Election-2019 A Recommended Strategy for Hindus

 TL;DR

Vote NaMo (I am not saying BJP/NDA, okay? Am saying NaMo and his team) - vote NaMo and his team 450+ seats. About 100 might be won by "true seculars".

A hand-waving argument, but will suffice for TL;DR: I don't have any great love for Modi, but when I see ALL THE Corrupt, Anti-Nationals HATE him so intensely, the simplest conclusion that I draw is the following: This man MUST be doing something right. Otherwise why do all these WRONG/EVIL people hate him so much?


Now for QL;YR (quite long,  yet read)

After the first two years of Modi-Sarkar (check here here here here here for first year, and here here for the second year) I stopped the evaluations. I had mostly said what I had to, and it was for Modi government to take it or leave it. During past 4-5 years, his government has done some good things and some bad things. While other things have been passable (to say the least), re' issues related to Hindus/Middle-Class, the errors of omission have outweighed the errors of commission. This is just to communicate to you that I have watched the proceedings with disinterest if not dispassionately. And by no means am I a Narendra-Modi fan, though I am not his detractor either. So this post is NOT about NaMo. It is for us, the Hindus.

I have been wanting to write this for quite sometime. I didn't want to waste these arguments on some state-elections (even though the arguments are not about them, their misuse is possible. And misuse, over-use blunt the utility and effectiveness of the argument).I don't take Exit polls very seriously and we must wait till actual results are out (whichever way). If BJP does well, they might ignore suggestions here and if they lose they might grab these with enthusiasm, however, I am unconcerned with that for the moment.

First things first:

Election 2019 is MORE IMPORTANT than 2014. You may ask, why?

In 2014, everyone knew Congress would lose and BJP will be the single largest party. However, every politician was confident that one of the following things would happen:

1. NaMo will not be made PM candidate.
2. Even if he is made, he will be unable to keep allies.

Both these points went awry and the assumption was rest asunder. And yet, there WAS a twist (as per my understanding). Even those who allied with BJP thought that ditching Modi as PM-candidate will only work to reduce BJP's seats so why do that (BJP/RSS ground level workers wanted Modi [Alleged Hindu-illiterates are quite wise you know?] so not selecting Modi would have led to a huge slack in kAryakartA-zeal; and further they (allies) were sure that BJP would not get 272 on its own). Thus they thought like so (my hypothesis): Let BJP get as many seats as possible (will reduce the additional number of allies needed post election, and thus there will be less power sharing). And after election (since BJP won't get 272 on its own) we can either force BJP not to make Modi a PM (I suspect that he might have withdrawn himself, any ways), or we will be able to force Modi to be a truncated PM (Go figure ... it is easy!). I am sure that even the Congress was BANKING on it. Thus you saw a kind of jovial contempt for Modi (for good or for bad it was also for cow-urine-drinking, tilak-wearing Hindus as well).

However, the unexpected happened. But, the rest is not history YET. The unexpected led to many things. However much we (as Hindus, and Middle Class) may be dissatisfied with Modi (and justifiably so), the anti-Modi camp (subsuming within itself anti-Hindu camp) is Greatly Worried. They want to avoid Modi winning (even a simple majority) whatever be the cost. Yes, you read it right - WHATEVER-BE-THE-COST. It is this, that makes 2019 a much more crucial election than 2014. And remember, a BJP (<= 271) = (tacitly implies) Modi won't be PM. So the "opposition" has solely one aim. Restrict BJP to 271 or less. Rest will be managed (incorporating intra-BJP treason).

For instance, NaMo in my view has been, at the very least, a somewhat Naeemuddin(check here), but the anti-NaMo (even a non-NaMo) PM will be demoniacal and Rabid anti-Hindu. For example, they will quickly do a few things. And for what? They would want to preclude a repeat of 2014 like Hindu-resurgence for ever. Thus, rabid anti-Hinduism (including violence, mass murder, blah blah) will abound. (Slow genocide is any way happening already, and I am NOT looking at NaMo as pro-Hindu either, at least not for now). However, our concern must be, to avoid a non-NaMo PM in 2019. Mind you, I am not even calling NaMo great/bad whatever now. I would rather classify him as a - presently safe/workable "place-holder".


My reasons for classifying him as a safe/workable "place-holder":

1.(Even if) Shit, Shit is  better than (Confirmed) Poison.
2. (Even if) Poison, non-lethal poison is better than (Confirmed) lethal-poison.
3. (Even if) Lethal Poison, In the short run, slow leathal posion is better than (Confirmed) fast lethal poison.


My message to larger Hindu voters (especially also the middle class) is: Your grouse is legit. Please don't whine this time, or better still, please whine all you can but please do swallow the bitter pill one more time, and vote NaMo. However, this time, keep a plan-B (NaMo replacement, if needed, though we must work as if it WILL be needed) ready by 2022-24. Another important aspect is for those who want to teach NaMo a lesson. Yes, we must teach NaMo a lesson, but without inflicting a lesson on ourselves. No point Cutting off the nose to spite the face (see here).


My message for NaMo: You may rely on TINA (there is no alternative) factor; but you must perceive that if your own CORE voters think WTWA (pronounced like fatwa: wut-wa: Wish There Was Alternative), there must be something amiss. Think about it! And you got a few months to ACT on it.


Now I come to "details". As I mentioned earlier, 2019 elections are more crucial than 2014. The thing is, you like it or not, NaMo remains, if not THE least anti-Hindu, one of the least anti-Hindus (anti-H he surely is!). Yogi etc might be somewhat better, but Yogi too is too damn soft for my taste. We need some one who has the balls to do 10X-"Islam" on Islam, get it? I know you got the drift. With that behind us, thus for 2019 I am treating NaMo as a reasonable "place-holder" we have. What does that mean? It means we must elect 450+ explicitly pro-Hindu Loksabha members (who, for now, are pro-NaMo [as place-holder] for his being non-corrupt, pro-development, blah blah).

With 450 pro-Hindu members, Hindus can push NaMo to do what Hindus want. In case some among 450 turn out shitty, we can throw about 150 out and still have 300. Worse, if most are shitty, our 150 can resign and form explicit pro-Hindu party, while leaving NaMo to continue doing his Vikas. You got the drift, right?

Now you may ask, among so many, Why only NaMo as the place holder (why not x,y,z?):

1.  I am advocating NaMo as a place-holder, for he is by now, at the very least, a familiar evil. Presently we don't know who will be lesser evil. And even if we "elect" a leader, the "leader" can later claim his hands are tied blah blah. So better we fight for a "good hand" (450+, pro-Hindu LS members; see?), then "leader" might not matter much.

Remark: This strategy will incentivize even non-BJP parties to put forth explicitly pro-Hindu candidates. Then Hindu-voters must choose one who is non-corrupt and pro-H. You ask why non-corrupt? The answer is as follows. Why are alleged secular-Hindu leaders secular? For they can win elections and make huge money. Thus anti-corruption automatically disincentivizes secularism. You may ask, why not corrupt who are pro-Hindu? The thing is, one who is corrupt will not remain steadfastly pro-Hindu. For lucre will lure him into secularism. We have seen that many times, ain't we? The rest of the argument is, the non-corrupt won't mind NaMo's (any PM's anti-corruption policies) and pro-Hindu won't let (even if NaMo, anti-H policies).

2. NaMo, Amit Shah, and team have formed a well oiled machinery which is working efficiently. Best to leave it working, and work on a plan-B (strong non-corrupt pro-Hindu to replace NaMo in case NaMo repeats sissyness.)

3. It is also to put some pressure and onus on hindus as well to find a replacement while someone is on the job. I, for one, just after 2014 victory was yelling for finding multiple new NaMos. The turd-tards were busy mocking Pappu, and gloating in self congratulations. In fact, it is only after Gujarat that a bit of sobriety entered the scene. However, even after that, they have always preferred the lazy argument: Arguments like, "So you want to vote Pappu?", "Middle Class is traitorous", etc. It is high time that such imbeciles are truncated within BJP/RSS. Yes, while it is true that they (those dissing Hindu middle class) also ARE our hindu family, however, we must brace for calm, sustained, fight. I never mind abusive language, so long as familial solidarity is a given. The goal must be, let the best strategy be taken. anyways, I digressed.

A quick, cursory, yet representative evaluation of NaMo's work:

I am not going to summarize pluses and minuses of the govt. I leave that for abler writers and minds. They have done that well (and much better than I do) and will do that. I would cursorily mention a few points.

NaMo's pluses (Each a big/huge plus): No Corruption, Infra investment, Swacch Bharat, Mudra, etc etc

NaMo's main minuses (Emotionally huge, pragmatically somewhat less so): 1. On Hindu Front 2. On Middle-Class economy front 3. (by and large) on civilizational front. 4. Too much "welfare"?

A benefit-of-doubt and alternative view of minuses:

1. NaMo's welfare is "capital investment" (not "consumer subsidy"). So one time cost will likely do away with recurring costs. Recall recurring "welfare" was one of the main planks of Cong's appeasement and vote-bank stratagem. More over, this new approach would likely result in a genuine empowerment which will (hopefully) push "poor" into "self sustainable" middle class.

2. This "welfare" also has other (likely Civilizational as well) benefits: The people who are vulnerable to "conversion industry" become less vulnerable (Though on ideological level also more needs to be done). I must mention here, that our poor are often much better positioned and ideologically rooted than the "middle class and rich". Never forget that they stuck to being Hindu despite poverty and suffering, while we (as middle class) quickly turn into whiners (however legitimate) and H1B-seekers.

3. This part I can't do well. Therefore, I would also like someone better equipped to make and present comparison between alternative scenarios and their real implications for middle class. For example, if we have  x% growth, y% inflation with y greater than x, does our quality of life improve or does it go down? Etc..

4. Further, on a broader canvas, if someone can formulate alternative/different strategies: check their consequences holistically, and present in simple to comprehend terms, it might tell us a different story. This again is not much of my domain but I suspect that while NaMo's has not been best, the best may/could not have been too different (in the first term).

5. Swamy vs Jaitley: This seems to be one of the major sore points for many. I view them as follows. They might have their weaknesses etc and even might be personal adversaries, but I surmise both love Hindus, India, and NaMo (in my preference, in that order) much more than they disagree or hate each other. And at this critical juncture will play judiciously.

6. Religious War /Caste War.

I have often mentioned that we are going through a combination of Religious-war as well as a caste-war. I have written about it cursorily. For now, it suffices to say that brAhmins pretend they are pro-NaMo but will likely vote against him; brAhmaNa-s are explicitly angry with him but will surely vote/support/bless him one more time. He is on to a tough job so things might not go as simple as one might want. In NaMo's second term it will become obvious whether NaMo merely faced difficulties or lacked right intentions. Thus at present give another chance. By 2024, his feet must be held to fire. The B-surnames must guard against being conned by brAhmins, and heed to wisdom of brAhmaNa-s. (Just to be plain, I don't assign brAhmaNa-ness based on support for NaMo, rather my support for NaMo derives from brAhmaNa-wisdom).

I further surmise (only as a benefit of doubt this time) that it is owing to this dicey deception game, NaMo is unable to be explicitly pro-Hindu. In my opinion, brAhmins are trying to con B-surnames, SC/ST, and minorities to unite (just as Cong vote bank used to be, and later became BSP vote bank) against NaMo. On the other hand, in my understanding, NaMo is trying to unite Indians (likely hoping gharwapsi, which muslims and christians should do if they get even an inkling of the con-game they are subjected to by their Mullahs, and Padres).


7. Thus, my note to X-ians and Sullas:

People convert(ed) to X-ianity and Islam (let us ignore love-jehad victims, rice-bag converts etc for the moment; not that their numbers are small, rather to make a larger point) to be free from alleged-"casteism" and "brAhminism". However, despite the conversion, they got into the trap of Mulla/Padre brAhmins. So what use was conversion? Newer "brAhmins" to replace earlier ones, with added contempt by Arabs and Europeans? Sullas and X must realize that sanAtana dharma is the only "religion" which is truly anti-brAhminism. Judeo-Abrahamisms are brAhminical traps. So sullas and X must do gharwapsi and join hands with Hindus, and work on (and fight for) brAhminism-free hinduism (not brAhmaNa-free). Realize that brAhminism is first and foremost anti-brAhmaNa. Likewise brAhmaNa-wisdom frees you from brAhminical clutches. (aparOkShAnubhUti [direct perception] over Officialdom)


8. Note to Hindus/Mimddle-Class who are contemplating voting against NaMo:

Before you make up your mind, calmly consider the following:

a. 5 years of corruption-free government. First time in 70 years. Not even Hajpeyi/PVNR did. Shastri might have been greater, but lasted (was allowed to last only?) 2 years.

b. We all lament Hajpeyi's election loss in 2004. The question is: Does only Modi need to learn from Hajpeyi-2004? Is there nothing that Hindus should also learn from what they did to Hajpeyi?

In my opinion, had Hindus given second term to Hajpeyi (even as a place holder) things would have been much much different.

c. We (in general) want democracy, and still blame someone who tries to win elections? Then, what do we want? A pious loser? Remember, for all his greatness what people did to Hajpeyi. He was a "pious loser". Who hailed him for his piety? None. Rather, all mocked him (even when they pretended they respected him) for being a loser. Again, I am no fan of Hajpeyi, but what needs to be said, must be said. The main point is, Hindus must avoid striving to become "pious losers". At least for quite some time now.(Also check "cut off nose ..." part mentioned earlier).

d. DeMon, Triple-T, etc are tough-decisions. Did Hajpeyi/PVN take any such tough decisions? Of course you will say, "coalition govt". Then why should we seek another "coalition govt"? Get it? We may only say that had Hajpeyi/PVN a majority like NaMo has, they would have taken much tougher decision. Yes, that does show NaMo in poor light, but does not take away his "place-holder" status for now. And as I mentioned earlier, we do need a place-holder in this crucial election.

e. PVN was "forced to do" many things which he did (likely unwillingly). Ditto Hajpey (Kandahar etc).. NaMo too "had to be the way he has been", but he DID have the option of "ceasefire with Cong". No gainsaying that. And from what appears (a few more active [could become action-packed as well] months are left) he won't be a "ceasefire with Cong" type. He shouldn't be.


So what is the bottom line?

Election 2019 are much more crucial than 2014. While NaMo may have been much worse than what was expected of him and what he could have been; he remains a safe and reasonable place-holder. Further, in reality he may not even be as bad as he is made out to be. More importantly, in our anger to teach him a lesson, we must guard against cutting off the nose to spite the face. We must elect NaMo with a team of 450+ non-corrupt, anti-corrupt, and explicitly pro-Hindu Loksabha members in 2019.

Happy Ramanavami

Haven't posted in a while. Wishing you all a very happy rAmanavamI.

SP4Y: Swaichchhik Pashchatap Prayashchitta Parihar Prasannata Yojana. A suggestion.

Dear Mr Narendra Modi (and Arun Jaitley),

Your recent speech at Company Secretary Institute's golden jubilee invoked quite appropriate examples from mahAbhArata. Duryodhana's arrogant pramAda, and Shalya's duplicity (the real story is more nuanced than you presented, but still) nearly pin-pointedly underlined the subject matter.

Despite my general support for DeMonetization (and overwhelming public support as well), I still maintain that it is still too early to evaluate DeMon. And it may never indeed get evaluated, except on data-independent sound principles. Our "alleged" intellectuals are too prejudiced to make an even a trifling unbiased evaluation, leave alone an objective evaluation.

Further, its truest vindication, if ever, will emerge only based on cleansing of "black money" that is yet to take place. I presume some work is underway. But I digress.

Likewise, GST rolling out has also been (again despite the fact that I generally support it) a somewhat damp squib. Basically, I suspect that the system is too infested. Few honest-dumb-fucks, largely what-do-I-care-I-get-may-salary, and more than critical numbers of intelligent-crooks. You get the drift? Nothing short of "draining the swamp" as Donald Trump termed it (and he too is miserably failing in it), will turn the tide in any realistic and tangible terms. I have a small suggestion re' GST. Try and get the following done(I am not an expert, I am sharing with you some general impressions):

1. Along BHIM app lines, get a JavaScript based web-page which can do Form-Validation off-line. Such a page can be hosted on a static-page site with CDN (content delivery network) etc. It need not be a free accounting software. Just some thing that can check (for validity, not necessarily "correctness of data") GST forms. What I mean is, for example, that wherever date must be put, a date-type is put and (say) not some arbitrary text.

Once Form is "valid", a person can attempt to submit (for example) it to the GST site.

2. For sometime, (say a few more months till things stabilize), allow only 1-2 submissions per person per month/per-time/whatever. I mean, if I am a trader, it should not be possible for me to submit/attempt-to-submit (say) 5-6 times. This will drastically reduce the load on GST form accepting servers. (Will work somewhat like indelible ink on finger during DeMon cash exchange at Banks).

I surmise that it should be possible to put such a system in about a few weeks (like BHIM app was made in a few weeks).

But I digressed again. This post is about a suggestion to give a last chance to those who might be having "black money". This chance is NOT about any concession, nor does it help them to get back any part of it. Rather it is about something else.

Corruption in India is for many reasons, but I want to highlight two of them. First is the regular allegation that India's traders are often thieves. This has been beaten to death, and you will have to figure out a way to correct it. Second is that governments in general are SO CORRUPT that people do not want to pay tax. I mean, if I am a trader (or for that matter anyone), why should I pay tax from my hard earned money, only to get infernal statues of Rahul Gandhi, Sonia Gandhi, Robert Vadra, et al, dotting the whole landscape, making blots all over the place? You get the drift? Good.

At the same time, of course, non-payment of tax MUST involve (notwithstanding any other things) certain amount of shame or guilt. (Though I doubt if shameless Indians have any of it). However, if you are going to run behind their behind (And I assume and wish you ARE going to; you promised to make tax-thieves cry bloody tears), as a last "concession", you could think of the following honorable exit: 

1. This does not help in any way to launder "black money"; it only helps one avoid humiliation; helps one cleanse onself of guilt and shame, and helps one to rejoin mainstream honorably.

2. Please feel free to refine as per needs. I am NOT an expert (in any thing).

Continuing from your mahAbhArata analogy, I have named it: SP4Y: Swaichchhik Pashchatap, Prayashchitta, Parihar, Prasannata, Yojana. And it is like so:

3.1 A person declares his hitherto undisclosed/uncaught/untaxed/whatever money to the government.

3.1.1 Consider including foreign bank deposits, as well as bEnAmI property also in the ambit.

3.2 50% of this declared income goes straight to the govt.

This money will give you quick slush funds, and generous breathing space despite global recession, and  looming wars. I suspect we are living in war times and thus we better play safe.

3.3 Remaining 50% also to govt (but this is with a twist). You make a few (I have mentioned 3) separate funds:

3.3.1 Citizens Monitored Disaster Management Fund.

3.3.2 Indian Investment Abroad Fund (this has 2 parts). It is done in rupees, not in any other currency. So those nations need to buy stuff from India or route through India.

3.3.2.1 Investment in Education and Health in poor/struggling nations (say from Africa, Latin America). Must be non-muslim nations. We ain't should fund our own destruction, okay? Such investments will lay foundation (long term relation building, send teachers and all)

3.3.2.2  Investment in Medium Term (say for 100 years). For example, in Siberian gas: extraction, fossil fuel based power generation. Russia has been our friend, and for further security it could be JV with Japan. And power transmission from there to India. We could sell power to Japan, Mangolia, Koreas, etc. Power cable will CROSS OBOR (China) so that will be added advantage. It can also connect with similar investment with Iran.

3.3.3 Investments in High Risk Technology Research. By high risk I do not mean risk to life. I mean, some mad, out of the box ideas; which if 2 in 10 work, we hit the sky, you get the drift?

4. Now people whose money gets into this (in principle you could make this open to general public also) can choose under which head the money will get used. In this aspect, it is akin to cooking-gas-subsidy voluntary surrender initiative. Clarification: They get "control" but NOT profit.(Drafting will have to take care of this aspect).  However, they can monitor if babus are working on the "investment" etc or not. On one had it needs to be ensured that owing to whatever little control they won't funnel profits to selves. On the other, since they themselves have been "thieves" in the past, they will keep a damn good tab on "cleaver by half" babus. (Need to ensure that the two thieves groups don't form a cartel).

5. You may be wondering why this 3.3.2.1 etc.? Make Jaitley also read this, at least about (say) ten times. He will get a taste of form-filling terror that he loves to inflict on people. Government forms are so full of such multi-layer convolutions.

6. The biggest advantage of this scheme is: You GET the money, without having to rely on those IT/ED/GST babus! Coz, if all goes well, people declare it on their own, and they just go and deposit it in some account, with a "preference for investments" directive. (Total half page). And they get a receipt. That's it.

7. Despite all your measures, if it still fails, your resolve, and peoples' support for making the corrupt cry bloody tears will get doubled! And tax-evaders would know it. Though, I think this scheme should be more of a positive initiative than a fear inspiring one.


All the Best.

Moses, Jesus, and Mahomet v0.1

Preface:

 

I have been toying with the idea of writing this article for a long time. You will soon notice that it still reads at least unrefined if not utterly unfinished. But given my limited writing abilities, I realized that even an unlimited wait would not lead to any significant improvement.

Also ours is the age of growing impatience. While the latest desi Shabbas Goy Pankaj Mishra authored "Age of Anger", it is more impatience than anger. Impatience with not mere "elite" but "elite suspected of wilful treason against, and callous indifference towards suffering of, people.

I have titled this v0.1 in an arbitrary manner. It only means that it is work in progress. However the progress might happen so slowly that you might never get to read any future versions. Also, the essence of the message of this article is unlikely to undergo any significant change.

Some Background:

By population, jews are about 0.2% of world population. If we assume that they were much more numerous about 2k years ago, may be they would have been (say) 5% of world population? Anyway, that is not the main point. About 2k years ago Christian and Moslem populations of the world were 0% each.

Now consider Abrahamism (jews plus christians plus moslems), their population is about 54%. If we add "secular, atheist, etc" into this (because Secularism, Atheism, as practiced in modern times are largely Abrahamic "atheism", while secularism is indeed "Judeo-Christian western" concept. Thus, post this addition, the Abrahamic population totals about 70%.

If a similar calculation is done in terms of land area. The percentage might add up to like more than 80% of inhabitable land area under control of Abrahamics. Compare that to say less than 1% land area that Judean kings might have controlled prior to 2k years ago.

Quite a feat, no? 

Yes, yes, I know, you would say that "Science/Technology practicing persons" in the sense of "modern Sci-Tech" were nearly 0% and have become nearly 100%, so don't read too much into it. But we MUST read into it. SciTech is being used by people everyday in their daily life, and it "works". If there are problems, theories and solutions are discarded. Nay, even if a guild of some practitioners goes somewhat askance (like modern cancer-treatment, psychiatry, etc) there is often a powerful counter push. Last but not least, if Sci-Tech too becomes a "propaganda" rather than remaining something that "works", it will also decline, nay it will also have to be shown the door. The "climate science" fiasco has already shown hints of that.

On the other hand, Abrahamisms insist that notwithstanding whether they "work" or not, they must be accorded a special privilege as "religion" coz it is their "faith" which must be deemed sacred, no matter what. And if you notice carefully, the notion of "Secularism" is more concerned about forcing non-Abrahamics into accommodating Abrahamisms, than anything else.

So, from this perspective, it seems interesting to investigate what Abrahamisms are all about and how and why they have had such massive percentage gains.

It is in order to study this, I have chosen the personalities of Moses, Jesus, and Mahomet.
 

My Usual Routine:


However, let me begin with my usual disclaimers and caveats.

Group-0

You might be wondering, what on earth has made me write this article. And that if i am writing this will I be heaping loads of well researched insults on these "prophets". Well, I am sorry to disappoint you.

However, this in no way must be taken even as a remotest hint of advice that we can drop our guard against the  abominable ideologies run after the names of these persons. Though in this article I am not touching upon the abomination aspect at all.

Just as a woman must be cautious regarding approaching men, for on one hand it indeed is plausible that they will eventually fall in love, marry and live happily ever after, it is not ruled out that the man will turn out to be a serial rapist, would rape her, impregnate her, and move on! In our case, we know for sure that notwithstanding whatever fair understanding we might accord these "religions", they have been rabid plunderers, and the only reason they havnen't moved on yet is because they feel their plundering is not yet finished.

Group-1

I am not writing this as a student of comparative religion or philosophy as that stupid ass Zakair Naik might claim for himself.

I am not a "scholar" either.

I began with an initial appreciation of the fact that Islam itself is a problem not what the apologists term as radical Islam, Islamofascism and such balderdash.

I could understand that notwithstanding its white-washed face, underneath Christianity also lay horrible past and even at present an ever continuing basket of subterfuge and stratagems.

I realized that the usual critics and exposers of Chrislamism always fell short of taking things to their logical end.

Thus I naturally ended up noticing that there were fundamental problems with Judaism (the parent of Islam and X) itself, and that things should not be brushed under the carpet for deference to terms like "Israel is our natural ally" and such levity.

Since these ideologies run in the name of these personalities, I wanted to understand them. Not from the point of view of admiring them, insulting them, or even evaluating them "objectively", but from the perspective, that If we give them generous benefits of doubt, can we find some take-home useful essence? Something? I have tried to find mine, though this need not be the all.

This article is some kind of summary of what I understand of the trio. While I must unabashedly declare that I am (in my writings) trying to be pro-Hindu, or at least trying not to be anti-Hindu, this article is more from a somewhat neutral perspective. At least, I am not writing this to grind any axe (though that can be, should be, and surely be a legitimate purpose in itself, just that I am not doing it in this article) against the trio.

Group-2

While there are numerous studies investigating and doubting the historicity of Moses, Jesus and Mahomet (and they are legitimate too), I am not undertaking any such revision here. As a non (jew, christian, moslem) I realise that the effect these "persons/prophets" have on us, especially on our survival, it is better to consider them "real threats" even if they are "fictional persons". Though, however, in this I am not critiquing their persona either.


However, I am not going to pull any punches, when I comment on the "followers" of these prophets. I am gut-sick and bone-tired of incorrigible fools shouting "Manuwadi brAhmaNical Patriarchy". I am not stupid enough to wish that someday they will also accord some semblance of benefits of doubts to each among Manu, brAhmaNas, and Patriarchs. This in no way means that legitimate, or even "hate-filled" criticism of these should be forbidden. Just that, I am not going to consider the sensitivities of anti-M-b-P in this article.

I have chosen Moses in a somewhat arbitrary manner, though he is important for the "ten commandments" which supposedly (notice the term supposedly) form Judeo-Christian Civilization. The choice of Jesus and Mahomet must be obvious.

So I am writing this assuming Moses, Jesus, Mahomet did exist; they were real people, they were good people, and they tried to identify cause of suffering, and proposed corrective measures. Likewise, further, they possibly loved the whole world too, identified some problems in their context, and likely tried to provide some timeless solutions to ever-standing problems.

And then I will present my thoughts on why certain other things happen despite their teachings.


Moses:

Jews believe that they were (are) Yahwe's chosen people, who once thrived and prospered; but did something wrong, fell from the grace and were exiled. A savior (Moses) was born, who led them to their freedom/salvation.

However, he did not merely save them. He went further. He told them that the cause of their fall from grace was some kind of immorality, and that they had to regain their morals, and that they must rebuild their lives on Ethics (given by ten comamndments).


My View:

Jews pride in being "the chosen people" often forgetting that the term "chosen" can (and should) also mean that they must be measured against "higher standards" (compared to the unchosen ones). Further, pre-Moses fall and exile must ever remind them that they too are fallible, and that their suffering is not always merely because others hate and/or victimize them. They may be inflicting their own downfall on themselves by compromising on their own "Ethics".

It is for them to judge themselves if they are living by even lower standards. The rest of the world could be having a different opinion to theirs.


Jesus:

Jesus of Nazarene was born (immaculate conception) to (virgin) Mary and Joseph and grew up to be a fine gentleman.

Jesus's teachings were "revolutionary" for his times. Replacing the typical Judaic prescription of "Jealous and harsh-judge" G-d (jews prefer to spell G-d I am told), the G-d of the "jewish scriptures", he presented a loving and compassionate "Father" in his "gospels" to people.


My View:

Jesus has been the most respected among these three, especially even by the non-Abrahamics.

I won't mock "immaculate conception" for I believe that such a thing could be at the very least plausible. In the case of Jesus, whether it did happen or not could be debated though. I emphasize that I have nothing against those who question immaculate conception on the basis of "science" or whatever. A simple and pure hatred of Christianity can also be a legitimate basis for questioning IC (just as Judeo-Christian-Muslims do to Hindus in particular and pagans in general). Just that I am not doing it in this article.

My small point is, we can focus on what Jesus did and said (even if it only a myth, we in this article take it to be real as explained before) rather than how he was born (though Christians consider the process of birth as one of the most crucial "proof" of his divinity). Also, since "immaculate conception" can not be proven to be impossible (however unlikely "laws of biology" might render it) we might as well, for the sake of nicety (at the very least) take it as plausible.

I did not mention the splitting of Red Sea by Moses earlier, but regarding that also, I would in this piece take a similar stand. What matters is that Moses saved his people, and actual splitting or not of the sea is not critical to that aspect. Or even the fact whether they were exiled to Egypt, or a town in (present) Yemen, then also known as Misr.

Coming back to the point that Jesus, seems the most respected among these three especially by Abrahamics. So much so, that (for example) Vivekananda likened Jesus to Siddharth-Gautam Buddha. But while Jesus and his early followers may have suffered, later Christians perpetrated horrible atrocities on "sinners". In fact one needs to merely look at what Portugese (Catholic) X-ians did to Syrian Christians in Goa, and the Shia-Sunni conflict among muslims will appear to be a child's play. And then imagine the plight of "heathens and pagans".

Now, re' Jesus, it seems that Rabbis and priests were exploiting the masses in the name of "G-d" and wielding the "fear of God's punishment". Jesus allayed such fears and declared that God was (like a) Father and loved people. This must have been a great relief to toiling populace of his times who might have been reeling under exploitation by the then "clergy". And there is also the aspect that Jesus, in fact, came to save people from Rabbinical (and other priestly classes) horrors.

In terms of the content of his message, we might even conjecture that Jesus's message was towards "realization" rather than "textual authority" (take a look at what he replied to a questioner who asked whether one could divorce one's wife by writing a certificate since Moses allowed so).

Notwithstanding any or all of this, Jesus has been used as a mere shield by Christans/Church to inflict untold miseries upon non-Christians.

Jesus' teachings, termed gospels, themselves underwent a lot of supposed "cleaning" (or should we say doctoring?). Various "gospels" were removed and only a select few were incorporated in the "authentic" King James version. As far as I understand, the very chasm between Eastern and Western Europe seems as much based upon differing Church scripture, as much on race. Eastern Church retained certain "gospels" which were removed by the Catholic Church. Also, never forget that while Bolshevism was against Russian Church (Eastern Orthodox), the saviors from Russian empire were propped by Pope, Catholic/Western Church (Recall Lech Walesa of Poland) etc.

Further, Jesus's life/teachings were sandwitched between Old Testamant (jewsih bible) and some early Church writings. It looks as if Jesus' influence was reduced to mere someone who died for the sins of others, whereas the main teachings were to be obtained from Old Testament and Church writings.

In that sense, Christianity (and much more so the Church) as we know now, may have much less to do with Jesus (and his teachings), and more to do with those who "control" Christianity/Church and their lust/greed for power and money.



Mahomet:

Mahomet's case seems the weakest. For in his own life, he committed awful plunder and subjected people (read his enemies) to mind numbing brutalities.

His canon message was that Allah is the only God, and Mahomet is Allah's final prophet.

My View:

We can still salvage some honor for him by assuming that may be his life story has been distorted and manipulated. May be he (like Jesus) saw the exploitation by "religious authorities" and wanted to end it once and for all. He probably noticed that common people who are not endowed with much intellectual power were being fooled over and over again by complexities perpetrated by the intelligent and cunning using "religion". He tried to plug the hole by emphasizing that there was only one God Allah, who was merciful and kind, you needed no intermediaries to pray to him, and you must consider this to be the final message.

So the question arises, that if Moses wanted his people to be moral, Jesus taught God loved all, and Mahomet abolished middlemen between men and Allah, why did such blood bath ensue the spread of their ideologies? A Jiddu Krishnamurti will dismissively say that all ideologies are utterly idiotic and violent. But that is simplistic generalization, and I suspect it to be even a deceptive generalization, for it merely provides a stick to beat up "all religions". Further, while I disagree, I surely accept that what JidduK said does indeed apply to those who consider what JIdduK said as new "ideology". But I digress.

A Remark:

It is important to say all this, for there are many well meaning Hindus (pagans) who get sentimental emotional about any criticism of Moses/Jesus/Mahomet.

This is highly common among especially "alleged educated hindu women". With due apologies to Rani Lakshmibai and Goddess Durga, I must mention that modern woman, much more so modern feminist woman often displays such utter lack of any political sagacity that one wonders whether they are even equipped to make any worthwhile political decisions. But yes, if we can have Rahul Gandhis, why not others. But understand, that while RG is, in most likelihood, treasonous (don't go by his foolishness/innocence charms that he is charading); many of these educated women seem non-treasonous in intent, so one wonders what makes them so vulnerable to such deep foolishnesses. But I digress again.

An Analysis: 

So, what was the cause that messages by these seemingly well meaning wise people led to endless wars? The answer seems to lie in the peculiar tendency prevalent among all the three. It is the wont of all Abrahamisms that, no sooner has a message been given, the "text keepers" enter the scene. The "authenticity of text" is quickly made to base upon "true copy of original" rather than any reasonable sense of the "realizability" of the message. Further, the "authentic message" always includes a call to "tell the whole world" (read conquer, convert or kill the rest). And then begins, first the evangelical imperialism, and then the eternal cleansing of the "impure" by the "pure".

Please contrast this "obsession" with "authentic text", with (say) a Socratic (pagan) teaching, other versions here and here.:

". . . Then anyone who leaves behind him a written manual, and likewise anyone who receives it, in the belief that such writing will be clear and certain, must be exceedingly simple-minded. . . ."

I have deliberately chosen as "western" and "phoren" quote. This is because I think usually normal Hindus instinctively understand this and need no "quotes". However the "educated" will be convinced only by "phoren" wisdom. Thus.

Further more, there is an even more sinister "unity" among these three. Recall that the ten commandments contain commands to prohibit theft, adultery, killing etc etc. However, notice that none of the "followers" among these are ever bothered by blatant flouting of these dictats by their peoples. Their focus is centered upon one and their only obssessive dictat: Thou shalt not worship God in any image. I used to wonder why this was so. I suspect that this is because this is the easiest stick that can be used to beat pagans with, and also gives heavy leeway to ignore on the one hand all other goodnesses that might be prevalent among the supposed adversaries, and on the other hand excuse all perfidies that the Abrahamics commit on the "unbeliever". This also provides them with the Marxist-like obsession with "destroying the old to build the new". Bertrand Russel likely had this mind also when he called Communism a Christian heresy. These days, Christains likewise call Communism "Islam without Allah". A better way to understand might be to see Marxism as "Judeo-Atheism".

The important point to understand is that, owing to this obsession with "God without image", "authentic text", "only one true God", "evangelical zeal", and carte blanche against "pagans/heathens/idolators", Judaism and its children remain an existential treat to any semblance of "religious freedom". The freedom they allow seems to be the freedom that Henry Ford once said re' his mass-produced cars: "You can get any color so long as it is black".

Now, I would also like to give some examples of fundamental structural differences between Abrahamics and non-A, in particular Hindus:

Hindus also believe that ultimately there is one Ishwara. [The word God of Abrahamics is quite different from Hindu word Ishwara, though just for once we can let it pass here to simplify the example]. But a typical Hindu construct is: If there is one Ishwara then all these multiplicities of gods must somehow be related to Ishwara (Unification)

In contrast, the typical Abrahamic construct is: If there is one God, then "only one" among these many gods must be true and the rest must be false, and therefore must be eliminated. (Exclusion and Extermination).

Swami Chandrashekhar Bharati, who was shankarAchArya of sRingEri math, in some place contrasted these aspects like so: Ishwara alone IS (no matter what name(s) you give Ishwara} versus There is only one (true) God (ours!). I have hardly seen anything that summarizes this fundamental aspect (Unification vs Exclusion) so well.

Another crucial difference seems to be:

The Abrahamic teacher would insist: Have "faith in the book", and this faith will lead you to rewards (usually only) in afterlife.

In contrast, Hindu guru would say: Do this sAdhana (Eg. Chant/Do-japa-of this name (say rAma, etc). There can be many other ways too, I have used this as a simple illustrative example) and you CAN realize "rAma, etc., and the whole truth" in this very life itself.

So does it mean that Hindus don't believe in afterlife? Not at all so. Hindus do believe in afterlife, rebirth, and the whole shebang. Afterlife, etc., mean that you can not get away with pApa (commiting sins) and "Law (of karma)" will catch up with you; also that your sAdhanA (even if you do not succeed in this life) would not go waste, and that you will begin from where you left off.

So, for example, Abrahamics would mention that the proof that Moses existed is that "the book" says he parted the Red Sea. If you say you doubt its veracity, you are an abominating unbeliever who must be eliminiated by torture. While a Hindu guru would say that the proof that rAma (and like wise others) "existed" is that you can chant his name and can realize in this very life itself.

Of course, mere pragmatism is not the test of "truth". But then what IS the test of "truth"? I need to digress here a little. After Hume's empiricism, and logical positivism of the Vienna circle, philosophy of Science (or of scientific truth) was taken to be Popperian proposal of "Falsificationism". That is, (scientific) conjectures must be subject to testing. Kuhn critiqued Popper, and proposed "Paradigms and their shifts". The current status seems to be (approximately) Feyerabend's Epistemic Relativism. Feyerabend proposes "Truth" as what "works". Of course, we need not take Feyerabend, or any other as the "only final" authority. But I would surely like to mention that Adi Shankara too declared re' knowledge: "sAvidyA yA vimuktayE" meaning (approx) "truth (or knowledge) is that which liberates you".

At the very least, the SciTech paradigm of "experiment and filter out what does not work" and "sAdhanA and aparOkshAnubhUti" seem closer than "Faith in Only true book and reap reward in (only) afterlife" paradigm. In fact, often the insistence on (only) "afterlife" betrays Abrahamic infiltration. That is one reason why I call Indian brAhminism as Judeo-brAhminism. We might also call it Abrahminism! This stands in stark contrast with the message of brAhmaNas (the spontaneously ethical) about sAdhanA and aparOkshAnubhUti (loosely translated as spiritual practices and relization of truth). I would also like to mention that I am NOT using Hindu-system's proximity to SciTech paradigm as proof of correctness of Hinduism. Rather, it only strengthens the case for SciTech paradigm as it can draw strength from its similarity to time-tested praxis of Hinduism. Emphasizing the aspect of truth as something which is ancient as well as enduring.


I must mention here that I have been told by many that Jesus's teachings were along the lines of sAdhanA and realization (in this life itself, a la Kingdom of Heaven within you, etc); but that such aspects have been subverted by the Church lest their hold (social, political, wealth control) on population should be compromised. I don't know enough to comment on its veracity. I think it surely is plausible, even if not highly probable. However, I would insist that no such consideration should lull Hindus into underestimating the existential threat(s) posed by Church and Christianity. It is just that we could remain intelletcually open to the possibility that in future some Jesusism might emerge which honors such aspects of Jesus, and gets rid of the threats-to-Hindus part.


(Might add some more)

An Open Letter. To: Donald Trump (contains To: Miyan N Sharief)

Dear Mr Trump,

A recent incident in Pakistan provided me with an opportunity to write to you a letter that might give you insights which might prove crucial. And a letter to MNSharief provides a nice foundation to convey what I wanted to convey to you. So let me begin by embedding the text meant for MNS.


Dear Ms MN Sharief,

This letter is meant for your Abboo, Mr MNSharief. However, since he is not on twitter, I am addressing it to you, with the intent that the content will reach Mr MNS.

The news re' saving an ancient temple in Pakistan has been a minuscule hint of a very small breath of fresh air, but of course it could be a huge part of mega Taqqiyya. All said and done, do you realize that all you Pakistanis were similar (pagan) majorities who were raped and plundered to make you become an Islamic "majority"?

And you know the basic problem? Let us be frank, okay?

With all your might and religious zeal, after thousands of years and hundreds of millions of deaths, when you become a perfect moslem in your own eyes, you would still only be a second rate Iranian moslem. I know you know, and you know that all know this. But the worst is not yet said.

With all their might and religious zeal, after thousand years and millions dead, when Iranian moslems have become near perfect moslem in their own eyes, they still have managed to become only second rate Arab moslems. So you know? You will manage, if ever, to become only third rate Arab moslem. And surprisingly, the worst has not been said yet.

With all their might and religious zeal, after countless holy wars, millions of deaths, and many millions of murder, the Arab moslems have not yet become even second rate jews. Likewise, Iranians have not become even third rate jews, and you can never even dream of becoming even a fourth rate jew. And even more surprisingly the worst is not yet said.

You know, I know you know, everyone knows, and you know everyone knows, and I know you know everyone knows that there can not be any second rate jews. You either are a jew, or you are a goy, expendable, dispensable.

So I ask you this question - and you too should ask this during interrogation of Hafiz Sayeed and friends - is it worth dying in hundreds and thousands, and killing in hundreds of thousands and millions, to become only a second rate Iranian, a third rate Arab, or a fourth rate jew, err fourth rate non-jew?

Why not try returning to your own civilizational roots? You don't need to hate Iranians, or Arabs, or jews, thought you can pity Iranians and Arabs, and hope that they see this light soon and return to their own civilizational roots respectively. 

You know, when you are in your own roots, or return to your own roots, even if you are held despicable, you have the right to remake it your own and become first rate, nay even surpass the first rate, pagans (even if you despise becoming Hindu again)?

Think about it. Ms Maryam Nawaz Sharief, you are a woman, imagine children born out of rape considering their mother's rapist as their hero and mother as adulteress. Does it make any sense to you?

Be a proud yourself than being a n-th rate someone else. Best wishes for speedy recovery.



Now back to you, Mr Trump:

I am sure you found the first few paragraphs in the letter to MNS highly enlightening and insightful. But did it strike a jarring note towards the end? Why? Why did it? Is it that you are proud of Judeo-Christian Civilization?

Consider this: Do you know what was the cause of White-Euro "rise"? And what has been the cause of its "fall"?

Aren't you told that you were all barbarians who got enlightenment after Judeo-Xianity, which helped you discover Science and invent Technology? But have you ever wondered, if JC was the cause? Why is it portrayed as the cause? Because discoveries/inventions happened after Europe became Christian, I beg your pardon, Judeo-Christian? But consider this, Europe "discovered/invented" SciTech after they colonized India/China etc. So if you apply post-hoc-ergo- procter-hoc (After this, therefore because of this) which you applied re' X-ianity, then what happens? Do you get the drift of my message?

And hasn't your fall been owing to White-guilt re' White-imperialism and White-racism? Now consider this: You are taught to think in terms of Judeo-Christian pride and White-guilt. Why not try interchanging? Why not White-pride but Judeo-Christian-guilt? Even now, when your executive order to keep some immigrants away is being criticized, isn't "violation of Christian values" mentioned as one major point? 

When Caeser conquered Egypt did he destroy Egypt? Then why did Judeo-Christian Europeans destroy the civilizations of the "conquered"? Was it because of their "whiteness" or was it because of their "Judeo-Christianity"? And it was all commensurate with "Christian values" then, no? Don't you see a contradiction? Or possibly even a deception?

I wont give you any answers, but I am sure if you ask yourself these questions, the very asking will produce some insights.

However, in light of what I asked Mr MNS, let me ask you likewise: Do you still want to be wannabe second/third-rate jew, err non-jew? Being expended over wars, and what not? Are you still ashamed of "Nazism"? Would you still be ashamed if it was "Judeo-Nazism"?

Your pal Steve Bannon is right about immoral capitalism and immoral socialism, it is just that he is not right about the cause and solution. See these as Judeo-Capitalism and judeo-Socialism and you might understand.

Keep SciTech, but use White-pagan past to make America great again. If you really want to feel guilty, feel guilty about what Europeans did as Judeo-Christians during their evangelo-imperial conquests? By the way, was it White-Euro-imperialism, or Judeo-Christian-imperialism perpetrated by befooled Europeans?

All the best. Leave "the only true" and provide welcome to "pagan truths".