Bhartiya Janta Party is a communalist party

My opponent makes claims like I'm making an evasive case, or that I'm avoiding his questions. The facts remain:-I've backed up my arguments with adequate justifications and external sources. -In the instance which Pro is referring to, there really was no question to be found. ALSO, I countered Pro's assertion (which he thinks is a question) with an actual question, which, by the way, he has NOT answered. -Pro started his argument (rd4) with what is supposed to be a focus on the loopholes in his own (Pro's) case. That looks like a REALLY careless typo, and it speaks volumes about how little thought my opponent actually put into the couple of jibes that followed. I request the judges to please make note of this, and not believe in my opponent's hollow remarks. My opponent's argument is based almost wholly on half-baked "truths" and inflammatory allegations. I shall now debunk Pro's claims and conclude this debate. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Rebuttals____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Pro questions BJP's nationalist intentions when mentioning "Hindustan":I disagree with your justification, because the context in which the BJP uses this ‘definition’ is dangerous. .. .. .If the BJP is so saintly in its approach why doesn’t the RSS admit Muslim members? I just can't believe my opponent did that. This is an outrageous statement, which is not only immature, but also FALSE. Not only does the RSS admit Muslim members, the Sangh Parivar actually has a Muslim wing. Also, more and more Muslims are joining the RSS these days, says spokesman Mohan Bhagwat. -----Source:. http://www.loksatta.com...(Video in marathi, summary in English right below the embed)-----The Muslim Rashtriya Manch (MRM, lit. National platform for muslims) is the Muslim wing of the RSS. It is over 100000 strong, and its members constantly strive for intercommunal harmony. -----Sources:Official site - . http://www.muslimrashtriyamanch.org...http://en.wikipedia.org...-----Pro's statements display a shocking ignorance, bordering on blind prejudice. The fact that my opponent could insinuate the RSS not even admitting Muslims, calls into question both his credibility and his preparation. ------------------Pro's response to my statement referring to Mughals as "Hindus":Wrong. BJP says the Hindus had inhabited the entire stretch of the Indian subcontinent for thousands of years. BJP argues that it was the Hindu forefathers who had established standards and norms and had fought against the foreign invaders, hence claiming that only the Hindu had a right “to be a child of this soil”. I don't know where Pro is getting all these inflammatory statements from, but unless he quotes a source supporting his remarks, I must remind the judges that THEY CANNOT BE BELIEVED. Religious minorities were hence counseled to pledge allegiance to the Hindu symbols and restrict practicing their own religious beliefs to their private spaces. Again - when did this happen? These are baseless allegations. I would very much like Pro to cite sources that support his claims, but then again, he's had his last word. BJP believes that Hindus who chose to convert to Islam or Christianity were forced not only to change their mode of worship, but also their style. .. .. .They believe the problem of non-Hindus was not the problem of faith, alleging that it transcends the barriers of faith and worship, and tends to create political tensions in the anti-national perspective. Who believes this, Mr. Pro? The BJP? Or you? I have simply no obligation to respond to this. I could just as easily claim that the BJP answers to the English, who were former rulers of India. Would that make it true? I hope the judges get my point. As a rebuttal against the above remarks made by my opponent, I would like to demonstrate instances where the BJP and the Sangh Parivar have supported other ethnic groups, and other ethnic groups have supported BJP. And yes, I WILL provide sources to back up my arguments. The Seva Bharati is a member of the Sangh Parivar devoted entirely to welfare work and upliftment of the less privileged. It does not discriminate between religions. (1)(2)The RSS did some relief work in the Sunderbans (West Bengal), where a large number of Muslims resides. This didn't impede them in any way. (3)I've provided a few examples of the Seva Bharati's relief work. Any and all instances are listed on their official website. (4)(5)(6)-----Sources:(1)Official website - . http://www.sevabharathi.org...(2)http://en.wikipedia.org...(3)RSS relief work in Sunderbans - . http://www.sewabharathi.com...;(4)Seva Bharati flood relief - . http://karsewak.blogspot.in...(5)Most notable instances - . http://sewabharti.org...(6)Summary of Seva Bharati's work - . http://sewabharti.org...-----Since the BJP is a member of the Sangh Parivar, and my opponent hasn't hesitated to introduce RSS when mentioning BJP's ideals, any mentions I make of the Sangh Parivar, RSS and Seva Bharati also count. ------------------Muslims (among other ethnic groups) supporting BJPThe belief of many people about the BJP being communalist stems from their alleged "hatred" of Muslims. I would like to pose the following question:If the BJP hates Muslims, then why would the Muslims vote for them? Yes, indeed. Recent poll data shows that a large number of Muslims in India voted for the BJP led by Narendra Modi. The BJP won 71 out of 80 seats in Uttar Pradesh, India's largest state, which also happens to have Muslims constituting over 20% of the state population. -----Sources:. http://indiatoday.intoday.in...http://www.theguardian.com...http://thediplomat.com...------------------The BJP goes on to call non-hindus contributing to the anti-national sentiments, is this not communal? I really don't think this qualifies as "communal". Going against anti-national sentiments is, by definition, NATIONALIST, and not communalist. Thus while “the nationals of this nation may have religious faith, they all have to subscribe and pledge supremacyto Hindutva which is the cultural ethos of the nation. In this view, a Hindu is “any person born in this country” but, Rama and Krishna are seen as national heroes. Pro has backed this up with a source (which I can't access, by the way), but I don't think that this opposes my argument. A national hero can be anyone. APJ Abdul Kalam (a Muslim) is viewed as a national hero by many. As far as pledging supremacy to Hindutva is concerned, I've already explained that Hindutva is a nationalist concept, that preaches religious tolerance. In that light, I don't see anything communal in these views, and neither should anyone else. ------------------When BJP talks about Kashmir they talk about Kashmiri pandits, not the Muslims in the valley. In 2002 they talk about the 250 hindus that died, not the 750 Muslims. Now, this is not quite right. All I've ever heard about 2002 is the 750 Muslims. Well, it's my word against Pro's, but a death toll is a death toll. Pro's remarks on Modi's "puppy" analogy: . .. compares Muslims to puppies which came under the wheel”. This is the kind of language he uses and attitude he adopts towards the Muslims of the country. I consider this an extremely biased analysis. Would Pro rather have Modi say that a tiger came under the wheel? It's glaringly obvious that Modi was referring to daily life; it's common for puppies to die under the wheel. Also, puppies are innocent and cute. Does this mean that Modi also considers Muslims as innocent and cute? What Pro has done here is selective criticism, nothing more. it should be noted, even a reputed organization like Reuters calls Modi a Hindu Nationalist. Then, I suppose, Reuters understands the original and proper definition of Hindu Nationalism. I'd say that's a really good thing. ------------------Murder of Mohsin ShaikhThis is a case of fanaticism. A few people beat up a man to death because he offended their hero(es). I don't see this as anything more than a case of motivated assault. The acts of a few bad men cannot be attributed to the ideals of the entire organization. Amit Shah's elevation to BJP presidencyI would like to point out that most of India's leaders have serious criminal records. If Pro's insinuation is that giving a post of power to an ex-criminal is wrong, then almost the entirety of India's political leadership needs to be dissolved, which is absurd, as the people elected this leadership in the first place. -----Sources:. http://idiva.com...http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...-----Also, there are nothing more than accusations against Shah, just as there are nothing more than accusations against Modi, which, by the way, Pro has done nothing to prove even after promising the same in round 3. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Conclusion____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________I believe I have conclusively shown that my opponent's claims are false and mostly speculative. As a result, there is not enough reason to call the BJP a "communalist" organization. I have provided a total of 33 external sources supporting my arguments. I leave the rest up to the judges.