Secular justification of Assam Violence

I had lengthy debate with a "Secular" tweeton @brownbrumby on continuing violence in Assam. One particular feature noticed is that whomsoever tries to criticize congress, critic gets "RSS" tag. This "Secular" bloc firmly believes that on going conflict in Assam is "ethnic" and not "communal". By saying "ethnic", this "Secular" bloc deliberately hide/deny important issue of illegal infiltration from Bangladesh.

This debate forced me to think who are "Secular" that forms "Secular Bloc".  "Google Intelligence" helped me find "Secularist Manifesto" on leftist Guardian. It added to my knowledge that secularism is a "political movement seeking specific policy end-points". Now that specific policy "end-points" may differ in space and time. This "Secularist Manifesto", in case of United Kingdom (UK), is against overwhelming presence of "Christianity" in the state parliament. This manifesto is to protect human rights of "non-christians" and/or "un-christian" legal residents of UK. Thus, it presents a very sensible case of the legal state subjects. But does it applicable to illegal residents in UK? If yes, why UK need to spend money on border security and legal immigration system? I leave it for UK nationals to decide.

Yes, I was arguing with my wrong concept of "Secularism" in this discussion.  I had previously hypothesized that "Secularism" refers to "religious neutrality". I firmly believed that "Secularism" has nothing to do with politics. In my view, politics combined with religion is a toxic mix that ruin the state. For example, in Nigeria where religion used in politics led to ethnic conflict between northern (Muslim majority) and southern (Christian majority) states. Nigeria is now at the verge of its partition on this religo-ethinc line just like Sudan. Sudan and Nigeria provide evidence that religion can not be ruled out as a driving force for ethnic violence.

Assam violence has illegal immigration problem at the core that has posed threat to its socio-cultural identity. The first president after independence of Bangladesh from Pakistan, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman argued that "without the inclusion of Assam the East Bengal economy could not be balanced". Does it indicate infiltration of Bangladeshi nationals in India is a planned long term annexation strategy of a newly born nation in 1971?

 

By looking at "Secularist Manifesto", it is not difficult to determine silence of "Secular" Indian media on this issue. Furthermore, why it is spreading disinformation regarding ongoing violence against natives of Assam. "Secular" Indian media is sleeping despite the fact that supreme court of India has termed this infiltration as "silent invasion" of Bangladeshi Muslims. This "Silent invasion" is now causing "ethnic" conflict with "religious" agenda on political sphere.