Comments on: India and the myth of ‘minority’

By: Saju

Saju — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 06:55:57 +0000

Is it reasonble to believe that we would have been like Europe had there been no British invasion. At least in the sense that a collection of small but rich countries. I am not sure how the style of functioning would have transpired in terms of democracy etc.

If that had happened, it would not have been such a bad thing according to me.

By: Arby K

Arby K — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 17:11:26 +0000

@ Mayank :

I am not sure what u r trying to convey. U r contradicting urself by saying India has never been a single country and in essence probably never will.

As for the part of India fighting united against all oppressors, history will considerably differ in that point.

Case in point , Third Battle of Panipat where the Mughal Nawab of Awadh fought on the side of the Afghan invader Ahmed Shah Abdali against the Marathas ; Battle of Plassey where the General of Bengal betrayed his Nawab and took the side of the British which led to the annexation of Bengal by the British ; Second Battle of Panipat where the Suri dynasty was breaking up with internal clashes and Hemu was attempting to usurp the throne for himself, when Akbar attacked him.

By: Vijayendra Mohanty

Vijayendra Mohanty — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 05:37:13 +0000

I moderate comments because there are some people who badmouth me and others here. I am not in favour of attacking individuals here. If you have something to say about an idea here, your comment will never be deleted. But moderation is needed.

And I never let go of any readers. I informed everyone. Migrated the RSS feeds and the email subscriptions also. Everyone is here.

By: Mayank

Mayank — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 13:13:01 +0000

btw if you are interested in getting more comments and having a conversation with ur readers, you should consider switching off the moderation. But i know u never care for ur readership, as you wouldnt have let go of readers while moving the blog.

By: Mayank

Mayank — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 13:11:13 +0000

@Arby
First you need to take lesson on history… we were brought together by British is one of the most uninformed sentence. I shouldnt have even cared to answer that.
When ever we have been attacked by the outside forces, we have always been together. True, we were never a single country and in essence never will be, but fact most important is we have always been perceived as a country. From a long long time. When alexander came to this part of the world, he came to conquer India and not Magadha, Porus or other Indian smaller independent parts.
And when ever we have fought with outside forces we have always fought as a single country.

By: Arby K

Arby K — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:05:58 +0000

India is a culmination of several distinct entities combined first by force by the British and then by leadership by Gandhi. But after both of them moved on, we fell back to our earlier stage. It remains to be seen how long it will last.

By: Vijayendra Mohanty

Vijayendra Mohanty — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 11:29:24 +0000

@Sanjeev Sarma,

My point exactly. The minority they seem to be catering to does not exist. They are selling us a version of India that we don’t live in. Why buy it?

By: Sanjeev Sarma

Sanjeev Sarma — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 08:32:58 +0000

Vimoh

We don’t define minorities amongst neighbors, friends or communities. I’ve covered the length and breadth of India, and supped and shared roof with myriad cultures, castes, creeds and so on.

My objection is PURELY to what happens in the annals of politics, with people who “define” my co-countrymen as minorities, and keep rubbing it in by appeasement, ignoring or supporting the cause of a few “key” leaders in a segment they’ve chosen to call minority.

Not for reasons of management, upliftment, etc. But because of pure sheer greed

Who says divide and rule went with the Brits.