Book Review: “The Indian Struggle (1920–1942)” by Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose

Posted on by
Reply
Image

I get a whole new level of excitement reading books written by personalities who aren’t professional writers (including historians and journalists). Especially when it comes to historical figures who have made monumental, history-altering contributions. Their words feel unfiltered; raw thoughts captured at the very moment they were shaping history. Their voices are not curated; they are lived. I’ve had the good fortune and wisdom of reading Ambedkar, Swami Vivekananda, Savarkar, Mazzini, and a few others.

Most recently, I came across Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose’s “The Indian Struggle (1920–1942),” and surely I had to read it. Netaji, one of the most enigmatic and influential leaders of India’s nationalist movement, has in recent years been acknowledged as a key force behind Britain’s decision to leave India. His book only reinforces why. If I had to give my verdict upfront, every Indian, especially those drawn to political history, should read this masterpiece. “The Indian Struggle” is a compelling insider’s account of India’s freedom movement, with a deep dive into various movements during the 22-year period in the scope of the book, the dynamics between various leaders inside and outside Congress, the unsung heroes lost to textbook sanitization, and the vulnerabilities that an astute colonial administration repeatedly exploited.

That said, the work reflects certain dated assumptions, such as acceptance of the Aryan Invasion Theory and a somewhat naïve view of Islamic rule, especially concerning the Mughals. But much like Ambedkar’s Annihilation of Caste, these limitations must be understood in the context of the historical scholarship available at the time. To dismiss the book on these grounds alone would be to overlook its larger intellectual and political contributions. All you can do is be cognizant of these flaws and read along. The book’s enduring value lies in its sharp political analysis and first-hand insights into the inner workings of the Indian National Congress.

“The leader of the Congress is Mahatma Gandhi — who is the virtual dictator. The Working Committee since 1929 has been elected according to his dictation and no one can find a place on that committee who is not thoroughly submissive to him and his policy.” (Page 55)


Netaji documents the internal frictions within Congress. Contrasting nationalists, Swarajists, and Gandhi’s loyalists, and does not hesitate to describe Gandhi as a “dictator” within the party and, eventually, in national politics. His narration of key events, particularly the rise and decline of the Swaraj Party under Deshbandhu C.R. Das, and the subsequent Responsivist movement, corrects several gaps in mainstream histories. It’s a shame that our history textbooks have barely mentioned Deshbandhu C. R. Das, despite his central position in the independence struggle during his active years. Notably, Bose highlights Deshbandhu’s towering yet under-recognized political legacy.

Netaji does not shy away from exposing Gandhi’s miscalculations (like with Khilafat leaders), whether in prematurely halting mass movements, bungling negotiations with the British, or alienating fellow freedom fighters. His description of how the British government repeatedly outmaneuvered Congress, even during its own existential crisis in World War II, is a particularly painful read. His parallels to the British suppression of Sinn Féin add a fascinating international dimension.

“for according to sane Britishers, ‘Gandhi was the best policeman the Britisher had in India.’” (Page 358)

Yet, despite sharp disagreements, Netaji displays admirable fairness. His praise for Gandhi and Nehru, when it is due, shows rare integrity, the ability to critique without bitterness and to admire without compromise. In the early chapters, his restraint in offering personal judgments reflects both discipline and dignity.

“On March 11th, the Mahatma had written to Sir Samuel Hoare informing him that in keeping with what he had stated at the Round Table Conference in London on November 13th, 1931, if the depressed classes were torn away from the main body of Hindus by the grant of separate electorate, he would resist it with his life and in pursuance of that resolve, he would fast unto death.” (Page 445)

Words change in meaning or connotation over time, and people’s sensitivity to certain terms evolves. And one can find such surprises (or shocks) while reading books from a different era. This book will also probably do the same as Netaji’s use of terms like “propaganda” and “terrorism” in a very neutral sense may shock the reader, but is only reflecting the political vocabulary of the time.

In the end, The Indian Struggle is not just a chronicle but also a window into the mind of a man who dared to dream of freedom in a different way. It is imperfect, yes, but indispensable. And for anyone seeking to understand India’s long and complex march to independence, this book is nothing less than essential reading.

P.S. I would like to mention a passage that will perhaps be staying with me for a long time. I would, perhaps, title it “The Price of ‘Unity’”.

“The writer still remembers clearly the long and interesting discussion which he had with Nehru in Calcutta, in April, 1939, when he announced his desire to resign the Presidentship of the Congress and organise a new party. Nehru argued that such a step would create a split within the Congress and would thereby weaken the national organisation at a critical moment. The writer urged, on the contrary, that one should distinguish between the unity which led to more effective action and the unity which resulted in inaction. Unity could be preserved superficially in the Congress only by surrendering to the Gandhi Wing — but since the Gandhi Wing was opposed to the idea of a national struggle, such unity if maintained, would serve to stultify all dynamic activity on the part of the Congress in future.” (Page 596)

The reason is that when it comes to Hindu advocacy, the go-to answer for many so-called Hindu leaders here in North America, who are clueless about action to be taken is that “Hindus need to be united” (what they essentially mean is everybody should be united behind them). But they never say what should be done after uniting. And where is this unity heading, if at all? And what if it is heading in the wrong direction that will end up harming the community? Nehru’s cry for “unity” to Netaji sounded like that.

From Deracination to Celebration — A Hindu’s Journey of Embracing Cultural Identity in Modern Times

Posted on by
Reply
Image

I was perhaps eight or nine when my father narrated the story of Ramayana over the holidays of a hot summer in a small city in western India. Yes, “across” a summer holiday. About half an hour to an hour slots almost every day after one of our meals (lunch or dinner). Parents, especially today, would appreciate the challenge here – to hold a child’s attention for that long, consistently every day, on a single long story. But then it was Ramayana, firstly. And secondly, with his exceptional storytelling skills, it wasn’t as difficult for him as I imagine now. In fact, his passion for transferring those skills was so high that I had my first audio cassette of a couple of short stories (which he narrated to me multiple times) recorded in our 2-in-1 at the age of five.

And while, over the years, these memories have stayed with me, it really registered as remarkable when I watched David Finkle, an award-winning multi-instrumental recording artist from Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory in southern Ontario, in a podcast a couple of years ago, explaining how music, art and storytelling have played a significant role in keeping the indigenous culture alive in Canada among the First Nations against all odds. His story of the hummingbird and the forest fire had a very uncanny similarity with the story of the squirrel and Rama Setu in Ramayana. Just like the indigenous communities of Canada, with the Hindu community, the art forms of storytelling, street plays, and folk songs have played a vital role in keeping the culture alive anywhere we go. Ask the Caribbean or Fijian Hindus, and they will tell you. If you want to etch a transgenerational memory of anything, present it in the art form. This was perhaps why I was even able to surprise my teacher at the weekend Ramayana class when I answered the birthplace of Mata Sita before she could blink.

However, art doesn’t just keep you connected with the past glory but also illuminates historical struggles, some of which may be alive even to the present day. So, while I was well-versed in Ramayana and loved Mahabharata stories, it did not translate into any appreciation for the community’s history, resilience or sacrifices, let alone pride. Despite visiting the Somnath temple multiple times as a kid and listening to many stories about Lord Shiva, the tale of the Somnath temple before 1950 never came up. While I visited temples as a kid, not once did I find any explanation (and to my critique, I never asked either) on why temples exist, let alone the struggles and sacrifices of the community in the past to keep rebuilding temples despite multiple attacks.

Over the years (mostly the 90s), schooling happened. Unfortunately, the history curriculum did not help to root me in the civilization. With a unique focus on the “problems” of the Indian society and the “solutions” that the colonizers brought, it painted a rather disappointing picture. The 90s was also a unique decade in post-independence India when the economy had just liberalized, free from the clutches of hyper-socialism that gripped the nation for more than four decades. This was one of the country’s most promising times, with high economic aspirations. This also meant academic excellence, especially in the fields that can land you in high-paying jobs, and career success became paramount for parents and children alike. Hence, religious pursuits were discouraged and only acceptable when material pursuits were taken care of. This deracination was getting confused with “modernity.”  Pop culture, led by the popular cinema, often depicting the visible practitioners of the Hindu faith as either villain or in comic roles, rendered explicit projection of one’s Hindu identity as “uncool” and “regressive”. On the other hand, being irreligious was considered “modern” but only among Hindus as I reflect. 

The thought, “What’s the use of temples?” germinated. By the 2000s, it had only grown stronger. “We go to a temple pray? We can do that at home also. God should be in our hearts.” I must have said many times while sipping my Cafe Latte, enjoying the beautiful ambiance of a Cafe Coffee Day. Of course, I did not pray at home either. Slowly, job-induced separation from family led to a gradual avoidance of temples. This period was also when I first encountered the issue of Ram Temple in Ayodhya. “Why such a hue and cry about one temple? Why not build a hospital or a school or a university?” I said, without actually reading the complete history of the movement.

But then, in the 2010s, the information age revolutionized access to knowledge and created new platforms for academics, historians, storytellers, and artists to reach the masses. Information dissemination was transformed and largely democratized as the social media companies hadn’t grown big enough to establish “controls” back then. The stronghold of “establishment media” was loosening. “I did not see it on Discovery, National Geographic, or History Channel” or “my library doesn’t have that book”; was no longer an excuse.

This accessibility brought me face-to-face with many stories of bravery, historical vows and temple significance. The bravery of Nihang Sikhs in 1858 CE. The vow of Suryavanshi Thakurs to not wear Paghdi and shoes. The “We are from all castes” interview. Historian KK Muhammad’s stern stand with truth. The fact that history did not start from 1992 CE. The knowledge that the court case for which the judgement was pronounced in 2019 was initially filed in 1950 CE. Knowing that the first court case in the dispute was filed as early as 1885 CE. Realizing this is not about “revenge” but legally reclaiming what was stolen. At the same time, the answers to the most pressing questions on Ramayana. The understanding that not all temples are just “places to pray.” The understanding that some temples have a special significance attached to the site in history in the context of the deity. The paradigm shift in my thought process was inevitable. It’s difficult to “un-know” the truth once you know it.

So, this Ram Navami, I thank the countless and silent contributions of those who preserved and passed on the memory of the birthplace of Rama for 500 years, setting an example of community resilience, as Hindus finally were able to provide their deity his rightful place. I also hope this event inspires the indigenous communities worldwide to have confidence in their civilizational roots and not be ashamed to express their cultural pride.

“If the potlatch, the cornerstone of the culture of many coastal Indians, could be eradicated, the government believed the missionaries would be free to fill the cultural void with Christianity. Children in residential schools were taught that potlatches were outdated superstitions that led to poverty, and they were encouraged to not attend when home visiting. In reality all the potlatch ban did was drive the potlatch underground. the government severely underestimated Indians’ resistance to losing the freedom to continue with traditions.”
– Page 48, 21 Things You May Not Know About the Indian Act

How My Opinion Evolved over time on Ram Mandir as I Stood Face-to-Face with the Facts

Posted on by
Reply

About a month ago, I came across this post by an X account called The Skin Doctor (@theskindoctor13) that said, 

“Did you, now a Ram-bhakt, ever consider at some point in your life, ‘Why fight for a temple or a mosque? Let’s build a school or a hospital there instead.’If yes, it’s not your fault. You grew up in a compromised society and a subverted education system that detached you from your religion, history, and culture, even made you feel ashamed about it.
However, you deserve credit for not adhering to the flawed concept of secularism when faced with truth, logic, and reasoning, unlike numerous others who continue to cling to it. You were objective enough to see through that subversion and emerge as a proud Hindu.“

Image

I relate to that because that’s exactly the idea I had about as much as 6-7 years ago. Why is there this whole fuss about “just one temple”? And this was the time when the last judgment on the case was by the Allahabad (now Prayagraj) High Court. One idea was that a country that has yet to achieve so much and needs to develop itself in so many ways, why is it wasting so much time and energy over a temple? Why not build schools, universities, hospitals, infrastructure, jobs, etc., which will make us a developed country?

So, what changed over time? 

A couple of things need to be understood when it comes to people who think Mandir is a waste of time:

– They think the mandir is just where you go to pray and has no real utility or significance

– They don’t know the significance of the site, or it doesn’t register to them as important 

– They think economic development and civilizational pride are mutually exclusive. They think the latter is fungible and the former is what matters only. 

– They don’t read enough, especially about the history of the movement. Most of them think that history started in 1992. 

– They think that most people in support of Ram temple are doing it due to their political affiliation

Becoming Aware of the Significance of the Site

Many people, especially people who have not learned or understood why there is so much fuss about one temple, think that it’s just one temple that was demolished by some Islamic invader to build a mosque over it (some even deny that), and now Hindus want revenge by destroying that mosque and rebuild temple over it. This is the oversimplification that many have consumed. 

One needs to read a bit, or if you’re not really into reading, listen to the scholars on the Hindu side about the significance of the site. The demand for the temple is not out of the blue. One cannot disagree that Shri Rama and Sita are two of India’s most widely revered deities, with hundreds of millions of devotees. So, demanding a temple, which was already there to begin with, before it was destroyed by a foreign invader – I am not sure how that is unjustified. 

Becoming Aware of the Significance of Temples

Many people have this question – “Why temple? What purpose do temples serve to society? We can pray at our home as well, no?” 

One of the most common misconceptions about places of worship, which we have inherited from Abrahamic religions, is that the places of worship are for the followers of that religion. It is just a place of prayer, and you can go to any place of worship to do that. That is what makes them disposable. One needs to do a bit of reading to understand that this is not the case with Hindu temples. Although temples do serve some purpose of congregation for the followers, and you can pray there, that is not the primary reason for the temple’s existence. 

Every temple belongs to the deity. The rules followed in a particular temple depend on the deity and, in some cases, the specific form in which the deity resides. That is why you may see different rules for the two different temples of the same deity – for example, Sabarimala temples. You go to a particular temple with reverence for what that particular site signifies in connection with the deity. Shaktipeethas have their own significance. Jyotirlingas have their own significance. Dwaraka and Mathura are religious sites because of a specific reason. Kailash Mansarovar has a specific significance. So, if you don’t revere the significance, you always have an option to NOT go to that temple. 

In this context, the Ram Temple demand emanates because it is believed to be the birthplace of Prabhu Shri Rama, and one really needs to be dumb to consider that insignificant. 

Becoming Aware that History Did Not Start in 1992

The media and Leftist-Marxist historians of the country, unfortunately, have misled us into believing that the whole issue of Ram Mandir started with the demolition of the mosque. This is akin to the similar strategy I have seen with respect to the 2002 Gujarat riots where the media and Leftists-Marxists-Islamists, whenever talking about it, skip the genesis of the riots, i.e. burning alive of dozens of people by setting the train coach on fire. This liberty with historical timeline has been a characteristic of the establishment historians and media.  

In the case of the Ramjanmabhoomi movement, the battle has been going on since 1528 (496 years ago) when the temple was razed to build a mosque over it. As early as 1853 (171 years ago) the first claim (or re-claim) by Hindus over the site was made. The year 1885 (139 years ago) saw the first court request with respect to the site. The case, whose judgment came in 2019, was filed in 1949 (75 years ago). Only during the 80s (~40 years ago) did the movement get a huge boost from the country-wide campaign launched to involve the masses. The beginning of the 90s saw a massacre where police, under the orders of the then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh – Mulayam Singh Yadav, opened fire several times on the karsevaks, comprising women and elderly as well, killing close to 40-50 (official figures say 28 while BJP maintains 56). Many of them were not even offered proper last rites, and the bodies were thrown away, tied with sandbags, in the Saruyu River.

This video really puts things in perspective. 

Many falsely associate the 1992 demolition with the judgement of 2019, not knowing that the cases on demolition are separate. Part of the blame definitely goes to the media and Leftist-Marxist “intellectuals” who gave such an impression or never bothered to clarify it. 

Economic Development and Civilizational Pride are Not Mutually Exclusive

A lot of people say, “We need schools, universities, and hospitals in this country. Why are we wasting our time on building new temples?”
Well, aren’t there new churches, mosques and other places of worship built? What benefit does society get from these new bars and ultra-expensive restaurants? It’s amusing to see this sudden and very, very special concern for the social development of this country the moment any Hindu temple is built. 

Why is it that the construction of a Hindu temple is believed to halt all other economic and social development projects across the country? A temple that was built with private money (mostly donations from average Hindu households), using private labour, on land handed over to the trust by the court. For those who are aware, the only token investment by the government in this temple construction is Rs.1 as an apology for the injustice done to the Hindu community for so many years, even after independence. 

Secondly, a mature and learned person understands that everything goes hand-in-hand. The resurrection of our civilizational heritage won’t come at the cost of social and economic development projects; those projects don’t have to make our civilization’s pride wait. One needs to look at the number of new AIIMS, IITs, IIMs, ITIs and other universities that have been constructed in the last ten years. More than 250 medical colleges have been built in the last ten years. IMF has observed India’s stupendous economic growth during the global slowdown. The UPI has revolutionized the way we conduct our finances. While the Ram Temple was being constructed in Ayodhya during COVID, we produced a completely in-house developed vaccine that we exported to dozens of countries while also becoming an overnight exporter of PPE kits and N-95 masks (which we did not produce before COVID). I can go on and on, but I have made my point. 

Lastly, if someone thinks that temples do not aid economic or social development, they need to read and understand more. At least in India’s case, where only temples (not mosques, churches, or gurdwaras) are under government control, anyone who is keeping abreast of news knows that the government earns billions from the temples all over India. It’s a different issue that none of these earnings are used to improve temple facilities but instead are used to execute secular projects. Spiritual tourism generates thousands, if not millions, of jobs and economic opportunities across the country. 

Historically, temples have served as places of significant economic, social and educational activity. I would recommend reading the book “The Educational Heritage of Ancient India” by Sahana Singh or watching this video to learn more. 

The West Talks About Decolonization, But We Set It In Action

There is much chatter around decolonization in the West and getting rid of the colonial past. I have observed that such chatter only happens as long as the colonized are not a political threat to the establishment. For example, in Canada, there is a lot of lip service and sympathy for the wrongs done to the First Nations, Metis and Inuits. In the United States, it’s not even that much. But, although this is very unlikely to happen, see how the behaviour changes if the same First Nations, Metis, and Inuits become a strong political force.   

In India, getting rid of the colonial past was okay till it was done against the British when city names were changed (Bombay became Mumbai, Calcutta became Kolkata, Madras became Chennai) or King George’s statue was toppled. No Christians in India were offended. But dare you talk about getting rid of the relics of colonizers before that? 

The same Marxist-Leftists who were more than zealous to getting rid of confederate names in the United States or topple the John A Macdonald statue in Canada are suddenly finding Hindus as fascists and oppressive when a colonizer construction constructed by destroying an indigenous place of worship is being reclaimed by the indigenous population. Such offence cannot be taken unless these very people “relate” to the colonizer himself. 

I was able to see through this hypocrisy. 

Understanding Why Ramayana Connects with So Many Hindus Around the World

When I was a kid, my father invested his time during one of my summer vacations to tell me the story of Ramayana. He was a fantastic storyteller. While his descriptions were very elaborate, they never came across as boring to me. So, while I was familiar with the story and had my own learning from it, I never invested any time in understanding why it connects with such a huge group of Hindus around the world. 

With the internet and social media, it became clearer, though. In the last few years, I have seen a transformation in terms of what more I can learn from the life of Shri Ram and Sita that helps me become a better person every day. Two names – Ami Ganatra and Srirama Chakradhar Garu – are must-watch/reads who have answered some of the most pressing questions, especially from youngsters who find some of the incidents in Ramayana seemingly discriminatory and objectionable. When you become aware, you become more confident. 

(I am putting a reaction video below because YouTube decided to remove this channel as they were standing up for truth and against the establishment bosses)

It’s my conviction that anyone who researches genuinely about the movement would be able to understand why dozens of millions of Hindus – even the ones who have never been to India but have grown up in a Hindu household – are so passionate about this temple. 

The (S)QUAD of “Caste” in North America

Posted on by
Reply

In the year 2023, and even before that, the Hindu community in the United States and Canada has witnessed a barrage of attacks in various forms. From being accused of being agents of foreign national political parties to physical attacks on Hindu temples and from disinformation campaigns on Hindu festivals to targeting specific Hindu symbols as evil and oppressive – the Hindu community has seen it all. 

However, one thing that has baffled some of the Hindus, mainly because of the mainstreamed nature of the trope, is the series of caste legislation/motions/resolutions that have been passed (or attempted to pass) across North America. From California Senate to Toronto District School Board and from various universities to private corporations, entities are updating their anti-discrimination policies to include “caste” as a protected category to give an impression that they are “outlawing” this form of discrimination. 

Image

So, one natural question that occurs to many is, “Who are these people who bring up such caste-related laws, motions or resolutions, and why are they doing it?”

If you observe carefully, four types of entities are involved in such cases. First is your political class, number two is your academia, number three is non-governmental organizations (or in this case, actually, it’s not even a not-for-profit), and the fourth is the media, which, unfortunately, plays a very biased and a negative role in such issues.

Political Class:
Now, one may wonder why they do that now. I would divide the political class into two parts – one who tables such laws and others who support or vote in favour of such laws. 

Now, if you look at any average politician, what are their major motives for doing anything? And I’m talking about an average politician. There might be some exceptions, but that is fine. However, on average, two major motivations for any politician will be “votes” and “funding.” So, how many votes are you able to get the politician when s/he does something? Or how much funding are you able to give (or make accessible) to a politician for a given action? In some cases, toeing a certain line would open certain doors of funding for their own political campaign or funding for their political party which they can boast about and help improve their stature in the party. If you want to identify such politicians, look at their political growth trajectory. See where they are being platformed. See their donor information, if publicly available. See what kind of people they associate with or engage with.  
In some cases, a politician might be tabling such motions just because they belong to a particular ideology and they think they are doing social justice or playing an important role in furthering that ideology. In such cases, very little can be done to change the mind of such politicians. Seattle City Council member Kshama Sawant would be one such example. Even the ideologically charged Senator of California, Aisha Wahab, did not meet certain groups that did not share her views on SB403. All you can do is name and shame them and ensure that such toxic politicians don’t get elected next time.  

And then there is a class of politicians, the largest population, I bet, who are completely clueless about the “caste” trope. But they still vote in favour because they fear they will be seen as “supporting discrimination” if they abstain or vote against such laws. The Toronto District School Board’s “caste” motion saw many such board members who did not know anything about “caste” but still voted in favour under the fantastic (totally unscientific) excuse of – “Just because we don’t see it, doesn’t mean it’s not there“. Such politicians need to be educated. They mostly have their heart in the right place, but they have a fear, especially if they’re white, that they will be seen as “white supremacists” if they vote against such laws. They might still go ahead and vote in favour, but not engaging with them is never an option. 

Academia:

Academics generally provide intellectual cover to the assertions that form the basis of these caste laws/motions/resolutions, like in the Toronto District School Board case. A professor from Carlton University in Ottawa tried to intellectualize the assertions in the motion, which were completely devoid of data or evidence. In fact, when Zakir Patel, one of the school board trustees, asked SADAN, headed by Professor Jangam of Carlton University, to provide at least one example of caste-based discrimination, SADAN could not answer that. However, the presence of such academics gives an impression of legitimacy to any assertions made on “caste,” even if no data or evidence backs them. 

Now, you may wonder why would they do that. For example, some of you may remember that Rutgers University professor Audrey Truschke used profanities for Prabhu Shree Ram a few years ago. But after that statement, an organization, ironically called Sadhana, hosted the professor because they were not really happy that the professor had only said this once. So they wanted her to double down on her statement – ek baar mein maja nahi aaya, dobaara karte hai (only once isn’t fun, let’s do it again!) – called her on their platform to elaborate on that. Now, during that conversation, at one point, she said something that perfectly summed up the academic echo chambers that are created in Western universities. She said that while she does not insist on her students following her thought process – she basically wanted to say that she gives her students the freedom to have their own thinking and so on – but if they want to pass the exam or get good grades, they must write what has been taught to them. 

So, think about it! In order to get a certificate or a degree where she is the professor, the student must follow what she teaches. Now extend that thought. So today, it is about a grade in a subject. Tomorrow, it will be about the degree that the student is pursuing. The day after tomorrow will be about getting a job as a professor or a lecturer at that university. And the day after, it will be about getting a tenure position. So, in every step of your professional life in academia, you have to toe a certain line; if you do not, you will suffer professionally. We know many academics – in India, the US, Canada, Europe – who have suffered professionally because they refuse to sing a particular tune that the people in power in that academic circle want them to. So, in some cases, these academics may be involved in such disinformation about “caste”, out of compulsion, but in other cases, they may have been indoctrinated since that’s the atmosphere we see in our universities. So they really believe in what they’re saying even though there is no evidence.

SJ Organizations:

Now, if you have followed these “caste” laws across North America, there will be a few names you would repeatedly come across, like Equality Labs and SADAN (in the case of Canada). You may wonder why these organizations, like Equality Labs, are doing what they’re doing. 

We need to understand that the DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) budgets are ever-increasing in Western countries. Now, when it comes to traditional discriminations like Islamophobia, Antisemitism, and anti-black racism, there has been much written about, read about and researched about these sorts of discriminations, and they have reached a certain level of maturity in terms of the discourse. So, in order to justify the continued increase in budgets and an opportunity to grab those increased budgets, the DEI community or the groups need to come up with something new. And I’m telling this, especially the “something new” with full responsibility because the CBC documentary on “caste” literally used these words – “Canada’s newest form of discrimination.” So, for them, caste is like a new toy in the market, which they get to play with. These organizations position themselves as “experts” (self-certified) in providing workshops to train (rather, brainwash) the staff, teachers, lawmakers, students, etc., on “caste.” And, by the way, these workshops will require funding, which is where these increased budgets will find their pockets. So, these budgets become their source of income, which is what they’re targeting. So this is their bread and butter, and the same goes for SADAN in Canada. One only needs to do a web search to see if Equality Labs is a “not-for-profit” organization or not. Just search if Equality Labs is a 501c(3) organization. 

Media:

Now, the final piece of the quad is the media. Now, unfortunately, the media has played a negative role when it comes to reporting on caste-related issues. Mostly, the articles have either ignored the Hindu perspective on the caste or severely underplayed it. Many Hindu advocacy organizations such as CoHNA have experienced it firsthand when a media outlet in the US interviewed a Dalit-Bhujan person on the “caste” topic, but the interview was completely ignored in the article that came out because the narrative was not in alignment with what they wanted to have. So, the Hindu community has seen that when the media does not get what they want, even from the very people they claim to be fighting for, they simply ignore them. 

This has more to do with ideological conformity than with personal hatred. If you notice, the premise of any article on such “caste” related laws is that the proposed legislation is intended to “outlaw discrimination.” What the articles don’t mention, by extension of that statement – because that will not just be factually incorrect but also sound stupid – is that caste-based discrimination is legally protected or the existing laws are insufficient to protect caste-based discrimination. Secondly, it also projects, without any need to mention explicitly, that individuals and organizations opposing such laws are in favour of caste-based discrimination. Guilty until proven innocent? And the Hindu community fits perfectly in this Marxist binary of oppressor vs oppressed. Economically well-to-do, enough proportion of fair-skin people to conflate with whites, self-censoring, and pagans (so, won’t get support from the right-wing ecosystem either). 

And let’s not forget the media’s role in various genocides like the Holocaust. I would recommend “The Gray Lady Winked” by Ashley Rindsberg to get a glimpse. 

One of the biggest miracles of this “caste” trope is that this is one area that has united the American/Canadian left as well as right, like nothing else. For the right wing, it is a lighter to ignite anti-immigration and anti-heathen sentiments among the general public, projecting Hindus as inherently backward, savage, filthy pagans. For the left wing, it gives them another target group, which can be projected as inherently and irredeemably “oppressive” – the source of all the oppression in the world (and if you think I am exaggerating, you’re probably unaware of Isabelle Wilkerson’s book). 

A Vegan Hindu

Posted on by
Reply

I turned vegan about four years ago. Even though I can’t say I am absolutely 100% vegan since occasionally it happens that an order gets screwed up at a restaurant or we were a little negligent in buying something we thought was vegan and turned out to have like 0.1% milk solids and many such occasions. Many times it’s a judgement call — whether we want to throw away the food or we make an exception and ensure we are more vigilant the next time. I, personally, have learned to not beat myself up for occasional lapses and look at the larger picture where I am at least responsible for bringing down the demand for dairy (I was a vegetarian since birth, so never had meat), at an individual level, by more than 99% I would say.
Mostly, when people talk about adopting a vegan lifestyle, there are generally two reasons – 1) Animal cruelty; 2) Climate Change.

Animal cruelty is largely associated with the meat industry with the direct slaughter of animals as well as their treatment before that. This holds true for any country in the world where ultimately an animal dies — method doesn’t make much difference to the animal. But then there also are other industries such as the dairy industry, the cosmetics industry, the leather industry, and even the pharma industry that engage in some or the other form of cruelty to animals.
The climate change part relates to reducing the carbon footprint and greenhouse gas emissions as it’s a very well established fact that meat products contribute significantly to climate change. It consumes far more water per kilogram of food, contributes significantly to the methaneemissions, and consumes more than 3/4th of the global agricultural land which could otherwise be used for crop production.

Image
Source: Our World In Data
Image
Source: Our World In Data

Reaction to Veganism
While Veganism definitely invites strong reactions from the meat-eaters with the most common reaction being going into the defensive, when it comes to India, such strong reactions, especially in my personal experience, also comes from the vegetarians. A part of the reason is that veganism ditches dairy, something very integral to the vegetarian diet, especially in India. Being the largest producer of milk and a large part of the rural economy centered around cows, it is seen as almost an attack on the Indian economy. Cattle rearing is also a cushion to the Indian farmers against the highly unpredictable monsoons that makes agricultural income very unstable. In addition, other products – dairy products apart from milk, cow dung, cow urine – has its own use in many ways that creates a source of additional income or helps in the activities that generate income for a farmer.

PETA India and Veganism
Unfortunately, when it comes to veganism in India, Peta makes more noise than anyone else. At the same time, Peta India is probably also the worst ambassador of veganism in India. It has been hurting vegans more than helping (if at all). A large part of it comes from Peta’s own record of dealing with animals and the hypocrisy of their messaging which is targeted only towards the communities in India, where they would not receive a violent response.
Peta appears to have absolutely no understanding of the ground realities in India and is simply copy-pasting the tactics they use in the western countries. Otherwise you wouldn’t see them throwing in “This Rakshabandhan, Go Leather-Free” when nobody wears leather rakhis and asking people to treat cows as “sisters” in a country that treats cows as mothers. You also wouldn’t see them giving awards to celebrities who end up celebrating turkey dishes after just a few days of receiving those awards. Not to forget, the mindblowing “fact-checking” that happened on it.

Image
Source: News Meter

It’s also a hypocrisy that Peta targets pretty much all Hindu festivals – Rakshabandhan, Diwali, Holi, Jallikattu, Janmashtami – but then goes “Abba Jabba Dabba” on Bakri Eid. In fact, a Peta website, AnimalsInIslam shows “humane” way of slaughtering animals. Can it be more hypocritical?

Is Veganism Anti-Cow?
India has been struggling for decades against cow smuggling within India as well as outside India (mainly Bangladesh and Pakistan). This doesn’t happen without cattle theft. Even a single cow stolen can wipe out a major source of income for an Indian farmer. Between 2015 and 2017, 56,359 cattle smuggling cases (cases, not cattles) were registered in India. According to data shared by the South Bengal Frontier of the BSF, in the year 2019, 29,720 cattle heads (that’s 81 daily) were seized in 2019 (the numbers that made it through will definitely be higher). And this is just the Bangladesh border. While the number did come down in 2020 but that has to do with COVID lockdowns. And cattle smuggling increases before Eid-ul-Adha as Indian security forces confirm.
It also needs to be noted that these statistics are just for cross-country smuggling. The statistics for smuggling within India is extremely hard to find, if at all they exist. Just the illegal slaughterhouses alone are estimated to be 30,000 across India. There are organizations such as CowConnect Foundation that has saved thousands of cows in Gujarat alone and Agniveer in Delhi-NCR that rescues about 15-20 cows daily.
And remember, as mentioned earlier, even a single cow stolen can wipe out a major source of income for an Indian farmer.
So, to answer the question if Veganism is anti-cow — NO. Animal slaughtering is. And vegans don’t slaughter animals. But do you know who does? Guess!

Adopting Veganism in a Dharmic Manner?
Many Hindus, especially vegetarians, have become resentful of veganism itself because of the dairy angle and Peta has just made that worse. Compound it with the constantly undermined issue of cattle smuggling that is ignored by mainstream media due to “secularism”. Even though wrong, one can understand where the resentment comes from. But then many idiots even allege that veganism will lead to more animals ending up in slaughterhouses which is absolutely ridiculous. Slaughterhouses function because there are people who consume meat. Not because of vegans. 
A big part of the misconception around veganism is that it is a western construct and is not aligned to Dharmic values. While it may be true that the concept of veganism does come from the west, we need not adopt it as it is without applying our own brains. We also don’t need to reject it just because it comes from the West. There is no harm in deconstructing the whole concept and seeing which parts can be adopted and to what extent, which parts can take time to create a suitable ecosystem/atmosphere and which parts don’t make sense at all in the Indian context. All these need to take place keeping in mind the ground realities of India — not just at a country level but as micro as individual level.
Plus, if you believe FitTuber, as he says “Nowhere in the Ayurvedic Scriptures, it has been mentioned that milk should be a mandatory part of diet“. So, veganism is definitely not against Sanatana Dharma.

Veganism is a Rich Class Thing?
Unfortunately, veganism has been portrayed in popular culture as a very South-Bombayish, urban elite culture and an expensive lifestyle – like being vegan means you need to eat only salads and exotic fruits/vegetables like Avocado, Kiwi, Quinoa, Kale etc. and drink Almond Milk. This is highly inaccurate.
When it comes to veganism, what Indians forget is that most of the Indian vegetarian cuisine is inherently vegan, at least the non-Punjabi (non-Paneer) cuisine. I can still enjoy Poha or Upma in the morning with coconut chutney, have an Aloo-Matar sabzi with Parantha in lunch and enjoy Baigan Bharta with Chapati for dinner. Vegan food includes all grains, pulses, beans, oils, fruits and vegetables. Now just imagine the combinations. In fact, some of the sweets like Chikki and Son Papadi are vegan as well. And when one starts looking, they’ll find many more.

Image
Vegan Aloo Palak by Pille R. Priske


In fact, turning vegan can drive down your grocery bill since you’d not be buying that expensive meat, eggs and processed dairy products.
Even when it comes to non-dairy milk, one can be smart about it to find solutions, some of which are already available. It was very convenient for Amul to compare their milk with Almond Milk since that is probably THE MOST EXPENSIVE non-dairy milk. Nut milks are of various types – Soy, Cashew, Coconut, Rice, Oats, Macadamia, Peanut and so on. And a quick look on the Nature’s Basket website reveals that the So Good Unsweetened Soy Milk is Rs.130 a litre. Compare this to Rs.44 to Rs.56 litres that Amul has claimed or Amul Taaza tetra pack that comes at Rs.64 per litre. So, non-dairy milks in India are already close to 2X-3X the price of dairy milk (contrary to the 6X difference Amul is projecting). And the gap decreases further when we talk about A2 Deshi Cow Milk which is typically close to Rs.100 per litre. 
And let’s not forget that plant-based milks, right now, don’t have the economies of scale that the dairy industry has. As the demand increases and the competition increases, price drops. So, comparing the price of large scale dairy milk with that of small-scale plant-based milk is incorrect. In North America, non-dairy milk used to be expensive but as the demand increased, the wholesale shops such as Costco have started stocking non-dairy milks as well. A carton of 6X946ml (5.67 litres) of organic soy milk costs C$10.69 (~Rs.640), which turns out to be Rs.113 per litre. Compare that to the regular organic 2% milk which is C$8.48 (~Rs.510) for a 4 litres pack, which turns out to be Rs.127.5 per litre.
And if you still want to close your eyes and say “Okay okay but but but…in India, it is still expensive” —- then let’s excuse the people who can’t buy that “expensive” non-dairy milk. What’s the excuse for the ones who can buy?
Maybe they can skip spending 1000 bucks on that shitty Bollywood movie and a popcorn or a third-class overpriced restaurant and instead buy stuff that’s actually helpful to you.

Indian Dairy Industry
It is to be understood that the case against dairy products is due to heavy industrialization (factory farming) in the dairy industry. While it may be less brutal than the beef farming, there is still brutality — be it the practice of injecting antibiotics, injecting hormones, using machines that vacuum the udders (to extract the milk), artificial insemination, the risk of mastitis or the practice of separating calves at birth. Even keeping the emotions out, this is a very unhygienic and potentially harmful (to humans as well eventually) way of running the dairy industry and yet it happens. Now, when it comes to India, a common argument is that factory farming doesn’t happen here. We, as a society (especially the Hindus), have always treated cows as a mother and when you visit our villages, cows are taken care of like a family member (well, almost).
This facilitator guide by ASCI (Agricultural Skill Council of India) for a Dairy Farmer does not discourage insemination. There are also sections on Modern Milking Machines, which are the vacuum pumps. Although, to its credit, it does discourage hormonal injections. This one study clearly mentions the usage of milking machines and one of main responsibilities of a Milk Union as artificial insemination administration. Farmers in Gujarat also use milking machines to extract milk from cows as the article mentions – Take Shirishbhai Vithalbhai Patel from Chikhodra, 4 km from Amul’s Anand dairy. This 47-year-old farmer has 200 cows and 60 heifers, and sells 1,800 litres daily.  His animals are entirely machine-milked at a parlour, operating from 5:30 to 8:30 in the morning and likewise in the evening.
If one is under the impression that the dairy industry in India is still very pristine, then the above information should burst that bubble. Yes, definitely, it is still way less “factory farmed” than the west.

Image
Source: The Hindu Business Line

Amul – The Torchbearer
Now, let us take a look at Amul – that has tried to portray itself as a torch-bearer of the Hindu cow-worshipping culture by invoking Lord Krishna (not Shri Krishna or Prabhu Shri Krishna?) and Holy Cow. While they are 100% right about the cultural part, using that to defend yourselves when, across-India, “Amul Model” is used for machine milking and artificial insemination, and to actually go on to say that “Dairy farming is good for the cattle” is quite a bubble (or self-fulfilling prophecy) they’re living in. 
Now, let us go deeper into Amul’s offering of raw milk. Amul has a very confusing product range in milk alone. They have:

So, Amul has “Amul Deshi A2 Cow Milk” and “Amul Buffalo Milk” (packaging says A2 milk) —– so the question is, what are the rest? A1 milk? Amul needs to print that information very clearly on the pack. 
Amul MD, Rupinder Singh Sodhi, in an interview to The Print’s Shekhar Gupta, provided extremely vague statements. One of them said, “Be assured that in India what you are drinking is A2 milk as all buffalo and indigenous cow milk is 100 percent A2 milk”. Does he mean to say that all of the Amul’s milk is from either buffalos or indigenous cows? If that is true, what is Shirishbhai from Chikhodra village doing with the 15 cross-bred Holsteins from whom Amul picks the milk directly? However, amazingly, the number comes down from 100% (in the form of “be assured”) to 90% in the very next statement as he says, “All HF (Holstein-Friesian) crossbred cows produce 50 per cent A2 milk and 50 per cent A1 milk. So 90 per cent of milk in India is A2 milk,” What he doesn’t mention is how much Amul’s share is from that 10% A1 milk? (assuming that the 90% figure is true). And if the majority of Amul’s milk is A2, why do they have two separate brands – Amul Deshi A2 Cow Milk and Amul Buffalo Milk (with the packaging mentioning A2 milk) – of A2 milk? You can’t have a spin-off from a mainstream product unless that spin-off is a minority. There is Maggi Masala Noodles and then there is Maggi Atta Noodles and Maggi Oats Noodles because the latter two are not 100% Maida. But Maggi can’t come up with Maggi Maida Noodles (apart from the reason that it’d be a marketing disaster) because that’s what Maggi Masala Noodles is.
If we believe this report, where most of the numbers are for the year 2012-13, >50% of the milk produced in the country is from buffalos while cross-breed account for 22% of the total cattle population. Given that cross-breeds have a higher yield, if we assume that the % share in the total milk production will be >22%. So, at most 78% of the total milk production in the country can have A2 milk. And this is at a country level, not Amul. Again, one must read the section “Livestock cross breeding” to understand how the cross-breeding basically destroyed the indegenous species. All for what?

Image
Source: India Water Portal

Also, one must watch this video to see the reality of the Amul (and other brands) milk products.


So?
So, the dairy consumers in India will only make some sense if that dairy comes from a local dairy farmer you know who is raising Desi Cow breeds, isn’t injecting hormones, isn’t using artificial insemination (you don’t artificially inseminate your family members, do you?) and isn’t using machines to milk the cow. You may still want to take some liberty with the last point (but then we can’t be riding on this high horse that dairy is for cattle’s benefit) but I don’t see any reason why Indians should encourage foreign breed cows whose milk is low on nutrition, causes diseases and is difficult to digest.
Also, one also needs to think about how much of the dairy in India is consumed in the purest form? i.e. milk. If your dairy consumption involves processed cheese, mayonnaise, flavored drinks, etc, tall claims of “dairy for nutrition” falls flat.

What will happen to farmers?
This is a very “sarkaari” argument. Often used whenever there is a discussion on privatisation or FDI in any sector. What will happen to people who are in “this thing” for decades? Or “Oh, so many people will lose their jobs”.
To begin with, let’s not think of our farmers as stupid that they can’t learn anything new. Also, what people forget is that veganism causes a demand shift and not a demand decline. People won’t stop eating the overall amount of food. They will only stop eating a certain type of food and instead eat something else. And in case of veganism, the drop in dairy demand shifts to agricultural products (like lentils and nuts) which are already the occupation of the dairy farmers. India is one of those rare countries that can grow three crops a year. Let’s not blame vegans for the inefficiencies of Indian agriculture (largely because of the government and politics).

0.1% Non-Vegan = 100% Non-Vegan?
Vegetarians might also be able to relate to this since this is a favorite pastime of non-vegetarians to prove that so-and-so product has like 0.00000000000000000000001% of animal product —– “Oh, so you and me, we’re the same, yeah?”. Yes, your half kg chicken is the same as that one brand of beer that used gelatin to clarify the end product. However, the same vegetarians won’t shy away from applying this tactic on vegans.
It needs to be understood that many of the folks who are like 99% vegans are still contributing by bringing down their dairy/meat demand to 1%. That still means something. So, maybe you can ditch cheese, mayonnaise, paneer, ghee, ice cream etc. but can’t ditch your morning tea – that is still not bad. Or maybe you reduce your “mithai” intake and limit it only to festivals and that too when you’re meeting family and extended family – let that be your cheat day. The idea is to minimize the harm to the environment and live in as much harmony with nature as possible.

References:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/978557/cases-of-cattle-smuggling-at-the-border-india/

https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local

http://www.environmentreports.com/can-eat-less-water/

https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/jan/10/how-much-water-food-production-waste#data

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases#methane

https://www.iea.org/reports/methane-tracker-2020

https://www.socalgas.com/stay-safe/methane-emissions/sources-of-methane-emissions

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YzjB0thvxY

https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTkVBzV_dDQ

https://www.opindia.com/2021/05/amul-md-slams-peta-india-for-asking-them-to-use-vegan-milk/

https://ourworldindata.org/land-use

http://www.fao.org/india/fao-in-india/india-at-a-glance/en/

https://legaldesire.com/peta-awarded-shilpa-hero-animals-award-days-later-taught-fans-roasting-turkey/

https://www.animalsinislam.com/islam-animal-rights/qurbani/

https://newsmeter.in/fact-check/cops-performing-aarti-of-lockdown-violators-are-from-mp-not-karnataka-679291?infinitescroll=1

https://sentientmedia.org/dairy-farming/

http://www.asci-india.com/BooksPDF/Dairy%20Farmer%20or%20Entrepreneur.pdf

https://veteriankey.com/role-of-dairy-farming-in-rural-development/

https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/columns/harish-damodaran/amuls-gen-next-farmers/article20530493.ece

Hakenkreuz = Hooked Cross NOT Swastika

Posted on by
Reply

A couple of weeks ago, in an anti-semitic attack, one of Montreal’s largest synagogue was vandalized with a graffiti of what people in the West call “Swastika” – a German hate symbol reminiscent of the massacre of over six million Jews in the Nazi concentration camps. In early December last year, a similar attack happened on Anne Frank memorial in Boise, Idaho.

Image


When I went through the responses on the news of the Montreal synagogue attack, I was quickly able to see some of the accounts suggesting the symbol is not “Swastika” but a Nazi hate symbol. But what was missing in every single post, except one or two, was the explanation of what the Nazi symbol is and what actually is Swastika. Half knowledge doesn’t help. While there is a growing population, including Jews, understanding that the Nazi symbol shouldn’t be called Swastika since the original Swastika is an auspicious symbol of not just Hindus but also Buddhists and Jains, not many have tried to understand what the Nazi symbol is and its origins. I am not going very deep in this post but will provide a brief along with much of the references one can go through (that I went through)

It is very important that when we say that the Nazi symbol is NOT Swastika, we also mention what it is. If we look at the german version of Mein Kampf (like this: https://mk.christogenea.org/_files/Mein_Kampf_German.pdf), the word Swastika appears nowhere. Hakenkreuz, on the other hand, had at least 9 occurrences. Just do a CTRL+F.
While some of the initial translations such as that of E.T.S. Dugdale accurately translates “Hakenkreuz” to “hooked cross”, the translation which became popular was the one by an Irish Catholic Priest James Vincent Murphy who, while avoiding translating many German words with no English equivalents, seemed okay to translate (or mistranslate) the German word “Hakenkreuz” to “Swastika” – especially when “Swastika” isn’t even an English word.

So, what is Swastika (Hindu Symbol)?
The actual Swastika is a sacred symbol for Hindus, Buddhists and Jains around the world. It is a combination of two words – ‘su’ (means ‘good’) and ‘asti’ (means ‘to exist’). It is a symbol of peace, well being and auspiciousness and has symbolized that since thousands of years in the Indian civilization. Indic religions use it on many auspicious occasions like festivals, house warming, havans, puja and so on. Read more about it here. The word is of Indian origin – Sanskrit – and so far there doesn’t seem to be any evidence that Hitler knew Sanskrit.

So, what is Hakenkreuz?
Hakenkreuz literally means “Hooked Cross” – a Christian symbol. Plenty of evidence is available of the use of “Hooked Cross” in the churches around the world – be it Benedictine Monastery in Austria (where Hitler grew up), or Byzantine Church in Israel, or Lalibela Church in Ethiopia or Plaosnik Baptistery in Macedonia. Hitler was born and raised Christian. There is plenty of literary evidence also available on the use of the word Hakenkreuz (hooked cross) along with Christenkreuz (Christian cross). Read this for more understanding.
Interestingly, Google has also fallen for this mistranslation. Amusingly, after setting up the translation from German to English – when you type “Christen”, it translates to “Christians”; when you type “Kreuz”, it translates to “Cross”, so when you type “Christenkreuz”, it translates to, as expected, “Christian Cross”. However, when you type “Haken”, it translates to “Hook”; when you type “Kreuz”, it translates to “Cross”, but when you type “Hakenkreuz”, it magically becomes “Swastika”!!

Image

Why mistranslate?
In simple words, to hide the Christian origins of Hitler’s hate symbol. To absolve the Church from one of the largest genocides on the face of the earth of the people who, according to the Church at that time, were Christ-killers. Also, further the anti-paganism by putting on hook the last living ancient civilization and the largest non-Abrahamic religion, even when they were one of the few ones who welcomed Jews who were being persecuted across the world. It was also convenient for the Church to attribute this hate symbol a Hindu name since it further propagated the Aryan Invasion Theory, comprehensively disproved now and abandoned by the colonial Europeans after the horrors of the second world war but continued to be taught in their colonies.

It is important to understand the correct origins of the persecution of Jews in the mid 20th century in Europe. It does take some amount of reading, yes, but it will prevent cases like:

  • European Union attempt to ban all uses of Swastika irrespective of renditions or
  • A random person asking a town in New York state to change its name or
  • The State of New York considered the bill to mandate that the Swastika be taught as a symbol of hatred and intolerance in all New York schools.

At a larger level, it stigmatizes one-sixth of the world’s population for no fault of their own. It creates a hateful atmosphere for Hindu students outside India, especially in the West, for practicing their faith. 

References and Additional Read:

SWASTIKA EDUCATION & AWARENESS CAMPAIGN (SEAC)

Wrongfully Accused: The Swastika Is Not Hitler’s Hakenkreuz

The History of the Swastika – A BBC Documentary

Mein Kampf – German

Mein Kampf (Ford Translation)

Mein Kampf – As Translated by E.T.S. Dugdale

Lost in Mistranslation: Why the Hindu Swastika is nothing like the German Hakenkreuz

Hitler’s Pope

10 Things You Need to Know About the Swastika

Cover Image Source: Vilification of Swastika has to Stop

WHY CAL DFEH’S ATTEMPT TO DEFINE HINDUISM REEKS OF ANTI-PAGANISM?

Posted on by
Reply

The recent Cisco case has made quite a headlines in the media recently and brought the discussion on caste-based discrimination among the Hindu community in the US at the forefront. While there is a lot of noise around it, I thought about my own experience around it and whether whatever that is being said, is it as generalized as it is projected or not? And I have my reasons to believe that my experience matters in this case.

One of the assertions that I have seen being made is that one can figure out a caste of a person based on the last name. While it might be true for very specific last names, it doesn’t hold true when you try and test it on a population. There are plenty of last names that are common across these western “caste” constructs created for the Indian society. So, if someone asks an HR department to hand over a list of Indian employees and they’d determine the castes of those employees, the person is full of sh*t.

To begin with, my last name is Mehta. For people who know enough, Mehta is a common (or at least well known) last name, not just in Gujarat but also, apparently, in Punjab and Rajasthan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehta). In fact, within Gujarat itself, this last name is also present in Jains and Banias (the trader caste). I studied briefly in Gurgaon where people often thought I am from Punjab or Rajasthan.

My last name doesn’t give away my caste unless people make assumptions. I don’t wear janeu — so, if someone taps on my shoulder, they would reach a certain conclusion. That inference would be true if I wasn’t a Brahmin and false if I was. And if you say that someone might have done that to check janeu and I just didn’t realize — I could also say that someone might have done that out of affection and the person just assumed that it was to check janeu. If I can be wrong, why can’t others be as well? While I am a vegetarian since birth, in the initial months in the US, I was an eggitarian (also much of my adult life in India) and later turned to vegan (which is again, predominantly non-vegetarians turning into vegans). So, my food habits also won’t clearly identify me as a Brahmin. If they go by my skin color, I may also end up being a Kshatriya but then my last name will create a confusion.

Having said that, was I ever asked about my caste by my Indian colleagues? NO — neither in India, nor in the US, nor in Canada. I don’t recall any conversation around that in my 2 years in the US and the same in Canada. Caste is not the discussion Indians have with each other when they meet, especially these times when there is so much happening around. And outside India, it’s being an Indian that matters and not the caste or the region. This caricature that Indians, when they meet each other, just discuss caste and religion is idiotic, simplistic and stereotypical. It also reeks of anti-paganism.

When Far-LEFT Has No Idea of Life Under Communism

Posted on by
Reply

The other day I was reading “A New Idea of India” by Harsh Madhusudan and Rajeev Mantri. And, in one of the sections, they have quoted the great American artist Andy Warhol making an observation on the American-style capitalism:


“What’s great about this country is that American started the tradition where the richest consumers buy essentially the same things as the poorest. You can be watching TV and see Coca-Cola, and you know that the President drinks Coke, Liz Taylor drinks Coke, and just think, you can drink Coke, too. A Coke is a Coke and no amount of money can get you a better Coke than the one the bum on the corner is drinking“


When I see the so-called SJWs being sold out far-left ideas and portraying capitalism as some kind of evil that the humanity needs to be protected, it just begs one question – “Have they ever lived under communism, actually, to experience what it is?” Because I can bet a million dollars (if I ever have any), if they live, they’d not like the indignity – which I think nobody should experience.

While India wasn’t 100% communist but it was a lot like it – maybe we can call it semi-communist – at least till about mid-1990s. But it is important to give an idea of the divide, which perhaps these SJWs aren’t able to understand.

Let me share an example:


Let’s go back to late 1980s (or, for that matter, early 1990s) India.

Let’s say I had to talk to my cousin in the UK – how would that process go?
To begin with, I don’t have a landline at my place because we are very middle class and even if we could afford a landline, it will take forever to get one due to years*, if not months, of wait list. So, I will have to walk down some distance from my house to an PCO-STD-ISD booth which will have only one or two phones – and may be just one with ISD calling facility. So, I wait for my turn. Once available, I go to my booth and dial my cousin’s residence number. If she/he is home, I will get to talk. Assuming, she picks up, we will have the conversation – all the while my sight is monitoring the constantly updating call charge based on the number of seconds I talk. I will be under pressure to articulate my sentences to minimize the time and maximize the message. Once we finish the conversation, she hangs up and goes back to whatever she was doing or wanted to do after the call. Meanwhile, I hang up the phone, pay the booth operator and then walk back to my home and get back to whatever I intended to do after the call.

Now, let’s say if my cousin from the UK had to talk to me – how would that process go?
To begin with, since I don’t have a landline at my place, I would have probably given the phone number of the only neighbor in the building (or one of the very few in our colony) who had the luxury of the landline. So, she has to be very mindful at what hour is she calling because otherwise, it will affect my relations with the neighbor. She dials the number from the landline in the living room of her home. If my neighbor is home, she/he will pick up. She asks for me and says that she’ll call up again in 5-10 minutes. My neighbor sends someone to call me asking that there is a phone call from my cousin. So, I leave whatever I am doing and rush to the neighbor’s place to prevent a missed call (because it’s not like my cousin will hold). So, I wait for the call. Once she calls the second time, we talk. While she is also under pressure to keep it brief to prevent exorbitant ISD charges, it would possibly be comparatively less than what I experience. We speak on whatever we want to speak. She hangs up and gets back to whatever she was doing. I also hang up, thank my neighbor for letting me know about the call and allowing me to use their landline and perhaps even a courtesy apology for the interruption.

COME 2020:

If I have to call the same cousin in the UK – how will that process go?
I pull out my cell phone. I have this application called WhatsApp, which my cousin also has in her cell phone in the UK. I pull out her contact and press the dial button. She picks up. We talk without any consideration for time (at least not due to charges) since I have this unlimited data pack or I am using my home WiFi. We finish our conversation (plus gossip) and hang up. I get back to whatever I wanted to do after the conversation and she gets back to whatever she wanted to do after the conversation.

Let’s say, if my cousin from the UK had to talk to me – how will that process go?

DITTO

And the reason is CAPITALISM

* – https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1742766518759794

Is Objective of Atheism to be a Non-Believer?

Posted on by
Reply

It took me some time to frame this question and I still don’t think I’ve done a good job of it but something to start with.

I am not religious in a traditional sense. I’ve tried to define religion for myself and the boundaries of it. Luckily, being a Hindu, I’ve got much more liberty to do that and play around with the whole idea of it. I don’t visit temples. I don’t do “pooja”. I haven’t believed in any blind beliefs – at least not the religious ones – as far as I can remember. I don’t have any idols in my house. Although I have a Ganpati badge and a Lakshmi coin in my bag. That too wasn’t kept deliberately but it was kept once for lack of an appropriate place and I never took it out after that.

But one thing I’ve learned over the years is that even if you don’t believe in something, it’s not necessary to criticize or mock people who believe. And this also holds true, the other way around. I always try not to do that. If I end up doing that and realize it later, I try my best to ensure not to do it again.

I find it a bit disturbing when atheists who mock religious beliefs or religious people just for the purpose of doing that. For one thing, it’s definitely not constructive. It may as well be counterproductive. It doesn’t initiate any dialogue or thought. All it promotes is a negative feeling, and in some cases, hatred. It is essentially about asking ourselves a few questions – 1) How much negativity we want to store in ourselves and relay it. 2) If we don’t believe in something, do we want to invest so much time and effort to make others also not believe it or we want to make peace with the status quo as long as it doesn’t affect us. 3) What is our compulsion to criticize or mock others for their belief system?

One thing I’ve learned over the years is that you cannot convince (if that’s really your objective) another person by mockery or criticism. That will hardly ever work. It has to be respectful as much as possible and logical.

Faith is very essential to the overall existence of human beings. While atheists may be tagged as “non-believers” or they may like to tag themselves that, the underlying thing is that we all are believers. We may believe or have faith in different things but our lives run on a belief system. We may also have had stupid beliefs in the past and even in the present, may not necessarily be religious. Anything which we believe just on the basis of hearsay is a blind-belief, in a way. Our biases, presumptions, pre-conceived notions – all will fall in the same bucket. But apart from that as well, our lives essentially rely on those millions of occasions when we put faith in total strangers.

When we take public transport, we put faith in the driver of the bus/train to take us to our destination, even when we don’t know her/him. In this case, essentially, we’re putting our lives at stake. In case of airplanes, besides the pilots, we also put faith on those tens or hundreds of technicians and other ground staff who are responsible to ensure that the plane that takes off, lands as well safely. Our lives are in their hands. When we go to a restaurant, we trust the chef, whom we may not even see ever, to give us good quality, non-contaminated food. When we go to a hospital, we trust all the doctors and nurses to diagnose us correctly and cure us well. When we buy house/condo, we put faith in the quality of the structure built by the builder. When we do investments, we put faith in the financial system of the country to do its job properly and give us deserved returns.

The only difference,  a big one, is that when atheists’ belief is broken, there is accountability (whether that actually means anything may still be a separate story).

India Tourism’s Differential Pricing

Posted on by
Reply

IMAG2227

Recently, on a coffee break with a colleague, she talked about a video she came across of a Moroccan traveler who was traveling to India and was outraged at high ticket prices for foreigners at some of the important historic sites in India. My colleague too was disgusted with that saying this kind of “discrimination” is bad. She was all the more shocked to see this approach/attitude coming from the government.

It’s true that many countries (or probably most) may not be having this kind of differential pricing but then, for me, that doesn’t necessarily make it a good reason.

While discussing this topic, one needs to understand two things properly:

  1. Differential Pricing
  2. Every Difference is Discrimination

1. Differential Pricing
Differential pricing, as a concept, isn’t new. For the same goods or service, often different charges are levied on different customers. Now, the basis may vary depending on the goods/service in question and many other factors. But everybody getting charged the same for a good/service may not happen every time. It is neither good for customers, nor for business. And screaming “discrimination” at the sight of two price points is really naive.

2. Not Every Difference is Discrimination
One of the principal argument in favor of the same pricing of tickets at all sites is that not all foreigners are rich. Many are average middle class who are on a budget and save the hard earned money for the trip, especially the backpackers. On the other hand, there are Indians who are rich but still pay subsidized rates. Very true.
Via Rail Canada charges discounted fares for senior citizens while regular adult fares for everyone above the age of 12. Will that be called discrimination? Aren’t there rich senior citizens who can actually afford to pay full adult fare? And aren’t there poor or middle-class adults who may not be able to pay the full adult fare? What about the children of rich adults who might be charged the same fare as children from poor or middle-class families.
Also, by that logic, when Indians travel to western countries, they should get subsidized rates at tourist sites. But that doesn’t happen. I’m not even saying that should happen. But this is just the example of the extent to which the logic can be extended.
There will always be exceptions who might be getting an unfair advantage of certain policies and some who might be getting penalized unnecessarily. It is always improvisation.

Also, if this pricing was hurting India, it would have been reflected in India’s tourism figures which say otherwise with an increase of 52% in the last five years.

Many people have compared the ticket prices at historical monuments and heritage sites in India vs the world, citing that even with the so-called extraordinary prices, India is still the cheapest place in USD terms. While that may be true, it is still a bad argument since pricing isn’t to make Indian heritage sites entrance prices at par with the global level. That is not what dictates pricing.

Lastly, we often miss the complete picture or the larger context when trying to analyze things. We need to keep that in mind.