Time For A Hindu Nation.

[lazybugger]

http://twishort.com/47ljc

 

 

Let me present a different view.

The military incursions of monotheistic invaders into Bharatvarsha tested some everyday realities in Hindu life. The most important among these was a sense of "We" amongst the hopelessly diverse Hindus.

The difference between the hopelessly diverse Hindus and the Islamic invader was stark. So much so that the latter could not be absorbed as another stone in the mosaic of our socio-political life.

Over a period of time, these differences waxed and waned depending upon the intensity of oppression which the Hindu kuffar was subjected to. Even in the most benign of Islamic rules, the native Hindu could not break some glass ceilings and could never ascend the Imperial throne. What transpired under stricter Sharia, left permanent and horrendously deep scars.

There were moments of common unrest such as during the 1857 war. However, even these common moments wouldn't last long enough to heal over the old scars and then soon enough new ones were carved.

For close to eight hundred years the Imperial seat was occupied by the Muslim ruler. When partition came, none of the anger, acrimony, distrust and mistrust, the jostling for positions of power and the compromises made to keep one's own areas of influence secured from the covetous eyes of the other - none of this was really unique or sudden to the two main contestants - Hindu & Muslim.

Modern post war political norms ensured the partition was indeed carved in stone. There was no way a future adventurist could send in his armies to annex the remainder - even though this was attempted and succeeded splendidly in parts during the 1948 invasion of Kashmir by Pakistan.

(As an aside it was quite common in Hindusthan for leaders to think partition would never last and the division would go because the new country would collapse. They underestimated Western ventilators and some)

Even so, the reality of partition; in effect the permanent formation of an Islamic State, that is, a State for Muslims, meant that the long eight hundred year old contest between the "visitors" and the "home" teams had ended with the visitors retaining a part of the play field as trophy.

A more bitter medicine awaited the ever unsuspecting Hindu. The 1946 Constituent Assembly elections were fought by the Indian National Congress promising a United Bharat. The voters who chose the INC as opposed to the Muslim League, chose it because they chose the promise of an undivided Bharat. Those who chose the Muslim League chose Pakistan or partition of this still united realm.

Later events quickly revealed that the INC and Hindu Nationalist political parties' promise of a United Bharat rested on nothing more than hope. It did not rest upon an indomitable Will. How could it when the central premise of the dominant "United" discourse was Hindu-Muslim unity? With such a narrative, any exercise of Will by the forces for Akhandta would mean identifying and fighting the Muslim as enemy.

Inevitably, when the collapse of the INC platform came and Pakistan took shape, mass killings and evictions ensued. These horrific events engulfed West and East Pakistan but, and this is critical, only small portions of Hindusthan; primarily Punjab and Bengal. Muslims in the remainder of Hindusthan were unmolested and safe. It was almost as if the ruckus for a Muslim State was on another planet.

Very cunningly, Mohammed Ali Jinnah had fought in the name of all Muslims in Bharat but never took all his Chosen People with him to the Promised Land. Instead, he settled for areas where Muslims were numerically dominant. INC/Hindu leadership did not deign to remind him of what he had left behind.

On the other hand, the INC had not learnt its lesson and with Hindu pressure groups lacking in influence, the old narrative of Hindu-Muslim unity never made its much deserved exit. Instead it hardened and took concrete shape in the form of a "non-religious" State. Although Secularism was kept at abeyance in the Constitution until Mrs Indira Gandhi's emergency, the philosophical underpinning of the new polity was evident all through under Nehruvian Ideology.

What this twist of events did was, to put it crudely but truthfully, provide a home to the Muslim and a hostel to the Hindu. 

Over hundreds of years, this hopelessly diverse Hindu people were beaten into a nation by circumstances. Now, when the time had come for this nation to claim ownership over land and State, these were snatched from it through vile trickery. 

It is a well known fact that nations exist without a State. The nation of Israel wandered for two thousand years without a State. However, eventually, the tremendous urge for a State comes through but takes various forms of petition and protest until a State is formed.

The Hindu Nation has land and population. It has hoary history, high culture and common struggle. It now lacks a State which it can own without hiding behind nebulous fluff. 

Numerous organisations and campaigns (The Hindu Code bill agitation, Anti-Cow slaughter movement, attempts to free Temples and Education, attempts to organise Hindu sages across Jatis and their Ashramas etc) have signalled the dire need to allow this Hindu State to take birth as painlessly as possible. 

There are critical factors that impede it and this frustrates the Nation to exasperation. Let me list a few :

1. The secession of the Hindu intellectual. He has morphed as the Secular-Liberal

2. The utter confusion and timidity of the remaining Hindu intellectuals - with rare exceptions

3. Conceptual haziness. For instance, what is Hindutva? What does it aim for? (The noxious mist of Liberal-Secularism shrouds even this straight forward idea.)

4. Lack of articulation vis a vis minorities.

"Akhir Hindu chahta kya hai?" 

The Muslim and indeed the non-Dharmic minorities have figured out that the Hindu wants something. It is our responsibility to spell out clearly what is it that we want. 

Hindus cannot any longer behave like that lover boy who won't speak up and own his love but instead hope to somehow send messages through good deeds and proclamations of affection minus the amour. 

We love the State. We must have the State. 

Fascinatingly, this isn't an unconstitutional demand. It is a constitutional possibility. 

It is this desire but an unwillingness to spell it out clearly that causes mass Hindu National anger to manifest in various forms.

This is dangerous. A Hindu leadership cannot allow this condition to continue indefinitely. 

One way to provide direction is to debate openly and place all cards on the table.

- Namaste

[tom bhayya]

chadavaledhu but nuvvu vesaavu antey matter undey untundhi ani GP antunna

[lazybugger]

I agree with almost everything that is said there.

 

As a first, Hindus can play with proportional representation, and doing away with brahminist (not just brahmins, but other upper castes too) hegemony.

 

Under this, even muslims will get 15% representation, which is far ahead of what they are given now.

[lazybugger]

chadavaledhu but nuvvu vesaavu antey matter undey untundhi ani GP antunna

 

sarey

[lazybugger]

As long as Hindus stay away from politics, the space will be occupied by liberals with the express intention of undermining Hindu interests.

[lazybugger]

If a Hindu nation is not possible, there's no reason for India to remain one country.

 

individual states do a much better job at controlling political narratives of the Hindus.

[KillChillPandey]

As long as Hindus stay away from politics, the space will be occupied by liberals with the express intention of undermining Hindu interests.

 

[KillChillPandey]

chadavaledhu but nuvvu vesaavu antey matter undey untundhi ani GP antunna

 

chadutunna nenu.. chadvesinaka anala lekuntey ippude anla ani confusion lo unna 

[lazybugger]

chadutunna nenu.. chadvesinaka anala lekuntey ippude anla ani confusion lo unna 

 

nuvvu manishi va chiranjeevi va?

[KillChillPandey]

nuvvu manishi va chiranjeevi va?

 

[KillChillPandey]

If a Hindu nation is not possible, there's no reason for India to remain one country.

 

individual states do a much better job at controlling political narratives of the Hindus.

 

mari how about unity in diversity slogan? how about secularism? antha matti key na?

[lazybugger]

mari how about unity in diversity slogan? how about secularism? antha matti key na?

 

first mana illu subranga ledhu, street ni oodavatam enduku?

 

Hindus lo ne anni problems unte, adhi solve cheyyakunda, secularism, diversity idantha useless maatalu.

 

Hindu and muslim elites (upper caste assholes) kalisi pannina kutra ne Indian version of secularism.

[KillChillPandey]

first mana illu subranga ledhu, street ni oodavatam enduku?

 

Hindus lo ne anni problems unte, adhi solve cheyyakunda, secularism, diversity idantha useless maatalu.

 

Hindu and muslim elites (upper caste assholes) kalisi pannina kutra ne Indian version of secularism.

 

aithey nen drop 

[lazybugger]

aithey nen drop 

 

em drop?

[KillChillPandey]

em drop?

 

discussion lo middle drop