Narendra Modi vs the rest ...

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

What you wrote above are right one. You don't read about what happen with Hindus of Punjab and Sindh are. My city have many family who come here empty hand. Gandhi ji never appeal to Muslim not to kill Hindus.

I did read about it and I also wrote about partition in my post. Nathuram Godse belonged to a Maharashtrian Brahmin family from Pune. Maharashtra and Maharashtrians were never directly affected by the partition like Punjabis, Sindhis and other Hindus from those states. But he was so moved by the plight of the Hindus returning to India from Pakistan both dead alive that he was very much enraged by it all, he was further enraged by Gandhi's continued policy of forgiving Muslims, keeping them happy. etc. He did fall out with RSS because he believed in direct and extreme action by force which RSS did not permit. Savarkar believed in Gandhiji only until Moplah happened, after that he realized that secular nation was not completely possible because you can never keep the Muslims happy, all they wanted was their own philosophy and for EVERY ONE to believe in Islam. India being majority Hindu, it was not possible and so he supported two nation theory BUT he also advocated that India be declared a HINDU nation at the time of partition. But your dear Gandhi and Nehru rejected that and threw Savarkar aside. Congress followed G and N and therefore the policy of Muslim appeasement begin at the cost of Hindu peace. Let me make it clear here that Hindutva does not mean hating Muslims but recognising that Hindutva is the first and foremost religion of India which in any case is true, Muslims should be able to recognise and respect that fact, many of them living in India do that any way. But given the rise of Wahabism as dictated by fanatical Mullahs, especially by the Deobandis who run Aligarh Muslim University, it is uncertain whether they will ever respect other religions.

What you wrote I also read some what, but I think it was not possible at that time to declare India as Hindu nation. Sikh community is one of largest community of North India. Sikhs are also not accepting that they are Hindu. At the of Partition Sikhs also demands for separate nation for them. But it also right that when Muslim get nation for them than they have not right to stay here.

anil wrote:

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

What you wrote above are right one. You don't read about what happen with Hindus of Punjab and Sindh are. My city have many family who come here empty hand. Gandhi ji never appeal to Muslim not to kill Hindus.

I did read about it and I also wrote about partition in my post. Nathuram Godse belonged to a Maharashtrian Brahmin family from Pune. Maharashtra and Maharashtrians were never directly affected by the partition like Punjabis, Sindhis and other Hindus from those states. But he was so moved by the plight of the Hindus returning to India from Pakistan both dead alive that he was very much enraged by it all, he was further enraged by Gandhi's continued policy of forgiving Muslims, keeping them happy. etc. He did fall out with RSS because he believed in direct and extreme action by force which RSS did not permit. Savarkar believed in Gandhiji only until Moplah happened, after that he realized that secular nation was not completely possible because you can never keep the Muslims happy, all they wanted was their own philosophy and for EVERY ONE to believe in Islam. India being majority Hindu, it was not possible and so he supported two nation theory BUT he also advocated that India be declared a HINDU nation at the time of partition. But your dear Gandhi and Nehru rejected that and threw Savarkar aside. Congress followed G and N and therefore the policy of Muslim appeasement begin at the cost of Hindu peace. Let me make it clear here that Hindutva does not mean hating Muslims but recognising that Hindutva is the first and foremost religion of India which in any case is true, Muslims should be able to recognise and respect that fact, many of them living in India do that any way. But given the rise of Wahabism as dictated by fanatical Mullahs, especially by the Deobandis who run Aligarh Muslim University, it is uncertain whether they will ever respect other religions.

What you wrote I also read some what, but I think it was not possible at that time to declare India as Hindu nation. Sikh community is one of largest community of North India. Sikhs are also not accepting that they are Hindu. At the of Partition Sikhs also demands for separate nation for them. But it also right that when Muslim get nation for them than they have not right to stay here.

Who said it was not possible to declare India a Hindu nation???  It was very much possible! Gandhiji insisted, in fact he was very obstinate about it to let Muslims stay in India if they wished to while Hindus were run out of Pakistan brutally while snatching away little and young girls and forcing them into becoming slaves to Pakis. But Gandhi and Nehru both didn't want to declare Hindu status because of their secularism which has so damaged our country. As far as Sikhs are concerned, they always had full respect towards Hindu as a religion since they understand that they themselves were Hindus at one point of time and there was no question of offending them as Hindus and Sikhs have always and even now lived and worked in total harmony! So that point is not valid. The question was only of having the will do do and that too with only a few people!

usha manohar wrote:

Hopefully Mr Modi will seriously look into abolishing article 370 in Kashmir and let it become a normal state like the others and bring in Uniform civil code ..these two measures could help our nation immensely. Most developed nations have a state religion and I dont see why India with a population of 80% Hindus cannot have a state religion. It solves several problems related to religion..  

That will be like a historical decision and a tough one going against populism. I think only BJP government with a majority mark can do that. They did not do it in last 5 years playing safe for next term. But if they come next term with clean mandate they should do it in favour of nation. There is a big demand of this from Modi on various social media platform especially after Phulwama incident. There is also speculation in media that this government is considering to abolish Article 35 A though they have not verified it. Even it came in today's newspaper. 

I just hope that if they come with clean mandate in upcoming election, they should take few of these tough decisions. They will be like last nail in the coffin of all the toruble and terrorism in Kashmir. We will have unrest for short time but things will be resolved in a long run.

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

What you wrote above are right one. You don't read about what happen with Hindus of Punjab and Sindh are. My city have many family who come here empty hand. Gandhi ji never appeal to Muslim not to kill Hindus.

I did read about it and I also wrote about partition in my post. Nathuram Godse belonged to a Maharashtrian Brahmin family from Pune. Maharashtra and Maharashtrians were never directly affected by the partition like Punjabis, Sindhis and other Hindus from those states. But he was so moved by the plight of the Hindus returning to India from Pakistan both dead alive that he was very much enraged by it all, he was further enraged by Gandhi's continued policy of forgiving Muslims, keeping them happy. etc. He did fall out with RSS because he believed in direct and extreme action by force which RSS did not permit. Savarkar believed in Gandhiji only until Moplah happened, after that he realized that secular nation was not completely possible because you can never keep the Muslims happy, all they wanted was their own philosophy and for EVERY ONE to believe in Islam. India being majority Hindu, it was not possible and so he supported two nation theory BUT he also advocated that India be declared a HINDU nation at the time of partition. But your dear Gandhi and Nehru rejected that and threw Savarkar aside. Congress followed G and N and therefore the policy of Muslim appeasement begin at the cost of Hindu peace. Let me make it clear here that Hindutva does not mean hating Muslims but recognising that Hindutva is the first and foremost religion of India which in any case is true, Muslims should be able to recognise and respect that fact, many of them living in India do that any way. But given the rise of Wahabism as dictated by fanatical Mullahs, especially by the Deobandis who run Aligarh Muslim University, it is uncertain whether they will ever respect other religions.

What you wrote I also read some what, but I think it was not possible at that time to declare India as Hindu nation. Sikh community is one of largest community of North India. Sikhs are also not accepting that they are Hindu. At the of Partition Sikhs also demands for separate nation for them. But it also right that when Muslim get nation for them than they have not right to stay here.

Who said it was not possible to declare India a Hindu nation???  It was very much possible! Gandhiji insisted, in fact he was very obstinate about it to let Muslims stay in India if they wished to while Hindus were run out of Pakistan brutally while snatching away little and young girls and forcing them into becoming slaves to Pakis. But Gandhi and Nehru both didn't want to declare Hindu status because of their secularism which has so damaged our country. As far as Sikhs are concerned, they always had full respect towards Hindu as a religion since they understand that they themselves were Hindus at one point of time and there was no question of offending them as Hindus and Sikhs have always and even now lived and worked in total harmony! So that point is not valid. The question was only of having the will do do and that too with only a few people!

You may be right one some points, sorry, you don't know about Sikh community. I am living is area where Sikh community is living in large number and my city is also adjoining to Punjab. I know well about Sikh culture and their traditions and culture. Sikh never accepted it that they are Hindu. Master Tara Singh was of Akali leader and at the time of Partition he demands for separate Sikh state. Here in my are Sikh are minor community, if they are Hindu why they are minor here. Their rituals of marriage is differ from Hindus.

Arunima Singh wrote:

usha manohar wrote:

Hopefully Mr Modi will seriously look into abolishing article 370 in Kashmir and let it become a normal state like the others and bring in Uniform civil code ..these two measures could help our nation immensely. Most developed nations have a state religion and I dont see why India with a population of 80% Hindus cannot have a state religion. It solves several problems related to religion..  

That will be like a historical decision and a tough one going against populism. I think only BJP government with a majority mark can do that. They did not do it in last 5 years playing safe for next term. But if they come next term with clean mandate they should do it in favour of nation. There is a big demand of this from Modi on various social media platform especially after Phulwama incident. There is also speculation in media that this government is considering to abolish Article 35 A though they have not verified it. Even it came in today's newspaper. 

I just hope that if they come with clean mandate in upcoming election, they should take few of these tough decisions. They will be like last nail in the coffin of all the toruble and terrorism in Kashmir. We will have unrest for short time but things will be resolved in a long run.

Flexible law is best one and rigid law is worst one. So section 370 was demand of that time. Time is enough changed. With this nation and Kashmir never get any benefit , one thing with this law and it is that Kashmir is till most backward state of India. This law is barrier in way of progress of Kashmir. It must be removed. Some political parties like National conferance and SP are always threating country and government that if this section is removed their may be big riots in Kashmir and it went to Pakistan. It is noting more than fictional fear which is created by some selfish politicians. It is question, that Kashmir have peace and calm with this section. Kashmir is burning, what will new happen if this section will remove?

anil wrote:

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

What you wrote above are right one. You don't read about what happen with Hindus of Punjab and Sindh are. My city have many family who come here empty hand. Gandhi ji never appeal to Muslim not to kill Hindus.

I did read about it and I also wrote about partition in my post. Nathuram Godse belonged to a Maharashtrian Brahmin family from Pune. Maharashtra and Maharashtrians were never directly affected by the partition like Punjabis, Sindhis and other Hindus from those states. But he was so moved by the plight of the Hindus returning to India from Pakistan both dead alive that he was very much enraged by it all, he was further enraged by Gandhi's continued policy of forgiving Muslims, keeping them happy. etc. He did fall out with RSS because he believed in direct and extreme action by force which RSS did not permit. Savarkar believed in Gandhiji only until Moplah happened, after that he realized that secular nation was not completely possible because you can never keep the Muslims happy, all they wanted was their own philosophy and for EVERY ONE to believe in Islam. India being majority Hindu, it was not possible and so he supported two nation theory BUT he also advocated that India be declared a HINDU nation at the time of partition. But your dear Gandhi and Nehru rejected that and threw Savarkar aside. Congress followed G and N and therefore the policy of Muslim appeasement begin at the cost of Hindu peace. Let me make it clear here that Hindutva does not mean hating Muslims but recognising that Hindutva is the first and foremost religion of India which in any case is true, Muslims should be able to recognise and respect that fact, many of them living in India do that any way. But given the rise of Wahabism as dictated by fanatical Mullahs, especially by the Deobandis who run Aligarh Muslim University, it is uncertain whether they will ever respect other religions.

What you wrote I also read some what, but I think it was not possible at that time to declare India as Hindu nation. Sikh community is one of largest community of North India. Sikhs are also not accepting that they are Hindu. At the of Partition Sikhs also demands for separate nation for them. But it also right that when Muslim get nation for them than they have not right to stay here.

Who said it was not possible to declare India a Hindu nation???  It was very much possible! Gandhiji insisted, in fact he was very obstinate about it to let Muslims stay in India if they wished to while Hindus were run out of Pakistan brutally while snatching away little and young girls and forcing them into becoming slaves to Pakis. But Gandhi and Nehru both didn't want to declare Hindu status because of their secularism which has so damaged our country. As far as Sikhs are concerned, they always had full respect towards Hindu as a religion since they understand that they themselves were Hindus at one point of time and there was no question of offending them as Hindus and Sikhs have always and even now lived and worked in total harmony! So that point is not valid. The question was only of having the will do do and that too with only a few people!

You may be right one some points, sorry, you don't know about Sikh community. I am living is area where Sikh community is living in large number and my city is also adjoining to Punjab. I know well about Sikh culture and their traditions and culture. Sikh never accepted it that they are Hindu. Master Tara Singh was of Akali leader and at the time of Partition he demands for separate Sikh state. Here in my are Sikh are minor community, if they are Hindu why they are minor here. Their rituals of marriage is differ from Hindus.

I know the community extremely well, have lived with Sikhs as neighbours, grown up with Sikh friends, may be there are some who refuse to identify with their original Hindu roots but it still does not mean that they are wary of Hindus or view other religions as a threat like Muslims do!

Narendra Modi is doing his best to help uplift the nation. If there is one lacuna in his working style that is talking too much about opposition parties. He should refrain from doing this which will be more graceful for his post and personality.

suni51 wrote:

Narendra Modi is doing his best to help uplift the nation. If there is one lacuna in his working style that is talking too much about opposition parties. He should refrain from doing this which will be more graceful for his post and personality.

I agree! Until now, he focused on projecting his work and completed projects rather loudly but I think that was necessary also to make people realise that BJP government is indeed doing productive work as compared to earlier and I think that that purpose has been solved. If granted a second term, which I hope and pray will happen, he should talk less and work as usual!

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

What you wrote above are right one. You don't read about what happen with Hindus of Punjab and Sindh are. My city have many family who come here empty hand. Gandhi ji never appeal to Muslim not to kill Hindus.

I did read about it and I also wrote about partition in my post. Nathuram Godse belonged to a Maharashtrian Brahmin family from Pune. Maharashtra and Maharashtrians were never directly affected by the partition like Punjabis, Sindhis and other Hindus from those states. But he was so moved by the plight of the Hindus returning to India from Pakistan both dead alive that he was very much enraged by it all, he was further enraged by Gandhi's continued policy of forgiving Muslims, keeping them happy. etc. He did fall out with RSS because he believed in direct and extreme action by force which RSS did not permit. Savarkar believed in Gandhiji only until Moplah happened, after that he realized that secular nation was not completely possible because you can never keep the Muslims happy, all they wanted was their own philosophy and for EVERY ONE to believe in Islam. India being majority Hindu, it was not possible and so he supported two nation theory BUT he also advocated that India be declared a HINDU nation at the time of partition. But your dear Gandhi and Nehru rejected that and threw Savarkar aside. Congress followed G and N and therefore the policy of Muslim appeasement begin at the cost of Hindu peace. Let me make it clear here that Hindutva does not mean hating Muslims but recognising that Hindutva is the first and foremost religion of India which in any case is true, Muslims should be able to recognise and respect that fact, many of them living in India do that any way. But given the rise of Wahabism as dictated by fanatical Mullahs, especially by the Deobandis who run Aligarh Muslim University, it is uncertain whether they will ever respect other religions.

What you wrote I also read some what, but I think it was not possible at that time to declare India as Hindu nation. Sikh community is one of largest community of North India. Sikhs are also not accepting that they are Hindu. At the of Partition Sikhs also demands for separate nation for them. But it also right that when Muslim get nation for them than they have not right to stay here.

Who said it was not possible to declare India a Hindu nation???  It was very much possible! Gandhiji insisted, in fact he was very obstinate about it to let Muslims stay in India if they wished to while Hindus were run out of Pakistan brutally while snatching away little and young girls and forcing them into becoming slaves to Pakis. But Gandhi and Nehru both didn't want to declare Hindu status because of their secularism which has so damaged our country. As far as Sikhs are concerned, they always had full respect towards Hindu as a religion since they understand that they themselves were Hindus at one point of time and there was no question of offending them as Hindus and Sikhs have always and even now lived and worked in total harmony! So that point is not valid. The question was only of having the will do do and that too with only a few people!

You may be right one some points, sorry, you don't know about Sikh community. I am living is area where Sikh community is living in large number and my city is also adjoining to Punjab. I know well about Sikh culture and their traditions and culture. Sikh never accepted it that they are Hindu. Master Tara Singh was of Akali leader and at the time of Partition he demands for separate Sikh state. Here in my are Sikh are minor community, if they are Hindu why they are minor here. Their rituals of marriage is differ from Hindus.

I know the community extremely well, have lived with Sikhs as neighbours, grown up with Sikh friends, may be there are some who refuse to identify with their original Hindu roots but it still does not mean that they are wary of Hindus or view other religions as a threat like Muslims do!

It is right that all sikhs are of Hindu origin. You are living in Maharashtra and Skihs which are leaving their are not too much. Some time come to Punjab and ask this question to them that you are Hindu, they will reply you. If Sikhs are Hindu than why they are minor community in my area. Their education institutes are minor community institutes. 

A now the latest air strike might prove to be beneficial for Modi.  A strong political will and a stable government is the need of the hour in our country.  Many people have realized it in current situation in our country. 

anil wrote:

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

What you wrote above are right one. You don't read about what happen with Hindus of Punjab and Sindh are. My city have many family who come here empty hand. Gandhi ji never appeal to Muslim not to kill Hindus.

I did read about it and I also wrote about partition in my post. Nathuram Godse belonged to a Maharashtrian Brahmin family from Pune. Maharashtra and Maharashtrians were never directly affected by the partition like Punjabis, Sindhis and other Hindus from those states. But he was so moved by the plight of the Hindus returning to India from Pakistan both dead alive that he was very much enraged by it all, he was further enraged by Gandhi's continued policy of forgiving Muslims, keeping them happy. etc. He did fall out with RSS because he believed in direct and extreme action by force which RSS did not permit. Savarkar believed in Gandhiji only until Moplah happened, after that he realized that secular nation was not completely possible because you can never keep the Muslims happy, all they wanted was their own philosophy and for EVERY ONE to believe in Islam. India being majority Hindu, it was not possible and so he supported two nation theory BUT he also advocated that India be declared a HINDU nation at the time of partition. But your dear Gandhi and Nehru rejected that and threw Savarkar aside. Congress followed G and N and therefore the policy of Muslim appeasement begin at the cost of Hindu peace. Let me make it clear here that Hindutva does not mean hating Muslims but recognising that Hindutva is the first and foremost religion of India which in any case is true, Muslims should be able to recognise and respect that fact, many of them living in India do that any way. But given the rise of Wahabism as dictated by fanatical Mullahs, especially by the Deobandis who run Aligarh Muslim University, it is uncertain whether they will ever respect other religions.

What you wrote I also read some what, but I think it was not possible at that time to declare India as Hindu nation. Sikh community is one of largest community of North India. Sikhs are also not accepting that they are Hindu. At the of Partition Sikhs also demands for separate nation for them. But it also right that when Muslim get nation for them than they have not right to stay here.

Who said it was not possible to declare India a Hindu nation???  It was very much possible! Gandhiji insisted, in fact he was very obstinate about it to let Muslims stay in India if they wished to while Hindus were run out of Pakistan brutally while snatching away little and young girls and forcing them into becoming slaves to Pakis. But Gandhi and Nehru both didn't want to declare Hindu status because of their secularism which has so damaged our country. As far as Sikhs are concerned, they always had full respect towards Hindu as a religion since they understand that they themselves were Hindus at one point of time and there was no question of offending them as Hindus and Sikhs have always and even now lived and worked in total harmony! So that point is not valid. The question was only of having the will do do and that too with only a few people!

You may be right one some points, sorry, you don't know about Sikh community. I am living is area where Sikh community is living in large number and my city is also adjoining to Punjab. I know well about Sikh culture and their traditions and culture. Sikh never accepted it that they are Hindu. Master Tara Singh was of Akali leader and at the time of Partition he demands for separate Sikh state. Here in my are Sikh are minor community, if they are Hindu why they are minor here. Their rituals of marriage is differ from Hindus.

I know the community extremely well, have lived with Sikhs as neighbours, grown up with Sikh friends, may be there are some who refuse to identify with their original Hindu roots but it still does not mean that they are wary of Hindus or view other religions as a threat like Muslims do!

It is right that all sikhs are of Hindu origin. You are living in Maharashtra and Skihs which are leaving their are not too much. Some time come to Punjab and ask this question to them that you are Hindu, they will reply you. If Sikhs are Hindu than why they are minor community in my area. Their education institutes are minor community institutes. 

They are categorised as minors in your area because they are fewer in number than other communities, that is all! In Punjab, obviously they form a majority!

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

anil wrote:

What you wrote above are right one. You don't read about what happen with Hindus of Punjab and Sindh are. My city have many family who come here empty hand. Gandhi ji never appeal to Muslim not to kill Hindus.

I did read about it and I also wrote about partition in my post. Nathuram Godse belonged to a Maharashtrian Brahmin family from Pune. Maharashtra and Maharashtrians were never directly affected by the partition like Punjabis, Sindhis and other Hindus from those states. But he was so moved by the plight of the Hindus returning to India from Pakistan both dead alive that he was very much enraged by it all, he was further enraged by Gandhi's continued policy of forgiving Muslims, keeping them happy. etc. He did fall out with RSS because he believed in direct and extreme action by force which RSS did not permit. Savarkar believed in Gandhiji only until Moplah happened, after that he realized that secular nation was not completely possible because you can never keep the Muslims happy, all they wanted was their own philosophy and for EVERY ONE to believe in Islam. India being majority Hindu, it was not possible and so he supported two nation theory BUT he also advocated that India be declared a HINDU nation at the time of partition. But your dear Gandhi and Nehru rejected that and threw Savarkar aside. Congress followed G and N and therefore the policy of Muslim appeasement begin at the cost of Hindu peace. Let me make it clear here that Hindutva does not mean hating Muslims but recognising that Hindutva is the first and foremost religion of India which in any case is true, Muslims should be able to recognise and respect that fact, many of them living in India do that any way. But given the rise of Wahabism as dictated by fanatical Mullahs, especially by the Deobandis who run Aligarh Muslim University, it is uncertain whether they will ever respect other religions.

What you wrote I also read some what, but I think it was not possible at that time to declare India as Hindu nation. Sikh community is one of largest community of North India. Sikhs are also not accepting that they are Hindu. At the of Partition Sikhs also demands for separate nation for them. But it also right that when Muslim get nation for them than they have not right to stay here.

Who said it was not possible to declare India a Hindu nation???  It was very much possible! Gandhiji insisted, in fact he was very obstinate about it to let Muslims stay in India if they wished to while Hindus were run out of Pakistan brutally while snatching away little and young girls and forcing them into becoming slaves to Pakis. But Gandhi and Nehru both didn't want to declare Hindu status because of their secularism which has so damaged our country. As far as Sikhs are concerned, they always had full respect towards Hindu as a religion since they understand that they themselves were Hindus at one point of time and there was no question of offending them as Hindus and Sikhs have always and even now lived and worked in total harmony! So that point is not valid. The question was only of having the will do do and that too with only a few people!

You may be right one some points, sorry, you don't know about Sikh community. I am living is area where Sikh community is living in large number and my city is also adjoining to Punjab. I know well about Sikh culture and their traditions and culture. Sikh never accepted it that they are Hindu. Master Tara Singh was of Akali leader and at the time of Partition he demands for separate Sikh state. Here in my are Sikh are minor community, if they are Hindu why they are minor here. Their rituals of marriage is differ from Hindus.

I know the community extremely well, have lived with Sikhs as neighbours, grown up with Sikh friends, may be there are some who refuse to identify with their original Hindu roots but it still does not mean that they are wary of Hindus or view other religions as a threat like Muslims do!

It is right that all sikhs are of Hindu origin. You are living in Maharashtra and Skihs which are leaving their are not too much. Some time come to Punjab and ask this question to them that you are Hindu, they will reply you. If Sikhs are Hindu than why they are minor community in my area. Their education institutes are minor community institutes. 

They are categorised as minors in your area because they are fewer in number than other communities, that is all! In Punjab, obviously they form a majority!

Yes it is saying I am that they are not Hindu. If they are Hindu than why they are minor community in my area?

Frankly speaking, we have to look at Indian politics since independence to really understand what is going on at present and why the opposition parties are willing to go to any lengths to malign a government which is not in a permanent paralysis mode, unlike previous governments.

Whatever reasons (that's for another topic) might there have been for Indian partition, but it happened. And since then, appeasement politics have been prevalent. Initially though with good intentions, to uplift the huge number of people below the poverty line, reservations were adopted as a temporary measures for 10 years. Though strangely, instead of uplifting the poor, this reservation was interpreted as targeted specifically for the lower caste of Hindus and thus successive governments & political parties thereafter started to divide the population on various statistical values based on CASTE, RELIGION, LANGUAGE, ETHNICITY etc. And based on these statistical figures started political movements based on the largest minority population of these sub-groups, with the assumption that the majority will take of themselves and majority will never be a united front.

So the political scene for the next 60 odd years were governed by demands for reservations for SC, ST, OBC, MUSLIM, WOMEN, LANGUAGE, ETHNICITY etc. All these changed with present government coming to power. Here was a Prime-Minister who believed in "Sabka sath Sabka vikas" , it was not merely a lip service but a philosophy he actually believed in and showed that with actions on the ground he took under various schemes the government started be it the Ujwala scheme (which didn't differentiate between the beneficiary on the basis of caste, religion or ethnicity) , Zer balance Bank account, cleanliness drives, toilets for all etc.

This created a major problem for all the opposition parties as each of them were relevant in the National scene on account for dividing the population and targeting one specific target group, like Congress & TMC mainly believed in appeasing the Muslim minority, Mayawati (BSP) appeasing the DALIT (as per the inaccurate interpretation), The Abdhullas (NCP) Ethnicity & Religion based, Arvind Kejriwal (AAP) irrelevant as they are failures in all aspects.  So they needed to create a different narrative to remain relevant.

So they first started with INTOLERANCE movement, but people saw through that as it showed, it was they were the ones who were intolerant as their special privileges were getting affected.

Then came the deflection on Rafael deal and hypothetical corruption charges, which they have been continuing even though there is neither any evidence for it nor any one believing their logic.

 Then charges of ignoring the farmers & working for the betterment of handful of the rich industrialists. With the current scheme of the Government to  give Rs 6000/- to each of the marginalized farmers every year, this allegation has also lost its tooth.

Now charges of using the armed forces for politics, again, here as per my understanding, operational effectiveness/ strike outcome of armed forces on the ground is not a victory or loss of the government but will to give the Go-ahead OR NOT, and it's implication on National & International scene is the Government's victory or loss. And here as well the  Government has the full moral & propriety right to claim victory. On the other hand opposition when questioning how many terrorist were killed? or show us the evidence of the strike... is actually questioning the integrity of the armed forces and not of the current Government... Thus the opposition has successfully managed to alienate another  huge chunk of population who has some or the other family member working for the forces. (The scattered opposition we hear about from the armed forces about government action & perils of war, if we examine carefully the persons behind these, we find their close link to a certain political party or member of the opposition).

I can keep going on and on about the various allegations against Modi and his government by the opposition & the outcome is that opposition parties have very well managed to keep alienating one after the other sub-group of various statistical data they use to divide the Indian population. When they are doing such a wonderful job of alienating the Indian population BJP and Mr Modi doesn't need to even canvass for 2019 election rather let the opposition dig their own grave, rather he should do what he does best, work at making INDIA GREAT AGAIN!!     

Frankly speaking, we have to look at Indian politics since independence to really understand what is going on at present and why the opposition parties are willing to go to any lengths to malign a government which is not in a permanent paralysis mode, unlike previous governments.

Whatever reasons (that's for another topic) might there have been for Indian partition, but it happened. And since then, appeasement politics have been prevalent. Initially though with good intentions, to uplift the huge number of people below the poverty line, reservations were adopted as a temporary measures for 10 years. Though strangely, instead of uplifting the poor, this reservation was interpreted as targeted specifically for the lower caste of Hindus and thus successive governments & political parties thereafter started to divide the population on various statistical values based on CASTE, RELIGION, LANGUAGE, ETHNICITY etc. And based on these statistical figures started political movements based on the largest minority population of these sub-groups, with the assumption that the majority will take of themselves and majority will never be a united front.

So the political scene for the next 60 odd years were governed by demands for reservations for SC, ST, OBC, MUSLIM, WOMEN, LANGUAGE, ETHNICITY etc. All these changed with present government coming to power. Here was a Prime-Minister who believed in "Sabka sath Sabka vikas" , it was not merely a lip service but a philosophy he actually believed in and showed that with actions on the ground he took under various schemes the government started be it the Ujwala scheme (which didn't differentiate between the beneficiary on the basis of caste, religion or ethnicity) , Zer balance Bank account, cleanliness drives, toilets for all etc.

This created a major problem for all the opposition parties as each of them were relevant in the National scene on account for dividing the population and targeting one specific target group, like Congress & TMC mainly believed in appeasing the Muslim minority, Mayawati (BSP) appeasing the DALIT (as per the inaccurate interpretation), The Abdhullas (NCP) Ethnicity & Religion based, Arvind Kejriwal (AAP) irrelevant as they are failures in all aspects.  So they needed to create a different narrative to remain relevant.

So they first started with INTOLERANCE movement, but people saw through that as it showed, it was they were the ones who were intolerant as their special privileges were getting affected.

Then came the deflection on Rafael deal and hypothetical corruption charges, which they have been continuing even though there is neither any evidence for it nor any one believing their logic.

 Then charges of ignoring the farmers & working for the betterment of handful of the rich industrialists. With the current scheme of the Government to  give Rs 6000/- to each of the marginalized farmers every year, this allegation has also lost its tooth.

Now charges of using the armed forces for politics, again, here as per my understanding, operational effectiveness/ strike outcome of armed forces on the ground is not a victory or loss of the government but will to give the Go-ahead OR NOT, and it's implication on National & International scene is the Government's victory or loss. And here as well the  Government has the full moral & propriety right to claim victory. On the other hand opposition when questioning how many terrorist were killed? or show us the evidence of the strike... is actually questioning the integrity of the armed forces and not of the current Government... Thus the opposition has successfully managed to alienate another  huge chunk of population who has some or the other family member working for the forces. (The scattered opposition we hear about from the armed forces about government action & perils of war, if we examine carefully the persons behind these, we find their close link to a certain political party or member of the opposition).

I can keep going on and on about the various allegations against Modi and his government by the opposition & the outcome is that opposition parties have very well managed to keep alienating one after the other sub-group of various statistical data they use to divide the Indian population. When they are doing such a wonderful job of alienating the Indian population BJP and Mr Modi doesn't need to even canvass for 2019 election rather let the opposition dig their own grave, rather he should do what he does best, work at making INDIA GREAT AGAIN!!     

Ameet Barua wrote:

Frankly speaking, we have to look at Indian politics since independence to really understand what is going on at present and why the opposition parties are willing to go to any lengths to malign a government which is not in a permanent paralysis mode, unlike previous governments.

Whatever reasons (that's for another topic) might there have been for Indian partition, but it happened. And since then, appeasement politics have been prevalent. Initially though with good intentions, to uplift the huge number of people below the poverty line, reservations were adopted as a temporary measures for 10 years. Though strangely, instead of uplifting the poor, this reservation was interpreted as targeted specifically for the lower caste of Hindus and thus successive governments & political parties thereafter started to divide the population on various statistical values based on CASTE, RELIGION, LANGUAGE, ETHNICITY etc. And based on these statistical figures started political movements based on the largest minority population of these sub-groups, with the assumption that the majority will take of themselves and majority will never be a united front.

So the political scene for the next 60 odd years were governed by demands for reservations for SC, ST, OBC, MUSLIM, WOMEN, LANGUAGE, ETHNICITY etc. All these changed with present government coming to power. Here was a Prime-Minister who believed in "Sabka sath Sabka vikas" , it was not merely a lip service but a philosophy he actually believed in and showed that with actions on the ground he took under various schemes the government started be it the Ujwala scheme (which didn't differentiate between the beneficiary on the basis of caste, religion or ethnicity) , Zer balance Bank account, cleanliness drives, toilets for all etc.

This created a major problem for all the opposition parties as each of them were relevant in the National scene on account for dividing the population and targeting one specific target group, like Congress & TMC mainly believed in appeasing the Muslim minority, Mayawati (BSP) appeasing the DALIT (as per the inaccurate interpretation), The Abdhullas (NCP) Ethnicity & Religion based, Arvind Kejriwal (AAP) irrelevant as they are failures in all aspects.  So they needed to create a different narrative to remain relevant.

So they first started with INTOLERANCE movement, but people saw through that as it showed, it was they were the ones who were intolerant as their special privileges were getting affected.

Then came the deflection on Rafael deal and hypothetical corruption charges, which they have been continuing even though there is neither any evidence for it nor any one believing their logic.

 Then charges of ignoring the farmers & working for the betterment of handful of the rich industrialists. With the current scheme of the Government to  give Rs 6000/- to each of the marginalized farmers every year, this allegation has also lost its tooth.

Now charges of using the armed forces for politics, again, here as per my understanding, operational effectiveness/ strike outcome of armed forces on the ground is not a victory or loss of the government but will to give the Go-ahead OR NOT, and it's implication on National & International scene is the Government's victory or loss. And here as well the  Government has the full moral & propriety right to claim victory. On the other hand opposition when questioning how many terrorist were killed? or show us the evidence of the strike... is actually questioning the integrity of the armed forces and not of the current Government... Thus the opposition has successfully managed to alienate another  huge chunk of population who has some or the other family member working for the forces. (The scattered opposition we hear about from the armed forces about government action & perils of war, if we examine carefully the persons behind these, we find their close link to a certain political party or member of the opposition).

I can keep going on and on about the various allegations against Modi and his government by the opposition & the outcome is that opposition parties have very well managed to keep alienating one after the other sub-group of various statistical data they use to divide the Indian population. When they are doing such a wonderful job of alienating the Indian population BJP and Mr Modi doesn't need to even canvass for 2019 election rather let the opposition dig their own grave, rather he should do what he does best, work at making INDIA GREAT AGAIN!!     

You have beautifully penned down all the points that are valid. 

This regime has done a lot though they could have done a little better with their talks and conducts in public sphere. It is not Modi but some of his party men who spoil the game.

And we can just hope that people use their vote sensibly keeping their personal, regional, communal and other small interests away and looking at the bigger picture.

The allegations that opposition keeps framing is mostly bouncing back on them. They might be digging their own grave. But still looking at the uncertainty of .Indian elections, I would keep my fingers crossed and hope for Modi to come back in national interest

Arunima Singh wrote:

Ameet Barua wrote:

Frankly speaking, we have to look at Indian politics since independence to really understand what is going on at present and why the opposition parties are willing to go to any lengths to malign a government which is not in a permanent paralysis mode, unlike previous governments.

Whatever reasons (that's for another topic) might there have been for Indian partition, but it happened. And since then, appeasement politics have been prevalent. Initially though with good intentions, to uplift the huge number of people below the poverty line, reservations were adopted as a temporary measures for 10 years. Though strangely, instead of uplifting the poor, this reservation was interpreted as targeted specifically for the lower caste of Hindus and thus successive governments & political parties thereafter started to divide the population on various statistical values based on CASTE, RELIGION, LANGUAGE, ETHNICITY etc. And based on these statistical figures started political movements based on the largest minority population of these sub-groups, with the assumption that the majority will take of themselves and majority will never be a united front.

So the political scene for the next 60 odd years were governed by demands for reservations for SC, ST, OBC, MUSLIM, WOMEN, LANGUAGE, ETHNICITY etc. All these changed with present government coming to power. Here was a Prime-Minister who believed in "Sabka sath Sabka vikas" , it was not merely a lip service but a philosophy he actually believed in and showed that with actions on the ground he took under various schemes the government started be it the Ujwala scheme (which didn't differentiate between the beneficiary on the basis of caste, religion or ethnicity) , Zer balance Bank account, cleanliness drives, toilets for all etc.

This created a major problem for all the opposition parties as each of them were relevant in the National scene on account for dividing the population and targeting one specific target group, like Congress & TMC mainly believed in appeasing the Muslim minority, Mayawati (BSP) appeasing the DALIT (as per the inaccurate interpretation), The Abdhullas (NCP) Ethnicity & Religion based, Arvind Kejriwal (AAP) irrelevant as they are failures in all aspects.  So they needed to create a different narrative to remain relevant.

So they first started with INTOLERANCE movement, but people saw through that as it showed, it was they were the ones who were intolerant as their special privileges were getting affected.

Then came the deflection on Rafael deal and hypothetical corruption charges, which they have been continuing even though there is neither any evidence for it nor any one believing their logic.

 Then charges of ignoring the farmers & working for the betterment of handful of the rich industrialists. With the current scheme of the Government to  give Rs 6000/- to each of the marginalized farmers every year, this allegation has also lost its tooth.

Now charges of using the armed forces for politics, again, here as per my understanding, operational effectiveness/ strike outcome of armed forces on the ground is not a victory or loss of the government but will to give the Go-ahead OR NOT, and it's implication on National & International scene is the Government's victory or loss. And here as well the  Government has the full moral & propriety right to claim victory. On the other hand opposition when questioning how many terrorist were killed? or show us the evidence of the strike... is actually questioning the integrity of the armed forces and not of the current Government... Thus the opposition has successfully managed to alienate another  huge chunk of population who has some or the other family member working for the forces. (The scattered opposition we hear about from the armed forces about government action & perils of war, if we examine carefully the persons behind these, we find their close link to a certain political party or member of the opposition).

I can keep going on and on about the various allegations against Modi and his government by the opposition & the outcome is that opposition parties have very well managed to keep alienating one after the other sub-group of various statistical data they use to divide the Indian population. When they are doing such a wonderful job of alienating the Indian population BJP and Mr Modi doesn't need to even canvass for 2019 election rather let the opposition dig their own grave, rather he should do what he does best, work at making INDIA GREAT AGAIN!!     

You have beautifully penned down all the points that are valid. 

This regime has done a lot though they could have done a little better with their talks and conducts in public sphere. It is not Modi but some of his party men who spoil the game.

And we can just hope that people use their vote sensibly keeping their personal, regional, communal and other small interests away and looking at the bigger picture.

The allegations that opposition keeps framing is mostly bouncing back on them. They might be digging their own grave. But still looking at the uncertainty of .Indian elections, I would keep my fingers crossed and hope for Modi to come back in national interest

After surgical strike to change of come back of Modi Ji is improved. BJP will gain 15-20 seats in North India.

Setiously anil, only 15-20 sets in North India? 

usha manohar wrote:

Setiously anil, only 15-20 sets in North India? 

I am sure Anil forgot to add one 0 in his speculation in entire India! or 50-80 in North India

suni51 wrote:

usha manohar wrote:

Setiously anil, only 15-20 sets in North India? 

I am sure Anil forgot to add one 0 in his speculation in entire India! or 50-80 in North India

I would say that unless they get at least 100-120 seats in the north they cannot hope to form govt during the next term , because the bulk of their seats come from the northern states