All Hail the Mighty

As the whole world fell dark and grey,

People engrossed by bleak and dismay.

Eternal was the night, the sun had fled

Doomed were the lively, as their lives were dead.

And then the winter stepped, cruel as a demon

Hate became harder, clear was its sermon.

Shackles tied, the people horrified

They couldn’t resist so they obliged.

Rulers bestial, they took themselves for sovereign

Absolutist and anarchist, their regime was mean

Their armies raped, their armies robbed

The tides of crimes were high, for long had people throbbed.

‘We shall light a lamp’ some bravely wise men resolved

Their resolve only to be bowed.

As the light couldn’t stand the snowy wind

But the wise were very determined.

They kept it lightened, every time and hour

Against the winds, against the snow, against the shower

The light was hope- though meagre and small

For their foes were heavenly and tall.

Before the light, they teared and sobbed

‘Hey lord thee cometh and saveth’-they prayed and hoped

But light was a sin under the evil regime

The wise weren’t spared, and punished for the crime.

Some wise slaughtered, some new rose and came

The hope was rising, so was the lamp’s flame

The times were tough, but determination at peak

Finally, the lord was pleased, and stepped to help the weak.

“Behold him, the ever smirking and jubilant

Always gentle, loving and eloquent

His patience beyond a man can have

Engrossed inside a virtuous suave?”

His words soothed, his words inspired

His words caressed, his words admired.

He was a sage, he was a warrior

He was a saint, he was a savior

Like a torch flamboyant he shone

And marched against the dark throne

With every step he took, the land turned sheen

From dark grey it turned lush green

He was followed, he was cheered

As scores joined, the enemies feared

He dispelled the dark, he broke the chains that spreed,

He settled the winters, and undid all the misdeed.

And then, he confronted the enemy, face to face

With his followers brimming with grace

Their courage unchallengeable, their strength unified

The enemy lost apparently, and after long had people sighed.

His wisdom mightier than seas and higher than Himalaya

Some call him Krishna, some call him Kanhaiya

His words were, and are still, the acute opulence

All hail the reverential, Lord Krishna- his excellence.

The Blame Game

Last century can be marked as the century of change. Unlike the previous centuries which were dominated by monarchs, last century observed the emergence of new ideas. The world shifted to a paradigm that was never observed before. New social, cultural and economic ideas and prospects floated up, some of them only to be submerged again. Colonialism and European supremacy ended, giving rise to third world.

In spite of so much change around, the human nature of blaming his failure/fault to someone else stuck to its original form, only to be adopted by certain ideologies for patronizing its audience. Hence, communists (who observed a rise and major fall in the last century itself) blamed poverty on bourgeois businessmen, feminists blamed their failure on men, blacks blamed their misery on whites, dalit groups blamed everything on brahmins. We see how ideologies started making their ideological antagonists, who were based on color, gender, income etc, their scapegoat. This was kind of analogous to the situation on medieval Europe wherein everything-from poverty to plague, was blamed to Jews because they followed uncommon religion.

And this kind of blame game, as can be commonly inferred, has recently, started in India in political spectrum, this time against British. I mean British had done a lot of wrongs on India, but blaming our failures on them is seriously ill. The politician belongs to Indian national congress and seems obsessed with British. His obsession can be proved from the fact that even when the debate was going around Khilji, he brought British there. This politician is Shashi Tharoor who can see wrongdoings committed by British only, but not by emperors preceding them or succeeding them.

This happened in a debate with Sadhguru. He defended the Mughals saying that Mughals became Indian, as if they did any favor to India. He ignored all accounts of their cruelty on Indian soil. I mean, should we take proud in someone who remained in India but exposed Indians to eternal black period? Were Mughals not looters simply because they lived and spent in India? By that logic even a bank robber is not wrong. See, he spends all his money in here. Let’s acquit them as well.

Also, Shashi is a big fan of the Indian government succeeding the Brits. He again ignores the wrongdoings of Nehru and Congress, and always justifies their wrongdoings by hook or crook. In a debate with Sanjeev Sanyal, he justified what we are taught in Indian schools that Congress had played major part, ignoring the contribution of revolutionaries like Netaji, Indian Armed Forces etc.

Another blame stamped by him is poverty of India is because of British. He says that when British landed in India, it was richest country in the world with 27% share of world’s GDP and they reduced it to less than 4%. This argument somehow boils down to the fact that British made India poorer on absolute scale. However, this may be true in many cases, but this argument is too lame to consider.

We are made to believe how colonialists were bad and we are suffering many problems because of them. Let’s analyze the case of poverty, which, of all the things is blamed on the colonialists, in India and many parts of the world.

Yes, India was a very rich country before British came. It contributed to 27% of world’s GDP, which made it 2^nd richest after China, if not the richest. The argument, as stated is that when British left, it was one of the poorer countries in the world. The argument tries to state that it was rapacious exploitation that made colonies poor. This may be true in many cases, whereas this fact ignores many other factors. India’s standard of living might have gone up on an absolute scale, but its contribution as a share of worlds GDP declined because other nations literally upshot their product.

Industrial revolution of Europe made way for them to increase their GDP multifold. The same happened in the United States, a newly founded state which functioned on the principles of liberty and freedom in personal and economic spheres. These principles made USA to promote entrepreneurship, emergence of new ideas and hence their economy multifold.

Okay, let’s assume, for their sake, that share of world’s GDP is an example of exploitation. Can Tharoor answer me why it reduced even after independence? India’s share of world’s GDP in 1947, as he states was less than 4%. In 1952, it was exactly 3.8%. In 1973, India’s GDP reduced to just 3.1% of world’s economy. Would you blame Nehruvian policies for this decline, and hence exploitation?

In 1947, Independent India could go either way- socialist and capitalist. Indian government went for the way which was very much trending but didn’t have any solidity. It was an experiment- a failed one- of the last century. It never worked in past, nor it would work in future because of its inherent flaws which makes it go against the universal laws of economics. Socialist countries like Venezuela are resource rich but cash poor countries. Imagine a country with rich oil reserves but yet it ran out of a basic commodity like toilet paper in 2013. Imagine an oil rich country that doesn’t have electricity for its govt offices, leave alone the people.

India adopted socialism because it was a fad back then. That was the time when people weren’t allowed to do business freely. Even if they started business, they could not expand it. Many companies listed in monopoly act like Birla had to invest in other countries like Indonesia, because they weren’t allowed to invest their capital in India because of government’s policies. India was deliberately stopped from becoming a manufacturing hub, the case in which even Pakistan outperformed us. In the initial years after independence, Pakistan under Ayub Khan assured growth rate of 5.82 percent, India less than 3.5%. Sad but true.

Then came the era of Indira Gandhi who nationalized all the banks. This was again a failure on many parts, and apparently she too never learned from history. A brief history of nationalized industries of USSR should have made her known that government planning in economy doesn’t work. Economy is like nature- it flows on its own when millions of people interact in the marketplace. 500 bureaucrats sitting over us can neither determine nor dictate what we want and what we don’t. Again her nationalizing of banks using taxpayer’s money is the reason they have combined losses of Rs 12869 crores, which will again be recovered from tax payer’s money.

The amount of failures on the part of the government of Independent India was so much that in 1960, India and South Korea were on similar economic level, but in late 1980s, South Korea’s per capita income was 10 times of that of India! And mind it, this stagnation was not due to British!

However, blaming colonialists for every wrong in the country is not peculiar to India, whereas the reality is completely different somewhat. People believe that colonialists became rich because they looted colonies, again this argument is more of an emotional than factual. Colonialists, on average, had spent more on maintaining the colonies than they could get back from them in terms of money. We may see people like Cecil Rhodes becoming rich, but we still ignore the cost that tax payers of Britain paid for it.

There were colonialists like Spain which looted gold and silver, and the inflow of these precious metals caused inflation in Europe. But after colonial era ended, Spain emerged as one of the poorest economies of Europe. This fact can conclude that Spain’s economy was based too much on its colonies- in terms of natural resources and human capital, but Britain, on the other hand was one of the richest countries in Europe. Hence, we can conclude that Britain had a good economic backing- and London emerged as the financial capital of the world.

Not all colonies were totally devastated by the colonialists in all aspects. Say for example Britain. What we call Great Britain was once a Roman colony. When Romans came to Britain, there were literally no buildings, ofcourse unless the Romans built it. Even British patriot Winston Churchill acclaimed, ‘We owe London to Rome.’ Even in the modern context, we find there were many colonies in Americas that didn’t even have wheels. Leave alone wheels, there were no animals to be used for transport- like horse or oxen unless the Europeans fetched them there. The innovation done by Americans owe much to the British and French when we see the context, as they were primitive and isolated people once, but now they could travel long distances and maintain a vast area under the United States.

There were colonies that literally flourished under the colonial rule. 2 great examples would be Hong Kong and Singapore, whose concepts of free markets and economic freedom were deployed by the Britishers. Even the colony like South Africa, that became independent after India, has 5 times per capita income than India. So, when we say we are poor, we are because out post-independence government made us so, not because we were ruled someday by Britishers. Blaming it on British would be like blacks blaming their poverty on slavery (which they do anyways, but that’s completely illogical.) If after 70 years we are still poor, it’s your fault, not somebody else’s.

What is a nation? by Achint Agarwal

असतोमा सद्गमय।

तमसोमा ज्योतिर् गमय।

मृत्योर्मामृतं गमय॥

ॐ शान्ति शान्ति शान्तिः।।

From ignorance, lead me to truth;

From darkness, lead me to light;

From death, lead me to immortality

Om peace, peace, peace

What is a nation? Formally it is defined by what is written in the constitution. But I believe a nation is what its people think it to be. In the English language, our nation is called India, a term derived from the Persian name for our country which is Hind, which in turn comes from the Sindh river, now known as the Indus.

To the Muslims that came to invade India, our country and its culture were an enigma. To them, we were pagans or kaafirs, people worshiping many different gods which to them was a barbaric practice. Their own pagan culture had already been overthrown to give way to Islam which is wrongly considered to be a religion. In fact, it is a system which manifests itself in the religious, cultural, social, political and even economic affairs of the people governed under it. They had long lost the notion of what is a way of life, they had long lost the idea that people could also simply live without a strict, well defined, all abiding system of governance (read religion) and society could still carry on peacefully (pun intended). They failed to (and still fail to) comprehend the fact that humans are an evolved species, and that they learn to adapt. So, as a society learns to adapt over time it leads to the creation of various practices that makes life comfortable for the inhabitants. These practices only suit that particular society and habitat as it has been created by those people, for those people and of those people.

Ours is THE OLDEST society in Eurasia if not the in the world, being more than 30,000 years old and thus having formed many practices, each pertaining to different aspects of life. And thus, to the Abrahamic invaders, this was a religion, as that is all they knew. So, the religion of the people living east of the Hind river became Hinduism. But, we are now independent again the invaders are gone but the symbolism still remains. We as the people east of the Indus know what our culture or so-called religion is called. We in fact do have a common name referring to the various practices our wise ancestors created. And that name is Sanatan Dharma, meaning the eternal Dharma.

But why, one may wonder, should we be concerned with such little trivialities.. after all no one’s life is being impeded by the current semantics.

This is a question that will come in the minds of liberal Indians. But the truth is, as Indians we have learnt to adjust a little too much. The citadels have withered away but the citizens have yet not come out of their servitude, to see what is rightfully theirs and where it is going. After all a nation is just an idea, the more pride and passion we invest in it the more powerful it becomes. As Lord Varys in Game of Thrones said, “Power resides where men BELIEVE it resides.” The more powerful the image of the nation in peoples’ mind, the stronger is their affinity and sense of responsibility towards it.

So, it is my request that if not a total transformation we should take a small step for change. For example, in all government forms, online or paper based, wherever a person’s religion is asked, the name Hinduism be replaced by Sanatan Dharma among the options. This is also required because ours is a secular country, it is important not to hurt the sentiments of all groups especially the minorities, and in this case by using a foreign name for our culture, the sentiments of not only the majorities Hindus, but the extremely small and always overlooked minority groups such as the Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs and even the various tribes of north east India are being hurt. Yes, all of their, forgive me, all of our sentiments are being hurt and ignored as we all share a common ancestry and a vibrant culture.

To further support my case I would like to quote article 351 of the Indian Constitution-

“It shall be the duty of the Union to promote the spread of the Hindi language, to develop it so that it may serve as a medium of expression for all the elements of the composite culture of India and to secure its enrichment by assimilating without interfering with its genius, the forms style and expressions used in Hindustani and in the other languages of India specified in the Eighth Schedule, and by drawing, wherever necessary or desirable, for its vocabulary, primarily on Sanskrit and secondarily on other languages.”

Why, after 70 years of independence should we use a word, which is probably even derogatory, for our own selves, and marks the beginning of the blackest period in the history of Bharat. Why not use a word which is more than 300 centuries old yet eternal and which carries the essence of our culture?

On the same note, I would like to remind you all that the government will most probably, in the future roll back the 2000 rupee note and introduce a new 1000 rupee not. On this new note, I believe the words ‘Ek sahasr rupees’ should be written instead of ‘ek hazar rupees’. I believe it is the duty of not only the government, but also all of us to follow and abide by the rules, rights and most importantly the duties given to us in the constitution. After reading article 351, do you not think it is our duty to embrace the great, ancient, and most logical of all languages for our daily use?

Yes, we have an utmost vibrant culture, which is why we are considered not just a country, but a subcontinent. We all have our own beautiful vernacular Prakritik languages and it is of utmost importance that we preserve them, but all official work requires some sort of common language. And what better language, than the most logical one? What better language, than one which has influenced every Prakritik language of Bharat, from Ladakhi in the north to Tamil and Malayalam in the south, from Gujarati in the west to Bengali in the east, and Nysihi and Adi in the north east. Hell, even English is related to Sanskrit. Both belong to the same Indo- Persian- European language family.

भाषासु मुख्या मधुरा,

दिव्या गीर्वाणभारती।

तस्यां हि काव्यं मधुरं,

तस्मादपि सुभाषितम्।।

Of all the languages, the God’s own language- Sanskrit is the mother, divine and most lyrical language. In Sanskrit, poetry is more melodious wherein the good sayings hold prime position.

A grand thanks to Mr Achint Agarwal for this article.

The Idea of Equality

Image Source

When any agenda is hatched, it primarily nests a cause- a cause which serves some good to some person or community. The agenda may hold genuineness and necessity to the people it serves but can be evil to those who are ignored. As the agenda proceeds, it matures and starts to accomplish some of its goals. People working for the agenda form organizations and groups. It starts gaining popularity amongst its beneficiaries and vindicators. With popularity come fame, power and money.

When money comes and keeps on coming, it makes a deep psychological impact on people such that people crave for more and more. If earned by working hard and thereby making an impact on the society, it can always be justified. But some people make (not earn) money by befooling others by projecting different kinds of lies. This holds true for some agendas as well- when money comes and comes to make the cause happen, the original cause is lost and money in itself becomes the new cause.

Most of the organizations have proved to be corrupted with flow of time and money. When independence, the original motto, of Indian National Congress (INC) was achieved in 1947, its protagonist Gandhi wished to dissolve it on the pretext that it would be corrupted over time. However INC continued to function and still does. The whole of India knows what it turned into and how corruption was main ally of it. Not listening to Gandhi not only impaired Congress as a party but India as whole.

Some organizations however have agendas which look too fascinating on papers. The people with such new ideas provide with a manifesto which creates delusion inside the people’s mind and make them dream of utopia. Such ideas look moral and fair inside of dreams, but they have an evil behind the curtains. However with time this evil curtails the idea and overpowers it. This emerges into misery and anguish and eventually towards protests and dissents. Since the original protagonists in the meantime have usurped power playing on people’s emotions, they have everything- their power, money and image- to lose now.

To continue the movement, new agendas and ideas are signed up. Organizations look up for new agendas for the sake of continuing. On the similar lines, a movement  for a very noble cause in the west- to grant women voting rights- is one of the most controversial ideas today. Known as 3rd wave feminism, it has been getting backlashes from many conservative and libertarian organizations in America. However in many European countries like Sweden, Germany etc it has become even more powerful.

Feminism is NOT Equality-

How many times we have seen people saying ‘ohh! Feminism is for equality and that’s why I support it.’ This is still a very popular apologia for supporting feminism however it is no longer true. If someone supports equality he/she must call himself/herself egalitarian. If you support equality of genders, it is well justified but it is not feminist. Maybe your version of feminism is equality but apparently it is not the mainstream version.

A significant example proving this point is when India passed the new rape law called Nirbhaya law the government wanted it to be gender neutral law in which even men/boys could have reported sexual assault but the government was forced to take it down because of feminist lobbies. The reason given by feminist lobbies were as absurd as that if the law would be gender neutral then women will face difficulties reporting it [1]. Even the government couldn’t force gender neutral version possible because it didn’t want to be portayed as anti-women.

Whereas in the western world- the world which has faced 2 waves of feminism before- the people are more skeptical of feminists. In the USA only 18% people classified themselves as feminists whereas 82% believe in equality [2]. The figures in the UK are more soothing- only 7% consider themselves feminists but 86% wanted equality.[3]. There haven’t been any such surveys in India but as far as I have experienced, people claim themselves feminists and at the same time believe in equality. This might be because India didn’t face 1st and 2nd wave feminism and people do not really know about what feminism actually was and what it has turned into. People tend to take feminism for the original-theoretical definition and blindly believe in it.

The Self-victimizing Attitude and Fallacies-

In an entitlement context, all sorts of ‘gaps’ and ‘disparities’ automatically

become ‘inequities’ and a reason for lashing out at others, instead of improving

yourself. – Thomas Sowell

After voting rights were granted to women, feminism continued moving on on the pretext that women were oppressed by patriarchy. To make sure patriarchy exists they fabricated new myths and drew new conclusions based on those myths. For example- decades old myth they propagated was about gender wage gap. Though no economist takes it seriously, this myth has been by far their political tool.

The data they show on how much a woman makes on a man’s dollar doesn’t account for the difference in professions, the difference in working hours, the difference between wages and salaries and the productivity as individual. For example in a study done by Dr Thomas Sowell in the USA with doctors, it was observed that young male physicians made more money per year compared to

young female physicians but male physicians worked 500 hours more than female physicians per year. Apparently they ought to make more money.

In olden days when heavy machinery didn’t exist and most physical work used to be done by manual labor, men had comparative advantage over women due to their higher physical strength. This higher strength is due to nature and not patriarchy. Women were in disadvantageous situation in mines, farms, construction work and transportation work. So one day of their effort used to be less than a man’s effort for the same time which translated into lesser profit for the firm and hence lesser pay for women.

Other factors like preference of professions also isn’t considered. Women mostly dominate in fields of teaching and nursing whereas men choose to work in riskier hazardous jobs which apparently pay higher than safer jobs. Men work more hours than women. Women choose to go for more work-life balance. Women at a time have kids and sometimes prefer to work part time. Therefore there is a significant difference between earnings of women with and without kids.

Most of the facts that feminist lobbies in the media concealed that it was established in 1973 in the US that women who worked continuously since their high schools through their thirties earned slightly more than men.[4] Even today women in 30s earn more than men both in US [5] and UK [6] for similar kind of jobs. This higher pay can be attributed not to biases against men but to better productivity, educational qualification and negotiation skills.

And if any businessman has to pay low to a woman for similar work with same productivity, he can hire all women. And if he doesn’t he will have to pay an extra cost for discrimination against women, apparently resulting in forfeiture of his profits. There is no need for any law to ensure equal pay- his losses will automatically make him leave the market or to take him anti discriminatory actions.

Another myth propagated both in US and India is about the rape culture. To say Indians are inherently rapists is the new fad among feminists. The news of one single rape in India is broadcasted in international media which stains the whole image of India. The extent of this stain is such that a boy from India was denied internship in Germany because he belonged to the country of rapists. [7]

The allegations of all men being rapists should not be wholly credited to foreign media but also to our own government. Inside the Delhi Metro, there are placards displaying that there are not many men in Delhi because they harass women. To say that most men in Delhi are serial molesters is like rolling in the mud. If every other man is a rapist, I wonder how people in Delhi are living without any civil war.

Again these allegations overlook the basic facts which are not so difficult to obtain in this age of internet (which feminists want to censure because it is not in their favor which I will come later on). Five minute of browsing can lead you to know that India ranks 94th in per capita rapes with just 1.8 rapes per 100,000 people.[8]. As far as Delhi is concerned, statistical data reveals that most-78% rape cases filed in Delhi are fake. This figure has gone up after the passage of Nirbhaya law according to which a man can be arrested on the premise that women can’t lie. Even a court sentence ruled that Delhi bears the tag of rape capital due to fake cases.[9]

The similar kind of mechanics are used by feminist groups in the USA. Their claim that 1 in 5 women are raped in college campuses is nothing more than a hoax. A simple calculation I made showed that if this were true, there would be more rapes inside college campuses than the whole country. Campus rape culture is the real hoax. These kinds of hoaxes not only hamper men but also terrorize prospective women who are going to join colleges.

Inequality of outcome doesn’t mean any kind of oppression. Many countries, in order, to ensure equal representation across parliament, company boards, jobs etc have passed reservation laws. Many universities and countries provide scholarship not on the basis of scholarly character but on gender which even demeans the word scholarship. They claim this will give equal chance to women to overcome hurdles they face. However though they never tell what kind of hurdles women face which others don’t. Maybe some women face disadvantageous conditions, this doesn’t mean collective justice against no injustice has to be provided. Moreover, these types of affirmative actions always lead to degradation in quality of the work.

For example a feminist columnist argued that criterion for STEM must be cut down to encourage more women participation.[10] That feminist either believed that women cannot pass a tough test or she was okay with undeserving female candidates occupying the seats than deserving male candidates. Or maybe she doesn’t respect choices women make in their careers. Moreover she might not know that women have 2-to-1 advantage of getting hired for STEM jobs [11].

The new trend of these feminist groups to demand safe spaced is again depressing. Asking for a space in universities where nobody dares to question you means you cannot defend your stance. And if you are not tolerant to others’ ideas then there is no need to join universities. You can better sit back at home and nobody would impeach your private ideas there.

The following words sum up the issue-

The misconceptions of yesterday do not die easily; they usually end up comprising the conventional wisdom of today. – RW Grant

From noble cause to political theology to vindictive cult-

A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with

totalitarian powers. –Friedrich Hayek

A religion or cult doesn’t give you right to question it and its god. All you can do is to sit back and believe what is written or keep your views private. If you dare to question it, you will be charged with blasphemy and put to death in many countries. Due to this unquestionable authority of religious organizations for centuries people were forced to believe that earth is flat. If you question it harsh

consequences will follow not because of god but because of self appointed practitioners.

Similar events occur in any communist and socialist societies owing to their unquestionable authority. Millions of people have been killed because the people in government tried to regulate the behavior of people. Stalin, Mao, Hitler etc had communist/socialist roots which aimed on concentrating social justice against no injustice over individual freedom. In case of both- religion and communism, extreme propaganda with loads of censorship is required.

More or less the same thing is happening to feminism with time. You dare to question feminism, you will put behind bars. The rise in radical version of feminism doesn’t give a heed to personal freedom- be it for women. When late Mr Christopher Hitchens was interviewed by a feminist reporter he claimed that women must have the choice to work or not and it is not compulsory for them to work. Guess what! He was labeled sexist for his views by the feminist reporter.

Feminists have been so much obsessed with gender diversity in different occupations but diversity of ideas is treated with contempt. Several voices by conservative opinions have been silenced from internet and universities. Censorship of ideas and speech has been demanded by such groups. A recent case can be observed when the voice of Milo Yiannopoulos was silenced from UC Berkley by breaking riots and damaging property.[12]

Several requests to demand safe spaces across internet aren’t new. In Canada a man was charged for disagreeing with a woman on Twitter [13]. During his trial period the court granted him bail on the condition that he would not use internet. Basically he was silenced from raising his voice over internet. He had to spend a lot on legal proceedings and thanks to many conservative voices, this case was highlighted and fundraising was done. The basic question arises: is it fine for someone to get offended online and put someone behind bars till no physical harm or threat wasn’t there!

The age of internet is probably the worse for authoritarian ideologies, for people can see what’s going on without falling for their propaganda but our feminists are a step ahead- they want to censor internet as well. Feminist lobbies at the UN wanted to censor internet to save feminists’ feelings.[14] This proves feminists are receiving backlashes from across the internet.

Keeping alone censoring, they even come to rioting on petty issues. The biggest blow on their face was when Mr. Donald Trump won the election. Feminists organized protest marches even when him becoming the President was decision of the voter system, and not patriarchy. In the march feminists resorted to violence or justification of violence against the President. A prominent feminist singer Madonna said that she would blow up the White House.[15] No matter how much they label Mr. Trump as intolerant, their actions reveal they are the biggest of intolerants and hypocrites.

Ohh on hypocrisy, the officials of the self proclaimed world’s first feminist government- Swedish government- put on hijab while visiting Iran. On one hand they talk about empowering women and on other hand they put on hijab which is a symbol of oppression of women. [16]

An Indian actress’ claim that the person who isn’t a feminist is not a good person is again a sign that she is wary of intolerance of ideas- another example of feminism becoming a cult. [17]

The new trend of feminists have lead not only men but also women to misery. Glorification of adoption of an unhealthy lifestyle against fat shaming, forcing women to take career option they don’t want by influence and coercing them to become men is making them loose all their happiness. In fact the happiness levels of women have gone down with every decade and perhaps will continue to do so ifthe level of feminism keeps on rising. To conclude with facts I can say that women were much happier under patriarchy than under feminism (I don’t know if patriarchy exists but for their comfort let’s assume it does)

The rise of internet and pro-freedom voices make me optimistic that feminism is a gone cause like communism. They replying pro-freedom protagonists with contempt and violence is a symbol they are getting more and more impatient. Many feminists’ news outlets like CNN had to close their comments section so that people don’t read what others think of CNN. People in west are denouncing feminism with some exceptions. Mostly the leftover feminism will be dissolved the time media –which is still feminist- will denounce it. The rise of social media will perhaps overpower mainstream media one day and it will be gone.

A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts

freedom before equality will get a high degree of both. –Milton Friedman

Suggestion:

Let’s not delve into the idea that men and women are equal. We are not equal and can never be! We are biologically different and we should be synergistic. Let’s respect the difference we have and turn the society the way it must be. In order to bring equality please don’t try to become men.

All the movements for equality in many countries have failed in the course of history because they take human freedom as contempt thereby becoming authoritarian and unquestionable.

Take great people with great deeds as your ideals without paying a heed to gender/color/race/caste/religion of that person. I have seen many people supporting Hillary and Indira Gandhi because they were women. However if you want to see women only as your godfather, go for great women like Margaret Thatcher and Golda Meir who advocated and fought for freedom. There is no need to go for dictatorial women like Indira Gandhi or miserable ones like Hillary Clinton.

Human civilization is not something achieved against nature; it is rather the outcome of the working of the innate qualities of man. –Ludwig von Mises

References:

[4] The fact that women who worked continuously earned slightly more than men who did the same is from page 103 of "The Economic Role of Women," The Economic Report of the President, 1973,
published by the U.S. Government Printing Office.

Decoding Cultural Marxism

Talking with a group of friends and explaining them about the tyranny of Akbar, who is so called
the great and a popular secular figure among Indian masses proved not only unfeasible but also
counterproductive for the young me. Whether I explained them about the jihad Akbar
committed against Hindus in Rajasthan or about the beheading of King Hemu’s father because
he refused to convert, those chaps had the power to effortlessly label me as anti-Islamic.
Though I had authentic resources to support me, but yet they overpowered me just by swinging
their tongue to label me with a word which can defame me easily. I was advised not to speak
about this matter in public.

In another case, while I was trying to talk about the names of cities, I was undermined by
another group of people, for the fact that my facts and their opinion were not coinciding. I was
talking of the cities like Hyderabad, Aurangabad, Tughlaqabad, Bakhtiyarpur, Shahjahanpur,
Sultanpet, Farukhabad, Aligarh etc who were forcefully renamed out of their glory to honor our
perpetrators. Again the 4-5 people staring right into my face were not happy at all. Their
argument ‘Why do you have problem with the installed establishment? Let them be where they
are. What are they snatching from you if they are named after invaders?’ in itself showed their
disrespect for their land.

In both the cases, I was expected, or rather forced to get engulfed by the idea which tries to
deracinate people off very truth. This idea is political correctness. Manufactured inside the
walls of the factory of Marxists in Germany and marketed throughout the world- USA, USSR,
India, Iran, France, Belgium, Scandinavia etc, it has been a successful product.

What we know as Political Correctness these days, it is a Marxist idea but is not really coined by
Karl Marx. His idea was to give people an economic equality to class of labors, whom he called
proletariat, so they could be free from the factory owners whom he called bourgeois. He thought
everybody’s income and purchasing power must be equal. This idea looks very attractive when
propagated using sugarcoated lines. Any person who believes that his life would become sweet
like sugar would fall for it, ignorant of the fact that this extra sugar would be a reason for
diabetes in the near future. People believe that their purchasing power would be same like
millionaires/billionaires would easily fall for it. They think that Capitalism is the unequal
distribution of poverty, without taking consideration that this economy called communism is
equal distribution of poverty (This line is inspired by a quote by Winston Churchill). Basic
understanding of history shows that this model of economy has resulted in people’s misery and
millions of deaths.

When some people from Frankfurt school extrapolated Marx’ ideas and gave it a cultural shape,
it came to know as Cultural Marxism. It focused on the society with the belief that conformed
with Marx’ ideals. Karl Marx’ ideas were based on assumption that all bourgeois are ruthless
power hungry people and proletariats are victims of the exploitation by the hands of bourgeois
governments and capitalists. In this regard, when Marxists took over the Soviet Union they
snatched the properties of the businessmen and made them owned by themselves. On the very
similar lines, the cultural Marxists are always engulfed in a belief that there is an oppressed
victim class and an oppressor culprit class.

In order to empower the so assumed victims, and that too based on the assumption that they
are victims, cultural Marxists believe that the culture of the land promotes oppression. Even if
such cases of oppression are in minority, they believe that in order to end it up they have to
uproot the culture of that land. When demarcating the boundaries on who is the oppressor (the
bourgeois) and who is oppressed (the proletariats), the notion they assume is that the people in
majority are always the oppressor, since they possess enough power based on numbers.
People who possessed any kind of social, political or economic power in the past are also
categorized in the oppressor class. When we think of US’ society, they put white males in the
bourgeois bracket and others- blacks, Hispanics, Muslims and women in proletariat bracket.
When it comes to India, Hindu Brahmin (Or any upper caste) males are the bourgeois whereas
Muslims, lower castes, women are proletariats.

After the classification between bourgeois and proletariat are done and established, they have to
tense the relations between the people of majority community if it happens to be smooth. Also
the minorities have to be portrayed as holy harmless cows being suffered by the hands of
majority. In order to achieve these goals, two herculean tools: projecting delusions and veiling
lies are used. Both activities, if analyzed carefully are complement to each other. After all, they
have to prove bourgeois are the oppressors. New jargons are created to veil the facts and new
facts (read lies) are created to veil the original ones.

Left in the education sector:

Some societies are inherently uniform whereas others are diverse. The uniformity (or diversity)
accommodates uniformity (or diversity) of culture, color, caste, economic status etc. The only
faultline that is too easy to exploit is the gender issue, since a society cannot be inherently fully
male or female. In order to divide the majority, its men are made bourgeois and women
proletariat. In the case of India, Hindus are examined on women’s rights according to their
standards and methods. The usual conclusion that follows is ‘Hindus were traditionally sexists
and misogynists.’ The book that teaches us misogyny which they quote is Manusmriti. However,
they overlook some basic philosophical and historic facts about the Hindu society:

1. Hindus had female deities who even fought with demons (hence they were warrior
women).

2. King like Chandragupta Maurya had a battalion of female soldiers. And who was the protagonist of this idea? Acharya Chanakya himself!

3. The practice of sati (which in mythology was purely consensual) was inflated during
Islamic rule where women had to burn themselves to save themselves from raids caught
in which they would be raped and sold across all the slave markets in Arab world.

But another fundamental question that arises is why these leftists fall silent on the issue of
rights of Muslim women. They can be beaten, announced divorce on just by speaking the word
talaq 3 times or be deprived of the right to be the only wife but nobody but right wingers are
ready to speak for them. Probably they don’t have anything to do with women’s rights. All they
have to do is to create rift between the majority community.

The Hindu community was divided on caste lines which were purely on the occupation one did.
This was called varna system which later evolved into caste system which was seen in last
century. Though nobody had seen this kind of caste system before Britishers under Macaulay
decided to ‘reform’ the education system in 1830s (not sure with exact years). The ancient
Hindu society had been divided on the occupation, but people were also allowed to choose for
the different occupation that his father. Chanakya, a born Brahmin who is also called castist by
Marxist made the king out of a maid’s son Chandragupta Maurya, who inherently would be
called a shudra.

However, if somebody blames Hindus for having different occupations and not an egalitarian
society in which everybody’s roles would be same, then ask him which society had that kind of
system. Every society runs by diverse occupation and occupational differences have to be
respected. Most of the Western societies had demarcation like- The Clergy (something like
Brahmin), the Aristocracy (something like Kshatriya) and normal citizens which again could be
businessmen (Vaishyas) or workers (kayasthas or sudras). In fact the egalitarian societies they
dream of are never egalitarian when it comes to jobs and respect. Ask them if communist
nations are too egalitarian then why do they have supremos like Maos and Stalins

Using this way of making fun of dominant culture, they try to take away the people of the land
from their existing culture and glory. Another property they make people possess is ‘self
hatred’. They are not from any distant land or culture. The self hatred is because our people are
either indoctrinated by communist propaganda or use this self hatred for their own benefits:
winning elections, gaining popularity etc. This self hatred is in the form of hatred of culture,
language, race, religion, beliefs, activities and texts. Hence they help these replaced by impose
foreign counterparts. In one way, they are not too different from colonialists and invaders, just
the difference is that colonialists and invaders were proud of their cultures.

One advantage Indian leftists enjoyed was the education system imposed by Britishers. This
education system already makes us believe that we were uncivilized before they arrived. This
education system makes someone learn English over their native language. With this system
settled in place, cultural Marxists had nothing much left to do. After all they had the first
government in their control which just conserved the British education system and the same
perverse laws of IPC 1860.

When the self hatred is incited by the education system, it is nurtured by media and the film
industry (Bollywood in India). Most of the media is owned or controlled by powers which use
India as laboratory for their cultural experiments. When a single man was killed in an incident
who happened to be a Muslim, media was acting like a drunk giant who blamed the incident on
right wing organizations like RSS and BJP and not on the state authorities who are responsible
for law and order of the situation. Such kinds of incidents were telecasted in many other
countries portraying Hindus as communal haters. The same kind of thing happened when
Nirbhaya was raped and India was shown as the country of rapists. A single rape happening in
India gets telecasted in world news. Whereas the reality is that India ranks 94th when it comes
to rape and developed nations stand far ahead of it.

What have we lost to leftist ideology?

Language of a person is an important aspect of his culture. It acts as a binding agent for the
community. When you take away his language, you make him disabled to read his ancient texts
and comprehend cultural hymns. Invaders in India had yanked away Sanskrit from them in the
past and replaced it with Persian, Arabic and even Turkish to some extent. Then came the
British who replaced them with English. We have been able to conserve our cultures and
languages after 800 years of slavery but they are very well corrupted from what they were ago.
We unconsciously use lots and lots of Urdu, Arabic and English words when we speak in Hindi.
That is exactly the leftist version of education made us do. When the current government
replaced foreign languages with Sanskrit in schools, they all went mad over it.

After we got independence from the British, we could have imposed our own education system
but again Nehru and government didn’t do that. They were busy in imposing other destructive
ideas like socialism in the economic system which their own Congress party disbanded in 1991.
In the recent years by the trends of leftist governments and social justice warriors have so
much made us loose in the name of progressivism and multiculturalism. This has happened in
India, Europe and US. Governments in India have taken the control of all the funds of temples
to use it for so called development purposes. The same thing they haven’t done on minorities. In
fact the minority community gets subsidized (free) hajj trips. The educational institutions
owned by Hindus are getting scrutinized by the government. They aren’t allowed even to admit
students of their choice under the banner of Right to Education. The non-Hindu aka minority
institutions have got free hand.

In a state in southern India there was a famous sport played annually called Jalikattu in which
the most fit male bulls. The idea behind the tradition was to find out the most suitable bulls for
mating but very recently, this old tradition called Jalikattu was banned on the petition of
‘People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (aka PETA)’ in India. The idea was to take away the old
culture and be progressive. But on the contrary, they always hold mum on issues of beef. Their
silence on beef ban and slaughtering animals for religious rites suggest us 2 things: (1) This kind
of progressivism lies only on majority community, or (2) slaughtering is ethical treatment of
animal.

On the lines of Multiculturalism- which is again a Marxist idea to malign the majority- European
nations’ government allowed inside them a huge influx of migrants under the banner of
refugees. The move got a huge supports from other governments and it acted like a status
symbol. Angela Merkel allowed around 1 million so called refugees into Germany. This
multiculturalism has given them-

1. Taharrush- an Arabic game in which people mass grope and rape women. Taharrush is
an Arabic word which comes from al-taharrush al jinsi which means ‘sexual harassment’

2. A German court ruled that people acting as Sharia police are going nothing wrong. They
are just exercising their right to free speech. So now Germany has Sharia law under the
right to free speech.

3. In a school where these migrants took refuge, female students were asked to maintain
proper dress code (no shorts and compulsory covered head) so that you do not offend the migrants.

4. Women are told not to go out alone in night due to immigrant.
This kind of refugee crisis has a lot to say on the hypocrisy of left ideologies. On one hand they
are so weary of any kind of violence against women but they fall silent on such issues.

The Blame game:

Like the communists who blame everything bad on bourgeois, cultural communists blame
everything on majority community and try to show how minority is affected by the majority.
Since in many prominent nations, Muslims are in minority, the news channels love to take their
sides to portray them as victims. Many a lot of times the news spread were found fake. This
kind of act is done to belittle the majority. On the other hand, most of the heinous deeds by the
minority or what they consider proletariat are hidden.

After Mr Trump won the US elections, the media showed how a Muslim woman was affected of
hate crime by radical white Christians (though that never happened). They label that most
crimes are done by whites due to the phenomenon of ‘White extremism’. But a terrorist attack
is not labeled as the result of ‘Radical Islamic terror’. When a terrorist attacks take place, it is
just another attack by a psychopath.

When they talk of the racism against Blacks issue, they try to peep into the income gaps
between black and white families. The income gap-they say- is because of inherent racism in
the United States. But their silence on the crime rates of blacks explains all. Blacks, in spite of
constituting only 13% of the population are responsible for 50% of murders, 55.6% robberies,
33% rapes and 38.3% violent crimes. But still the leftists cry about the high percentage of blacks
in prison.

When Israel falls prey of Hamas rockets from Gaza and West Bank, the media channels justify
those attacks as reaction to the Israeli occupation. But Israeli pre-emptive to save itself faces
strong rebuttal. This time, the United Nation accused Israel for being against women and Israel
had to face a resolution against it. Ironically, these resolutions are brought by the organization
that elected Saudi Arabia for human rights council. Israel, and not Saudi is being blamed on for
bias against women.

Modi, even after getting acquitted from all courts, still has to face repercussions for what
happened in 2001 riots when he was the chief Minister of Gujarat. The right wing organizations
are still blamed to have biases against the minorities whereas the reality always hidden from us
is that it was a retaliatory action to the train burning incident. Media again blamed it on Right
wing organizations for being too intolerant. Perhaps the media wants us majority people to be
tolerant of all the crimes against us.

Sorry, but who is intolerant?

President Donald Trump during his public campaigning days informed on how Muslims had
celebrated the attacks of 9/11, shouting allahu akbar (God is great), all the media was behind
him for inciting hatred. In the next phases he advocated to not to take any refugee without any
scrutiny because it was very potentially dangerous to invite people without knowing his
backgrounds. Donald Trump, for speaking the truth was made to face serious criticism.
When Simon and Schuster decided to publish the book by an alt right person named Milo
Yiannopolous, the critics threatened the publisher for a boycott. A similar boycott was
threatened against Peter Thiel –co founder of Paypal and Palantir- because he donated to
Donald Trump’s Presidential campaign.

The leftist institutions always advocate for ethnic diversity, gender diversity, religious diversity
in company boards, educational institutions against the cost of diversity (i.e. by introducing
quotas). They have made another fad of diversity under the name of providing equal
opportunities. But yet these people are intolerant of the diversity of ideas. The person with
ideas which oppose them has to oppose the sugarcoated ideas and is met with loads of
criticism. Imagine a person saying that he opposes the idea of multiculturalism- he will be
criticized by saying that he is intolerant of other cultures. He will be labeled as a demagogue
and even normal people will hate him for they don’t know how harsh these ideas are and the
real outcome of them.

You didn't know this about Independence Movement!

First and foremost, a very Happy Independence Day to all my fellow Indians sitting in all the corners of the world.

This day, every nationalist is swindled in the beauty of Tiranga, the melody in Jana Gana Mana is kind of different from every other day, the voice 'Bharat Mata ki Jai' is filled with more valour and energy. All these remind us of the sacrifices our forefathers made to hand us India free from the British Raj. And this independence was not just from 150-200 years of slavery from British, but also from the barbarian rule which in was faced by Indians for about 600 years since the arrival of Ghori. The whole of what we call as the freedom movement can never be put into words, but still I shall try to fill some gaps our eminent historians made. 

There are 2 reasons I am putting in effort to write this post. First, fost of the prominent freedom fighter, whom Britishers really feared are not even counted in the list of Freedom Fighters. The names of a lot of revolutionaries who made significant contribution aren't even scribed of their names in mainstream history books (NCERT). With the leftist influence on our academic institutions like JNU, one can never expect so in near future.They did not fight that to earn any title or in any expectation of any returns from us, but undermining their contribution to the movement is insult to them. Second, there are a lot of misconceptions spread by these academicians about the freedom movement, which not only glorifies the wrong ones but also put the right ones into wrong places.

So here are few instances where we all were blurred from the reality.

The forgotten ones-

1. Veer Savarkar

When I referred a friend of mine to read about Veer Savarkar (Vinayak Damodar Savarkar), he asked me who he was. Had this ignorance been just from any random person who doesn't even understand the meaning of the term independence, it would have been fine. But as experiment, I referred his name to tens of people, but most of them really didn't know about him. Some had read his name somewhere but they still did not know about his contribution. Again since he is unknown to many, it is not their fault but the fault of historians and academicians.

Well, he was the one who fought against British rule sitting in England. He became impeccable leader of India house, the society found by Shyamji Krishna Verma (I gave you another name to research) focused on imparting the values of nationalism in Indians across England.

Savarkar, for his pan India activities was then sentenced to 2 consecutive life imprisonments which no other revolutionary was ever sentenced to. That amounts to 50 years imprisonment. Savarkar faced a total of 27 years imprisonment (11 in kaala paani in Andaman, 3 years in Ratnagiri, 13 years under house imprisonment) against Gandhi's 6.4 years and Nehru's 10 years. And he was sentenced to most harsh prison 'Kaala Paani' whereas Gandhi and Nehru were sent to most lavish prisons.

(Gandhi's cell in Aga Khan Palace)

(Nehru's room in Ahmadnagar fort)

Both of these are equipped with facilities like bed, sofa table-chair, more like a hotel room, on the other hand Savarkar was not even allowed to keep books with him,

(Savarkar's cell in Andaman Jail from which he wasn't even freed for natural calls)

The strictness on the part of Britishers by sending him to unveils to isolated jail unveils how much they were scared of him. He was not even allowed leave alone visitors but books as well. I can't go into much detail, else Savarkar ji's legacy will itself cover the whole post.

2. Shahid Udham Singh-

The whole of India know about the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre in which General Dyer opened fire on Indians celebrating Baisakhi. The then Lieutenant Governor of Punjab Michael O'Dwyer endorsed the massacre. But very few of us know about the vengeance.

He Singh fired 5-6 shots at Michael O'Dwyer the Caxton Hall, London on 13 March 1940. O'Dwyer was expected to speak in the joint meeting of the East India Association and the Central Asian Society. O'Dwyer died immediately.

During his trial he said-

I did it because I had a grudge against him. He deserved it. He was the real culprit. He wanted to crush the spirit of my people, so I have crushed him. For full 21 years, I have been trying to wreak vengeance. I am happy that I have done the job. I am not scared of death. I am dying for my country. I have seen my people starving in India under the British rule. I have protested against this, it was my duty. What a greater honour could be bestowed on me than death for the sake of my motherland?

(CRIM 1/1177, Public Record Office, London, p. 64)

He was convicted for murder and sentenced to death. He was hanged on 31 July 1940.

Nehru condemned Mr Singh's actions, regarding it as senseless.  Gandhi called it action of insanity.

Not only these two, there are thousands of freedom fighters and leaders we don't know about and I salute them for their contributions

Some hidden facts-

1. The khilafat conspiracy-

Our History books taught us that Khilafat was a peaceful movement which was lead by Ali brothers and backed by Gandhi. But the truth goes just 180 degrees away from what is told. Khilafat was neither peaceful nor for independence from Britishers.

After the defeat of Axis powers to Allied ones in World Ear 1, the Ottoman Empire, ruled by a brutal caliphate was overthrown by Britishers for its support to Axis powers in 1918. The Ali brothers, with Muslim support could not tolerate the fact that the caliph was overthrown. They even went to England to demand the reestablishment of the caliph but remained empty handed. In the retaliation against Britishers because they insulted the caliph, there was a whole movement backed by Gandhi which sought to back Britishers off. Muslims in Malabar region in Kerala killed around 100,000 Hindus as retaliation.

What this movement did was the rise of religious sentiments in Indian Muslims which formed the base of partition purely on the basis of religion.

2. The act of mutiny by armed forces-

If we look at the incidents prior to the independence in 1947 that thousands of Indian soldiers returned to India after serving Britishers in world war. The retaliations by the Indian armed forces in Karachi, Jabalpur, Asansol etc and navy's revolt in 1946 against the British raj were probably the significant indicators which made the Britishers believe that they won't be able to sustain for long. 

3. The Bose effect-

Clement Attlee, the former Prime Minister of United Kingdom came to India back in 1948, just after India's independence and met former Chief Justice of India. CJI asked him (not his exact words) "Why did you leave India? You had won the world war. Gandhi's movement like quit India failed back in 1942. Then what made you take a quick decision to leave India?"

To this question, Mr Attlee answered, "It was not because of Gandhi we left India, it was because of the spark that Bose created among the Armed forces of India. It was the rise of Indian nationalism that made us leave. We knew that we won't be able to sustain it for long. If we won't leave voluntarily, then we will have to quit with bloodshed."
(Reference: The Sunday Tribune - Spectrum)  

So yes, the mutiny by the armed forces can be attributed to Mr Subhash Chandra Bose.

And perhaps due to the popularity of Bose, Gandhi and Nehru had agreed to the Britishers that Bose will always be a war criminal even after the independence and will be handed to the Britishers. 

Gandhi, others had agreed to hand over Netaji

Some of the files which have been declassified reveal that the Congress government had snooped Bose's family for 20 long years, for which Nehru was the Prime Minister for 16 years. (Means some of the other Congressis were involved)

Jawaharlal Nehru govt ordered IB to spy on kin of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose | Daily News & Analysis

Some controversies regarding his missing or death (assassination) will not be controversies anymore.

Bose not involved in air accident- The Hindu

Due to the length and time constrains, I cannot put in much, but to sum it up, I can say It was not the was you were taught, it was the war they fought. 

Also read this to know about Savarkae: Did Savarar really commit treachery?