What is south asian american about it?

Please ignore the troll.

>>There’s a fascinating set of Hindu Nationalist Greeting Cards from the 1990s

Really? From the 1990's? Could'nt you pick something recent? What are you trying to influence the indian elections in your own little way? Anyway...

>>Mother India calling her sons to fight against capitalism, Islam and Christian missionary activities

After arguing myself hoarse with those folks about capitalism and free markets, I've come to the realisation that they are clueless about these concepts. In their narrow vision, Wise will bring in their chips and nachos and put the local chakri makers out of business! That's capitalism and it is, hence, dangerous.

But then again, very few really understand capitalism or free markets. Not even those at Harvard. So I'm inclined to give the VHP a pass on this one.

M. Nam

My sister studied in a Christian convent school in India. Before we knew it, she was saying prayers before dinner , it was kinda cute initially . But a few months later the parents found out how the school was organizing church visits where they got some vague insinuation about how all the non christians will not end up in this lovel place called heaven and its not too late to get a ticket to that amusement park.

Evidently it was overzealous teacher, the school corrected the problem and went back to more subtle measure after parents complained.

Overall schools should not be a place for religious indoctrination whether it is a convent school, madarsa or the Sangh parivar school. All of them are equally guilty.

For the record, my father studied at a Hindu school and my mother at a (Catholic) convent school. So I'm not trying to criticize either one in a blanket fashion.

MoorNam:

The article I link to claims that the iconography was set by this particular artist in the 1990s and has not evolved much since. Whether that is true, I don't know. A (Hindu) friend sent me the link, and I shared the images I thought were the most interesting.

interesting. with the global recession/depression, i've been thinking about fascist economics, protectionism, economic nationalism, scapegoating and so on. i was wondering if there were tensions between the liberalisation wing of the hindu right and the more nationaistic/collectivist. i've seen some stuff connecting hinduism to economics but this is the first time I've seen a direct shot aimed at capitalism and globalization.

Mother India calling her sons to fight against capitalism, Islam and Christian missionary activities

That bit about fighting capitalism is strictly for the birds; outside some of the older generation of pracharaks no one on the Hindu Right took this seriously. The BJP on the whole has been even more keen to abase itself before the altar of global capitalism than the post-Nehruvian Congress.

This message is the reason why I find the VHP’s educational activities problematic, because it teaches that India belongs to Hindus alone, and that all others must either convert or leave.

There are many other problems about the VHP’s educational doctrine; it denies other groups like adivasis their own history and brushes under the carpet the social stratification and dehumanisation that lower castes have had to endure for centuries and are still enduring. Their views on gender roles and expectations are what one would expect of a conservative religious movement. It is based on a very selective interpretation of history and religion that really is the persepctive of a segment of society and not the whole.

They do have cool iconography though

Really? It is pretty sub-par iconography. Even mainstream Hindu imagery has better quality and more imaginative images, imo, never mind the more advanced nationalist stuff.

Any contact with foreigners anywhere in the world brings problems and opportunities. Many times, opportunities far outweigh the problems unless the foreigner is barbaric. The native and the foreigner gains through the exchange of ideas. Humanity grew that way. Offcourse, there are barbaric foreigners. So a good defense is a great thing. But a closed society is even more dangerous, because we will face more barbaric inside the country( I am not talking about Billu!)

It is kind of convenient to forget what India gained from foreigners. It would be worthwhile for people to realize the very "chillies", that everybody think is there from the vedic ages, came to India through trade about only ~200 years back. Most of the staple vegetables, that we think are Indian, came to India through trade, capitalism and exchange of ideas. That would be a good message to use to get people open to more ideas.

I am shocked. SHOCKED to find controversy in this thread.

That bit about fighting capitalism is strictly for the birds; outside some of the older generation of pracharaks no one on the Hindu Right took this seriously. The BJP on the whole has been even more keen to abase itself before the altar of global capitalism than the post-Nehruvian Congress.

It is kind of convenient to forget what India gained from foreigners. It would be worthwhile for people to realize the very "chillies", that everybody think is there from the vedic ages, came to India through trade about only ~200 years back. Most of the staple vegetables, that we think are Indian, came to India through trade, capitalism and exchange of ideas. That would be a good message to use to get people open to more ideas.

Spending hundreds of millions of dollars to condition people into suddenly wanting things that they never really wanted before, on the other hand, that's the kind of consumerism that it is wholly appropriate to reject. People have a right to determine which direction they want their culture to move in. Just because culture changes doesn't mean you should just throw up your hands and revoke your responsibility to cultivate a just culture rather than fostering the reckless consumerism of society's collective id.

For the record, my father studied at a Hindu school and my mother at a (Catholic) convent school. So I'm not trying to criticize either one in a blanket fashion.

i'm not familiar with all the education types available in india... what's a hindu school?

and do convent schools promise to parents not to try to indoctrinate their children? i.e. do parents know what they're getting into?

I figure capitalism is just shorthand for unfettered consumerism these days.

I think that is correct; there were some attempts to formulate a more coherent response to globalisation. Some BJP ideologues tried to develop a 'swadeshi nationalism' that relied on a combination of economic autonomy together with state capitalism and then you has elements like the SJM and the 'computer chips, not potato chips' brigade. None of which were all that popular or successful since large parts of the middle class and the aspiring classes were all too keen to enter mass consumer nirvana that global capitalism seemed to offer and Indian industry was keen to remove trade and regulatory barriers as well.

12 · Conrad Barwa said

I figure capitalism is just shorthand for unfettered consumerism these days.

I think that is correct; there were some attempts to formulate a more coherent response to globalisation. Some BJP ideologues tried to develop a 'swadeshi nationalism' that relied on a combination of economic autonomy together with state capitalism and then you has elements like the SJM and the 'computer chips, not potato chips' brigade. None of which were all that popular or successful since large parts of the middle class and the aspiring classes were all too keen to enter mass consumer nirvana that global capitalism seemed to offer and Indian industry was keen to remove trade and regulatory barriers as well.

Personally I'd rather worry about keeping things stable so we can get rich first and worry about reclaiming our souls later. If we can set up bulwarks along the way to make reclaiming our souls easier later on so much the better. But the mission of this generation of Indians should be to get GDP per capita up to $20,000 and maybe creating a model for renewable energy and tolerant secular politics in a plural society.
It's a lot easier to worry about that sort of thing once we've dealt with hunger and illiteracy. It's all about priorities.

It's a lot easier to worry about that sort of thing once we've dealt with hunger and illiteracy. It's all about priorities.

100% agree with you here!

Koenraad Elst has a nice treatment of this sort of issue in "BJP vis-a-vis Hindu Resurgence"--see especially chapter 12, "Vulgar Nationalism." He argues that "the Sangh is not able to discern objective allies and enemies on the world stage, so that it is unable to make friends"--that seems to be true! They at least need a better PR department!

They at least need a better PR department!

Well, as one notable politician has said' you can put lipstick on a pir, its still a pig' :P

I am fascinated by the idea of Bharat Mata. It is a relatively newly evolved deity in the Indic pantheon, though a perfectly legitimate manifestation of shakti. What could be more emotionally evocative than an amalgamation of God(ess), Mother and the Nation?
I like Abanindranath Tagore's 1905 'Bharat Mata' for it's mystical, serene grace (it was also one of the first named visual depiction of this deity) and a 1947 painting by Shobha Singh showing the lion pushing the imperial crown into an abyss. There was also a version depictiong Bharat Mata in the Chhinmasta avatar that I have been unable to locate on the web.
There is an excellent book on the evolution of the mythology of Bharat Mata by Neumayer and Schelberger (Oxford Publication), especially good for it's collection of obscure, often wildly imaginative, almost surreal depictions, specially ones with martyrdom themes.
It would be sad if this glorious deity is hijacked by any one organisation or religion, because by her very nature she was conceived to be a secular and inclusive entity, a unifying mother earth. It would be sadder if she is rejected for being identified by a particular religion. She belongs to all.

Bharat Mata will put the rashtra in your rashtrabhakti.

It would be sadder if she is rejected for being identified by a particular religion. She belongs to all.

As for her belonging to everyone, it's not really the Hindutva guys who are associating it solely with themselves. There was even a temple to her built in Varanasi that was open to people of all religions and yet it is almost all Hindus. Muslims and Christians aren't going to bow their heads to such a figure.
Vande Mataram was supposed to be the national anthem instead of that milquetoast Jana Gana Mana. It was rejected because Muslim and Christian groups opposed the idea of having to sing paeans to a mother goddess.
Sometimes it really seems like Hindus can never win. Even when they reach out their hands they are spurned and what ends up happening? The symbols, once again, end up feeding the right wing because the lefties are too busy seeking rents and being purity trolls to bother building bridges or fostering understanding.

Christian European nations are the ones who invented the practice of personifying the nation

Yoga, I am aware of that, but I feel that the tradition of Shakti worship gives the concept of Bharat Mata added deapth and perspective over western depictions.

I genuinely get the feeling that as far as the Indian political and intellectual elites are concerned, the only way to be a good Hindu is to not care at all.

It was rejected because Muslim and Christian groups opposed the idea of having to sing paeans to a mother goddess.

I don't think Christian groups opposed this when the issue was being debated and I think few would bother now. The problem came up with BankimChandra's novel which was altered in a way to deflect hostility away from the British colonialists towards past Muslim aggressors. The issue has become poisoned now with communalism and it would be difficult to reclaim it now. Unfortunately, many of the early literary figures and thinkers had an anti-Islamist stance which is often overlooked today.

I don't think anybody would really object to these visualisations of the nation; as long as mutual respect is shown to other communities. More important are the actual policies and practises that are followed and it is here that most versions of Hindu nationalism collapse; but this is an old story, you can see it critiqued in Premchand and Tagore.

I don't think anybody would really object to these visualisations of the nation; as long as mutual respect is shown to other communities

as long as mutual respect is shown to other communities

Wish it were true

Oh yeah, the boat on Vande Mantaram has long since sailed; it will be a mammoth task to convince conservative Muslims that it can be accepted as an expression of inclusive nationalism. But lets face it, this isn't how it has been used anyway or how it is perceived these days in the context of inter-communal relations.

And what would that entail

Easier said than done I know; but I think if a genuine attempt is made to listen and understand the views of other communities I don't see how a problem can occur. Using symbols that are intended to exclude or somehow target a specific community would be against the spirit here imo. A lot obviously depends on context. The important thing to remember with minorities is that they are obviously fearful of being forced to give up their identities and replace it with a majoritarian one they don't want. I think if they aren't forced but can see what they are being asked to do is to contribute to a greater national identity that includes them; then common symbolism can be easily found.

This message is the reason why I find the VHP’s educational activities problematic, because it teaches that India belongs to Hindus alone, and that all others must either convert or leave. They do have cool

The quote :"Arise, let’s confront the challenge" announces this card, urging the people to fight against foreign elements such as Muslims, Christians, MNCs, corruption, cow-slaughter and so on. is from here . The poster says ""Arise, let’s confront the challenge".Rest is author's imagination.

Easier said than done I know; but I think if a genuine attempt is made to listen and understand the views of other communities I don't see how a problem can occur. Using symbols that are intended to exclude or somehow target a specific community would be against the spirit here imo.

24 · mastervk said

This message is the reason why I find the VHP’s educational activities problematic, because it teaches that India belongs to Hindus alone, and that all others must either convert or leave. They do have cool

The quote :"Arise, let’s confront the challenge" announces this card, urging the people to fight against foreign elements such as Muslims, Christians, MNCs, corruption, cow-slaughter and so on. is from here . The poster says ""Arise, let’s confront the challenge".Rest is author's imagination.

@ Yoga Fire - I would agree that there are political entrepreneurs who would lose out amongst the Muslim community if there should be a change but these exisrt on both sides of the religious divide and are hardly unique to Muslims. I do think there needs to be more communication on the matter and I don't see why we always fall into the trap of letting some conservative clerics speak for an entire community; partly this is the fault of the state and successive govts which for one reason or another have pandered to extremist sentiment at the cost of social integration and pluralism. I do think the Muslim community is much more variated and diverse than is given credit for and more needs to be done to consciously woo opinion within it away from inward narcisstic trends.

26 · Yoga Fire said

24 · mastervk said

This message is the reason why I find the VHP’s educational activities problematic, because it teaches that India belongs to Hindus alone, and that all others must either convert or leave. They do have cool

The quote :"Arise, let’s confront the challenge" announces this card, urging the people to fight against foreign elements such as Muslims, Christians, MNCs, corruption, cow-slaughter and so on. is from here . The poster says ""Arise, let’s confront the challenge".Rest is author's imagination.

Is Pakistan represented as a Shiva-Lingam covered by a burkha?

LOL ..Only burkha..Other interesting stuff :West Bengal (Lenin??) Kerala (Pepsi) Rajasthan (Hunger)Punjab/Haryana(female infanticide/crying girls)and so on

15 · rob said

They at least need a better PR department!

well, their acts of terrorism and pogroms keep getting called riots, so they're doing really well on this count.

16 · Conrad Barwa said

ou can put lipstick on a pir, its still a pig

it was an insult to pigs then. it is an insult to pigs in this context too.

their acts of terrorism and pogroms keep getting called riots

LOL, yes, nobody but those awful Hindoos have ever started a riot in India. . . .

I do think there needs to be more communication on the matter and I don't see why we always fall into the trap of letting some conservative clerics speak for an entire community; partly this is the fault of the state and successive govts which for one reason or another have pandered to extremist sentiment at the cost of social integration and pluralism. I do think the Muslim community is much more variated and diverse than is given credit for and more needs to be done to consciously woo opinion within it away from inward narcisstic trends.

When you're doing negotiations you have this concept called a 'BATNA,' that is "best alternative to a negotiated agreement." If you negotiation doesn't have a deal, what are you left with? The more tilted the status quo is in your favor the less you need care about negotiating, communicating, or fostering productive dialogue.

And let's face it, the deck is pretty strongly stacked against practicing Hindus and moderate religious people of all stripes alike. Even the media narrative is stacked against them. Ennis finds the VHP's education disquieting because . . ., but the reason the VHP has the sympathy it does is because this is exactly the attitude that expansionist Muslim groups and missionary Christians have towards Hindus. (In fact, by maintaining the stance that you can't convert into Hinduism from outside they're actually being more charitable to Christians and Muslims than vice-versa.) And they are not trivial forces. People find it easy to justify the tilted coverage because "Hindus are a numerical majority" but that's irrelevant since that's not how political power is distributed in India. I mean, when decrying the presence of the Jerusalem cross on India's coinage or protesting the seizure of temple lands is considered "Hindu chauvanism" how far into bizzarro-world have we gone?

They've even lost the effort to frame issues in the media. On this very site while the Kerela nun thing was all over Time magazine and the NYT we were discussing Pink Chaddis. The "Oppressive Hindu Right" story has legs in a way that "minorities trying to undermine the Indian state by seeking ever-increasing rents at the expense of the whole" doesn't. I respect the bloggers on this site and don't think they have any sort of agenda, but it's easy to fall into this trap of focusing on one tree and ignoring the rest of the forest.

On top of that you have guys this ranting their heads off about the imperative of raising the green flag over India again.

I love that India isn't purely people with tilakas on their heads. I think it's cool that India is a diverse country. But decrying Hindu chauvanism while being completely silent on all the ways in which Hindus are actually being harmed by government policies actually makes the situation worse. Rather than bringing Indians together it undermines India as a plural society by making Hindus retrench themselves and making Muslims and Christians define themselves as being distinct and separate from Hindus rather than as fellow Indians.

So when a Hindu sees the state itself facilitating this sort of thing how is he supposed to claw his civil liberties back without "threatening" the religious minority groups? Remember their BATNA, they have no incentive to cooperate with fostering a reconciliation. The government already inflates their power far beyond their numbers and in the rush to privilege them has ended up establishing a precedent of all Indians not being equal under the law. So unless someone comes up and sets things in an actual secular direction then all you're going to have is a continual erosion of a Hindu sense of security and with it a deterioration of the country's cultural landscape.

From the 1990s???? It is 2009. There are plenty of current events to talk about in this new century. Why not also bring up the fact that Pakistan was happy to be the one to have the "Islamic" nuclear bomb, if you want to bring up the past: http://www.paktoday.com/islamic.htm
"...In 70s when Pakistan's then Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto launched his campaign to win funds for the nuclearization, he sold the idea to Libya, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Iran as an Islamic project. All these Muslim countries supported the project whole heartedly. Pakistan never faced any shortage of funds as far as her nuclear ambitions were concerned. And therefore it feels obliged to share the technology with other Muslim countries.

There has always been a tacit understanding that Pakistan's bomb will be used to regain the glory of Islam and defend the "rights" of the Muslims wherever they are persecuted by infidel powers. This was truly an Islamic bomb. On the one hand it strengthened the autocratic hands of the oligarchy and allowed Pakistan's armed forces to rehabilitate themselves after the humiliating defeat in 1971 and on the other hand it allowed Pakistan to gain a very profitable position within the Muslim world. It was felt that Pakistan's nuclear capability served as a morale booster for the entire Islamic world. Foreign Minister of Iran expressed his joy and pride and said that the nuclear test by Pakistan has strengthened the confidence of the Muslim world in the face of the nuclear threat from Israel.

Other Muslim nations were equally proud of Pakistan's achievement. "No more shall the West humiliate Muslims," thundered the Imam of Al-Aqsa mosque who saw in the explosion of the Pakistani bomb "the beginning of the resurgence of Islamic power." Sheikh Ahmad Yasin, the leader of the Hamas thought that the Pakistan nuclear bomb was a shot in the arms of the Arabs who had failed to produce even a single tank. The Saudi King Fahd and the Crown Prince Abdullah also expressed their satisfaction over Pakistani detonation of nuclear device and thereby strengthening the defense of the Islamic world. The UAE president too described the Pakistani nuclear response fully justified in the face of serious threats to its security. The Egyptian Mufti called upon the Muslims to rally support for the nuclear blast by Pakistan..." Friday, December 26, 2003

Here is something that is happening currently thanks to Taliban Islamic supremacists - look up what a "dhimmi" is in an Islamic state and requirement to wear distinctive clothing to be easily identified as dhimmis and not Muslims:

No more safe at home, Pak Hindus flee to India
March 16, 2009
"...Though there were no direct threats, the Hindu families were never left in any doubt about their minority status. Sometimes it would be a warning not to stare at Muslim women for long, at other times, it would be the subtle coercion of the local administrators to sell their land when the situation was still normal. The families were weighing their options until October when they were asked to wear a red patch in their pagadis (turban).

"We were told Hindus are not supposed to wish a Muslim even inadvertently and that is why, in order to make it obvious for a passing Muslim that we were Hindus, we ought to have some element of red in our headgear," Hardwari Lal, who is now in Amritsar with his family of 13, says...."

#33 was from this link:http://specials.rediff.com/news/2009/mar/18sld1-hindu-families-face-the-heat.htm

See the similarity of the dhimmi's fate in Afghanistan:

Sikhs struggle in Afghanistan
Thursday, 25 September, 2003

"...Things got worse during Taleban rule.
In a controversial move, the Taleban forced Hindus and Sikhs to wear distinctive yellow tags and ordered Hindu and Sikh women to be veiled.
Inder Singh Majboor, who owns a small shop outside the temple, remembers it as a difficult time.
"We were frightened by the order. Even though we were allowed to continue praying and holding ceremonies, we were made painfully aware of the fact that we were minorities," Mr Majboor says...." http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3138282.stm

31 · Yoga Fire said

"I don't care about your feelings, this is the right thing to do."

yes! yes!

31 · Yoga Fire said

the seizure of temple lands

this ranting their heads off

But decrying Hindu chauvanism while being completely silent on all the ways in which Hindus are actually being harmed by government policies

unlike the balanced summary above, for example.

36 · varun said

31 · Yoga Fire said

"I don't care about your feelings, this is the right thing to do."

yes! yes!

Yes Varun. All Hindu's are genocidal and made from straw. We've all heard the Marxist History 101 story thank you.

They've even lost the effort to frame issues in the media. On this very site while the Kerela nun thing was all over Time magazine and the NYT we were discussing Pink Chaddis.

The fact that the Rome-based Catholic Church is screwed up and abuses its nuns all over the world, including in Kerala, clearly is a more important story for a South Asian blog to cover than a grassroots movement among Indian women to push back humorously against the forces of social oppression.

/sarcasm

Seriously, why would the "Kerala nun thing" be something Hindus should be framing in the media? No Hindus were quoted in the TIME article (and I couldn't find a mention of Jesme Raphael when I searched the NYT). Is the idea among right-wing Hindus now that religion is a zero-sum game in which a deprecation of one religion is a win for another religion? When the Catholics look bad, the Hindus look better?

Sorry to disabuse you, but I think we're seeing an accumulated win for the agnostics. People who become disgusted with the Catholic Church, or with Hinduism or Islam, are less likely to turn to another major religion than they are to become vaguely "spiritual" or agnostic or even downright atheist.

38 · Yoga Fire said

All Hindu's are genocidal and made from straw. We've all heard the Marxist History 101 story thank you.

i am a fan of all who are sensitive about kneejerk characterization and proof by example.

The "Oppressive Hindu Right" story has legs

is considered "Hindu chauvanism" how far into bizzarro-world have we gone?

On top of that you have guys this ranting their heads off about the imperative of raising the green flag over India again.

by knee jerk characterization, i mean marxist history 101 of course. can jnu, doniger acolyte, prashad-lite, and other carefully thought out descriptions be far behind?

The fact that the Rome-based Catholic Church is screwed up and abuses its nuns all over the world, including in Kerala, clearly is a more important story for a South Asian blog to cover than a grassroots movement among Indian women to push back humorously against the forces of social oppression.

Even in your admittedly sarcastic reply you were choosing to frame the issue in such a way. The Catholic church is an international force so the fact that this abuse happened in Kerela makes it not an Indian issue. But male privilege and chauvinism isn't international and doesn't happen around the world? Why do we discuss Indian norms without comparing it against norms regarding machisimo in Latin America?

by knee jerk characterization, i mean marxist history 101 of course. can jnu, doniger acolyte, prashad-lite, and other carefully thought out descriptions be far behind?

6 · Manju said

i've been thinking about fascist economics, protectionism, economic nationalism, scapegoating and so on. i was wondering if there were tensions between the liberalisation wing of the hindu right and the more nationaistic/collectivist.

I have spoken about exactly this in the past, and this chapter of BJP/Sangh parivar politics is rarely mentioned now, even in India. I am amazed at the party discipline BJP/Hindu right has shown in this regard -- the complete retraction of swadeshi economics (except indigenous manufacture of certain beverages) and aggressive alignment (both rhetoric and actual) with development/modernization/free markers. Splinter orgs in the Hindutva movement, affiliated or sympathetic to BJP, earlier concerned with protectionism morphed/gave way to outfits more concerned with *cultural protectionism.*

A new article in the Atlantic by Robert Kaplan provides an overview of this curious mix of aggressive economic liberalization and cultural protectionism in Gujarat.

Sorry to disabuse you, but I think we're seeing an accumulated win for the agnostics. People who become disgusted with the Catholic Church, or with Hinduism or Islam, are less likely to turn to another major religion than they are to become vaguely "spiritual" or agnostic or even downright atheist.

Yes, I like the way things are moving in that direction. It's all good. :-)

30 · rob said

LOL, yes, nobody but those awful Hindoos have ever started a riot in India. . . .

Rob, I don't see how your comment is an appropriate response to OP. pee r does not say that nobody else in India ever started a riot'; merely, that the VHP has gotten away with more than it should.

If I say your dog peed in my backyard, and you say, "Well, X and Y's dogs have peed in your backyard too." That answer doesn't magically grant reprieve to you and your dog. All the offending dogs and their owners deserve the appropriate sanctions -- which include cleaning my backyard and compensating me ( and harsher penalties for repeat offenses).

Actually "cultural protectionism" can be effective if you focus it on subtly skewing people's preferences rather than using the power of the state as a kudgel.

For example, I was recently doing some research on the economic development of Turkey and I noticed that during the reform era the Ottoman Sultanate established various factories by importing European technology and business administrators. Despite their best efforts, however none of the civilian oriented factories were ever able to produce at the level or the price that their European competitors were. Due to pressure from the British they couldn't protect the industries with tariffs so they just had to focus the factories on producing stuff for the military.
The only factories that were ever successful without the patronage of the military were those that produced fezzes. I thought about this for a while before it hit me. Nobody else wore fezzes but the people in the Ottoman Empire. They had no real competition and they had indigenous expertise in fez-making available. It's like all the benefits of protectionism without having to get the state involved. You also still have some incentive to innovate since if your factory falls too far behind then others will jump in to fill the market.

The British did the same thing. Part of the rationale behind cultivating British tastes and mannerisms among Indians was not only to make them more pliant subjects, but also to expand the market for British goods. If you can convince a typically shirtless South Indian that wool business suits in a tropical climate are a good idea then you suddenly have tens, if not hundreds, of millions of new customers!

If I say your dog peed in my backyard, and you say, "Well, X and Y's dogs have peed in your backyard too." That answer doesn't magically grant reprieve to you and your dog. All the offending dogs and their owners deserve the appropriate sanctions -- which include cleaning my backyard and compensating me ( and harsher penalties for repeat offenses).

Here's the thing. Nobody here is denying that the bad stuff that is being done by Hindu groups is bad. The point is that the single-minded focus on all the bad stuff done by Hindu groups without the same focus on bad stuff done by other groups (and cast in the appropriate scale) besides the occasional one-off story paints an inaccurate picture of reality and feeds extremists and grievance-mongers on all sides.

Keep in mind, when we're talking about countries it's not just your back-yard, it's every citizen's back yard. So if everyone's dog is peeing on our yard so that we can't use it, but people only get really mad when my dog does it, then not only do I have to deal with the trouble of controlling the dog but the damn yard is still covered in pee.

The point is that the single-minded focus on all the bad stuff done by Hindu groups without the same focus on bad stuff done by other groups (and cast in the appropriate scale) besides the occasional one-off story paints an inaccurate picture of reality and feeds extremists and grievance-mongers on all sides.

I think you are expecting too much. Everyone is biased and they report on things that suit their point of view. The only thing that we can argue is that there should be freedom to publish your own biases.

But the way these folks deny the freedom is by calling others who attack X and Z as "communal" / Hindutvadi fascist" etc while terming themselves as some kind of a "secular progressive liberal" champions.

That's why we see cases like the arrest of an editor for publishing an article by an agnostic / atheist for hurting Muslim sentiments in India and that goes unnoticed..

Even here you see some so called "secular liberal progressives" repeatedly calling for banning commenters / closing threads if they find some unpalatable truths. :-)

46 · Yoga Fire said

Actually "cultural protectionism" can be effective if you focus it on subtly skewing people's preferences rather than using the power of the state as a kudgel.

yes, very effective.

Meanwhile, read more on the cultural icon Maharana Pratap here.

Whatever its ends and advantages, cultural protectionism should still be lawful and not violate constitutional norms (perhaps naive). Which is why I am also against granting too much political currency to organized Muslim social organizations that block legal reforms.

Today Sharad Pawar's acolytes, drunk on the support that Marathi cultural chauvinism gets, can openly declare on TV that a Marathi Manush will be the 'King of Delhi.' Perverted *Cultural protectionism* is proving to be very costly to the Indian democracy. Anurag Kashyap's 'Gulaal' deals with this subject in a deft manner. Highly recommended. It is a very cynical movie, and shows why a combination cultural chauvinism, violence, and corruption is necessary to gain political power in contemporary India.

Keep in mind, when we're talking about countries it's not just your back-yard, it's every citizen's back yard.

Yoga Fire - I just completely disagree with you here. I can't see how anybody can argue that political power is distributed against Hindus or that things are somehow 'stacked' against them; this is absurd imo. Political power has to a great degree been dominated by elites that have come from the upper echelons of Hindu society in India for a long time; only now is it being slowly challenged. The Hindu Right would have been powerful but the problem is for them they will never be able to overcome the internal divides created by caste and other ethnic boundaries; the sharp polarisation in the countryside, particularly in northern India means that this will increasingly be the main axis of conflict. This is actually going to be the same problem for Pakistan, where Islamism isn't going to be enough to mediate over social conflict.

But decrying Hindu chauvanism while being completely silent on all the ways in which Hindus are actually being harmed by government policies actually makes the situation worse.

How exactly is the state 'harming' Indians as Hindus? The state does many harmful things to its citizens in India, it certainly doesn't do them because of their religion. Generally speaking the lower down the socio-economic hierarchy you are the more you will be penalised one way or another. You can just look at police behaviour to verify this. In places like UP, it is just basically a marauding force that has been criminalised and has for years targeted minoirty groups for dperedations.

And I am sorry but in a democracy, numbers do matter as does who gets to define the majoritarian culture and the 'rules of the game'. None of which minority groups can do. Even groups like Sikhs which would be regarded as part of the established order can suddenly be cast an "anti-national" and be visibly isolated and targeted; the majority community can do this, no minority community can.

Remember their BATNA, they have no incentive to cooperate with fostering a reconciliation. The government already inflates their power far beyond their numbers and in the rush to privilege them has ended up establishing a precedent of all Indians not being equal under the law.

Who are the "their" here. You take the word of some conservative leaders as representing the whole community? Many of these communities aren't even unified internally. There are huge conflicts and divides within the Church over issues like caste and there is a similar divide between Muslims between their own elite and the non-ashraf classes. I agree with you that their leaders haven't done a good job of representing the interests of their community as a whole and the state has unncessarily pandered to a conservative section of this leadership but this has been extremely detrimental to these communities more than anything else. You can see from looking at NSS data and other statistics produced by the state itself on how far behind economically and socially most of these groups are with regards to mainstream society. They have paid a high cost. So I don't know what "priveleges" they are supposed to enjoy here.

So unless someone comes up and sets things in an actual secular direction then all you're going to have is a continual erosion of a Hindu sense of security and with it a deterioration of the country's cultural landscape.

I think this is partially true; though I don't see the erosion of a "Hindu sense of security" that you claim exists. There is a sense of loss of power amongst traditional elites, especially at a national level but I don't think that is the same thing as conflating it with a decline in 'Hindu security' (whatever this means). I am all for secularism but it is time we admitted that this was only an elite project that wasn't really popularised for the masses; for decades this existed mainly on paper and within upper middle class circles; while actual politics on the ground was always suffused with religious politics. I think the major difference was that this only started taking a darker turn over the last few decades as various groups saw they could exploit it for electoral gain (which they did successfully). I don't think a top-down imposition of secularism will work anymore - not that there is even much will to try it these days.

The main problem for religious nationalism IMO, at least in India, whether Muslim or Hindu is that it will increasingly be faced with serious social and economic contradictions which I don't think they can offer satisfactory solutions to. At the grassroots level from what I have seen, while they can serve as a way of mobilsing voter blocs in the short-term; they are just failing to meet peoples' aspirations and blaming some other group or the state is only going to work for so long.

Of course this is a huge issue with a lot of complications and I am excessively simplyfying it here; but this is the aspect of the problem that seems most significant to me.

48 · Ponniyin Selvan said

That's why we see cases like the arrest of an editor for publishing an article by an agnostic / atheist for hurting Muslim sentiments in India and that goes unnoticed..

Dear Hindutva Apologist,

FTR.

Signed,
Secular Progressive Liberal

Dear Hindutva Apologist,

FTR.

Signed,
Secular Progressive Liberal

Hmm. Maybe some day we will be able to see such comments arise unprompted. What a wonderful world that would be where everyone agrees to control their dogs' pee!

52 · Yoga Fire said

See this right there? This kind of crap is exactly the problem. Does your tone then make you a terrorist apologist?

I have a long history of exchange with Ponniyin Selvan, and I do not say this lightly. How come you fail to notice his habitual usage of the phrase "Secular Progressive Liberal" (especially the scare quotes)?

52 · Yoga Fire said

Does your tone then make you a terrorist apologist?

I'll let my comments speak for themselves.

Yoga Fire, you've started commenting recently. Just to let you know, PS and I have long made peace with each other's opinions, I think :) At this point, I'm immune to his name-calling (and vice-versa, I believe).

Yoga Fire, you've started commenting recently. Just to let you know, PS and I have long made peace with each other's opinions, I think :) At this point, I'm immune to his name-calling (and vice-versa, I believe).

That's right. I'm in agreement with portmanteau. :-)

Yoga fire,

I think we should not care much about the labels we are assigned. It is not that people are stuck with the same label all the time. Once they change their opinions they move from one label to another.

48 · Ponniyin Selvan said

The only thing that we can argue is that there should be freedom to publish your own biases.

Yeah, but the extremists on both sides reject the free speech doctrine (and the Indian Constitution and jurisprudence have a notorious bias against even slightly controversial speech, sacrificing it to preserve 'communal harmony' and 'public order'). The Muslim extremists go nuts over the Danish cartoons and Nasreen, while the Hindu ones can't take weird representations of Hindu Gods and Kamala Surayya.

The Muslim extremists go nuts over the Danish cartoons and Nasreen, while the Hindu ones can't take weird representations of Hindu Gods and Kamala Surayya.

The difference is that the "secular progressive" brigade (that is almost the whole of Indian media and "intellectuals") will pounce on the Hindu nutcases while giving a free pass to the Muslim nutcases claiming somehow the rules apply differently for "minorities" .

20 · Yoga Fire said

I genuinely get the feeling that as far as the Indian political and intellectual elites are concerned, the only way to be a good Hindu is to not care at all.

You sir...have quoted one of the essential philosophies of Hinduism that have been ignored for ages now. Remember how hopped up on soma we used to be...

Wow the pix all looked scary. It is just a milder version of brain-washing about the "other".

I will be the first to admit that I think some Muslims have acted as fifth columnists and the Congress has sold the country for money, its "ideals", votes and what not. But BJP/VHP has done no better - they are supposed to defend Hindu causes, instead they just keep the issue alive for votes/power.

But, the pictures paints ALL Muslims and Christians as universally bad. That's just propaganda and will lead to more fault lines between the different communities. I hope these kind of images don't get posted at SM again since this is supposed to be a neutral site.

Digressing a tad from our usual religious/political discussion, doesn't anyone else find the first card with the lingam amidst the explosion rather cute, in a somewhat retro nostalgic manner? It brings back memories of old movies where sex scenes could only be hinted at, with scenes such as a couple falling into bed dissolving almost immediately into scenes of fireworks.

If you're self loathing enough to convert to Christianity in INDIA, then get out.

I assume you don't have a bhangi or chamar in your social circle?

Shaad,

Lingam isn't really meant to be sexualized in a concrete (pun unintended) way. The only time I have seen it so, e.g. man actually referring to his penis as "lingam," is in crappy erotica written by white women.

50 · Conrad Barwa on March 20, 2009 05:47 AM · Direct link · “Quote�(?)

Yoga Fire - I just completely disagree with you here. I can't see how anybody can argue that political power is distributed against Hindus or that things are somehow 'stacked' against them; this is absurd imo.

Perhaps the below rough dates will cause you to rethink that statement:

1200 - 1800: Islamic Sultanates
1700 - 1947: British Raj
1947 - 2009: Partition of India, birth of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, People's Republic of Bangladesh, and the Socialist, Secular Democratic Republic of India

63 · gangtok slim said

Perhaps the below rough dates will cause you to rethink that statement:
1200 - 1800: Islamic Sultanates
1700 - 1947: British Raj
1947 - 2009: Partition of India, birth of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, People's Republic of Bangladesh, and the Socialist, Secular Democratic Republic of India

Are you kidding me here? Firstly, I was talking about modern India, not what happened hundreds of years ago. Secondly, you need to go back an re-learn some of your history, a mere change of rulers at the top cannot redistribute political power throughout an entire society. It was very difficult for any rulers who came from outside India to rule India successfully unless they were able to get the consent of the majority of the population and the collaboration of the indiegenous elite, which was largely Hindu. when these were withdrawn or became hostile as in the great Zamindari revolts against the late Mughal Empire and the mass movements against British colonial rule, these systems of imperial domination collapsed. you might actually want to look at the personal histories of people like Gandhi, Nehru and Jinnah - they all started out as loyal British imperial citizens of Empire before they moved gradually towards a more radical stand.

Conrad, i think if you reread Yoga's comment, you'll see that he lists out examples for just that--modern india. The examples are all pretty damning of the congress party's anti-secular actions--especially in Andhra Pradesh.

Hindus may be in the majority, but the strategy for many parties, esp the congress (notorious for formulas like KHAM-Kshatriya, Harijan, Adivasi, Muslim) is to fragment the hindu vote and consolidate minority votes--with attempts at rent-seeking i.e. bethlehem and haj subsidies. That's how elections are won in India, and that's how the majority itself can have diminished influence in the power structure. after all, hindu temples are the only ones that are managed, and whose funds are redistributed to other religious institutions, by the Indian government (whither an establishment clause?). That's why Yoga's polite point about this post is relevant.

Satyajit Wry,

Yoga Fire's comment included just one reference to an action that could be construed as "anti-Hindu" by the state which related to the extension of govt control over lands that would be administered by the TTD. Since this is a govt-sponsored trust that is meant to run the temple complex for the public I am at a loss to understand how this could be see as an "anti-Hindu act by the state". My understanding is that the TTD trust has administered the temple complex since the early 1930s fairly successfully so I can't see the problem here. In anycase Yoga Fire's objection was to the description of the protests against this action as "Hindu chauvinism" rather than the action itself; I would agree with him that it is not correct to label these actions as Hindu chauvinism but that is not what the initial point was about.

Hindus may be in the majority, but the strategy for many parties, esp the congress (notorious for formulas like KHAM-Kshatriya, Harijan, Adivasi, Muslim) is to fragment the hindu vote and consolidate minority votes--with attempts at rent-seeking i.e. bethlehem and haj subsidies. That's how elections are won in India, and that's how the majority itself can have diminished influence in the power structure. after all, hindu temples are the only ones that are managed, and whose funds are redistributed to other religious institutions, by the Indian government (whither an establishment clause?). That's why Yoga's polite point about this post is relevant.

'Bethelem subsidies' could you be a bit more specific here about what you mean. There is no obligation or need for Christians to go to Bethlehem and neither does the GoI provide any subsidies for Christians to do so. If you are going to make comments about other religions, you should make an effort to get the basic facts right. I am unaware that there is a redistribution towards other religious institutions in the manner which you describe; there are some targeted subsidies given by the state by these are neither extended in a wholesale fashion or given to all minority religions in the fashion which you are implying. Plenty of religious events whose administration expenses come from general taxation revenue that everybody pays but which are primarily for Hindus like the Kumbh mela, Amarnath pilgramage etc. but I don't see non-Hindus up in arms but this and rightly so. The state isn't an accounting firm which pays out what you put in; it has to enforce certain rights and maintain a balanced order regardless of costs. Specific subsidies like the Haj ones are small beer imo.

Secondly, there seems to be some confusion about the distrbution of political power and whether we are talking about (i) the dissipation of political power from Hindus to Muslims and other non-Hindu groups or (ii) the downward distribution of power from upper caste Hindus to middle and lower caste Hindus. I see no evidence for (i) but of course there is a significant social revolution as (ii) is occurring.If (i) was the case, then I think the complaints that are often wheeled out would have some force but if what people are really complaining about is the loss of power by the upper caste Hindu elite; well this is really a feature of social democracy and cannot be reversed.

Bethelem subsidies' could you be a bit more specific here about what you mean. There is no obligation or need for Christians to go to Bethlehem and neither does the GoI provide any subsidies for Christians to do so.

Lupus - really thanks for that; almost couldn't beleive it when I read it. That is really wrong imo; the govt should not be wasting money on things like that esepcially since it isn't even mandated in the religion. Encouraging visits to the Holy Land has brought no end of grief to that piece of territory and has just aided reactionary and divisive tendencies in all the religions involved. I don't know why the AP state govt has indulged in this act particularly since Christians are such a small minoirty in the state; if they were serious about their welfare they should spend that money on some social welfare or educational schemes to benefit the deprived in the community rather than wasting it like that.

We are fortunate that this kind of thing is not constitutionally sanctioned and it looks to be a relatively recent development. There certainly wasn't anything like this when I was growing up.

We are fortunate that this kind of thing is not constitutionally sanctioned and it looks to be a relatively recent development. There certainly wasn't anything like this when I was growing up.

India is growng more "secular" by the day. :-)

What do you mean not constitutionally sanctioned ?. This is done by the state government of Andhra Pradesh.

What do you mean not constitutionally sanctioned ?. This is done by the state government of Andhra Pradesh.

I mean it isn't something that is contained in the constitution as a right that should be granted to religious minorities (like say freedom of worship etc.) or separate personal law codes. I think it is quite insulting to Christians actually that the govt that use this as a cheap gimmick (the amounts involved so far seem to be small) especially since travelling to the Holy Land has got nothing to do with faith or practise in Christianity and mounting these ridiculous pilgramages are what Catholics are are poked fun at by other denominations. Unlike Hindusim or Islam such pilgramages have been historically peripheral for Christianity and when this issue has come up it has invariably been to distract attention from other problems and been reactionary (eg the impetus behidn the early Crusades). That it took till last year for a state with a mall Christian population to engage in this gimmiclery indicates just how irrelvant this issue is (or at least should be).

If it isn't constitutionally sanctioned, then it is simply a matter of govt policy and the AP govt should it desire can stop this overnight.

Conrad, so I hope you see what we mean now. The problem is that YS Rajasekhar Reddy is a determined evangelical--his brother in law actually being a TV evangelist along the lines of CBN (Benny Hinn, et al). Demolishment orders for numerous temples have been given, and to the point about the TTD, an actual government order was given to restrict TTD only to 2 of the 7 hills (Venkateshvara being the Lord of Seven Hills and all), so that YSR could build megachurches on the other 5. This is after he raided the TTD's funds and forced it to be 2.2 crores a year for his religious activities. So as you can see, the AP govt doesn't want to remove Bethlehems subsidies. And in order to declare their "secular" credentials, both Naidu and Chiranjeevi have promised to expand Bethlehem subsidies to give them a crack at a new religious minority vote bank. sonia gandhi, as the extra constitutional locus of power has seen to similar activities at the national level, as seen with the 2 RS Cross Coin above. since for the mass rural base in India, these type of cheap transactional gimmicks work, we can only expect them to grow and continue to waste indian coffers (which already have a 10.8% fiscal deficit thanks to this "economic dream team").

Part of the concern that many of us share is that religious rent-seeking then opens up to hindus--could you imagine subsidies for every hindu pilgrimmage under the sun? And the ironic part is that haj subsidies themselves are illegal under islamic law. Saudi Arabia frowns on it, a Lahore high court struck down a Pakistani version of it, and numerous Indian Muslims themselves have called for a repeal of this.

Ultimately, the vast majority of hindus, and yes, even the bjp leadership, don't want an exclusionary hindu india. we embrace pluralism and respect the christian tradition in india that dates back to Gondopharnes in the 1st century, as well as all the others. but these type of activities compel them to vote for the only alternative to the congress.

Satyajit Wry,

I think you are getting a bit carried away here. What evidence is there that the AP govt has given the "order to demolish numerous temples" or that "mega-churches" (by which I assume you mean cathedrals) in itself an odd claim since churches of the same deonomination would not be built in so close proximity to an area which has little direct historical connection with Christianity as Tirupati? And targeting a minority that is barely 1% of the population is not going to get you very far in Indian politics these days.

The economic deficit is also a structural porblem not one caused just by a single admin or by religious subsidies. But I suspect you are just pulling my leg with some of these claims.

I think it is quite insulting to Christians actually that the govt that use this as a cheap gimmick

If it isn't constitutionally sanctioned

The hindu situation is a bit like the boiling frog scenario.

The consititution offers protection to non-hindu institutions from government interference, while offer no such protection to Hindu Institutions. As a result the Hindu institutions have been weakened dramtically, by various governments, stealing the funds, the lands, ruining the temple administration by distributing the posts ot their todies, limiting various functions etc.

Also because the non-hindu religious institutions are strong, they wield considerable influence over their communities voting habits. So it is highly beneficial for governments to curry favor with the non-hindu religions.
This has always occured, right from independance.

The CM is a Christian. He is aslo famous for stomping over the religious rules at Tirupati to allow Sonia to visit it.

Whether the CM is a Christian or not isn't the issue; in fact it is irrelevant to the point I was making. I didn't realise that he had to violate that many rules for Sonia Gandhi to visit Tirupati; I thought she had already visited the temple before in 1999, without this level of furore.

As a result the Hindu institutions have been weakened dramtically, by various governments, stealing the funds, the lands, ruining the temple administration by distributing the posts ot their todies, limiting various functions etc.

I haven't seen any evidence of this as a concerted campagin or a widespread pattern. Most temples complexes are relatively well run considering the demands they have to cope with; where mismanagement occurs it is down to poor administration and corruption and this can be corrected by the appropriate public action.

Also because the non-hindu religious institutions are strong, they wield considerable influence over their communities voting habits.

Excuse me but how yould you know exactly? Communities like Christian, Sikhs and Muslims have many internal divisions and come into conflict with each; quite often violently. This just sounds like an over-generalisation without any real evidence.

Conrad, I truly wish I were just making it up, but alas:

Temple Demolishment:
1
2
3
4
5

As for the deficit
1.you might recall NREGS and the Farmer Loan Waiver which hit the $20B mark
2.this administration presided over an unprecedented rise in tax revenue but squandered it away
3.india's bonds are now facing junk rating status thanks to the current administration
4. virually zero progress on the Vajpayee golden quadrilateral project---but i'm sure they'll still find a way to name it after Indira Gandhi

Satyajit

That is surprising, I don't know why all these examples are coming from AP. I just want to add though that all the examples you cite seem at least partly to be driven by urban development - in the 2 cases of roadside temples being demolished to accomodate road-widening. Personally, I find this objectionably since efforts should be made to try and find a compromise which won't involve demolishing places of worship; I think development is important but should not come at any cost. One example seems to be more in the guise of reconstruction to improve access at Tirupati by the TTB; I have no idea about the details of that case, the only grounds in which I could see it could be criticised is if ancient or historical parts of the temple complex have been damaged since this is part of our heritage and should not be destroyed under any excuse. One case (3) is attributed to unknown vandals, so I don't see why the state should be blamed for this. There is only one solitary case of temple demolishment in a village, with no explanation given as to why it was done. Maybe further details would be appropriate before one can find out exactly why this was done but I agree that unless there is a good one, there needs to be some accounting of why this was done. In conclusion, I don't think this fits some sort of anti-Hindu pattern that you seem to be suggesting as the motivations for actions carried out were for other purposes - this doesn't make them acceptable to me but then our govt demolishes peoples' houses with minimal compensation in the pursuance of development schemes. This is a governance problem imo not one of discrimination.

Re your other points.

1. The NREGA forms a big part of my research and I have to say, I broadly support it. It is a necessary and vital programme. The Farm loan waiver not so much.
2. That is true of all admins across the world; the global economy is facing the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression and are taking on unprecedented debt to tackle it. We are not different and are actually better placed than many other economies in this regard.
3. The deficit is a problem but under current macroeconmic conditions no country can afford to cut spending or raise taxes too much. India needs to do better in improving its tax coverage and reduce the black economy to fight this shortfall.
4. Oh come on, that project was mired in corruption and problems way before the Congress govt, the NDA had botched it up pretty badly as well.

Conrad,

Please read the articles in entirety. Of course YSR cannot openly demolish temples for religious purposes so they are disguised under "Road Development", but the ISCKON temple, out of the many other roadside religious shrines was the only one scheduled for demolishment. And I think we've been over the TTD example enough to establish the agenda. I have tried to restrict myself to the english language media which underreports these activities as the private owners don't want to antagonize the government. You are more than welcome to do your own research if you really find all this to be that incredulous

1. You still sure about NREGS? How bout now? Now?

The Farm Loan waiver was a completely corrupt operation which wasted money and didn't help farmers at all (And, the CAG reported 50,000 crores missing). Add that to the growing list of corruption scandals (Satyam and D. Raja Telecom scandal) and underpaid/underarmed and humiliated military.

2&3. Yes, India is better placed economically--hence it should have a more responsible government. Please don't excuse away this deficit when this deficit was for the previous years' (before economic collapse)spending

4.Dude, where are your figures on the National Highways? here're mine:

Arun Shourie on the boiling frog

Please watch the video and challenge his facts. Not saying you don't do this, but unfortunately other commentators have. Thanks.

Okay I am confused now, if only the ISKON temple is being singled out then how is it an 'anti-Hindu' move as the other shrines are being left in place. I don't know the details so I can't comment. And no such 'agenda' has been established by anybody on the TTD, several allegations have been made but that is all. Without further evidence I really don't see the credibility of saying anything more.

1. Are you having a laugh? From 10 years spent in Africa, all I can say is that the World Bank is an extremely stupid organisation when it comes to development. It has inflicted untold damage by its so-called approach and no country will develop by following its strategy. Yes, I am quite convinced, I spent two years studing the NREGA in UP and am satisfied with my findings that it is a vital programme. Corruption scandals are common to every regime and as for the military that is also something that needs to be changed but it is a policy of the entire political class, the BJP included, that has underfunded and demoted the status of the army and the officer corps in particular. No govt for various reasons has taken any concrete steps to solve this issue; this is a structural problem.

2. Shourie should spend less time swanning around university campuses and more time actually traversing the NH then he could see what progress or lack of is being made. I have for the Delhi-Kolkata route for the past few years, so I don't need to listen to Mr Shourie to know what the lack of progress under successive govts is like. My figures for the fiscal deficit are somewhat different for Shourie's of course what he won't tell you is that the high oil prices in the previous fiscal year acted as a huge drag as it automatically raised the subsidy - independently of govt control. We can talk figures if you like but I always go to the original data, I would not rely on data provided for by an intermediary, especially a politician on this score (which is what Shourie is).

The other shrines were apparently non-hindu. And Conrad, plenty of examples have already been provided upthread about the evangelism of YSR. Here's another article.

1. The question about NREGS is whether it has actually generated any real public good. The consensus is that it has not. Please provide facts and figures rather than blanket statements on the world bank. Even setting the "economic hitmen" aside, there's plenty of in-house data to show how much of a corrupt venture it is.

2, Dude, please watch the video. The data Arun Shourie actually quotes are from a Morgan Stanley report...so no need for him to personally inspect the NH. The CAG already does that. Please show data. Yes, Shourie is a politician, but he is also an economist and he uses third party facts. I mean for god's sake, he actually thanked congress babu Pranab Mukherjee for preventing Sonia Gandhi from gifting away Siachen. he may be a bjp'er but he's a patriot first.

3. Frankly, considering all the attacks in 2008, the continuing Maoist crisis, crumbling infrastructure and military, and a belligerent China, Shourie is correct in swanning around university campuses and town hall meetings in order to raise awareness of india's dire straits and the UPA's record

As an aside, given your PhD studies, do you have any good academic data on rural poverty/farmer suicide links from policy institutes? Links? Thank you in advance. Who says we can't be productive while we debate ;)...

UPA economic mismanagement and subsidies

is (facebook-style) waiting for someone to bemoan how the blog has been taken over by Hindutvadians, Hindutvadites, Hindutvandans ...Indians

Somehow, when the US actually nukes a nation - its worthy to be repeated ad nauseum on discovery, etc.
When Pak develops a nuclear weapons ring, touts its islamic bomb - no biggie there.
But when India - finally- goes nuclear, and some Hindus tie it to cultural nationalism, we have some NRIs get all worked up.
Grow up. At the end of the day, all said and done, all the soap and water wont make you anyone else..but Indian. Keep crapping on your own people, and you are the ones who will suffer as the real India - not the one full of snake charmers, urine drinkers, heathen idol worshippers, "daleets" / oppressed untouchables gets smeared further.