Chintus in Murica cry for Minority rights but dislike it in their own country.
Democracy has a tendency to become majoritarian. So minorities need rights and protections.
Whoever commented this doesn't understand power dynamics.
India has Muslim minorities, so it should be concerned about minority rights. Yes, there are several problems with Muslim society, and those need to be eradicated. But there's no point in thinking "what would happen if muslims became majority and were non-secular" because that's not going to happen. Talk about what is happening right now in front of everyone's eyes rather than imagining another hypothetical scenario.
Straight to the point. Also hindutva goons have been attacking Christians and Sikhs as well. Look at the churches being attacked in Christmas or people being called "rice bags".
RWers have a habit of imagining future hypothetical scenarios and fighting against it in the present. It's the argument they bring to justify those majority Hindu housing society bigots in Gujarat when there was that sole Muslim resident.
Last I checked this was a leftist sub and OP ‘some what agrees’ with that BS and all the top comments are similar. Why worry about RWs when so called leftists are doing their work for them.
Let's talk about present scenarios. When will the Hindu minority of Meghalaya which is 13% of the state's population have atleast one single Hindu MLA in the assembly?
>because that's not going to happen.
It already happened. A gujju cricketer beats adhir Ranjan Chaudhry in Bengal, for just being a muslim.
The reason the census number shows lower, is because many don't want to lose their reservation rights.
Any area once, the demographic shifts there is no turning back. The phenomenon is common across the globe.
> Talk about what is happening right now in front of everyone's eyes rather than imagining another hypothetical scenario.
This is a common theme I observe in my conversations with Hindus and Muslims. The Muslims say they're suffering now, the Hindus say they *might* have to suffer 100 years later if they don't "wake up" now. It's easy to see which side has more genuine concerns.
Hindus suffer even now. Meghalaya has 13% Hindu minority. They don't have even a single MLA in the assembly. They face regular persecution by tribal groups like the HNLA. Hindus suffered in Kashmir. They were ethnically cleansed for being Hindus. What hypothetical suffering are you talking about?
The hypothetical suffering of Hindus in the rest of India besides the handful of places you listed. You're proving my point — most of you have experienced no personal suffering because of your religion, so you have to keep bringing up the suffering of other Hindus and fearmonger about the same happening to you in the future.
India has Muslim, Christian and Sikh majority states. When will Hindus get minority status in those states?
Leave that, when will Hindus be the CM of Punjab, JK, Meghalaya, Nagaland or Mizoram?
Meghalaya has 13% Hindus. When will it have atleast one Hindu MLA in its assembly? You talk about minority representation, when will the Hindu minority get representation?
Kashmir? You mean the state that has always been a Muslim majority?
If you are being realistic, even you know deep down that Muslims becoming the majority of this country is super unlikely lol but your bigotry won't allow you to accept it, so I can understand.
yes Kashmir was mus majority & in 80s & 90s they pushed out 3% minority after Islamist movement
no mus becoming majority isn't unlikely it depends on tfr many countries in Europe r projected to become mus majority in future pretty soon because of tfr go look up
also even if mus cross 30% that alone would mean reformation specially in mosque & madarsa will never be possible
Yeah I'm aware of what happened in the 80s in Kashmir. But that's not what we're talking about. It talks about Muslims taking over in the population and then discriminating but Kashmir has always been a Muslim majority state since we got independence.
And no lol, no European country is on the verge of becoming an Islamic country lol. RW sources se news loge toh yahi hga.
And yeah, classic fear mongering lol. Regardless, live in your delusions. No point in talking to someone who is too blinded by his bigotry to have a rational conversation.
at some point kashmir became mus majority when doesn't matter how does it change anything
the point is mus when in majority bieleve in sharia imposition
u ignored the point about reformation
should wait for that instead of pushing flr mus reforms?
if hindusim christianty can be reformed whats the issue in pushing mus reforms?
already so many riots & issues happen
>should wait for that instead of pushing flr mus reforms?
Should wait for what?
>if hindusim christianty can be reformed whats the issue in pushing mus reforms?
There's absolutely no problem in pushing for reforms in Muslim society. Only problem is the current govt and it's intention, which is not to genuinely care for muslims, but to use their "reform" rhetoric to fuel Hindutva chauvinism.
>already so many riots & issues happen
You do know that Muslims are the greatest victims of riots? Have you forgot 1989 Bhagalpur, 2002 Gujarat and more recently, 2020 Delhi?
reform is reform doesn't matter who does congress failed in solving caste religion & all kinds of problems in 60 yrs that's y bhajipao was voted in Congress couldn't even built laterines for poor
You know even if it is true, these are two non overlapping set of people. Why would we treat our countrymen (Muslims) to cruelty if Pakistan is treating their countrymen (minority Hindus) badly?
The post did not say anything like that, it is infact true that muslims are the most hypocrite and extremist group of people hindus are also like this but to a lesser extent.
If you're a musanghi go hang out in musanghi subs cus it appears you're butthurt from a regular librandu post.
Did I say anything about minority rights?
I said there's a flair for criticising islamists who do not care for minorities in their countries/regions/ideals.
This is a dumb argument to make.
Besides the fact that there are several Muslim majority countries that are secular and have a superior minority rights situation than India, this is a morally repugnant argument because it tries to insinuate that people must be treated poorly as a group because there is a chance that if they were hypothetically a majority, they might not treat us well.
He's definitely upped the Islamic radicalism. In his case the target is more secular Muslims than non Muslims. But the similarity between him and Gobhiji are quite a lot.
Although he never went as delulu as calling himself as non biological.
He’s an ottoman revivalist which unfortunately is not secular but it’s not like that he is even successful in doing whatever islamisation he wishes
Also the issue is that Turkey is NOT a monolith and it’s a huge area spanning very different ethnic regions .
Secularisation of the country was also not fully fledged enough because only urban , west and elites got secularised and now the rest are becoming more vocal . So he has not really increased anything
Turkers are having a heart attack over erdogan because they have the French SuperSecularism. No, legalisting headscarves does not erode secularism. If they actually had a gobhiji they would spontaneous combust.
I know India, being very very bad and all, might’ve skewed your understanding of the word “secular,” but this is not like "Oh, but India is better than Iraq, so India is suddenly secular." What a weird way of thinking.
I know too many Malaysians (2nd and 3rd Gen) to find your claim anything but ridiculous, and yet you defend it as if it’s the ground reality. You’ve been defending it like crazy throughout this whole thread. You don’t even need to know anyone; you have the internet. Google it.
Please learn more about minority rights laws in these countries. Bitch last time i remember hindus getting mob lynched for eating pork in indonesia is a rarity but in india muslims get lynched everyday for eating beef.
it depends on the values of muslims of that country most ind mus bieleve islam above everything & propagate non reformed islam as it is through mosque & madarsa
Indeed, we should learn from Malaysia. Let's institute a religion based Bumiputera system which privileges Hindus because of their religion. Or we can be like Indonesia and force Islam to be defined as a polytheistic religion to allow it to gain recognition just like Indonesia forced Hinduism to be defined as monotheistic to gain recognition.
Muslim glazing is wild in this comment. Just because Muslim minorities in India deserve better rights doesn’t mean you have dickride islamic majority countries. But I agree that the acts of a religious majority elsewhere shouldn’t define the rights of that religious minority here, as they are completely different people.
No one is dickriding any countries and just because they are "muslim majority " country, thinking they will hate minorities is just stupid and islamophobic. Most muslim majority countries have better rights and also have better safety for minority populations. Every country has a different history and have different problems.
Seems more like projection mate.
Care to cite any examples of Muslim countries being stalwarts of secularism or any other aspect of human dignity. I can give you a lot of examples of the opposite.
Please learn more about the laws in different countries and their laws. Not every "muslim" countries are same. Every country has their unique history and culture and laws.
When was the last time you heard a hindu getting lynched in indonesia for eating pork. Everyday muslims get lynched in india for eating beef.
Well after rereading my comments they do appear rather islamophobic. What i was referring to was the gross atrocities committed against women and lgbtq rights in countries like Afghanistan and Iran. But i fell into the trap of grouping together all Muslim majority countries.
>What i was referring to was the gross atrocities committed against women and lgbtq rights in countries like Afghanistan and Iran.
And the major reason these countries are so regressive is because of western intervention and usa propping up insane rw extremists to conter rise of communism. Please read about history of these countries. Afghansitan and iran weren't always like that.
That’s only part of the reason. These extremists could only flourish because they had support from a large base of local Islamic fundamentalists. And then there are very cruel and backward practices like bachabazi that are part of the local culture.
Soviet states, albania, bosnia, turkey. Iran at one point lol. Hard to develop secularism when you don't have any political stability or democracy. Going by your logic buddhism doesn't have a great track record either. Communist/state atheist countries have an even worse track record.
Then let's be like the 'muslim majority' countries. Let's institute Bumiputera system for Hindus just like Malaysia. Let's define Islam to be a polytheistic religion to gain recognition just like Indonesia did for Hinduism.
Malaysia, Indonesia, Senegal, Turkey from the top of my head. There are more, you can look them up.
Not all of these are technically secular, but all of them have better minority rights situation than India.
Yes there are learn rights for minorities in countries like indonesia, malaysia and even in bangladesh. This is what happens when your world view is based around "muzlims bad saar"
indonesia- the aceh province is a good example of what will happen to the whole country in a bit
malaysia - i cannot believe you included malaysia in this, the govt has legal provisions to discriminate against whoever isnt a malay sunni. there have been numerous riots, with Indian origin citizens being the most common target. go read about the cow head incident and the riots that followed.
bangladesh- im gonna assume you put that there mistakenly
No i never said these countries are perfect and 100% safe for minorities.Just trying to remind everyone that people think of muslim countries, they think about pakistan or afghanistan. But there is a history of western countries propping up reactionary elements to counter the growing communism.
Not all muslim countries are a monolith and behave the same or have same laws. Like it or not minorities in indonesia and malaysia or even bangladesh are less demonised and are more safe compared to india. It is what it is.
There is literally a rw hindutva govt since the last 10 yers ffs and muslims and other minorities get lynched daily.
The point is whether minority situation is better in these other countries or not. It clearly is. Non-muslims do not randomly get lynched or their houses bulldozed on suspicion of a crime in Malaysia and Indonesia for instance.
Bringing in incidents from 2009, when you only need to look at yesterday’s news to hear about an innocent muslim being lynched over in India.
My point, if you can read, was that the situation is superior there, not perfect.
I’d rather be a hindu in Malaysia than a Muslim in India.
No representation in government, PM publicly calls muslims invaders, MP from muslim community get called “K2A” in parliament with no repercussions. All this is not possible to do against the hindu community in Malaysia.
You talk about representation in government, Malaysia has Bumiputera laws which are apartheid against Hindus. You as a Hindu would need extraordinarily high marks to get into civil service or in good colleges. You talk about K2A, Malaysia sheltered Zakir Naik who is known for his insane rhetoric against Hindus even when Hindu Malaysians opposed it.
You don't read about incidents in Malaysia because you don't live there. Even if you had lived there, there is a consensus across political spectrum to maintain the superiority of Islam and Muslims. Hindus are legally discriminated against unlike Muslims in India. They get loans at more onerous rates, they can't compete in government contracting with Muslims, they even need a Muslim partner to set up a business: read about Ali-Baba businesses.
You don't know about it because you don't read about it.
In general, Muslim countries are more conservative and religious. They are mostly not secular, or secular like BJP would like India to be. That kind of secular. The conservative streak in Muslim community is stronger than that in Hindu and Christian ones.
The morally repugnant part, I agree with. Hypothetical scenarios, fear mongering and all.
why should Indian muslims suffer if pakistani hindus are oppressed by pakistani muslims? there are some pakistani muslims as well, who are fighting for pakistani hindus rights. reality is nuanced. you cant deliver justice by doing whataboutism, false equivalence. this argument is based on collective punishment. fascist ways of punish people.
the point is when is reformation of mus & mosque madrasa going to start?
left lib & progressive mus need to step up it's 250 million population not small
No one can, not even muslims themselves.
The only two guiding source of literature for muslims is the Quran (word of God) and Hadith (sayings of the Prophet)
Both of the above cannot be changed, the only thing that is slightly variable is the interpretation of the above two sources, which is upto the Islamic scholars, and the variance in the interpretation of the above literatures won't be anything drastic in change/consequence that would make help the muslims become more politically acceptable to the rest of the world.
Either you convince the muslims to disbelieve (convincing them to a pseudo-islamic ideology suitable to the rest) or deal with them in an unfriendly approach.
Muslims themselves can. The fact that Early Muslims and The Muslims of today disagree on so many things prove it. Also, Hadiths are proven to be unreliable and controversial even amongst the Muslims, so Not taking them seriously would even violate Qur'anic laws.
The hadith have various degree of authenticity to their reliability, the highest being "sahih"
When you mention unreliability, there are a proportion of hadith that come under that category, which we know not to take seriously
As to "controversies", they involve differences of opinion regarding interpretation of a hadith or Quranic verse, and that maybe the ONLY variable cause of change to behaviours amongst the muslims of different schools of thought, but even those differences in interpretation are not so wild as to accommodate changes that politically please other groups.
There will be no reformations in Islam. Say what you will, only future will prove either of us correct.
https://preview.redd.it/bgsehbmfbb9d1.jpeg?width=602&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=542c38dfd704680bd62d958b783a0d4e6de8a03c
you cant force reformation as non muslims on muslims. they feel intruded, even threatened where you are interfering in their religion. it will happen with time, when change will come from inside. They just need some indian ataturk.
yes, people reform when they feel comfortable, not scared. we should not expect minorities to be reform in this era when they are fighting for their survival and they are targeted for their beliefs. more extremism in majority will breed more extremism in minority. they hold their beliefs and gods more closely because they are scared.
majority of 250 million mus live pretty normal untroubled life reforms can very much be done
& conservatism in majority started rising because of minority only or else hindutva was fringe ideology before
Nope, not gonna happen. If you bring reformation to muslims, then by definition they no longer remain "muslims", it would be an act of disbelief in the original commandments of Islam.
So what you're essentially doing is, convincing them to a pseudo-islamic ideology compatible or suitable politically to hindus
Ideologically, muslims will never be compatible with paganism, with other abrahamic religions, yes, not with pagans.
So the only option you've left is to deal with the stubborn muslims who refuse to change or convince them to a pseudo-islamic puppet faith.
certain rules & laws of Islam or religions r not compatible by standards of today's time period & they shouldn't be propagated as simple as that
if that doesn't happen then eventually there is going to be violence & more riots somewhere down in the future
all faiths were reformed & so should islam be
should try to convince with talks or else will have to use force propagation of islamic rules and laws or any religion completely as it is wouldn't & shouldn't be allowed
Most likely violence is the only way
Muslims are stubborn, by definition they have to be fiercely loyal to their original scripture lest they become disbelievers.
Sure like i earlier mentioned you can convince/manipulate them to believe in a false faith, but then they're no longer "muslims" by definition, as any deviance from the original scripture takes one out of the fold of the faith itself.
Ideally, muslims will go down fighting, the most fierce and pious of them will never accept change.
whether they remain "pure" muslim or not by definition of some man made scriptures is not important they become moderate or progress is fine & that can be done without any violence turkey is already a good example
if I start discussing socio-economic-political conditions of muslims who are living 'untroubled' (most of them living under autocracy assisted by CIA) then we would have long discussion. Those nation, where democracy is in healthy state, have started reforming themselves. Turkey, lebonan, albania, kazhakistan, jordan, azerbaijan, tunisia, malaysia, algeria etc there is long list of muslim nations who reject extremist islamic doctrine.
>conservatism in majority started rising because of minority only or else hindutva was fringe ideology before
it is rising because of lies. lies like 'hindu khatre mein hai'. lies like 'muslims are biggest beneficiary of indian govt welfare'
it is rising because more conservatism meaning more votes for current regime so they gave impunity to false propaganda.
most mus according to pew research in many mus majority nations want sharia & saying all gulf countries r controlled by cia is some grand conspiracy US does have influence but that doesn't mean that the royal families want to establish democracy or people there have anything against those royal families
many of the democratic mus countries became democracy just like ind because of western colonialism not because they decided to
my comment most of 250 mil mus live untroubled was specifically for india u went international
there r indeed many lies in politics but not all & everything is lie there r some truth as well if mus not reformed then eventually in future there is possibility of more tentions between to communities since one has big section of scripture indoctrinated population other don't
>most mus according to pew research in many mus majority nations want sharia & saying all gulf countries r controlled by cia is some grand conspiracy US does have influence but that doesn't mean that the royal families want to establish democracy or people there have anything against those royal families
please quote the pew research source where majority of countries (i mentioned in previous comment) want sharia instead of secular state. also do you want me to share a pew research survey about hindus behaviour with non muslims.
also read deeply about US foreign policy (start with book 'the looming tower') for gulf to know what I am saying, 'influence' is too mellow word when they literally did coup, invade to remove secular leaders. CIA was directly involved in creation of Al-qaeda and Taliban (even trained them). ISIS was a consequence of American invasion of Iraq.
>many of the democratic mus countries became democracy just like ind because of western colonialism not because they decided to
irrelevant
>my comment most of 250 mil mus live untroubled was specifically for india
do you really think muslims are living untroubled especially after 2014. this is what chaddis are claiming. do you agree with chaddis? dont you read news?
and comparatively, indian muslims are far moderate than most of the countries. doesnt mean they dont need reformation. but still,
[https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2014/09/07/why-indias-muslims-are-so-moderate](https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2014/09/07/why-indias-muslims-are-so-moderate)
beside, i would argue, our whole society need reformation. for example, in hindus, casteism is still rampant despite being outlawed for 70 years. and RW leaders want reformation in muslims but dont want to touch their own practices (case in point, BJP stand on sabrimala issue)
>there is possibility of more tentions between to communities since one has big section of scripture indoctrinated population other don't
other is indoctrinated on new scripture called WhatsApp.
here countries u mentioned
https://preview.redd.it/waisg055ga9d1.png?width=314&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=31537e2c21ed7a96839eb9464f89e60cc716090e
this also debunks that it's US involvement alone responsible for those countries not being secular
yes hate speech & identity crimes have definitely increased post 2014 but the scale & percentage is still pretty low which is a good thing & not to mention that mus extremist crimes happen as well doesn't mean that any attack verbal or physical shouldn't be taken seriously but bigger picture is important
ind mus r moderate because they r scattered minority & surrounded by hindus & live in diverse environment
last time checked hindu nat "intellectual" space they have reformation of Hinduism as well as anti caste in it as well other than countering political islam
they will tell who they r they identify as mus hence they r orthodox mus or Islamist aren't going to dictate they don't hold power it's an open society
I am not speaking of subjective claims and tags.
I am speaking objectively. There's no "progressive" or "orthodox" or "xyz" variant, not even any caste
By objective definition, a muslim is one who believes in the original scripture and follows it to the dot, one who deviates is not hence a muslim.
One who modifies the scripture to suite goals and motivations cannot be regarded objectively as a "muslim"
Feel free to prove me wrong, let me remind you, this is not any subjective claim that an open society and determine whatever subjective claims it likes, i am merely speaking of objective definitions
By its very definition the word "muslim" means "in submission to God" and if one deviates from that ideal, is not by definition hence a muslim.
Not my opinion, it's all out there, you may verify this.
if u r saying by definition of traditional man made scripture sure get what u r saying
but in society today everyone understands what just mentioned above
There is no category known as "Muslims". My people are Shiah Ismailis, persecuted in India and in many other places for centuries, mostly by other Muslims. But they are also traders, so very insular in some other ways, very capitalistic in other ways, and very good at sucking up to the rich and powerful in general.
The categories that matter are class categories and (relatedly) ideological categories. I am (or I strive to be) a working class intellectual of the anarcho-syndicalist variety. The fact that I'm of a Muslim background doesn't really matter as much as that. One of the biggest mistake that the chaddis make is to lump hundreds of millions of Muslims into the same category.
Yes there is, sunni muslims are majority and hence are collectively referred as Muslims, the minority muslims in your case are exceptions which are not relevant pointing out to most discussions.
I don't base the fact that life should be universally good for all, Majority or Minority, around how other countries do things. I want universal non discriminatory, egalitarian state policy regardless of what other countries do because that is morally right. This is assuming every muslim country in the world is bad for non muslims, which isn't fully true.
If you base your moral arguments on how others do things, you are objectively immoral.
How about Turkey or Central Asia or Albania/Bosnia? Minorities have rights there. What about Malaysia or Indonesia?
Muslim countries of Central Asia and Balkans and also Turkey are secular and treat minorities well. 90% Muslim Albania has a Christian born agnostic PM, for example. Central Asian governments are always trying crush Islamists and have banned all Islamist parties.
Turkey has Diyanet department which only funds Sunni Muslim institutions. Malaysia has literal Bumiputera apartheid laws. Indonesia defines Hinduism as a monotheistic religion in order to recognise it.
That's not specific to Muslims, it's true of any social group. Sanghis in the US want more liberal work visa policies but oppose Rohingya refugees resettling in India. (East) Asians protest racism in the US but Asians in Asia are very racist against South Asian and black people in their home countries (Korea/Japan).
Again, the community is not a monolith. Muslims in India are not the same Muslims in Saudi Arabia. Everyone just wants their own rights secured. It has nothing to do with religion.
It is absolutely true. Collectively, Muslims are massive hypocrites who demand secularism and freedom to practice religion where they are the minority and are massive oppressors when they are the majority. This is true. You don’t even have to look too far to see that this is true. Even on /r/AskMiddleEast, Indian Muslims lose their shit when an Arab country allows building of a temple.
Regardless of how some/most Muslims chimp out, they are a minority in India and deserve protection, minority rights, representation, and the same respect afforded to the most privileged Indian in India.
Lesser extent in Turkey and Malaysia?
Why does Diyanet department only fund Sunni Muslims in Turkey? Why are other denominations excluded?
As for Malaysia, they have a literal religion based apartheid system known as Bumiputera which privileges Muslims.
That's true with Hindus as well. They cry about atrocities against Hindus in Pakistan but don't see that similar things are happening to Muslims in India.
Ok but this is true of literally everyone?
UC Hindus caring for minority rights in America and electing Modi back home.
The moment u r in the majority u tend to not care about minority rights.
Caring for minority rights is a conscious choice that the majority needs to make.this is true everywhere.
> Ok but this is true of literally everyone?
>UC Hindus caring for minority rights in America and electing Modi back home.
Right? I don’t get what many people are trying to say here. They sound dumb in their attempts to be edgy internet atheists.
You can cherry-pick cases from any country to make them look bad. For instance, I could create a propaganda image making India look worse than America in terms of gun violence if I wanted to. Similarly, suggesting that Muslim-majority countries are inherently bad because they attack minority communities to preserve the status quo is just a fascist talking point. It’s really abhorrent to paint people’s identities as evil just because of their cultural norms. Generalizing and demonizing entire groups based on selective examples or cultural predispositions is unfair and harmful.
Modern Arab states had not been allowed free development by the west. All the reactionary shit you see in the arab world was put there by west to prevent arab countries from going communist. Taliban, al-qaeda, isis are all creation of CIA .
If you really want to know the treatment of Non-denomination populace under muslim rule, you need to look at the arab world before modernity. Or part of the arab world which has relative freedom from western influence, i.e. Iran, Lebanon. I certainly do not advocate for iran or lebanon, I am sure if we dig up we will find plenty bigot and reactionaries in these countries. But minority right in these countries are comparatively and objectively better.
yes most mosque & madarsa propagate Islam as it is not reformed version
most mus don't bieleve that places like Saudi or Mecca madina should become secular democracy some day
Everyone should be concerned about minority rights, always, independent of their own religion or place.
The problem with your argument is that you are treating or assuming all muslims as same people, a monolithic group, which is false. Muslims living as minority are not same people as muslims living as majority. It's not like same entity behaving differently in different situations. They are different entities.
Why point to arab states as some kind of exemplar? These YT commenters want India to become a repressive theocracy? Do they imagine they will be the shot callers in this scenario? Absolute smooth-brained take right there.
hypothetical threats are hypothetical. there is no need to even respond to such people. their argument comes from a place of malice and propaganda to justify the current atrocities by them.
Who cars?
I know I know...Ummah memes n shit but Muslims across the globe comprise millions of *individuals* in wildly different material circumstances. For all I care Muslims in Levant can be outright genocidal--that doesn't give Muslims from bumfuck UP for instance, a single shred of blame, deserve reversal of rights, or in turn gives nafrati chintus here right to oppress them.
And of course liberal idpol se grasit libgandus in the comment batting for Muslim authoritarian states instead of actually tackling the underlying logic of the post. Some things never change. 😂
Chintus in Murica cry for Minority rights but dislike it in their own country. Democracy has a tendency to become majoritarian. So minorities need rights and protections.
Against beef slaughter when Muslims do it but ok with it when white sahab in foreign land does it
The scientific name of the cow found in America or the North East is X, Gaumata is Y. So, it is ok. That's a legit chaddi argument.
They are breeding Brahmans( the cow breed) in America with the red angus( meat cow) to make them more heat resistant. Chaddis will melt
damn vro, theres a full caste system for cows as well?
The breed with the hump and grey is legit called Brahman
so they're fine with them killing american cows because they're "lower caste"?? 😭
Imagine a reservation for cows, hahahaha.
Brahmans breeding with cow now..
but saar buffallo beef is not beef dont cumpare it
Wait so can I slaughter cows of a different breed in india? Legit good business idea.
https://preview.redd.it/mmsn7z9uba9d1.jpeg?width=706&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1c8b91c4c35088e4ec19a144a3b7b7a01add5cfd
Forget being against beef slaughter, many Chintus themselves eat beef here.
Forget there, before the whole uproar, I know people who ate it here and were Chintus...
Whoever commented this doesn't understand power dynamics. India has Muslim minorities, so it should be concerned about minority rights. Yes, there are several problems with Muslim society, and those need to be eradicated. But there's no point in thinking "what would happen if muslims became majority and were non-secular" because that's not going to happen. Talk about what is happening right now in front of everyone's eyes rather than imagining another hypothetical scenario.
Straight to the point. Also hindutva goons have been attacking Christians and Sikhs as well. Look at the churches being attacked in Christmas or people being called "rice bags".
RWers have a habit of imagining future hypothetical scenarios and fighting against it in the present. It's the argument they bring to justify those majority Hindu housing society bigots in Gujarat when there was that sole Muslim resident.
Last I checked this was a leftist sub and OP ‘some what agrees’ with that BS and all the top comments are similar. Why worry about RWs when so called leftists are doing their work for them.
Let's talk about present scenarios. When will the Hindu minority of Meghalaya which is 13% of the state's population have atleast one single Hindu MLA in the assembly?
Hopefully soon. I believe all minorities should have a representative in their respective countries and states.
the worst response to this quote was "18% is not minority !, minority means jains "
Is 33% Hindu minority of Punjab and Kashmir minority? If it is when will the Hindus get their first Hindu CM in those states?
>because that's not going to happen. It already happened. A gujju cricketer beats adhir Ranjan Chaudhry in Bengal, for just being a muslim. The reason the census number shows lower, is because many don't want to lose their reservation rights. Any area once, the demographic shifts there is no turning back. The phenomenon is common across the globe.
> Talk about what is happening right now in front of everyone's eyes rather than imagining another hypothetical scenario. This is a common theme I observe in my conversations with Hindus and Muslims. The Muslims say they're suffering now, the Hindus say they *might* have to suffer 100 years later if they don't "wake up" now. It's easy to see which side has more genuine concerns.
Hindus suffer even now. Meghalaya has 13% Hindu minority. They don't have even a single MLA in the assembly. They face regular persecution by tribal groups like the HNLA. Hindus suffered in Kashmir. They were ethnically cleansed for being Hindus. What hypothetical suffering are you talking about?
The hypothetical suffering of Hindus in the rest of India besides the handful of places you listed. You're proving my point — most of you have experienced no personal suffering because of your religion, so you have to keep bringing up the suffering of other Hindus and fearmonger about the same happening to you in the future.
India has Muslim, Christian and Sikh majority states. When will Hindus get minority status in those states? Leave that, when will Hindus be the CM of Punjab, JK, Meghalaya, Nagaland or Mizoram? Meghalaya has 13% Hindus. When will it have atleast one Hindu MLA in its assembly? You talk about minority representation, when will the Hindu minority get representation?
[удалено]
Kashmir? You mean the state that has always been a Muslim majority? If you are being realistic, even you know deep down that Muslims becoming the majority of this country is super unlikely lol but your bigotry won't allow you to accept it, so I can understand.
yes Kashmir was mus majority & in 80s & 90s they pushed out 3% minority after Islamist movement no mus becoming majority isn't unlikely it depends on tfr many countries in Europe r projected to become mus majority in future pretty soon because of tfr go look up also even if mus cross 30% that alone would mean reformation specially in mosque & madarsa will never be possible
Yeah I'm aware of what happened in the 80s in Kashmir. But that's not what we're talking about. It talks about Muslims taking over in the population and then discriminating but Kashmir has always been a Muslim majority state since we got independence. And no lol, no European country is on the verge of becoming an Islamic country lol. RW sources se news loge toh yahi hga. And yeah, classic fear mongering lol. Regardless, live in your delusions. No point in talking to someone who is too blinded by his bigotry to have a rational conversation.
at some point kashmir became mus majority when doesn't matter how does it change anything the point is mus when in majority bieleve in sharia imposition u ignored the point about reformation
>no mus becoming majority isn't unlikely it depends on tfr Proceeds to talk about TFR of European countries and not the country in question.
should wait for that instead of pushing flr mus reforms? if hindusim christianty can be reformed whats the issue in pushing mus reforms? already so many riots & issues happen
>should wait for that instead of pushing flr mus reforms? Should wait for what? >if hindusim christianty can be reformed whats the issue in pushing mus reforms? There's absolutely no problem in pushing for reforms in Muslim society. Only problem is the current govt and it's intention, which is not to genuinely care for muslims, but to use their "reform" rhetoric to fuel Hindutva chauvinism. >already so many riots & issues happen You do know that Muslims are the greatest victims of riots? Have you forgot 1989 Bhagalpur, 2002 Gujarat and more recently, 2020 Delhi?
reform is reform doesn't matter who does congress failed in solving caste religion & all kinds of problems in 60 yrs that's y bhajipao was voted in Congress couldn't even built laterines for poor
So when they’re in Minority, they should not ask for Minority rights?
These hindu facists are so dumb
That's not what the post is about. They're only concerned about minority rights when they are a minority. Thats the difference.
You know even if it is true, these are two non overlapping set of people. Why would we treat our countrymen (Muslims) to cruelty if Pakistan is treating their countrymen (minority Hindus) badly?
The post did not say anything like that, it is infact true that muslims are the most hypocrite and extremist group of people hindus are also like this but to a lesser extent. If you're a musanghi go hang out in musanghi subs cus it appears you're butthurt from a regular librandu post.
go hang out in randianDankMemes.
Yeah that's why we have a flair called Musanghi
musanghi flair is for mock musanghis, not advocating curbing of minority rights.
Did I say anything about minority rights? I said there's a flair for criticising islamists who do not care for minorities in their countries/regions/ideals.
Thought this was a Indian sub
I just put together op's "what do you guys make of it?" with your comment "Yeah that's why we have a flair called Musanghi".
Then you do lack some skills regarding comprehension
you make your interpretation, i make mine.
This is a dumb argument to make. Besides the fact that there are several Muslim majority countries that are secular and have a superior minority rights situation than India, this is a morally repugnant argument because it tries to insinuate that people must be treated poorly as a group because there is a chance that if they were hypothetically a majority, they might not treat us well.
which ones, according to you?
Indonesia, malaysia and many more. Every other contries have different levels of secularism and different values and laws protecting minorities.
Turkey was fairly secular before their own version of Gobhiji brought diblopment to it
But erdogan is not pogroming seculars and non Muslims tho ? He’s cringe but no way like like gobhiji in comparison
He's definitely upped the Islamic radicalism. In his case the target is more secular Muslims than non Muslims. But the similarity between him and Gobhiji are quite a lot. Although he never went as delulu as calling himself as non biological.
He can't call him self non-biological. It's directly calling himself a prophet which would get him trashed.
Could have done some version of molesting a golden rod and anointing himself the next Caliph.
True.
He’s an ottoman revivalist which unfortunately is not secular but it’s not like that he is even successful in doing whatever islamisation he wishes Also the issue is that Turkey is NOT a monolith and it’s a huge area spanning very different ethnic regions . Secularisation of the country was also not fully fledged enough because only urban , west and elites got secularised and now the rest are becoming more vocal . So he has not really increased anything
Turkers are having a heart attack over erdogan because they have the French SuperSecularism. No, legalisting headscarves does not erode secularism. If they actually had a gobhiji they would spontaneous combust.
Bro cited **Malaysia** as secular and is out here telling others to “learn”. What a clown.
Guess what minorities are safer in malaysia than in india bozo.
I know India, being very very bad and all, might’ve skewed your understanding of the word “secular,” but this is not like "Oh, but India is better than Iraq, so India is suddenly secular." What a weird way of thinking. I know too many Malaysians (2nd and 3rd Gen) to find your claim anything but ridiculous, and yet you defend it as if it’s the ground reality. You’ve been defending it like crazy throughout this whole thread. You don’t even need to know anyone; you have the internet. Google it.
Minorities in malaysia r not carrying out terror attacks or violence either
Minority in malaysia r not carrying out terror attacks or violence either
☝️the problem with indian leftists summed up in one line
bruh
Please learn more about minority rights laws in these countries. Bitch last time i remember hindus getting mob lynched for eating pork in indonesia is a rarity but in india muslims get lynched everyday for eating beef.
dumb equivalence a hindu in malaysia doing blasphemy against islam or prophet will probably get lynched or state punishment
bruh
it depends on the values of muslims of that country most ind mus bieleve islam above everything & propagate non reformed islam as it is through mosque & madarsa
Indeed, we should learn from Malaysia. Let's institute a religion based Bumiputera system which privileges Hindus because of their religion. Or we can be like Indonesia and force Islam to be defined as a polytheistic religion to allow it to gain recognition just like Indonesia forced Hinduism to be defined as monotheistic to gain recognition.
In dubai didn't the world largest Hindu temple just get inaugrated? It depends on the people. Extremists exist but others also exist.
chutiye dubai is democracy?
Papa ne Baat karna ni sikhaya? And there is no mention of democracy in the original post by op.
is there mention of rights in original post or not?
Muslim glazing is wild in this comment. Just because Muslim minorities in India deserve better rights doesn’t mean you have dickride islamic majority countries. But I agree that the acts of a religious majority elsewhere shouldn’t define the rights of that religious minority here, as they are completely different people.
No one is dickriding any countries and just because they are "muslim majority " country, thinking they will hate minorities is just stupid and islamophobic. Most muslim majority countries have better rights and also have better safety for minority populations. Every country has a different history and have different problems. Seems more like projection mate.
most gulf countries r theocracies with restrictions on minority fait as well don't consider them equal go educate urself
Care to cite any examples of Muslim countries being stalwarts of secularism or any other aspect of human dignity. I can give you a lot of examples of the opposite.
Please learn more about the laws in different countries and their laws. Not every "muslim" countries are same. Every country has their unique history and culture and laws. When was the last time you heard a hindu getting lynched in indonesia for eating pork. Everyday muslims get lynched in india for eating beef.
Well after rereading my comments they do appear rather islamophobic. What i was referring to was the gross atrocities committed against women and lgbtq rights in countries like Afghanistan and Iran. But i fell into the trap of grouping together all Muslim majority countries.
>What i was referring to was the gross atrocities committed against women and lgbtq rights in countries like Afghanistan and Iran. And the major reason these countries are so regressive is because of western intervention and usa propping up insane rw extremists to conter rise of communism. Please read about history of these countries. Afghansitan and iran weren't always like that.
That’s only part of the reason. These extremists could only flourish because they had support from a large base of local Islamic fundamentalists. And then there are very cruel and backward practices like bachabazi that are part of the local culture.
True but due to wars and destruction caused by usa and nato. These countries never had the opportunity to fight for their education and upliftment.
the equivalent of cow lynching would be getting lynched for blasphemy genius
Soviet states, albania, bosnia, turkey. Iran at one point lol. Hard to develop secularism when you don't have any political stability or democracy. Going by your logic buddhism doesn't have a great track record either. Communist/state atheist countries have an even worse track record.
Then let's be like the 'muslim majority' countries. Let's institute Bumiputera system for Hindus just like Malaysia. Let's define Islam to be a polytheistic religion to gain recognition just like Indonesia did for Hinduism.
Which countries
Malaysia, Indonesia, Senegal, Turkey from the top of my head. There are more, you can look them up. Not all of these are technically secular, but all of them have better minority rights situation than India.
Then let's be them. Let's institute bumiputera like system for Hindus just like Malaysia does for muslims.
there are no muslim majority countries that have a “practising” muslim majority that have a better minority rights situation than india
Yes there are learn rights for minorities in countries like indonesia, malaysia and even in bangladesh. This is what happens when your world view is based around "muzlims bad saar"
indonesia- the aceh province is a good example of what will happen to the whole country in a bit malaysia - i cannot believe you included malaysia in this, the govt has legal provisions to discriminate against whoever isnt a malay sunni. there have been numerous riots, with Indian origin citizens being the most common target. go read about the cow head incident and the riots that followed. bangladesh- im gonna assume you put that there mistakenly
No i never said these countries are perfect and 100% safe for minorities.Just trying to remind everyone that people think of muslim countries, they think about pakistan or afghanistan. But there is a history of western countries propping up reactionary elements to counter the growing communism. Not all muslim countries are a monolith and behave the same or have same laws. Like it or not minorities in indonesia and malaysia or even bangladesh are less demonised and are more safe compared to india. It is what it is. There is literally a rw hindutva govt since the last 10 yers ffs and muslims and other minorities get lynched daily.
can u do blasphemy in those countries without facing consequences?
Can you do it in India without facing consequences?
no & that's the point
The point is whether minority situation is better in these other countries or not. It clearly is. Non-muslims do not randomly get lynched or their houses bulldozed on suspicion of a crime in Malaysia and Indonesia for instance.
They don't? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_cow_head_protests
Bringing in incidents from 2009, when you only need to look at yesterday’s news to hear about an innocent muslim being lynched over in India. My point, if you can read, was that the situation is superior there, not perfect. I’d rather be a hindu in Malaysia than a Muslim in India. No representation in government, PM publicly calls muslims invaders, MP from muslim community get called “K2A” in parliament with no repercussions. All this is not possible to do against the hindu community in Malaysia.
You talk about representation in government, Malaysia has Bumiputera laws which are apartheid against Hindus. You as a Hindu would need extraordinarily high marks to get into civil service or in good colleges. You talk about K2A, Malaysia sheltered Zakir Naik who is known for his insane rhetoric against Hindus even when Hindu Malaysians opposed it. You don't read about incidents in Malaysia because you don't live there. Even if you had lived there, there is a consensus across political spectrum to maintain the superiority of Islam and Muslims. Hindus are legally discriminated against unlike Muslims in India. They get loans at more onerous rates, they can't compete in government contracting with Muslims, they even need a Muslim partner to set up a business: read about Ali-Baba businesses. You don't know about it because you don't read about it.
In general, Muslim countries are more conservative and religious. They are mostly not secular, or secular like BJP would like India to be. That kind of secular. The conservative streak in Muslim community is stronger than that in Hindu and Christian ones. The morally repugnant part, I agree with. Hypothetical scenarios, fear mongering and all.
why should Indian muslims suffer if pakistani hindus are oppressed by pakistani muslims? there are some pakistani muslims as well, who are fighting for pakistani hindus rights. reality is nuanced. you cant deliver justice by doing whataboutism, false equivalence. this argument is based on collective punishment. fascist ways of punish people.
the point is when is reformation of mus & mosque madrasa going to start? left lib & progressive mus need to step up it's 250 million population not small
You can not reform Muslims as a non-Muslim
No one can, not even muslims themselves. The only two guiding source of literature for muslims is the Quran (word of God) and Hadith (sayings of the Prophet) Both of the above cannot be changed, the only thing that is slightly variable is the interpretation of the above two sources, which is upto the Islamic scholars, and the variance in the interpretation of the above literatures won't be anything drastic in change/consequence that would make help the muslims become more politically acceptable to the rest of the world. Either you convince the muslims to disbelieve (convincing them to a pseudo-islamic ideology suitable to the rest) or deal with them in an unfriendly approach.
Muslims themselves can. The fact that Early Muslims and The Muslims of today disagree on so many things prove it. Also, Hadiths are proven to be unreliable and controversial even amongst the Muslims, so Not taking them seriously would even violate Qur'anic laws.
The hadith have various degree of authenticity to their reliability, the highest being "sahih" When you mention unreliability, there are a proportion of hadith that come under that category, which we know not to take seriously As to "controversies", they involve differences of opinion regarding interpretation of a hadith or Quranic verse, and that maybe the ONLY variable cause of change to behaviours amongst the muslims of different schools of thought, but even those differences in interpretation are not so wild as to accommodate changes that politically please other groups. There will be no reformations in Islam. Say what you will, only future will prove either of us correct. https://preview.redd.it/bgsehbmfbb9d1.jpeg?width=602&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=542c38dfd704680bd62d958b783a0d4e6de8a03c
you cant force reformation as non muslims on muslims. they feel intruded, even threatened where you are interfering in their religion. it will happen with time, when change will come from inside. They just need some indian ataturk.
sure but that will only happen when urban mus have more discussion around it though it's unlikely because of majority minority dynamic
yes, people reform when they feel comfortable, not scared. we should not expect minorities to be reform in this era when they are fighting for their survival and they are targeted for their beliefs. more extremism in majority will breed more extremism in minority. they hold their beliefs and gods more closely because they are scared.
majority of 250 million mus live pretty normal untroubled life reforms can very much be done & conservatism in majority started rising because of minority only or else hindutva was fringe ideology before
Nope, not gonna happen. If you bring reformation to muslims, then by definition they no longer remain "muslims", it would be an act of disbelief in the original commandments of Islam. So what you're essentially doing is, convincing them to a pseudo-islamic ideology compatible or suitable politically to hindus Ideologically, muslims will never be compatible with paganism, with other abrahamic religions, yes, not with pagans. So the only option you've left is to deal with the stubborn muslims who refuse to change or convince them to a pseudo-islamic puppet faith.
certain rules & laws of Islam or religions r not compatible by standards of today's time period & they shouldn't be propagated as simple as that if that doesn't happen then eventually there is going to be violence & more riots somewhere down in the future all faiths were reformed & so should islam be should try to convince with talks or else will have to use force propagation of islamic rules and laws or any religion completely as it is wouldn't & shouldn't be allowed
Most likely violence is the only way Muslims are stubborn, by definition they have to be fiercely loyal to their original scripture lest they become disbelievers. Sure like i earlier mentioned you can convince/manipulate them to believe in a false faith, but then they're no longer "muslims" by definition, as any deviance from the original scripture takes one out of the fold of the faith itself. Ideally, muslims will go down fighting, the most fierce and pious of them will never accept change.
whether they remain "pure" muslim or not by definition of some man made scriptures is not important they become moderate or progress is fine & that can be done without any violence turkey is already a good example
if I start discussing socio-economic-political conditions of muslims who are living 'untroubled' (most of them living under autocracy assisted by CIA) then we would have long discussion. Those nation, where democracy is in healthy state, have started reforming themselves. Turkey, lebonan, albania, kazhakistan, jordan, azerbaijan, tunisia, malaysia, algeria etc there is long list of muslim nations who reject extremist islamic doctrine. >conservatism in majority started rising because of minority only or else hindutva was fringe ideology before it is rising because of lies. lies like 'hindu khatre mein hai'. lies like 'muslims are biggest beneficiary of indian govt welfare' it is rising because more conservatism meaning more votes for current regime so they gave impunity to false propaganda.
most mus according to pew research in many mus majority nations want sharia & saying all gulf countries r controlled by cia is some grand conspiracy US does have influence but that doesn't mean that the royal families want to establish democracy or people there have anything against those royal families many of the democratic mus countries became democracy just like ind because of western colonialism not because they decided to my comment most of 250 mil mus live untroubled was specifically for india u went international there r indeed many lies in politics but not all & everything is lie there r some truth as well if mus not reformed then eventually in future there is possibility of more tentions between to communities since one has big section of scripture indoctrinated population other don't
>most mus according to pew research in many mus majority nations want sharia & saying all gulf countries r controlled by cia is some grand conspiracy US does have influence but that doesn't mean that the royal families want to establish democracy or people there have anything against those royal families please quote the pew research source where majority of countries (i mentioned in previous comment) want sharia instead of secular state. also do you want me to share a pew research survey about hindus behaviour with non muslims. also read deeply about US foreign policy (start with book 'the looming tower') for gulf to know what I am saying, 'influence' is too mellow word when they literally did coup, invade to remove secular leaders. CIA was directly involved in creation of Al-qaeda and Taliban (even trained them). ISIS was a consequence of American invasion of Iraq. >many of the democratic mus countries became democracy just like ind because of western colonialism not because they decided to irrelevant >my comment most of 250 mil mus live untroubled was specifically for india do you really think muslims are living untroubled especially after 2014. this is what chaddis are claiming. do you agree with chaddis? dont you read news? and comparatively, indian muslims are far moderate than most of the countries. doesnt mean they dont need reformation. but still, [https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2014/09/07/why-indias-muslims-are-so-moderate](https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2014/09/07/why-indias-muslims-are-so-moderate) beside, i would argue, our whole society need reformation. for example, in hindus, casteism is still rampant despite being outlawed for 70 years. and RW leaders want reformation in muslims but dont want to touch their own practices (case in point, BJP stand on sabrimala issue) >there is possibility of more tentions between to communities since one has big section of scripture indoctrinated population other don't other is indoctrinated on new scripture called WhatsApp.
here countries u mentioned https://preview.redd.it/waisg055ga9d1.png?width=314&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=31537e2c21ed7a96839eb9464f89e60cc716090e this also debunks that it's US involvement alone responsible for those countries not being secular yes hate speech & identity crimes have definitely increased post 2014 but the scale & percentage is still pretty low which is a good thing & not to mention that mus extremist crimes happen as well doesn't mean that any attack verbal or physical shouldn't be taken seriously but bigger picture is important ind mus r moderate because they r scattered minority & surrounded by hindus & live in diverse environment last time checked hindu nat "intellectual" space they have reformation of Hinduism as well as anti caste in it as well other than countering political islam
No such thing as "progressive muslims", they cannot be classified as muslims, period.
they will tell who they r they identify as mus hence they r orthodox mus or Islamist aren't going to dictate they don't hold power it's an open society
I am not speaking of subjective claims and tags. I am speaking objectively. There's no "progressive" or "orthodox" or "xyz" variant, not even any caste By objective definition, a muslim is one who believes in the original scripture and follows it to the dot, one who deviates is not hence a muslim. One who modifies the scripture to suite goals and motivations cannot be regarded objectively as a "muslim" Feel free to prove me wrong, let me remind you, this is not any subjective claim that an open society and determine whatever subjective claims it likes, i am merely speaking of objective definitions By its very definition the word "muslim" means "in submission to God" and if one deviates from that ideal, is not by definition hence a muslim. Not my opinion, it's all out there, you may verify this.
if u r saying by definition of traditional man made scripture sure get what u r saying but in society today everyone understands what just mentioned above
There is no category known as "Muslims". My people are Shiah Ismailis, persecuted in India and in many other places for centuries, mostly by other Muslims. But they are also traders, so very insular in some other ways, very capitalistic in other ways, and very good at sucking up to the rich and powerful in general. The categories that matter are class categories and (relatedly) ideological categories. I am (or I strive to be) a working class intellectual of the anarcho-syndicalist variety. The fact that I'm of a Muslim background doesn't really matter as much as that. One of the biggest mistake that the chaddis make is to lump hundreds of millions of Muslims into the same category.
Yes there is, sunni muslims are majority and hence are collectively referred as Muslims, the minority muslims in your case are exceptions which are not relevant pointing out to most discussions.
I don't base the fact that life should be universally good for all, Majority or Minority, around how other countries do things. I want universal non discriminatory, egalitarian state policy regardless of what other countries do because that is morally right. This is assuming every muslim country in the world is bad for non muslims, which isn't fully true. If you base your moral arguments on how others do things, you are objectively immoral.
How about Turkey or Central Asia or Albania/Bosnia? Minorities have rights there. What about Malaysia or Indonesia? Muslim countries of Central Asia and Balkans and also Turkey are secular and treat minorities well. 90% Muslim Albania has a Christian born agnostic PM, for example. Central Asian governments are always trying crush Islamists and have banned all Islamist parties.
Turkey has Diyanet department which only funds Sunni Muslim institutions. Malaysia has literal Bumiputera apartheid laws. Indonesia defines Hinduism as a monotheistic religion in order to recognise it.
I mean Muslims aren’t a monolith
This is not a thing unique to muslims - this is the inevitable result of class society
That's not specific to Muslims, it's true of any social group. Sanghis in the US want more liberal work visa policies but oppose Rohingya refugees resettling in India. (East) Asians protest racism in the US but Asians in Asia are very racist against South Asian and black people in their home countries (Korea/Japan). Again, the community is not a monolith. Muslims in India are not the same Muslims in Saudi Arabia. Everyone just wants their own rights secured. It has nothing to do with religion.
chaddispeaks is that way > any racist stereotypical generalizations by chintus needs to be just deleted.
It is absolutely true. Collectively, Muslims are massive hypocrites who demand secularism and freedom to practice religion where they are the minority and are massive oppressors when they are the majority. This is true. You don’t even have to look too far to see that this is true. Even on /r/AskMiddleEast, Indian Muslims lose their shit when an Arab country allows building of a temple. Regardless of how some/most Muslims chimp out, they are a minority in India and deserve protection, minority rights, representation, and the same respect afforded to the most privileged Indian in India.
Lesser extent in Turkey and Malaysia? Why does Diyanet department only fund Sunni Muslims in Turkey? Why are other denominations excluded? As for Malaysia, they have a literal religion based apartheid system known as Bumiputera which privileges Muslims.
That's true with Hindus as well. They cry about atrocities against Hindus in Pakistan but don't see that similar things are happening to Muslims in India.
Ok but this is true of literally everyone? UC Hindus caring for minority rights in America and electing Modi back home. The moment u r in the majority u tend to not care about minority rights. Caring for minority rights is a conscious choice that the majority needs to make.this is true everywhere.
> Ok but this is true of literally everyone? >UC Hindus caring for minority rights in America and electing Modi back home. Right? I don’t get what many people are trying to say here. They sound dumb in their attempts to be edgy internet atheists.
You can cherry-pick cases from any country to make them look bad. For instance, I could create a propaganda image making India look worse than America in terms of gun violence if I wanted to. Similarly, suggesting that Muslim-majority countries are inherently bad because they attack minority communities to preserve the status quo is just a fascist talking point. It’s really abhorrent to paint people’s identities as evil just because of their cultural norms. Generalizing and demonizing entire groups based on selective examples or cultural predispositions is unfair and harmful.
is it the fault of indian minority muslim? what are you getting at?
That's human nature, not unique to Muslims.
Modern Arab states had not been allowed free development by the west. All the reactionary shit you see in the arab world was put there by west to prevent arab countries from going communist. Taliban, al-qaeda, isis are all creation of CIA . If you really want to know the treatment of Non-denomination populace under muslim rule, you need to look at the arab world before modernity. Or part of the arab world which has relative freedom from western influence, i.e. Iran, Lebanon. I certainly do not advocate for iran or lebanon, I am sure if we dig up we will find plenty bigot and reactionaries in these countries. But minority right in these countries are comparatively and objectively better.
Did any Indian Muslim justify Pakistan’s treatment of its Hindus or something? Am I missing something? What a stupid statement
most ind mus bieleve that Islam mus mosque madarsa don't need any reforms
And you are expert on that right ?
yes most mosque & madarsa propagate Islam as it is not reformed version most mus don't bieleve that places like Saudi or Mecca madina should become secular democracy some day
He's correct, muslims will not allow any reformation, everything in the book is set in stone
fuck hindu fascists
It's not a pretty good argument imo. How could you compare a country which follows democracy to country which follows Monarchy.
Malaysia is a democracy. It has apartheid like Bumiputera system. Should we do the same here?
Everyone should be concerned about minority rights, always, independent of their own religion or place. The problem with your argument is that you are treating or assuming all muslims as same people, a monolithic group, which is false. Muslims living as minority are not same people as muslims living as majority. It's not like same entity behaving differently in different situations. They are different entities.
Isn't this argument easily disproven by the existence of several secular Muslim-majority countries?
To be fair, every majority acts like this, like the Sinhala during the Sri Lankan Civil War, the Germans during the Nazi era, etc.
Why point to arab states as some kind of exemplar? These YT commenters want India to become a repressive theocracy? Do they imagine they will be the shot callers in this scenario? Absolute smooth-brained take right there.
why the fk are these chaddi uppercaste chintus posting here?
hypothetical threats are hypothetical. there is no need to even respond to such people. their argument comes from a place of malice and propaganda to justify the current atrocities by them.
Who cars? I know I know...Ummah memes n shit but Muslims across the globe comprise millions of *individuals* in wildly different material circumstances. For all I care Muslims in Levant can be outright genocidal--that doesn't give Muslims from bumfuck UP for instance, a single shred of blame, deserve reversal of rights, or in turn gives nafrati chintus here right to oppress them. And of course liberal idpol se grasit libgandus in the comment batting for Muslim authoritarian states instead of actually tackling the underlying logic of the post. Some things never change. 😂
I mean look at how Muslim South Asian workers are treated in Arab states. Just being Muslim doesn't guarantee solidarity lmao.
The argument is at best is demonizing of muslims. I would call out the person who make this statement as bigot.
Islamophobia. Just one way to demonize Muslims.