When the judiciary I.e the SC tells a petioner that he has to be secular ,you know that nobody has understood the word and what it implies.never know that secularism is an individuals responsibility.
Caste & jati isn't the problem, it's casteism & jativaad that's the issue. Ever heard of Harry Potter, a fictional character? Why do you think his last name was Potter? Because in their feudal society of England somewhere along the line of his ancestry his family profession was pottery i.e. "Mritshilpo (earth work)". Did that make him a social outcast? Did he stop using that surname because someone from his society would look down upon him because once upon a time his family profession was pottery? No right. That's the crux of it. Casteism existed long ago, for whatever reason, accept that. Casteism exists even now in some places, accept that & then take measures to end that casteism. Promote intercaste marriages, promote more blue collar jobs for everyone, promote mandatory quality primary, secondary & higher secondary education for everyone of every caste without discrimination. After a time you'll only find caste with no casteism, & when social upliftment is done to a significant level, the general public itself will demand abolition of the caste based reservation. Simple enough 🤷🏻♂️
Your idea is good, but you cannot eliminate or change DNA of caste discrimination from people. It is so pathetic and backward some upper casts don’t accept another upper caste boy or girl for marriage because they will be outcast within their own cast. Can anyone explain the logic here?
@@anildanta4731 caste is an identity, so that can't be changed & for me, it isn't the problem. But casteism or simply caste discrimination comes from the perception that somehow people of some castes are lower or higher than the others & it is a big problem. So basically what I'm saying is, the DNA isn't the problem, the "Perception" is. So all we need to do is to try to change that "Perception" of the majority people, that's it. So how to change that "Perception"? Things like, 1. Mandatory quality primary, secondary & higher secondary education for everyone, 2. More blue collar jobs for everyone (which will come due to upcoming manufacturing sector boost in our country), 3. More intercaste marriages due to above-mentioned steps, as average income of different caste people will start to equalise which will result in increased social interaction & social cohesion, Will eventually change the general "Perception" of majority middle-class people of Bharat which will end Caste discrimination for good. (It's my opinion)
I am inline with everything you said, except accepting that because it existed thousands of years back. It's shame on any society. Well there are laws to prevent discrimination, but the system in India, don't help with this. Promote inter caste marriage? An upper caste parents don't accept another upper caste as fit, how do you fix this mentality? In 2023 you have a upper caste man urinating on lower caste man. People are prevented from riding a horse while marrying his own caste spouse, what are we talking about measures? We have seen family members killing their own son or daughter because they married outside the cast. This is DNA, educating people don't fix this. And there are upper caste people who are asking for changing their caste into backward category so they can get some reservations. The moral is this will remain for millions of years or for the life of earth.
Reconciliation - No reconciliation without there being truth- you speak as if the episodes in respect of which reconciliation is being talked about are all a thing of the past, which is simply not the case. The mindset in both the Abrahamic communities which led to those episodes continue to this day, maybe more in the one and less in the other, but continuing nevertheless. When India emerged in 1947, 85%Hindu etc. etc., my only expectation was that at last and at least now we Hindus will not be pestered for our religion not being like the Abrahamic ones and not be pestered to convert. For me , secularism meant as much a guarantee of this, and Hindus not being subjected to the conversion operating book as it was to the Muslim and Christian "minorities" not being denied their civic rights as citizens of India. But in actual fact, the Christian and Muslim communities have continued waging war against Hindus by other means. Ti them secularism actually means they can continue doing what they were doing during the Mughal and British periods against Hindus. Constant and false attacks against Hindus constant hostile and negative and false press coverage, Christian thought leaders collating "evidences" of Church attacks in Hindu majority India, Christian leaders going to the US to testify against Hindus and Hindu majority India, - these would not indicate any intention of reconciliation. For them this is upholding Secularism. Hindus who never stand up for Hinduism against Islamic and Christian attacks are secular Hindus.
Sardar patel did think of using force on royal families. But indian forces were in ratio of 1:4 with Princely states. It could start a huge civil war. Also, a lot of these royal families would have annexed to Pakistan in stress.
@@magletters Jinnah tried to accede Bikaner and Jodhpur but Bikaner refused very quickly and was one of the first to accede to India whereas Jodhpur took some time and then acceded to India.
If India was one country before independence, why the kings are fighting with each other expanding their kingdom? There was never one king who ruled India and spoken same language, Right? The kings are always fighting for their kingdom to defend against another King of same religion. I wonder if India was one country how we let Moghuls and British to enter and rule us for 1500+ years? How did all these kings failed to protect with their massive army?
Agree! the bit Rajeev answered at 37:00 was an absolute word salad, according to other guy India was created by people following dhamic values . then they go talking about Sardar convincing royal families. so contradictory.
@@elwang1536Good catch !! This is exactly what some authors are trying to do rewrite history to present us alternate version. I always wonder why Kauravas and Pandavas are fighting for land and throne when they have the entire earth for them to share and live together in harmony and peace? What is wrong if someone says india is union of states? Why people are asking for separate states within the same state and it is being separated many times?
@@chanduaggarwal5025 Let's not take things too personal. You have to learn to accept others opinion as well and history as it is instead of drawing narratives suiting our ideology. I am not denying the fact about India being connected, but you are missing the point I highlighted earlier. What you call today as Maharashtra or Madhya Pradesh may have many Kings ruling same time and they all are fighting with each other either to expand kingdom or protecting their kingdom from other invaders. They don't exists as friendly kings or group of kings protecting Maharashtra from any other King. If you don't like this way of understanding history before Independence, you can stick to your own theory of One Nation 1500 years ago. Have fun !! By the way I am not overreacting, but just responding to your point. Nothing personal, it's history debate.
Remove any and all reservations . Only Merit based societies prosper . Varna Shastra recognised the individual abilities and limitations . I may love to be an astronaut , but , too bad . I just dont have the qualities and qualifications ! Are you gping to make teservations for me ?
You need reservation in these inequal society. Mr Pasadena don't shove your brahminism upon us.varna didn't not .Most hindu aplogosits don't get it that if you remove reservation then lower caste Hindus won't be hindu .
Removing or at the very least, restricting access to reservation for the relatively better off among backward castes will somehow cause them to cease being Hindus? How much more patronizing can one get? You think that reservation is what binds together various castes under the overarching umbrella that is Hinduism? Thanks for providing some much needed laughs with your unintended satire.
@@vikramtiwari3607 spiritual values and religious values can only help in one sense material needs are of another . Who will provide for the lack of representation in power.
why shouldn't Hindu private school reserve seats for lower caste Hindus.?Ban minority owned schools espically language based .Ex:-Konkani choor and tulu bc are among the most forwad communtiy but still their childhren awail state quota , but in their private owned school dont give preference to home state people. Hyprocsy .Runn dosa restaurants when you actually dont have any ownership over it .
And in even cricket , use your way by making k l rahul play every match .Tulu Jihad .Add to that the main reason bjp has a bad perception in Karnataka is because they favor costal bc to much.
Here's an idea. How about all hindus get admission? Whats with this reservation nonsense? Hindus are hindus, period. This concept of caste is nothing but low iq tribalism.
This guys calls himself a carvaka, yeah I see it cleary, the way he describes the Gyanvapi case. you'r a carvak of the highest order. (saving Caravaka form Charvaks)
Wait what,criminalise the use of caste surname.your statement sounds like a statement from a communist dictator.people have identities,culture ,heritage if you ban surname people would still have identities in other forms or they would become like woke finding group in absurd things
If India was one country before independence, why the kings are fighting with each other expanding their kingdom? There was never one king who ruled India and spoken same language, Right? The kings are always fighting for their kingdom to defend against another King of same religion. I wonder if India was one country how we let Moghuls and British to enter and rule us for 1500+ years? How did all these kings failed to protect with their massive army?
The point is Bharat had a civilizational identity that kept it together not that it was a nation state that's the whole point of the book , to move to becoming a fully integrated nation state.
@@jishnu9551There is no doubt India is one country, but how does 'Integrated Nation State' should operate? We have a CM, Governor for each State, elections are separate for these states, Assembly is separate, each of them have borders (we do have disputes between states still, river water sharing etc.), Languages are different. Right? In spite of these states with boundaries India is one country so we have one PM, one President, One Supreme Court, One Election Commission etc. Right? I don't understand why people get agitated when someone says 'Union of States', isn't it true? What is wrong in this beautiful union? Is this really important even to discuss when there are bigger issues to solve?
@@anildanta4731 I do not deny any of what you said . It is a Union of States but is also a whole. Unlike USA federalism works differently in India , moreover States can't secede like USA or former USSR. The point I was making about nation integration was related to things like Individual rights . Individual rights in our country is overrided by personal laws , hence everyone not registered under special marriage act would have laws that govern based on religion. Isn't that fundamentally segregation? Freedom of religion is one thing but Religious based imposition is not correct. our constitution framers understood that hence mentioned UCC in DPSP but because it's BJP putting it forward many are using mental gymnastics to oppose it , for vote bank as well as for saving face. The point I'm making is citizens of our country should be seen as equal and same and should be seen as citizens as first and individual rights over group rights.
@@jishnu9551 I agree with most of your point of view, except one thing I.e. UCC and religion deciding few factors. It is same with Hindu religion also and more complex than Islam. You will see when we are close to have a draft. Also don’t fall for gimmicks of BJP’s proposals which are no doubt are for votes. They will say Delhi need statehood when they are in opposition, and then say it should be under central rule when they come to power. They are in fact using this UCC as vote bank by telling Muslims have too much freedom. Trust me no laws are equally applied to all citizens, whether it is criminal law or civil, they are applied based on Money, Power, Political connections, vote bank, caste etc. It’s a fact and you can find ton of examples in everyday life. So what gives you confidence that UCC will be applied equally?
@@anildanta4731 I don't think you understand what UCC does? Do you know that Hindu Personal Law is codified? Moreover you say Muslims have too much freedom? Freedom on what? You're equating religious conservatism and freedom as same.
When the judiciary I.e the SC tells a petioner that he has to be secular ,you know that nobody has understood the word and what it implies.never know that secularism is an individuals responsibility.
Caste & jati isn't the problem, it's casteism & jativaad that's the issue.
Ever heard of Harry Potter, a fictional character? Why do you think his last name was Potter? Because in their feudal society of England somewhere along the line of his ancestry his family profession was pottery i.e. "Mritshilpo (earth work)". Did that make him a social outcast? Did he stop using that surname because someone from his society would look down upon him because once upon a time his family profession was pottery? No right. That's the crux of it.
Casteism existed long ago, for whatever reason, accept that. Casteism exists even now in some places, accept that & then take measures to end that casteism. Promote intercaste marriages, promote more blue collar jobs for everyone, promote mandatory quality primary, secondary & higher secondary education for everyone of every caste without discrimination. After a time you'll only find caste with no casteism, & when social upliftment is done to a significant level, the general public itself will demand abolition of the caste based reservation.
Simple enough 🤷🏻♂️
Jati is the problem. Caste will be the reason why Hinduism will die out in a few decades
Harry Potter was clearly a casteist
Your idea is good, but you cannot eliminate or change DNA of caste discrimination from people. It is so pathetic and backward some upper casts don’t accept another upper caste boy or girl for marriage because they will be outcast within their own cast. Can anyone explain the logic here?
@@anildanta4731 caste is an identity, so that can't be changed & for me, it isn't the problem. But casteism or simply caste discrimination comes from the perception that somehow people of some castes are lower or higher than the others & it is a big problem. So basically what I'm saying is, the DNA isn't the problem, the "Perception" is. So all we need to do is to try to change that "Perception" of the majority people, that's it. So how to change that "Perception"?
Things like,
1. Mandatory quality primary, secondary & higher secondary education for everyone,
2. More blue collar jobs for everyone (which will come due to upcoming manufacturing sector boost in our country),
3. More intercaste marriages due to above-mentioned steps, as average income of different caste people will start to equalise which will result in increased social interaction & social cohesion,
Will eventually change the general "Perception" of majority middle-class people of Bharat which will end Caste discrimination for good.
(It's my opinion)
I am inline with everything you said, except accepting that because it existed thousands of years back. It's shame on any society. Well there are laws to prevent discrimination, but the system in India, don't help with this. Promote inter caste marriage? An upper caste parents don't accept another upper caste as fit, how do you fix this mentality? In 2023 you have a upper caste man urinating on lower caste man.
People are prevented from riding a horse while marrying his own caste spouse, what are we talking about measures? We have seen family members killing their own son or daughter because they married outside the cast. This is DNA, educating people don't fix this. And there are upper caste people who are asking for changing their caste into backward category so they can get some reservations. The moral is this will remain for millions of years or for the life of earth.
Why our constituent assembly did such a shoddy job , completely ignoring the Indian philosophy of running a state.
Reconciliation - No reconciliation without there being truth- you speak as if the episodes in respect of which reconciliation is being talked about are all a thing of the past, which is simply not the case. The mindset in both the Abrahamic communities which led to those episodes continue to this day, maybe more in the one and less in the other, but continuing nevertheless.
When India emerged in 1947, 85%Hindu etc. etc., my only expectation was that at last and at least now we Hindus will not be pestered for our religion not being like the Abrahamic ones and not be pestered to convert. For me , secularism meant as much a guarantee of this, and Hindus not being subjected to the conversion operating book as it was to the Muslim and Christian "minorities" not being denied their civic rights as citizens of India. But in actual fact, the Christian and Muslim communities have continued waging war against Hindus by other means. Ti them secularism actually means they can continue doing what they were doing during the Mughal and British periods against Hindus.
Constant and false attacks against Hindus constant hostile and negative and false press coverage, Christian thought leaders collating "evidences" of Church attacks in Hindu majority India, Christian leaders going to the
US to testify against Hindus and Hindu majority India, - these would not indicate any intention of reconciliation. For them this is upholding Secularism.
Hindus who never stand up for Hinduism against Islamic and Christian attacks are secular Hindus.
Excellent conversation.
Sardar patel did think of using force on royal families. But indian forces were in ratio of 1:4 with Princely states. It could start a huge civil war. Also, a lot of these royal families would have annexed to Pakistan in stress.
Interesting point, do you have any references? TIA
@@magletters Jinnah tried to accede Bikaner and Jodhpur but Bikaner refused very quickly and was one of the first to accede to India whereas Jodhpur took some time and then acceded to India.
Thanks!
I've bought a couple of copies of the original print and given as gifts
I think the title is inspired from Raghuram Rajan's book 'Saving Capitalism from Capitalists'
Si be it.
Good
If India was one country before independence, why the kings are fighting with each other expanding their kingdom? There was never one king who ruled India and spoken same language, Right? The kings are always fighting for their kingdom to defend against another King of same religion. I wonder if India was one country how we let Moghuls and British to enter and rule us for 1500+ years? How did all these kings failed to protect with their massive army?
Agree! the bit Rajeev answered at 37:00 was an absolute word salad, according to other guy India was created by people following dhamic values . then they go talking about Sardar convincing royal families. so contradictory.
@@elwang1536Good catch !! This is exactly what some authors are trying to do rewrite history to present us alternate version. I always wonder why Kauravas and Pandavas are fighting for land and throne when they have the entire earth for them to share and live together in harmony and peace? What is wrong if someone says india is union of states? Why people are asking for separate states within the same state and it is being separated many times?
It might not have been ruled by the same king, but the entire continent was connected because of one sanskriti
@@chanduaggarwal5025 Let's not take things too personal. You have to learn to accept others opinion as well and history as it is instead of drawing narratives suiting our ideology. I am not denying the fact about India being connected, but you are missing the point I highlighted earlier. What you call today as Maharashtra or Madhya Pradesh may have many Kings ruling same time and they all are fighting with each other either to expand kingdom or protecting their kingdom from other invaders. They don't exists as friendly kings or group of kings protecting Maharashtra from any other King.
If you don't like this way of understanding history before Independence, you can stick to your own theory of One Nation 1500 years ago. Have fun !! By the way I am not overreacting, but just responding to your point. Nothing personal, it's history debate.
Remove any and all reservations . Only Merit based societies prosper . Varna Shastra recognised the individual abilities and limitations . I may love to be an astronaut , but , too bad . I just dont have the qualities and qualifications ! Are you gping to make teservations for me ?
You need reservation in these inequal society. Mr Pasadena don't shove your brahminism upon us.varna didn't not .Most hindu aplogosits don't get it that if you remove reservation then lower caste Hindus won't be hindu .
@@sachithrao6353Cope loser. Reservations literally justify the fact that you're subhumans who can't keep up on merit. Study hard or d13
Removing or at the very least, restricting access to reservation for the relatively better off among backward castes will somehow cause them to cease being Hindus? How much more patronizing can one get? You think that reservation is what binds together various castes under the overarching umbrella that is Hinduism? Thanks for providing some much needed laughs with your unintended satire.
@@vikramtiwari3607 what happens you fool if they convert in large number your brahmin ass is getting hurt .
@@vikramtiwari3607 spiritual values and religious values can only help in one sense material needs are of another . Who will provide for the lack of representation in power.
why shouldn't Hindu private school reserve seats for lower caste Hindus.?Ban minority owned schools espically language based .Ex:-Konkani choor and tulu bc are among the most forwad communtiy but still their childhren awail state quota , but in their private owned school dont give preference to home state people. Hyprocsy .Runn dosa restaurants when you actually dont have any ownership over it .
And in even cricket , use your way by making k l rahul play every match .Tulu Jihad .Add to that the main reason bjp has a bad perception in Karnataka is because they favor costal bc to much.
Here's an idea. How about all hindus get admission? Whats with this reservation nonsense? Hindus are hindus, period. This concept of caste is nothing but low iq tribalism.
This guys calls himself a carvaka, yeah I see it cleary, the way he describes the Gyanvapi case. you'r a carvak of the highest order. (saving Caravaka form Charvaks)
He has told many times he's a Political Hindu and a Neo Charvak. He's also told if you don't understand what that is, that's your problem not his. 😂
Caste is a big problem,we need to criminalize the use of caste surnames.Surnames like Kumar and Bharti should be promoted.
Wait a few mins, the trads will be here telling you how caste is part of your Sanskriti lmao.
@@thehumanoid6543yes caste is Sanskriti and it will be there
@@shaileshjoshi1727it should be eliminated
@@thehumanoid6543learn about jaati Varna and it is impossible to delete caste especially from the rural India
Wait what,criminalise the use of caste surname.your statement sounds like a statement from a communist dictator.people have identities,culture ,heritage if you ban surname people would still have identities in other forms or they would become like woke finding group in absurd things
Isn't this harsh guy defend that anglised ram mohan Roy who propagated monotheism and wanted to destroy Sanatan dharma under the garb of reformation
Are the two things mutually inclusive?
Secular musalman b bna lo kuch communist 😂😂😂😂
If India was one country before independence, why the kings are fighting with each other expanding their kingdom? There was never one king who ruled India and spoken same language, Right? The kings are always fighting for their kingdom to defend against another King of same religion. I wonder if India was one country how we let Moghuls and British to enter and rule us for 1500+ years? How did all these kings failed to protect with their massive army?
The point is Bharat had a civilizational identity that kept it together not that it was a nation state that's the whole point of the book , to move to becoming a fully integrated nation state.
@@jishnu9551There is no doubt India is one country, but how does 'Integrated Nation State' should operate? We have a CM, Governor for each State, elections are separate for these states, Assembly is separate, each of them have borders (we do have disputes between states still, river water sharing etc.), Languages are different. Right? In spite of these states with boundaries India is one country so we have one PM, one President, One Supreme Court, One Election Commission etc. Right? I don't understand why people get agitated when someone says 'Union of States', isn't it true? What is wrong in this beautiful union? Is this really important even to discuss when there are bigger issues to solve?
@@anildanta4731 I do not deny any of what you said . It is a Union of States but is also a whole. Unlike USA federalism works differently in India , moreover States can't secede like USA or former USSR. The point I was making about nation integration was related to things like Individual rights . Individual rights in our country is overrided by personal laws , hence everyone not registered under special marriage act would have laws that govern based on religion. Isn't that fundamentally segregation? Freedom of religion is one thing but Religious based imposition is not correct. our constitution framers understood that hence mentioned UCC in DPSP but because it's BJP putting it forward many are using mental gymnastics to oppose it , for vote bank as well as for saving face. The point I'm making is citizens of our country should be seen as equal and same and should be seen as citizens as first and individual rights over group rights.
@@jishnu9551 I agree with most of your point of view, except one thing I.e. UCC and religion deciding few factors. It is same with Hindu religion also and more complex than Islam. You will see when we are close to have a draft. Also don’t fall for gimmicks of BJP’s proposals which are no doubt are for votes. They will say Delhi need statehood when they are in opposition, and then say it should be under central rule when they come to power. They are in fact using this UCC as vote bank by telling Muslims have too much freedom. Trust me no laws are equally applied to all citizens, whether it is criminal law or civil, they are applied based on Money, Power, Political connections, vote bank, caste etc. It’s a fact and you can find ton of examples in everyday life. So what gives you confidence that UCC will be applied equally?
@@anildanta4731 I don't think you understand what UCC does? Do you know that Hindu Personal Law is codified? Moreover you say Muslims have too much freedom? Freedom on what? You're equating religious conservatism and freedom as same.