From: shankar@are.Berkeley.EDU (Shankar Subramanian)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: Re: Indian Muslims had it their way since the independence.
Date: 11 Dec 1992 22:51:29 GMT
Organization: UC Berkeley, Agr & Res Economics
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: are.berkeley.edu
Keywords: Garv se kaho ham hindu hai!

In article <1gb3d9INN6pp@kumquat.cs.utk.edu> vkodali@cs.utk.edu (VENKATA RAMANA KODALI) writes:
>In article <1992Dec10.231341.19014@ennews.eas.asu.edu> sardesai@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (Shantanu Sardesai) writes:
>
>******* stuff deleted ********
>
>Nice article. One of the few articles depicting the reality of the situation
>in India. It is time to stop all the privileges enjoyed by the muslims
>as a minority in India. 
>

This is truly bizarre: this notion of the privileged Muslim is common
even among the educated in India.   This is something akin to the Nazis
blaming the Jews for their `privileged' position.  The usual FASCIST
line, pick a minority and blame it for all the things that have gone
wrong in society.  And after getting rid of the Muslims, whose turn will
it be next?  As the reaction to the Mandal report suggests, perhaps the
Harijans.  Ethnic cleansing is the name of the game, if the Serbs can
do it why not us?  After all they are Aryans too and don't we love dem
Aryans?

What are these so-called privileges?
Shariat law?  Well, I agree that some aspects of Shariat law are retrograde
and in fact many Islamic countries in the Middle East and elsewhere have
done away with these provisions, for example, polygamy and quick divorce.
The reason demands for these laws persists in India is that some backward
elements among the Muslims use these to enforce their hegemony.  In any
case, there is nothing about these exceptions that can be classified as
privileges.  Is it a privilege to be polygamous or to be able to divorce
your wife merely by uttering talaq three times?  Is it a privilege that
Muslims are not subject to the same civil code in personal matters?  Hindus
who believe these are privileges presumably desire that they too should
be permitted polygamy, instant divorce and not having to pay alimony to
one's ex-wife.  It's curious that it is mostly Hindu men who go on and on
about the privileges of the Muslims.  Clearly Hindu women don't think 
polygamy is something to fight for!
  As for the reality on the ground: how many Muslims make it to the top
in public service or business in India?  As you should know, the Muslim
elite in most parts of India took off to  Pakistan in 1947, abandoning
their poor and less fortunate brethren.  Muslims are on the average
poorer and less literate than Hindus.  And for some this is a sign
of privelege!
  The other issue most Hindus pounce upon is the use of vote banks in
electoral campaigns, that most parties find it expedient to put up
Muslim candidates in Muslim areas and to promise the electorate all
sorts of things.  Well the same parties put up Harijans in constituencies
with large numbers of Harijans and Brahmins in Brahmin-majority constituencies
and promise the sky to the electorate.  Of course, once the election is
over no one gets anything.
  If you look at the pattern in Hindu-Muslim riots since 1947, you'll
find that of late the Muslims have been the ones getting it in the neck
at the hands of the largely Hindu armed forces and police.
   As for the usual nonsense about Indian Muslims being closet Pakistanis,
you seem to forget about the enormous nationalist Muslim contingent which
chose a secular India to a confessional Pakistan.  These people and their
descendants are still with us and we do great disservice to them by
calling their loyalty into question.  The common Muslim is by no means
pro-Pakistan.  Think of Lance Naik Abdul Hamid (Paramvir Chakra, posthumous,
1965) and others like him before blaming Muslims for what is happening in
India.

Shankar Subramanian