On Wednesday 20 Jul 2011 6:43:50 pm Bharath Chari wrote: > However, I can't understand the reasoning that hate politics within a > country is less abhorrent or different to cross border ones. If that > wasn't your submission, then I stand corrected. >
Bharat it is your prerogative to hold the view that you hold. I will try and explain my view patiently and it will be a long one. I believe that you and others who hold this view are making a fundamental error. I will explain that. I am not saying Muslims should be hated. I think a few of you people know me well enough to take a call on that without my having to say it - but I deliberately make that disclaimer because every time the topic comes up on this list the usual "defence" is to accuse me of representing the viewpoint of Hindutva parties. Thank you for not doing that because I neither repersent the BJP/RSS nor do I represent a "hate Muslims" viewpoint. In your stated view the national "hate India" policy in Pakistan is no different from a "hate Muslims" policy followed by the RSS-BJP combine. The Nazis were another such group (following a policy of hate). The KKK of the US would be "like the Nazis", also the Pakistani Jamaat ud Dawa. The BNP of Britain is similar. For you it does not matter that in India that group is only a subset of Indians, but in Pakistan those groups represent a national "hate India" policy. The difference is trivial or non existent in your stated viewpoint. As I see it, your viewpoint is one that ignores nation states and national boundaries for the purpose of characterizing groups of people as those who do or do not indulge in "hate politics". There is an error here. You will find the Congress, CPI and other parties accusing the BJP of "Hindu terror" but you will never find them accusing the BJP/RSS of being "like Pakistan". There is a good reason for this. It is a fundamental error to ignore or be ignorant of "nation states". The "world order" - the way the entire world works revolves around the "nation state". Nation states are recognized and accorded some powers that can be misused. When those powers are misused it is accepted as "the right of a sovereign state to follow its own policy" and if any other nation does not like that policy, it can only be handled via international diplomacy or war. What has all this got to do with a BJP anti Muslim policy and Pakistan? Pakistan is a nation state set up as an anti India nation. A sort of "foil" to "Hindu" India. Nothing unusual about this. History is replete with examples of nations set up to hate another nation on the basis of some characteristic. In an ideal world Pakistan would have developed into a vibrant, wealthy nation that gave bumbling India a run for its money. But that is not what happened. Pakistan's national obsession is not to outdo India but to hurt India in some way. In order to hurt India is is necessary in Pakistan to hate everything that is Indian. It does not matter if an Indian is BJP or Congress. He must be hated. If he is an Indian Muslim or a Sikh, or Tamilian, or Bodo, or Naga or belongs to a scheduled caste - he must be supported to rebel against India. Since Pakistan is a sovereign nation state, these national policies of Pakistan cannot be changed by anyone except by diplomacy or war. In my view Indians who equate Pakistan with the BJP are wrong. It is instructive that Indian political parties do not make this mistake. The comparison of the BJP to Pakistan reduces Pakistani national policy to a level where the entire reason for the creation and existence of Pakistan is dismissed as an "alternative, if unsavory, viewpoint". As if Pakistan's national policy is some minor political difference of opinion. If you follow the press in Pakistan you find that the Pakistani establishment is deeply affronted by the act of India's dismissing Hindu-Muslim differences as a mionor political difference. Pakistan the nation represents the difference between Hindus and Muslims. If you do not acknowledge the difference, you are not acknowledging Pakistan. You do not accept Pakistan as a nation state and you are interested in Pakistan's destruction by the act of tribvializing the fundamental differences betwen Hindus and Muslims. Pakistan exists because Hindus and Muslim are two separate nations. Opposing this is an act of war. It is an act of oposition against the idea of Pakistan. What Pakistanis have done is to create a "fait acompli" for India in which opposing the idea of Hindu-Muslim differences, or calling for Hindu and Muslim friendship or unity is an act of war which seeks to dissolve and break up Pakistan. If an Indian accepts that Hindus and Muslims are different, then the idea of Pakistan survives. It survives because Indians accept that Hindus and Muslims are two separate nations. If an Indian disputes Hindu-Muslim differences, then Pakistan must fight that Indian because he is opposed to the idea of Pakistan. In the Pakistani narrative it is normal (and natural) for the Indian to be anti-Muslim. Any Indian who is not overtly anti-Muslim is not to be trusted because he is anti Pakistan, and Pakistan was set up for Muslims. He is a covert anti Muslim agent. Heads you lose, tails I win. For the BJP-RSS to be like Pakistan it would have to be anti-Hindu (exactly like Pakistan) , or it would have to be "pro-Pakistan and anti Muslim". That means discarding Akhand Bharat and accepting Pakistan as a necessary dumping ground for Muslims. The Congress, the BJP and all political parties know this well, having been directly in the diplomatic "line of fire" with Pakistan. This is why, in a national dialogue, the official policy of the Congerss is not to accuse the BJP and RSS of being "like Pakistan". Oh yes they do accuse the RSS of being like the Nazis. But not like Pakistan. Accusing the BJP/RSS of being like Pakistan would be a diplomatic self goal for the Congress because the Pakistanis interpret this as "Congress is looking for Hindu-Muslim unity - and fails to acknowledge the idea of Pakistan. Therefore Congress is anti- Pakistan" The Congress and other political parties in India have got their act right. They do accuse the BJP/RSS of hate politics. But they do not compare that with Pakistan. The act of comparison is not just a superficial similarity, it indicates a profound ignorance of history and geopolitics in the Indian subcontinent (or South Asia if you like). Your sentiment may be right, but the comparison with Pakistan is ignorant naivete. Pakistan is a separate issue that must not be muddled with or included in Indian political debate. Pulling Pakistan into a political debate in India is a mistake. Hindu-Muslim relations in India need to be dealt with without invoking Pakistan as both you and Suresh have erred in doing. Pakistan is a sovereign nation state that follows its own policies. Pakistan is "international relations" for India, not an internal political issue. Hindu Muslim relations in India and the BJP-RSS role is an Indian internal political issue to be dealth with in India. Pakistan is not involed and bringing Pakistan in is wrong. Thank you to anyone who got this far. shiv
