03-27-2006, 02:03 AM
There is something called "victim syndrome" that is deep roooted in Christianity. It valorizes martyrs, i.e. those who volunteer to become victims for the service of good against evil. Jesus was the pre-eminent voluntary victim. Most saints ordained by the Vatican in its history were martyrs as their main claim to deserving sainthood. The church maintains a FORMAL database of martyrs organized by year and by country, and this is a celebrated status. There is a whole trackong system worldwide funded to notify of martyrs and church training often encourages its evangelists to put themselves in harms way to become martyrs.
Muslims also adopted this idea and they call such a person "shaheed" or martyr.
But in the Hindu-Buddhist-Jain traditions greatness was not based on being martyrs - Ram, Krishna, Shiva, Goddess, various gurus and saints over centuries, intellectuals like Patanjali, Abhinavagupta, Nagarjuna, etc., each were greats on entirely different criteria than martyrdom. We never extolled victimhood as a way to achieve glory. Sikhs do have a few martyrs who died at the hands of the Mughals.
What effects does the martyrdom archetype and victim syndrome cause in the world?
It encourages jihad as a way to reach paradise, it makes people want to claim victim status quickly to get support. That is why the strategy being taught to dalits and minorities across India is how to become "victims" in order to advance. This is new to most Indian jatis, as they competed in the past and went up/down the socioeconomic strata without any of this victim syndrome. Most medieval kings in India were shudras, and many of India's famous textile, iron/steel, and other manufacturing industries were controlled by jatis which later became classifed by British ethnographers as "victims".
This new menatlity causes conflicts by design.(social engineering) It is about time serious intellectuals problematized the use and abuse of victimhood as strategy to get ahead.
regards,
Rajiv Malhotra
Muslims also adopted this idea and they call such a person "shaheed" or martyr.
But in the Hindu-Buddhist-Jain traditions greatness was not based on being martyrs - Ram, Krishna, Shiva, Goddess, various gurus and saints over centuries, intellectuals like Patanjali, Abhinavagupta, Nagarjuna, etc., each were greats on entirely different criteria than martyrdom. We never extolled victimhood as a way to achieve glory. Sikhs do have a few martyrs who died at the hands of the Mughals.
What effects does the martyrdom archetype and victim syndrome cause in the world?
It encourages jihad as a way to reach paradise, it makes people want to claim victim status quickly to get support. That is why the strategy being taught to dalits and minorities across India is how to become "victims" in order to advance. This is new to most Indian jatis, as they competed in the past and went up/down the socioeconomic strata without any of this victim syndrome. Most medieval kings in India were shudras, and many of India's famous textile, iron/steel, and other manufacturing industries were controlled by jatis which later became classifed by British ethnographers as "victims".
This new menatlity causes conflicts by design.(social engineering) It is about time serious intellectuals problematized the use and abuse of victimhood as strategy to get ahead.
regards,
Rajiv Malhotra