Nexus Between Entities Influencing India

[Husky]

1. Follows from post 295.



And another case. A British person sounds sympathetic to India because...

Try to see if you can guess it before the comment-er reveals it of himself.

Marcus • 5 days ago



I fear you have missed the entire point of his ending, which was to denounced those on the other side for having missed the entire point of the debate. That point is that any quantification of reparations owed is missing the target if Britain cannot first imply admit their wrongdoing. I am British (now emigrated to America), and throughout our schooling we were taught that the British had a powerful empire which brought democracy to much of the world. Sadly, that's where most Britishers' knowledge of their former empire ends, which is both tragic and resoundingly naive. Thus, very few Britishers have any idea of the atrocities of the empire (I myself, as an educated man had no idea before watching the video how much India was pillaged for supplies during the world wars). My Keralan wife has since taught me much about it. However, Shashi's argument was cleverly targeted towards such people - even most in Oxford know little more than this! In this sense the wider picture, as you put it, was a subject for another day, and he achieved exactly the right aim with his concluding comments.

Knew it. The wifey is a native. Hence his sympathy.



Is there ever any exception? I'm so tired of this. Indic spouse. Wannabe-convert. Indophile.



Can't any European - let alone one of a former colonial country - show sympathy without such trappings, and *because* India is in the right and the colonial west (starting with Britain) in the wrong?

Too much to ask, right?





2. And I see some crazy Euro supremacist (oryanist too by any chance?) goes by the handle KingOfGondor at the link. Oh so funny. So predictable too.

Have been waiting sometime to see signs of oryanism poisoning Da Legendarium. Saw the first noticeable and unmistakable indications very recently in a tolkien discussion forum where for some inexplicable reason India was brought up (IIRC we were the inspiration for some of the bad guys, albeit conflated the Middle-Easterner islamics. A la in C.S. Lewis. And as usual.)



Whether "KingOfGondor" is an oryanist or not, he's an apologist for colonialist, a pro-colonialist. And if he's an alien too, then he's further a Euro supremacist.

But his comments seem to often be at Indian sites and on Indian matters. Perhaps he's one of the many native wannabe-aliens. Which is pathetic because all things Gondor (and west in Middle-Earth) are specifically NOT miscegenated and NOT brown. So not even Indian Indo-Europeanists need apply. And any who do are obviously total wannabes=losers.



In Tolkien's world, brown skin=evil.** And signifies rapists. And plunderers. Further, in Tolkien's world, miscegenation with dark peoples is also produces invariable evil (quite like the KKK believe, but western racist views were not exclusively held by the KKK, right? Tolkien's good point is that he was not additionally an anti-Semite, which is why he the nazis weren't such big fans.)



[** Oh and Pukel men are actually irrelevant to the topic, and cannot be held up as any exception for reasons that are apparent from the text.]





3. One person commenting on the main article said: "The analysis by John Dolan that you linked to is a favorite of mine".



Looking this up in the main article to see what exactly this referred to:

The little-known but erudite literary critic John Dolan, in a brutal takedown of Arundhati Roy mentions how the old British “Lefties” love a good scolding from their former colonies—even better if the native scolds them on their own soil.

Which links to exile.ru/articles/detail.php?ARTICLE_ID=6487&IBLOCK_ID=35



This appears to be the updated link. Back in 2007 it was still at: exile.ru/2002-April-05/great_literatury_frauds_of_our_time.html

(and now preserved at web.archive.org/web/20070314023044/http://www.exile.ru/2002-April-05/great_literatury_frauds_of_our_time.html )



Don't know why Indians are complimenting Dolan. Already touched on this in in a 2007 comment, but: you don't even need to read between the lines to know that Dolan's article, while a justified attack on Suzanna Roy, is merely on account of him being actually irked by any Indians/ex-colonised who would (more justifiyingly) criticise western -in this case US- hegemony, even if Dolan is also partly complaining about the intra western (inter British-AmriKKKan) spat, where the Brits like to use the Suzanna Roys against the stage 2 colonials, the AmeriKKKans.



Dolan mistook Suzanna Margaret "Arundhati" Roy for a Hindu merely because of the Hindu pen name she had deceptively assumed. And his going on about her alleged "Aryan" features - whatever those are supposed to be - are another mistake based on his faulty assumptions: she's only part Indian, the other half is Syrian christian. (And until very recently, the 2 main Syrian christians claimed they were each racially pure Syrians and the other was Syrian mixed with "low-caste" Indians. Now, as per the various Oryanist theories in effect, neither of those cases qualify as "Aryan".)



Suzanna's Indian half is Bengali. And IIRC the Paki islamics don't even allow Bengali Hindus into the Oryan clique, as witnessed in their butchering Bangladeshi islamics as untermenschen compared to islamic Pakis' own alleged Oryanness (though don't know what Pakis are on about: they are admixed heavily with Turks and Arabs, not just Iranians. And some Pakis are simply not Indian to any extent, whether they be part Iranian at least - for their desperate needy claims to "oryanism"/white supremacism - is something they should investigate.)



Anyway, perhaps Dolan may have been more sympathetic to Roy if he knew that the various Suzanne Roys are actually often paid agents not just of Britain but of the US too (e.g. Teesta Seetalvad who is kept by the CIA) to antagonise heathenism in India and to keep christoislamic/western hegemony in India intact.



His criticism is actually for those Indians (and other former colonised populations) who would expose the west for this, even if he mistook Suzanna Roy for one of this kind. He is hardly the friend of Hindu nationalists, I'd have thought. Much less someone to admire, even though his most critical words about Suzanna Roy happen to be right - because they were personal attacks, see bold bit below:





web.archive.org/web/20070314023044/http://www.exile.ru/2002-April-05/great_literatury_frauds_of_our_time.html

And she [the Syrian catholic Suzanne "Arundhati" Roy] is a fraud. A literary careerist who has parlayed an overwritten melodrama into unearned fame; a child of privilege whose early experiments in poverty were no more than a smart career move; a Yuppie whose real job was aerobics instructor, not slum bottle-recycler; a world-travelled, overeducated dilettante posing as a regional writer; and a fake saint who fucked her way to fame and survives, in spite of her complete lack of talent, because her crude scolding warms the heart of old British lefties who love it when their tame Indian slaves get up on their hind legs to denounce the bloody Americans, who oppress the world so much less skillfully than they used to.