Post 2/?
The 3 statements by Elst that I saw and wished to comment on. Much of the highlighting is as in original.
1.
Narendra Modi is objectionable not because he is pro-Hindu: he may be a Hindu in his personal life, but all those of his govt's important policies that I've heard of so far are exclusively nationalist - i.e. with India's welfare in mind - and not Hindu (i.e. not with the intention of infusing Hindudom with the strength that was drained out of it).
IIRC from what I think I saw in the twitter section of the Rajeev2004 blog, Modi's govt has policies regarding J&K and Pakistan occupied J&K and resettlement. He has policies about illegal Bangladeshi infiltratis aka jihadis being sent back to the islamic hellhole they came from and where they belong. Etc.
And as he declared for all to hear: toilets before temples. I haven't yet heard of him starting on the sanitation project, so we won't hear about the temples for a while yet if at all.
AmeriKKKa and the rest of the west find Modi objectionable NOT because he is Hindu but because he IS a nationalist. India hasn't even had a nationalist leader for a while (forget one with the reversion of the nation to Hindu-dom at his heart, i.e. a pro-Hindu leader). The west knows full-well that modern India is nigh-on incapable of producing a heathen leader oriented towards restoring heathenism like Julian. We can only produce Hindu nationalists - i.e. leaders who act in nationalist interests who are Hindu in their personal life.
- Modi has given no indication of saving Padmanabha Kovil of HRCE/christo looting, or of removing the islamaniac building from the temple premises in the region of Tirupati, or of having stolen vigrahas and temple wealth returned from foreign museums and thieves who acquired this, or of having the Iridium temple dome returned (which had been stolen and smuggled to aliens who had before that made it clearly known they wanted to acquire it) etc etc.
- I have not as yet heard of Modi having Dara Singh or Swami Aseemanand, Sadhvi Pragya etc released or having Lakshmananda avenged by bringing to justice the christian assailants who attempted his life multiple times and succeeded in the end.
- Have not even yet heard of Modi making sure a Sri Rama temple is rebuilt at Ayodhya. (I don't know in what state of destruction the Ramarsethu was at.)
- Not heard him declare universal residence status to any TSP-E/W Hindu who wants to return home, let alone by excepting the Goan christos of TSP.
The above are some of the *minimum* steps a pro-Hindu leader would take. But Modi is very much a nationalist going by his measures so far. Which means he will not sell India to aliens and alien interests, thereby turning the nation into a Banana Republic. <= BANANA REPUBLIC has an official meaning and that is the sense I am using it in. (Will paste stuff on this in the next post as it is *very much* relevant).
And as a nationalist Indian leader - i.e. someone who will not comply to foreign diktat - he is very much against the interests of the west and which is why they never wanted to see him or any like him elected in India. It is the reason they hate Shinzo Abe - because he cares about Japan and its interests first. They hate Putin because he is a Russian Iron Man that has enough ego to make Russia strong again and enough pride not to sell his country to most foreign bidders, regardless of whether his other qualities are meritorious or not.
What the west hates above all things is not just heathenism, but the existence of autonomous and autonomously prosperous large nations outside the west.
Heathenism makes other people's will naturally of autonomous-bent - i.e. immune to the Western Will for what other people "ought" to be doing/falling in line.
E European and Russian orthodox christianism is another - far more minor - point of difference, but which until our time was still a major distinction and point of contention, that set the E Europeans apart from western ones and allowed them to not always roll over to western interests.
2.
Elst would have you believe it is Indian "imagination" aka paranoia that the west conspires.
So it must be:
- Venezuelan paranoia. (And S/C American paranoia in general. But people's memories are short. I guess no one remembers the infamous School of the Americas? Where AmeriKKKa famously groomed the foreign dictators that would destroy S and C American populations and keep them 2nd world Banana Republics forever?)
- Russian/Ukrainian paranoia. (Also include colour revolutions here)
- Chinese paranoia.
- Serbian/Yugoslavian paranoia.
But NONE of these are paranoia.
(Just as the relentless needling about and attack on Shinzo Abe/Abe's Japan by western media, by western christian institutions in Japan and their students, and by western native puppets is not Japanese paranoia. It is very clear to anyone who is even slightly familiar with Japan.)
Western long-distance meddling in all the above cases are obvious to the victim populations. And it all follows a familiar class of pattern.
Indeed, all the above and many more cases are obvious to *anyone* who's been following international news for the past decades and has seen the pattern.
The decades-long attack on India - the western conspiring with the native Indian puppets they had set up, e.g. Romila Thapar and her free chair in US uni-s, despite US pretence of dislike of communists (except where they are aligned with the west against the west's more urgent enemies) - followed by their more recent concerted attack on Modi as the representative of a strong India (as opposed to the weak, impotent and put-upon shove-over India as it was under the puppet KKKangress govt where its strength and any possibility of autonomy and resurgence was continually drained)
Again: these most pointed western attacks on India - which clearly show bias and ill-intent/pre-meditation - follow a very similar attack strategy to how the Serbians and their erstwhile Yugoslavia were repeatedly discredited and demonised by the conspiring west.
Elst will next deny that too (or plead that it was a special case, or some other excuse, etc etc).
3.
It is very true that christianism descends with increased force on a heathen nation in ascendance - a nation that is becoming prosperous. E.g. South Korea was poised to turn into an affluent 1st world nation, showing clear signs of emergence, and BAM that's when christianism stepped up it's timetable for Asia and christianised S Korea at a frenetic pace, from which the once-heathen nation is still reeling. Now the evil Korean christians pretend that christianism brought affluence to Korea and that it had only been languishing in poverty because it had been native Asian heathen and Buddhist up to that point.
And that is the same trick christianism intends to pull on India if Hindu nationalism only aims at developing India and not at reversing the trends of de-Hinduisation and christoislamisation (and "secularisation" in the Indian context is merely christo-conditioning, which itself is one step removed from christianisation/conscious covnersion).
Depending on where India is at the development threshold when a (crypto)christian govt next takes over, christianism will either sink "India Shining/Rising" again - as KKKangress rule did in the last reign - OR if on the positive side of the threshold, the cline of development in India will be hijacked as an agent for christianisation and as a direct by-product of India's increased christianisation (i.e. "jeebus brought the prosperity" type advertising).
Anyway, Indians always want to learn the hard way, and modern Hindu nationalism is no different. Which is why a develoment agenda for a Hindu nationalist government is ultimately doomed from the start, as anyone with a pair of eyes can see. (Of course, that will not stop my moments of wishful thinking and hoping or imagining possibilities of what might be.)
The 3 statements by Elst that I saw and wished to comment on. Much of the highlighting is as in original.
1.
Quote:Was Manmohan Singh any less native? Is Arvind Kejriwal more foreign than Modi? For anti-Modi Indians and for their Western dupes, Narendra Modi is not insufferable because he is native (so were most preferred alternatives) but because he is seriously pro-Hindu.
Narendra Modi is objectionable not because he is pro-Hindu: he may be a Hindu in his personal life, but all those of his govt's important policies that I've heard of so far are exclusively nationalist - i.e. with India's welfare in mind - and not Hindu (i.e. not with the intention of infusing Hindudom with the strength that was drained out of it).
IIRC from what I think I saw in the twitter section of the Rajeev2004 blog, Modi's govt has policies regarding J&K and Pakistan occupied J&K and resettlement. He has policies about illegal Bangladeshi infiltratis aka jihadis being sent back to the islamic hellhole they came from and where they belong. Etc.
And as he declared for all to hear: toilets before temples. I haven't yet heard of him starting on the sanitation project, so we won't hear about the temples for a while yet if at all.
AmeriKKKa and the rest of the west find Modi objectionable NOT because he is Hindu but because he IS a nationalist. India hasn't even had a nationalist leader for a while (forget one with the reversion of the nation to Hindu-dom at his heart, i.e. a pro-Hindu leader). The west knows full-well that modern India is nigh-on incapable of producing a heathen leader oriented towards restoring heathenism like Julian. We can only produce Hindu nationalists - i.e. leaders who act in nationalist interests who are Hindu in their personal life.
- Modi has given no indication of saving Padmanabha Kovil of HRCE/christo looting, or of removing the islamaniac building from the temple premises in the region of Tirupati, or of having stolen vigrahas and temple wealth returned from foreign museums and thieves who acquired this, or of having the Iridium temple dome returned (which had been stolen and smuggled to aliens who had before that made it clearly known they wanted to acquire it) etc etc.
- I have not as yet heard of Modi having Dara Singh or Swami Aseemanand, Sadhvi Pragya etc released or having Lakshmananda avenged by bringing to justice the christian assailants who attempted his life multiple times and succeeded in the end.
- Have not even yet heard of Modi making sure a Sri Rama temple is rebuilt at Ayodhya. (I don't know in what state of destruction the Ramarsethu was at.)
- Not heard him declare universal residence status to any TSP-E/W Hindu who wants to return home, let alone by excepting the Goan christos of TSP.
The above are some of the *minimum* steps a pro-Hindu leader would take. But Modi is very much a nationalist going by his measures so far. Which means he will not sell India to aliens and alien interests, thereby turning the nation into a Banana Republic. <= BANANA REPUBLIC has an official meaning and that is the sense I am using it in. (Will paste stuff on this in the next post as it is *very much* relevant).
And as a nationalist Indian leader - i.e. someone who will not comply to foreign diktat - he is very much against the interests of the west and which is why they never wanted to see him or any like him elected in India. It is the reason they hate Shinzo Abe - because he cares about Japan and its interests first. They hate Putin because he is a Russian Iron Man that has enough ego to make Russia strong again and enough pride not to sell his country to most foreign bidders, regardless of whether his other qualities are meritorious or not.
What the west hates above all things is not just heathenism, but the existence of autonomous and autonomously prosperous large nations outside the west.
Heathenism makes other people's will naturally of autonomous-bent - i.e. immune to the Western Will for what other people "ought" to be doing/falling in line.
E European and Russian orthodox christianism is another - far more minor - point of difference, but which until our time was still a major distinction and point of contention, that set the E Europeans apart from western ones and allowed them to not always roll over to western interests.
2.
Quote:In their imaginary world, the West is plotting against India and using the secularists and minorities as sepoys. In the real world, the West is only modestly interested in India, but is being turned anti-Modi by the Indian secularists and the minorities (some of which are but the Indian franchise of multinationals, esp. the Christian and Islamic communities).
Elst would have you believe it is Indian "imagination" aka paranoia that the west conspires.
So it must be:
- Venezuelan paranoia. (And S/C American paranoia in general. But people's memories are short. I guess no one remembers the infamous School of the Americas? Where AmeriKKKa famously groomed the foreign dictators that would destroy S and C American populations and keep them 2nd world Banana Republics forever?)
- Russian/Ukrainian paranoia. (Also include colour revolutions here)
- Chinese paranoia.
- Serbian/Yugoslavian paranoia.
But NONE of these are paranoia.
(Just as the relentless needling about and attack on Shinzo Abe/Abe's Japan by western media, by western christian institutions in Japan and their students, and by western native puppets is not Japanese paranoia. It is very clear to anyone who is even slightly familiar with Japan.)
Western long-distance meddling in all the above cases are obvious to the victim populations. And it all follows a familiar class of pattern.
Indeed, all the above and many more cases are obvious to *anyone* who's been following international news for the past decades and has seen the pattern.
The decades-long attack on India - the western conspiring with the native Indian puppets they had set up, e.g. Romila Thapar and her free chair in US uni-s, despite US pretence of dislike of communists (except where they are aligned with the west against the west's more urgent enemies) - followed by their more recent concerted attack on Modi as the representative of a strong India (as opposed to the weak, impotent and put-upon shove-over India as it was under the puppet KKKangress govt where its strength and any possibility of autonomy and resurgence was continually drained)
Again: these most pointed western attacks on India - which clearly show bias and ill-intent/pre-meditation - follow a very similar attack strategy to how the Serbians and their erstwhile Yugoslavia were repeatedly discredited and demonised by the conspiring west.
Elst will next deny that too (or plead that it was a special case, or some other excuse, etc etc).
3.
Quote:Naïve Hindus seem to think that the mission is a ploy by foreign nations. In reality, Christianity uses nations until they lose power, then it crosses the floor to whatever new power comes next. If India becomes powerful, the missionaries will become great patriots ââ¬â and all the more eager to convert India. So, thinking in term of ââ¬Ånationalââ¬Â vs. ââ¬Åforeignââ¬Â is a sure way to misconceive the problems Hinduism faces.
It is very true that christianism descends with increased force on a heathen nation in ascendance - a nation that is becoming prosperous. E.g. South Korea was poised to turn into an affluent 1st world nation, showing clear signs of emergence, and BAM that's when christianism stepped up it's timetable for Asia and christianised S Korea at a frenetic pace, from which the once-heathen nation is still reeling. Now the evil Korean christians pretend that christianism brought affluence to Korea and that it had only been languishing in poverty because it had been native Asian heathen and Buddhist up to that point.
And that is the same trick christianism intends to pull on India if Hindu nationalism only aims at developing India and not at reversing the trends of de-Hinduisation and christoislamisation (and "secularisation" in the Indian context is merely christo-conditioning, which itself is one step removed from christianisation/conscious covnersion).
Depending on where India is at the development threshold when a (crypto)christian govt next takes over, christianism will either sink "India Shining/Rising" again - as KKKangress rule did in the last reign - OR if on the positive side of the threshold, the cline of development in India will be hijacked as an agent for christianisation and as a direct by-product of India's increased christianisation (i.e. "jeebus brought the prosperity" type advertising).
Anyway, Indians always want to learn the hard way, and modern Hindu nationalism is no different. Which is why a develoment agenda for a Hindu nationalist government is ultimately doomed from the start, as anyone with a pair of eyes can see. (Of course, that will not stop my moments of wishful thinking and hoping or imagining possibilities of what might be.)