Mujahideen had organized a state-level conclave in Kozhikode on September 20 under the banner of 'Youth Movement Against IS Terrorism', which was inaugurated by its president, TP Abdulla Koya Maudani.
In his address, Maudani called for united efforts to counter the proliferation of the ideology of the Middle East terror group, asserting that the outfit was justifying terrorist actions by distorting Islamic symbols as well as history.
ISIS was distorting ideologies related to 'Jihad' and 'Khilafat', Maudani explained, and added that Sunni and Shia "extremism" would only lead to destruction of the Muslim community.
Separately, chief of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind, Kerala, MI Abdul Aziz said at a press conference in Kozhikode earlier this month that terrorist activities of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) were un-Islamic as well as a challenge to society.
He said that the claims of ISIS with regard to the establishment of an Islamic Caliphate were "fake". His organization also held several meetings at other places in Kerala highlighting the atrocities committed by ISIS.
The Rajasthan unit of Jamiat Ahle Hadees had organised a youth conference in Jodhpur on September 13 against terrorist activities of ISIS.
Speakers at the conference urged youths to refrain from associating with ISIS which they said was involved in un-Islamic terrorist activities.
Also, Syed Zainul Abedin Ali Khan, Dargah Dewan, Dargah Sharif, Ajmer, said at a press conference on September 19 that the entire world should unite against ISIS, which was undermining the basic tenets of Islam.
In Delhi, ISIS was criticized by several Muslim outfits at a 'Peace Conference' held at India International Centre on September 17.
In Uttar Pradesh, Maulana Khalid Rashid Firangi Mahli, Imam, Eidgah Aisbagh, Lucknow; executive committee member, All India Muslim Personal Law Board, issued a 'fatwa' on September 9 against ISIS, saying the outfit was involved in un-Islamic activities in killing innocent people.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...inst-un-Islamic-ISIS/articleshow/49155295.cms
NEW DELHI: Slamming ISIS for "un-Islamic" acts and "undermining the basic tenets" of the faith, several Indian Muslim organizations in the country have launched campaigns against the terror group, saying it was trying to justify its violence by distorting Islamic symbols and history.
Muslim organizations have held meetings in places like Delhi, Jodhpur, Kozhikode and Lucknow to urge Muslim youths to refrain from associating with ISIS, which they said was involved in un-Islamic activities resulting in the killing of thousands of innocent victims.
According to a home ministry report, in Kerala, Ittehadul Subhanil Mujahideen had organized a state-level conclave in Kozhikode on September 20 under the banner of 'Youth Movement Against IS Terrorism', which was inaugurated by its president, TP Abdulla Koya Maudani.
In his address, Maudani called for united efforts to counter the proliferation of the ideology of the Middle East terror group, asserting that the outfit was justifying terrorist actions by distorting Islamic symbols as well as history.
ISIS was distorting ideologies related to 'Jihad' and 'Khilafat', Maudani explained, and added that Sunni and Shia "extremism" would only lead to destruction of the Muslim community.
Separately, chief of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind, Kerala, MI Abdul Aziz said at a press conference in Kozhikode earlier this month that terrorist activities of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) were un-Islamic as well as a challenge to society.
He said that the claims of ISIS with regard to the establishment of an Islamic Caliphate were "fake". His organization also held several meetings at other places in Kerala highlighting the atrocities committed by ISIS.
The Rajasthan unit of Jamiat Ahle Hadees had organised a youth conference in Jodhpur on September 13 against terrorist activities of ISIS.
Speakers at the conference urged youths to refrain from associating with ISIS which they said was involved in un-Islamic terrorist activities.
Also, Syed Zainul Abedin Ali Khan, Dargah Dewan, Dargah Sharif, Ajmer, said at a press conference on September 19 that the entire world should unite against ISIS, which was undermining the basic tenets of Islam.
In Delhi, ISIS was criticized by several Muslim outfits at a 'Peace Conference' held at India International Centre on September 17.
In Uttar Pradesh, Maulana Khalid Rashid Firangi Mahli, Imam, Eidgah Aisbagh, Lucknow; executive committee member, All India Muslim Personal Law Board, issued a 'fatwa' on September 9 against ISIS, saying the outfit was involved in un-Islamic activities in killing innocent people.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...inst-un-Islamic-ISIS/articleshow/49155295.cms
Just to let you know that the Government of India has imposed an unofficial blockade on Nepal because apparently it is not happy with our new constitution. Its been around 12 days now and coupled with strikes inside Nepal (which has lasted for 53 days), the country has effectively shut down. For those who don't know, Nepal is surrounded on three sides by India and at present has no concrete economic ties with China in the north, so we are totally fecked. Besides the complete shortage of fuel in almost the entire nation, now hospitals are reporting shortage in medicines and other essential supplies. Any goodwill Modi had built up in his last visit has completely vanished in the political sphere. From what I see from posts in this thread as well as some of my friends' post, many of you don't seem too pleased with this government as well. Can you share me some thoughts on the current government?
Some links here:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...ith-pm-narendra-modi/articleshow/49241748.cms
https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/india-tries-shape-nepals-new-constitution
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...urrency-stock-vanish/articleshow/49175897.cms
Some links here:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...ith-pm-narendra-modi/articleshow/49241748.cms
https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/india-tries-shape-nepals-new-constitution
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...urrency-stock-vanish/articleshow/49175897.cms
Our government seems much more interested in PR exercises, than issues like this, which IMO should be topmost priority.
Letting and abetting the situation to escalate so badly in perhaps the only 'friendly' neighboring country and buffer country to China, is absolutely shocking foreign policy. By the time they wake up to what's happening, China would have already cozied up to Nepal. And our general public wonders why we're always playing catchup to the Chinese...
What I don't seem to understand is why the blockade has been imposed in the first place. It is not as if India doesn't have sufficient influence in the existing political sphere to pursue underhand silent pressure as it has always done. It is common knowledge in Nepal that many of our current politicians as well as political parties (cue Maoists) have huge political debt to pay to India which has always influenced all of Nepal's political and economic decisions. But that has always been done behind the scenes. Here, the country has decided to come to the foreground demanding modifications (no pun intended) on the constitution. It just seems very strange and detrimental to both countries.
Is this related to the Madhesi issue?
Yes it is.
I think the issue was the new constitution guidelines could start unrest in the Indo-Nepal border (I guess the Madhesi issue) which is detrimental to Indian security and hence the retaliation.
That is what the official stance is isn't it. But let's take yesterday for example. From the Jogbani-Biratnagar customs point, altogether 60 vessels passed yesterday filled with items like cement, vegetables, consumer goods, but only 11 vessels containing petroleum products were passed. All in all only 22 petroleum vessels entered the country yesterday when substantial number of trucks containing other items were sent by the customs. There is no reason to prohibit petroleum products exclusively when other items are being let into the country (although in a limited amount) when it is clear that petroleum products are the ones in shortage. Additionally, unrest is primarily observed in 8 districts in south-eastern Nepal. but customs all across Nepal have been effectively shut down when it was totally unnecessary. The point has been regularly reiterated by Nepal's current ambassador to India who has been frequenting Ministry of External Affairs almost daily. Nothing has come off it yet.
I don't see how protest in Nepal is detrimental to Indian security anyway. Happy to be enlightened.
Didn't some hindu extremist group in India threaten they would impose a blockade since they dont like the new constitution ? I read it last week in times of India.
I am just talking about the news that India is against a volatile atmosphere so close to their borders. I am not even sure of there is an official stance as the blockade is unofficial.
I dont have so much knowledge on what are all the issues that India would face to put a comment on it.
The official stance is what exactly as you put it. And security checks at the border and safety of Indian transporters has been mentioned as the reason behind "slow trade". Unfortunately, both are not true.
What is your stance on Madhesi issue, their demands and how you see that progressing?
The Indian Govt fecked up. They should have influenced the constitution before it was announced. Now it is a no-win situation. There are some provisions in the constitution which could lead to a Sri Lanka like situation in long term in Nepal. The Indian Govt is absolutely right to try to avoid something like that occurring. But they have put themselves in a very bad situation now.
It is a very complex issue. First comes the question of defining a Madhesi, and there is no single definition. It is not based on geography since hilly people or people of Tharu community for instance living amongst "Madhesis" won't be identified as a Madhesi by the "Madhesi" themselves. It is not based on ethnicity or language since there are people of various ethnicities and languages among people of "Madhesi" community. A loose definition that is doing rounds in the academic circle is that it is an identity created by the hilly people themselves i.e. people who have a certain colour, lifestyle, geographical location and such, are called Madhesis. The current movement was borne out of Tharu movement in the West genuinely legitimate demand of a Tharu state considering the region is their indigenous land and they are the majority besides the people of hills of course. No such legitimacy can be found in the Madhesi demand. There is no doubt that they have been marginalized in the political structure for a long time, and population wise, the southern region is indeed the most populous region in the country. Therefore their demands on proportional representation is legitimate and which at this point has already been agreed to be met by the ruling political parties. I find no issues on their demand on citizenship based on mother's name either but I don't think that's a big issue anyway. Actually of all their demands most have already been agreed upon by the ruling parties.
The main concern is, as I have already indicated above, that of State delineation. As I hinted earlier, there is no legitimate logic behind the demand for a single Madhesi state. Actually the current State 2, is in fact a Madheshi state (the only ethnic state in Nepal). Unfortunately, it contains no economic resources like major rivers or touristic destinations or important industrial towns and even politicians within ruling parties fear the State might turn to a "Bihar" in terms of its poverty. Such places have been, as Madheshis would feel, stripped away to be a part of another State (although there is no reason for those places to be in their State anyway). Now, if the existing State is to be divided in order to accommodate Madeshi demand, that State would start another movement as well. There is no solution to this and its a lose-lose scenario for all. The States should never have been delineated on the basis of ethnicity in the first place and now we are facing the result of that.
One must realize however, that the existing protest in Madhes is not just a constitutional right based movement. That particular region is the most unequal place in Nepal where feudalism has a stronghold. The current protests are not just manifestation of people's demand for rights but also for their equality. However, the politicians there have managed to divert the agenda to their own interests. Surprisingly many politicians who are leading the movement failed spectacularly in last election so this movement is their fight for political survival too. So its basically a confluence of failure on part of all concerned and populist politics in Madhesh.
Could you tell me what that is about? I have heard parallels with Sri Lanka but I don't know what transpired there.
I am only going by what I have read in the press. For example this - http://kathmandupost.ekantipur.com/news/2015-10-01/errors-and-lies.html
Sri-Lanka parallel is being made because you can not leave a sizable proportion of your population unhappy after such a decisive change to your country's political system.
These are the changes India wants suppsedly -
http://indianexpress.com/article/wo...tion-address-madhesi-concerns-india-to-nepal/
The proposed amendments are:
* Article 63 (3) of the Interim Constitution provided electoral constituencies based on population, geography and special characteristics, “and in the case of Madhes on the basis of percentage of population”. Under this provision, Madhes, with more than 50 per cent of the population, got 50 per cent of seats in Parliament. The latter phrase has been omitted in Article 84 of the new Constitution. “It needs to be re-inserted so that Madhes continues to have electoral constituencies in proportion to its population,” a government source told The Indian Express. - See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/wo...concerns-india-to-nepal/#sthash.cx56czKN.dpuf
* In Article 21 of the Interim Constitution, it was mentioned that various groups would have “the right to participate in state structures on the basis of principles of proportional inclusion”. In the new Constitution (Article 42), the word “proportional” has been dropped — Delhi wants it re-inserted.
* Article 283 of the Constitution states that only citizens by descent will be entitled to hold the posts of President, Vice-President, Prime Minister, Chief Justice, Speaker of Parliament, Chairperson of National Assembly, Head of Province, Chief Minister, Speaker of Provincial Assembly and Chief of Security Bodies. This clause is seen as discriminatory for the large number of Madhesis who have acquired citizenship by birth or naturalisation. Delhi says this should be amended to include citizenship by birth or naturalisation.
* Article 86 of the new Constitution states that National Assembly will comprise 8 members from each of 7 States and 3 nominated members. Madhesi parties want representation in National Assembly to be based on population of the Provinces. This, Delhi says, should be done to address concerns.
* Five disputed districts of Kanchanpur, Kailali, Sunsari, Jhapa and Morang: Based on the majority of the population, these districts or parts of them may be included in the neighbouring Madhes Provinces. * Article 154 of the Interim Constitution provided for delineation of electoral constituencies every 10 years. This has been increased to 20 years in Article 281 of the new Constitution. Echoing the Madhesi parties, India wants this restored to 10 years.
* Article 11(6) states that a foreign woman married to a Nepali citizen may acquire naturalised citizenship of Nepal as provided for in a federal law. Madhesi parties want acquisition of naturalised citizenship to be automatic on application. This also finds favour with Delhi.
http://indianexpress.com/article/wo...tion-address-madhesi-concerns-india-to-nepal/
The proposed amendments are:
* Article 63 (3) of the Interim Constitution provided electoral constituencies based on population, geography and special characteristics, “and in the case of Madhes on the basis of percentage of population”. Under this provision, Madhes, with more than 50 per cent of the population, got 50 per cent of seats in Parliament. The latter phrase has been omitted in Article 84 of the new Constitution. “It needs to be re-inserted so that Madhes continues to have electoral constituencies in proportion to its population,” a government source told The Indian Express. - See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/wo...concerns-india-to-nepal/#sthash.cx56czKN.dpuf
* In Article 21 of the Interim Constitution, it was mentioned that various groups would have “the right to participate in state structures on the basis of principles of proportional inclusion”. In the new Constitution (Article 42), the word “proportional” has been dropped — Delhi wants it re-inserted.
* Article 283 of the Constitution states that only citizens by descent will be entitled to hold the posts of President, Vice-President, Prime Minister, Chief Justice, Speaker of Parliament, Chairperson of National Assembly, Head of Province, Chief Minister, Speaker of Provincial Assembly and Chief of Security Bodies. This clause is seen as discriminatory for the large number of Madhesis who have acquired citizenship by birth or naturalisation. Delhi says this should be amended to include citizenship by birth or naturalisation.
* Article 86 of the new Constitution states that National Assembly will comprise 8 members from each of 7 States and 3 nominated members. Madhesi parties want representation in National Assembly to be based on population of the Provinces. This, Delhi says, should be done to address concerns.
* Five disputed districts of Kanchanpur, Kailali, Sunsari, Jhapa and Morang: Based on the majority of the population, these districts or parts of them may be included in the neighbouring Madhes Provinces. * Article 154 of the Interim Constitution provided for delineation of electoral constituencies every 10 years. This has been increased to 20 years in Article 281 of the new Constitution. Echoing the Madhesi parties, India wants this restored to 10 years.
* Article 11(6) states that a foreign woman married to a Nepali citizen may acquire naturalised citizenship of Nepal as provided for in a federal law. Madhesi parties want acquisition of naturalised citizenship to be automatic on application. This also finds favour with Delhi.
The news article was denied by Ministry of External Affairs and the Indian Embassy in Nepal but I wouldn't be so sure that it wasn't leaked on purpose. Anyway, I'll go by each and every one of those amendments accordingly. The first one is just plain wrong. State structures have been made proportionally exclusive in the new constitution. The second, very few countries in the world afford representation of naturalized citizenship in the highest authorities. I don't see why Nepal should. Who constitutes as a natural citizenship can be a matter of debate, as is the case pointed out by point no. 5, and I myself am of the opinion that provisions made in point 5 should be amended but as I said earlier, I don't think its a big issue anyway. Provisions of point 3 has already been agreed upon by the government. So the only issue of contention is that of point 4.
And as I mentioned earlier, I don't see how that can be solved. Kailali and Kanchanpur I agree is a legitimate demand. Sunsari, Jhapa and Morang is just wrong.
The issue is that their unhappiness stems largely from the State's initial neglect in involving the Madhesi's during the constitution forming process. Now its a case of misinformation for a large section of the population in Madhesh most of whom don't even know what is there in the constitution. This has been verified by various news reporters who interviewed the protesters. As I said, the only contentious issue is that of State delineation and all other issues can be easily negotiated. It doesn't seem as if Madheshi leaders are ready to negotiate though. They want all their demands fulfilled, even if they aren't rational. Provided the current support they have received from the Indian government, things might indeed go their way. But that would mark the start of another confrontation in Eastern hills.
Last edited:
Key point. They are living in a bubble of self delusion that nothing seems to penetrate.
UP Election 2017: Rahul's Raebareli rally falls flat, but Priyanka Gandhi saves the day for Congress
The sight of a black helicopter flying high up in the sky over Uttar Pradesh's Raebareli town drew the crowds to the Girls Inter-Collegiate Ground. Rahul and Priyanka Gandhi were in town. A small ground, with about half its available space reserved for the helipad, was full. Curious onlookers had perched themselves on roofs of houses surrounding the ground.
For many of these people, it was for the first time in living memory that the Gandhi siblings were addressing a rally together in Raebareli. The town has historically been a Gandhi family stronghold, but Rahul and Priyanka had never done this together. Until today. It showed how much the upcoming Assembly election means to the Congress party.
In the 2012 Assembly election, Congress couldn't win a single seat from Raebareli. The picture does look admittedly shaky for the party again this time, and it's said to be one of the reasons why they delayed this Raebareli road show. "They were assessing the situation before exposing themselves," was the cryptic reply a local Congressman gave this correspondent, an hour before the rally was scheduled to begin.
The Inter-Collegiate Ground is located in the heart of Raebareli. It has been an impregnable fortress of sitting MLA Akhilesh Singh, an Independent candidate. Congress has been unable to win from here for a few decades now. But Singh has been diagnosed with cancer and has been undergoing treatment for the last three years. The Congress now senses a chance. More so because Singh's daughter Aditi has joined the party. She is already a personal favourite of Priyanka Gandhi, and is expected to win from this seat despite being a Congress candidate. The fact that Akhilesh Singh's might is firmly behind his daughter is expected to be a big boost for the embattled party.
On Friday, Rahul Gandhi was flanked by Priyanka on one side and Aditi on the other. Before he rose to give his speech, he was constantly chatting with his sister. A big banner of the SP-Congress alliance fluttered above him, with pictures of the party leaders and the phrase UP ko ye saath pasand hai (UP likes them together). Apart from pictures of Rahul and Akhilesh, there were also photos of Priyanka and Dimple Yadav. A Samajwadi Party functionary rose to the dais to felicitate the Gandhis. But that was the only mention of Samajwadi Party at the rally. No SP flag, big or small, was to be seen.
However, what would hurt the Congress would be the sight of people moving away by the time Rahul Gandhi started blasting Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Those gathered at the rally included the young and old, men and women, those who were wearing a polyester Congress headband, or those waving a paper flag. But soon after they saw the chopper with the two top Congress leaders, people started leaving the rally. A man standing with a group of people on a narrow lane outside the ground shouted: "Bhai apne neta ki kuch toh izzat karo; thoda aur sun lo! (Listen to your neta, wait a little longer)." Some laughed at it, some others shouted back at him to go back in the ground.
Rahul Gandhi started talking by comparing Modi to Shah Rukh Khan from Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge. "He was like Shah Rukh in DDLJ. Within two and a half years of taking power, he went from talking about 'acche din' to looting people like Gabbar Singh!" he said. It was a bit difficult to comprehend how Shah Rukh from DDLJ had anything to do with Gabbar Singh of Sholay, and how either of them were connected to the Uttar Pradesh Assembly election.
The crowd kept leaving the venue. But Rahul kept criticising Modi, using the same old themes that he had been using throughout — farmers' condition, loan waivers, etc. He even mocked the prime minister over his demonetisation idea, over Vijay Mallya, and over his 'Make in India' initiative. He concluded this segment by saying people will very soon see 'Make in UP' and 'Make in Raebareli' tags as well.
Those interested in trivia may consider noting down the number of times he took Modi's name. Every second sentence the Congress vice-president spoke began and ended with Modi's name, which took up most of the time as well.
Outside the rally's venue, a group of bored looking person said, "Jaldi Priyanka bolein, aur kaam khatam ho. Inka (Rahul) sunne ke liye kaun rukha hai? (Priyanka should talk soon and get this over with. Who's come here to listen to Rahul?)"
Another man next to him said, "Bhiya ye toh unka ran niti hai ki Priyanka baad me bole, pahle bol deti toh sab bhag jate. (This is to ensure people stick around. If Priyanka was to speak first, they would all run away."
Once they realised Priyanka wouldn't speak and the rally would soon conclude, their frustration became evident. Their verdict was clear: "They haven't let Priyanka speak fearing she would overshadow her brother. She doesn't want to upstage her brother, and the party wouldn't like that either."
An hour later, news came through that Priyanka did speak at another rally, in Maharajganj. This got the Congress leaders and sympathisers excited. More so because she targeted Modi, saying Uttar Pradesh doesn't need outsiders when there are so many natives already present here.
"Modiji, does Uttar Pradesh need to adopt anyone from outside? Is there no youth here? You have two such youth in Rahulji
and Akhileshji before you, who have Uttar Pradesh in their hearts and minds," Priyanka had said, clearly referencing Prime Minister Modi's choice of Varanasi as a Lok Sabha constituency, saying there are people like Rahul and Akhilesh who are Uttar Pradesh's native sons.
The theme was common to the speech given by Rahul. But the style and presentation were different. And that's the reason people liked her much more.
http://www.firstpost.com/politics/u...andhi-saves-the-day-for-congress-3288734.html
The sight of a black helicopter flying high up in the sky over Uttar Pradesh's Raebareli town drew the crowds to the Girls Inter-Collegiate Ground. Rahul and Priyanka Gandhi were in town. A small ground, with about half its available space reserved for the helipad, was full. Curious onlookers had perched themselves on roofs of houses surrounding the ground.
For many of these people, it was for the first time in living memory that the Gandhi siblings were addressing a rally together in Raebareli. The town has historically been a Gandhi family stronghold, but Rahul and Priyanka had never done this together. Until today. It showed how much the upcoming Assembly election means to the Congress party.
In the 2012 Assembly election, Congress couldn't win a single seat from Raebareli. The picture does look admittedly shaky for the party again this time, and it's said to be one of the reasons why they delayed this Raebareli road show. "They were assessing the situation before exposing themselves," was the cryptic reply a local Congressman gave this correspondent, an hour before the rally was scheduled to begin.
The Inter-Collegiate Ground is located in the heart of Raebareli. It has been an impregnable fortress of sitting MLA Akhilesh Singh, an Independent candidate. Congress has been unable to win from here for a few decades now. But Singh has been diagnosed with cancer and has been undergoing treatment for the last three years. The Congress now senses a chance. More so because Singh's daughter Aditi has joined the party. She is already a personal favourite of Priyanka Gandhi, and is expected to win from this seat despite being a Congress candidate. The fact that Akhilesh Singh's might is firmly behind his daughter is expected to be a big boost for the embattled party.
On Friday, Rahul Gandhi was flanked by Priyanka on one side and Aditi on the other. Before he rose to give his speech, he was constantly chatting with his sister. A big banner of the SP-Congress alliance fluttered above him, with pictures of the party leaders and the phrase UP ko ye saath pasand hai (UP likes them together). Apart from pictures of Rahul and Akhilesh, there were also photos of Priyanka and Dimple Yadav. A Samajwadi Party functionary rose to the dais to felicitate the Gandhis. But that was the only mention of Samajwadi Party at the rally. No SP flag, big or small, was to be seen.
However, what would hurt the Congress would be the sight of people moving away by the time Rahul Gandhi started blasting Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Those gathered at the rally included the young and old, men and women, those who were wearing a polyester Congress headband, or those waving a paper flag. But soon after they saw the chopper with the two top Congress leaders, people started leaving the rally. A man standing with a group of people on a narrow lane outside the ground shouted: "Bhai apne neta ki kuch toh izzat karo; thoda aur sun lo! (Listen to your neta, wait a little longer)." Some laughed at it, some others shouted back at him to go back in the ground.
Rahul Gandhi started talking by comparing Modi to Shah Rukh Khan from Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge. "He was like Shah Rukh in DDLJ. Within two and a half years of taking power, he went from talking about 'acche din' to looting people like Gabbar Singh!" he said. It was a bit difficult to comprehend how Shah Rukh from DDLJ had anything to do with Gabbar Singh of Sholay, and how either of them were connected to the Uttar Pradesh Assembly election.
The crowd kept leaving the venue. But Rahul kept criticising Modi, using the same old themes that he had been using throughout — farmers' condition, loan waivers, etc. He even mocked the prime minister over his demonetisation idea, over Vijay Mallya, and over his 'Make in India' initiative. He concluded this segment by saying people will very soon see 'Make in UP' and 'Make in Raebareli' tags as well.
Those interested in trivia may consider noting down the number of times he took Modi's name. Every second sentence the Congress vice-president spoke began and ended with Modi's name, which took up most of the time as well.
Outside the rally's venue, a group of bored looking person said, "Jaldi Priyanka bolein, aur kaam khatam ho. Inka (Rahul) sunne ke liye kaun rukha hai? (Priyanka should talk soon and get this over with. Who's come here to listen to Rahul?)"
Another man next to him said, "Bhiya ye toh unka ran niti hai ki Priyanka baad me bole, pahle bol deti toh sab bhag jate. (This is to ensure people stick around. If Priyanka was to speak first, they would all run away."
Once they realised Priyanka wouldn't speak and the rally would soon conclude, their frustration became evident. Their verdict was clear: "They haven't let Priyanka speak fearing she would overshadow her brother. She doesn't want to upstage her brother, and the party wouldn't like that either."
An hour later, news came through that Priyanka did speak at another rally, in Maharajganj. This got the Congress leaders and sympathisers excited. More so because she targeted Modi, saying Uttar Pradesh doesn't need outsiders when there are so many natives already present here.
"Modiji, does Uttar Pradesh need to adopt anyone from outside? Is there no youth here? You have two such youth in Rahulji
and Akhileshji before you, who have Uttar Pradesh in their hearts and minds," Priyanka had said, clearly referencing Prime Minister Modi's choice of Varanasi as a Lok Sabha constituency, saying there are people like Rahul and Akhilesh who are Uttar Pradesh's native sons.
The theme was common to the speech given by Rahul. But the style and presentation were different. And that's the reason people liked her much more.
http://www.firstpost.com/politics/u...andhi-saves-the-day-for-congress-3288734.html
Priyanka Gandhi saying that the government committed a huge atrocity against women by making them wait in queues for money after demonetization was just ridiculous. Equating rape and sex abuse with rape is extremely disrespectful to rape victims and trivializes what they have undergone. Politicians sinking to new lows. Not unexpected though. Priyanka Gandhi has lived a very privileged life. She lives in a government mansion in Delhi and gets secret service security that is funded by the taxpayer, even though she isn't a government employee or in public office. Ridiculous.
There Is More Than One Version To The Story Of Christianity In Northeast
Samrat - Feb 22, 2017, 1:10 pm
Tuting is about as far as one can go into Arunachal Pradesh without winding up in China. Twenty kilometres further, as the crow flies, is Chinese territory. To get there, you have to undertake a bone-jarring ride up from Pasighat in the Arunachal plains that, depending on your travellers luck, can take between two and three days. After Tuting, you reach the village of Geling, where the road ends. The ridge of the hill facing Geling is the Line of Actual Control, the working – and disputed – boundary between India and China.
It is not exactly the busiest place. Life pretty much ends at dusk in Tuting. After that, a great, silent darkness descends on the earth.
The silence was broken on one night I was there, by a crescendo of shouts of “praise the Lord, praise the Lord”, coming from the room next to mine. It turned out to be a group of evangelists, trying to attract converts from the local Buddhist faith.
Proselytisation is a fact of life in Arunachal Pradesh. It has been the site of a competition between evangelical Christian churches, Hindu groups affiliated with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, Buddhist monasteries, and adherents of local faiths, for decades. The competition for harvesting souls has reached all the way to the border with China.
To paint this competition as a picture of grand conspiracies and civilisation conflict would be easy. It is, after all, the conventional wisdom.
The civilisational conflict worldview may lead one to think, in the case of northeast India, that Christian evangelists are somehow responsible for implanting the seeds of rebellion in simple tribal heads, as a recent article in Swarajya did. Such a thinker may even assert, like the writer of that article, Jaideep Mazumdar, that evangelists have followed a long tradition of creating a sense of alienation between newly baptised tribals and India, which then led to the birth of insurgencies.
The article went on to state that, “For Arunachal, the Christian missionaries have a more diabolic plan: to not only convert all the tribals into Christianity, but float a fraudulent theory that all of them belong to the same genetic stock as the Nagas and, hence, should join their Naga brothers in demanding that they live together as one people under a common administrative and political setup”.
The Naga identity, Mazumdar claimed, was an artificial one created by Baptist Missionaries.
I disagree with this line of thinking, for a number of reasons.
The idea that a certain identity is “artificial” assumes that certain other identities must be “natural”. It would be interesting to hear from Mazumdar, or anyone else who shares his views, how the vastly diverse Indian identity is a more “natural” one than the much smaller and more homogenous Naga identity.
Identities form with the passage of time, and this is true for the Naga and Indian identities, and for all others too. It may be that one identity is older than another, but time has not ended. What is now young will one day be old.
The genesis of insurgencies in Northeast India, which Mazumdar lays at the doors of Christian missionaries, is also more complex than a simple matter of religious difference. The impact of missionaries may or may not have contributed to insurgencies in Nagaland and Mizoram. I would like to hear Jaideep Mazumdar explain how Christianity was implicated in two of the most powerful insurgencies in the Northeast, in the Brahmaputra valley in Assam and the Imphal valley in Manipur, that involve populations which are not Christian.
A second area of tribal rebellions against India is the belt from Telangana to Jharkhand, where Maoism has taken hold. Would Mazumdar be able to explain, using his Christian conspiracy theory, why so many tribals in that vast area also rebelled against the Indian state?
It is one thing to blame the missionaries for converting the Nagas to Christianity. The fact is that two processes occurred more or less simultaneously in the Naga Hills from the 1870s. The spread of Christianity was one. The spread, for the first time, of an Indian administration into the Naga Hills was another. Without the empire building of the British, the Nagas may not have become Christians, but it is not certain that they would have become Indians either.
Suspicion of foreign missionaries is an old thing here. Historically, the first Protestant missionary to preach the gospel in Northeast India was not a foreigner but a Bengali from the Srirampur Mission near Kolkata, named Krishna Pal, who spent eight months in 1816 around Pandua where the Khasi Hills meet the plains of East Bengal, according to “A Brief History of Christianity in North East India” by Rev Dr Woba James.
The first contact between Baptist missionaries and an Arunachal tribe occurred before missionary contact with the Nagas of Nagaland. This was in 1839, when Mr and Mrs Miles Bronson and Mrs Jacob Thomas, who came to work among the Singphos in Jeypore in Assam came into contact with the villagers of Namsang in Tirap district of Arunachal Pradesh, writes Dr James. The first mission to the Naga Hills came much later, in 1872.
The effects of Christianity on the tribes have been mixed.
According to Rev. Dr James, Christianity “provided an ideology that helped the tribal people maintain their identity in the face of serious erosion of their traditional religious, social and political institutions”.
However, Dr James concedes that “Western Christianity regarded their culture as the only valid expression of Christian culture. They considered everything non-Christian as the product of depraved human beings under the influence of Satan”.
The erosion of tribal traditions, cultures and institutions has taken place in Northeast India in sizeable measure as a consequence of this belief.
Part of the reason Christianity made rapid progress in Northeast India is because it became linked with the idea of progress. The great anthropologist and lapsed missionary Verrier Elwin, in his book “A Philosophy for NEFA” published in 1957, had noted that conversion to Christianity was often accompanied by a feeling of superiority and a foreign outlook. “I was told in Tuensang by more than one Christian youth that ‘what we want is American dress, language and way of life’,” he had written.
“The Hindu, despite himself, considers whether the tribal regions cannot in some way be brought within the all-embracing tolerance of Hinduism; the Christian cannot help regarding them as rivals to his own universal faith; the agnostic looks on all religions, tribal as well as others, as bound to collapse before the spread of scientific knowledge,” wrote Elwin.
Elwin doubted that the NEFA tribals would accept Hinduism in any organised manner, despite obvious similarities between Hindu and traditional tribal beliefs, because “between them and that great religion stands the gentle figure of the cow”.
The Puritanical strain of Hinduism, with its many taboos, was never popular in the Northeast, home to legendary Shakta and Shaiva temples.
“Hindu missionaries who teach teetotalism and vegetarianism, as well as a number of other taboos hitherto unknown to the tribal mind, are as divisive of the village unity and as destructive of tribal culture and custom as the Christian missionaries”, Elwin concluded.
The thrust of his advice to the government of India was to keep missionaries of all hues and denominations out of Arunachal Pradesh, or NEFA, as it was then known.
That wise practise could have been continued if the Arunachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1978, had been implemented in the years since. Unfortunately for Arunachal, the Act, which prohibits conversion from one religious faith to any other by use of force, inducement, or fraud, did not see rules for carrying out its provisions framed in the last 39 years.
Conversion as a matter of conscience is a spiritual act. Selling one’s soul in exchange for food, shelter, healthcare or education is not.
The trafficking in souls, which is what competition between proselytisers of different faiths is largely about, has no spiritual purpose. It is a battle between the sales and marketing teams of giant multinational organizations.
Identity politics is the political end of that competition.
The trouble with such identity politics is that the categories by which it brands peoples are often too broad to be meaningful. For instance, there is a vast internal diversity within Hinduism. The same is true for Christianity and every other great world religion.
While it is true that there are puritanical vegetarian Hindus who observe multiple taboos, it is also true that there are ancient communities of meat-eating Brahmins and pot-smoking sadhus who do not observe those taboos.
Similarly, while there are evangelical, proselytising Christians who believe everyone except them is going to hell, there are also many who live good Christian lives without becoming zealots.
A lot of people in this country have studied in ‘convent’ schools over the years. I was one of them. In my 12 years in that Catholic school, I do not recall anyone ever trying to convert me.
About half the students in my class in school were Hindus. To the best of my knowledge, they all remained Hindus after 10 or 12 years of schooling.
Over the decades, lakhs of Hindu students have graduated from some school or college whose name starts with “Saint” without being induced or coerced to adopt Christianity. Perhaps Jaideep Mazumdar himself was one such student.
The service and grace of many should not be forgotten in the face of the proselytising zeal of the few. That would be a disservice to both Christianity and Hinduism. More importantly, it would be a disservice to humanity.
https://swarajyamag.com/ideas/there...ion-to-the-story-of-christianity-in-northeast
Samrat - Feb 22, 2017, 1:10 pm
Tuting is about as far as one can go into Arunachal Pradesh without winding up in China. Twenty kilometres further, as the crow flies, is Chinese territory. To get there, you have to undertake a bone-jarring ride up from Pasighat in the Arunachal plains that, depending on your travellers luck, can take between two and three days. After Tuting, you reach the village of Geling, where the road ends. The ridge of the hill facing Geling is the Line of Actual Control, the working – and disputed – boundary between India and China.
It is not exactly the busiest place. Life pretty much ends at dusk in Tuting. After that, a great, silent darkness descends on the earth.
The silence was broken on one night I was there, by a crescendo of shouts of “praise the Lord, praise the Lord”, coming from the room next to mine. It turned out to be a group of evangelists, trying to attract converts from the local Buddhist faith.
Proselytisation is a fact of life in Arunachal Pradesh. It has been the site of a competition between evangelical Christian churches, Hindu groups affiliated with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, Buddhist monasteries, and adherents of local faiths, for decades. The competition for harvesting souls has reached all the way to the border with China.
To paint this competition as a picture of grand conspiracies and civilisation conflict would be easy. It is, after all, the conventional wisdom.
The civilisational conflict worldview may lead one to think, in the case of northeast India, that Christian evangelists are somehow responsible for implanting the seeds of rebellion in simple tribal heads, as a recent article in Swarajya did. Such a thinker may even assert, like the writer of that article, Jaideep Mazumdar, that evangelists have followed a long tradition of creating a sense of alienation between newly baptised tribals and India, which then led to the birth of insurgencies.
The article went on to state that, “For Arunachal, the Christian missionaries have a more diabolic plan: to not only convert all the tribals into Christianity, but float a fraudulent theory that all of them belong to the same genetic stock as the Nagas and, hence, should join their Naga brothers in demanding that they live together as one people under a common administrative and political setup”.
The Naga identity, Mazumdar claimed, was an artificial one created by Baptist Missionaries.
I disagree with this line of thinking, for a number of reasons.
The idea that a certain identity is “artificial” assumes that certain other identities must be “natural”. It would be interesting to hear from Mazumdar, or anyone else who shares his views, how the vastly diverse Indian identity is a more “natural” one than the much smaller and more homogenous Naga identity.
Identities form with the passage of time, and this is true for the Naga and Indian identities, and for all others too. It may be that one identity is older than another, but time has not ended. What is now young will one day be old.
The genesis of insurgencies in Northeast India, which Mazumdar lays at the doors of Christian missionaries, is also more complex than a simple matter of religious difference. The impact of missionaries may or may not have contributed to insurgencies in Nagaland and Mizoram. I would like to hear Jaideep Mazumdar explain how Christianity was implicated in two of the most powerful insurgencies in the Northeast, in the Brahmaputra valley in Assam and the Imphal valley in Manipur, that involve populations which are not Christian.
A second area of tribal rebellions against India is the belt from Telangana to Jharkhand, where Maoism has taken hold. Would Mazumdar be able to explain, using his Christian conspiracy theory, why so many tribals in that vast area also rebelled against the Indian state?
It is one thing to blame the missionaries for converting the Nagas to Christianity. The fact is that two processes occurred more or less simultaneously in the Naga Hills from the 1870s. The spread of Christianity was one. The spread, for the first time, of an Indian administration into the Naga Hills was another. Without the empire building of the British, the Nagas may not have become Christians, but it is not certain that they would have become Indians either.
Suspicion of foreign missionaries is an old thing here. Historically, the first Protestant missionary to preach the gospel in Northeast India was not a foreigner but a Bengali from the Srirampur Mission near Kolkata, named Krishna Pal, who spent eight months in 1816 around Pandua where the Khasi Hills meet the plains of East Bengal, according to “A Brief History of Christianity in North East India” by Rev Dr Woba James.
The first contact between Baptist missionaries and an Arunachal tribe occurred before missionary contact with the Nagas of Nagaland. This was in 1839, when Mr and Mrs Miles Bronson and Mrs Jacob Thomas, who came to work among the Singphos in Jeypore in Assam came into contact with the villagers of Namsang in Tirap district of Arunachal Pradesh, writes Dr James. The first mission to the Naga Hills came much later, in 1872.
The effects of Christianity on the tribes have been mixed.
According to Rev. Dr James, Christianity “provided an ideology that helped the tribal people maintain their identity in the face of serious erosion of their traditional religious, social and political institutions”.
However, Dr James concedes that “Western Christianity regarded their culture as the only valid expression of Christian culture. They considered everything non-Christian as the product of depraved human beings under the influence of Satan”.
The erosion of tribal traditions, cultures and institutions has taken place in Northeast India in sizeable measure as a consequence of this belief.
Part of the reason Christianity made rapid progress in Northeast India is because it became linked with the idea of progress. The great anthropologist and lapsed missionary Verrier Elwin, in his book “A Philosophy for NEFA” published in 1957, had noted that conversion to Christianity was often accompanied by a feeling of superiority and a foreign outlook. “I was told in Tuensang by more than one Christian youth that ‘what we want is American dress, language and way of life’,” he had written.
“The Hindu, despite himself, considers whether the tribal regions cannot in some way be brought within the all-embracing tolerance of Hinduism; the Christian cannot help regarding them as rivals to his own universal faith; the agnostic looks on all religions, tribal as well as others, as bound to collapse before the spread of scientific knowledge,” wrote Elwin.
Elwin doubted that the NEFA tribals would accept Hinduism in any organised manner, despite obvious similarities between Hindu and traditional tribal beliefs, because “between them and that great religion stands the gentle figure of the cow”.
The Puritanical strain of Hinduism, with its many taboos, was never popular in the Northeast, home to legendary Shakta and Shaiva temples.
“Hindu missionaries who teach teetotalism and vegetarianism, as well as a number of other taboos hitherto unknown to the tribal mind, are as divisive of the village unity and as destructive of tribal culture and custom as the Christian missionaries”, Elwin concluded.
The thrust of his advice to the government of India was to keep missionaries of all hues and denominations out of Arunachal Pradesh, or NEFA, as it was then known.
That wise practise could have been continued if the Arunachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1978, had been implemented in the years since. Unfortunately for Arunachal, the Act, which prohibits conversion from one religious faith to any other by use of force, inducement, or fraud, did not see rules for carrying out its provisions framed in the last 39 years.
Conversion as a matter of conscience is a spiritual act. Selling one’s soul in exchange for food, shelter, healthcare or education is not.
The trafficking in souls, which is what competition between proselytisers of different faiths is largely about, has no spiritual purpose. It is a battle between the sales and marketing teams of giant multinational organizations.
Identity politics is the political end of that competition.
The trouble with such identity politics is that the categories by which it brands peoples are often too broad to be meaningful. For instance, there is a vast internal diversity within Hinduism. The same is true for Christianity and every other great world religion.
While it is true that there are puritanical vegetarian Hindus who observe multiple taboos, it is also true that there are ancient communities of meat-eating Brahmins and pot-smoking sadhus who do not observe those taboos.
Similarly, while there are evangelical, proselytising Christians who believe everyone except them is going to hell, there are also many who live good Christian lives without becoming zealots.
A lot of people in this country have studied in ‘convent’ schools over the years. I was one of them. In my 12 years in that Catholic school, I do not recall anyone ever trying to convert me.
About half the students in my class in school were Hindus. To the best of my knowledge, they all remained Hindus after 10 or 12 years of schooling.
Over the decades, lakhs of Hindu students have graduated from some school or college whose name starts with “Saint” without being induced or coerced to adopt Christianity. Perhaps Jaideep Mazumdar himself was one such student.
The service and grace of many should not be forgotten in the face of the proselytising zeal of the few. That would be a disservice to both Christianity and Hinduism. More importantly, it would be a disservice to humanity.
https://swarajyamag.com/ideas/there...ion-to-the-story-of-christianity-in-northeast
“Swarajya” For Hindu Temples"
Swami Venkataraman - Jun 18, 2015, 12:30 pm
The Hindu American Foundation believes that the right way for the Modi government to manage/avoid controversies arising from social and cultural issues is to articulate a clear social agenda. We covered academia and textbooks in part I. Here we address the management of Hindu temples. One of the great ironies of Indian secularism is that a vocally secular government sees no contradiction in managing Hindu temples, and only Hindu temples. This despite article 26 of the Indian Constitution providing people of all religions with the freedom to manage their religious institutions. Several state-level Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR & CE) Acts have allowed states to assume financial and management control of over a hundred thousand Hindu temples, including magnificent ancient temples of immense religious significance. These HR&CE departments are headed by a cabinet minister or by ostensibly autonomous, but government appointed, boards which includes both politicians, and non-Hindus.
Such laws are generally justified under Article 25(2)(a) of the Indian constitution, which empowers the state to make law “regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice.” However, in practice, this is only applied to Hindu temples. A comparison of the legal rights of various religions in India today is shown in the table below. Such institutionalized discrimination against an ostensible 80% majority community is without parallel anywhere in the world. Some Hindu sampradayas such as the Ramakrishna Math & Mission have even tried to claim “minority” status and obtain protection from government interference.
* In the state of Karnataka, for instance, where Hindu temples have to contribute 5% of their gross annual income to a “common pool fund.”
**Legal definition includes Buddhists and Jains
The natural outcome of government management of temples, beside the obvious violation of secular ideals, are monumental corruption and misuse of funds, as well as, in numerous cases, the neglect of temples that borders on the criminal.
The neglect of temples is even more heart breaking. Numerous are the instances where ancient murals and paintings are white washed; mandapams are demolished and walls are sand blasted causing precious inscriptions to disappear. While the government eventually issues notifications acknowledging the errors of such senseless acts, the damage is already done and new forms of egregious violations occur at other temples. There are long running rackets in the smuggling of exquisite ancient sculptures abroad. Several ancient temples of immense religious and heritage value are literally crumbling to the ground for lack of maintenance. The collapse of the temple tower of the famous Kalahasti temple in Andhra Pradesh a few years ago comes to mind.
The near-total ignorance and indifference among the educated elite of India about how temples are managed baffles me. The unkindest cut usually comes in the context of discussing religious conversions in India. Leftist intellectuals and many among the educated elite accuse Hindus of “not performing adequate social service” unlike Christian missionaries, even as the government controls temple/institutional coffers and usurps monies for non-Hindu causes and others essentially run most of their schools and hospitals on a “for profit” basis (that funds other charitable endeavors) free from any government interference. George Orwell would be proud.
The long-term process of turning Hindu temples and institutions over to the control of Hindus themselves ought to be the second major item in the social agenda of the Modi sarkar. There are many legitimate questions about who would manage the temples and how corruption can be avoided. Local temple committees drawn from and reflecting the composition of the devotees who worship at the temple can provide governance, ensure democratic participation of locals, and be subject to filing financial information like all non-profits. The Sikh Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandak Committee and the Islamic Wakf boards already provide a ready model for temple management. These bodies may not be perfect, but no one questions their right, or that of various missionary orders, in managing their respective places of worship. Claiming that the government must manage temples makes the implicitly bigoted assumption that Hindus alone are incapable of managing their own temples.
The Hindu Dharma Acharya Sabha, an umbrella body consisting of the leaders of all traditional Hindu sampradayas, is one possible organization that can serve as an overall coordinating body and provide a broader vision for how the surplus from some temples can be used to provide social service to the poor near each temple as well as to support other temples. Handing temples over to Hindus will go a long way in ensuring proper conduct of rituals, cleanliness of temples, and service to society.
https://swarajyamag.com/culture/swarajya-for-hindu-temples
Swami Venkataraman - Jun 18, 2015, 12:30 pm
The Hindu American Foundation believes that the right way for the Modi government to manage/avoid controversies arising from social and cultural issues is to articulate a clear social agenda. We covered academia and textbooks in part I. Here we address the management of Hindu temples. One of the great ironies of Indian secularism is that a vocally secular government sees no contradiction in managing Hindu temples, and only Hindu temples. This despite article 26 of the Indian Constitution providing people of all religions with the freedom to manage their religious institutions. Several state-level Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR & CE) Acts have allowed states to assume financial and management control of over a hundred thousand Hindu temples, including magnificent ancient temples of immense religious significance. These HR&CE departments are headed by a cabinet minister or by ostensibly autonomous, but government appointed, boards which includes both politicians, and non-Hindus.
Such laws are generally justified under Article 25(2)(a) of the Indian constitution, which empowers the state to make law “regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice.” However, in practice, this is only applied to Hindu temples. A comparison of the legal rights of various religions in India today is shown in the table below. Such institutionalized discrimination against an ostensible 80% majority community is without parallel anywhere in the world. Some Hindu sampradayas such as the Ramakrishna Math & Mission have even tried to claim “minority” status and obtain protection from government interference.
* In the state of Karnataka, for instance, where Hindu temples have to contribute 5% of their gross annual income to a “common pool fund.”
**Legal definition includes Buddhists and Jains
The natural outcome of government management of temples, beside the obvious violation of secular ideals, are monumental corruption and misuse of funds, as well as, in numerous cases, the neglect of temples that borders on the criminal.
- In the 1980s, the then Kerala chief minister K Karunakaran ordered the Guruvayur Temple to deposit Rs 10 crore with the state treasury to offset a government deficit. Whether this money was ever returned or not is uncertain. In addition, the temple’s land holdings were decimated from 13000 acres to 230 acres by the Land Reforms Act which conveniently excluded non-Hindu institutions.
- The Andhra Pradesh government is well known for regularly raiding the treasury of the famous Tirupati temple.
- The Maharashtra government admitted to the Bombay High Court in 2004 that US$190,000 from Mumbai’s Siddhivinayak temple were being diverted to a charity run by a politician, Minister for Welfare, Rehabilitation and Textiles, Vilasrao Patil Undalkar.
- In 2010, the Orissa government sold 500 acres belonging to the Jagannath Puri temple at a throw away price of Rs. 1 lakh per acre to the Vedanta Resources mining conglomerate before finally being stopped by the Supreme Court of India. This was reflective of both callous disregard for Hindu institutions as well as the worst kind of crony capitalism. The opposition to Vedanta Resources drew from environmental and social factors, not from the perspective of respecting the Jagannath Puri temple.
- In Tamil Nadu, the HR & CE Department controls over 4.7 lakh acres of agricultural land, 2.6 crore square feet of buildings and 29 crore square feet of urban land of temples. By any reasonable measure, the income from these properties should be in thousand of crores of rupees. The government, however, collects a mere Rs.36 crore in rent against a ‘demand’ of mere Rs. 304 crore — around 12 per cent realization. Politically connected individuals have brazenly appropriated temple property for personal use. A friend of mine recalls the time his uncle managed a small temple in Tamil Nadu controlled by the HR&CE Department. An official would arrive monthly to empty the temple’s hundi and would have the temerity, right in the presence of the uncle, to simply shove a portion of the cash collected into his own pocket.
The neglect of temples is even more heart breaking. Numerous are the instances where ancient murals and paintings are white washed; mandapams are demolished and walls are sand blasted causing precious inscriptions to disappear. While the government eventually issues notifications acknowledging the errors of such senseless acts, the damage is already done and new forms of egregious violations occur at other temples. There are long running rackets in the smuggling of exquisite ancient sculptures abroad. Several ancient temples of immense religious and heritage value are literally crumbling to the ground for lack of maintenance. The collapse of the temple tower of the famous Kalahasti temple in Andhra Pradesh a few years ago comes to mind.
The near-total ignorance and indifference among the educated elite of India about how temples are managed baffles me. The unkindest cut usually comes in the context of discussing religious conversions in India. Leftist intellectuals and many among the educated elite accuse Hindus of “not performing adequate social service” unlike Christian missionaries, even as the government controls temple/institutional coffers and usurps monies for non-Hindu causes and others essentially run most of their schools and hospitals on a “for profit” basis (that funds other charitable endeavors) free from any government interference. George Orwell would be proud.
The long-term process of turning Hindu temples and institutions over to the control of Hindus themselves ought to be the second major item in the social agenda of the Modi sarkar. There are many legitimate questions about who would manage the temples and how corruption can be avoided. Local temple committees drawn from and reflecting the composition of the devotees who worship at the temple can provide governance, ensure democratic participation of locals, and be subject to filing financial information like all non-profits. The Sikh Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandak Committee and the Islamic Wakf boards already provide a ready model for temple management. These bodies may not be perfect, but no one questions their right, or that of various missionary orders, in managing their respective places of worship. Claiming that the government must manage temples makes the implicitly bigoted assumption that Hindus alone are incapable of managing their own temples.
The Hindu Dharma Acharya Sabha, an umbrella body consisting of the leaders of all traditional Hindu sampradayas, is one possible organization that can serve as an overall coordinating body and provide a broader vision for how the surplus from some temples can be used to provide social service to the poor near each temple as well as to support other temples. Handing temples over to Hindus will go a long way in ensuring proper conduct of rituals, cleanliness of temples, and service to society.
https://swarajyamag.com/culture/swarajya-for-hindu-temples
All this talk of Modi messing up big time with demonetization...etc etc...seems to be completely WRONG.
Just saw that the BJP are going to have a huge win in UP - a win that people are crediting PM Modi with.
Just saw that the BJP are going to have a huge win in UP - a win that people are crediting PM Modi with.
Last edited:
It depends on state. For instance, in Tamil Nadu, the move is hugely unpopular and people think Modi is responsible. But BJP never had a chance in TN anyway. There will be plenty of states where he could get hurt due demonetization.
True...regional/state politics is huge in India and I shouldn't have generalized.
But, the win in UP is massive, right?
Of course, UP is a massive state and it's a massive win. Gives a lot of political mileage to BJP as well to say demonetization worked. It will be very tough to match their last victory but with no viable opposition, BJP is set for another term.