Thursday, September 13, 2007

Naxal Ram silent on Rama Setu issue

Naxal Ram is in a fix. If he supports the government stance that Ram did not exist, he will face inconvenient questions like why he is named so. If Ram did not exist, what about Narasimhan, an even "more mythical" figure?

The government withdrew its petition stating that Ram did not exist owing to the enormous backlash from the Hindu community. But the letters to the editor Naxal Ram keep pouring from stalinist communists. Such letters gain prominent space on this communist rag. This neatly summarizes the editorial policy of Chindu.

Opinion - Letters to the Editor : Ramar Sethu issue

This refers to the Archaeological Survey of India’s submission in the Supreme Court that there is no evidence to prove that Ramar Sethu is man made (Sept. 13). Predictably, the BJP and its cohorts act out their charade of Hindutva-charged nationalism that befools both history and common sense. Marine biologists and geologists assert that there is no man made bridge across the Palk Strait. What exist are the remains of an ancient coral reef. The uproar over the Ramar Sethu offers the BJP an opportunity to restore its faded aura. Ayodhya being a distant dream, and its repeated machinations on the nuclear issue snubbed, the BJP is finding refuge in the Ramar Sethu issue.

T. Marx,


Anonymous said...

This cited letter opens the secular show in the letters column of Chindu and it is also the longest. But, it is too clever by half, in not stating that the ASI also questions the very fundamentals of Hinduism as it is practised today - Rama did not exist, Ramayana is mythology etc. etc. What was the need to abuse the majority religion like this when the arguements could be just limited to the Sethu?

Within a century or so, both Marx and Marxism have become non-entities in the land where communism was a big show only till recently. China swears more by market forces than Marx.

May be Chindu's chief should consider changing his mythical name, just like some of his Dravidian buddies used to do in the good old days.

Anonymous said...

At last, the Editor-in-Chief offers his pontification.

In this seemingly scholarly editorial he is careful not to state that the very existence of Lord Rama has been questioned by the Govt. of India. Besides, there is a pearl of wisdom.

".......the undersea ridge between Rameswaram and the Sri Lankan coast that goes by the geographical name Adam’s Bridge and is also known as Ramar Sethu."

So, do we take that whoever this Adam was, he preceded Lord Rama? What if someone comments, "Naxal who is also known as Ram"? Who came first, Naxal or Ram?

Chindu (and the commies, of course), blame it all on BJP! Further, a couple of scapegoats have been identified in the ASI and in a few days we may also hear that these poor chota babus have some connection with the RSS.

xyz said...

The only defence of Hindu,based as they are in madras, is they are trying to balance tamil nationalism with the claims of indian nationalism.

Particularly in the context of tamil nationalism/pride/identity/exclusiveness/chauvinism prevalent so widely in tamil journalism/media/film/politics/literature/public life.