As they should be. During the 60s and 70s there was a big influx of left wing Marxists into the academia of India who wrote very positively of Islamic invasions, hide the atrocities and glorify their oppressive rule. Examples of these Marxist academics are Romila Thapar.
Marxists no matter in which community they come from are the enemies of their own community.
-Hindu Marxists are anti Hindu and even anti Sikh if the Sikhs appear to be fighting on the side of the Hindus against Muslims. They are extremely pro Muslim.
-Sikh communists also popularly known as Kaamreds(ਕਾਮਰੇਡ) are anti Sikh to the core. But politically they are very pro Muslim and pro Hindu. After 1978 they openly chose to side with the Nirankaris, Hindus and the oppressive Indian government. Since the mid 90s many of these kaamreds have infiltrated Sikhs by becoming Sikh missionaries where they try to undermine Sikhism through their atheistic arguments. Dasam Bani is there favourite target.
-Muslim leftists and Marxists which can be found in Pakistan are anti Muslim but very pro Hindu and surprisingly even pro Sikh. Najam Sethi and Hasan Nissar are examples of such leftist Muslims.
Of these three Marxists/leftists the Pakistani Muslim ones are the only leftists/Marxists I have a positive view on. They are the only ones who legitimately make any sense of the three.
The people you are referring to are a Cultural Marxists. They are the type to believe that race, ethnicity, culture and religion are all handmaidens for Capitalist exploitation and thus, in each and every society, it must be checked by working against the cultural mainstream and establishment of said country.
I am an economic Marxist, or at least left-leaning economically, and thus despise these people.
Their thinking is fundamentally asinine. It is *they* who push for Pro-Islam BS in Western Academia and media. In India they do the same thing regarding Islamic imperialism and European colonialism.
Instead of being proud of the fact that Marathi Hindus, Assamese Hindus and Punjabi Sikhs defeated Islamic hegemony and catalyzed the Indian subcontinent’s “Reconquista”, they choose to promote the idea that the Mughals were benevolent rulers. They aren’t idiots, so why do they do this? Because if you promote the idea that Islam is a boon to India, the average Hindu or non-Muslim in India today won’t reflect on history and work against Islam and Muslim supremacist endeavours.
Instead of being proud and highlighting the South Indian Hindu military victories decisively ending Dutch Colonialism, halting Portuguese Expansionism and fighting so hard against British Imperialism well into the 19th century - they seek promote the notion that all things European and Christian are good and not to be resisted, and that the Indians of the yesteryear knew this to be true hence why they never resisted. This is why Cultural Marxists are so keen on protecting Evangelization efforts by foreign missionaries. They know that Christians won’t replace Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists demographically in their lifetimes - but if the native religious communities of the subcontinent get away from their culture and heritage and feel themselves fragmented, that’s a win for their Cultural Marxist framework and MO.
In the West and Europe, it’s precisely the reverse. The Cultural Marxist wants to destroy European heritage and institutions and promote multiculturalism in order to stand against ethnic nationalism.
Islamic genocide of Hindustan
in GURBANI | SAKHIAN | HISTORY
Posted
The people you are referring to are a Cultural Marxists. They are the type to believe that race, ethnicity, culture and religion are all handmaidens for Capitalist exploitation and thus, in each and every society, it must be checked by working against the cultural mainstream and establishment of said country.
I am an economic Marxist, or at least left-leaning economically, and thus despise these people.
Their thinking is fundamentally asinine. It is *they* who push for Pro-Islam BS in Western Academia and media. In India they do the same thing regarding Islamic imperialism and European colonialism.
Instead of being proud of the fact that Marathi Hindus, Assamese Hindus and Punjabi Sikhs defeated Islamic hegemony and catalyzed the Indian subcontinent’s “Reconquista”, they choose to promote the idea that the Mughals were benevolent rulers. They aren’t idiots, so why do they do this? Because if you promote the idea that Islam is a boon to India, the average Hindu or non-Muslim in India today won’t reflect on history and work against Islam and Muslim supremacist endeavours.
Instead of being proud and highlighting the South Indian Hindu military victories decisively ending Dutch Colonialism, halting Portuguese Expansionism and fighting so hard against British Imperialism well into the 19th century - they seek promote the notion that all things European and Christian are good and not to be resisted, and that the Indians of the yesteryear knew this to be true hence why they never resisted. This is why Cultural Marxists are so keen on protecting Evangelization efforts by foreign missionaries. They know that Christians won’t replace Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists demographically in their lifetimes - but if the native religious communities of the subcontinent get away from their culture and heritage and feel themselves fragmented, that’s a win for their Cultural Marxist framework and MO.
In the West and Europe, it’s precisely the reverse. The Cultural Marxist wants to destroy European heritage and institutions and promote multiculturalism in order to stand against ethnic nationalism.