Kapil Mishra Represent BJP's Third Generation Well

In America, taking the fight out of a dog means you are taking the courage out of the dog. Congress, with its carefully mapped plan and British blueprint, have done exactly that to the Hindus. Even when out of power, Congress established system (eg supreme court) continues their work. It used to be the whole बिना खड़ग बिना ढाल/bina khadag bina dhal nonsense. Now it's, Hindu is good and Hindutva is evil nonsense. PM Modi who was the first PM born after independence, clearly had no fond memories of anything Pakistani which was a breath of fresh air. But sometimes it feels that the Ganga Jamuni Tehzeeb nonsense may have had some impact on him (either that or his fervent belief in sabka sath sabka vikas). However, one second generation leader has turned out to be the kind of leader Hindus need and deserve and that is Yogi Adityanath. He is not the focal point of this post though.

As D.K. Singh (Editor at The Print) says, Yogi Ji, is not just a role model for BJP chief ministers but is also inspiring the third generation of BJP leaders. As we all know that Yogiji's way of administration has raised an erstwhile BIMARU state of UP to the second largest economy in the nation. Law and order has been restored. UP is on a path it deserves. While that in itself should be inspirational, there is another trait in Yogiji and that is his faith and his refusal to apologize for it. Yogiji has shown that progress and unapologetic belief in Hindu faith can go hand in hand. Yogiji is putting fight back into the Hindu. He is waging a war against the Congress ecosystem

There are a number of third generation leaders (we should be indebted to PM Modi's ability to identify and nurture them) who are getting inspired by Yogiji. Of all those BJP young guns, the one who stands out is an ex AAP member Kapil Mishra who has not only surprised us but also impressed us with his outspokenness, energy, willingness to help others with money and support. But the thing that impresses us most is his ability to stand up to Congress' ecosystem. He does not shy away from a fight and is vociferous about his beliefs. 

We believe that his work needs to be highlighted.

Like Kapil Mishra said clearly at the Digital Hindu Conclave, it's time to REALIZE & ACCEPT the presence of the "Enemy at the Door" & without any further delay and before our decline worsens, we need to create a Hindu Ecosystem. 

Links of the complete speech of Kapil Mishra 

https://youtu.be/2qMVzgVGUZM

https://youtu.be/o9GyM4sRU3Y

This post is the result of Kapil Mishra's recent and earlier appearances on TV debates. When the ecosystem stifles you, telling the truth isn't just rebellion. It becomes an act of revolution where truth becomes a weapon. Few wield that weapon better than Kapil Mishra. Watch the following and decide for yourself. 

Watch Kapil speak from 25:53 to 28:15 in the video above.  

                       You too will say: आपके शब्द सुन सच-मुच सीना चौड़ा हो गया.

Even when the Hindu RW leaders are peddling their own version of Ganga Jamuni nonsense, Kapil Mishra has been exposing the hypocrisy of the so called moderate Muslim. 

No sooner does one even hint at criticism of murderous Mughals, these Muslim moderates shed that veneer of "tehzeeb" and become abusive. The Islamic apologists in the panel, Shoaib Jamai and Taslim Rehmani invariably and immediately resort to violent abuse and name calling instead of engaging in a civic debate. It is the astha/faith of Islam and the community that non-believers are not even considered humans that enables them to use terms like innocent and humanity in a selective way. They don't even attempt to hide behind taqiyya any more. Issuing fatwas for beheading like 'sar tan se juda' (Kamlesh Tiwari) scarily commonplace these days. The Azad maidan riots, the Delhi CAA riots, and the recent Maharashtra riots are repeated reminder that the enemy is at our door and we desperately need a Hindu ecosystem. A safety net, a support system.

Must Read: https://nethindu1.blogspot.com/2021/07/on-common-muslims.html

Note: Taqiyya, in Islam is the practice of concealing one's belief and foregoing ordinary religious duties when under threat of death or injury.

Kapil MIshra Represent BJP's Third Generation Well

Here is one more of Kapil Mishra interventions in favor of the Hindu ecosystem. 

Gurugram में सड़क पर नमाज़ के विरोध को Kapil Mishra ने बताया जायज.  बेशक बताना भी चाहिए/bashak batana bhi chahiye.

The Gurugram protests were about public spaces like parks and roads being blocked for namaz. Public spaces are for public use, the residents started questioning as to why does the Muslim community block those spaces when they can offer namaz in the numerous mosques in that city.

It is said that civilizations get destroyed from within. India will not be destroyed by Pakistan or China. It will be destroyed by dhimmi Hindus.

That the Hindus are fighting an existential fight. Unity is our most potent weapon. Divided we will fall. This is why the call for a Hindu ecosystem by Kapil Mishra is of a paramount importance. We hope he continues his dharma yuddha. May Bholenath protect him and others fighting this battle.

On Common Muslims

I started studying the religion of Islam some 8 years back. Like many others, I was also disturbed that such a large population of India and other parts of the free world was seen to be a perennial problem. I was disturbed by history of Islam in India. When you study the history of partition, of Hindus who were left in Pakistan and then were cleansed out, of the brutal genocide of Kashmiri Pandits, you cannot be blamed for thinking that Muslims seem to believe it is their right to murder non - Muslims, and degrade us all in every conceivable way. During partition riots, not only was there widespread bloodshed, initiated and carried out by popular Muslim leadership, but Hindu women were paraded naked on streets multiple times! The relish Muslims seemed to experience in degrading Hindus!!

One argument I oft encountered when raising difficult questions about Islam was - but all Muslims are not bad. You find good and bad people in all communities. And every community has carried out atrocities against other communities. So what is exceptional about Muslims? Sounds fair, and yet Muslims always seem a little different from other communities. In those days, it was hard to pinpoint, but to me it always appeared that there was something wrong with the Muslim community itself, rather than it being a case of a few bad apples in an otherwise normal group of people.

And so, I set out to first answer this question - is it something wrong with the community, or all atrocious behavior of Muslims were exceptional? After a little thought, I found a way to answer this question. You can always understand the mainstream ethos of a community, any community in the world, simply by studying its heroes. After all, a community which has a fundamentally good sense of ethics won’t glorify someone who did terrible wrongs. Or even if such a figure came to acquire respect for some reason, there would be qualifications attached to such respect. Such a person would never be considered an ideal.

And as it happens, Muslims do have an ideal. Such is the status of that ideal, that Muslims recorded every word and action of that man so they could emulate him precisely. Slightest criticism of that ideal results in calls for beheading by Muslims. So, I could simply study this person and then I would know the mainstream values of Muslims.

I did that. I studied two biographies of Mohammed and a number of Hadis. I also read most of Koran for good measure. I was right in saying that a community’s heroes’ tell you what that community is like. After knowing Mohammed, everything fell in place. Muslims are different! They have dehumanized all non - Muslims of the world. In their minds if they don’t have power, and physically when they do, such as during partition of India or in geographies where they have a majority. What is done by evil minds in other communities, is heroic behavior for Muslims.

Subsequently, I engaged in many debates with believing Muslims as well as sympathizers who have little knowledge of Islam. What I heard cemented my belief. I now challenge any apologist of Islam to show me difference between conduct of Mohammed and that of, say, ISIS. Invariably, the apologists lose the argument and resort to name calling instead of answering questions. The ones who were a little more open minded studied the subject themselves and have largely come round to accepting that Islam is fundamentally flawed. I am also happy to note that in public discourse, people display more knowledge of what happened in Arabia between late 6th and early 7th century, and there is growing acceptance of the idea that Islam itself is a problem, an intractable one at that. And non - Muslims have no responsibility for the “distress” Muslims seem to be perennially afflicted with.

As debates progressed, I encountered another line from those desperate to throw a lifeline for Muslims. I cannot, by the way, understand why some non - Muslims have such desperation to defend Muslims. But it’s there in many otherwise normal persons. So those like me who want to change the world have to answer it.

This line is - but what about your Muslim neighbor, office colleague, batchmate etc. He or she is a “normal” person “just like you”. He does not show fanaticism. Nor found involved in terrorist activities. Why should that person suffer discrimination? Why shouldn’t the society ensure that person is not in discomfort on account of his identity?

I agree that we should not stop a “normal” Muslim on the road and unload our anger against him. I am not advocating gratuitous violence against anyone. Not even proactively telling him about our views on Islam. However, we really need to have a hard look at this question - should we really be obliged to bend over backwards for his “comfort”. For instance, should we hold back our thoughts on political issues because a handful of Muslims might feel hurt? At macro level, should our policies be adjusted to ensure this so called “normal” Muslim does not feel bad about anything?

I do not think so. I believe that once we have determined that Islam is fundamentally wrong, any believing Muslims should be assumed to be a follower of that wrong, unless proved otherwise. The Muslim neighbor may indeed seem as no different from any of us. But if he is a believing Muslim, it is impossible that he does not plan to destroy you, or reduce you to second class status as soon as he has adequate political power. Mainstream Muslims have always done that. Unless they change in fundamental ways, they will always do that.

Here is an illustration to understand this point.

I once engaged with just such a Muslim on a whatsapp group. The group has some 100 odd members. Barring a handful, all are Hindus, some notionally, some in belief. There are a few Christians. And there is just one Muslim. Being among those rather vocal on Islam and Muslims, I was advised by one of us to engage with him while others watched. Only request to me and the Muslim - let us call him Faisal, was that we should maintain civility.

And so the engagement happened. I learned enormously about the Muslim mind from that exchange. I am sharing what happened and what emerged out of it.

I started by challenging Faisal that most Muslims are not loyal to India and our Constitution. They want to re-institutionalize Shariah laws (I.e. Hindus have second class status). They cheer Pakistan not only in cricket matches but in wars too (1965 and 1971). Survey after survey has shown it. Along the way, I also told him that I had studied Islam and wanted to ask him how he could accept as his ideal a monstrous evil like Mohammed. Faisal said a few things and then abruptly left. I cannot produce all exchanges, but here is a gist of what Faisal, one of those “normal” mainstream Muslims, said:

I do not agree to surveys that most Muslims are not loyal to the Indian constitution (e.g. seeking Shariah laws). It is not healthy for our society to spread such (mis)information. I know more Muslims than others, and we are not like this.

Muslims / Islam have become a punching bag nowadays. It is easy to blame things on religion. Its all about interpretation. Taliban and ISIS also claim to follow Islam. Look at Muslims around you. Study their behavior.

No more from me. I got to go!

That was it. He refused to answer any questions about what Islam says, what Mohammed did in his lifetime and what Muslims have done all around us every time they had power!

I later thought - Faisal must know about all the violence Muslims have inflicted. He can’t be unaware of the genocide of Kashmiri Pandits, to name one horror committed by his co - religionists. Why doesn’t he acknowledge it? He may express his opinion of it later, but why doesn’t he first acknowledge that such incidents might have made us Hindus view Islam and him in a certain way? Why does he claim unalloyed victimhood? Moreover, he claims to have a version of Islam that is perfectly peaceful and totally different from that of Taliban and ISIS. Why doesn’t he explain how he came to acquire such a version? In all my studies of Islam lasting years, I never came across such a version. And before I could start asking questions about his version, he left!!

Faisal must have seen horrifying attitudes of his community members first hand. He comes from Bihar. In 1946 elections, nearly 90% Muslims voted for Muslim League that openly called for murder and rape of Hindus. The probability that at least one of his grandfathers supported that Muslim League is

nearly 100%. I find it very hard to believe that he had not heard from (or heard about) them. Then why did he feign ignorance of those attitudes in his community. A decent, civil behavior would be to acknowledge it, acknowledge that the Hindu view of Muslims is not without basis, and after that defend himself and his community if needed. He does not do that. He brushes aside our views as misplaced, harmful for the society, and moves on. As if we are supposed to just grin and bear it when we learn about Muslims committing atrocities on Hindus.

That is your “normal” Muslim neighbor / colleague / batchmate who you thought is no different from you. Make of it what you want. As far as I am concerned, Faisal’s behavior of expecting others to never feel angry about genocides shows the real face of Islam. That it is a genocidal ideology of world domination no different from Nazism. It kills basic decency and civility in its adherents. I have never seen an upper caste Hindu fail to acknowledge the horrors of untouchability. Nor a Briton refusing to admit the atrocities of the British Raj. Nor an American White not admitting that they killed Red Indians and committed slavery on blacks. How different a Muslim who studied with us in college! If such a person can dissimulate in front of us, what of the more fanatical types? No wonder you never hear any voices in Muslim community against fundamentalism.

I am more convinced than ever that we all need to rise up to the political challenge of Islam and Muslims if we want to preserve the freedoms of free societies earned with so much blood. And that means not relenting on the political pressure we have just started creating on Muslims. On overt fundamentalists, as also on “regular” folks around us like Faisal. They are no different once one looks beneath the surface.

Pagans vs Abrahamics - why Hindus are a free society, and Muslims can’t be one

Abhishek Banerjee, a mathematician at IISc Bangalore, is probably the best “columnist” today in India. Recently, he made an interesting point on Turkey’s thuggish act of converting Hagia Sophia into a mosque. He said that believing Muslims hate India because we are the last standing Pagan culture. All other cultures in the world converted to one of the Abrahamic religions, or to communism which too is a kind of Abrahamic religion.

 This remark really got me thinking. To begin with, let me clarify that in my opinion Hindus are more than Pagans. We describe ourselves as a “Dharmic” people, and we believe that Dharma is a far more profound idea than paganism. However, we do share our personality with Pagans in many fundamental ways. So in this write up, I will refer to ourselves as “Pagans”.

 While I fully agree with Abhishek, I found myself asking this question - what are the traits of pagans - the important facets of their collective ethos, and how and are they different from “Abrahamic” personality. Let me make a crude attempt at listing the critical differences between the two. I think it might help us Hindus understand ourselves better, and maybe it will motivate us even more to defend the free, democratic Nation-State that India has become. So here are the most important differences (in my opinion) between a “Pagan” and an “Abrahamic” mindset:

 1. Pagans are polytheists, Abrahamics are belligerent monotheists: We take this for granted, but as I think more about it, this seems quite a significant fact - why aren’t there monotheistic Pagan cultures? Well, there might be an odd one (none that I know about), but all significant Pagan cultures have been polytheistic. At the very least, no pagan culture was antagonistic towards “others”. We all know about myriad Hindu Gods, but then Greco - Roman religions also had many deities. Pre-Islamic Egyptians were likewise polytheistic. So were pre-Islamic Persians / Zoroastrians.

 And think about it - why should it be so? On the face of it, it may seem unimportant. But it is not. It is a critical difference that determines their vastly different collective ethos. Not only are Abrahamics avowed monotheists, they seem offended by the idea that any society should have multiple Gods. Abrahamics seem to have acute anxiety about this and they seem to want to attack and humiliate Pagans only on this count. Why this anxiety? Why should heavens seem to fall (to them) if people worship multiple Gods? It seems irrational on the face of it, but for the moment, let us record this and move on.

 2. Pagans admit flaws in their Gods, Abrahamics insist their “One God” is perfect: All of Hindu Gods, every single one, is admitted as having flaws. Indra is egoistic and promiscuous, Shiva is very intense and prone to anger, Brahma is known to have lied and lost the privilege of being worshiped. The list goes on and on. A little research I did on Greek Gods revealed similar view of them by their worshipers. Zeus, for instance, is said to “mate everything in sight”. More research is sure to confirm this about other Pagan Gods.

 Abrahamic faiths not only insist on one almighty “God”, but this God is believed to be perfect and infallible. Of course, to non - believers, this almighty seems far from perfect. Allah of Muslims, for example, not only comes across as exceedingly egoistic (don’t you dare worship anyone other than me!) and cruel (eternal hell for worshiping anyone else besides me), but also doesn’t seem to know basic maths! He committed errors while guiding his followers about share of inheritance!

 The point is that Abrahamics do not admit any flaws in some being out there assumed to be omnipotent. Of course they tie themselves in knots when questioned about these imperfections, but they have an immense desire and insistence on a flawless, omnipotent being.

 This is another critical difference between Abrahamics and Pagans. I suspect it is rooted in the psychological make up of the respective followers. It results in profoundly different kinds of societies. One immediate implication is that Abrahamics are less tolerant of “imperfect” behaviors. Pagans accept that human beings will come with all kinds of flaws and the society must factor that in while building institutions and forming the social contract. Abrahamics too have imperfections like their supposedly “flawless” God does, but they are perpetually defensive and in denial about it. It turns them into a natural hypocrites.

 3. Pagans celebrate sexuality and romance, Abrahamics have anxiety around sex and women: I invite people to look at the way Hindu women dressed historically (i.e. before the first Abrahamic - the Muslim, set foot on the subcontinent). There are enough depictions on temples and cave carvings, in the paintings of Ajanta, and in Hindu literature. Contrast it with the way traditional Muslims and Christians insist their women should dress up. A clarification here - the present day nominally “Judeo - Christian” western civilization is different. It sort of de-abrahamized itself during the Renaissance, when it adopted modernity and secularism, retaining only vestiges of orthodox Christianity. People like Brazilians too - while devoted Christians on paper, actually are more native American and African Pagans than devout Christians. I am open to being questioned on this, but I seriously doubt a believing Christian would look at the Rio carnival as anything but depraved debauchery.

 The matter goes beyond women’s dress. If you study Hindu Gods’ “lives” - the reference points for Hindus to get their sense of right and wrong, you find Hindus celebrating romantic love between Goddesses and their partners. Sometimes, as in the case of Radha, her consort is not even married to her. We still enjoy Raas Leela every year. All devatas and Eeswaras deeply love their women. The love isn’t asexual. There is enough to tell you that their love is of a typical loving, sexual couple. There is no embarrassment about sexual desires.

 On the other hand, in both Orthodox Christianity and Islam, sex is shame. In Christianity, we are all “born in sin” from which we need to be “saved”. Abrahamics endeavor to keep their women in some manner of confinement - Muslims more strictly than Christians, and then create spaces for sexual fulfillment that are thoroughly demeaning to women. All “sultans” had harems which were little more than private brothels, women therein being little more than playthings, to be handed down to the next lower ranking “amir” after the more powerful one was done with her.

 This separation of women’s roles between sexual beings on the one had, and respectable wives on the other, is a feature of Abrahamic faiths. Hindu civilization, modern day western civilization and I am sure other Pagan cultures, don’t separate these roles for women. We all respect women even while we take cognizance of their “sexual” roles.

 At this point, it is pertinent to point out that one limited exception to this is Communism which we clubbed with Abrahamics. In Communism, there isn’t an endeavor to box women into confined spaces. However, even in communism, there is no celebration of romance and sex. Just that the shackles are reduced as compared to other Abrahamics.

 4. Pagans handle “authority” lightly, Abrahamics are obsessed with matters of authority and power: To understand this, we need to look at the interaction between someone powerful like a king and a powerless subject, in the imagination of respective people. Sure enough, there is protocol in the Pagan cultures too - the subject has to bow to the king. Maybe signal subordination in other ways. But there is an ease and comfort between a powerful and a powerless in Pagan cultures.

 I can recount scene after scene in Sanskrit literature which show how easygoing the Hindu kings were with their subjects. One, just for illustration, is when Ram is about to leave Ayodhya for his vanvaas, and gifting cows to Brahmins before he leaves. A destitute Brahmin named Trijat comes to him and requests for a gift so he may live better. Ram asks him, half jokingly, to throw a stick and then Trijat could get all the cows standing till the landing point of the stick. Trijat does it and gets the gift of a thousand cows. The point here is that a powerful prince being so lighthearted with a common man is a norm within Hindu culture. Extreme sternness and abject humbleness in “lesser” mortals is the norm in Abrahamic cultures. Its as if the slightest gesture of “equality” between the powerful and the powerless poses extreme threat to our Abrahamic sultan.

 These were the most noticeable differences I could narrate from my observations and studies of different cultures. Some points to be made here before I close - one, like I said earlier - the West today is definitely not an Abrahamic culture. It is not a “Christian” civilization. It is an inheritor of the Greco - Roman culture. It abandoned orthodox Christianity long back and is only nominally Christian. Two - I do not claim this write up to be a rigorous study, though I am certain this can be a starting point for one on this subject. Moreover, most of my observations are based on Hindu culture, though whatever little I have learned of other Pagan cultures like Greeks or Egyptians matches the traits listed above. Three - it should be obvious, but bears stating - there are many individuals, even powerful kings / leaders sometimes, in either culture who nevertheless show traits of the “other” i.e. A powerful Hindu might behave like an Abrahamic, or a prominent Muslim might be “soft” like Pagans. I have described the mainstream ethos of different cultures. There being billions of individuals in either culture, the number of deviants could run into crores even if a small percentage overall. This small segment could even be large enough to create a deviant subculture within an overarching mainstream culture.

 To conclude, I think Abrahamic mindset is driven by:

1. Extreme anxiety in matters of sex (my woman may not desire me, may tempt others with her sexuality, may enjoy herself with other men), leading to a certain way of treating women.

2. Extreme anxiety in matters of power (My status may be challenged by / lost to “lesser” mortals who are not accepting of my authority and status).

These instincts lead Abrahamics to act in certain ways, and we can see the result all around.

Pagans, on the contrary, are naturally “free” people and create societies in which an individual does not have to be a “fighter” to flourish. In these societies individuals of many diverse temperaments can prosper. At their best, the Pagan societies have been the most productive in matters of economy, arts, science and technology. Abrahamics can’t be similarly productive by themselves. Historically, they have done well only when they could access some Pagan society to “feed” on. In the absence of subjugated Pagans available to “carnivorous” Abrahamics, these societies tended to flounder.

Pagans being natural prey for predatory Abrahamics, they need to develop defence mechanisms to ensure their survival. I leave that topic for another day!

Sanjay

Is Yogi Adityanath the Heir Apparent to Narendra Modi?

Even when the five time, immensely popular MP from Gorakhpur was selected by Amit Shah to lead UP, a number of people were skeptical. Us included. An unapologetic Hindu, the Yogi always challenged the BJP for their soft approach to Hindutva and the problems of their core group of supporters. This would be a problem for a career politician but Yogiji is anything but that. But for like Modi and Shah who are performers and result oriented men, Yogiji was a kindred spirit. They trusted him with politically the most important state.
Yogiji started his tenure like a sledgehammer. He identified law and order as the main problem and went after criminals with a vengeance. People responded positively to that. His initiatives with rioters was also met with an overwhelming approval. His hard work and dedication earned him #YogiRoxx trend on Twitter. But none of that earned him any approval, leave alone praise from the PM. Before the 2019 general elections, Yogiji started talking about Ayodhya and Ram Mandir as he felt very strongly on the issues. This made him very popular amongst the voters but his statements were met with a strong rebuke from the PM (we all remember PM’s body language on a trip to UP where he treated Yogiji like an errant person). At that time I thought that all that felt like a father disciplining his son.
Then came Covid-19, the biggest problem the world had collectively face since WWII. Even believers like us were very worried about UP. We thought it was only a matter of time before UP surpasses Italy and Spain. Then came some more bad news. Migrant workers were being disowned by the employers and send back home. The worst was Kejriwal’s sleazy tricks at the Anand Vihar bus depot where an immense panic was caused. In face of seemingly insurmountable odds, Yogiji and his team rose to the challenge and dealt with the problem with ruthless efficiency. Thanks to his effort, the erstwhile BIMARU state was one of the best managed. If you consider the enormity of the task, Yogiji’s performance amongst all the CMs is the best. We are not going to quote numbers and stats. But population of UP is similar to Pakistan and Brazil. Number of cases, recovered and deaths for UP is 21,549 14,215, 649. The same for Pakistan is 203000, 92624, 4118 and for Brazil is 1.32 million, 716000, 57103. Such great is Yogiji’s performance that it earned him praises from the most unlikely of quarters, Pakistan.
Pakistan-newspaper-praises-yogi-governments-strict-lockdown-enforcement-in-up. 
 
Having obtained a chokehold on the Covid problem, Yogiji set out to solve the problem of the returning citizens of UP. He has taken the PM’s Gareeb Kalyan Rojgar Abhiyan and made it more muscular and innovative and launched Atma Nirbhar UP Rojgar Abhiyan under which 1.25 crore jobs will be created in 31 districts in 125 days.
1-25-crore-jobs-31-districts-125-days-pm-modi-to-launch-atma-nirbhar-up-rojgar-abhiyan-today.

Suddenly Yogiji went from a populist leader to a problem solver, a high achiever, a man who found opportunity in a crisis, a visionary a consummate leader. He now reminded us of an ex CM of Gujarat. Yogiji, the leader has arrived as was recently acknowledged by that ex CM.
In the following video, the PM acknowledges the enormity of the task and praises Yogiji sky high for the way he dealt with the problem. He says that this kind of success would not have been possible in the past. All UP received in the past was excuses. But no more. Now UP has a leader who did not go to his father’s funeral because he was needed in Lucknow. A very rare praise from the PM of Yogiji’s success and sacrifice.
https://twitter.com/BJP4India/status/1276449392178782208

In the following video the PM praises Yogiji’s wisdom and strength in this time of crisis.
https://twitter.com/bjp4india/status/1276447418955882496?s=11

In the following video the PM acknowledges Yogiji’s ability to not only adapt the central government policies but improve upon them in both qualitative and quantitative manners. Yogiji found opportunity in crisis and improved and increased the scope of Atmanirbhar India. You can almost feel that the PM is hinting at his potential replacement.
https://twitter.com/BJP4India/status/1276444638803419138

In many ways, the PM sounds like a proud father who is parsimonious with his praises but one who finally decides to give credit where it is due. Words like these from a man like Narendra Modi must mean a lot to an upcoming leader like Yogi Adityanath.
From the point of view of Modi-Shah, their ability to recognize the potential in Yogiji speaks volumes of the future of the BJP and their ability to groom future leaders. BJP is truly in safe hands. But as a voter we cannot help but draw parallels between Modi and Yogi. Honest to a fault, both men have almost identical family backgrounds. Despite of their powerful stature, their families are not favored in the public arena. Both of them are extreme hard workers and over achievers. Both of them are monks – one declared while the other waits for his retirement. That said, Yogiji has a long way to go before he becomes a Modi. He is still a diamond in the rough who needs to work on his diplomatic skills. In one aspect, he out does Modi and that is his unapologetic approach to Hindutva and nationalism.
Leading in peace and prosperity is easy. True leaders shine in times of trouble. Yogi has proven his mettle in the worst of times and for that citizens of UP must feel relieved and proud that finally they have a leader who is going to put the state on the road out of the BIMARU statues. The nation has to be relieved because in Yogi we have a person who is more than capable of leading the nation.

Sri Aurobindo on how to deal with the Muslim problem.

Sri Aurobindo on how Hindus should deal with the Muslim problem. Present excerpts from his words from 1906 to 1940 (Courtesy Gautam Dey)

In an earlier part we had shared Maharshi Aurobindo’s views on Gandhi. We now present Aurobindo’s views on how the Hindu community must deal with Muslims. These are excerpts from book ‘India’s Rebirth’ that contains his thoughts at various points of time. 

Excerpts are verbatim from the book, format is when spoken and matter.
September 4, 1906 - Partition Bengal
“The idea that by encouraging Muslim rowdyism, the present agitation may be put down, is preposterous and those who cherish this notion forget that the bully is neither the strongest nor the bravest of men, and that because the self-restraint of Hindus, miscalled cowardice, has been a prominent feature of his national character, he is absolutely incapable of striking straight and striking hard when any sacred situation demands this.
Not has it been proved recently, that the mild Hindu is so absolutely helpless and incapable of defending his rights and liberties as he is painted by his foreign enemies.”
June 19, 1909 - Hindu Muslim
“Of one thing we may be certain, that Hindu-Mahomedan unity cannot be affected by political adjustments or Congress flatteries. It must be sought deeper down, in the heart and in the mind, for where the causes of disunion are; there the remedies must be sought.”
September 4, 1909 - Muslim problem
“Every action for instance which may be objectionable to a number of Mahomedans is now liable to be forbidden because it is likely to lead to a breach of the peace, and one is dimly beginning to wonder whether the day may not come when worship in Hindu temples may be forbidden on that valid ground.”
April 18, 1923 - Hindu-Muslim unity
“(Sri Aurobindo :) I am sorry they are making a fetish of this Hindu-Muslim unity. It is no use ignoring facts; some day the Hindus may have fight the Muslims and they must prepare for it Hindu-Muslim unity should not mean the subjection of the Hindus. Every time the mildness of the Hindu has given way.
The best solution would be to allow the Hindus to organize themselves and the Hindu-Muslim unity would take care of itself, it would automatically solve the problem. Otherwise we are lulled into a false sense of satisfaction that we have solved a difficult problem when in fact we have only shelved it.”
May 18, 1926 - Khilafat
“Take the Hindu-Muslim problem: I don’t know why our politicians accepted Gandhi’s Khilafat agitation. With the mentality of the ordinary Mahomedan it was bound to produce the reaction it has produced: you fed the force, it gathered power and began to make demands which the Hindu mentality had to rise up and reject. That does not require Supermind to find out, it requires common sense. Then, the Mahomedan reality and the Hindu reality began to break heads at Calcutta. (Refers to the riots in Calcutta the previous month).”
June 29, 1926
“If it is India’s destiny to assimilate all the conflicting elements, is it possible to assimilate the Mahomedan element also?
Why not? India has assimilated elements from the Greeks, the Persians and other nations. But she assimilates only when her central truth is recognized by the other party, and even while assimilating she does it in such a way that the elements absorbed are no longer recognizable as foreign but become part of herself. For instance. We took from the Greek architecture, from the Persian painting, etc.
The assimilation of the Mahomedan culture also was done in the mind to a great extent and it would have perhaps gone further. But in order that the process may be complete it is necessary that a change in the Mahomedan mentality should come. The conflict is in the outer life and unless the Mahomedans learn tolerance I do not think the assimilation is possible.
The Hindu is ready to tolerate. He is open to new ideas and his culture has got a wonderful capacity for assimilation, but always provided that India’s central truth is recognized.”
August 1, 1926 - Muslim problem
“The attempt to placate the Mahomedans was a false diplomacy. Instead of trying to achieve Hindu-Muslim unity directly, if the Hindus had devoted themselves to national work, the Mahomedans would have gradually come of themselves….
This attempt to patch up a unity has given too much importance to the Muslims and it has been the root of all these troubles.”
May 28, 1940 - Gandhi’s attitude to Muslims
“Have you read what Gandhi has said in answer to a correspondent? He says that if eight crores of Muslims demand a separate State, what else are the twenty-five crores of Hindus to do but surrender? Otherwise there will be civil war.
(A disciple:) I hope that is not the type of conciliation he is thinking of.
Not thinking of it, you say? He has actually said that and almost yielded. If you yield to the opposite party beforehand, naturally they will stick strongly to their claims. It means that the minority will rule and the majority must submit. The minority is allowed its say, “We shall be the ruler and you our servants. Our hard [word] will be law; you will have to obey.” This shows a peculiar mind I think this kind of people are a little cracked.” June 21, 1940 – Kashmir
“In Kashmir, the Hindus had all the monopoly. Now if the Muslim demands are acceded to, the Hindus will be wiped out.”
November 28, 1940 - Gandhi’s Ahimsa
“Something in him takes delight in suffering for its own sake. Even the prospect of suffering seems to please him… It is the Christian idea that has taken hold of him.
The English are not quite wrong when they say that the Indian must settle their own differences. The Lucknow Pact has become a big political blunder. The Mahomedans, they want to rule India.”

General Elections and Whatsapp Wars

In the run up to the general elections in India, for at least about a year, a phenomenon

everyone has noticed, and many have been involved in (including me!) is what I am calling “whatsapp wars”. In the many whatsapp groups of which almost all middle class Indians are part, the more political minded ones have engaged in fairly heated arguments, and in many cases, separation and end of friendships. I too left my engineering group permanently, and my relationships with a few of my neighbors / batchmates / acquaintances have pretty much ended. I have known many others in similar situations. In fact, the phenomenon was even reported in the mainstream media sometimes.

What really happens that makes people, otherwise friendly, to start hating each other with such intensity? And what should people do to moderate things? Are relationships more important, or are political biases masquerading as principles and values more important? Having been a part of it a few times, I have some thoughts around these questions, and I thought of putting them down and sharing with some folks I know and perhaps care about.

First lets see what happens – a “Right Wing” (called RW, but not really right winger in the classical sense) Hindu Nationalist pro – Modi person posts something that a secular / liberal person, or rather, one who believes he is one, finds highly objectionable. The number of occasion when the reverse happens are relatively few. Now once objection is raised, a complaint is lodged with the admin of the whatsapp, usually with a threat to quit the group. The admin, who is usually anxious to maintain the group integrity, goes to the offender and requests him to moderate. At times, this leads to behavior change if only temporarily. Other times, the damage is permanent and someone or the other leaves the group.

This is usually the cycle. I found some of the batchmates of one of my colleges too foul mouthed. Not because of their views, but because of the language they used – one of them, in reply to something I posted just said “you are scum”, I quit the group. I was willing to put up with political views, howsoever extreme, but not this kind of outright personal abuse. I, by the way, am a right winger myself, a strong supporter of Modi. On other occasions, I have caused people to quit one of my groups, though thankfully never permanently. I derive some solace from the fact that even those who went to the extent of quitting the group because of my views later acknowledged that I was never uncivil.

To me, it is always a source of distress when this kind of a “separation” happens. Sure enough, some of our views will be considered extreme by someone or the other and vice versa. But personal abuse, threats, demands to silence, that is something I never am able to come to terms with. However, like with everything else, I did endeavor to understand why this happens, and here is what I think goes on:

With me, things on whatsapp group have always gone out of control only on one issue – the nature of Islam. There is something about this matter that some people, instead of responding to a comment with a counter – logic, as they usually do in other matters, simply go ballistic and try to silence me and some others with similar views. On every other matter, I can write the most provocative message, and it will at most elicit a frown and someone pointing out why I might be wrong. On Islam, the outrage of secular / liberals is palpable instantly. Of course, they claim they are upset by the tone of religious discrimination. But that does not explain extreme emotion. Why, for instance, won't they answer me with some logic? Why won't they first show me how exactly I advocated discrimination (I don't think I ever do), rather than demand belligerently that I be silenced.

There is an answer to this. I will lay that out before you. But to start with, I will tell you a very small episode from my life that is analogous to the overreaction of political partisans on whats-app, and illustrate the phenomenon more clearly.

I had a very good friend some 35 years back. In fact we are still connected and he is still a good friend though we have not met for decades. We were the sort of friends who pulled each others' legs with impunity, fully assured that we will remain friends even after taking liberties with each other. I am going to call this friend Markos. He is a Keralite Christian and a really good human being.

As it happens, Markos had a tendency which in my mind was a minor flaw. I did not at all care that he had it. But something interesting happened when I used it to pull his leg once.

Markos liked to pretend that he liked art movies. I thought he really did not enjoy the boring insipid fare that passed for high art. I thought he was just putting on an appearance of liking them, just to come across as a sophisticated guy who liked high art. So what happened when he saw one of these flop movies and came back and told me “I really liked the movie”. I was the wise guy and shot back, full of mischief: “You only think you liked the movie”. I would not do that with anyone but a close friend like Markos. And how do you think Markos reacted? He ceased to be a dear friend instantly! He absolutely went ballistic! He raved and ranted against me and started pointing out every flaw he noticed in me since we first met a few years previously.

I was taken aback of course. I protested that I was only having some fun at his expense. But he was not soothed. He continued his tirade for quite a while more. I did not react after this. After a few days, as it happens with youngsters, our friendship was back to nearly normal.

Moral of the story: If someone fools himself about something, and you point it out, he will go berserk on you.

Now back to Islam and whatsapp groups.

Those secularists who read these thoughts of mine will again burn with rage, but I am certain that they go ballistic because some RW guy reminded them that they are fooling themselves about the nature of Islam. Let us look at some beliefs they hold, or rather, fool themselves that they hold about Islam:

1. Islam is a religion of peace

2. Islam is just like any other religion

3. Muslims are just like other people, they should be seen as such

4. A demographic change has no implication for peace in society

5. Most Indian Muslims feel no loyalty for Pakistan

6. Most Indian Muslims feel loyalty to India

I can list several more.

It is immaterial here how true these assumptions are. Of course, I believe much in these assumptions is false. But that point is not central here. The central point is – deep down the secularists also believe these assumptions are mostly false. It is just that they won't admit it to themselves. In fact, they go to great lengths to continue to lie to themselves. They never examine the whole matter with any rigor. Because they are afraid of what might come out if they did.

Like Markos fooled himself that he liked the movie, they too fool themselves.

And then, when someone brings home to them about the self – deception, they go ballistic!

What is the way out of it then? And when I discuss this final part, I will even admit the possibility that my analysis might be faulty. But first let me proceed on the assumption that it isn't.

If indeed they admit the possibility that they might be engaging in self – deception, they owe it to everyone, including themselves, that they thoroughly study the subject. Islam is the number one political issue in the world. It literally takes thousands of lives every year. In extreme cases, such as when ISIS ruled parts of the world (supported, I might add, by a “mainstream” nation) women were raped and sold like cattle! If mankind is faced with something so horrifying, then every thinking person must have full knowledge of the roots of the problem. No one has to believe people like me, though I do think we spent a lot of time and energy studying it. But they must do it for their own sake if nothing else. It is not an innocuous matter like a boring art movie that can be left alone.

Assuming I am wrong (very unlikely IMO). Then they must answer why they react with such fury when the subject comes up. After all, no one ever sees this kind of fury when similar statements are made about Hindus for instance. In fact, they themselves engage in fairly offensive commentary about other religions, particularly Hinduism, and at most get a rebuttal from some RW guy. No one ever demands to silence them. Moreover, I would like to see at least one common assumption held by “anti – Muslim bigots” (which is how they describe anyone who puts question marks on Muslim behavior) proven false by them clinically and rigorously. Not responded with outrage, rhetoric and non – sequitur.

Is Sam Pitroda Crazy?

Sam Pitroda has put his foot in his mouth thereby giving the BJP a huge stick with which to be beat Congress. A statement of that kind made three or so weeks away from general elections seems suicidal. This begs the question – Is he crazy?

The simple answer is NO. He is not crazy or suicidal (politically). So what explains the outburst? A “cui bono” analysis is needed here. A lot of peaceniks and left wing loonies will talk about peace even over dead Indian bodies. Guys like Sudheendra Kulkarni, Judge Katju or the entire aman ki asha brigade are repeat offenders of this. But they can afford to say it and get away with it because they do not have to face the voters. Pitroda is very closely associated with Congress and knows what he says has political ramifications for Congress especially the Gandhis. So on whose behalf did he make the statement?

Twitter handle @DrGPradhan has my support despite being reviled by many twitteratti on the right. I consider him as a fellow Modi supporter. For me that is enough. One thing he harps on is an active cooperation between 10 JP and Pindi. On the face of it, both have a common enemy – Narendra Modi. But the theory of cooperation between ISI/Pakistan and the grand old party of India, even to avid Congress haters, may seem a bit farfetched. It would seem too much. But it is this context, Pitroda’s intentions can be explained.

Imran Khan is an isolated man. His plans for Pakistan’s economy lie in tatters. He looks weak in front of the public and knows can be made a sacrificial goat by the army. He knows that there is no talking to Modi sarkar without giving them what they want (and he can’t acquiesce to those demands because the army would not let him). The only thing he can do is influence the Indian voters through his proxies. First attempt was through JeM who carried out the Pulwana attacks. They had hoped for a Manmohan Singh like response which would lead to Modi’s electoral loss. Instead they got the Balakot attack which totally changed the security paradigm in South Asia forever.

So Imran reached out to his other proxies and asked them if somehow public opinion can be changed in the favor of Pakistan. In face of Indian media’s inability to do so, that responsivity fell on Congress. Enter Sam Pitroda who though he was close enough to Congress be taken seriously but removed enough to not damage Congress. Maybe what he said could have been worded better but evern as it was, it would’ve worked with anyone except Modi. Unfortunately, Modi is such skilled politician that he turned it around and made it all about nationalism. Boom! What was supposed to be a favor for a friend across the border has now become a millstone around the neck of the very people Pitroda was supposed to protect.

Maybe, just maybe, Gaurav Pradhan's worst case scenario is correct and 10 JP and Pindi really are connected.

Peace Was a Possibility

Imagine a Scenario.

It is after 25th Dec 2015. PM Modi’s visit to Pakistan is over. A strong and allegedly a hawkish Indian leader touched the Pakistani PM’s mother’s feet. The symbolism screams peace.

PM Sharif decides a radical turnaround of decade old policies. Realistically assesses friendship with China. Looks back at history and realizes that long lasting peace can only be possible when negotiated between strong leaders (the old edict of Roman Emperor Hadrian (AD 76–138) "peace through strength or, failing that, peace through threat). Sharif decides to abandon the failed strategic depth policy in Afghanistan and leaves the hapless Afghans to their own devices. He then, safe under the nuclear umbrella, puts J&K on the backburner and negotiates mutually beneficial trade deal with “Baniya (a common Pakistani invective for Hindus) Modi and turn the South Asian Subcontinent around. Modi becomes the new Reagan and Sharif the new Gorbachev.

Imagine that. How many lives would’ve been saved? How much profit would’ve been made? Every economic initiative of Sharif and then Imran Khan would have yielded dividends.

But it did not. Fueled by a false sense of security and superiority, terror attacks continued Modi kept getting pushed into a corner until Pulwana attacks. It then led to Balakot attacks and now Pakistan and their army stands naked in front of the world and worse in front of their own people. The money from Saudi Arabia is now being spent on defending Pakistan and the infrastructure help from China has now become an easy target.

Pakistan has had all kinds of advantages in the past. It is their intense Hindu hatred which has destroyed all those advantages and continues to destroy any and every opportunity they get. Balakot attack has destroyed the myth of Pakistani army as their only functioning organization. Modi gave them the biggest opportunity for peace in their short history. Instead of taking advantage of that, they are standing over the ruins of Balakot and any hope for betterment of their unfortunate country.

Irrelevant Activism Of Indian Communists

Back in 1998 I was working around Howrah in an MNC. As a person from UP, I used to wonder if I needed a VISA to be there. I had not felt so out of place in the hinterlands of United States. On my train rides north of Howrah, I saw abandoned factories and their skeletons, reminder of the good days gone by. In the factory I worked, workers on an average got 72 days of vacation yearly. They would go on strikes at the drop of a hat. A simple visit to the bank was a painful reminder of how dysfunctional a state was West Bengal.

I took a train ride to a place called Falacata up north. When I reached there, what I found was a small place, no more than a tehsil. A visit to the market place in the evening was quite an eye opener. It was a small place. Three shops at the most, this was not a place of significance. It catered to the tea gardens nearby. The looks of this place told me that most people there were struggling to make ends meet and did not know or cared for places outside of West Bengal if not Falacata itself.

I saw a three story building which proudly displayed a banner on the topmost part. Someone painted this banner at that height, a testament to the effort it must’ve required. It was written in Hindi so I understood it. Translated into English, it said: “Free Black Activist Mumia Abu Jamal”. It was quite a shocker. I doubt if too many people there knew who this guy was. Since I had spent some time close to Philadelphia in the US, I had heard of this guy. Abu Jamal had shot and killed a police officer Daniel Faulkner. Subsequently, he was sentenced to life in prison without parole. Abu Jamal became quite a cause celebre in the US attracting liberals from all walks of life. But the guy despite of their best efforts, never got out.

Had I not stayed close to Philadelphia, I would not have known about this guy. People in the Midwest of US have not heard of this guy. But somehow, in a Podunk town of Falacata, there was someone who went to considerable effort to put up that banner. Now remember, there is plenty in WB to fight, causes to protest, injustices to stand up to, employment and healthcare to demand and yet Mumia Abu Jamal took precedence over all those issues.

That’s the nature of Indian communist. Their activism is NEVER about things that matter but about symbols, perceived enemies, exerting power from behind the scenes (without any responsibility) and of course freebies. In many ways they are like Muslims who rate their neighborhood, city, state and nation well below Ummah. For an Indian communist, Marx, Lenin and Mao are more important than any national issue or hero. If the man on the street wants a temple in Ayodhya, they suggest a hospital. When Ram Chandra Bhartiya wants name of Aurangzeb Road changed to a national hero, they mock them while naming streets in Kolakata, Tripura as Lenin Sarani or Marx Sarani.

People of India finally caught a break in 2014, when they elected Narendra Modi as PM. He is democratically challenging every status quo and bringing about meaningful changes. He is taking away power form irrelevant activists who lead one kind of life and espouse entirely the opposite. The Indian communist is afraid of Modi. The Indian communist is afraid of the no-longer-afraid voter. Hopefully, we are seeing beginning of the end of a failed murderous ideology and its murderous grip on states like West Bengal and Kerala.

Casteism: Rise Above or Sink With It

Any system that pits one human being against another is evil. It is against all laws of this world or the other. My co-blogger is a Tamil Brahmin while I belong to one of the non-descript kind of castes. Both of us abhor the system. We are nation first kind of Hindus.

We have written on the topic often and from different point of view. The most recent violence at Bhima-Koregaon is very upsetting and is forcing us to write again on the topic. Interacting with other on twitter using our handle @NetHindu1 we see that discussion on this sensitive issue tends to bring out the worst in all of us. Dalits are playing the victim card (and rightly so). Brahmins are bragging about their ability, reach and influence despite of smaller numbers. Other upper caste members are complaining about reservation. It is downright ugly. Fissures are turning into chasms. We as Hindus are playing right into the hands of Leftists, urban naxals and jihadis who are very effectively using morons like Jignesh Mewani. All you have to do is to read the twitter page of this jihadi Shehla Rashid and see what I mean.

Hindus have always fallen prey to the divide and rule ploy that is the only piece of history that matters here. Who collaborated with whom in what war is old news and often does not take into account local and selfish factors of that time is not doing us any good except these “I am smarter than you and know more history than you” arguments. Clearly, we irrespective of our castes are not learning anything from history.

I am of the opinion that if you pit two people who are identical in every aspect, they will still try to find a way to exert their superiority over the other. I have seen that in India and I have seen here in the US. An ocean away, people still make Polish or Italian or Irish jokes even though they are multiple generations away from the old country. One-upmanship is a human phenomenon. Hindus are made it more structured and killed for it.

The choice in front of as Hindus is: are we going to rise above casteism and take back our country from Naxals and Jihadis or stay beholden to either our pride or victimhood, stay divided and lose the war to the “Bharat tere tukde honge” jihadi gang. Pakistanis are probably rubbing their hands in glee at this windfall due to our stupidity.

What can we do? All of us need to realize our collective responsibility. Dalit leadership needs to be taken into confidence and reassured by upper caste leaders. They need to realize that joining hands with Jihadis will result into mass forced conversions as seen in Pakistan. Our political leadership needs to crackdown one the naxal-jihadi nexus, go after their funding and pre-emptively keep them out of potential hotspots i.e. better than our current Home Ministry is doing.

After reading these people on twitter, sometimes I feel that I don’t know as much as them. But I do know that we have a serious problem. A solution, more practical than finger pointing needs to be found. Our future depends on it.
An article we had written on collective responsibility can be read at.

https://nethindu1.blogspot.com/2011/01/religious-coversion-and-our.html

Modi, Yogi and Fadnavis: Comparing the CMs

Back in 2013, Sanjay Singh in an article absolutely worth reading again said:

More than anyone else, Togadia himself should be acutely aware of his own and the VHP’s near complete irrelevance in Gujarat today. This has been reflected during the last two assembly elections that Narendra Modi won. The VHP’s cadre base has shrunk and Togadia is struggling hard to stay afloat in the state.

Even today, PM Modi gets accused by the far right Hindus as betraying their causes. The fact is that Modi is an India first kind of Hindu which means he puts nation first and his faith second. Of course this does not mean he shies away from a proud public display of his faith. Thanks to him, Yoga is an international phenomenon with Saudi Arabia embracing the practice. This is just one of the example.

His India first attitude gets displayed by his passion of keeping peace at all cost which is essential for prosperity. This approach has earned him a different variety of invectives but clearly he could care less. After the post Godhra massacre riots (his inexperience let him down). But after that, as we all know, there was NO incidence during his tenure as CM or after him. He went after the troublemakers hard despite of their affiliations. VHP was sidelined and Jihadis were dealt with decisively. This is a man who places a lot of dividend in peace because it IS important for prosperity. As a CM, he was second to none.

Now as we all can see UP CM Adityanath is probably the second most popular person in BJP. A mahant of the Gorakhnath mutt, he is completely unapologetic about his faith and the way he practices it. If you rise above the media din and smear campaign launched against him by these so called conservatives, you will see that underneath the saffron robe is a pragmatic man who is fair (as Muslims in Gorakhpur will tell you) and is inspired greatly by Narendra Modi. A report in Economic Times says the following:

Adityanath aims to model the investor summit on Vibrant Gujarat, the popular biennial investor summit started by Modi in 2003. Adityanath had a morning meeting with ten of the country's prominent bankers, including State Bank of India chairman Rajnish Kumar, Central Bank of India chairman Rajeev Rishi and Dena Bank chairman Ashwani Kumar among others, inviting them to open regional offices in the state.

Adityanath spoke of planned reforms and investments in infrastructure, civil aviation, food processing, tourism, film making and the dairy industry. He said the state government is bringing reforms in labour laws and scrapping as many as 1,200 obsolete rules.

It is therefore no surprise that the UP CM puts great importance on law and order. The following was said in an NDTV report:

According to data released by the UP Police, between March 20 and September 18, there have been 431 encounters, in which 17 criminals were killed; two policemen died and 88 were injured; so far, 1,106 criminals have been caught.

In a sort of a prequel to the debacle at BhimaKoregaon, proactive action at Saharanpur and the eventual arrest of Chandrashekhar Azad of Bhimsena controlled what could have been a disaster.

On one hand the Yogi is creating tourism hotspots in UP and on the other inspecting homeless shelters for adequate protection against the cold. Just like Modi, this is a one man army.

Now Yogi inherited possible the worst state in the entire union unlike Devendra Fadnavis who got this plum job as CM of arguably the most prosperous and economically robust state. All he has to do is maintain.

However the coolest first couple of any of the states in India have tried their best to be a Not-Modi-Not-Yogi CM. Destroying Hindu run budget schools by implementing RTE, aiding the “Be Santa” campaign (clearly ashamed of their Hindu roots), absolute Muslim appeasement. Of course the worst is the latest debacle in BhimKoregaon where urban naxals and jihadis ran amok under the garb of dalits to open up really old wounds with the ultimate aim of dividing Hindus along caste lines for the benefit of Congress. All Fadnavis had to do was to be proactive like Yogi Adityanath and all this could have been avoided. Instead he and his wife are more in news because of their love for dogs and picking up fights with RW twitteratis.

Fadnavis needs to emulate Modi and Yogi in proactive governance and maintain a strong law and order in a state that is so much easier to govern than UP. He needs to govern his state like Modi and Yogi – with firm hand and respecting everyone. The algorithm for good governance is there. All he and others have to do is to conform to it with sincerity without abandoning your faith.

The following are the references used:

//economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/62214138.cms?
utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/1-encounter-every-12-hours-up-cops-have-new-strategy-for-crime-control-1752487

http://shankhnaad.net/nation/public-sphere
/item/506-the-anti-hindu-stature-of-maharashtra-cm-devendra-fadnavis

Major Gogoi, General Pershing and Tactics To Win Wars

History is replete with examples of dirty tricks used to win or even gain an upper hand in wars, conflicts even business deals. One such example is from the Moro rebellion in Philippines when the Moros were carrying out suicide attacks against the American forces. There is some debate about whether General Pershing ordered the following or turned a blind eye but this is what is agreed in an article in Time magazine (respected leftist source):

In 1941, TIME ran a letter to the editor from a soldier named J. R. McKey who had served with Pershing in the Philippines decades before. In the letter, McKey describes using pigs in burials to deter Muslim insurgent activities, but does not ascribe the act to Pershing.

McKey wrote, "U.S. soldiers ... had a pretty good cure for juramentado [Moro swordsmen] activities. Knowing the horror of the Mohammedan for any contact with swine, and particularly with its blood, these American roughnecks, when they had killed a juramentado, held for him a very public funeral. The body of the defunct bad man having been deposited in the grave, a pig was brought, stuck, its blood sprinkled freely over the D B M, the dead pig thrown in with him, and the burial completed."

Some reports do say that Pershing was engaged in burying Muslims with pigs or throwing pig's blood on them. According to the History News Network, a Chicago Daily Tribune article from 1927 describes Pershing sprinkling prisoners with pig's blood, then setting them free to warn others of being doused with the blood. "Those drops of porcine gore proved more powerful than bullets," the article wrote.

Christopher Capozzola, a history professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, also cited an incident in which Pershing brought a pig's head to a ceasefire negotiation with a Muslim leader.


Wars and conflicts should not happen in an ideal world but they do. If one can use out of the box thinking in ending wars then it should be considered a win-win. Loss of life is irreversible. Everything else can be settled by peaceful negotiation.

The stone pelting in J&K (without going into a detailed discussion of the how and the why) is clearly a Pakistani funded operation and these stone pelters are like daily wage workers for the ISI. China has outsourced their anti-India operation to Pakistanis who then have sub-contracted it out to these unemployed youths who ideally should be in schools like the rest of the angry, scared and frustrated young Indians instead of taking on a professional army.

We all saw what Major Gogoi and his troops did. Tying an Indian youth to the front of the jeep, trussed up like an animal. I am quite sure that this poor guy was scared for his life. For the observers, it invoked different feelings. For some it was an outrage and others a “paying back in the same coin” event. But no sensible Indian can really brag about it.

Having said that, the one thing that is getting lost in the story of fear and outrage is that no lives were lost, no one was hurt- neither the stone pelters nor the soldiers. From that perspective (loss of life being an irreversible reaction), it was a damned good day and Major Gogoi (who must’ve done this out of frustration) must be commended and supported for this.

The left on the social media is latching on to a statement by retd. Lt. Gen. Panag. First and foremost, the Lt. Gen. is an Indian citizen who has the right to speak his mind and should not be abused. But his being in the army should not put him above criticism either.

Civility in Indian political discourse was lost long time ago. But critics of Maj. Gogoi’s tactic should appreciate that no lives were lost because of him and that is and should be the crux of the story.

Relevant urls:

http://time.com/4235405/donald-trump-pig-blood-muslims-story/

http://www.businessinsider.com/6-mind-blowing-tricks-used-during-war-2014-9

Demographic Change - Wakeup or Perish

Islamic Invasion Of India: The Greatest Genocide In History


https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2015/08/31/islamic-invasion-of-india-the-greatest-genocide-in-history/