Skip to content

A confused case against Hindutva

Saturday, January 7, 2012

Personally speaking, I have waited eagerly for this article to appear as was promised early on by its author. I was curious to learn of a new, perhaps unique, case against Hindutva and how it would be made – not being satisfied with cases made by others against it so far.

Let us think about the initial thrust of Harsh’s case -

1. Hindu organizations conflate being Hindu with being Indian

** The presence of the Muslim Rashtriya Manch is confusing though

2. In the process of doing so, they transform the philosophical/religious content of “Hinduism” into a vacuous nothingness. Arun Shourie’s observations vide a Supreme Court ruling on Hindutva seems to back this conclusion

** Two exceptions in Savarkar and Golwalkar are cited – they, according to Harsh, make a more rooted and exclusive case for a Hindu nationality by somehow creating uniformity amongst Hindus to conform with what a modern nation would look like

3. This transformation takes place due to an eagerness to incorporate “non-Hindus” in Hindusthan into this  ”Hindu nationality” and ensure they don’t resist the entry too much due to conflicting theological reasons

Now, before proceeding further, I would like to assert that all of the above conclusions the author draws are shallow and mostly baseless. Let me add that these false conclusions could be the result of a peculiar trait shared by most Hindu mass organizations – their lack of intellectual articulation. However, that cannot be an excuse for the author out to make a case against a powerful idea. 

In order to articulate its goal of Hindu Sanghatan or philosophy of Hindutva, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh – the most powerful as well as the head of all Hindu organizations- likes to tell a story from the life of its founder Dr K.B. Hedgewar. It goes something like this -

One day some early comrades came to Dr. Hedgewar and vented their frustration. They said,

“Look, it is impossible to unite Hindus. By the time we’re done convincing some, the others drop off and then some others don’t like who we have on-board already. This seems to be an impossible and thankless job you’ve given us. What do you want us to do now?!”

Dr. Hedgewar patiently listened to them and took a stick. He drew many lines on the mud ground, looked up at his comrades and asked them;

“Is this what you see when you go out?”

“Yes!” They exclaimed, immediately connecting with their angst.

The good Doctor smiled at them and then just after the last line he had drawn, he drew a line that was longest of the bunch.

“What do you see now?”

The spirited but weary group lit up as the Doctor explained – “The longest line is our national identity. The short lines are all those identities you’ve experienced in your work. Our mission is not to erase the short lines but only to draw attention of all our people to that longest line – Then you will have Hindu Sanghatan.”

What Hindutva is is the philosophy that nurtures this principle of the long line over all those small lines.    

The “nothingness”, the sense of “vacuousness” the author finds within the Hindutva narrative of Hindu religiosity is simply the inarticulation of the small lines. Let me confess that this negligence remains by far the biggest blunder committed by intellectuals of the Hindutva movement.

As the Hindutva movement grew stronger and witnessed alongside a comparable assertion of minorities – particularly Muslims; it seems to have made the decision to make a familiar overture to minorities from the Abrahamic family of religions. It appears to have told them to become one of those smaller lines – without losing their religious essence but also embracing a larger (Hindu) nationality as brothers. This overture was essential for two very important reasons -

1. The Abrahamic minorities were being frightened off by secular-liberals with the Hindutva bogeyman

2. These minorities as a matter of survival/power tactics exerted their energies to break the Hindu coalition by reaching out to individual Jatis/Janajatis

Therefore, it made eminent sense for the Hindutva movement to invite Abrahamic minorities to a table that hosted the numerous small lines of Hindu society and thereby hope to negate fissiparous tendencies.

Let me quickly close this part of my argument by saying that my above explanation clearly shows it is Hindu; and not any Hinduism, which is a misnomer anyways; that is a territorial concept, akin to being a nationality. This is historically accurate. And Hindutva would be the political philosophy that nurtures this nationality.

In the second phase the author wrongly assumes a probable disconnect between the Hindus of Hindusthan and people following similar non-Abrahamic traditions outside of our country. In the process, he badly misunderstands the nature of Dharma and its relation to diverse groups, their traditions, customs, norms etc.  He stands it up against “expansive and universal” religions of the Abrahamic variety and wonders if the Hindutva movement would not make our Dharma even more inward looking than it already is – since it never was as universal as Islam or Christianity anyways.

Let us be clear that the nature of Dharma is certainly inward looking in that the effort is on cleansing one’s self and consequently living in harmony with our environment/nature. The fact that our Jatis and Janajatis with their diverse customs and rituals; their Gods and Goddesses, live side by side without treading on other’s toes, without dictating and imposing one’s acquired notions on their neighbors, in short, without being expansive; the fact that this has been our way all these millennia speaks of an inner, deeper transcendent truth or Dharma. I submit that it is this Dharma that meaningfully sustains our national life within Hindusthan and gives meaning to similar traditions outside of this country.

We are not in the numbers game, even though numbers are important. Hindus have traditionally not converted but incorporated. At this point in time, I would like to state a pertinent fact -

The only reason Islam and Christianity stand opposed to Dharma are their missions of expansion. There is no peace in their missions because they have no notion of harmony outside of dead uniformity. One either has to believe in the Son of God or God’s Last Prophet. We do not want to become that. Our mission is different – it is to harmonize. If for the sake of argument, Islam and Christianity would forsake their global proselytizing missions, in due course their followers would become Dharmic since the cessation of their outward expansion would turn their focus inward.

Therefore it is plainly silly to suggest that somehow Dharma is short changed by Hindu nationality and Hindutva. It is the duty of Hindutva to protect and ensure Dharma does not decay in Hindusthan, its cradle. Once assured of health, it can focus on driving home its unique message across the nations of this troubled world.

Coming to the third phase, the author focuses on the everyday anxieties of Hindu nationalists. The fact that they react to “minority communalism” with a matching “majority communalism” instead of taking the higher moral ground and ask for systemic changes nee the actual and real seperation of Religion and State.

I submit that there cannot be any meaningful separation of Religion and State in a multicultural polity wedded to Liberal Democracy and Universal Franchise. A reader who really reads the highlighted text closely should be able to grasp the truth of this statement. Even so, some illustrations are in order.

1. How does a state separated from religion – a Secular State – view conversions when one portion of its population traditionally does not convert and the other insists as its right, that it does.

2. How does a Liberal Democratic state wedded to the notion of equality reconcile with its commitment to special rights of minorities in a multicultural polity?

These problems are not exhaustive but obvious enough and need to be dealt with by any champion of seperation of State and Religion.

In the following lines the author inadvertently seems to acknowledge the above problem when he says even the liberal proposals of Hindu organizations such as demand for a Uniform Civil Code and the abolition of Article 370 pertaining to the full integration of Jammu and Kashmir with the Union of Hindusthan – hit the Wall of Liberal Democratic politics. I wished he addressed this Wall but instead he digresses to the need to abide by the court’s verdict on Ayodhya and withdraw communal legislation such as bans on conversions and slaughter of cows. More arrogantly the author places the onus of dealing with conversions to Abrahamic religions on Dharmic systems that are traditionally not equipped to deal with it.

So on the one hand we find no explanation for why even liberal Hindu proposals are being systemically scorned and on the other hand are being asked to give up traditional rights. Heads I win, Tails you lose.

In the remainder of his post, Harsh further embellishes the ridiculous notion that effectively says, unless Hindu organizations fold up all their political pretensions, they cannot expect improvement in the minority situation. Even Muslim feminists can’t seem to find their feet only because the Hindu movement also favors a Uniform Civil Code.

Well well.

This is perhaps the oldest rabbit in the liberal magician’s hat.

In closing, what we really need from Harsh is a solid, internally consistent argument or case against Hindutva or a similar case for Secular-Liberalism. As it stands, he has failed to give us either.

- Namaste

PS – Readers may want to peruse my case for a Hindu State

Filed in Tradition like water, must never run dry and always find its level | | Comments (0)

Dharma & I

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Dharma is the art of living an equanimous life amidst harsh realities of man and nature.

Dharmic techniques and traditions teach us how to achieve this state of equanimity in practical terms.

To be responsible and help others in their responsibilities – is to live the Dharmic life.

All else is details.

- Namaste

Filed in Tradition like water, must never run dry and always find its level | | Comments (0)

Rajasthan HC riders on Arya Samaj

Friday, October 28, 2011

A Rajasthan High Court bench has observed thus on the practice of couples approaching the Arya Samaj when their marriages likely face opposition at home – “The pious purpose of the Arya Samaj Mission has been lost by the local units in the state and they are becoming a tool for pacification of ‘greed and lust’ for girl and boy and once it is over, the marriage lands in courts, resulting in irreversible breakdowns” – Aditionally, the bench ruled, in cases where parents remain opposed to the marriage, three prominent persons from each side may stand in as witnesses.

Apparently, the provocation for all of this was a marriage conducted by the Arya Samaj, between a 34 year old man with an 18 year old girl; the parents of the married girl brought her back home forcing her husband to go to court.

On pure merits, the concern about “thoughtless” marriages is real in traditional society. Ours is fortunately a very traditional country where parents still care about their children’s well being and remain linked well into and past their marriages. When marriages unfortunately break down, affected couples find support in their parents home and when marriages survive, parents support the new family in various ways including by taking care of grand – children. So, the concern for their children’s welfare is real and understandable.

What is not understandable is the liberal-feminist criticism of the court’s ruling. This ideology has never failed to lean on the State’s legislative authority and the judiciary in particular, for support in pushing its socially subversive agenda against traditional order - but vicsiously turns against its benefactor when it rules in a manner not in tune with the “Party Line”?

As a traditional Hindu, I do not support the ruling because the court is not competent, nor has it any business to meddle in society’s affairs. In my opinion, its jurisidiction was limited to freeing the bride in question – IF she had complained in court about being held by her parents against her will. It was left to the parents to disown and disinherit an adult daughter who went against their considered wish or to agree and go with whatever the future holds.

The bogey of “honor killing” is constantly raised. This is a liberal-feminist stick with which traditional society is guilt-tripped and beaten down with respect to time-honored social norms and mores. Traditional society has nothing to be ashamed of. Yes, family honor is very important. Yes, it will be protected against blemish. There is nothing wrong with families using personal emotional pressure when liberal-feminists see nothing wrong in imposing impersonal State authority and diktat. Protecting honor does not mean killing; just like giving and receiving dowry does not mean bride-burning. If anyone is killed, the State is well within its jurisdiction to try the accused and impose its harshest penalty.

The State should cease acting the social reformer. Liberal-feminists, if they could exercise their mental capacities, would realize that this is a double edged sword and instead engage society on its terms rather than constantly trying the State’s back door.

References :

Times of India

Blog Post

- Namaste

Filed in Tradition like water, must never run dry and always find its level | | Comments (0)

Dharma & Lean

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

For some time now, the similarities and linkage between the concepts of Dharma and Lean has fascinated me.

Eastern philosophies have distinguished themselves from “Abrahamic” or monotheistic belief systems in one glaring manner – the former has emphasised the adherent’s self purification through one’s own efforts and thereby and through such a manner connect with outer concentric realities to ensure self realization and worldly balance. We’ll call these philosophies, Dharmic; whereas the latter have prided upon divine guidebooks revealed to messiahs of Yahweh or Allah, whose divine instructions their adherents need to follow to win the prize of heaven. When viewed logically, the chances that the eastern adherent will reflect using reason, intuition, experience etc in order to improve self and surroundings are more as compared to the adherent who will refer to his guidebook for answers.

Let’s now take a look at Lean. The essence of Lean Management made famous by Toyota Corporation through its Toyota Production System, is to realize customer satisfaction and delight through continuous improvement of production and quality systems, not excluding human personal safety. This means any company that adheres to principles of Lean will aim to continuously identify and remove wastes that impede quality and efficient production with reference to customer demand, i.e. Takt time. This system demands involvement of all employees within that company’s various inter-connected departments to visualize their common goal and work towards it using the Lean Management system in place – always observant of waste and with an eagle eye on customer demand.

Clearly, my hypothesis rests on the undeniable similarity between Dharmic- self-improvement and Lean’s- removal of material(visible/invisible) waste. So all things considered, how do these work seperately and how can they come together in synergy?

I’d just like to reiterate that Dharma and Lean offer no compulsion. Individuals and companies adopt these philosophies – (Lean is a management philosophy) - willingly. They cannot be herded by shepherds.

Let’s dwell on Dharma and its tools

As a Hindu, my Dharma is to improve my self i.e, the quality of my inner being or soul and  my material standing in life – so that I can live with my inner self and outer worldly concentric circles of family, community/society, nation and universe, in balance and productive peace. According to my need and capacity, I will have an inner and outer “Takt” or demand standard that can progress or retard in direct proportion to my efforts. My inner Takt will be guided by my outer responsibility toward the said concentrics. (Note – If the inner Takt is not guided by outer responsibility, we will have husbands/wives abandoning their worldly responsibilities)

When translated, all this means is that there are appropriate and varied tools of meditation, yoga, schools of philosophy etc and socio-ethical concepts and traditions of righteous conduct as per one’s station in life – Brahmacharya, Grihasta, Sanyasa, Vanaprasta understood in conjunction with the purusharthas of Dharma including Artha, Kama and Moksha; that help us identify our Takt; our current capacity and needs with respect to self and surrounding worldly reality and begin the works of clearing the waste or obstacles so identified in the path of realization of such personal/social/political goals.

Now, we move to Lean and its tools

According to the very excellent David Mann in his  Creating a Lean Culture, Lean Management can be tied together by four principles. They are;

1. Standard Work

- An articulation or listing of essential routine leading to measurement of periodic metrics

2. Visual Control

- A visual representation of features or works listed in Standard Work, that clearly identify “Behind (RED)” and “Ahead (GREEN)” conditions – A team or family or community or even a nation would then “see together – learn together – act together”

3. Accountability

- An escalation and GoTo mechanism in case help is required; for assistance and resolution

4. Leadership principle

- A committed leadership that recognizes the importance of these systems/institutions and which, with rigor, seeks to observe and coach intermediate supervisors in order to maintain Lean Management System

The above principles come together for a purpose. The purpose is identified in Mission and Vision statements that are further minutely articulated; after due considerations to available data and to perceived strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. These inputs are further fed into a Strategy Deployment Plan or a Strategy X; that clearly visualizes long and short term goals and resources to work the priorities that will help meet these goals. Now, these goals are little else than customer demand (Takt) projected into the future. However, the calculation is a stretch on current capacity to meet current customer demand.

The spinal chord of this entire system is something called continuous improvement; or the identification and removal of waste and thereby continually improve once performance. This also provides inner organic coherence.

Can you now see how Dharma and Lean are so closely linked?

But modern Dharmic life and society faces a practical problem – The problem is we have lost sight of tools that can help articulate our Mission and Vision statements, that can help evaluate our SWOT, help deploy a winning strategy and maintain course to the set goals/by Takt in the individual, family, community/society and national spheres. We have irrational Standard Work, poor Visual Control, zero Accountability and irresponsible Leadership Discipline – all leading to tremendous waste and unforgiving failure.

Can we not use the tools provided to us by our Dharmic soul mate, Lean Management, in order to live healthy, safe and productive lives? Think hard.

This post is dedicated to my dear friend Amit Gupta

- Namaste

PS – I will be publishing user friendly templates shortly. For those wishing to learn more, please email samanyasutra@gmail.com

Filed in Samanya Sutra, Thoughts on the Hindu State | | Comments (0)

Q/K/Gaddafi and the US

Saturday, October 22, 2011

Readers know i’ve always admired Lawrence Auster and my respect for him increased even more when I read his views on Gaddafi’s brutal murder. Hindus unfamiliar with LA’s writings and thought process may find it strange that a White Christian American nationalist hauls his own Govt and the West over hot coals for betraying Gaddafi; an erstwhile sworn enemy of the United States; in so dishonorable a manner – I will only advise such Hindus to read more of LA closely. We have much to learn and profit from this great Traditionalist.

This entry, I found the best of a series so far on the subject.

- Namaste

Filed in Thoughts on the Hindu State, Tradition like water, must never run dry and always find its level | | Comments (0)

On Secularism

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

This post was first published at Centre Right India as part of a larger debate to discuss secularism in Hindusthan. There are other more beautiful pieces on the CRI site that deserve attention and comment. Please visit and participate. – Namaste

What is secularism?

This political system or ideology can be variously understood -

1. A State without religion

2. A convenient apportioning of powers between State and religious authorities

3. A State treating all religions equally without itself aligning with any one particular religion

4. State suppression of religion

In Hindusthan, we claim to follow the 3rd variety.

Genesis of secularism in Europe

Secularism evolved in a Europe whose politics was trying hard to disentangle itself from the suffocating embrace of the Church. As always, both selfish and noble reasons motivated this effort. Nevertheless, without the presence of the Church, it is safe to say, secularism or its wellspring, liberalism, would not have seen the light of day.

It is important to realize that secularism is an ideology, not a natural state of mind. It is an ideology of State that, like all ideologies, seeks to mould minds in its image.

Genesis of secularism in Hindusthan

In Hindusthan, the genesis of secularism took a more complex course. Briefly, various Hindu social reform movements provided an impetus to a modernising nee self-alienating Hindu elite to think in terms of a nebulous Hindu Church and the need to separate this Church from the State. Ironically, such a Church never existed.

I believe the seed of secularism were sown in the Nehru Report of 1928 and its existence formalized during the emergency in 1976.

Goals

Secularism has certain goals in Hindusthan, chiefly;

1. A State without religion and the maintenance of such a condition

2. The inculcation of a “scientific spirit” in the citizenry which counteracts a pervasive religious spirit – this is essential if the ideology of secularism is to be sustained

Practical challenges to secular goals

1. Universal Adult Franchise

2. An overwhelmingly religious population

3. The liberal basis of secularism that compels it to acknowledge special needs and concerns of minorities, consequently keeping the majority on a tight leash

4. A diverse majority and assertive minorities

When one thinks about these challenges and links them up in a chain of cause & effect, it becomes easy to appreciate the true nature of secularism as political farce.

The harm secularism does

An imposed, ill-designed, contradictory, artificial political farce as ideology, can only corrupt our polity.

Society distracts and fragments itself in the pursuit of quick, segmented dollops from the political class. Institutions that sustained social health weaken and wither due to a designed lack of incentive and attention. Most such institutions of the majority are actively subverted to achieve a two-fold aim – keep the majority weak and divided to prevent assertion and sustain secular politics – which develops a vested interest in perpetuating itself for the sake of power devoid of noble intent, if any.

Such a condition naturally gives hope and ambition to assertive minorities – a never-ending cycle of turbulence ensues.

Are secular goals noble?

It should be evident by now that secularism is impractical and harmful, however, what about its goals? Are they not noble in themselves? The answer to this question is simple. It depends in the clime in which secularism grows – it can either be a poisonous weed or a useful plant. In the largely homogeneous countries of Europe under the thumb of a regressive Church, it played the part of a useful plant but is turning into a poisonous weed as society turns heterogeneous and becomes unable to socially assimilate immigrants. In Hindusthan, this import was a weed which progressively turned poisonous; since the nature of Dharma is inherently and basically different. Dharma does not impose a “State religion” nor is it dogmatic.

Secularism and Hindu Nationalism

Hindu nationalism has an inadequately developed critique of secularism that does not countenance its dissolution. On the contrary, it seeks to uphold a purer or truer version of it. This is natural because in essence, Hindu nationalism has not been able to disconnect itself from modernistic impulses carried in the germ of such false notions such as the demand for a Uniform Civil Code and a visceral self-defeating anti-Jati or Jati-absent political discourse. Hindu nationalists inaccurately but sincerely claim Hindu(ism) or Dharma is secular and so reconcile secularism with Dharma. Nothing can be further than the truth. The straight jacket of secular ideology is the very anti-thesis of subtle and naturally balancing impulses and traditions of Dharma.

This self-negating Hindu nationalist narrative has so far effectively kept “game changing” ideas out of the political and social sphere – What can these ideas be? I propose;

1. The need to officially identify the Constitutional non-minority as the Hindu National Majority

2. The need to guarantee equal political representation to all Jatis & Janajatis, including those from minority segments

3. The need to guarantee Personal Law to all population segments including Hindu/minority Jatis/Janajatis

- Family as unit of society

- All changes to Personal Law should follow a popular mandate for change by the affected group

4. The withdrawal of the State from all religious/Dharmic institutions – Necessary social guarantees may be sought

5. The channelization of all charitable funds; domestic and foreign as per proportion of population

6. Withdrawing official recognition to all totems of conversion – it should not matter if a person is inclined to worship Allah or meditate upon Brahman – people should be free to discourse and choose as per their inclination – similarly, choosing and/or changing Personal Law should become as fluid

7. The apparent contradiction between points 1 & 6 will clarify itself when seen from the point of national pale

I believe such measures will effectively reverse the ill-effects of secularism and strengthen family/societal/national structures.

But is it possible to discuss and improve upon these ideas? To do that, one must shed inhibitions and squarely recognize the free-fall we are in. In almost every area of life there is decay, confusion and anxiety, with the secular regime staying a corrective hand - therefore, no set of suggested remedies should be summarily dismissed without convincing reason. Especially not when current remedial actions aren’t working.

- Namaste

Postscript – There is a crying need to address this issue in totality and not remain reactive to specific incidents.

Filed in Tradition like water, must never run dry and always find its level | | Comments (0)

Thoughts on feminism

Friday, October 14, 2011

Why am I writing about feminism? Because with a wife and two growing daughters and a niece, I would be a fool not to be interested in getting to know this ideology better. They are always going to be my first impulse.

What is this feminism? What are its premises as I have understood it?

Feminism is the ideology of the struggling female of the human species who seeks a place of equality at the high table she believes, sits the male of the same human species. The essential premises of feminism may be listed thus -

1. There is a Dark Age which women have never really passed over

2. In this (ongoing) Dark Age, men have conspired to subdue and shackle women for their own selfish ends

3. The last couple hundred years or so have provided enough opportunities for women to come unto their own (meaning, to stand “equally” with the male)

4. This advantage must be pushed and equality sought with man

5. That the struggle for equality will be contested by man is a given – therefore the process of struggle will hurt

6. Elements such as family, children, the home – are collateral in this struggle for equality with man

7. Since financial independence is key to access material needs/wants, a career is of prime importance – therefore equality must be demanded in all avenues of employment – even if this pushes out the possibility of the earning male of households

Like all ideologies – religious as well as political, feminism has its Dark Age and the struggle against it becomes its source of legitimacy. It has clearly identified the “other” in the “dominant male”. Its strategy is to evangelize its creed amongst the unsuspecting male and female. This ideology, of course, accepts no responsibility for consequences; much like how the ideologies of Christianity or Islam accept no responsibility for the continued plight of the converted untouchable.

The goal is “equality”. The erasure of all natural and complimentary distinctions between man and woman. Feminists clearly recognise that the continued relevance of these natural distinctions are obstacles to their goal. Yes, they have decided that the goal of equality, no matter how fluid in its conception, how unstable; is worth all the destruction of the family/society as we have known it.

The moment such an argument is made, the feminist evangelist, like her religious evangelist cousin, is quick to point out that an unjust immoral advantage is sought to be protected by the defensive male, or the so branded male chauvinist. Much like how the “upper Jatis” are accused of protecting their turf against alien incursions. This invariably puts mild and sensible skeptics on the defensive. Job done.

None can deny that women are illtreated by irresponsbile and criminal minded men. Just like men are at the receiving end of similarly minded women. It is the poison-as-medicine of feminism that should be rejected out of hand. Instead, husbands/families should be made responsible for their members and their welfare. Social institutions should be strengthened. Children have to be reared with care and attention. A woman should do what she can do best, a man, likewise.

We need better and healthier personal, family relationships and support structures. What does feminism, with its road-roller attitude offer in terms of support to shattered lives? Nothing but to rely on the State and its machinery.

Truly has it been said – a feminist discards the male only to marry the State.

There is another sinister contribution from feminism – the irresponsible male. The ideology of the “free” woman has ironically freed the male from discharging his  responsibility towards the female. Now, where the female remains physically weak but with an overbearing attitude, the male seeks justification in his brutality. He does not spare even innocent women who remain dedicated to her family, to him and their children. The feminist, has one solution to offer – struggle, more struggle, call the police (State), walk out…..fend for yourself. Don’t reconcile, don’t leverage the extended family (provided this has survived feminist depredations), stay and assert for self and family.

Walking out becomes less painful once you achieve financial independence – women are told by the evangelists. The scars of broken relationships, lost families somehow can be papered over by monies in the bank. Somehow, the naturally subtle and delicate woman can rebuild – what?

Our society is stronger than in the West. They have failed to stem the tsunami of feminism -but we, man and woman, husband and wife, sons and daughters will hold it in a cup and drink it at breakfast.

- Namaste

Filed in Discussion | | Comments (0)

How can we neutralize the effect of conversions?

Monday, July 18, 2011

In a number of discussions with Shri Munusamy Ganapathy and others, I have gathered that there are families where its members follow or are adherents of different religions and traditions. Isn’t it typically Hindu? Hindu society has been traditionally open to philosophical ideas and systems. Its members are not encumbered by protective rituals such as a baptism or theological defences such as apostasies or threats of excommunication. Perhaps this is the reason why one might find Hindus in Churches but not Christians or Muslims in Devasthanas.

There is an abiding threat Hindu society faces in converting missions. These have become a threat not because a mode of worship changes but because the converted are lost to Hindu society. What creates this break if not the ritual of baptism or circumcision with attendant wordy rites of passage? What would happen if these, even though conducted, would lose their seal of sanctity and permanence?

Suppose there was a declaration from the leaders of our Jatis and Janajatis de-recognizing the binding permanence of all rites and rituals (prevalent amongst Christians and Muslims) tied to a converted Hindu   – would that not ensure converting missions lose their sting whilst allowing the so inclined amongst Hindus to worship the Gods they want? Not only that but in due course, it would make way for Christians and Muslims in Hindusthan to become truly Hindu in a cultural sense. In this scenario shuddhi itself would become an irrelevant exercise.

- Namaste

Filed in Thoughts on the Hindu State | | Comments (0)

What does it mean “to politicise”?

Monday, July 18, 2011

Thanks to my friend on twitter @BhaskarChat I read this piece by Shri Ajit Doval on the evolution of SIMI (Students Islamic Movement of India and it’s post ban avatara IM (Indian Mujahideen). Couple of observations, though acknowledged by the less politically correct, seemed worth noting once again -

“Thanks to India’s soft policies, security agencies are reluctant to initiate any action against anti-national elements unless and until a criminal case is possible.”

“The next set of problems emanate from the fact that our counter-terrorist doctrines, structures and systems have evolved around the threats from foreign terrorists. Apprehending domestic problems, the government has always denied that there could be local participation. But this reality needs to be accepted so that the intelligence agencies can include domestic players in their coverage. This acceptance will also increase the role and responsibility of the district and local-level intelligence units of the states that are in a state of neglect. The National Intelligence Grid is also a welcome step and needs to be pursued on a war footing.”

Towards the end of the article, the author says something that is commonly heard in our public discourse but to me has made no sense. He says – “It is important that while taking firm actions against anti-national elements, the innocents are protected and collateral damages are avoided. Last but not the least, political parties should stop politicising terror since it can be catastrophic if we have to face its indigenous variant.”

Now, I understand the concern for innocents but without politicising a serious issue that effects the safety of the man on the street, how do we hope to get politicians to address or even take seriously Shri Doval’s tactical concerns wrt counter-terrorism measures viz the need for harder policies and the inclusion of homegrown terror networks in the security radar? In a democracy, it is critical that issues are politicised. Here, politicization should not be deemed to mean political one upmanship even though that seems inevitable it will occur – but this is the system we have chosen.

The other fear that indigenous terror can be catastrophic contains a warning about what an antagonized minority might do if pushed to the wall. In this case it is even more important for this and like issues to be discussed publicly. We need people to be made aware of what can be in store for them, in their environment. It is unavoidable. Consequently, such knowledge can work as a good deterrent against instigators of catastrophe.

The tragic reality is that Hindu society is the least politicised in Hindusthan when it should have been in the thick of things. It is purely reactive in nature, having been made to lose critical instincts of inquiry and cohesive action by this country’s long reigning secular-liberal parasites who live off of its divided votes and distracted mind.

So the thing to do is to properly politicise issues inviting all kinds of opinion, especially when it concerns serious matters of security. Intellectuals such as Shri Doval should be visiting schools and colleges. Non-liberal opposition political parties should reach out to their constituents with these issues so that discourse is well rounded. This would be a good start.

- Namaste

Filed in Thoughts on the Hindu State | | Comments (0)

How to wipe out Islamic terror – An analysis

Sunday, July 17, 2011

Dr. Swamy‘s article in DNA has created quite a flutter; a veritable Hindu cat has been set amongst liberal pigeons. Hindu nationalists have been uniformly supportive and combative in his defense in various fora. In this post, I would like to survey this article while offering my observations on it as I progress.

Referencing the recent bombings in Mumbai, Dr. Swamy defines the phenomenon of terrorism as employing terror tactics to compel the target population to act against its own interests. He quite rightly asserts that Islamic terror is this country’s top national security problem and sees this growing in dimensions in the near future as Pakistan collapses to the Taliban and the US vacates its occupation of Afghanistan – leaving Jihadis with a vast playfield all their own. He sees the inevitable targeting of Hindusthan and Hindu society as a historical continuum to the unfinished or halted project of Islamic expansion in this country. – Nothing wrong in this factual and proven narrative.

Dr. Swamy then takes Hindu society to task for being so self-centered to the point of even ignoring obvious attacks on its body politic and carrying on as if nothing or very little has happened to it. He argues that if only half of these Hindus were to rise above “caste and language” a Hindu party could come to great power. I would like to pause here and say that Hindus as a society will not “rise above Jati and language” because there is strength in these identities. It is for the Hindu party to cater to these identities and win Hindu confidence.  Hindu politicians cannot invent a different Hindu people but must work amongst those they have committed themselves to.

Clearly, the author continues, local Muslims are being cajoled into conflict with Hindus thereby creating a fear psychosis. This is an extremely plausible given common sense and the Karachi Project. To become blind to it in the name of fairness and justice is the same as having the blood of innocent Hindus on our hands when the bombs continue to go off. Hindu sense of fairplay will only be used to further Jihadi goals.

A Virat Hindu, Dr. Swamy translates it as Committed Hindu, obviously to the well being of Hindu society and nation will be a necessary adjunct to Hindu character and physical make-up. The Muslim is not off-handedly excluded from this fortification against Islamic terror, provided he genuinly feels for the Hindu. As proof of this, the Muslim is required to acknowledge his Hindu ancestry and feel pride in it; failing which he along with similar minded citizens would lose their right of franchise. In my opinion, non-Hindu minorities should not be compelled to acknowledge their Hindu ancestry on pain of losing voting rights. They should be able to live by their religious traditions freely taking inspiration from whichever far-off land their Gods originated. Their right to franchise should not be eliminated but limited in scope – sufficient enough to empower their economic and political decision making at the local levels.

The beautiful concepts of vyaktigat and rashtriya charitra in a Hindu is reiterated with Dr. MM Singh being offered as an illustration of a person with good vyaktigat charitra but lacking in rashtriya charitra as shown in his kow-towing to Smt Sonia Gandhi on national policy.

Dr. Swamy insists on a zero tolerance, no negotiation policy with terrorists – for this the Hindu nation must be prepared and political and social leaders must address and discuss this policy openly. Hindus must know what they might have to sacrifice if and when the dark hour strikes in their lives. I see nothing wrong in it. More than adequate retaliation is recommended as a means of showing the nation will not be cowed down.

The good doctor quickly debunks the bogus theory of poverty and lack of education as source of terrorism. This needs reiteration because this hokum is constantly resorted to even by those who don’t believe in it only to avoid facing the real and actual cause of Islamic terrorism. It has become a tactic to shut up Hindu upstarts who won’t be easily satisfied.

I am not sure how Dr. Swamy can differentiate the political and religious aspects of Islam and address only the political since each segment bolsters the other. This will need more thinking. Perhaps a way forward is to guarantee their religious autonomy and allow Muslims and like minorities to repose political faith at the national level in the Hindu nation. 

In any event, he recommends defeating Islam’s political goals in Hindusthan and lists them down along with his solutions. (Here, I have not carried Dr. Swamy’s solutions but introduced my own thinking – readers may please refer the linked article for the doctor’s recommendations)

Goal 1 – I myself favor a pull mechanism that would allow Muslims a face saving way to pull out of the quagmire of Article 370.

Goal 2 – At the very least the three Devasthanas, including the Shri Rama Janmasthan must be returned to the trust of Hindu society.

Goal 3 – We need a Hindu State for an existing Hindu Rashtra. We do not need a Uniform Civil Code. In fact, we must, as far as possible, revert the modernist Hindu Code to traditional family laws. We must also assure all minorities their Personal Laws.

Goal 4 – Instead of prohibiting conversion, perhaps a better way would be to derecognize the condition of conversion that insists on a “baptism, apostasy and excommunication” as the case might be. In the traditional Dharmic manner, people should be free to openly debate and adopt their philosophy and change it if they wanted to.

Completely agree on the Bangladesh proposal – It is only fair that Bangladesh parts with land to house its people.

Goal 5 – I will recommend that Hindu organizations and political parties invite these Muslim and Christian propagandists to come and answer questions posed to them in full public view. This can then be televised and distributed via other media.

Finally, I agree with Dr. Swamy that Islamic terrorism is not an insurmountable problem. However, for Hindus to be organized, even he must agree that it would be successful only along Jati and Janajati lines by assuring them equal political representation and making them stake holders in the future of the Hindu nation.

- Namaste

Filed in Thoughts on the Hindu State | | Comments (0)