>
> Combined with some other, equally prejudiced comments on this list earlier
> supports the view that Indian polity is increasing driven by a "us and them"
> mindset.
So somebody who wants to protect himself from hassle and looks for
references before letting out their place to a member of a community
(because in his own experience i.e. not reports in the press or other
"anecdotal" evidence, they have a statistically significant number with the
"us and them" attitude) and a person who hears of a few cases of missing
names from electoral rolls (anecdotal by their own admission and through the
Indian press who always have a flair for sensationalism no less) and
attributes this to a large scale conspiracy to disenfranchise them are in
the same boat?
But looking at the larger picture, I guess this is the very nature of
terrorism, divisive politics, and religious fundamentalism (the only
difference between the first and the last two is the intentional violence on
innocents, the long term damage to society remains the same). They create a
faceless enemy and I suppose the human tendency to always get to the root of
the fear, to understand it, leads them to conclude that it is an entire
community which they have to fear (the propaganda makes this a very easy
conclusion to arrive at). This has also created a very easy label to put on
those whose actions (and incidentally statements on this list) can be termed
cautious at the most - "bigot".
So what is the pragmatic, intelligent response to such tactics,
acknowledging the fact that such tactics are being used by members in each
of the major communities in India, be it on caste or religious lines? What
might be constructive to the discussion would be an implicit assumption that
everybody on this list means well and have nothing to profit from such
tactics ("Assume goodwill").
Kiran
