The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Rejuvenation Models for Bharat

Cross-posting from "Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India" Thread
johneeG wrote:Originally, RJB had much bigger potential. Initially, it had included Kashi and Mathura also. And there was a real fear that there would be a demand that all the monuments that were erected after the willful destruction of the Indic places of worship are restored to the original owners. If that demand had come up, then it would have been a death knell to the present setup. It is like 100 megaton. It would have achieved much more in few months than what a generation of 'saffronizing' of education would do.
johneeG garu,

great post.

RJB Andolan and in fact any real or hypothetical movement to reclaim the destroyed temples in India was basing the rejuvenation of Bharat on Bhakti yoga strategy. Nothing wrong with that unless it impeded the other yoga strategies - Jñāna and Karma.

"Saffronization" of Education is the Jñāna yoga strategy, the strategy I would favor as the rejuvenation principle. It revolves around reclaiming Bharat as the Mother Civilization of Mankind.

Narendra Modi has, I believe, correctly based the rejuvenation of Bharat on Karma yoga strategy - development, growth and prosperity but keeping our civilizational heritage in the center.

The Bhakti strategy, IMHO, should come last. It should be the icing on the cake. It should represent our victory and not our struggle.

JMTs
Sushupti
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 22 Dec 2010 21:24

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by Sushupti »

Liberal mask slips and ugly Islamist face for everyone to see.
Image
member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by member_20317 »

Peddling AMT/AIT in political discourse and Undermining Sanskrit concepts by illegitimate translations are twin strategy that are focused on India due to the unique character of the civilization. Basically the customization of their attack.

And you will find Asharfi/Progressives/Seculars/Mallechas/Social Scientists/Macaulayputras in this together. Pretty toxic pus.

I think it is time we started handling the Agenda, Propositions part of the Bharatiya on this thread. The extroverted gaze.

...............
vvv

oh yes, Sushupti ji, quite ok. Anything that I want restricted will remain in my mind only, not on the forum.

Gurujan, before this gets further. Request a considered and longer thought out post on this thread. Quite a few of us are not there on Teetar and I for one would like to avoid having teetar here. Just a humble request, otherwise we will have this thread getting treated like certain other threads.
Last edited by member_20317 on 18 Apr 2013 12:26, edited 2 times in total.
Sushupti
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 22 Dec 2010 21:24

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by Sushupti »

^^^ composed a tweet from above to give it back to this left-libo aka stealth Islamist. I hope it's OK with you.
Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by Agnimitra »

^^ I have reservations about how this "Ashrafism" concept is used and Subbu Swami's defining "apna" based on who considers their ancestors Hindu.

Need to make ideological affinity more important than who's ancestors where what. Middle Easterners who defect to Indian idea become apna, Hindu-putra who defects to something else becomes paraya. Learn from Sikhi.

"Ashrafism" concept should be used only to counter Aryan-Dravidian tactics.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Javed Akhtar wrote:Mr Swamy you niether have Dravidian features nor complexion. Any idea how Aryan blood has entered your veins.
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

I think, Javed Akhtar deleted that tweet later on! but :lol:
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Bharatiya Nationalist Agenda

... For 2014-2019

I did mention some of this earlier ...
A suggestion for a secular agenda for the Bharatiya Nationalists in the coming years
  1. Correct Colonial View of Indian History - do away with AIT/AMT nonsense, do away with all colonial-heavy history depts.
  2. Introduce Sanskrit as India's National Language - make a start for a new language framework for India
  3. Increase Archaeological Surveying of India Manifold - increase the budget, clean the house, upgrade the technology
  4. Digitize all the Ancient Manuscripts of India - provide an nation-wide digital platform where it all can be accessed in original and translated form
  5. Procure Land in Ayodhya for Tourism
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Ashrafism
Carl wrote:^^ I have reservations about how this "Ashrafism" concept is used and Subbu Swami's defining "apna" based on who considers their ancestors Hindu.

Need to make ideological affinity more important than who's ancestors where what. Middle Easterners who defect to Indian idea become apna, Hindu-putra who defects to something else becomes paraya. Learn from Sikhi.

"Ashrafism" concept should be used only to counter Aryan-Dravidian tactics.
Carl ji,

this is how I see it.

Ajlafism is akin to Bharatiya feeling among Indian Muslims.

Now I suppose this is all under construction so it would take time, but the general intention should be that it takes root and one can start that now. In Malaysia one has the concept of Bhumiputra, under which of course mostly Malay Muslims get classified, and Chinese and Indians are left out.

I've tried to specify the behavior pattern among Ashrafs, the Ashraf memes as far as I could (in multiple consecutive posts).

So is Ashrafism an ideology?
  1. It is Arabic/Turkish/Persian genealogical supremacism among Subcontinental Muslims, often among Ashrafs.
  2. It is like Zionism, with the exception that it is turned on its head - instead of a people wishing to establish their dominion over what they consider their holy lands, Ashrafism is all about establishing the dominion of the holy land over all other lands.
  3. It is imperialism of the Muslim Master Races over the Ajlafs and Kufr in the Indian Subcontinent.
Among Ashrafs, Ashrafism is an ideology. Among Ajlafs, Ashrafism is an affliction.

Just like among the Europeans, Western Universalism is an ideology, but among Indian Macaulayites, Western Universalism is an affliction.

Now if there is an Ashraf in India, chances are good that he would believe in Ashrafism. If he doesn't then he would have to make that perfectly clear and not seek entitlement in India. Otherwise one would have to take it that Mr. Ashraf is indeed an Ashrafist, in which case others would have to disabuse him of his sense of entitlements.

In case an Ajlaf however looks as if he suffers from Ashrafism, then again one would have to sideline him from any positions of authority and influence as his presence would be "against Ajlaf interests".
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Published on September 1, 2011
From the blog: Bharateeyata


Bharateeyata

The definition that we are from the land of King Bharata is what we all heard in our childhood through some recent history. The name bhAratam for our land existed in vedic literature even before Ramayana and Mahabharata era – before Bharata – the son of Sankuntala.

In defining our land, Vedas have described them as “havir bharana saamarthyath” – i.e the one who takes and supports “Havissu” – Havissu’s are the ingredients one uses to please devatas through the fire in the Yagnas – since it is said that “Agni mukhavai devaha”. Since our land depended on the Yagnas and Fire, it is called Bharatam. Bharateeyulu worshipped fire. Be it external fire or the Vaisvara Fire in the digestive system – that is why we do “achamanam” before eating food to appease the fire in the belly.

Also, vedas said “Agnir meva chistitiha” – “let this agni be in my Vak” - speech. That sacred speech is called Vaani – The presiding deity of speech is fire. Vaani is Saraswati or Bharathi. We are (were) the people who worshipped Jnanam (Saraswati) knowledge. bhAratam is a land where Jnanam is superior hence it is said “Bharathi Bharataasritha”.

Also in “niruktam” this light of knowledge is also called ‘bha’. We are the people who have “rtam” in light of knowledge – “bha”. “rtam” is interest or love. bhArateeyulu have had interest and love in pursuing the light of knowledge.

So per VedambhAratam is a land where we worshipped the cosmic deities through Yagnam, we were the people who have pursued the knowledge and gave importance to “vid” – knowledge. Where there is respect for knowledge and vidya there is “Samskaram” which is Samskruthi. bhArateeyata is itself a Samskruthi.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Navigating the Religious Discourse in India

We all feel uncomfortable when making a comment on a religion other than our own. This comes from the concept of "sarva dharma samabhAva", which one can translate as "to treat people of all dharmic religious schools equally".

In modern India, we have even suspended the requirement in this guideline for some religious school to be even "dharmic". That is tolerated as we have broadened the definition of religion, by including other non-Indic religions into the mix - Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Zoroastrianism?, etc., but without putting down the definition of religion itself in black and white - what is Religion, or more importantly what is all included in the purview of Religion?

What we know is that every Bharatiya has a right to have his own Dharmic path! We have extended this right to mean, that every Bharatiya has a right to have his own religion! Time will tell if this was wise.

However when we are not restricting the right only to dharmic paths but to all religions, then we need to contain the purview of this right through a different means.

Nehruvian-Secularists, aka Islamo-Christianists, in India have opined that there is no need for any such restriction - Each religion can decide what all is in its purview and may claim its jurisdiction over these fields. Since different religious communities demand differing extent of jurisdiction, it has led to discrimination in the treatment of say religious communities which demand lesser extent of jurisdiction. This is the thinking in "India's Muslims have first claim on India's resources".

Current Indian Laws seems to have opined that the restriction should be - Each religious community can rule itself as long as it does not impinge on the rights of the other, which has led to a multiplicity of civil codes in India. However through such an approach Indian Laws have decide to forego its right to intervene in the affairs of various communities, say for the protection of the rights of the individual, e.g. rights of women and children, rights of religious deviants, etc.

Even if we were to go by the current Indian laws which leaves the affairs of religion to each community, these laws still seem inadequate to curb the "pushiness" of various communities which act per Nehruvian-Secularism, and desire larger extent of jurisdiction and more privileges, and this "pushiness" comes at the cost of lesser demanding religious communities.

In such a setup when the lesser demanding religious community protests against the "pushiness" of the more demanding religious community, then the protest is often demeaned as "communal".
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Navigating the Religious Discourse in India (Cont.)

It is the "pushiness" of certain religious communities as well as "behavior" towards other communities which actually creates the demand for social introspection.

It is then that less demanding religious communities desire to understand the reasons for this "pushiness" and "hostile behavior" by the more demanding religious communities. This creates a need for a discourse on religion in society, and in fact at the global level as well. If the "pushiness and entitlement" and "hostile behavior" was not there, there would have been no such demand.

Another reason for this demand is a citizen's need to understand his rights within the structure of the state. So when the citizen sees the "state abdicating its responsibility" towards other citizens because of considerations of autonomy of religious communities, then a citizen doubts the sincerity of the state to protect his rights as well.

Still another reason for this demand is the perpetual desire of a nation to create itself as a more cohesive entity with clarity of identity and purpose acknowledging its civilizational depth which is required to give it strength for facing the future.

So 4 reasons which create a demand for bringing in religion under scrutiny are
  1. Pushiness and Sense of Entitlement by certain religious communities viz-a-viz others
  2. Hostile Behavior of certain religious communities towards others
  3. Abdication by the state of its responsibilities in protecting the rights of the individual due to considerations of claims of "sovereignty" by certain religious communities
  4. Nation building
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Navigating the Religious Discourse in India (Cont.)

So what aspects of religion can and should be considered acceptable for scrutiny, critical analysis and contextual criticism?
  1. Re: Pushiness and Sense of Entitlement by certain religious communities viz-a-viz others: Here one needs to look at all the spheres of life over which a religion claims "sovereignty". It can be that some spheres of life in which they may show "sense of entitlement" may be spheres of life which impinge one other's rights. These spheres of social life could be criminal law, banking laws, taxation, inter-communal marriages, and general liberty to live in peace. "Pushiness" may be visible if the whole religious community bears down on the state to bend to its wishes, e.g. in case of freedom of expression, so the general behavior of the community needs to be recorded and analyzed. Also the values regarding education and hard work within the purview of religion and doctrine too needs to be looked at. The "business models" encouraged by a community should also be closely analyzed to see from where this sense of entitlement, ignorance or non-productivity may be coming from.
  2. Re: Hostile Behavior of certain religious communities towards others: For this it may be necessary to look at the history of hostile behavior, as well as any religious tenets which may be causing this hostile behavior. The behavior of the society needs to be recorded and studied and one should arrive at conclusions. How the religion along with this intrinsic hostile behavior is propagated also deserves attention.
  3. Re: Abdication by the state of its responsibilities in protecting the rights of the individual due to considerations of claims of "sovereignty" by certain religious communities: Here it is necessary to understand the memes within the community, as well as the doctrine which leads maltreatment of weaker sections of the community, as well as abuse of any religious deviants.
  4. Re: Nation building: Here one needs to look at civilizational allegiance of the religious community. Also one needs to see whether one can find any commonality in structures, principles and purpose.
When one speaks of "religion as a private matter", the only real aspects one can leave out of critical discourse are
  • the spiritual dimension of the religion,
  • the relationship model of God and man,
  • the symbology,
  • the mythology,
  • the cosmogony,
  • the daily rituals and festivals,
but all aspects of religion which affect
  • the rights and dignity of the individual within the community,
  • other religious communities,
  • the sharing of great commons in society and
  • the national character
should be considered relevant and be fair game for national discourse. Of course in all this scrutiny it is important that one tries at least not be abusive of the other.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Islamo-Christianism aka Nehruvian Secularism

Cross-posting from "Vested Interests in India for Giving In to Pak Blackmail" Thread
shiv wrote:
RajeshA wrote: I think if some Nehruvian-secular, aka sickular, aka pseudo-secular uses "secular" in India, we should always call him "Islamo-Christianist". No need to hold back there. No need for political correctness there. Some tend to call them "anti-national" which is under the current international situation indeed "anti-national", but that becomes simply an abuse term and does not bring the truth to the fore. Also calling them communal, which they in fact are may not work, due to the term's current use. However "Islamo-Christianist" is a very direct term. And that provides full exposure to their operations in India.
I would prefer Islamo Christian Hindu. Many of these IslamoChristianists proudly strut about showing their own Hindu credentials/ancestry so they get the full weight of (silent) support from Islamists and Christianists when they choose to describe other Hindus as communal.

It is important not to "excommunicate" them from being Hindu. They are Hindu all right, but are dishonest fake liberal. They are happy to insult Hindus and say that they use insulting language about Hindus despite being Hindu themselves - using that as an excuse to place themselves on a pedestal higher than other "communal, right wing" Hindus.
  1. Islamo-Christianism is a political ideology with the goal of furthering the group and civilizational interests of Islam and Christianism in a land.
  2. Islamo-Christianism is not a religious ideology, since otherwise Muslims would not tend to support the Christianist part, nor would the Christians tend to support the Islamic part.
  3. Since Islamo-Christianism is a ideology revolving around a convenient political pact, such an ideology would mostly be prevalent in non-Islamic non-Christian societies like India.
  4. Anybody can be an adherent of an ideology. It is not confined to Muslims and Christians.
  5. In India, there are many politically-active nominal Hindus, who belong to this Islamo-Christianism political ideology.
  6. Since Islamo-Christianism is a political ideology trying to further the interests of Islam as well as Christianity in a non-Christian land, often they work by stealth, not disclosing its true nature.
  7. For this reason, Hindus who are followers of this ideology, tend to retain their nominal Hindu status, as with this status they can further the interests of the ideology much more effectively.
  8. In fact nominal Hindus are best placed to further these interests as being neither openly Muslims nor Christians, they can also receive support and confidence from both Islamics and Christianists.
  9. Question is why would they do something like this, betraying their Hindu heritage? It is because that is their business model - to have their political and prosperity interests be financed by Islamic and Christianist lobbies, both internal and external, and their vote-banks.
  10. In fact the Islamo-Christianist nominal Hindus make a virtue out of their sold-out allegiance, calling their communal support to Islamic and Christianist interests as a sign that they have risen above "narrow" considerations of religion, claiming for themselves the title "secular".
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Islamo-Christianism & Vote-bank Politics

Cross-posting from "Vested Interests in India for Giving In to Pak Blackmail" Thread

Jātivadi Politicos in India are best suited to avail of this Islamo-Christianist political dividend. They have their own locked down vote-bank of some Jāti or Jāti-Coalitition, and think that with an additional vote-bank they would have sufficient votes to win elections. Jātivadi Politics in India is especially prone to the lure of Islamo-Christianism. Jātivadi Politicos really have only the assured support of their own Jātis for which they often work in a partisan way. Their whole agenda is to cut the state's resources cake in such a way, that their Jātis get the most of it. Beyond that they seldom have any program. If they try to bring too many other Jātis or people under their umbrella they would end up diluting the share of their committed Jātis so they have limited flexibility on this front. If they dilute too much, another more hardline Jātivadi politico could then prey on the politico's votebanks. In fact Jātivadi politicos secure their position by playing up the rivalry among the Jātis. However by adding an Islamo-Christianist vote-bank for example, they wouldn't have to dilute their share or their rivalry rhetoric as all the concessions would be for religious expansion and not economic. Muslim vote-banks usually are left high and dry as far as education, jobs, etc. are concerned or they get their funding from external charities, whereas Christians are either mostly somewhat better-off due to their education level or they too get their funding from abroad.

Then there are Founder-Squeezing Politicos in India who also indulge in this Islamo-Christianism. At some point in time some popular leader founded a political movement providing some form of liberation to an otherwise oppressed or subjugated people. As a mark of gratitude, many people would continue to vote for a party who uses his name and claims to carry on the founder's legacy. Progeny of the founder are often given automatic trust that they would carry on the founder's legacy, so they have a better chance to harness that historic gratitude, which leads to dynastic politics. Since the historic gratitude of a section of the people has been secured, these Founder-Squeezing Politicos think that by adding an additional vote-bank they too would have a good chance of winning elections.

Then there are Rebellion Politicos. These politicians often have a dedicated following based on an ideology running counter to that of the nation or the mainstream. Left-wing parties which are in open rebellion against Bharatiya interests, against interests of the majority and have been able to channelize the discontent and anger of the people into a rebellion against the nation, e.g. Marxists, Maoists, Naxalites, etc.. Often these rebels, e.g. Naxalites, tend not to vote but the leaders of this rebellion may indeed be interested to bring them into electoral politics, and make them into a dedicated vote-bank. This rebellion ideology also allows the politicos to align themselves with Islamo-Christianist interests and add another vote-bank to theirs, thus also securing for themselves a win in the elections.

As such Islamo-Christianist lobbies tend to support those politicos who can show their own dedicated vote-bank, either Jātivadi vote-bank or Founder-Gratitude vote-bank or Rebellion vote-bank and then by coming into power, they can further the Islamo-Chrisitanist interests.
  • Jātivadi vote-banks - RJD, SP, BSP, JD(U)
  • Founder-Gratitude vote-banks - INC, DMK, TDP
  • Rebellion vote-banks - CPI-M, CPI
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Bharatiya Nationalist Politics

In order to build an 80% majority in India of Bharatiyas, Bharatiya Nationalist politics must ensure that the Islamo-Christianists interests do not have a willing partner or the electoral politics fails completely.
  1. 50%+1 Majority: India must move to 50%+1 votes for winning elections. If no candidate wins this much, then there is a run-off election in the constituency between the two highest-grossing candidates.

    This would ensure that no nominal Hindu can play Jātivadi politics in order to sew together a winning Jātivadi vote-bank and an Islamo-Christianist vote-bank. Usually Jātis are not that large in any state. There is a multiplicity of these Jātis. As such any politician would have to get the support of multiple Jātis for winning elections. If he does so, he cannot simply rely on his own Jāti. He would then have to play politics not based on Jātivad. If he does that, all other Jātis would go to the rival camp and vote for them. Basically Jātivadis would have to look for themes which unite Jātis - one theme being religion.

    We have also seen that the founder-gratitude politics in India is coming to an end. The people are less interested in those simply trying to get votes in the name of some founder like say Mahatma Gandhi, Nehru, Periyar, N.T. Rama Rao, etc. As such their vote-share is decreasing on this count, and they have to try to win elections on a different basis.

    Also Rebellion Vote-banks are limited. Usually one has the mainstream with a small or sizable rebellion. But the rebellion can never be too large unless we are talking about a small coterie keeping all the power and wealth. A big middle class ensures that such polarization decreases with time.

    What this means is that in 50%+1 Majority system, all three Jātivadi, Founder-Gratitude and Rebellion politics would not have much of a chance of wining elections even with the help of Islamo-Christianist vote-banks.
  2. More Growth, Less Socialism - The more we grow the bigger the pie. Then individual Jātis would not be fighting for crumbs and demanding reservations, etc. Politics would move from reservationism to opportunity. Thus growth, development and better governance are necessary agendas to stop people from both reservationism and rebellion.
  3. Inclusionist Politics - At the moment the Muslim masses are dependent on their so called "leaders" and their dawahs for sustenance. If enterpreneurship among the Muslims receives support then as enterpreneurs they may be tempted to support the politics of those who promise development and better governance rather than those who support only a religious agenda, thus breaking the integrity of IslamoChristianist vote-banks. Also those people who have been lured into an open rebellion against the state, even they should be brought back into mainstream and opportunities given to them also. However in all these cases it would require reverting the brain-washing they have undergone.
  4. More Bhaktivadi Politics - Politicizing dharmic religious themes in the past, like Ram Janambhoomi have in fact played a unifying role bringing Hindus together overcoming their Jāti differences.
  5. More Bharatiyata - By increasing the civilizational identity of the people in India, people would be able to understand their interests over and above the limits of Jāti. Also they would be able to see through the cover of Islamo-Christianism used by many JJātivadi politicos.
Last edited by RajeshA on 22 Apr 2013 13:59, edited 1 time in total.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Jātivadi Politics

As mentioned earlier
RajeshA wrote:Jātivadi Politicos in India are best suited to avail of this Islamo-Christianist political dividend. They have their own locked down vote-bank of some Jāti or Jāti-Coalitition, and think that with an additional vote-bank they would have sufficient votes to win elections. Jātivadi Politics in India is especially prone to the lure of Islamo-Christianism. Jātivadi Politicos really have only the assured support of their own Jātis for which they often work in a partisan way. Their whole agenda is to cut the state's resources cake in such a way, that their Jātis get the most of it. Beyond that they seldom have any program. If they try to bring too many other Jātis or people under their umbrella they would end up diluting the share of their committed Jātis so they have limited flexibility on this front. If they dilute too much, another more hardline Jātivadi politico could then prey on the politico's votebanks. In fact Jātivadi politicos secure their position by playing up the rivalry among the Jātis. However by adding an Islamo-Christianist vote-bank for example, they wouldn't have to dilute their share or their rivalry rhetoric as all the concessions would be for religious expansion and not economic. Muslim vote-banks usually are left high and dry as far as education, jobs, etc. are concerned or they get their funding from external charities, whereas Christians are either mostly somewhat better-off due to their education level or they too get their funding from abroad.
So what are the ideological interests of a Jātivadi Politico?
  1. His Jāti should continue to consider him as their Hero, their Savior, their Provider. As such no other power from the same Jāti should rise to challenge him.
  2. His Jāti is more entitled to the resources of the land - college seats, government and public sector jobs, promotions, job transfers, water for agricultural lands, better and earlier electricity provision, dominance over others, etc. The entitlement claim is made either based on historical continuity or on real or imagined historical subjugation or victimization.
  3. Jāti consciousness among his Jāti should remain high. As such Bharatiya national interests, Dharmic interests, etc. should not play much of a role within the Jāti. Rivalry and tension on the ground with Jātis outside his Jāti-Coalition are desirable.
  4. But here is also where the venality of a Jātivadi's "secularism" comes in - any national level thinking actually undermines the cohesiveness of his vote-bank on the plank of Jātivad. National interests level thinking would allow his captured vote-bank to be poached and hijacked by political players who have more to offer in safeguarding national interests. He changes his position and shows some more "nationalist rhetoric" when the threat level to the country increases to a level where he is forced to follow the demands of his own people, but this is generally very superficial. Generally speaking his jātivadi rhetoric would be higher than his patriotic rhetoric by a good factor. Even if he is not into this rhetoric he would see to it that such rhetoric dominates the life of the community. He undermines the nationalist parties and calls them "communal" vs. his own "secularism", so that people do not get carried away by the nationalist rhetoric of these parties.
  5. His Jāti's interests can only be met through political power, and for that it is "perfectly acceptable" to enter into a political alliance with Islamo-Christianist vote-bank bankers.
So both due to demands of the rhetoric to undermine patriotic forces and the demand of additional vote-banks, a Jātivadi politician often aligns himself with Islamo-Christianist interests.

This however says nothing about the thinking of the Jāti.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Modi's Development Agenda

Cross-posting from "Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India" Thread

Till now from all that Modi has said, what can we expect:

  1. India turns to solar energy to power itself. Other internal sources of energy would be looked at. All dependence on Oil to go.
  2. Infrastructure building to receive attention. Primarily infrastructure which boosts commercial logistics would take precedence. More ports to come up. Railway network to connect to ports and airports.
  3. Disinvestment from profilt-making PSUs. Upgradation and reform of loss-making PSUs.
  4. Move towards maximum indigenous research, development and production of weapon systems.
  5. Full computerization of administration and governance. Bureaucrats would move from desk-jobs to field jobs. Minimum Government, Maximum Governance.
  6. More accountability and transparency in government.
  7. Emphasis on skill development of the youth.
  8. Removal of red-tape in India. Entrepreneurship and business would be given support.
  9. Emphasis on Agriculture and Manufacturing, giving each a third of the responsibility for GDP growth. Value-addition to agricultural products. Perhaps value addition to mineral wealth.
  10. FDI, Yes. FDI in Retail, No!
  11. Turning India into a knowledge economy.
  12. Boost to Tourism.
  13. [Contributed by Arjun] First priority for systematically growing the Pie, ie GDP Growth, before Redistribution schemes that seek to break the pie up
  14. [Contributed by Arjun] Focus on Export Competitiveness of Indian industry - Indian entrepreneurs to be encouraged towards capturing as much of the world market as possible in various sectors
  15. [Contributed by harbans] Improvement in speedy justice delivery system.
Add to it, if I have forgotten something.
member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by member_20317 »

RajeshA wrote:Bharatiya Nationalist Politics

Inclusionist Politics - At the moment the Muslim masses are dependent on their so called "leaders" and their dawahs for sustenance. If enterpreneurship among the Muslims receives support then as enterpreneurs they may be tempted to support the politics of those who promise development and better governance rather than those who support only a religious agenda, thus breaking the integrity of IslamoChristianist vote-banks. Also those people who have been lured into an open rebellion against the state, even they should be brought back into mainstream and opportunities given to them also. However in all these cases it would require reverting the brain-washing they have undergone.
M J Akbar had a piece where he mentioned his fear of Muslims getting sidelined like the SC/ST. There is a palpable fear of that neglect. We certainly cannot let Ajlafs continue under the Islamists. At the same time neglect seems like the most likely response if the Islamist hold on Indian Muslims is not negated. For the time being Indian Mulims enjoy an equal status and even misuse this status. But there has got to be some limit to the fulcrum. What if instead of the load arm or the force arm it is the pivot that gives way. The balance between the Muslims and non-Muslims is on account of a subtantial freedom to the educated muslims, which undermines the excess weight that can be brought into play by the Islamists. What if the educated muslims willing to take up nationalist positions get wiped out.

But just as on the case of SC/ST (post independence scene) there will be an even faster change for the educated muslims if there is concord established even if only informal. This can be used to strengthen the pivot till a lasting solution can be found to the job of fishing out and barbequeing Islamists.

But whatever said, the neglect carries a probability that cannot be ignored by neither the non-muslims nor by educated nationalist muslims.
Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by Agnimitra »

Rudradev wrote:I would caution very strongly against applying such categories as "Capitalist", "Socialist", "Liberal", or even "Right-wing" and "Left-wing" to anything within the Indian system. Not just because they are foreign, but because the very assumptions from which these classifications derive are completely disjointed from an Indian worldview.

For example, there is a pernicious idea that the traditional Vaishya Dharma, or the relationship of Indian mercantile classes to wealth, is essentially "capitalist." This could not be further from the truth. "Capitalism" is a form of sophistry developed by the apologist Adam Smith to philosophically justify the accumulation of wealth as a natural outcome of Protestant work ethic, in the face of pre-existing memes in Western materialism that glorified poverty. Socialism is a response to Capitalism that re-establishes the glorification of poverty without the earlier tone of overt religiosity. This entire back-and-forth proceeds across a playing field whose geography is dictated by the contours of Western Materialism. The precepts of Western Materialism themselves could not be further removed from the way in which Vaishya Dharma regards the concepts of wealth and prosperity.

Indian Vaishya Dharma is nothing at all like Capitalism, because in our view, the accumulation of wealth is itself a task consonant with divinity; there is no sophistry required, and nothing to apologize for. To cast one thing in the mold of the other, is like asking Pt. Bhimsen Joshi to sing Raga Maalkauns in "F sharp minor, allegro moderato". It's meaningless.
Rudradev ji, this is a great post and I was just reading it again on the blog here.

One point that occurred to me was that the Indic philosophical eye (i.e., thought and vision - jyotisha) also does include in its field of vision a "daridra-yoga" case which can be used via spiritual method to draw closer to God. In this conjunction of karma and circumstance, poverty or deprivation can also be meaningfully dovetailed to draw closer to God. E.g. would be Sudama-Krishna relationship. Even here there is fulfillment in the Lord via charity, and Sudama drew closer to the Lord via poverty - though not by glorification of it but by embarrassment and humility.

Reason I mention it is that in refuting non-Indic classifications and labels, it would be even more fruitful from the Bharatiya PoV to show their conceptual frameworks as a limited special case of a Bharatiya paradigm of concept and vision. Just like classical mechanics is a special case of theory of Relativity at speeds much lower than light.

By showing the libtards that their Macaulayite classifications are included as special cases within a larger, more intellectually fulfilling paradigm, one is more likely to win over converts. Therefore one must surround them on all sides and encompass them wholly so they have nothing to hide behind - subsume all their shibboleths. Just my 2c.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Carl wrote:Reason I mention it is that in refuting non-Indic classifications and labels, it would be even more fruitful from the Bharatiya PoV to show their conceptual frameworks as a limited special case of a Bharatiya paradigm of concept and vision. Just like classical mechanics is a special case of theory of Relativity at speeds much lower than light.

By showing the libtards that their Macaulayite classifications are included as special cases within a larger, more intellectually fulfilling paradigm, one is more likely to win over converts. Therefore one must surround them on all sides and encompass them wholly so they have nothing to hide behind - subsume all their shibboleths.
What one can do is
  1. One keeps one's Philosophical System at hand
  2. One analyzes the Target Ideological System using Categories from one's own Philosophical System as faithfully as possible
  3. One shows what assumptions the Target Ideological System makes as compared to the Standard - one's own Philosophical System
  4. One shows under what psychosociological and political circumstances these assumptions are made
  5. One shows what psychosociological memes manifest under the Target Ideological System and where such a system eventually leads
  6. One shows what spiritual and social benefits cannot be available under the Target Ideological System
  7. One shows why one needs to move to the different paradigm - one's own Philosophical System
Basically this is Purva-Paksha!
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Demise of Communists in India

Published on Apr 24, 2013
By Rajeev Srinivasan
Communist paranoia as Modi heads for Narayana Guru ashram: First Post
The facts are as follows: Narendra Modi is scheduled to visit the Sivagiri Ashram established by Sree Narayana Guru today. The monks had, to be even-handed, invited Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi to the same event, but they demurred, so only Modi is visiting. This has caused paroxysms of outrage amongst the Communists in Kerala, with head honcho Pinarayi Vijayan lamenting that this was an effort to turn Sivagiri into a Hindu ashram!

You could have fooled me, but I used to think that Sivagiri is, in fact, a Hindu matham. My first clue was the name ‘Sivagiri’ = Siva + giri, and I was under the impression that Siva was usually a Hindu deity. My second clue is that I have been there, and it definitely looked and felt like a Hindu ashram. I must have been mistaken: it must be an elaborate hoax, like those Christian faux-ashrams run by clever people in saffron with remarkable names such as Swami Charles Satchidananda, etc, and discreet crosses placed in strategic places.

Modi visited Dakshineswar Kali Temple and Belur Math in Kolkata recently. AFP
Or perhaps not: Vijayan may be suffering from terminal confusion, or this is yet another instance of Communist double-speak. In the tradition of the Soviets and the Chinese, they are making up history as they go along, erasing certain facts and inserting convenient, new fables.

There is an ironic symmetry in the whole episode if you look at it from the point of view of jati. Here is Narendra Modi, an OBC, visiting the ashram of Sree Narayana Guru, himself an Ezhava OBC, the person most responsible for creating self-respect amongst the oppressed lower castes of Kerala. And who is objecting? The Communists, most of whose support base are OBC Ezhavas! The alleged saviours of the oppressed are now showing their true casteism.

Sree Narayana Guru deserves wider renown than he gets, because he created a quiet revolution in Kerala. In addition to being an orthodox Saivite monk, he was a social reformer of the first order. He was the one who first provided a theoretical underpinning to the rise of the so-called lower castes. Kerala, which had once been termed a ‘lunatic asylum’ by Swami Vivekananda, was riven by casteism in the last decades of the 1800s – a curious phenomenon for an area that had produced the great Sri Sankara (also known as Adi Sankara).

In fact, Sree Narayana Guru was the greatest religious and social reformer from Kerala after Sri Sankara. Let us note that Sankara cleansed Hinduism, circa 800 CE, of a lot of its accumulated excesses, and provided the intellectual heft for the Counter-Reformation. Along with the ecstatic personal devotion of the Tamil Bhakti saints, this led to the counter-resurgence of Hinduism, which ate into the Reformation that Buddhism and Jainism had created about 1,200 years earlier.

In a metaphysical coincidence, 1,200 years after Sri Sankara (sambhavami yuge yuge?), Sree Narayana was able to rescue Hinduism in Kerala from the accumulated excrescences that threatened it. By providing an intellectual basis for the resurgence of the so-called lower castes, he enabled them to make their rightful claim to the traditions of their ancestral religion.

In 1888, exactly 125 years ago, on Sivaratri, Sree Narayana Guru consecrated a Siva temple at Aruvippuram, near Thiruvananthapuram. When questioned how he, an Ezhava, dared to do something that was the monopoly of the so-called upper-castes, he replied mildly that it was “only an Ezhava Siva” that he had invoked. That epochal statement laid bare the absurdity of limiting Siva, the Creator and Destroyer of all, to just the property of some small group of people.

Following this, in 1936, the enlightened Maharaja of Travancore signed the Temple Entry Proclamation, throwing open all Hindu temples to all Hindus, regardless of caste. This year, interestingly, is the 100th birth anniversary of that beloved Maharaja, Sri Chitra Tirunal.

And so, a century after the monk and the Maharaja removed the fetters, and Kerala has become the least (overtly) casteist part of India – although I note that there is tremendous covert casteism and religious prejudice there – here come the obscurantist Communists, wanting to oppress people based on caste and religious identities. Whatever happened to egalitarianism?

Perhaps this is not too remarkable if you think about it, because it is evident that Communism is another neo-Semitic religion, pretty much a clone of Christianity. The parallels are numerous, although that is outside our scope here. But that makes Communists paranoid: a Hindu consolidation may wipe them out as a political force (much as the Pope and the Americans collaborated discreetly to bring down Communism in the Soviet Union and its empire).

I have long been entertained that the Ezhavas are the very backbone of the Communists in Kerala, but they have become increasingly resentful at the fact that they are merely the water-carriers and hewers of wood for the Communists. The loaves and fishes of office, as it were, are enjoyed by the so-called upper caste Hindus, and increasingly by Christians and Muslims.

The Communists came to power in Kerala in 1957 under EMS Namboodiripad (a Brahmin) even though their cadres were overwhelmingly Ezhavas. For 50 long years, the Communists contrived to deny an Ezhava the post of Chief Minister. For instance, there was KR Gowri, a woman and arguably the tallest leader among the Communists, who was denied the CM post on extremely flimsy grounds.

It was only in 2007 that, with much hemming and hawing, that V Achuthanandan, an Ezhava, finally became Communist CM. That too after they had contrived to defeat him in a ‘safe seat’ at one point, and even in 2007, the party appartchiks had pushed forward a Muslim candidate.

This is not surprising behaviour for Communists. So far as I can tell, in that other bastion of theirs, Bengal, all the top leaders are so-called upper caste Banerjis and Boses and other such. They disdain the lower-castes, and do nothing for them, despite all the fine words and crocodile tears.


What is the concern, really, that Vijayan is expressing? That there will be a consolidation of the Hindu vote in Kerala? The Ezhavas have been proposing just such a tie-up, but the other large group of Kerala Hindus, the Nairs, have been hesitant.

If the Ezhavas abandon the Communists and vote in large numbers for the BJP, that would instantly mean the BJP, hitherto winless in Kerala, would become a force. If in fact the Nairs also do the same thing, then Hindus will become the swing-vote in Kerala and thus the BJP the king-makers, determining whether the Congress or the Communists come to power.

This is precisely the game that the Muslims and Christians have played in Kerala. They vote together as a bloc, and thus whoever they side with will be able to form a government.

Thus, a Hindu consolidation, which Modi may catalyze, would mean the rather quick eclipse of the Communists; and maybe of the Congress too.
Therefore, quite rationally, the circus we are seeing in Kerala now. On the one hand, Communist fulmination from Vijayan et al.

On the other hand, the Congress has been berating Shibu Baby John, an ally and a minister, who visited Modi to, as he put it, “study development in Gujarat”. Shibu has been forced to recant (I am reminded of Galileo at the Vatican) and show remorse for his alleged sin.

So we have come full circle. Irony of ironies, the OBC Modi has become an “untouchable”. And “untouchability” has come back to Kerala, a century after Sree Narayana Guru helped eradicate the practice. I tell you, Kerala is a place where an impartial observer has to be rolling on the floor laughing almost all the time. That is, when he is not weeping with frustration.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Ends & Means
dada wrote:This points to a fundamental difference in their outlook. Islamic philosophy provides the "End" & everything else / everybody else are mere tools ,means to attain this END. Tools / means keep changing with time as technology evolve. 1400 yrs ago muslims considered "wielding swords" as the core skill , today the sword has been replaced by "AK Series guns" , tomorrow it will be something else ! But the Basic MINDSET has remained virtually same !

Interestingly everybody in the muslim world can be treated as tools to achieve the supremacist end !

Dont forget how muslims saw the boeing aircraft filled with passengers & fuel as a live bomb & used it to an devastating effect in 9/11 attack.what was the END ? what was the means ?

people who stubbornly hold "end ideas" control people "filled with means ideas". It happens even in the business world!
Very interesting formulation! You're right about Islam!

In comparison, Dharma is a situation+ends+means outlook!

1) As such Dharma gives the other the benefit of the doubt and embraces others, but under surveillance. Dharma analyzes the situation, whether the other is Dharma, Bhule-Bhatke or Adharma. If Dharma sees the other as Adharma, then that too fixes the "End".

2) Once Dharma has its target, the "End" fixed, then basically it does not flinch till it has been vanquished. The it has a similar "missionary zeal" as some other ideologies.

3) In order to crush Adharma, Dharma does look at the "Means" and would choose the means which gives the least harm to "innocents" which is part of the ongoing situation analysis, but there can be no doubt that Dharma would do whatever it takes to crush Adharma, for when done as "Nishkam Karma" the means would not taint us.

Our choice of "End" is really as such dependent on the other and our understanding of the other! Whatever/Whoever turns out to be "Adharma", its crushing becomes our "End".
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Ends & Means

Continuing from the "Understanding Islamic Society" Thread
dada wrote:What are the Ends adopted / Means developed by the Western World ?
Note that West developed empirical / scientific method to develop the steam engine, machines, ships, military technology, the artillery etc
All these are machines ! nonliving systems which can be controlled-operated by trained people

What are the Ends adopted / Means developed by the Islamic World ?
Islamic world has developed the "metatechnology (the CULTURE)" to produce "younger generations which can be plentifully produced using its mentally caged female population" ! These people are mentally prepared to die for the larger cause of political islam !
I dont think islamic culture produce people ready to LIVE for islam ! It produces people ready to die for islam !

Understand this difference clearly. The war tools of islam are mainly living people not dead machines !
It has spreadout these tools far & wide through immigration both legal & illegal taking full advantage the loopholes in the system, need for politicians to capture power through vote banks ( as in indian west bengal, assam, european countries like germany , finland etc)

As Indians, What are our ends ? What are our means ?
Nobody else can decide for us. We have to decide that ourselves. We have to produce our own means !

What can China teach us in these matters ? if the 21st century is going to be the Asian century , let us start moving in that direction.
dada ji,

I moved the discussion here, as this thread is more of a solutions, vision thread, whereas the "Understanding Islamic Society" Thread is a purely analysis thread.

China cannot teach us anything in these matters. Bharat was always the Guru of the world. China can perhaps help us refine our thinking on the "Means".

End

What our Mission is, is actually explained very clearly to us in the Rig Veda.

इन्द्रं वर्धन्तो अप्तुरः कृण्वन्तो विश्वं आर्यं अपघ्नन्तो अराव्णः - Rigveda 9.63.5

Indram vardhanto apturah krinvanto vishwam aaryam apaghnanto araavNah - RV 9:63:5

Translation by Atri garu: Augmented by Indra's strength, civilize the world by destroying the non-liberal and jealous ones.

So making the universe, the reality, Arya is our whole mission!

Means

Here we return to the concept of Varna. The Varna system actually spells out for us the various paths we need to take to make everybody Arya!
  1. Brahmana: Knowledge
  2. Kshatriya: Power
  3. Vaisya: Prosperity
Sudra is the active application of these strengths to the task at hand! Dharma is the system of ethics which would guide us on our way!

There should be clarity on both "Ends" and "Means" for the Bharatiyas!
RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RamaY »

RajeshA wrote:Ends & Means
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 2#p1148782

For open forum readers...
RamaY wrote:Ramana garu,

My take. The dispute between Daityas (children of Diti) and Aaditeyas (children of Aditi) is time immemorial.

Both of them do not have any issue with accepting Brahma (creation) and Shiva (Dissolution). Their problem is with Vishnu (preservation and sustenance = how to live the life). Daitya's glorify death (like Abrahamic religions in modern construct) and their disrespect for life.

The major contention between these two groups is how to live life. Aaditeyas think life is the key aspect in trinity (birth, life and death), where as Daityas emphasize on the so-called after life (death/Shiva). From their (Daitya) view Life is just a phase between Birth and Death, where as for Dharmics death+birth are just a stopping point in life (journey).That could be one of the reasons why we see lesser acceptance of punar-janma (rebirth) on Daityas.

If we go thru puranic stories, we can see that Aaditeyas are well-known for their celebration of life; what we call swarga-sukhas. Even daitya's celebrate life, but the key difference is the way they do it - an unsustainable celebration. That unsustainable exploitation of nature (and what it gives) results in friction between nature (natural forces - Dikpalakas and Vishnu who is the leader of sustenance). Since Aaditeyas depend on the sustainability of the nature, they end up fighting on the side of dikpalakas and thus the eternal enmity between brothers.

I will give you an example. Ravana is brother of Kubera and probably has more spiritual power than Kubera. Yet, he resorted to invading Kubera (living north-of Himalayas) and forcibly take his Pushpaka. If Ravana desired so, he could have won a similar vimana thru his penance, but he wouldn't do so, as he thinks might is right. The society respects and even admires Ravana's spirituality and reverence for Shiva, but it cannot co-exist with him for his enmity with Vishnu. Vishnu (Sustenance) is essential for the rest of Dharmic society and cannot be compromized about.

This fundamental difference in the world-view is difficult (impossible IMO, as that is the whole Ego part) to fix. Some dharmic see the Shiva bhakti of Daityas and think they are same as Dharmics (Like Carl garu in Islamic Sectarianism thread). But that is an incomplete understanding IMHO.

That doesn’t mean all Daityas are Asuras (not all Muslims are Terrorists) and we can definitely have a Prahlada or Bali and so on. Yet they are successful only for so-long. Even Prahlada (or is it Bali) couldn’t control the Asuric forces during Sagara-Manthana from their destructive attitude. And even today Dharmics can make (short-term) alliances with Asuras to achieve something (like Sagara-Manthan) but at the end of the day we would need a Jaganmohini to do the final task.

But expecting Daityas to make peace with Aaditeyas is like undoing the whole creation (separation of universe = trinity from Nirguna Param)

JMH(umble)T
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Secularism, Sanskriti and the NPT Debate
shiv wrote:No religious person can be secular technically. Secular laws have to be forced on him without being wishy washy about religious sensitivity. The problem about "secular laws" is a definition of "what is secular?".
Indian State needs to give Indians an answer:

Islamic Civilization is being supported by a host of Islamic countries, Saudi Arabia being one of the foremost, as well as through a very hospitable environment in the West and India.

Western Civilization too is being supported by the whole West through the historical "research", global institutions of power, through NGOs, through the Vatican and their programs, and through a vociferous agenda of promoting conversions in non-Abrahamic countries using the excuse of "freedom of religion".

Sinic Civilization is being supported by an aggressive Chinese state and their economic power.

Which country is supporting the Bharatiya Civilization, the Hindus, the Dharmics?

If there is no such country, then how can the Indian state claim that India has the luxury of being "secular"? Considering all the support the other civilizational ideologies are receiving from other states, taking the position that "Indian Secularism would ensure equal treatment of all religious groups in India" is simply not valid!

In what way is this debate any different from the NPT debate?

Some countries choose to possess nuclear weapons but forbid others to have the same kind of weapons! Isn't this discriminatory? Of course it is ! And India has rightly pointed this discriminatory nature out!

But we saw that India went for nuclear tests and made us a Nuclear Weapon State. A country with the size and history of India deserved to have the same Hard Power!

Similarly civilization, its philosophy, its culture, its history are the Soft Power of a nation! So why is Indian State trying to castrate itself by declaring neutrality in terms of civilization, by declaring Secularism, and that too such a tainted one, that it supports Christianism and Islam?

If India rejected NPT, shouldn't India also reject Secularism, as it has come to mean 'Devoid of Civilizational Strength'!
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Reprogramming Cerebro Islamus

Cross-posting from the "Vested Interests in India for Giving In to Pak Blackmail" Thread
dada wrote:QUOTE : "Once you instil certain beliefs very deeply into a child as the child's first memories and earliest knowledge, it is difficult to erase without causing great discomfort from cognitive dissonance."

This works like this. Imagine a local train entering a station. Passengers struggle to get inside the train. But once they get inside, they block the entry of new passengers into the train at same/all subsequent stations until they reach their destination!

Here new passengers are similar to new notions,ideas that you are exposed to as you increasingly interact with other cultures over a time period.
Now the question is how to smoke out those ideas which are already there in the train, and do not allow others to enter!

I think, either
  1. One gives all those passenger ideas inside the train a severe bout of flatulence. Basically it means ensuring a deterioration in the circumstances of the train. The standard of living of the person should fall rapidly, and all the blame should be put squarely on the ideas within the train, and this blame should be carried through good propaganda. To some extent one can use the example of Pakistan, but the propaganda is not getting through.
  2. One electrocutes all those passenger ideas inside the train. This means electrocuting the train, and causing it pain, until the train decides to throw out the current passenger ideas. This means reeducation camps with an effective penalty system. It means social marginalization.
  3. One halts the train, and pull out the passenger ideas. This means setting up a national counter-narrative with counter-ideas and compelling people to go through mandatory therapeutic sessions, which psychoanalyze the current ideas and shows to the patients, how wrong they are. For this the patient would have to give full attention and not be able to use some hand-waving. The patient would have to interact actively. One would have to institutionalize some form of reward when the patient is deemed healed. In many ways this is based on philosophy and psychology therapy.
  4. One halts the train, and starts dropping in new passenger ideas into the train from its sunroof. This means pushing in new passengers into the train through a different opening and that too before the train becomes full. That means starting education early, and giving a certain type of education, one rich with Bharatiya Sanskriti Studies. The studies should start in kindergarten itself and should be especially oriented towards countering the brainwashing that takes place in the family.
  5. One shows to the train, that is faring substandard passenger ideas This involves showing off by the other trains, that they look more sleek, they are faster, they provide more comforts, and that they are just as determined at reaching the destination. This means adopting a policy of overt racial superiority and rubbing it under their noses that they are inferior, and that too because of the passenger ideas they carry. But it also means active interaction, so that they can see the other's superiority at close quarters in every sense of the word.
  6. One tells the train that it cannot travel on the current rails. Basically it is saying that the train cannot share the railway network with you. Something like happened at Partition time, where the trains were told to drive on a different railway network.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5355
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by ShauryaT »

>>Matrimc wrote
>>Since we are comparing US and India, we know that India doesn't have $$ nor the educated polity. Is it your contention then that only educated people should be allowed to stand for elections in India?

It would make sense to attach some basic educational / experience qualifications for whose who we entrust to write our laws.

>>Do you also want to impose certain minimum land holdings/assets as a qualification too?

As the electoral polity stands now, I would first advocate a separation of the executive from legislature and different election procedures based on levels of government. I would advocate a Varna based body (or a body of experts) and a body of commons. Universal Suffrage makes most sense to me at the local level but not at state and central levels, where indirect elections can play a role. On the question of wealth holdings, no in fact, my contention is the opposite, which is based on Varna and in turn this Varna is based on the concept of Yagna. These yagnas with respect to varnas are then based on guna/karma. Please read the earlier posts in this thread, which elaborate on the matter. The system envisioned tries to balance and regulate knowledge, wealth and power for society's benefit.

>>Do you also want people have a certain minimum education level to participate in elections? Would people with higher education will have priority? Would people with more assets have priority? Foreign educated? US higher than UK?

The only way to get a priority is through Yagna.

>>One can certainly have a political system of that kind. In fact US has started that way. If you think that India should go to this kind of a system, I would like you to expand on that and flesh it out.

There are two aspects of US polity that can apply very well to Indian situations. 1. The hard separation of powers between bodies and 2. The federalism and benefits of a government that can react to the diverse needs of India.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12131
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by Vayutuvan »

Thanks - noted. I have to do some homework to understand the definition of yagnya.
Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by Arjun »

RajeshA wrote:Similarly civilization, its philosophy, its culture, its history are the Soft Power of a nation! So why is Indian State trying to castrate itself by declaring neutrality in terms of civilization, by declaring Secularism, and that too such a tainted one, that it supports Christianism and Islam?

If India rejected NPT, shouldn't India also reject Secularism, as it has come to mean 'Devoid of Civilizational Strength'!
Good post, RajeshA ji.

The touchstone for evaluating any government should be its attitude and commitment towards making India a legitmate 'pole' in the competition between civilizations - ie as an alternative to Western, Sinic and Islamic models.

Don't know if secularism itself is a bottleneck in that process. What is more important is that an attitude of strong and healthy competitiveness exist against the other 'civilization' models on offer from the West, Islam and China - along with a deep desire to emerge as the universalism of choice. Once this attitude is entrenched - ie the goal is set, the solutions would automatically follow.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Secularism, Sanskriti and the NPT Debate
Arjun wrote:
RajeshA wrote:Similarly civilization, its philosophy, its culture, its history are the Soft Power of a nation! So why is Indian State trying to castrate itself by declaring neutrality in terms of civilization, by declaring Secularism, and that too such a tainted one, that it supports Christianism and Islam?

If India rejected NPT, shouldn't India also reject Secularism, as it has come to mean 'Devoid of Civilizational Strength'!
Good post, RajeshA ji.

The touchstone for evaluating any government should be its attitude and commitment towards making India a legitmate 'pole' in the competition between civilizations - ie as an alternative to Western, Sinic and Islamic models.

Don't know if secularism itself is a bottleneck in that process. What is more important is that an attitude of strong and healthy competitiveness exist against the other 'civilization' models on offer from the West, Islam and China - along with a deep desire to emerge as the universalism of choice. Once this attitude is entrenched - ie the goal is set, the solutions would automatically follow.
Arjun ji,

"Secularism" in India is taking on increasingly the dimension of a formal distance by the state from both civilizations - Islamic and Bharatiya, and not just from Islam as personal religion on the one hand and Dharmic Sampradayas on the other.

What "model" and "name" of the Supreme some group wants to promote, is indeed something to be left to the group, and the state need not be concerned with that. That would be "Indian Secularism".

What Indian State is however increasingly promoting under the garb of "secularism" is formal neutrality towards Islamic and Bharatiya civilizations, and thus support to none. With English as official language in India, this task has become even more easier.

What the Indian political system is promoting under the garb of "secularism" is "Nehruvian Secularism" aka Islamo-Christianism.

This formal neutrality towards civilizations means that Bharatiya Sabhyata has lost almost complete support from the Rashtra, whose duty should have been to be carrier of this Sanskriti.

Education, Administration, Media, Scientific Research, Commerce, almost all fields have been Macaulayized. Whatever few steps, the Nehruvian establishment has taken in regard to supporting Bharatiya Sanskriti are simply eye-wash and even the eye-wash has been so bureaucratized with uninspiring, uninterested and pay-centered people that even these efforts have acted as a detriment rather than "some" support. Much of the culture itself has been Macaulayized, so that access to it by the culturally interested elite is through the medium of English. Other Church groups have also played a part in "secularizing" aspects of Bharatiya Sanskriti in order to digest it.

With the loss of support from the Indian State, Bharatiya Sabhyata is naturally at a huge disadvantage with respect to other Civilizations, which receive very active and substantial support from their sponsors.

Now why has it so happened?

It is because from the perspective of "secularism" one sees that what we call "Hinduism" is a part of the whole Tree of Knowledge, part of Bharatiya Sanskriti, and if one wants to turn off the tap to "Hinduism" by the state, one would have to stop watering the roots of the Tree itself, that means withdrawing support to Bharatiya Sanskriti. If any support has to be given, then only after making that part of Sanskriti "secular", where other groups too like the Church groups have taken a liking to it for the purpose of digesting it.

"Indian Secularism" should be directed only at providing individual citizens the same services, rights and privileges. This however should be tempered by the interests of promoting Bharatiya Sabhyata which itself assures that according to Raj Dharma people should be treated equally regardless of their sampradayik affiliation.

So only by placing the goal of "Promotion of Interests of Bharatiya Sabhyata" at the top of India's priorities can one assure that "Indian Secularism" works correctly.

It is because this has not happened, that both India's Constitutional Secularism as well as Nehruvian Secularism have both been very detrimental to the interests of the 85% of Indians - the Dharmics.
member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by member_20317 »

Linking a post here by Virendra ji, for everybody to meditate on.

Yesterday there was a prog. on undie tv wherein G. Parthasarthy mentioned how Chinese do not recognize the 'Johnson Line' they also do not accept the 'McCartney McDonald Line'. The 'Indian Line of Perception' is also not ok with them. And furthermore the Chinese also refuse to provide details (maps) of the 'Chinese Line of Perception'.

I am not commenting. Thoda likha hai bahut samajhna.


http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 0#p1447755
Virendra wrote:Image
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Āryāvarta

Cross-posting a post by harbans from "Managing Chinese Threat" Thread
harbans wrote:We have to change perception and start to be real and make a much needed claim to this area:

What has the Han who has eaten fish off the South China coast got to do with Shiva meditating on Mount Kailash off the waters of Lake Mansarover. There is no holier spot for hundreds of millions of Shiv Bhakts than the above.
Image
Last edited by RajeshA on 26 Apr 2013 17:04, edited 1 time in total.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

harbans ji,

at some point we will have to do a Dandi March to Kailash Parbat without any visas!
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

Rajesh Ji, the KM region is one of the most pristine and beautiful regions in the world. It is the holiest of holy spots and for millenia it's association with the Shiv Dharmic has been established. This is the spot that Shiv Ji is supposed to be meditating. The Han Chinese has no root, no business to be here one bit. The deal we must make with HH The Dalai Lama is something like this. We endorse UN resolutions in Tibet. We endorse the Govt in Exile as the real Govt in Tibet. When Tibet is free we make the entire Kailash Mansarover region as a Shiv Dharmic Sthal with visa free entry for Tibetans and Indians alike. This are is the source of the Indus, Ganges, Brahmputra and all major river systems of SE Asia. There is no 'maturity' in our 'mature' talks with China at all. One has no locus standii being 5000 miles West of hinterland and negotiating with an India whose hinterland at best is a few ten kilometers from these areas.

This 2 decade old mechanism that bureacrats and schemists seem to have so much faith in is just a mechanism by which Chinese keep focus away from Tibet and KM. By making an inroad here and there and then withdrawing they are only trying and getting our policy makers up a 'Chana ka Jhar'. As most of the incursions and withdrawals are happening behind public eye and bureacrats like Alka Acharya and experts like Guha keep rattling how nicely the joint mechanism is holding. All this only achieves one goal: That of solidifying Chinese prescence in Tibet and keeping Tibet and KM fade away from the Indian public and policy maker world view.

Basically we have not even whimpered one bit anywhere that KM cannot be Han. We have leftists talk and rail against imperialism. The biggest imperial act in modern times has been Han take over control of the KM region and it's occupation of Tibet. There has not been one voice anywhere against this. Defacto we have acknowledged that Lord Shiva is Chinese. That has already happened. JLN and ABV both stupidly endorsed that without any public debate with an eye to Oslo. The ongoing battle now is Nepal with time frame 5-10 years at maximum. With that in 2 decades we have UP and Bihar turning majority Islamic states. China gives recognition in exchange of Bodh Gaya. The HAn would have claimed Buddha and Shiva.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Āryāvarta

harbans ji,
harbans wrote:It is the holiest of holy spots and for millenia it's association with the Shiv Dharmic has been established. The Han Chinese has no root, no business to be here one bit.
Well actually Taoism is an expression of Shaivism, which was there in China before Buddhism made an entry there.

Of course, in order to have any rights to Kailash-Mansarovar, Chinese would have to accept Shaivism, but since they don't, they indeed have no locus standi there.

But these tangential thoughts aside, we need to bring Shaivism again into the center of Indian consciousness, and create a new politicized Ram Janambhoomi Movement centered around Kailash-Mansarovar.

The problem as I see it today is that Indians based on outward looks do not consider Tibetans to be a part of the "race", whereas in fact Tibetans are very much "Arya" and "Arya" is our race, regardless of ethnicity. That needs to change.

Āryāvarta is an ever expanding geography. Kailash-Mansarovar are not even the periphery of Āryāvarta, but rather should be the spiritual center of it.

And just like the West has "The Expanding West" as a mission, and Islam has "The Expanding Ummah" as a mission, and Chinese have "The Expanding China" as a mission, similarly Bharatiyas too should have "The Expanding Āryāvarta" as a mission. And lo and behold, much of Southeast Asia is already part of Āryāvarta, though not recognized as such because Bharat itself is ruled by West-Ummah-China interests. But at least they are independent countries. Tibet on the other hand is Āryāvarta, but is colonized by Anarya regime, and thus it needs to be liberated by all Aryas.

Kailash-Mansarovar are however so central to Sanatan Dharma that they need to be within Bharat itself.
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

Absolutely right Rajesh ji. KM is at the heart of Dharmic India.
But these tangential thoughts aside, we need to bring Shaivism again into the center of Indian consciousness, and create a new politicized Ram Janambhoomi Movement centered around Kailash-Mansarovar.
Agree with that sentiment. A few loud, high profile rallies should raise public awareness, where joint behind the scene border management groups are trying their best to fade them.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Āryāvarta

harbans ji,

at the moment as I mentioned, many unawakened Indians do not consider Tibetans as a part of them, on the one hand because they look "different", but also because they are Buddhists, and Hindus have put up a little wall around them, based on historical narratives - both Hindu as well as Colonial/Macaulayite.

It is for this reason, that Hindus have not embraced the Tibetans as our brethren who long for liberation from their oppressors. Changing this can take some time.

But Kailash-Mansarovar are central to Hindu narratives, and hence it should be much easier to get our blood heated and to have a Shiv Bhoomi Mukti Sangharsh. This then can link up with Tibet Independence Movement and Buddhism.
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

Yes we should have had a Shiv Bhoomi Mukti Jagran Sangarsh by now. We should have been talking to the Chinese to hand over the entire KM region all 400k sq km and discussing our boundaries with Tibet on that matter. Every time we meet up with Chinese leaders we should have kept this on the table. The best way to do this IMO is to make a deal with HH Dalai Lama that this 400k Sq km region shall be a Shiv Dharmsthal with direct routes from India and Tibet without visa etc. In exchange we recognize openly that the legitimate Govt of Tibet is the one in Dharmasala. Our discussion with Chinese along with the Tibetans should be 2 step: Step 1 that Chinese move out of KM region. We will discuss the northern boundaries. Step 2 Chinese discuss with Tibet the Northern and Eastern boundaries of the Tibetan state. The border management talks of course conducted maturely must be on where on Tibet's Northern and Eastern boundaries do the Chinese get back too. Irony is right now we are discussing boundaries a few km away from our hinterlands! Nonsense about mature nations discuss and talk..lets atleast get right what we should be talking about in the first place!
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Āryāvarta
harbans wrote:Yes we should have had a Shiv Bhoomi Mukti Jagran Sangarsh by now.
I would suggest without "Jagran" for tactical reasons. It makes the assumption that the struggle is only to increase awareness among the people for the struggle rather than achieving liberation for Shiv Bhoomi. "Jagran Sangarsh", Awareness Struggle, is good when we are talking about social evils, but in this case we want a change in the political geography. Awareness comes with the struggle. It is not the end goal.
harbans wrote:We should have been talking to the Chinese to hand over the entire KM region all 400k sq km and discussing our boundaries with Tibet on that matter. Every time we meet up with Chinese leaders we should have kept this on the table.
Actually we should destroy the Nehruvian legacy in India completely by highlighting that it was Nehru who gave away Kailash and Mansarovar to the Chinese!

Of course, it is also a part of his legacy, that he allowed under his watch an Anarya regime to invade Āryāvarta, i.e. Tibet, and that too should be said out loud.
harbans wrote:The best way to do this IMO is to make a deal with HH Dalai Lama that this 400k Sq km region shall be a Shiv Dharmsthal with direct routes from India and Tibet without visa etc. In exchange we recognize openly that the legitimate Govt of Tibet is the one in Dharmasala. Our discussion with Chinese along with the Tibetans should be 2 step: Step 1 that Chinese move out of KM region. We will discuss the northern boundaries. Step 2 Chinese discuss with Tibet the Northern and Eastern boundaries of the Tibetan state. The border management talks of course conducted maturely must be on where on Tibet's Northern and Eastern boundaries do the Chinese get back too. Irony is right now we are discussing boundaries a few km away from our hinterlands! Nonsense about mature nations discuss and talk..lets atleast get right what we should be talking about in the first place!
Well there is the plan of formally integrating the whole of Tibet into India through an instrument of accession agreed to by the Dalai Lama, by the Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile and through a referendum by Tibetan Diaspora-in-Exile. In this case Kailash-Mansarovar would be a part of Bharatiya Rashtra.

Or we can propose to the Tibetans that Bharat would do her utmost to free Tibet, and that they would consider granting the territory around Kailash-Mansarovar to Bharat. Under this treaty, providing military training to Tibetans from Chinese-controlled "Tibetan Autonomous Region" (TAR) and other areas there too would be part of the agreement.

Every male Tibetan should receive military training in India, and India would have to free the necessary funds to that effect. After training the Tibetans can go back to TAR and lie low until the war breaks out in earnest.

These Tibetans in China however then free to provide training within China to other oppressed peoples of China as well, including the Uyghurs and the Hui.

One needs to put the knife on China's throats if one wants them to behave!
Post Reply