^ What I said. ^
I think we're stretching the definition of "middle class" if it includes illiterates. Or else the education system is unspeakably horrible. Not that this would surprise me in such a country.
It is unspeakably horrible, and it has stayed that way for as long as the "secular" party was in power. The only positive developments to come in a long time were the initiatives by the "Hindu" party.
I can only conclude that the middle class is participating in the ongoing oppression then.
Here's the problem - they're not. In fact, they're completely
apathetic. The middle classes are concentrated in the urban centres, where this is not a problem, so they don't give a crap, because it isn't happening to them, they don't have to see it, and they don't have to worry about it.
So Hinduism came up with the caste system
since then?
That's not only barbaric, that's outright
regressive!
The idea of
varna is old, but the "caste system" as we know it today appeared only five hundred to a thousand years ago. But then, India wasn't a Hindu -ruled country at that time, was it?
Sounds little different from atheism, then.
I congratulate you, by the way, on completely and utterly dodging the difficult questions of the first post with a segue into the history of Hinduism, followed by an extended monologue on how Hinduism is a non-ideology.
It is a civilisational framework. The problem is, it hasn't been in use for around a thousand years. What else but degeneration and decay can be expected in such a situation? Self-preservation was priority number one, and when fighting pure and undiluted barbarism, it is difficult to stick to high ideals. Once barbarism is defeated and eliminated, however, things normalise.
The only thing you did say about caste system was this: [sarcasm] Yeeeeeah, riiiiiight. Very enlightening. I'm sure the dalits must be keeping themselves downtrodden, since obviously the authorities would like nothing better than for them to become uplifted. [/sarcasm]
That's the point - the authorities, too, are apathetic unless it's an election issue. And where it is an election issue, then they'll do anything to pander to the respective vote banks. For instance, Tamil Nadu has reserved 70% of its seats in all colleges and universities for untouchables and OBCs. The central government recently passed a law saying that reservations in colleges nationwide be increased to 50% from 23.5%.
The problem, of course, is that this, like all other "political" or "quick-fix" solutions, hasn't done anything to help these people, because the problem is at all levels. When, for instance, even the people you label as the "power elite" cannot get an education in rural areas because of a paucity of infrastructure, do you expect that reserving some seats is going to help anyone? When a typically "Hindu" solution is proposed - that you focus on the local problems of the people, at an individual level, and try to fix that - none of the "secular" parties want to do it, because it isn't a potent symbol which you can wave in front of the voters. Whereas when a "Hindu" government does it, it works, and these problems are eradicated. Just look at Gujarat.
Sweet, I can be a Hindu too now?
Seriously, though, what this apparently boils down to is that
Hinduism sees nothing wrong about violating fundamental human rights and dignity, because Hinduism has no rules with any permanence.
A bunch of philosophical systems which are basically about the nature of reality and consciousness are being blamed for
not stepping out of their domains of knowledge?
Let me ask you this - would you blame a philosophy professor for not commenting on something which he wasn't qualified to comment on in the first place?
A de-facto separation of spiritual life and the state structure has existed in India as long as Indic thought was the dominant paradigm. So don't you think that you are essentially conflating two disparate things - a social problem with a religious one? Because even among the converted Muslims, there are two castes, the Ashraf and the Ajlaf, and ironically enough, the Ashraf claim superiority on the basis of their foreign descent, and do not mingle or intermarry with the Ajlaf. But it was the "Hindu" party which appointed an eminent and much-loved scientist, and Ajlaf Muslim, to the Presidency of the country.
I say now to SEND IN THE MISSIONARIES and get rid of Hinduism before it merges with New Age pop philosophy and creates an unspeakable monster that is utterly immune to criticism due to its "anyone can disagree, and nobody cares" attitude. There's already quite enough bad pseudoscience, spirituality and mysticism spreading into the Lands of the Enlightenment (a pompous title, but one that gets the point across - the West developed science, India developed the caste system and a disrespect for rigor).
The "rigour" comment is a bit out of place. I am yet to see philosophers as anally rigorous as those at the end of the Gupta age (after that, philosophy in India went to hell in a handbasket, because the structures capable of supporting it were destroyed by the Muslims).
Oh, and India developed the mathematics behind the science. I'd like to see how far you can go with Roman numerals.
