[Reader-list] Taliban is the future

[Kshmendra Kaul]

Dear Yasir
 
Thank you for your respose and the analyses therein. Always a pleasure to read you and get educated.
 
I absolutely dont mind your comments about "Hindu" and "Indian Secularism".
 
I am sure you applied your mind in the making of those statements. If that is what your aggregated understanding of  "Hindu" and "India Secularism" is, then I am sure it is an informed opinion from you.
 
Incidentally, I see myself as a Kashmiri Pandit (or rather a Koshur Bhatta) and not as a Hindu. 
 
And incidentally I have a very low opinion of Indian Secularism. I see it as a convoluted interpretation of 'secular' and do believe that the way it is practised  and propagated is nowhere close to being 'secular' and has done immense harm to India.
 
And incidentally I have an identical opinion about Indian Democracy also.
 
And incidentally I am not "Anti-Islamic". If I am, then I am equally and perhaps more "Anti-Hindu" too. I am wondering whether it is so difficult to differentiate between a critical evaluation being done and it being an "Anti" attitude. I get identical judgements from many of my "Hindu" friends also. They believe I am a 'Anti-Hindu'-'Closet-Muslim'.
 
I will tell you who is Anti-Islamic. It is the Muslims themselves and few more so than those of Pakistan. Just as the Hindus themselves are Anti-Hindu. (AGGREGATED JUDGEMENT).
 
An offering of Love from Faiz:
 
Gulshan-e-yaad mein gar aaj dum-e-baad-e-saba
Phir se chahay ke gul afshaan ho, toh ho janay do

Umr-e-rafta ke kisi taak pe bisra hua dard
Phir se chahay ke farozan ho, toh ho janay do

Jaisay begaanay se milte ho vaisay hee sahi
Aao doh char ghadee mere muqabil baitho

Garche mil baithaingay hum tum to mulaqaat ke baad
Apna ihsas-e-ziyaN aur ziada hoga

Hum sukhan hongay hum donoN toh har baat ke beech
Unkahi baat ka mohoom sa parda hoga

Koi iqrar na maiN yaad dilaoonga na tum
Koi mazmoon wafa ka na jafa ka hoga

Gard-e-ayyam ki tehreer ko dhonay ke liye
Tum se goya ho dum-e-deed jo meri palkein
Tum jo chaho toh suno, aur jo na chaho na suno

Aur jab harf karrain mujhsay guraizaan aankhein
Tum jo chaho to kaho, aur na chaho, na kaho
 
Kshmendra
 

From: yasir ~يا سر <yasir.media at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Taliban is the future
To: "Sarai Reader-list" <reader-list at sarai.net>
Date: Sunday, March 14, 2010, 4:02 AM


>
>
> Liberal = We accept you; You accept us; On a mutuality of terms
>
> Islamic = We accept you on our terms; You accept us on our terms.
>
> This Non-Liberal facet of Islam holds true not only for Inter-Faith
> relationships, but also for Intra-Faith relationships depending on which is
> the dominating Group who can dictate terms.
>


i am sure you would't mind if i added:

Hindu = We accept you on our terms; You accept us on our terms.
Indian Secularism = We accept you on our terms; You accept us on our terms.
(In case you are fooling yourself we are still Hindu)

But i dont buy this self-fulfilling prophecy or logic. for one or the other
religion, whether its muslims christians in india, hindus christians in pk,
christians in syria, maronites, muslims druze in lebanon, jews in iran,
muslims in israel, muslims orthodox xtians albanians, macedonians in
ex-yougoslavia ....or whatever___ its a wrongly framed question. Religion is
just that: an ideology being used by the group in power, which has various
consequences, predictable and unpredictable, further below and much further
below. The way things are run politically is purely that: political-social.
If you are vouching for secularism, you better take out 'religion' as an
explanatory factor, and see the groups, especially religious groups, in ways
social-political. i agree that will give the right picture of the govt's
position and make-up. to target religion for wrong doing is to add something
extra which is not required. one can find religious principles to suit one's
taste in ideology. In pk as in india the religious false principle is much
abused in politics as well as by religious thanedars and thekadars to make a
living. there is too much religion which is hardly religion, is much
nationalism & fake idealism if not buffoonery chicanery & charlatanry, is
blatantly populist, making for the worst examples of human behaviour on the
planet. The positive examples are rare, short and has positive implications
for 'religious freedom'. But then we will not be able to explain this
through a 'religious' explanation, which i am arguing is totally flexible
and in fact at the disposal of the group in power.  I think this will settle
the question.

In actual practice the term secular is a problem in itself - its not talking
about what it seems to be talking about. and i will interpret this
differently from you, kk. In a total reversal, in the US govt buildings are
prohibited from using religious symbols in /on buildings, but they you will
see displays of symbols, on christmas, chanukkah, eid, _ _ _ -  legally
these are taken as cultural symbols rather than religious, as people may be
non practicing celebrators of christmas, eid, hanukkah _ _ _ this is a much
better interpretation than the opposite which holds in turkey and france
that the identifcation of scarf as religious symbol to be banned in schools
and government institutions - which is just flawed principle designed to irk
a smaller of weaker scapegoated people endlessly for a populist / ruling
group's cause - and not a bit more. so i might not have a problem with what
you are calling 'secular' (altho you go a bit overboard with the
anti-islamic bit) but with how the problem has been described & framed.

best
_________________________________________
reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
Critiques & Collaborations
To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe in the subject header.
To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list 
List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>