Response http://svaradarajan.com/2014/04/08/votes-and-vengeance/

 Response to
http://svaradarajan.com/2014/04/08/votes-and-vengeance/comment-page-1/#comment-2589


When sickuliars like you peddle fear by calling BJP as demon, your opening quotes on fear fit in equally appropriately.
While you launched yourself on Amit Shah's speech as 'Hate speech' there was one hate speech that eclipsed all, it was ‘boti boti, speech that is completely missing in your message of peace, probably being closer to your ideology. Beni Prasad misses the special mention.Why?

On the topic of Assam infiltration and Modi's comment: Are you saying that there is no infiltration from Bangladesh? Let us move on to the other questions once you answer that. Leave the rhetoric now and focus on substance.  
Amit Shah: I answer your rhetoric question here directly. The action of revenge is by the affected victims against the perpetrators. Revenge against the crimes of SP committed to garner minority vote. Let us hear clearly what your objection is.
While your narration slips to suppositions of who were affected,  focus is the the revenge,  topic that was raised to reverse the injustice of inequality based on religion. The narration should focus on who started it, who committed crimes and who were punished for their crimes. Also, where the lapse in justice crept in due to which the people had to respond to the injustice. When people have to take justice in their hand, it shows the failure of government.
From that perspective, Amit Shah had to address the victims of Muzzafarnagar riots, who were denied justice, the building block of democracy, being equal in the eye of law. The refusal to identify the criminals in the name of religion, the root cause, is not only communal but the first blow against the democratic system, that does not seem to bother you much. It is introduction of nepotism and governance by religious bias, which seems to have escaped your analysis. The question is, is the omission an intentional cover up or sheer incompetence as social commentary. Which one do you chose?
From that perspective of injustice, is it wrong to rouse people who indeed were treated as second class citizen?
Is it wrong to say that the ill-treatment of women and sisters are being judged on the basis of the community that ill-treats? It is not time to avenge those who are bent on destroying democracy? Will it not destroy democracy and lay the foundation of theocracy?
The comment on man living without food and sleep is factually correct. Do you have any opposing view? Having to beg may not lead a person to suicide but the loss of honor does.
Then go on to peddle your lies. Calling spade a spade here. What you termed earlier in the same article as an allegation has been elevated to a fact.
Putting up with such injustices will not bring peace. Destroying these enemies of democracy alone will bring about justice. Peace does not come by calling. It has to be worked at. Amit only asked to work for it in democratic way by pressing a button whereas you  are thrusting your jaundiced, preconceived views in his words to see it in the comfortable perspective you have colored yourself with.
The rest of the diatribe can also be shown to be hollow, but let me wait to see if you have an answer for my questions. I can answer all your liberal innuendos too without much effort. But to keep the topic focused to Amit Shah in Muzzafarnagar, let me not expand the debate.
.