[Reader-list] [Fwd: Re: Amaranth Land Issue]

[Tapas Ray]

PS:

Radhika,

Please see what you wrote yourself:

radhikarajen at vsnl.net wrote:

 > when nation was divided on the faith of being a nation for muslims, 
it > is logical that muslims have to get relocated in the nation that 
they > wanted. ?
 >


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Amaranth Land Issue
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 16:46:36 -0400
From: Tapas Ray <tapasrayx at gmail.com>

Radhika,

Here's how I see things.

I agree if you mean that the parties you call "pseudo-secular" use
communal sentiments for narrow political gain. However, they do this not
just with religion but also with other identity factors like language,
ethnicity, and caste, according to taste. This sets them apart from the
BJP to some extent. But only to some extent, because I think the BJP too
would not, and probably does not, give up a chance to use those other
identities. It is probably just a question of degree.

However, this does not put the BJP, and the Parivar in general, in the
same category as those parties, because unlike those, these are
exclusionary, supremacist, feed on anti-minority paranoia, have
institutionalised violence (think of the RSS shakhas), and used it on a
scale probably not reached by the "pseudo-seculars".

The BJP (as a representative of the Parivar) may or may not have been
better or worse than the "pseudo-seculars" in specific instances of
governance, but even a "better performance", however defined, can never
be its claim to power as long as the above are true.

Last but not the least, before thinking about Lalbahadur Shastri's
death, etc., we should recall the Gandhi assassination, which we tend to
forget but never should. Unless the BJP and the Parivar openly admit
that their role has been extremely harmful for the country, and give up
their Hindutva ideology in both theory and practice, they will continue
to be an anomaly in our democratic system.

Tapas




radhikarajen at vsnl.net wrote:
>  Very correct, those who say they are secular are actually seen very communal in day to day governance, but it is funny that if BJP unites all in the nation it is called communal just because united hindu votes would be more of potent force. ?
> 
>  As to administration of religious places it should be noted that rich funds of dioceses of any denomination of christian faith has absolutely no control as how it is used. recent news of about the priest of an evangelist was bashed up by his own commune in kerala, accounts were asked for 1499 crores misused by him. This news appeared in all the print but not in visual media. !
> 
>  Regards.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tapas Ray <tapasrayx at gmail.com>

>> Radhika,
>>
>> You did not get my point. I was saying exactly the opposite of 
>> what you 
>> thought I was saying. My point was that Prakash Ray should be the 
>> last 
>> person to say that the government of J&K ought to get out of the 
>> wakf 
>> board/temple trust business.
>>
>> But I am not surprised, because he has done similar things in the 
>> past - 
>> spoken fiery words against Modi's "right-wing economic policies" 
>> if I 
>> remember correctly, while the party he is always defending, namely 
>> CPI(M), has been condemned on that very issue in the state it 
>> rules, 
>> i.e., West Bengal.
>>
>> On the present issue, he is suggesting that the J&K government get 
>> out 
>> of the wakfs and temple trusts, even though in West Bengal a 
>> minister 
>> heads the wakf board, and that board was the focus of an 
>> investigation 
>> into a massive scandal a few years ago, involving CPI(M) people. 
>> You 
>> will see this if you read the news items I copied below my post.
>>
>> Hope this helps.
>>
>> Tapas