Indian Elections 2014 - A Hindu Revolution: What Made the Hindus Seek a Revolution, like the Iranians?

1 2

(BJP/Modi won the Indian elections 2014. Though the global philosophers haven't said so, in a 3-part series this author argues that the change is a Hindu Revolution. While the first part argued why it was a Hindu Revolution (HR), strengthening the case this second part argues why the Hindus felt that the HR was necessary. The yet to be published third part will argue, whether the world needs to fear the revolution, like the Iranian Islamic Revolution) No Dictator to Revolt Against Using the 2014 election and gaining power after almost a millennium, Hindus did have a Revolution (HR), like by the Muslims in Iran. But why was there a need for a revolution? For a start, unlike Iran, India did not have a Shah-like dictator or even a Savak-like torturing agency. The Past Wasn't All Bad Yes, India had a series of 'alien' rule by the Muslims, the British, the socialists and then by globalisation. But then, not all was bad. True, the Muslims even managed to rule for several centuries, but then, unlike Egypt and Iran that had their religions wiped out shortly after their conquest by the Muslims, India still remains a majority Hindu state. Muslims are, in fact, baffled by this unusual failure or the exception that compels their missionaries today to finish the unfinished job. Although both Hindus and the National Geographic agree on India being uniquely protected by mountain ranges, desert and the seas, and the former even adds a 'blessed land' - like Israel for the Jews - the enigma is mostly explained by Islam's Hanafi school of thought that did the trick. By letting Hindus qualify as jizya tax paying dhimmis, and the collected cash filling the ruler's coffers, it has helped save India. This resistance still gives pride to the Hindus. Furthermore, unlike the Brits, they took India as their homeland and therefore almost retained India's GDP. Though they destroyed constructs, the monuments left by them are treasured by all today. Unless P N Oak is right, the world famous symbol of love, the Taj Mahal, forms the crown jewel. While their contribution to the Indian classical music is well known, the less known translation of Hindu text to Persian aided knowledge in Persia. Indeed the Brits ruled as foreigners and reduced its GDP, but unlike the Muslims they gobbled up only 1-2% of Indians as Christians. While their railways gives a good feeling to most Indians, the given English language gives pride to its elite. Being an international language that has merged with globalisation, while the entrepreneurs and job seekers cherish that language, qualifying for international prize and sales, writers go ecstatic. Though they burnt books, they also made Hindu literature available to the international audience. While Buddha enlightened all spiritually, removing his birth place enigma, they enlightened all in a mundane way. Indeed, India got vivisected on religious grounds into Hindu India and Muslim Pakistan, during partition. But, as if tracing Bollywood copying Hollywood plots, it copied the British constitution. Its written form, unlike in the UK, was even 'bragged' about. The Turn of the Socialists: Although the, 'I am the last British ruler of India' saying man couldn't resist the lure of 'From Russia with Love' and ditched the West for the then USSR that heralded a socialist rule in India, it matched the West's struggle against religion. In so doing, while less virulent Indian communists became ecstatic, socialist scribes turned the 4th pillar into a free socialist media (not today's social media) and congressmen just followed the idolised chacha, its minorities just felt contended with their special minority rights. In addition, his showing teeth as the Non Aligned Movement (NAM) even brought prestige to him and to the nation. It's not that the Hindus didn’t get anything, they got the Hindu ways in the state ceremonies. Like the non-biting NAM, they were 'non-opposing' anyway. And when the seemingly innocuous daughter Indira's turn came to warm the hearts of the ones in the North Pole, India even became officially socialist and secular. With this ascent from de-facto to de-jure, its modernity beat countries like UK with de-facto secular alone. In effect, while communist Russia became ecstatic, freedom seeking scribes felt free from the divine clutch. As amazingly as deer not fearing the tiger, minorities preferred a godless secular state than a Hindu one. Their glee was almost more than that of the atheists. But then, as if contented with the continued Hindu ways in the government and secular meaning 'Respect of All Faiths', passive Hindus just remained passive. Seemingly modern and western, the acceptance was such that the new mantra - 'We are a secular nation' - easily beat the Gayatri, and became the most quoted mantra. One stroke of a pen suddenly changed the nation's ethos. All accepted the power of democracy that aided the smooth transition of power. Under it, people could fire and hire their PM, as they did to Indira Gandhi after the Emergency. Almost more than in the West, free scribes could challenge the Supreme Court, disregard copyrights and even publish concocted stories. With the Saraswati river descending from mythology to history, Dwarika climbing up from the deep sea and one gene theory emerging to demolish two gene theory of the Aryans coming from outside, even Hindus seemed to show a grin. While quoting from books of their experts and philosophers made the West glad, receiving prizes from English literary world made the Indians go gaga. A man even said in broken English, 'Brits came too late and left too early'. The Turn of Globalisation Impenetrable to the Muslim and the Christian onslaughts earlier, India fully let globalization penetrate itself. That changed India as never before. Getting gadgets, the Net, English-aided highly paid jobs (beyond parental imagination) and social and sexual freedom, it was the youth's turn to be happy. Cash flow from entrepreneurs, and UK's NHS and USA's cyber city, helped. Moreover, with God vanishing from the national ethos, and as expected, that secularism descending from state to homes, He gradually disappeared from ordinary homes too. Yes, even the homes of the minorities! With this, the idea of many lives got reduced to 'one life' of the Semites and then to that of the atheists. With the afterlife bliss thus gone with the wind, fear of hellfire extinguished and money filling the void as a neo-God, (It even brought respect, irrespective of the means), bliss was to be found through money here. Irrespective of what Adi Sankaracharya said, this life was real and had to be enjoyed. To miss the bliss coming out of the cash, gadgets and the opposite sex was foolish. Suddenly a new mantra emerged - 'Life is short and single, therefore enjoy'. It almost competed with the mantra of secularism. With the dream worlds - Bollywood, media and the PC/mobile porn - converting beauty to sexy and bliss of love to bliss of body for both sexes, joy was easy. For cash couldn't buy love, it could buy the body. Hedonism, therefore, skyrocketed in the cities. Being chanced than planned, the 'can have sex, but with a condom' teaching translated into condom-less, even pill-less sex. But then, with mums organising the ways for abortions and STDs, virginity not demanded by future spouses, and the whole thing being part of the respected 'exploring of sexuality', even city girls never had such good time before. The seeking of joy was never so free from consequences. Adults weren't less. Airing 'Bedroom isn't the business of the state', women's desire did a “two to tango” to the triad of masculine desires - look, feel and penetrate. While skyrocketing pre-marital sex offered bliss to the singles, adultery and consensual swap offered it to the married. And those who didn't go for the full Monty - look, feel and penetrate- got their two of the three joys in the Bollywood aided conversion of the Namaskar to hugs. Worldly success mattering more; while own tuition fee and fashion made college girls get their cash in hotels, sibling's tuition made housewives try the easy way. And housewives who escaped all that got glued to soaps full of repeat marriages/affairs. With free sex symbolising modernity, and Indians calling West immoral ever since they saw Brits dancing with other's spouses, an Australian blogger's 'Indians are more immoral' made them now look more modern than the West. With God not quite dead - whatever Nietzsche might have said - but still having a self half-life till the next generation, almost like the cattle of the agricultural revolution, even He was being tamed. It's so because secularism had hit ordinary homes, but faith- homes still claimed 'virgin territories'. With Him remaining blissful with the seeking of forgiveness and holy place donations that mitigated secular sins, piety got paired with the latter. In fact, with secrecy and hypocrisy maintaining prestige, and secular sins thus easily mitigated, faith-home donations matched the skyrocketing mundane joy. Noting 'business is booming', even the priests felt joyous (At least till the next generation, when 'Churches of Church of England' will emerge). Like their faith offering goodies of both mono and polytheism, they seem to enjoy best of both theism and atheism. True freedom indeed! Certainly there was corruption, but where in the world it isn't? Also, voters had the right to hire leaders and, if very corrupt, fire them anyway. Sure India had Maoist terrorism, but being in the villages, it didn't dominate the airways. Of course, Jihadi terrorism happened in the cities, but being occasional, they were live reported, talked about, condemned and then gradually forgotten - till the next. Yes, rape is more frequent and is even an epidemic, but like corruption, it is global. If sufficiently gruesome, it even gets nationwide protests and change in the ways of the courts. Indeed Bollywood blatantly copies Hollywood, but it has penetrated homes of the people of Pakistan, where it is banned. If anything, there should be a revolution in Pakistan, not in India. So Why the Revolution? The Glorious Past: Almost suggesting not all can be made happy, or God's job isn't easy, or even majority doesn't always mean empowered, despite all that, Hindus who were in the majority were not happy. But then, why? Albeit all three - the past, the present and the future - were the cause of the discomfort, the past was by far the most important. Not being European ruled primitive people, who were made civilized by the 'White man's burden', but having a glorious past that even made Indians retort 'They lived in caves, when we were in palaces', the formed utopia enticed a desire to achieve it. It was a similar incentive that made the French revolutionaries aspire for when apprised about their rights. It sounds like the tit for tat Atom Bomb blast, but unlike the 'We ruled over the Hindus' of the Pakistanis, this utopia was for real. With its influence stretching from Afghanistan to Japan; its narrative, Mahabharata, forming world's longest story; its perfected language, Sanskrit, seen as the mother of languages and computer friendly; its grammar by Panini regarded as faultless; its inventions like '0', yoga and meditation helping humanity even today; its 6 system of philosophy even including atheism; its several universities attracting global students like Oxford and Harvard do today; its GDP and gold reserve topping global figures; its ideals being 'truth wins'; respect for sacrifice and high morals; and its pluralism accommodating persecuted minorities like Jews and Zoroastrians, the Hindu utopia wasn't misplaced. It is the descent from that civilization, when they, the Hindus, had a say through Islamic, British, socialist rule and then through globalisation that has, in effect, produced a wounded civilization for them. It is the resentment and the desire to re-achieve that utopia that forms the nidus of the revolution. But then, there is more. Exasperation with The Muslim Rule: Although Islamic conquest didn't make India Islamic, it was filled with killings and destructions. While the genocide done caused physical pain, the ravaging of architectural constructs and temples and the building of mosques over them caused emotional hurt. The burning of libraries caused the loss of their knowledge, and their past. Seeing it as 'past is past' and today's Muslims not guilty of that, and tracing truth and reconciliation, the Hindus demanded only the three main temples - among the many destroyed. Not getting those, especially the Ram temple in Ayodhya, they felt resentful. Bad treatment of Pakistani Hindus and their lessening in number hurt them.NEXT

Hindu God Bishnu

The Hindu Sacred Word OM

Hindu Dance in Bali

The Nalanda University

You may also like: Disturbing stats on black-white inequality Now girls are a THIRD more likely to go to university than boys Sound effect: Bhajans (Hindu faith songs) helping Autism Lessening productivity 50% of Americans have worked with a hangover Scientists say fist bump is healthier than handshake ?Hug & kiss Meet Darknet, the hidden underbelly of the searchable Web