E pluribus unum
The fallen one responds to Swaminathan Aiyar and Turd with the beard ( aka Vir singhavi), explaining why allowing Kashmir to secede is a bad idea. For the most part the post is tolerable enough, however it is in summarizing his argument that fallen one blunders.
The reality is this: To ensure the well-being of people in the region, including those of its neighbours, India as a whole, and not just Jammu & Kashmir, needs to place a premium on individual freedoms on the one hand, and on tolerance on the other
I am sorry but this is same old secular non-sense. We can not dream of the well being, the freedom, the tolerance unless India is united, politically as well as culturally. And that is the biggest question what is the idea behind India. Curiously this is always left unanswered for some strange reason. This failure to address the question render the rest of the exercise about Kashmir moot.
Having said that, let me admit here that a careful reading of the above post makes one discern the secular assumption behind India, that is, utilitarian, with utility function comprising of individual freedom, prosperity in some way. In this it is similar to what former blogger (and present greedy capitalist pig) Ritwik wrote here *, however a little more candidness on the part of secularists will be most appreciated.
PS. As regarding Kashmir, I say keep Jammu and Ladakh to ourselves, divide Kashmir between ourselves and Jihadis, expel Hurriyat, Muftis and Abdullahs from India, and if the independent Kashmir makes some nuisance or tries to merge with Pakistan. bomb the ingrates to stone age. Or whatever barbar says.
* That post was a part of arguments between us which started with this post. I still have to counter Ritwik's arguments. I will reply to it one of these days , but briefly while in general I find much to agree with consequentialism (a superset of Utilitarianism) , I don't think it answers question of national identity, or even the dynamics of human societies, leave alone philosophical quandaries.
