Posted on 04/12/2005 9:27:39 AM PDT by underlying
Many black folks from the south would disagree with you. Theoretically they could vote but we all know the reality behind those "redemption" tactics
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/voting/intro/intro_a.htm
Having said that the South of today is totally different from the south of the 70s. Today it is the liberals who are at fault.
Then it obviously wasn't working well. Those of the lower caste were treated terribly by those in the upper caste. Still happens today, although not nearly so often, and it has only been in the last 20 years that big change has occurred.
" in contrast ISLAMIC nations like pakistan treat non-muslims as half human"
Yep. Never said otherwise. My comments were directed at the author's claims that Hinduism was so wonderful.
Yes, perhaps for the last 20 years. But that wasn't the result of Hinduism.
Mohammedans don't seem to be able to get along with anyone.
it is more than 20 years from 1947 to 2005. if you go to india today you would be amazed at the reverse discrimination that is practised there. imagine quotas that in some cases go up to 70%.
a good chunk of india is ruled by parties that belong to the "lower caste" lobbies.
Gee, no kidding. My point is, no matter the 'government' policy, it obviously didn't have much impact until about the last 20 years. Hinduism didn't give India 'affirmative action.' It fought against it.
if hindus decided to fight against it - they wouldnt have given it to them in the first place. duhhhh...why give away something when you dont WANT to? as i said pushing a passive religion or people into a corner will only invite a backlash.
Oh, please. You made the claim this was right after the British gave India back to Indians. You think at that point the people of India cared about anything but the British leaving?
The Hindus sure didn't act as though 'affirmative action' were in place in their personal lives. Mother Theresa, if she were alive, could tell you story upon story of how the lower caste were treated. Article after article was printed in papers about it. Stories were on the news. No matter what was said on paper, it wasn't being carried out in reality.
Hinduism is a passive religion? Since when does a 'passive' religion favor beating someone up (even to death) for becoming a Christian or burning a woman to death because her dowery wasn't big enough?
Oh please stop your anti indian propaganda. If you go to India you will find that caste is going away in urban india. Hinduism is a passive religion and like all religions (including Chrisitianity) it has 'some' blood on its hands.
From what I remember - the Hindu god Krishna belonged to a "lower caste". Besides there is no other country or society that gives affirmative action on the scale that India does. The British never had affirmative action - it was after Independence that the Hindus took this corrective action. So your claims of British forcing this in India is propaganda. At that time the lower castes were in no position to dictate terms.
Right now parties that are made up of these castes rule a majority of indian states. this is with a country that is 80% hindu. speaks volumes about their tolerance.
And from what I remember - dowry existed in Europe and is also practised among Slammies and Christians in India. It has a lot to do with economic backwardness and illiteracy. It is foolish to think that this practice exists in urban india.
When did you see Hindus or Buddhists hijacking planes or bombing people. An unplanned incident here or there doesnt speak about a billion people in the same way that Scott Peterson doesnt represent all american men.
Pl stop your propaganda against a peaceful religion and a progressive nation. Your energies are better spent on tackling the real threat from Islamic fundamentalism.
IS going away. I'm not denying that India is changing. What I'm arguing against is the claim that India changed way back in the 40s. That is simply not true.
"Hinduism is a passive religion and like all religions (including Chrisitianity) it has 'some' blood on its hands."
LOL Well, if you think burning women and beating people up is 'passive' go for it.
"Besides there is no other country or society that gives affirmative action on the scale that India does."
Perhaps this has occurred over the last 20 years or so. Prior to that, it was not the case.
" So your claims of British forcing this in India is propaganda."
LOL Now where did I ever claim that? Please point to the post where I made this claim.
"And from what I remember - dowry existed in Europe and is also practised among Slammies and Christians in India."
And?
"When did you see Hindus or Buddhists hijacking planes or bombing people."
Ah, I see the problem. You think I'm comparing Hinduism to Islam. I'm not. No way. What I am doing is claiming that Hindus are not the loving, peaceful people they are cracked up to be.
"Pl stop your propaganda against a peaceful religion and a progressive nation."
Name one thing I have said that isn't true. And make sure I actually said it, because you seem to have a habit of reading things that were never posted.
By the way, it hasn't been all that long ago when the Hindus were allowing their kids to starve while cows, who were considered sacred, were wandering around freely.
You may think Hinduism is wonderful. I simply do not.
and did they send you the monkey's backside. /sarcasm. many hindus are vegetarians. if you depend on hollywood for your education - i can only pity you.
You do know that was a joke, right?
I will start with your last post. There are plenty "isnt trues" there
Perhaps this has occurred over the last 20 years or so. Prior to that, it was not the case.
affirmative action in india has existed since 1947. it is a part of their constitution. the constitution itself was drafted by a person belonging to the lower caste
http://www.india-seminar.com/2001/508/508%20soli%20j.%20sorabjee.htm
Well, if you think burning women and beating people up is 'passive' go for it.
a scott peterson killing his pregnant wife doesnt make all americans guilty..duh..similarly individual hindus killing their wives doesnt make all hindus wife beaters or murderers. they are the most affluent community in this country with the lowest divorce rate.
And here are some more "untruths" that your posts are sooooo full of. just sroll above
They did that (affirmative) for economic reasons (to gain more business from the U.S. and European nations) - post 14
You made the claim this was right after the British gave India back to Indians. You think at that point the people of India cared about anything but the British leaving? - post 29
again you should stop bad mouthing a peaceful people and turn your guns against the real threat - islamic terror.
oops sorry..my apologies. :-)
Dont worry you will get there some day. In the meantime you should read this quote by William Durant (he is the most read historian of the 20th century)..
"India was the motherland of our race, and Sanskrit the mother of European languages. She was the mother of our philosophy. . . of our mathematics. . . of the ideals embodied in Christianity. . . of self-government and democracy. . . Mother India is in many ways the mother of us all."
Or probably you prefer Mark Twain who said this
"In religion, India is the only millionaire... the One land that all men desire to see, and having seen once, by even a glimpse, would not give that glimpse for all the shows of all the rest of the globe combined."
While hinduism and India have their own drawbacks - it is an emerging and a tolerant democracy. India owes much of this to its Hindu traditions.
No prob. I made a joke like that once around my school friends (mostly Hindu and Buddhist); I've never seen so many pissed off pacifists.
LOL How arrogant of you to presume you know what I will think 'some day'. Check back with me 'some day.' I guarantee you I won't think Hinduism is 'wonderful'.
I do not base my views on what Durant and Twain have to say. Perhaps you do.
On paper perhaps, not in practice. The treatment of those of the lower caste has only been improving to any degree in the last 20 years. Doesn't matter whether the constitution was drafted by someone belonging to the lower caste. It wasn't being followed in every day life.
"a scott peterson killing his pregnant wife doesnt make all americans guilty."
We started out talking Hinduism, and it seems you've switched to nationalism. I never said all Indians were guilty of these things. You seem to equate being Hindu with being Indian. There is a difference, especially in the last 30 years or so. Probably why the caste system is falling away.
It is Hinduism that instituted the caste system in the first place. Therefore, your 'analogy' doesn't work with this discussion unless you are trying to claim that all Indians are Hindu and all Americans are. . .well, whatever you want to try to claim they are. We both know that isn't the case.
"again you should stop bad mouthing a peaceful people and turn your guns against the real threat - islamic terror."
Guns? This is a discussion thread. If it came to choosing which to shoot, I'd shoot the Islamic terrorist. But I still hold the opinion that Hindus are not such a 'peaceful' and 'passive' people as has been claimed.
And you still haven't proven that I've stated any untruths.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.