12-13-2005, 08:42 AM
http://www.indiblog.com/78/hindu-right-err...islamic-terror/
<b>
Hindu Right erroneously equated to Islamic Terror
</b>
Martha Nussbaumâs fantastic tales are only getting more tiring - now she compares the RSS-BJP Hindu âRightâ of India to Al Qaeda! This is the height of wrong analogies and misinformation - it has indeed turned into a slandering of the Sangh Parivar.
Iâm not involved with the Sangh, but I have no qualms in saying that Iâm a sympathiser partly because of all the bad publicity they get for no apparent mistake of theirs.
Such artificial ideas of purity and authenticity are not only misleading, they are also the very ideas that have been exploited politically by the Hindu right in trying to cast non-Hindus as alien polluters of the national fabric.
Here Martha is clearly getting confused and pulling words out of the RSSâ mouth. Hindu and India are two different things even though there is a significant overlap. The RSS has never accused non-Hindus of âpolluting the national fabricâ of India. All they have asked of the non-Hindus is to Indianize themselves; in other words, to integrate with the Indian society which is predominantly Hindu.
Now what is wrong in this? Has not and does not America encourage integration of its ethnic minorities by even requiring of them to learn English? UK thinks that its Muslim community is not integrated well enough after its July bombings. Integration is healthy and it is only this that RSS has asked of Muslims.
When a respected editor states that the main job of liberals in this era is to counteract the influence of Islamic totalitarianism (See Peter Beinert, âAn Argument for a New Liberalism: A Fighting Faith,â The New Republic, December 13, 2004), I feel alarmed.
Iâm alarmed at Marthaâs reaction to this editorâs statement. Islamic terror is indeed a global problem today leading to the loss of numerous innocent lives with startling regularity. Therefore, intellectual attack of Islamic totalitarianism by liberals is to be encouraged and not shunned.
She justifies her reaction by equating Islamic terror to the Gujarat riots. The two things are clearly different - while the former is planned attacks on civilians to cause maximum damage by a network of groups occurring regularly in the 21st Century, the latter was sporadic fighting by the civilians themselves, called riots, and occurred over a specific period in 2002 after a triggering incident (which was the Godhra incident where a Muslim mob burnt alive about 60 Hindus).
Equating Islamic terrorism and the Gujarat riots as Martha does is absolutely untenable and unacceptable.
Martha then goes on to describe the anti-Muslim feeling and alleges that it is increasing. Hindu-Muslim relationship has always been tense ever since the Mughal occupation of India. Even though there is peace and Hindu-Muslim brotherhood and innumerable examples of friendship, the overall atmosphere has never been perfect - so there is nothing new here. Consider the Partition of India, for instance.
Finally, Martha locates the Hindu Right in the peopleâs hearts - thereby, she calls the general population the Hindu Right itself. Not only is this allegation preposterous, but her deduction leaves much to be desired. After riots, it always takes some time to reach the pre-riots atmosphere.
If I were to use the same deduction, then I could blame the Americans for harbouring ill-will against Russians, against any Communist even to this day! Why are the villains in Hollywood movies Communists? Why does the invasion of North Korea in a Bond movie seem politically right in America?
Truly, studying Gujarat Riots is commendable for it will tell us how to avoid, prevent or curtail such explosive situations. But if the study is biased right from the outset, if it is based on misleading deductions and a false foundation, then the results are likely to be questionable, at the very least.
<b>
Hindu Right erroneously equated to Islamic Terror
</b>
Martha Nussbaumâs fantastic tales are only getting more tiring - now she compares the RSS-BJP Hindu âRightâ of India to Al Qaeda! This is the height of wrong analogies and misinformation - it has indeed turned into a slandering of the Sangh Parivar.
Iâm not involved with the Sangh, but I have no qualms in saying that Iâm a sympathiser partly because of all the bad publicity they get for no apparent mistake of theirs.
Such artificial ideas of purity and authenticity are not only misleading, they are also the very ideas that have been exploited politically by the Hindu right in trying to cast non-Hindus as alien polluters of the national fabric.
Here Martha is clearly getting confused and pulling words out of the RSSâ mouth. Hindu and India are two different things even though there is a significant overlap. The RSS has never accused non-Hindus of âpolluting the national fabricâ of India. All they have asked of the non-Hindus is to Indianize themselves; in other words, to integrate with the Indian society which is predominantly Hindu.
Now what is wrong in this? Has not and does not America encourage integration of its ethnic minorities by even requiring of them to learn English? UK thinks that its Muslim community is not integrated well enough after its July bombings. Integration is healthy and it is only this that RSS has asked of Muslims.
When a respected editor states that the main job of liberals in this era is to counteract the influence of Islamic totalitarianism (See Peter Beinert, âAn Argument for a New Liberalism: A Fighting Faith,â The New Republic, December 13, 2004), I feel alarmed.
Iâm alarmed at Marthaâs reaction to this editorâs statement. Islamic terror is indeed a global problem today leading to the loss of numerous innocent lives with startling regularity. Therefore, intellectual attack of Islamic totalitarianism by liberals is to be encouraged and not shunned.
She justifies her reaction by equating Islamic terror to the Gujarat riots. The two things are clearly different - while the former is planned attacks on civilians to cause maximum damage by a network of groups occurring regularly in the 21st Century, the latter was sporadic fighting by the civilians themselves, called riots, and occurred over a specific period in 2002 after a triggering incident (which was the Godhra incident where a Muslim mob burnt alive about 60 Hindus).
Equating Islamic terrorism and the Gujarat riots as Martha does is absolutely untenable and unacceptable.
Martha then goes on to describe the anti-Muslim feeling and alleges that it is increasing. Hindu-Muslim relationship has always been tense ever since the Mughal occupation of India. Even though there is peace and Hindu-Muslim brotherhood and innumerable examples of friendship, the overall atmosphere has never been perfect - so there is nothing new here. Consider the Partition of India, for instance.
Finally, Martha locates the Hindu Right in the peopleâs hearts - thereby, she calls the general population the Hindu Right itself. Not only is this allegation preposterous, but her deduction leaves much to be desired. After riots, it always takes some time to reach the pre-riots atmosphere.
If I were to use the same deduction, then I could blame the Americans for harbouring ill-will against Russians, against any Communist even to this day! Why are the villains in Hollywood movies Communists? Why does the invasion of North Korea in a Bond movie seem politically right in America?
Truly, studying Gujarat Riots is commendable for it will tell us how to avoid, prevent or curtail such explosive situations. But if the study is biased right from the outset, if it is based on misleading deductions and a false foundation, then the results are likely to be questionable, at the very least.