Gurcharan Das in a piece for the Financial Times has this to say about Narendra Modi:
“…he might alienate India’s Muslims, potentially raising the risk of domestic terror. So far, the Muslim minority has been relatively moderate and less Islamist”
Ignore for a moment how terribly condescending this is to the average Indian Muslim.
I just want to make one thing clear in this short post – if ” if you vote for him, then they will bomb” comes even once in anybody’s argument, how are we different from Pakistan where putatively anti-Islamist parties like ANP/PPP were threatened?
You may argue against Mr. Modi or anybody else on principle but if your spiel includes “oh, the threat of terror may rise” you are legitimizing cowardice in a democracy. Say so, for that is precisely the aim of Islamist terror – to terrorize. Mr. Gurcharan Das seems to have internalized it in his public pronouncements.
When a CNN or a Yale journal does not include the Danish cartoons, Islamist terror has won. A decision made on this basis is dhimmihood. Similarly, India too has a functioning if imperfect democracy and judiciary. So a political decision made on the basis of terror attack threats is again dhimmihood.
When we vote based on fear, they have again won. And they cannot be allowed to win.
Latest posts by Harsh Gupta (see all)
- From pseudo-secularism to a liberal cultural nationalism - May 17, 2014
- A Letter to Indian Muslim Youth - July 5, 2013
- Smart welfare in India - June 28, 2013