Even that. You think he would advocate the same for Parsis? Why not? IF so, it's based on behavior, not some xenophobic impulse to purity
I'm no longer a libertarian in this case. State has to create a differential status regime - being M or X cannot be 'equal' with being an H
-
-
Sorry. That doesn’t work for me because it alters the character of the State I envisage. it is completely unsamskritic to my understanding
-
Your understanding is ahistorical. Dharma/samskar requires craftiness, a Machiavellian attitude for the social good.
-
Then we’re back to step 1. Identifying the problem. We see it differently. Hence I see it as self-defeating in these times to create an
-
outcaste caste - as it were - of M and X. In the modern world this won’t work well for us.
-
The 'modern world' is not an abstract construct. Machinations and fissures are exploited by Western NGOs. Have to throw them out first.
-
In any case, you can be creative yourself - go on think up how to 'solve' this problem.
-
I will always favour absorption and retain the very Indic ability to co-existence with the other. Ofc react in times when co-existence is
-
breached by the other. That’s a natural law anyway. Not really so much of a strategy or a tactic.
- 12 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.