'Secularism goes against Indian idea': Assam CM Himanta Biswa backs RSS call to remove words from Constitution; adds 'socialism never our vision'
"
While launching a book titled The Emergency Diaries: Years That Forged a Leader at the state BJP headquarters in Guwahati, Biswa said that these words were not part of the original Constitution and should be dropped, as secularism goes against the Indian idea of Sarva Dharma Sambhava, and socialism was never part of India's original economic vision.
"Today, we launched the book The Emergency Diary, which talks about the struggle and resistance during the Emergency.
When we talk about the Emergency, this is the right moment to remove its remaining impact, just like Prime Minister Modi is working to erase the legacy of colonial rule. Two major outcomes of the Emergency were the addition of the words secularism and socialism to our Constitution. I believe secularism goes against the Indian idea of Sarva Dharma Sambhava.
Socialism was also never truly our economic vision, our focus has always been on Sarvodaya Antyodaya," Biswa said.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Forget Furosemide, Use This Household Item To Help Drain Edema Fluid
WellnessGuide
Learn more
Undo
"So, I request the Government of India to remove these two words, secularism and socialism, from the Preamble, as they were not part of the original Constitution and were added later by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi," he added.
This comes a day after Hosabale proposed that the words "socialist" and "secular" were forcibly added to the Constitution and should now be reconsidered.
"The Emergency wasn't just a misuse of power, but an attempt to crush civil liberties.
Millions were imprisoned, and freedom of the press was suppressed." He said that those who imposed the Emergency and trampled the Constitution and democracy have never apologised.
The words "socialist", "secular", and "integrity" were inserted into the Preamble under the 42nd Constitutional Amendment moved by the former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi government in 1976.
The amendment changed the description of India in the Preamble from a "sovereign, democratic republic" to a "sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic."
Earlier, the Supreme Court dismissed a plea challenging the inclusion of the words "socialist", "secular", and "integrity" to the Preamble of the Constitution.
A bench of CJI Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar said amendment power of the Parliament extends to the Preamble as well, and the fact that the Constitution was adopted in 1949 does not make any difference.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
19 minutes ago
- Time of India
Cabinet okays bill that seeks to ban ‘online money game'
NEW DELHI: Cabinet on Tuesday approved a bill that seeks to ban "online money game", where users pay a fee or deposit money, proposing a maximum three years in jail or fine of up to Rs 1 crore for those involved in offering, encouraging or inducing players to participate, which also extends to banks facilitating these transactions. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now At the same time, Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Bill, which will be introduced in Lok Sabha on Wednesday, seeks to promote e-sports and online social games where no money is involved. A regulator body is planned to oversee the functioning of the sector, sources told TOI. The proposed legislation defines "online money game" as an online game played by a user by paying fees, depositing money or other stakes in expectation of winning. 2 years' jail, ₹50L fine likely for those advertising online games Online social games have been defined as those that don't involve exchange of money, although users may be allowed to pay a subscription or one-time access fee. Govt has proposed the new law considering unregulated online money gaming platforms pose threats to national and economic security as they use digital wallets and cryptocurrencies for money laundering and illicit money transfer, cross-border data flows without compliance of data protection law, sources said. Moreover, offshore entities are seen to be circumventing tax and legal obligations. The proposed legislation also assumes significance as online money gaming poses serious concerns, including addiction among children and youth, mental health issues, financial losses leading to suicides and lack of uniform regulation across states. Law enforcing agencies face problems in tracking and regulating these platforms, particularly those hosted or operated from outside India. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Sources said the govt proposes penalties of up to two years in jail or with a maximum fine of Rs 50 lakh or both for any entity advertising such games in media. For those offering online money games and banks engaged in transactions face violations of the proposed law will be "cognisable and non-bailable" offences. Every subsequent violation after conviction would attract penalties of at least three years' jail and fine of Rs 10-20 lakh. In the case of advertisers, such penalties would be 2-3 years in jail and fine of Rs 5-10 lakh. The bill proposes to hold senior executives of the companies liable, if it's established that the offences have been committed with the consent or connivance or due to their neglect. It also proposes blocking of platforms and money gaming services, if the entities or individuals fail to comply with the law. According to the proposal, the bill seeks to encourage Indian startups to build culturally relevant content, reduce dependence on foreign platforms and promote self-reliance in the digital gaming ecosystem.
News18
28 minutes ago
- News18
Decoding RSS: Ten Key Tenets Of World's Largest Voluntary Movement
Prime Minister Narendra Modi praised the RSS for its selfless contribution to nation-building from the ramparts of the Red Fort during his Independence Day speech It is very difficult to understand the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) but very easy to misunderstand it. This is what can be said about the largest voluntary movement in the world that is completing 100 years on this year's Vijayadashami. That is also the reason for a political debate that has started after Prime Minister Narendra Modi praised the RSS for its selfless contribution to nation-building from the ramparts of the Red Fort during his Independence Day speech. Let us take a look at 10 key tenets that are key to understanding the RSS: First, RSS is not an organisation in society, but it is organising society. So, it can't be looked at from the traditional or any other existing lens of analysing non-governmental organisations or, in fact, any other organisation. Second, RSS's only work is to create people with strong character who are committed to the service of the society and nation. Whatever work is done, it is done by the RSS volunteers known as 'swayamsevaks". And as they work closely with society in different fields, the credit for any change or betterment goes to society itself. Thus, neither the RSS nor its volunteers seek recognition for any achievements. Third, the objective of the RSS is to transform society. This 'transformation" would be achieved, according to the RSS, when every individual would get an opportunity to realise their full potential. Fourth, when this objective is achieved, the RSS should just merge with the whole society and vanish. And when history is recorded, no credit should be given to the RSS, as it is the society that has transformed itself. Fifth, the RSS believes in a holistic perspective and not a binary vision. It doesn't believe in the fragmented vision of 'majority vs minority" or 'left vs right". For the RSS, all Bharatiyas are part of one nation. Sixth, when the RSS talks about Hindu unity, it doesn't associate the word 'Hindu" with a religion or a way of worship. For the RSS, the word 'Hindu" denotes all those who consider Bharat to be their motherland and are committed to serving her. An individual going to the mosque or a church or even an atheist is as much a 'Hindu" for the RSS as an individual going to the temple if he or she is ready to live and die for Bharat. Seventh, the RSS believes that the concept of 'secularism" was picked up from the West and imposed on India in the post-Independence era by politicians and intellectuals who were not rooted in the cultural ethos of Bharat. The concept of 'secularism" as it is applied today was a typical Christian response to intra-Christianity wars and the dominance of the Church in Europe. The Christian wars in the 16th and 17th centuries had ravaged Europe, as the Church was intertwined with the State in such a manner that one couldn't segregate the two. The French Revolution laid down the foundation for the principle of laïcité—the separation of religion and the State. In 1905, France formally codified it as a law. The rest of Europe broadly followed this principle. Indian intellectuals and politicians who were in awe of 'Western liberalism" or 'Marxism" picked up this idea and thrust it upon India. In the Indian civilisational construct dating back several millennia, religion never dominated the State because we were ruled by the concept of 'dharma"—a set of eternal values that has nothing to do with any particular way of worship. Eighth, the RSS associates 'religion" with a way of worship and 'dharma" with a set of eternal values that have been driving Bharat's civilisational journey since the beginning. This set of eternal values is 'Hindu Dharma". So, when the RSS talks about the concept of 'Hindu Rashtra", it implies a nation that is constantly guided by 'dharma", not by any 'religion". Ninth, the RSS believes that we as a 'nation" are different from the modern 'nation-states". Our idea of nationalism is different from the West's idea of nationalism. Noted historian David Sasson, who earned his PhD under Eric Hobsbawm, one of the foremost authorities on Western nationalism, observed in his introduction to a collection of essays and lectures by Hobsbawm, 'On Nationalism", 'In Europe, nationalism was the product of the 'dual revolutions', the French Revolution and the British Industrial Revolution. The rise of the 'White man's nationalism' in Europe resulted in colonisation of large parts of Asia, Africa, and Latin America, civil wars within the Western nation-states, countless military conflicts between nations, at least two world wars and ethnic cleansing of minorities in the Western countries by the dominant political powers who had captured the power riding on the wave of 'nationalism'. That is why significant sections of the society as well as the academia, media and intelligentsia in the West are wary of 'nationalism'. In the West, utterance of the word 'nationalism' brings back memories of loot, plunder, bloody wars and a quest for material wealth and military superiority. 'Hindu Nationalism' is quite different from European or Western Nationalism. The trajectory of European nationalism and Hindu nationalism are altogether different. Radha Kumud Mookerji, known for his monumental work on history and culture of India. has explained the difference in his seminal work Nationalism in Hindu Culture published in 1921. According to Mookerji, it is a mistake readily to assume that the origin of that remarkable social phenomenon of nationalism is to be found in the West; that it is a genuinely Western product imported into the Eastern countries long after their growth and development; that the Eastern mind was completely a stranger to the very conception of the mother country, a sense of natural attachment to her, and a corresponding sense of duties and obligations which the children of the soil owe to her. Such misconceptions are due to a colossal ignorance of the culture of the East. Even in the dim and distant age of remote antiquity, unillumined by the light of historical knowledge, we find the underlying principles of nationalism chanted forth in the hymns of the Rig Veda embodying the very first utterance of humanity itself. That book, one of the oldest literary records of humanity, reveals conscious and fervent attempts made by the Rishis (seers), those profoundly wise organisers of Hindu polity and culture, to visualise the unity of their mother-country, nay, to transfigure the mother earth into a living deity and enshrine her in the loving heart of the worshipper." Tenth, and the most interesting tenet of the RSS philosophy, is that there are two kinds of people in our society—those who have joined the RSS and those who would ultimately join it. That is why the RSS doesn't respond to even its most vicious critiques, and history has been a witness—there is no dearth of RSS-baiters who later became the most committed swayamsevaks. The writer is an author and columnist. His X handle is @ArunAnandLive. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views. Click here to add News18 as your preferred news source on Google. tags : hindu Narendra Modi rss view comments Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: August 20, 2025, 04:29 IST News opinion Right Word | Decoding RSS: Ten Key Tenets Of World's Largest Voluntary Movement Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Loading comments...
Time of India
32 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Will give view on Prez reference; won't decide validity of TN guv verdict': Supreme Court
Supreme Court of India NEW DELHI: Keeping aside objections of Kerala and Tamil Nadu govts on the maintainability of the Presidential reference, Supreme Court on Tuesday said it would give its opinion on the President's 14 queries if it finds these raising important questions of law on SC's power to fix timelines for her and governors in granting, withholding or refusing assent to bills passed by assemblies. After hearing senior advocates K K Venugopal for Kerala and A M Singhvi for TN, a five-judge bench of CJI B R Gavai and Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar asked, "Are you really serious in raising preliminary objections?" CJI said, "We are not deciding the validity of the (April 8) Tamil Nadu judgment (regarding its governor's role on bills). We are only deciding Presidential reference and will be giving an advisory opinion." Kant said, "We will first decide whether a question of law of public importance has been raised in the reference." Opinion given by a Constitution bench of SC is binding on all, Mehta tells court Singhvi said SC cannot overturn the two-judge bench's April 8 judgment in the Tamil Nadu case through an advisory opinion and that if the opinion expresses a view contrary to that expressed in the Tamil Nadu case, then there would be two sets of constitutional laws - one for TN on the governor's role on bills and the opinion applicable to all other states. Solicitor general Tushar Mehta cited a few judgments to argue that the opinion given by a Constitution bench of SC is binding on all and can even overturn views expressed by a bench on similar issues. Both AG R Venkataramani and Mehta, supported by senior advocates Harish N Salve, N K Kaul and Maninder Singh, argued in support of the Presidential reference and said in the light of the two-judge bench's judgment, but without referring to the facts of that case, the President felt an authoritative pronouncement from SC was needed given that there had been a series of disjointed pronouncements on the core issue. Venkatramani's arguments outlined the Centre's unease over SC, through its April 8 judgment, foraying into the legislative domain and amending constitutional provisions on the roles of governors (Article 200) and the President (Article 201) in relation to their power to give or deny assent to bills passed by legislatures, and said the two-judge bench should have referred the constitutional issues to a five-judge bench as mandated by Article 145(3) of the Constitution and not ventured to decide them. By prescribing timelines, "SC looked upon the President as an ordinary statutory authority and asked her to give assent to a bill within a specified time without examining whether the bill is unconstitutional, against the national policy framed by the Union govt or against the national interest," the AG said. Venkataramani also faulted SC using its exclusive powers under Article 142 to mandate the President to seek advisory opinion of the court under Article 143 whenever she had doubts about constitutionality of a bill. "SC robbed the highest constitutional authority of the power to think, and decide the legality or constitutionality of a bill," he said, adding that another unthinkable part of the SC judgment was the use of Article 142 powers to grant 'deemed assent' to bills. Without referring to facts of the case where the TN governor had long delayed granting assent to bills, the bench asked the AG, "If the facts of a case on egregious delay (on the governor's part) comes for adjudication before a constitution bench of SC, can you suggest what should be the court's approach?" The AG said even if a constitution bench can examine the issues, under no circumstance could the court either amend the Constitution or assume the role constitutionally assigned to the governor to grant "deemed assent" to bills. "If this is permissible, then for every small mistake or delay, the states would approach SC for grant of deemed assent." Mehta supplemented the AG's arguments and said the CJI-led five-judge bench could keep the TN facts aside and give an ideal interpretation of Articles 200 and 201. "Some mistakes committed by a governor or a minister or anyone in a given case should not be the guiding factor for interpreting constitutional provisions," he said. The SG will continue his arguments on Wednesday.
