What is Hindutva?

[MIG]

I think it means Hinduness but are there any other sinister meaning such as world domination etc or is this just a simple peaceful concept?

 

[Howzat]

First thing you need to realize is that 'Hindu' is not the original name of the religion. It's a name given by the outsiders. It's called Sanatan Dharm.

Hindutva means Hunduness. Though the Bharat actually means the whole universe.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

Hindutva, imo, is an ideology which say's India should be a Hindu state and Hindu values and beliefs are superior to others. I guess you could compare it to Islamism or Zionism in that in any State one group of people have more rights than the rest.

 

[Golden arm]

Hindutva, imo, is an ideology which say's India should be a Hindu state and Hindu values and beliefs are superior to others. I guess you could compare it to Islamism or Zionism in that in any State one group of people have more rights than the rest.

Please dont mix zionism with islamism,
You can compare Islamic fascism with zionism, but not islamism.

 

[srh]

Please dont mix zionism with islamism,
You can compare Islamic fascism with zionism, but not islamism.

maybe binLadinism?

 

[SpiritOf1903]

maybe binLadinism?

YE, THAT

 

[Golden arm]

First thing you need to realize is that 'Hindu' is not the original name of the religion. It's a name given by the outsiders. It's called Sanatan Dharm.

Hindutva means Hunduness. Though the Bharat actually means the whole universe.

interestingly it was given by Muslim Arab intruders.

 

[MIG]

Question is - is this a fascist idealogy ( Hindutva) - this is what it appears to the non Hindus .

 

[Garuda]

Question is - is this a fascist idealogy ( Hindutva) - this is what it appears to the non Hindus .

Hindutva or hinduism or hinduness is not what the fascists tell or show.

Its like Islam told and shown by taliban is not the correct.

What is actual Hindutva is not as simple to describe. Whatever I have heard from my parents is Hindutva means to respect everything that helps you to live. Respect everything as every single thing on this universe is created by god. you disrespect his creation means you disrespect the god. Everything has a purpose of creation.

I donno what is the book definition. But thats what has passed to me.

 

[MIG]

Hindutva or hinduism or hinduness is not what the fascists tell or show.

Its like Islam told and shown by taliban is not the correct.

What is actual Hindutva is not as simple to describe. Whatever I have heard from my parents is Hindutva means to respect everything that helps you to live. Respect everything as every single thing on this universe is created by god. you disrespect his creation means you disrespect the god. Everything has a purpose of creation.

I donno what is the book definition. But thats what has passed to me.

Totally appreciate your effort to explain this - and I am not stating that it is akin to fascism - your example of Taliban to Islam is perfect in that context.

 

[googly]

Hindutva is not synonymous with Hinduism. Hindutva is a Hindu nationalistic movement and the philosophy adopted largely by RSS and to a lesser extent by the BJP. It was first coined in the early 20th century as part of the national movement which wanted the Indian state to be build upon Hindu principles, as they defined it. Savarkar was one of the major proponents of it. The philosophy and ideology died out during the independence movement when the vast majority of Hindus aligned with Gandhi and Nehru and was dealt a near killer blow in the minds of people when Ghodse assassinated Gandhi. He was widely seen as aligned with the RSS, though RSS declined having anything to do with him.

After independence, Indian politics generally revolved around the Congress with the main opposition coming from rag tag local parties based on farmers' rights etc. That remained the case till the mid 80s. When Indira Gandhi was assassinated and there was a Congress supported backlash against the Sikhs in '84, Rajiv Gandhi was fearful of losing popularity. In response, he chose to garner almost complete control of the Muslim vote bank in India through various appeasement policies like the Shah Bano alimony controversy, Haj subsidies, increased financial support for Muslim institutes etc. Things which would do little to help the Muslims in reality, but would consolidate their votes on emotive issues. At the same time, he also opened the Babri Masjid for worship by Hindus to get on their good side as well.

At the same time Rajiv Gandhi also got caught up in corruption scandals like Bofors, and was accused of rigging the elections in Kashmir which was leading to a major decline in his popularity. The BJP, which had 2 seats in the '84 elections, the Janta Dal, led by VP Singh who had split ways with Congress on Bofors, and the Communist Parties fought the '89 elections together against the Congress and assumed power.

VP Singh was pretty sure that his government won't last long - what with disparate parties like BJP and Communists supporting it. He immediately began to garner his own vote bank based on caste lines by invoking and expanding reservation based on caste - the Mandal commission. This led to lot of protests from upper caste Hindus but consolidated the lower castes in favor of his party.

The birth of modern Hindutva came at this point. The BJP could not afford to have the Hindu vote split up on caste lines and Advani took a country wide Rath Yatra to build a temple in Ayodhya whipping up mass hysteria in the name of religion. The term, Hindutva, was seldom if ever used in mainstream Indian politics or media before this but immediately found takers amongst the upper caste Hindus particularly in urban India in the face of perceived appeasement of Muslims and lower caste Hindus. The official version was to build a nation based on core Hindu principles which according to the BJP and RSS are shared by all Indians - they have the same culture and differ only in religion. On the surface there is nothing wrong with the notion, but the extremists of this ideology commonly use it as a weapon of hatred against Muslims like Modi and Thackeray. The moderate ones like Vajpayee emphasize only the cultural oneness which can bind all Indians.

Amongst, various other things the reason why Hindutva finds support is because it is a strong proponent of a uniform civil code in India and no special concessions made to any religion. To emphasize once again it's not a facet of Hinduism, it's a political instrument.

 

[Hail-Akram]

As I understand Hindutva = Hinduism.
Hindu is religion and Hindutva is the philosophy supported by or endorsed by Hindu religion.

Thats my understanding.

There are such words which are used/understood in a wrong way - for example Islamist. I think the word actually means a person who follows or preaches Islam. But media often uses it for referring to terrorists who want to "enforce" Islam on the world.

 

[chacha kashmiri]

If hindutva is consigned only to hindustan why do we have the hss in the uk.

 

[max]

I always thought that it meant blame ISI for every thing

 

[tahaqureshi]

This brings me to another question, why is India often called "Hindustan" when it is supposed to be a secular state?

 

[pun500]

This brings me to another question, why is India often called "Hindustan" when it is supposed to be a secular state?

well thats what you guys call or RSS ie political pure hindu state supporters.

As such india has always been called bharat by ppl in india when translated to hindi/marathi..etc

 

[tdigi]

This brings me to another question, why is India often called "Hindustan" when it is supposed to be a secular state?

When India was partitioned in 1947, Pakistan was created as a Islamic state, but Hindustan was not created as a Hindu state. India accepted a Constitution which does not have the secular word in it but the secular concept is there — respect for all religions, equal rights, status for Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Parsis, etc.

The word Hindustan is used because of the past history & etymological practice. Arabic rulers of the past referred the sub-continent as Hindustan. The name has been derived from Hindi word Hindu that itself has been derived from Sanskrit word Sindhu which means Indus River. Sindhu is thus a Sanskrit word but Persians pronounced it Hindu. So basically Hindustan means Land of Indus River.

On the topic of Hindutva, the supreme court of India has said the following:

The words Hinduism or Hindutva are not confined only to the strict Hindu religious practices unrelated to the culture and ethos of the people of India depicting the way of life of the Indian people. These terms are indicative more of a way of life of the Indian people, and are not confined merely to describe persons practicing the Hindu religion as a faith.

The meaning of 'Hindutva' is used as a synonym of 'Indianisation' -- i.e. development of uniform culture by obliterating the differences between all cultures co-existing in the country.' It is indicative more of a way of life of the Indian people.

 

[tdigi]

well thats what you guys call or RSS ie political pure hindu state supporters.

As such india has always been called bharat by ppl in india when translated to hindi/marathi..etc

You also please read my post above.

 

[MIG]

Put it this way, is Hindutva a call for Hindus to return to their roots ?

 

[moumotta]

Put it this way, is Hindutva a call for Hindus to return to their roots ?

What do you mean by 'returning to roots'.

 

[tdigi]

Put it this way, is Hindutva a call for Hindus to return to their roots ?

Please elaborate coz I didn't understand it either.

 

[MIG]

Please elaborate coz I didn't understand it either.

What I understand of Hindutva is that its a movement for Bharat/Hindustan/India to return to its true Hindu values.

In itself, Hindutva isnt anything sinister at all

What is Hindutva?

The term "Hindutva" is derived from the two terms 'Hindu Tattva", which literally mean "Hindu Principles". Now the question is, what are Hindu Principles and what comprises the "Hindutva" Outlook?

To answer this question we would have to begin with the history of the Hindus. The history of the Hindus is the history of a civilization which has developed in its natural state, without interruption, since antiquity. Its age is dated to be between five and nine thousand years. Hence Hindu History is a prototype of how human civilization would have looked, if civilization all across the globe had been allowed to develop in its natural state. This is the relevance for us to study Hindu Civilization, Hindu History and Hindu Culture.

The evolution of Hindu Civilization can be considered to be natural and continuing as there is no last messiah in the Hindu world view. In fact this is what distinguishes Hindu Civilization from the rest. And this is why Hinduism is called a Living Idea, guided by the sum total of human wisdom that is not considered to be embodied in one person, or one book, or one period of human history. Hence the term "Living". Hindutva is the articulation of this idea of continuity of freedom of thought from which emerge the multifarious Hindu Principles.

Two instances of Hindu Principles that symbolize the outcome of freedom of thought are the pronouncements made not today, but four thousand years back by unnamed rishis (Hindu ascetics) that, "This world is one family" (Vasudaiva Kutumbakam) and that "The Universal Reality is the same, but different people can call it by different names" (Ekam Sat Viprah Bahuda Vadanti). In these two proclamations made in ancient Hindu India, we see the seeds of globalism and freedom of thought, four thousand years before the world was to become the global village of today.


Thus in its true essence, Hindutva is a stridently assertive rational-humanist line of reasoning. And it is this essence of Hindutva that we have kept in mind, while developing this website. At the level of practice, the Hindutva outlook boils down to upholding righteousness (Sat-guna) and fighting ignoble attitudes (Dur-guna). Taking poetic license, we can describe the practitioners of this outlook as "Heenam Naashaayati iti Hinduhu" (Those who uphold righteousness and fight ignobleness are Hindus).


Thus, far from being a narrow nationalistic doctrine, Hindutva is in its true essence, 'a timeless and universal compilation of human wisdom'. Hence it is also called "Sanatana" which means, something that is "forever continuing."

What the real problem with Hindutva is the people associated with it or its proponents.

Just check on Google - type Hindutva and you see names like hindutva.org etc - all rabidly anti Islam/Muslim/Christian etc

In other words, Hindutva is becoming a rallying cry for fascist Hindu groups - do you accept that?

I accept that this is the same argument against Islam when we defend Islam against charges of murder and terrorism - that its not Islam but its misguided Muslims who are doing this but the difference here is that Islam is practiced by millions where as Hindutva as a concept is different from hinduism which is practiced without harm to anyone - by millions as well.

 

[Garuda]

Put it this way, is Hindutva a call for Hindus to return to their roots ?

Hindutva is just things you do as a Hindu. Like every religion follow their religion you follow yours.


Now, when RSS uses the word Hindutva, it becomes different. Though they have not mentioned any definition but definitely it becomes aggresive. I don't understand why we need a sword and trisul to be hold when a politician from BJP/RSS/VHP goes for a campain. These things are just adding a different color to a simple adjective.



Its like real meaning of Jihad and Al-quaida calling for Jihad.

 

[googly]

What I understand of Hindutva is that its a movement for Bharat/Hindustan/India to return to its true Hindu values.

In itself, Hindutva isnt anything sinister at all



What the real problem with Hindutva is the people associated with it or its proponents.

Just check on Google - type Hindutva and you see names like hindutva.org etc - all rabidly anti Islam/Muslim/Christian etc

In other words, Hindutva is becoming a rallying cry for fascist Hindu groups - do you accept that?

I accept that this is the same argument against Islam when we defend Islam against charges of murder and terrorism - that its not Islam but its misguided Muslims who are doing this but the difference here is that Islam is practiced by millions where as Hindutva as a concept is different from hinduism which is practiced without harm to anyone - by millions as well.

MIG, a few of the responses here are misleading of the types, "To me Hindutva is this or that". Hindutva is a specific social political concept. The closest analogy to it would be what Jinnah wanted for Pakistan - a nation state with Islam as the founding block. Similarly, Hindutva is a specific socio-political concept campaigning for India to be built as a nation with the core Indian culture as it's building block. This core Indian culture is assumed to be shared amongst all Indians regardless of the religion.

Hindutva cannot be understood in isolation with politics, hence my post above which details it's rise and popularity in context of Indian politics. As you are perhaps trying to allude that it can be and has been misused - that's true and it continues to be by the likes of Modi and Thackeray who use it to spread hate against Muslims.

The wiki page for it provides a pretty neutral and accurate description of the concept :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindutva

There are many other research papers on the idea - I can try to provide a few if you are interested.

 

[MIG]

Thanks Googly - will check the Wiki page.

 

[tdigi]

In other words, Hindutva is becoming a rallying cry for fascist Hindu groups - do you accept that?

I accept that this is the same argument against Islam when we defend Islam against charges of murder and terrorism - that its not Islam but its misguided Muslims who are doing this but the difference here is that Islam is practiced by millions where as Hindutva as a concept is different from hinduism which is practiced without harm to anyone - by millions as well.

Yes you are right. If any fascist group is using the philosophy of Hindutva to gain dominance and obliterate other religions, culture or ways of life..then it's completely wrong. The hindu way of life cannot be against other religions including Islam, if someone thinks otherwise then it is a distorted view. Having said this, do we have fascist groups crying Hindutva or Islam for their own benefit? YES! Such thinking is narrow minded and people need to be educated and enlightened on this issue.

The supreme court of India expressed its views in 1995 that the term Hindutva is related more to the way of life of the people in the subcontinent. It cannot be assumed to mean and be equated with narrow fundamentalist Hindu religious bigotry. A Hindu may embrace a non-Hindu religion without ceasing to be a Hindu.

Unfortunately there are some ideological parties in India who try to play with the emotions of the people on the basis of a distorted view of Hindutva and this especially gets more attention during elections.

These are people who will commit atrocities against each other in the name of religion which is fundamentally wrong thinking. No religion of this world will say that you can do harm to others in trying to advance oneself. If some people are thinking otherwise, then let good sense prevail and let them have the courage to reject their religion - whatever it is!

Hindutva in the political context has been interpreted as being Indian first. Patriotism and religion here are two separate issues. Religion is sacred and a deeply personal belief which leads to one's salvation in different ways, but being against one's motherland in the name of any religion is unacceptable...be it a Hindu or Muslim. This is the root philosophy of ideological groups like the RSS.

The former Prime Minister of India Atal Vajpayee said this in 1998:

"Mecca can continue to be holy for the Muslims but India should be holier than the holy for them. You can go to a mosque and offer namaz, you can keep the roza. We have no problem. But if you have to choose between Mecca or Islam and India you must choose India. All the Muslims should have this feeling: we will live and die only for this country."

Hindutva is about national pride/unity and it is inclusive of all religions and minorities in India. It cannot and should not be used as an excuse to do cruel things to others.

 

[adarsh_bang]

i'm sure what mig is asking about is the ''new hindutva'' which came into existence following the rss's attempt to ''resurrect hindu religion'' and in the name of resurrection they've taken to narrow fundemantalism and intolerence...

this matter is more political then religious if you ask me... and this ''media hyped hindutva'' has no resemblance with the hinduism of old

 

[tdigi]

I also agree with what Googly has to say on this topic...we essentially are trying to convey the same thing.

 

[MIG]

i'm sure what mig is asking about is the ''new hindutva'' which came into existence following the rss's attempt to ''resurrect hindu religion'' and in the name of resurrection they've taken to narrow fundemantalism and intolerence...

this matter is more political then religious if you ask me... and this ''media hyped hindutva'' has no resemblance with the hinduism of old

I think that is exactly the hinduvta i am talking about.

 

[tdigi]

I think that is exactly the hinduvta i am talking about.

MIG I think now you know both sides of the coin.
Narrow minded and fundamentalist approach of the so called modern day Hindutva does not fit my definition. RSS was banned in India three times but came out of it through court battles....don't know much about it.

Googly and I have already expressed our views on what we think Hindutva is...and I fully subscribe to those views. What we need here is people who subscribe to fascist views...that will generate some lively debate!

 

[pun500]

You also please read my post above.

and where was i wrong .... outsiders call us hindustan (after independence when we adopted the name india/bharat)

before that it was land on indus river like you said ...ie hind (in short) which later became hindustan

 

[adarsh_bang]

I think that is exactly the hinduvta i am talking about.

glad you got what you were looking for mig bhai... now, what would you want to know about it ??

this adulterated cocncept of hindutva was actually used as the main agenda in the recent most election campaign by n.d.a ( which constitutes of hard line , left wing parties)
but the indian population masha ALLAH have the ability to use their heads... and tell right from wrong... needless to say the party's using this agenda lost badly... the democratic, secular parties gained clear majority and as a result we dont get to hear this ''misunderstood hindutva'' thing anymore... its gone for now... and gone for good (THank GOD )

 

[RexRex]

googly is pretty much spot on .. it is used in a politically negative sense these days although it's origin had a different spin on it.

 

[pal]

Hindutva has become almost an entirely political concept. It is devoid of religious significance or meaning. I don't even know if it ever existed as a religious term. Veer Savarkar, who is credited with using it in its modern context, was an atheist. I think tdigi has it right. It has more to do with nationalism (with the nation being an idealized vision of ancient Hindu India) than anything else.

Personally, I think they are deluding themselves if they think India will ever become a non-secular Hindu nation. As a Hindu, I find that it is too narrow a concept. I don't think the people who support it are correct to affix Hinduism or being Hindu to being Indian. Some of the most devout Hindus I have met have not been Indian. I fear that they might feel excluded if they ever experience the misfortune of meeting some of these Hindutvaadis.

 

[chacha kashmiri]

This is most interesting. It explains why yusuf khan had to change his name to dilip kumar just to succeed in india and why someone like amitabh bachan and shatrughan sinha try their upmost to try and uphold what they feel is hindu culture by using as little urdu as possible.

 

[moumotta]

This is most interesting. It explains why yusuf khan had to change his name to dilip kumar just to succeed in india and why someone like amitabh bachan and shatrughan sinha try their upmost to try and uphold what they feel is hindu culture by using as little urdu as possible.

Einstein )

 

[chacha kashmiri]

Einstein )

Thanks for that, it really added to the discussion.

 

[moumotta]

Thanks for that, it really added to the discussion.

You would have figured out that I was also trying to say the same but lacked your eloquence.

 

[adarsh_bang]

This is most interesting. It explains why yusuf khan had to change his name to dilip kumar just to succeed in india and why someone like amitabh bachan and shatrughan sinha try their upmost to try and uphold what they feel is hindu culture by using as little urdu as possible.

wait chacha... you are mixing up some unrelated things here...
by the way.. have you never heard amitabh speaking urdu??? his urdu is as brilliant as his hindi actually... but then again... this hindutva thing has got absolutely nothing to do with the examples you mentioned bro

 

[chacha kashmiri]

wait chacha... you are mixing up some unrelated things here...
by the way.. have you never heard amitabh speaking urdu??? his urdu is as brilliant as his hindi actually... but then again... this hindutva thing has got absolutely nothing to do with the examples you mentioned bro

I remember hearing or reading that he uses as little urdu and as many hindi words as possible and somehow related it to a hindutva thing which i somehow also linked to amitabh bachans attempt at being a politician and his past links with zee and came to a conclusion that it had something to do with hindutva or reclaiming a hindu identity, but i must have my wires crossed somewhere.

 

[IMD Walrus]

Yes you have. I don't know the circs which led to Yusuf Khan changing his name, but he was not the only actor, muslim or otherwise, who did change his name. Would it have made a difference? Maybe, maybe not.

Amitabh speaking more hindi than urdu is neither here or there though.

 

[deathstreak]

well thats what you guys call or RSS ie political pure hindu state supporters.

As such india has always been called bharat by ppl in india when translated to hindi/marathi..etc

and where was i wrong .... outsiders call us hindustan (after independence when we adopted the name india/bharat)

before that it was land on indus river like you said ...ie hind (in short) which later became hindustan

Sorry its a part of the constitution people forget.

By act of its Constituent Assembly, India now has two official names: in Hindi, Hindustan; in old Sanskrit, Bharat. The name India is recognized as an English translation of Hindustan.

Hindu and Hindustan are derived from the same work and not from each other.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,811816-2,00.html#ixzz0dgsaBMmH

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Hindutva is not synonymous with Hinduism. Hindutva is a Hindu nationalistic movement and the philosophy adopted largely by RSS and to a lesser extent by the BJP. It was first coined in the early 20th century as part of the national movement which wanted the Indian state to be build upon Hindu principles, as they defined it. Savarkar was one of the major proponents of it. The philosophy and ideology died out during the independence movement when the vast majority of Hindus aligned with Gandhi and Nehru and was dealt a near killer blow in the minds of people when Ghodse assassinated Gandhi. He was widely seen as aligned with the RSS, though RSS declined having anything to do with him.

After independence, Indian politics generally revolved around the Congress with the main opposition coming from rag tag local parties based on farmers' rights etc. That remained the case till the mid 80s. When Indira Gandhi was assassinated and there was a Congress supported backlash against the Sikhs in '84, Rajiv Gandhi was fearful of losing popularity. In response, he chose to garner almost complete control of the Muslim vote bank in India through various appeasement policies like the Shah Bano alimony controversy, Haj subsidies, increased financial support for Muslim institutes etc. Things which would do little to help the Muslims in reality, but would consolidate their votes on emotive issues. At the same time, he also opened the Babri Masjid for worship by Hindus to get on their good side as well.

At the same time Rajiv Gandhi also got caught up in corruption scandals like Bofors, and was accused of rigging the elections in Kashmir which was leading to a major decline in his popularity. The BJP, which had 2 seats in the '84 elections, the Janta Dal, led by VP Singh who had split ways with Congress on Bofors, and the Communist Parties fought the '89 elections together against the Congress and assumed power.

VP Singh was pretty sure that his government won't last long - what with disparate parties like BJP and Communists supporting it. He immediately began to garner his own vote bank based on caste lines by invoking and expanding reservation based on caste - the Mandal commission. This led to lot of protests from upper caste Hindus but consolidated the lower castes in favor of his party.

The birth of modern Hindutva came at this point. The BJP could not afford to have the Hindu vote split up on caste lines and Advani took a country wide Rath Yatra to build a temple in Ayodhya whipping up mass hysteria in the name of religion. The term, Hindutva, was seldom if ever used in mainstream Indian politics or media before this but immediately found takers amongst the upper caste Hindus particularly in urban India in the face of perceived appeasement of Muslims and lower caste Hindus. The official version was to build a nation based on core Hindu principles which according to the BJP and RSS are shared by all Indians - they have the same culture and differ only in religion. On the surface there is nothing wrong with the notion, but the extremists of this ideology commonly use it as a weapon of hatred against Muslims like Modi and Thackeray. The moderate ones like Vajpayee emphasize only the cultural oneness which can bind all Indians.

Amongst, various other things the reason why Hindutva finds support is because it is a strong proponent of a uniform civil code in India and no special concessions made to any religion. To emphasize once again it's not a facet of Hinduism, it's a political instrument.

This reply is very enlightening. I did a search for old threads about RSS following a discussion in another thread, and this is probably the most relevant.

 

[BreadPakoda]

glad you got what you were looking for mig bhai... now, what would you want to know about it ??

this adulterated cocncept of hindutva was actually used as the main agenda in the recent most election campaign by n.d.a ( which constitutes of hard line , left wing parties)
but the indian population masha ALLAH have the ability to use their heads... and tell right from wrong... needless to say the party's using this agenda lost badly... the democratic, secular parties gained clear majority and as a result we dont get to hear this ''misunderstood hindutva'' thing anymore... its gone for now... and gone for good (THank GOD )

Goes on to show that nothing is permanent.

Hopefully things will change soon.

 

[PakLFC]

Hindutva is a political movement not a religious belief. They believe in the Akhand Bharat nonsense of uniting the entire subcontinent and some even say beyond to bring back the glory days That everyone in India is a Hindu even if they are not!! What they mean is even if a person is a Christian, Sikh or Muslim they are culturally Hindu because of their ancestry! There is nothing spiritual about Hinduism at all rather a belief of restoring some ancient pride that exists in the minds of many people.

 

[Bosanquet]

This reply is very enlightening. I did a search for old threads about RSS following a discussion in another thread, and this is probably the most relevant.

You don't need old threads for information about RSS.
Prof. Google will tell you all you want to know - and then some.
Even apart from the murder of the Mahatma (by an ex-member), you may be amused to learn that this para-military and avowedly deeply patriotic organisation had the following policies:

1) They did not "recognise" the Indian constitution for decades after independence because it was not based on "Hindu laws".
2) They refused to fly the Indian flag - demanding their own saffron flag should replace the tricolour. They continued with this refusal until forced by law to do so 10 - 12 years ago.
3) They remained away from the independence movement so as not to upset the British.

These are 3 particulary egregious examples. I'm sure you can discover more if you are interested. Though why you should be , I have no idea.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

You don't need old threads for information about RSS.
Prof. Google will tell you all you want to know - and then some.
Even apart from the murder of the Mahatma (by an ex-member), you may be amused to learn that this para-military and avowedly deeply patriotic organisation had the following policies:

1) They did not "recognise" the Indian constitution for decades after independence because it was not based on "Hindu laws".
2) They refused to fly the Indian flag - demanding their own saffron flag should replace the tricolour. They continued with this refusal until forced by law to do so 10 - 12 years ago.
3) They remained away from the independence movement so as not to upset the British.

These are 3 particulary egregious examples. I'm sure you can discover more if you are interested. Though why you should be , I have no idea.

I was having a debate with [MENTION=136588]CricketCartoons[/MENTION] about the merits of the RSS and he was quite the passionate supporter to dispel myths about the organisation. We shall see how he responds, although like me, he has never won POTW so his views should probably be taken with a pinch of salt. Or a handful of salt in his case, he's a big fan of Bengali sweets so some saltiness would add some much needed balance.

 

[CricketCartoons]

You don't need old threads for information about RSS.
Prof. Google will tell you all you want to know - and then some.
Even apart from the murder of the Mahatma (by an ex-member), you may be amused to learn that this para-military and avowedly deeply patriotic organisation had the following policies:

1) They did not "recognise" the Indian constitution for decades after independence because it was not based on "Hindu laws".
2) They refused to fly the Indian flag - demanding their own saffron flag should replace the tricolour. They continued with this refusal until forced by law to do so 10 - 12 years ago.
3) They remained away from the independence movement so as not to upset the British.

These are 3 particulary egregious examples. I'm sure you can discover more if you are interested. Though why you should be , I have no idea.

3. Is that why Savarkar got jailed in andaman, which was the harshest punishment, while gandhis and nehrus got soft treatment?

2. They refused because partition, the formula on which partition was based was not implemented. If there was a Muslim Pakistan, there should be a Hindu Hindustan, which never happened. This was a valid grievance. Although the Modern RSS has accepted the reality and are proud of the flag.

1. See 2. Again the modern RSS demands, which many propagandists vilify them for, are constitutional.

RSS were exonerated of all charges related to Gandhi's death by the court. Even if an ex RSS member assassinated him, it in no way can be ideologically blamed on RSS. If a practicing/non practicing member of a religion commits a crime, does the religion get blamed?

 

[CricketCartoons]

I was having a debate with [MENTION=136588]CricketCartoons[/MENTION] about the merits of the RSS and he was quite the passionate supporter to dispel myths about the organisation. We shall see how he responds, although like me, he has never won POTW so his views should probably be taken with a pinch of salt. Or a handful of salt in his case, he's a big fan of Bengali sweets so some saltiness would add some much needed balance.

You were not having a debate as you don't have any idea about the RSS. But good to see you being Bosanquet's cheerleader. I will enjoy debating with him though.

 

[Bosanquet]

3. Is that why Savarkar got jailed in andaman, which was the harshest punishment, while gandhis and nehrus got soft treatment?

2. They refused because partition, the formula on which partition was based was not implemented. If there was a Muslim Pakistan, there should be a Hindu Hindustan, which never happened. This was a valid grievance. Although the Modern RSS has accepted the reality and are proud of the flag.

1. See 2. Again the modern RSS demands, which many propagandists vilify them for, are constitutional.
Then, after confessing that he was misguided into taking the revolutionary road because of the “excited and hopeless situation of India in 1906-1907”, he concluded his November 14, 1913 petition by ***
RSS were exonerated of all charges related to Gandhi's death by the court. Even if an ex RSS member assassinated him, it in no way can be ideologically blamed on RSS. If a practicing/non practicing member of a religion commits a crime, does the religion get blamed?

Life is short & my time after work much shorter. Thus on the sporadic instances when I have an hour or 2 for this, I prefer not to engage trolls. "Do not feed the troll!" is a wise adage. I have made a mental note of your remarkable "work" on the "Tommy-sir" topic & the Israeli visa one.

But your reference to Savarkar will not pass. His imprisonment in the Cellular jail (btw, have you ever even been to Port Blair & cellular jail. I have. Twice. Loads of Bangladeshis there.) says nothing about the Hindu Mahasabha/RSS. They (Hedgewar) had an absolute policy to keep out of the independence movement in order not to upset the British. Much like the Muslim League.
And after he did get imprisoned (and unlike Nehru & Gandhi) he wrote begging letter after begging letter for mercy. When eventually freed after numerous such appeals he swore NEVER to oppose the colonial powers again. Here is a quote from an article on savarkar in "The Wire".

Then, after confessing that he was misguided into taking the revolutionary road because of the “excited and hopeless situation of India in 1906-1907”, he concluded his November 14, 1913 petition by assuring the British of his conscientious conversion. “f the government in their manifold beneficence and mercy release me,” he wrote, “I for one cannot but be the staunchest advocate of… loyalty to the English government (emphasis added)”.

Here's another direct quote from Savarkar when Subhas Bose & the INA attacked British India....

“..it must be noted that Japan’s entry into the war has exposed us directly and immediately to the attack by Britain’s enemies…Hindu Mahasabhaites must, therefore, rouse Hindus especially in the provinces of Bengal and Assam as effectively as possible to enter the military forces of all arms without losing a single minute.”

Yes, wonderful words indeed from a great patriot.

BTW, the Hindu Mahasabha led by this great patriot also went into direct collaboration with (unimaginably) The Muslim League in order to run the governments in Sindh & Bengal! He called it "advance through reasonable compromise".
There is however one thing I like about him - his staunch Atheism!

The RSS blamed Gandhi & Congress for partition. This led to an ex-RSS fanatic to murder the greatest emancipator of the 20th century. But do you have any knowledge about who propounded first the 2- nation theory? 16 years before Jinnah & The Muslim league? I will point you towards an academic paper published in HEIDELBURG PAPERS IN SOUTH ASIAN AND COMPARATIVE POLITICS by Prof. Asish Nandy
in 2009.

And as for the national flag, they only fly it because they are forced by law to do so - The Flag code of India - since 2002.

And that is a bigger response than any troll has got out of me in years.
In return perhaps you would care to enlighten me as to why a person waving the Bangladeshi flag is such an advocate of an extreme Hindu-supremacy group.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Life is short & my time after work much shorter. Thus on the sporadic instances when I have an hour or 2 for this, I prefer not to engage trolls. "Do not feed the troll!" is a wise adage. I have made a mental note of your remarkable "work" on the "Tommy-sir" topic & the Israeli visa one.

But your reference to Savarkar will not pass. His imprisonment in the Cellular jail (btw, have you ever even been to Port Blair & cellular jail. I have. Twice. Loads of Bangladeshis there.) says nothing about the Hindu Mahasabha/RSS. They (Hedgewar) had an absolute policy to keep out of the independence movement in order not to upset the British. Much like the Muslim League.
And after he did get imprisoned (and unlike Nehru & Gandhi) he wrote begging letter after begging letter for mercy. When eventually freed after numerous such appeals he swore NEVER to oppose the colonial powers again. Here is a quote from an article on savarkar in "The Wire".

Then, after confessing that he was misguided into taking the revolutionary road because of the “excited and hopeless situation of India in 1906-1907”, he concluded his November 14, 1913 petition by assuring the British of his conscientious conversion. “f the government in their manifold beneficence and mercy release me,” he wrote, “I for one cannot but be the staunchest advocate of… loyalty to the English government (emphasis added)”.

Here's another direct quote from Savarkar when Subhas Bose & the INA attacked British India....

“..it must be noted that Japan’s entry into the war has exposed us directly and immediately to the attack by Britain’s enemies…Hindu Mahasabhaites must, therefore, rouse Hindus especially in the provinces of Bengal and Assam as effectively as possible to enter the military forces of all arms without losing a single minute.”

Yes, wonderful words indeed from a great patriot.

BTW, the Hindu Mahasabha led by this great patriot also went into direct collaboration with (unimaginably) The Muslim League in order to run the governments in Sindh & Bengal! He called it "advance through reasonable compromise".
There is however one thing I like about him - his staunch Atheism!

The RSS blamed Gandhi & Congress for partition. This led to an ex-RSS fanatic to murder the greatest emancipator of the 20th century. But do you have any knowledge about who propounded first the 2- nation theory? 16 years before Jinnah & The Muslim league? I will point you towards an academic paper published in HEIDELBURG PAPERS IN SOUTH ASIAN AND COMPARATIVE POLITICS by Prof. Asish Nandy
in 2009.

And as for the national flag, they only fly it because they are forced by law to do so - The Flag code of India - since 2002.

And that is a bigger response than any troll has got out of me in years.
In return perhaps you would care to enlighten me as to why a person waving the Bangladeshi flag is such an advocate of an extreme Hindu-supremacy group.

Lies, half truth and propaganda, but thanks for the effort.

All you have done is to go back in history and extend it to the modern age to blame the RSS. If you want to judge the past of RSS, you must remain in context and the political environment prevalent then.

The modern RSS has evolved and has been only second to the Army and police forces in serving the nation, whether it was during 1971, anti emergency and pro democracy movement in 70s or various natural disasters.

But let us go back to history to humour you.

The flag which represents india now, represented the congress flag then. The final shape was only a slight modification of the congress flag. Why would RSS respect the flag which represented the congress, the party which was responsible for partition? The opposition was not against the nation, but the design of the flag. I don't like the white and green in the flag myself, but respect it anyway, as this piece of cloth represents my country.

And the flag code of 2002 did not force them to fly it, in fact 2002 removed the restrictions of hoisting the flag. You should check your sources before writing rubbish.

You blame Veer Savarkar for writing a mercy petition when he was in jail for years and you glorify the fake mahatma. Therein lies your hypocrisy. The same apostle of peace who campaigned to encourage indians to join the world wars and fight for the british. The same fake mahatma who was a racist and looked down upon the blacks. Who patronized dalits and said that upper caste is like elder brother, and if elder brother beats you up, you don't have to leave the home (hinduism). Not to mention the other ugly things he used to do. On the other hand, Savarkar broke taboo and ate with the dalits when he was in prison. He was far more a patriot and reformer than your hero, the fake mahatma..whose contribution to the freedom movement is minimal. If you hate Savarkar, you must despise gandhi, but only if you were not a hypocrite.

The RSS were mirror image of the Muslim League, both parties led by two visionary leaders. Did you know that the RSS in the form of Hindu Mahasabha tied up with the Muslim League to form provincial government? Even then they were prudent enough to understand realpolitik and bury differences.

RSS is not a hindu supremacy group. If it was hindu supremacist, why would it have a muslim wing, which has done great service for the muslim society (you can read up about their contribution). Did the KKK have a black panthers wing? RSS is an inclusive group which puts patriotism and nationalism first, and works on strengthening the foundations of the country through its stress on hindu culture, which is the common heritage of all indians, from all religions.

 

[TM Riddle]

Life is short & my time after work much shorter. Thus on the sporadic instances when I have an hour or 2 for this, I prefer not to engage trolls. "Do not feed the troll!" is a wise adage. I have made a mental note of your remarkable "work" on the "Tommy-sir" topic & the Israeli visa one.

But your reference to Savarkar will not pass. His imprisonment in the Cellular jail (btw, have you ever even been to Port Blair & cellular jail. I have. Twice. Loads of Bangladeshis there.) says nothing about the Hindu Mahasabha/RSS. They (Hedgewar) had an absolute policy to keep out of the independence movement in order not to upset the British. Much like the Muslim League.
And after he did get imprisoned (and unlike Nehru & Gandhi) he wrote begging letter after begging letter for mercy. When eventually freed after numerous such appeals he swore NEVER to oppose the colonial powers again. Here is a quote from an article on savarkar in "The Wire".

Then, after confessing that he was misguided into taking the revolutionary road because of the “excited and hopeless situation of India in 1906-1907”, he concluded his November 14, 1913 petition by assuring the British of his conscientious conversion. “f the government in their manifold beneficence and mercy release me,” he wrote, “I for one cannot but be the staunchest advocate of… loyalty to the English government (emphasis added)”.

Here's another direct quote from Savarkar when Subhas Bose & the INA attacked British India....

“..it must be noted that Japan’s entry into the war has exposed us directly and immediately to the attack by Britain’s enemies…Hindu Mahasabhaites must, therefore, rouse Hindus especially in the provinces of Bengal and Assam as effectively as possible to enter the military forces of all arms without losing a single minute.”

Yes, wonderful words indeed from a great patriot.

BTW, the Hindu Mahasabha led by this great patriot also went into direct collaboration with (unimaginably) The Muslim League in order to run the governments in Sindh & Bengal! He called it "advance through reasonable compromise".
There is however one thing I like about him - his staunch Atheism!

The RSS blamed Gandhi & Congress for partition. This led to an ex-RSS fanatic to murder the greatest emancipator of the 20th century. But do you have any knowledge about who propounded first the 2- nation theory? 16 years before Jinnah & The Muslim league? I will point you towards an academic paper published in HEIDELBURG PAPERS IN SOUTH ASIAN AND COMPARATIVE POLITICS by Prof. Asish Nandy
in 2009.

And as for the national flag, they only fly it because they are forced by law to do so - The Flag code of India - since 2002.

And that is a bigger response than any troll has got out of me in years.
In return perhaps you would care to enlighten me as to why a person waving the Bangladeshi flag is such an advocate of an extreme Hindu-supremacy group.

I'm a no RSS follower but you have gone overboard with a few things in there.

You mentioned Savarkar writing mercy petitions but conveniently forgotten Tilak accepting British right to rule over India after he got out of Mandalay jail. Yes Tilak the great freedom fighter openly supported the British in the first world war and he wasn't alone in that regard. Almost all Congress party members considered it as their loyal duty to provide support to the British government.

Regarding never opposing colonial powers, this had been a continuous theme within the Congress before the arrival of Gandhi. Mehta, Gokhale, Naoroji all were against opposing the colonial government and believed in famous policy of prayer and petition for meeting their demands off. Some of the early Congressis even went on to extent of believing that Indians weren't fit for self rule and going beyond constitutional agitations for their demands was unethical and morally unjustified.

The only people who truly thought about getting India free from the foreign rule were the revolutionaries who btw have been constantly disparaged by being called as terrorists in Congress approved history textbooks while people like GB Pant are hailed as great freedom fighters lol.

Oh and you are absolutely wrong about flag code of India thing. Read about Naveen Jindal and his plea in Supreme Court and you might know why it came about.

 

[Bosanquet]

I'm a no RSS follower but you have gone overboard with a few things in there.

You mentioned Savarkar writing mercy petitions but conveniently forgotten Tilak accepting British right to rule over India after he got out of Mandalay jail. Yes Tilak the great freedom fighter openly supported the British in the first world war and he wasn't alone in that regard. Almost all Congress party members considered it as their loyal duty to provide support to the British government.

Regarding never opposing colonial powers, this had been a continuous theme within the Congress before the arrival of Gandhi. Mehta, Gokhale, Naoroji all were against opposing the colonial government and believed in famous policy of prayer and petition for meeting their demands off. Some of the early Congressis even went on to extent of believing that Indians weren't fit for self rule and going beyond constitutional agitations for their demands was unethical and morally unjustified.

The only people who truly thought about getting India free from the foreign rule were the revolutionaries who btw have been constantly disparaged by being called as terrorists in Congress approved history textbooks while people like GB Pant are hailed as great freedom fighters lol.

Oh and you are absolutely wrong about flag code of India thing. Read about Naveen Jindal and his plea in Supreme Court and you might know why it came about.

My post was predominantly about Savarkar/RSS/related organisations. And Gandhi tangentially. It gave facts and included references to articles and sources that all can look up for themselves. What Tilak may have done is not relevant to what I wrote about Savarkar. That's a straw man argument. I am not comparing the them. RSS failed to oppose british rule right up to the time of independence. It is well documented. What the congress did before Gandhi was not part of the discussion either. In the period that mattered it was the congress that led the movement & the RSS & Muslim league stayed out, currying favour with the colonial power.

I am aware of the role played by the armed revolutionaries & nowhere have I belittled their contributions in any way. Again, was not a relevant aspect of my post (apart from the mention of Subhas Bose).

Re the Flag code - not quite sure what you mean but will look up your reference. Fact remains that the uber-patriotic RSS refused to fly the Indian flag at their Nagpur headquarter during either Republic day or Independence day celebrations from 1950 - 2002.

 

[Bosanquet]

Lies, half truth and propaganda, but thanks for the effort.

All you have done is to go back in history and extend it to the modern age to blame the RSS. If you want to judge the past of RSS, you must remain in context and the political environment prevalent then.

The modern RSS has evolved and has been only second to the Army and police forces in serving the nation, whether it was during 1971, anti emergency and pro democracy movement in 70s or various natural disasters.

But let us go back to history to humour you.

The flag which represents india now, represented the congress flag then. The final shape was only a slight modification of the congress flag. Why would RSS respect the flag which represented the congress, the party which was responsible for partition? The opposition was not against the nation, but the design of the flag. I don't like the white and green in the flag myself, but respect it anyway, as this piece of cloth represents my country.

And the flag code of 2002 did not force them to fly it, in fact 2002 removed the restrictions of hoisting the flag. You should check your sources before writing rubbish.

You blame Veer Savarkar for writing a mercy petition when he was in jail for years and you glorify the fake mahatma. Therein lies your hypocrisy. The same apostle of peace who campaigned to encourage indians to join the world wars and fight for the british. The same fake mahatma who was a racist and looked down upon the blacks. Who patronized dalits and said that upper caste is like elder brother, and if elder brother beats you up, you don't have to leave the home (hinduism). Not to mention the other ugly things he used to do. On the other hand, Savarkar broke taboo and ate with the dalits when he was in prison. He was far more a patriot and reformer than your hero, the fake mahatma..whose contribution to the freedom movement is minimal. If you hate Savarkar, you must despise gandhi, but only if you were not a hypocrite.

The RSS were mirror image of the Muslim League, both parties led by two visionary leaders. Did you know that the RSS in the form of Hindu Mahasabha tied up with the Muslim League to form provincial government? Even then they were prudent enough to understand realpolitik and bury differences.

RSS is not a hindu supremacy group. If it was hindu supremacist, why would it have a muslim wing, which has done great service for the muslim society (you can read up about their contribution). Did the KKK have a black panthers wing? RSS is an inclusive group which puts patriotism and nationalism first, and works on strengthening the foundations of the country through its stress on hindu culture, which is the common heritage of all indians, from all religions.

This is why I don't waste my life with trolls. Every fact that they don't like is dismissed as "Fake news". Even when referenced to academic work and clearly documented quotes and sources. And then comes their own inimitable nonsense - with no backing data or supporting sources. Just rants and assertions. Also gratuitious insults.
Oh and do read the post that you reply to - it tells you exactly which provincial governments the british ****-licking mahasabha formed with the equally brown-nosing muslim league. It's not something new to me. It is expected of appeasers.
Finally, clearly, you haven't found the energy to check out who first thought of & talked about partition. Or perhaps you have & it's inconvenient.
Anyway goodbye troll. No more feeds from me.Enough life wasted.

 

[CricketCartoons]

This is why I don't waste my life with trolls. Every fact that they don't like is dismissed as "Fake news". Even when referenced to academic work and clearly documented quotes and sources. And then comes their own inimitable nonsense - with no backing data or supporting sources. Just rants and assertions. Also gratuitious insults.
Oh and do read the post that you reply to - it tells you exactly which provincial governments the british ****-licking mahasabha formed with the equally brown-nosing muslim league. It's not something new to me. It is expected of appeasers.
Finally, clearly, you haven't found the energy to check out who first thought of & talked about partition. Or perhaps you have & it's inconvenient.
Anyway goodbye troll. No more feeds from me.Enough life wasted.

Very convenient of you to run away when your half truths are called out.
If you call Savarkar british serving, why don't you do the same to gandhi, who did far more for the british. Every statement I wrote about gandhi has historical proof. Which one do you dispute?
Show me where does the flag code of 2002 forced anyone to hoist the flag? You are not even aware that it merely lifted restrictions on people to hoist it any day of the year.

But if you don't have the courage to answer these, then you can hide behind the excuse of not wasting your time. Indeed, when your propaganda is exposed, your time is wasted.

 

[khan991]

A bunch of lunatics

 

[BreadPakoda]

Genuine questions. Would be great if anyone can answer.

Why do RSS folks wear half pants?

Why are most of the RSS members unfit? They either look fragile or have a huge paunch.

 

[TM Riddle]

Genuine questions. Would be great if anyone can answer.

Why do RSS folks wear half pants?

Why are most of the RSS members unfit? They either look fragile or have a huge paunch.

They don't anymore.
From last year they have transitioned to full pants.
Re fitness, why are most Indians unfit including police constables? It's how we are.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

RSS is not a hindu supremacy group. If it was hindu supremacist, why would it have a muslim wing, which has done great service for the muslim society (you can read up about their contribution). Did the KKK have a black panthers wing? RSS is an inclusive group which puts patriotism and nationalism first, and works on strengthening the foundations of the country through its stress on hindu culture, which is the common heritage of all indians, from all religions.

Doesn't stressing on Hindu culture hold the country back? Modern countries would adapt ideas from everywhere and replace their outdated dogmas in order to move forward. Why restrict yourself to your geography and long-standing prejudices when they might hold you back?

 

[Josh]

Hindutva might be like dawah of Islam

 

[CricketCartoons]

Hindutva might be like dawah of Islam

Sorry, Hindutva is more like Sufism. All inclusive and universal message of oneness. Just like the extreme devotion of the sufi dervishes towards the Almighty is mistaken as blasphemy, the extreme patriotism of the RSS malangs and qalandars is mistaken as fascism. Both advocate selfless service towards mankind without ego or reward, and both are fierce guardians of their faith.

 

[PakLFC]

Hindutva is a political movement not a religious belief. They believe in the Akhand Bharat nonsense of uniting the entire subcontinent and some even say beyond to bring back the glory days That everyone in India is a Hindu even if they are not!! What they mean is even if a person is a Christian, Sikh or Muslim they are culturally Hindu because of their ancestry! There is nothing spiritual about Hinduism at all rather a belief of restoring some ancient pride that exists in the minds of many people.

Correcting a previous error. I meant that Hinduism like any other faith is a spiritual path or religious belief. Hindutva is an oppressive political movement forcing non Hindu's to be Hindu's irrespective of their faith. Hindutva and Hinduism are very different to each other.

 

[WebGuru]

In this short clip Shashi Tharoor explained it really well a year ago that what's coming next for India under Hindutva leadership...

<iframe width="720" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bubnpPvDy8M" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Ram Shekhar]

It is the most bigoted concept ever and it is becoming mainstream in India now. Once Hitler believed Germans are superior than others and now Modi is following him. BJP is murdering Indian democracy without any remorse as sensible Indians are watching helplessly. India will never be the same again.

 

[WebGuru]

It is the most bigoted concept ever and it is becoming mainstream in India now. Once Hitler believed Germans are superior than others and now Modi is following him. BJP is murdering Indian democracy without any remorse as sensible Indians are watching helplessly. India will never be the same again.

The sad truth is most indians are happy with it and will elect BJP and Modi again

 

[Ram Shekhar]

The sad truth is most indians are happy with it and will elect BJP and Modi again

Yes, as I said India is not the same anymore. There is so much venom in the people it has reached the next stage. The next step probably is to declare India as a Hindu nation and people won't say a word. Sad truth!

 

[WebGuru]

Yes, as I said India is not the same anymore. There is so much venom in the people it has reached the next stage. The next step probably is to declare India as a Hindu nation and people won't say a word. Sad truth!

True

Tharoor may not be a perfect politician but he explained it a year ago in this clip

<iframe width="720" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bubnpPvDy8M" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Swashbuckler]

The sad truth is most indians are happy with it and will elect BJP and Modi again

Fascists (like Modi) often endear themselves to the people and long after they are long people realize how wrong they were, even in Europe there have been many examples. This might be a phase we are going through, who knows 40 years from now our next generation will be looking at this period and cursing our stupidity.

I am not making an exact analogy but here on PP I get similar vibes about Zia-Ul-Haq, he was popular in his time but the current generation of educated Pakistanis realize the damage he did, I am not that exposed to Pakistani politics so if I am wrong, do correct me.

 

[WebGuru]

Fascists (like Modi) often endear themselves to the people and long after they are long people realize how wrong they were, even in Europe there have been many examples. This might be a phase we are going through, who knows 40 years from now our next generation will be looking at this period and cursing our stupidity.

I am not making an exact analogy but here on PP I get similar vibes about Zia-Ul-Haq, he was popular in his time but the current generation of educated Pakistanis realize the damage he did, I am not that exposed to Pakistani politics so if I am wrong, do correct me.

You are right Zia and Zulfiqar Bhutto destroyed our institutions, economy, politics and society. They both gave us the gift of extremism.