Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 15 Nov 2015 02:25

Majority of the Indian hindu populace use swastikas with abandon. They are not upset. The only ones who are upset are those who call themselves world citizens and take on a sense of catholic guilt. It requires certain amount of rooted-ness in shruti/smriti/puarana/ithasa to be able to shrug off and keep doing what we have to do. Several people ask me, upon hearing that I am hindu, whether hindus venerate cows, elephant headed god, and monkey god. I calmly say that yes we do worship them in a matter of fact way. It is totally factual. Where is the need to be ashamed of it?. I also tell them their names - kAma dhEnu, vinAyaka, and AnjanEya/hanumanta. I have never encountered anybody who argued with me after that. Partly that is what it is to be a hindu and we need to be able to state this in a matter of fact way. I make it a point never to ask whether they believe in god/devil, whether Christ existed, creationism, or any of the other christian beliefs. The conversation ends right there. Some of them want to use it is the opening gambit in a long drawn theological argument which I simply refuse to participate in due to my strong belief in hindu way of life and that it is not something to be ashamed of.

rgosain · Post by **rgosain** » 15 Nov 2015 02:32

vayu tuvan wrote:Majority of the Indian hindu populace use swastikas with abandon. They are not upset. The only ones who are upset are those who call themselves world citizens and take on a sense of catholic guilt. It requires certain amount of rooted-ness in shruti/smriti/puarana/ithasa to be able to shrug off and keep doing what we have to do. Several people ask me, upon hearing thatg I am hindu, whether hindus venerate cows and elephant headed god and monkey god. I calmly say that yes we do worship in a matter of fact way. I also tell them their names - kAma dhEnu, vinAyaka, and AnjanEya/hanumanta. I have never encountered anybody who argued with me after that. Partly that is what it is to be a hindu and we need to be able to state this in a matter of fact way. I always never ask what whether they believe in god/devil/, or do they believe whether Christ existed, creationism, or any of that. The conversation right there. Some of them want to use it is the opening gambit in a long drawn theological argument which I simply refuse to participate in through the strength of my belief in hindu way of life.

Wonderfully explained.
I usually tell them that we also believe in infinite multiverses hence the myriad of gods and that usually ends the conversation. The ones who are really, genuinely interested do come back..

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 15 Nov 2015 02:34

^^^ Agreed. I didn't think twice of the swastikas in our Diwali Rangoli until I began thinking of a way of telling the readers of Daily Kos about the double standards they have. I thought Shiv's post would help make it clear to them.

It is not that what those readers think really has any significance. But I have the "broken windows policing" philosophy about this - namely, even such minor things should not be given a pass.

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 15 Nov 2015 04:27

vayu tuvan wrote:The conversation right there. Some of them want to use it is the opening gambit in a long drawn theological argument which I simply refuse to participate in through the strength of my belief in hindu way of life.

Minor pick-nit - is 'duty bound to action' the same as 'belief in a proposition'?
Note - the latter is Abhrahamic and the former is more Dharmic... The confusion set in when Karma became fate for whatever reason. The deracinated assumed that theirs is a belief as well, just as Hindu is a religion as well.

In a real conversation, nay argument, with someone who was trying to make me see one 'good news' -

Q: What is your belief?
A: None

Q: So you are a Hindu?
A: Yes

Q: How can you believe in nothing and be a Hindu?
A: I follow Dharma in all my actions. I hold strong opinions loosely.

Q: So you believe in Dharma? (almost being relieved)
A: In as much as it helps the well being of all living beings and stabilizes them.

Q: So you can abandon Dharma?
A: In extreme circumstances it may be warranted. It is not a belief!

Notice this went on for a while... For someone in the belief framework, the other is relativistic and confounding!
My two paisa for free - we need to fix our selves when we throw around terms like faith, religion & belief.
None of these are natural to the system we come from... the more immersed I get in my own exploration,
the more convinced I have become of how much we have lost - our entire mindset needs to be reset.
The real challenge is English and the framework enmeshed into words - it is a trap!

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 15 Nov 2015 04:45

Pulikeshi: Someone saying, I believe in the worship of Ganesh, Hanuman, Ganga, etc is fine too. Let us not take away the simplicity of worshipping the creator in its creations. This simple message is also well understood, if explained in a clear manner. Now, your answer is a perfectly valid one, but that requires education. Which very, very few are willing to be educated on (my contention being most Indians have not formally learnt about Dharma and hence this education is lost - until a special attempt is made). Simple test, ask the average person, if they know what their formal value systems are? This process of re-education will take time.

Will respond later to your previous post on Asian consolidation.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 15 Nov 2015 05:15

hindu way of life is quite bewildering to those who have their beliefs rooted in the book. I want to call myself a hindu atheist but still it would not convey the right meaning. hindu skeptic may be? still the same problem.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 15 Nov 2015 05:16

^^^ About the "believe in" -- it has shades of meaning we Hindus need to understand.

For example, in Christian thought, Satan knows that God exists, but Satan does not "believe in God".

One who repeats the words of the Apostle’s Creed “I believe in God the Father Almighty...” and means what he says is not simply announcing the fact that he accepts a certain proposition as true; much more is involved than that. Belief in God means trusting God, accepting God, accepting his purposes, committing one’s life to him and living in his presence.

In this sense, it is impossible to "believe in science" for example.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Nov 2015 05:25

A_Gupta wrote:^^^ Shiv, I used what you wrote on this dailykos.com comment. In retrospect, I should have asked you first. Apologies!

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2015/11 ... t_58282176

Not an issue.

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 15 Nov 2015 19:58

X posted

Surasena wrote:.... you mean the most well known living French author, ex agnostic, and ex Islam hater Michel Houellebecq who just set off a firestorm with his new novel, then yes.

From his earlier novels "Whatever" & "Platform":
THE SUICIDE OF THE WEST:
The Novels Of Michel Houellebecq

Alan Dent

Major writers provoke controversy. Not everything controversial is major, but everything major is controversial. Literature, to paraphrase Pound, is controversy that stays controversial. Michel Houellebecq has internalised the condition of modern Europe more fully and sensitively than any other writer. His capacity to recreate that condition through fiction has the quality of apparent ease characteristic of genius. Houellebecq's shorthand for our plight is, the suicide of the West. The following passage from his latest novel Plateforme (not yet available in English) might be taken as an indication of what that shorthand means:

My European ancestors had worked hard for several centuries; they had undertaken to dominate and then to transform the world, and to a certain extent they had succeeded. They had done so out of economic interest, a taste for work, but also because they believed in the superiority of their civilization: they had invented the dream , progress, Utopia, the future. This consciousness of a civilizing mission had evaporated during the course of the twentieth century. Europeans, at least some of them, went on working, and sometimes working hard, but they did so for gain or out of a neurotic attachment to their task; the innocent consciousness of their natural right to dominate the world, and to direct its future, had disappeared. Due to accumulated effort Europe remained a rich continent; those qualities of intelligence and relentlessness that my ancestors had shown, I had clearly lost A well-heeled European, I could obtain at trifling cost, jn other countries, food, services and women; a decadent European conscious of my approaching death and having subscribed utterly to egocentrism, I saw no reason to do without them. I was aware, however, that such a situation was hardly tenable, that people like me were incapable of ensuring the survival of a society, or were even unworthy to live. Changes would come, were already coming, but I couldn't feel myself genuinely concerned; my only genuine motivation was to get myself out of this shitheap as quickly as possible.

It’s a fact, I mused to myself, that in societies like ours sex truly represents a second system of differentiation, completely independent of money; and as a system of differentiation it functions just as mercilessly. The effects of these two systems are, furthermore, strictly equivalent. Just like unrestrained economic liberalism, and for similar reasons, sexual liberalism produces phenomena of absolute pauperization. Some men make love every day; others five or six times in their life, or never. Some make love with dozens of women, others with none. It’s what’s known as ” the law of the market”. In an economic system where unfair dismissal is prohibited, every person more or less manages to find their place. In a sexual system where adultery is prohibited, every person more or less manages to find their bed mate. In a totally liberal economic system certain people accumulate considerable fortunes; others stagnate in unemployment and misery. In a totally liberal sexual system certain people have a varied and exciting erotic life; others are reduced to masturbation and solitude…………

Love as a kind of innocence and as a capacity for illusion, as an aptitude for epitomizing the whole of the other sex in a single loved being rarely resists a year of sexual immorality, and never two. In reality the successive sexual experiences accumulated during adolescence undermine and rapidly destroy all possibility of projection of an emotional and romantic sort; progressively, and in fact extremely quickly, one becomes as capable of love as an old slag.

The fact that women are forced either to become more meretricious in order to attract men or to face withdrawal into loneliness leads to the deflating conclusion elaborated in Platforme that the progressive professionalization of sexual relations is inevitable...

http://www.pennilesspress.co.uk/prose/s ... e_west.htm
Other earlier novels:

An interview about his latest novel Soumission (Submission in English) which has been wrongly called "Islamophobic" when it really is a scathing indictment of contemporary France (including the sexual revolution) & its Enlightenment inheritance:
That hypothesis is central to the book, but we know that it has been discredited for many years by numerous researchers, who have shown that we are actually witnessing a progressive secularization of Islam, and that violence and radicalism should be understood as the death throes of Islamism. That is the argument made by Olivier Roy, and many other people who have worked on this question for more than twenty years.

This is not what I have observed, although in North and South America, Islam has benefited less than the evangelicals. This is not a French phenomenon, it’s almost global. I don’t know about Asia, but the case of Africa is interesting because there you have the two great religious powers on the rise—evangelical Christianity and Islam. I remain in many ways a Comtean, and I don’t believe that a society can survive without religion...

It’s not necessarily racial, it can be religious. In this case, your book describes the replacement of the Catholic religion by Islam.

No. My book describes the destruction of the philosophy handed down by the Enlightenment, which no longer makes sense to anyone, or to very few people. Catholicism, by contrast, is doing rather well. I would maintain that an alliance between Catholics and Muslims is possible. We’ve seen it happen before, it could happen again.

You who have become an agnostic, you can look on cheerfully and watch the destruction of Enlightenment philosophy?

Yes. It has to happen sometime and it might as well be now. In this sense, too, I am a Comtean. We are in what he calls the metaphysical stage, which began in the Middle Ages and whose whole point was to destroy the phase that preceded it. In itself, it can produce nothing, just emptiness and unhappiness. So yes, I am hostile to Enlightenment philosophy, I need to make that perfectly clear...

We haven’t spoken much about women. Once again you will attract criticism on that front.

Certainly a feminist is not likely to love this book. But I can’t do anything about that.

And yet you were shocked when people described Whatever as misogynistic. This book won’t help your case.

I still don’t think I’m a misogynist, really. I would say that this isn’t the crucial thing, in any case. The thing that may rub people the wrong way is that I show how feminism is demographically doomed. So the underlying idea, which may really upset people in the end, is that ideology doesn’t matter much compared to demographics...

Isn’t there something despairing about this gesture, which you didn’t really choose?

The despair comes from saying good-bye to a civilization, however ancient. But in the end the Koran turns out to be much better than I thought, now that I’ve reread it—or rather, read it. The most obvious conclusion is that the jihadists are bad Muslims. Obviously, as with all religious texts, there is room for interpretation, but an honest reading will conclude that a holy war of aggression is not generally sanctioned, prayer alone is valid. So you might say I’ve changed my opinion. That’s why I don’t feel that I’m writing out of fear. I feel, rather, that we can make arrangements. The feminists will not be able to, if we’re being completely honest. But I and lots of other people will.

You could replace the word feminists with women, no?

No, you can’t replace the word feminists with women. Really you can’t. I make it clear that women can be converts, too.

http://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2015 ... -new-book/

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 16 Nov 2015 12:48

The Most Intolerant Wins: The Dominance of the Stubborn Minority

Preliminary draft from Nassim Taleb...

First, the geography of the terrain, that is, the spatial structure, matters a bit; it makes a big difference whether the intransigents are in their own district or are mixed with the rest of the population. If the people following the minority rule lived in Ghettos, with their separate small economy, then the minority rule would not apply. But, when a population has an even spatial distribution, say the ratio of such a minority in a neighborhood is the same as that in the village, that in the village is the same as in the county, that in the county is the same as that in state, and that in the sate is the same as nationwide, then the (flexible) majority will have to submit to the minority rule

Second, the cost structure matters quite a bit. It happens in our first example that making lemonade compliant with Kosher laws doesn’t change the price by much, not enough to justify inventories. But if the manufacturing of Kosher lemonade cost substantially more, then the rule will be weakened in some nonlinear proportion to the difference in costs. If it cost ten times as much to make Kosher food, then the minority rule will not apply, except perhaps in some very rich neighborhoods.

Society doesn’t evolve by consensus, voting, majority, committees, verbose meeting, academic conferences, and polling; only a few people suffice to disproportionately move the needle. All one needs is an asymmetric rule somewhere. And asymmetry is present in about everything.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 16 Nov 2015 13:42

^^^ Pulikeshi, that is a very important article.

One of the goals must be how to create the effective asymmetry, however slight, in favor of Indic civilization in face of the p-secular onslaught.

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 17 Nov 2015 04:16

Yep, you are correct.
One suggestion - the intolerant minority in India ought not to be the focus, even if that is what needs addressing.
As others have pointed out the minority in-house is actually a majority outside... so therefore...
The key is for India to become the intolerant minority to the rest of the world - Indian ethos pursued in an intolerant way...
a billion in a 7 billion world is a minority

but who is willing? even if willing caveat emptor!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Nov 2015 09:42

Pulikeshi wrote:The Most Intolerant Wins: The Dominance of the Stubborn Minority

The creation of endless, multiple minorities would be a useful trick here. Minorities based on birth (gotra), profession (varna) and faith (family deity) is essential.

One thing is missing from the above article - and that is the use of death and death threats within the minority to keep purity. Causing death is another name for war. So the ability to cause more death than anyone else is an advantage. From this viewpoint a minority able to cause death/wage war is at a disadvantage compared to a majority who can do that.

The idea of death threats is explained in a post I made in another thread but it may be appropriate here. Next post..

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Nov 2015 09:43

Speaking of stubborn minorities I think this post has a place here, its about minorities stubborn enough to kill.

I believe I just had an epiphany about the mode of spread of Islamist ideology. The idea came to me on seeing a cartoon on Twitter which shows IS refugees stuck between IS knife and EU hand stopping them. I created and image using that cartoon and a map of Europe.

I will explain the image and post it below.

Islamists spread by persecuting their own people first. Thise who go out as refugees are accepted in outside lands out of compassion. One they are accepted the form little Islamic oil droplet communities where radicalism sprouts and they repeat the process - pushing out still more people even further - who are then accepted out of compassion. And the process repeats till oil droplets are everywhere and there is no one to accept the original locals out of compassion

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 17 Nov 2015 10:18

Doc Ji, could that happened India as well for a 1000 years, its happening in Haryana and other places still. This is probably what happened to Sikhs also in West Pakistan.

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 17 Nov 2015 10:39

shiv wrote: The creation of endless, multiple minorities would be a useful trick here. Minorities based on birth (gotra), profession (varna) and faith (family deity) is essential.
...
One thing is missing from the above article - and that is the use of death and death threats within the minority to keep purity. Causing death is another name for war. So the ability to cause more death than anyone else is an advantage. From this viewpoint a minority able to cause death/wage war is at a disadvantage compared to a majority who can do that.

Pursuit of purity may be a achilles heel, but your point on lowering the barrier on causing more death than anyone else is important. If one looks at the geographic influence of Bharat, the civilization, historically and how it has shrunk today one should fathom what has been lost over a millennia. It takes a rather clueless population to remain in the tamasa state that has currently taken over intellectually. We have an intellectual layer that will not even defend what is left, leave alone mourn what has already been lost.

On the multiple minorities... I am still leaning towards a outward looking solution, it will have the side effect of unifying the Indian Universalism as it arises... the internal minority by gotra, varna, deity etc. had their purpose and will continue, but they do not pack the necessary intolerance. I wonder if Hindutva could be a virulent force that may take up the position going outwards, if so, it has to get its internal story straight. I find it far too confused on diet, dress, fake morality, etc. right now to become a coherently intolerant meme to impose on the external world. Further, the Indian experience has been a far more gentler co-optation - intolerance does not necessarily mean violent, it just means at a very minimum the holding of ones values over all other and expecting the imposition of it, how ever justified, as a moral good - it is your Dharma to do so - as in: कृण्वन्तो विश्वमार्यम्

WU has also not been able to face up to the challenge of an intolerant minority and hence the struggles we see in France, UK, Belgium for example. But this only points out at scale (to tie it back to some posts I had made a while ago) the social contract system of individual to state simply fails to reconcile the intolerant groups, especially minorities. These minority groups will always win in a WU setup eventually. Here ironically, the oil droplets actually may be better medium run, as it enables the majority and its constituent groups to insulate , maybe even inoculate, itself from the intolerant minority groups. Notice in a trivial example - a minority eating beef in India, can impose that on another minority that does not

Albeit, in this example your comment on why liberals are not really liberal as they cannot criticize the intolerant becomes key. It is far easier for liberals to curse the vegetarians, than it is to take on the beef eaters. Not that either groups has to be taken on per se, just that the imposition of either vegetarianism or beef-eating by one on the other is a manifestation of intolerance.

Here again, the smaller, more intolerant group wins. For a non-ideological such as myself, it was very amusing to see an NDTV debate where a beef-eating participant asked the vegetarians not to eat, but hold their noses in their own home

. That said, this also brings into question UCC - is a compromised Uniform Civil Code for example necessarily a good thing for the majority? The logic again is quite counter intuitive and needs careful study and analysis.

My free paisa for free!

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 18 Nov 2015 09:12

Aguptaji, you would like this.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 18 Nov 2015 17:38

Thanks, RoyG!

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 18 Nov 2015 20:39

Quick notes on Balu - whilst I respect his theoretical, more importantly experiential, approach to social phenomenon, there still exists a few post intellectual gymnastic realities:

The 'colonial consciousness' that he talks about needs to be understood in terms of WU. If colonialism resulted in birthing the said consciousness, then WU has sequestered, nurtured and harnessed it in a 'post-colonial consciousness' that has a detrimental bearing on India and her culture if not civilization. Example: The English Media in India and its manifest misunderstanding of Indian and the 'other' - the gap between knowledge and empirical experience is so immense that it is an understatement to call it stupidity!
It is easy to argue 'India,' 'Hinduism,' 'Buddhism,' 'Caste,' etc. did not exist, but for as a colonial construct. However, post the intellectual gymnastics, experientially it does today. Perhaps for the very same reason Balu suggests we pay more attention to experience vs. knowledge, it is imperative to control the narrative on what these terms mean to the practitioners rather than the modelers who come from a different framework. Then again, perhaps that is Balu's intentions as well.
Balu's argument tends to lead one to anticipate a better version of models corrected for colonial distortions. Taken one step further - one could argue a better version of models exist corrected of Islamic, Buddha matha, Huna, etc. distortions... it is hard to defend these models, as prima facie, they will fail Balu's own dictum to look at the current experience - unfortunate or not, all these influences are part of the current Indian experience and would be hard to isolate just the colonial one and leave the rest out.
Intellectually it may be correct to suggest no such thing as Hinduism or Buddhism exists. However, the reality of the matter is that without a definition that takes all the influences including colonialism and our current use of English as Lingua Franca into account and acknowledging the inherent bias and theological foundation of words such as belief, just, fair, etc. it would be very difficult to defend the civilization and the system of Dharma that supports it. The pursuit of truth imho is fine and dandy, but the cause is lost if the end goal is ill defined. On this point, perhaps my proposals are more based on realism and Balu's academic. The only eternal goal is the preservation of Dharma and our way of life! In this one can rely on our Ithihasa and Sri Krishna's dictum in the Gita.

My contributions to the chaos - feedback and criticisms are welcome.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 19 Nov 2015 18:26

The neocolonialists are trying to stop Balu now. The momentum is picking up. Protests by dalit and tamil groups.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 20 Nov 2015 00:13

Pulikeshi wrote:...
My contributions to the chaos - feedback and criticisms are welcome.

Exercise 1: Just as you were able to avoid "belief in a proposition", can you use Hindu, Hindu culture, Hindu traditions, Hindu rituals, Hindu books, Hindu temples, etc., and avoid "Hinduism"? At the beginning, it is just like avoiding "footballism"; we say, footballs, football players, football fields, football tournaments, etc., exist, but "footballism" doesn't.

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 20 Nov 2015 06:04

^^^ Valid exercise on face value, at one level even agree with the suggestion - Thanks for putting a smile on my face

Two challenges:

Footballism - is not widely used and is not the offspring of a 'colonial or post-colonial consciousness' - meaning there is no one in academia telling me what they have defined as Footballism and that honorary degrees can be conferred in comparative sportsology, there is no chair of Footballism, etc. Neither does a dhimmi 'colonial or post-colonial consciousness' elite exists that cares to protect, nourish and perpetuate footballism on pliant masses.
The words Hindu, Hinduism etc. have been footballed thus far for sure... so perhaps an apt comparison. The key dear critical analyzer is that beyond the various indigenous and exogenous experiences and definitions needs to arise a post-post-colonial experience and definition. That is my humble suggestion, but not a solution yet.

The SC definition of Hindu just means a denizen of the sub-continent for example... this is hard to defend in an intolerant way

One way is to come up with new terms and defend their meaning... for the new values we want to uphold...
Thanks for your feedback by the way....

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 20 Nov 2015 17:48

^^^ Well, the goal of the exercise is very modest, actually. Just to uncover if there are any places where we need the concept/word "Hinduism".

In general, to get to a post-post-colonial experience, I think we need to stop using words which are not clear in meaning, and that we don't generally encounter in our experience. "Hinduism" may be one of them.

Of course, in mathematics, set theory tells us we can put anything together in a set. Say {horses, the sky, butterflies, milk}, we can give this set a name, say, "hipkapi" and then use "hipkapi" in our speech and writings. But "hipkapi" lacks coherence. To uncover the concepts which do describe our world, we need to start describing our experience as directly as possible, not using hipkapi-type concepts. Eventually, a better description may emerge.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Nov 2015 21:48

Arun - footballism is such a great analogy that I am going to use it and spread it far and wide.

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 21 Nov 2015 00:43

A_Gupta wrote:Eventually, a better description may emerge.

I can drink to that!

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 22 Nov 2015 06:57

Temple deities are minors can they own land - SC to decide

The Supreme Court has taken up the challenging task of deciding whether a temple deity, legally recognized as a 'minor', is entitled to own land attached to the temple and whether the property could be cultivated on his behalf by 'sevaits' (pujari or guardian).

I know many Indians are unaware of legal intricacies to this precedence in law... Yes, it exists in Secular India

Temple deities are perpetual minors. Neither is there awareness that the principle of partnership/trust comes from the Manu Smrithi (yes it does occur in Roman Law perhaps enabled the British to adopt it as well), nor is there any clue as to why this is important and this pursuit of modernization and pursuit of Western Universalism is completely detrimental to the survival of the civilization. Whereas there have been improvements and acceptable modifications to law of partnerships/trust/companies, etc. there is a misalignment and complete ignorance on the Hindu Laws and their impact on modern law as exemplified in the comments section of times article. That pujaris are disappearing from rural areas and now these challenges - esp in a BJP ruled state/center seems like a terrible idea. There is a reason why the Hindu deities are perpetual minors (leave that an exercise to the reader for now) unlike other secular groups such as partnerships, etc. who are legal persons per law. There is long precedence for this perhaps thousands of years old that these groups are material beings even if they are not natural beings.

Technical Legal position for those interested:

An idol of a Hindu temple is a juridical person
When there is a Sevakars/Shebait/Dharmadikari, ordinarily no person other than the Dharmadikari can represent the idol
Worshippers of an idol are its beneficiaries, though only in a spiritual sense

PS: This topic may not seem to fit this WU thread, but I think it is important as India is dangerously close to pursuing WU blindly as the only model. There is now a generation of Indians that have never been taught any of these principles in their civics or other classes, which means we get stupid arguments based on half-baked WU concepts without understanding the brilliance of the system we came from....

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 22 Nov 2015 07:37

^^^ You omitted this:

But the Rajasthan high court has upturned the norms governing upkeep and administration of temples by ruling that deities being minors could not cultivate land and hence temple land should vest in the state government. The HC order has mainly hit the pujaris hard as they have been for generations maintaining the temples and their families through income from cultivation of temple land.

The consequence of the HC decision is that all lands of deities would now vest with the Rajasthan government, which has even issued advertisement for auction of Deity lands. The petitioner said this ruling affected lakhs of small temples/deities, primarily in the rural areas and small villages.

There's a fr**king BJP government in the state!

PS: I'm sorry, but there is no way to support the BJP or PM Modi if this government seizure of temple lands goes through. I shudder to think that it is the Supreme Court that might save Hindus from a BJP sarkaar.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 22 Nov 2015 20:36

Is this the decision of the state Govt? What is the Govt stand?

I think the 'minor' part of the deity comes from Allahabad High Court judgement about Janmasthan temple. Wonder how this had been generalized and how can anyone vest temple lands when Pujaris are maintaining the temple. I think this is byproduct of secularism even though Hindus have not given anyone right to decide worship of deities and any other traditions.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Nov 2015 20:50

Arun the court arguments do not worry me. They are simply lawyers trying to win a case or extend it forever. But the point is that the Indian constitution allows the government to control temples, but not mosques or churches? Why?

In Karnataka (and perhaps elsewhere) government controlled temples are called Muzrai temples

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 22 Nov 2015 20:58

shiv, the court case was prompted by the Rajasthan State Government seizing temple lands. Notice - it is not for the State to manage -- the state is selling it. It is one thing to control the temples, another to separate the temples from the sustaining lands.

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 30 Nov 2015 05:48

NRIs and their idea of India

This discussion is worth watching for those with interest in WU - there are several good points raised...
but as always. I must point out some obvious short comings of such a framework primarily based on WU.

Is India dimensionally restricted to a nation-state? Should the people of Indian origin and NRIs with affiliation to the nation-state not feel any ties to the civilization foundation of India? NDTV seems to restrict all discussion to India the nation-state.
Foreign NGOs, Churches, Mosques, etc. have a right to comment on political-economic-social and otherwise happenings in India, but damn if the NRI or PIO opens their mouth on such things? Seems an interesting line being pursued here by NDTV.
If Amartya Sen and Lord Desai pontificate on TV and pursue agendas that is perfectly fine, but damn if the lowly Tech-Coolie open their mouth about their backward, regressive, Hindu ideology... They do not send enough remittances anyway...
Mohan Guruswamy's myopia again in display - if we can quantify the world to just statistics and numbers - and view facts - then we can only go on what we measure... sad part of reality is much of what we don't measure has a disproportionate impact if not influence on outcomes. The less I say about Ajay Shukla the better, there is no opinion from that man that has made sense.
No one in the program point out repeated evacuations of Indian citizens in West Asia by the Indian nation-state. The gulf NRIs have been taken care of by the Indian Government irrespective of which political party ran the show. That said, there is always room for improvement...

I know on BRF this is a touchy topic, but the very idea of India is being debated in multiple ways on multiple channels... wonder what the brain-trust here think is the direction of evolution here... Messrs. Kharge, Guruswamy and others think, 'we are all migrants' - whereas there are quite a few others that view that 2/3rd of humanity perhaps had origins in the subcontinent... Not sure if this needs a topic of its own, but expect this battle for the idea of India to get messy with WU confusing the heck out of all of us... as always my few free paisa for what its worth...

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 30 Nov 2015 07:37

Pulikeshi: Will say this, with the advent of social media, what is being heard is largely the voice of the American led NRI/PIO community and most under 40 years of age with a disproportionate majority coming from urban, forward caste and Hindu backgrounds in India. I am of the opinion, that this not a true representation of the voice of India. At most times, they are largely disconnected from day to day realities of the nation, have a superiority attitude in their conversations with resident Indians, have not integrated yet in their adopted lands. Most disconcerting is their abusive and abrasive tones reflected in social media. It is a reflection of their lack of accountabilities for what they say and do. Most importantly they seem to have forgotten a basic fact that they have no native interest in the polity of India as they are not amongst those being governed. From a US based representation of the data I know of, half are not even Indian citizens anymore and their first loyalties are elsewhere (and should be) and MOST other nominal Indians, NRI's with a Indian passport are either well on the way to attaining their local citizenship or have close families/spouses in that category. Less than 1% of immigrants do a return to native lands.

Anyone can comment on things, but to participate actively in the political discourse by NRI and foreign citizens of Indian origins is at the same level of inviting foreign influence in local affairs and should be treated as such. Indian interests are unduly compromised many times unwittingly, the IUCNA deal being an example where India paid for it by way of strategic costs. The NRI/PIO community supported this deal very actively, without a commensurate understanding of Indian interests. I fear the same thing is happening now with the clamor to acquire an EMALS carrier tech amongst other things from the US. Watch that space.

I think the media's issue is somewhat different, rooted in a combination of factors to do with their own ill efficiencies, the news cycles, ideological opposition, deracinations and the fact that they are no longer the sole arbiters of the public opinion. But, in all this something worse happens. In between the shrill voices of the media and the loud and vociferous noises on social media, which the politicians exploit, what is lost is the discussion and a focus by the media on real issues and real news. Even the few good reporters and worthy news get swept by and do not get their space to discuss things of import to the nation, until the news fits a certain commercial model. This is not just an Indian media issue, the issue is in many countries. The Indian media just feels being in competition with another rhetorical mass voice that can be as hollow as they are.

Having said all of that, NRI/PIO links with India can be anything BUT political. Resident Indians do not need any input from their non-resident cousins on this score of governance especially as it relates to the election cycle. If NRI's comments on this matter have to be heard it should be no different from, what a foreigner is entitled to comment upon and say.

I am a US based NRI myself.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 30 Nov 2015 08:54

It is probably unfair to classify all NRI's under one banner. For people of my personal social standing and community - "NRI" usually means USA. Having said that I have been a UK NRI myself and one must not discount Gulf "gelf" NRIs

My closest contacts have been with the American NRI who constitute nearly 50% (??) of all NRIs. Among this group there are two separate categories. One are those who emigrated before Y2K and those who emigrated after Y2K and the IT "revolution" in India.

Among those who migrated before Y2K - there are people who left the socialist India of the 1960s and 1970s and America gave them an identity and a life. Some of these people (by no means all) are totally American in their outlook - although they are now growing old and are contributing to India in ways that people will neither see nor recognize. But the shame of Indianness was more common among this group. The after Y2K crowd are proud Indians by and large - in my view. many of them have seen better lives in India before going and have a less negative outlook.

Also among the older Indians who "became American" there is now the fact that they are politically active in America and so are their children and have views on Democrats, Republicans, Ombab, Trump etc. In some cases the second generation "fully American" children of 1960s and 70s Indian Americans are facing race and colour realities in America that make their political outlook go in a particular direction. Of course for India all these people are "our children" whether they want to be or not. If we can allow psec liberal turds to live among us what harm can a few NRIs do?

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 30 Nov 2015 09:43

shiv wrote: My closest contacts have been with the American NRI who constitute nearly 50% (??) of all NRIs.

The numbers I have read are US NRI/PIO is about 3 million out of a total of 20 million total NRI/PIO's. Half of the US NRI's are actually PIO's. Majority of NRI's remain gulf based.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 30 Nov 2015 09:54

^^OK. I need to remember that.

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 30 Nov 2015 12:26

ShauryaT wrote: Having said all of that, NRI/PIO links with India can be anything BUT political. Resident Indians do not need any input from their non-resident cousins on this score of governance especially as it relates to the election cycle. If NRI's comments on this matter have to be heard it should be no different from, what a foreigner is entitled to comment upon and say.

To some extent this is correct, but then no NRI/PIO professors should have signed one petition or another - pro or against Modi....
The ruling clans should not have been under the patronage of foreign powers including European, Russian (formerly USSR), US, etc.
Now that the middle class and the unwashed have gotten into the game, there is wide consternation all around from the elite?
I can give several other examples to show that the horses have left the barn, is there any use closing the gates? to what end?

Also, when I suggest WU influence, I am suggesting this focus on passport as a key parameter for allegiance....
India seems to be slowly developing a model wherein it incorporates not only the neighboring states much more,
but also the diaspora into active participation. Of course this comes with it own dangers, but the governments irrespective
of ideology have gone down this path... In this India imvho is doing a fine job... I have often wondered if Greece would
have been spared eating crow if only she had been more successful in incorporating her diaspora... the India model is unique!

Whether IUCNA was right or wrong - it took two to tango right? The Indian government actively used the Indian-American lobby.
Caveat Emptor - Indian Government needs to keep tabs on who is funding and influencing it and her people
and perhaps there are laws necessary to prevent overseas funding of interest groups, NGOs, election campaigns, etc.
I do not know what laws are on the books in India on this topic... worth some home work some day

All that said, India is more than just a nation-state to several people - some of Indian origin and others who are foreigners...
Many of the Indian origin migrants (first generation for sure) suffer from a guilt, even if they are well adjusted in their new homes.
Sometimes this misalignment is especially because of that well adjusted to their new homes... I have met several folks, even CEOs who are afflicted.
What Modi has done is two fold - one 'forgive' the transgressors and 'accept' the well wishers despite their failing... very Catholic!

I suspect his having travelled abroad during his stint in the mother organization along with his keen observation of the
human condition has led to this unique opening... not sure where and what this will lead to yet.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 30 Nov 2015 13:40

In my view, NRIs who are Indian citizens have every right to comment and get involved in Indian political life; OCIs who are Indian citizens, but also hold other nationalities, may do so as well as they have all rights other than to vote and buy certain sorts of property, but they should ideally disclose their dual nationality (I fall in this category); PIOs who are not Indian citizens must disclose they are foreign nationals before commenting or as part of their profile blurb. In this way freedoms of expression. etc., are upheld while full disclosure is also maintained. Trouble now is that there are a lot of OCIs and PIOs acting as if they are Indian citizens.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 30 Nov 2015 15:01

The huge number of Muslims now in Europe,numbering millions are now revealing their brazenness and mediaeval ambitions to take over the EU by threat of terror. Laws are being flouted each day in deference to the sharia and bigoted Islam,in the "continent of Christianity" which is reeling under the onslaught of jihadi terror on one side and the loss of faith of their people on the other.It seems incredible ,but Europe,awash with Christianity ,Christian art,music,culture extraordinary,and churches galore,that fought great wars against the "Turks" and "Moslems" centuries ago that saved Europe from defeat and conversion to Islam, is now afeared of this insidious barbaric movement that is at the gates of the EU states ,but is in great danger of being overwhelmed because of the impotence of its leaders and the bogus genuflection towards human rights for Jihadi terrorists!

The "Lord's Prayer" has been banned from Christmas ads in the UK,for fear of upsetting "other faiths"-read Muslims. This ChrISIS,Santa will be wearing black robes,a black beard ,ride in a Toyota pickup-no sled with Rudolf and the reindeers; carrying Kalashnikovs,TOW missiles and grenades as presents,and instead of singing "Ho,Ho,Ho!",shout A-o-A,.A-o-A,A-o-A instead!

PS:Guess who will play Santa.Ooops! It will be a Sultan not Santa,with one Erdogun in the lead role!

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 30 Nov 2015 17:54

JE Menon wrote:In my view, NRIs who are Indian citizens have every right to comment and get involved in Indian political life; OCIs who are Indian citizens, but also hold other nationalities, may do so as well as they have all rights other than to vote and buy certain sorts of property, but they should ideally disclose their dual nationality (I fall in this category); PIOs who are not Indian citizens must disclose they are foreign nationals before commenting or as part of their profile blurb. In this way freedoms of expression. etc., are upheld while full disclosure is also maintained. Trouble now is that there are a lot of OCIs and PIOs acting as if they are Indian citizens.

Since January of this year, PIO has been done away with, there is only OCI henceforth.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 30 Nov 2015 19:16

JE Menon wrote:OCIs who are Indian citizens, but also hold other nationalities, may do so as well as they have all rights other than to vote and buy certain sorts of property, but they should ideally disclose their dual nationality

To my knowledge, OCI's are NOT Indian citizens and hence their rights remain confined to the non-political space. Indian law does not allow dual citizenship. No such amendment of the Indian citizenship act was done for OCI and hence OCI's do not enjoy any privileges for example by those conferred under article 16 to Indian citizens. OCI is in fact nothing but a life long visa along with changes in certain laws as relates to property and investment that brings parity with a certain class of Indians. The context of the word class here is from the realm of taxation and other aspects such as who is allowed to buy farm land for example.