Friday, November 27, 2015

There’s a macho aspect to Žižek

Wednesday, November 25, 2015 — Adam Kotsko
Žižek’s recent remarks on the refugee crisis have provoked considerable ire in online leftist circles. 

Žižek always names the specific Western values in question, and they are values that most on the left agree with: democracy, equality, and secularism. Of course, the meaning of all of these concepts is a site of significant contestation—or at least it should be. Many leftists are eager to invoke ideals of democracy and national sovereignty when the E.U. is dictating economic policy to member governments, but those same ideals are rejected as incipiently fascist when it is a question of determining who should be allowed to enter a given country. Such sheer opportunism represents an abdication of the task of articulating a genuinely leftist conception of the powerful master-signifier known as democracy.

If you think that the master-signifier of “Western” is not worth fighting for, I respect that—but it is very much in play in contemporary debates, and I see no reason for the left to unilaterally disarm in the struggle over a powerful and (to most people in Western countries) broadly positive symbol. Every cultural tradition is multiple and varied, and the Western traditions did in fact lead to the development of imperialism and fascism and Marxism and anarchism. The specific form of secular religious tolerance practiced in most Western countries is a contingent historical development that originated in contingent historical conditions in Europe, and as such they are naturally imperfect. At the same time, the critiques of those practices that want to remove their de facto pro-Christian bias amount to pitting one aspect of the Western cultural heritage against another. Does the corollary of recognizing the value of other cultures have to be the absolute rejection of everything stained by the taint of a Western genealogy?

Where the responses descend into the worst incoherence is on precisely these points of cultural difference. Often we seem to be in the vicinity of an ideological contradiction akin to Žižek’s famous example of the fantasy Mexican immigrant who is simultaneously a lazy benefit-scrounger and a workaholic who is stealing all our jobs. Here the contradiction is that we must respect cultural differences—but without ever specifying what those differences are. Furthermore, it’s insulting to Muslims to claim that they can’t assimilate… to our utterly worthless, oppressive culture.

This incoherence shows that leftists are stuck within the same West vs. the Rest dyad as the conservatives they denounce—it’s just that the left has inverted it. The real struggle, namely that against capitalism, runs diagonally through all of those cultural divides.

Adam Kotsko Says:

Having given Voyou’s question some thought: yes, that’s a commonplace in popular discourse, but Zizek is saying that intolerance is unavoidable as long as capitalism persists. I don’t know that we have time to abolish capitalism and still accomodate the refugees in a timely manner.
Emily Says:

There’s a macho aspect to Zizek. He’s a tough guy who is able to look reality straight on without flinching, without being confused or scared. He is willing to boldly act and courageously take on the burden of real freedom, alone, without help from anyone. He isn’t weak or hypocritical like the pathetic liberals he holds in such contempt. He’s willing to get his hands dirty and send his enemies to the Gulag. Is that also part of the over-identification strategy?

Wednesday, November 18, 2015

Odia sailors were navigating the waters of South-East Asia › indian-history-textbook...
Identity (Distortion & Appropriation) | 11-11-2015 - The debate over rewriting the history textbooks of India has been re-ignited and as usual emotions are running high ...
What makes it even more troublesome is the dominance of north India, especially the Gangetic plains in the textbooks which fails to reflect the diversity and plurality, diversity and variegated hues of Indian history. The south finds a flimsy mention with Cholas, Satavahanas etc. the Vijayanagar Empire is largely ignored despite it lasting almost as long as the Mughal Empire and its historical importance in shaping the socio-political and economic milieu of large parts of India.
There is also hardly a mention of the Chalukyas, Gurjaras, Pratiharas, Kashmiri dynasties, Kakatiyas, Rastrakutas, and Ahoms. Do we read about the Eastern Gangas and Palas of Bengal who ruled for four centuries each? Or the Western Ganga dynasty, which ruled from 350 C.E to 1000 C.E? Many times, these dynasties and empires ruled areas larger than the largest European countries for centuries. And then we have the bewildering absence of any history of the Northeast in our textbooks.
Then there is the third issue of the exclusion of Dalits and Tribals from these books. [...] There is no reason why history should be a bland political narrative especially of foreign overlords and their shenanigans. History has to be an organic and vibrant entity, which relates to everyday life and India as a living civilization.
The sixth flaw in history writing is India’s interaction with the world down the ages. The strong maritime traditions of India, the spread of its ideas and philosophies across the world and the various influences imported by India are lacking in emphasis.
Human civilizations do not develop in isolation. In fact, interactions with the world is an important part of the history of any country and civilization. It is more so with India, which has exerted tremendous influence on the socio-political and economic development in the Indian Ocean Region and the Central Asia.
India has always had a strong maritime tradition: the world’s first international trading port is Lothal in Gujarat from where Indian ships sailed to Arabia, Iran, Africa and Babylonia, carrying with them not just goods but people and ideas. Harappans maintained trading posts as far as the northern reaches of Afghanistan and as early as 3rd century BCE, Odia sailors were navigating the waters of South-East Asia. These trade relations led to the flowering of the rich tradition of cultural exchange and spread of knowledge systems across Asia.

Boita Bandana Reminds the World of Orissa's Super Nautical Past ... › 2010/11/22 › boita-b...
Nov 22, 2010 - Subhas Chandra Pattanayak Post-independence politicians have reduced Orissa to a state of inanity. › 2015/10/30 › why-s...
Oct 30, 2015 - We see more and more today that Indian History has to be rewritten according to the latest linguistic and archaeological ...
Not only that, but British and Marxist historians, eager to give prominence to the Congress, which was in the first place a British institution, robbed of their true places in history giants, such as Sri Aurobindo, who, apart from being the avatar of the ‘supramental’ age, was the early prophet of Indian independence, when all Congress wanted was a few crumbs from the British. As a result, very few Indian children know about Sri Aurobindo today.
The Prime Minister inaugurated in 2007 a museum of Indian history in the Lokh Sabha annexe in Delhi, which was conceived by Somnath Chatterjee, Speaker of the Parliament till 2008. One is extremely surprised to see that for the communists, Indian history stars with Ashoka, a politically correct king because he was supposed to be Buddhist, then passed on to Akbar, another acceptable figure to Marxists & Muslims, as he was an ‘enlightened’ emperor (but pretty ruthless in his early reign), then practically jumps to Subash Chandra Bose, Mahatma Gandhi and Nehru, who are given prime importance in this museum. Not a word about Sri Aurobindo, Tilak or Bipin Chandra Pal, the real revolutionaries of the Indian Independence Movement. › Opinion › Views
Jun 15, 2015 - The debate over the need to re-write Indian history textbooks is heating up and, yet again, it is likely to ...
Indian history textbooks need to be rewritten. Opponents will argue that the current government will use this opportunity to insert “right-wing biases” but this is no excuse for perpetuating outdated scholarship and the biases of colonial and Marxist historians. Indian historians tend to mix up the evidence with their opinions. This happens everywhere to some extent as all history is written from some perspective, but mainstream Indian historians are notorious for doing so.
Perhaps one way forward is for the next generation of textbook authors to separate the hard evidence from their interpretations. This will have two good outcomes. First, it will make the author’s opinions more transparent. Second, it will encourage students to think more critically and draw their own conclusions.
This will have the added advantage of making the subject more an exploration of the past rather than the memorizing dates.
Sanjeev Sanyal is the author of Land of the Seven Rivers: A Brief History of India’s Geography (2011). › article › does-i...
No. BJP's doctoring of history, so reminiscent of totalitarian states, is an attempt to turn the clock back and, if- possible, ...
"History" of a particular kind is vital for the Sangh Parivar, to consolidate its claim to be the sole spokesman of the "Hindus" who have to be convinced that their interests and emotions are and have always been unitary and inevitably opposed to those of Muslims or Christians, regardless of differences of caste, gender class, immense regional variations. There had once been a certain fit between such assumptions and the habit, derived in part from the British, of slicing up Indian history into "Hindu" and "Muslim" periods, treating religious communities as unchanging blocs and defining eras in terms of the religion of rulers. All this changed as history-writing came of age and progressed beyond the deeds of kings and great or evil men. The BJP's doctoring of history, so reminiscent of totalitarian states, is an attempt to turn the clock back and, if possible, do away with history altogether.
(Sumit Sarkar is Professor of History, Delhi University. This article first appeared in the Times of India, 2 December 2001 and is reproduced here courtesy Delhi Historians Group)

The Hindu November 18, 2015
Many of the signatories of the above two statements by Indian and “overseas” historians have been part of a politico-ideological apparatus which, from the 1970s onward, has come to dominate most historical bodies in the country, including the Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR), and imposed its blinkered view of Indian historiography on the whole academic discipline.

Anchored mainly in Marxist historiography and leftist ideology, with a few borrowings from postmodernism, the Annales School, Subaltern and other studies, this new School, which may be called “Leftist” for want of a better term, has become synonymous with a number of abusive and unscholarly practises; among them:

1. A reductionist approach viewing the evolution of Indian society almost entirely through the prism of the caste system, emphasizing its mechanisms of “exclusion” while neglecting those of integration without which Indian society would have disintegrated long ago.

2. A near-complete erasure of India’s knowledge systems in every field —philosophical, linguistic, literary, scientific, medical, technological or artistic — and a general underemphasis of India’s important contributions to other cultures and civilizations . In this, the Leftist School has been a faithful inheritor of colonial historiography, except that it no longer has the excuse of ignorance. Yet it claims to provide an accurate and “scientific” portrayal of India!

3. A denial of the continuity and originality of India’s Hindu-Buddhist-Jain-Sikh culture , ignoring the work of generations of Indian and Western Indologists. Hindu identity, especially, has been a pet aversion of this School, which has variously portrayed it as being disconnected from Vedic antecedents, irrational, superstitious, regressive, barbaric — ultimately “imagined” and, by implication, illegitimate.

4. A refusal to acknowledge the well-documented darker chapters of Indian history , in particular the brutality of many Muslim rulers and their numerous Buddhist, Jain, Hindu and occasionally Christian and Muslim victims (ironically, some of these tyrants are glorified today); the brutal intolerance of the Church in Goa, Kerala and Puducherry; and the state-engineered economic and cultural impoverishment of India under the British rule. While history worldwide has wisely called for millions of nameless victims to be remembered, Indian victims have had to suffer a second death, that of oblivion, and often even derision.

5. A neglect of tribal histories : For all its claims to give a voice to “marginalized” or “oppressed” sections of Indian society, the Leftist School has hardly allowed a space to India’s tribal communities and the rich contributions of their tribal belief systems and heritage. When it has condescended to take notice, it has generally been to project Hindu culture and faith traditions as inimical to tribal cultures and beliefs, whereas in reality the latter have much more in common with the former than with the religions imposed on them through militant conversions.

6. A biased and defective use of sources : Texts as well as archaeological or epigraphic evidence have been misread or selectively used to fit preconceived theories. Advances of Indological researches in the last few decades have been ignored, as have been Indian or Western historians, archaeologists, anthropologists who have differed from the Leftist School. Archaeologists who developed alternative perspectives after considerable research have been sidelined or negatively branded. Scientific inputs from many disciplines, from palaeo-environmental to genetic studies have been neglected.

7. A disquieting absence of professional ethics : The Leftist School has not academically critiqued dissenting Indian historians, preferring to dismiss them as “Nationalist” or “communal”. Many academics have suffered discrimination, virtual ostracism and loss of professional opportunities because they would not toe the line, enforced through political support since the days of Nurul Hasan. The Indian History Congress and the ICHR, among other institutions, became arenas of power play and political as well as financial manipulation. In effect, the Leftist School succeeded in projecting itself as the one and only, crushing debate and dissent and polarizing the academic community.

While we reject attempts to portray India’s past as a glorious and perfect golden age, we condemn the far more pernicious imposition by the Leftist School of a “legislated history”, which has presented an alienating and debilitating self-image to generations of Indian students, and promoted contempt for their civilizational heritage. The “values and traditions of plurality that India had always cherished in the past” are precisely those this School has never practised. We call for an unbiased and rigorous new historiography of India.

Tuesday, November 17, 2015

Jonardon Ganeri wins the 2015 Infosys Prize

Devotees throng Aurobindo Ashram to pay tributes to Mother › others › news
3 mins ago - Puducherry,Nov 17(UNI)Thousands of devotees from all over the country and abroad thronged theSri Aurobindo  ...

Aurobindo Centre conducts yoga camp - The Hindu › Cities › Puducherry
9 hours ago - The Sri Aurobindo Centre for Advanced Research is holding a day-long study camp on 'Yoga as Practical Psychology' ...

Savitri Era of those who adore, Om Sri Aurobindo & The Mother.

Friday, November 13, 2015

BJP lost Bihar because Lohiaites allied with Congress

Why the #BJP Lost #BiharPolls  | … via @IndiaFactsOrg
Modi is marginally supported, but not really accepted by the RSS and the BJP which are still following the Brahmo Samaj and crypto-Gandhian vision of India in which the Saint or the Monastic or the semi-Ascetic order becomes part of Governance.
For them, a Vasishtha or a Vishvamitra asking a Rama to deal with adharma is not enough, but many mini-Parashuramas are needed to displace the existing rulers. This should also explain the bitter and almost pathetic rebellion of an intellectual like Arun Shourie who resents the entry of several semi-Parashuramas.

Gopi Maliwal
BJP lost Bihar because former Lohiaites allied with their former foremost enemy - Nehru Cong - and defeated Modi-led BJP. Same would have been the result in VS elections in Maharashtra, Jharkhand and Haryana if there was no 3-way split. And, if one looks at vote share %, BJP's performance in Assam, Jharkhand, Bihar, AP, Maharashtra, UP, Delhi, Haryana and J&K would have been much less sterling in LS elections as well if opposition had combined, a probability much higher now post-Bihar environment than it was in 2014. 
Was the caste the factor for such vote distribution in all those states? If so, why BJP is able to stand on its own and win in HP, UK, Raj, MP, Guj, Goa & CS (all mostly 2-party states with non-significant presence of certain vote banks) despite different caste composition in these states?
I have not seen any credible analysis from any expert on this phenomenon. It will be useful to look at these aspects instead of tilting at imaginary windmills.

Dipankar Gupta on what the Bihar elections mean for caste politics Kavita Chowdhury |  Nov 14, 2015
First, based on numbers alone, no caste can win an election on its strength alone. So even in constituencies that are supposed to be dominated by the Yadavs for instance, the percentage (of Yadavs in the population of that constituency) would be around 15 per cent at the most. Again, only 15 per cent of Bihar's population comprises Yadavs. So if 25 per cent of Bihar's MLAs are Yadavs, the remaining 75 per cent are non-Yadavs. Several Yadavs fought on Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) tickets, others on Mahagathbandhan tickets. Some won, some lost. The point is, caste alone does not win an election. But we find that the Other Backward Classes (OBC), upper castes and Dalits got together, leaving out some sections of extremely backward classes, to bring about this verdict. Incidentally, there is nothing in the caste order that promotes such coalescence.

It is an important sociological point that we define caste system in terms of mutual repulsion. So if they come together, it can't be because of caste; it must be something else. During the Mandal Commission agitation, the OBCs came together, regardless of their differences, because they saw the promise of a future where their children, who belonged to agrarian or lower middle class backgrounds, would have a foothold in colleges and government jobs. So Jats, Gujjars, Ahirs, Kurmis, Yadavs etc got together because of the promise of jobs and educational opportunities in urban areas. We saw that largely, the Khuswahas did not vote for the Yadavs and the Scheduled Castes did not align with the Paswans. So if you were to look at caste logic alone, it would not work. When they come together it's not because of caste affinity, but external factors.

It's our very Orientalist approach, and it's unfortunate, that we think people vote only along primordial caste loyalties and lines, and no other considerations. [...] What brings Ahirs, Kurmis, Koeris etc together? The agglutinative factor is not caste sympathies but an issue like reservation, or factors like safety in Bihar or women's empowerment through the bicycles for girls scheme. Many people have told me about Chief Minister Nitish Kumar's record in building roads and bridges and the change it has brought into their lives. [...] The Mandal agitation had brought these classes together on the basis of reservation. Kumar brought people together on the basis of his development card.

Tuesday, November 10, 2015

Fair and balanced flow of information including contrasting views

As India’s National Broadcaster and also the premier Public Service Broadcaster, All India Radio (AIR) has been serving to inform, educate and entertain the masses since it's inception, truly living up to its motto – ‘Bahujan Hitaya : Bahujan Sukhaya’. One of the largest broadcasting organisations in the world in terms of the number of languages of broadcast, the spectrum of socio-economic and cultural diversity it serves, AIR’s home service comprises 414 stations today located across the country, reaching nearly 92% of the country’s area and 99.19 % of the total population. AIR originates programming in 23 languages and 146 dialects.
All India Radio (AIR) has been serving to inform, educate and entertain the masses since it's inception, truly living up to its motto – ‘Bahujan Hitaya: Bahujan Sukhaya’.
To provide information, education and entertainment, for promoting the welfare and happiness of the masses (Bahujana Hitaya Bahujana Sukhaya), All India Radio strives to :-
a) Uphold the unity of the country and the democratic values enshrined in the constitution.
b) Present a fair and balanced flow of information of national, regional, local and international
interest, including contrasting views, without advocating any opinion or ideology of its own.
c) Promote the interest and concerns of the entire nation, being mindful of the need for harmony and understanding within the country and ensuring that the programmes reflect the varied elements which make the composite culture of India.
d) Produce and transmit varied programmes designed to awaken, inform, enlighten, educate, entertain and enrich all sections of the people.
e) Produce and transmit programmes relating to developmental activities in all their facets including extension work in agriculture, education, health and family welfare and science & technology.
    f) Serve the rural, illiterate and under-privileged population, keeping in the mind the special needs and interest of the young, social and cultural minorities, the tribal population and those residing in border regions, backward or remote areas.
g) Promote social justice and combat exploitation, inequality and such evils as untouchability and narrow parochial loyalties.
   h) Serve the rural population, minority communities, women, children, illiterate as well as other weaker and vulnerable sections of the society.
i) Promote national integration.

The Prasar Bharati Board functions at the apex level ensuring formulation and implementation of the policies of the organization and fulfillment of the mandate in terms of the Prasar Bharati Act, 1990. The Executive Member functions as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Corporation. Officers from different streams working in the Prasar Bharati Secretariat assist the CEO, Member (Finance) and Member (Personnel) in integrating actions, operations, plans and policy implementation as well as look after the budget, accounts and general financial matters of the Corporation.
 Prasar Bharati Marketing offices located at Mumbai, New Delhi, Kolkata, Chennai, Bangalore, Thiruvananthapuram, Kochi, Hyderabad, Guwahati and Jallandhar, look after the marketing activities of both All India Radio and Doordarshan.
Prasar Bharati also has a unified vigilance set up at the headquarters, headed by a Chief Vigilance Officer. 
The Director General heads the Directorate of All India Radio.Skip Navigation Links Home > Profile > Organization

Friday, November 06, 2015

Bracketing the most exalted and enlightened Indian minds with the CPI(M)

October 30, 2015 Press Communique
Growing Communal Violence
 All across North India, communal tensions are sought to be sharply escalated by the RSS/BJP outfits.  During the Dussehra, Muharram festival period, reports of such tensions leading to riots in some places were reported. 
Simultaneously, inflammatory campaigns such as against `beef consumption’; campaigns decrying reservations for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and OBCs with the RSS chief asking for a review of existing reservations; murderous attacks on dalit families like in Dadri etc are intensifying.  Till date, the Union Government and Prime Minister Modi have not assured parliament or the country of any action against any member of the Union Cabinet or RSS leaders and BJP MPs who continue to make inflammatory speeches spreading hatred and communal disharmony. 
Given such patronage by the BJP Central and state governments and the refusal by PM Modi to take any action, various outfits of the RSS are being emboldened by the day to mount such attacks that seek to undermine the secular democratic foundations of the Indian Republic and create widespread insecurity amongst the religious minorities in the country.  They are undermining the Constitutionally guaranteed fundamental right of all Indian citizens to “life and liberty” and their habits.
The Polit Bureau while strongly condemning such growing communal activities, has called upon all CPI(M) units and other Left, progressive and democratic forces to unitedly rise in protest against such nefarious designs of the RSS/BJP.
CPI(M) Hails this Protest 
In protest against the growing intolerance and the spread of hatred across the country that has led, amongst other violent attacks, to the murders of rationalist thinkers and activists like Dhabolkar, Pansare and Kalburgi, a large number of award winning littérateurs have returned their Sahitya Academy and other recognition of excellence awards to the government in protest. 
They have been joined by reputed historians and film personalities who have similarly returned their national awards.  12 such prominent film makers have so far protested in this manner.  
Latest is the return of awards  by Indian scientists of international repute as a form of protest against the current situation of intolerance, hatred and violence.  Over 100 scientists have joined in this protest.  Internationally renowned Dr. P. M. Bhargava, founder chief of the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, has announced the return of the Padma Bhushan conferred upon him as a mark of protest.  The Padma Bhushan is the third highest civilian award of our country. 
The Polit Bureau salutes these eminent personalities who have shown the courage and taken this extraordinary expression of protest in the defence of the unity of the Indian people and in defence of the syncretic civilisational ethos of our country.  Such action by Indian intellectuals, scientists and creative artists strengthens the resolve of all Indians who cherish the secular democratic foundations of our Republic to defend our country and people’s unity.  The Polit Bureau of the CPI(M) hails the courage and commitment of these eminent individuals.
The protests by such large number of eminent scientists nails the lie of the RSS spokesman and BJP’s senior Cabinet Ministers that these are ‘politically motivated’.  The Union Finance Minister appears to have gone to the extent, as reported by the media, to say that: “space of the Left has reduced”. He further claimed that “those returning awards were in a way electioneering against the BJP in Bihar polls.” Such is the contemptuous political bracketing that the RSS/BJP does in their flimsy defence. 

Press Release Date: 
Thursday, November 5, 2015
 CPI(M) General Secretary, Sitaram Yechury’s reaction to Shri Venkaiah Naidu’s Press Conference and Release of the BJP book “Know the Truth”.
  1. There is nothing new in this “truth”. All the charges against the Left raised ad nauseam in the past are repeated once again. The Left is accused of hegemonising the intellectual discourse in the country. The point of view of Left intellectuals has been persuasive and continues to be so because of the strength of its scholarship, reasoning and study of Indian history. The RSS, unable to meet these high standards, has once again unleashed a calumny of disinformation, speaking of “ideological motivation” of the Left.
  2. We are thankful to Shri Venkaiah Naidu Garu for bracketing the most exalted and enlightened Indian minds with the CPI(M).
  3. The return of State awards as a form of protest is nothing new. During the course of the freedom struggle this has happened on many an occasion. Recollect that Gurudev Rabindranath Tagore returned his knighthood in protest against the atrocities of the British colonial rule in India.
  4. The issue is not of an ‘alternative RSS/BJP point of view’ emerging in the battle of ideas. The RSS point of view has always been there in the academic and intellectual discourse of India. The current intolerance in the country is highlighted by the growth of violence and intimidation between opposing points of view unleashed by the RSS and the various tentacles of the communal octopus. Violent intolerance is the issue before the country and people today. The largescale protests that have enlarged to include litterateurs, historians, film makers, scientists, former chief of Indian armed forces etc are a reflection of protests against this atmosphere.
  5. The creation of such an atmosphere is unambiguously moving towards what Sardar Patel described when he ordered the ban on the RSS, as “cult of violence spearheaded by the Sangh” that had claimed many lives “including that of the Mahatma”.
  6. The hallmark of the current intolerance is the violent attacks that are being unleashed all across the country. A Muslim is killed allegedly for consuming beef. Two dalit children are burnt alive. Pakistani Gazhal singer Ghulam Ali is not allowed to perform. The BCCI office is attacked as they were to discuss a possible cricket series with Pakistan etc. Instances of ‘moral policing’ are being reported from various parts of the country.
  7. It is simply untrue that all these issues were not brought before the government by anybody so far. In the parliament in the very first session after this BJP government under PM Modi took office demands were raised asking the Prime Minister to take action, if not at least give an assurance to the parliament and through it to the people that action will be taken against members of the Union Cabinet and BJP MPs who continue to make inflammatory hate speeches across the country. Till date, forget any action, no such assurance has been forthcoming from the Prime Minister.
  8. The CPI(M) and the Left have always been critical of the role of the Congress party like in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots or their compromising attitude towards communalism. Our record on these matters is there for all to see. But when it comes to saying that in the past why did ‘so and so’ not protest and why protests are taking place now, the RSS has to answer:
(a)            Why did it not join the national struggle for freedom? Even Nanaji Deshmukh, a respected RSS leader ha asked in his book why the RSS had not participated in the freedom movement as an organisation?
(b)            The British Home record on the basis of intelligence reports telegraphed to London by the Bombay Police department had noted that the “Sangh has scrupulously” remained within the law. Has the RSS ever answered why they cooperated with the British during the course of the freedom struggle?
(c)             Has there been any apology from either the RSS or the BJP for the 2002 communal genocide in Gujarat?
(d)            Till date the RSS has not retracted or apologised for their Guru’s, Madhav Sadhashiv Golwalkar’s observation that we should learn from the methods used by Hitlerite fascism and that India should “learn and profit” from this.

The series of violent attacks and communal disturbances that have consumed the lives of innocent people and the complete silence on the part of the Prime Minister confirms today’s reality of intolerance. No other conclusion can be drawn except that the current BJP central government under Prime Minister Modi is, in all practical terms, patronizing such violent intolerance across the country.
The only agenda that this government seems to be pursuing is that of advancing the RSS objective of transforming the secular democratic Indian republic into their version of a rabidly intolerant fascistic “Hindu rashtra”. Development of the country and the people clearly is not on this government’s agenda.

Savitri Era of those who adore, Om Sri Aurobindo & The Mother.