Muslim appeasement; is there anything like that?

I was in the middle of a discussion in a forum, suddenly one guy expressed his anguish about his situation. He was heartbroken and agitated that a 13 year girl of a doctor couple can be so judgmental about his political preference!

So, what was the judgment passed that so agitated the guy called, Riyaz?

The judgment said, “Because you are a Muslim, so you support Congress.”  

This judgment from a 13 year old from an educated family really rattled Riyaz. Probably, he wanted to know

Or he may be angry for not finding the effect of the so called Appeasement for his community that this girl was pointing to; instead what he got was SACHHAR COMMITTEE REPORT.

So, Riyaz has more reasons to feel upset with the false reasoning. But, then he heard that there are two perspectives of appeasement;

• Economic & social
• Political

As the theory of economic & social appeasement was debunked by the Sacha committee report. a new bogye emerged: Muslim community has been exploited as a vote bank through Political Appeasement. OK…fair enough; that is at least a good home work on the part of the HINDUTVA forces. Even, Riyaz also conceded that he feels that congress has tried to APPEASE them at times. 

Then, he should not have felt bad about the JUDGEMENT of the 13 year old; why then was he agitated? 

People say, truth hurts, but if you are not Mahatma BUDH, then it can happen that LIE can also hurt. So, I thought let us probe this further as Riyaz is no Mahatma Budh, was it a TRUTH or a LIE that had rattled Riyaz? 

To find an answer to this question, we have to look at several aspects of appeasement:

• Reasons for appeasement
• What are the appeasements?
• Is appeasement only limited to Muslims?

Reason for Appeasement

After exhausting all my thinking caps, the only reason of appeasement, that can be crystallized, is to appease Muslims to win vote. If that is the argument then it has the weakest leg to stand on with this simple fact based on basic counting skills:

What are the Appeasements?

The proponents of appeasement will come up with the following usual suspects when ever there is a debate. They are:

Article 370: Is it an appeasement based on religion?

We have similar arrangements in north-east too, you can read about Nagaland. Kashmir was a special case as it was absorbed after it signed an instrument of access with conditions. India is simply respecting that treaty. We signed that treaty with a HINDU king.

So, can we cerebrally link this is to appeasement of MUSLIMS?

Common Civil code: This is the biggest handle for the proponents of appeasement. Some time, I also think that this should be done without realizing how exactly this can be done.

Was Hindu code bill in any way a blue print of how a common civil code should look like? It is far from that. It was just an attempt to REFORM archaic Hindu laws where male were allowed to POLYGAMY, and female was never considered as members of a family (They were having no right on family property). In that back-drop reformist Hindu leaders thought it to be pertinent to amend the Hindu personal law.  

Indian constitution celebrates diversity, then how come UNIFORMITY through common civil code will be able to do justice to DIVERSITY.

I think, the reason why HINDUTVA forces are crying for Common Civil Code is not that they believe in it, rather they think they have lost out to the Muslim male in enjoying POLYGAMY.  

Haj quota: Any practicing Muslim would proclaim that enjoying a HAJ to Mecca on Govt. largess is morally not on sound footing. So to say that by extending Haj quota to Muslims, the Govt. has own over the Muslims will be wrong. I think Haj is an enterprise where Indian Airlines earn a lot of money, it actually does not help those who go for the pilgrimage. If this is appeasement, then shortly I am going to provide you proof how Hindu temples are being funded by Govt.

Shah Bano Case: A Supreme court judgment, directing the husband of 60 year old Shah Bano to provide her with maintenance after divorce, was reversed by the Parliament. This act by the then Congress govt. is considered as the single most credible example of Appeasement of Muslims.  Subsequently, the law was amended as per the Muslim Personal law.

How can this be an appeasement? Was there a common civil code in place to apply IPC uniformly on all the religious groups? There is none. So, for SC to pass this order was beyond their jurisdiction.

The remit of SC is to see if an existing laws are implemented, not to frame new law. 

So, the Govt. of the day just intervened to set things right; it was not an attempt to appease Muslims. 

Is appeasement only limited to Muslims?

Many of us think that Govt. funds Muslim religious activity by providing Haj subsidy. If that is unfair, then what is this? 

Rs212-crore Budget of Jagannath Temple for 2014-15

This headline in Indian Express talks about Odisha Govt. making an allocation of Rs. 96.33 crore to supplement the annual temple budget of 212 core for the year 2014-15.

Then, what about the money the tourism department spends around religious places throughout India?

So, are we really logical while making the case for APPEASEMENT of MUSLIMS?

The fact is India’s pluralism is a NEGATION of Pakistan’s two nation theory. Even this theory was supported by Savarkar and the foremost ideologue of RSS, GOLWALKAR. 

India at its birth made promise to itself to uphold democracy and pluralism or secularism at the same time. This is a tough balancing act for;

AND

This juggling act by the Govt.of India can at times looks like an attempt to appeasement, while this really is the duty the Govt. has to discharge.