The so-called ‘Secular Idea of India’ never existed. The moment its proponents accepted, formally, Jinnah’s heinous two-nation theory and the plan for partition of Akhand Bharat on religious lines…it was dead – we can say before it was even born!
And the moment so-called ‘Nehruvian Consensus’ arrived on the fantastic idea of formally accepting this Jihadi-separatist theory’s practical outcome, “recognizing”, formally,P****stan as an Independent, Sovereign, “Islamic Nation-State,” formed on our stolen lands, and constituting our stolen people, it was well and truly buried.
And so, it is preposterous now, for alleged Seculars to dig out this moral-carcass of secularism up; stuff-it and puff-it with Abrahmo-Leftist straw-man arguments, and parade it all around as a scarecrow to ward off those alleged ‘fascist Hindutva vultures circling overhead, waiting to kill, destroy and feast on their glorious Secular Idea of India.’
Wake up! Smell the coffee – or the carcass! It was already dead.
You killed it.
In or even before 15th August 1947.
Nobody cares about what you believed in theory, about a theory.
What matters is what did you do, when it came to its “practical implication.”
One can argue that before 15th August 1947, our founding fathers were pressurized into accepting partition of Akhand Bharat by jihadi separatist violence. That they wanted to prevent massive loss of lives, if they didn’t agree to it. Not to mention equally vicious foreign colonizer scheming, who still, technically, held control of our fates in their hands.
Barring aside the fact that it still destroy their much-touted commitment to ‘Secular Idea of India’, let’s take it at face-value.
What about after 15th August 1947?
Because then, everything we did, was our own decision, wasn’t it?
The decision to accept, formally, that a nation based on religion is indeed possible on the territory and with people we considered our own, that too, an alien religion…whose responsibility was it?
The British?
No, if we were really given formal independence, then the colonial British control on us seized to exist on that night and so… the responsibility for this betrayal lies with us and us alone. (or rather, the OG ‘Nehruvian Consensus’ and ‘Secular Idea of India’ designers.)
Were we operating under pressure?
Then whose pressure?
And more importantly… what does it do to the argument for “independence” then?
At any rate, I refuse to believe it.
Because if Nehru and co. of Secular Brigade had the ‘Moral Strength’ to defy not 1 but 2 Super-Powers – that had just won a massive World-War-II, with mammoth war-machinery and resources still in place: the USA and USSR – and if Nehru still chose to co-invent a ‘Non-Aligned movement’, not joining either Capitalist or Communist bloc, despite tremendous pressure to do so, then I refuse to believe that he – and other ‘Secular’ leaders – were under any kind of “pressure” on this little matter of “recognizing” P****stan, and even if they were, it wouldn’t have worked.
If they didn’t want to, nobody could’ve forced them.
Especially given the fact that we also happened to be at war with that Jihadi snake-pit, at that point in time, over Kashmir.
And if some kind of “National-Interest” is cited here, then boss…how low are you going to get, to compromise on your very essence, of who you are – and who you claim you are, in front of the whole world – especially with regard to a Jihadi separatist Idea, opposing which at all costs, standing against which at every possible ideological junction, is your sole, single-point, reactionary agenda in defining “Who we are? As a nation?”
That too…
When it was coupled by massive loss of territory. Of strategic importance, not to mention cultural. And let’s not even talk about the resources.
Smallest possible nations have stood up to much more powerful and aggressive nations – even super-powers, over the loss of some bloody small islands.
West P****stan alone, lest anyone forgets, is world’s 7th largest country today.
And even if we keep material concerns aside, then what about ‘humanistic ones?’ A word Seculars love to peddle around every chance they get.
All this happened in the wake of unprecedented human suffering in the entire history of humanity, as far as mass-forced-migration was concerned. That is a universally acknowledged, uncontestable fact, right?
Hence, its a suffering that should’ve cemented this ‘Secular Idea of India’ as a defining pillar of our foreign policy – as it evidently was, in case of refusing recognition to Israel. (Or so the Seculars claim.)
It was guided by “Who we are? As a nation?” (or so the Seculars claim.)
So…what can be a bigger national-interest than… well, the nation itself! In case of our arch-ideological nemesis P****stan?
In fact…
Not formally recognizing P****stan was the least OG ‘Secular Idea of India’ leadership could have done, to bolster its claim of sticking to its principles.
If they didn’t want to do war for Akhand Bharat, the least they could’ve done was adopting a non-violent, purely diplomatic position on the matter.
It would’ve been principled.
They could even have said that ‘Okay, partition was forced on us. We were helpless to prevent it. But as an Independent nation, we refuse to “recognize” the physical outcome of that poisonous, Jihadi, separatist, 2-nation theory. If we want to stay true to ourselves, we won’t do it.’
But no, that didn’t happen.
And so, if we’re still sticking to ‘National-Interests’ theory, then we’re in agreement that ‘National Ideas’…even the most prized ideological possession of Seculars called ‘Secular Idea of India’, is actually up for sale – which wouldn’t be all that surprising either given Seculars’ history around the world, and given the fact that it always has been, since 1947. And Seculars and Hindus, we just haven’t agreed on the price yet.
Or perhaps like true brown-sahebs and jaichandas, Secular Abrahmo-Leftists only want to sell it – and the nation – to foreign colonizers.
In fact… think about it this way:
Secular argument, since time-immemorial, was always that ‘Not all Muslims wanted P****stan. And even in P****stan, there were many Muslims who still missed India – in fact, we will shove down these ‘humanistic’ ideas of brotherhood down your fascist Hindu throats until you’d choke on it and a Jihadi separatist would do you a favour by beheading you around the neck.’
In all institutions…of cinema, art, literature, academia, whatever, you-name-it and which is invaded and occupied 100% by Abrahmo-Leftists… that’s what we’d heard, right?
So why would OG ‘Secular Idea of India’ leadership give up on these vast majority of non-bigoted, perfectly peaceful, say-no-to-partition kind of ideal Muslims? Especially if there were so, so many of them – as Seculars would have us believe nowadays.
Weren’t we committing the worst, horrific sort of betrayal against them, if we accepted both P****stani theory and its practical?
Isn’t it like saying that, “ALL Muslims – especially those in so-called P****stani area, are bigoted, pro-Jihadi-Separatist, anti-Hindu monsters who wanted Partition and wanted to steal away sacred Hindu lands of their civilization and wanted to fully Islamize it?”
Isnt’ that…I don’t know, ‘Islamophobic’, I guess?
Because if that wasn’t true, then why didn’t we keep the hope alive for these tolerant, ideal, liberal Muslims who were trapped inside a poisonous idea of P****stan?
By refusing to “recognize” P****stani core-propaganda that ‘all Muslims in P****stan, were, by default… well, staunch Jihadi-separatists who couldn’t bear to live next-door to a Hindu without beheading them sooner-or-later,’ we Bharatiyas would have been doing them a favour, no?
Because the moment we formally “recognize” P****stan, as an Independent, Sovereign, Islamic State, that hope was permanently shattered. The doors were permanently shut.
All Muslims living over there were automatically declared bigoted Jihadi separatists.
So why did we formally “recognize” P****stan, as an Independent, Sovereign, Islamic State?
If it was neither in ideal, liberal Muslims’ interest living across the British drawn Redcliffe line – and if it evidently wasn’t in Hindus’ interest either.
In fact, the only people who did an ideological victory-lap – and kept reaping its rewards for 50 years, were P****stanis!
We suffered the massive consequences of ‘Nehruvian Consensus’ and ‘Nehruvian Socialism’, in both social and economic spheres, for half a century! Perhaps even more!
And despite all that, ‘Secular Idea of India’ leadership kept appeasing them, all the time! From every generation!
To the point it has become – quite laughably – ‘Shrodinger’s Secular Idea of India.’
(To be continued… with Shrodinger’s Bharatiya sub-continental quantum-mechanism-beating political theories, of course!)
