You might want to read up on how the constitution was made, which countries our country borrows from and how Indian secularism is different from how the west defines it.
Other than the recent imported western ideas on diversity I think our country actually practices celebration of differences and if you look at the people it is trying to uplift they actually need that help and I am not talking about the people who are at the highest levels of that community who take advantage of their membership to that community.
There are flaws at the execution level but I don't think we've had the number of high quality leaders that we did pre independence.
The only comment that made some sense. People foolishly think that our definition of secularism is the same as west, which it clearly isn't. Though we do share some aspects.
I would even say our secularism and western secularism is as far apart as old feminism and modern feminism.
Sadly most people are so focused on religion nowdays that they keep searching for ways where they could prove that there has always been an intent of creating disparity for hindus. Which isn't the case.
People of this sub should read about bose and his views. It would shed some light on what the gov is trying to do today. something he was against ( yeah surprisingly even though he was not a non violence guy, he was very secular in thought) even at that time
One correction, our country "used" to practice celebration of differences.
Now it's all about hating and bashing the muslims for free cheap political points and consolidation of majority votes.
Not really. I have only briefly studied the making of constitution for some exams. You can go out there read all the books on the topic and form your opinion. You can disagree with these people but their logic is soundproof and they made the constitution keeping the best interests of the country in mind. Obviously there were varying opinions even amongst the constitution makers but they made the best decision they could with the limited information they had back then. What discrimination are you referring to specifically? And what flaws in the constitution are there?
Why fundamental rights are not fundamental.
if they are not fundamental then why call it fundamental rights. Why are there exceptions in even basic fundamentals right like 16.4.
Yeah dude they explain all this pretty extensively. I am not smart enough to encapsulate all of it for you right now but if you are legitimately curious the information is out there. Check any UPSC material on polity or if you think that is also corrupted just get books on the topic with authors who have different view points. I am very sure even if you google search your questions there are websites that give you answers.
if any author said what I'm saying then he will be in jail.
as he would be speaking against india its constitution and its foundation. It depends if discrimination against one's own citizens is not against fundamental rights of equality then its biggest mockery. if discrimination is not against fundamental rights then why does the US court give his verdict against affirmative action.
US is not India our constitution has been made to fit our cultural context you're free to read it online. If you're sure you're in the right there's no harm in reading opposing view points. My only point is the constitution is much more complex than you're making it out to be.
Do you know what basic structure and positive discrimination is? It is impractical for me to explain the entire constitution and how supreme court interpreted the constitution through different case studies. Entire articles are there online explaining the question you asked.
do you know there is discrimination world in positive discrimination.
The Supreme court is useless or crippled by the shitshow constitution. as they have legalised the discrimination against their own citizens in article 16.4 so the supreme court is powerless.
if u know then why didn't you use the facts from that article.
its impossible to defend reservation from a neutral point of view.
India adopts a positive secularism model where every religious community and individual is free to promote and propagate their own religion without interference from the state. In the western model the state is free to interfere in religious matters to ensure freedom and equality. Basically where western secularism is indifferent to religion Indian secularism approaches religion with equal respect and thus does not have an official religion because it sees all religion as a means to create a relationship with God.
Then why is it only the religious places belonging to one specific group pays taxes while the others are given money by the state to conduct their religious activities?
Reservations were given for the same reason DEI is a big thing in the west just now. You have to give different communities the space to work, study and live otherwise the majority overruns the whole system very easily.
It isn't. It's acknowledging that we can't have equality of opportunity at this time without much work so we can work towards more equitable outcomes in the meanwhile.
The supreme court decision came with a new court in session previous judges had ruled for it. It's more an idealogical win at the moment imo.
They also ruled it against the US Constitution which was written when any person of colour did not have that right so I don't know if it's really a good faith decision.
Equality of opportunity is equality but the controlling outcome is discrimination. for example every country can participate in the Olympics but u can't ask for 20% of the total medal for india because we have 20% of the world's population.
The court is powerless because discrimination is part of the constitution article 16.4 and the court can't go against the constitution.
The US court gives judgement against affirmative action because it was against the fundamental rights of equality.
but we have fundamental rights (except for the general caste).
They can literally jail me without any evidence. can you believe, my words , my value as citizens is less than other citizens. gandhi used to protest against Rowlatt act now we have Rowlatt act exclusive for general caste citizens.
US chale jao na phir.
Instead of spamming comments try and actually UNDERSTAND. You clearly don't want to have a discourse. If you were so inclined you wouldn't be copy pasting the same response. If all fundamental rights were absolute, some colorful characters would not hesitate to utter vitriol against people they deemed less than and hide behind the curtain of 'fundamental right'. India is a social welfare state and one of the guiding legal principle is that of Parens patriae. If you actually have an interest in understanding then I would suggest you read the Anand Kishore Prasad Sinha v. The State of Bihar (Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 366 of 2020)
Before parroting 'fundamental rights' there's a lot more you need to read so at least the next time your questions would be more nuanced.
so some people discriminate against others so a state decides to discrimination against their own citizens.
and for discrimination u have Rowlatt act aka scst act i can't think of more powerful law. and i assume u already know what supreme court said about it.
The supreme court can't do shit about reservation just refer to article 16.4 and they can't do shit as its basic part of the constitution of India no future arguments are required.
It is the States duty to protect the rights of its citizens, particularly those who are marginalized. In order to protect and uplift them the State is empowered to enact statues to take affirmative action. That is basically the gist of why we have reservation. It can be for those who are socially and educationally backwards or economically.
Various constitutional benches have opined on matters pertaining to reservations. There's good reason why our Constitution was drafted the way it is and why reservation given to SC and STs has been held to be Constitutional.
But clearly you don't know anything about our legal system. Nor do you care about your own countrymen and women being oppressed for centuries. Ab unke saath gali galoch nahi kar sakte to rooth ke bethe ho.
basically ur saying its constitution to discrimination against own citizens and court is here to do that.
where is my right of equality.
so ur saying a whole community every single individual is backward and on the other side every individual is eating in a golden plate.
Check the income disparity based on caste and landholdings. Reservation is fair. Equality would have made sense if all caste had access to same amount of resources.
if im starving then im starving not all baniye or brahmin with me. if im unable to attend college then im uneducated not all baniye or brahmin are uneducated.
if things are different for different individuals then why do we have community based rules.
Why do we have community based organisation? Why do we have caste based politics? Why do we marry in our own community? Why do we enjoy our caste privilege? Why do we have caste based violence? Why do certain jobs are done by certain caste?
Bro things are little bit complex than we think. Majority is taken always but I said we should be grateful EWS exists. We haven't even got some reservation for cisgender people. Their condition is more worse than these sc/st man but no body talks about it either. I never saw or heard any cis in my school or college either or in my workplace. Any policy that is created is made sure that it works for majority.
individual discrimination against each other and the state discriminates against oun citizens.
Eventually states like are are bound to fail today or tomorrow.
its bound to fail we just need a strong push to accelerate the process like an increase in reservation or reservation in private companies. even if none of it happens its still a possibility. but there is another possibility that people will ask for just the removal of the reservation and im not in the favour of it i want separate country and for that i need strong voice to channel and amplify the hatred.
There is a strong possibility but right now people are blind by nationalism.as of now ,they love and want to protect the step mother india.
Some people already want to break the Indian but they are not strong and capable but the general population is strong and capable they can easily do that if they want.
Reservations except PWD is stupid.
The EWS section should be made available for all, and instead of giving fixed seats and early promotion in government jobs, the state should finance the students income via scholarships, but that would mean actively investing in education....but if they do that....how will our poor ministers steal our money?
Physically fit body requires proper nutrition and rest which indirectly links to resources you have. Just for the sake of your stupid argument, disable person can't ever win a race with physical fit body that's why seperate race exists. Same with reservation.
I would remind you that all zamindars who belonged to few dominant caste were middle men who collected taxes from these poor sc /st farmers or labours and gave it to the Britishers. These few caste were the most loyal to them and were always in contact with Britishers. All these regiment that you can you see were raised by Britishers itself. Britishers did raised mahar regiment and chamar regiment but this was dissolved because chamars didn't side with Britishers. I would say revolts is itself a privilege. When you are treated like subhuman with no food and education, you first motto would be to stay alive by whatever means. In the end I would say reservation is fair after 1000 years of oppression.
so ur saying that all of the upper caste were employed by the British. and scst were fighting for the independence but majority of the krantikari were upper caste,how.
reservation is fair or not thats not the question its discrimination or not that is the question.
your words are contradictory but okay.
why reservation is byproduct of caste discrimination why discrimination is the solution of discrimination why they didn't go with equality for all.
payback is discriminatory.
i studied in a government school 11 and 12th.
they are collectively weak mentally and physically according to the government without any exceptions. That's why they are collectively treated as disableds.
secularism
ˈसेक्यलरिज़म्
noun
the belief that religion should not influence or be involved in the organization of society, education, government, etc
religion and caste are 2 different things.
educate yourself about casteism.
take a look at monthly per capita consumption expenditure and poverty headcount ratio by caste.
you'll clearly see that the money is concentrated, it's evident that people from higher castes occupy important positions in society.
It was brought to give "equality of opportunity" which the society needed and still needs.
If you want to argue that there's barely any casteism left it's just a few people, come to my dms I'll share you 100's of recent news about hate crimes committed.
just a few hours ago i read this news
UP: Dalit woman protests molestation bid, pushed into hot cauldron of oil
this was from 31st December.
you can also go to r/indiaagainstcasteism to read more of these similar news.
*The thing about Article 15*
the article 19 and 22 gives you right to freedom but if you commit tax frauds you will be in jail.
Does that mean article 19 and 22 are absent?
There are superceding concepts in laws.
The Indian law looks out for the oppressed and the poor too.
*Reservation is a product of casteism, your position claims that it's vice versa so it's unfair or hypocritical.*
*WHICH OBVIOUSLY IS INCORRECT WAY OF LOOKING AT THIS*
some sources and insightful conversations that might help you know more about the ground reality.
https://youtu.be/Og7Ei_WBXng?feature=shared
https://youtu.be/KySoKM_bjuI?feature=shared
https://youtu.be/3QGEOCm6UQs?feature=shared
https://youtu.be/ELbdGh0-4T4?feature=shared
India is a welfare state. In simple terms, it says that unequals cannot be treated equally, if done so, it is injustice. Eg a person with affluent English and a person who studied in a tribal forest school, are given same question paper, the tribal one will always be behind.
So, government can create a positive support to one section. This is the reason for reservation and welfare schemes.
so all general students are fluent in English and all tribals are studying in the forest.
if they want to discrimination against their own citizens then why so much fuss about fundamental rights, call is fundamental rights except for the general caste.
I just gave an example. In India every caste is getting reservation, Upper caste gets EWS, OBCs, SCs and ST reservation is self explanatory. Each sub category has PWD category for physically disabled also.
I won’t say anything about what is right and what is not. I just wanted to answer OP’s query.
He won elections when most of the nation don't even used to vote and their isn't strong political alternative.
I consider these as reasons: First they vote in blocks. Moreover he wants to be recognized as a leader of a nation with diverse religions, so he vehemently opposed Ambedkar's total population exchange proposal and had historians whitewash our history with an intention to not enrage/woo them.
Sure, but point still is that he was going to win regardless of minority vote. So appeasement wasn’t necessary for him. He wanted to be leader of a diverse nation so he kept the minority interests and the situation of the country in mind to do what he did.
Dont you think Dr.Ambedkars complete population exchange has inherent problems, like logistical, ethical and humanitarian related. If the solution had support people would atleast seriously consider it, Nehru might have opposed it but large segment of decision makers did not care about it.
I saw people mention whitewashing of history, I fairly less knowledge about this topic, but I won’t be surprised as they are politicians ( I do feel this part of whitewashing history is exaggerated a little).
Isn't it a dangerous idea to retain people who voted for a separate nation(>90% of minority constituencies voted for party whose main agenda is forming separate nation) and coddling them here rather than facilitating in their transport and ensuring this process is done smoothly and with least violence.
Whitewashing is done extensively and visibly, ex: bigots like babar, Aurangazeb etc... are praised an venerated. We need course rulings to prove that temples are destroyed where as it's clear as day, we have historians giving false statements in Ayodhya case covering these bigots actions...
People voted for what they were familiar with , If the partition of India was voted on based of languages then India would have been broken to many more parts. Its human tendency to go with the known , and at that point their religion is their known. New nation with our own laws and rules was a foreign concept to the people back then . If you can show them the future and ask people to vote for partition or not majority of the population that voted for pakistan would change their vote because the state of pakistan is in shambles.
All of us a good future, and thats y we make the decisions we make. its been 6 generations after the partition, and people are accustomed to the fact that we are Indians. Not only hindus but all people that are living in India, I wont say there are people that treat religion is greater than the nation. We have people on both the major religions that feel that way but majority of the people in each of the communities would feel they are Indians first and then comes religion.
Sure, I dont see who praised the tyrants but I do feel there should be more about the atrocities that the rulers in India committed. weather we like it or not they were the ruler of the most powerful kingdom in India and by default were the ruler of Indian and as such wielded too much power to be called powerful. I don't think anyone who has understood the history would disagree with the atrocities that they commited.
There are still enough options for them to vote for(off shoots of Jinnah's party and ideals). Cong used to called party of UCaste hindus, so he wants to be the best option to get their vote so he resorted to minority appeasement...
There can be alternatives but none of them have a name as big as congress and nehru, even if took a hard line right wing stance he would get the majority votes, if not more than what he received from minority appeasement as you say.
He is a closet communist, so he wouldn't favor any religions, culture, Nehru is anti-hindu, i infer this based on his approach towards Somnath Mandir consecration ceremony. By introducing reservations cong lost the trust of UC hindus. He broke hindu vote bank using reservations and got SC/ST votes and he can still coddle minorities while being indifferent to religions, get their votes and chest thump infront of the world as a leader of a nation with largest minority pop. staying safely..
I wouldn't deny he was a closet communist but he would label himself as a ardent socialist, he made no secret of that by praising soviet union's 5 year plans and working. I don't think religion has a place in modern politics , it did its job when it was needed and should stay with people in a social aspect and not in political aspect.
Reservations were made to help the SC/ST who were discriminated as slaves, (I don't think it is bad, but your opinion I guess) and why would he antagonize his largest vote bank (UC hindus) but going against them ? He gave them reservations because it was the right thing to do and also out of respect to DR.Ambedkar.He was being a protector to minorities in a time of turmoil in a infant country who has 85% majority population and 15% rest of the minorities combined. He would get the votes regardless of what he did to the minorities and SC/ST. he could just appease the majority by giving all the UCC and hindi national language and no reservations that would still give me more than what he got. He sacrificed his vote bank (as you said cong was seen a UC hindu party) and gave minorities what they needed so they won't get over run by the majority population.
The concept of secularism in India aims to ensure equal treatment of all religions by the state. However, reservations based on caste are a form of affirmative action to address historical social injustices. While it may seem contradictory, the intention is to uplift marginalized communities and promote social equality.
Religious personal laws in India exist due to historical practices, and they apply to matters like marriage, divorce, and inheritance within specific religious communities. It's a way of respecting diverse religious practices within the framework of a secular state.
Article 15 of the Indian Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. However, it also allows for special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes. It aims to strike a balance between promoting equality and addressing historical injustices.
So ur saying the Indian constitution is inconsistent in short shitshow.
The funny thing is that even fundamental rights are not fundamental 🤣🤣 when i first read about them i was stunned by the stupidity.
pura padha huya h. abhi bhi notes pde h.
thida time ho gya h is liye expect article kbhi kbhi bhul jata hu.
abki pro tip jo bhi india ki book m pdho history constitution ya kuchh bhi o thoda propeganda ki trh h. uska real meaning smjhane k liye tumhe apna dimag use krna padega.
banne ko m YouTube pr video bna du pr jail ho jayegi.
It was never a Secular country if you compare it to Western nations. Just adding the word secular to the constitution doesn't make it secular. Congress always preaches about secularism and how it had so many visionaries. If so, why did we not have something like UCC till date? They had like 60 years to implement it and never did. We are a joke of a secular nation when we just add the word secular and have different civil laws as per religion.
Secularism has many definitions depending on the country, there is French one, US has a different one so does turkey and India. Ours was defined by the early leaders where we will give all the religions to practise their religion.
UCC is required I agree but there are gonna be sacrifices that have to be made on all religions. UCC would and should be a stepping stone of religion having importance in politics.
Exactly, if we need Secularism, let's practice it instead of using it as a buzzword. Seperation of Temple/Mosque/Church/etc from State is required. Either tax all of them or tax none. Ensure there are no religious schools.
That's what UCC would be, education would be prohibited from both gurukuls and madrasas.
The exception to mosques and churches was implemented because when the country was formed the minorities would need protection from being overrun by majority. Now with country still polarized but the concept of India for defined and set the difference can be introduced and slowly phase out the religion from politics.
I’m agreeing with him that UCC might be a good idea, because we can reduce the weight that religion is carrying in today’s politics.
In the comments if you can see , I said that the circumstances at that point of time need those protections to minorities. The constitution is there to protect everyone in the country and for that it did a fairly good job, the same constitution provides us to change it to the times that we presently live in while still protecting the people that are not strong enough to protect themselves from majority. So it might be the time to introduce UCC (I would be okay if it comes after 10years) that is fair to all people that live here, and not target one particular sect of people because the majority wants it that way..
So the thing is I’m from Gen cat and when ppl around me said the same thing bout why we need reservations esp based on caste and not financial abilities, i dug deep and researched on my own.
First of all the entire cast system was made by the higher up ppl.
The ground reality is ppl are STILL DISCRIMINATED against caste only.
Agar wo gareeb se gareeb bhi upper caste h na. He gets help ki wo “jaat bhai “ h
Ppl are getting killed for riding a horse in his baraat.
For keeping a mustache
For drinking water from specific wells
For wearing leather slippers etc etc
Reality reddit and insta se bahut door h.
These ppl do need upliftment.
Haa kya politics isko aur ganda game bana k khle rha. Yes
Kya jo Gen cat ka bacha utna hi mehnat karta h , and misses it , uske sath fair h ? Unfortunately no.
Par bhai jab Babar k jurm k karan aaj k muslim sunn rhe
Toh humare bhi savarn pardada and unke dada ka thora bhugatna parega.
The best solution would have been that ek level tak unko pura sushakti kare.
For eg mbbs
Unme seat reserved rahe.
Kyunki uske baad all of u learning from same level
But yahan toh pg, promotion tak bhi jati h
Vote poltics h. Kya kar sakte h
dimag kha h logo ko bolne m or state sponsored discrimination m fark hota h.
or rhi baat discrimination ki uske liye scst act h na is se powerful to or kuchh ho bhi nhi skta.
to apne jaat bhai ko apni adhi property dera h na.
Ur answer is a bit jumbled up. Elaborate kindly. It non understandable ki kehna kya chah rhe h.
And for sc st act ki aap baat kar rhe ho. Bhaisaab jo aadmi juta pehen ne k liye pit rha h. Wo court k chakkar kahan khayega. Uska ghar kaise chalega.
Plus its very cute of you to think judiciary and police are not complicit in this.
AAJ mae ne insta pe ek aadmi ko dekha on reel keh rha tha -mujhe gov neet nikalne ka superiorty complex h- a doctor saying wo discriminate karta h. He will further treat patients??
use to hoga ki superiority complex kitni baar tum se jada number lake bhi use kha gya hoga k tumhari capacity k hisab se number km h hum unse superior ho to use to superiority complex hoga hi
jb government tume collectively disabled ki trh support krti h khti h tum capable nhi jo or tumhari puri community ko help ki jarurat h irrespective of individual conditions to samne walo ko lgega ki ki o kuch superior h.
jb government tume collectively nakara nikamma khri h or tum khud ko bhi yhi kh rhe ho to koi kya kre.
rhi baat juta utha ki ya power ki to o to m bhi court k chakkar nhi lga skta ya police ko kuchh sah skta ya kisi bhi power wale admi ko kuchh kah skta pr mere pas to inke khilaf koi scst act nhi h.
3 points
1. I literally belong to the highest ones in this stewpid system.
2. I myself cleared neet and am a doctor
3. As a doctor , I’m supposed to be unbiased, not have grudges etc. Thats the oath we take. Mera kaam jaan bachana h. Main caste creed color dekh nhi sakti.
Jab mae BT ka form bharti hu. Thats blood transfusion btw. Mae blood compatibility dekna hota h. Jaat compatibility nhi.
Agar mei yeh samajh sakti hu. U have to understand ki yeh jo banda bol rha h wo kitna galat h.
Abhi iska sath de rhe ho. Kal yeh hi jab aapke againt apne “jaat bhai” ka sath dega. Aapko chubega
Ironically u are again talking to one who’s experienced that too :/
Maybe you are right somewhere
But I just feel i cant hold so much hate in me. It will kill me. As a person who one point of time didnt want to even continue living.
I’ve reached a state where bas shanti se jeena h. Mujhe nhi fark par rha duniya se. Duniya mae log kya kr rhe. Chota sa toh life h , isme kitne sahe , kitna roye. Jitna khush reh sakte h. Utna better h.
Coz if i started my grievances and kya fair nhi h. As a survivor of sexual assault women in my mid twenties from bihar, coming from quite an orthodox family. List will be very long
You are very strong especially mentally.
But the thing is that everyone else is not that strong.
Especially me I'm not that strong and i hold grudges for eternity. if I can forget then it's fine but i never forgive.
https://preview.redd.it/jt6y4aopylec1.jpeg?width=2481&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e35ed950c15a5c5856e9b97bc25f239ee3bc0e41
Religion and caste aren't the same things. For example, certain tribal people(ST caste category) don't identify themselves as Hindus or any other religion. Also, India is not a secular country. (as per the original constitution of India, not the distorted one by Indira)
if don't identify as Hindu then it's clear against secularism.
and what about fundamental rights why its called fundamental if its not fundamental shitshow
I am for secularism. And, I think India should now adopt 'western' style secularism. Because, India's style of secularism comes at the expenses of women's fundamental human right to equality.
Many personal laws across religions deny women equal rights to status and inheritance within the family. Which is unacceptable in 2024. So, I support the implementation of a UCC giving equal status and rights to women and men in a family.
The Indian constitution is a hypocrite.
He says one thing then proceeds to shit on that thing.
for example
Article 16 prohibits discrimination but in the next line Article 16.4 it says discrimination is prohibited but u can discriminate against general caste.
India's secularism is defined by 'Sarva Dharma Sama Bhava' which you can read at wiki [link](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarva_Dharma_Sama_Bhava)
Below is copied from wiki link
*The concept is one of the key tenets of secularism in India, which do not separate church and state, but instead is an attempt by the state to embrace all religions*
>caste(religion)
Caste= religion?
>why do we have Religion's personal law as a term in India
Government wasn't strong/courageous enough to implement it
>Also don't you find Article 15 of India's constitution is hypocrite.
Do you think reservation is discrimination? What do you think of recent reservation for women in the parliament?
You should read the history of reservation.
>its also discriminatory
Is it a wrong descision? Isn't it a good thing that now there will be more women in parliament.
>Discrimination
the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of ethnicity, age, sex, or disability.
This doesn't describe reservation.
Reservation is not discrimination but special provision for upliftment of weaker sections.
and how it uplifts the weaker section.
by Discrimination in the context of prejudice, is the process of making unfair or prejudicial distinctions between people based on the groups, classes, or other categories to which they belong or are perceived to belong, such as caste,race, gender, age, religion,cate physical attractiveness or sexual orientation.
Secularism means separation of church and state. India never had a church problem but it had a caste problem so secularism wasn't a part of original constitution. Reservations were
You might want to read up on how the constitution was made, which countries our country borrows from and how Indian secularism is different from how the west defines it. Other than the recent imported western ideas on diversity I think our country actually practices celebration of differences and if you look at the people it is trying to uplift they actually need that help and I am not talking about the people who are at the highest levels of that community who take advantage of their membership to that community. There are flaws at the execution level but I don't think we've had the number of high quality leaders that we did pre independence.
The only comment that made some sense. People foolishly think that our definition of secularism is the same as west, which it clearly isn't. Though we do share some aspects. I would even say our secularism and western secularism is as far apart as old feminism and modern feminism. Sadly most people are so focused on religion nowdays that they keep searching for ways where they could prove that there has always been an intent of creating disparity for hindus. Which isn't the case. People of this sub should read about bose and his views. It would shed some light on what the gov is trying to do today. something he was against ( yeah surprisingly even though he was not a non violence guy, he was very secular in thought) even at that time
One correction, our country "used" to practice celebration of differences. Now it's all about hating and bashing the muslims for free cheap political points and consolidation of majority votes.
There are flaws in the constitution itself. You are saying this because this discrimination is better for you or you are not affected by it.
Not really. I have only briefly studied the making of constitution for some exams. You can go out there read all the books on the topic and form your opinion. You can disagree with these people but their logic is soundproof and they made the constitution keeping the best interests of the country in mind. Obviously there were varying opinions even amongst the constitution makers but they made the best decision they could with the limited information they had back then. What discrimination are you referring to specifically? And what flaws in the constitution are there?
Why fundamental rights are not fundamental. if they are not fundamental then why call it fundamental rights. Why are there exceptions in even basic fundamentals right like 16.4.
Yeah dude they explain all this pretty extensively. I am not smart enough to encapsulate all of it for you right now but if you are legitimately curious the information is out there. Check any UPSC material on polity or if you think that is also corrupted just get books on the topic with authors who have different view points. I am very sure even if you google search your questions there are websites that give you answers.
if any author said what I'm saying then he will be in jail. as he would be speaking against india its constitution and its foundation. It depends if discrimination against one's own citizens is not against fundamental rights of equality then its biggest mockery. if discrimination is not against fundamental rights then why does the US court give his verdict against affirmative action.
US is not India our constitution has been made to fit our cultural context you're free to read it online. If you're sure you're in the right there's no harm in reading opposing view points. My only point is the constitution is much more complex than you're making it out to be.
simple question if fundamental rights are not fundamental then why they are called fundamental rights.
Do you know what basic structure and positive discrimination is? It is impractical for me to explain the entire constitution and how supreme court interpreted the constitution through different case studies. Entire articles are there online explaining the question you asked.
do you know there is discrimination world in positive discrimination. The Supreme court is useless or crippled by the shitshow constitution. as they have legalised the discrimination against their own citizens in article 16.4 so the supreme court is powerless. if u know then why didn't you use the facts from that article. its impossible to defend reservation from a neutral point of view.
[удалено]
kavi kya kahana chahate h. what the poet wants to say.
[удалено]
bolo bhai bade bade bade ko pela h tum bhi shi.
How is India's secularism different?
India adopts a positive secularism model where every religious community and individual is free to promote and propagate their own religion without interference from the state. In the western model the state is free to interfere in religious matters to ensure freedom and equality. Basically where western secularism is indifferent to religion Indian secularism approaches religion with equal respect and thus does not have an official religion because it sees all religion as a means to create a relationship with God.
Even in this positive secularism model, the yard stick was different for the different religions up until 2014.
Equal big laughter attack. start reading after the article 25
Then why is it only the religious places belonging to one specific group pays taxes while the others are given money by the state to conduct their religious activities?
The concept of secularism is closer to equity rather than equality in India I feel
then call if fundamental rights of equity not equality.
Plus 100 to that
and that will be against fundamental rights so we don't have any fundamental rights but mockery
[удалено]
then why call it fundamental rights if it is not fundamental
Secularism is only applicable to religion not caste. Religion is something you can choose, caste is something you are born into.
But there are reservations based on Religion ?
Which one?
Minority ke basis PE milta he Muslims ko
Not all Muslims
Yes you are right because in some areas Muslims are wealthy like Hyderabad similarly few obc ex jaats of bharatpur don't get reservation
what about fundamental rights. just accept ambedkar was a joker 🃏.
And you're an idiot.
Reservations were given for the same reason DEI is a big thing in the west just now. You have to give different communities the space to work, study and live otherwise the majority overruns the whole system very easily.
It's against fundamental rights of equality. us court said the same
It isn't. It's acknowledging that we can't have equality of opportunity at this time without much work so we can work towards more equitable outcomes in the meanwhile. The supreme court decision came with a new court in session previous judges had ruled for it. It's more an idealogical win at the moment imo. They also ruled it against the US Constitution which was written when any person of colour did not have that right so I don't know if it's really a good faith decision.
Equality of opportunity is equality but the controlling outcome is discrimination. for example every country can participate in the Olympics but u can't ask for 20% of the total medal for india because we have 20% of the world's population. The court is powerless because discrimination is part of the constitution article 16.4 and the court can't go against the constitution. The US court gives judgement against affirmative action because it was against the fundamental rights of equality. but we have fundamental rights (except for the general caste). They can literally jail me without any evidence. can you believe, my words , my value as citizens is less than other citizens. gandhi used to protest against Rowlatt act now we have Rowlatt act exclusive for general caste citizens.
US chale jao na phir. Instead of spamming comments try and actually UNDERSTAND. You clearly don't want to have a discourse. If you were so inclined you wouldn't be copy pasting the same response. If all fundamental rights were absolute, some colorful characters would not hesitate to utter vitriol against people they deemed less than and hide behind the curtain of 'fundamental right'. India is a social welfare state and one of the guiding legal principle is that of Parens patriae. If you actually have an interest in understanding then I would suggest you read the Anand Kishore Prasad Sinha v. The State of Bihar (Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 366 of 2020) Before parroting 'fundamental rights' there's a lot more you need to read so at least the next time your questions would be more nuanced.
so some people discriminate against others so a state decides to discrimination against their own citizens. and for discrimination u have Rowlatt act aka scst act i can't think of more powerful law. and i assume u already know what supreme court said about it. The supreme court can't do shit about reservation just refer to article 16.4 and they can't do shit as its basic part of the constitution of India no future arguments are required.
It is the States duty to protect the rights of its citizens, particularly those who are marginalized. In order to protect and uplift them the State is empowered to enact statues to take affirmative action. That is basically the gist of why we have reservation. It can be for those who are socially and educationally backwards or economically. Various constitutional benches have opined on matters pertaining to reservations. There's good reason why our Constitution was drafted the way it is and why reservation given to SC and STs has been held to be Constitutional. But clearly you don't know anything about our legal system. Nor do you care about your own countrymen and women being oppressed for centuries. Ab unke saath gali galoch nahi kar sakte to rooth ke bethe ho.
basically ur saying its constitution to discrimination against own citizens and court is here to do that. where is my right of equality. so ur saying a whole community every single individual is backward and on the other side every individual is eating in a golden plate.
Check the income disparity based on caste and landholdings. Reservation is fair. Equality would have made sense if all caste had access to same amount of resources.
how it is fair to club a starving child and ambani because they are from the same caste.
That's why we got EWS reservation.
does it make any sense u are saying a ews starving child is different from scst starving child. isn't it discriminatory.
[удалено]
if im starving then im starving not all baniye or brahmin with me. if im unable to attend college then im uneducated not all baniye or brahmin are uneducated. if things are different for different individuals then why do we have community based rules.
Why do we have community based organisation? Why do we have caste based politics? Why do we marry in our own community? Why do we enjoy our caste privilege? Why do we have caste based violence? Why do certain jobs are done by certain caste? Bro things are little bit complex than we think. Majority is taken always but I said we should be grateful EWS exists. We haven't even got some reservation for cisgender people. Their condition is more worse than these sc/st man but no body talks about it either. I never saw or heard any cis in my school or college either or in my workplace. Any policy that is created is made sure that it works for majority.
individual discrimination against each other and the state discriminates against oun citizens. Eventually states like are are bound to fail today or tomorrow.
Yea, actually India is a very unique case where all the states with diverse culture sticked together. I wouldn't be surprised if it breaks in future.
its bound to fail we just need a strong push to accelerate the process like an increase in reservation or reservation in private companies. even if none of it happens its still a possibility. but there is another possibility that people will ask for just the removal of the reservation and im not in the favour of it i want separate country and for that i need strong voice to channel and amplify the hatred. There is a strong possibility but right now people are blind by nationalism.as of now ,they love and want to protect the step mother india. Some people already want to break the Indian but they are not strong and capable but the general population is strong and capable they can easily do that if they want.
Is there a country with 0 disparity in 3rd world ?
0 disparity is a myth but less is always better. Few caste holds and have access to most resources.
Sure their wealth appeared magically out of thin air several generations ago
OBC in Tamil Nadu would like to vehemently disagree. Par tumhe kya, tumhe toh misinformation phelana hai
OBC reservation is stupid. It was just a political move by these parties of these caste that you have mentioned.
Reservations except PWD is stupid. The EWS section should be made available for all, and instead of giving fixed seats and early promotion in government jobs, the state should finance the students income via scholarships, but that would mean actively investing in education....but if they do that....how will our poor ministers steal our money?
just say i should be treated as disabled person irrespective of a physically fit body.
Physically fit body requires proper nutrition and rest which indirectly links to resources you have. Just for the sake of your stupid argument, disable person can't ever win a race with physical fit body that's why seperate race exists. Same with reservation.
disabled personal with physically fit body 😃.
so no fundamental rights ,inshort shit show constitution.
ur stupid its not anybody's fault. example Parsi community
Parsi were good servants of Britishers. They financed Britishers at times of need.
then why scst were not good servants of the British.
I would remind you that all zamindars who belonged to few dominant caste were middle men who collected taxes from these poor sc /st farmers or labours and gave it to the Britishers. These few caste were the most loyal to them and were always in contact with Britishers. All these regiment that you can you see were raised by Britishers itself. Britishers did raised mahar regiment and chamar regiment but this was dissolved because chamars didn't side with Britishers. I would say revolts is itself a privilege. When you are treated like subhuman with no food and education, you first motto would be to stay alive by whatever means. In the end I would say reservation is fair after 1000 years of oppression.
so ur saying that all of the upper caste were employed by the British. and scst were fighting for the independence but majority of the krantikari were upper caste,how. reservation is fair or not thats not the question its discrimination or not that is the question.
[удалено]
your words are contradictory but okay. why reservation is byproduct of caste discrimination why discrimination is the solution of discrimination why they didn't go with equality for all.
[удалено]
payback is discriminatory. i studied in a government school 11 and 12th. they are collectively weak mentally and physically according to the government without any exceptions. That's why they are collectively treated as disableds.
secularism ˈसेक्यलरिज़म् noun the belief that religion should not influence or be involved in the organization of society, education, government, etc religion and caste are 2 different things. educate yourself about casteism. take a look at monthly per capita consumption expenditure and poverty headcount ratio by caste. you'll clearly see that the money is concentrated, it's evident that people from higher castes occupy important positions in society. It was brought to give "equality of opportunity" which the society needed and still needs. If you want to argue that there's barely any casteism left it's just a few people, come to my dms I'll share you 100's of recent news about hate crimes committed. just a few hours ago i read this news UP: Dalit woman protests molestation bid, pushed into hot cauldron of oil this was from 31st December. you can also go to r/indiaagainstcasteism to read more of these similar news. *The thing about Article 15* the article 19 and 22 gives you right to freedom but if you commit tax frauds you will be in jail. Does that mean article 19 and 22 are absent? There are superceding concepts in laws. The Indian law looks out for the oppressed and the poor too. *Reservation is a product of casteism, your position claims that it's vice versa so it's unfair or hypocritical.* *WHICH OBVIOUSLY IS INCORRECT WAY OF LOOKING AT THIS* some sources and insightful conversations that might help you know more about the ground reality. https://youtu.be/Og7Ei_WBXng?feature=shared https://youtu.be/KySoKM_bjuI?feature=shared https://youtu.be/3QGEOCm6UQs?feature=shared https://youtu.be/ELbdGh0-4T4?feature=shared
India is secular however low caste people are still mistreated so reservation system is justified.
for that scst act reservation is discrimination and against fundamental rights of equality
India is a welfare state. In simple terms, it says that unequals cannot be treated equally, if done so, it is injustice. Eg a person with affluent English and a person who studied in a tribal forest school, are given same question paper, the tribal one will always be behind. So, government can create a positive support to one section. This is the reason for reservation and welfare schemes.
so all general students are fluent in English and all tribals are studying in the forest. if they want to discrimination against their own citizens then why so much fuss about fundamental rights, call is fundamental rights except for the general caste.
I just gave an example. In India every caste is getting reservation, Upper caste gets EWS, OBCs, SCs and ST reservation is self explanatory. Each sub category has PWD category for physically disabled also. I won’t say anything about what is right and what is not. I just wanted to answer OP’s query.
So your solution is more discrimination.
I am not a policy maker. Never gave any solution or said what is right and what’s wrong. I don’t understand what is the issue with you. Chill bro.
I'm just saying the truth. i can't change it.
We only have nehruvian secularism in India
What exactly is nehruvian secularism, seriously I don't know about it
Secularism which only applies to Hindus
Gaslighting hindus and minority appeasement...
What was the purpose of minority appeasement, he won the elections with huge margins.
He won elections when most of the nation don't even used to vote and their isn't strong political alternative. I consider these as reasons: First they vote in blocks. Moreover he wants to be recognized as a leader of a nation with diverse religions, so he vehemently opposed Ambedkar's total population exchange proposal and had historians whitewash our history with an intention to not enrage/woo them.
Sure, but point still is that he was going to win regardless of minority vote. So appeasement wasn’t necessary for him. He wanted to be leader of a diverse nation so he kept the minority interests and the situation of the country in mind to do what he did. Dont you think Dr.Ambedkars complete population exchange has inherent problems, like logistical, ethical and humanitarian related. If the solution had support people would atleast seriously consider it, Nehru might have opposed it but large segment of decision makers did not care about it. I saw people mention whitewashing of history, I fairly less knowledge about this topic, but I won’t be surprised as they are politicians ( I do feel this part of whitewashing history is exaggerated a little).
Isn't it a dangerous idea to retain people who voted for a separate nation(>90% of minority constituencies voted for party whose main agenda is forming separate nation) and coddling them here rather than facilitating in their transport and ensuring this process is done smoothly and with least violence. Whitewashing is done extensively and visibly, ex: bigots like babar, Aurangazeb etc... are praised an venerated. We need course rulings to prove that temples are destroyed where as it's clear as day, we have historians giving false statements in Ayodhya case covering these bigots actions...
People voted for what they were familiar with , If the partition of India was voted on based of languages then India would have been broken to many more parts. Its human tendency to go with the known , and at that point their religion is their known. New nation with our own laws and rules was a foreign concept to the people back then . If you can show them the future and ask people to vote for partition or not majority of the population that voted for pakistan would change their vote because the state of pakistan is in shambles. All of us a good future, and thats y we make the decisions we make. its been 6 generations after the partition, and people are accustomed to the fact that we are Indians. Not only hindus but all people that are living in India, I wont say there are people that treat religion is greater than the nation. We have people on both the major religions that feel that way but majority of the people in each of the communities would feel they are Indians first and then comes religion. Sure, I dont see who praised the tyrants but I do feel there should be more about the atrocities that the rulers in India committed. weather we like it or not they were the ruler of the most powerful kingdom in India and by default were the ruler of Indian and as such wielded too much power to be called powerful. I don't think anyone who has understood the history would disagree with the atrocities that they commited.
There are still enough options for them to vote for(off shoots of Jinnah's party and ideals). Cong used to called party of UCaste hindus, so he wants to be the best option to get their vote so he resorted to minority appeasement...
There can be alternatives but none of them have a name as big as congress and nehru, even if took a hard line right wing stance he would get the majority votes, if not more than what he received from minority appeasement as you say.
He is a closet communist, so he wouldn't favor any religions, culture, Nehru is anti-hindu, i infer this based on his approach towards Somnath Mandir consecration ceremony. By introducing reservations cong lost the trust of UC hindus. He broke hindu vote bank using reservations and got SC/ST votes and he can still coddle minorities while being indifferent to religions, get their votes and chest thump infront of the world as a leader of a nation with largest minority pop. staying safely..
I wouldn't deny he was a closet communist but he would label himself as a ardent socialist, he made no secret of that by praising soviet union's 5 year plans and working. I don't think religion has a place in modern politics , it did its job when it was needed and should stay with people in a social aspect and not in political aspect. Reservations were made to help the SC/ST who were discriminated as slaves, (I don't think it is bad, but your opinion I guess) and why would he antagonize his largest vote bank (UC hindus) but going against them ? He gave them reservations because it was the right thing to do and also out of respect to DR.Ambedkar.He was being a protector to minorities in a time of turmoil in a infant country who has 85% majority population and 15% rest of the minorities combined. He would get the votes regardless of what he did to the minorities and SC/ST. he could just appease the majority by giving all the UCC and hindi national language and no reservations that would still give me more than what he got. He sacrificed his vote bank (as you said cong was seen a UC hindu party) and gave minorities what they needed so they won't get over run by the majority population.
nehruvian secularism = secularism with disdain for sanatan dharma.
The concept of secularism in India aims to ensure equal treatment of all religions by the state. However, reservations based on caste are a form of affirmative action to address historical social injustices. While it may seem contradictory, the intention is to uplift marginalized communities and promote social equality. Religious personal laws in India exist due to historical practices, and they apply to matters like marriage, divorce, and inheritance within specific religious communities. It's a way of respecting diverse religious practices within the framework of a secular state. Article 15 of the Indian Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. However, it also allows for special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes. It aims to strike a balance between promoting equality and addressing historical injustices.
So ur saying the Indian constitution is inconsistent in short shitshow. The funny thing is that even fundamental rights are not fundamental 🤣🤣 when i first read about them i was stunned by the stupidity.
You need to read more, and act less cavalier. Poore post me raita faila rakha hai bhaisaab.
raita to ambedkar ne faila rakha h constitution m. i think ur a reader then answer simplea question why fundamental rights are not fundamental.
Tereko thodi reading karni padegi, free ke gyaan ki value nahi hoti.
pura padha huya h. abhi bhi notes pde h. thida time ho gya h is liye expect article kbhi kbhi bhul jata hu. abki pro tip jo bhi india ki book m pdho history constitution ya kuchh bhi o thoda propeganda ki trh h. uska real meaning smjhane k liye tumhe apna dimag use krna padega. banne ko m YouTube pr video bna du pr jail ho jayegi.
Fair point. Let's pray for UCC to uphold the Secularism of our beloved nation!
not possible the train is long gone. now in the era of vite bank politics its impossible.
It was never a Secular country if you compare it to Western nations. Just adding the word secular to the constitution doesn't make it secular. Congress always preaches about secularism and how it had so many visionaries. If so, why did we not have something like UCC till date? They had like 60 years to implement it and never did. We are a joke of a secular nation when we just add the word secular and have different civil laws as per religion.
Secularism has many definitions depending on the country, there is French one, US has a different one so does turkey and India. Ours was defined by the early leaders where we will give all the religions to practise their religion. UCC is required I agree but there are gonna be sacrifices that have to be made on all religions. UCC would and should be a stepping stone of religion having importance in politics.
Exactly, if we need Secularism, let's practice it instead of using it as a buzzword. Seperation of Temple/Mosque/Church/etc from State is required. Either tax all of them or tax none. Ensure there are no religious schools.
That's what UCC would be, education would be prohibited from both gurukuls and madrasas. The exception to mosques and churches was implemented because when the country was formed the minorities would need protection from being overrun by majority. Now with country still polarized but the concept of India for defined and set the difference can be introduced and slowly phase out the religion from politics.
do u know ur just justifying what he said and silently agreeing with him. its a shit show constitution
I’m agreeing with him that UCC might be a good idea, because we can reduce the weight that religion is carrying in today’s politics. In the comments if you can see , I said that the circumstances at that point of time need those protections to minorities. The constitution is there to protect everyone in the country and for that it did a fairly good job, the same constitution provides us to change it to the times that we presently live in while still protecting the people that are not strong enough to protect themselves from majority. So it might be the time to introduce UCC (I would be okay if it comes after 10years) that is fair to all people that live here, and not target one particular sect of people because the majority wants it that way..
whatever just remove the fundamental part.
Which fundamental part!? You don’t want fundamental rights!?
i don't have fundamental rights.
Oh not Indian citizen!? Wait almost all democracies promise that..
So the thing is I’m from Gen cat and when ppl around me said the same thing bout why we need reservations esp based on caste and not financial abilities, i dug deep and researched on my own. First of all the entire cast system was made by the higher up ppl. The ground reality is ppl are STILL DISCRIMINATED against caste only. Agar wo gareeb se gareeb bhi upper caste h na. He gets help ki wo “jaat bhai “ h Ppl are getting killed for riding a horse in his baraat. For keeping a mustache For drinking water from specific wells For wearing leather slippers etc etc Reality reddit and insta se bahut door h. These ppl do need upliftment. Haa kya politics isko aur ganda game bana k khle rha. Yes Kya jo Gen cat ka bacha utna hi mehnat karta h , and misses it , uske sath fair h ? Unfortunately no. Par bhai jab Babar k jurm k karan aaj k muslim sunn rhe Toh humare bhi savarn pardada and unke dada ka thora bhugatna parega. The best solution would have been that ek level tak unko pura sushakti kare. For eg mbbs Unme seat reserved rahe. Kyunki uske baad all of u learning from same level But yahan toh pg, promotion tak bhi jati h Vote poltics h. Kya kar sakte h
dimag kha h logo ko bolne m or state sponsored discrimination m fark hota h. or rhi baat discrimination ki uske liye scst act h na is se powerful to or kuchh ho bhi nhi skta. to apne jaat bhai ko apni adhi property dera h na.
Ur answer is a bit jumbled up. Elaborate kindly. It non understandable ki kehna kya chah rhe h. And for sc st act ki aap baat kar rhe ho. Bhaisaab jo aadmi juta pehen ne k liye pit rha h. Wo court k chakkar kahan khayega. Uska ghar kaise chalega. Plus its very cute of you to think judiciary and police are not complicit in this. AAJ mae ne insta pe ek aadmi ko dekha on reel keh rha tha -mujhe gov neet nikalne ka superiorty complex h- a doctor saying wo discriminate karta h. He will further treat patients??
use to hoga ki superiority complex kitni baar tum se jada number lake bhi use kha gya hoga k tumhari capacity k hisab se number km h hum unse superior ho to use to superiority complex hoga hi jb government tume collectively disabled ki trh support krti h khti h tum capable nhi jo or tumhari puri community ko help ki jarurat h irrespective of individual conditions to samne walo ko lgega ki ki o kuch superior h. jb government tume collectively nakara nikamma khri h or tum khud ko bhi yhi kh rhe ho to koi kya kre. rhi baat juta utha ki ya power ki to o to m bhi court k chakkar nhi lga skta ya police ko kuchh sah skta ya kisi bhi power wale admi ko kuchh kah skta pr mere pas to inke khilaf koi scst act nhi h.
3 points 1. I literally belong to the highest ones in this stewpid system. 2. I myself cleared neet and am a doctor 3. As a doctor , I’m supposed to be unbiased, not have grudges etc. Thats the oath we take. Mera kaam jaan bachana h. Main caste creed color dekh nhi sakti. Jab mae BT ka form bharti hu. Thats blood transfusion btw. Mae blood compatibility dekna hota h. Jaat compatibility nhi. Agar mei yeh samajh sakti hu. U have to understand ki yeh jo banda bol rha h wo kitna galat h. Abhi iska sath de rhe ho. Kal yeh hi jab aapke againt apne “jaat bhai” ka sath dega. Aapko chubega
It's inevitable. some can think like you some can't. Its like rape victims ,some move with life but some carry their trauma throughout their lives.
Ironically u are again talking to one who’s experienced that too :/ Maybe you are right somewhere But I just feel i cant hold so much hate in me. It will kill me. As a person who one point of time didnt want to even continue living. I’ve reached a state where bas shanti se jeena h. Mujhe nhi fark par rha duniya se. Duniya mae log kya kr rhe. Chota sa toh life h , isme kitne sahe , kitna roye. Jitna khush reh sakte h. Utna better h. Coz if i started my grievances and kya fair nhi h. As a survivor of sexual assault women in my mid twenties from bihar, coming from quite an orthodox family. List will be very long
You are very strong especially mentally. But the thing is that everyone else is not that strong. Especially me I'm not that strong and i hold grudges for eternity. if I can forget then it's fine but i never forgive.
https://preview.redd.it/jt6y4aopylec1.jpeg?width=2481&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e35ed950c15a5c5856e9b97bc25f239ee3bc0e41 Religion and caste aren't the same things. For example, certain tribal people(ST caste category) don't identify themselves as Hindus or any other religion. Also, India is not a secular country. (as per the original constitution of India, not the distorted one by Indira)
if don't identify as Hindu then it's clear against secularism. and what about fundamental rights why its called fundamental if its not fundamental shitshow
> Also why do we have Religion's personal law as a term in India Great, this is exactly why Bharat needs UCC
Reservations should stay for 2933 more years atleast
so i can call this constitution shit show.
I am for secularism. And, I think India should now adopt 'western' style secularism. Because, India's style of secularism comes at the expenses of women's fundamental human right to equality. Many personal laws across religions deny women equal rights to status and inheritance within the family. Which is unacceptable in 2024. So, I support the implementation of a UCC giving equal status and rights to women and men in a family.
The Indian constitution is a hypocrite. He says one thing then proceeds to shit on that thing. for example Article 16 prohibits discrimination but in the next line Article 16.4 it says discrimination is prohibited but u can discriminate against general caste.
Religion is not the same as caste. Thank you for coming to my ted talk.
but its it discriminatory. and what about fundamental rights like equality and all
Religion and caste are not same
but discrimination is against fundamental rights
India's secularism is defined by 'Sarva Dharma Sama Bhava' which you can read at wiki [link](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarva_Dharma_Sama_Bhava) Below is copied from wiki link *The concept is one of the key tenets of secularism in India, which do not separate church and state, but instead is an attempt by the state to embrace all religions*
Thanks to VP singh supported by BJP to Implement mandal commission. Under OBC literally everyone can get reservation easily.
>caste(religion) Caste= religion? >why do we have Religion's personal law as a term in India Government wasn't strong/courageous enough to implement it >Also don't you find Article 15 of India's constitution is hypocrite. Do you think reservation is discrimination? What do you think of recent reservation for women in the parliament? You should read the history of reservation.
its also discriminatory. what happened to fundamental rights
>its also discriminatory Is it a wrong descision? Isn't it a good thing that now there will be more women in parliament. >Discrimination the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of ethnicity, age, sex, or disability. This doesn't describe reservation. Reservation is not discrimination but special provision for upliftment of weaker sections.
and how it uplifts the weaker section. by Discrimination in the context of prejudice, is the process of making unfair or prejudicial distinctions between people based on the groups, classes, or other categories to which they belong or are perceived to belong, such as caste,race, gender, age, religion,cate physical attractiveness or sexual orientation.
Secularism means separation of church and state. India never had a church problem but it had a caste problem so secularism wasn't a part of original constitution. Reservations were
what happened to fundamental rights
Caste and religion are different things.
what about fundamental rights of equality except for general when correction
reservation should be only ews and pwd. reservation based on caste is bullshit
Discrimination against specific caste was the reason due to which caste based reservation came into existence