European secularism a bad fit for India

[SanjeevaniButi]

You are the one being disingenuous. Hindu kingdoms existed all along even during the British rule and before too. They had the political freedom to implement just rules. The society had the choice to behave justly with all its people. No one forced them to behave badly. Even when political freedom was won and people finally did the right thing, you are arguing against that right thing.

I agree on the discrimination but I also keep an open mind on why it would have happened. What social and political compulsions would have made it acceptable to a largely fair and tolerant society.

You cannot view the past from a narrow prism. You also have to ask why it happened. What were the circumstances and conditions that introduced such distortions.

I do not agree that Amedkars way was better than Gandhis and I think recent history bears me out. Let us leave it at that.

5 day working for maids with PF and job security? LOL. Why just Dalits? Everyone should be encouraged to take such an approach. Only that would make them even more unemployed because very few would be able to afford them.

Especially dallits, since they claim victim status and have no qualms about seeking a lopsided solution.

We are not talking of natural born advantages or disadvantages here for you to sneak that specious argument in. We are talking about socially imposed disabilities and correction of it.

How can you restrict the boundaries of "natural" to what you find convenient ? Discrimination against women is also a socially imposed disability so why not reservation for women and special laws and rights for them ? Again, lets drop this point, just something to think on.

The upper castes were the culprits here and it is their exploitative tendencies which is being sought to be curbed here. The Dalits are the not perpetrating injustice but getting what is their due. If the other castes want to continue their exploitative behavior, then I am sorry that would no longer be politically or economically feasible for them.

Humans are predatory and exploitative. Nothing to do with caste.

However civilization makes us temper our baser tendencies.

SC constitute only 8.5% of India's population during independence. ST was another 8.5%. Which is why Ambedkar sought 15% reservation. So if the other castes were really exploitative, there never would have been any social justice or empowerment. So reality is that social justice was largely due to upper caste action. Ambedkar would have died before he could say anything against an really exploitative upper caste.

You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

Today a lot of castes has wriggled into the SC/ST and OBC category to exploit the others. That too is a reality.

It was affirmative action and there was no dilution of meritocracy. While the bar is low for entrance to the education system for the lower castes, the pass out examination is the same for everyone. So unless they get the required marks no one is giving them a degree any different from other. Gurumurthy's reference was not just limited to Dalits. He ambit was rather all castes. If the upper castes had not started playing caste politics, then no one else need have gotten into it. So blame the upper castes for the negative energy in the society in the first place.

Also Gurumurthy, Dr. Swamy, Dr. Vaidyanathan all agree with reservation for Dalit castes.

What did Mayawati do? She gave the maximum number of seats to the Brahmins. It was her clarion call "Hathi nahi Ganesh hai, Brahma, Vishnu, Mahesh hai" She was also far better administrator than Mullah Yadav and his son. Also she just followed on the footsteps of the upper caste politicians. They were the guiding light. I do not know if Karunanidi is from Dalit caste. He is a communist and his politics had ethnic chavunism.

Today political expediency requires a new set of real politiks. We all see what we want to see.

How many schools and colleges were there by the way? Do you think they were sufficient for the population? Do you think the Dalits were in a situation to attend the schools and colleges with the Upper Castes? What was untouchability all about then. Seems a fiction according to your narrative.

As many they were there for other castes. Still I am not discounting the discrimination, just point to other alternative realities.

No we are not so ill informed about our past.
I think we better end this discussion. We do not agree on this subject.

We are ill informed, but hopefully the future is brighter.

 

[Saheli]

I struggled through the posts. There are many ideas I don't understand. From your discussion I could clearly sense the difference between Idians and Chinese. You are basically Western races who concerned so much about "God" , the other world, and ultimate meaning of life. Generally speaking, Eastern Asian thoughts are not so deep, so profound as the Western thoughts. We tend to take it more lightly. In our vague thoughts, we think, whatever one believes in, either God or Buddha or any other Deity, he or she should believe in Goodness, that is, being good to others. And that's enough for a Chinese, the only basic principle. Generally we are "foolishly" happy in THIS world, unaware of its end, untouched by the suffering or the esctacy of the other world.

Actually Western thoughts are not deep or profound. It is the Eastern thoughts which have depth to them. It is that depth that gives it lightness of heart. Indians are likewise foolish happy people just like the Chinese.

The discussion is happening because of clash of values between monotheism of the West and the foolish happy religions of the East.

 

[Saheli]

I agree on the discrimination but I also keep an open mind on why it would have happened. What social and political compulsions would have made it acceptable to a largely fair and tolerant society.
You cannot view the past from a narrow prism. You also have to ask why it happened. What were the circumstances and conditions that introduced such distortions.
I do not agree that Amedkars way was better than Gandhis and I think recent history bears me out. Let us leave it at that.

We all understand the circumstances which is why I am always supportive of upper castes, which is why there is no bitterness against upper castes in the lower caste community. There are no grudges held. But practicalities of life cannot be based on sentimentality. We have a hugely deprived segment of society which needs to be gotten at par. That is what the discussion is about, not some eternal vendetta.

Especially dallits, since they claim victim status and have no qualms about seeking a lopsided solution.

Their claim is not bogus and anyone employing a Dalit should do that or are you suggesting that upper castes continue to exploit them ever more while the onus is only on Dalits to be fair?

How can you restrict the boundaries of "natural" to what you find convenient ? Discrimination against women is also a socially imposed disability so why not reservation for women and special laws and rights for them ? Again, lets drop this point, just something to think on.

How is disadvantage born of bigotry equal to being born as handicapped? Are you saying that discrimination against Dalits is natural order of things? That it should be legitimized? Do you think it is your right to buy slaves?

Yes discrimination against women is a socially imposed disability and there are reservations for women everywhere. Much of the govt aided schools do not even have fees for girls.

Humans are predatory and exploitative. Nothing to do with caste.
However civilization makes us temper our baser tendencies.
SC constitute only 8.5% of India's population during independence. ST was another 8.5%. Which is why Ambedkar sought 15% reservation. So if the other castes were really exploitative, there never would have been any social justice or empowerment. So reality is that social justice was largely due to upper caste action. Ambedkar would have died before he could say anything against an really exploitative upper caste.
You cannot have your cake and eat it too.
Today a lot of castes has wriggled into the SC/ST and OBC category to exploit the others. That too is a reality.

Sorry, I think you have taken in too much Christian beliefs and are very far from understanding of humans. Psychopaths are predatory. Not humans. Hindu belief system is human is divine and not a beast, which is why Indian civilization was always humane for much of its history.

Upper castes were exploitative and there is nothing doubtful about it. After Independence, it is also true that some upper castes wanted to get away from that bigotry and reform the society. Also by this time, European theoretical ideas of equality of human beings had already shamed quite a few of them. That does not negate what happened before or has happened even since then. I do not know why you are making these flawed logic arguments.

No, there were movements where Dalits were leaving Hinduism too en mass and converting into other religions. That knocked some sense back into upper castes too. Quite probably many Ambedkar like people have died, he survived.

You are the one who want the whole pie, loot, status, and all and expect others to wait for evolution.

Yeah, we know still the top dog in corruption and exploitation still are the upper castes.

As many they were there for other castes. Still I am not discounting the discrimination, just point to other alternative realities.

Unless the British were personally manning all the schools in the country there is no way they could have stop discrimination. The first to get educated were the upper castes, so they were the ones to get jobs. How many SC/ST could have been even aware that they would be let into education systems or that their fate and lot need not be the same as it has been for centuries together. You are talking as if everything offered on platter to them and they chose to not get educated.

 

[SanjeevaniButi]

Their claim is not bogus and anyone employing a Dalit should do that or are you suggesting that upper castes continue to exploit them ever more while the onus is only on Dalits to be fair?

You know exactly what I have said.

How is disadvantage born of bigotry equal to being born as handicapped? Are you saying that discrimination against Dalits is natural order of things? That it should be legitimized? Do you think it is your right to buy slaves?

Yes discrimination against women is a socially imposed disability and there are reservations for women everywhere. Much of the govt aided schools do not even have fees for girls.

The society still practice bigotry against the ugly, the dark skinned, the fat, the lazy, the short, the bald etc. All of those are socially imposed discrimination too. So how about reservation for all these sections too ? Why only selective affirmative action ?

Why not 50% reservation for women in all walks of life ? from parliament to education to jobs etc. ? Why such selective bias ?

Sorry, I think you have taken in too much Christian beliefs and are very far from understanding of humans. Psychopaths are predatory. Not humans. Hindu belief system is human is divine and not a beast, which is why Indian civilization was always humane for much of its history.

Upper castes were exploitative and there is nothing doubtful about it. After Independence, it is also true that some upper castes wanted to get away from that bigotry and reform the society. Also by this time, European theoretical ideas of equality of human beings had already shamed quite a few of them. That does not negate what happened before or has happened even since then. I do not know why you are making these flawed logic arguments.

There is a predatory instinct in every human, civilization tempers it, but is not always successful. But to deny that it exists in humans is absurd. Hinduism identifies three gunas in humans. Asura, manushya and deva guna. We are required to conqure our Asura guna, sustain our manushya guna and move towards deva guna.

So existence of predatory behaviour is very much acknowledged and accepted in Hinduism.

History is witness to the fact that MAJORITY of castes (why do you keep saying upper caste ? what are those ?) chose to abolish discrimination. It was a minority who opposed it.

It is absurd to think that theoretical ideas of equality came from the west to India When Megasthenes came to India in the 4th Century B.C., he found that slavery system was unknown to the Ancient Indian society.

There is NO other society which could claim the same.

No, there were movements where Dalits were leaving Hinduism too en mass and converting into other religions. That knocked some sense back into upper castes too. Quite probably many Ambedkar like people have died, he survived.
You are the one who want the whole pie, loot, status, and all and expect others to wait for evolution.
Yeah, we know still the top dog in corruption and exploitation still are the upper castes.

Evolution is a natural order of things, irrespective of weather one wants it or not. I do see it as a positive, kindly force that corrects any imbalance without any major negative side effects. That does not mean one should not strive for change, only be aware of the nature of society and be aware of its natural fissures and strength and weaknesses. Those changes are long lasting and more benign. Gandhi with his extensive understanding of Indian had a much enlightened way forward which would have yielded greater, long term and better benefits to dalits than Ambedkar could ever delivery. That is my belief.

Unless the British were personally manning all the schools in the country there is no way they could have stop discrimination. The first to get educated were the upper castes, so they were the ones to get jobs. How many SC/ST could have been even aware that they would be let into education systems or that their fate and lot need not be the same as it has been for centuries together. You are talking as if everything offered on platter to them and they chose to not get educated.

You keep claiming Upper caste, who exactly do you mean by upper caste ?

I thought this was about out castes and castes.

Even with reservation you could not have made SC/ST aware of the need for education. That effort was independent of reservation. That was what Ambedkar wanted, empowerment through education. They way he had.

What you are talking about is the Periyar way, empowerment thought demonizeing others and self pride by humiliating others.

Anyway I agree that its time to end this debate, since there is nothing new coming into the discussion except reiteration of old points.

 

[Saheli]

You know exactly what I have said.

Yes, I know exactly what you said and that was only Dalits should be involved in providing PF and 5 day week work days for maids. Rest of the populace and continue their merry ways.

The society still practice bigotry against the ugly, the dark skinned, the fat, the lazy, the short, the bald etc. All of those are socially imposed discrimination too. So how about reservation for all these sections too ? Why only selective affirmative action ?
Why not 50% reservation for women in all walks of life ? from parliament to education to jobs etc. ? Why such selective bias ?

No, the society does not practice bigotry against the ugly, dark skinned, the fat, the lazy, the short, and the bald. No one is denied jobs or made untouchable because he/she is dark, fat, bald, short, or ugly. No one is made an untouchable and made to live in the edge of the city because he/she is lazy. While people might be made fun off lightheartedly for their natural born shortcomings, it never translates into the kind of bigotry that happened to the Dalits. You are trivializing the argument by bringing this absurd comparisons. Or perhaps according to you the SC/ST are the short, ugly, lazy, bald, fat, dark skinned people?

What bias? 50% reservation does not make sense because all women do not choose to get employed. A lot of them prefer to be housewives. I do not make argument for the heck of it. Bring your arguments with some reality attached to it.

There is a predatory instinct in every human, civilization tempers it, but is not always successful. But to deny that it exists in humans is absurd. Hinduism identifies three gunas in humans. Asura, manushya and deva guna. We are required to conqure our Asura guna, sustain our manushya guna and move towards deva guna.
So existence of predatory behaviour is very much acknowledged and accepted in Hinduism.

No. The picture you posted of Afridi with the goat head while his child cried was apt explanation that human are not born predators. The culture they belong to either makes them predators or civil beings. Hinduism is correct that we all have divine guna in us. Corruption and lack of identification of that divine leads to falling down to Asura gunas. Predatory behavior is not considered the natural state of being of humans, but corruption and degradation.

History is witness to the fact that MAJORITY of castes (why do you keep saying upper caste ? what are those ?) chose to abolish discrimination. It was a minority who opposed it.
It is absurd to think that theoretical ideas of equality came from the west to India When Megasthenes came to India in the 4th Century B.C., he found that slavery system was unknown to the Ancient Indian society.
There is NO other society which could claim the same.

History is also witness to the fact that majority of the castes practiced caste discrimination. Majority of the society practiced caste discrimination. Which minority opposed it?

I said European "theoretical" ideas of equality since by the time of the end of empire they were well past supporting slavery. Also the operating word is theoretical, since in practice they were still discriminatory. None of my argument is about Ancient India and caste discrimination, which is why I said Hindu society was humane for majority of its history. My argument is only restricted to the time period of extreme caste discrimination which was post Islamic invasion and where the Hindu society seems to have forgotten the divinity of human being.

Evolution is a natural order of things, irrespective of weather one wants it or not. I do see it as a positive, kindly force that corrects any imbalance without any major negative side effects. That does not mean one should not strive for change, only be aware of the nature of society and be aware of its natural fissures and strength and weaknesses. Those changes are long lasting and more benign. Gandhi with his extensive understanding of Indian had a much enlightened way forward which would have yielded greater, long term and better benefits to dalits than Ambedkar could ever delivery. That is my belief.

All evolution happens due to stress. So I would call legislation, affirmative actions as evolution too. I see no negative effects of that on our society. If anything it has prevented fissures from forming in our society because it has prevented hostilities between castes. Politics of caste is another thing and it is very superficial.

You keep claiming Upper caste, who exactly do you mean by upper caste ?
I thought this was about out castes and castes.

All castes are upper castes for me since I belong to outcastes and do not consider myself to be an outcaste.

Even with reservation you could not have made SC/ST aware of the need for education. That effort was independent of reservation. That was what Ambedkar wanted, empowerment through education. They way he had.

Agreed which is why I said just legislation were not enough and meaningless unless the schools were there and the awareness was there. Which is why the timeline kept getting extended. But that is not to say reservations should not have been there.

What you are talking about is the Periyar way, empowerment thought demonizeing others and self pride by humiliating others.
Anyway I agree that its time to end this debate, since there is nothing new coming into the discussion except reiteration of old points.

No I am not talking about Periyar way. There was no demonization of other and self pride by humiliating others. I just spoke in favor of affirmative action and historic truths about discrimination, neither of which is equivalent of the ill treatment of Brahmins by Periyar and his followers.

 

[SanjeevaniButi]

Since I am winding it, I will keep it short,

1. I said "Especially dalits" not "only dalits".
2. The real world practices just as much discrimination to the kind mentioned. You can add muslims and North easterners to that list too.
3. It was not me who posted afridi's pic
4. We know majority practiced discrimination and also know that they ended it. We know why it was ended, not why it was started.
5. you earlier admitted to reservation in parliament was corruption of the system. In hindsight, Gandhi was wrong there. Reservation in parliament was better than reservation in jobs and education. Ambedkar was right.
6. Review the past posts to see how you have demonized other castes but fail to acknowledge their positive contribution in ending the discrimination. Do it later with a calmer mind.

 

[Saheli]

Since I am winding it, I will keep it short,

1. I said "Especially dalits" not "only dalits".
2. The real world practices just as much discrimination to the kind mentioned. You can add muslims and North easterners to that list too.
3. It was not me who posted afridi's pic
4. We know majority practiced discrimination and also know that they ended it. We know why it was ended, not why it was started.
5. you earlier admitted to reservation in parliament was corruption of the system. In hindsight, Gandhi was wrong there. Reservation in parliament was better than reservation in jobs and education. Ambedkar was right.
6. Review the past posts to see how you have demonized other castes but fail to acknowledge their positive contribution in ending the discrimination. Do it later with a calmer mind.

1. You said the onus is on Dalits.
2. No I do not agree.
3. Okay.
4. The majority practiced discrimination but people collectively ended it, including the upper castes. There can be no justification for why it started and no legitimization of it. Yes, an understanding of the circumstances leading up to it is required and desired.
5. No I did not say that reservation in parliament was corruption of the system, but just an undesirable thing and would have fractured the Hindu community beyond repair.
6. This debate with you was entirely about reservations for Dalits and the justification for it. So I brought in all the arguments that supported the argument in my favor. Nothing I said was misrepresentation or falsehood. Also it was only for the sake of this debate. Otherwise, apart from 2-3 threads where in I have spoken in favor of Dalits, I have never done so in other threads. All of my arguments have always been in support of them and appreciative of their contribution to our society.

 

[wolfschanzze]

Secularism is a concept of Europe to keep away church from state, we never had that problem as we accomodated all,and our dharma says everyone reaches god,but only abrahamics claim they reach god rest will burn in hell.
So for them Secularism is needed for us Dharma which ruled this land since its creation is good enough.

 

[SanjeevaniButi]

1. You said the onus is on Dalits.
2. No I do not agree.
3. Okay.
4. The majority practiced discrimination but people collectively ended it, including the upper castes. There can be no justification for why it started and no legitimization of it. Yes, an understanding of the circumstances leading up to it is required and desired.
5. No I did not say that reservation in parliament was corruption of the system, but just an undesirable thing and would have fractured the Hindu community beyond repair.
6. This debate with you was entirely about reservations for Dalits and the justification for it. So I brought in all the arguments that supported the argument in my favor. Nothing I said was misrepresentation or falsehood. Also it was only for the sake of this debate. Otherwise, apart from 2-3 threads where in I have spoken in favor of Dalits, I have never done so in other threads. All of my arguments have always been in support of them and appreciative of their contribution to our society.

Since dalits are now beneficiary of affirmative action there is onus on them to fight for the rights of similarly disadvantageous sections and not make selective points about economic sustainability. Upper castes are exploiters anyway in your narrative.

We cannot claim 'no justification' unless reasons are know. That is like saying there is no justifications to War or death penalty or Abortion. Everything is subjective.

A half truth is also a lie. There is nothing wrong in speaking FOR dalits, only when you speak AGAINST other castes.

 

[Saheli]

Since dalits are now beneficiary of affirmative action there is onus on them to fight for the rights of similarly disadvantageous sections and not make selective points about economic sustainability. Upper castes are exploiters anyway in your narrative.

Why? The affirmative action is not a favor done. It is everyone's responsibility. Upper castes were exploitative and less so now.

We cannot claim 'no justification' unless reasons are know. That is like saying there is no justifications to War or death penalty or Abortion. Everything is subjective.

We can and we should find no justification to treating humans lesser than vermins just because of accident of birth. How you can compare that to abortion, war, or death penalty is beyond me. Starting to suspect you approve of slavery and other deeds too and have deep rooted hatred for Dalits.

A half truth is also a lie. There is nothing wrong in speaking FOR dalits, only when you speak AGAINST other castes.

There was no lie on my part, just obfuscations and illogical comparisons on your part. There is nothing wrong in speaking for Dalits. There is nothing wrong in speaking about the atrocities committed by the upper castes too.

 

[SanjeevaniButi]

Why?The affirmative action is not a favor done. It is everyone's responsibility. Upper castes were exploitative and less so now.

If upper caste are less exploitative now (how?) then clearly the quota for reservation should have gone down, not up. Space can be made for other exploited communities by vacating space for them by dalits and reducing burden on others.

We can and we should find no justification to treating humans lesser than vermins just because of accident of birth. How you can compare that to abortion, war, or death penalty is beyond me. Starting to suspect you approve of slavery and other deeds too and have deep rooted hatred for Dalits.

People suspect me of hating christians and muslims, so why not dalits

By having death penalty you still treat humans less than vermins. "No justification" is enough to kill. Same goes for war where you treat enemy soldiers less than vermins and kill them at the first opportunity. You treat an unborn child less than vermin by killing him/her. Yet people justify all these actions. Because the justification has some basis in the history, present and future. Same is true for other social strictures that made one dalit.

I am not saying that the justification is correct, it is clearly a wrong justification in the light of what we know and with the hindsight of history and with the advantage of modern education and internet, but we cannot say "no justification" is good enough. We do not know the circumstances of that time. That is the point. If a benign society took this action then there would have been a very strong valid reason for doing so. Maybe the society would have been worse off if such action were not taken. We do not know.

That does not mean we do not correct that today. It just means you keep an open mind about it. I do agree its a lot easier for someone not directly affect by it to say that.

There was no lie on my part, just obfuscations and illogical comparisons on your part. There is nothing wrong in speaking for Dalits. There is nothing wrong in speaking about the atrocities committed by the upper castes too.

Which part was illogical ? How do you explain labelling others as "upper caste is exploitative", "upper case release negative energy", "upper caste are culprits", "upper caste are corrupt", "upper caste needs to have sense knocked into them",etc.

 

[Saheli]

If upper caste are less exploitative now (how?) then clearly the quota for reservation should have gone down, not up. Space can be made for other exploited communities by vacating space for them by dalits and reducing burden on others.

The upper castes are less exploitative now because of laws and education and social awareness. How does their being less exploitative now have any bearing on restitution for their past? Do the Dalits automatically become an integrated society because the upper castes are less exploitative? Do they automatically get the same standing in the society? So because the upper castes have seen the error of their ways, the Dalit is now to be considered one of the most accomplished segment of the society? Which other community has been exploited like the Dalits that you want space made for? Burden on others? You talk as if the upper castes are giving away their property to the Dalits and free food and money.

People suspect me of hating christians and muslims, so why not dalits

You do. All your arguments on this thread have shown only support for supremacist behavior, condoning exploitation by arguing that human being is a natural predator, refusing to hold upper caste accountable for their actions, talking as if you are losing your personal wealth because of the Dalits.

By having death penalty you still treat humans less than vermins. "No justification" is enough to kill. Same goes for war where you treat enemy soldiers less than vermins and kill them at the first opportunity. You treat an unborn child less than vermin by killing him/her. Yet people justify all these actions. Because the justification has some basis in the history, present and future. Same is true for other social strictures that made one dalit.

A human being who has acted like a vermin will be treated as a vermin. This is based on his action, not on his birth. A war which is just will be supported to establish Dharma. I am not supporting illegal wars. I am not supporting abortion unless it is threatening the mother's life. Yes there are people who justify wrong and you seem to be one of them. Even in case of war, death penalty, abortion it does not follow their children and their children will choose to do the same or the society will treat them the same. Caste discrimination punished the innocent generation after generation after generation just for being born in that family and you are okay with it.

am not saying that the justification is correct, it is clearly a wrong justification in the light of what we know and with the hindsight of history and with the advantage of modern education and internet, but we cannot say "no justification" is good enough. We do not know the circumstances of that time. That is the point. If a benign society took this action then there would have been a very strong valid reason for doing so. Maybe the society would have been worse off if such action were not taken. We do not know.

No justification is good enough for this.

That does not mean we do not correct that today. It just means you keep an open mind about it. I do agree its a lot easier for someone not directly affect by it to say that.

Sorry, there is no keeping open mind about untouchability. I am not affected by it. I have never been treated different. I have never used any reservation. I wont condone wrong just because it is done by people from my group or my religion.

Which part was illogical ? How do you explain labelling others as "upper caste is exploitative", "upper case release negative energy", "upper caste are culprits", "upper caste are corrupt", "upper caste needs to have sense knocked into them",etc.

All your arguments were illogical. Comparing bigotry of caste discrimination with jibes on fat, bald, ugly people. Comparing natural born disabilities with socially imposed disabilities. Lying about Hinduism. Endorsing supremacist tendencies. Endorsing evil behavior in men.

Upper castes were exploitative I said and it is the truth. Past tense. It is true even today, but in a very limited sense. Upper castes released negative energy which you were so much harping about by practicing caste discrimination and doing caste politics. You seemed rather eager to put the blame for it on the Dalits, I just showed you the blame lay elsewhere. Upper castes are the ones who have controlled all levers of power in this country for much of the time since Independence and India did not earn the moniker for being one of the most corrupt country in the world for nothing. Guess who introduced and sustained corruption in this country? The Gandhis and the Nehrus. Kashmiri Brahmins. I did not say upper caste needs to have sense knocked into them, but that they had sense knocked into them when people starting deserting Hinduism because of their behavior.

 

[SanjeevaniButi]

@Saheli


1. Present day caste Indians are NOT responsible for the past so its foolish to hold them accountable.
2. Any affirmative action increases burden on those not benefiting from those actions.
3. Same twisted logic can also be used to show you hate upper caste, condone injustice as long as your community benefit etc. It is childish.
4. You do not see the irony in judging others actions as "vermin" like and treating them accordingly, but have a problem with others judging actions as "vermin" like and treating them accordingly as per their value system. Which their leader told them is the right thing to do. You have benefit of modern day education and access to information, they had none. Their value systems were a product of their age, times, circumstances and environment, as are yours. No one is more superior than the other, and no one is more right either.
5. You cannot be selective about keeping an "open mind" .... that is the whole point.
6. I compared bigotry with similar kind of bigotry, discrimination with other kind of discrimination, social imposition with similar kind of social imposed limitation. I see nothing illogical about it. Each was to a specific point.
7. Accepting evil nature is not endorsing. That is where you need to keep an open mind.
8. You are actually justifying stereotyping and generalization. Can I do the same ?

 

[Saheli]

@Saheli


1. Present day caste Indians are NOT responsible for the past so its foolish to hold them accountable.
2. Any affirmative action increases burden on those not benefiting from those actions.
3. Same twisted logic can also be used to show you hate upper caste, condone injustice as long as your community benefit etc. It is childish.
4. You do not see the irony in judging others actions as "vermin" like and treating them accordingly, but have a problem with others judging actions as "vermin" like and treating them accordingly as per their value system. Which their leader told them is the right thing to do. You have benefit of modern day education and access to information, they had none. Their value systems were a product of their age, times, circumstances and environment, as are yours. No one is more superior than the other, and no one is more right either.
5. You cannot be selective about keeping an "open mind" .... that is the whole point.
6. I compared bigotry with similar kind of bigotry, discrimination with other kind of discrimination, social imposition with similar kind of social imposed limitation. I see nothing illogical about it. Each was to a specific point.
7. Accepting evil nature is not endorsing. That is where you need to keep an open mind.
8. You are actually justifying stereotyping and generalization. Can I do the same ?

1. No one is holding the present generation responsible, the reservation is meant for past acts. Perhaps you need to look up the meaning of Affirmative Action.
2. They have benefited enough from the actions of their ancestors. Either they give up those benefits or shut up about any so called burden.
3. Nope. While I have defended upper castes aplenty here, I have never heard you have anything to say good about lower castes. Nor do I advocate benefits in perpetuity unlike you who are openly biased.
4. Have you gone off your mind entirely? You mean to say India had no sense of right and wrong in ancient times? If their leaders told them to treat people as inhuman they were supposed to follow that? Do you even know the meaning of irony to make that ridiculous comparison. Have you any sense of accountability?
5. I do not know what you are talking about, you just seem to be comfortable with evil deeds and that is disgusting.
6. You do not even know what are valid arguments or what are similar situations. You make a fool of yourself when you bring in such arguments.
7. Accepting evil and being comfortable with evil is endorsing evil.
8. No, I have not worked on stereotypes but gave you what is statistical certainty. You were very happy to bring in Mayawati back then, I do not know why you should be protest over Gandhis. Oh but I know, what is good enough for others is not good enough for you.

 

[arp2041]

BJP paid brigade in full force

Congress runs E-NREGA not BJP.....

Now Shooooo..........