(7) मुसलामानों के प्रसादन (संतुष्टि )के लिए देश के सर्वोच्च्च न्यायालय अपेक्स कोर्ट का फैसला अध्यादेश से उलटकर एक
मुसलमान बेवा का हक़ मारना सेकुलर होना है।
(८ )१९४८ से बंद पड़े अयोध्या मंदिर का पहले ताला खुलवाना ,फिर शिलान्यास करवाना सेकुलर होना है।
by R Jagannathan
It is also a confirmation of the political narrative hatched by
Modi’s detractors: to show that he is inherently divisive and
hence responsible for all the bad things that happen during
the course of this election campaign. Janata Dal (U) CM
Nitish Kumar said “Bihar has never had a tradition of
violence and such attacks have never taken place before.”
Really? What were the Bodh Gaya blasts about? His party
spokesperson Sabir Ali hinted on TV that these things were
happening only because of certain developments of the last
few months. I have no doubt the only development he was
referring to related to Modi’s emergence on the national
scene. And Digvijaya Singh’s prime concern in a tweet was
to point out the coincidence between Modi’s rally and the
he “secular” gameplan is to use the BJP to frighten the daylights out of the average Muslim so that he exercises his vote to defeat that party and, in the process, forget to demand the real things that matter to him. If Muslims constantly use their vote as veto and nothing positive, can the national atmosphere ever be secular? The communal veto runs counter to the idea of a citizen voting after exercising his or her judgment.
This was the real purpose of Rahul Gandhi‘s references to
Muzaffarnagar’s Muslims and their alleged dalliance with the
ISI – a remark that has boomeranged on him and exposed
once again the “secular” effort to treat the BJP as the only
communal ogre to scare the minorities into exercising their
vote again as veto.
The Patna blasts will surely be used to suggest that they
happened because of who Modi is, and what the BJP
allegedly stands for: hatred and destruction. But there is no
one to question that repeated spews out of “secularists”.
In 2014, Muslims have one more chance to break out of their isolation by using their vote to think of themselves as citizens and not as a votebank. This doesn’t mean voting for the BJP, but it certainly means voting with their hopes rather than fears.
They have to take a chance with some of their choices. India can be truly secular only when it can countenance a so-called communal party in power and the country still remains recognisablly secular at the end of it all. The BJP is also playing into this faulty narrative by being repeatedly shrill on secularism. Its best bet is to stay calm and give Muslims a chance to think for themselves.
Veto is an anagram of vote. But the two mean different things. It’s the difference between being driven by fear or hope. It’s about exercising rational choice rather than being reduced to a bundle of negativisms by so-called “secularists”.
Read more at: http://www.firstpost.com/politics/why-muslims-should-reject-the-politics-of-veto-1198325.html?utm_source=ref_article