| Bharat Rakshak http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/ | |
| The Hindu fake liberal http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=4336 | |
| Author: | shiv [ 24 Sep 2008 11:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | The Hindu fake liberal |
Every self goal scored by a Hindu liberal trying to create equivalence where equivalence is non existent or incredible is a goal in favor of Hindu extremism. If Hindus who consider themselves moderate and secular also choose to be partial liars where they ignore one crime and talk of another crime - they and the people they support have it coming. Let us see where the intelligence and rhetoric of the Hindu liberal takes him. The most pathetically contemptible aspect of the Hindu liberal is that his viewpoint could be respected if he just converts to another faith and argues or appeals as a Christian or Muslim. But you won't find Hindu liberals doing that . they remain Hindu and try to lie their way through. He thinks that his Hinduness will act as a balm and please non Hindus as an example of great secularism. This is a joke that will end soon. The liberal will have to learn to face up to the truth and the truth is unless he can acknowledge that bigotry exists outside Hinduism in great doses, Hindus will will be quite happy to act like bigots because that is a reputation they already have - without anyone doing anything. Hindus lose nothing by being called bigots - they only need to add violence to their bigotry. The Hindu liberal spends his life being apologetic to shake of the pre-existing reputation of bigotry that Hindus have and hastens to chasten Hindus who he sees as bigots by great sacrificial acts of self flagellation. That defines the Hindu liberal  | |
| Author: | Sachin [ 24 Sep 2008 12:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Delhi Blasts news and info |
fanne wrote: It happens that in around 1857 British had captured Delhi. They also were converting many Indians and it was common to see some Sir John Singh, Sir Smith Gupta. The first day of 1857 revolution, Delhi was held by the revolutionary. The first thing they did was to kill these Sirs, people gladly pointed to their mahals. There is a good book my William Dalrymple - "The Last Moghul". The book is about Bahadur Shah Zafar and Delhi during the days of 1857 (the beginning, Brits getting the initial kicks, the seige and then the final suppression of the revolt). The book has good detailed notes about some of these "Sirs" who converted and were later killed. There were some British civil servants and military officers who thought it was a God given right to convert the heathens and show them the true light. Dalrymple also says that before these british officers, there were other Britishers who took a strong liking to the Indian way of life. | |
| Author: | CRamS [ 24 Sep 2008 01:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Delhi Blasts news and info |
Rank cowardice is another piskological reason for Hindu liberals to go into a self flagellating mode in the face of Isalmist terror. Thus, many Hindu liberals who feel impotent and powerless and too chicken scared to retaliate in kind when TSP & their local boys taunt with impunity, will lash out at their own as a self satisfying outlet to vent out feelings of frustration and humiliation. It makes these Hindu liberals feel different & superior from those attacked: jee this attack was not on people like me and hence no need to feel powerless, and no need to act; its the fault of 'those bigoted Hindus' who deserve this for what they did to Muslims. And by proclaiming this from roof tops, it makes them feel all the more enlightened and victorious in the face of abject defeat. The most nauseating, shameful manifesation of this cowardice is evident when these Hindu liberals bend down on their knees before TSP. Recall, Shekar Dhuppat types going before Jihadi sethi and decaling: "we will take care of BJP". Or when the fart goes on Nightline after Pakis attacked Indian parliamnet, and with a cool, straight face, showing off his pompous liberalism expresses no outrage at the diabolical Paki act, rather, but is more concerned about "Hindu nationalists" on a war mongering path. | |
| Author: | shiv [ 24 Sep 2008 01:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Delhi Blasts news and info |
CRams - the behavior of the Hindu liberal is the behavior of a person who has been taught that he is of an inferior civilization that is full of bigots who discriminate against their own in "a caste system", who burn widows and do not have the egalitarianism of Islam. he does not believe that his background is that bad and seeks to put on good behavior to prove that he's a jolly good fellow - not a bigot and spends his life cricitcising Hindus whom he feels are causing the bad reputation that Hindus and Hinduism have been given. The fact is that no amount of Hindu good behavior and apology is going to change anything because as long as the Hindu behaves it is business as usual for everyone else. What is happening now is that Hindus other than self flagellating "liberal Hindus" are beginning to realise that they have been astounding jackasses and that nothing they do will ever give them a good reputation. they will always come under attack from Islamic, Christian and Liberal Hindu groups. Once the Hindu realises this he is no longer anxious about being called a bigot. He is called bigot no matter what he does. Better to be that bigot rather than a lifelong apologist. It gets things done in a way that no other tactic can do. | |
| Author: | gandharva [ 24 Sep 2008 01:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Delhi Blasts news and info |
A Brief History of Hindu Liberal Quote: It may be remembered that Pandit Nehru was by no means a unique character. Nor is Nehruism a unique phenomenon for that matter. Such weak minded persons and such subservient thought processes have been seen in all societies that have suffered the misfortune of being conquered and subjected to alien rule for some time. There are always people in all societies who confuse superiority of armed might with superiority of culture, who start despising themselves as belonging to an inferior breed and end by taking to the ways of the conqueror in order to regain self confidence, who begin finding faults with everything they have inherited from their forefathers, and who finally join hands with every force and factor which is out to subvert their ancestral society. Viewed in this perspective, Pandit Nehru was no more than a self alienated Hindu, and Nehruism is not much more than Hindubaiting born out of and sustained by a deep seated sense of inferiority vis a vis Islam, Christianity, and the modern West. Muslim rule in medieval India had produced a whole class of such self alienated Hindus. They had interpreted the superiority of Muslim arms as symbolic of the superiority of Muslim culture. Over a period of time, they had come to think and behave like the conquerors and to look down upon their own people. They were most happy when employed in some Muslim establishment so that they might pass as members of the ruling elite. The only thing that could be said in their favour was that, for one reason or the other, they did not convert to Islam and merge themselves completely in Muslim society. But for the same reason, they had become Trojan horses of Islamic imperialism, and worked for pulling down the cultural defences of their own people. The same class walked over to the British side when British arms became triumphant. They retained most of those and Hindu prejudices which they had borrowed from their Muslim masters, and cultivated some more which were contributed by the British establishment and the Christian missions. That is how the British rule became a divine dispensation for them. The most typical product of this double process was Raja Ram Mohun Roy. Fortunately for Hindu society, however, the self alienated Hindu had not become a dominant factor during the Muslim rule. His class was confined to the urban centres where alone Muslim influence was present in a significant measure. The number of this ******** breed was few and far between in the countryside where Muslim rule had never struck strong roots. Secondly, the capacity of Islam for manipulating human minds by means of ideological warfare was less than poor. It worked mostly by means of brute force, and aroused strong resistance. Finally, throughout the period of Muslim rule, the education of Hindu children had remained in Hindu hands by and large. So the self alienated Hindu existed and functioned only on the margins of Hindu society, and seldom in the mainstream. All this changed with the coming of the British conquerors and the Christian missionaries. Their influence was not confined to the urban centres because their outposts had spread to the countryside as well. Secondly, they were equipped with a stock of ideas and the means for communicating them which were far more competent as compared to the corresponding equipment of Islam. And what made the big difference in the long run was that the education of Hindu children was taken over by the imperialist and the missionary establishments. As a cumulative result, the crop of self alienated Hindus multiplied fast and several fold. Add to that the blitzkrieg against authentic Hindus and in favour of the selfalienated Hindus mounted by the Communist apparatus built up by Soviet imperialism. It is no less than a wonder in human history that Hindu society and culture not only survived the storm, but also produced a counter attack under Maharshi Dayananda, Swami Vivekananda, Sri Aurobindo and Mahatma Gandhi such as earned for them the esteem of the world at large. Even so, the self alienated Hindus continued to multiply and flourish in a cultural miliu mostly dominated by the modem West. And they came to the top in the post independence period when no stalwart of the Hindu resurgence remained on the scene. http://voiceofdharma.org/books/hibh/ch9.htm | |
| Author: | shiv [ 24 Sep 2008 01:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Delhi Blasts news and info |
gandharva wrote: Muslim rule in medieval India had produced a whole class of such self alienated Hindus. They had interpreted the superiority of Muslim arms as symbolic of the superiority of Muslim culture. This is precisely human psychology. If Hindus now become violent and terrorize any groups - the other groups too will recognize Hindu culture as superior. All the more reason for more bigotry and fundamentalism which is a winning tactic. What is the source of this passage? | |
| Author: | fanne [ 24 Sep 2008 02:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Delhi Blasts news and info |
Not surprisingly the biggest apologist come from those part of society that has lost heaviest to the alien religion - Bengalis (80% of Bengal land and population has been converted, Bengal land includes Bangla Desh and current WB), Punjabi Hindus (Kuldeep Nayyar etc, here also most of land and population is Muslim, including pak Punjab), Tamil Brahmins (N Ram, Mani Shankar Aiyer etc)- Needless to say being a Brahmin in TN is as minority and powerless as you can get. I never thought of Kerela, but Kerela Hindus also fall in this category. Now I am on the fly expanding my theory to include Kashmiris pandits (people like Haskar and Dhar who gave wrong advice to Indira Gandhi on all most all strategic matters). So something is common here. Maybe we are upon a profound truth, all societies that have been conquered so badly that they have lost any hope of survival, people behave in a liberal fashion, maybe they are just preparing for the future (that they think will befall on them) and are preparing a case of surrender where they are gently taken POW. The only analogy I can think is from the X-files (people who watch these). The story goes like this - An alien race has landed on earth. They incubate as virus within human body after affecting it and then they gradually take over and make human an alien. There is no cure against this virus. A group of scientists, industrialist, and politicians have negotiated with the alien to not go around killing indiscriminately but they will co-opt and let the aliens take over the earth gradually. This group has now two kinds of people, one kind is preparing anti-virus to stop it in secret and the other group is willing to die and kill its fellow human for the alien co-opt. Now you just have to make the alien say religion of peace and humans with Hindus and you would see the same dynamics happening here. So if my theory is right a liberal Hindu has to be pitied not respected or hated. Of course you do not want him to be in position of power, the only thing he/she would do is to hurt his/her own kind. Shiv sir can we have a separate thread on this. I guess we need to dissect this disease some more. What is good is that all these societies maybe know the truth and the day a great leader comes (in whom they have confidence), they follow the right path - Subhash Chandra Bose, Vivekanand, Shayma Prasad Mukharji, Lala Lajpat Roy etc etc. rgds, fanne | |
| Author: | fanne [ 24 Sep 2008 02:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Delhi Blasts news and info |
Btw the concept of Dhimmi also explains things that I am trying to explain. | |
| Author: | Suppiah [ 24 Sep 2008 02:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Delhi Blasts news and info |
There is a reason why Stalinist puppets as well as sewage mouthed rowdies of so-called "rational" parties in TN etc., take on the Hindus and make any anti-Hindu remarks, but dare not try that with other religions, particularly Islam. This reason is called the instinct of self-preservation. On the contrary, the Hindu religion has become a lamp post where any stray dog can lift its leg and do its deed, without paying any price for it, electoral, physical or otherwise. Change that and you will change the behaviour of the marxist rapist goons as well as their trojan horse army. | |
| Author: | shiv [ 24 Sep 2008 02:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Delhi Blasts news and info |
fanne wrote: can we have a separate thread on this. rgds, fanne Done | |
| Author: | Suppiah [ 24 Sep 2008 02:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu liberal |
Suggest change thread name to Hindu fake-liberal. The only thing liberal about these fakes is the liberal use of lies and falsehood to promote their anti-Hindu as well as anti-Indian ideology. They know that once the Hindu religion is disgraced and destroyed, the cultural wasteland called India can then be used to sow and reap their poisonous harvest exactly like AIDS kills your immunity so other diseases can go ahead and kill you. | |
| Author: | shiv [ 24 Sep 2008 02:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu liberal |
Suppiah wrote: Suggest change thread name to Hindu fake-liberal. The only thing liberal about these fakes is the liberal use of lies and falsehood to promote their anti-Hindu as well as anti-Indian ideology. They know that once the Hindu religion is disgraced and destroyed, the cultural wasteland called India can then be used to sow and reap their poisonous harvest exactly like AIDS kills your immunity so other diseases can go ahead and kill you. I agree with this because as a system Hinduism is more liberal than any other religions. A Hindu is liberal by definition when it comes to religion. It is a continuous indoctrination that the Hindus is a bigot that creates the fake liberal who thinks "Hindus may be bigots but I am going to change all that" | |
| Author: | samuel [ 24 Sep 2008 02:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Delhi Blasts news and info |
shiv wrote: gandharva wrote: Muslim rule in medieval India had produced a whole class of such self alienated Hindus. They had interpreted the superiority of Muslim arms as symbolic of the superiority of Muslim culture. This is precisely human psychology. If Hindus now become violent and terrorize any groups - the other groups too will recognize Hindu culture as superior. All the more reason for more bigotry and fundamentalism which is a winning tactic. What is the source of this passage? IIRC, Sita Ram Goel, How I became a Hindu. Good book. S | |
| Author: | Suppiah [ 24 Sep 2008 02:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
One thing you will find is that world over, these liars always go after the majority religion. If it is Hinduism in India, it is Christianity in US. The reason for this is the simple 80-20 rule. You go after the 80% not the 20%. This also provides a convenient camouflage of being 'pro-minority, progressive, liberal' etc. though the main objective is to clear the ground, or 'format the disk' so they can install their virus much more easily. But I have to say their tactics as well as strategies are failing in big ways. The pseudo-rational camp has failed in big ways. Good example again is TN today. After 40+ years of so called 'rational' rule (their rationality is a joke that is a subject of another thread) religion is so strong today as it has never been, certainly much stronger than these rowdies found it when they started their campaign. The Marxists too will fail big time, unable to manage the contradictions of hawking an ideology flushed down the toilet by their overseas paymasters as well as the 'pragmatic' need to kill and rape their own citizens to clear land for money bag tycoons simply to attract investment. | |
| Author: | fanne [ 24 Sep 2008 02:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu liberal |
Thanks Shiv sir. I know we have quite a decent participation from Bengal and TN (and of course many other states). I am just a very un-enlighten person. I am chemical engineer from IIT (and an MBA from here) so my knowledge of History etc. as you can guess is very very basic. What little ability I posses is, seeing a pattern in random data, and in the 12 years of reading BR and India forum and many other sources here is my theory - In Bengal (and I am taking this as the first case as most of these media and NGO who are die hard anti India and anti Hindu come from this state), since a long time there were a group of people (and I have seen references flying around) who would dish out the Bengali/Hindu ethos. I have seen references that quotes a historian during British rule, who can be said was the father of all left leaning people today (and he had a counterpart in west as well - call him a handler). Most of the people who we know as heroes in history have been manufactured heroes like Arundhati Roy is today. They had movements (just like secularism is today, a noble concept, a very Hindu tradition, but abused and used as a tool to undermine Hindus), that weekend Hinduism. I am not claiming since I know little, Man Mohan Roy etc fall in this category. As with any population, more so which has seen majority of its people subjugated and converted, any theory that showed its native religion/culture in bad light had many takers. The silent majority did not have the courage or the wherewithal to appose such a view. But whenever they had a worthy leader, this silent majority stood steadfast behind these people - This explains success of Subhase Chandra Bose, Khudi Ram or Sri Vivekananda. Surprisingly most of the Bengalis who have been of that kind, you would find them not in WB but outside of it. Even today a silent majority in WB does not vote for communist (if they vote at all), but they do not have a leader to give their feeling a voice. I believe in a society which is under siege, a half measure leader cannot rally this majority (that explains the failure of BJP or Congress during Indira time), but a great leader can (for example a Bengali Modi would sweep WB). This is from personal examples, I have met many benglis and most of them follow the same philosophy that say Pronnoy Roy or Rajdeeb Sirdesai follow. But then I know few of them who would put any of us Jingos to shame. Their number is very less, but I guess they compensate for their lack of numbers with their talents (that I do not have). I know most of the readers at BR have much more data then I would have, can you please develop this discussion further? It would help us deconstruct Hindu liberals of today and yesterday and maybe help us identify means to counter them. Thanks, fanne | |
| Author: | vsudhir [ 24 Sep 2008 02:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Timely thread, IMHO. Time to stop being apologetic for nonexistent sins and take the battle into the sanctimonius camp. Somebody rightly mentioned that Hinduism is inherently liberal and there's good reason why the semitic ones aren't. In very simple words, the reason is that Hinduism doesn't grudge anybody's ticket to heaven. It recognises the validity of multiple paths (to some 'supreme reality', lets say), emphasizes the importance of being and doing good (good karma) over all else (esp blind belief that some gawd will ordain all sins committed in His name washed away)and disowns any attempts at defining the 'one true path/book/gawd' sort of hyperventilation that has always been the hallmark of the abrahamics. For that one reason alone, Hinduism poses no threat to minority groups and has always allowed minority viewpoints (including, most spectacularly, atheism) to live, even flourish. Hindus aren't out to convert anybody, wage demographic warfare, impose their supposed superiority etc. How many of Hindusim's idological opponents (from marxism to mohammadenism) can make the same claim? Hindu fake liberals are fake in their attempt to go far beyond hinduism's innate liberalism to basically present false choices as the only choices. Enough already. | |
| Author: | shiv [ 24 Sep 2008 02:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Delhi Blasts news and info |
fanne wrote: Btw the concept of Dhimmi also explains things that I am trying to explain. The Dhimmi liberal | |
| Author: | Abhi_G [ 24 Sep 2008 03:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Fanne, it is not Man Mohan Roy but Raja Ram Mohan Roy. But I am trying to understand the direction you want. Do you want a dissection of the current *Bengali* psyche? If that is so, it will be a troublesome topic. But I do admit that media is full of Roys, Ghosh etc. But who funds them? FYI Arundhati Roy is not a Bengali, her father was/is (?) Bengali. At the same time you will find Chandan Mitra and Swapan Dasgupta et al. So once again, what is your question exactly? | |
| Author: | SwamyG [ 24 Sep 2008 03:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Delhi Blasts news and info |
shiv wrote: CRams - the behavior of the Hindu liberal is the behavior of a person who has been taught that he is of an inferior civilization that is full of bigots who discriminate against their own in "a caste system", who burn widows and do not have the egalitarianism of Islam. I disagree as it is only one set of reasons. The current media and books might have taken a more anti-secular (or anti-Hindu) stance, but even in the recent past the bulk of the population has not been told that our civilization was/is inferior. They have not been taught that Islam is more egalitarian than Hinduism. What is happening is that Hindus are jumping to the "Modernism". Changing times calls for different sets of behavior. A Hindu can be liberal and still maintain a healthy respect for the past, present and future of Hindu civilization. They are not mutually exclusive mindsets. The so called liberals that we see on TV or read on magazines/newspapers are small bunch of liberals with an agenda, and/or having some of the inferior complexity that you mention. It would be wrong to generalize this to all Hindu liberals. | |
| Author: | nkumar [ 24 Sep 2008 03:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Great thread. I have been calling these guys pseudo-liberals in debates I had with my friends. They are moles/viruses which have colonized the brains of the elite. Needless to say, I too was one of them till a few years back. Its been a long journey. I was an iconoclast when I was in my teens, used to look for science in everything. I remember how I used to look neighborhood aunts and friends in contempt for going to temples and organizing Hawans. Then, I went for my undergrad, I turned into a liberal or a pseudo-liberal to be precise. But finally internet saved me! Yes, internet. I discovered greatness of ancient Indian science/engineering, I said..wow, we were so advanced compared to our contemporaries, then I came across tons of material by the likes of Sita Ram Goel, Arun Shourie etc. These guys saved me. Then I came across BRF, IF which removed any iota of pseudo-liberalism which remained inside me. Now my transformation is complete. Iconoclast => Pseudo-liberal/Fake-liberal/"Atheist born of Hindu parents"/Modern Hindu/Secular => Doubtful Hindu => Hindu Fundamentalist  The entire journey took a lot reading, internal debates, contradictions in my mind and it took more than 15 years! PS: If only we can have a thread on EJ threat now, IMHO it is another burning issue. | |
| Author: | Abhi_G [ 24 Sep 2008 03:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
nkumar wrote: Iconoclast => Pseudo-liberal/Fake-liberal/"Atheist born of Hindu parents"/Modern Hindu => Doubtful Hindu => Hindu Fundamentalist The entire journey took a lot reading, internal debates, contradictions in my mind and it took more than 15 years! PS: If only we can have a thread on EJ threat now, IMHO it is another burning issue. nkumar, Sita Ram Goel's How I became a Hindu is a wonderful read in the above mentioned context. | |
| Author: | fanne [ 24 Sep 2008 03:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Abhi G, Thanks for the correction (gosh Man Mohan Roy for Raja Ram Mohan Roy, I must be going nuts). Well let me get the easy part out first, yes for every Ghosh, Roy out there, we have our own Dasgupta, Mitra. I would also like to add Arundhati Ghosh to this list, she did a great job with newclear deal during PVNR time. We also have our Arindam and Raja Bose in the forum itself. So to all Bengali friends here at BR, I would assume almost all are from that second group of Bengalis who believe that they are great, their religion, and culture, past is great and they have a future; and that they will fight to save. My theory is that the current Bengali psyche has nothing current about it. It is very old. It is as old as the first Dhimmi who would have said in Bengali - Hinduism sucks!! If we can trace that history, its group and sub groups, we can come to the current psyche. One other thing that made me learn more and refine my mental model of Bengali Bhadrlok was that all of these Hindu/India haters are not communists, during the no confidence motion they showed their allegiance to the 'western' masters. So there is a great deal of groups and subgroups...but again I am postulating that this is a continuation of some 300-400 years of allegiance. I am sure many Bengalis would have written about it at least in Bengali literature. Can we collate all that? Have the informers of British times (they must have been rich and powerful) have their progeny running most of newspapers? Is this question even valid? I understand that a great majority of Bengali intellectuals (not all; and some of the leading light of the counterattacks are Bengalis) are anti- Hindu and anti Indian. I am trying to understand why? There is a problem, you cannot say the same about say Gujratis intellectuals or Biharis or Oriyaas or Marathis. There is a problem, what is the source of it. I am here just trying to know the enemy, and then only I can think of countering it. Thanks, fanne | |
| Author: | vsudhir [ 24 Sep 2008 03:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Nice one, Nkumar. My own journey is something similar. Though moi would call my current station more of 'yindu nationalist' than yindu fundamentalist - can't really claim profound gyan on hindu 'fundamentals' now, whatever those might be. | |
| Author: | fanne [ 24 Sep 2008 03:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Btw there was this thread with name of the first historian (who was from Bengal) who laid the foundation of wrong history of India like Aryan Invasion theory and Hindus lost all wars that it fought etc etc. rgds, fanne | |
| Author: | Vikramaditya [ 24 Sep 2008 03:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
nkumar wrote: Great thread. I have been calling these guys pseudo-liberals in debates I had with my friends. They are moles/viruses which have colonized the brains of the elite. Needless to say, I too was one of them till a few years back. Its been a long journey. I was an iconoclast when I was in my teens, used to look for science in everything. I remember how I used to look neighborhood aunts and friends in contempt for going to temples and organizing Hawans. Then, I went for my undergrad, I turned into a liberal or a pseudo-liberal to be precise. But finally internet saved me! Yes, internet. I discovered greatness of ancient Indian science/engineering, I said..wow, we were so advanced compared to our contemporaries, then I came across tons of material by the likes of Sita Ram Goel, Arun Shourie etc. These guys saved me. Then I came across BRF, IF which removed any iota of pseudo-liberalism which remained inside me. Now my transformation is complete. Iconoclast => Pseudo-liberal/Fake-liberal/"Atheist born of Hindu parents"/Modern Hindu/Secular => Doubtful Hindu => Hindu Fundamentalist The entire journey took a lot reading, internal debates, contradictions in my mind and it took more than 15 years! PS: If only we can have a thread on EJ threat now, IMHO it is another burning issue. Interesting ..... I have never been a psec or any of its devious variants. | |
| Author: | samuel [ 24 Sep 2008 03:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Excerpt from: http://voiceofdharma.org/books/hindusoc/ (Read em all here http://voiceofdharma.org/books/ ncluding how I became a Hindu and others!) This is the genesis of the Nehruvian Secularism. A concept which was evolved in Europe in order to free societies from religious fanaticism has been converted by the Nehruvian ruling class into a cover for furthering the cause of religious fanaticism. The verbal shell is the same. But it has been surreptitiously stuffed with the potent poison of Islamic imperialism. Secularism in India today is the single most powerful shield for protecting the further progress of Islamic imperialism in the truncated Hindu homeland. It is small wonder that the Muslim leaders in independent India have revived in stages all the old strategies of Islamic imperialism - contrived grievances, the posture of being a persecuted minority, street riots, and so on. The Leftists who now style themselves as secularists are again shouting themselves hoarse against �Hindu communalism�. Only the whipping boy has changed. It was the Arya Samaj, Purushottam Das Tandon, the Hindu Mahasabha, and Sardar Patel in pre-independence India. It is the RSS and other patriotic organisations in the post-independence period. What is worse, the success of Islamic imperialism in dividing India and in continuing to steal another march on the Hindu homeland, has encouraged another Indian community, the Sikhs, to copy the Islamic model as well as the Islamic methods. The Ek OMkãr has been converted into Allah. The vãNî of the Gurus has been converted into wahî which is supposed to be the latest and the best. The Gurus themselves are being paraded as prophets who proclaimed exclusive power for the Panth. And the Panth itself has been made into an Ummah which claims a monopoly of virtue for its members simply because they swear by a book and wear a distinctive hairdo. The Panth now proclaims that its scriptures do not permit it to separate religion from politics. It accuses Hindus of a conspiracy to destroy its religious and cultural identity. It is uncontrollably angry with the �brute Hindu majority� for denying to it what it �more than amply deserves by virtue of its achievements in the past�. It has passed a resolution which demands an exclusive domination over a well-defined area without reference to the wishes of other inhabitants of that area. And it is increasingly taking to violence to frighten the �lãlãs�3 into surrender. It will not be long before the Panth opts for a separate homeland �after having exhausted all peaceful methods of an honourable accommodation with the Hindus�. The slogan has already been raised by a section of the Panth. Meanwhile, the Panth has grabbed and is enjoying more than its fair share in the economy, polity, and administration of the country. Here is another wolf prowling around in sheep�s clothing. The response from the secularist ruling class is bound to be the same old stereotype which was evolved in the face of the Muslim wolf. The secularists have started by being concerned over the �communal situation� in the Punjab, and have thus already placed the aggressor and the victim of aggression on the same pedestal. In the next round, the �legitimate� demands of the Panth will be conceded. And �illegitimate� demands will go on becoming �legitimate� as the tempo of violence increases. In the final round, the demand for separation is bound to become fully �legitimate�. The dreadful deed will then be blamed on �Hindu communalist� which �refused to see reason at the right time�.4 S | |
| Author: | nkumar [ 24 Sep 2008 03:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
vsudhir wrote: Nice one, Nkumar. My own journey is something similar. Though moi would call my current station more of 'yindu nationalist' than yindu fundamentalist - can't really claim profound gyan on hindu 'fundamentals' now, whatever those might be. Vsudhir, actually me too a Hindu Nationalist. There was a bit of sarcasm involved when I said that that I am Hindu Fundamentalist. What do you think we are in the eyes of "secular" types? | |
| Author: | Abhi_G [ 24 Sep 2008 03:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Fanne, I am not sure if you are referring to Jadunath Sircar. AIT was not founded by him. If I know correctly it was Max Mueller. I found R.C.Majumdar more nationalist. I think the growth of the secular liberalism has been in almost all cities in India during the British period. The reason why it was prominent in Bengal is because Bengal was having a cultural renaissance during that time and the Brits got their foothold in Bengal. | |
| Author: | samuel [ 24 Sep 2008 03:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Excerpt from: http://voiceofdharma.org/books/hsus/ch4.htm The traditional Hindu, however, does get stirred when the Muslims and Christians cross the limits and threaten the unity and integrity of his country. He does want to retain his majority in his only homeland against Muslim and Christian attempts to reduce him to a minority by fraudulent mass conversions. He does believe that Hindu society and culture have a right to survive and put up some defence in exercise of that right. But the Hindu addict of Macaulayism stubbornly refuses to concede that right to Hindu society and culture. He cannot see the need for defence because he cannot see the danger. And he has many strings to his bow to run down the Hindu who dares defy his diktat. His attitude can by summarised as follows: 1. To start with, he refuses to recognise any danger to Hindu society and culture even when irrefutable facts are placed under his nose. He accuses and denounces as alarmists, communalists, chauvinists and fascists all those who give a call for self-defence to the Hindus. Better, he explains away the aggression from other faiths in terms of the aggression which �Hindu communalism� has committed in the first instance; 2. Next, he paints a pitiful picture of the aggressor as a poor, deprived and down-trodden minority whom the Hindus refuse to recognise as equal citizens, constitutionally entitled to a just share in the national cake; 3. At a later stage, he assumes sanctimonious airs and assigns to the Hindus an inescapable moral responsibility to rescue their less privileged brethren from the plight into which the Hindus have pressed them. In any case, the Hindus stand to lose nothing substantial if they make some generous gestures to their younger brethren even if the latter are slightly in the wrong; 4. In the next round, he harangues the Hindus that any danger to them, if really real and worth worrying about, arises not from an external aggression against them but from the injustice and oppression in their own social system which drives away its less privileged sections towards other social systems based on better premises and promises. Does not Islam promise an equality of social status because of its great ideal of the brotherhood of men? Does not Christianity present an example of dedicated social service a la Mother Teresa? 5. If the Hindus are not convinced by all these arguments and become bent upon organising some sort of a self-defence, he comes out with a fool-proof formula for that eventuality as well. The Hindus are advised to put their own house in order which, in his opinion, is the best defence they can put up. They should immediately abolish the caste system, start inter-dining and inter-marrying between the upper and lower castes, particularly the Harijans, and so on and so forth. It never occurs to him that social reform is a slow process which takes time to mature and that in the meanwhile a society is entitled to self-defence in the interests of its sheer survival; 6. If the Hindus still remain adamant, he tries his last and best ballistics upon them. He suddenly puts on a spiritual mask and lovingly appeals to the Hindus in the name of their long tradition of religious tolerance. How can the followers of Gautama and Gandhi descend to the same level as Islam and Christianity which have never known religious tolerance? The Hindus would cease to be Hindus if they also start behaving like followers of the Semitic faiths which have been conditioned differently due to historical circumstances of their birth. But he never dares put in one single word of advice to the followers of Islamism and Christianism to desist from always having it their own way. He knows it in his bones that such an advice will immediately bring upon his head the same abusive accusations which Islamism and Christianism hurl at the Hindus. This is the outcome which he dreads worse than death. He cannot risk his reputation of being secular and progressive which Islamism and Christianism confer upon him only so long as he defends their tirades against the Hindus. But the stance which suits Macaulayism best is to sit on the fences and call a plague on both houses. The search for fairness and justice is somehow always too strenuous for a follower of Macaulayism. The one thing he loathes from the bottom of his heart is taking sides in a dispute, even if he is privately convinced as to who is the aggressor and who the victim of aggression. He views the battle as a disinterested outsider and finds it somewhat entertaining. The reports and reviews which some of our eminent journalists have filed in the daily and the periodical press about happenings in Meenakshipuram and other places where Islamism is again on the prowl, leaves an unmistakable impression that these gentlemen are not members of Hindu society but visitors from some outer space on a temporary sojourn to witness a breed of lesser beings fighting about Tweedledum and Tweedledee. An adherent of Macaulayism can well afford to take this neutral, even hostile stance, away from and above Hindu society, its problems and its struggles, because, in the last analysis, he no more regards Hindu society as his own or as his indispensable benefactor. He has already managed to monopolise most of the political and administrative power in this country and the best jobs in business and the professions. He has secured a stranglehold on the most prestigious publicity media. The political upstarts and the neo-rich look up to him as their paragon and try to mould their sons and daughters in his image. But what is uppermost in his mind, if not his conscious calculation, is the plenty of patrons, protectors and pay-masters he has in the West, particularly the United States of America. The scholars and social scientists over there in the progressive West approve and applaud whenever he pontificates about India�s socio-economico-cultural malaise and prescribes the proper occidental cures. They invite him to international seminars and on well-paid lecture tours to enlighten Western audiences about the true state of things in this �unfortunate� country and the rest of the �under-developed� world. He can travel extensively in the West with all expenses paid on a lavish scale. Even in this country he alone is entitled to move and establish the right contacts in social circles frequented by the powerful and the prestigious from the West. And, God forbid, if the worst comes to the worst and the �fanatics like the RSS fascists� or the Muslim fundamentalists or the Communist totalitarians take over this country, he can always find a safe refuge in one Western country or the other. There are plenty of places which can use his talents to mutual profit. The salaries they pay and the expense accounts they allow are quite attractive. The level of living with all those latest gadgets is simply lovable. In any case, he has all those sons and daughters, nephews and nieces, cousins and close relatives ensconsed in all those cushy jobs over there-the UN agencies, the fabulous foundations, the business corporations, the universities and research institutions. So, Hindu society with all its hullabaloo of religion and culture be damned. This society, and not he, stands to lose if he is not permitted to work out his plans for progress in peace. In any case, this society cannot pay even for his shoes getting polished properly. | |
| Author: | GuruNandan [ 24 Sep 2008 04:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Delhi Blasts news and info |
shiv wrote: The fact is that no amount of Hindu good behavior and apology is going to change anything because as long as the Hindu behaves it is business as usual for everyone else. What is happening now is that Hindus other than self flagellating "liberal Hindus" are beginning to realise that they have been astounding jackasses and that nothing they do will ever give them a good reputation. they will always come under attack from Islamic, Christian and Liberal Hindu groups. Once the Hindu realises this he is no longer anxious about being called a bigot. He is called bigot no matter what he does. Better to be that bigot rather than a lifelong apologist. It gets things done in a way that no other tactic can do. I couldn't agree with you more. Since Shri Sita Ram Goel's works seems to be more widely read now, i want to post this article about him written by Koenraad Elst. Excerpts from the article India's only communalist A short biography of Sita Ram Goel Koenraad Elst Quote: 1. Is there a communalist in the hall ? A lot of people in India and abroad talk about communalism, often in grave tones, describing it as a threat to secularism, to regional and world peace. But can anyone show us a communalist? If we look more closely into the case of any so-called communalist, we find that he turns out to be something else. Could Syed Shahabuddin be a communalist? After all, he played a key role in the three main "Muslim communalist" issues of recent years: the Babri Masjid campaign, the Shah Bano case and the Salman Rushdie affair (it is he who got The Satanic Verses banned in September 1988). Surely, he must be India's communalist par excellence? Wrong: if you read any page of any issue of Shahabuddin's monthly Muslim India, you will find that he brandishes the notion of "secularism" as the alpha and omega of his politics, and that he directs all his attacks against Hindu "communalism". The same propensity is evident in the whole Muslim "communalist" press, e.g. the Jamaat-i Islami weekly Radiance. Moreover, on Muslim India's editorial board, you find articulate secularists like Inder Kumar Gujral, Khushwant Singh and the late P.N. Haksar. For the same reason, any attempt to label the All-India Muslim League as communalist would be wrong. True, it is the continuation of the party which achieved the Partition of India along communal lines. Yet, emphatically secularist parties like the Congress Party and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) have never hesitated to include the Muslim League in coalitions governing the state of Kerala. No true communalist would get such a chance. On the Hindu side then, at least the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS, "National Volunteer Corps") could qualify as "communalist"? Certainly, it is called just that by all its numerous enemies. But then, when you look through any issue of its weekly Organiser, you will find it brandishing the notion of "positive" or "genuine secularism", and denouncing "pseudo-secularism", i.e. minority communalism. Moreover, in order to prove its non-communal character, it even calls itself and its affiliated organizations (trade-union, student organization, political party etc.) "National" or "Indian" rather than "Hindu". The allied political party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP, "Indian People's Party"), shows off the large number of Muslims among its cadres to prove how secular and non-communal it is. Even the Shiv Sena shows off its token Muslims. No, for full-blooded communalists, we have to look elsewhere. There is only one man in India whom I have ever known to say: "I am a (Hindu) communalist." To an extent, this is in jest, as a rhetorical device to avoid the tangle in which RSS people always get trapped: being called "communalist!" and then spending the rest of your time trying to prove to your hecklers what a good secularist you are. But to an extent, it is because he accepts at least one definition of "communalism" as applying to himself, esp. to his view of India's history since the 7th century. Many historians try to prove their "secularism" by minimizing religious adherence as a factor of conflict in Indian history, and explaining so-called religious conflicts as merely a camouflage for socio-economic conflicts. By contrast, the historian under consideration accepts, and claims to have thoroughly documented, the allegedly "communalist" view that the major developments in medieval and modern Indian history can only be understood as resulting from an intrinsic hostility between religions. Unlike the Hindutva politicians, he does not seek the cover of "genuine secularism". While accepting the notion that Hindu India has always been "secular" in the adapted Indian sense of "religiously pluralistic", he does not care for slogans like the Vishva Hindu Parishad's advertisement "Hindu India, secular India". After all, in Nehruvian India the term "secular" has by now acquired a specific meaning far removed from the original European usage, and even from the above-mentioned Indian adaptation. If Voltaire, the secularist par excellence, were to live in India today and repeat his attacks on the Church, echoing the Hindutva activists in denouncing the Churches' grip on public life in christianized pockets like Mizoram and Nagaland, he would most certainly be denounced as "anti-minority" and hence "anti-secular". The full article at http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/hinduism/sitaramgoel.html ShivJi, Thank you for starting this thread. This is a very important topic that needs to be understood deeply. As for what is Hindu Fundamentalism, Shri Goel says Quote: Fundamentalism is as foreign to Hinduism as honesty is to Christian missions From the book "Catholic Ashrams" | |
| Author: | Johann [ 24 Sep 2008 04:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
It might be worth discussing what a Hindu 'genuine liberal' as opposed to a pseudo-liberal might look like, and real life people who fit that category. | |
| Author: | Katare [ 24 Sep 2008 04:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
I am lost what is the context of this discussion? Who is calling Hindu's are bigot? | |
| Author: | harik [ 24 Sep 2008 04:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Johann wrote: It might be worth discussing what a Hindu 'genuine liberal' as opposed to a pseudo-liberal might look like, and real life people who fit that category. Bro, Hindu was always liberal. For all the thanks you have received here on this fora , for this you wont get one. Actually the word liberal is a *new* thing to him. Now tell me have those Nepalese who served the empire , received the liberality ? Dont come back with some , you know what. Though as fas as I am concernerd your views are always welcome. | |
| Author: | GuruNandan [ 24 Sep 2008 04:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Katare wrote: I am lost what is the context of this discussion? Who is calling Hindu's are bigot? Anybody who proclaims his/her Hinduness is dubbed as a "Communalist", "Fanatic", "Bigot" and what have you? Do you ever see anyone worth the name even from the BJP ever say on any TV, media that He/She is a proud Hindu? I haven't seen any. They are so shy of the term Communalist. So you find them perpetually on the defensive. They try to argue how they are the true secularists and the Secularists are the pseudo ones and so on it goes on endlessly. IMO, the best remedy to this malady is to identify oneself as a Hindu Communalist and call the other (Secularists, Communists, Muslims, Christians) as Hindu Haters. Brand them just as they brand you. Don't use the term "Pseudo Secularists". Call them "Hindu Haters/Baiters" to their face. And honestly, isn't that what all the above four are all about? | |
| Author: | fanne [ 24 Sep 2008 04:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Sameul Sir, I understand that this is the nature of the current dhimmis. I (again that would explain a failing of the Hindu society) would not agree to this as I have not personally come to these conclusions. On face of them they all seams right (with few corrections here and there). But then one other quality that I have developed (and you can extrapolate that to the whole society), I would not oppose your analysis, it helps build my case even if I believe they are wrong (in this case they are not, there is an element of truth). For each points if we have say 4-5 references, it would be more convincing. Having said all that, I believe the root of the current behaviors lies in the past. If it is clear that one JhutHistroy Roy was the first person to start this nonsense with history and these were his motivation and these were his British/Western pay masters and these were his disciple...and then they have been followed by this and that and btw today’s imminent historian Misses Thapar is her follower and one of her greatest backer is one disciple from the same university that the handler of Jhuthistory roy was, the story becomes very clear. You can then also show that one Mr. Hatehindu Mohan Roy started this movement, these were his motivation and counterparts and then his disciple from the same school of thought is say one miss A Chatterjee, and btw these are the connections and these were the western handlers and these are the connections then the game is in the open there. Our one traitor Roy was given a title of Sir and was feted as one of the greatest in the Bhadralok. Though it is hush hush but some Bengali literature say that he earned his 'Sir' not because of his literary merit but because he used to provide information on indepence seeking revolutionary to the British. Then we got independent and btw his great grandson today’s own this media. This is an open and shut case. Remember, during Independence, British took all records of one department (they did not leave anything)- Their intelligence, with that went all the knowledge of their 'assets'. I am trying to achieve something like that. Information like these. It exist, people have pointed out those in many different threads at different times. There was a great discussion on how Dravidism was invented one fine day by British, it had the name of the officer, lectures etc. Before that, the current followers of Dravidism did not know that they were Dravids!! Now that is a great information. You construct all the history and then when you let the people see the truth, change happens. Same with AIT. What I have learned is that Max Muller (btw who was a priest, a German staying in UK) was the greatest proponent of AIT. How he came to the dates of Aryan invasion? The world according to then (per Bible I believe), was created one fine day 6000 years ago. So he calculated how much time it would have taken so called Aryans to come from the Caucus to the Ganga plains, ergo he got the date of arrival of AIT. Once people know this truth, they won’t waste time debating the authenticity of AIT. Btw you are doing a great thing by adding your perspective; I am though looking for something else. Thanks, fanne | |
| Author: | harik [ 24 Sep 2008 04:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
shiv. Please do keep the thread name as it is "Fake hindu liberal". If it were not that average hindu is a *liberal*, india would not have been accomodating. For all your anthologies and analogies you can come up with to accommodate discussion , that is a fact. Though "fake hindu" would have better. I am not complaining. Just a observation. | |
| Author: | samuel [ 24 Sep 2008 04:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
fanne wrote: Having said all that, I believe the root of the current behaviors lies in the past. Please say more here...where in the past, how, what happened? | |
| Author: | SwamyG [ 24 Sep 2008 04:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
A point I would like to make is the concept of "liberal" - it is heavily Western oriented. People are expected to be either a liberal or conservative. It is like you are either believe of "The Book" or not. Too narrow and dogmatic. It does not allow people to exist or have "grayness". Being progressive does not mean that one disrespects everything from the past, and being traditionalist or conservative does not mean that one hates everything modern. India is yet again caught up within a framework that suits Western mind set. | |
| Author: | fanne [ 24 Sep 2008 04:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Past as in during British rule and maybe before it. The like of Prannay Roy and Pradeep Sardesai have existed for a long time in Bengali Society. It has been like a school of thought. It was initially liberally backed by the imperial power. It was like the zamandari system of the thought process. Smaller landholders (smaller intellectuals) seeked favor from these thought zamindars aptly backed by the imperial power, all they had to do was promote a certain type of thought process (what we call today anti-Hindu, anti India). Even after Independence (and I have to understand exactly how), this thought process continued. Things like secularism (which means hate Hindu and appease all others), communism, AIT, Dravidism, Caste system (a wonderful discussion going on right now), India was never a nation, modernism, primacy of English over Indic language, and Macualitisim etc etc are all symptom of the controlling of that thought process. It is a disease, I am trying to analyze its source, carriers etc so that something can be done about it. Thanks, fanne | |
| Author: | surinder [ 24 Sep 2008 05:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
fanne wrote: Remember, during Independence, British took all records of one department (they did not leave anything)- Their intelligence, with that went all the knowledge of their 'assets'. Interesting. I never thought of the intelligence records. What is the source of this inormation? Can you tell us more details? What did the British do with those records? If they kept them, then they might be released at some point ... maybe not. Reminds me of a Harvard history professor who was writing a book on British Gulags in africa (the Mu Mu revolution). She found records heavily edited. The British had destroyed many vital records to hide the facts of the gulag. I would be surprised if they survie. If they survive and can be made public, I suspect many careers in India are going down. | |
| Author: | Katare [ 24 Sep 2008 05:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
If what Guru explained to me is the case than the thread should be named "Hindu hating hindus" or some like that. The word liberal has different meaning in west compared to India. Indians consider USA a bright example of a liberal democracy/society but you would have hard time finding a US govt/Neta/Institute owning up to liberal tag. Indian mass media is filled with these Hindus who feel so proud discussing "victimization" of Muslims in the aftermath of a crippling bomb blasts purported by Muslims on innocent unarmed citizens of India. I have seen only one program recently on NDTV by some lesser known anchor who had guts to ask tough questions. She was reasonably blunt with her three muslim guests on asking how much of a blame the muslim community should take for their member’s act of terrorism. If you watch news TV you'll get a feel that all these bomb blasts are well deserved slap on Hindus and now it’s our duty to protect Muslim youths from police which is falsely implicating them without any evidence that they are related to Islam or muslims. The whole tone is if we are not extremely compassionate and forgiving in our approach we would get more punishment from these “muslim youths”. These “muslim youths” are getting into terrorism because of the failure of the govt and society to provide them a better future and sense of ownership. Religious bigotry of radical clerics, ISI and silence of muslim elite has nothing to with it. If the media chooses to call these terrorists as “muslim youths” we have a big problem especially when the Bajrang dal members doesn’t qualify as “Hindu Youths”. I think this whole terrorism business is over rated; they kill a couple of thousands a year. Snakes kill ten thousands, mosquitoes kill hundred thousands and road accidents kill another 100K. The damage inflicted by these bigots is miniscule and we can fight it out for 100 thousand year without changing a thing….bring it on biatches……… | |
| Author: | Johann [ 24 Sep 2008 05:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Hari K, I was *not* talking about religious toleration, which is what you refer to. Of course Hindusim is capable of tremendous religious toleration, and yes I think its capacity for toleration exceeds most others. However the term liberal has a specific *political* meaning, even though that the exact meaning is contested. The original meaning was a person who stood for the guarantee of *individual* freedoms, *and* rule of law. Pseudo-liberalism which gradually took over after WWI is often fundamentally communal in outlook, placing some people or groups (usually minorities) beyond the rule of law because of some narrative of victimhood. The reactionary right outaged by this often wants to do the same thing, but in reverse. Shiv's point is an obvious one - pseudo-liberalism overshadows and discredits liberalism, and pushes people towards the reactionary right. So I ask again, shouldnt we talk about genuine Hindu liberals? | |
| Author: | fanne [ 24 Sep 2008 05:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Surinder, I have no clue, I have read it God only knows when and where. But here at BR we have people, if someone knows about it, they would. My effort is more directed towrds this. Thanks, fanne AFAIK, as far as liberal Hindus go, I guess we all are one, I am a strict vegetarian, I am because a matter of my faith (and not health or compassion, though they also help in my justification). My wife however eats meat and cooks at home. I live with that. Am I liberal? I do donate money to the local firefighters and other poor people, in this foreign land, none of them follow my religion, I hope I am a liberal. During festival of Muharram, I do head he advice of my neighbors and do not play the music at high volume (though if it is Holi, I have refused to tone down my festivity which has not gone down well with the 'other' side, but I guess I am still liberal and the other side is not). If examples like these make me a liberal I would believe there are some 900 million Hindu liberals in India. | |
| Author: | gandharva [ 24 Sep 2008 05:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Quote: Their intelligence, with that went all the knowledge of their 'assets'. Good point. For example, Chandrashekhar Aazad made the fatal mistake of visiting "Aanandbhavan" in Allahabad and within minutes he came outof it, he was surrounded by police leading to his death. | |
| Author: | ramana [ 24 Sep 2008 05:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
The shift in the capital from Calcutta to New Delhi in 1911 was body blow the the Bengal psyche. Suddenly they lost their primacy in the Indian sub-continent and that lead to the growth of the Leftist/deracination movement. | |
| Author: | ramana [ 24 Sep 2008 05:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
The belief in Dharma is the most liberal you can get. Dharma is the right way and that ensures all those individual freedoms. So a Hindu fake liberal is aDharmic. | |
| Author: | Abhi_G [ 24 Sep 2008 05:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
fanne wrote: The like of Prannay Roy and Pradeep Sardesai have existed for a long time in Bengali Society. fanne Fanne, wait. What are you trying to say? What time frame are you talking about? What are your references? Have you read something about Hinduism in Bengal? | |
| Author: | harik [ 24 Sep 2008 05:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Johann wrote: Hari K, I was *not* talking about religious toleration, which is what you refer to. Of course Hindusim is capable of tremendous religious toleration, and yes I think its capacity for toleration exceeds most others. However the term liberal has a specific *political* meaning, even though that the exact meaning is contested. The original meaning was a person who stood for the guarantee of *individual* freedoms, *and* rule of law. Pseudo-liberalism which gradually took over after WWI is often fundamentally communal in outlook, placing some people or groups (usually minorities) beyond the rule of law because of some narrative of victimhood. The reactionary right outaged by this often wants to do the same thing, but in reverse. Shiv's point is an obvious one - pseudo-liberalism overshadows and discredits liberalism, and pushes people towards the reactionary right. So I ask again, shouldnt we talk about genuine Hindu liberals? Dude if you think I was talking abt *religious* *liberalism*, I am not! I am not Europeran, where they , entertain becone they *need* *them* So please get *off* your You know what I mean! Dont tell me or try to be patronising abt what a hindu can be. Do me a facour, >However the term liberal has a specific *political* meaning, even though that the exact meaning is contested. So what is your take. And please be precise in *your* opinion / take abt -liberal-, and lets take it forward. BTW have those *Bahadurs* got their due! ... dont tell me they are better than they would have been! | |
| Author: | harik [ 24 Sep 2008 05:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Abhi_G wrote: fanne wrote: The like of Prannay Roy and Pradeep Sardesai have existed for a long time in Bengali Society. fanne Fanne, wait. What are you trying to say? What time frame are you talking about? What are your references? Have you read something about Hinduism in Bengal? Fanne you are wrong , here , yes today it might seem true, but take account of last 40 yrs, you will see , why so. | |
| Author: | Abhi_G [ 24 Sep 2008 05:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Ramana, as far as I know the intellectual leftist inclination started with M.N. Roy. This guy seemed to have been very widely traveled, Russia, Mexico, China etc. There was also a shift after the Ribbentrop Molotov agreement fell through. Many revolutionaries who had leftist ideals and fought against the British changed their stance. It seems to me that the revolutionaries of those times were heavily influenced by Russia. | |
| Author: | fanne [ 24 Sep 2008 05:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Abhi_G, No I have not read, or do not have references, If I had I would have by now framed them in my writing and put across. But I know they exist, I have seen them in various forums, here, IF and many other places. Like (and I am going out of limb here, I can be very wrong), Sir Raja Ramohan Roy was at his time what say Arundhati Roy is of our time. For time frame, I would say British era definitely, I suspect it must have been from the time of Muslim rule, except for Punjab, which was at the gateway of India and had faced Islam some 500 years ago, Bengalis were the only people where more of them were Muslims than Hindus. While all others regions fought and a small minority did get converted, in Bengal a large majority did. It would not have been possible without Trojan horses or self haters in the Hindu society (but then I have never read something like this, it is just a hypothesis, can be entirely wrong). But I have read that starting from British period; British did manufacture a group of intellectuals that would run down the Indic religion/culture/traditions. That monster has survived independence and it thrives today. Thanks, fanne | |
| Author: | fanne [ 24 Sep 2008 05:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
hari ji, Please explain more. Hard to comprehend this short explanation. TIA, fanne | |
| Author: | harik [ 24 Sep 2008 05:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
This thread was abt Fake Hindu liberals. Can we stick to that please.  | |
| Author: | fanne [ 24 Sep 2008 05:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Abhi_G From what I understand, the secularism of the Marxist kind would not differentiate between one religion or the other. It would be bad to both Hindus and Muslims. Do you think the left thinking in Bengal (started by M N Roy as you say, pleas wite a small one on the origin and teaching etc) borrowed heavily from then in fashion anti- Hinduism/Indianism promoted by then imperial power and what we see today is a mixture of both; i.e. Marxism that was supposed to hate both religion ended up hating the majority religion? rgds, fanne | |
| Author: | Abhi_G [ 24 Sep 2008 05:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
What I think are two major events that triggered the leftist rise post independence. The partition of Bengal and the Bengal famine before that. The leftists found a rich area to launch their class struggles that led to huge detrimental effects much later on. But I would say that many old timers who were revolutionaries pre-independence did some real good work to rehabilitate the refugees. The refugee situation in Bengal was tragedy. The leftists, many of them refugees themselves, blamed the Congress to be step motherly, which was true in those circumstances. They conveniently whitewashed the Muslim League, the Direct Action Day etc. | |
| Author: | surinder [ 24 Sep 2008 05:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Johann wrote: Hari K, I was *not* talking about religious toleration, which is what you refer to. Of course Hindusim is capable of tremendous religious toleration, and yes I think its capacity for toleration exceeds most others. However the term liberal has a specific *political* meaning, even though that the exact meaning is contested. The original meaning was a person who stood for the guarantee of *individual* freedoms, *and* rule of law. Pseudo-liberalism which gradually took over after WWI is often fundamentally communal in outlook, placing some people or groups (usually minorities) beyond the rule of law because of some narrative of victimhood. The reactionary right outaged by this often wants to do the same thing, but in reverse. Shiv's point is an obvious one - pseudo-liberalism overshadows and discredits liberalism, and pushes people towards the reactionary right. So I ask again, shouldnt we talk about genuine Hindu liberals? Johann, The fundamental definition of Liberal is that ideology which wants to change from the past and introduce & embrace new ideas. How much new and how much of a change is always in question. Conservative, is the opposite: He beleives that one must not change, but instead go back to the essence of the past. Since most societies seem to have a past that is closedness and exclusivity, liberalism has had come to mean accomodation and more rights. That unfortunately is what is thought is the meaning of the word today. But the fundamental meaning is important & should not be forgotten. For instance: those who advocated black rights in US were liberals, those who denied them were conservatives. Those who advocated socialism in 20's were liberals, and those who opposed it were conservatives. But in Gorbachev's Russia, those who advocated capitalism were liberals, and those who supported communism/socialism would be called conservatives. Essentially a liberal is defined in relation to the conservative, and both are defined with the past as a reference. The essence is the past. This of course leads to the dilemma: Which past? In 1940's India, a person seeking independence from UK would be called a liberal if his reference is last 150 years of British rule; but would be called a conservative he is seeking the return of Harsha & Chanakya. | |
| Author: | Acharya [ 24 Sep 2008 05:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
fanne wrote: But I have read that starting from British period; British did manufacture a group of intellectuals that would run down the Indic religion/culture/traditions. That monster has survived independence and it thrives today. Thanks, fanne There are also knowns as WOGS - Westernized Oriental Gentlemen. Modern Indian sociologists after independence was the 20th century version of this manufactured process. These leftists are big time specimens of this species. | |
| Author: | RajeshA [ 24 Sep 2008 05:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
When dealing with the topic of this thread, one is naturally confronted by the question of self-description in these terms. I for one, would also consider myself as a Hindu Liberal, however I find, that there are aspects of Hindu identity, as has already been appropriated by certain groups, which disturbs me. I find disturbing, when religious groups want to decide how the religion may be portrayed, and if it is done otherwise, it comes to violence. When a Deepa Mehta is not allowed to make Water because some groups do not like the self-criticism in public discourse. Self-criticism, self-analysis and reform should always remain vital components if a religion has to be vibrant and meaningful. I am also against religious groups deciding on what is blasphemous and what is not, and they take the law into their own hands to mete out justice, as they see it. It is important, that the society decides the terms of blasphemy and the response to it taking atheistic, agnostic, secular, generally religious and specific religious considerations in mind. I find it disgusting, when some goons go around on Valentine's Day and start destroying the shops catering to the merchandise for this festival, all in the name of preventing foreign religious customs to take hold in India. All over the West, people have accepted several customs and practices originating in Hinduism and Buddhism from meditation, yoga, ayurveda to religious festivities, because it makes them feel good. These practices like Valentine's Day in India is importing the entertaining and feel-good aspects of another culture. The people are not bothered about the Saint and his religion on which the Day is based. By criticizing the popular practices which do not harm anybody, a religion simply demeans itself. I find it wrong, that Caste still plays a role in society, over and above that, of simply identity, but also remains an indicator for a place in the social hierarchy. I would welcome the day, when caste simply becomes another part of identity and loses its value as a social hierarchy marker. I find it shoddy, that Hinduism is propagated in society as a system of symbols and not as a system of philosophy. There is also little corresponding drive by the Hindu groups to do missionary work using principles of charity. Chauvinism can only go so far. Neither are groups susceptible to propaganda by Christian and Muslim missionaries targeted by the Hindus preemptively to include them in the mainstream and to alleviate their problems. There are many ills in Hinduism, but it is also my identity, my culture, my sphere of spiritual inquiry and my belief that of all the religions only Hinduism offers a framework for creative thought and relevance to the times at the same time, as its abstractness, symbolism, paradoxical interpretability imbibes it with immortality. Hinduism thrives when the believer is inquisitive while many Abrahamic religions thrive when the believer just learns by heart and remains dogmatic. India's Destiny is Secularism, which is a separation between State and Religion, while allowing all belief systems to thrive as long as they do not undercut national interests. Secularism however, as it is practiced today, has become just perverted rhetoric and nothing more. So a true Hindu Liberal would say, that Hinduism is the best thing mankind has been able to cook in terms of spiritualism, but being a gourmet and a Hindu, he would like to strive for improvements. A fake Hindu Liberal would say, he has been born in a pool of shit but the Christian and the Muslim would still be able to see the Lotus in him and befriend him. The Indian in me however will always dominate the Hindu in me. | |
| Author: | Karkala Joishy [ 24 Sep 2008 05:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Here is another example from the Star of Mysore. http://www.starofmysore.com/main.asp?ty ... item=18133 Quote: RAMANUJA, SHANKARACHARYA TOO INDULGED IN CONVERSIONS: DEJAGOW Mysore, Sept. 23 (DM)-Former Vice-Chancellor and litterateur Prof. D. Javaregowda (Dejagow) said that Hindu religious leaders like Ramanujacharya and Shankaracharya too indulged in religious conversion in their respective eras. Presiding over the function organised to release 10 books by senior litterateur late Basavaraj Kattimani as part of the first anniversary of Sapna Book House on Narayana Shastri Road yesterday, he said that no conversions would have taken place if everything was right in the Hindu society. But this existed even in the era of Buddha and Jesus Christ. They also instigated their followers to convert people, he said. Hindus - the kings of self-goals.  | |
| Author: | venkat_r [ 24 Sep 2008 05:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Though at a disadvantage of not reading the book by Sita Ram Goel, I am still not sure what is being dissed here - who is this Hindu liberal and what are his opinions that are being criticised here? Not sure if we are looking at the same things here. I thought i was a nationalist and a liberal, being a Hindu - would be called Hindu nationalist or a Hindu liberal, if not more generally for a Indian Nationalist and Indian liberal. Are they mutually exclusive? But probably I thought wrong - Can some guru explain? It would be much better if examples are taken and then talk about what is wrong in each case - it will help in enlightning people like me better. Like giving some video clips of the hatred or the inferiority complex displayed by these Hindu Liberals. | |
| Author: | Acharya [ 24 Sep 2008 05:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Karkala Joishy wrote: Here is another example from the Star of Mysore. http://www.starofmysore.com/main.asp?ty ... item=18133 Quote: RAMANUJA, SHANKARACHARYA TOO INDULGED IN CONVERSIONS: DEJAGOW Mysore, Sept. 23 (DM)-Former Vice-Chancellor and litterateur Prof. D. Javaregowda (Dejagow) said that Hindu religious leaders like Ramanujacharya and Shankaracharya too indulged in religious conversion in their respective eras. Presiding over the function organised to release 10 books by senior litterateur late Basavaraj Kattimani as part of the first anniversary of Sapna Book House on Narayana Shastri Road yesterday, he said that no conversions would have taken place if everything was right in the Hindu society. But this existed even in the era of Buddha and Jesus Christ. They also instigated their followers to convert people, he said. Hindus - the kings of self-goals. A person who does not understand political conversion that too a foreign imperial one will make a statement like this. | |
| Author: | Johann [ 24 Sep 2008 05:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Hi Surinder, You are absolutely spot on to point out that liberal and conservative positions on specific issues change over time, because liberals tend to be comfortable with change, while conservatives treasure tradition. Yet what made (genuine) Liberals consistantly different from both conservatives and radicals is their emphasis on simultaneously advancing individual rights and rule of law. Radicals usually place communal rights ahead of everything including rule of law, while conservatives try to advance both communal rights with rule of law. That's the pattern I have seen from looking at a lot of different societies at many different points. It is a gross over-simplification of course, because people dont always fall in to such neat categories, but its still a useful rule of thumb. Hari K, - The idea of liberalism is broader than any individual society or country or religion. - People are not the same thing as ideas, or sets of ideas. So if the hostility of your posts is because you think Im trying to suggest that either Hindus or Hinduism are incompatible with liberalism, you couldnt be more wrong. If you think this about European superiority, you are also wrong. Please calm down - I'm having difficulty actually following what you are saying in your posts - getting upset and angry isnt going to make your points clearer, or discussion worthwhile. If you want a modern history of the political development of liberalism and the conflcits within it, there's no shortage of material out there. There's a whole bunch of different things that this thread is about - political solidarity among people who regard themselves as Hindus - the nature of the liberalism of the educated Indian classes - the nature of the response to that brand of liberalism - the interaction of ideology, identity, society and politics Shiv's focus is on the nature of liberalism in India in particular. A genuinely liberal response is to uphold the law, regardless of the community from which a law-breaking individual comes from. That is what has been missing in India for some time, and the result is communal polarisation. Why has it been missing? Are there still people left in the Indian ruling classes who are committe to it? Those are questions that this thread has to look at in addition to everything else. | |
| Author: | fanne [ 24 Sep 2008 05:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Acharya Sir, I was expecting that you could pull some information from your hard drive and back up some of my theories. Can you do some of that please. Thanks, fanne | |
| Author: | RajeshA [ 24 Sep 2008 05:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
surinder, thanks for the concise definition of liberalism. It is useful as a reference point. | |
| Author: | rajrang [ 24 Sep 2008 06:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Delhi Blasts news and info |
fanne wrote: Not surprisingly the biggest apologist come from those part of society that has lost heaviest to the alien religion - Bengalis (80% of Bengal land and population has been converted, Bengal land includes Bangla Desh and current WB), Punjabi Hindus (Kuldeep Nayyar etc, here also most of land and population is Muslim, including pak Punjab), Tamil Brahmins (N Ram, Mani Shankar Aiyer etc)- Needless to say being a Brahmin in TN is as minority and powerless as you can get. I never thought of Kerela, but Kerela Hindus also fall in this category. Now I am on the fly expanding my theory to include Kashmiris pandits (people like Haskar and Dhar who gave wrong advice to Indira Gandhi on all most all strategic matters). So something is common here. Maybe we are upon a profound truth, all societies that have been conquered so badly that they have lost any hope of survival, people behave in a liberal fashion, maybe they are just preparing for the future (that they think will befall on them) and are preparing a case of surrender where they are gently taken POW. The only analogy I can think is from the X-files (people who watch these). The story goes like this - An alien race has landed on earth. They incubate as virus within human body after affecting it and then they gradually take over and make human an alien. There is no cure against this virus. A group of scientists, industrialist, and politicians have negotiated with the alien to not go around killing indiscriminately but they will co-opt and let the aliens take over the earth gradually. This group has now two kinds of people, one kind is preparing anti-virus to stop it in secret and the other group is willing to die and kill its fellow human for the alien co-opt. Now you just have to make the alien say religion of peace and humans with Hindus and you would see the same dynamics happening here. So if my theory is right a liberal Hindu has to be pitied not respected or hated. Of course you do not want him to be in position of power, the only thing he/she would do is to hurt his/her own kind. Shiv sir can we have a separate thread on this. I guess we need to dissect this disease some more. What is good is that all these societies maybe know the truth and the day a great leader comes (in whom they have confidence), they follow the right path - Subhash Chandra Bose, Vivekanand, Shayma Prasad Mukharji, Lala Lajpat Roy etc etc. rgds, fanne I think you are ignoring some obvious facts - the Sikhs who are also predominantly from Punjab do not seem to display the problems discussed in this thread. (They are close to hindus in most respects and considered as hindus for the purposes of this discussion.) Similarly you have ignored DMK leaders of TN (who are not brahmins) but display anti-hindu behavior. Do communists display such tendencies? India is too diverse and complex to generalize in this manner and label specific segments of Hindu society. The majority of hindus tend to be liberal in most areas of life except possibly in the social area - where maybe they are not as tolerant as the west? This is more of a question rather than my conclusion. Need to be careful that the really liberal hindu (and probably most hindus are) is not the subject of the ire expressed in this thread. The majority of any population are not intellectuals - they have an average IQ of 100. Cannot expect them to exercise critical thinking always - like members on this thread. The majority tends to develop a respect for persons in power, wealth, strength etc. over time and if this continues for centuries a complex may set in. The majority probably does not even have the time for such analysis - are more concerned in making ends meet on a day to day basis. However, it is unfortunate that some leaders and influential persons in India tend to criticize Hindus more readily than others for the same "offenses". For some it may simply be a matter of getting votes. The others may simply not be in good mental condition or simply be incapable of critical thinking. They may be sympathized with so long as they are not in a position of power (or wealth) to influence anyone or anything. | |
| Author: | samuel [ 24 Sep 2008 06:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
The danger with using the definition of a liberal as it seems to be discussed is that it brings all this baggage that is outside a Hindu universe. The best examples we come up with to describe liberal, for instance and naturally, are our understanding of what it is in the west. But there too, I don't think of it as being so clear cut. Plenty of liberals advance the rights of their communities first over individual rights, and plenty of conservatives are for more individual freedoms. This really leads to an awkward digression of inserting a western description in what is essentially a Hindu or Indian dialog within its national and religious context, and history. Indeed, this very return and redefinition of liberalism in western terms, at least going by examples here, relieves one of the claim of the origins of liberalism as the dharmic way. So, I'll second the suggestion that in so far as we can diagnose the dharmic way forward it is consistent with what some might interpret as liberal because sanatana dharma is a very liberal way of life. And when we say, Hindu Liberal, sanatana dharma is the absolute barometer or test by which we judge. Now, next to this origin and approximation to liberalism, we face this notion of a fake-liberal, which is entirely defined in the context of the modern understanding of liberalism, imported from somewhere. In that context the Hindu fake-liberal is one who excuses the trespasses of all religions and might in-fact transplant them as faults of Hinduism itself. This is quite different from the true liberal, a consistency may show up here in definition, in that by following the dharmic way, one is able to see adharma wherever it arises. JMT S | |
| Author: | surinder [ 24 Sep 2008 06:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Johann, It is just because Liberalism happens to concide more with individual rights and rule of law that we have come to associate Liberalism with it. But fundmentally the unstated assumption is that liberalism is something that is a departure from the past reference point & conservatism is a re-assertion of the past. But these are also basically western concepts, which have had either a shorter history, or a more or less linear history. For countries like India such definitions become consufing because of the vast & turbulent history, which makes the base reference unclear. Let me point out some more illogical elements of this term: A Hindu who espouses return to Mughal glore would be called a liberal. A Muslim who calls for the same is a conservative. A Hindu whos breast holds a yearning for return of the glory of the Vedas would be called a Conservative, but he would automatically also hold the humanistic all-embracing compassionate nature of Vedas and that would make an excellent champion of human rights, minority rights, which would be called a liberal. If we advocate a break from the Nehruvian politics (now that is the establishment) that should be termed liberalism, but often it is not. Some one said something pithy about the Japanese LDP. It is the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) that has ruled Japan since WW2. They said it is neither liberal, nor democratic and neither a party. Also, one could split their personalities. They may be social conservatives and fiscal liberals. Hispanics in US are. If you are extra liberal, you are ultra-liberal. If you are even more liberal than that, then you become left wing. If you tilt more, then you become anarchist. If you tend to be more than average conservative, you are called right wing. More than that, you become Nazi or Fascist. Please note an interesting phenomena: The two extremes on the left and right begin to look the same. Just as madness & genius begin to appear the same; or old age and childhood start to converge. | |
| Author: | fanne [ 24 Sep 2008 06:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Rajrang boss, I purposefully did not include the Sikhs. They have not lost as Punjabi Hindus (and I do not mean to differentiate them, I understand that they have many similarities), and not all Punjabi Hindus are apologetic. The Sikhs in fact gave back as good as they got from the attackers and then some (as Johnan would put it), they are the victors. As far as DMK goes, now that whole philosophy was anti- Hindu, there is nothing hidden about it, there is nothing pseudo. If you think, that is the same reason I have not included other religions in this discussion, it is obvious that they would not promote Hinduism. The focus of this discussion are those Hindus (i.e. they still claim they are Hindus) that are fake liberals. rgds, fanne | |
| Author: | SK Mody [ 24 Sep 2008 06:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
harik wrote: This thread was abt Fake Hindu liberals. Can we stick to that please. Note that the topic says "Hindu Fake liberal". This is different from "Fake Hindu Liberal".  So does Shiv mean: a) A person who at the core is Hindu but is faking a "classical liberal" (in the context of western civilization) attitude. . b) A person who at the core is Hindu but is faking a "pseudo-liberal" (ie: modern liberal) attitude. c) A Hindu Fake (or Fake Hindu) who is actually a liberal (of some kind). d) A Fake Hindu who is also a Fake liberal (of any kind). Which category for example would Ms A Roy fall into? Knowing Shiv from his Piskological posts, I'm sure he chose his words quite deliberaltely. | |
| Author: | Johann [ 24 Sep 2008 06:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Hi Surinder, Its not just rule of law. Liberalism is at its heart a 'middle class' phenomenon, what radicals disparagingly call 'bourgeois'. All political ideologies eventually become a bit muddled as they struggle to coherently represent people who often have conflciting interests and points of view. However, the middle classes in most societies do consistantly value two things - the freedom of choice, and the rule of law. They generally prefer not to have to chose between the two (just as conservatives prefer not to have to chose between communal rights and rule of law). The middle classes can not rely on their own strength to create those conditions for themselves as the rich and powerful can. They have to rely on building a system that at least on paper values those norms. I submit that pseudo-liberals are far thicker amongst the elite than the middle classes, because they are confidant of their own security (economic or physical) come what may. They can afford to take it for granted. | |
| Author: | Rahul M [ 24 Sep 2008 07:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Quote: We also have our Arindam and Raja Bose in the forum itself. add yours truly to the list. I must commend fanne for a starting a very relevant line of thought in the analysis of the FHL. while faux liberalism and communism is present in nearly everywhere in Indian society, there can be little doubt that the most virulent and widespread form comes from bengal. before I try to expound on this subject let me respond to a few comments made here : Quote: Having said all that, I believe the root of the current behaviors lies in the past. If it is clear that one JhutHistroy Roy was the first person to start this nonsense with history and these were his motivation and these were his British/Western pay masters and these were his disciple...an7d then they have been followed by this and that and btw today’s imminent historian Misses Thapar is her follower and one of her greatest backer is one disciple from the same university that the handler of Jhuthistory roy was, the story becomes very clear. You can then also show that one Mr. Hatehindu Mohan Roy started this movement, these were his motivation and counterparts and then his disciple from the same school of thought is say one miss A Chatterjee, and btw these are the connections and these were the western handlers and these are the connections then the game is in the open there. the marxist history that we read in history books nowadays was NOT written by historians before independence, bengali or otherwise. The bengali historians who existed before were by and large nationalists and dhimmi ones, who undoubtedly existed were never important enough to gain fame/notoriety. marxism crept, nay strode in history books in the first decades after independence with Nehru's blessings culminating in JNU which started as a talking parrot to help IG centralise power. the CPI/CPI(M) split had similar roots to the rise of JNU. the pre-independence history in fact didn't talk much about history of India, which was IMHO a blessing in disguise. There was also the fact that till the 40's, the british were never very comfortable with the marxists and didn't give them much entry into academia. Asking people to create false history with only dhimmitude as the sauce was probably too much to ask ! Quote: The shift in the capital from Calcutta to New Delhi in 1911 was body blow the the Bengal psyche. Suddenly they lost their primacy in the Indian sub-continent and that lead to the growth of the Leftist/deracination movement. not at all ! the capital shift has an effect on bengali psyche that is negligible to non-existent. if anything, the nationalist movements went from strength to strength in the period following the capital shift. Quote: The like of Prannay Roy and Pradeep Sardesai have existed for a long time in Bengali Society. fanne I know Abhi_G and harik have opposed this view but I'll say fanne is right, But again, they were never really important, with the exception of early to mid 19th century. even at that time, there were serious opposition to people like ram mohan roy from Hindu groups. Remember that Rabindranath was also a brahmo. His admiration for India is amply evident from his works. In effect brahmo dharma, the torch bearer of europe in India became an offshoot of Hinduism that performed some reforming acts and was duly absorbed back into the fold. The 2nd gen of brahmo samajis including keshav sen showed obvious signs of this duality. Ram Mohan, however fits the definition of a DIE to a T. the while talking about the bengali DIEs, we are missing two very important movements, which were, IMHO more important than the DIEs. first were the religious teachers. Ramkrishna and Vivekananda being the most important of this group but by no means the only ones. There have been literally scores and scores of pandits, sadhus and sadhaks spread throughout bengal who had held Hindu society together during the onslaught of the samajis and the missionaries. these people again played a vital part in supporting the armed struggle against the british. secondly, I don't know how much people outside the state know of them but the armed freedom fighters of bengal(quickly followed by others in various regions of India), starting around 1900 but picking up during the 20's and 30's was an event that literally shook up the people of the state and the crown itself. In a period which is aptly described in bengali literature as agni yug it became a movement that touched virtually every little village and lighted the heart of every youth in the region. The threat of 20 year olds challenging the power of the british crown in police stations, treasuries and armouries all over bengal, which was thought to be a soft non-martial state with 14-15 year old boys refusing to divulge information even when their nails were being removed one by one with pliers was something the british couldn't stomach for too long. Do you think the militaristic solution appeared to Netaji in a vacuum ? If anyone thinks Gandhi brought us independence, think again. Could he have done that without the fearless and selfless acts of these people in bengal and elsewhere in India ? That would be a great disservice to these immortal souls. So why am I making this big lecure note on the revolutionaries of bengal ? There remains one thread that connects virtually every revolutionary of the agni yug, they were ALL influenced and inspired by the teachings of Vivekananda, without fail. That list includes Netaji, whom many have described as Vivekanda's spiritual son, and if you have read his biography, aptly so. Incidentally, even MN Roy was a nationalist (again influenced by Vivekananda) and quite different from the DIE communists we see around us. He gets a lot of undeserved flak IMO. And yet, almost all of them, including Netaji had socialist ideals. Outside bengal, that includes Bhagat Singh. They considered socialism and in some cases, communism to be a legitimate and unifying way to move India forward without forgetting the poorer class. Were they DIE ? hardly ! If we want to understand the evolution of the FHL, we need to first differentiate between the pre-independence revolutionaries and the post-independence fake liberals. The growth of the DIE marxist liberals started from the early 40's with active support from the british government. these are the characters who have helped develop the individuals we see now, the bengali marxist DIE doesn't originate earlier than that. | |
| Author: | munna [ 24 Sep 2008 07:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Fanne both Sikhs and Hindus of West Punjab lost on equal measure. While Sikhs were large land holders over there, the Hindus were traders, money lenders and industry owners. Almost all of them came to the East Punjab without shirts on their backs. Punjabi Hindus are not represented by K Nayyar. He is a darling of Khalistanis and has running feud with his own co religionists. Talk to non English type desis they will enlighten you further  .As far as liberalism is concerned some of my best friends are Pakis who have called my gods to be fake, my Indian Muslim friends have never accepted my Diwali invites  yet I love them, I support right to intimacy in public for couples, I support youth celebrating Valentine's day and criticize those street mofos troubling them, I do not expect my future wife to be virgin, I have never condoned any violence against any group even if by my favourite political grouping.BUT I am proud to be a Hindu, I do not believe in NCERT propaganda history books, I am Narendra Modi fan, I support nationalist political parties in India, I oppose forced conversions and do not believe in Nehru but in Patel. I know in our national discourse everyone will forget the upper points that i Mentioned but will haul me over the coals for being supporter of Hinduism and even being proud of Hinduism. In other words I will be branded a HT courtesy constitutionalist Hindus, atheist Hindus, Liberal Hindus and XXXX Hindus but none will come forward and be just Hindu because inherently you need something to justify/qualify your Hinduness. | |
| Author: | R_Kumar [ 24 Sep 2008 07:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Katare wrote: If what Guru explained to me is the case than the thread should be named "Hindu hating hindus" or some like that. There are many people with Hindu names but they aren't Hindu. They are using Hindu name to earn their bread and butter. Prime Example is Mahesh Bhut. This moron is 100% Muslim, not that anything wrong with it if he wouldn't have hidden his real identity. He is one of the most anti Hindus with Hindu name. For this reason, I have stopped watching his movies. | |
| Author: | Abhi_G [ 24 Sep 2008 07:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Rahul, thanks. You have put things in order very eloquently. The cheap noise and scenes created by the CNN-IBN, NDTV anchors, no Hindu worth his salt should forget the blood, tears and lifeless bodies of our nationalists and soldiers. | |
| Author: | samuel [ 24 Sep 2008 08:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
The Hindu Fake-Liberal is a type of human found in abundance in India and other countries. The modern term, pseudo-liberal (or fake-liberal) refers to those who call themselves liberals but really are conservative. Pseudos pay superficial tribute to the liberal concepts that they in reality undermine. An example might be someone come by at an interfaith meeting and suggest, "your religion, with all these gods and goddesses, is so exotic! Must be exciting! " A Hindu might (by mistake) take that to be a compliment; in reality the other person whilst not lying had chose not to use the word false, in a pseudo interfaith demonstration. The Hindu Fake-Liberal operates in reverse gear. Instead of undermining the opponent, he undermines his own as an apologist for faults that lay elsewhere. He is the master of what is known here as self-goals. In the old days, we saw such fake-liberals in movies, perhaps. "Welcome to my humble home, Mr. Smith," then turn around and say, "Abe Raju, b*h*nch*d, khana jaldi laa too badzaat." That was a kind of Hindu fake-liberal, because their openness extended only to the suck-madi. But it is far more sinister today than this old-style sucker. It turns out that modern day islamism is not just exposing islamists, it is exposing our own Fake-Liberals too. For example, he might say, it is not the poor muslim youth's problem if they don't have anything but bombs to play with or, maybe, I wouldn't doubt that this was a setup by the Hindus to suppress the muslims. This is because the religion of peace must be respected and the lack of peace must be as much our fault. It takes two hands to clap, no? He will reason. The fake-liberal's realm of fakery isn't restricted to Islam. Dhimmitude, self-alienation, and other traits are also seen. The true Hindu-liberal on the other hand arises as Dharmic individual, which is the benchmark for a Hindu. Although the Hindu Fake-Liberal is best viewed as a religious condition, it really has spread its wings and has become a social condition. It threatens India. | |
| Author: | Rony [ 24 Sep 2008 09:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
The Hindu psedo-liberalism is a subject of its own. It would make an excellent thesis for a Phd.My own expereince with psedo-liberalism is contradictory in nature.I have to admit i was a complete fake liberal in my early teens.I used to think that china was our ally ( i do not know why i thought like that.I never heard about 1962.I know America is bad and anti-India so i thought china might be good and pro-India), naxalites are 'good people' and Indian communists are the only non-corrupt politicians.Those were the times of Ayodhya movement and i was in my 10th class. The media was full of 'Hindu fundamentalists'. We used to live near the border of Hyderabad old city.Inside the house, both my parents (who are ardent Telugu Desam supporters) used to hail BJP and admire RSS during the Ayodhta movement.But i used to think that they were 'conservatives'. I used to be a true dhimmi.When ever i used to go out, i used to pray that i should not come across another Hindu on the street. I used to think that "there are too many Hindus in this country".I used to think BJP is an anti-national party and RSS a 'rowdy organization'. Althoug because of this fake liberalism and dhimmitude,i was becoming a traitor from within ( without me knowing it),from outside i was patriotic. I wanted to join NDA. My parents asked me to read 'The Hindu' to 'improve my english' .As i started reading its (and its sister publication Frontline's) anti-Hindu polemics daily, my dhimmitude and fake liberalism started melting.I started questioning each and every anti-Hindu claim by the 'Hindu' newspaper.That search for truth led to even deeper introspection.My dhimmitude and fake liberalism was almost dead. It was completely dead the day i happened to see Koenraad Elst's 'Ayodhya and After : The issues before Hindu Soceity' in a second hand book store owned by a Muslim in Nampally.When i saw the book over the top in the store, i was thrilled because it had answers to most of my questions.That was the end of my fake liberalism. | |
| Author: | Rahul M [ 24 Sep 2008 09:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Quote: What I think are two major events that triggered the leftist rise post independence. The partition of Bengal and the Bengal famine before that. The leftists found a rich area to launch their class struggles that led to huge detrimental effects much later on. But I would say that many old timers who were revolutionaries pre-independence did some real good work to rehabilitate the refugees. The refugee situation in Bengal was tragedy. The leftists, many of them refugees themselves, blamed the Congress to be step motherly, which was true in those circumstances. They conveniently whitewashed the Muslim League, the Direct Action Day etc. this saved me from typing out everything. well articulated abhi. there are some more points, I would elaborate if anybody asks. fanne, between Abhi_G and myself, have we succeeded in answering your questions ? | |
| Author: | fanne [ 24 Sep 2008 10:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Rahul I would be truthful here - Haven't we heard that before - No fear or favor when trying to find out the truth. This thread is in its early days, it will take time time to evolve (as have happenned with other threads). I am hoping that more people would write theories, point to web links and share information that supports my theory. Many things are going on, what you say (may be accurate, may not be or it may be partial truth) does not support my theory. What you have pointed out does not point to the fake liberalism being an age old process. My understanding of it does not support this data. Please understand I am not calling you either “not very learned” or someone spreading falsehood, just that maybe we both have much to discover. It may very well be what you say is the truth and I have to adjust my understanding. I would rather wait for many more pages to come to that conclusion. I have learned many things about Bengal History. I recently saw a photograph of a Hindu monk; tied to a tree and beaten by some hooligans in WB (the temple has maybe refused the sale of temple land to communists or something like that). The photograph was at site www.howrah.org It was amazing to see the courage of this guy holding his head high in spite of tremendous pain and suffering with no sign of fear. Now photos like that make me think that the people have not forgotten their roots. Anyway I still believe that there is more to the story that meets my or your eyes. Let’s see what others have to say. Yes we have to separate the signal from the noise, that task I believe we can do. Thanks, fanne | |
| Author: | Rahul M [ 24 Sep 2008 11:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3873&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=80 please look here for posts under my name for the incident you are talking about. one clarification, I'm not saying westernised people/pro-brit dhimmis weren't there. of course they were present, the raj ran on these people ! fortunately, the DIE intelligentsia didn't have the quality or the quantity to become a driving force. the assembly line lefties that we see now was missing. from my voracious consumption of literature and writings from and on those times, it is my feeling that the societal inertia was too strong for a person to completely renounce his roots, very few actually managed it for a lifetime. intellectual gymnastics of young people was given its way for some years after which the great Indian antidote was applied -- a quick marriage and attendant problems, which was effective in most cases ! why doesn't this work now ? the answer is ideology. in those times, people paid lip-service to the anti-Indian views and even acts, gathered their salary at the end of the month, performed puja at home and forgot all about the brits after retirement till it was time to get the son acquainted with the gora officer in search for a job. the vast majority of the bengali bhadralok was comprised of clerks who followed something akin to the above lifestyle. what lever do you think a brit could have on him ? the elites were either the land owning class or lawyers(mostly), neither had a brit over him coercing him what to do. secondly, most of the brits weren't looking for subversion, it was their India and a servile attitude sufficed to perpetuate it (or so they thought) de-stability wasn't something they wanted. thirdly and most importantly, the current marxist DIE has onus upon himself/herself to propagate the belief and help a believer as a sacred duty. look around today, who is DIE no 1 ? if we have a vote, I'm sure BRFites will not come to a consensus on a single name. It is the network of DIEs spread across the country speaking in one voice influencing the populace with one coordinated effort that is powerful and influential, not the individual by himself/herself. this was the matrix that pre marxists DIEs lacked, a gel to hold them together.no wonder they were never remotely as powerful as today's variety. I can elaborate on the evolution of post independence DIEs if you want. p.s. If you are interested I'll recommend you to read Rabindranath's 'gora'. | |
| Author: | Bharati [ 24 Sep 2008 11:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
What are the factors that turn an Hindu to a HFL? 1) is it eagerness to be known as a liberal, but since Hindu society is intrinsically liberal, the HFL overdoes the his/her 'liberalness' by trouncing his/her own? ( MSM, educational institutions, pseudo-intellectuals are the ones who propagate this distorted meaning of the word 'liberal') 2) is it cowardice ? (no guts to criticize where substantial reactions can be expected, therefore attack Hinduism since it is 'safe') The below one is applicable to pseudo-intellectuals 3) is it in the anticipation of the honorary awards thrown by the western institutions? Somehow they IHLs don't realize they are scoring self goals and stand by their views despite opposition. What does it take to get rid of this phenomenon? | |
| Author: | Manu [ 24 Sep 2008 11:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Bharati wrote: What are the factors that turn an Hindu to a HFL? According to me, it is NOT because a HFL has a great epiphany one fine day. It is a reaction (in adulthood) to a deep feeling of loss, surrender and a deep inferiority complex (accumulated all the way to adulthood). When the past is too bloody & savage to contemplate, one tries to obliterate it. As they say, comprehension leads to depression. It is a drone’s blind compromise. Per the HFL, The only perfect crime that exists is not the one that remains unsolved but the one which is solved, but with the wrong culprit. Hence the need for this thread. Further, In India, the maximum number of HFL have found a home in the press/media - supposed to be the fourth estate, but is actually the fifth column. Perhaps a surfeit of money (from India and abroad), and the associated life within an invisible plastic bubble that seems to accompany it, they are actually not aware of reality. They may entertain notions of impunity but in the end, everyone is culpable. | |
| Author: | Bharati [ 25 Sep 2008 12:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Are there people in this forum who never were dhimmis at any point in their lives? I am interested to know how this was possible. I believed the AIT, anti-Modi propaganda by media, missonary propaganda that they are only helping poor people, evil RSS/BD spreading hatred. Thanks to my father, I did not fall for Nehruvism and the likes. After my under grads, the views expressed in the newspaper editorials didn't seem right and I was pretty confused. It didn't occur to me that the intellectual elite could be such idiots. I didn't know of the existence of alternate viewpoints which are not communal/anti-national. Thanks to the internet, I got to read a little, mostly on IF and then for the last few months have been on BRF(got to know of this forum from my husband who has been lurking around here last 5-6 years since his graduation days) and receiving gyaan from the gurus. I am determined to learn as much as I can from people here, and other sources such as books and articles and also create awareness in as many people as I can. The reason why I am telling my tale is to give an example for how hard it is for an average person not to be a dhimmi/HFL. One has to go out of the way to discover the truth or be fortunate enough to have known enlightened person(s). It is most unfortunate that the state and intellectuals of India are creating populations who are unwittingly posing a great threat to our civilization and national security. | |
| Author: | Vikramaditya [ 25 Sep 2008 12:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Quote: Are there people in this forum who never were dhimmis at any point in their lives? I am interested to know how this was possible. Present Madam ... but as I said elsewhere I cuoldnt possibly put a finger on what contributed towards me staying that way even through my teenage impressionable years . Maybe one of these days I will make an attempt to write down the things that impacted me. | |
| Author: | GuruNandan [ 25 Sep 2008 12:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Bharati wrote: The below one is applicable to pseudo-intellectuals 3) is it in the anticipation of the honorary awards thrown by the western institutions? Almost often this is the case. The amount of control that the West exercises over the so called Intellectuals in India is enormous. They enjoy a mutual Camaraderie between them. I am told that the Western Embassies in Delhi throw huge parties to which most of the Who's who of the Intellectuals, Media People and Hindu Baiters are invited. It is easier to get a Visa to the US if you are a Hindu baiter and write a research paper about any subject related to Hindus with swear words including "Communal, Bigoted, Fascist, Caste. Cows, Curry" etc. The Western academia and other institutions welcome these sort of Windbags. OTOH if a person is truly an intellectual and refuses to tow the Western Line, they are kept at an arms length. How many people invited Shri. Goel? Even in India he was completely ignored. | |
| Author: | vsudhir [ 25 Sep 2008 12:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Quote: What are the factors that turn an Hindu to a HFL? Because they might actually think its a cool thing to do. After all wasn't Aamir in Rang De Basanti a FL too? The arbiters of cool (dhimmedia, bollywood etc) project HFLness as some sort of superevolved enlightenment and that fools the younger ones. And so much easier too. How much more convenient to emerge smelling sweet and reasonable admist communalo-fascists yindoo bigots onlee? The older ones are battle hardened veterans whose heart would break (wind would break, more likely) upon acknowledging that all that they've believed was just and right from early on all their lives was actually a massive fraud. Cognitive dissonance on a hilarious scale which they attempt to desperately stave off by clutching ever more tightly at the old bromides. For some, its an opiate of choice. In too deep to even bother coming out (true bakis, born wrong side of radcliffe line only). Happily, the majority are merely brainswashed by accident and can be easily shown the true path once some basic questions are put such as - "do you believe the media and the netas would care more if instead of pandits, muslims were ethnically cleansed from some part of india?" Basic stuff like that that brings out what they always suspected was true. The smarter ones (like nkumar) typically put these questions to themselves and self-awaken. And so on. Hope that helps onlee. | |
| Author: | fanne [ 25 Sep 2008 12:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Rahul, lets continue this conversation, it has been rewarding. I would digress to answer the question of my intellectual journey, but then that is a digression. I have lived all my life in hostel (from nursery till now). The schools were some of the best that the country has to offer. Initially it was a missionary school and later on a very Indic school. The only great thing that I learned was that I had something called logic and I can use that to analyze anything, do not let anyone fool you if their action/words did not pass your logic test. The closest I went to becoming a Dhimmi was when RG came to power and the media was all rara. I was quite impressed. I was young, impressionable and a news hog. Since I was I guess 13-14 years of age I would read some 10 different newspapers daily. There some eminent writers like Prafool Bidwai and others and their writing would irritate me no ends. Their logic was something like this, I have a cow, it gives milk that’s why mangoes are sweet. And I would sit scratching my head, I would of course not agree to that (so never a dhimmi) and only later I came to know that all these intellectuals were a$$*&%$%. Anyways I had my own set of logic, before I came to know AIT was wrong and read new theories on why, I made my own then, it was simple, ancient Indians were stickler for Satya (truth), why the would then lie about us being from this land when they came from outside. Not that they would have thought that many thousand years after they had written all these great book some party would benefit from that lie. I was good at history in my school and I would learn them but I always told myself, most of it were a lie and I was writing as such just to pass the exam. Anyways one day I said something like RG is a great guy, I and my dad only had a 10 minute chat, since then I have been 'independent'. I never found too many like minded fellows. In IIT I was mostly known for picking fights with people who would criticize India. In fact I won the debate when I was in first year speaking against the topic brain drain is better than brain in drain (and here I am migrated already). Then one fine day when I was in US, in my first year I discovered BR and realized there were eccentric people like me. It has been a great learning experience. I can say one thing though, most of the hunches that I had have turned to be true, though the reason for that truth has greatly varied. So that has been my journey. rgds, fanne | |
| Author: | shiv [ 25 Sep 2008 01:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
SwamyG wrote: A point I would like to make is the concept of "liberal" - it is heavily Western oriented. People are expected to be either a liberal or conservative. It is like you are either believe of "The Book" or not. Too narrow and dogmatic. It does not allow people to exist or have "grayness". Being progressive does not mean that one disrespects everything from the past, and being traditionalist or conservative does not mean that one hates everything modern. India is yet again caught up within a framework that suits Western mind set. Johann wrote: It might be worth discussing what a Hindu 'genuine liberal' as opposed to a pseudo-liberal might look like, and real life people who fit that category. My reply is directed at both your posts I guess. Swamy I think you are dead right in that the word liberal is a heavily Western oriented one. The western liberal is a product of the climate of Western civilization - the liberal whose thoughts and actions broke free from the shackles of conservatism. The "Conservatism" that the Western liberal broke down (for himself) had a particular "shape" or "form" that was heavily based on the history of Western society and the conservatism of the Church. No such history exists in India. Hindu ideas can be described as "liberal" in the Western sense in some aspects, and ultra-conservative in other areas. There is no "Hindu liberalism" in the Western sense. That is what brings us to the Hindu fake liberal The Hindu fake liberal is a person of Hindu background brought up in a Western Macaulayite environment who then likes the idea of liberalism. But his liberalism is what has been described in various terms as "dhimmi liberalism" or "pseudo-secular liberalism". I will try and explain this (aside from my blog link made earlier) I would define a true Hindu liberal as a person who acknowledges the religious liberalism of Hinduism while working to remove the social conservatism and other aspects of Hindu conservatism - aiming for a truly liberal viewpoint in the Western sense. Many such liberals exist - and I believe I used to be one such liberal not so many years ago. The problem that the true Hindu liberal is condemned as a "pseudosecular" person by the right wing and as a "hindutvadi" by the Hindu-fake liberals because he treads on both sets of toes. To an extent Mahatma Gandhi and Ambedkar may have been Hindu true liberals. Nehru was probably fake liberal. The fake liberal finds it easy to condemn Hindu conservatism, but is resolute in his ability to avoid condemning Islamic conservatism in an areas where Hinduism is patently more liberal. This is what creates the Hindu dhimmi-liberal or fake liberal.Also, as we have seen on these fora - the fake liberal condemns Islamic conservatism in the briefest and most delicate terms while reserving space to bash the Hindu conservative in the same breath. This would be perfectly understandable from a Muslim but is laughable from a person who calls himself Hindu and liberal  But what I see happening now is that the fake liberals have gone overboard and are making Hindu right wing arguments seem attractive. I see a fair number of true liberals aligning themselves with the right wing. A price will be extracted from the fake liberal group for being unable to read themselves and society. When blatant support is given to one extreme ideology, It becomes clear that extreme ideologies work and must be employed to move society in various ways. That is what is happening in India. It could be a dangerous portent, but the fake liberals are not helping. Just my view. | |
| Author: | shiv [ 25 Sep 2008 01:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
The worms that are coming out of the woodwork with this discussion are interesting. I have a message on my blog from a former member of BRF - some people on here will recognize him as an out and out fake liberal and he is squirming - just as intended. This discussion has caused him enough takleef to actually make him resurface after many years to post a comment where he describes this discussion as "masturbation" and that he is "rolling on the carpet" | |
| Author: | samuel [ 25 Sep 2008 01:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
the polarization of the country with the movement of the true liberals towards swaraj camp is a natural consequence of the institutional and individual fake-liberal response to islamism. /before independence, when INC reached out for compromise, it was motivated in large part to prevent the Muslim league from tearing India up. With india partitioned that whole policy needed to be purged. congress could not do it. It persisted however, especially in the wake of the mahatma's passing, and the country is in a tail spin ever since. | |
| Author: | G Subramaniam [ 25 Sep 2008 01:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
shiv wrote: The worms that are coming out of the woodwork with this discussion are interesting. I have a message on my blog from a former member of BRF - some people on here will recognize him as an out and out fake liberal and he is squirming - just as intended. This discussion has caused him enough takleef to actually make him resurface after many years to post a comment where he describes this discussion as "masturbation" and that he is "rolling on the carpet" What is the URL of your blog? | |
| Author: | GuruNandan [ 25 Sep 2008 01:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Bharati wrote: Are there people in this forum who never were dhimmis at any point in their lives? I am interested to know how this was possible. I sensed that there was something innately sinister about Islam at a very young age because of being indoctrinated at home. My father's family were survivors/refugees from the infamous Moplah riots. I have heard horror stories about brutal massacre and pillage of Hindus from my father. And i have been a SS since young. That reinforced antagonism towards Islam. I think that helped me escape being a Dhimmi. But i didn't realize that the source of viciousness of Islam was the Quran, Hadith and Sira until i read books from Voice of India - Courtesy Shri Sita Ram Goel and Shri Ram Swarup. Similarly for ideologies like Christianity and Communism. | |
| Author: | ShauryaT [ 25 Sep 2008 02:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
The one key event that shook me up was December 6, 1992. Future generations will use that event as one of the key markers that changed an entire generation, along with other factors such as the opening of the economy and opening up of the media and soon to follow the arrival of the internet. | |
| Author: | sudarshan [ 25 Sep 2008 02:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
Amazing! What a timely topic. Let me take a stab at collating my own random thoughts on this subject over the past few years. What is the difference between the HFL and the true HL, you ask? I believe I have interacted with members of both these interesting species, and am now a self-certified expert. Here's what I believe are the characteristics of the true HL. Usually a traditionally brought up Hindu, (regardless of habits acquired upon reaching adolescence, such as eating meat, etc.), who, owing to his/her upbringing, genuinely believes in "live and let live" and all that other good stuff. The foreigner can tell this breed by certain traits. If there is something genuinely wrong with India, the HL will openly admit it, without shame or undue embarrassment, maybe with frustration. If the said foreigner takes this as license to diss everything about India, the more aggressive HL (admittedly in a minority right now), will give it right back to the foreigner (I've seen this happening several times), while the less aggressive HL will smile politely and turn away. This is the kind of Hindu that tantalizes (and ultimately frustrates) the drooling convert-seeking Christian fundamentals: for this Hindu openly criticizes the caste system, or widow-burning, which leads to the belief that (s)he is ripe for conversion; yet this Hindu is in touch with the higher aspects of Hinduism, and wouldn't dream of embracing any other faith. It is my belief that among the Hindus that advocate brotherly love for the unmentionables next door, a vast majority actually belong to the genuine HL breed; they only harbor illusions of being friends with the unmentionables because of the ideals they were exposed to through their childhood and youth. This is the breed that comes to BR, and discovers the truth: that the hurdles to friendship with the unmentionables exist on the part of the unmentionables themselves; that until said hurdles are removed (if ever), there can be no question of friendly relations. True Liberals- get it? This breed has an open mind, and is willing to consider additional information which may modify/radically alter previously held cherished beliefs. This breed is India's true asset, and will turn out to be the worst nightmare of the enemies of India, because this breed would under normal circumstances abhor violence; but once convinced that violence is the only way, this species will be unyielding. Peaceful elephant going ballistic upon repeated provocation; or, per the Tamil saying- "Saadhu mirandal oor kalangum" (when the normally pacific man goes berserk, the whole town trembles). The HFL is a wholly different breed. There happen to be self-righteous pricks in any society; Indian/Hindu society is no different. It is owing to self-righteous European pricks of the last two centuries (they might or might not have been in the majority in Europe of those times; don't really know, don't really care) that entire native populations got wiped out. The difference between the SRPs of Europe, and those of India, is (IMO) that European SRPism was predicated on notions of superiority, while that of India is the exact opposite. Maybe this is the reason why Indian SRPs will never wipe out native populations, or maybe the reason is cultural. But the fact is (IMO again) that the Indian SRPs have appointed themselves as whistle-blowers, and see themselves as the Solzhenitzyns and Pasternaks of India; i.e., as true-blooded patriots, who only point out the flaws in their country out of concern for their countrymen. This is the reason you the Arundhati Roys or the Praful Bidwais proudly keep their Hindu names; they wear it as a tag that gives them freedom to criticize (Hindu) India. "What do you mean, anti-Hindu? I'm a proud Hindu; I just don't like this and that aspect of Hinduism." This-and-that aspect being practically all of Hinduism. Their attitude is the same as that of the white man who has shouldered his moral burden; lift up the heathens, even against their will; failing which, obtain the gratification of becoming martyrs. Heaven will be my reward, and sucks to you all. Members of this breed, to my thinking, have little other resource to sustain an equitable relationship with themselves; take away their self-righteousness, and what have they left? That is a major reason why they will fight any attempt to prove them wrong. The amazing thing (or maybe not so amazing, when you consider the "wear your Hindu identity as a badge" aspect), is that only a fraction of the HFL actually convert to Islam or Christianity; for the most part, the HFL is content to espouse the (usually misguided) cause of inveterate anti-nationals from behind the mask of being a true Hindu. Superficially, the HL will act like the HFL in many circumstances. The HL will balk at talk of taking up a hardline against the Pakis or the Bungle-deshis. The HL might very well genuinely believe that "they are also people like us." "Only their politicians cause trouble- the people are after all our separated brothers." This is partly owing to constant Macaulayization/secularization right from the school level, partly due to an irresponsible aversion to educating themselves (too busy having fun). It is my belief that India's nuclear tests in 1998 brought out the latent patriotism of many among this group, who then flocked to the net and found sites like BR. Wanna look up BR enrolment stats from around that time? Feel free to include me in this group. In fact, you know what ? Feel free to conclude that I came to BR after 1998, that I initially balked at the hardline stance of BR, and went through a slow (somewhat painful, owing to destruction of cherished beliefs) acclimatization process. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if your conclusion turned out to be entirely true.The HFLs are a lost cause; the HLs can be won over with patience and logic. The latter, thankfully, are in the majority. Now my question to the gurus is, which of these breeds do the WKK types actually belong to? Deluded HLs, or lost HFLs? Sudarshan | |
| Author: | nkumar [ 25 Sep 2008 02:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
shiv wrote: The worms that are coming out of the woodwork with this discussion are interesting. I have a message on my blog from a former member of BRF - some people on here will recognize him as an out and out fake liberal and he is squirming - just as intended. This discussion has caused him enough takleef to actually make him resurface after many years to post a comment where he describes this discussion as "masturbation" and that he is "rolling on the carpet" Shiv ji, IMO, this problem is more acute with people who are well educated and have a very strong prior beliefs. These people are intelligent, can analyze issues but their prior has a very shaky foundation when looked from a rational or logical framework and deep down in their heart they know that. But these guys have been "liberals" all through their life or have built their reputation/career on heavy dose of liberal arguments. So, whenever you have a discussion which foreplays/tickles their rational mind, it causes them immense "taqleef" or in other words conginitive dissonance sets in. If this problem persists, it may result in failure to achieve "intellectual erection", and then all they could do is..."rolling on the carpet" like this... | |
| Author: | shiv [ 25 Sep 2008 02:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
G Subramaniam wrote: shiv wrote: The worms that are coming out of the woodwork with this discussion are interesting. I have a message on my blog from a former member of BRF - some people on here will recognize him as an out and out fake liberal and he is squirming - just as intended. This discussion has caused him enough takleef to actually make him resurface after many years to post a comment where he describes this discussion as "masturbation" and that he is "rolling on the carpet" What is the URL of your blog? This is the relevant article | |
| Author: | shiv [ 25 Sep 2008 02:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
nkumar wrote: shiv wrote: The worms that are coming out of the woodwork with this discussion are interesting. I have a message on my blog from a former member of BRF - some people on here will recognize him as an out and out fake liberal and he is squirming - just as intended. This discussion has caused him enough takleef to actually make him resurface after many years to post a comment where he describes this discussion as "masturbation" and that he is "rolling on the carpet" Shiv ji, IMO, this problem is more acute with people who are well educated and have a very strong prior beliefs. These people are intelligent, can analyze issues but their prior has a very shaky foundation when looked from a rational or logical framework and deep down in their heart they know that. But these guys have been "liberals" all through their life or have built their reputation/career on heavy dose of liberal arguments. So, whenever you have a discussion which foreplays/tickles their rational mind, it causes them immense "taqleef" or in other words conginitive dissonance sets in. If this problem persists, it may result in failure to achieve "intellectual erection", and then all they could do is..."rolling on the carpet" like this... nkumar I have noticed that the typical dhimmi-liberal/fake-liberal has strong Macaulayite roots and excellent English - typically from "convent school education" (like me). They are very strong on rhetoric to support the lie they live. A good dose of equivalent rhetoric and a grasp of English can upset them and lead to the extreme anger of cognitive dissonance - the anger and frustration that arises when the fake liberal realises that positions he has held on to for a long time actually suck. Hence the use of words like "masturbation" to club the opinions of a large number of people. Bahut mazaa aaya.. | |
| Author: | Acharya [ 25 Sep 2008 02:47 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
ShauryaT wrote: The one key event that shook me up was December 6, 1992. Future generations will use that event as one of the key markers that changed an entire generation, along with other factors such as the opening of the economy and opening up of the media and soon to follow the arrival of the internet. English educated Indians were being programmed to be a liberal from 1900 and the global plan to create a liberal elite from all nations was started around 1935. - Wilsonian project after first war. Indian education system was changed in 1935 for the all the regions and Marxist and leftist education was introduced. Indians - English educated - were being programmed with a AIT version of history which created a kinship with colonial white western Anglo male population. This was spread across all of Europe, educated elite of ME, Russia and the commonwealth from 1900. This global population was the foundation of the liberal world as we see today in the world. Indian English education after 1968 onwards started being more rooted on the local history and culture. The decline of communism and liberal/cultural revolution reduced the global liberal world order. | |
| Author: | shiv [ 25 Sep 2008 02:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Hindu fake liberal |
ShauryaT wrote: The one key event that shook me up was December 6, 1992. Future generations will use that event as one of the key markers that changed an entire generation, along with other factors such as the opening of the economy and opening up of the media and soon to follow the arrival of the internet. I was a dhimmi liberal then . The www was not yet there for me, and one day I will make public the entry I made in a private diary then | |
No comments:
Post a Comment