Amit Misra

hinduwoman, i don't want to sound patronizing, but are you too young or unaware to know the circumstances of the elections from the 1960s thru 90s? do you recall that time at all? the Janata Part experiment? Jayprakash Narayan? Indira Gandhi? Rajiv? The Advani Rath Yatras? Not to get too long-winded about it, the answer to BJP's electoral success is straight and simple. Hate-politics. The RSS, under Advani's tutelage mounted a vicious campaign to mobilize hindu (largely unemployed) youth, feeding them the classic fascist lie: the muslims are responsible for your problems. told them that it was a matter of pride to be nasty, specialy to muslims. dredged out wrongs committed by victorious muslims in medieval times and pointed at them as stains on the hindu pride.
lady, pride is a negative emotion. at par with the last refuge of the scoundrel: patriotism. it was on these two props that BJP went ahead on its election-winning phase. but now the tide is turning. the people have learnt that these slogans were as empty as Indira's "garibi hatao" (remove poverty) or Rajiv's "21st century." the BJP is losing election after election. this is exactly when it gets more dangerous than ever before. it will use all the hatred it can whip up to polarize the vote allong communal lines.
wish i had time to respond to other parts of your message. will do so sometime soon.
regards,
amit

Amit Misra

but the Times of India, Hindustan Times, The Hindu, Dainik Jagaran, Jansatta, etc., do report in gory detail when muslim mobs or mobsters commit mayhem. do i detect disappointment in the complaint that there are fewer newspaper reports of muslims killing/raping hindus?
Islam, or for that matter any organized religion cannot be a movement for peace. people whjo say that are either deluding themselves or society. organized religion is solely and exclusively a means of acquiring political power. (just as personal religion is solely and exclusively a means of escaping responsibility--notice the neat way i hook up power and responsibility?)
so its not my way to call islam a religion of peace, but i put my foot firmly down about bemoaning what muslim "invaders" did to hindus in 798 AD to 1798 AD or thereafter (odd how all muslims in history are clubbed under the umbrella term of "muslim invaders" in the hindu discourse!). simply because its no different from what hindu invaders did to other hindus or to jains, buddhists, animists, et alia, and it all happened so dreadfully long ago. in fact, i find it pathetic that nations like south africa need truth and reconciliation commissions, or that japan issues apologies for atrocities committed on south asians during WWII. does it right a historic wrong if contemporary apologies salve healed scars? or does it right a historic wrong if contemporary vengeance is wrought upon the descendants of its perpetrators?
and minority rights. well, i am staunch advocate of pampering minorities. after all, i am an atheist-- one representative of a global minority . i say that it is an essential function and cardinal virtue of a state to pamper its minorities. diversity is to be celebrated, not curbed. another reason to keep the minorities thriving- when at last the majority view (hindutva, liberalization, privatization, Bretton Woods think tanks, Sardar Sarovar, Global War against Terrorism, etc.) is shown up to be the colossal fraud on people that it is--"manufactured consent" in Chomsky's telling phrase, you have somebody left that thinks differently.
If the RSS benefits by twisting the intent of minority-encouraging measures, so be it. Such "benefits" just go to show that our people are not politically mature enough. We've got the leaders we deserve.

sorry i snipped the fernandes bit, but i don't want to talk about bad jokes personified.

to set the record straight, i would like to point out that "thar ain't no sich animal" as a secular-IST. its a figment of the hindutva imagination. the people who marched in lucknow were middle-class citizens, those that tried to in ahmedabad (and were attacked and scattered by the RSS) included students of the Indian Institute of Management there. one guess why there were no non-crocodile-tear-shedding peace marches in gujarat. the RSS didn't let them!

Ah, but the trouble is, the RSS includes lying to the people as an acceptable means towards its end (political power). i, though not an intellectual sensu stricto (i work in a lab and use my brains, thats about all), am constrained by a sense of morality that prevents me from lying. About god, about glorious hindutva, about the Kingdom of Rama. Its just unfortunate that our people prefer the lies to the stark realities of human existence, and that I shall have to grovel to be spared my life.
<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />
hey hinduwoman, you have the last word and lets call it a day. i've just goofed off from the lab for far longer than i was supposed to. won't be back for many a day. hope to see your nom-de-guerre changed to "woman" when i return...
namaste
amit

hinduwoman

I refuse. I chose hinduwoman in sheer rage precisely because I did not want any bloody secularist to think I can be of their camp. The so-called intellectuals secularists of India are those who

Feel the Koran should not be analyzed as a historical document because it is a matter of faith

Calls it intellectual freedom to discuss Ramayana as a story of savage colonization and that Ram was never a real person, but calls it communalism when it comes to discussing Mohammed's character

Demands that Rushdie's book be banned because it hurts Muslim sentiments but says they cherish freedom of speech above all

Demand the arrest of those who disrupt showing of Fire and then use governmental authority to stop the showing of a film because it shows a 'distorted' picture of Stalin as a mass-murderer

Explain that they cannot fight for Muslim women's rights because it would give fuel to Hindu communal propaganda that Islam is a misogynist religion

Insist that RSS is forcefully imposing worship of Ram on the rest of India to the detriment of local gods --- a theme crafted for western sensibilities

Instead of critiquing VHP's proof of Ramjamnashan temple write paper that Ram was actually a Pharaoh of Egypt and that merely their saying that VHP is a communal organization can take the place of facts

Negate Islamic history in India with gems like how the Sultans never oppressed Hindus for their religion, that Babar was a secular emperor, that Aurganzeb's reign contained only isolated examples of temple destruction, that Tipu was a gentle secular person whose creed was humanism, presumably under the belief ordinary Indians are unable to read history for themselves

Shrieks about saffronization of History conveniently forgetting how they themselves had unceremoniously thrown out portions that did not agree with their preconceived notions and that even now they teach in universities that Soviet Union was really a success in essence

Speak about the evils of US and Capitalism and then go to American organizations with begging-bowls -- whether it is for investment in the two communist states or for invitations to speak in international seminars

Explains that RSS cannot be Hindus since they reject caste-system, is wicked because they offer temple entry and Sanskrit education to dalits trying to make Hindu society more liberal, and is guilty of making a passive religion more war-like (now the secularists are experts in what is the essence of Hinduism as well)

Broadcasts on media that the muslims of Godhra were provoked by chants of Bharat Mata ki jai. This fits in with their thesis that patriotism is bad (perhaps because their bread and butter are international seminars and foreign NGOs) and so presumably the provokers should have shouted Victory to India in Pakistan.

Calls the destruction of Babri Masjid barbaric and then burns to death in broad daylight eight Anandmargis and hacks a BJP schoolteacher before his students and the rest of their brethren is mum about it so that we now know what civilized action is

Is against anyone who says that Muslims and christians must regard themselves as Indians first and Muslims and Christians second

Concludes anyone who tells them that any of their theseses can be wrong are fascists.


THESE HYPOCRITES ARE NOT PEOPLE I WANT AS MY FRIENDS.

Since these are the people who declare themselves secular, progressive, liberal, creedless and sect less humanists

I AM A RABID ATHEIST HINDU FUNDAMENTALIST.

hinduwoman

Mishra, your entire speech is nothing but verbal fog. And yes, it is patronizing based on the assumption that the speaker has a cooler and more rational head and anyone who disagrees is blinded by hate. Hatepolitics is a convenient term to apply to anyone who disagrees with leftist-oriented politics. So I will be even more patronizing.

Yes to be proud of any aspect of Hindu culture, to allow Hindus have any sense of self-worth is very bad; one should only be proud of being Macaulay's children

And of course this is not demonizing, but merely a statement of sober unbiased fact.

Really, funny that I did not notice any. Somehow Muslim atrocities on Hindus do not find a space unless it is the terrorists. Also these reports in the English Press do not continue to be broadcast day after day with weighty editorials thundering about the evil effects of communalism, as it happens when Hindus kill Muslims. Of course if this implies that Hindus have a superior moral standard and so must live up to it unlike Muslims, I am all for it. (Notice I said English Press, not the vernacular one. Most vernacular press seems to have a different opinion about what is going on, so much so that our English Press want them to be punished for inflaming communal passions. Of course that opens up a whole another can of worms ).

Indeed, and Kashmir is so far away, Bangladesh after all is another country and Islamic terrorism is only a figment of imagination of Jews and Hindu bigots, Sayed Sahabuddin and Bhukhari are full of admiration for ordinary Hindus, and ordinary Muslims did not cheer for Iraq

This of course includes allowing triple talaqs and polygamy (dreadful that some of these pesky Muslim women do not understand the glory of diversity and wishes to do away with such things, but don't worry, the secularists are bent on averting such disaster), allowing madrasas where only the Koran is taught and be shocked that anyone can say that such education is unsuitable for this age and can breed terrorism, and of course let the secular government pay for their haj journey. People have always wondered why a secular govt. should pay for a religious pilgrimage of only one particular community out of tax-payer's money, but as you explained the minorities must be pampered even if it means distorting the meaning of secularism.
Some diversities are to be curbed if civilization is to progress and I don't give a damn if it tramples on minority rights. How come such pampering of minorities are not applicable to tribals when they kill witches?

A secularist or rather a pseudo-secularist in India is defined as someone who goes on saying that Indian Muslims must be allowed to live under shariat because the State must protect minority rights and it is wrong to ask any community to integrate itself into the national mainstream. He also says that the grievances Hindus have built up against Muslims are imaginary. He also insists that it is wrong for any Hindu to be proud of his culture. Obviously you are not a figment of imagination.
What you have not yet said is that there is too much attention on plight of Kashmiri pandits and not enough on atrocities committed by Indian army.

You mean the army was hand-in-gloves with the RSS?

In other words any popular movement that refuses to listen to intellectuals (say, a revolution in a communist state) occur not because the people really want it but because their support is manufactured. Only the intellectuals who throw around terms like postmodernism and deconstruction are clever enough to understand what is going on.

Yes, they do lie their head off when they read out the choice bits from the Koran. Their fondness for lies is shown when they demand that the secularists show proof of their favourite charge that Hindu kings routinely destroyed temples of conquered kingdoms. And the way they sneaked in a poem praising Palestinian suicide-bombers as martyrs who have gone to heaven on the front page of a Urdu gazette is nothing short of miraculous. Saying that Christian missionaries hold Hindu religion in contempt is a lie. And of course demanding that all citizens live under one law comes under the heading of lying.

As I said before as long as the so called intellectuals only know Islamic correctness and measure their success by papers they have published (reviews only by their own group counts), it is people like Bal Tackeray and Uma Bharati who would continue to shape history for good or evil.

roshan

LOL!

anyway, ive been reading news at hindustan times for more than 6 months now, and from what ive noticed, if any atrocity is committed by hindus, they always mention that it was done by hindus.

when muslims commit atrocities, they normally hide it by not naming the religion.

hinduwoman

That is an occupational disease of all secularist newspapers. You will notice in Times of India , Indian Express, Telegraph and also in TV like NDTV. Nowadays we know that if they say a member of a particular community has done something, then they mean muslims; if neither the name of the criminal nor the victim is given then it means the aggressor is a muslim and the victim a hindu.

brahma

Whatever do you mean? Are you a Hindu? If so, then how can you be an atheist? And if you are indeed an atheist, how can you be a true Hindu? Lets go with dictionary.com's definition
a·the·ist
noun.
One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods.

sbaii

Hinduwoman,
I am very impressed by your lengthy and highly informative postings. I admit to knowing very little about Indian history and even less about recent Indian political history. The secularist government does seem to be acting above the call of duty in protecting minority rights,i.e., paying for the haj and tolerating the madrasas. It sounds like there is a strong communist streak among the secularists if they are still singing the praises of the defunct USSR.
With so many minorities, Indian society sounds similar to the U.S. society. Is language a barrier among India's minorities? I believe India is still quite a poor country and there is nothing that breeds religious zealotry like poverty. The U.S. standard of living helps to keep religious fundamentalism from growing too much. It also helps to keep GW Bush and company from running rampant over the country. Although they have got a lot more power than I feel comfortable about.
How much Rss influence do you see in India's approach to Pakistan and the Kashmir conflict of late? Are you saying that all the social work is merely a ruse the Rss is using to gain power and then impose a much more conservative social rule?
What does hindutva mean?
I hope that you will respond by private message to me as I seldom come to this board and will probably forget to look in for your response.

hinduwoman

Yes, Hindu Atheist does sound like an oxymoron.
But Hinduism is not solely about the gods, it is a bundle of social customs, moral codes, world views.
Unless you really, really want to I won't bore you with all the deep reflections I have come up with. Suffice it to say it is basically an emotional attachment to the whole culture thing.
there are quiet a lot of us floating around.

hinduwoman

sbii,
I will respond by private message in a day or two because it will be a really long answer.