Indian Nationalists Are Dangerous

As Hell.

Case in point, see the link.

It’s obvious that this guy is a Hindu. The craziest, most dangerous and most West-hating Indians of all are Hindus. It is among the Hindus that the extreme hatred of West reaches its full apex. For some reason, Indian Muslims and Sikhs do not seem to have this extreme hatred of the West.

From the link: India needs 10,000 nuclear warheads and the means to deliver them to the US. Wow!

Notice how he uses the phrase “the White man” over and over. I have heard upper caste Hindus use this bristling phrase over and over. These people don’t just hate Whites. They seethe with hatred for the entire West. This is East versus West thinking. We came over them, colonized them, shat on their lousy culture and religion, rejected their crappy science and medicine and replaced them with our superior science and medicine. That’s a humiliation they will never forget. This is the voice of 300 years talking.

Notice at the end that he’s a radical Friedmanite neoliberal. Most Hindutvas are like this. He was also an advisor to Indira Gandhi. Scary!

These Hindus really hate us, don’t they?

I don’t think the average Hindu hates the West. He’s too busy starving to care. But with the middle and possibly upper classes, there is a fascist-like rage that is really frightening. The more you look at it, the more you see Europe 1930’s.

If Whites were so horrible and evil for India, then why don’t Indian Muslims and Sikhs hate the West too? They don’t; it’s a Hindu thing. By the same token, if Indian Muslims are so evil, then why don’t Sikhs hate Muslims too? I am around a lot of Sikhs here. Indian nationalists I know assure me that Sikhs hate Muslims, but I don’t see that. Sikhs don’t appear to hate much of anyone. They don’t hate Muslims, Hindus or the West. Who hates Indian Muslims? Hindus and only Hindus.

What is it with Indian Hindus that has provoked this wild and menacing rage?

210 Comments

Filed under Asia, East Indians, Economics, Europeans, Fascism, Hinduism, India, Islam, Military Doctrine, Nationalism, Neoliberalism, Nuclear Weapons, Political Science, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Religion, South Asia, South Asians, Ultranationalism, Whites

210 responses to “Indian Nationalists Are Dangerous

  1. nazbol

    Rob, would you say the Chinese middle and upper classes also share this anti-Western sentiment? You do know that India is currently aligned with the “West” against China right? The Hindu guy that you linked to seemed to be pro-Soviet. Aren’t you as well?

    • johnUK

      Given all we have done to China including supporting separatism/terrorism in the country and blowing up there embassy in Belgrade to name a few things and all the genocidal acts under British occupation would you blame the Chinese for being anti-western?

      Westerners especially the US, Australia and Britain hate the Han Chinese people.

  2. Raskolnikov

    He’s just a some crazy guy online. For every Hindu talking extremist crap online I could find about 20 WNs. As an aside he seems to have a serious case of narcissistic personality disorder:

    “I am told I am handsome (my photograph is at http://www.Psychotherapy.eBoard.com ) and a genius. Because of my achievements as a scientist (I can reasonably claim to be the foremost scientist in the world in my field)”.
    http://anegroforpresident.blogspot.com/

  3. Dirty Bull

    Look.All the Hindu nationalists need to do is keep calm, steady and do absolutely nothing for 40 to 5o years.
    Not fire a weapon in anger, build a nuclear fleet or raise an army.
    By that time whites will have fucked themselves up so badly (both in north America and Europe), that they’ll cease to be a credible force.
    All you Hinduvtas, just keep your powder dry, your heads cool, relax and sit it out.

    • Hacienda

      “Look.All the Hindu nationalists need to do is keep calm, steady and do absolutely nothing for 40 to 5o years.”

      There will be about 10,000 whites left in the US. 2 of them will be leading
      physicists in 57 dimension space theory. About a 100 will be subjects of for psychology studies, esp bi-polar disorder, manic depression. A small village of WNs will be kept around for tourist visits. The rest will be selectively bred by Thais to be porn stars, addicted to genetic modification porn and be billionaires. Kobe Bryant’s rape child will the the 4rth consecutive black president.

      • Gay State Girl

        Hacienda
        The same will occur with your beloved China. The high/female ratio due to selective abortion of female feti and the subsquent abductions of South Asian women for marriage will ultimately dilute Chinese nationalism.

        • Gay State Girl

          Many Southeast Asians are still resentful of the Chinese and this will be China’s downfall.

        • Hacienda

          “The same will occur with your beloved China.”

          Don’t think so. China has a strong racial-ethnic identity. USA doesn’t.
          Chinese are conservative in a way that colonial Anglos aren’t and can’t ever be. Two different animals. Anglo and Chinese. Lucky for you, as a Jew that both are the way they are. Jews can exploit Anglos for culture modification, Chinese for Jewish chauvinism. Exactly what you do for yourself here on this blog.

        • Gay State Girl

          Hacienda
          China is not breeding enough women so they have to import women from Southeast Asia and the South Pacific in order to breed. This will dilute Chinese national identity as these women come with their own cultural identities and may pass it on to their children. Many of these countries hold some level of resentment against the Chinese and for I will add for Lindsay’s sake say that interbreeding could lower the Chinese IQ.

          BTW I’m not that way IRL. I find tribalist jews just as repulsive and embarassing so I stay away from the jewish news sites and blogosphere. My posts here are mainly a reaction to what I read elsewhere.

        • Hacienda

          “China is not breeding enough women so they have to import women from Southeast Asia and the South Pacific in order to breed. ”

          All countries import SE Asian women if given an opportunity, LOL.
          In fact I import SE Asian women. I have a bunch of them in my garage. I treat them well, take them to the park on Saturdays, bought a karaoke machine for them, teach them one word of English a day. Although, I’ll probably switch to Korean in a bit. I feed them 3x a day. Satay Saturdays, Pho Fridays, and Tapa Tuesdays. It’s the high life for my sweeties. I’m very culture sensitive. But I don’t feed them too much, don’t want them losing their exquisite SE Asian conquest figures.
          I traded one of them to an insurance salesman. I got an Ipad and Clippers tickets in return. Nice.
          I try to send them to night school, but they prefer karaoke, playing cards, and working in hostess bars. I want to open up a brothel in Macau.

          “interbreeding could lower the Chinese IQ.”

          No chance. SE Asian women are strictly for the sex, not for the babies.

        • Gay State Girl

          Hacienda
          How do you expect to breed pure ethnic Chinese and maintain high IQs in the Chinese population with the high male/female ratio of Chinese? An equal number of females are needed to carry on the population because males can produce an infinite amount of offspring over the course of their lifetime but a females can only produce a limited amount of offspring during her lifetime.

        • Gay State Girl

          Hacienda
          http://www.chinadecoded.com/2010/05/25/why-chinese-men-are-marrying-vietnamese-women/
          Many Southeast Asians still harbor negative feelings toward the Chinese so China is producing hostility from within.

        • Amy

          Interesting that Vietnam has (according to the article) five females for every two or three males. I wonder why?

        • Amy

          Oh duh!! How quickly we forget these things.
          Recent births in Vietnam have been more skewed toward males though, same as in China.

        • Amy

          I’m going to be kicking myself for weeks about that. In my defense, I’m still sleep-deprived for being up half the night with a dying cat earlier this week. Still…

        • Gay State Girl

          Amy
          Most countries have more females than males because men die at an earlier age, are more likely to die in battlefield, and are more likely to engage in risky behavior due to high levels of testosterone.

  4. Matt

    Seriously, I think you may be letting your anger and annoyance at what these clowns say and do in their own country to overcome your sense of perspective. The nuclear thing might be a problem if they find a way to deliver it on the back of a Sacred Cow.

  5. Shyam

    I think that out of a billion or so Hindus, you would find maybe a few tens of thousands at the most that hate western culture. The rest of them are either too poor or too much into western culture and its materialism to hate the west.

    How many Hindus you know that are conspiring or have conspired against the west like the Muslims have done (and are still doing)? There is no organized Hindu movement for or against anything because the whole notion of “Hinduism” being a single entity is entirely inaccurate and mainly espoused by its critics so that they have a target to aim at.

    To put things in perspective, the Indian PM is a Sikh and majority of the middle class Hindus have no issues with it. I have yet to see a Hindu come up as a politician in Pakistan or Bangladesh (whatever few Hindus are left there after they have been systematically driven out or killed).

    There is a whole state full of Sikhs in India and they are at peace.

    To answer a few fundamental questions,

    1) Is India diverse? Yes very much so as it never had a phase where people were wiped out en masse (such as the native americans in the US) or where there were religious wars fought (Islam in the middle east, the crusades etc) that wiped out hundreds of thousands of people and more importantly, their culture and religion.

    2) Is there freedom or religion? Yes, as long as you practice your own and leave the others alone and maintain the status quo (which is that there is terrible fiscal and social inequality in the country).

    3) Are their Hindu nationalists? Yes, but a few thousands amongst a billion. There is no pan-hindu movement for achieving a greater good or whatever crap that organized thoughts or religions strive for.

    Om Shanti

    • Indigenous

      People were not wiped out enmasse? WHAT happened IN NAGALAND CONFLICT and Tripura conflict? you wiped out 300,000 indigenous Naga Tribes who originally are Mongolian and call them foul words and “chinks”, occupying an illegal land taken in from Western side of Burma. India ends with West Bengal. Anything “east” is not India but Burma. Period. And if you go around saying “India is diverse blah blah “, diversity has to be agreed by everyone, not imposed or forced on other tribes. Where is your boundaries ? where does it end? Tomorrow you could claim Iran and Israel and Europe as part of “diverse India”, an empire is always diverse, so was Rome, so was the third riech. Don’t impose your Hinduism or your morality or your identity crisis on other tribes who already have an identity for thousands of years.

      • Dota

        This is a good point. India’s atrocities in the state os Assam are seldom reported.

        • Poor comprehension abilities. The talk is about Naga Tribes and not

          Assam. And if ever there was any such thing happened the people there have full right to raise the issue. But no one has any right to pursue it with violence because its not with in the law of land.

          India, as a country, never ever tried to invade or attack any other regions or country. If there was any, it was in self-defense .

          I thinks Indians have failed in diplomatic games and the propaganda against Indian neighbor is considered more credible than the harsh realities India has to face on daily basis.

        • No, when India declared its independence, many regions in India refused to go along. This was their right. India invaded every single one of those regions and princely states, attacked them violently. Then they declared war on Kashmir. The Indian state has been rooted in bloody violence since the very beginning.

        • Robert,

          I am very sorry to state that the information you got is not factually or historically correct. The formula of Indian Partition was that apart from Pricnely states, Hindu majority states were merged in India and Muslim majority states were merged in pakistan. Princely states like Kashmir and other were given a choice either to go with India, Pakistan or go independent.

          Kashmir King Hari Singh wanted to go independent. But then Pakistani Kabaili leaders supported with Pakistan Army attacked the Kashmit and then Hari Singh went and signed accession paper with India. That is historical proof. And then India sent its troops to save Kashmir from going to Pakistan. Then United Nations intervened and siege fire happened. UN passed a resolution at that time with a condition that both Indian and Pakistani troops backtrack from their respective occupied Kashmir and there should be a plebiscite. But Pakistan never agreed to this.

          You can refer to –

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_47

          Also read –

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_India

          Now please tell if India has done anything wrong..

        • Steven

          @Robert I struggle to think of a nation not rooted in bloody violence.

        • INDIAN OCCUPIED GOA

          INDIAN OCCUPIED GOA

          India had Recognized Goa has a foreign Territory in the Indian Subcontinent. Indian Consulate General operate in Panjim Goa from 1947-1955. In 1961 India invaded Goa a overseas Province of Portugal. Indian Army killed Goans and raped Goan Girls.From 1961 till today 2014 India has colonized Goa. It is estimated that Indian slumdogs are more than 60% of the Goa Population and the Indigenous Goans are Minority in their own Lands. The vast majority of Goans are unhappy about Indian Occupation of their Land.

          Read Here : GOANS KILLED BY INDIAN TROOPS 1961-62

          http://goa-invasion-1961.blogspot.in/2013/05/goans-killed-by-indian-troops-1961-62.html

        • INDIAN ARMY RAPISTS

          The Indian army is well known for Raping Muslim women in Kashmir and also Christian women in North East India

          In 1961 the Indian army Raped Goan Catholic Girls during India invasion of Goa

          http://valpoi.blogspot.in/2011/04/rape-of-goan-women-by-veronica.html

        • Stephen Fernandes

          Goans were forced to leave Goa after 1961 brutal occupation of Goa by India and Indian SlumDogs were allowed to built slums in Goa. Today Goa has become like Slum under Indian Occupation, this slumdogs Indians even dream of annexing whole south east asia and grow slums there.

    • @ Indigenous – “Don’t impose your Hinduism or your morality or your identity crisis on other tribes who already have an identity for thousands of years.”
      Exactly. My biggest peeve with mainland Indians is their obsession is trying to make faux “Indians” out of people who have very little cultural or ethnic connection with the mainland Indian cultures or any connection with the Hindu ideals and way of life.
       
      @ Robert Lindsay – “India invaded every single one of those regions and princely states, attacked them violently.”
      Exactly. This is where Indian ‘nationalists’ fail on. India was a country put together by military force, using ‘laws of the land’ such as AFSPA and others created to suppress dissent against Hindi imperialism.

      • Tamilnadu , Kerala , Andhra and Karntaka are not Hindi imperial states and still I wonder there is not any AFSPA there.

        And what is this ‘main-land’ Indians. I don’t need a ship to go to north eastern states. I can go by road. So except Andman, Lakshdweep, all of India is main-land and as far as culture is concerned, even so-called mainlanders have so much difference betwen them. There is not a single thing a guy from Punjab and Tamilnadu shares regarding culture.

      • Mainlanders is a term used to refer to Indians of South Asian ethnicity, vis. a .vis. NE people who are ethnically, culturally and geographically South East Asians. The difference is more than mere culture – it is geographically isolated and the people are of a completely different ethnic markup.
         
        You have once again, resorted to pulling and stretching arguments. The differences between a Tamil and Punjabi is far less than the difference between the mainland Indian cultures and NE cultures. Both Tamils and Punjabis, for example, follow the Hindu dharma system, along with its underlying caste system, conservatist moral code and a fatalistic outlook towards life. Try selling that in Shillong, Tinsukia or Aizawl.

        • Dota

          Welcome back AI. You’ll stay I hope? 🙂

        • Steven

          He comes and goes. It hasn’t been long.

        • Dota

          Well ok Mr Steven ^

        • @ Mohit Gupta
          Regarding the AFSPA, this is again one of the ‘mainland vs. non-mainland’ things. Two years back, some circles of the Indian administration pondered over using the Indian military to handle the Naxal conflicts and the terrible law-and-order situation in the states of Bihar and Andhra. The proposal was met with outrage, both from the parliament and the public, since apparently, the Indian military cannot be used against Indian nationals. Clearly, in spite of their political rhetoric, the Indian administration and public do not consider the Kashmiris or the ethnic groups North East India as Indians enough.

          This article in Kafila (a leftist periodical) deal with this issue excellently and mirrors my own experience with Axom nationalism as well, except that I picked up arms in the nineties while Phukan didn’t.

          http://kafila.org/2011/11/02/my-days-with-nationalism-in-assam-ankur-tamuli-phukan-2/
           
          @ Dota
          Thank you. I have been promoted recently and with great responsibility comes erratic 14 hour workdays which doesn’t leave me much of spare time.

        • If you mean to say that AFSPA isthere in Kashmir and North East is just because Indians ( BTW, Ne people are also Indians) don’t consider them Indians is over-simplification of complex issue.

          The thing is that Kashmir and NE are all border Areas and this is usual in the world to have security forces at border areas. And APSPA is there because there is militancy there. BTW I don’t support APSPA.

          If you say that to tackle Naxals, Army was not called in some ‘main-land’ states is deflection of administrative realities. Law and Order is the subject of states.Army is under the control of central government. So this is more of an academic issue. The thing is that CRPF or other police forces are no less agressive than Army in such battle fields. So if its Army or CRPF, this doesn’t matter. The fact is that we are fighting with the problems of insurgency in both the places.

        • “…this is usual in the world to have security forces at border areas.”
          It is unusual in most civilised democratic nations to suspend basic human rights of citizens in border areas by imposing military rule on them.
           
          “…don’t consider them Indians is over-simplification of complex issue.”
          It is not all that complex. What makes the ULFA inherently different from the Naxals, that the Indian military is used against the former but not against the latter? And why is there no AFSPA in Bihar or UP in spite of their extremely terrible law-and-order situation (which makes Assam or Nagaland look like Switzerland)?
           
          If the Union of India is willing to suspend several of fundamental rights for over three generation and still expects North Easterns to believe in India, then you might as well wish for 72 virgins in heaven for blowing yourself up in a market square.
           
          I have no allegiance to a state whose army can rape, torture and murder my people with no avenue for judicial recourse or justice (thanks to AFSPA). If I am forced to be a part such a state, I have the right to bear arms and fight against it.

        • “It is unusual in most civilised democratic nations to suspend basic human rights of citizens in border areas by imposing military rule on them.”

          Its unusual in most democratic nations for people to start separatist movement and kill security forces in numbers and then expect that there would be no retaliation. It hurts every time a civilian is killed or injured.

          “And why is there no AFSPA in Bihar or UP in spite of their extremely terrible law-and-order situation (which makes Assam or Nagaland look like Switzerland)?”

          Because people there are not fighting for so-called “Freedom”. And for the law and order, there is police. Army is called in emergency situation only at the request of state government. Not at your or mine invitation or wish.

          I have no allegiance to a state whose army can rape, torture and murder my people with no avenue for judicial recourse or justice (thanks to AFSPA).

          Nor do I. I have categorically rejected any need for AFSPA in NE. But Its required in Kashmir. And BTW they are my people too.

          “If I am forced to be a part such a state, I have the right to bear arms and fight against it.”

          You have all the right. In same way government has all the right to make new laws so that they tackle people with guns. But I don’t see you taking arms and fighting against your own country as you are too busy earning your livelihood like other so-called main-landers.

        • @ Mohit Gupta
          Hence my argument that India isn’t a nation. Its just a country, a political union of several nations.

          The Maoists and Naxalites are both seperatist. You really need a crash course in politics.

          I did and do play my part in it, unlike your fellow mainlanders do sit, whine, blog and tweet instead of tackling their issues head on. I have just switched the track – from armed militancy to more pacifist options and I made it very clear during the surrender deal that if I am provoked, I WILL pick arms again.

        • “I have just switched the track – from armed militancy to more pacifist options and I made it very clear during the surrender deal that if I am provoked, I WILL pick arms again.”

          If you people are so powerful to get a deal from government then why are you whining here ? I can see, you are ditching your own people so that you can now lead a peaceful life and others follow your legacy.

          All Maoist and Naxals are nothing but brain-washed youth.

        • @ Mohit Gupta
          I am here because I like to discuss and debate on socio-political issues that are close to me, not to play some petty political agenda. Of course, you wouldn’t understand what that means, because it isn’t like desi engineers to understand the value of interacting and discussing things with people. Everything to you is a goal oriented maths problem.
           
          Regarding whether I ditched my people or not, it is not your place to judge. I mean, what did you do for your people?

  6. Job Abraham

    Check on the fastest cruise missile currently available and check who it belongs to 🙂 we could shoot it up your ass just to put you and your rhetoric into a permanent orbit around the sun… maybe a little warmth would wipe out the cobwebs in your brain.

  7. Gay State Girl

    Lindsay
    India supposedly made English their national language so they could avoid ethnic rivalry. What do you make of that?

  8. johnUK

    For some reason Robert recently “jack” instead of “johnUK” comes up in the name field in the comments section.

    He is not a Hindu nationalist.

    This guy seems like Indian nationalist perhaps a Marxist.

    ”These Hindus really hate us, don’t they?”

    No, in fact they are pro-western unlike Pakistanis who have conspired to commit terrorist attacks and with the case of London bombing did commit terrorist attacks against the west.

    Hindu nationalists, at the least the main Hindu nationalists, are pro-Western/Israeli and hate Pakistan and Muslims who have directly attacked India with CIA/MI6 backing with numerous terrorist attacks.

    Pakistani nationalists are the most fascist of them all and if they could would strike India with nuclear weapons who with ISI along with Saudi Arabia have been the main sponsors of Islamic terrorism all over the world sparking numerous wars killing and ethnically cleansing at least over a million people.

    ISI and Pakistani nationalists are indistinguishable from Al Qaeda and international jihad terrorism with senior jihadist linked to Al Qaeda having senior connections to the ISI.

    Pakistan is an absolute shithole who unlike India is de-modernising and not even attempting to improve the situation in the country.
    What is worse big evil has exported there Islamic anarchy and filth abroad and around the world.

    With recent events in Pakistan it looks like it is in a state of internal collapse. Thank god!

    • Gay State Girl

      Pakistanis needs to divorce itself from the Arab world and embrace its pre Islamic history as many Iranians are doing.

      JohnUK and Lindsay
      A serious question. What has Al Qaeda done for the people of Pakistan in return for sheltering them? What have the Palestinians and other Arabs done in return for Pakistanis and the rest of the non Arab muslim world for their tireless devotion? Inquiring minds want to know.

      • Wade in MO

        “What has Al Qaeda done for the people of Pakistan in return for sheltering them?”

        Well, I’m not going to say that they’re deserving of some sort of sheltering, but they did help defeat the soviets a few decades ago. Also, southern Afghanistan is dominated by Pashtuns and so is the part of Pakistan that borders it. The Pakistani government doesn’t have a firm hold over the region. If the pashtuns have taken in the Taliban and/or al-Qaeda the government of Pakistan really might not have a lot of say in harboring them. I don’t think they’d try to get to much “firmer” of a hold over the Pashtun region because it seems the government is somewhat shaky at times anyway. Also, their border with Afghanistan doesn’t seem to be the most secure border on Earth. Remember, this is an artificial country. At one point, even Banglandesh was part of Pakistan.

        • Gay State Girl

          I understand that but I was referring to many individual minded Iranians who are disillusioned with the Islamic Republic and want to reject the Islamic nature of their culture.

      • johnUK

        @Gay State Girl

        “Pakistanis needs to divorce itself from the Arab world and embrace its pre Islamic history as many Iranians are doing.”

        Actually Pakistan’s Islamist turn was influenced by the Islamic revolution in Iran which under Pakistan’s military leader brought in Islamic practices and gave larger sway to Islamic religious leaders.

        What Pakistan needs to do is to get rid of Islam and the Islamic death cult which I think is impossible until the country is destroyed via internal break up or war with India other that that the only hope is a hardcore Communist movement inside Pakistan.

        As for your question about AQ I will answer this later.

        @Wade in MO

        At one point, even Banglandesh was part of Pakistan.

        Would explain why Bangladesh is a shithole as well and why Bangladeshi girls are trafficked in India as sex slaves.

        • Dota-Player

          @ John UK

          “Would explain why Bangladesh is a shithole as well and why Bangladeshi girls are trafficked in India as sex slaves. ”

          Bangladesh has made considerable progress after gaining independence from Pakistan, economically, and in some aspects, even socio/culturally. They have a fairly progressive take on developing villages. Indian villages are hell holes by comparison.

          “”What Pakistan needs to do is to get rid of Islam and the Islamic death cult “”

          No.

          Islam isn’t Pakistan’s problem, Wahabism is. Wahabism has tried to subdue and replace Pakistan’s diversity with an intolerant Arab philosophy. The break up of Bangladesh and the ruptures in Balochistan are a product of ethnic identities re-asserting themselves against the artificial Islamic identity thrust upon the country by Wahabism. If the country had organized itself as a confederation comprised of semi-autonomous provinces (which are ethnically homogenizes for the most part) Wahabism would never have taken root.

        • johnUK

          @Dota-Player

          Bangladesh has made considerable progress after gaining independence from Pakistan, economically, and in some aspects, even socio/culturally. They have a fairly progressive take on developing villages. Indian villages are hell holes by comparison.

          I would to see this but Bangladesh is kept in check like Algeria by the military and police apparatus that keeps the Islamism suppressed.

          I think a couple of years ago in Bangladesh Islamists slaughtered a number of the country’s military personal.

          Islam isn’t Pakistan’s problem, Wahabism is. Wahabism has tried to subdue and replace Pakistan’s diversity with an intolerant Arab philosophy

          I here this BS excuse all the time.

          There are other non Wahabbi Islamic movements as well as regional Islamic costumes of various tribes that are just as extreme and fascist as Wahabism around the world.

          If Pakistan was not a Muslim country it would have progress better like India which has lifted millions of poverty.

  9. Wade in MO

    Found an interesting and relevant site Robert:
    http://indianterrorism.bravepages.com/

  10. Dota-Player

    Like Zionism, Hindutva is multifaceted. There is cultural Hindutva and political Hindutva. The former despises western culture and glorifies the greatness of Indian civilization, which is defined through the narrow lens of Hinduism and only that. Cultural Hindutva has made waves recently by mobs storming nightclubs and attacking women who were deemed ‘immoral.’ They’ve also vandalized shops selling valentine day cards.

    Political Hindutva is interesting since it is actually quite pro west. They are more than happy to accommodate US imperialism if India can get a piece of the action. They are extremely pro Zionist. Economically, they are neo-liberal. They have hijacked India’s anti-colonial legacy and made a mockery of Nehru’s values.

    @ Shyam

    “There is a whole state full of Sikhs in India and they are at peace.”

    Were you asleep during the 1980s?

    “I have yet to see a Hindu come up as a politician in Pakistan or Bangladesh (whatever few Hindus are left there after they have been systematically driven out or killed). ”

    Sikhs are still somewhat better of than Muslims in status as their religion is seen as being ‘indigenous.’ Like it or not, a large number of Hindus dislike Muslims in some form or the other. Muslims are just barely above Dalits in the social order of India.

    • Aaron

      It’s not surprising that Hindu nationalists are Zionist. The structural similarities between Jews in Israel and Hindus in India are pretty compelling. Ulster unionists are also fanatic Zionists, from what I’ve heard, which isn’t surprising either. Zionism is the flagship nationalism for a certain political structure: Israel/Palestine, Ulster/Ireland, India/Pakistan…

      One possible future scenario: as US support for Israel declines due to declining Jewish influence in the US, Israel builds alliances with Indian, Ulster, and other nationalists. Especially, nationalists who represent majority nations having to deal with hostile ethnic or religious minorities within their states, and even more especially those dealing with minorities supported by irredentist neighboring states or territories, and even more especially those dealing with minorities that are Muslim. The alliances would be more rhetorical than material: defending each other’s legitimacy, countering hostile propaganda and UN resolutions, etc.

      This hypothetical Israel/Ulster/India/etc. bloc would be ideological and therefore weak. It would easily be trumped by alliances based on material interests, like military aid. Still, it’s one possible scenario. For anti-Hindutva anti-Zionists like Robert Lindsay, it would be a convenient one-stop target.

      • johnUK

        @Aaron

        All the nationalist parties in Europe at least the main ones are now pro Zionist because of Muslim immigration.

        • Aaron

          I don’t really know about European nationalists, but I know that the high-profile ones like Geert Wilders are pro-Israel. I think the Vlaams Belang explicitly cited the Muslims as the reason for their switch to a pro-Israel stance, so what you say is definitely a big part of it, probably most of it. With opportunists like Nick Griffin (BNP), it’s harder to tell the motive. But what about Sinn Fein, the Basque nationalists, the Scottish nationalists? It’s not like Sinn Fein is Zionist, right? I don’t think you can ignore pro-Palestinian European nationalists like Sinn Fein just because they’re relatively minor players.

          My hypothesis is still that it’s a matter of structure. Parties representing stateless nations (Basques, Scots, etc.) or nations identifying with irredentist states (Irish in Ulster) will tend to be anti-Israel. Those on the other side (BNP) will find it easier to be pro-Israel. But I don’t really know about European nationalism. If there are any experts – by which I mean, people who have read some Wikipedia articles – maybe they could say whether this pattern really exists.

        • Aaron

          Correction to what I wrote above: I think it was actually the Lega Nord, not the Vlaams Belang, that said they switched from pro-Palestinian to pro-Israel because of the Muslims. That goes against my hypothesis, because the Lega Nord represents a stateless “nation” (or community).

        • johnUK

          @Aaron

          BNP took a pro-Zionist turn due to the Muslim issue.

          Even when Griffin was anti-Zionist his primary concern was about Muslim crime and behavior in Britain and across Europe.

          Scottish nationalists LOL

          They are as main stream as the major 3 political parties who should not be put in the same category as Sinn Fein or Basque nationalists.

  11. Dota-Player

    @ John Uk

    “”There are other non Wahabbi Islamic movements as well as regional Islamic costumes of various tribes that are just as extreme and fascist as Wahabism around the world.

    If Pakistan was not a Muslim country it would have progress better like India which has lifted millions of poverty.””

    No offence, but if there’s any bs here, its the orientalist jazz you’ve posted above. I’m tired of hearing the rant’s of people who cannot bifurcate religion and regional culture. Every Islamic region practices its own brand of Islam; and Islam is only as liberal as the Muslims who practice it. I despise the intellectual dishonesty of those who place Islam inside a vacum, striped of historical context, and then bash it. If you’ve got a state as liberal as Haroun Rashid’s was 1300 years ago, you get progress. Yes Islamists exist everywhere, but it is societies tolerance for them that is a tell tale sign. In Bangladesh, society at large isn’t as tolerant of this crap, not just the liberal Awami league dominated goverment. Societies are populated by real actors, not passive by standers. If a culture is violent and intorlerant, it will use religion as an outlet for expressing that rage. Hindutvadis have attacked women in night clubs. That is taliban like behavior right here in India. The Pashtun code is similarly fucked up and that colours the Islam they practice. You don’t see such behavior in Iranian society despite the Mullah regime which has been imposed on them. Despite Sanctions, there is no widespread poverty in Iran, and Iran produces the largest number of PHDs and reseach personell in all of the Islamic world. Persian’s see their Islam as unique and an expression of their culture.

    • johnUK

      @Dota-Player

      Please cite as an example a liberal Muslim country in the world today?

      The core problem that connects all these societies together is Islam and the more Islamic it is the less civilised it is.

      In non-Muslim countries were Muslims are a significant minority and there is a chance for Islamic supremacy over its non-Muslim inhabitants then it is almost certain Muslims will start civil strife and ethnic conflict which will be supported by Muslims across the world financed with millions of dollar from Muslim countries and billionaire businessmen especially if it suits US/EU geo-political hegemony.

      Face facts Islam is the only religion on the planet that is at war and conflict with every other religion and even secular Muslim countries around the world whither they be Orthodox or Catholic Christians, Buddhists, Jews, Hindus, atheist or different Islamic religious sects.

      Despite Sanctions, there is no widespread poverty in Iran, and Iran produces the largest number of PHDs and reseach personell in all of the Islamic world.

      In regards to poverty rate I don’t think that is accurate.

      http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2008/0805_iran_salehi_isfahani.aspx

      • Wade in MO

        “Please cite as an example a liberal Muslim country in the world today?”

        Other than a few Hezbollah problems, Lebanon is supposed to be relatively liberal. Many other muslims regard their popstars as sluts because of the way they dress.

        Non-arab muslim countries are supposed to be considerably less crazy than arab muslim countries. British scholar Michael Axworthy claims that only 1.4% of Iranians attends Friday prayers regularly despite the fact that it’s an islamic republic. Some turkic countries are run by secular regimes, although Turkey itself as gotten more islam friendly lately. their problems seem to be more ethnic than religious though. Although I’m not too familiar with the area, I never heard too much craziness coming from Indonesia. Somalis are crazy, but that not becuase they’re muslims. It’s because they are just turds in general.

        “Face facts Islam is the only religion on the planet that is at war and conflict with every other religion and even secular Muslim countries around the world whither they be Orthodox or Catholic Christians, Buddhists, Jews, Hindus, atheist or different Islamic religious sects”

        To be fair, Islam is located in between all of those religions and has far more points where it can have conflicts than the others. The non-islamic areas (India, Europe, China, etc) are located on the periphery and large parts of their borders are ocean.

        Frankly, I’d fear an american/british invasion more than any muslim terror attack. The anglosphere is quite violent too, but has much more power. Compared to the anglosphere’s actions (deposing 2 governments, etc) a few terrorist attacks actually seem rather impotent.

        • Dota-Player

          The gist of Wade’s comment is that every region is unique and should be treated as such. Pakistan is screwed because of their fail economic policies. I have Pakistani friends who have been in the import export business for years, and they can give you detailed accounts of incompetency. They complain that the country failed to ride the wave of Chinese growth, but instead, allowed itself to be dominated by Chinese exports. India has recently begun to rectify this imbalance, but Pakistan remains oblivious to the issue. Were you aware of these details? (I can get more). Probly not. Because that would require real research. Its just easier sitting back and blamming everything on Islam like a true psuedo intellectual.

          “”Face facts Islam is the only religion on the planet that is at war and conflict with every other religion and even secular Muslim countries around the world whither they be Orthodox or Catholic Christians, Buddhists, Jews, Hindus, atheist or different Islamic religious sects. “””

          Whatdayaknow, John of Damascus lives

        • johnUK

          @Wade in MO

          But Hezbollah does not outright run Lebanon and is itself involved in foreign jihad like with Bosnia where Hezbollah instructors came into Bosnia and started training Muslim Bosnian militants supported by the EU and US.

          Some turkic countries are run by secular regimes, although Turkey itself as gotten more islam friendly lately.

          Turkey through the CIA, MI6 and NATO has been the primary state of supporting Islamic terrorism and fascist pan-Turkish nationalism in the Eurasian sphere that includes all Turkic countries.
          It is nothing new as prior to WW1 Britain promoted pan-Turkish nationalism like it does today as a geo-political weapon against Russia.

          Turkey recent Islamist turn is complete BS by the Jewish mass media who since the Flotilla incident have suddenly discovered Turkeys Islamist connections.

          Frankly, I’d fear an american/british invasion more than any muslim terror attack. The anglosphere is quite violent too, but has much more power. Compared to the anglosphere’s actions (deposing 2 governments, etc) a few terrorist attacks actually seem rather impotent.

          All the terrorist attacks have government/intelligence network connections to them especially the London bombing with the hand full of other being link to our terrorists in the Balkans and/or North Caucasus like the Kosovo Albanian attack in Frankfurt.

          ”A drastic case is support for the Balkan jihads (Bosnia and Kosovo) since 1992 against the Serbian Orthodox Christians. Al Qaeda was the Clinton administrations partner in the Balkans. U.S. planes transported the mujahideen to Bosnia to fight Christian Serbs and Croats. As a result Bosnia became the hub of terrorist operations extending into Western Europe and North America, including 9/11. The Hamburg Al Qaeda cell, which played a pivotal part in 9/11, was recruited from Bosnia”

          http://moderntokyotimes.com/2011/03/06/frankfurt-airport-jihad-who-is-to-blame/

          The war on terror is absolute joke.

          Any idiot with half a brain can clearly see the official 9/11 narrative is BS aided at least by the US government and the other attacks in London and Spain allowed to happen by the domestic intelligence services of Britain and Spain which are offshoots of a terrorist network they help create and maintain to fight there proxy wars overseas.

          Even the first 93 WTC there is government connections to the terrorists.

        • Wade in MO

          @JohnUK

          “Turkey through the CIA, MI6 and NATO has been the primary state of supporting Islamic terrorism and fascist pan-Turkish nationalism in the Eurasian sphere that includes all Turkic countries.
          It is nothing new as prior to WW1 Britain promoted pan-Turkish nationalism like it does today as a geo-political weapon against Russia. ”

          I’m aware of pan-turkism. What you’re forgetting here is that your comment was about islam and islamic violence/oppression. Pan-turkism is not islamism. Many more extreme forms of islamism are anti-nationalist so pan-turkism would be verboten to many of them.

          I’ll comment on the rest later becuase I might have to run to the basement quickly.

        • johnUK

          @Wade in MO

          “I’m aware of pan-turkism. What you’re forgetting here is that your comment was about islam and islamic violence/oppression. Pan-turkism is not islamism. Many more extreme forms of islamism are anti-nationalist so pan-turkism would be verboten to many of them.”

          It has incorporated with Saudi and other Arab countries help jihadism into the movement which incorporates the Cold War era Gladio network with the Grey Wolves supporting Chechen jihadists and US/NATO’s international jihad network that they began to set up in the mid 70’s.

          During the mid 90’s onwards Turkey was running jihadist training camps in the mountainous region to the East of the country were the 99 earthquake hit.
          The suicide bombings in Turkey in 2003 were blowback from this.

  12. No they do . Lots of Sikhs hate Muslims especially those from India and also hate Pakistan. Perhaps not to the same degree as Brahmans, and of course not all Sikhs are like that but a significant percentage of them do.

    Some Sikhs hate Brahmans and Muslims mutually.

  13. Malayali

    http://www2.eboard.com/eboard/servlet/BoardServlet?ACTION=NOTE_SHOW&ACTION_ON=NOTE&OBJECT_ID=4476187&SITE_NAME=Destination&BOARD_NAME=Psychotherapy&SESSION_ID=h7qo0hx970fvv3254&TAB_ID=30851

    “You’ve got to be kidding.

    (AP)”Poll: Racial views steer some away from Obama
    One-third of polled white Democrats harbor negative views toward blacks”

    I am told I am handsome (my photograph is at http://www.Psychotherapy.eBoard.com ) and a genius. Because of my achievements as a scientist (I can reasonably claim to be the foremost scientist in the world in my field), I am listed in Who’s Who in America (2008 and earlier editions) where I have lived for 42 years and in Who’s Who in the World (2009 edition). But I have to live in a tiny room in the ghetto with poor blacks which is a lot better than having to live, as I did, in a Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) library for six and a half months sleeping on the chairs at night and going without food for up to 3 weeks at a time (in principle, I am a multimillionaire in India, even in dollar terms) after having been mugged in a Harvard seminar because my work had put me in a position of leadership in my field. All because of my race (I was told I was “colored”, never mind if technically a Caucasian).

    A Negro was made Chief of the Army Staff before the first invasion of Iraq because, just as policemen who are low caste Hindus are the most aggressive toward Muslims in India, blacks in America are the most aggressive toward brown people. Obama has already promised to “invade” Pakistan. If he becomes president, God help the world, including America.
    Satish Chandra”

    LOL. He has got to be a troll.

  14. Shyam

    @ Dota-Player

    “@ Shyam
    “There is a whole state full of Sikhs in India and they are at peace.”
    Were you asleep during the 1980s?”

    Nope I was a toddler then. However, from what I’ve read, it was the Congress(I) party (which has little to do with any “Hindutva” agenda) which persecuted the Sikhs in retaliation to the murder of Indira Gandhi. The pro-Hindu party (BJP) then for the most part was either neutral or purportedly supported the Sikhs. Of course, they indulged in some cheap gimmickry to get votes. But anyways, I have two points to make regarding your retort:

    1) Anti-Sikhism in the 80s had nothing to do with “Hindutva”. It was a bunch of crazy congresswallahs going berserk over their leader being killed. Also, I’d like to mention that some extremest Sikhs did bomb the Air India flight in retaliation and the Canadian Govt screwed up so badly after that.

    2) My original statement still stands. Sikhs (except Khalistan supporters most of whom are in Canada and a few in the US) live in Harmony in India.

    “Sikhs are still somewhat better of than Muslims in status as their religion is seen as being ‘indigenous.’”

    I’d say that the Sikhs are much much more (not just somewhat) better off than a lot of Muslims and a lot of the poor “Hindus”. They have a reputation of being extremely hard workers (Sardarji jokes not withstanding).

    “Like it or not, a large number of Hindus dislike Muslims in some form or the other. Muslims are just barely above Dalits in the social order of India.”

    Well, like it or not, a large number of Muslims dislike “Hindus” because of Idol Worshipping, Polytheism and Infidel related laws prescribed to them in their charming religion . Also, a large number of Tamils dislike Kannadigas and vice versa and have seen that. I am Tamil myself (raised in Hyderabad) and I personally have seen rocks thrown by the friendly old-city Muslims whenever a Hindu procession goes through that route. Have also seen the workings of the BJP and am not pleased with them either. They are strong in south India nowadays. A lot of Tamilians despise Hindi speaking people. I know plenty of Baniyas that hate Marathi guys and south Indians..

  15. Dota-Player

    @ Shyam

    “”Nope I was a toddler then. However, from what I’ve read, it was the Congress(I) party (which has little to do with any “Hindutva” agenda) which persecuted the Sikhs in retaliation to the murder of Indira Gandhi. The pro-Hindu party (BJP) then for the most part was either neutral or purportedly supported the Sikhs. Of course, they indulged in some cheap gimmickry to get votes. But anyways, I have two points to make regarding your retort:””

    Re-read my post please. I never said Hindutva had anything to do with the anti-Sikh riots. I was disputing your statement that Sikhs live in peace. Indians are uncivillized people. As Aakar Patel points out, Indians can morph into animals, participate in some ugly atrocities, and then revert back to normal the next day and forget the entire episode.

    “My original statement still stands. Sikhs (except Khalistan supporters most of whom are in Canada and a few in the US) live in Harmony in India. ”

    No it doesn’t. And Sikhs are sick of Hindutvadis trying to undermine their religion by claiming that Sikism is just a seperate branch of Hinduism. I’ve had numerous Sikhs tell me this.

    “”Well, like it or not, a large number of Muslims dislike “Hindus” because of Idol Worshipping, Polytheism and Infidel related laws prescribed to them in their charming religion .”””

    I’m not going to get drawn in a mud slinging match between Islam and Hinduism. All I’m saying is that there are numerous societies in the west that dislike their minorities, however, that does not stop the latter from climbing up. Even today, a large segment of the White population in the US mistrusts/fears black people. A lot of blacks themselves are known to be viciously anti-white. But that did not stop Obama from becomming President. Granted he’s a masonic fraud, but that civil society accepts him despite his race is the difference that civilization makes. India lacks that civilization. Your response of ‘muslims hate us too’ was predictable and sadly very typical. You may appear educated, but ultimately, your still one of them.

  16. you gay carpenter worshipping christain piece of shit. We burn church here for people like you fuck you white christain dog

    • Thanks for your comments my Hindutvadi friend. Now please fuck off back to India, ok? If you feel like going for a swim, there are some delightful corpse-filled rivers to swim in, you can bob right along with the corpses or laze on the shore next to some rotting corpses, however you wish to spend your vacation.

      • Dota

        LOL, he’s a Patel and hence probly Gujarati. They tend to be the most facist and fanatical Hindutwadis you can find.

  17. VEro

    Sir,
    You should have known about a survey in which Pakistan which is the biggest beneficiary of US aid in the recent years have more hatred for America than any other country.
    http://www.slate.com/id/2239339/

    I guess you posted this article by the sheer number of Filthy rubbishes you received from Hindutvadis. They are pusillanimous morons who can just froth at their mouth. Now since internet penetration is a bit deeper in India, every ass can type their mind out .

    • Pakistanis may indeed hate the US, sure, but I don’t feel threatened by them. Besides, Pakistanis never say two unkind words to me. I only know one Pakistani, and he’s a really nice guy. So, you know, Pakistanis don’t yell at me and attack me, so I don’t mind them. But these Indians attacked me so much, I started hating them back. You know, you hit a man enough and he might start hitting back.

      I’ve written some pretty nasty stuff about Pakistan too, but no ever got mad about it.

      There is something wrong with these Indians. They are so belligerent and full of themselves. You tell a Pakistani that that Pakistan sucks, and he nods his head and says yeah I know. You tell an Indian that, and he about threatens to kill you.

      • Geronimo

        You claim to be a left leaning socialist but I can tell you without a shadow of doubt that you judge people by nationality, race etc.

        I bet if someone kept saying that your country sucked, your languages sucked, your life sucked you would get pretty p***ed at that. Your theory also breaks down because indians have not perpetrated a terrorist attack on american soil while pakistanis have bombed away in the past decade.

        Maybe you need to stop whining about nationalities based on a few pointless experiences and start changing people’s minds. I know many indians read your blogs and abuse you but you keep abusing them back.

        The end result is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Instead of providing a positive liberal example for ignorant people you give them more anger and they end up becoming spiteful.

        i know you can do whatever you like on your blog, but toning the rhetoric down might actually help the liberal cause.

        • Hi, nice to meet you.

          Bye, you’re banned.

          Actually, I had quite a good friend who was an Indian Hindu. He’s a good person overall, I must say. The culture sucks ass though, and so does the religion. It’s utter shit, just admit. These people judge others by what caste they are! What scumbags! Nation of racist maniacs, ingrained into the culture like wheat kernels into bread.

  18. VEro

    Sir,
    As i said in the latter part that internet penetration is a bit deeper here than Pakistan and ofcourse English language is an issue there as well( Indians fall short in that as well but the proportion of people knowing basic english for comprehension differs a lot between two countries atleast in major cities ). There’s every possibility that posts relating pakistan might not bring you commenters from Pakistan as against posts relating India.
    Imagine what a moderate educated Indian might know about the world politics. He generally believes and lives the life their elected representatives,spriritual gurus, seperatists(we have all such groups in india) who happens to be a American hater. Plus the population of India is much more than Pakistan so obviously there’s a lot of brainwashed asses you could see in forums, discussions et al.
    There are people all over the world who hate America without even knowing the cause of hatred. I’m afraid you might have encountered few such people.
    Generalizing a community as a whole for this problem doesn’t serve any purpose. Trust me you’re dealing with morons and fanboys who had been brainwashed for decades and have a little understanding of what the fact really is.

  19. J J S

    As a member of the Sikh minority in India, all I can say is that the Hindus that I deal with on a regular basis are EXTREMELY anti-Western and even anti-Christian.

    They actively troll the Internet, attacking any blog or site that talks about the true nature of hinduism. I believe the West hasn’t yet recognized the true nature of this wounded beast.

    To all the Hindus who write back, answer this: Why has every minority in india faced riots at the hands of ‘peaceful’ hindus? Not just the Sikhs, but even the Muslims and Christians (who educated and helped build the nation)!

    • Hi, it’s very nice to see you on this site! I live in a town that has many Sikhs, and I just want to say that I like you guys a lot, ok? 🙂 I have a very high opinion of Punjabi Sikhs. All around very good people.

      OTOH, I am not so sure about Hindus at all.

      Can you tell me the relationship of Sikhism to the Hindu religion and why it is better in your opinion.

      • Dota

        “”Can you tell me the relationship of Sikhism to the Hindu religion””

        I don’t want to speak for JJS, so I’ll keep this brief. Sikhism is a daughter religion to both, Hinduism and Islam. Ritualistically, it is very Hindu. It’s philosophy and worldview however, are characteristically Islamic. Sikhs are monotheists and many verses from the Guru Granth Sahib are strikingly similar to those found in the Quran (The Quran similarly draws its material from the Bible and other non cannon writings). The philosophy of the Kirpan (sword) is also strikingly Islamic. Muhammad said that it was binding upon every Muslim to oppose injustice with his right hand. Sikhs carry the Kirpan around precisely because they are commanded to oppose injustice should they encounter it. The Sikh place of worship, the Gurdwara, also distributes food and water to the neighborhood needy. This form of charity is also very Islamic as the emphasis is on distributing food more than cash (Westerners tend to donate lump sums to organized charities). Hindu temples on the other hand accumulate tons of gold, silver and jewels every year so that the gods are appeased while the people outside continue to starve.

        I have a soft corner for Sikhs myself 🙂

        • Hinduism is CRAP.

          Thx for this. Now I like Sikhism even more.

        • Sikhism have NO Relation with ISLAM. If any Sikh would read the above message he would curse his stars.

          Islam and Sikhism have always at war. Aurangzeb, the Mughal King in India tried to convert Hindus to Islam on the edge of sword, but failed miserably as Hindus would die rather than to become Muslims.

          The Mughal Emperor, Aurangzeb cherished the ambition of converting India into a land of islam. This philosophy was also pleaded by Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi (1569–1624), leader of the Naqashbandi School, to counter the liberal policies of Akbar’s reign.The Emperor’s experiment was carried out in Kashmir. The viceroy of Kashmir, Iftikar Khan (1671–1675) carried out the policy vigorously and set about converting non-Muslims by force.

          A group of Kashmiri Pandits (Kashmiri Hindu Brahmins), approached Guru Tegh Bahadur and asked for help. They, on the advice of the Guru, told the Mughal authorities that they would willingly embrace Islam if Guru Tegh Bahadur did the same. Orders of the arrest of the Guru were issued by Aurangzeb, who was in present day North West Frontier Province of Pakistan subduing Pushtun rebellion. The Guru was arrested at a place called Malikhpur near Anandpur after he had departed from Anandpur for Delhi. Before departing he nominated his son, Gobind Rai (Guru Gobind Singh) as the next Sikh Guru.

          He was arrested, along with some of his followers, Bhai Dayala, Bhai Mati Das and Bhai Sati Das by Nur Muhammad Khan of the Rupnagar police post at the village Malikhpur Rangharan, in Ghanaula Parganah, and sent to Sirhind the following day. The Faujdar (Governor) of Sirhind, Dilawar Khan, ordered him to be detained in Bassi Pathana and reported the news to Delhi. His arrest was made in July 1675 and he was kept in custody for over three months. He was then cast in an iron cage and taken to Delhi in November 1675.

          The Guru was put in chains and ordered to be tortured until he would accept Islam. When he could not be persuaded to abandon his faith to save himself from persecution, he was asked to perform some miracles to prove his divinity. Refusing to do so, Guru Tegh Bahadur was beheaded in public at Chandni Chowk on 24 November 1675. Guru Ji is also known as “Hind Di Chadar” i.e. “the shield of India”, suggesting that to save Hinduism, Guru Ji gave his life.

        • MAtt

          Side note: Is it true that the Sikhs–unlike Hindus and Muslims–have no particular food laws, but that Gurdwaras serve primarily vegetarian food to avoid offending the food laws of others?

      • This crap is what the Hindus always say about Sikhs. However, in my town, we have many, many Sikhs. Also in some nearby towns. I have gotten to know a very large number of these Sikhs to the extent you can get to know them, as they are an insular people who don’t relate well to non-Sikhs. I have had countless conversations with them. I never met one single Sikh who gave two shits, or 2 tenths of a shit, about Islam or Muslims. They simply do not care. They never talk about Islam or Muslims, and if you ask them, they just shrug their shoulders and say who cares.

        On the contrary, I have met Indian Hindus around here who have a lot of hatred for Muslims. Also of course I have met many Hindus on the Net. The overwhelming majority of them have an extreme hatred for Muslims.

        So really there is nothing to compare the attitude of Sikhs and Hindus regarding Muslims.

        • Matt

          Every South Asian I’ve ever met who turned out not to be a douchebag over the long term has been Muslim, Sikh, Christian, or otherwise not Hindu.

        • Please come to India once and talk with Indian Sikhs then you would know the truth.

          NRI Sikhs obviously won’t care. If Hindus really hate Muslims so much, how is that our President was Muslim, Our Businessman are Muslims and above all our most loved film stars are all Muslims…Indian have second largest of Muslim Polulation in the world.

          Indian Hindus hates muslims as much as Muslims hate Hindus. Not much, Not less. I have muslims as my best friend. He now lives in DC. Yeas there is a certain hatred in Indians for Pakistanis for obvious reasons but even that is reciprocated weell by Pakistanis.

  20. prm

    Mr. Lindsay I am an Indian citizen. And I don’t support the proponents of Hindutva.
    I am a Tamilian. I am from a low caste and a Dravidian by race.

    Unlike many other Indians who have opposed the views in the article. I do not oppose anything written there or in your comments.
    I know truth is bitter.
    If not for the British colonial rule, this country as the world knows today would not have existed.

    If you want to know more please visit defenceforumindia.com/.

    There is a battle going on between Hindutva and non Hindutva forces.

    • Great stuff, thank you very much for this!

    • Daniel

      prm writes: “If not for the British colonial rule, this country as the world knows today would not have existed.”

      Indeed. Many condemn the British for partitioning their Indian colony before they left, but they forget that the Indian subcontinent was a motley collection of states before the British imposed their rule. Before leaving, they also “betrayed” the princely states by urging them to accede to either India or Pakistan, and not remain independent. Hindu nationalists should give the British the primacy of place in their pantheon of heroes.

      • Have ever read about Chandragupta or Chanakya or Mauryan Period.

        Anyway even America wouldn’t have been a country if British wouldn’t have colonized it , right ? But does it matter now for Americans?

        Now time to read about Mauryan India

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurya_Empire

        • Matt

          Mauryan India… Point granted, but that was a long time ago, and wasn’t the best known and most progressive of the Mauryas–Asoka–one of those terrible Buddhists?

          Oh, and did you know that Vaishnava Hindus appropriate Buddha as an incarnation of Vishnu? But it gets really warped. Vishnu became Buddha to lead people astray and bring the End of the World closer. Just in case you thought the Abrahamic religions cornered the market on morally dubious apologetics and mental gymnastics.

  21. Xera

    Robert, Tunnel rats blog is not working and Im assuming it’s been taken down, i’m worried these Hinduvta nationalists finally breached U.S free speech.

  22. Jaipal

    Daniel said: prm writes: “If not for the British colonial rule, this country as the world knows today would not have existed.”

    “Indeed. Many condemn the British for partitioning their Indian colony before they left, but they forget that the Indian subcontinent was a motley collection of states before the British imposed their rule. Before leaving, they also “betrayed” the princely states by urging them to accede to either India or Pakistan, and not remain independent. Hindu nationalists should give the British the primacy of place in their pantheon of heroes.” (Quote)

    @Daniel,

    India was and is a Hindu nation. The concept of Indian nation is infact very old
    and goes back to the Vedic period. The Hindu Marathas are the ones who united the
    nation for the most part prior to the British. Modern India is a continuation of the
    Maratha Empire reincarnated. And, no the British have nothing to do with Indian
    unification. That was entirely accomplished by Indians themselves under the
    leadership and statesmanship of Sardar Vallabhai Patel! We don’t owe you anything.
    The English have no importance in Indian history except that they were just a bunch
    of parasitical looters which we Indians resisted and finally threw out!

    • Daniel

      Yes, yes, Mr. Jaipal, I think the people here are familiar with the Maratha Empire and with Mr. Patel. They would also know that the Maratha Empire never controlled the entirety of present-day India, before the British took over. And were it not for the parasitical British, Mr. Patel and the other founding fathers would have had a harder time “founding” India, for not only would they have to unite the people under the rule of the Marathas (again, we are assuming that the British did not enter the picture), but they would also have had to edge on the Maratha rulers to conquer the “rest of” India.
      The perennialist view of the Indian nation is also not compatible with historical facts. If the people had already known this concept of an Indian nation going back to the “Vedic period,” there wouldn’t have been any need for Mr. Patel and company to unite them.

      • Jaipal

        Daniel said: “They would also know that the Maratha Empire never controlled the entirety of present-day India, before the British took over.” (Quote)

        @Mr.Daniel,

        Actually, the relevant point is that the Marathas had brought much of the country under their
        control between 1674 AD-1805 AD. What matters here is seeing the “big picture”.
        The very fact that the Marathas could build a large empire across India with the concept of
        Indian/Hindu nation and a political expression for it in the form of Maratha Empire
        means that my basic point stands, namely that the notion of Indian nation was already
        in existence and it was being articulated at a political level, well before the English even
        appeared on the scene!

        Just because they did not control each and every inch of India at that time does not
        invalidate the fact that an Indian imperial power with Indian national consciousness
        was certainly in existence at some level. Had the British not appeared on the scene,
        the Marathas would have taken the remaining parts anyway over a period of time!
        So, my basic point stands!

    • atheistseparatist

      @Jaipal
      ”India was and is a Hindu nation.”
      Do you seriously think you own the place just because you follow a particular religion?
      If the answer is yes, then i recommend that you go fuck yourself.
      No wonder everyone here hates you and ridicules you.

      • atheistseparatist

        All cultures eventually die (often abruptly)……..what makes you think your hindu culture is any special?

        • @Atheist Separatist,

          What makes me think that Hindu culture is special?
          Well, the fact that Hinduism/Hindu culture managed to weather, many a storm
          in its 5000 year old history! It was able to last that long when most other contemporary
          civilizations like the Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Hittites, Persians, Babylonians etc etc
          died off long back with nothing more than being museum pieces to be oogled at!

          Take the Vedas for example. Vedas are chanted today in the exact same manner and
          fashion that they were back in 2000 BC!! Much of the Vedic literature, including the
          Vedas were orally composed and preserved and passed down by word of mouth across
          many, many generations in an unadulterated manner! That is something impressive and
          great.

          And I, as an Indian Hindu, am proud of my ancestors. I have something to be proud about!
          Whereas you have nothing to be proud about. Your Atheism means that you simply live
          in denial and negation and in the process have cut yourself off from your roots!
          No wonder you suffer from an inferiority complex and to some extent a self-hate
          which is the natural outcome of denial of one’s identity!

          Lastly, I frankly don’t give a damn about what the people here feel about me!
          Whether they like me or hate me, I could care less. I don’t give a shit and never have.

      • Jaipal

        @Atheist Separatist,

        Yes, India is a Hindu homeland meant for Hindus. Indian culture and
        civilization is basically Hindu in character and orientation! Since this culture
        and heritage shaped the country for the last 5000 years, it has become intimately
        entwined with the country’s national civilizational identity! Many Indians take
        great pride in this heritage which is why we lived for it, fought for it and died for it
        throughout our long history!

        Every country has something that it stands for. For India, it is Hindu culture and
        civilization! I have no shame in saying so.

        The only reason you can show your pathetic Atheism in India is because, Hindus
        are somewhat tolerant and accomodating, unlike the Christians and Muslims.
        I’d like to see how you would fare in a Islamic dominated society? Before you
        can even say the word “Atheist”, you’ll have your head cut off!!

        • atheistseparatist

          I have recieved more than my fair share of death threats from hindus.
          If you want to preserve your hindu culture in your own personal space…then you are fine by me. But don’t expect everyone to chime in with your lunacy. Atheistic and anti-theistic culture in india is also very old ( older than many of hindu books in fact).
          Plus, I don’t need your ‘tolerance’ and ‘permission’ to be an atheist.

          One final thing. Just because some culture is very old doesn’t mean it has to be preserved. After all, you don’t go about asking people to go naked and live in caves (which undoubtedly all of our ancestors did).
          The only reason you want to preserve hindu culture is because you feel a sense of proximity with it. Because you were raised into it. You probably never doubted it while growing up and even if you did, you quickly reverted. You refuse to see any faults in your culture let alone correct it.

          You are willing and actively work to compromise and sabotage the lives of the present and future generations just so that you could promote your culture. Which is why you are pathetic and not I.

        • Jaipal

          @Atheist Separatist,

          Hinduism and Hindu culture have many good things. If properly understood
          and followed, India can certainly come up using those Hindu teachings in the
          modern period. There were many prosperous and successful Hindu Dynasties
          in our past which abided by Hindu culture. This shows that there is nothing really
          wrong with Hindu culture/beliefs as such. Now, there may be aberrations which have
          crept in over time, like casteism and what not. The remedy is to eliminate the bad things
          and hold on to the good things in our culture!

          No nation can succeed or go forward without having a sense of pride in its roots.
          Many of the problems in India is due to Secularism and the anti-national outlook
          it has generated, which also explains the run-away corruption!

        • Daniel

          “The remedy is to eliminate the bad things and hold on to the good things in our culture!” I will have to agree with you on that, Mr. Jaipal.

          You said that casteism is an aberration which crept into Hindu culture. Do you mean that casteism did not originally exist in Hindu society? I think you have to elaborate on this.

        • Dota

          Daniel

          It’s pointless debating with Jaipal since he is very dishonest. When it suits his agenda he’ll defend caste as an efficient means of dividing labour. He’ll falsely compare caste with European feudalism to make his point.When other commenters express their horror at this inhuman system, our boy Jaipal then argues that it isn’t ”true Hinduism.”

        • Jaipal

          @Dota,

          I am not intellectually dishonest. Just because you don’t like what I am
          saying, doesn’t mean that I am necessarily wrong. In case you didn’t quite
          understand, there is a difference between the terms “Caste system” and “Casteism”.
          Caste system was a form of social organization where people were grouped on the
          basis of occupation/duties. Casteism, on the other hand, is discrimination on the
          basis of caste, which certainly is not allowed or encouraged in Vedic culture.
          Casteism exists only because people have forgotten what the original intent was
          behind caste system. As I said earlier, the solution is education.

  23. Daniel said: “And were it not for the parasitical British, Mr. Patel and the other founding fathers would have had a harder time “founding” India, for not only would they have to unite the people under the rule of the Marathas (again, we are assuming that the British did not enter the picture), but they would also have had to edge on the Maratha rulers to conquer the “rest of” India.”
    (Quote)

    @Daniel,

    No, your mistaken. Had the British not appeared on the scene, the Maratha Empire
    would have continued and would have in the course of time, even before the 20th-century,
    brought the remaining regions under their control. That would not have been much
    of a problem. If they could successfully bring a majority of the country under their
    rule, then what is the doubt that they could have brought the remaining parts
    if they had the time to do so?? The Marathas were the paramount power at that time
    and no other local kingdoms were willing to or able to challenge them, militarily!

    The Maratha Empire could have lasted upto the early 20th century and been replaced
    by a republican form of democratic government led by Sardar Patel.,
    sort of on similar lines as how Sun Yat Sen in China overthrew the Manchu Dynasty and
    instituted a nationalist government prior to Communist take-over! There is no particular
    need for the British here!

  24. Jaipal

    Daniel said: “The perennialist view of the Indian nation is also not compatible with historical facts. If the people had already known this concept of an Indian nation going back to the “Vedic period,” there wouldn’t have been any need for Mr. Patel and company to unite them.”
    (Quote)

    @Mr.Daniel,

    You are wrong as usual. In Ancient Indian history, there were dynasties like the Mauryan
    Empire, Gupta Empire, Pala Empire, Pratihara Empire etc that united much of the country
    keeping in mind the notion of Indian nation/Hindu nation! Again, its the big picture that
    matters here.

    The perenialist view of Indian nation is infact correct because if you look at the Vedic
    literature starting from the Rig-Veda onwards, there were Vedic Empires that brought
    much of the country together. It was through these Vedic Empires that Hindusim and
    Sanskrit language became the common cultural heritage acknowledged by the people
    across the country. This was made possible only through the agency of Vedic political
    power!

    Now, as for your comment on Sardar Patel, the fact is India is an old country with
    5000 years of history, so it is not unnatural that there would be times when the country
    underwent a cyclical development of imperial unification and breakdown, similar to
    China for example, which also faced times of union and times of disunion!

    Sardar Patel simply brought reunification in modern times basically as a continuation
    of the Maratha policy in the eithgteenth century which was disrupted by British intrusion!

  25. Jaipal

    @Daniel,

    You are confusing the issues, basically. That is, conception of nation is not always
    coterminous with physical established borders of states all the time.
    For example, Polish people had a national sense for centuries without having a
    formal political state to articulate their aspirations ect. Would you deny the fact that
    because Polish people did not have a recognizable state with fixed political boundaries,
    that they must have necessarily lacked national sense and outlook??

    What about Germany? Prior to 1870 AD, they were divided into numerous principalities
    and there was a lack of formal political boundaries of the “German State” but does that
    mean that the “German” people living within this area were necessarily lacking a broad
    sense that they were “Germans”?? What made their unification ultimately possible
    was because the national conception was always there, at the core, but was finally
    articulated in a political format in 1870 AD.

    Same logic applies to India. Indians always knew that they were members of a common
    nation, a holy land which was considered enobling to be born in. They had imperial dynasties
    which brought the country together from time to time. Inspite of political turbulence and
    and disunion at times, the goal was always to get united and the national conception always
    existed across the country, whatever may have been the political situation at times!
    The very fact that Indians in Ancient times considered non-Indians and foreign lands
    as “mleccha”/barbaric is proof that a sense of territoriality existed which differentiated
    between who was belonging to the national fold and who didn’t belong!
    existed at the core.

    • Daniel

      Ah, ok. I think I see the reason for our disagreement, Mr. Jaipal. Lloyd Cox in “nation-state and nationalism” (The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology, 2007, Volume VII) discussed five approaches to the nature of “nations.” The first or “objectivist” view conceptualizes the nation in terms of essential features, like a common language, shared culture, contiguous territory, etc. The second approach argues that nations can only be conceived with reference to people’s subjective states, exemplified by Hugh Seton-Watson’s statement that a nation exists “when a significant number of people in a community consider themselves to form a nation, or behave as if they formed one.” The third approach sees nations as invented categories rather than real collectivities (Ernst Gellner argued that nations are invented by nationalism, instead of being the source of nationalism.) The fourth approach views nations not as fictional entities, but as “imagined communities” in the minds of the people. The fifth and most recent approach is to conceive of nations as “symbolic frames” or “discursive formations” defined by the claims made in evoking and promoting nations. The so-called primordialist and perennialist views of the nation (Athena S. Leoussi, “nationalism,” The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology, 2007, Volume VII) fall under the first approach.

      The belief that the Indian nation has existed for thousands of years because it has a millennia-old cultural heritage (including Vedic literature and Sanskrit language, among other elements) is a perennialist view, and since you consider the perennialist view to be “correct,” I assume that you subscribe to such a view, or at least do not oppose it. I used to have a similar perennialist view of nations, until I encountered the ideas of Benedict Anderson. I now favor the second, third, and fourth approaches to the concept of nation, but most especially the fourth.

      You cited the example of China. China is indeed comparable to India. China also has a long history, and the Chinese have also been keenly aware of their culture and of “barbarians” who did not share their culture. However, this sentiment of Chinese prior to the 19th century has been termed “culturalism” instead of nationalism (John K. Fairbank, Edwin O. Reischauer, and Albert M. Craig, East Asia: Tradition & Transformation, 1978). Although China and India have gone through periods of unity and disunity, and both have had rulers who periodically reunited their respective countries, this does not indicate the presence of nationalism, since when we look at “the big picture” as you would say, the people (meaning the masses in general) were not lamenting their “national disunity” or clamoring for “reunification,” and even the “unifiers” undertook their military campaigns not to rebuild the “nation,” but to establish their personal empires. In China, for example, the scholar class lamented the chaos and disorder and the incessant wars during times of disunity, but not the “disunity of the nation.” Such sentiments would only surface in the 19th century, and would become widespread only in the 20th century. The case of India is similar. The Marathas for example had to fight many battles in the long process of consolidating their rule over much of India, and the people in the territories of their opponents certainly did not just surrender their lands to the Marathas because they wanted to be part of a “united Indian nation.” I cannot remember now who it was who said that China and India are better described as “civilization states” rather than nation-states. You also cited the Poles and the Germans. The Poles may have had a “broad sense” that they were Poles, and it may have been the same for the Germans, but ethnic or ethnocultural identity should not be confused with nationalism. I have only encountered the term “culturalism” applied to China, but I wonder if it can equally apply to the peoples of India, Poland, Germany, and other ethnic groups before the advent of nationalism.

    • Daniel

      The question of whether or not the Marathas would have eventually conquered all of India as we know it today if the British had not intervened is difficult to answer, because it involves speculation into alternative history. However, after the Maratha defeat by the Afghans and their Indian allies (not the British) at the 1761 Battle of Panipat, the Maratha expansion was halted, and their empire began to be plagued by infighting. So, while the contention that no local kingdoms were able to or willing to challenge the Marathas may be correct, after 1761 the Marathas themselves were no longer in any position to carry on with their plan of uniting all of India (assuming that they had such a “plan”).

  26. Jaipal-
    Why do you continuously hit ‘return’ mid sentence like this? Are you trying to take
    up as much space as possible with your inane & pointless rants?

    Because it makes you look like an illiterate & uncouth retard when you hit return mid
    sentence like this. Get it?

    • Jaipal

      @Phatimabibi,

      Since you are a Muslim woman, I don’t think you can really comprehend what
      I’m saying! That is not too surprising since your own “prophet” Moha-MAD
      himself considered Muslim women as being deficient in intelligence and destined for
      eternal hellfire!! He even claimed that he saw that the majority of inhabitants of hell
      were women!!! That seems to be your impending fate. Enjoy!! LOL.

      • Jaipal

        Before, you die, Fatima, do stock up on a bottle of Camel Piss.
        Hell is pretty hot. You’ll need it!!

        • Jaipal

          @Daniel,

          The Caste system was originally based on occupation.
          There was flexibility in the system which permitted mobility
          between the castes. This was the situation up until the 1200’s AD.
          Therefore, Casteism is indeed an aberration that crept in over a period of time.

          The system was originally based purely on merit but it became hereditary based
          over some time due to misinterpretation of the original intent behind the system.

  27. Pepperoncini

    @Jaipal
    Bogus revisionism. Caste was a foreign institution , it was Indo-Aryan. Indo-European culture had a caste system, but it was 3 fold with warrior nobility on top followed by priests/ritual specialists and then commoners. In India the Indus Valley people / indegenous people were absorbed into the Indo-European system of hierarchy and a 4th caste (Sudra) was created to subjuate the natives.
    It wasn’t merit based at all, this is Hindu revisionism . It was subjuation which also had a racial context to it. If it was merit the natives would be on top as the Indio-Aryans were barbarians while the natives were the civilized people.

    If you are soo convinced that caste was based on merit than you have no problem being subjuated by the Brits they ruled the SubContinent which obviously proves that they deserved to be on top.

  28. Jaipal

    Daniel said: “Although China and India have gone through periods of unity and disunity, and both have had rulers who periodically reunited their respective countries, this does not indicate the presence of nationalism, since when we look at “the big picture” as you would say, the people (meaning the masses in general) were not lamenting their “national disunity” or clamoring for “reunification,” and even the “unifiers” undertook their military campaigns not to rebuild the “nation,” but to establish their personal empires. ” (Quote)

    @Daniel,

    It is truly hard to say exactly what the commoners or the masses of the times really
    thought. This is because most histories/historial works, where existing, usually
    tend to be focussed on the politically important figures like Kings, Generals etc.
    Commoners and their views usually don’t get much attention. This would certainly
    be the case in medieval and pre-modern periods. So we can’t really say for sure
    how the masses really thought. Therefore, we can only look at the macroscopic
    political events taking place and interpret them as to what their final relevance
    was. Also, usually these events catalysed by major actors like Kings and generals,
    usually would have had the support of the masses too, for without that, they wouldn’t
    have been able to accomplish whatever they wanted to at a political level!

    As far as the Marathas are concerned, they were led by a commoner/Shudra by name
    Shivaji Bhosle, who articulated the vision of a pan-Indian Hindu nation led by the
    Maratha forces. Their slogan was “Hindavi Swaraj” which means Indian rule and
    its vision covered the country as a whole! Therefore, the inspiration for the Maratha
    expansion across the country was not due to any personal reasons but rather for the cause
    of Indian Hindu nation represented by the Maratha Empire. This naturally raises the
    question, namely, how and why did this commoner by name Shivaji articulate such a
    vision? Because, it was most likely a prevailing view in the air at the time and was
    accepted by the “masses” too! Also, the Maratha armies had volunteers from different
    parts of India fighting for them and the locals of the areas conquered by them enthusiastically
    came forward and participated in their wars! So, you are wrong about the “personal” factor
    here!

    • Jaipal

      Daniel said: “The question of whether or not the Marathas would have eventually conquered all of India as we know it today if the British had not intervened is difficult to answer, because it involves speculation into alternative history. However, after the Maratha defeat by the Afghans and their Indian allies (not the British) at the 1761 Battle of Panipat, the Maratha expansion was halted, and their empire began to be plagued by infighting. So, while the contention that no local kingdoms were able to or willing to challenge the Marathas may be correct, after 1761 the Marathas themselves were no longer in any position to carry on with their plan of uniting all of India (assuming that they had such a “plan”).” (Quote)

      @Daniel,

      You are wrong. While the Battle of Panipat in 1761 AD was certainly a tactical set-back
      for the Marathas, it was only temporary. Because nine years after that battle, the
      Marathas, starting around 1769 AD had recommenced their reconquest/reunification
      plans and continued waging battles against local upstarts. By 1771 AD, they had retaken
      Delhi and Northern India along with the Punjab in the North and reasserted their hold over
      other areas. So, they still remained the paramount power in India until the early years
      of the 1800’s AD. The post-Panipat phase of Maratha expansion was accomplished by a
      Maratha general by name Mahadji Shinde. Even the Afghans had recognized Maratha
      supremacy in 1764 AD, even after the Panipat battle.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahadaji_Shinde

      Basically, the Marathas did recover from that battle and continued to remain the
      pre-eminent power of India until the early ninteenth-century.

  29. Jaipal

    Pepperoncini said: “@Jaipal
    Bogus revisionism. Caste was a foreign institution , it was Indo-Aryan. Indo-European culture had a caste system, but it was 3 fold with warrior nobility on top followed by priests/ritual specialists and then commoners. In India the Indus Valley people / indegenous people were absorbed into the Indo-European system of hierarchy and a 4th caste (Sudra) was created to subjuate the natives.” (Quote)

    @Pepperoncini,

    There is nothing revisionist about whatever I am saying.
    As far as Indo-European culture is concerned, the problem here is there are no
    records from the time of PIE to know exactly how the PIE people lived.
    There is no literary proof that their society was hiearchical in the first place.
    If they really were nomads, then they would not have had a caste system in the first place.
    Caste system makes sense only among sedentary societies , not among tribal societies!

    Caste system was foreign? That is simply not true because the Aryans never invaded
    India, as there is no proof for any Aryan invasion. However, there is evidence
    for Indo-European emigrations from India towards the West!

    The Shudras were the commoners only. You seem confused.
    There was a group called the Vaishyas who are traders!
    There is no proof at all that the Shudras were created for the purposes of
    subjugation. Thats simply your imagination gone wild!

  30. Jaipal

    Pepperoncini said: “It wasn’t merit based at all, this is Hindu revisionism . It was subjuation which also had a racial context to it. If it was merit the natives would be on top as the Indio-Aryans were barbarians while the natives were the civilized people. ” (Quote)

    @Pepperoncini ,

    I’m starting to think that you don’t have much of an intellect!
    I pointed out above that the Caste system had flexibility among the various castes
    and there was mobility between them. There was simply no place for hierarchy.
    This came about much, much later on. Caste is not organized according to race
    but according to duties and occupations that people are supposed to do.
    There is no textual evidence that Caste was ever based on racial considerations
    in the first place.

    Indo-Aryans were barbarians? Again, where is the proof for this?
    Did you know that the Rig-Veda is the composition of a King-Sage dynasty
    known as the Bharatha Dynasty?? Go and consult Michael Witzel of Harvard
    university if you have any doubts!

  31. Jaipal

    Pepperoncini said: “If you are soo convinced that caste was based on merit than you have no problem being subjuated by the Brits they ruled the SubContinent which obviously proves that they deserved to be on top.” (Quote)

    @Pepperoncini,

    This is the most laughable and illogical statement you have probably made in your
    above reply. LOL. First of all, the Hindu Caste system was a system for organizing
    and accomodating the needs of the Hindu society in India. This has nothing to do
    with the Brits at all.

    The English were intruders which the Indians resisted and finally threw out!
    The onl way their empire could exist and be sustained is because of Indian military
    support in the form of sepoys. When they lost the loyalty of the sepoys, their empire
    collapsed! The English empire was a criminal system run by criminals.
    They didn’t deserve to come on top. It was through criminality only!

  32. Adrian

    Credit is given where it’s due. I used to be in the health industry. When the British colonised India they quickly realised that Indian medicine is far superior than Western medicine. It’s documented that the British took the herculean task of studying and compiling medicine knowledge throughout the South Asian continent. That is how the famous botanical gardens in London was founded. To grow and research the medical properties of such discovered plants. That is how GlaxoSmithKline was founded.

  33. “For some reason, Indian Muslims and Sikhs do not seem to have this extreme hatred of the West.”

    I can not stop laughing !!

    I mean, you really ought to meet some real Indian Hindus before making such a factually incorrect statement.

    On a survey done on President Bush, India was the only nation where he was thought to be popular more than even America. So, obviously Indians Hindus or Muslims or Sikhs don’t really hate west as such..

    Yeah I can say with some undeniable proof that Indian muslims have some issue with USA because of their global sympathy for Muslims all around the world who are suffering because of America’s war on terrorism.

    • Here in my town we have Indian Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus. The Hindus hate the West, the US, the UK and Christianity far worse than Indian Muslims or Sikhs do. We have some Indian Muslims on this blog as commenters. The hatred of the West, the UK and the US and Christianity on the part of Indian Hindus that I have seen on the Net is absolutely off the charts! And yes I have known some Indian Hindus. They were high castes, and they were basically Hindutvadis, even though they denied it. The truth is that almost all Indian Hindus are Hindutvadis in one way or another. Both of these men had a hatred for the West, the US, the UK and Christianity that was absolutely off the charts.

      I really think that Indian Hindus hate the West, the US, the UK and Christianity more than most people on Earth, with the exception perhaps of radical Islamists like Al Qaeda.

      • Sorry to say that but I asked all of my FB friends if they hate US,UK or Christians but they all said – NO WAY !!! And they are all Hindus..

        On a different note If Hindus won’t be Hindutva-vadi then who would just like If Christians won’t be Christian then who would or if Muslims won’t be Islamic then who would?

        And what is wrong in being Hindutva-vadi? I have not heard any Hindu bringing down a building like WTC or bombing places and killing people indiscriminately. Have you ???

        I am not sure why the Hindus you interact with hates West. I think we have no reason to hate America. Yeah there some issues regarding US always supporting Pakistan in wars but that is just a concern and not hate.

        The American Centre here in Delhi is always filled up with Hindus. We celebrated American Independence day there and it was a fun-filled event. Seriously, Indian Hindus living in India actually adore western countries for their economical success. There are some difference in political circles regarding poliy decision fo US. But nothing personal. Really.

        • Bhabhiji

          I know so many Indian Hindu women who have married non-Indian men, and its on the rise.

          The Parsee community in India is dying out because they do not recognize non-born Parsee spouses of Parsee women to be Parsee.

        • Bhabhiji

          Aakash, chota chota lingam chota chota gwal, choto so mero madan gopal!

          Blander food = bigger lunds? Ladies, what’s the verdict?

      • Bhabhiji

        Indian Hindus interculturally and interreligiously date and marry at higher statistics than Indian Muslims or Indian Sikhs and we don’t require our partners to convert to our particular Hindu sects though they are free to if they want. Though most of our partners take some interest in our religious cultures to one degree or another, oftentimes more than we do.

        Have you ever dated an Indian Hindu, Bob? 😉

        • Yes but only once. You can’t touch those women, realistically speaking. Pretty much untouchable for non-Indians.

        • Aakash

          Hey Robert did you bang her? I had an easier time getting laid with Indian chicks back in India than here in the states. I did get one Indian chick here though and she was from Abu Dhabi and obviously a Malayalee. The other prude Indian bitches in the US can go to hell: especially the ones born here.

          Bhabhiji, aap ko ek prashn poochna hai. Aap mera lund apne muh mein lengeen?

        • Aakash: Yes. 20 year old girl.

        • Aakash

          Robert

          Indian vaginas become very flabby after they hit 30 years or so. Hard to bang after that with all the bloated labia and FUPA. Indian food is extremely fattening and the bitches put on fat like its been ordained by god.

          Good for you man. I wish I lived back in the 70s. Must have been amazing growing up….

        • TRASH

          You’re best bet at casual sex is with a married Brahman woman over 40 whose marriage is a shame anyhow and was a teenage arranged thing. Hubby is usually into the Russian prostitutes.

        • TRASH

          BHABHIJI Goras in India are best off with the $100 call girl who will do out-calls to your hotel. $150 for no condom if that is your thing.

          Going around Mumbai’s “Woman Market” is dangerous for Goras because of course its Muslim-run though the girls are only $20.

          You can hang around social scenes and try your luck but you might also get beaten up for being a Gora.

          I’d say Indian Desi girls in America have less traditional restrictions and that is why we have seen such an emergence of Indian porn stars.

  34. Srikanth

    Turn on any local tv news channel, maximum crime is committed by Muslim in India, it is like white stereotyping blacks. Majority welfare benefits go to Muslims.

    Hindu temples operate from dawn to midnight most places, we need traditional paraphernalia for it to function, they are expensive. Most Hindus including the poor keep our religion running. Most money generated in our temples end up as subsidy for Muslims.

    Thousands of years, the same religious process continuing, all Hindus are same, we are divided by enemies internal and external, Hinduism will prevail.

    Go home and slaughter some cows

    • TRASH

      Mumbai Mafia more or less demonstrates this. Kashmir Muslims in Goa run the lucrative drug trade for tourists. They are also pimps in the red light area.

      In the UK most Indian criminals or youth gangs are Muslim.

      I’m not sure why this is.

    • //Hindu temples operate from dawn to midnight most places, we need traditional paraphernalia for it to function, they are expensive. Most Hindus including the poor keep our religion running. Most money generated in our temples end up as subsidy for Muslims.//

      I heard a true incident. A poor hindu person used to work as driver at the house of a rich jain merchant. That hindu asked for a deepawali gift, and the rich jain paid only 10Rs. I ask, why will such people live in hindu fold? They better join the leagues of superior.

      • TRASH

        Jain merchants are really only interested in filling their own pocket. They are not gripped by Nationalism or helping the fellow Hindu or even the fellow Jain.

        Muslims are probably paid not to revolt in the streets as they are the street criminal element by and large.

    • //Most money generated in our temples end up as subsidy for Muslims.//

      Another of those RSS-BJP lie. It is your jain,baniya and rich traders who might be using these money.

      First of all, I hate these temples etc now. We need universities, research labs, engineering, technology, and not these ancient method. You people have no idea what temples were. But because your real masters are baniya, so you are being fooled by them.

      P.S: I am caste brahman as per Indian constitution and have denounced caste brahmanism.

  35. Steven

    My late grandfather was stationed in India around 1946-48 (he did a stint in Egypt too). He told me when he had dementia that he was once at a rally where Gandhi spoke, but I’m not sure if that is true.

    One time he was kidnapped by some Indian insurgents of some sort, some group who were fighting for independence. They asked him why he came to India and when he told them that it wasn’t voluntary and that he was low ranking, they let him go. It was a close call.

    India and the army may have been the best time of his life. He always told stories about it. Even when he could barely remember members of his own family, he was still talking about the army and telling us how to say thanks in Hindi.

    • India, ruled by anglo brit lord was so good. Even my ancestors were made as landlords/tax insepcts, under them. Nobles only promote nobles.

      But with these indic people crying for racism, everything is dead now. Cities like new delhi, bangalore, which once were heavens look hellish. West Bengal was dead long time back itself.

  36. Bhabhiji

    “We came over them, colonized them, shat on their lousy culture and religion”

    Oh come on, you are writing this just to rile people up. Americans never colonized India, the Brits did. India and America both fought the British.

    Plus, you yourself PRACTICE KUNDALINI YOGA and acknowledge that Hindu culture gifts many great things of benefit to the world.

    So I know you’re just trying to rile us up. Won’t work with me. I love white people and Americans and am very happy you are practicing yoga, meditation and other things from my culture. You are most welcome to it!

    • TRASH

      British actually did little of the sort: they were running a trading empire purely for economic reasons and had little interaction with the locals. Anglo-Indians are a small minority in India, Englishmen did not rape local women or commit widespread mayhem/looting.

      Brahman at the top of the Hindu caste were quick to become local administrators and co-operate with British.

      English in India wanted very little interaction with Indians beyond trade. They did not try to convert them to Christianity or even interfere with their local practices.

  37. Bhabhiji

    Aakash Chotu, my reply above.

    • Bhabhiji

      Bob said, “I don’t think the average Hindu hates the West. He’s too busy starving to care. But with the middle and possibly upper classes, there is a fascist-like rage that is really frightening.”

      The people who “hate whitey” are those who get indoctrinated into cultural marxism in western universities. They are a small minority of latte sipping SWPLs, even if they are brown or black.

      • No, the ones I speak of are classic Hindutvadis or Indian nationalists. Middle class and upper middle class Indians with good educations, Hindus who believe all the Hindutva/nationalist crap. They hate the White/Christian West for some odd reason. There is some Indian Hindu hatred of White European Christians thing going on.

        These guys were not Leftists at all. They hated the Maoists and voted for Congress. Both Brahmins.

        • Bhabhiji

          Congress is leftist and pro-Christian. The leader of the Indian Congress Party is Sonia Maino Gandhi, an Italy born Catholic.

          Anyway, as a practicing Hindu myself, I do disagree with Christianity on many points, and I do think some aspects of western culture are degraded but not all, and I don’t hate anyone.

          I can’t speak for those guys or what they were thinking. Who knows? Maybe they just couldn’t get laid in the land of free porn and the home of the depraved. LOL!

          Were they hot? If not, they couldn’t get laid and thus have sticks up their asses, like a lot of South Asian guys.

        • Neither of them is a Leftist, and neither one is pro-Christian in any way, shape or form. They have the typical Hindu nationalist dislike of Christianity and Christian European civilization, a lot of relating back to the British.

          They are both basically Hindutvadis and especially just Indian nationalists period, but they both get really mad if you call them Hindutvadis since they say they are not extremists. I have come to think that the majority of Indian Hindu intellectuals are Hindutvadis or at least Indian nationalists.

          I told one guy he was a Hindutva and he got mad and told me he voted for Congress.

          They both live in India, are very good looking and are married.

        • “Congress is leftist…”
          Ha ha! Nice one! If the Congress is leftist, then Fox News is run by Robert Lindsay.
           
          “Maybe they just couldn’t get laid in the land of free porn…”
          I’d think getting laid and free porn are anti-theses of each other, just like ‘diet’ Coca Cola. The best way to keep a teenage guy virgin well into his mid-twenties is to hook him to internet porn, like a lot of American blokes of my age I know.

        • Congress is left of Centre. Nehru was a socialist. JNU is hotbed of leftist movement. How can anyone bracket Congress in RIGHT. If Congress is rightwing then what is BJP?

          I think we would have to derive new definition of left and right in that case.

        • Congress = Centre-right. BJP = Far Right.
           
          JNU has been named after Jawaharlal Nehru by the then Indian Parliament. The left wing character is because the student body of JNU is overwhelmingly dominated by AISA – the student’s wing of the Communist Party of India. It has nothing to do with Congress party or Nehruvianism.
           
          Your leap of logic is amazing.

          1> Jawaharlal Nehru University = Leftist
          2> Nehru = Congress
          3> QED; Congress = Lefist

          Are you an Indian educated engineer or mathematician by any chance?

        • “Congress = Centre-right. BJP = Far Right.”

          Haha.. you won’t believe I knew it was coming and that is why I even thought of putting a disclaimer that “Now don’t say BJP is far right”, but let it go..

          OK. So this far right BJP is supporting P.A. Sangama a tribal leader from North East and whole north east is rallying behind him.

          So does that make whole of north east FAR -RIGHT ?

        • “Your leap of logic is amazing.

          1> Jawaharlal Nehru University = Leftist
          2> Nehru = Congress
          3> QED; Congress = Lefist

          Are you an Indian educated engineer or mathematician by any chance?”

          One has to be extremely ignorant to believe that Gandhi/Nehru Family= Not Congress or

          JNU is not hotbed of leftist because of the support of congress

          or Congress don’t have tendencies.

          “Are you an Indian educated engineer or mathematician by any chance?”

          So, if I graduate from MIT would make me more intelligent? That’s what you want to tell.

          Well I rarely respond to such personal ridicule because it not only is irrelevant but in also non-conclusive.

        • Beatrix

          BINGO! Mr Mohit Gupta is a recent IIT graduate & electrical engineer!

          I am really happy for you that you completed the biggest project of your life by determine that I am an engineer from IIT. 🙂 🙂 🙂

          Anyway 8 years is not recent !!

        • @ Mohit Gupta
          Partisan politics. Congress fielded an insider man, Pranab Mukherjee. The BJP would rather dissolve itself than support him, so they went for the next credible choice. The North Easterns are rallying for Sangma, not the party who needs Sangma as their poster kid in the prez polls.
           
          Don’t think the Khasis are going to be fooled by this ‘act of charity’. You can’t hypnotise a Khasi peasant to vote for BJP in the elections. Even if a particular BJP candidate happens to lean towards socialism, the BJP is still headed by the far right Hindutva leaders. For a tribal Christian to vote for BJP, it is a culturally suicidal move.
           
          Again, you are off the mark. The argument is not whether Gandhi family is a part of the congress, but whether JNU’s leftist character makes the Congress a leftist party. Which is a resounding NO because the Congress as a political party has very little influence in the JNU student politics. As I said before, it is AISA which dominates the JNU student body, not the Congress fielded NSUI.
           
          I assumed you are an engineer since I have observed your lack of political awareness among alumni of engg and medical colleges in mainland India. A guy like you would be hammered in a political debate in the JNU or Presidency.

      • //Congress is leftist and pro-Christian. The leader of the Indian Congress Party is Sonia Maino Gandhi, an Italy born Catholic.//

        Ha ha ha, really, you people stoop down to so low level. Ok, if Current Congress President Sonia gandhi is italy, and was born in catholic culture, how does it makes her a traitor? And how does a grass cutter blood line modi is a partriot?

        You hindu fundamentalist are the ones who want all the superior race of the planet to become extinct. And of course, you will, as all of you were plebians or commoner. Know the history what your ancestors used to do. If you want proof, then search that why Vedic Lord Indra destroyed your agrasen’s pratapgarh.

      • //Neither of them is a Leftist, and neither one is pro-Christian in any way, shape or form. They have the typical Hindu nationalist dislike of Christianity and Christian European civilization, a lot of relating back to the British.//

        Leave them Sir, these people have no idea. And what’s wrong in being a pro-christian? First of all, Christianity has been denounced by the entire world, and the europeans have created their own version of Christianity. Second, those who converted in these lands, they did it by their choice, and not by force. And I am not surprised. Who would like to be servant of these babus, the so called hindus?

        • //I assumed you are an engineer since I have observed your lack of political awareness among alumni of engg and medical colleges in mainland India//

          Ughh, Engineers make very good politicians too. Yes, if that’s all about the true politics to frame law. But if you are talking about the hindutva politics, then good engineers will suck in that too.

      • TRASH

        Brahman and Khatris do business with whites or Arabs or anyone else in the financial or economic sectors in the white collar. Parsis will sell steel to anybody who buys it like TATA.

        They really do not give two shits about Goras and want to make money.

        University PC does not rub off on them. They get a degree in the US and run off to Dubai to make their money.

        If you stay in the hotels or clubs they do or work with them you will quickly perceive they have zero interest in whites and no sense of Nationalism for the most part.

        Nationalism is a lower-caste/lower class thing in all countries.

    • Aakash

      Bhabhiji

      I won’t believe you are a woman unless I personally check your vagina out, squeeze your tits, put a beer on your head, hold both your ears and stuff my cock in your mouth.

      • Bhabhiji

        No chance Aakash, I don’t do South Asian guys.

        • Dota

          lets see:

          pop Hinduism – check
          degrading Indian males at every opportunity – check
          OM Shalom – check

          Our girl AP is back for another pounding

        • Aakash

          @Dota

          Om Shalom is pretty cheesy and I feel weird combining the sum total of all knowledge/awareness in the universe with a simple salutation just because the words rhyme and idiot sycophants have nothing better to conjure up.

          Who is “Our girl AP”? She likes being pounded? Thats interesting. I’m all for that. Pound the bitch.

        • So much for your hindu culture, that you are posing as a female here. Is hinduism about this only?

  38. Jake

    Is there honestly anything good about Indian males at all?

    • Bhabhiji

      Yes. On their own they’re OK. Its when they live with their parents far into adulthood that they something goes wrong. I’m a big believer in leaving the nest, which is anti-thetical to most South Asian families.

    • Is there honestly anything good about males at all?

      • Bhabiji

        Yes, there’s many good things about males. Even desi males. The failure of desi males is the failure to individuate from the parental unit. That is the root cause of their problems. Other than that they have good qualities.

  39. Bhabhiji

    Bobby, Congress is left-centrist and pro-minority, hence pro-christian. You are conflating “Indian Nationalist” with “Hindu Nationalist” and both of those with “Hindutvadi”. Those 2 guys you mention were probably just regular ol ordinary Indians who love their country. I’m pro-Hindu, a practicing Hindu, and I want the best for India. That does not mean I’m “Hindutvadi” so your use of that word to describe pro-India people, or even pro-Hinduism people, is not correct. Moreover “Hindu” has no theistic connotation necessarily. The first philosophical schools of atheistic thought sprang up in Hindu culture.

    Also, the fact that you describe them as “handsome” does not mean they are getting laid, even (or maybe especially) from their wives. Ha.ha.

    To all the South Asian guys reading this: Pix or GTFO!

    • Bhabhiji

      PS: India’s Congress Party is led by Sonia Maino Gandhi, an Italy born Christian, Bobby.

      Once more 2 all South Asian Guys reading this; PIX OR GTFO!

      • Dota

        Bhabhi

        “Bobby, Congress is left-centrist and pro-minority, hence pro-christian. You are conflating “Indian Nationalist” with “Hindu Nationalist”

        And you are conflating Congress with the Democrats. This is India and not North America where the left is pro minority. The congress party is quite right wing and the Neo Liberal reforms which opened up India’s economy to outside capital were conducted by Narishima Rao, of the Congress party. Just because they adopt a softer stance with retards to minorities doesn’t mean that congress = democrats = leftist. Silly little NRI girl.

        Aakash

        Asian Philosopher was a young NRI girl (probably college) who briefly hung around here and then quit. She’s into pop spirituality shaped by western romantic portrayals of India/Hinduism, hates the joint family system, and despises Indian males claiming that they are lame in the sack. Her crowning thesis is that India is messed up because of the joint family system and only that. I strongly doubt she has ever set foot in India despite her claim to the contrary.

      • “The congress party is quite right wing….Just because they adopt a softer stance with retards to minorities doesn’t mean that congress = democrats = leftist. Silly little NRI girl.”
        Right-o. The INC (Congress) is politically and socially very conservative, on a level comparable to US Republicans. It might appear left-wing only from the perspective ultra-right Hindutva radicals.
         
        There is no mainstream left wing political party in India. Most of left wing organisations in India have been banned by the government as ‘illegal outfits’ (KMSS, NSCN, ULFA, etc.)
         
        Bandying INC as a left wing party shows characteristic Desi political illiteracy. Anything that doesn’t have ‘Jai Shree Ram’ as a part of its political slogan is ‘evil lefty hell bent in destroying the Great Indian Culture (TM)’

        • Bhabiji

          “The INC (Congress) is politically and socially very conservative, on a level comparable to US Republicans.”

          Everyone in India is “socially conservative” including far left desi commies. American Republicans are not socially conservative, at least not anywhere near the level of your average Indian commie. “Social conservative” in the US means getting divorced only once or something. I don’t see any social conservativism here really, and that works in my and most desi womens’ favor.

        • “Everyone in India is “socially conservative” including far left desi commies.”
          There are many Indian cultures, particularly cultures in NE whose social ‘liberalism’ would put most Americans in the conservative bracket.
           
          I am not surprised you don’t experience social conservatism in the United States. It is all relative. Indian Hindus are some of the most socially conservative people in the world, so anything outside their narrow purview would appear as socially liberal. Even Central Asian Muslim capitals like Bishkek and Tashkent are paradises compared to Delhi. On that note, Karachi has a more socially liberal atmosphere than Bombay.

    • Are you the same American women married to an Indian and lives in Amritsar?

  40. Bhabhiji

    Bobby, you should allow a gori to write a guest post on “tips for dating desi guys and their mothers” . Should be fun!

  41. Jake

    Too be honest, both Indian males and Indian females are both the most ugliest specimens of humans on the planet, that’s why Indians are so angry I guess. They are so ugly they can’t be accepted or assimilate into any other mainstream society on planet Earth. I would hate it and probably kill myself if I was ever born an Indian; infact I think every Indian under this criteria should just kill themselves instead of polluting the world srs.

    • Bhabjiji

      Not only Indian, but South Asian dudes in general have a hard time assimilating even to their own wives because they are first and foremost married to their mothers who prevent them from assimilating elsewhere.

    • No need to do suicide. With your rotten brain and mentality you won’t survive for long.

      Seems some Indian fucked you very hard.

      • Jake

        Indians can’t fuck with anyone srs all other race of males are just above you guys (maybe for except Asians).

        • You seems to dream so much little kid. Why do you talk about race all the times. Only spineless character takes refuge under these shallow racial, religious and nationalistic group.

          GROW UP and Behave like a man. The life is very short, why are you wasting it in hating some one. Please find someone you can love and let others live.

    • Bhabiji

      “I would hate it and probably kill myself if I was ever born an Indian”

      Jake, you’re only supposed to say that if you’re an Indian mother who’s beloved son chooses his own wife.

  42. “If Whites were so horrible and evil for India, then why don’t Indian Muslims and Sikhs hate the West too? They don’t; it’s a Hindu thing. By the same token, if Indian Muslims are so evil, then why don’t Sikhs hate Muslims too? ”

    So you need a proof that Indian muslims hate west? OK.. Here it is..

    “Mumbai: Although the US has withdrawn the Military course that was instigating anti-Islamic sentiments among military officers, anger among Muslims over the issue is growing in India. Raza Academy, an organization of Barelivi Muslims, conducted a protest demonstration against the US for the idea of bombing Mecca and Madina, the holy cities of Muslim world. The protestors also expressed concern at the silence of Saudi Government over the issue”

    http://twocircles.net/2012may20/hateful_us_military_course_instigates_protest_mumbai.html

    http://www.khilafah.com/index.php/analysis/asia/13369-o-muslims-protest-against-the-abductions-arrests-and-dismissals-of-sincere-army-officers-by-traitor-hasina-at-the-behest-of-us-india

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Students%27_Organization_of_India#Protest_against_Dove_World_Centre_Florida.27s_U.S._Call_for_Quran_Burning_on_9.2F11

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42927020/ns/world_news-death_of_bin_laden/t/protesters-condemn-brutal-killing-bin-laden/

    http://zeenews.india.com/news/nation/muslims-protest-against-obama-s-visit_666062.html

    Do you really need more proof. ?

  43. ray

    dear robert , can you tell me who is the best in destroying mother nature ??
    probably you would blame the native indians in north america ?????

    • In North America, the Whites and those who came after them have been the best at destroying Mother Nature. It’s not just Whites. Non-Whites such as Asians, South Indians, Blacks, Hispanics, etc. have been good at it too. The Native Americans have been the best of all groups at not destroying the country.

      On the other hand, the preservationist instinct in the US is entirely the result of native born White Americans. Without us, there would be no environmentalist movement, period. Whites have been both the best preservationists on Earth and some of the finest destroyers also.

  44. Santiago

    Thanks for an insightful article. More importantly, thank you for telling it like it is. As a young Christian in India, I can confirm that Hindus have a pathological hatred of anything Western (and especially Christianity). I’m glad to see the West take note of what is surely a dangerous threat to world peace and intellectual growth. Bravo!!

    • YW my good friend! Stick around on this blog and we will have lots more Hindu bashing to come! That is what this blog is all about, socking it to the Hindus!

      • india_LandofRapes

        Buddhism were kicked out of india by Sunga dynasty ,Sunga’s and brahmins united to kick out Buddhism once for all.

        In olden times Buddhism posed a greater threat to status quo of Elite in India, bhikkhu’s fled India and took refuge in Nepal, Srilanka and some moved to other East asian nations

        • Jet Li

          oh, thats right U,U i forgot it, Buddhism also rejects caste, maybe is just that, every religion or movement or culture that reject caste should be rejected; like christianity, islam, buddhism, western culture or east asian culture U,u

        • india_LandofRapes

          Hinduism is a solipsistic religion, “The fundamental question of Every hindu intellectual is : What is brahman, and the answer is :You are brahman, only you exist, rest of the world is maya(an illusion) created to pin your down”.

          This solipsism combined with hyper opportunism has created modern hindu cult , it has complete disregard of nature and fellow human beings.

        • india_LandofRapes

          its not just caste, its status quo, today even lower caste indians who have billions of $ in their bank vaults detest their fellow lower caste.

          Hindu philosophy and religion creates mitt romneyism . A complete disregard of every thing around them.

          Most elite hindus are narcissists thats why they can’t stand any criticism

        • Jet Li

          yes, religions are often used as easy tools to slave people,pretty sad, here 2 examples with hinduism and christianity
          lower caste Hindus have had reduced social statuses similar to slaves. justification for such acts was often provided through the use of careful selection of scripture from the vast plethora of Hindu religious literature, though the most ancient scriptures place little importance on caste and indicate social mobility (Rig Veda 9.112.3), while later scriptures such as the non sacred Manusmriti state that the four varnas are created by God (Brahman), implying immutability
          even the bible has one passage which justifies the slavery of canaan people: Genesis narrative about the Curse of Ham has often been held to be an aetiological story, giving a reason for the enslavement of the Canaanites. The overall objective of the story is to justify the subject status of the Canaanites, the descendants of Ham, to the Israelites, the descendants of Shem, The curse on Canaan, invoked in response to an act of moral depravity, is the first intimation of the theme of the corruption of the Canaanites, which is given as the justification for their being dispossessed of their land and for the transfer of that land to the descendants of Abraham, The story’s original objective was to justify the subjection of the Canaanites to the Israelites

    • Ichigo Kurosaki

      i think is because how they suffered under the west in the colonial times, and everything associated to the west including christianity is bad for them, however i think buddhism of religion minorities could survive better, because lots of hindus view buddhists are their sibling religion, some think buddhists are hindus too, as some think Buddha is an avatar of Vishnu, however maybe animosity towards China could change things for buddhists (the typical image of China is that of a buddhist culture, though chinese have heavier chinese folk religion component in their culture, buddhist component is second place in chinese culture) so that rivalry with chinese could reflect in worse animosity towards buddhists too, after all they have many differences and educated hindus couldn’t consider the 2 as the same belief, i hope everything is fine for buddhists too in India

      • india_LandofRapes

        Actually its brahmins who invited British into india,Its brahmins who sided with Islamic invaders .

        You have to read Hindutva Leader Savarkar who wrote extensively why Indians must not fight against British.

        As long as the invader respected Caste and Social status of India, Indian elite had no problem in helping the invaders.

        Throughout history indians rarely fought against their colonizer, hindutva’s preached to obey their master as its in karma of lower varna to become a slave .

        Lower castes are already slaves in Hindu india, they have nothing to lose, only people whose EGO got hurt is upper caste.

        all the complaints about Islamic barbarity come from upper caste.

  45. I have to agree with you, as usual. And the moment I read the link, I found this in the opening:

    // India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) was split off from the Intelligence Bureau which had continued after 1947 to be loyal to the British. Later the Americans supplanted the British and RAW functions as a branch of the CIA against India.//

    I don’t know for how long will these hindutva based people will fool the public with such lies. What business does america have by making RAW as a delegation of CIA? And to make matters worse, this person is saying that RAW works against India?

    It is only these hindutva minded people who blame everything on west. And by western countries, their diaspora is limited to USA/UK/German and Russia. This is again the same, where they try to hide their incapability.

    Fortunately, we had jawahar lal nehru as our first prime minister, and not a hindutva minded fundamentalist who would have smashed India into pieces.

  46. This man whose link you have quoted is a madman. He makes outrageous claims that have no basis in fact. This guy had nothing to do with Indira or rajiv Gandhi. Most of what he writes is fiction. He could be working for kgb for all we know. But what he writes is utter bullcrap.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s