Unidentified Living Objects

It's after a long break that I am writing something on the blog. I took a look at my recent blog entries and felt that it's title, 'My musings on random subjects' is slightly off the mark.....I usually end up writing about politics. But then I have always been interested in politics. I was one of the very few teens who checked out the editorials and political news of ToI before the sports page....not that Indian sports has a lot of news-worthy stuff going on. Anyway, I am not going to change this title. It gives me the flexibility to write about whatever I wish.

Over the past few days, I have been following the development of the Seer Arrest episode of Indian politics. I am happy that there has been no storm of protest or violence by his followers. At the same time, I am sad that there is no one who seems to be really interested. I would have liked to see if the government would have had the guts to arrest the Shahi Imam of the Jama Masjid under similar circumstances. I must warn you that I am not trying to indulge in Muslim bashing. But one must accept this stark difference between the people of these two faiths. Am I trying to say that Hindus should become as reactionary and fundamentalist as Islamic fanatics. No. All I wish is that Hindus not be so apathetic to their religion. These are two extremes and I wish we Hindus started moving towards somewhere in the center.

One sixth of the world's population is Hindu. But you should see the descriptions of Hinduism and of Hindu religious beliefs and ceremonies given in the Microsoft Encyclopedia and in the writings of Wendy Doniger. And we do nothing to challenge them. The problem with Hinduism is that it was not forged during times of struggle or hardships like Christianity or Islam were. As such, it lacks the fundamentalism and intolerance of these religions. No Hindu text preaches that all non-Hindus should be either converted or slaughtered nor does any text tell us that Lord Shankar will hurl his trident and consign all non-Hindus to eternal hell while Hindus enjoy the fruits of heaven. Indeed Hindu religious texts do not even have rituals to convert people to Hinduism. If u believe, you believe. It's that simple. They do have suggestions on how to lead a life which benefits you, your family and the society you live in. Indeed, the Kamasutra, that vaunted tome of Love and Erotica, devotes a majority of it's pages describing how a man should interact with his wife, with other women, with his creditors and debtors, with government officials, with his employer/employee, with the king etc.

All my friends know my political leanings quite well. And while I do not agree with the more fundamentalist views of RSS, VHP etc. I do agree with them when they say 'Garv se kaho hum Hindu hai' (Proclaim proudly that we are Hindus). Unless we respect ourselves, others won't. And I know there is a lot of work to be done before we can start respecting ourselves as a group. The first and foremost thing that needs to be done is the eradication of the caste system. This system divides the Hindus and hence is detrimental to the religion. I know this is not easy what with the caste politics and quota systems. But then the right path is never easy ( as pointed out by SRK in DDLJ! - Parth would be sure to exclaim ;-) ). We should also be more aware of our past and our heritage. We should teach our children at least a smattering of sanskrit and at least familiarize them with the existence of the Vedas, the Upanishads and their broad contents. We should at least introduce them to Kalidas, Panini, Aryabhatta and to the fact that Brahmabhatta stated what we call the Pythagoras Theorem, about 800 years before Pythagoras was born.

Our leaders like Nehru and other socialists and communists have tried to erase our Hindu identity and tried to give India a secular credo. While this was good when it came to governance, judiciary etc it is bad when it comes to forging a strong and united community. And without such a community, a country is weak and ineffective. While separation of Church and State is a very correct principle, it is also true that both should co-exist. Weakening of one, automatically weakens the other and leads to the destruction of both.

May be people in India will think I am over-reacting. But the problem seems all the more serious to me because I am looking at it sitting here in the US. I think the people in India are too close to the problem. (Something like this transpired between me and my friend Parth a few months ago. He complained that desis living in the US become overly critical of Bollywood fare after they come to the US. I explained to him that when one's friend circle consists of two Koreans, one Peruvian, one Sri Lankan, one Australian and one Taiwanese, Bollywood is rather an embarrassment.) I think it's time India dumped it's communists, who in any case had publicly declared in the 60's that China's President is their President, and started on a path of self-discovery and self-respect.

The Second Colonization

Today, I read an article by John Pilger in Outlook. It set me thinking about European colonization in the 17th century. What the United States is doing in the Middle East is very analogous to what Europeans did then. The Europeans were hunting for spices, the Americans are hunting for oil. The europeans looked down upon the natives as uncultured barbarians (see Mahatma Gandhi's retort to that in my previous post). The US through it's wanton acts of murder of civilians, women and children has demonstrated that it barely considers the Iraqis and Afghans to be humans. The Americans are using their superior military power to subjugate the natives and install puppet regimes. UK exploited India by looting cheap raw materials and forcing Indians to buy expensive finished products. The US will loot Iraqis by ensuring that US companies get juicy construction/exploration et al contracts and by keeping the oil tap open. Of course, one might say that this will prove impossible given today's information age, democracy etc. etc. But even the Chinese and the erstwhile Soviets could learn a lesson or two from the US and UK governments on media control. Since the war in Iraq, there have been many reports on the number of women and children killed by the US, on the non-existence of WMDs. There have been studies which showed that of the average 2700 daily attacks on the US troops in Iraq, only 6 can be traced back to US's arch-villain al-Zarqawi. But none of these have been given any attention in the media. The media has been working as the spokesman of the government. A most ironic incident happened recently when a US Marine was captured on tape, murdering a wounded defenseless man in cold-blood. Instead of simply reporting this incident and demanding to know what the military intended to do about it, the media, even before the Pentagon or the White House, has gone on the defensive describing the soldier's actions as a natural reaction to the brutality of war and by drawing attention to the beheadings carried out by the insurgents. Of course, they failed to mention that condoning and even defending this action is tantamount to admitting that the US military is no better than the terrorists they are fighting. Infact it is even more dangerous because of the better weapons and equipment at their disposal.
In January, we can hope that the colonization of Iraq will be completed with the installation of a 'democratically elected' government. Where then will this terrorist group calling themselves the US military turn it's attention next? Iran? Jordan? North Korea? Definitely not North Korea.....You see, they actually have nuclear weapons supplied to them by the US's major non-NATO ally in the Indian subcontinent.

American Morality

Now that George W. Bush is starting his first term as the elected President of the USA, pollsters have performed their post-mortem of the election. One of the surprising outcomes of the same was that Bush won because of his stand on "moral issues" like gay rights, abortion, stem cell research etc. This one took my breath away. Apparently, it's moral for the president to intentionally mislead the people of this country into a failed war but it's immoral for gay couples to have joint bank accounts and file income tax returns together. It's ok for the Vice President to refuse to co-operate with an inquiry commission in order to protect Kenneth Lay from charges of fraud but it's not ok to give women the choice whether they want to have a baby or not. It's moral for the administration to reward billions of dollars of the tax payers money, in the form of no-bid contracts, to Halliburton but God forbid, if we spend a fraction of that money on stem-cell research, it might result in cures for previously incurable diseases!!!
Is it really possible that an entire country (well, half of it actually) can have such a warped concept of morality and such blatant arrogance? Is it really possible for so many people to be OK with their leader cheating them but to hate so vehemently, a bunch of people with whom they may never come in contact? But given that this twisted mindset exists, is it such a surprise that a large majority of the world populace hates America? After all, you reap only what you sow.
All this talk, by American "experts", on the "moral issues" which decided this election has reminded me of a quote by the Saint who preached tolerance and non-violence: When Mahatma Gandhi visited the UK to attend a Round Table Conference, a British journalist asked him what he thought about Western Culture. The Mahatma had replied, "I think it would be a great idea!"