11-04-2005, 03:57 AM
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivili...n/message/81709
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The article in question is a little dated (08/29/2003), so it is
possible that it has already been discussed in this forum.
Please see the following link:
http://www.thejewishweek.com/top/editletco...php3?artid=2951
In the article titled "Jews And India: Troubling Ties"
<b>Mr. Zahir Janmohamed</b> writes, (and I quote)
"Advani also has a track record of endorsing anti-Semitic Indian
organizations and leaders recruiting and training proponents of hard-
line Hindu nationalism.
One of the organization's pioneering ideologues, Veer Savarkar,
endorsed the Nazis' persecution of German Jews."
Now I am fairly certain that these above statements are **pure**
**fabrications**. Veer Savarkar, far from endorsing anti-Semitism,
was a Judeophile. (As I am sure forumites are aware).
There is also stuff about Indian students admiring Hitler which I
frankly find incredible. But that would be harder to disprove, it
seems to me.
Any comments? Perhaps we should contact the web-site/magazine in
question?
The magazine in question is "The Jewish Week", a NYC
publication.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Shri Elst replied..
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivili...n/message/81725
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Reference may be to his speech in Bombay ca. 1938 in which he simply
says that every country is entitled to its own system, the USSR to
Communism, Germany to Nazism etc. It is a reply to an attack by
Nehru on Nazi Germany. Savarkar says that in terms of political and
economical effectiveness, Nazism seems to serve Germany well (as was
also said at the time by Churchill, Lloyd George, Kennedy father annd
son, et al.), better than anything the ignorant outsider Nehru could
dictate to it. Persecution of the Jews does not figure in the speech
at all.
Savarkar was at any rate not a member (but in fact an acerbic critic)
of the RSS family to which Advani belongs and to which this paper
seems to refer. So, apparently, there is a confusion here with RSS
sarsanghchalak Golwalkar, who did famously write a line in 1938 that
could be interpreted (with some malice, but there's enough of that
around) as endorsing the Nazi oppression of the Jews in the forms it
took before the Kristallnacht, i.e. essentially the Nuremberg laws
limiting or excluding Jewish participation in certain professions and
prohibiting Aryan-Jewish intermarriage. Because most people's
knowledge of the chronology of WW2 is hazy, the public can easily be
fooled into reading this as an endorsement of the deportation and
mass killing of the Jews of 1941-44.
In reality, Golwalkar merely intended to observe that the German
experience proved how nations cannot live together in amultinational
state but had better live in separate nation-states, a point promoted
at the time by the Zionist movement. I'm not saying that the "proof"
is valid, merely that he saw it as "a lesson for us to profit by",
viz. that multinational coexistence under one roof is the cause of
friction. Golwalkar's booklet We, in which this point is raised,
contains a number of pro-Jewish passages and one specifically anti-
Nazi one concerning Sudentenland, where he thought the Czechs should
have assimilated the Germans. He also contrasts the
German "barbaric" and "violent" character with the Hindu character,
whose path is outlined by the sages rather than by the bloodthirsty
warriors who make up the national pantheon of so many other nations
including Germany.
All the same, Golwalkar's language was careless and a little foolish,
and this not only in the Germany-related pasages. Later on, he
realized this himself, and after the impounding and destruction of
the booklet's fourth reprint's remaining stock by the government in
1948 (after the Mahatma murder), he ordered it not to be reprinted,
explaining to his lieutenants that it was "a bit immature". About
99% of present-day Sanghis have had no exposure to the booklet
whatsoever. Yet, if you were to believe current reports about
Golwalkar, every RSS-BJP member gets up and goes to sleep with this
line on his lips.
In a normal world, the sidelining of the booklet by Golwalkar himself
would have been the end of the matter, as indeed it was for the Sangh
activists themselves. But actually, Nazi-centric Communist
propagandists saw the damage value of this yellowed and forgotten
booklet. They found it especially useful after their traditional
support base collapsed and their presence in UK/US universities
became their main bastion. There, they had to reckon with the factor
of Jewish influence, which could only favour the pro-Zionist Hindu
nationalists over the virulently anti-Zionist Indian Mullah-Marxist
combine. So, to trump this, they needed truly strong stuff, viz.
depicting the Hindu nationalists as India's even bigger enemies of
the Jews, i.e. as Nazis. So now, after a few years of working at it,
they have achieved the opinion-engineering feat of reducing the
name "Golwalkar" to a Pavlovian identification with the one-liner
about "Germany's race pride" etc.
You may consider this all most unfair, but this is the reality with
which the Sangh leadership has to deal. On the occasion of
Golwalkar's upcoming centenary, it should have organized a conference
to re-evaluate Golwalkar's work, concluding it with an official
statement confirming or abandoning specific positions taken by
Golwalkar. Instead, as sarsanghchalak Sudarshan has announced in his
Vijayadashami speech, there will be the usual hagiographical
programmes, the same repetitive speeches about "his enduring lessons"
and "his undying example" blabla. Mindless, stupid, collectively
narcissistic, materially wasteful, and totally counterproductive.
Golwalkar today is a millstone around the Sangh's neck, in fact one
that keeps on getting heavier, and Sudarshanji cheerfully announces
that he will keep on inflicting that millstone on his followers. And
the whole world press will announce in bold print: "Hindu chauvinists
confirm allegiance to Nazi leader". Thus further and durably
estranging any potential allies.
It is related that two youngsters once visited Savarkar, telling
him: "We are willing to give our lives for the Motherland." He
replied: "If you want to die for the Motherland, you go to the old
man (Mahatma Gandhi). But if you want to kill for the Motherland,
then I can indicate a few useful targets for you." Well, tongue-in-
cheek of course, but if I were the Savarkarite adviser of these would-
be killers eager to serve the Hindu cause, I guess I would suggest
the current RSS top brass. Throw them into the Indian Ocean with a
millstone around their necks.
> There is also stuff about Indian students admiring Hitler which I
> frankly find incredible. But that would be harder to disprove, it
> seems to me.
>
Anyone can get any desired result from an opinion poll, it all
depends on how you frame the question. But it is quite possible that
many Indian students consider Hitler a remarkable man,-- so do most
Americans. In Time's pop poll for the "man of the 20th century", the
goal posts had to be changed in order to prevent Hitler from coming
out on top. Thanks precisely to moral and historical illiterates
such as Time's own editors, whose moral universe is one-dimensionally
Hitler-centred, Hitler has become easily the most-mentioned 20th-
century public figure in current political discourse. Note, by
contrast, that the names "Hitler" and "Nazi" do not figure in
Golwalkar's We, whereas in those days anyone favouring Hitler and
Nazism could have openly said and written so.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
User Harish posted a few quotes from Savarkar..
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivili...n/message/81729
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The following are the statements of Veer Savarkar about Jews:
Veer Savarkar, ideologue of Hindutva, saw the Jews as allies in a
common struggle. In his famous Hindutva of 1923, he wrote:
"if the Zionists' dreams were realised, if Palestine became a Jewish
State, it would gladden us almost as much as our Jewish friends."
Savarkar had been pro-Zionist since 1908 and remained so as Bharat's
betrayers went in the opposite direction. In 1952, Savarkar looked to
the Jews an example for the Hindu to emulate if they wished to be a
modern nation:
"Even a tiny state like Israel has sensibly started developing fish
field and sand fruits and because of that they are able to meet the
needs of the countless immigrants who would have otherwise half-
starved. The Jews are a brave and intelligent people. And although
their State looks like a child before our great state of Bharat we
must emulate its example."
In the post-1947 years Savarker denounced Comrade Nehru's refusal to
recognise Israel, saying quite frankly that he feared that it would
invite the very Muslim opposition which he was so eager to please. In
February 1956 at the annual session of the Hindu Mahasabha in
Jodhpur, he was clear that this was a suicidal course:
". . . if tomorrow there breaks out a war between Pakistan and Bharat
almost all Muslims will be arrayed on the side of Pakistan in
opposition to us and their enemy Israel will be our only friend.
Therefore I say that Bharat should give unequivocal recognition to
Israel. If we desire to safeguard the independence of Bharat we
should be militarily strong."
http://www.swordoftruth.com/swordoftruth/a...voice/yhbb.html
The man had great foresight whatever his shortcomings (like his indo-
centric definition of a Hindu),he predicted many things way before
they occured, too bad idiot Hindus never realised that he was the
real leader of Hindus not the semi xtianised Gandhi and in the end
they got their karmic punishment during partition and are still are
suffering right now for following Gandhi and Nehru.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The article in question is a little dated (08/29/2003), so it is
possible that it has already been discussed in this forum.
Please see the following link:
http://www.thejewishweek.com/top/editletco...php3?artid=2951
In the article titled "Jews And India: Troubling Ties"
<b>Mr. Zahir Janmohamed</b> writes, (and I quote)
"Advani also has a track record of endorsing anti-Semitic Indian
organizations and leaders recruiting and training proponents of hard-
line Hindu nationalism.
One of the organization's pioneering ideologues, Veer Savarkar,
endorsed the Nazis' persecution of German Jews."
Now I am fairly certain that these above statements are **pure**
**fabrications**. Veer Savarkar, far from endorsing anti-Semitism,
was a Judeophile. (As I am sure forumites are aware).
There is also stuff about Indian students admiring Hitler which I
frankly find incredible. But that would be harder to disprove, it
seems to me.
Any comments? Perhaps we should contact the web-site/magazine in
question?
The magazine in question is "The Jewish Week", a NYC
publication.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Shri Elst replied..
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivili...n/message/81725
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Reference may be to his speech in Bombay ca. 1938 in which he simply
says that every country is entitled to its own system, the USSR to
Communism, Germany to Nazism etc. It is a reply to an attack by
Nehru on Nazi Germany. Savarkar says that in terms of political and
economical effectiveness, Nazism seems to serve Germany well (as was
also said at the time by Churchill, Lloyd George, Kennedy father annd
son, et al.), better than anything the ignorant outsider Nehru could
dictate to it. Persecution of the Jews does not figure in the speech
at all.
Savarkar was at any rate not a member (but in fact an acerbic critic)
of the RSS family to which Advani belongs and to which this paper
seems to refer. So, apparently, there is a confusion here with RSS
sarsanghchalak Golwalkar, who did famously write a line in 1938 that
could be interpreted (with some malice, but there's enough of that
around) as endorsing the Nazi oppression of the Jews in the forms it
took before the Kristallnacht, i.e. essentially the Nuremberg laws
limiting or excluding Jewish participation in certain professions and
prohibiting Aryan-Jewish intermarriage. Because most people's
knowledge of the chronology of WW2 is hazy, the public can easily be
fooled into reading this as an endorsement of the deportation and
mass killing of the Jews of 1941-44.
In reality, Golwalkar merely intended to observe that the German
experience proved how nations cannot live together in amultinational
state but had better live in separate nation-states, a point promoted
at the time by the Zionist movement. I'm not saying that the "proof"
is valid, merely that he saw it as "a lesson for us to profit by",
viz. that multinational coexistence under one roof is the cause of
friction. Golwalkar's booklet We, in which this point is raised,
contains a number of pro-Jewish passages and one specifically anti-
Nazi one concerning Sudentenland, where he thought the Czechs should
have assimilated the Germans. He also contrasts the
German "barbaric" and "violent" character with the Hindu character,
whose path is outlined by the sages rather than by the bloodthirsty
warriors who make up the national pantheon of so many other nations
including Germany.
All the same, Golwalkar's language was careless and a little foolish,
and this not only in the Germany-related pasages. Later on, he
realized this himself, and after the impounding and destruction of
the booklet's fourth reprint's remaining stock by the government in
1948 (after the Mahatma murder), he ordered it not to be reprinted,
explaining to his lieutenants that it was "a bit immature". About
99% of present-day Sanghis have had no exposure to the booklet
whatsoever. Yet, if you were to believe current reports about
Golwalkar, every RSS-BJP member gets up and goes to sleep with this
line on his lips.
In a normal world, the sidelining of the booklet by Golwalkar himself
would have been the end of the matter, as indeed it was for the Sangh
activists themselves. But actually, Nazi-centric Communist
propagandists saw the damage value of this yellowed and forgotten
booklet. They found it especially useful after their traditional
support base collapsed and their presence in UK/US universities
became their main bastion. There, they had to reckon with the factor
of Jewish influence, which could only favour the pro-Zionist Hindu
nationalists over the virulently anti-Zionist Indian Mullah-Marxist
combine. So, to trump this, they needed truly strong stuff, viz.
depicting the Hindu nationalists as India's even bigger enemies of
the Jews, i.e. as Nazis. So now, after a few years of working at it,
they have achieved the opinion-engineering feat of reducing the
name "Golwalkar" to a Pavlovian identification with the one-liner
about "Germany's race pride" etc.
You may consider this all most unfair, but this is the reality with
which the Sangh leadership has to deal. On the occasion of
Golwalkar's upcoming centenary, it should have organized a conference
to re-evaluate Golwalkar's work, concluding it with an official
statement confirming or abandoning specific positions taken by
Golwalkar. Instead, as sarsanghchalak Sudarshan has announced in his
Vijayadashami speech, there will be the usual hagiographical
programmes, the same repetitive speeches about "his enduring lessons"
and "his undying example" blabla. Mindless, stupid, collectively
narcissistic, materially wasteful, and totally counterproductive.
Golwalkar today is a millstone around the Sangh's neck, in fact one
that keeps on getting heavier, and Sudarshanji cheerfully announces
that he will keep on inflicting that millstone on his followers. And
the whole world press will announce in bold print: "Hindu chauvinists
confirm allegiance to Nazi leader". Thus further and durably
estranging any potential allies.
It is related that two youngsters once visited Savarkar, telling
him: "We are willing to give our lives for the Motherland." He
replied: "If you want to die for the Motherland, you go to the old
man (Mahatma Gandhi). But if you want to kill for the Motherland,
then I can indicate a few useful targets for you." Well, tongue-in-
cheek of course, but if I were the Savarkarite adviser of these would-
be killers eager to serve the Hindu cause, I guess I would suggest
the current RSS top brass. Throw them into the Indian Ocean with a
millstone around their necks.
> There is also stuff about Indian students admiring Hitler which I
> frankly find incredible. But that would be harder to disprove, it
> seems to me.
>
Anyone can get any desired result from an opinion poll, it all
depends on how you frame the question. But it is quite possible that
many Indian students consider Hitler a remarkable man,-- so do most
Americans. In Time's pop poll for the "man of the 20th century", the
goal posts had to be changed in order to prevent Hitler from coming
out on top. Thanks precisely to moral and historical illiterates
such as Time's own editors, whose moral universe is one-dimensionally
Hitler-centred, Hitler has become easily the most-mentioned 20th-
century public figure in current political discourse. Note, by
contrast, that the names "Hitler" and "Nazi" do not figure in
Golwalkar's We, whereas in those days anyone favouring Hitler and
Nazism could have openly said and written so.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
User Harish posted a few quotes from Savarkar..
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivili...n/message/81729
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The following are the statements of Veer Savarkar about Jews:
Veer Savarkar, ideologue of Hindutva, saw the Jews as allies in a
common struggle. In his famous Hindutva of 1923, he wrote:
"if the Zionists' dreams were realised, if Palestine became a Jewish
State, it would gladden us almost as much as our Jewish friends."
Savarkar had been pro-Zionist since 1908 and remained so as Bharat's
betrayers went in the opposite direction. In 1952, Savarkar looked to
the Jews an example for the Hindu to emulate if they wished to be a
modern nation:
"Even a tiny state like Israel has sensibly started developing fish
field and sand fruits and because of that they are able to meet the
needs of the countless immigrants who would have otherwise half-
starved. The Jews are a brave and intelligent people. And although
their State looks like a child before our great state of Bharat we
must emulate its example."
In the post-1947 years Savarker denounced Comrade Nehru's refusal to
recognise Israel, saying quite frankly that he feared that it would
invite the very Muslim opposition which he was so eager to please. In
February 1956 at the annual session of the Hindu Mahasabha in
Jodhpur, he was clear that this was a suicidal course:
". . . if tomorrow there breaks out a war between Pakistan and Bharat
almost all Muslims will be arrayed on the side of Pakistan in
opposition to us and their enemy Israel will be our only friend.
Therefore I say that Bharat should give unequivocal recognition to
Israel. If we desire to safeguard the independence of Bharat we
should be militarily strong."
http://www.swordoftruth.com/swordoftruth/a...voice/yhbb.html
The man had great foresight whatever his shortcomings (like his indo-
centric definition of a Hindu),he predicted many things way before
they occured, too bad idiot Hindus never realised that he was the
real leader of Hindus not the semi xtianised Gandhi and in the end
they got their karmic punishment during partition and are still are
suffering right now for following Gandhi and Nehru.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->