@OmerGhazi2 You and a few others like you can stay. The jihadis will have to leave. We are not giving away any more land to Muslims to make them comfortable. Every last one.
Dear Muslims,
You're not oppressed,you're just shit at running countries without oil.
Your women are veiled because your men can't control their dicks.
Your "religion" is a pathetic attempt to justify your own inferiority complex.
@saharzaman India is not secular! Get that out of your peanut brain, that was a word artifically introduced into the Constitution by the dictator Indira Gandhi during the Emergency. India is a Hindu Rashtra and your kind have already overstayed your welcome. Time to catch train missed 1947.
@ShekharGupta The entire world-view of the Jihadi revolves around first proving himself the perpetually persecuted oppressed victim. Its the "Palestine Effect" where no real genocide exists but the PR is so screeching loud, and that proves as the gateway grevience allowing them to take over.
@IbnKhaldunIndic@khanthefatima@MujMash@AdityaMenon22 The mulli is the "moderate" and she would dog-whistle to the "radicals" to take care of you. The entire planet knows these people are murderers/terrorists.
@imMAK02 You fcks have no right to criticize our democracy or Constitution. The moment you demand rights based on religion, you become a Paki and should fck off to your real homeland.
Muslims will not be allowed to question the authority of the Indian state. The Muslim identity will have to coexist with Indian identity. The moment you start asking about Muslim rights because the secular state doesn't address sensitivities of regressive Islam, you become a Paki
@kartikeya_1975 He needs to be executed by a female squad so his 72 virgins are denied and he must be made an example for the rest of the 250 million snakes that remained behind after 1947.
We should be thankful to The Quint for publishing Sharjeel Imam's interview. It brings to light a view that a section of the Muslim community holds under the garb of rights. Sharjeel's thought robs pre-independence Muslim groups of the guilt of partition, as he squarely blames the Congress leadership for the subcontinent's partition.
I do not see Sharjeel as a terrorist, but rather as a person who has no faith in India's Constitution, its liberal values, its pre-Islamic civilisational past, Hindu philosophy, and, most importantly of all, its democratic structure. His comparative analysis of rights is blind when it comes to Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and the Maldives.
He imagines Muslims in South Asia as a unified community but does not accord the same status to Hindus. He derives his method from Marxist thought and his working philosophy from Islam. In fact, he goes on to argue that only Muslims had a sense of "us" in South Asia. He excludes Islam's contact with Western modernity and its inability to respond to it from a non-religious perspective.
In the name of empowerment, he puts forward the idea that two states exist within India: a Hindu upper-caste state at the top, and another occupied by Muslims, Dalits, and other religious denominations at the bottom.
He builds this fallacy by drawing ideas from Sayyid Qutb, a leading literary critic who was one of the foundational ideologues of the Muslim Brotherhood. Sharjeel is an Islamist opposed to the very democratic idea of India and its civilisational past. I am not bothered by his reverence for Jinnah, Ali Shariati, or Iqbalโthat hardly affects me. What bothers me is that his ideas have been left unattended academically.
The debate around his bail is another matter. The real debate centers on what Sharjeel proposes. He proposes another mobilisation of Muslims in India, which aligns with the same language used by the Muslim League before partition. It is full of disdain for other communities. His proposed alliance with Dalits, Tribals, and other religious minorities is envisioned as a path towards monotheism.
He finds redemption in this ideological path rather than in what the Constitution, the civilisation, and the state stand for today.
This is deeply disturbing. His idea of representation in elected bodies that accounts purely for numbers is an argument borrowed directly from the Muslim League.
Furthermore, Hinduism in India has continuously evolved through various internal reform movements that have left the Muslim community largely untouchedโquestions that have been completely left unattended by him.
Most importantly, he confuses backwardness with the specific historical practice of untouchability. It is for this reason that quota extensions in the Central List have not been blindly given to other communities at large.
Lastly, it is no surprise that both Islamists like Sharjeel and the Indian Right blame the Congress for partition. This ideological congruence needs to be studied further. Subsequently, Sharjeel's denial of Bharat's civilisational past, alongside his view of India as merely a product of partition, closely mirrors the rhetoric of certain Congress leaders who define India strictly as a "Union of States." This, too, requires a rigorous academic response.
@kalki2111@RAlzear@JoseSama15 According to Fondapol's study of Islamist attacks (based on GTD, ACLED and other sources), there were 64,678 such attacks worldwide from 2001 to April 2024, causing at least 243,124 deaths. The vast majority occurred in Muslim-majority regions.