Hacker News Reader

Why you try to repeat the Indian government propaganda. Just make one correction first Bangladesh is a secular nation like India with Muslim majority. This is the wisdom and adherence to secularism of India’s administration during that time (not sure but it was Indira Gandhi at that time, who insisted that Bangladesh should be a secular country like India, after it was freed by Indian military). This was overturned by ordinances for a short while but than those ordinances were termed illegal by Sheikh Hasina. So before claiming about Bangladesh as Islamic country get your facts correct, as it stands for more than a decade it’s a secular country.

A persecuted person is persecuted irrespective of religion. CAA could have made it clear keeping India’s secular fabric intact, but it didn’t . As the current administration is bent upon making India a religious dictatorship, this is used as backdoor for that idea. NRC+CAA combined is like a rocket and a war head, making it a missile to launch an all out attack to weed out Muslims from India. So the intentions were nefarious with this act.

This has been declared repeatedly by current Indian government many times that they will conduct NRC nationwide, so the fears of Muslims are genuine. May be it will be nice if you read the bill yourself and see if they used the term Muslim anywhere in it.

> Bangladesh is a secular nation like India with Muslim majority.

"Bangladesh Constitution establishes Islam as the state religion" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Banglad...

Persecution of religious Minorities in Bangladesh - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Banglad...

Please don’t be a Wikipedia warrior, read the whole article and related links as well, get the information correct first. Ziaur Rehman tried to change secularism as fundamental tenet of constitution in Bangladesh, which is restored by Bangladesh’s Supreme Court [1].

Hope India’s Supreme Court can stand up to this current government’s religious dictatorship and uphold India’s secularism. At present they are postponing it until Jan 22, let’s see.

[1] https://zeenews.india.com/news/south-asia/bangladeshs-court-...

Persecuted muslims have more than 50 islamic countries to go to. Persecuted Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Hindus have only India.

> Persecuted Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Hindus have only India.

Get your facts right before claiming something. For Buddhists India is not a good country as refugee, Dalai Lama and others have been in India for over 40 years, they are still considered as refugee not given passports, they travel as stateless (they are persecuted buddhist with evidence and proof). Top 10 places by population for buddhists in the world are China, Thailand, Myanmmar, Japan, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Korea. [1]

For Hindu's it's the same story. Tamil Hindus persecuted in Sri Lanka who came to India are still stateless and are considered refugees, so India failed to even help Hindus. Also for your information following are the places with large Hindu Population Indonesia, Nepal, Malaysia, Bangladesh (it's a secular country), Sri Lanka [2].

So don't claim they don't have a place to go as India itself rejected Tamil Hindus and did not grant them any rights and this CAA still excludes them, because it will deteriorate India's relations with Sri Lanka.

India has the second highest population of Muslim's in the world, higher then Pakistan according to Pew Research [3]. Being a secular country it has to give equal status to any prosecuted individual irrespective of religion. So this NRC+CAA is against the very idea of India and principles of its foundations.

Hopefully instead of this government driven propaganda people look at real numbers will notice that the whole exercise of NRC+CAA is done with malicious intent, there is nothing good in it with dates set arbitrarily.

This is done by learning from British system of dividing India along Muslim and Hindu to stay as authoritative power as long as possible.

[1] http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/bstatt10.htm

[2] https://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/world-top-ten-coun...

[3] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/01/the-countri...

If India is not a good place, then why Dalai Lama is staying in India, he could have gone to some other countries.

Buddhists who came from Tibet considers China have occupied their place, neither did these guys ever ask for Indian citizenship, When Dalai Lama goes to other place, he does it that way because to be an example indicating China have occupied their land and it rightfully belongs to them.

One cannot get a citizenship of a country and ask for a country from another country.

As an Indian we would be more than happy to have such people.

Next regarding Tamil Hindus of Srilanka, Many people from SriLanka live here in TamilNadu.

Nobody is denying them in India, They don't want to loose their land in SriLanka. If they come to India, they need to start from scratch, which is painful for anybody.

> If India is not a good place, then why Dalai Lama is staying in India, he could have gone to some other countries.

This place is part of his own country historically called south Tibet, read Simla accord [1]. It was the ingenious diplomacy of Nehru to let China accept the McMahon line in 1962 war settlement, instead of using airplanes to fight back (at that time India had superior air power, but as new country will suffer tremendously). So in the end China got 阿克赛钦 (Aksai Chin) a dreary icy dessert and India got fertile south Tibet which is present Arunachal Pradesh. People in India might not know this is called to win some you lose some and Nehru is fantastic to see it as a visionary, India still lacks a leader like him and Gandhi.

I hope current leadership in India instead of thumping chest, understand it that to resolve a conflict, war is not the way. Also doing a worship of war machines doesn’t bring peace [2]. Mind and education are the most important tools to win any battle including with oneself, not the demonising of education.

There are protests in Tamil Nadu against the exclusion of Tamil Hindus by local Indians [3] , so again get your facts right before claims.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simla_Accord_(1914)

[2] https://sputniknews.com/asia/201910091076994210-indian-defen...

[3] https://thewire.in/politics/why-lankan-tamils-muslims-exclud...

> Pakistan, Non-Muslim population fell from 23% to 3%.

This is a straight up propaganda and an outright lie [0]. The population of non-Muslims in Pakistan has always hovered around 3.5%.

Census 1951 - 3.4% non-Muslims (oldest)

Census 1998 - 3.7% non-Muslims (newest)

[0]https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/pakistan-bangladesh-no...

Pakistan includes both West Pakistan (currently Pakistan) and East Pakistan (currently Bangladesh)- based on 1947 partiton, until 1971 when India helped Bangladesh gain independence from Pakistan.

Both 'Pakistans' had a responsibility to protect minorities as per Nehru - Liaqat pact, and they both failed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_discrimination_in_Pa...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Banglad...

The fact like people like you exist, suggests India has failed as well.

There was mass forced migration when the partition happened, so there might have lived more than 23% non-Muslims on Pakistan’s territory before.

Certainly, that can’t be used as an argument against persecution of non Muslims - the country didn’t even exist then!

It can, because Jinnah himself had assured all minorities of Pakistan the safety. AFTER partition, the rioting mobs killed and drove out Hindus, later Ahmadiyyas, and more recently Christians.

Just goes to show you the importance of secularism and it's need to be bastioned. Using the same protected grounds under which people seek asylum, to discriminate is inherently unprincipled. All things being equal, non muslims may well have more pressing claims to refugee protections. The merits and priority of a migrants application can be determined without destroying India's secular fabric.

You are mostly right, except the last part where "This Bill is applicable only for illegal immigrants".

The thing is, the Indian government also plans to implement a National Register of Citizens (NRC) in tandem with this bill where all citizens are supposed to prove that they really are "Indian". This diabolical CAB bill now makes the burden of proof for citizenship criteria only applicable to India's Muslim minority by giving an explicit exemption to all non-Muslims.

So yes the bill is innocuously worded but the intent behind it along with the NRC is registrar is mala fide at best and fascist at worst.

OP isn't mostly right. They know what they're saying. It almost reads like a Govt Press Conference where they pretend to be neutral while taking an obviously anti secular decision hoing that nobody catches up with it

Some of you guys are actively flagging my post to support the government disinformation and propaganda on this thread.

Let me repeat: The NRC and CAA need to be read together. When read together you understand how close it is to the Nuremberg laws.

The current Indian government has nothing to offer and is a repressive regime baring its fangs. Companies should be advised to stay clear of the region for a while.

The problem is many have been living for generations without any documentation. How are they supposed to prove?

As clearly said before, If one is living in India for more than 11 years, under CAB they will be considered as Indian citizens.

There are examples of people living in the UK for long enough to be entitled to British citizenship, yet denied it and threatened with deportation because they cannot prove it.

I do not know if that is a reasonable fear in this case because I do not know the general social attitudes in India right now, but how would you relax someone who is scared the same may happen again?

It seems to be pretty much aimed at reducing muslim citizenship, because of how it treats people from different religions and the clear preference for hindu in the government. Do you any response for that? It seems analogous to the us muslim ban.

If a section of society "A" that is oppressed by "B" is being helped by government how is that illogical ? For some reason if that section "A" are Hindus suddenly people claim that to be anti-muslim. Hindus in neighboring counties have no place to go, government of India made that simpler for them to get citizenship because of bad behavior of prominent religions in those counties.

When there's a dominant group (A) that makes laws to help itself because it feels under threat against a much weaker group (B), it's pretty easy to see that A did an unfair and unreasonable thing. In the US this is the current party in power making laws against immigration of Muslims and claiming the 'other' is illegitimate, in India, it is?

And how do you prove that? And after proving, what is the guarantee that it is going to be remembered? What is the guarantee that after it is remembered once, it will be kept that way?

Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed's nephew was left out of the NRC for the second time. We can't even get our electoral rolls correct repeatedly; people who have voted from the same area for 40+ years are left out mysteriously.

Govt itself is denying their own Identifying cards and documents, how can anyone prove that they've lived for 12yrs?

I wonder why such a misleading comment has become a top comment.

> Why segregation based on religion? Because of persecution of minorities in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan.

Well, we have documented evidence of Shri Lankan Hindu Tamils being prosecuted in Shri Lanka. Why are those Hindus not included?

Also if you read this link below, Shia Muslims have been ruled non Muslims. So they r not Muslims acc to Pakistan itself but yet they're not included https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/07/opinion/pakistans-religiou...

> NRC (National Register for Citizens) is aimed at moving illegal immigrants to detention camps or they are free to leave to there actual country. During NRC one(Everybody in India) needs to prove there citizenship. This Bill is applicable only for illegal

Either you are intentionally ignoring that CAA and NRC are going to go hand in hand or you are ill informed.

In NRC everyone has to show documents, that itself is wrong at so many levels. They did this in Assam but they found out that Hindus are being left out of the Registry, and that's why they brought this bill, to leave Muslims out of the NRC. This way, only Muslims will be "illegal migrants" because other non Muslims are going to get citizenship according to CAA

> To whom does this rule apply: Illegal migrants who entered India till 2014.

And how are you going to check of someone is a migrant? Any govt proof won't work and we have to "prove" our parents grandparents documents. India isn't known for documentation is it?

Edit: Family member of a former president was left out od NRC Assam, he was a Muslim.

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/former-president-fakhr...

Religious persecution must be done on State-sanctioned grounds (like an official religion or a theocratic state based on Constitution). Any other persecution could just be a particular party's policies e.g. Tomorrow a Buddhist party could come to power in Bangladesh and persecute, say Jews. That does not have Constitutional sanction. Next week a different party might persecute a different religion.

> Sri Lankan Hindu Tamils being prosecuted in Shri Lanka.

And 4 lakh Hindu Tamils were given asylum in India in past 40 years. Proof - https://twitter.com/PIBHomeAffairs/status/120730426394626867... Currently there is no persecution going on there as civil war is over. If in future, they get ill-treated again, a new version of CAB might be brought.

There have been many instances of citizenship granting based on particular cases throughout India's 70 year post-independence history. This CAB is just one of them. It's neither the first, nor last.

cAB is the first time that a party has selectively handed out citizenship to win Bengal elections and to keep only Muslims out of the NRC. During Assam NRC, Hindus and Muslims both were kept out, so they brought a loophole before the nationwide NRC so that they can hand out citizenship to non Muslims.

> Well, we have documented evidence of Shri Lankan Hindu Tamils being prosecuted in Shri Lanka. Why are those Hindus not included?

> Also if you read this link below, Shia Muslims have been ruled non Muslims. So they r not Muslims acc to Pakistan itself but yet they're not included https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/07/opinion/pakistans-religiou....

The amendment doesn't touch upon linguistic or sectarian oppression. It only deals with religious oppression.

Huh? Are these sects of a religion or are they an independent entity?

To make things clearer:

> Pakistan, Non-Muslim population fell from 23% to 3%.

Mainly because Bangladesh was separated from Pakistan.

> Why segregation based on religion?

India is a secular country. Why is there any mention of religion at all? And, other neighboring islamic countries don't give citizenship automatically if you are Muslim.

> This Bill is applicable only for illegal immigrants(It has got nothing to do with Indian Citizens), If somebody wants to come to India legally, they can come.

Everyone has to prove their citizenship in NRC. The requirements for NRC is ridiculous. Producing documents dating back to 1971. Landless, poor people, people from flood prone areas, tribals and other disenfranchised communities will have tough time producing documents. Only Muslims can not get citizenship through CAA, if they fail to get into NRC. And, what will be the proof of religion? What will happen to Atheists? Does it mean that you either become Hindu or leave country.

Your post is coated with misinformation and propaganda in the guise of informative post.

> NRC (National Register for Citizens) is aimed at moving illegal immigrants to detention camps or they are free to leave to there actual country.

Hmm, so when someone does not have any citizen documents of any country, what is "their actual country"? Or would they in practice be destined for the camps?

What a sham. Saying that "it only applies to illegal immigrants" is bullshit

1. NRC = prove that your ancestors were here before 1951 by records. Which most Indian people (of any religion) can't. So most people will be left out of the citizenship registry.

2. CAA = if you're not a citizen, but a Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, Sikh or Christian, you get citizenship. (excluding Muslims)

So effectively, it says, if you're not Muslim, you get citizenship. If you're Muslim you go to detention camp.

Cut the crap.

The government in power has strategically choose this move to strengthen their vote bank in upcoming elections in Assam[1].

There are other neighbouring countries like Nepal, China, Sri lank, Myanmar etc. where minorities are facing the same level of persecution which is conveniently ignored because they did not find in the current agenda of the government.

For the first time in Indian history, There is a citizenship law which discriminates based on religion.

Talking about NRC. It is going to be yet another blow to already struggling Indian economy after demonetization[2] & poor rollout of GST[3].

With NRC government will make entire population loose hundreds of hours of man power individually by making them go through a bureaucratic, unthoughtful, ill defined process to prove their citizenship. Moreover, NRC has already proven to be a failure when the government executed it[4]

1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Assam

2 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Indian_banknote_demonetis...

3 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goods_and_Services_Tax_(India)

4 - https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-natio...

Assam NRC has cost 1.3 thousand crore and Assam is 3% of the entire population. This government doesn't have funds to run day to day operations (it has delayed payment of taxes to states), where will it bring so much money?

Also why is it needed? Because government could not do any good work. Economy is in a free fall, unemployment rate is highest in 45yrs

This is what makes me more concerned.

Government is taking no interest in solving internal crises which has reached an alarming rate. Economist, Major corporates, industrialist has been raising concerns on the same. Instead, government are finding ways to keep the religion divide alive. What a shame!

They're actually doing what right wing does best. Blame everyone else for their problems and divert attention

They hire thousands of people to stifle anti govt thoughts. Look at the IT cell downvoting anything remotely anti Govt on this thread

[flagged]

It's not a straight up Nazi policy. Can't we have a good faith approach and see. It what you are saying does happens then we can revolt. And we would.

But would it bad to if only the good happens? What's wrong with a bit of optimism?

Because the past actions have left us with no faith in its abilities to act responsibly. In November 2016 the government just woke up one night and declared the highest denominations of Indian currency as illegal tender (not just not legal, but possession of it beyond a set date would be treated with jail time). This was apparently to curb black money. Everyone knew that black money was almost never stored in cash, but in land and real estate. Tonnes of evidence then came up how BJP candidates themselves distributed boxes full of newly monetized notes to the ones they favor. This was during a time when the common man stood in queues at cash points to withdraw their own money only to be rationed a fraction of it due to distribution problems with the newly minted notes.

The effects of this gimmick was the obliteration of the small sector economy throughout the country and is now the backbone of financial crunch the country is facing. Also it completely failed to nail the black money problem it was proposed to solve. Widespread corruption and the BJP candidates themselves made sure that their rich friends cleaned up the money (I got all kinds of acquaintances who did).

We do not live just in the present. My optimism with the current government has eroded by their actions in the past. When such laws alienate an entire community of people by their religion (or skin color or economic status) and we are talking about holding them in detention camps, do we keep calm and let the atrocities begin to unfold or do we protest?

Maybe revolting withing detention camps isn't a good idea?

By that point the protesters are already labelled as illegal and demonized by everyone else.

How about revolting IF and when they try to put you in camps?

Optimism does not mix well with detention camps.

It worked for us when throwing out the Brits in the 40's. So why shouldn't it work now if required?

Let me get your argument straight here: You are saying that because the British tried it and it didn't work that makes it ok to try again? Are you hoping for failure or success here?

Anyway, to address your question:

Because then the British were a small minority, exhausted by WW2 attempting to oppress a large majority who clearly had natural justice on their side.

This time it is a large majority attempting to victimise a smaller minority for a reason which historically has led to wars, genocides and mass killing.

Optimism about religious discrimination of any type seems like a bad thing.