Protests against the Citizens
Amendment Act might be the harbinger of the last stand in the civilizational
battles between decadent Nehru-Marxian intellectual complex and the emergent
mass Hindu resurgence. The intellectual public sphere sees every policy move of
Modi 2.0 as another nail in their coffin. Nehru-Marxian post-independent
narrative with the ostensible aim is to deracinate the Indian psyche is being dared
like never before. Current violent manifestations are pointers towards a rear
guard battle being waged by the erstwhile establishment self-styled public
intellectuals. Given the high stakes for Nehru-Marxian establishment, a virtual
existential battle, it turning uglier should not surprise us.
The Indic psyche seems to be
waking up from the long sufferings of Stockholm syndrome arising of long years
of Islamic invasions followed by British rule. The first signs of the challenge
emerged around the early 1980s, imaginably in part as reaction to Meenakshipuram
conversions in 1981. LK Advani shaped the political contours of the same with
the Ram Janmabhoomi movement becoming the symbol around which the Hindu forces
rallied.
In the Nehurvian-Marxo
intellectual domination, Hindus’ would be judged by the adherence to ‘moral
virtue’ modelled on so called Gandhi-Ashokan principles. Any deviation would be
frowned upon and involved in deliberate white washing of the physical and
intellectual virtues that in the normal course determined the hard or soft
power of a society. It was this characterisation of Hindu society that LK
Advani began his battle against. The current battles are continuation at a
larger level.
A key propaganda element necessitates
a formation of ‘mass opinion’ in the Western world against the current establishment.
Like a push and pull narrative, the
Western establishment of public intellectuals, media, celebrities and sections
of political class are too happy to join the bandwagon. To them, it is an
opportunity of reinforcing their alleged moral superiority conferring them a
right of delivering sermons to the allegedly inferior rest of the world.
Perhaps first off the block is Washington Post. Its
editorial board is calling Indian
government to withdraw the Citizenship Amendment Act. Further it seems to
salivate the prospect, however faint it might seem, of a chink in Modi-Shah
armour.
The context is appropriate to
examine why Indian Nehruvian establishment loves foreign intervention and why
the overseas intellectual pretenders love to play to the Indian intellectual
gallery.
Inviting a foreign player to
meddle in Indian affairs in nothing new. In medieval times, it was on
invitation by Ibrahim Lodhi’s uncle, that Babur invaded India dethroning the
Lodhi dynasty. Tippu in his battles with the British sought help from the
Turkish Caliphate. In 1761, Ahmed Shah Abdali’s intervention and Battle of
Panipat originated in a letter from Shah Walliullah. In fact, in July 2013, 65
Indian MPs from both houses wrote to President Obama requesting him to deny
Narendra Modi, visa to US. Ironically,
just 6 years later, an US President is seeking votes in the name of the same
Narendra Modi! As journalists and intellectuals quote ‘approvingly’ the
Washington Post advice, they are merely following a precedent established
centuries ago. The current round of
protests too has seen its share of foreigners participating to ‘save’ Indian
democracy. The government crackdown on such foreigners unsurprisingly has
invited crass reaction from the media and celebrity establishment. To the dying
Nehru-Marxian establishment, the self-styled Western opinion builders are
considered superiors to native Indians, partly the reason being their demi-God
Karl Marx said so. Marx was one of the first to argue “British,
the last of the wave of conquerors of India, represented the first one superior
to the Indians”. He posited that this enabled a British resistance to
Hinduisation, thus foundations being laid for Indian regeneration through
destruction of native industry.
Ironically,
Marxian claims of British superiority over the Indian race anchors the free
flowing advice that keeps emerging from the Western intellectual establishment
to rest of the world. Contrary to perception, the first roots of ‘White Man’s
burden’ could be traced to Marxian description of Indian society. To Marx,
Indian society revealed degradation of substantial magnitude best illustrated
by worship of cow and Hanuman (monkey). To the British lay a duty, of
regenerating the society. The pursuit of the same, in Marx’s words, lay in a
path of first annihilating the existent way of life before regenerating through
laying the fundamentals of materialist models of the West.
Imperialist
theory attributes these duties to a poem by Rudyard Kipling in 1898 titled
‘White Man’s Burden’. Kipling urged the US not to abandon Philippines which
they had conquered from Spain in 1895. To Kipling, Philippines represented the
moment for US to demonstrate its civilizational superiority to transform
Philippines from an ancient society to modernist by inculcating the Western
values of life. Expanding this, to Kipling, the Western societies, Britain,
mainland Europe, US were thrust with a serious responsibility. The
responsibility was to engage in mission to transform the ‘savage’ and ‘semi
savage societies’ across Asia, Africa and rest of America into modern ones.
Western civilizational values were superior in all aspects and diffusion of the
same across the heathen would be perhaps the achievement or fulfilment of the
responsibility thrust on by history on the Western society.
The
theoretical justification of imperialism still runs deep into the Western
establishment. Many are yet to come to the terms of decolonization and still
harbour dreams of fulfilling their cultural responsibility. Unique to Hinduism is an
uncluttered continuity in the face of frequent trials without sacrificing
substantial degree of its intrinsic roots.
In contrast, China, Japan among others surrendered to Westernization in
many dimensions, notwithstanding certain degree of retention of religion and
culture. To Hinduism, inward centric
reactions, both strategic and tactical, conceivably helped retain the core.
This resilience is what continues to ‘torment’ the Western psyche at the elite
level.
The global elite club functions
as if it’s a repository of all world’s knowledge. It proceeds on the premise it
has the power to determine the narrative. There is sense of vanity that they
are morally, intellectually, socially, economically, politically superior to
the rest. There seemingly exists a sense of responsibility of liberating the
‘souls’ of the less privileged so as to speak. Any contrarian responses are dismissed
with disdain. As they perch themselves in an ivory tower, they increasingly
lose the touch of the ground realities. The realities are those what they
believe are and not what exists outside.
If facts do not fit into the
worldview they have created for themselves, then facts are wrong. In other
words, their ivory tower is oblivious of rest of world.
Washington Post opinion is thus a
logical outcome of the ivory tower think they inhabit. It should be a surprise
if its fellow mates New York Times, Economist, Guardian etc, don’t sermonize
the Indian audience. The best way of course is to rub them more by ignoring
them
Comments
Post a Comment