Western Intellectual Framework

[Raju]

As I have seen often on this forum and elsewhere. A lot of Indians who live outside India esp in west are being thoroughly brainwashed about that country.

Ofcourse there are warts and all in India and there are genuine grievances. But these are being packaged in the west to spread an anti-establishment seed in the minds of people with a view to destabilize countries who could become competitors to the west under a more nationalist regime sometime in future.

this is not only happening in India but is being carried out in numerous other countries in the world under garb of 'free press', 'democracy' and freedom of expression. Upcoming generations in such societies are being asked to believe that their native cultures, something that their ancestors have believed for generations are all negative and discriminatory. There is a major attempt at inducing guilt amongs an entire new generation and thus make them fertile and conducive to receiving 'New World' agenda.

Western academia, think tanks and universities play a very important role in this.

Reading some articles which have described in detail how these things have been planned.

The last two centuries of Indological studies have focused on the themes of divisiveness among Indians. This is today accomplished by constructing identities of victimhood with other Indians depicted as culprits:

i. Western feminists are telling Indian women that they are victims of Indian culture.

ii. Dalit activists are being sponsored to blame Brahmins.[ii]

iii. The divisive Aryan theory is being used as 'fact' to construct a separate Dravidian identity and to 'Aryanize' North Indians as foreign culprits. And

iv. India's English language media is sometimes subverting traditions by glorifying everything Western and denigrating or ignoring everything indigenous.

[Raju]

This gives a peek into the real nature of the British rule over India. It is surprising that no one has ever researched the opium trade out of India under the Brits, though this was how the Raj was funded for 200 years. The author calls it "white washing" of the past.

'Opium financed British rule in India'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7460682.stm

It is not a coincidence that 20 years after the opium trade stopped, the Raj more or less packed up its bags and left. India was not a paying proposition any longer.

Lot of Indians believe that the British built institutions, the police, bureaucracy.

I don't know what people think about when they say such things.

When they talk about [the British building] modern institutions it amazes me.

Was there no police force in India before the British came? Of course there was. There were darogas (policemen), there were chowkis (police stations). In fact the British took the word chowki and put it into English. So to say such things is absurd.

[Raju]

The RAND Corporation is a big think tank in the US. They deal with how social opinion on any subject can be manipulated post an incident has been manufactured.

Soldiers of Reason: The RAND Corporation and the Rise of the American Empire

by Alex Abella (Author)

Abella says, RAND theorists' notion that self-interest, rather than collective interests like religion, governs human behavior has influenced every aspect of our society, from health care to tax policy. The RAND Corporation continues today—as brilliant, controversial and, in Abella's view, amoral as ever—with the complicity of all Americans. If we look in the mirror, Abella concludes, we will see that RAND is every one of us. The question is, what are we going to do about it?

The Manhattan Project proved to the military during World War II the efficacy of assistance from independent civilian scientists. Seeking to maintain that link and understanding the need to cope with peacetime threats to national security, Air Force hot shots, including the legendary Generals Henry Harley "Hap" Arnold and Curtis LeMay, helped to found RAND (for "research and development"). Throughout the next half-century, RAND's intellectual gunslingers--its researchers and advisors have won 27 Nobel Prizes--expanded their role and helped set large portions of America's military and political agenda. RAND's detractors accuse the corporation of subordinating morality to the achievement of U.S. government policy, of operating wholly without conscience and of practically inventing the Cold War. Los Angeles Times contributor and novelist Abella (Final Acts, 2000, etc.) takes a swipe at the problematic implications for the country of RAND's seeming amorality, but he deals far more successfully with the corporation's history, particularly the early years, and the procession of larger-than-life personalities who passed through RAND's portals and who influenced the nation's thinking far more than any single policy paper the institute produced. RAND's luminaries have included the brilliant mathematician John von Neumann, thermonuclear war expert (and model for Dr. Strangelove) Herman Kahn, national-security expert and Cold War strategist Albert Wohlstetter, Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers, and even the humorist Leo Rosten. Its theorists have contributed to our everyday lexicon such words and phrases as "fail-safe," "doomsday machine," "systems analysis," "futurology," "zero-sum game" and "prisoner's dilemma." How many enemy factories can we destroy with the kind of aircraft we possess? After a nuclear exchange, would the living truly envy the dead? Paid to think the unthinkable, RAND's analysts and their mission come off here as simultaneously marvelous and horrible.

Do you remember Stanley Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove? Way too crazy to be real, right? Well, in fact, no: the famous Peter Sellers character was based on a real person, and that person, a mad genius by the name of Herman Kahn, is one of the key characters in this fascinating book by Alex Abella. Kahn and a bunch of like-minded people (extremely smart, but somehow missing any kind of ethical dimension to their thinking) formed the core of the RAND Corporation during the Cold War, and the ideas they came up with arguably have shaped the world we live in today more than anybody else's. Failsafe, mutually assured destruction, anybody? This is larger-than-life stuff, so it's not surprising that Abella's history of RAND - from its inception at the end of World War II to its providing of the ideological underpinnings for the invasion of Iraq - is not just informative, but also entertaining and scary in equal measure. Abella convincingly demonstrates that there are two big problems with RAND and, by extension, with America's military and foreign policy: first, even though the think tank wielded huge influence in every administration since 1945, it has never been accountable to an electorate. Second, and more crucially still, RANDites for too long believed that human behavior was basically predictable: faced with a choice, every human would be rational about that choice and pick what was in his/her best interest. Too bad that, outside the ivory tower, things haven't been quite as straightforward...

[apne]

The British were bad, but they are not the sole cause of all indian problems. India cannot survive without the support of America and west. It becomes pretty clear from india's association with USSR in early decades, it got us nothing. India is what it is today only because of implementation of liberal policies after 1991. And that too was under duress. India had applied for a loan from world bank and it refused to give the loan unless India agreed to policies of privatisation as per America and Europe. India is dependant more on Imports for survival than on exports. It is incapable of meeting energy needs and military requirements on it's own.

The problem of India is Gandhi and Nehru. They tried to hinduize everything in India. They worked slyly towards establihing India as a pure hindu nation. Gandhi is infact the forerunner of modern hindutva ideology. He was the first to bring religion into politics by claiming "politics cannot be seperated from religion". If he had not been assassinated , he would have turned india into a cow dungeon. The vision of Gandhi was not based on furture or technology, but a mythical text, Gita, and vedas.The story of Gandhi and his religious thought are intertwined. He interpreted everything through hinduism, "Hinduism is an ocean into which everything flows into". He sided with the British and opposed revolution. Through a make believe impotent non-voilence he prevented India from attaining independance not only political but ideological. Indias political system is based on british model. After independance nothing changed, only people in positions of power did and their designations. Common man continued to be exloited and still is. Gandhi was used by british to their advantage. It is doubtful whether Gandhi could have done what he did if was not a Hindu. He saw all religions through hinduism and for him only Hinduism provided a framework for balance between religion and politics (as majority were hindus). He successfully used Hinduism to reach his political ends. In this sense he is no different from "Sangh Pariwar". Gandhis refusal to embrace any other religion was based on Hindu spirit of inclusivism.

The problems started when they backtracked from promises made by them to Sikhs. And then Nehru and Patel coerced various princely states into joining indian dominion, it brought about political unity but not national unity. After Nehrus death politics in India continued to be funded by the Soviet and its secrets were sold for a song to CIA and KGB by indian officials. Indian agencies helped create militancy in Punjab (exposed by former agents) and did not want to find a solution. Indira Gandhi used the punjab problem to garner hindu votes, which she needed badly post emergency. Every problem was blamed on Pak and CIA.

But Sikhs were not alone in wanting their fair and deserved share in India, they were just ahead in time by a few decades. Now other communities, especially Dalits have become aware of the atrocities and want freedom of thought and life. As is with other communities. The brahmins are the root cause of every problem in India. The muslim problem is the finest example. After independance, the somnath temple in gujrat was re-built under govt patronage and a mosque in it's place was demolished. Nehru played a formost role. The reason given that the mosque was built in first place by demolishing somnath temple by invadors and the mosque was not used by muslims as they had gone to Pakistan, was an act of 12th century and not modern day India.

Now when these suppressed people move to west there they find an atmosphere wholly opposite to India. Then the feeling and memories of injustice done back home comes back haunting and the result is not unpredictable. The atrocities done on their parents and families are not easy to forget.

"Vision of Gandhi, no different from Hindutva"

Hinduism….. is the most tolerant creed because it is non-proselytizing and it is found capable of expansion today as it has been found in the past. It has succeeded, not in driving out (as I think it has been erroneously held), but in absorbing Buddhism. By reason of the Swadeshi spirit a Hindu refuses to change his religion, not necessarily because he considers it to be the best, but because he knows that he can complement it by introducing reforms.

Unfortunately, Hinduism seems to consist today merely in eating and not eating….Hinduism is in danger of losing its substance if it resolves itself into a matter of elaborate rules as to what and with whom to eat.

Hinduism is not an exclusive religion. In it, there is room for worship of all the prophets of the world. It is not a missionary religion in the ordinary sense of the term. Hinduism tells everyone to worship God according to his own faith or dharma, and so it lives at peace with all religions.

A man may not believe even in God and can still call himself a Hindu. Hinduism is a relentless pursuit after Truth and if today it has become moribund, inactive, irresponsive to growth, it is because we are fatigued and as soon as the fatigue is over, Hinduism will burst forth upon the world with a brilliance perhaps unknown before.

Hinduism is like the Ganges, pure and unsullied at its source, but taking in its course the impurities in the way. Even like the Ganges it is beneficent in its total effect. It takes a provincial form in every province, but he inner substance is retained everywhere.

The Gita is, in my opinion, a very easy book to understand. The general trend of the Gita is unmistakable. It is accepted by all the Hindu sects as authoritative. It is free from any form of dogma. In a short compass it gives a complete, reasoned, moral code. It satisfies both the intellect and the heart. It is thus both philosophical and devotional. Its appeal is universal. The language is incredibly simple.

Brahmanism that can tolerate untouchability, virgin widowhood, spoilage of virgins, stinks in my nostrils. It is a parody of Brahmanism. There is no knowledge of Brahman therein. There is no true interpretation of the scriptures. It is undiluted animalism. Brahmanism is made of sterner stuff.

The Gita is the Universal Mother. She turns away nobody. Her door is wide open to anyone who knocks. A true votary of the Gita does not know what disappointment Is. He ever swells in perennial joy and peace that passeth understanding.

Hinduism is not a religion. It is a way of life. Many who do not practice formal religion are nearer to this way of life than some who do.

from The "Young India" periodical

[Raju]

Gandhi lived in difficult times .. Gurkhas, and Punjabis in baloch regiment were used for killing Sikhs and Hindus in Jallianwala Bagh. Sikhs were assembled to take revenge on Mughals & muslims in Delhi in 1857. Muslims living in Potohar and Chakwal were targeted to control the hindu populations. So each community was directed against the other.

In between all this Gandhi had to find out a way to unite all these errant groups and bring some kind of common base which serve the purpose and give self-respect to those people under colonial rule for well over 5 decades. So he did what he had to do.

We will not be able to accurately judge him today. It is not possible .. one has to have lived in that period of darkness.

And secondly the purpose of this thread is not to debate gandhi and his views. IIRC it has been discussed some place else in this forum and I had participated in that discussion.

[apne]

Gandhi can easily judged from his work, life and thoughts. It is a weak argument that he should be judged according to the time he lived. Same can be said to apply to British, they were ruling India in dark times. Infact at that time there was no India as a nation only different kingdoms. When the British arrived they found the house divided against themselves, so conquered it easily. That way the actions of 'Mahmud of Ghazni' too were not wrong or cruel. The age he lived in demanded the things he did, so he did them.

India is paying the price of Gandhi's vision. During one of his rallies a 'Brahmin' rightfully remarked that "he has come to re-instate the glory of Hinduism". I just wanted to state that "anti-establishment seed in the minds of people" is the legacy of Gandhi and not western propaganda. If anyone indulged in whitewashing of history, it was Gandhi, Nehru and gang.

[Raju]

China, India To Be Invited Into Trilateral Commission

By Benjamin Fulford

6-9-8

The Trilateral Commission plans to invite China and India to join them next year, according to the Sankei Newspaper, one of Japan's leading dailies. http://sankei.jp.msn.com/world/america/080...01854009-n1.htm

In an article dated May 10th, 2008, that somehow slipped under my radar screen, the paper, citing un-named Trilateral Commission sources, says many Trilateralists have been complaining in recent years that the commission should disbanded because, without India and China involved, it had become meaningless.

As a result of these complaints, it was decided at the April Trilateral meeting in Washington to invite China and India the club.

"Adding India and China to the commission will be an event of world historical importance," the paper quotes Masa Yamamoto, a Tokyo-based Trilateral commissioner, as saying.

Both Japanese and US Trilateral commission members have told me in the past the commission was becoming irrelevant. The Japanese members complained that the US and European members never took their advice and so that Japan was beginning to distance itself from the organization.

The Trilateral Commission was set up by David Rockefeller in 1973 because the members of the Bilderberg group refused to let Japanese join their club for racist reasons, commission members say.

Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg and CFR are the real policy making bodies of the western elite where they hand down their agenda for the world to their workers on the ground.

[SunSingh]

According to Sant Jagjit Singh ji, aryan invasion theory was ccreatored by british to make it easier to assimilate indians. Before this indians had too much pride in their deep heritage, but the theory essentially spreads teh fallacy that Indian knowledge and much of its culture is a kind of ''export'' of the west. Truth is that ancient science went from india to the west.

[Raju]

With this move they have appropriated India's past since they didn't have a glorious past and have defined it's present in their image.

What they say is that they have occupied the place once the so-called Aryans did when they ruled over the 'dark natives'.

[Raju]

taxonomy of the Indian elite. In slideshare.

http://www.slideshare.net/vepa/indian-elite-research