A country that proudly declared itself a secular democracy must not discriminate immigrants based on religion. India is among only three countries in the whole world, along with France and Turkish Republic of Cyprus, with the word secular in its constitution.
Yes there are many issues associated with illegal immigration into India. A large part of that illegal immigration is due to rampant corruption among Indian law makers and Govt officials. Almost anyone can get a "valid" (on Govt supplied stationary) ID and even passport by using fake documents in India. Modi Govt can concentrate on that, hold politicians, lawyers, and Govt official accountable to solve the illegal immigration issue. There are many other probable options to address illegal immigration and national security. Invoking religion is very counter productive for India and its democracy.
12
Someone once said that nationalism is the disease of mankind. I don’t understand why the Hindu nationalists think this will end well. It never has.
17
What a sad day for India. As a person of Indian Muslim heritage and who loved, even boasted about the plurality of India as compared to so many other Muslim majority countries, these developments are tragic. Muslims have lived in and contributed to Indian society and civilization for hundreds of years. India cannot remove Islam or Muslims without harming its own soul.
15
“We (Hindus and Muslims) eat the same crop, drink water from the same rivers and breathe the same air. As a matter of fact Hindus and Muslims are the two eyes of the beautiful bride that is Hindustan. Weakness of any one of them will spoil the beauty of the bride (dulhan)” Quote by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan (1817-1898) Indian Muslim Reformer and founder of Aligarh Muslim University
Unfortunately the bride is blind in one eye because of partition 1947 spearheaded by Mohd Ali Jinnah supported by Pakistan movement in the same university
9
We can thank the English for having created this mess in the first place!
8
Obviously this is an abuse of power by the Indian government, plain and simple. I could not however fail to note the hypocrisy of the leadership at Google who, in the aftermath of the 2016 election was this distraught https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRf9UxsM-NE and fought ferociously the so called "travel ban" which was entirely justified on national security grounds. Will Google (or any other of the large tech companies) boycott India as a place to do business with? I don't think so. As my mother used to say, if you wait long enough in life, you'll be surprised by what you see.
5
Here are a few additional facts:
1. The mosque that is mentioned here was built originally by demolishing the Ayodhya temple (akin to Mecca for hindus) that has been reinstated by Modi govt. Jai Shree Ram!
2. The muslim majority Kashmir was hindu majority before the hindus were driven away, slaughtered by islamic radicals. This has been restored by Modi.
3. The NRC bill will truly have a way for hindu minorities in other countries to migrate to India as a safe haven which Nehru's congress had failed to do so even after 50 years of independence.
30
Incorrect headlines-
Don't misguide the world that Muslims are not welcome.
It is about the people from Islamic neighbors Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan.
You guys need to study more.
30
Statehood is not a right, regardless of what some might think. Be good. Assimilate. Obey.
11
The muslims divided the nation and got their own states. THe hindu minority in those states were brutally culled from 20 plus % to 1% now. It is very fair that those coming back into India be stopped unless they are persecuted minority. NYT and all the media in west have only one agenda that is to show Global Leader Modi in poor light.
32
This article misrepresents what Citizenship Amendment Bill represents & what’s the point behind it. It is not discriminatory against any citizen of India since it doesn’t concern in any way the country’s citizens. Geographically India is surrounded by avowedly Muslim countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh etc. Muslims from these neighbors can’t claim religious persecution. Minorities like Christians, Buddhists, Hindus etc face persecution since independence represented by constant reduction in population from 23% in 1951 to just 3.5% in 2011 in Pakistan. It’s therefore logical to brand Muslims migrants as infiltrators & other religious minorities as genuine refugees seeking refuge in India from these neighbors. This bill defines a genuine refugee from an infiltrator. This is further essential looking at long term aggressive and nefarious designs of Pakistan vi’s a vi’s India.
27
@Vir You are wrong. This bill is the first step to declaring millions of Muslim Indian,Citizens as illegal. Now every Indian Muslim will be forced to prove their citizenship going back half a century and will be automatically considered illegal unless/until proven otherwise. While every other community will be given a free pass.
This is exactly what Nazi Germany did in 1940 to the jews and declared millions of Jewish German Citizens as illegal and snatched all their properties and threw them in the concentration camps. India is just following that model.
19
The exclusion of Muslims in an overt fashion is unfortunate. But, at its core, the law makes a distinction between refugees seeking shelter from persecution and illegal migrants seeking economic opportunity.
All developed countries in the world have laws that expel illegal migrants who are merely seeking economic opportunity. India is simply catching up. With increasing competition for scarce resources, expect to see more such laws passed by other countries.
You have described the plight of Muslims in India who may be impacted by this law. For balanced coverage, you should also describe the plight of religious minorities in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan. If you find that these countries systematically persecute minorities, then you should applaud India’s efforts to help them. How about asking other countries to also come forward to help these minorities?
18
Your article misrepresents the proposed law.
The law makes a distinction between illegal immigrants seeking economic opportunity and refugees seeking shelter from religious persecution. All developed countries, including US, already have laws that ban illegal immigration for economic opportunity. India is simply catching up. With increasing competition for resources, we can expect more governments to become more strict with illegal immigration.
You have highlighted plight of illegal Muslim immigrants in India. For balanced coverage, you should also publish an article on the plight of religious minorities in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan. If you find that these minorities are indeed prosecuted, then you should applaud India’s efforts to provide shelter to them. Why not ask other countries to also come forward to help these victims?
22
Not long ago, Lakshman Achuthan, who appears regularly on CNBC and Bloomberg, said that India was on the verge of faster cyclical growth. He highlighted them as an economic bright spot in the global economy. So I doubt the notion, mentioned here, that Modi is trying to divert attention from the economy. I think the bigger picture here is that we now have two major powers, China and India, taking extremely tough measures -- obviously China more than India, but still -- against Muslims. Now why might that be? Well, you could say it's intolerance. Or you could say that people are fed up with Islamic terrorism, and in these emerging powers, not constrained with guilt over colonialism or slavery, they plan to be a lot tougher than the West. Let's see how the Islamic nations respond. Crickets is my guess.
10
@Cobble Hill there is a lot of difference between what China is doing compared to India. China being China does everything a bit harshly like “One Child Policy”. Chineses Muslims have not been stripped of their citizenship or property rights etc. they are being put in a prison and being trained. I don’t agree with that but all said and done when the Chinese Muslims do emerge from the prisons/camps they will enjoy the same rights and privileges like anyone else.
What India is doing is taking a muslims family who have lived there for 50+ years and stripping them of citizenship and possibly confiscating all their property and putting them in permanent detention. The Indian Muslims are presumed illegal unless/until they prove otherwise. No other religious community in India has to undergo this humiliation.
12
what we are talking about s an amendment to enable naturalization of persecuted hindus in other countries where the % of hindu population has fallen from 20-30 to 1-2%..it doesn't have a provision to block muslims.thi is misreporting at its best.when indian was partotioned in 1947 to give rise to the terror state of pakistan, the govt should have negotiated a safe passage for people escaping to either sides.thousands were killed due to the mismanagement.this is a first step towards setting that correct.anybody can claim first hand experience in the comments section behind an anonymous identity as visible in many comments herein
11
@MB Indian Muslims are not against Hindu refugees coming to India. This bill is much more then that. This bill along with NRC presumes every Indian Muslim as illegal unless/until they prove otherwise. No other religious group in India will go through this humiliation.
5
What a shame! I am a Hindu immigrant from Bengalooru (formerly Bangalore) in Southern India. This is not the India i grew up in. Although religious disturbances were not uncommon during our day, Indians of my generation knew the country to be a bulwark of secularism in a region dominated by nationalist and religious sentiments : Sinhalese (Sri Lanka), Muslims (Pakistan, Bangladesh, Iran and Afghanistan), Buddhists (Burma), Hindu (Nepal) etc. I suppose we can write those days off as being history ?
I suppose strong armed extremism is simply the flavor of the day.
We knew the BJP was dangerous. We just did not know how malignant it was. I suppose anything born out of the RSS could never have been any better ?
18
@Plato
Try reading some Indian history before trashing the RSS.
Did you know Muslim League that first floated the idea that Muslims are nation was created in 1906, almost 20 years before the birth of the RSS?
6
As one commentator pointed out the pertinent question is why the people of India voted the BJP to power. The simplest answer is the party also had many other planks in its campaign: anti-corruption admin, anti-dynastic politics, promises to bring ‘development’ to people people who have been neglected all their lives. People bought into it because of they were tired of business as usual. They took a chance because ideas like secularism, questions of law and civil rights are simply far-fetched for them to understand.
India is a case study of the fragility of a polity that pays lip service to democracy, rule of law, and more importantly social justice. If the conditions did not improve in a liberal environment in a meaningful way for the larger population in time for them to realise that its indeed those values that enable their prosperity, they will move on to alternatives, good or bad. They will think China is doing just extremely well. India started as a project in nation building without a consensus. It’s in for a reckoning.
13
What else do we expect from those who killed Mahathma Gandhi for his liberal ideas?. Those folks are in power - an extreme right wing who is inspired from Nazi Germany!
There are 1000s of terrorizing and unbelievable stories emboldening from India, especially since last couple of Years after BJP-RSS came in to power. Only a few gets in to the international media. May God protect this nation and all the human beings living under fear! A lot of poor people!!
7
@Wisdom People who propose liberal ideas rarely take accountability for the consequences of those ideas. India has a massive problem, with economic migrants pouring in from neighboring countries. Much like the US does. And it has far fewer resources to tackle that problem. Liberal outrage is better directed at India's neighbors who are far less tolerant of minorities.
11
The West has always wept for pious intolerant believers, not their victims. The UK and the US facilitated the rise of jihad to defeat its enemies. Indonesia half a million "communist sympathisers" killed using CIA provided extermination lists, in East Pakistan two million Hindus killed by US ally Pakistan, and more. The minorities in India's neighboring countries have been completely exterminated in an ongoing genocide against non-believers. How is India to protect the victims of pious believers? This state has been brought about by the West's use of believers.
16
One of Islam's tenants is brotherhood. Why doesn't Pakistan or Bangladesh take in Muslim refugees? Why didn't rich Saudi Arabia or Kuwait take in Syria refugees? Why is it the expectation that India or Europe bear the brunt of this burden?
Anyway, no one is barring Muslims from becoming citizens, here.
22
@Sanjana Pakistan has been hosting millions of refugees from Afghanistan for decades. Bangladesh has been doing the same for the Rohingya. The real question is why you seem to think they're doing nothing.
9
@Zain how come million more landing in India, because you do not treat them well
7
How does this deprive muslims of statehood. The bill simply helps persecuted minorities from neighbouring countries get an automatic citizenship. The impetus is on the words minorities and persecuted.
18
This article further proves western propaganda of intentionally misrepresenting the proposed law. Whereas, thousands of refugees have crossed over from eastern borders and harbored by local politicians for personal gain, they are intentionally marginalized by the same politicians in order to foment hatred again local population. The bill is to address illegal migration. Yes, it's not as open as adopted by some of the European countries but to paint it with a religious broad stroke is incorrect.
19
The logic behind the bill is hard to argue against, why would you have persecuted refugees from Muslim majority Pakistan and Bangladesh. However, lot of non-Sunni sects also get persecuted in Pakistan..wouldn't they qualify as refugees? If they're economic migrants, do you make them disenfranchised because of their religion? Honestly I don't think anything much is going to change on the ground, except having a large number of stateless people which could be dangerous in the long run. The agenda is political so that illegal migrants don't get to vote, sounds very Trumpesque.
4
Muslim commentators on this board, especially from India, should learn more about the grant of residency and citizenship in the Middle East, particularly in Saudi Arabia, to Muslims from the Indian subcontinent.
As well-known Pakistani journalist Hasan Nissar says Muslims from the subcontinent aren't allowed to marry local girls, or allowed to run a business independently, nor granted citizenship.
No body dare protest that!!
The Indian bill is about potential new migrants...not current citizens, irrespective of the religion they follow.
18
Like many here I feel sad and angry at the crude bigotry shaping political debate in India. Growing up there as a part Hindu/part Muslim child, religion was barely mentioned, caste was the issue we needed to resolve in order to join the modern world. Now false divisions are being weaponised to distract from the country's problems. Shame on you Modi, Shah and the rest, shame.
9
Misleading headline. This applies only to persecuted groups. Persecuted Muslims are free to go to Pakistan and Bangladesh.
9
So surely, Shias, Ahmadiyas, ex-Muslims who are persecuted in Pakistan, should be welcome in India as immigrants? Well, according to CAB, they are not. So do you see the hypocrisy now?
10
I'm surprised by the NYT reporting in India. On the issue of Kashmiri separatism (largely a Muslim problem), the NYT calls for listening to the wishes of the people while on issues affecting other communities in the rest of India, it becomes a champion of secular values.
19
A path to faster naturalization for religious minorities who escape to India because of discrimination in Muslim countries is anti-Muslim, how?
14
Like Trump's GOP, it is this cowardly hypocrisy that gets me mad.
I know that India's neighbors' - Pakistan, China, Myanmar are even worse, but if India loses its millenia old secular and tolerant traditions, it will have lost its soul forged by Gandhi, Nehru.
I am born Hindu myself, have lived through religious riots in Ahmedabad, India, caught in 'lathi' charges there - I know of which I speak.
Today's India, Hindu crazies peddle nonsense stories that Indira Gandhi was in fact a Muslim, with no evidence.
i remind these conspiracy theorists that while the 60 inch chest Modi thumping his huge chest got his MiG 21 shot down by Pakistan, it was that diminutive woman - Hindu or Muslim - that had the courage, to defy Nixon and China, to split Pakistan in half.
This 'Howdy Modi' is as hollow as Trump, or worse, and is no match for a 5 foot tall woman in standing up to Pakistan.
4
Here's an idea: let's divide the world up by religion. Then we can have world religious wars.
4
It is very sad to see India deviate from its secular underpinnings.
The emergence of fact-free political TV and social media has been a disaster for secularism and democracy everywhere as people's basest instincts can easily be amplified to political ends. The future looks pretty dark.
3
Since 2018 many Indian thinkers were forecasting this situation and most Indians I know in US were saying no its not racism, NRC is just against terrorists, Kashmir is just about development and the all will be fine.
These are nationalist warriors in power. They will continue to kill (physically, socially, economically) all those who they perceive as a threat to their racist ideology. This won't stop for another 5 years. In the process they are mimicking all the failures of other nationalistic an racist Muslim Christian and Buddhist Nations which will be the demise of a great nation called India. That's why capital is running away from India.
Let's hope the American and other companies show their support against this law which will only weaken India.
6
@Rick; America has a de facto Muslim ban which the courts affirmed. Do as you say, not as you do?
3
“Remember that all through history, there have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they seem invincible. But in the end, they always fall. Always.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
8
Christopher Hitchens is proved correct again: "religion poisons everything." Primitive tribal myths are a tiresome vestige of early civilization.
5
Great. Looks like Modi wants a civil war.
6
Also relevant:
Blood and Soil in Narendra Modi’s India
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/12/09/blood-and-soil-in-narendra-modis-india
6
Utterly disgusting. When we talk about the rise of ethno-nationalist bigotry and the assault on liberal democracy in eh world, Narendra Modi and his disgusting pack of jackals should be at the head of pack. The Indian diaspora - that often treats this man as a rock star - should be ashamed of itself. This kind of institutionalized bigotry is exactly the kind of thing that will tear India apart.
9
As surely as Gandhi was thrown out a railway carriage in South Africa, agenda setting western liberal mouthpieces are throwing out Hindus and their stories from public consciousness. There was no room for the physical presence of a brown Hindu in that railway carriage. Today, that Hindu has physical room, but must keep absolutely quiet about his or her lived experience in the world, or be branded a hindu nationalist a fascist, or worse.
This bill provides an easy citizenship pathway to Hindus, Sikhs, Parsis, Jains and Christians persecuted in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh. That the numbers of the people following these indigenous faiths has declined drastically is no mystery to anyone. That they are horribly persecuted is not a mystery either!
That India, which is a civilizationally Hindu state chose to recognize this reality and provide a pathway to these stateless peoples can only be cause for celebration! Why demand that this bill aimed at providing refuge to these unfortunate peoples also accommodate muslims?
Persecuted Muslims can still apply for naturalization through the earlier, normal process! This headline is a blatant lie that exposes Hindus to Islamist propaganda of hate and the consequent violence. In Gandhi's era, publications carrying 'the white man's burden' routinely demonized Hindus & the nyt among others has continued in that same vein.
As Gandhi did in that era, I protest this distortion, these lies and this hate. As Gandhi did, I will win.
30
Foreigners are foreigners
Same in USA lol
7
Banning Muslim immigrants. Where have I heard that idea before?
9
"Think more; believe less", attributed to John Trudell, Native American activist.
I firmly think that our being encouraged to "believe" , to "have faith" in the unprovable lends itself to the laughable belief that the rectal orifice occupying the White House has "god"'s approval, no matter how many lies it tells or how many children get torn apart by its orders, by those who follow and enable it.
People: get a grip! All these rightwing politicians are using religious belief systems to aggrandize and consolidate power; human power connected to godliness is a real winner.
More advice: Don't believe everything you think, and i don't, but I do think and believe the above.
I am very sorry for what is happening in India
1
A big mistake committed by one of the most successful democracies in a developing country ever. This will lead to significant trouble and sadly people will die.
2
India's been moving towards Hindu fundamentalism since the 1970s - if not Independance! This is in large part what the Sikh separatist movement of the 1980s and 1990s was about. The Sikhs number less than Christians in India thus it was relatively easy for the central government to dominate that narrative but with 200 million Muslims to contend with, it's going to get much uglier.
4
@Aliya
Sikh separatism began with fundamentalism
against Nirankaris and other moderate sects.
Now Sikh separatism exists only in British Columbia, where there is a lot of empty land called Khali-stan.
12
@Sandeep It was and remains a complex issue related to riparian water quotas, land reforms, Chandigarh, Punjabi suba and sure, the Nirankaris - all of which was viewed as a form of ethnocide
3
Asaduddin Owaisi, a Muslim lawmaker, who tore up a copy of the bill, is the same politician who refuses to support a Uniform Civil Code for all Indian, arguing that Muslims have a religious right to marry multiple wives.
So much for secularism in India.
30
Modi stated that he is following the Israel model for building settlements in Kashmir so disenfranchising Muslims in India is part of the plan as it is inIsrael.
2
@penney albany Modi never stated that, please do not spread falsehood.
12
The India consul general in US stated this at a meeting in NY last week
Reported by Middle East Eye
1
@penney albany the idea is to bring back the kashmiri pandits who had been forced to flee the valley by islamic fundamentalism. Please do read up on the kashmiri pandit exodus
6
While we feel a natural affinity for those who are oppressed by government policies, I find that I am trying to resist that tendency because the info provided in the article was less than what should be necessary to accept the shape of the narrative.
What I did hear was that Assam was concerned that the policy change would allow others to come in and buy their land. So why would they fear an economic transaction except that there real fear is loss of power and identity ...the very same thing the article seems to object to with regard to India's new policy?
4
I am an Indian Muslim. Indian first and then Muslim. Sadly this law will now make me Muslim first and then Indian. The pride in identifying my heritage has been weakened by Mr. Modi, there was so much hope that Mr. Modi would rise above communal biases but he is no better than a fascist, demagogue.
11
@Riyaz Esmail Sir, this is for immigrants only. In India there are two kinds of illegals one persecuted due to religion(leftover of partition in name of religion by Jinnah) and other economic. For minorities who faced religious persecution, they are being considered and remaining economic migrants will have to be according to law. This is nothing to do with Indian citizens so do not spread misinformation
19
Wait a second, will you, as a Hindu, feel offended if only Hindu immigrants were being rejected by Indian government but all other religions were accepted? Does that seem like something you will love to see? Of that proposition is not okay to you, the one rejecting only Muslims should not be either.
2
@Mohit If Hindus had two nations for themselves and were persecuting minorities in the nations created for them, then I would've no issues keeping Hindus out. Historical context here is the key which unfortunately, you won't understand.
5
Muslim politicians in India berating the bill are crying about the loss of secular values. The same politicians maintain a stoic silence on the issue of a uniform civil code in India, and only talk about the religious rights of Muslims in allowing Muslim men to have multiple wives.
Such kind of posturing has helped the rise of the nationalist parties in India.
23
@Albela Shaitan They expect Hindus to visit dargah, mosque, etc, Hindus need to speak secularism and when it comes to Muslims they are not even allowed to speak any other religious scripture or even venture nearby. For Muslim secularism is haram even when in minority and not allow anyone to be near when they are in majority, e.g they threw hindus out of J&K
8
Extremism of any kind is generally bad for the well being of any nation. History has demonstrated this many many times.. and apparently Modi is not a student of history.
In the case of present day India, Hindutva facisim is going to tear the country apart to some degree.. even if it does ultimately lead to the effective dehumanization and demize of Muslims inside India.
Hindutva is the set of movements advocating Hindu nationalism. Members of the movement are called Hindutvavadis. As I understand it.... a 1995 Supreme Court of India judgement the word Hindutva could be used to mean "the way of life of the Indian people and the Indian culture or ethos".. which is an exrtremely facist approach to religous views and expression inside India.
The true test of a national leader is not in what they can destroy.. but rather how they are able to bring different views and interest groups together peacefully and in cooperation rather then civil war. In my view.. Modi has failed here as a leader... and is not on the path of becoming todays most prominant nationalist facist authoritarian leader.
In this regard... Modi is much like Trump... and I guess the world of nations is currently on a path to go through a generation of nationalist facist authoritarianism. Nuclear weapons in the mix just make things more dangerous
2
Sad to see but not surprising, given the global state of affairs. The language and policies of the Trump administration give cover to Modi and the growing global epidemic of leaders that divide, marginalize, and detain minority groups. This is a reflection of the scary world we are building for future generations.
3
@ARR Sir Pakistan was formed on basis of religion and several minorities living in tent in India and are now being considered. Where is Indian citizens getting discriminated against in this? Economic migrants can not be given citizenship.
4
If India keeps this up.. they are going to trigger a religion driven war of huge proportions in the region, not unlike the long running annimosity between Sunni and Shia in the middle east.
It's not a new issue either. It goes back to when Britian packed up and left India, and in the process.. as they often did when deconstructing the empire.. they made rather arbitrary and cavlaier decisions as to how to settle factional disputes left behind. In the case of religious factions inside India at the time spoiling for control of a free India.. the British simply split geography and declared India and Pakistan as national solutions to the religious animosity. Of course that has not really worked, and set the stage for either ongoing wars between India and Pakistan, or a rise in the sort of religious authoritarianism that is now taking root inside India.
The downside to this sort of thing is always... either war between nations or civil war within nations. Either way... a lot of innocent people are killed in the process... up to and including large waves of genocide.
1
The bill allow only persecuted minorities including Christians, Hindus and others.
General Zia ul Haq, Pakistan’s third military ruler who ruled from 1977-88, imposed a policy of state-led Islamization. Thousands of minorities have been prosecuted under Pakistan's blasphemy laws, and death sentences have been handed out to some of them. Asia Bibi, a poor Christian woman from Punjab, was the first woman in Pakistan’s history to be charged with blasphemy and sentenced to death.
Christians, along with other non-Muslim minorities, are discriminated in the Constitution of Pakistan.
Forced conversions are prevalent. One example of forced conversion of a young Hindu woman, Rinkel Kumari. She was abducted with the help of a ruling-party lawmaker and forced to marry and convert to Islam. This is just one case of abduction and forced religious conversion in Pakistan, with around 20-25 kidnappings and forced conversions of Hindu girls in Sindh every month according to a report by the Asian Human Rights Watch.
Again, this bill only allows persecuted minorities irrespective of their religion (Hindus, Christians, Sikhs etc).
20
@KR
Why has the international press avoided even mentioning these blatant human rights violations that regularly take place in Pakistan (and probably other majority Muslim countries)? The tragic case of Asia Bibi is also rarely mentioned in the world’s press, either.
17
We can safely say that Trump Administration and the Republican party bear partial blame for such events relating to abuse of minorities in other parts of the world. The past three years have witnessed constant coddling and giving green light to hatered spewing, intolerant leaders and Tyrants alike including Modi (who has a record of supporting crimes) by the current administration.
In the past three years the current administration has openly and shamelessly supported religious and racial discrimination wherein land belonging to one people is seized and given to other "selected" people. Trump has embraced leader and Tyrants alike like the Sissi, Saudi Regime, Duterte etc who have spared no effort in crushing individual rights and have no qualms about spreading hatred
between religious and ethnic groups. Again in the Middle East our claims of being a honest broker from whom fairness, justice can be expected have been shattered. We have lost the moral high ground to bring the worlds attention to human rights abuse, racism and climate change because of the trampling of the principles on which US was founded by Trump and his party.
If these universal principles pertaining to human rights, decency, respect, fairness and freedom are important to US we need to send them out of white house next year and make him jobless.
1
I'm not sure what, exactly, it is that drives man to create religions out of thin air and then follow them blindly off the cliff, but this article does a fantastic job of highlighting the madness of the entire endeavor. 2 sets of people, exactly alike in almost every respect, at each others' throats because their respective gods are incompatible. It is madness.
3
India is not America, even if this bill passes, you can count on the Indian government's inability to properly implement anything complex. That incompetence plus the usual corruption (the illegal immigrants can easily bribe their way to getting documents) should allow those already in India to remain. For those that are caught, Bangladesh (where most come from) will refuse to accept them, so they too will stay.
4
'The way hearing is preceding in the Lok Sabha and Raj sabha; soon the CAB will pass and the President is ready to sign it to make it a law.
These transferred of Muslims from India will make India basically a Hindu nation like Pakistan and Israel on this globe. India will either change her Constitution or very well replaced it based on Vedas, Geeta, and Ramayan. These historical human tragedy will resolve with the loss of hundreds of thousands human beings but surely much less than what we have lost during the partition. Surely it will take decades to resettle Muslims refugees in the world but the Hindu majority will be glad to make India free of Muslims after 75 years of the birth of their nation.
There will be many questions will still remain; what will happen to Muslims graves and corps buried here? What will happen to Taj Mahal, Kutumb Minar, Red Fort and hundreds of thousands mosques and Muslim properties? Also what will happen to Mahatma Gandhi, Nehru and many leaders who fought for the independence? The entire history will have to be wiped out and rewritten keeping thousands of RSS gurus and Babas busy for months and years!!'
I’m Hindu based in Pakistan and it worries reflecting on the circumstances we find ourselves in. I live a happy life here; despite what the headlines may lead you to believe, not all Muslims are radicals. The Khan government, despite struggling to fight against economic downturn and corruption, is quite secular, even opening the Katarpur Corridor for Indian Sikhs, while India is stripping Kashmir out of its autonomy.
But if things gets worse and worse over there in India for Muslims, it will be only be a matter of time before Pakistani radicals start to directly retaliate against Hindus. And the law and order in Pakistan is not efficient enough to protect the minorities. When theocracies collide, minorities on both sides are the most affected.
74
@Agam Saran A related question would be: how welcoming is Pakistan of immigrants and refugees who are non Muslim? Could a non Muslim immigrant naturalize in Pakistan if they wanted to?
19
@Agam Saran this is for most people who have already living in India in tents and are from Pakistan living in India. they are waiting for their citizenship
5
@Agam Saran as a Pakistani it is my hope that Pakistan responds to India’s hate with love for minorities. I’m just one person, but I know there are millions who celebrate Pakistan’s secular moves like that of katarpur; and hopefully it will remain that way.
8
This is great news! Hindus are most Muslim countries - they live in fear in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and are treated as second class citizens in much of the Middle East. It’s about time India stepped up and protected them. Is the Muslims feel so persecuted, maybe they should go to other of the Muslim majority countries. Why are they staying in India? No one is keeping them there.
10
When I was a small boy growing up in India, the scars of Partition still lingered in the North. Discrimination against Muslims was not uncommon. But we felt we were moving beyond it. After all, Hinduism was the most tolerant of all the major religions in the world. We were proud of that. We were a secular democracy with a secular military led by people from all religions. Our history textbooks enshrined Nehru's secular modernism and Gandhi's nonviolence and love for people of all faiths. We had new ideas and ideals to offer the world, even if we didn't always live up to them ourselves. What on earth happened to all that? I'm still rubbing my eyes in disbelief. How did we turn into a backward society full of hatred and spite? How did my educated friends and relatives become bigots as they grew older? And why is this happening not just in India but all over the world? I'm losing hope for the human race as one country after another spirals down the same path towards everyone hating everyone.
75
@bpmhs Every country is turning into nationalist especially in the case of Muslims. Just study the history. Wherever Islam has become majority, it’s full of chaos, unrest in society, wars and persecution followed by conversion. We don’t want this to happen to our future generations. That’s why we support CAB!
12
The news/opinion was true but not balanced, as the context was lost. E.g.
1) The State of Assam was mentioned, but a small detail missing that all the "minority" community are actually illegal aliens from neighboring country.
2) Imagine a tiny state like Delaware (or Assam) suddenly populated with 200,000 foreigners in one year? Will/Should they love it?
3) Does anyone have a in-principle birth right to land in another country and demand citizenship? US and Israel have been unfairly mentioned, but does anyone even think about UAE (Dubai), Saudi, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, etc. What would happen if the majority aliens (read: Indians) ask for citizenship after living there for 50 years? Overnight UAE will become "Hindu". Why the burden of being "fair" falls only on democracies?
4) How do you call 200 million people "minority"?
5) The ruse used by Muslims: "cry for equality when in minority, and kill everyone else when you become majority" has caught on by others. Now you are seeing the global backlash of that secret strategy implemented by them for hundred years.
6)How come "minority" Hindu's in Pakistan shrink from 15% in 1947 to 3% today? Public outcry anyone?
Lastly, people are not stupid. NYT needs to stop publishing extreme left talking points. I am pretty balanced, not Modi supporter, & yet I can understand how some American's may have voted so radically in 2016. NYT needs to remain the beacon of hope AND moderate or soon lose its online paid readership.
36
@IndianAmerican
When you say minority in pakistan shrank from 15 percent to three percent, what you should keepin in mind was the 1947 percentage included Hindus in east PAkistan. When East Pakistan became bagladesh most Hindi minoroties ended up in Bangladesh. So to compare 1947 figures that included East Pakistan to current day Pakistan when East Pakistan is no longer there is a bit unfair.
4
@IndianAmerican
You have made some good points....why the burden of being fair falls mostly on democracies?
4
@Suresh
That theory has been debunked.
The numbers of Hindus counted were from WEST Pakistan, not East Pakistan
In the same breath, why aren't numbers of minorities in Pakistan increasing NOW?
Muslims and Christians are showing a growth in their numbers in India...
5
modi seems as bad as trump here.
3
First of all - I read the bill.
The bill allows minorities (Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians) from Afghanistan, Bangladesh
and Pakistan to attain Indian citizenship in 6 years. They won't be treated as illegals.
There is no direct mention of any opposition to Muslims from those countries from attaining the citizenship. They can go through the normal process (12 years) to get citizenship.
There is NO denial/purging of citizenship to/of Muslims that are already in India.
My opinion is - yes the bill gives preferential treatment to the non-muslims from those countries but do Muslims from those countries need to move to India? Are they prosecuted in those countries? I don't think so.
I think the media is reading too much into this bill. It is not an aim at the secular nature of the constitution.
39
@Raj Thanks! Finally, an accurate representation of the bill. The headline of the story is a travesty, meant to fit a narrative. Unfortunately, it frames the story, and readers will walk away with no real idea as to what it is that they are objecting to about the bill.
15
@Raj
Yes Muslims in PAkistan are persecuted, specially the Ahemediyas and Shia Muslims.
2
@Suresh
Ahmadiyyas were at the forefront of creation of Pakistan, an Ahmadiyya Unit fought against India in Kashmir in 1947-48.
One of the foremost advocates for Pakistan was Muhammad Zafrulla Khan who was an Ahmadiyya. The Lahore Resolution of 1940 was authored by Khan himself.
2
It is indeed horrifying that Indians (of any faith) should feel unwelcome or threatened in India. Nor is the notion of 'religious' tests for immigrants defensible. No ifs, ands or buts.
Now, to some perspective altogether missing in this article by people who mistake their familiarity with naan bread as wisdom about the Indian predicament and can live dangerously from safe confines. First, changing the status of Kashmir (from where I hail) as Indian territory is not messing with India's secular sensibilities; it is an attempt by the Indian government to stop the ethnic cleansing by Hindus funded by Pakistani military. What does NYT want? Ethnic cleansing of Hindus from a place we have lived for millennia?
Second, in its own ham handed way, India is dealing with its cross-border-introduced criminal element. True, it is not doing this well, and religious tests are ghastly and not aligned with Indian values at all. However, I do recommend all the keepers of the faith in Islamic countries to begin accepting the refugee co-religionists who are illegally squatting, engaged in organized crime, engaging in jihadi activities in India (starting with Rohingyas and Bangladeshis). I am sure the Indian government will cooperate fully in relocating them to these countries.
14
Pakistan and Bangladesh formed on the basis of ideology of two nation theory that Hindus and Muslims cannot co exist in unified state and need for Muslim nations .Wheel has turned full circle after 71 years with Muslim vociferous clamor to be citizens of Secular Hindu dominated India . Does it remind you about ideological super power state which collapsed after 75 years of existence?
4
We are feeling helpless in India... BJP does not have respect on Constitution or Indian concept of unity in diversity... However, in the event of upsurge of Islamic extremists, they are playing popular politics with support from less than even 40% citizens...
As an American, South African of Indo-Muslim origin, I have always been proud of all aspects of my identity to the extent of getting Indian NRI status. But what is happening in India today is heartbreaking and destroying what was once an extraordinary cultural fabric. Today my Indian identity feels much diminished.
7
@Sipa111 Maybe you should check out Pakistan, see what kind of cultural fabric is left when your co-religionists are in the majority.
7
Muslims marginalized Hindus for centuries. But the Muslims of India today are innocent of that crime. This back and forth never seems to end among humans and their children suffer because of the sins of the fathers.
4
@DSD The Muslims of Pakistan and Bangladesh still marginalize Hindus today. That's why they aren't being allowed to immigrate into India illegally. That's all this bill does.
17
How are Hindus treated in Pakistan? oh yeah- they are murdered out of hand.
Tell me, again, how unfair not having a clear path of citizenship is.
23
Nehru, Sardar Patel, Gandhiji must be all rolling in their ashes. This is a very sad day for India and the future of India. Trump-wanna-be Modi and his party are really taking the country down a far right autocratic rule. India is no longer a secular democracy.
6
Don't you just love the sight of the gender divisiveness of Islam whereby 'Muslims' as in the photo caption are only men? The world has moved on from the deep gender inequality of earlier days and yet we are all asked to go along with the ongoing rampant gender inequality at the heart of Islam and thus of all Muslims. And no other religion that I know of engages in the ostracism and violence towards anyone who wishes to publicly renounce Islam. These negatives need to be openly discussed.
20
@Caroline. For your information, Jews and Hindus also have places of worship where men and women are separated. Still, I fail to see how gender segregation in religion justifies the explicit discrimination against the largest minority in a country like India.
5
@Caroline
Yes, so true. While it is somewhat natural to be on the side of the underdog being dominated, in this situation you have to step back to view the whole picture. ...and that shows the dominated being the dominator.
It's very hard to see that and not feel resentment. So I could can not understand the nature of the grievances there and cannot form a position. ...but to think of a Hindu mob demolishing a temple which had been standing for centuries is to believe there is rage there that needs to be soothed instead of stoked and Modi's party is certainly not doing that.
4
@S. Jackson
The orthodox Jews generally share the same place of worship at the same time. The women get the balcony seats.
1
The classic tragedy that is India. One step forward, and 3 back.
4
This is horrific.
1
The world is changing for the far worse.
1
If we had a decent President, we could use the State Department to push against this bill. Sadly, that's not going to happen.
4
@Jarvis Slacks Why? As the article itself notes, the intent of the bill is to provide refuge in India for persecuted minorities. India is surrounded by Muslim majority countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, some of whom have Islam as a state religion. Notably, India doesn't. By restricting immigration in this way, India makes room for refugees who are truly persecuted in those countries, not economic migrants. This is simply a different form of the policy the Trump administration is pursuing in the US.
21
@Michael It's remarkable how you have utterly ignored the historical/political context behind this, not least Modi's and the RSS/BJP's long record of at the very least ignoring anti-Muslim violence and at worst, fomenting it. This is a purely ideological move, not an attempt to help refugees. Shame on you for portraying it otherwise.
1
That’s a grossly misguided idea, Michael. The only purpose of this bill is to dilute the opposition vote-bank further in the hope that these non-muslim migrants will vote for the ruling BJP once they become naturalised citizens. This is a dangerous and borderline, if not outright (that is for the SCI to decide, as I hope there will be a debate over this bill in the Supreme Court of India) unconstitutional social engineering.
1
I guess the big question to consider is simply why all this is happening in India. Could growing income inequality since the undertaking of economic reforms in 1991 have something to do with it? Forty years ago, India was quasi-socialist and everybody was "equally poor" as some like to put it. But that's all in the distant past now.
The connection between growing income inequality and sectarian chauvinism among a country's religious or racial majority population is a big and worrisome topic that deserves major examination.
3
I really don't understand many of the comments being made here. My understanding is that the bill does not strip citizenship from all of India's existing Muslim citizens - who will continue to enjoy the same equal rights they did before. It puts restrictions on immigration. Like any country, including the US, India has a right to determine who it admits into the country. The founders of India may have had a different vision, but they are all dead now, and it is the current government and current citizens who have to make the country work.
26
@Michael What if United States decided tomorrow that it won't allow any permanent residency and citizenship applications from Muslims? How would you feel then?
5
@Michael You've misunderstood the bill then. If you are a hindu or a christian or a sikh and can't prove your ancestry is indian you get to stay and even follow a path to citizenship. If you are a muslim you don't get that same right.
So in a worst case scenario, someone living in poverty and lacks papers to prove their ancestry (which is not uncommon among the poorest) will lose their right to naturalization if they are muslim, but not if they are hindu or christian. Furthermore, this makes it easier to expel muslims who can't prove their ancestry.
10
No, you misunderstood the bill. It is applicable only for refugees or illegal immigrants. This bill does not discriminate against citizens.
6
Finally, good policy making constructed poorly making it easy to disparage as hindu nationalism. Modi instituted many constructive programs that have no religious element.
Undoubtedly there are likely to be many problems identifying illegal migrants from neighboring countries, but the principle of deporting illegal immigrants is a fair.
The unfortunate optics is on account of an automatic amnesty for persecuted faiths from neighboring Islamic countries, instead of a structure of case by case consideration which would have the very same effect, without all the attendant hypocritical western furor.
6
@Raymond
Modi also has a history of pro-Hindu, anti-Muslim views and actions. The 'religious element' has run through his career.
2
@Steven - It is far more objective to look at "religious" legislation to quantify the religious element, than some selective narrative of "views and actions." This "views and actions" device lacks the deeper context that the West misses in the Middle-east and Asia, landing it in all kinds of quagmires.
The legislation in India relating to religion, for example, is one that favored Muslims such as Article 370 or Muslim Personal Law, and Affirmative action for Muslims.
If these tend to get rolled back when they don't work well, there will be accusations of religious bias against the minority.
Vote bank politics by post independence "secularists" led to polarization.
It would be like saying that rolling back Affirmative Action based on race is "Anti-Black" even if, (lets say) studies proved that they don't achieve the desired effect.
Sometimes the quiet majority feels marginalized and this could explain much of what is happening here in the USA.
I’m glad I got out of there. But I see the same thing happening here. These are sad times.
7
This law doesn't block muslims from becoming citizens of india. They can still become citizens. Only thing that it does is that it makes it easier for persecuted religious minorities from pakistan, bangladesh and afghanistan to become citizens of India.
26
@subodh Your claim is belied by the facts and statement sreported in the article itself. This is Hindu nationalism as a blunt-force instrument, plain and simple, continuing a recent history of 'anti-Muslim sentiment'.
2
Firstly, the comment about Israel is fallacious. There is no religion criterion for citizenship in Israel, and there are many Muslim citizens.
Secondly, such intolerance and violation of human rights should be sanctioned in the UN. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.
5
@MHW
India has more than 250 million Muslims citizens. So what is your point? Israel discriminates against its Muslim citizens and India is beginning to emulate Israel.Also Any Jew anywhere in the world can become Israeli citizen. Can a Muslim from another country become Israeli citizen?
3
@MHW
India has more than 250 million Muslims citizens. So what is your point? Israel discriminates against its Muslim citizens and India is beginning to emulate Israel.
1
By imposing a religious test, India is now no longer the democracy it was. It is more like Israel, and less like the United States.
It is perhaps no accident that Indian officials are openly talking about turning Kashmir into another Gaza. Or that Israel has been selling arms to India.
This is nationalism at its worst.
13
@Baddy Khan
One can only hope so.
1
Religion and Nationalism are a very dangerous combination. The Muslim world has and continues to suffer because of it and now it appears the Hindu dominated country of India is wading into that dangerous place.
4
No narrative of the present legislation on citizenship is complete without taking into account massive influx of human migration from Bangladesh. Human migration from Bangladesh is akin to migration of Africans into Europe and Hispanics into US It is result of economic reasons from overcrowded countries exaggerated by climate change
Uncontrolled illegal migration causes sudden imbalance in society and impringes on the livehood and way of living in native workers. It does not give chance for assimilation with gradual controlled legal influx .
Present proposed legislation is a backlash not different from political movements in US and Europe.
13
This is a disgrace to democracy everywhere, committed by the leader of the world's largest democracy. I have little doubt that this and related moves were facilitated by the hateful anti-Muslim actions taken by Trump and his enablers. See what happens when you elect a narcissistic sociopath to run the country? Vote Democratic to clean house in 2020 before it's too late.
4
I echo many of the sentiments on this thread. Glad to see NYT readers are saddened by this news. Hate to see what the comments look like on Fox.
2
My parents are Muslims from Hyderabad, India. India is succumbing to an authoritarian and ignorant impulse. Journalists who write critically about Modi or the BJP are being hunted. There are well over 100 million Indian Muslims, with deep Indo-Islamic roots and a rich cultural heritage that is uniquely Indian (the Taj Mahal is an example). India can no longer truly call itself a secular state under Modi.
103
@Jess
Mohd Ali Jinnah the founder of Pakistan killed the idea of composite secular India in 1947 . Modi is conducting the funeral rites in 2019
10
@Jess 14% of Indians are Muslim, that is over 200 Million people
6
Atleast India will be better than its great neighbors like Pakistan and Bangladesh who routinely persecute non Muslims for being kafir!!
15
All this talk about "democracy" seems hollow. Even at the infancy of the so-called democracies of Greece to become a citizen (of several city states therein) one was obliged to murder the citizen of another. Not much has changed. Ancient Rome basically fell apart when it opened up citizenship to non-Romans of the empire (although there were multiple causes, this was just one of the last grabbing at straws... as I am sure others will chime in here with the various other reasons). There seems to a great deal of outrage (false or true)here in the comments, but I have never seen much comments about those Islamic countries that deny citizenships (or even unrestricted entry or visits ) to non-Islamics. Of course one pause might ponder the difference between a republic and a democracy. But then I could be totally wrong. It would not be the first time today.
15
@Mark Shyres
Rome as a city state would not had a chance to be even a mini empire, perhaps a statelet only if it had to rely on original Romans only.
2
@Mark Shyres
Roman citizenship was coveted, and it's expansion served to bind the empire together rather than tear it apart. note for example St Paul's use of his citizenship in the new testament, and the dogged determination of the Romanians to retain their Roman identity.
1
@TS
Yea, they counted on their slaves and hired troops as well. Of course being a slave in ancient Rome was not the same as slavery in the U.S. As I recall from history many if not most of the slaves were not of African origin, but were captives of war.from many places, .and those from Africa (including Carthage) did not call themselves African-Roman. I think their lot was not bad...other than those tossed into a pool of eels as punishment.
1
“There are Muslim countries, there are Jew countries, everybody has their own identity. And we are a billion-plus, right? We must have one identity,” said Ravi Kishan.
We do have one identity. I look in the mirror everyday and see that identity. I identify as a human being with all the faults and greatness that we are as human beings. All the rest is just false reasoning to kill each other. Until we evolve as a species we will never know peace.
13
@Hedonikos Some people will not evolve anytime soon. The most you can do with them is keep them away from you. That's what India is trying to do with this bill, keep out the same people who have turned Pakistan and Bangladesh into failed states.
3
Every country has the right to determine what to do with illegal immigrants. At the time of partition, in 1947, both Pakistan and Bangladesh (then East Pakistan) had over 15% Hindus. Over the years Hindus in these countries have been ethnically cleansed that has included burning their houses, abduction of women and forced conversions. Today Pakistan has less than 2% Hindu and Bangladesh less than 5%. Mistreated Hindus have no place to go but India. Illegal Muslim immigrants are mostly migrating to India for economic opportunities and should be sent back to Pakistan or Bangladesh where they came from as those are the homelands Muslims chose to settle.
58
@D.K. Sarkar Who told you about '5%' in Bangladesh?
2
After creation of Bangladesh in 1970s & US withdrawal from Afghanistan, socioeconomic condition of Pakistan & Bangladesh deteriorated with rise of Islamic extremism. Previously almost exclusively Hindus used to flee Islamic Pakistan (part of it later became Bangladesh) to escape religious prosecution/ethnic cleansing there. Later large number of Muslims also started to migrate to various countries mainly to India for better future. That mostly uncontrolled & illegal immigration from Bangladesh (& to some extent from Pakistan) created havoc in bordering states in India that include Kashmir, West Bengal, Tripura, Assam, other states in North East India. Demography changed, economic situation worsened, conflict with local people increased. Violent Bodoland movement started as a result of it.
Gradually those immigrants spread out all over India.
Local politics also changed. Communist came to power in Bengal & Tripura. Most of its ministers were born in East Pakistan & actively promoted illegal immigration as pert of Govt policy. Islamic extremists promoted by Pakistan engaged in ethnic cleansing of Hindus in Kashmir. All political parties promoted illegal immigration.
Islamic block countries in international organization like the UN kept the pressure on India to protect the status quo & Muslims.
That frustrated most Hindu Indians. Then RSS-BJP came to power. Now they are doing what they promised to its electorate, just like Trump & other populist leaders in western world.
33
“The Bill seeks to amend the Citizenship Act, 1955 by seeking to grant citizenship to undocumented and illegal non-Muslims from Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan who came to India on or before December 31, 2014.”
This is India’s way of trying to be fair to migrants who could not make India their home during the evil perpetrated by the Colonial British Empire. Sorry, but why is this the end of democracy in India. There are already established protocols for others to migrate to India lawfully.
16
This bill is not anti-minority. The data will show that Muslim population in India has grown from around 10% at the time of independence to around 15+% now. That wouldn't have happened if there were any systematic campaigns against Muslims. There wasn't, there still isn't. But expecting India to accept Muslim refugees from Pakistan and Bangladesh is a bit much. The question to ask is, why are there religious refugees from these Islamic countries?
45
@Jay Wow, way to ignore history -- especially recent history. The Congress Party tried for decades to make Gandhi and Nehru's vision work, and under them there was no 'systematic campaigns against Muslims'. But that changed with the rise of Modi and the RSS/BJP.
1
@Steven Where is the evidence ? What specifically has the Indian government done to discriminate against Muslims? What law has changed? Yes, the BJP/RSS has a Hindu agenda, like the Republicans in the US have a Christian agenda. But what specifically has the government done to foster discrimination against Muslims?
If you cite evidence of religious violence, that exists in the US as well. And be careful of claims that the Congress made secularism work under the Gandhis and the Nehrus. Ask the Sikhs who were murdered in Delhi by Congress thugs. And who do you think opened the Ayodhya structure and gave access to Hindus? I am not here to claim that India is some secular utopia. But recent history - one needs to be factual.
4
I was born in the walled city of Ahmedabad, a predominantly muslim neighborhood in western India. My (Hindu) mother still talks about the vibrant culture, the kinship, and the common decency of people - especially during tough times (such as the India-Pakistan wars when curfew was imposed and there was tension). Each family was allotted 10 oz of milk per day during the wars. I was just a baby. Our Muslim neighbors used to pool their supplies and give to my mom so that my sister and I could drink milk daily.
How far India has fallen as a country. How valueless and cruel it has become. I am forced to conclude that Mahatma Gandhi was the only good thing that happened to India - the only thing that gave the country stature. Of course most Indians don’t recognize that at all.
As Gandhiji said “The greatness of a civilization can be judged by how it treats its weakest members.”
Today, India has joined the ranks of the worst countries in the world.
274
@jen
You speak in the voice of Pandit-ji's and the Mahatma's India!
Both Pakistan and India would have fared better if their founders had lived longer.
And, India's case, they would have done better if the founder's children had not dominated politics in ways that planted the seeds for the sectarian India that replaced secular India.
14
@jen
But they do now make an excellent Scotch, the first important and necessary step to a new civilization and a golden age.
4
@Mark Shyres
Plus the Amrut is free of Trump's tariff. Or politics.
3
My heart is broken. What is wrong with the world. Why are right wing religious factions gaining so much support? Why do so many groups feel so vulnerable with their identity that they must undermine someone else? India was a proud secular democracy. This is not the the India I grew up in, this is a completely stolen agenda not unlike here.
I hope the sane citizens rise up against this horrible atrocity. As a practicing Hindu, my support and heart is with the Muslims of India and those that wish to migrate. Please fight for your rights as a people. Please educate the BJP that freedom for India was won because both Hindus and Muslims came together and liberated India. Ensure that newspapers carry articles of the valiant enlisted Muslim men and women who have given their lives for India. Hinduism survived centuries only because it is the most tolerant, all-embracing of philosophies. This way of life must not be allowed to be hijacked by the BJP.
119
@Meena Why is a bill that provides for naturalization in India for persecuted religious minorities (Sikhs, Christians, Buddhists, Jains) from Pakistan and Bangladesh? Bear in mind that Pakistan and Bangladesh were created because Muslims wanted their own country. Then why does the world expect India to take in Muslim refugees from these countries? There is nothing in the bill that discriminates against Indian Muslims.
17
@Meena Your commented as "..... freedom for India was won because both Hindus and Muslims came together and liberated India". Nothing is farther from the truth.
If they could have done anything "together" partition would never haven been the outcome.
They were killing each other prior to partition, and the extent of atrocities is unthinkable today. This will be known to those who have read history, from the books & reconfirmed via newspaper clippings of that time.
There has been a large scale infiltration of Bangladesh Muslims and to an extent, from Pakistan, via the Kashmir route. In the 1980s the destination was Assam, today, it is everywhere.
And they need to be stopped. That is all this bill is attempting, & Did you notice that there is a cut off date? This is applicable to those who entered before 2014.
12
@Meena Niki Haley would be right at home.
1
India has been a sanctuary for the people fleeing from the onslaught of Islam for centuries. Some 900 years ago, followers of Zoroaster arrived on Indian shores and have prospered in India ever since. This new bill is in continuation of the same tradition of offering shelter to persecuted minorities in our neighborhood. India suffered horribly through the process of partition based on a premise propounded by Muslim leaders that the continental Muslims can’t coexist with Hindus. However, more Muslims want to migrate to India than the other way around in spite of the impression of discrimination given in your article.
38
@Humanist please show facts to show that India has been a place for people fleeing the onslaught of Islam. This is not true. Furthermore, totally irrelevant in a modern day context.
1
What a terrible shame. I visited India 3 times in the '90s, to study music and yoga. I remember a group of us meeting with the resident musician at an Ashram in New Delhi, a very revered woman. She told us that Hinduism is not a sectarian religion, that it accepts all paths, and indeed, the spiritual literature of Hinduism, such as the Bhagavad Gita, emphasizes that all paths lead to the same destination. Another important teaching of Hinduism is that all of us here are reflections and unique individual expressions of the One. So it is a fundamental misunderstanding to think that because one is called a Hindu and another is called a Muslim that the two are not deeply connected in the manifold Oneness.
4
Time to visit India and checkout the Taj Mahal before current party in the govt. demolishes it to make way for a Hindu temple.
15
Any one who has lived in India is aware of the shoddy state of Indian bureaucracy and the way data is gathered and stored.
Many births are not registered specially when children are born at home. Also villages which are supposed to record the information and send it forward to be included in the database often do not bother to do so.
Amy Kazmin, the reporter for Financial Times, writes that when she sent her husband to the obtain a birth certificate for their new born daughter, there were so many errors that she had to insist that he go back to the municipal office to get it corrected. And this happened in Delhi, to white, English speaking, affluent, foreigners stationed in India. What will happen to illiterate and poor Indians.
This bill will terrorize the ordinary citizens and the unscrupulous municipal officials will make a killing in bribes to provide or correct birth certificates.
20
This goes back to the terrible decision to divide India when it was freed by the British empire. Jinnah was intransigent. Partition created the “karma” that seems still to be at work today. Much wisdom will be needed to heal that deep wound to India’s soul. Would that another Sri Aurobindo appeared to give the sorely needed guidance.
11
@Meredith
How does Partition either explain or justify Hindutva fasciism?
There are 200 million Muslims in India. They elected to stay in Nehru's secular India.
Modi, the RSS and Hindutva destroyed that.
Partition has nothing to do with it.
8
@John B actually, partition has a lot to do with it. if you had any roots or ties to India, you would know instinctively the hatred that the lines drawn at the time spawned, all because it was Jinnah who wanted a Muslim state. this is not fiction, it is fact. written in the history books, history written not by Indians, but by white western folks, so you can safely believe it as gospel. the call for a muslim state hit a nerve that is still raw to this day. please understand that you speak of a land where a predominant religion, hinduism (a way of life), has been around since at least 1700 BC, the Vedic period. again, this isn't something that hindu Indians tout. it's something white western researchers have pinned down. some even argue the teachings date back further because it began as an oral tradition, but we'll be conservative here. when the first muslim invasion happened around 650 AD, hinduism had already been in existence for more than a thousand years. still, the people withstood repeat invaders, including the British. they also learned to accept others into the fabric of their society, something muslim states are unable to do.
consider this: only 4% of the population of Pakistan is minority comprising Hindu, Christian, Sikh, others, but 14% of the population of India is exclusively Muslim. ever wondered why?
4
@Desi Why do you Modi fans keep touting Pakistan as some model to be emulated? Modern India was founded as a secular state. That's history too. India is now abandoning that model.
3
The downfall of Indian secualr democracy has already started when the majority voted back bjp into power. Democracy is the tyranny of the masses. What this government does now will have far reaching consequences In the country and outside. This is what happens when we vote a despotic regime to power.
9
Can we please see the bill for what it is, before we hyperventilate? India was partitioned because Muslims wanted a separate country (which then split into two, Pakistan and Bangladesh, from the chaos that ensued after Punjabi Muslims of West Pakistan didn't accept a democratically elected Bengali Muslim as the Prime Minister). The minority population in Pakistan and Bangladesh (Hindus, Sikhs, Christian, Jains, Parsis) sometimes seek refuge in India because of religious persecution. The minority population of both Pakistan and Bangladesh has diminished after their split from India. This bill is merely to allow naturalization of religious minorities who seek refuge in India because they are persecuted in these Islamic nations. Muslims cannot be minorities in their own country, can they be? Then why include them in the bill? They sought a different country and got India partitioned. Why would they even want to come back to India?
42
You do not really address the issue of 2 million people having been left off the lists in Assam . And aren’t you implying that a migrant from anywhere if he happens to be Muslim has no rights in India but has to leave ?How is that fair or just ?
6
@Shazia Amin if the migrants came illegally from Bangladesh and Pakistan despite enjoying superiority as a Muslim citizen in an Islamic country, maybe it is up to the Indians to decide if they want to accept them or not? How is a bill to accept religiously prosecuted migrants (Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Christians in Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Afganistan and Bangladesh) regressive? The Muslims (or any human being) are still more than welcome to apply for citizenship of India through Naturalization if they are not in India illegally.
22
@Jay
You conveniently ignore that Hindu fanatics/nationalist persecute vehemently Indian Christians as well.
4
As I Indian American, I am ashamed.
9
Near the end of the article, it finally mentions that this is about illegal migrants and both Hindus and Muslims have to show documentary evidence, and there is a path to citizenship.
50
@Nitin C If you think that under this government, Hindus lacking documentary evidence will be treated the same as Muslims lacking them, I have a bridge to sell you.
8
All India is doing is allowing disfranchised communities in neighboring countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangla-Desh, where strict Sharia law exists, to seek safe refuge.
Muslims in those countries are a majority, support Sharia, need not flee to India.
This law allows non Hindus like, Jains, Sihks, Christians, Buddhist, Jews, etc the right to refuge and path to citizenship.
63
@Gyns D , All Jim Crow did was "to allow people of various ethnicities and races to seek safe refuge in their own communities and prevent crime". That would be totally fine with you, right?
3
The article should have mentioned Pakistan's placement of religion in its constitution and immigration policies. Context matters. India's Hindus no doubt feel criticism of this law is hypocritical and unfair. The article doesn't touch on this aspect.
44
@mainliner The article doesn't touch on this because it is completely irrelevant. Just because Pakistan practices religious bigotry is not an excuse for India to do the same. That point should be absolutely obvious.
6
@Shaun Narine Thank you! The 'whataboutism' and logical disconnect that Modi fans/nationalists are displaying over and over on this comment thread would be a laugh, if it wasn't so indicative of a dangerous, primitive, knee-jerk tribalism.
3
@Shaun Narine
If India allows an easier path to citizenship to those persecuted in Pakistan, its bigotry? In what moral universe?
3
Pandit-ji (Jawaharlal Nehru) would turn over in his grave.
Nehru, a Hindu Brahmin, was deeply educated in both classical Persian and Urdu (languages central to Islam).
To his last day, Nehru could not give a complex speech in Hindi (the vernacular associated with Hindus).
Nehru was a profoundly secular man.
The Hindutva politics of Modi and the RSS would horrify Nehru.
Nehra had much more in common (culturally, intellectually, linguistically and politically) with Jinnah than with Modi.
7
@John B And yet it was Jinnah who insisted on partition, and Nehru who allowed it, which led to our current situation. Maybe India would have been better off with a different leader, one who was more in touch with his own people, who didn't set up the license raj, and didn't allow Muslims to push him around.
11
@John B maybe spend a little time educating yourself about India and its history? Persian was used as the court language under the Mughal/Islamic rule in India before the Britishers came to loot. It was common for influential people to know Persian, the court language. Urdu and Hindi are not for Muslims and Hindu, rather they are more like Irish English and American English used by people all over the Indian subcontinent. The dominance of Urdu and Hindi as the major language varies as per the regions of India. Nehru couldn't give a speech in about 20 other OFFICIAL languages of India.
5
@John B and Modi has much more on with a common indian than Nehru. That gives Modi more authority over this subject than Nehru.
1
I don't know if it is possible to put into words how supremely tragic this is. Every day it just seems more and more like on global scale bigotry and hate is winning everywhere. It would be nice if we could place this bill as the fault of a few corrupt and heartless politicians but when a party that campaigns on this goal is swept into office with overwhelming nationwide support it's truly a testimony to the nature of the countries citizens. I don't know which is more disheartening Trump winning 64% of white voters in the US election or Indian voters voting en-mass for legalized religious discrimination. Tragedy seems all around these days.
108
@Steve -- Then I would suggest you begin your own personal campaign to get the fascists out of our government, and rebuild our global reputation, so we can put a stop to the growth of disastrous authoritarianism. Convince the people around you to vote the Republicrooks OUT of every level of government, and reinstate our representative democracy. Get the money out of politics, end gerrymandering, ban the electoral college, tax the rich, end useless wars, improve life for all Americans, and let's become the country we always brag about, but have never been. We USED to have great influence, in the world, before tRump. Now, they all laugh at him, and us.
9
@Steve India is only doing what we Pakistanis did decades ago, by brutally wiping out all Hindus and Sikhs from there. And what does it tell about Pak or Bangladesh or Mayanmar if muslims from there want to take refuge in India - which is what this bill is trying to deny them the citizenship.
Don't take me wrong, I am an anti India. But on this I support.
41
@Riaz Haq Your comment does not make any sense whatsoever. "India is only doing what Pakistan did decades ago, by brutally wiping out all Hindus and Sikhs there" is such a classic Hindu nationalist point. I doubt your name and nationality are what you say it is.
Also that is no argument for the Indian government doing what it is. This isn't a competition as to which government can be more brutal and intolerant than the other. There are real lives involved here.
18
I like Modi for all the good work he is doing. Economy, cleanliness initiatives etc.. Basically returning India to its fundamentals. But, this I frankly do not understand. There is nothing for India to be be gained from this. It is not like people are flocking to enter India now.
On top of all this, India can never be changed from its secular principles. Different religions have co-existed there for centuries and it will continue to be that way.
This is bad PR and Modi certainly knows this.
3
@Raj This bill is not to bring any more people but just to give legal rights to the people who have already arrived in India as an illegal immigrant and have been staying for a long time (more than 5 years). Several people don't have any civil rights even after staying in India for more than 20 years because they came illegally into India. This bill is giving citizenship rights to some of them.
5
@Raj
Modi's 'good works' are overrated. His government lies about India's GDP, and India's economy is not living up to his promises for it. The RSS does 'good works' too but it's all a cover for pressing their right-wing ideology. With his re-election we saw what really interests Modi: Hindu nationalism.
1
Rise of religious fundamentalism is very serious problem in almost all major democracies worldwide including India and USA.
In USA it started since USA was founded in late 1780s (for more detail one can read the book, "Godless people in a Godly country".) American secularism is basically the result of infighting among various Christian clans. In India it started as soon as the country became free from British rule in 1947. Unlike USA and most other western democracies (state is separated from Church but not officially secular), India's official declaration as a "secular" country totally distorted the meaning of "Secular" which is the result of very orthodox & fundamentalist mindset of people like Jinnah, MK Gandhi etc (not Nehru though) and many other political leaders. "Secular" India allowed each & every Indian to do whatever it liked in open public in the name of religious freedom. Blocking public places, noise pollution at odd hours of day/night, extortion to organised religious festivals, banning books/movies/painting etc., national holidays to appease almost all religious groups, allowing Islamic countries to offer aid/scholarship to Indians on the basis of religion and many such practices frustrated many there. That tradition also gave rise to anger among majority Hindus particularly when Pakistan & Bangladesh were openly Islamic and had a very strained relationship to India. That's the main reason why RSS-BJP came to power.
1
It won't be wrong to say that Jinnah was not emotional or religious at all, unlike MK Gandhi. Jinnah just
exploited religious sentiment to get his political ambition fulfilled. Jinnah promoted a very orthodox fanatic image once he decided on division of India based on his "two nation theory" to get Pakistan mainly to protect & promote rich "elite" Muslims of India.
After creation of Bangladesh in 1970s and then US withdrawal from Afghanistan after end of USSR invasion there, socioeconomic condition of Pakistan & Bangladesh deteriorated. Previously almost exclusively Hindus used to flee Islamic Pakistan (including East Pakistan, that later became Bangladesh) to escape ethnic cleansing there. Later huge number of Muslims also started to migrate to various countries mainly to India for better future. That mostly uncontrolled & illegal immigration from Bangladesh (and to some extent from Pakistan) created havoc in bordering States in India that include Kashmir, West Bengal, Tripura, Assam, other states in North East India. Demography changed, economic situation worsened, conflict with local people increased. Gradually those immigrants spread out all over India.
Local politics also changed. Communist came to power in Bengal & Tripura, Islamic extremists promoted by Pakistan engaged in ethnic cleansing of Hindus in Kashmir. All political parties promoted illegal immigration. Islamic block countries in UN kept the pressure on India to protect the status quo.
7
Sunnis and Shiites can't even get along, so how can Muslims and Hindus? There's an awful history of bad blood between them.
Ask the Sikhs in NW India; these extremely peaceful people finally had to raise armies to defend themselves from continuous Muslim invasions. You can't turn the other cheek forever.
Although often over-the-top, Chris Hitchens' claim that religion poisons everything merits serious consideration. (As an agnostic, I think that it can be a good thing or bad, depending on the group or individuals. The real problem, of course, is obdurate human nature: We're barely civilizable.)
As always, the situation is so jacked up that it's beyond repair. Maybe we are suffering under a divine curse; mythically, it's certainly true.
28
Yeah this is bad, it is similar to the muslim ban law that Trump tried to pass early on during his presidency. It should be overturned for the very reason Trump's muslim ban could not be passed as originally framed, it is unconstitutional and the same applies to India and could be overturned by the courts.
End result is that Modi might try to frame it similarly to how the US finally did it, which is to pick specific migration from specific countries as a national security threat. In India's case it could end up being migration from Pakistan and Bangladesh, the two countries from which most people migrate to India.
Unfortunately, the guy actually responsible for the progressive and democratic India is seldom referenced by anyone (in India or West). Dr. B.R.Ambedkar, who was the chief architect of Indian Constitution was deeply disappointed with the implementation of Constitution. He was worried about how people in India who practice the evils of caste system, discriminate their own people can suddenly embrace the idea of democracy. His famous words,
"Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated. We must realise that our people have yet to learn it. Democracy in India is only a top-dressing on an Indian soil which is essentially undemocratic."
proves that the inherent soul of India is still undemocratic.
5
I just returned from India and it is not the India I left many years ago. In many areas of India there is no real freedom of press or thought. If newspapers speak out against the government, there is immediate retaliatory cancellation of all government advertisements. No one dare criticize the PM. Previously people would speak out in their whatsapp group and now even those were hacked by the government. The economy has gone down and it will continue to go down because India is not China. Indians can never be ruled with fear. Indira Gandhi tried it in 1977 and it got her into prison. The BJP has no learnt the lessons of the past. Indians like their freedom to speak and be free.
7
Much has been written about the rise of populist nationalism. Less often do commentators note that the new populism and nationalism are often tied to religion. In this demagogic politics defense of the people and of the nation is at the same time a defense of the faith. Religion, along with race and ethnicity, becomes a defining characteristic of "the people" and an essential criterion for membership in "the nation." No matter that the religious Other has been part of the nation for centuries. The new populist nationalism demands purity --the religious Other might perhaps be tolerated, but full civic equality is off the table. Nonetheless, these states have the gall to call themselves democracies!
5
I was involved in an accident some years ago up in northern ontario and had to airlifted to a hospital with a broken leg. The bill for the helicopter ride was $240, which I gladly paid. My marginal rate is just over 50% on income of $250,000. I understand there is no free ride.
Some going to mention how and why the population of non-Muslim peoples in neighboring Pakistan, Bangladesh, etc have declined since 1947? No?
61
@HistoryRhymes Because the governments of Pakistan et. al. are excellent examples of tolerance. India should strive to be better.
3
@tim We are better in many ways.
The bill is to safeguard the refugees (Non-muslims) who are made refugees by the Muslim countries Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan.
Which part of the bill is problematic? Do they need to give citizenship to Muslims too, who persecuted Non-Muslims?
Do you now that there are around 3 Million Refugees within India for 3 decades? They are Pundits who are persecuted overnight by Muslims in J&K and they cannot even enter J&K even now?
47
@tim
Proud to say that under PM Imran Khan, Pakistan after a really long time is starting to declare hindu temples as heritage sites, is returning hindu temples abandoned or confiscated by the state at the time of Partition back to communities, and is openly discussing how we as a nation should protect our minorities. I am ofcourse ashamed that it has taken so long.....
That said, what is happening in India today is simply that the worst fears of Muslims in the 1940s Of being at the mercy of a large intolerant majority are coming true. My grandfather used to tell me that in the last years before Partition, muslims had the status that was the equivalent of the “untouchables” ( the lowest caste)... and my other grandfather migrated from Delhi because he was afraid for his life during Partition...these things happened...
14
This is 22nd century, is it possible for Modi to throw India back to the past years of religious intolerance? The world is watching, what will India gain by this? Only Modi and Shah knows. If the BJP rule continues for more years, will India as nation will be there? I wonder how leader can be so narrow minded!
6
There will be a karmic price for India to pay. Modi's legacy will be how he stirred up hate and division for his own political power, leading to India's downfall, which is now only a matter of time. The sheep is being led to the slaughter once more.
20
What will be the response of all the US companies with large offices in India? Will they continue to operate in a country with legally mandated racism? Microsoft, Google, and others should leave India if this law passes.
130
I disagree. It’s not corporate America’s job to judge India’s political system, but instead to follow the law of whatever country they are operating in. Exceptions when their activities would harm the U.S. which this doesn’t.
52
@DRS
If a US company elects to invest and do business in a racist country, you are correct that they are bound to follow its laws.
An American firm in apartheid South Africa was bound to observe South African law - including race laws.
BUT, no corporation is bound to invest in a racist nation. That is a moral choice.
Investing in India has become more morally dubious with the rise of Hindutva.
39
@Steve They will use their relations with China as a model, no doubt.
11
It is a sad day for India. I was born in Chennai, India in 1941. I was born a British subject as India was ruled by the British at that time.
I remember the days when Gandhi preached tolerance and respect for all. He reminded us that we are all God's children .
The worst of India is now in charge.
The founders of India had noble ideas. Now we have mob rule.
Hopefully there will be some good people left who will resist this behavior. God save India !!
165
@Sankaran
And let us not forget that the tolerant Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated by a Hindutva murderer from the RSS - Modi's political home.
23
@Sankaran Indians not God must save India.
4
India, despite all its troubles, was on the morally right path for 70 years. Today, India's becoming what it always wanted to be - a small place with constricted hearts and no soul - a religion based country just like its neighbour. India and Pakistan have finally become the same.
56
@bharath
You are comparing India and Pakistan? Where are the 14% Hindus now, after 70 years of Independence? If you want to compare and say both are equal, wait until we do the same to Muslims what they did to Hindus in Pakistan.
I am sure we will not do that kinda barbarism.
10
@Srinivasan Mudhaliar
The barbarism of the caste system is alive and well and getting worse in Hindutva India.
7
World’s largest democracy?
26
It seem the Indian democracy (through its populace) is at war with its own constitution.
53
@Basit
This comment reminds me of another country - closer to home - where we see the same thing
4
Law that is supposed to protect minority is as of now championing majority, which means minority is without representation but majority claims that minority is not without representation as they are represented by the leaders of their faith. However, past few events do not support this claim.
6
@CA
To what "law" to you refer? Only in some countries do laws protect minorities...and, on suspects, that those countries are not the majority.
2
@Mark Shyres I am referring to law of land vesting in constitution, judiciary and enforcement
It is hard to convey in words the heartbreak I am feeling. This law, I fear, will have effects like those of Jim Crow did in America. India will not be better for it and the world will be the worse. Having visited India, from the Rajghat that honors Gandhi and the perfection of the Muslim Taj Mahal to the ghats of Varanasi and the ruins of Fatehpur Sikri, I have come to realize how deep and long the divide between Muslim and Hindu is and how the British Raj exploited it and made it worse. But this law is more likely to divide than unite, to raise fears and stoke resentments.
123
@W F Wooden
Secularism in India died when Grandson of Hindu convert Mohd Ali Jinnah caused division of India on the basis that Hindus and Muslims are two distinct civilizations which cannot live together . Muslims in Muslim majority provinces supported his position instead of Muslim Nationalists Abdul Kalam Azad and Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan. It also died when majority of Kashmiri Muslims desired separation from Secular India
33
@W F Wooden
Actually, Mogul India, which England seized and colonized was hugely more tolerant of religious diversity than Modi's India.
The Muslim emperors had Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and even the occasional Jesuit as court advisors.
14
@Azad Did partition divide India? Yes, it did. But there were a lot of Muslims who believed in India as a nation and remained in India and did not go over to Pakistan. To all of them, India is their homeland. They chose "secular" India over Pakistan. This government is robbing them of their feeling of belonging in their homeland.
Also as far as Kashmiri Muslims go, have we really given them any reason to be a part of the country in the past 70 odd years? What reaction do you expect from them after years of oppression and violence?
23
The beginning of the end of India as its founders envisioned. The lowest common denominator prevails over idealism and common sense - is this a defining characteristic of democracy? The US is no exception.
43
@Max duPont "The beginning of the end of India as its founders envisioned"
India was not founded in 1947 when the British left. India is (at least) 3500 years old.
When you refer to the people who wrote the current Indian constitution as the "founders of India" you are insulting the Buddha, Akbar, Gandhi, Kabir and many others who lived long before 1947.
8
@Ludwig You sound like a writing under a clear-pseudonym.
And no: Before the Company, there's zero evidence of united India.
As in, zero evidence of sovereign-state of India before the Dominion of India.
A vast, contiguous land of landlocked kingdoms doesn't constitutes as "country" when even short-lived historical Empires over there didn't faithfully correspond to the official map of the Republic of India or even the one proposed by the "Greater India" zealots.
5
India is moving backward from the age of Enlightenment to darkness. India is no one thing, it is splashes of color, the BJP and Modi would like to see it as a monochrome. How dull.
59
Everyone points a finger at China over the detention camps, and most blame it on China’s communist regime.
How do you explain a secular, democratic country (India) doing this to people who have been living there for decades if not centuries?
And, in the same vein, how do you explain the migrant detention camps on the Southern US border?
The world has gone mad. Shame on us!
135
How do you explain this? The country has a “Hindu Nationalist” prime minister, elected by many many many millions of bigoted religious Indians. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it.
22
@M Nations DO want to protect their identity and that identity is in large part cultural and ethnic. If you seek to undermine that identity in the name of "we are all one species" you are going to see right wing backlash as you see in Europe, in Brexit and even here in the US. Buddhism is a tolerant religion but even Myanmar has started to assert its Buddhist identity.
Progressives, you have some good ideas. But you do not have a magic bullet to solve all the world's problems with progressive ideas. Turkey is not Finland and India is not Sweden. Perhaps they will be some day and perhaps they will not. And do not use the word "dictator" for someone like Erdogan or Trump or Putin whose power comes in part from respecting identities.
Progressives have a certain belief in how the world should be run, a belief which almost amounts to theology because it is immune to facts and reason. But PLEASE, PLEASE, learn to accept identities which fall short of "all of mankind."
21
Finally a government doing the right thing. For years Congress and other political parties have used Muslims as vote banks. Their opposition is based entirely on their desire to loot India. They care two hoots about Muslims or India. The US has implemented similar measures.
21
@A A And what does US' own “similar measures” prove exactly?
Because if you're going towards the "Tu Quoque" fallacy, Mr [self-censured] — then India's so-called "Democracy" lags not just drastically, but even fundamentally behind already — and that's *before* the introduction of such a legislation.
2
Employers will eventually realize that outsourcing their labor to openly bigoted countries, whose blatant racial and religious discrimination only provokes cultural schisms and terrorism, is bad for preserving employee safety, let alone profitability.
That means entirely avoiding the insane covfefean modi's India. It also means entirely avoiding xi China, whose tyrant hopes to make a gulag, Tiananmen, or crater of Hong Kong.
13
The bill appears to be pending in the lower house of Parliament, but thank you for bringing this to light. I used to be proud of my country as being one of the few countries in the world where people of all communities and religions could live together and in peace. I know it has always been tough and we have never had a perfect system. However, intolerance was never this blatant. In these dark times, I would like us all to be reminded of the lyrics of a very famous patriotic song: "Mazhab nahi sikhata, aapas main bair rakhna" (rough translation: Religion/Faith does not teach us to harbour grudges among ourselves).
I hope this is just another nightmare, we all wake up very soon from. Jai Hind!
50
@@AD #Citizenship_Amendment_Bill_2016
I would like to explain what Citizenship Amendment Bill is meant to do.
First of all, it aims at at helping the persecuted minorities (Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Parsis and Christians) from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh to acquire Citizenship in an easy manner.
Why is this Bill needed?
1. Protecting persecuted minorities is a legacy of Partition of India on religious lines. India cannot leave the minorities of those countries, especially Pakistan and Bangladesh to be slaughtered by Islamist totalitarian governments and terrorist groups in those countries.
2. Preserving the demographic balance of India
Demography is Destiny. India needs to make sure that Indic religious groups form an overwhelming majority in all parts of India to ensure India's civilisational continuation and also national integrity and security.
3. So should Assam take the burden alone?
Definitely not. As Modiji had said in rally in Feb 2014 somewhere in Assam, the whole country will take care of them. Most probably Madhya Pradesh or Rajasthan will take care.
4. Will this derail the process of deporting illegal immigrants?
Definitely not. As you all know there is a conspiracy by Bangladeshi infiltrators who want to convert Assam into a Muslim majority province and then make it a part of Bangladesh. The NRC will be implemented with the infiltrators first deleted from voters lists, detained.
4