This is not the response I was looking for. My opinion is that we complicate things for ourselves by venting out and throwing cheap abuses and cusswords when we find something offending. In short, we "get angry" and vent our feelings out thus exhausting the anger.
Far from it, we should not lose our temper and need to look at the situation with a very cool head and keen eyes. See what is being said. See who is saying it and why. See the motivation and the intention behind it (if there is one), and finally see if we can influence the author, the institution, the medium, and finally the audience (in increasing order of importance) about the true picture as percieved by Hindus.
By abusing someone and going into their ancestry and how they were born would not solve our purpose. In this situation I am reminded of Mahatma Gandhi's experience in South Africa. Once he was beaten up and thrown out of a train by racist cops with no provocation other than to travel in a frist class compartment. Gandhi's response was not to throw abuse at him, and not even to plot a personal revenge but to bring down the institution that was creating such racist attitude. To what extent he was successful is well known to us.
Dr.Kealey has written an article. Any amount of vituperative argument would only make Dr.Kealey more defensive. Engage Dr.Kealey to a public or private discussion on his motivation to write what he wrote. What he has achieved by this as an academic and as an individual. Advise him on places where he has overlooked facts. Ask him if he feels this is the final version of his thoughts on Hinduism and the pre-free-market societies and how Hinduism can be an example in positively influencing the same society today (Yoga being but one of the infinite influences.) Ask him if he could have written the article in any other way that is less offensive and in a way that dignifies his position as a Vice Chancellor.
Far from it, we should not lose our temper and need to look at the situation with a very cool head and keen eyes. See what is being said. See who is saying it and why. See the motivation and the intention behind it (if there is one), and finally see if we can influence the author, the institution, the medium, and finally the audience (in increasing order of importance) about the true picture as percieved by Hindus.
By abusing someone and going into their ancestry and how they were born would not solve our purpose. In this situation I am reminded of Mahatma Gandhi's experience in South Africa. Once he was beaten up and thrown out of a train by racist cops with no provocation other than to travel in a frist class compartment. Gandhi's response was not to throw abuse at him, and not even to plot a personal revenge but to bring down the institution that was creating such racist attitude. To what extent he was successful is well known to us.
Dr.Kealey has written an article. Any amount of vituperative argument would only make Dr.Kealey more defensive. Engage Dr.Kealey to a public or private discussion on his motivation to write what he wrote. What he has achieved by this as an academic and as an individual. Advise him on places where he has overlooked facts. Ask him if he feels this is the final version of his thoughts on Hinduism and the pre-free-market societies and how Hinduism can be an example in positively influencing the same society today (Yoga being but one of the infinite influences.) Ask him if he could have written the article in any other way that is less offensive and in a way that dignifies his position as a Vice Chancellor.