![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
This talk page seriously needs neutral voices, the article itself needs more information most importantly regarding various cells within the party and its performance as the principal opposition since 2004. I have removed the template in the top most part of the page because its really not required as the article is fair enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niteshpradhans ( talk • contribs) 18:36, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
Since 2004 the party has been in the opposition. A section should be included in the page pertaining to its role as the leading opposition party of India. ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.161.145.20 ( talk) 14:34, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
This article is terrible, this talk page is terrible, and this entire subject is severely in need of neutral voices. It seems that the entire collective editing this article is composed of party supporters. This is not acceptable. I am not an expert and cannot personally contribute, but someone should. There should at minimum be a clearly defined "criticism" section. -- Jammoe ( talk) 20:21, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
BJP IS BEST PARTY NOW SHOWING,BECAUSE OF CONGRESS GOING TO RISE ALL TYPE OF LIVING THINGS,NOT CONTROLING,INTERESTING IN SHAREMARKET SHOW- MIDDLE CLASS INCOME GOING DOWN,INTEREST INCOME GOING DOWN, BHARTIYA JANTA PARTY BEST -RAMIZ SAIYAD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.98.165.226 ( talk) 18:26, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
I tend to agree with Jammoe. Whoever this is (Ramiz Saiyad), please note that this is Wikipedia and not your personal domain to post personal comments. Lets all work together for a better Wikipedia Swaroop ( talk) 03:37, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
thae article is too pro BJP , it doesnt give much significance that the BJP is the politicial organization which mainly belives in hindu nationalism , under the controversies the hate speeches of advani and the 1983 assam riots and the tehelka corruption expose do not figure if wikipedia is neutral it should these items too —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Bestinformer (
talk •
contribs)
06:39, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
I do not see any reason that both sections are needed in this article. They can be easily combined into one consistent section highlighting party ideology and listing the primary objectives of the ideology. I just wanted to know if anyone disagreed with me before I made any attempt at it. -- Rahulpat ( talk) 20:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
political oppurtunism, duplicity and evidence manipulation
BJP's politics also give a probably correct impression that it has to be regarded as a contemporary legatee of many medieval deccan dynasties like chalukyas etc. There are a number of strong reasons behind this. BJP has had its origins in the karnataka-maharashtra-andhra region, the home to the above mentioned dynasties. The political activities of BJP in tamilnadu like supporting a non-existent matha at kanchi etc, show that it wants to gain foothold in tamil south. BJP , Has previously attempted and still continues to covertly and overtly take up the management and “ownership” of ancient temples of tamil nadu. For this purpose it is working alongside pseudo-scholars, and pseudo-intellectuals to forge an identity to connect it to those temples historically. It has already created its own versions of many available ancient texts and documents of ancient tamil dynasties, with the help of pseudo-intellectuals. The RSS organization regularly brings in people at different position who take up tamil names and claim to be “tamil brahmins”. It has also attempted to systematically spread misinformation that these “brahmins”(whom it has sponsored) were the ones who have descended from(references: www.bharathavarsha.com/iyer.html) those who were patronized by ancient tamil clans (chola/pallavas), even though it is well known that the former were inveterate foes of the latter and that during that age there was a perpetual trade embargo implemented most effectively by the cholas. The term “iyer” used by southern BJP functionaries is a very recent one and not prevalent during ancient times. The brahminical identity of many such people itself remains a suspect. A good number of these people are from deccan. With the help of anti-socials and vested interests within the state of TN and south they create an identity for themselves linking them to the state from remote past. The usual modus operandi is by trying to enter into matrimonial relationships with those who are presumed to be “natives”.
The tainted kanchi acharya is known to be a hardcore supporter of both BJP and shiv sena and those parties have used that falseful math’s influence to gain political ascendancy.But this is not only for generally known motives of gaining power in tamil south. The less known reason seems to be the fact that BJP, considering the humiliating defeat and further annihilations suffered by medieval deccani dynasties like chalukyas etc at the hands of the powerful and imperialist ancient tamil royal races of cholas and pallavas,sees an oppurtunity now centuries after the demise of the above mentioned tamil royalties, to make up for those humiliations.Infact, this did not happen all of a sudden. foundations of this were laid by titular(under british supervision) deccan chiefs of tanjore from 18th century on and to a lesser extent by the nayaks of vijayanagar dynasty. All of whom came down atleast a few centuries after the demise of the brilliant chola empire. The nayak chiefs and their nobles are also guilty of manipulating and forging the available authentic grants belonging to cholas and pallavas and also smuggling a few. It is well known fact that the deccani dynasties among the others were natural enemies of the powerful chola and pallava emperors and the latter never really considered giving up their enmity with the former, renewing it time and again by dispatching exceptionally predatory expeditions to deccan.
These activities point to the astonishing level of opportunism displayed by BJP and their sly character. Considering BJP as a political option violates the most fundamental, universal and timeless truth about rights to governance.
Further it is well possible to prove that the kargil conflict of 1999 was stage managed by BJP because it envied what it saw as a "congress led" 1971 win over pakistan. An operation similar to 1986 brasstacks was also staged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.119.160 ( talk) 13:49, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Andhra Pradesh is not economically stagnant. Check your facts before posting idiocy. Yes the Defeat of TDP was the reason NDA couldn't survive. But the TDP was defeated because of other reasons. Such as farmers felt Chandrababu Naidu didn't care about them and the Congress promised Free Electricity which they've failed to withhold. -- 138.88.117.66 18:20, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
One of the BJP's slogans is "true
Hindus vote BJP". Recently the prime minister got into a controversy for saying that
Hindutva and Indianness are the same. They recently got re-elected in
Gujarat using the Hindu nationalist platform. To the BJP, Hindutva doesn't conflict with secularism, Hindutva is secularism. A screwed up world view, but that's how it is. --
Arvindn
How so, Abdul Kalam is a Muslim. But he is respected widely among the BJP. As a matter BJP offered support to him in the first place. Actually all BJP wants to unity among Hindus and Indians.-- 71.163.68.87 00:48, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
The article currently says, "It [the BJP] has allied with regional parties to roll back the left-of-centre tendencies formerly endorsed by the Congress Party, which dominated Indian politics for four decades." This is clearly a point of view meant to justify the BJP's random alliance with parties of disparate ideological orientations merely to get hold of power, after it failed to secure a majority of its own. Such statements tend to bias the neutrality of the article concerned. -- fredericknoronha 18:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
may god save you indians from religion based fanatics & terrorist escorts. was there a single paragraph which didnt offer speculative bjp favourable views & which through omission of glaring realities tried to portray as if bjp was a unlucky loser which deserved to win!! Ksense ( talk) 05:44, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
BJP doesn't consider itself to be "Hindu nationalist." You consider it to be so. According to BJP, Hindutva and Indianness are the same. That is exactly the point here. They consider themselves to be Indian Nationalist party. Abdul Kalam, a Muslim became the President of India thanks to them. Please leave out politics and post only facts.
Shouldn't someone mention the violence in Gujarat? The BJP was accused of condoning it or even supporting it.
mr100percent 7:51, May 14, 2004 (UTC)
Well, some white supremacists are members of the US Republican Party. Should we mention that in the Republican party page? It was done by people who just so happened to be members. Also, it is pro da calling the BJP "Hindu nationalists" Doesn't the republicans have a Christian nationalist agenda?
In the second paragraph after the list of presidents, it says:
The BJP considers itself to be a secular party and [...] However the BJP is considered by some to be a secular party.
Either the 'however' should be reworded, or something else got mixed up. Iaen 14:03, 2004 Oct 12 (UTC)
So is the party left-wing, right-wing, socialist, centerist or what?
Some of the latest versions of the page use Bharat in place of India in the text. As the Bharat article redirects to the India one, i think it would make sense to replace 'Bharat' with 'India' in most cases since India is the term most commonly used in English Vino s 13:09, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
using india in place of Bharat is similar to change name of our mother under influence of some looters (here british) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.111.95.19 ( talk) 11:10, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
This is way too pro-pov. There is no mention of the BJP's repeated attempts to rewrite history [1] and their numerous antisemitic comments. This group claims that Hindu civilization began 111.5 trillion years ago... a few trillion before the big bang. KI 03:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Though India is Democratic and Republic all the Political parties supports Caste system and Religion. There is no scientific progress and thinking and all political parties also support reservation on caste system. vkvora 04:03, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
This is no NPOV article - It only contains BJP Propoganda.They should mention Gujarat and also the rioting as a show of Model BJP ruled state.
I strongly agree. I'm from the US reading this article in order to understand Indian politics--and therefore without knowledge or experience for bias--but the wording sounds like it should have been written for the BJP website itself. If you are going to clean a page of any negative content, couldn't you at least be a bit more subtle about it? -- 124.123.119.232 ( talk) 01:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
A.B. Vajpayee (Ex.P.M.) is a brahmin.
-- Anirudh777 07:23, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Yeah thats why we have Bangaru Laxman and other smart former dalits in power in the BJP right? Yeah, that's why we have vice-president of BJP a muslim right?
Yes off course because to confuse and to gain muslims votes and eye wash for mulsim community nothing else. Eg: After Gujrat Riots Abdul Kalam Made President of India because to use as the duster for what BJP had done in Gujrat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.172.4.133 ( talk) 14:00, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
No use debating that guys, its present in every political party. Caste equations are formed everywhere. Most of it is only eyewash. Swaroop ( talk) 03:45, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Bakasuprman will no doubt be able to justify his recent revert of my careful editing of some recent uncited additions? Hornplease 04:11, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Question CAN A PARTY WHICH IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DIVIDING THE COUNTRY ON RELIGIOUS GROUNDS AND INSIGHTING HATRED AMOUNG TWO COMMUNITIES BE GIVING CHANCE TO RULE OUR NATION. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hussaine ( talk • contribs) 13:15, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
I changed the word orgy to the word outburst as I did not find orgy to be an appropriate word to use within this context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tenjikuronin ( talk • contribs) 05:18, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
How is it that the Gujarat riots are mentioned in this article while the US Republican Party article talks nothing about KKK et all.
Wikipedia is overrun by Congress fans trying to destroy BJPs good image if anything.-- Milki 22:56, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
I Have a Simple Question about BJP, VHP, RSS, Bajrand Dal Etc. These people Want to build Ram Rajya, Is this is what mean Ram Rajya(Gujrat Riots) mean. Killing Innocent People, Raping There own Indians, Sister, mothers etc. Then Every one should think about These Parties. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.172.4.133 ( talk) 14:13, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, i agree with 122.172.4.133. We learn in our class 1 that all Indians are our brothers and sisters. I won't comment anything about the BJP, RSS and Bajrang Dal, though the Bajrang Dal was shown to have a hand in the Mangalore pub attack. And whoever wants mention of KKK in the Republican Party page can by all means go and add it there. Swaroop ( talk) 03:51, 23 August 2009 (UTC) . Th Jay942942 ( talk) 22:30, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm removing the Gujarat Riots reference. The Congress page doesn't talk about the attacks on Bombay. The Republican Party page doesn't talk about KKK or and The Democratic Party page doesn't say anything about their pro-slavery stance (in the past). So Why should an unsourced statement made by some Congress fanatic be part of the BJP Page unless someone can convince me otherwise.
Most of non-science related pages at wikipedia have criticism section why its not here, it should be added and filled with criticism BJP faces but in neutral langauge.
My POV: BJP is a party with a Roadmap, 21'st Century road and 10'th Century map ;-)
Vjdchauhan 11:09, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Please guys, view this merely as a Wikipedia article. Criticism is an integral part of any good article and it removes the feeling of non-neutrality that users get on reading articles. Swaroop ( talk) 03:53, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
And whoever says that criticism isn't there in pages of the Democrats, Republicans, AIADMK and whatever, please note that each article is independent of each other. Swaroop ( talk) 03:54, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Pectore talk 05:35, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Not necessarily, criticism(say of this BJP article) removes a feeling of bias. Of course there is nothing called as neutral criticism, which would be meaningless. And criticism is vital for a non-biased view. Swaroop ( talk) 12:30, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
I have added the section [ [3]] on recent unprecedented derecogntion issues faced by BJP in the wake of Election CD controversy. [4].See also [ Special Report], [ After CD row, BJP releases provocative advertisement ] [ Fight BJP politically: Derecognition will make it a martyr] Terminador 02:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Dear friends,
It seems that the honorable Sri Narendra Modi, the best CM in India, has had his page Hijacked by some Bangladeshi and some American Congressman. I ask you to step up and bring balance to his article. Thank You - Jai Hind. Tri400 12:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Can anyone explain why all references to the UP election as well as the threat of derecognition have been removed? If not, I will restore it. Hornplease 23:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Why are certain members removing edits without any explanation? And they have removed it at least three times without any explanation. -- TomCat111 20:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Why is their no mention of the Gujarat Riots in this article? The article on Indian National Congress mentions the Anti-Sikh riots. Amit@ Talk 09:00, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Editors are requested not to add their POV about the comparision of riots under various dispensations, and to edit the articles of the respective parties for the same. Thanks. ReluctantPhilosopher ( talk) 16:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I think the 'Political accusations' chapter should be removed, my empirical understand is that such chapters just function as an open invitations of opponents of the party in question to post their own pov queries. Gujarat 2002 is a notable event, and should be mentioned in the history chapter with a link to main article, but should be kept brief as per WP:UNDUE. -- Soman ( talk) 20:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
The less known reason seems to be the fact that BJP, considering the humiliating defeat and further annihilations suffered by medieval deccani dynasties like chalukyas etc at the hands of the powerful and imperialist ancient tamil royal races of cholas and pallavas,sees an oppurtunity now centuries after the demise of the above mentioned tamil royalties, to make up for those humiliations
Should this (and more) be there in the article? ReluctantPhilosopher ( talk) 16:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Nope. Its rambling OR. I've reverted it before but the author is keen on its addition. KBN ( talk) 06:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Can't we block the anon who keeps adding content llike
"BJP's politics also give a probably correct impression that it has to be regarded as a contemporary legatee of many medieval deccan dynasties..." etc.
-- ReluctantPhilosopher ( talk) 16:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Wow - this entire article reads like an opinion piece with almost NO sources for the contents. In serious need of re-write to remove the bulk of the statements. Triage ( talk) 14:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi this is User: Political Dweeb's explanation. The reason I took away the article on this talk page called the "BJP's position" is because no one seemed to want to talk to me about it so I put up the paragraphs under the title called Secret advertisement so anyone or the representatives of the Indian Peoples Party could clarify for me this position. Therefore does the Indian Peoples Party represent conservative ideologies on the right but support or oppose extreme forms of discrimination like anti-Semitism, Nazism, Holocaust denial and the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party which used the Indian Peoples Party banner on their links page?-- Political Dweeb ( talk) 15:52, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you User: Relato refero for that reply I will now give you one answer and two questions. Firstly from what I have learned from the Wikipedia page on Hindutva ideology it does seem to be a personal but constructive form of ideology on the right wing that accepts different traditions and religons of India even if they are not part of it.
However Relato refero my two questions are
(1)Is it possible so it can be clarified for safety's sake if you can communicate with a representative of the BJP to see if they oppose the LNSGP and the other extreme forms of discrimination that I previously been talking about?
(2)This second question is about why was the article called "Secret advertisement" that I made taken away from the Wikipedia page on the Indian Peoples Party? Because I learned recently as far as I know that underneath an editing box like this there’s a small rectangular box with the words Edit summary above it. So did I just need to write in it to explain why I changed the BJP article by adding extra text/paragraph’s Political Dweeb ( talk) 12:47, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you User: Shovon76 for your reply. I found on the history of the edits made to the page on the BJP that Relato refero said that the point I made about the link between BJP and LNSGP was unsourced. However I had shown the link called http://www.nazi.org where the BJP link banner was on so I do not understand what Relato means when he says I have not sourced it. Political Dweeb ( talk) 16:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
In the past few days there have been some questionable, unsourced edits to this article. At first I tried to remove them, but realized that I couldn't decifer between what was the recent POV edits and older material, as some was sourced. I would like to help with the editing of this article, but will wait for some more experieced editors to comment and/or edit first. Thanks. Ism schism ( talk) 15:41, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Frnds, I intend to trim down the article a bit. I hope to begin with the criticism / controversies portion which is quite big, it seems, with allegations and refutations. I request your invaluable opinions, and suggestions. -- Karimpuli ( talk) 11:07, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Tripping Nambiar, the issues are mainly related to ideology that is going beyond the boundary of NPOV. Additionally, the template used is only meant for sections. If you want to add a fresh NPOV, raise the number of issues here and add. -- Googlean ( talk) 05:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
FACT tag needed only when there is be short of of RS. User:Tripping Nambiar has added it without properly reading the Hindu article & other incidents which is directly coming to the subject. However, I haven’t removed it from xenophobia as I could not find any direct sources accusing this term with the subject. My question to User:Karimpuli is that if the burden of proof lies with the one who put the fact tag (as you quoted at the edit summary), It would have been better, if the person who added the fact tag had responded i.e Tripping Nambiar? -- Googlean ( talk) 08:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Friend, if "it is impossible to provide accurate reference on each and every wording", the tags shall remain. -- GRRRRRRR................ ( talk) 11:51, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
So whats this parties econimic position?-- J intela ( talk) 17:49, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
I thought the BJP was a fascist party that helped Gujarati rioters pour petrol down the throats of Muslim men and set it alight after raping their female family members in front of them. Couldn't this article have a bit more detail about this? It seems to be written by the wrong people —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.95.125.189 ( talk) 05:58, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
talk about bias. -- 94.71.97.213 ( talk) 17:00, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Wiki reflects only administrator’s view (in this case mostly privilege Hindu upper cast Indian’s), they can allow content to be added without any reliable reference like in this article or delete content which is supported by reliable sources references but goes against their ideology. They are making wiki dirty place & biased. Such administrators shall be blocked.
Edit shall be reverted if it does not confirm to fundamental wikipedia policies, namely neutral POV, no original research, reliable sourcing, and also make inappropriate use of primary sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maverick1728 ( talk • contribs) 16:11, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
{{ editsemiprotected}} Mvz321 ( talk) 10:25, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Should be relegated to major issues, not things that have only been in the news for a couple weeks. Issues about Gujarat (which continue to haunt the party) belong, random incidents don't, since every party has corrupt people. Pectore talk 17:11, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
{{editsemiprotected}}
BJP in various states ==
BJP is currently in power in five states ( Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Chhattisgarh and Himachal Pradesh) where the party enjoys a majority of its own. In four other states — Punjab, Nagaland, Uttrakhand and Bihar — it shares power with other alliance partners.
Nirjharvarshney (
talk)
06:39, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
I added a warning that this page might be biased because of this sentence:
"Nationalism (Patriotism) is always better than fake (Pseudo) secularism, corruption, appeasement (vote bank politics), tolerance to terrorism and family/dynasty politics with help of corporate media-made delusions and false propaganda." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.177.176.175 ( talk) 15:47, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Someone recently removed the description Right Wing claiming that the source was an opinion piece. There are literally hundreds of peer reviewed sourced describing BJP as a Right Wing, Hindu Nationalist party - I have inserted some of them. Many academic sources also state that it is predominantly supported from the upper castes, this might be included in the article as well. ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 20:09, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
This page is very biased. It overwhelmingly only represents the official views of the highly controversial BJP Party. If there is a group of editors willing to try to craft an attempt at a more neutral page, please...let's talk. Otherwise this page is little more than propaganda.-- Chip.berlet ( talk) 01:08, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Bharatiya Janata Party/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Mr. Goldstein Orwell,
May I ask why you have removed every single authentic and very well cited edits? Every single edit I did was cited, supported, and consistent with the reports of the highly reputable and the largest Indian newspapers (among others, the Times of India and the Hindu) and BBC. You can click on every single link to verify that my edits were consistent with the historical news reports. My edits are necessary because they play a vital role in balancing, otherwise highly inaccurate, distorted and biased views. I would also like to know the exact words that might have violated your policies, so I can use the vocabulary consistent with your policies. Thanks |
Last edited at 00:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 20:04, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
This talk page seriously needs neutral voices, the article itself needs more information most importantly regarding various cells within the party and its performance as the principal opposition since 2004. I have removed the template in the top most part of the page because its really not required as the article is fair enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niteshpradhans ( talk • contribs) 18:36, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
Since 2004 the party has been in the opposition. A section should be included in the page pertaining to its role as the leading opposition party of India. ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.161.145.20 ( talk) 14:34, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
This article is terrible, this talk page is terrible, and this entire subject is severely in need of neutral voices. It seems that the entire collective editing this article is composed of party supporters. This is not acceptable. I am not an expert and cannot personally contribute, but someone should. There should at minimum be a clearly defined "criticism" section. -- Jammoe ( talk) 20:21, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
BJP IS BEST PARTY NOW SHOWING,BECAUSE OF CONGRESS GOING TO RISE ALL TYPE OF LIVING THINGS,NOT CONTROLING,INTERESTING IN SHAREMARKET SHOW- MIDDLE CLASS INCOME GOING DOWN,INTEREST INCOME GOING DOWN, BHARTIYA JANTA PARTY BEST -RAMIZ SAIYAD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.98.165.226 ( talk) 18:26, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
I tend to agree with Jammoe. Whoever this is (Ramiz Saiyad), please note that this is Wikipedia and not your personal domain to post personal comments. Lets all work together for a better Wikipedia Swaroop ( talk) 03:37, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
thae article is too pro BJP , it doesnt give much significance that the BJP is the politicial organization which mainly belives in hindu nationalism , under the controversies the hate speeches of advani and the 1983 assam riots and the tehelka corruption expose do not figure if wikipedia is neutral it should these items too —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Bestinformer (
talk •
contribs)
06:39, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
I do not see any reason that both sections are needed in this article. They can be easily combined into one consistent section highlighting party ideology and listing the primary objectives of the ideology. I just wanted to know if anyone disagreed with me before I made any attempt at it. -- Rahulpat ( talk) 20:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
political oppurtunism, duplicity and evidence manipulation
BJP's politics also give a probably correct impression that it has to be regarded as a contemporary legatee of many medieval deccan dynasties like chalukyas etc. There are a number of strong reasons behind this. BJP has had its origins in the karnataka-maharashtra-andhra region, the home to the above mentioned dynasties. The political activities of BJP in tamilnadu like supporting a non-existent matha at kanchi etc, show that it wants to gain foothold in tamil south. BJP , Has previously attempted and still continues to covertly and overtly take up the management and “ownership” of ancient temples of tamil nadu. For this purpose it is working alongside pseudo-scholars, and pseudo-intellectuals to forge an identity to connect it to those temples historically. It has already created its own versions of many available ancient texts and documents of ancient tamil dynasties, with the help of pseudo-intellectuals. The RSS organization regularly brings in people at different position who take up tamil names and claim to be “tamil brahmins”. It has also attempted to systematically spread misinformation that these “brahmins”(whom it has sponsored) were the ones who have descended from(references: www.bharathavarsha.com/iyer.html) those who were patronized by ancient tamil clans (chola/pallavas), even though it is well known that the former were inveterate foes of the latter and that during that age there was a perpetual trade embargo implemented most effectively by the cholas. The term “iyer” used by southern BJP functionaries is a very recent one and not prevalent during ancient times. The brahminical identity of many such people itself remains a suspect. A good number of these people are from deccan. With the help of anti-socials and vested interests within the state of TN and south they create an identity for themselves linking them to the state from remote past. The usual modus operandi is by trying to enter into matrimonial relationships with those who are presumed to be “natives”.
The tainted kanchi acharya is known to be a hardcore supporter of both BJP and shiv sena and those parties have used that falseful math’s influence to gain political ascendancy.But this is not only for generally known motives of gaining power in tamil south. The less known reason seems to be the fact that BJP, considering the humiliating defeat and further annihilations suffered by medieval deccani dynasties like chalukyas etc at the hands of the powerful and imperialist ancient tamil royal races of cholas and pallavas,sees an oppurtunity now centuries after the demise of the above mentioned tamil royalties, to make up for those humiliations.Infact, this did not happen all of a sudden. foundations of this were laid by titular(under british supervision) deccan chiefs of tanjore from 18th century on and to a lesser extent by the nayaks of vijayanagar dynasty. All of whom came down atleast a few centuries after the demise of the brilliant chola empire. The nayak chiefs and their nobles are also guilty of manipulating and forging the available authentic grants belonging to cholas and pallavas and also smuggling a few. It is well known fact that the deccani dynasties among the others were natural enemies of the powerful chola and pallava emperors and the latter never really considered giving up their enmity with the former, renewing it time and again by dispatching exceptionally predatory expeditions to deccan.
These activities point to the astonishing level of opportunism displayed by BJP and their sly character. Considering BJP as a political option violates the most fundamental, universal and timeless truth about rights to governance.
Further it is well possible to prove that the kargil conflict of 1999 was stage managed by BJP because it envied what it saw as a "congress led" 1971 win over pakistan. An operation similar to 1986 brasstacks was also staged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.119.160 ( talk) 13:49, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Andhra Pradesh is not economically stagnant. Check your facts before posting idiocy. Yes the Defeat of TDP was the reason NDA couldn't survive. But the TDP was defeated because of other reasons. Such as farmers felt Chandrababu Naidu didn't care about them and the Congress promised Free Electricity which they've failed to withhold. -- 138.88.117.66 18:20, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
One of the BJP's slogans is "true
Hindus vote BJP". Recently the prime minister got into a controversy for saying that
Hindutva and Indianness are the same. They recently got re-elected in
Gujarat using the Hindu nationalist platform. To the BJP, Hindutva doesn't conflict with secularism, Hindutva is secularism. A screwed up world view, but that's how it is. --
Arvindn
How so, Abdul Kalam is a Muslim. But he is respected widely among the BJP. As a matter BJP offered support to him in the first place. Actually all BJP wants to unity among Hindus and Indians.-- 71.163.68.87 00:48, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
The article currently says, "It [the BJP] has allied with regional parties to roll back the left-of-centre tendencies formerly endorsed by the Congress Party, which dominated Indian politics for four decades." This is clearly a point of view meant to justify the BJP's random alliance with parties of disparate ideological orientations merely to get hold of power, after it failed to secure a majority of its own. Such statements tend to bias the neutrality of the article concerned. -- fredericknoronha 18:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
may god save you indians from religion based fanatics & terrorist escorts. was there a single paragraph which didnt offer speculative bjp favourable views & which through omission of glaring realities tried to portray as if bjp was a unlucky loser which deserved to win!! Ksense ( talk) 05:44, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
BJP doesn't consider itself to be "Hindu nationalist." You consider it to be so. According to BJP, Hindutva and Indianness are the same. That is exactly the point here. They consider themselves to be Indian Nationalist party. Abdul Kalam, a Muslim became the President of India thanks to them. Please leave out politics and post only facts.
Shouldn't someone mention the violence in Gujarat? The BJP was accused of condoning it or even supporting it.
mr100percent 7:51, May 14, 2004 (UTC)
Well, some white supremacists are members of the US Republican Party. Should we mention that in the Republican party page? It was done by people who just so happened to be members. Also, it is pro da calling the BJP "Hindu nationalists" Doesn't the republicans have a Christian nationalist agenda?
In the second paragraph after the list of presidents, it says:
The BJP considers itself to be a secular party and [...] However the BJP is considered by some to be a secular party.
Either the 'however' should be reworded, or something else got mixed up. Iaen 14:03, 2004 Oct 12 (UTC)
So is the party left-wing, right-wing, socialist, centerist or what?
Some of the latest versions of the page use Bharat in place of India in the text. As the Bharat article redirects to the India one, i think it would make sense to replace 'Bharat' with 'India' in most cases since India is the term most commonly used in English Vino s 13:09, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
using india in place of Bharat is similar to change name of our mother under influence of some looters (here british) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.111.95.19 ( talk) 11:10, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
This is way too pro-pov. There is no mention of the BJP's repeated attempts to rewrite history [1] and their numerous antisemitic comments. This group claims that Hindu civilization began 111.5 trillion years ago... a few trillion before the big bang. KI 03:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Though India is Democratic and Republic all the Political parties supports Caste system and Religion. There is no scientific progress and thinking and all political parties also support reservation on caste system. vkvora 04:03, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
This is no NPOV article - It only contains BJP Propoganda.They should mention Gujarat and also the rioting as a show of Model BJP ruled state.
I strongly agree. I'm from the US reading this article in order to understand Indian politics--and therefore without knowledge or experience for bias--but the wording sounds like it should have been written for the BJP website itself. If you are going to clean a page of any negative content, couldn't you at least be a bit more subtle about it? -- 124.123.119.232 ( talk) 01:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
A.B. Vajpayee (Ex.P.M.) is a brahmin.
-- Anirudh777 07:23, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Yeah thats why we have Bangaru Laxman and other smart former dalits in power in the BJP right? Yeah, that's why we have vice-president of BJP a muslim right?
Yes off course because to confuse and to gain muslims votes and eye wash for mulsim community nothing else. Eg: After Gujrat Riots Abdul Kalam Made President of India because to use as the duster for what BJP had done in Gujrat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.172.4.133 ( talk) 14:00, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
No use debating that guys, its present in every political party. Caste equations are formed everywhere. Most of it is only eyewash. Swaroop ( talk) 03:45, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Bakasuprman will no doubt be able to justify his recent revert of my careful editing of some recent uncited additions? Hornplease 04:11, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Question CAN A PARTY WHICH IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DIVIDING THE COUNTRY ON RELIGIOUS GROUNDS AND INSIGHTING HATRED AMOUNG TWO COMMUNITIES BE GIVING CHANCE TO RULE OUR NATION. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hussaine ( talk • contribs) 13:15, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
I changed the word orgy to the word outburst as I did not find orgy to be an appropriate word to use within this context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tenjikuronin ( talk • contribs) 05:18, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
How is it that the Gujarat riots are mentioned in this article while the US Republican Party article talks nothing about KKK et all.
Wikipedia is overrun by Congress fans trying to destroy BJPs good image if anything.-- Milki 22:56, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
I Have a Simple Question about BJP, VHP, RSS, Bajrand Dal Etc. These people Want to build Ram Rajya, Is this is what mean Ram Rajya(Gujrat Riots) mean. Killing Innocent People, Raping There own Indians, Sister, mothers etc. Then Every one should think about These Parties. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.172.4.133 ( talk) 14:13, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, i agree with 122.172.4.133. We learn in our class 1 that all Indians are our brothers and sisters. I won't comment anything about the BJP, RSS and Bajrang Dal, though the Bajrang Dal was shown to have a hand in the Mangalore pub attack. And whoever wants mention of KKK in the Republican Party page can by all means go and add it there. Swaroop ( talk) 03:51, 23 August 2009 (UTC) . Th Jay942942 ( talk) 22:30, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm removing the Gujarat Riots reference. The Congress page doesn't talk about the attacks on Bombay. The Republican Party page doesn't talk about KKK or and The Democratic Party page doesn't say anything about their pro-slavery stance (in the past). So Why should an unsourced statement made by some Congress fanatic be part of the BJP Page unless someone can convince me otherwise.
Most of non-science related pages at wikipedia have criticism section why its not here, it should be added and filled with criticism BJP faces but in neutral langauge.
My POV: BJP is a party with a Roadmap, 21'st Century road and 10'th Century map ;-)
Vjdchauhan 11:09, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Please guys, view this merely as a Wikipedia article. Criticism is an integral part of any good article and it removes the feeling of non-neutrality that users get on reading articles. Swaroop ( talk) 03:53, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
And whoever says that criticism isn't there in pages of the Democrats, Republicans, AIADMK and whatever, please note that each article is independent of each other. Swaroop ( talk) 03:54, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Pectore talk 05:35, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Not necessarily, criticism(say of this BJP article) removes a feeling of bias. Of course there is nothing called as neutral criticism, which would be meaningless. And criticism is vital for a non-biased view. Swaroop ( talk) 12:30, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
I have added the section [ [3]] on recent unprecedented derecogntion issues faced by BJP in the wake of Election CD controversy. [4].See also [ Special Report], [ After CD row, BJP releases provocative advertisement ] [ Fight BJP politically: Derecognition will make it a martyr] Terminador 02:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Dear friends,
It seems that the honorable Sri Narendra Modi, the best CM in India, has had his page Hijacked by some Bangladeshi and some American Congressman. I ask you to step up and bring balance to his article. Thank You - Jai Hind. Tri400 12:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Can anyone explain why all references to the UP election as well as the threat of derecognition have been removed? If not, I will restore it. Hornplease 23:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Why are certain members removing edits without any explanation? And they have removed it at least three times without any explanation. -- TomCat111 20:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Why is their no mention of the Gujarat Riots in this article? The article on Indian National Congress mentions the Anti-Sikh riots. Amit@ Talk 09:00, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Editors are requested not to add their POV about the comparision of riots under various dispensations, and to edit the articles of the respective parties for the same. Thanks. ReluctantPhilosopher ( talk) 16:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I think the 'Political accusations' chapter should be removed, my empirical understand is that such chapters just function as an open invitations of opponents of the party in question to post their own pov queries. Gujarat 2002 is a notable event, and should be mentioned in the history chapter with a link to main article, but should be kept brief as per WP:UNDUE. -- Soman ( talk) 20:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
The less known reason seems to be the fact that BJP, considering the humiliating defeat and further annihilations suffered by medieval deccani dynasties like chalukyas etc at the hands of the powerful and imperialist ancient tamil royal races of cholas and pallavas,sees an oppurtunity now centuries after the demise of the above mentioned tamil royalties, to make up for those humiliations
Should this (and more) be there in the article? ReluctantPhilosopher ( talk) 16:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Nope. Its rambling OR. I've reverted it before but the author is keen on its addition. KBN ( talk) 06:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Can't we block the anon who keeps adding content llike
"BJP's politics also give a probably correct impression that it has to be regarded as a contemporary legatee of many medieval deccan dynasties..." etc.
-- ReluctantPhilosopher ( talk) 16:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Wow - this entire article reads like an opinion piece with almost NO sources for the contents. In serious need of re-write to remove the bulk of the statements. Triage ( talk) 14:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi this is User: Political Dweeb's explanation. The reason I took away the article on this talk page called the "BJP's position" is because no one seemed to want to talk to me about it so I put up the paragraphs under the title called Secret advertisement so anyone or the representatives of the Indian Peoples Party could clarify for me this position. Therefore does the Indian Peoples Party represent conservative ideologies on the right but support or oppose extreme forms of discrimination like anti-Semitism, Nazism, Holocaust denial and the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party which used the Indian Peoples Party banner on their links page?-- Political Dweeb ( talk) 15:52, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you User: Relato refero for that reply I will now give you one answer and two questions. Firstly from what I have learned from the Wikipedia page on Hindutva ideology it does seem to be a personal but constructive form of ideology on the right wing that accepts different traditions and religons of India even if they are not part of it.
However Relato refero my two questions are
(1)Is it possible so it can be clarified for safety's sake if you can communicate with a representative of the BJP to see if they oppose the LNSGP and the other extreme forms of discrimination that I previously been talking about?
(2)This second question is about why was the article called "Secret advertisement" that I made taken away from the Wikipedia page on the Indian Peoples Party? Because I learned recently as far as I know that underneath an editing box like this there’s a small rectangular box with the words Edit summary above it. So did I just need to write in it to explain why I changed the BJP article by adding extra text/paragraph’s Political Dweeb ( talk) 12:47, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you User: Shovon76 for your reply. I found on the history of the edits made to the page on the BJP that Relato refero said that the point I made about the link between BJP and LNSGP was unsourced. However I had shown the link called http://www.nazi.org where the BJP link banner was on so I do not understand what Relato means when he says I have not sourced it. Political Dweeb ( talk) 16:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
In the past few days there have been some questionable, unsourced edits to this article. At first I tried to remove them, but realized that I couldn't decifer between what was the recent POV edits and older material, as some was sourced. I would like to help with the editing of this article, but will wait for some more experieced editors to comment and/or edit first. Thanks. Ism schism ( talk) 15:41, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Frnds, I intend to trim down the article a bit. I hope to begin with the criticism / controversies portion which is quite big, it seems, with allegations and refutations. I request your invaluable opinions, and suggestions. -- Karimpuli ( talk) 11:07, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Tripping Nambiar, the issues are mainly related to ideology that is going beyond the boundary of NPOV. Additionally, the template used is only meant for sections. If you want to add a fresh NPOV, raise the number of issues here and add. -- Googlean ( talk) 05:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
FACT tag needed only when there is be short of of RS. User:Tripping Nambiar has added it without properly reading the Hindu article & other incidents which is directly coming to the subject. However, I haven’t removed it from xenophobia as I could not find any direct sources accusing this term with the subject. My question to User:Karimpuli is that if the burden of proof lies with the one who put the fact tag (as you quoted at the edit summary), It would have been better, if the person who added the fact tag had responded i.e Tripping Nambiar? -- Googlean ( talk) 08:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Friend, if "it is impossible to provide accurate reference on each and every wording", the tags shall remain. -- GRRRRRRR................ ( talk) 11:51, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
So whats this parties econimic position?-- J intela ( talk) 17:49, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
I thought the BJP was a fascist party that helped Gujarati rioters pour petrol down the throats of Muslim men and set it alight after raping their female family members in front of them. Couldn't this article have a bit more detail about this? It seems to be written by the wrong people —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.95.125.189 ( talk) 05:58, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
talk about bias. -- 94.71.97.213 ( talk) 17:00, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Wiki reflects only administrator’s view (in this case mostly privilege Hindu upper cast Indian’s), they can allow content to be added without any reliable reference like in this article or delete content which is supported by reliable sources references but goes against their ideology. They are making wiki dirty place & biased. Such administrators shall be blocked.
Edit shall be reverted if it does not confirm to fundamental wikipedia policies, namely neutral POV, no original research, reliable sourcing, and also make inappropriate use of primary sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maverick1728 ( talk • contribs) 16:11, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
{{ editsemiprotected}} Mvz321 ( talk) 10:25, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Should be relegated to major issues, not things that have only been in the news for a couple weeks. Issues about Gujarat (which continue to haunt the party) belong, random incidents don't, since every party has corrupt people. Pectore talk 17:11, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
{{editsemiprotected}}
BJP in various states ==
BJP is currently in power in five states ( Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Chhattisgarh and Himachal Pradesh) where the party enjoys a majority of its own. In four other states — Punjab, Nagaland, Uttrakhand and Bihar — it shares power with other alliance partners.
Nirjharvarshney (
talk)
06:39, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
I added a warning that this page might be biased because of this sentence:
"Nationalism (Patriotism) is always better than fake (Pseudo) secularism, corruption, appeasement (vote bank politics), tolerance to terrorism and family/dynasty politics with help of corporate media-made delusions and false propaganda." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.177.176.175 ( talk) 15:47, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Someone recently removed the description Right Wing claiming that the source was an opinion piece. There are literally hundreds of peer reviewed sourced describing BJP as a Right Wing, Hindu Nationalist party - I have inserted some of them. Many academic sources also state that it is predominantly supported from the upper castes, this might be included in the article as well. ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 20:09, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
This page is very biased. It overwhelmingly only represents the official views of the highly controversial BJP Party. If there is a group of editors willing to try to craft an attempt at a more neutral page, please...let's talk. Otherwise this page is little more than propaganda.-- Chip.berlet ( talk) 01:08, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Bharatiya Janata Party/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Mr. Goldstein Orwell,
May I ask why you have removed every single authentic and very well cited edits? Every single edit I did was cited, supported, and consistent with the reports of the highly reputable and the largest Indian newspapers (among others, the Times of India and the Hindu) and BBC. You can click on every single link to verify that my edits were consistent with the historical news reports. My edits are necessary because they play a vital role in balancing, otherwise highly inaccurate, distorted and biased views. I would also like to know the exact words that might have violated your policies, so I can use the vocabulary consistent with your policies. Thanks |
Last edited at 00:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 20:04, 2 May 2016 (UTC)