Picking up facts from history without context is a dangerous setup. In today’s debate, the context of ‘changing constitution’ doesn’t mean amending or tinkering the constitution. Rather it is about the way BJP and RSS has outwardly propagated it’s ideology which is against the principles of the existing constitution – including the basic structure features such as secularism, federalism and democracy. I would like to remind here the RSS’s fascination of Fascism. Going by it’s core agenda, it would mean BJP wants a theocratic constitution like the one in Pakistan, but just of a different colour. Unfortunately, this article is misguiding the readers and diluting the debate by finding regressive moments in the story of evolution of our constitution. Regressive moments (definitely, unfortunate and condemnable) are few and situational, and it’s impact is hardly felt, infact what we’ve evolved as a result over the years is a stronger moral constitution. It is an intellectual failure or corruption of the this writer to misfit arguments. ‘Hold Muslims hostage here in order to save Hindus there’ argument endorsed by this writer exposes the core RSS ideology and is in no way different from the that ideology of the fundamentalists/jihadists in Pakistan. Infact, this statement proves Shashi Tharoor right who called India to be a ‘Hindu Pakistan’ under this government.
The core of this debate is ‘How can an ideology based on One religion be consistent with Indian values and it’s constitutional principles?’ .. Also, please do not use Journalism as piece of Political agenda and a direct/indirect means of election campaigning.
The author has put the history in proper perspective but has forgotten important point. The Constitution has been tinkered with whenever the government was in majority and vast majority which was the case with Congress. On the other hand BJP has hardly been in comfortable majority and was always in coalition. Need to amend always has arisen when the thinking was autocratic or inadequate provision s. Today the issue has come up because the leader is tending to be autocratic and the need is have more and more power even to hide own qualification.
Picking up facts from history without context is a dangerous setup. In today’s debate, the context of ‘changing constitution’ doesn’t mean amending or tinkering the constitution. Rather it is about the way BJP and RSS has outwardly propagated it’s ideology which is against the principles of the existing constitution – including the basic structure features such as secularism, federalism and democracy. I would like to remind here the RSS’s fascination of Fascism. Going by it’s core agenda, it would mean BJP wants a theocratic constitution like the one in Pakistan, but just of a different colour. Unfortunately, this article is misguiding the readers and diluting the debate by finding regressive moments in the story of evolution of our constitution. Regressive moments (definitely, unfortunate and condemnable) are few and situational, and it’s impact is hardly felt, infact what we’ve evolved as a result over the years is a stronger moral constitution. It is an intellectual failure or corruption of the this writer to misfit arguments. ‘Hold Muslims hostage here in order to save Hindus there’ argument endorsed by this writer exposes the core RSS ideology and is in no way different from the that ideology of the fundamentalists/jihadists in Pakistan. Infact, this statement proves Shashi Tharoor right who called India to be a ‘Hindu Pakistan’ under this government.
The core of this debate is ‘How can an ideology based on One religion be consistent with Indian values and it’s constitutional principles?’ .. Also, please do not use Journalism as piece of Political agenda and a direct/indirect means of election campaigning.
Some random RSS harami spitting dung…
The author has put the history in proper perspective but has forgotten important point. The Constitution has been tinkered with whenever the government was in majority and vast majority which was the case with Congress. On the other hand BJP has hardly been in comfortable majority and was always in coalition. Need to amend always has arisen when the thinking was autocratic or inadequate provision s. Today the issue has come up because the leader is tending to be autocratic and the need is have more and more power even to hide own qualification.