Narendra Modi remark, The Leftist Counter Attack, and a Confused (Savarkarian) Hindutva

When we say that the (Savarkarian) Hindutva brigade is empty between the ears (though not filled with poisonous fecal matter like many of their adversaries), often the point does not drive home. When we say that platitudes of Mohandasian-Socialism and Integral-Humanism will not suffice when there is failure in countering leftist propaganda on specific issues, often we are viewed as given to excessive nitpicking. Not that we consider nitpicking to be wrong; but what does one make of a group which considers any analysis, more detailed than platitudes, nitpicking?

The recent exchange between Narendra Modi and Shashi Tharoor makes for a handy illustration.

Narendra Modi spoke (as given here):

In a veiled attack on union minister Shashi Tharoor, Modi said, "Have you heard of a Rs. 50-crore girlfriend? An MP was in the dock recently over Rs. 50 crore lying in a woman's account. In Parliament, the MP denied knowing the woman, but a month later, he was distributing cards all over Delhi announcing his marriage with her."

also

“There was a Congress leader who was a minister in Parliament. He was accused of amassing wealth from cricket. He had said in Parliament that he is not connected to the Rs 50 crore that is in the lady’s name,” said Modi. “Have you ever heard of Rs 50 crore girlfriend?” he asked, during a rally in Himachal Pradesh.

In reply,  Shashi Tharoor tweeted:

@narendramodi My wife is worth a lot more than your imaginary 50 crores. She is priceless. But you need2be able2love some1 2understand that.

And later said (as given here)

Speaking to reporters after he tweeted, Tharoor said, "He (Modi) was silly to make that remark.. so I replied saying my wife is priceless.. and I added that he needs to love someone to understand that.. now we have to see if he is capable of understanding that.."

Let us take a look at the statement by Narendra Modi. It makes a few assertions:

1. It was alleged that a sum of INR 50 crore was found in a lady's (Sunanda Pushkar?) bank account.

2. The Congress Leader (Shashi Tharoor?) denied having any connections with the lady.

3. A short while later, ST and SP got married.

4. A hint is made that since INR 50 crore were given to a lady, the lady may have been a girl-friend.

We have imprinted question marks to emphasize that Modi did not take any names! For the moment, let us accept that we understand who the hinted persons were. However, then the question is: Are any among the above assertions non-factual? Are these assertions libelous? ST is at liberty to file a libel suit against Modi. However, will his case have any merit if the facts aren't wrong, especially since ST is a public figure?

Now, let us look at ST's retort. It too contains a few assertions:

1. Modi was silly to make that remark.

2. So, I replied, my wife is priceless.

3. Modi needs to be able to love someone to understand that.

The first assertion is an opinion, which ST is entitled to have. Just like others are entitled to the opinion that ST is one of the androgynous, gayish, boor, who used divorces as stepping stones to newer women. The second assertion is an expression of his personal emotion. Every man, even a Shashi Tharoor, is surely entitled to feel that his wife is priceless. We congratulate Sunanda Pushkar, and wish the couple well. The third assertion too is a kind of emotional reality. The only glitch being that it insinuates that Modi is incapable of understanding love. Now, this indeed is libelous! Especially, since it is difficult to prove one way or the other. Only legal experts can have definitive say on the matter. 

However, what is amply clear in this is that ST has not denied any of the charges made by Modi. He merely had made emotional counter-charges! Modi's later assertion that ST was removed from his ministership due to the allegations and the matter is still unresolved, and yet ST has been made a minister again is surely germane to the political debate on Corruption.

Nevertheless, notice how the hullabaloo has skirted the primary issue (Corruption by Congress) and  is, harping on the 'social inappropriateness' of the observation. Recall that, until now, without any proof, rather despite the SIT report to the contrary, Narendra Modi is called by various names including mass-murderer, and so on. Does any one ever question the inappropriateness of the usage of such epithets?

In the Leftist, gender-Feminist paradigm, a man can be carelessly called a mass-murderer and it is OK; but if a woman is referred to, notwithstanding the factual nature of the content, by any term which these anti-Males deem derogatory, it is the misogynist expression of the everlasting-hateful-patriarchy against the eternal-victim the women.

Also rife are the insinuations that such despicable misogyny is inseparable part of Hindutva! Do these people ever tell you what Muhammad did according to Islam's own historians?

However, what is the Hindutva-brigade doing? They are busy doing everything besides plain, simple, and direct confrontation! This is what is so irritating about them. Not that Modi is extremely wise; but if the Hindutva brigade can not be half-as-smart as Modi, why does it indulge in Advani-like tomfoolery?

It is never a problem if a woman (and we are not insinuating anything here) is a prostitute. In our tradition, the prostitute, Pingala attained as high a state of devotion as any spiritual realization that other great men may have attained. We, Hindus, must never fall into the trap of Semitic Morality, where a sex-worker is looked down upon, or is condemned to death by stoning. And, we must also expose these Leftists who subscribe to the same semitic morality when they think that calling a sex worker a prostitute is insulting to the woman! It is those, who are screwing our motherland by misappropriating lakhs of crores of tax-payers money, that are an insult to human kind. It is those, who think that a prostitute woman is unworthy of respect, that are an insult to human kind.  Hindutva brigade will be much wiser in exposing such abominations including the Tharoor types, as well as the Leftist gender-feminist types.

On Pitfalls on the way to Hindu-Awakening

Recently we had commented on an interview of Shri Pratap Simha. We had mentioned how the present times are such that even a mild suggestion questioning the prevailing set-up draws hostile reaction. We had opined that journalists like Shri Simha should rather be even more aggressive. It was, therefore, a pleasant surprise that an article appeared on Mohandas, exposing his "True Legacy". We are in no mood to congratulate Sandeep for he has been too kind on Mohandas! However, our constant refrain that the current establishment is so anti-pathetic to questioning of Mohandas was manifest in the comments section of the said article.

We would like to remind our readers that a few years ago a video-clip was forced to be withdrawn from a web-site; a clip in which a man, dressed as Mohandas, did a pole-dance. The Government of India considered it as an 'insult to a national icon' in its explanation to why they pressed for the removal of the clip. Needless to mention that Government of India never found Mother-F*cker-Hussain's paintings "vulgarising" Hindu-icons as "insulting". However, this is not the occasion to expose the hypocrisy or the double standards practiced by Secularism. That has been done time and again, and by much more competent authors.

We have a different point to make here.

We understand the importance of scholarship and research during various investigations, including journalistic ones. However, we must also guard against falling into the trap of Moral-High-Ground. This is a trap where all responsibilities, in this case the burden of scholarship and research, fall only on Hindus while the adversaries rely largely on propaganda.

As we mentioned in our previous post, if after 1400 years of "performance" of Islam, and after millions of deaths during partition, if we need "scholarship" and "research" to start discussing Islam or Mohandas; may scholarship and research be damned! We also need to focus on people who instinctively and spontaneously perceive that the best thing that could have happened for Hindus was if politicians like Mohandas and Jawahar had not been there at all. However, as history is replete with examples of treason, including the likes of Jayachand (who betrayed Prithviraj Chauhan), recent history contains Mohandas and Jawahar.

We leave a more nuanced examination of the Mohandas kinds for others. Here, we would like to emphasize that it is crucial to understand that post 1857-sepoy-mutiny the British foisted Congress as an axis of counter-revolution against Indian freedom-struggle. Thus while Congress provided a fake-leadership to "independence-struggle", most of its leaders were sold out on the world-view which suited their British masters. Therefore, most of those, who were supposedly providing "intellectual leadership" were consistently making similar mistakes.

While in the "spiritual" (in reality fake-spiritual) domain Brahmo-Samaj and Arya Samaj were consumed with a zeal to convert Hinduism into a Monotheistic (also Formless-God) philosophy and idol-worship-free religion; in the political domain fake-saints like Mohandas attempted to foist their own perverted views of "truth" and "non-violence" on the Hindus. [Recall that despite all of his 'sleazy-truthfulness' Mohandas never spoke the Truth about Islam!] We need to understand that it was crucial for the British to constantly reinforce the "image of a saint" for Mohandas; for without such an image, Mohandas would not have had the "appeal" and "legitimacy" which was so badly necessary to pull the con-job off! In this sense, while the rest of the "freedom-fighters" of the Congress-type were stupid enough at best and evil enough at worst, Mohandas took the cake!

Even in these very days, the anti-Hindu revolution is continuing. While during "freedom-struggle" Hindus were supposed to be non-violent; after independece Hindus are supposed to be unconditionally and perpetually "magnanimous" as "the majority".

Similar games are played when "Hindus" (read the alleged upper-caste-Hindus) are supposed to be paying for the redemption of "Dalit Christians" (or Muslims and so on) even after "Churchianity" and "Islam" are supposed to have "redeemed and liberated" them!

While Muslims, Churchians, etc. are free to organise themselves as groups, any such attempts by Hindus are termed "Communal", as if being "Communal" is a bad thing in itself, at least for the Hindus. Thus, as we said in our earlier article, it is important for Hindus to state simply and spontaneously that they are Hindus and they have a natural affinity and concern for Hindus and Hinduism. We remind our readers that we are speaking here about that Sanatana Dharma which is more ancient than time and yet is eternally alive. And we are not talking about Savarkarian Hindutva, which at best is a starting approximation, but which at worst becomes suicidally dangerous, in its insistence on accepting Owaisi-like Muslims as Hindus!

It is urgent that we bring up discussions on factual topics such as "Islam is a Problem", "Secularism is a Problem", "Socialism is a Problem" on the table; rather than beating our chests and wasting our scarce resources in our attempts to demonstrate that we are "not communal", we are "truly-secular", and that we "care for the poor".

Thus, our request to Shri Sandeep is that while he is at liberty to invest his time in doing research and "exposing" the likes of Mohandas; he should guard against the trap of burden of "research and scholarship". While his interlocutors may have been honest intellectuals; more often than not they are attempting subversion.

Do we imply that research and scholarship on Mohandas must be forbidden? Not at all. Except that "Research and Scholarship" on Mohandas must not be a precondition for criticising Mohandas, if such preconditions are absent while praising Mohandas.

What-Mohandas-was is not that important for us, even if it is important for "researchers". But the fact that perverted versions of "Truth" and "Non-violence", foisted on us, the Hindus, in the "alleged name of Mohandas", have been and are a disaster for us, is manifestly obvious. Take notice, how the Kejriwalian "anti-Corruption" movement is harping on "Secularism" and "Socialism". It is important for Hindus to perceive this fact at once and change their attitudes towards "established ideas". 

We have nothing against admirers of Edwina, or admirers of Sleazy stories of celebacy, who as private individuals spend their own money in building memoirs, busts or statues of Jawahar and Mohandas. However, if agents of Mohandas and Jawahar use tax-payers' money for telling citizens the "greatness" of these two, the burden of research, scholarship, and proof must be on them.

We again request authors like Shri Pratap Simha and Shri Sandeep that they should avoid moral-high-ground traps as much as possible, never mind the "research and scholarship" controversies! In our opinion, their energies are much more useful in their ongoing efforts in awakening and uniting the Hindus as Hindus. And they indeed will be in future as well.