lod ([info]oldhen) wrote,
@ 2005-07-06 05:50:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood:still awake..
Entry tags:hindutva, politics

Ayodhya reloaded..
Terrorists yesterday attacked the Ayodhya site ramming a Jeep stock full of explosives into the compound barricade. Considering that it's one of India's most heavily guarded sites, they didn't get very far. Of course, that's not to stop the Sanghis from calling a nationwide bandh, with Advani personally leading the protests. Where were the protests on the "saddest day" your life (supposedly the day the Babri Masjid came down), Mr. Advani? Or were you too busy celebrating to see India burn? Ever the protector of the (Hindu) citizenry, Narendra Modi was quick to announce a reward for the brave jawans, and demand the return of POTA to deal with the terrorists, and disrupters of law and order. What were you doing mr Modi, when your goons led the organised slaughter of Muslims on the streets of Gujarat? Did you play the fiddle when the trishul wielding Hindutvadis were busy lynching and assaulting women - did you? A few terrorists attack a shrine compound and there's instant reward for the police, hundreds of Hindu extremists attempt to ethnically cleanse Gujarat and they're lauded for their "admirable restraint in the face of grave provocation" - there's justice for you, Modi shtyle. An excellent introduction to the Gujarat pogrom can be found here, and one to the Sangh's brand of extemism here.

I wish I believed in God, some God, any God at least then I could fantasise about a special place in perdition reserved for the likes of Narendra Modi - lots of trishul-shaped pitchforks and boiling oil, he'd get his comeuppance come Judgement Day. I wished I believed in Karma, the Karma Generatrix (pdf) even, so I could fantasise about Modi being reborn as a cockroach, doomed to a life of insignificant indistructibility. But, I don't so all I do to vent my frustrations at Hindutva is write, and protest when I can. I really don't know why Hindutva gets my goat so, but it does, like little else. They've somehow managed to foist their fascist, essentially upper-caste supremacist view of Hinduism upon us, hijacking a traditionally plural, tolerant religion in the process.

I know the Sanghis have been actively courting various Hindu religious leaders, and self-styled "spiritual gurus" - but surely there must be some truly enlightened Hindu thinkers, who're upset at this rise of Hindutva? Can they stand up please and be counted? Please.. Like one of my fav. columnists, Dilip D'Souza (many thanks due to [info]mmk for the feed) puts it so pithily:

Someone save us from the insanity of people who think temples and mosques are important, and so go about destroying mosques and temples. Someone tell them, they are just stones. Someone tell them, the people who die are our temples and mosques

Not someone. You. Me.


Is this such a hard message to get out? Whatever happened to the likes of Jittu Krishnamurthy? To fill this void of reason, we have various self-styled "gurus", the likes of Double Sri aka His Holiness Sri Sri Ravi Shankar. "His Holiness"?? - is there no limit to the man's ego, how many appellations is he going to confer upon himself? This wise man in his infinite wisdom suggests that Ayodhya would be peacefully resolved, if the Muslims simply gave away the land to the Hindus, failing which Parliament should legislate the same. When yours truly tried to gently point out the openly political nature of that suggestion, the great man proclaimed that I was "Anti-Hindu" and should be "more reasonable" - swell..

All terrorist attacks are definitely worthy of opprobrium as senseless acts of violence, but surely this is a time for unity, not discord, for quiet but determined resolve, not more hate-mongering.. I started writing this to decry violence in the name of religion or any other name, and it turned into a Hindutva tirade - oh well, hope you enjoyed the rant. :)




(Post a new comment)

your thoughts are pseudo secular
(Anonymous)
2005-07-06 10:21 am UTC (link)
While you are entitled to your thoughts, since you have posted this on the net and left it open for comments, here are my thoughts on this

Terrorism has no place in the civilised socity that we live in. These are acts of persons who are not fit to belong to the human race. It is best to treat them as vicious savages and kill them before they kill civilization. Having said that, I found your thoughts pseudo secular, because you seem to have devoted substantial portion of your post deriding the hindutva brigade as if justifying this act of terrorism

Terrorism in any form or by any faith has to be condemned. Dont have double standards on that

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: your thoughts are pseudo secular
[info]beatzo
2005-07-06 10:44 am UTC (link)
Right. You are absolutely right. In fact you have convinced me enough to go out in the midday sun and start condemning terrorism. In fact, I will even go and kick terrorism in the ass and shout - "You have no place in the civilised society I live in."

Or are you talking about the terrorists themselves? The ones who got shot and died the same day? They do not belong to the human race (or any other race, for that matter) any longer - unless you believe in reincarnation, in which case they are now reborn as slugs or roaches - and will doubtless come to a painful end.

Have a nice day, and good luck with the condemning, anonymous one.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: your thoughts are pseudo secular
[info]oldhen
2005-07-06 10:51 am UTC (link)
in which case they are now reborn as slugs or roaches

lol :) thanks for the support!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: your thoughts are pseudo secular
(Anonymous)
2005-07-06 12:22 pm UTC (link)
I get the sarcasm. My comment was to highlight the fact that terrorism in any form should be delt with strongly.

On me posting as anonymous, it is because I dont have a Live journal account. However you with a name like Beatzo is no less anonymous than I am

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: your thoughts are pseudo secular
[info]oldhen
2005-07-06 10:47 am UTC (link)
Comments, thoughts and constructive criticism are always welcome. I been called a lot worse than "pseudo-secular", so that doesn't bother me..

I agree terrorism has no place in a civilised (or uncivilised) society, and definitely should be condemned, and said as much in the post. I make no bones about my bias against Hindutva, however if the post gave the impression of justifying terrorism - that was not the intention.

Do put this attack in perspective - Sanghis tore down the Babri Masjid, after innumerbale assuarances from the RSS that the Kar Seva would be "peaceful" - what followed was hate-mongering and thousands died in communal riots. In Gujarat in 2002, the slaughter that followed Godhra was a state-sponsored pogrom, in which thousands were hunted down and slaughtered on the streets.

Yes, this act of terrorism is to be condemned, but the people that rushing to condemn it would do well get their own house in order first, they have blood on their hands.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: your thoughts are pseudo secular
[info]rileen
2005-07-06 11:01 am UTC (link)
Perspective, sadly, is the first casualty all too often .......

I was in Varanasi, during the entire buildup to the Ayodhya incident, as well as the aftermath. That is why i have little patience with people who try to justify that, or ignore it and say the BJP's good because of discipline or whatever. It's often easier to hold one's silence.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: your thoughts are pseudo secular
[info]oldhen
2005-07-06 08:43 pm UTC (link)
I was in Varanasi, during the entire buildup to the Ayodhya incident, as well as the aftermath

Can well imagine that it must have been a pretty harrowing time. Unfortunately, there seem to a lot of seemingly rational people who seem to prefer to ignore the Sangh's human rights record in favour of its discipline - can only shake your head in disbelief. Just needed to vent, and get the angst out of the system :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: your thoughts are pseudo secular
(Anonymous)
2005-07-06 12:24 pm UTC (link)
I glad that you accept criticism. However my comment was only my point of view and not ment to criticise yours

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]shortindiangirl
2005-07-06 12:13 pm UTC (link)
Only more evidence that these injustices will wait for you and your degree! :-)

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]oldhen
2005-07-06 08:44 pm UTC (link)
Point taken, anj! Will get to work - the ankle's a lot better, so there's no excuse not to ;-)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


(Anonymous)
2005-07-06 01:17 pm UTC (link)
Oh wow. Nice post, but it sounded as if it's been written by a Anti-Hindu extremist.

The Hindus in India are the oppressed ones being ruled by Muslims and Christians for the last thousand years. You think the Hindus were allowed to live peacefully then? You think the temples were safe then? You think the Hindu women were not raped then?

No. I am not trying to say that we need to go all out and take "revenge" and there are somethings in history which cannot be changed and there are somethings which should not be forgotten. So why dont you also rant about Babbar, Mohammed of Ghori, Aurangzeb, Tipu Sultan, The British "Sirs"?

I do not know much about Ayodhya except that it is believed to be the place where Ram was born and that Babar broke down the temple to construct a mosque. And some "devotees" (if you can call them that) decided to break it to re-construct the temple (obviously the forces of some politician). No one knows if Ram was born there (or if Ram existed) or if there was a temple. But we know that there was a mosque there which was broken down which caused riots. It caused riots only because we have a democracy. Do you think there were riots of this scale during the mughal era if an emperor decided to break down a temple?


And about Godhra. It's obvious that the muslims (if they really burnt the train) would have strong sentiments against the Kar sevaks. The real tragedy was that the muslims who were not involved had to bear the brunt of the Modi attack (if he led the attack as widely believed). It sometimes is unfortunate to be in the wrong place in the wrong time.


This world is complex and our country even more. It's useless to point a finger to Advani or Modi. This country is full of morons and has been full of morons. If you feel strongly about something then go do it instead of sitting in a foreign land (for whatever reason) and ranting. Come back and fight - your birthplace is burning! That's what Modi and Advani are doing - their convoluted minds think what they are doing is right and they're fighting for it though it may seem uncivilised to a lot of minds.

And yes you may just delete this bullshit now! Sorry. I just wrote what came to my head.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]oldhen
2005-07-06 08:26 pm UTC (link)
I have no doubt that the Hindus in India have faced more than their fair share of oppression and repression under various rulers - Muslim, Colonial, even Hindu. I'm sure there were rapes, that temples were desecrated, and numerous atrocities committed. However, both the oppressors (Mughal and British) and the oppressed are long gone. What purpose is to be served by ranting against long dead folks? Can you hold a person responsible for the presumed sins of their grandfathers?

Narendra Modi headed a representative, democratically elected government in the State, people trust the government to protect all it's citizens, not just the ones that voted for you. The trishul wielding crowd was no rag-tag mob, they were a police-aided, systematic ruthless lot armed with voters lists detailing Muslim households, could all this be possible without government complicity? Do try and picture what it must feel like to be a Muslim in Gujarat, when your own government turns against you, can you really expect them to have faith in government? Democratic governments are supposed to be accountable, unlike the imperial and colonial rulers of yesteryears - we hold them to more stingent standards. I can cite meticulous reports detailing human rights violations if you want them.

Reading the original post again, I can see why people would believe it to be extremist - personally, I feel so strongly about Hindutva because they claim to represent all Hindus, and, indirectly me, maybe if I had been raised Muslim I would be ranting against Wahabbism.. Like I said, they've taken a religion that traditionally has held that there are many paths all equal to God, and tried to portray their own narrow interpretation as representing all of Hinduism. I sincerely believe that Hindus would be better served getting their own house in order (re: caste system) before pointing at past oppressors and their presumed descendants. Yes, the world is complex, I wish our "leaders" would recognise that and behave responsibily, it's pretty simple really.

Yeah, I know I'm sitting in a foriegn land and ranting, I'm stuck here for a while in pursuit of a rubber-stamp of a degree, but at least we can do our bit here to stop the flow of funds to hate ideology. Like [info]latelyontime puts it below, I'm ready to acknowledge that my political views are both left-leaning, and there is guilt..

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


(Anonymous)
2005-07-07 03:29 am UTC (link)
>>> What purpose is to be served by ranting against long dead folks?

No need of ranting. Just set the things straight. Build a temple where once stood a temple at the least. Of the 800 million Hindus, I am sure at least 500 million would love to see a temple there. A temple for Lord Ram - their hero, the name they utter in every day prayers.




>>> feel like to be a Muslim in Gujarat, when your own government turns against you, can you really expect them to have faith in government?

The muslims (majority) would never vote for BJP and probably "sympathasized" the terrorists and were mostly jumping in joy when the train was burnt. It never was their "own" government.

And if you believe in Hinduism, Karma catches up with you no matter what if it was even an evil thought.

If the Hindu backlash had not happened in Gujrat, it would have given the extremist muslims more encouragement to attack other Hindu establishments. Hindus never started the war.

The problem how you are seeing is a small group attacked another small group in a terrorist act and the government which was voted to protect the rest of the population did not protect them. I am 100% sure that those who voted for Modi did get "protection", whatever it means. The people who died in Godhra were brothers, sisters and relatives of somebody and the people who killed them were brothers and relatives of somebody. The war between them is acceptable.




>>> know I'm sitting in a foriegn land and ranting, I'm stuck here for a while in pursuit of a rubber-stamp of a degree

Don't you think that you are trying to steal American jobs? Don't you have guilt that because of you some local did not get a seat in the college? You talk about hate ideology when you are actually fuelling it. You very well know that these terrorist acts in India are politicized to gain on "vote banks" and we very well know all politicians (well, most of them) are badly educated. We educated folks feel the need to peace and harmony (well, I may sound like a re-incarnation of Lord Modi, but I would love to see India peacful and prosperous), yet ever educated Indian aspires to go to the US or abroad. Why? To make India properous? No. We Indians just think about ourselves when cornered and some try to potray themselves as altruistic. Why don't you become a politician and talk to people about ideologies rather than running away from the ball of fire and shouting "FIRE. please douse it now" from a distant land?


There's no place for religion, race, color and creed if world peace is what we want. And as long as there are those elements no way can we avoid bloody conflicts. If everyone minds their own business there would be no need for governments.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Reply part 1 (lj comment length restrictions)
[info]oldhen
2005-07-07 05:36 am UTC (link)
There are some pretty inflammatory statements in your comment, but I'm going to ignore them, as discussing them really doesn't add value..

Build a temple where once stood a temple

It has never been established beyond doubt that there ever existed a temple before the Babri Mosque was built. At the very least it's fair to say since there was a mosque at the site for 300 odd years, that Muslims have equal claim to the land, any settlement that doesn't take their sentiments into account is plain unfair. Why not convert the site into a playground, for example?

Of the 800 million Hindus, I am sure at least 500 million

Where did you get this figure from? That's certainly not the impression I get from talking to friends and family in India. Frankly, the numbers are irrelevant, to assume a position is ethical, fair and justified simply because a majority of people support it is rather naive. Adolf Hitler was democratically elected, did that justify Nazi fascism?

It never was their "own" government

Sigh.. You really don't get the concept of democracy do you? A democratically elected government is responsible for the security of all its citizens, not just the people that voted it into power. If you do not agree with this basic definition, there's no point continuing - let's just stop here.

Godhra was a senseless act of terrorism, that was a travesty of justice and definitely condemnable. But, who was responsible for it? Do we know even today, three years on? Is the proper response to terrorism to first attempt who the perpetrators were, and then go after them, following the law all the while, or is it to find the someone, anyone that you think belongs to the community that the terrorists came from, and butcher and slaughter them? For every act of terrorism, by a Pakistani sponsored terrrorist in Kashmir, would India's proper response then be to target the first Pakistani Muslim that could be found? Would this deter or encourage the terrorists?

I really don't think you get the scale of the involvement of Narendra Modi's government in the state-sponsored pogrom that followed the Godhra incident. Let me try once more, here are the facts of the case as reported by every major Indian and International human rights agency.

In the span of 6 days (between Feb 28 and March 4) the pogrom led to 2000 Muslim deaths, the displacement of tens of thousands people and rape and sexual mutilation of countless other women and children. This was no rag-tag mob of raving lunatics, this was an organised state-sponsored pogrom with State governtment officials including the police being active participants. Mr Modi's immediate response was to laud the admirable restraint of Gujarat's Hindus in the face of "grave provocation". In the immediate aftermath of the pogrom, the independent National Human Rights Commission indicted Mr. Modi's government saying:

"It was obvious that the riots were pre-planned, as the rioters were equipped with the minutest details about houses and business establishments belonging to the minority community. The VHP and Bajrang Dal (the militant wing of the Sangh Parivar) activists even had voter's
lists with them to identify houses belonging to Muslims. This could not have been possible without the help of the administration and the police."


as did an another independent citizens group, the 'Citizens for Justice and Peace' headed by a former Supreme court justice. Indeed the Supreme Court itself was moved to characterise Mr. Modi as "A modern day nero"

More background here.

Following which, *every* major Indian and International human rights organisation has unequivocally condemned Mr. Modi, reports of which can be found below:
Amnesty Intl [1, 2]
Human Rights Watch summary, and the full 70 pg report in a pdf if you're so inclined. Yes, I've read all of them, and would urge you to do the same.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Reply part 2 (lj comment length restrictions)
[info]oldhen
2005-07-07 05:38 am UTC (link)
The war between them is acceptable

No it really isn't (to me).

because of you some local did not get a seat in the college?

That's simply nor true, I know this as I've been privy to subsequent admissions committee descisions.

You talk about hate ideology when you are actually fuelling it

How did you make this leap of judgement? Do you really honestly believe that by (presumably) being more academically qualified than some American citizens, that leads to hate ideology against Indians in the US?

ever educated Indian aspires to go to the US or abroad

Do we really need to get into this - my reasons for coming abroad etc? As far as criticising Modi - would the argument have less weight coming from a Japanese citizen say? Is the validity of the argument to be judged by the passport of the person making it, or by the intrinsic worth of the argument?

Let's try and keep this discussion to the validity of arguments, and not about you or me personally.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]latelyontime
2005-07-06 03:11 pm UTC (link)
I am not going to go into the mudslinging that some well intentioned people have started here. Simply because they, in their attempts at pointing out your politics to you, are missing the forest for the leaves.

I am presuming that most people with political ideas would be aware of the fact that all representations or commentaries are necessarily politically affainced and that your views are a part of a leftist Hindu who feels guilty for acts which are performed by a representative community. I will also agree that your views - especially the tone, has unfortunately been a little on the extremist, but I can understand that such a strong fervour is necessary for the process of disavowal that you are going through.

Religion and politics, when wedded, can only lead to horrifying results. I have no commentary to provide right now on the new attacks on Ayodhya. But I do believe that these attacks are not proofs of how the State has never really resolved the issue of secularism in our country.

Secularism, for what it is worth, would be better off as an equal disregard for religion rather than an equal acceptance of it. But then, that's just my take on it.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]oldhen
2005-07-06 09:03 pm UTC (link)
are of the fact that all representations or commentaries are necessarily politically affainced

I agree with you (and hope everyone else does too) completely that all commentaries are necessarily subjective, as are most if not all arguments - is there really such a beast as "objective commentary"? Certainly the views are left-leaning, maybe I should have put in a disclaimer to that effect, can append one to the post..

who feels guilty for acts .... ...such a strong fervour is necessary for the process of disavowal

Well put, this is certainly a biggish part of the tenor of the post - feeling guilty and needing to distance myself from the Hindutva ideology. I haven't really analysed just why it so outrages me, but it really does.. Need to find a good way to channel this angst into action..

Secularism, for what it is worth, would be better off as an equal disregard for religion

Thanks for the balanced view, couldn't agree more. But, India chose the equal acceptance path all those years ago, it's hard to see the political will and mandate to change paths emerging anytime soon..

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]latelyontime
2005-07-07 12:29 pm UTC (link)
Nah...objectivity died its death with the arrival of 'situated knowledges' and a realisation of the fact that science, with all its claims to being objective is actually the most volatile discipline of human knowledge.
feeling guilty and needing to distance myself from the Hindutva ideology.
I guess I could understand it because I have seen so many people do it...and it is a natural reaction to the kind of things one has to go through.

Thanks for the balanced view
Glad you found it balanced. I am sure there will be people who will disagree though.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]oldhen
2005-07-08 07:29 am UTC (link)
science, with all its claims to being objective

How, I wish more of my fellow scientists saw the world through this relativistic prism.. Your user pic seems particularly apt for this thread, huh?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]latelyontime
2005-07-08 07:42 am UTC (link)
I think increasingly scientists have also come to accept relativism as the key to exploring the world. I have some friends who are doing their research in quantum physics and molecular biology and so on and they are, thankfully, broad minded enough to understand that the world as it appear from their perspective is not necessarily correct.

My user picture was actually inspired by my conversations with parents tsk tsk

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]oldhen
2005-07-08 08:01 am UTC (link)
I think increasingly scientists have also come to accept relativism as the key

There is cause for hope then.. :)

their research in quantum physics and molecular biology

Good to know my molecular biology brethren share this viewpoint ;) I guess expect all scientists to exhibit that level of understanding, and am therefore disappointed when a significant percentage don't.. Are the molecular biology friends in B'lore? If so, there's a good chance I might know some of them - the community in B'lore is pretty small. By the way, what do you research?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]latelyontime
2005-07-08 08:47 am UTC (link)
Hmmmm you should start teaching undergrad students. It is the cure for expecting anybody to change and when someone does, it is a pleasant surprise all the way through.:)

No, the molecular biology friends are not even in India. We shared the same hostels in my post grad days in Pune and now all of them are scattered all around the world doing their research. I think the one scientist who was in Bangalore and I knew was [info]rashmiprasad but she too has flown off to phoren lands now.

What do I research? I am enrolled in cultural studies. I research the emergence of new technosocial subjectivities in urban India with the rise of contemporary digital cultures. It is a mouthful, I know, but yeah!

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]mrsgollum
2005-07-08 08:11 am UTC (link)
The issue is sensitive as it is, but taking sides only makes it even more so.

It's sad how the train carnage reaction snowballed into mass killings. Even sadder when people who hardly know anything about Hindu tradition and culture claim to be bearers of religion and are still stuck in their worlds of temples,idols and Gods. Foolish it is when we read that these are mere symbols for focus and means to what religion atleast proposes is a reason for one's existence. Yes, people are confused.

But, then why should we take sides and further confuse ourselves and others? The worst thing, of course, is forgetting that women and children were actually burnt in that train. In an earlier post, there was a poem you quoted for victims of the riots. Surely, you have enough objectivity(if at all that exists undiluted in this world) to have found similar poems for the train victims. Lest you may think so, this is not something pro-victims or pro-rioters. It is merely the two sides, of which we choose to focus on only one - the one that appeals to our conscious.

Secularism, like a friend here points out, is equal regard for human beings (and possibly equal disregard for all religions) , and does not really amount to judgement on the basis of religion - ideally religion is best left to the individual as long as it does not interfere with other individuals.



(Reply to this)


[info]beerbal
2005-07-08 12:57 pm UTC (link)
Someone save us from the insanity of people who think temples and mosques are important, and so go about destroying mosques and temples. Someone tell them, they are just stones. Someone tell them, the people who die are our temples and mosques

That's fine as rhetoric, but in truth, plenty of people find mosques and temples important. And with a fervour that makes it very difficult to tell them otherwise. (Anyway, why presume the superiority of a faithless world?)

This wise man in his infinite wisdom suggests that Ayodhya would be peacefully resolved, if the Muslims simply gave away the land to the Hindus, failing which Parliament should legislate the same. When yours truly tried to gently point out the openly political nature of that suggestion, the great man proclaimed that I was "Anti-Hindu" and should be "more reasonable" - swell..

Is that really such an execrable suggestion? Regardless of authenticity, the place seems to have a special significance to a large number of Hindus. A mosque rebuilt some distance away would probably serve the same purpose. It does seem a reasonable solution.

(Reply to this)


Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…