hanumadu wrote: ↑Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:58 am
It's not as if Namo has done nothing for the core voter base. He has slowly been cleaning up the ecosystem like reducing the students intake into social sciences at JNU. With time we can replace the faculty with indic faculty. Appointments to Indian Council of Historical Research etc are Indics. Over many years, these will do a lot to create a level playing field for Hindus.
More than UCC or Ram Mandir, I prefer demographic control and ghar wapsi. If we fail in demographics every other gain will be squandered in no time. Cutting funds to madrassas, deradicalisation of muslims and population control should be way higher up in the priority list for Hindus than Mandir or UCC. We have to take their power to influence elections in any significant way. All political parties will fall in line once that happens.
+1,00,008
See... separate and apart from Vikas/Development/Economy,
there are two types of "Hindu interest" issues. Structural and Iconic.
The ICONIC issues are the ones that are guaranteed to raise the emotional pitch very strongly. They pertain to symbolic matters that are very obvious, clear, and in-your-face. This does not mean that they're not important matters, they may be very important to many of us... e.g. Jallikattu, traditional celebrations of festivals (like diwali crackers or dahi handi), womens' entry into temples etc.
However, the nature of public consciousness is such that large amounts of mass public sentiment will quickly climb on top of such Iconic issues, stay there for a while, and then the issues will fade from public memory in a relatively short time. This is not a good or a bad thing, it's simply how society works. Therefore political interests (BIF as well as PIF) can utilize such Iconic issues for very specific purposes that usually centre around short-term flashpoints. They also make for very good TRP.
The STRUCTURAL issues are the matters that do not appear to have very immediate or obvious effects but profoundly impact the structure of society in the long term. These include FCRA, anti-conversion, triple-talaq (though this may be iconic for Muslims it is structural for us), Hindu control over temples, RTE, etc. Typically Hindu masses will not get agitated over these issues or become motivated by them.
This is why it is very important for the GOI to pursue them consistently, quietly, and ruthlessly... because typically, no one will come out on the streets to support Structural Issues.
However, one generation from now, the handling of Structural Issues today will have a defining influence on the state of Hindus in India.
The handling of Iconic issues can also have long-term impacts, no doubt, but in a much more unpredictable and stochastic way (which will be continuously influenced in different directions as unforeseen circumstances develop).
On the question: Is Modi Sarkar doing enough for Hindu interests? I would say the following.
Modi Sarkar has successfully taken up many Structural Interest Issues, and has fought long, relatively quiet battles against the BIF in the judiciary as well as legislative organs to get our way on these issues. The degree of success is of course partial (these things take a long time to change) but the fight is ongoing. We should not expect instant microwaveable solutions to Structural Issues that affect Hindu Interests... it is a long, brutal slog of "ek aur dhakka", month after month, constituency by constituency.
However there are two Structural Issues on which I, personally, believe that Modi Sarkar has NOT done enough and should do more. They are (1) RTE and (2) Getting government out of the business of controlling Hindu temples. There is a third structural issue that has not been touched at all apart from once in the very beginning of Modi sarkar: reforming the Judiciary so that its worldview is no longer Nehruvian in aspect but unapologetically Indic.
On these three specific Structural issues, I will agree with anyone who says Modi Sarkar has not yet done enough for Hindus.
On the Iconic issues, I think it is a waste of our time to get too much into discussing them here UNLESS they can in some way be leveraged against the BIFs. Often it is the BIFs who try to create discord in our ranks by giving a lot of predominance to Iconic issues (from the other side) as a means of provocation. It is important that we not respond to their provocation with great emotional upswells, and end up dancing to the enemy's tune. Let's discuss these issues as they come up, of course, but with a very clear and unemotional mind as to who is doing what and with what agenda.
Iconic is not less important than Structural. They are like tactics and strategy respectively. But to bundle all these issues together and cry that Modi is not pro-Hindu enough, means that the enemy is winning. Better to see what we can do to control the short-term narrative re: Iconic issues, and the long-term narrative re: Structural issues.
Just my thoughts.