All you need to know about the Dragon’s dubious nature and clash at LAC
The series of events from at the LAC is now getting worst with the passage of time. From June 15 when the first time it was reported that China and India’s military troops clashed in hand to hand combat at LAC that was a disputed border as claimed by China in the humiliating mountains resulting in the death from both the sides. This was the deadliest confrontation between both the countries in 45 years marking a danger escalation between two nuclear powers.
What is going on between India and China?
In the 1950’s a famous term was used to describe the relationship between both the countries as “Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai” which means India and China are brothers, however that was the exception rather than the norm with a deep seeded mistrust on both sides still felt today. In the past, despite attempt for amicable relationship such as the India China friendship association cracks were already appearing in their bilateral relationship due to multidimensional reasons behind the same. Like China never accepted the borders drafter by the British in 1940 demarcating the frontier between TIBET and BRITISH INDIA also known as McMahon line. The ambiguity of the 550 mi line which India recognises as its official border soon became a source of tension between two Asian neighbours.
Finally, it calumniated in the Sino Indo War in 1962, the battle lasted a month. Over the next few years India managed to recover the lost ground in a mid-occasional clash between both the countries including one in 1975 which brought 45 years of easy peace at border. Despite efforts from the political leadership to diplomatic talks the issue remained unresolved. Between 1993and 2005 India and China signs a series of agreement including the 1996 agreement[1]that prohibiting the fire arms in volatile area. So what are both side fighting over exactly and what is importance of the same?
The McMahon line forms a long border between both the countries that extends for more than 3400 km in the harsh cold mountain region. Both sides building their infrastructure at LAC now due to escalating tensions between both the side. The tension between India and China goes beyond the land borders and given the economic position this will have broader implication for the region and rest of the world too. The two countries make up around 36% population of world. Both the countries are the global economy. The geo political tensions for India is not a novel thing as Pakistan is always there for India too give some new tensions at LoC but the recent development at LAC is unprecedented in the last 45 years especially. Even before the recent clash the geopolitical tension between tow juggernaut have been on the rise of late. In the recent years India’s neighbors Pakistan, Nepal and Sri Lanka has knot the closer ties between China under its Belt and Road Initiative. To counter the rise of China, India has sought closer ties with other strategic players such as US, Japan and Australia. The latest clash has also led to a boycott of Chinese company in India and a ban on many Chinese apps by the government, also the populace of India is now boycotting China.
Current Situation: The Paradigm Shifted
In India China Standoff the current situation is still on the raises edge it is till volatile and grim. The dubious nature of China and continual postponement for the military level talks is raising concern for the Indian side. The recent standoff at Ladakh and the deployment of various fighter planes of IAF is giving a strong signal that situations are not normal in anyway at the LAC, despite of series of talks at military level and diplomatic level things are not deescalating at LAC region at all. From Miraj 2000, Apache helicopters to the newly inducted Rafael all are set ready by the IAF for any emergencies. The Indian air force is in top gear for both defensive and offensive air operations. Military preparedness in Ladakh has been high for nearly 5 months now but since the end of august the tempo of missions get a record high. The Indian Air forces are fully prepared for any eventuality. From the actions of both the end it is clear that the war clouds looming large in Ladakh, Mirage 2000 fighter jets, SU-30s and other jest have been carrying out a number of sorties, the Army is extensively deployed an increasing number along the line of actual control to keep an eye on extremely belligerent and untrustworthy China coupled with the major fact that China is appears reluctant to return to the dialogue table.
In the recent past, the huge event happened where China violated series of agreement as after 1975 for first time there was a firing on LAC. In the recent event that happened due to the frustration of China by the steps taken by Indian side at different fronts from diplomatic issues to ground level things where India has captured the Black top post that is located in South of Pangong lake. China tried to capture the Black top post twice but unable to do so. The event took place and firing happened on 8th September just added fuel to the burning fire, each side has different view on the event that had happened. In a statement, Colonel Zhang Shuili, spokesperson for the PLA Wester Theatre Command claimed the Indian Army “crossed the line and entered Bangong Hunan, the western section of the Sino-Indian Border” and the “Indian actions seriously violated the relevant agreements and agreements between China and India, pushing up regional tensions, and easily causing misunderstandings and misjudgments” the Chinese side is blaming India for all actions through its mouth piece for international world i.e. global times. India claimed that there are no firing from the Indian side, China violated the agreements of 2005 and 1996. Situation at LAC is very tensed right now due to multidimensional reasons.
The strong message on the recent events were sent to China as no cooperation policy with China till the border issues get resolved. In a diplomatic way with an implicit meaning India pulls out of Military Exercise in Russia named Kavkaz 2020where many other nations were participating like China, Pakistan , Turkey and other SCO countries will also participate in the exercise. The deployment of T90 tanks at border region to deployment of warship by Indian Navy in South China sea is giving a clear insight that things may getting worse if there will not be de-escalation between two nations. There is not an iota of doubt that it is a changed India and not a India of 1962’s and that’s why still both the nations are trying to de escalate the things, further it is also cleared by the Indian side that if talk fails then military is last option as CDS General Mr. Bipin Rawat said.
The top Chinese analyst has endorsed Modi’s “Mazboot Bharat” resolve to fight back the aggression at the Line of Actual Control. Chinese analyst Gordon Changin hi s article narrated how the PLA troops have been pushed back. He analysed the India’s effort to fought the situation at LAC, he presented a remarkable thing on which we should encourage our soldiers and current government regime he said “the Indian leaders soldiers are no more psychologically paralysed, till now China was always under the impression as it will be able to get its way as India remains defensive after the 1962 war but now as China took India by Surprise as India responds ferociously” it is a big revelation from somebody who is from China itself.
It is clear that we are in a New India as the aforesaid contentions are coming from the insider who is from China itself and a great analyst of PLA policies. The winds are changed now, already government puts ITBP and SSB on high alerts furthermore the Defence minister said that Indian Army is prepared for every situation but the present standoff at LAC must be de escalated as it is good for both the nations in every aspect. It is not wrong to quote what PM Narendra Modi said :[2]
The enemies of India have seen the fire and fury of our forces.
A layperson’s cynicism if not complete distrust with regard to the Indian judicial system could be attributed to, inter alia, the proclivity of the judiciary to exhibit capriciousness to an alarming extent. The inconsistency of the judiciary is ostensibly its only consistent characteristic. Its judgment with regard to the series “UPSC Jihad” aired by Sudarshan TV chief editor Suresh Chavhanke is evincive of the same.
The context behind this series is the illustration of government schemes for religious minorities securing employment in the civil services. The inordinate advantages enjoyed by the Muslim community, such as higher number of attempts, higher upper age limit, suspicious rate of success in a particular language etc. having been conceded, have already been reported.
Given the phenomenal competition that exists for the UPSC examinations, a difference of mere 1% could indicate a plethoric difference. As Suresh Chavhanke reported, the difference in the marks for interviews between Muslims and non-Muslims in 2018 was as high as 9.5 per cent. It is beyond anyone’s comprehension as to why such figures must not engender skepticism and how the mere reportage thereof could be construed as slanderous to the Muslim community.
The true controversy, however, was not with regard to the State’s endeavours, but those of an organization named Zakat Foundation of India, an NGO that has also sought to groom Muslim candidates for the civil services. Here is a document prepared by the NGO that evidently champions concerning prospects of a takeover of Indian bureaucracy by Muslim candidates. It would not have been so disquieting had the iniquitous links between the Zakat Foundation and radical Islamist organizations not surfaced.
The disquieting paradigm adopted by the Zakat is already a source of consternation. That it upholds the notion of there being institutionalized oppression of the Muslims in India is amply evident. Not surprisingly, it is opposed to the the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) that was passed by the government in December 2019. With eminent lawyers like Harish Salve having demonstrated the constitutionality of the Act based on historical precedent, any opposition to the CAA — with the contention not only that it is unconstitutional but is also an instance of institutionalized discrimination against Muslims — can justifiably be suspected of malice prepense against the nation. Manifestly not sufficient to prosecute an individual who harbours such views, it is of utmost essence to discern possible execrable notions that may have engendered such views. For what objection could it possibly have to India offering sanctuary to persecuted minorities of our neighbouring theocracies who suffer no fault of their own — verily a righteously corrective measure — but verily India’s own legacy of the Partition?
Perhaps the most outrageous instance of the Foundation meddling with the process of justice was its set of demands to the Hindu community, fulfilling which the Muslims would be prepared to concede the Ram Janmabhoomi to the Hindus. This, when the case was already being heard at the Supreme Court. One of the atrocious points was a demand of extending reservations to the Muslims, in the same manner as done for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. None other than the Members of the Constituent Assembly summarily rejected such a proposition. Their observations receive much more credence when one realizes that the Jains and the Buddhists, phenomenally smaller in numbers when compared to the Musalmans, did not demand such proportional representation.
That having been illustrated, the NGO’s possibly links with iniquitous organizations now become the gravest grounds for considerations of national security. By its own admission, it received Rs. 13,64,694.00 from the Madina Trust based in the United Kingdom during the financial year 2018–19. The Madina Trust-UK is known for anti-India activities. On the 15th of August and the 3rd of September, 2019, there were attacks on the Indian High Commission in the United Kingdom by unruly mobs. The Economic Times reported on the groups and leaders that were present at the violent protests, one of them was Madina Trust-UK, a trust evidently sympathetic to Pakistan. An article by Sam Westrop on FirstPost is quite revealing of the sheer extent of nefarious activities.
Given the existence of such diabolical plots, how would one view the attempt to scuttle such voices as seek to expose Zakat’s possible iniquitous intentions? As K Bhattacharjee rightly notes, “attempts that are being made to silence such criticism are borne of a misplaced sense of righteousness that could pose a serious threat to the national security of India.”
It must then be a source of profound misfortune and concern that none less than the Supreme Court of India be liable for the same.
Justice D.Y. Chandrachud’s observations with particularly appalling. He contends:
The anchor’s grievance is that a particular group is gaining entry into the civil services. How insidious is this?…Such insidious charges also put a question mark on the UPSC exams. Aspersions have been cast on UPSC. Such allegations without any factual basis, how can this be allowed? Can such programs be allowed in a free society?
Justice Chandrachud is a highly erudite judge. For him to make such specious observations is indeed surprising, particularly so given that Sudarshan TV could not have made its position any clearer, as reported by Bar and Bench:
Sudarshan TV maintains that it has “no ill will against any community or any individual and it does not oppose the selection of any meritorious candidate in the service of the Union or the States.”
The channel made further particularly apt points in its representation:
UPSC is an open competitive examination and members of every community may participate in the entrance examination and qualify. The thrust of the programme is that there appears to be a conspiracy which needs to be investigated by NIA or CBI. It appears that terror linked organizations are funding the Zakat Foundation of India, which in turn is supporting the UPSC aspirants.
What is profoundly interesting as well as confounding, is that while Justice Chandrachud recognizes that injunctions would set a terrible precedent and that “there will be injunctions galore”, which the judges do not want to be law of the land, his concern for the cohesion of India’s diversity is not quite relevant to the case. He observed, “Let a message go to media that a particular community cannot be targeted.” and that “We recognize national security, but we need to have individual respect too.”
While the observations by themselves are valid, they appear erroneous insofar as the case is concerned. The following questions must be posed to the Supreme Court:
Why must Muslims not be mentioned, given that the Zakat Foundation’s own report aims to groom Muslims exclusively? How could facts be reported otherwise?
How does the revelation of such facts constitute hate speech against Muslims, when Suresh Chavhanke never called for any action that could target Muslims exclusively on account of their religion, either institutionally or otherwise? How could it be inimical to Muslims given that none of his statements evinced contempt for Muslims as a religious group, but only the nefarious activities of Zakat?
Does the Supreme Court, by means of its understanding that the nation’s plural fabric could be negatively impacted, indirectly admit that the Muslim sentiment is eminently frail and ergo cannot tolerate even a truthful report? Does it indicate the judiciary’s capitulation to radical elements of society who could potentially hold society at gunpoint? Is that also why the Honourable Court has yet not declared the Government of India’s ban on Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses unconstitutional?
Where was the conscience of the Supreme Court when the narrative of “Hindu Terror” was deliberately disseminated? Why did it not express concern when a book, “26/11: RSS ki saazish” effectively exonerating a foreign terrorist group and implicating a reputed sociocultural organization of the worst terror attack in Indian history, was released? Given that the Supreme Court views truthful and non-hateful reporting as detrimental to the nation’s plural fabric, it could certainly have viewed such an insidious book as covert support to a foreign terrorist group, thereby a threat to national security.
Why did the Supreme Court not bother about the integrity of journalism and “individual respect” as Justice Chandrachud observes and considers important, when a media trial declared Narendra Modi a murderer of Muslims courtesy of the 2002 riots in Gujarat while he was the state’s Chief Minister? Why did the Honourable Court never compel the iniquitous protesters at Shaheen Bagh from clarifying their provocative sloganeering against Hindutva?
Why did the Supreme Court not express concern when eminent voices along with a foreign national, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, propounded, “Smash Brahmanical Patriarchy”?
In the event that the Supreme Court is so concerned about banning hate speech, shall it be so dutiful as to ban some religious scriptures that are replete with such language?
Judicial capriciousness is evidence of a dysfunctional law and order system. Such a judgment sets terrible precedent.
While the Court agreed that a pre-telecast ban was an extreme recourse, Justice Chandrachud confoundingly justified it saying so:
We are very conscious of the fact that pre-publication, pre-telecast ban by us is a matter of extreme recourse. We do not do it easily. It could take us down a slippery slope… This court is circumspect about clamping down on any news/opinions. Only in certain narrow range of issues is it [pre-telecast ban] done, like child sexual abuse cases, gender violence or cases regarding matrimonial or even any personal relationship.
It is beyond one’s comprehension how the Court could not discern that Suresh Chavhanke could be categorized under none of the foregoing range of issues. Exposing a national security threat could possibly not have constituted a justifiable ground for the Court to impose a ban. This case has only evinced the sheer hollowness of the judicial system, which Their Honours artfully conceal beneath their ability to quote philosophy and poetry in their judgments and articulation skills rivalling those of Dr. Shashi Tharoor. Such capriciousness by the judiciary cements the unfortunate impression that the judiciary is an elitist institution in its own echo chamber, whose members are lost amidst the sea of abstract theoretical jurisprudence, severely disconnected from ground reality, and who appear to not discern nuances of reality.
The Indian judiciary appears to lose all semblance of nuance so soon as the word, “minority” appears. This is yet another problem in the Hollow Republic of India — and I use that term after prodigious consideration. So soon as the term “minority” is used, the intelligentsia forthwith feels an unfettered passion to protect them from majoritarianism even in the event that there exists none. It does not discern the distinction between protection and indulgence. It shuts off ears to possible contraventions of law and order by the minority community and almost conforming to an unwritten decree, shall philosophize it. It appears that the judiciary is a mere extension of that disposition.
The solution is to either micromanage and introduce curbs against all thoughts, which would be in grave contravention of principles of free speech, or to permit all forms of speech save, say, those which would be subjected to prosecution under the U.S. Brandenburg precedent or an Indian equivalent thereof. Hopefully, the judiciary does not set a precedent that may prove itself to be an ossified, biased institution that could conform to a paradigm potentially detrimental to national interest out of a misplaced sense of righteousness, for such an impression would be inimical to its own reputation.
In our series of compiling and documenting the greatest of Indian Medieval warriors who have been denied their seat of significance by fake historians we are going to write a brief compilation of Bappa Rawal, a Scion of Mewar region in 8th Century.
Indian fake historians until now remained silent about what happened to north western frontier of India between 8th to 12th Century nearly 400 years, after the fall of Raja Dahir another great Hindu King of Sindh who lost his battle against Arab in 712 AD. The valor and legend of Bappa Rawal the King of Mewar reveals the true history.
Bappa Rawal, (8th century) was a celebrated King of Mewar region in Rajasthan. He is identified as having predecessors of present days Gahlot, Sisodia, Kalabhoj, Shiladitya and Khumana who ruled Mewar during different phases of time.
References of Bappa Rawal are also available in ancient historical sources like 15th century Ekalinga mahatmya (Also known as Ekalinga Purana), Indologist David Gordon White`s work and 11th century writer Al- Baruni.
It has been agreed upon that Bappa Rawal whose original name was Raja Kalbhoj (काल भोज) established the Mewar Kingdom and famous Eklingiji Temple in 728 CE.
Bappa Rawal as popularly called for his greatness and reverence created a confederacy of warriors along with Pratihar King Nagbhata 1st, Bhils and Nagas and decimated the Malechha Arabs and captured the Chittor Fort. They decimated and chased the Arab Mohammad bin Qasim’s army into the deep desert beyond Ghazni.
Bappa Rawal in a sense had broken the myth that Indian Kings could not unite against foreign invaders to protect the mother land. The fake narrative to divide and derecognize them has been in history books for too long. The ferocity and bravery of Bappa Rawal was so astounding that subjects offered him name of reverence Bappa. (मेवाड़ का संस्थापक पिता)
King Bappa Rawal Jee was a visionary Commander. He comprehended immediately that invader are not be decimated within the borders of India alone but to be demolished in their homeland as well. Bappa Rawal did not have the word forgiveness in his dictionary.
True to his ferocity and military power, he collated and commandeered another confederation of Jaisalmer and Jodhpur kingdom and chased Arabs out of Afghanistan in his maiden effort. The brute power of Confederation was unimaginable. Most of the Arab were killed in this battle.
To strengthen the north western frontier, Bappa Rawal built a city named Rawalpindi still surviving after his name. The city was strategically located and hence made his military garrison.
After strengthening the post of Rawalpindi, Bappa Rawal led 16 valiant forays into Ghazni (Afghanistan) and subjugated entire Ghazni and expanded the kingdom of Mewar boundary up to Iran.
Along and beyond Gujarat, Bappa Jee ran through present Sindh and Baluchistan and freed the entire area from single trace of malechha (Arabs). Such was the power and fear of Mewar in those days that the entire north western frontier was in total command and administered from Mewar only.
It is an illusion for today’s learner and fake historian who coined a thought that Afghani were warrior and not defeated. But the fact scores of Indian Kings from Bappa Rawal Jee, King Lalitaditya and Sardar Hari Singh Nalwa an army General of Great Ranjit Singh defeated subjugated and ruled this Ghazni for quite a long period.
Bappa Rawal had proved his military statesmanship on a vast geographical area deep into central Asia as well. His successful military expedition into Sindh, Baluchistan, Ghazni, Kandahar Khorasan, Turan, Isfahan and in Iran established him as one of the greatest King of contemporary world political map.
The fake myth as taught to the impressionable young mind, that Indian warriors not invaded and controlled North West also stands demolished when we read his successful military expedition.
Such was the terror of Mewar kingdom in those days that Arab forgot the prosperous land of India for any successful military expedition for next 400 years. He introduced coins of Gold to commemorate the establishment of Mewar Kingdom. Later on, among his great descendent, Rana Sanga (Rana Sangram Singh), Maharana Pratap and Rana Uday Singh were the other great Warrior and king of India.
Bappa Rawal Jee who assumed the honor of savior of Chittour at the mere age of 20 finally ruled for next 30 year. He took to spiritual path thereafter and submerged himself into the devotion of Lord Shiv in 753 AD.
आज भारत विश्व में अपनी नई पहचान के साथ आगे बढ़ रहा है। वो भारत जो कल तक गाँधी का भारत था जिसकी पहचान उसकी सहनशीलता थी, आज मोदी का भारत है जो खुद पहल करता नहीं, किसी को छेड़ता नहीं लेकिन अगर कोई उसे छेड़े तो छोड़ता भी नहीं। गाँधी के भारत से शायद ही किसी ने सर्जिकल स्ट्राइक और एयर स्ट्राइक जैसे प्रतिउत्तर की अपेक्षा की होगी। उसके बाद अब डोकलाम विवाद और फिर गलवान घाटी में चीन को अपने जवाब से भारत ने विश्व में अपनी इस बदली हुई पहचान की मुहर लगा दी है। उससे बड़ी बात यह है भारत की इस नई पहचान को विश्व बिरादरी सहजता के साथ स्वीकार भी कर चुकी है। जो की वैश्विक राजनीति में भारत की कूटनीतिक एवं रणनीतिक विजय की परिचायक है।भारत की यह नई पहचान इसलिए भी विशेष हो जाती है क्योंकि उसे यह पहचान दी है एक ऐसे नेता ने जिसके जीवन की शुरुआत बेहद साधारण रही। जिसका जन्म किसी राजनैतिक परिवार में नहीं हुआ। जिसका केवल बचपन ही नहीं पूरा राजनैतिक जीवन ही संघर्षपूर्ण रहा। एक चाय वाले से एक प्रचारक, एक प्रचारक से एक मुख्यमंत्री और एक मुख्यमंत्री से प्रधानमंत्री बनने तक का उनका यह सफर बहुतों के लिए प्रेरणादायक है खास तौर पर युवाओं के लिए। शायद वो भी अपनी इस ताकत को जानते हैं इसलिए भले ही अपनी वर्तमान योजनाओं के केंद्र में वो गरीबों और वंचितों को रखें लेकिन उनकी भविष्य की योजनाओं का केंद्र तो देश के युवा ही होते हैं। युवाओं और बच्चों से साल भर वो भिन्न भिन्न माध्यमों से जुड़े रहते हैं। चाहे परीक्षा पे चर्चा हो या चंद्रयान छोड़े जाने के कार्यक्रम में बच्चों की भागीदारी। इन बच्चों में वो देश का भविष्य देखते हैं तो इन बच्चों को उनमें अपना एक अभिभावक नज़र आता है।
यही कारण है कि देश की नई शिक्षा नीति के जरिए मोदी इन बच्चों में छुपे वैज्ञानिक और इंजीनियर ही नहीं बल्कि इनमें छुपे चित्रकार और गीतकार को भी जगाना चाहते हैं। ताकि वे जितनी गहराई से विषय को समझें उतनी ही शिद्दत से मानवीय संवेदनाओं को भी महसूस करें। क्योंकि वो जानते हैं कि भारत को आज जिन समस्याओं का सामना करना पड़ रहा है उन सब का मूल भ्रष्टाचार है और भ्रष्टाचार का मूल दूसरों के अधिकारों तथा अपने दायित्वों के प्रति संवेदनहीनता है। शायद इसलिए एक तरफ वो युवा आईएएस अधिकारियों एवं पुलिस कर्मियों से व्यक्तिगत संवाद करके उन्हें आमजन के प्रति अपने कर्तव्यों का एहसास कराते हैं तो दूसरी तरफ “मन की बात” से आम जनता से रूबरू होकर उन्हें देश और देशवासियों के प्रति उनके दायित्वों का बोध कराते हैं। विशेष बात यह है कि उनकी इन साधारण सी लगने वाली महत्वपूर्ण बातों को देशभर के लोगों का भारी समर्थन देखने को भी मिलता है। चाहे नोटबन्दी हो या स्वच्छता अभियान। राष्ट्रीय स्तर पर उन्हें मिलने वाले समर्थन के आगे विपक्ष का राजनैतिक विरोध ध्वस्त हो जाता है। कोरोना काल में जनता कर्फ्यू से लेकर उनकी एक अपील पर देश भर में घंटियों की गूंज ने विश्व के शक्तिशाली से शक्तिशाली नेताओं की नींद उड़ा दी। यही कारण है कि चाहे विश्व के सबसे शक्तिशाली देश अमरीका के राष्ट्रपति हों वो चुनावों से पहले अमेरिका में बसे भारतीयों को आकर्षित करने के लिए “हाऊडी मोदी” कार्यक्रम करवाते हैं तो इस्रायल जैसे देश के राष्ट्रपति चुनावों से पहले मोदी के साथ अपनी मित्रता के बैनर लगवाते हैं।
कोरोना जैसी महामारी जिसने यूरोप के विकसित देशों से लेकर अमेरिका तक को हिला दिया वहाँ भारत के गांव गांव तक कोरोना से बचने के लिए मास्क का उपयोग और हाथ धोने को लेकर आमजन की जागरूकता देखते ही बनती है। कोरोना से भारत जैसा गरीब देश इस प्रकार से लड़ लेगा इसकी विश्व में किसी ने अपेक्षा नहीं की थी। ऐसा लगता है कि इतनी सहजता और सरलता से असंभव को संभव बनाने में मोदी को जैसे महारथ हासिल है। तभी तो संविधान से धारा 370 का हटना हो या राम मंदिर का ऐतिहासिक फैसला ,सरकार के इन कदमों से नरेंद्र मोदी ने देशवासियों के दिलों में वो जगह बना ली जो कल्पना से परे है। वडनगर के एक साधारण से स्कूल से शिक्षा अर्जित करने वाला विद्यार्थी विदेशों के बड़े बड़े विश्वविद्यालयों से बड़ी बड़ी डिग्री धारी नेताओं के लिए इतनी लंबी लकीर खींच देगा किसने सोचा था। राजनैतिक परिवार में पैदा होने वाले एवं राजनैतिक वातावरण में पलकर बड़े होने वाले ऐसे नेता जो राजनीति में टिके रहने के लिए इसे ही अपनी सबसे बड़ी शक्ति मानते थे उनके लिए नरेंद्र मोदी जैसे व्यक्तित्व का प्रधानमंत्री बनना एक सबक है।
खुद मोदी के शब्दों में, मैं मुख्यमंत्री बनने से पहले मुख्यमंत्री के दफ्तर नहीं गया। मैं सांसद बनने से पहले संसद भवन नहीं गया। और प्रधानमंत्री बनने से पहले प्रधानमंत्री कार्यालय नहीं गया।
जब ऐसा नेता मुख्यमंत्री बनता है और तमाम राजनैतिक विरोध के बावजूद भारी जनसमर्थन से लगातार तीन चुनाव जीतता है। यह नेता जब बना सके।”चौकीदार चोर है के नारों के बावजूद पहली बार से भी अधिक बहुमत से प्रधानमंत्री बनता है तो यह यात्रा उसकी सफलता से अधिक उसके संघर्ष को बयान करती है। वो संघर्ष जो उनके व्यक्तित्व को बयान करता है। वो व्यक्तित्व जो इन शब्दों से परिभाषित होता है कि “एक सफल व्यक्ति वह है जो औरों द्वारा अपने ऊपर फेंके गए ईंटों से एक मजबूत नींव
Farmers in Haryana and Punjab have been protesting amid Covid-19 against the agriculture ordinance that has been passes by central goverment during lockdown with vision of “One Nation, One Market”.
This protest had taken the very whole different turn after Union Minister Harsimrat Kaur Badal submits resignation from Modi goverment over this ordinance, as for the information Akhali Dal was the one of the oldest political party that had collation with NDA.
Goverment passed three ordinance post lockdown, under which prominent article was The Farmers‘ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Ordinance, 2020 approved by APMC. Under this article farmer can sell their goods directly to the open market, that basically covers whole nation, without being dependable on MANDI SYSYEM and so called as TRADERS.
Rights and living standard of farmers have always been the topic of discussion, always we all used to say that all these mediators should be removed so that farmer can get the rate that they deserve. Main idea of this act is to bring transparency And competition in price so that farmers can be benefited and to uplifit their standards of living. Under this program farmers have to get register with e-NAM license for free of cost, and then they are ready to sell of their goods anywhere in country without any additional tax, and mandatorily payment to be completed within 3 days of trading.
Choas right now is all about that MINIMUM SELLING PRICE (MSP) will fall out and trader will acquire the market, this act also had grievance effect on MANDI WORKERS (DALAL), Haryana leader of opposition Bhupendra Singh Hooda said if government ensure the goods price must be above MSP then they will withdraw protest from their own very side.
If you take my opinion, this act is like a bitter medicine that obviously doesn’t taste good but in long term surely to benefit the backbone of the nation “FARMERS”.
With the end of World War one the entire Europe learnt that Nationalism is bad when you live in a free world. Multiculturalism and Tolerance has to be the basic principles of any free nation. People in Europe and world understood this and implemented, in most of the newly formed democratic countries.
What happened after seventy years, which is making Europe moving for right wing and Nationalism again? Why is a country like Sweden today feeling the heat? What changed in past decade that made liberal society to change? Let’s take a look at following facts about Sweden.
Since independence Sweden was a liberal country, with strong Christian beliefs. They were nice people with high per capita income and a small population to feed. Crime rate in Sweden was very low compared to Europe. People were happy by a high index in world ranking. It was surely a heaven for every human being. With the rising crises in Middle East and Africa the refugees moved towards Europe and with the liberal values Europe accepted. Sweden accepted most from Somalia, Afghanistan and other war zones. It was on humanitarian grounds. Swedish government arranged shelter and food for these people in an extreme cold country. They slowly made refugees to integrate in small and big cities with the local population.
Story till now was nice, Swedes were happy with new neighbors. Trying hard to make them comfortable and integrate with the Swedish culture. Government of Sweden spent more money on refugee management than defense. Government provided financial benefits to youth as grown as in mid-thirties. Education for children provided at low cost, healthcare was promptly given.
It took no more time to change. Refugees started making ghettos and refused to accept the Swedish culture. They refused to learn the language or adjust by any means. Streets soon became dangerous to even walk in evening. Sexual crime rates spiked by about eight percent. So much was the situation that a police officer in charge of a city had to warn women avoid going out late night. Security forces detected few areas which are difficulty in operations, most of them were the settlements of refugees. Pictures of Jesus Christ had to be covered, not to offend the religious sentiments of new neighbors. This came on peoples freedom of speech now and the NO GO Zones formed inside cities. Drug cases increased, violence spiked and soon people started joining ISIS from Sweden.
For the first time after independence Swedes voted for right wing, securing few seats in parliament. Swedes divided on the basis of immigration policies in Racists and Non racist. Nationalists and Anti nationals. Liberal government started feeling the heat. 2013 riots and 2020 riots added fuel to the fire. This will go on and the nationalist movement will strengthen further.
We talked about the facts on ground, lets understand, what made Swedes change their mind to right wing. However liberal a society may be, when something threatens its culture, they will stand up. Multicultural Sweden felt the heat of rising Islam. Refugees refused to leave the baggage of culture behind, not doing anything to integrate. Ghettos became so dangerous that News channels from Australia and Russia were attacked while reporting. Stones pelted on them and told them to go back and not capture anything on camera. Local people started living in one area and refugees captured another, trying not to contact each other. Military had to be called in few areas for law and order. Free cities of Sweden turned into red areas.
RT of Russia made a documentary on this issue which is worth watching. Same problems started in other European countries in past few years. Germany and France are slowly again moving right after the horrific experience from World war. India is no different, after the 1971 Bangladesh war, India felt the immigration wave and followed by the Assam agitation and Bengal’s capture. Came the rise of Right in India too.
How can this problem be solved is difficult and apolitical. You may offend people if expressed the real reason behind the problems. You may hurt religious sentiments while finding core problems. Speaking might award you with Islamophobe title. What Sweden and Europe did was in good faith but they refused the century old history for a modern world. They forgot that Europe changed, India changed but few countries and few peoples did not. Their beliefs and their practices match today as much as they did hundreds of years ago. We fall for their victim cards and crocodile tears but one chance and these refugees burn your country within seconds. Measures are radical and whether we will accept it is a deep debate.
Disclaimer:I have a limited understanding of American politics, society, economy, international relations, institutions, demography, etc. I am still very confused about the whole election process in the US and have little idea of how the elections work there. It’s really complicated. However, over the past few years, I have paid attention to American politics especially in relation to India. Even with such limited understanding, I am convinced that Donald Trump, though far from an ideal president is still a much better choice than Joe Biden. It’s up to Americans to decide and vote,but with such one-sided narrative in media in favour of Biden, I think its important to express views in favour of Trump (over Biden) even though it is coming from an Indian citizen. My views will probably be the line of thinking of many Indian Americans and they will vote Republican because of these reasons without admitting it in the public (the silent Trump voters). If liberals find my views offensive, they have the option of dismissing it as an opinion of another Russian bot.
Donald Trump is a troll, a racist, a white supremacist, a bald orange man, misogynist, sexist, homophobe, Islamophobe, xenophobe, bigot and what not. These are some of the adjectives with which Donald Trump is usually exposed to an unknown outsider who has no idea about American politics. This was before he was elected in 2016. After his election, things have gotten worse. The media, celebrities, Hollywood, late-night show hosts and even some scientists, academicians have gone berserk regarding Donald Trump. This phenomenon is rightly labelled by Conservatives as Trump derangement syndrome. This kind of anti-Trump narrative is many times beyond logic, evidence, facts and are mainly reactions to Trump’s statements and tweets. Well, Trump specifically frames his words and tweets for such reactions and these people fall for it, every single time.
Anyway, I am dividing my post into various sections where section-wise, I will deal with the negative aspects, positive aspects of President Trump and in the end, I will discuss why Democrats especially the combination of Biden-Kamala Harris is just the kind of duo India would not like to have in the White House. There are a few positive aspects of Biden as well which I will mention in the end.
Donald Trump: the negatives
Narcissism & overconfidence: I made up my mind on this after this interview by John Bolton to WION: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=696DSoojiGQ I have watched Trump’s interviews, debates, his speeches. This becomes quite clear that he is a narcissist and immensely over-confident. As seen in his response to Wuhan virus pandemic. He is not the leader you would want in times of challenge as he might not listen to the advice of experts because of his arrogance and over-confidence.
Indifference to climate change: While my complaint is not regarding the fact that he withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement as that agreement might be disproportionately putting the cost on advanced economies and giving an easy pass to China. My complaint is his indifference regarding the steps that should be taken to tackle climate change. I known there are sections of his supporters who deny the very existence of global warming and climate change, but that should not come in the way to take steps to promote green technologies, economy, research. At the same time, I would like to mention that the green deal the Democrats talk about especially people like AOC is absolute garbage and would destroy economies and livelihood instead of curbing anthropogenic factors regarding climate change. Solving the problems caused by climate change actually presents an opportunity for new research, new forms of responsible economic, spiritual-yogic societies and above all, the well-being of billions of people and animals around the world of the present and the future. This opportunity should not be at the mercy off or being hijacked by political ideologues.
Money oriented governance and actions: Donald Trump has been a successful businessman. He sees everything as some sort of a business deal. Be its trade deal with India, China or the new form of NAFTA that his government has come with. While this will bring certain benefits to the US, it is problematic in many aspects. For example, if China agrees to accept a favourable trade deal likeable to Donald Trump, he may give concessions to China and even turn blinds eye on its strategic allies like Taiwan, Japan. All though he is going hard on China, we have to see if he does the same when the US-China trade war is over.
Protectionist Visa policies: The largest beneficiaries of America’s H1B visas are Indians. With Trump’s emphasis on America first, he has restricted visas and made it increasingly difficult for Indians to obtain work permits. While I agree with the need of protecting borders and employing local workforce but the legal immigrants, especially the competent diaspora of Indian Americans and Indian citizens seeking to work in the US benefits the US in forms of taxes, new products, entrepreneurship, new companies, and most importantly world-class human resource for research and development.
Lack of intellectual depth: India is at least a 10000 years old living, continuing civilization. Compared to a leader like Narendra Modi who understands India’s civilizational ethos and treat his prime ministership as a service for the nation, Donald Trump hardly has a deep understanding of American culture, history, society. Forget about his understanding of India, world history and nuances of geopolitics and strategic affairs. Leave Trump, even the prominent right-wing American intellectuals like Ben Shapiro rely on the works of a Marxist so-called “historian” Ramchandra Guha to understand India. That’s a failure on the part of both Indians as well as Americans. Indians, especially India’s MEA, MHRD, Ministry of Culture has failed to get the understanding of the true idea of India through to the American think tanks and American society in general. Americans in their ignorance, laziness and indifference have retorted to the usual mediocre Marxist, colonial sources and narratives regarding India. This lack of intellectual depth and overconfidence is the reason Trump would even ask for mediating for Kashmir.
Positive aspects of President Trump
Most pro-India US president in decades: The US governments over the years have not been pro-India in the region of the Indian subcontinent. Since, the decades of 60s, 70s, the US has always supported Pakistan over India for multiple complex reasons which I will not go into. India, on the other hand, was with the Soviets during the cold war era. For all their faults in form of interventions in Indian politics, media, culture and society, the Soviets did help India over the years during the wars of 65 and especially 1971. In 1971, most famously the US and UK had sent their aircraft carriers to contain and attack India in order to save Pakistan. Soviet sent their aircraft carriers, ships to bloc the US, UK intervention and Bangladesh was liberated. Coming to 2020. Indian soldiers taught the PLA a lesson for their mischief in the Galwan valley. India lost 20 soldiers while the Chinese side suffered minimum 45, some sources even stating numbers as high as 70-100 casualties. With such humiliation and high tensions (which is still going on), the US sent their two aircraft carrier strike groups in the South China Sea in the Indo-Pacific region. This is a very big move on the part of the US and no president in the past has shown such tangible support to India in strategic and military affairs. The US is also now cooperating with military and communication technologies and is now willing to sell their best military equipment to India (though there is still rooms for improvement). India-US has already signed key agreements such as COMCASA. So, in military, strategic, geopolitical affairs the India-US partnership has progressed far ahead compared to the previous governments of both nations. However, there is still scope for improvements particularly relating to US withdrawal from Afghanistan and their half-hearted actions on Pakistan. The US is putting so much pressure on Iran. But the kind of things Pakistan has done, the whole sanctions, restrictions and pressures should have been applied to Pakistan. Also, Pakistan is still not blacklisted in the FATF which is a mystery to me. If there is a country that deserves to be in the top spot of the FATF blacklist, it has to be Pakistan. The US still has strategic interests with Pakistan and their lack of intellectual depth to understand and study the people and culture of the Indian subcontinent and the lazy, pacifist attitude of Indian officials has prevented the US and India from going extra hard on a terrorist state like Pakistan. India last year made article 370 practically ineffective and also enacted a citizenship bill to grant citizenship to religiously persecuted minorities of neighbouring Islamic countries. Both these steps were viciously targeted by Marxist-Islamist nexus across the globe. From the leftist media to the terrorist organizations to the ISI to the Pakistani PM. These coordinated well-planned gangster politics to harass common Indians on the street reached its peak and culmination in the well-planned Delhi riots by the Islamic fundamentalists such as Tahir Hussian. Amongst all this anti-CAA drama, a lot of “woke” politicians around the world taking a cue from leftist media started badmouthing India, the Indian government and worst of all, even undermining and sidelining the main narrative of the atrocities faced by Hindus in these Islamic nations. Trump and the US government never fell for the woke, leftist trap which I am a sure a Democrat president would have fallen into. The same thing happened with the Labour party in the UK and they paid for it with the British Indians overwhelmingly voting for the Conservatives. The USA has finally started recognizing India as a potential ally in the Indo-Pacific region (again a term recently popularized by the Americans). Both these countries share principles of democracy and rule-based order. Both face common challenges in the form of China. And India is the only country in the world which can ultimately compete with China on multiple fronts: human resource and manpower, manufacturing, army, economy. Although India is still far behind on many aspects, it can still catch-up and play to its strengths. With support from nations like Australia, Japan and the US, India can seriously challenge Chinese expansionism in the region and if the time may come as it to be, can even slap hard the Chinese like it did on the Galwan valley.
Waking up to the Chinese threat: Even before the Wuhan virus pandemic, the USA under Donald Trump has been on a trade war with China. Companies like Huawei are banned. And the US government is finally waking up to the fact that China has been stealing IPs, technologies, jobs, research and all kinds of things from the west. China is an economic giant majorly because of the US. Be it laptops, mobiles, automobile parts, toys or medicines. The Chinese through their trade-distorting practices have monopolised vast sections of trade in the west and killed many other manufacturing clusters around the world. If this wasn’t enough, the Chinese have copied and reverse-engineered critical defence technologies too. All though they are still far behind the western technologies, it now has a vast industrial complex and has brought up huge numbers, even exporting arms and ammunition albeit of sub-par standards around the world. The Chinese debt trap policy is something the US has been warning about to its allies and other nations for a while now. This was all missing from the previous presidents of the US. Many US officials, politicians, media persons, NBA stars are praising CCP and China. The reason being, CCP has deeply infiltrated the USA and its culture through its investments, ideologues and other means which KGB and Soviets used to employ during the Cold War era. The communists are the masters of propaganda and there are many communist sympathizers in various streams of US culture, politics, universities, Hollywood, media. With such a challenging task to counter China, the US needs a president who can call Wuhan virus the Chinese virus. And it’s not racism (Japanese elephantiasis, MERS) but rightly putting the primary blame on China and CCP. As mentioned in the previous point, the US shifting its attention from Europe and Middle-East to China (and consequently Pakistan) is important for the world peace as the Chinese are looking for world domination in a new form of expansionism, bullying, debt-trap and even colonialism. Example: Baluchistan in Pakistan’s occupation has been handed over to the Chinese under CPEC and it is estimated that the Chinese will be the majority population in Baluchistan by 2050. This means India will face China from the north-east as well as north-west, western regions. Pakistan is so deep in Chinese trap now that its almost impossible for them to act independently. Here, the role of the US becomes important if it really wants to maintain its status of leader of the democratic world. It has back its credentials on the ground and supports democratic ASEAN nations, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Australia and India. And I have more confidence in President Trump on his anti-China stance compared any previous US presidents who were ignorant and oblivious to the Chinese threat.
No major wars: This is an achievement in itself for a US president. The warmongers and military-industrial complex in the US tried its very best to force the US to attack Iran. But to his great credit, President Trump held back. Compared that to Bush or Obama. Bush’s invasion of Iraq was a disaster and the US now is giving up Afghanistan also. Obama’s regime was even worse. He bombed and killed so many people and practically ruined the Syria-Iraq region. How the hell did Obama get Nobel peace prize is still a mystery. Though considering that even frauds like Mother Teresa have won it, the mystery remains no more.
Politically incorrect: Trump speaks a lot of nonsense, self-praising garbage. But many times, he speaks “politically incorrect” but truthful words like his bashing of the fake news CNN and leftist media nexus in the US. Or him clearly stating the worlds “Radical Islamic Terrorism”. His recent labelling of Wuhan coronavirus as Chinese virus (though I would have preferred CCP virus) is equally truthful and reflects sentiments of millions around the globe. I wish more leaders give up this nonsense of political correctness and speak truth more often. I don’t mean to say Trump is truthful all the time. He is a habitual liar (or delusional). But he also speaks uncomfortable truths emphatically that no other leader would dare to.
Trump triggers Libtards: I am specifically using the word Libtard because I respect genuinely liberal individuals and institutions such as Tulsi Gabbard, Joe Rogan, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Fry, Sam Harris, Anand Ranganathan, Amish Tripathi, Liberal Hindu (Youtube Channel), Arif Aajakia, Tarek Fateh, Rajiv Malhotra, Mohan Bhagwat, Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh (RSS). Now compare this to USCIRF, UNESCO, UNHRC or the people such as Ilhan Omar, AOC, John Oliver, Hollywood stars and their counterparts in India such as Javed Akhtar, Sonam Kapoor, Anurag Kashyap, Amir Khan, NDTV, Wire or the so-called useless liberal comedians. I prefer to call them Libtards because they bring bad names to true liberals. Anyways, Trump is a phenomenon which has triggered libtards the most in the west. Modi and his actions also trigger libtards daily. But in the case of Modi, he never seeks to trigger libtards on purpose. Libtards get triggered because they are, well they are libtards. Trump on the other hand intentionally triggers the whole libtard lobby and mafia. This libtard mafia works around the world in sync. Wire in India will quote Washington Post from the US, John Oliver will use clips from NDTV, Al Jazeera to bad mouth India, leftists from JNU will copy the style of Antifa. These people have become increasingly annoying and even dangerous as evident in Shaheen Bagh and anti-CAA Delhi riots or the recent riots in the US by hijacking the Black Lives Matter protests (I will explain racism in some another post). To expose these libtards, you can logically counter them or you can just trigger them. When triggered, these libtards do all kinds of absurd, illogical things which naturally exposes them to an average person. That’s why Oscar ratings are plummeting over the years, the legitimacy of the mainstream leftist media is an all-time low. And Donald Trump has played a part in this. All though to be fair, libtards have played a much bigger role themselves.
Democrats: America’s INC (Indian National Congress)
Indian National Congress is in a mess. They have lost the plot. They have no idea what India that is Bharat, really is. They may win a few state elections based on the merits of local leadership but they cannot win elections at the centre, at least not till they get their acts together and stop being so woke, far left bordering on the lines of anti-India, anti-Hindu narratives.
The same is true for the Democrats in the US. While the Democrats aren’t tied to a single-family like INC, they are tied to a single, narrow-minded narrative and power circle. That’s why good candidates like Tulsi Gabbard, Andrew Yang were systematically ignored. Tulsi wasn’t even invited to the recent DNC despite gathering so many delegates, chiefly because she single-handedly ended the run of Kamala Harris. And then there is Kamala Harris. Suddenly she has rediscovered her Indian roots. There has been this trend in the US that the anti-India, anti-Hindu kind of Indian Americans who probably dislike Indian culture more than the Pakistanis, people like Kamala Harris, Pramila Jaypal, Ro Khanna are getting into powerful positions in the Democratic party. Probably because being anti-India especially in the Modi era helps them appease the leftists, Islamists, socialists, communists in the party. There are Indian Americans in Republican party also who are disjointed from Indian culture and values but at least they aren’t so openly anti-India. I urge Indians to not fall into this trap. Indian Americans probably already know all this. I would rather put my hopes on people like Nikki Halley or even better Tulsi Gabbard to look for India’s narrative in the US instead of the losers with deep inferiority complex like the ones I mentioned before. By the way, some idiots in the US were targeting Tulsi in the past for her associations with the BJP and RSS. These idiots don’t know that BJP is by far the largest political party in the world. BJP got more votes in the last election than the entire population of the United States of America. These idiots should come out of their little ignorant bubble and moral high-grounds. There are problems with the BJP but it commands and deserves respect for it is the ruling party in the centre and numerous Indian states. Similarly, Punjab Congress commands respect for the support it has of the people of Punjab.
Moving on, there is this squad in the Democratic party. These people are similar to Rahul Gandhi but much worse. The squad consisting of Ilhan Omar, AOC, Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib are incredibly annoying, radical, woke. They off-put even the most hardcore Democrat supporters. Donald Trump’s greatest ace is these people and their narratives which has essentially hijacked a significant part of the narrative of the Democratic party, at least in the elections. Bernie Sanders was heavily under their influence and even Joe Biden has not shown any signs to dispel these narratives which at times are justifying jihadi terrorism, antisemitism, anti-Hindu bigotry and even genocides. AOC’s green plan was nothing short of the destruction of the economy, a typical communist plan to grab power, destroy industries, livelihood in the grab of human rights, environmental protection and other rosy ideas that communists sell (Bernie saying Cuba has excellent education policies).
Finally coming to the nominee himself, Joe Biden. Well, I have watched his debates and he was just awful. I mean he is very uninteresting, non-threatening and seems like an agreeable kind of person. This trait of agreeableness may attract some votes. But this agreeableness means he will be arm-twisted by far-left, socialists in his party. He may even be influenced by radical Islamists like Ilhan Omar. If he becomes president, the military-industrial complex might force the US into another war or the pro-China politicians and think tanks may force him to stop acting against China. These are all some undesirable course of events. So, while on the surface, Joe Biden seems to be the nicer of the two candidates, he might be too weak for the job. And the questions regarding his mental health and well-being is serious. Plus his awful debate skills means he will be trashed hard by Donald Trump. All though it may backfire on Trump as it is very difficult to beat down a non-threatening, non-triggering personality like Biden. So, the greatest plus point that the Biden brings is that he is not Donald Trump. Seriously, that’s it. Even if you look at the speeches of Obamas and others who were endorsing him, they were all non-sensing around the anti-Trump rhetoric and vague ideas, adjectives like empathy, racism, white supremacy, bigotry, misogyny. What are his plans for the presidency? No idea. But let’s wait for his debates with Trump. That might bring out something concrete (all though I have serious doubts against it).
Conclusion There are around 4 million Indian Americans in the US which is roughly 1.2% of the US population. Though small in numbers, Indian Americans are at the top of income groups, job ladders and other socio-economic indicators. However, Indian Americans have for multiple reasons failed to grab the political power and the narrative. They still try hard and struggle to fit into the political sphere and dialogues. To make matters worse, many of them have inferiority complexes for their own identity and these people seek recognition from the white English speaking western politicians, groups, society, media. The same problem exists with many Indians around the globe, the root of which is the continuation of the colonial education system in India which has been hijacked by the Marxists after independence. Indians and Indian Americans need to realise the truth of these inferiority complex ridden Indian politicians like Kamala Harris who have ditched their Indian identities long back. People like these are more damaging to Indian narratives than even the Pakistanis.
Coming to the question of Trump. He probably is not a nice person. He lacks decent moral values. He has botched response to Wuhan virus pandemic. But his policies and actions overall are much better than Obama, Bush especially concerning India. I also think that Modi has got the hold of Trump’s personality and both of them seems like the two best friends. Modi knows how Trump thinks, operates and this can be utilised and should be utilised by Modi government in Trump’s second term.
Coming to Biden. His party has gone nuts, too far off the centre towards left. They have sidelined likeable leaders like Tulsi, Yang. And kind off lost the plot. Their only best chance is because of the Wuhan virus pandemic and deep unrest in society. Without this pandemic, Trump would have smashed Biden. But now, there is a chance. Also, China prefers Biden to be the president. So, the choice becomes obvious. But even if Biden wins, my hope is the deep state of the US have realised the importance of India and threat of China and will force the next president to go on the lines of pro-India, anti-China policies.
As far as surveys saying Biden is in lead is concerned. I don’t give much importance to such surveys. They failed miserably last elections also. The Trump supporters are silent voters as they face a lot of flake for their support to Trump. Many people are attacked just for wearing a MAGA hat. So, don’t be surprised if the polls and predictions fail again.
The famous American Historian Will Durant said: “The Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex of order and freedom, culture and peace, can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.”
Post-independence, popular discourse among a section of Indian historians and ‘liberals’ has sought to prove that Mughals were not invaders but Indians. The most common argument put forward by them is that they stayed in India, adopted Indian culture, and also married Indian women. Based on this logic the concept of invader and invaded is largely falsified because in most cases invaders stay for personal benefits, and this is especially true in the case of India because of its vast wealth and resources, unless the invaded revolt and succeed. So the first part of the argument is preposterous and needs no further investigation. But the second part of the argument that they adopted Indian culture, married Indian women, and so on, needs to be subjected to a critical analysis. In this article we try to understand whether a section of historians and liberals have failed to live up to their principles by propagating the narrative that Mughals were Indians either by not conducting a sufficient critical analysis as deserved or by ignoring facts.
For centuries India has been a land of sages and higher learning. Before the Islamic conquest of India, India already had seats of higher learning such as Nalanda and Taxila to which scholars from all the over the world travelled in order to study. History is witness to the fact that everyone lived in peaceful coexistence in India. If Mughals championed the Indian culture and ethos why is there evidence that is contrary to this widely propagated belief by a section of India’s historians and liberals? The bedrock of the Indian ethos is Sarvdharm Sambhao, which can be broadly translated as respecting people from all backgrounds. Sanatanis have displayed this behaviour by providing refuge to Parsis, Jews, the family of the Prophet Muhammad, and several others who were persecuted largely due to their religious and cultural beliefs. In fact, the first mosque ever built is in India. We can discount the early Mughal period in this analysis because they were struggling to set foot in India. Instead, let’s examine whether, even at the peak of their power, they followed practices that were against the Indian ethos and culture.
Assimilation with the Indian Ethos & Culture – Slavery and the Mughals
The Slave Trade & the Slavery Laws of the Mughals
Megasthenes, the Greek Ambassador to Ancient India said, and I quote: “All Indians are free, and not one of them is a slave…Indians do not even use aliens as slaves, and much less their own countrymen.” Slavery is the worst form of social evil and has scarred the generations afflicted by it. Dr BR Ambedkar, one of the leading Indian thinkers on social reform and justice, writes on slavery, especially female slavery in Islam, and its practice in Mohammedan homes. In his book Thoughts on Pakistan, Dr Ambedkar quotes from Stobart’s book Islam and its Founder, “In another way also a Mohammedan may really have more than four wives, and yet keep within the law. This is by means of living with concubines, which the Koran expressly permits…… At the present day, as in days of past, in multitudes of Mohammedan homes, slaves are found.” Dr Ambedkar further quotes from Muir’s book, Life of Mahomet: “…so long as this unlimited permission of living with their female slaves continues, it cannot be expected that there will be any hearty attempt to put a stop to slavery in Mohammedan countries.” Dr Ambedkar also quotes 70th sura that reveals living with slaves is not a sin. Dr Ambedkar concludes with the following remarks: “Everybody infers that Islam must be free from slavery and caste. Regarding slavery nothing needs to be said. It stands abolished now by law. But while it existed, much of its support was derived from Islam and Islamic countries.” Given this permission of slavery in the religious text, let’s see if there is evidence that slavery and the slave trade existed in the Mughal era by looking at the following facts that can be found in the historical record:
Mughal general, Firuz Jang enslaved 200,000 Hindus.
Akbar’s general, Abdulla Khan Uzbeg enslaved 50,000 men and women.
Jahangir sent 200,000 Indians as slaves to Iran in 1619–20 alone.
Shah Jahan sent 100 Hindu slaves as a gift to the Khan of Bukhara.
Mughal emperor, Aurangzeb clearly laid down rules for slavery in Fatawa-e-Alamgiri, which served as the law and principal guiding document of the Mughal Empire during his reign. It contains laws to encourage slavery, which in brief are as follows: a) The right of Muslims to purchase and own slaves; b)the Muslim man’s right to have sex with a slave girl he owns or is owned by another Muslim (with the master’s consent); c) no inheritance rights for slaves; d)the testimony of all slaves was inadmissible in a court of law; e)slaves require the permission of the master before they can marry; and f)an unmarried Muslim may marry a slave he owns but a Muslim married to a Muslim woman may not marry a slave. In addition, the conditions under which slaves may be emancipated partially or fully are also codified.
So, throughout the Mughal period not only was slavery practised by Mughals within India, but Indians were also sent as slaves to the Caliph in Arabia. While a section of Indian historians has glorified the Mughal Empire and its emperors for their art and architecture –an issue which also requires greater critical analysis and is addressed later in this article – the highly controversial and condemnable aspects of their rule such as slavery have not been dealt with at all or, if dealt with, have not been given the due importance they deserve. Given that slavery was practised throughout the Mughal period and detailed laws were even established in accordance with their religious text to regulate aspects of this inhumane practice, it did not remotely fit the culture and ethos of India. Research should have been conducted on the effect of slavery on the Indian populace, the various aspects slavery, and how it came to be abolished. But slavery has been brushed under the carpet in favour of the glorification of Mughals. If Mughals are Indian, then practising slavery, sending your own countrymen as slaves to Arabia and also formulating rules for slavery are not only outrightly non-Indian, it is in fact inhuman. This alone should be sufficient to declare them invaders, but we must take this analysis further.
The Harems & Multiple Wives of the Mughals – Symbol of Female Slavery
We have already discussed earlier, how Dr BR Ambedkar and other academicians considered female slavery via harem and concubines as the worst form of female exploitation practised in Islamic countries. Let us now analyse the extent of female slavery during the Mughal period.
Bano, in his paper for the Indian History Congress in 1999, writes, and I quote: “It was, however, the size of the Mughal harem, its elaborateness in pomp and style and the mode of its management that attracted the attention, and to some extent the imagination, of especially the European observers who have left graphic descriptions. By Akbar’s time the harem became real colossal in size compared to the earlier days of the dynasty.” According to Abul Fazl (who was the grand vizier of the Mughal emperor, Akbar, and author of the Akbarnama, the official history of Akbar’s reign in three volumes), there were 5,000 women in Akbar’s harem. Akbar had 300 wives. The rest were dancing girls, concubines and sex slaves. His son, Jahangir had 300 wives and around 1,000 women resided in his harem.
Meena Bazaar was an annual fair started by Akbar. The fair drew 30,000 women every year. The fair was observed inside the fortress which was closed to the outside world. The Mughal emperor was the only man inside the fortress with 30,000 women. “Jahangir held Meena Bazar to catch the sight of pretty ladies of the town”, so said Thomas Coryat, an English writer and traveller during the Mughal period. This fact has also been stated by a famous Italian writer and traveller, Niccolao Manucci, who visited India during the Mughal period. He describes how the objective of the Meena Bazaar was the recruitment of women as wives and concubines into the Mughal emperor’s harem.
This painting depicts Shah Jahan with concubines in his harem. It was commissioned after the death of his beloved wife Mumtaz Mahal.
Throughout the Mughal period, the emperors had huge harems of women. Therefore, the liberal argument that they married Indian women hence they are Indian is both simplistic and shallow because it does not take into account the horrible aspect of this arrangement, namely female slavery, and also the sheer number of marriages that each Mughal emperor had clearly indicates that these were mostly military alliances to keep their empire secure, which is a common strategy adopted by invaders. The status of women in the Indian culture is supreme and we pray to several aspects of woman. The idea of treating them simply as slaves for pleasure was taken to its highest limits by the Mughals. Liberals champion the cause of feminism and women’s empowerment and their reasons for ignoring this horrible practice of female slavery can best be answered by them. But surely it can be said that this was inhuman and in every aspect it did not and does not reflect the Indian culture and ethos.
The Destruction of Cities, Depopulation, and the Sending of Money to the Caliph by Mughals
We find from the accounts of travellers during the Mughal period that contrary to the popular belief that the Mughals developed cities, they in fact depopulated them and created army cantonments. This half-baked truth that the Mughals were builders of cities has been part of the Indian discourse and needs greater attention. Let’s look first at the journal of DR Thomas Roe who visited India as late as during the rule of Jahangir, by which time the Mughals had ample opportunity to develop cities as well as system for public welfare. DR Thomas Roe says that present Mughal Emperor Jahangir has ruined Indian cities, depopulated them and also issued orders not to allow the repair of the destruction done. DR Thomas Roe further states, “Jahangir seeks to destroy everything that hasn’t already been destroyed by his ancestors.” This statement by DR Thomas Roe is worth analysing because DR Thomas Roe is implying that the destruction of Indian cities had been going on under the ancestors of Jahangir, and that Jahangir further added to this destruction. Commenting on the living conditions of ordinary Indians, DR Thomas Roe states that Indians live in mud houses which are not fit for living while Jahangir lives in a lavish stone house. DR Thomas Roe also states that there is no law of inheritance, Jahangir owns all property and wealth and only leaves what he wishes for widows and daughters. Jahangir robs all. DR Thomas Roe is stating this about the same Jahangir who has been glorified by the liberals and in Indian history textbooks as a champion of justice.
Rank
City
Population in Year 1500
#1
Beijing
672,000
#2
Vijayanagar
500,000
#3
Cairo
400,000
#4
Hangzhou
250,000
#5
Tabriz
250,000
#6
Gauda
200,000
#7
Istanbul
200,000
#8
Paris
185,000
#9
Guangzhou
150,000
#10
Nanjing
147,000
Rank
City
Population in Year 1895
#1
London
5,974,000
#2
New York
3,712,000
#3
Paris
3,086,000
#4
Chicago
1,420,000
#5
Tokyo
1,335,000
#6
St. Petersburg
1,286,000
#7
Manchester
1,244,000
#8
Birmingham
1,074,000
#9
Beijing
1,055,000
#10
Moscow
1,002,000
If you look at table for the year 1500, two Indian cities Vijaynagar features at number 2 and Gauda at number 6 on the list most populous cities before Babur attacked India. By the end Aurangzeb’s rule (ended in 1707), not even one Indian city features in the top 10.
The Number of Indian Cities Named after Mughals
We are also discounting the fact that most Indian cities of importance had their Indic names changed to Islamic ones to change the identification of India, again going against the culture of India which respects diversity. While Mughal emperors were destroying and renaming of Indian cities, they were also sending money out of India especially to the Caliph to solidify their position in the Islamic world power hierarchy.
Emperor Babur writes in his autobiography Baburnama: “Suitable money gifts were bestowed from the treasury on the whole army, to every tribe there was, Afghan, Hazara, Arab, Balluch etc. to each according to its position. Every trader and student, indeed every man who had come with the army, took ample portion and share of bounteous gift and largess”. In 1576, a Mughal Haj caravan left Agra with its party of sponsored pilgrims and an enormous donation of Rs 600,000. In 1577, another Haj caravan left with a double bounty of Rs 500,000 and Rs 100,000 for the Sharif of Mecca, who was a descendant of Prophet Mohammad’s grandson Hasan ibn Ali. In just one instance in 1659, Aurangzeb exported to Mecca Rs 660,000 in an era when one rupee was worth 280 kilograms of rice. This same Aurangzeb hanged to trees all Indian peasants who had defaulted on their taxes.
The Unspeakable Atrocities Perpetrated by Mughals
From the slaughtering of the Sikh gurus to the trampling of Indian fighters under an elephant, the countless conversions, payments of jazia, hangings of farmers, etc. the Mughal period was full of atrocities and injustice. But we are not discussing these aspects in this article, primarily because we are trying to analyse the liberal argument that Mughals were Indians because they stayed in India and adopted Indian culture.
The Constructing of Islamic Structures by the Destroying of Hindu Monuments by Mughals
Monuments built during the Mughal era are commonly pointed out by liberals as adding richness to the Indian culture. On the surface, this argument seems valid especially when one looks at the Taj Mahal and how liberals have successfully promoted the Taj Mahal as the singular symbol of India. But should destroying Hindu architecture and replacing it with Islamic architecture be categorized as Mughals adding to richness of India? It’s not addition, it is at best replacement. The scars it has left on the Hindu masses can still be seen with multiple court cases going on for decades with Hindus demanding that their holiest of sites, which have Islamic architecture built on them, be returned to them.
The true testament to Mughals being Indians would have been their adding to India’s landscape and not first destroying the beautiful and sacred Hindu structures and replacing them with their own. Not only were Hindus’ holiest places destroyed; to further shame the Hindus, Islamic structures were built on those very spots. For example, Somnath Temple in West India, Kashi Vishwanath and Krishna Janambhoomi in Central India, and Jagannath Puri in the South are some of the holiest temples that were destroyed on the orders of Mughal emperors, and in many of these places the Islamic structures still stand. An estimate says that over 40,000 Hindu monuments were destroyed during the Islamic invasion of India.
It should also be noted here that Hindu temples have always been a centre of cultural activity and so the destruction of these temples should be seen as an attack on Indian cultural activities as well. For example, Bhaskar Mishra, a researcher of the Jagannath culture states that the Jagganath Rath Yatra (a major Hindu festival) did not take place 32 times between 1558 and 1735 due to Mughal invasions. In the early phase of the Mughal Empire we can understand the destruction because of looting, and that destruction is part of the consolidation of power. But the claim of the liberals that the Mughals became Indians falls flat when we see that the destruction of monuments and cities throughout the later Mughal period as well. Even, Taj Mahal was not dedicated to the Indian public in the sense that till the Mughal rule it was a private architecture and only a selected few from the Mughal court were allowed access. If the Taj Mahal was conceived and built as a public architecture it would have been viewed differently. Also when Shah Jahan was spending an enormous amount of the public exchequer’s money, the country was going through its worst-ever famine which took the lives of around seven million people.
Here, it is worth mentioning the current case of the Hagia Sophia in Turkey, which has exposed the hypocrisy of the liberals once again. While they opposed the conversion of the museum to a mosque that was once a church and before that a pagan temple, they support the presence of thousands of mosques that have been made by destroying temples in India. The liberals championing the cause of diversity and justice completely ignore the fact that the Mughals, instead of respecting the diversity of architecture, were destroying it and replacing it with their own. Their dual standards on diversity and justice stand exposed.
Conversion through Sufism during the Mughal Era
In popular culture, especially through Bollywood movies, Sufism has been primarily promoted as a spiritual mystical aspect of Islam. Indeed, many of its songs and poems are spiritual and do connect with the ordinary Indian. But it’s another matter that many of these songs are songs about conversion to Islam. As our primary aim in this article is to discuss the Mughals, let’s now analyse the nature and role of Sufism during the Mughal era.
Khan, in his book Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery, writes that none of the Sufi saints came to India with the idea of ‘peace and love’. Instead, they arrived as a part of an invading army or participated in Jihadi wars against Hindu kings, aimed at capturing their kingdoms and wealth and enslaving their people.
Two of the most respected Sufis in India are Nizamuddin Auliya and Moinuddin Chishti. From Mughal emperor Akbar who came praying for a son to a relentless stream of around 12,000 people who throng every day, the pull of the 12th century Sufi shrine of Khwaja Moinuddin Chisti remains undiminished. Indian historians did a great disservice to the people of India, especially Hindus by hiding the following facts about Chisti. All this while, Hindus have been praying to someone who not only fought against their own ancestors but also destroyed their monuments and converted them.
Moinuddin Chisti fought for Mohammad Ghauri and Nizamuddin Aulia fought for Sultan Alauddin. Moinuddin Chishti came to India with the invading army of Mohammad Ghori and helped them in their jihαd. He and his followers used to slaughter cows and cook kebab inside Hindu temple premises. His followers abducted and presented Hindu queens as gifts to Chishti. According to Sufi literature, it was Moinuddin Chishti himself who captured Prithviraj Chauhan in the battle of Tarain and “handed him over to the army of Islam”. Also, Ajmer Sharif Dargah was built on a Hindu temple. Specifically, the Buland Darwaza has sculpted idols which according to local tradition was earlier the site of a Mahadeva temple.
While the liberals of India propagate the Sufi culture through songs and poems, they completely ignore the context of the arrival of Sufism in India and how it became a channel of conversion of the Indian masses both by use of force and persuasion. We can see that the liberal class has become the torchbearer of celebrating diversity, and yet they overlook the role of Sufism in attacking the very core of diversity by converting people to one singular identity.
Conclusion
An honest and critical analysis of the Mughal period would certainly have delved deeper into the highly inhumane and horrible aspects of their empire and how it left scars of torture and fear among the Indian masses. But the race to prove the secular credentials of the Mughals has meant that these facts have been ignored and worse refuted. This has led to further disharmony between communities because, in the collective subconscious of society, the pains of our ancestors live on. In the field of psychology this is known as transgenerational trauma, a concept well researched and beautifully explained by Dr Rajat Mitra. The one-sided narrative has continued for many years, and despite the school history textbooks that were written during the eras of Nehru and Indira Gandhi paddling the same narrative (and that it has been estimated that the Mughals were around for 6% of the total time in Indian history but occupy 48% of the space in Indian history books), it has been surprising to see through social media that the common Indian has not been willing to buy into this narrative.
Here I leave it to the reader to decide if the Mughals were Indians or invaders who attacked the soul of Bharat and Bharatwasis and stayed because of the vast wealth and the power it gave them especially in the Islamic world. By hiding the wound, the pain won’t be stopped. Instead it will continue to fester and get deeper. So acknowledge the wound exists, and treat it with love and care for a real composite India.
Marriage and Concubinage in the Mughal Imperial Family, Shadab Bano, Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, Vol. 60, Diamond Jubilee (1999), pp. 353-362
The objective of this piece, amongst other things, is to offer my sympathies and suggestions to those who are on the right of centre and who feel stressed because of their social media interactions or who feel hesitant to express their socio-political views due to a variety of reasons. While I may sympathise with those on the left once in a while, I am under no obligation to offer them my suggestions – they don’t even need them. I would also like to clarify at the outset that these suggestions are based on my own experiences and may not necessarily work for everyone. Having been reasonably active with my social media interactions, there are three elements which I think are crucial – content (what to say), language (how to say) and magnitude (how much to say). I will be dealing with each of these one by one before I delve into some other critical aspects.
Content
In this section, we will try to understand what sources of information can be used to gather the ammunition we need for our social media battles. To begin with, it’s a must to have absolute clarity, conviction and dedication in terms of your ideology and about the side of the spectrum you are on. It’s not easy for everyone to have a deep understanding of all political, social, historical, civilisational, cultural, legal and economic issues. However, basic understanding of relevant issues is vital, which makes reading very important. Those who do not have the time and the patience to read books on a variety of subjects can rely on reading articles on different platforms. After being active on social media for a while, you would know which individuals, portals and publications are on your side and which are not. Observe the patterns in the messaging of their posts and exercise your judgment. From time to time, it helps to read what is being said and written by the other side also. This gives you an idea of the potential arguments you might face and will prepare you to counter them better.
Watching television news and debates might give you a momentary adrenalin rush, it does not provide any useful understanding of issues though. While the decibels on some channels may be lower than the others, the accuracy of their content and the quality of their analysis is mostly below average. There are channels that very smartly use words like “allegedly” and “reportedly” to give you the impression that they are being neutral, but they are in effect conveniently diluting the news to further their agenda. You will also notice that when a news item is in line with their agenda, they never use these words. The number of panellists you see on news channels these days acting as experts on anything and everything is simply unbelievable. It is also noticeable that spokespersons of political parties are the most honest and genuine people on news channels; they are just doing their job. The most dangerous ones are those who appear as senior journalists, experts and neutral political commentators. In times wherein one can’t even find neutral cricket commentators, it’s amusing to see neutral commentators on something as partisan as politics.
Human beings, by their very nature, can’t be neutral – all of us have varying degrees of biases on issues that matter to us. It is therefore always safer to trust someone who openly reveals which side they are on rather that those who claim to be neutral. Also, do not trust everything on face value; even challenge your own thoughts from time to time to strengthen your intellect and skills. Instead of wasting your time on news channels, it will be much more useful if you can watch documentaries, interviews and the wide range of other shows we have online. Even though the makers have their own agenda there as well, these are at least better researched and thus give you a deeper perspective. Depending on which side these makers belong to, you can use the information and analysis to your advantage.
All news platforms are in the business of peddling fake news to varying degrees. Some might be more subtle than the others, but there are certainly no exceptions. So before sharing or quoting any news report, please verify its accuracy to ensure that your credibility is maintained. All supposedly prestigious and globally renowned media houses (all left leaning, unsurprisingly) do this and despite having been exposed several times, their followers continue to believe in them and defend them. In a similar way, we must also continue to support media houses which are on our side. Nowhere does this mean that we should share a fake news story that they may have published. Remember, the objective is to maintain your credibility without allowing the other side to use your misplaced guilt against you.
Language
This element is the least complicated and the easiest to understand. First things first, never ever use abusive language in anything that you post – it’s an absolute non-negotiable. When you use abusive language in your argument, no matter how good your content is, the focus shifts entirely to your language. This may result in all your effort towards having effective content going waste and may cause permanent damage to your social media reputation. It is possible to be assertive, scathing and hard-hitting in your arguments while maintaining a civil language. Those who do not use a civil language find it extremely hard to survive, have no respect from anyone and are a liability for their own side. Without being abusive, if you want to be hurtful in your arguments, it’s a personal choice and also depends on your target audience. You may afford to be slightly hurtful on Twitter as the people you interact with are generally not connected to you personally but doing that on Facebook may damage personal relations.
Magnitude
Each social media platform has its own unique flavour and you need to use them strategically to narrate the story that you really want to. These are mediums to tell your audience who you are and how much you want them to know about yourself is completely in your hands. In your initial days of using every platform, it’s advisable to be observant and restrained. Once you understand which is the platform that you find the most liberating, start expressing yourself on it. You can use multiple platforms to present different facets of your personality and outlook or you may use all of them in a unidimensional manner also – the choice is completely yours. It really depends on what your overall objective is. Personally, I have found Twitter to be the most effective medium for open, unrestrained and matured political interactions.
If your online political interactions are mostly with people personally connected to you, you need to be extra cautious – not everyone has the same level of maturity. You may have heard your right wing gurus say that their leftist friends don’t matter to them – it’s totally up to you to decide that for yourself. If your connections are mature enough to have open political debates without taking anything personally, you are lucky. In most cases though, you will see them gradually feeling uncomfortable with you in their circles. This is not because they do not like you, it’s because for the first time their long standing socio-political outlook has been questioned and challenged, and this can make anyone feel uncomfortable. India being an inherently left leaning country with her education system been strategically designed to produce minds that are made to believe that their value systems are the only progressive, modern, intellectual and inclusive value systems, it is difficult for the products of Macaulisation to listen to, let alone respect any differing opinions. When they are faced by those who can effectively articulate their alternative views, the intrinsic intolerance of the left comes out in many surprising ways.
It is my view that people from either side should not feel offended as a result of heated debates on socio-political issues. So never back down, always assert your point clearly, be ready to take the punches and have the strength to give it back.
Let us now briefly go through some other themes which are important to understand in order to make your social media interactions less stressful and frustrating.
Interacting with celebrities
Social media has a knack of giving an illusion that celebrities are easily accessible. The ability to comment on their posts or send them messages and the possibility of getting their response might make us feel that they are also a part of our world. However, this is far from true. And if you disagree with them on a socio-political issue, their response generally would not be pleasant. Even worse, you will be labelled a troll! In many cases, you will end up getting blocked. The everyday realities and challenges of our world are very different from their powerful and privileged world, and hence, one should never expect them to even understand, let alone relate to our experiences and perspective. Having said that, one should never hesitate to call out their hypocrisy. The opportunities of doing so are plenty and trust me, our voice impacts them much more than we can imagine. In real life, we interact with people who disagree with our socio-political views on a daily basis. These are people who are close to us and can be family, friends, co-workers or acquaintances. This, in a way, makes us immune to the wily social media comments to a great extent. Celebrities, however, live in their own bubble and are surrounded mostly by those who echo their views, which makes them more susceptible to disagreements.
Your admiration for celebrities for the work that they have done in their respective field should never come in the way of expressing your disagreements. You can continue to be a fan of their talent, craft or achievements and still criticise them for their socio-political stand. The hypocrisy of these high-achievers is on full display very frequently and opportunities to call those out should never be missed. You can see on a daily basis the way the left viciously attacks celebrities who take a right leaning stand and do not even spare sportspersons, male or female, who have won international laurels for the country. They even go to the extent of discrediting the talent and achievements of right leaning celebrities. For guidance, you may want to read an earlier piece I wrote criticising someone I admire.
The secularism conundrum
We Indians are systematically taught to hate our heritage and glorify the invaders that tried to destroy it. And we are perhaps the only major civilisational country to do that. The easiest and the most common ground to target the Indian right is secularism. However, the entire left and a large section of the right seems to miss the point that it is not actually secularism that we don’t believe in, but the pseudo-secularism that is rampantly practised by most political parties. India is inherently secular by her very nature and no historical and political events have been able to impact that. However, when it comes to the secularism of the 42nd amendment, we have our reservations. India’s political power has mostly been in the hands of those who just couldn’t stop romanticising over everything that came from our west and always looked down upon everything that is Indic. Our educational institutions, media, judiciary and the entire intelligentsia was also developed like that. As a result, the systemic flaws in our socio-political take on secularism continue to plague our nation even today. And when a system is flawed, no matter how long it has been there for, it’s our moral duty to challenge that.
Every year you would see the same set of people giving sermons on Holi, Diwali, Naag Panchmi, Rakshabandhan and possibly every other Hindu festival you can think of, but no one bats an eyelid on Eid al-Adha. The same self-proclaimed gender equality champions love talking about how discriminatory Karwa Chauth is, but you would never hear them utter a word against Triple Talaq. Organisations that are supposed to be neutral also practise this bigotry on a regular basis. And they are always on the lookout to give a caste-based spin to any issue just to suit their narrative. The entire Indian right, hence, should also keep in mind that always feel free to assert your Hindu identity, but never your caste identity. We are not the people who should be known by which caste we belong to. We should be known by our common Indic roots and heritage. And those who have an undying desire to celebrate the victory signs of gruesome invaders and forced morality of predatory imperialistic powers need to be met with equal force.
My final two cents
To those who think that they, in some way, were already aware of what has been said in this piece – excellent; it’s still helpful to have everything in one place. To succinctly summarise the overall messaging of this piece:
Keep enhancing your awareness on the basis of relevant and reliable sources
Be open and uninhibited in your expressions without being abusive
Try to strike the right balance between being assertive and restrained; when in doubt, err on the side of being assertive – there are people who have your back
Never hesitate in exposing hypocrisy and expressing disagreements
Never try being neutral – it doesn’t work
The entire left-libertarian (I don’t call them liberals) ecosystem that controls the world was built on the foundations of mutual admiration clubs and on the principles of you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours. In order to challenge them, you need to build a similar ecosystem of your own. It is imperative, hence, to always take a stand for those who are on your side and stick together no matter what.
Most of us believe that to serve our nation we have to make some certain sacrifices in our lives just like our soldiers, scientists, and journalists make in their lives. They don’t get to live a life around their family and friends, they don’t get to see their children growing up, they can not choose to be happy the way they want in their lives. They put their nation before anything else and fulfill their duty no matter what cost they have to pay to keep our country safe, prosperous, and truly democratic.
We can never thank them enough for providing their service to this very land we proudly call our home. But, what about us, why we find it difficult to make a choice that can create a difference in our society and help our nation grow and prosper?
I get it, we all have our individual lives, we have responsibilities of our children, of our parents and we rarely get any time to be a part of something that brings a difference in the society. Some of us who are privileged or have a lifestyle that allows them to offer their time to an organization or a community that works for the welfare of people, do get the chance to play their part in the building of our nation but the larger number of us seldom get an opportunity to do the same.
Although we held the nation high in our lives, most of us often fail to participate in the interests of our great nation. The main problem we here face is not being able to find a way that doesn’t ask for a sacrifice. You spend your evenings wondering about the solution that allows you to take some action for the betterment of your country without losing your way of life.
This is not something you can feel proud of, right? Is there something you can do about this situation? Or let me ask you in a rather uncomfortable way, are you willing to do something about this situation?
I can hear your heart saying this out loud, “yes, I am ready”.
Here are the 3 ways you can serve your nation and bring a real difference around you:
Donate money to organizations like OpIndia, Upword, Swarajyamag, Nimittekam:- It is not easy to run an organization that works really hard to secure the interests of our nation. Make a contribution every month, no matter what amount you feel right to donate, your support helps these organizations deliver the truth we deserve as a citizen of India.
Help people understand the current challenges India is facing as a nation:- What can be better than offering insights on the current challenges we are facing as a civilization. Join the hundreds of YouTubers, writers, and columnists who serve the people by providing well-researched information on various topics including politics, economy, education etc.
Teach the children of your family the true history of our country:- This is something what I really enjoy when I get a chance to spend some time with the young minds of my family. Our ancestors made sacrifices for centuries to preserve the cultural heritage of our civilization, you can help children learn the real history that instills a sense of pride in their hearts for the country they must fight for when the time calls for it.
If you like this article please share it with your family and friends using your social media platforms.
