When you see Russia get into existential war over Ukraine, or Israel bomb Syria or India battle with Pakistan or Bangladesh, it is not because of some whim. It has a historical and geographical context. That is critical to understand for analyzing geopolitics.
Dive into the shadowy world of the Deep State—its hidden structures, powerful networks, and the far-reaching impact on global events and control.
The scale, the ferocity and the disinformation to help the genocidal administration and its jihadi allies is mind-boggling. We go through the history and its links to the present on the greatest Genocide in modern human history. The Hindu Genocide in Bangladesh!
This is Modi's election. And in that, this election is a battle for Indians to wrestle back their identities that have been assaulted and demonized. In order to facilitate colonial structures that perpetuate slavery. This Indian election is an exercise in freedom.
When one loses his own self and identity, then it could be a spiritually significant moment. It is a moment of complete libration.
However, when one loses his identity to force-fit another identity through gaming and shenanigans, then it is slavery.
A thin line. But an important one.
A complete lack of identity is a powerful state. Swapping of identities just to "fit in" with a more powerful and abusive group is a never-ending slavery.
Maybe subtle but extremely potent way to destroy you and your civilization's entire repository of wisdom.
This election is a battle for Indians to wrestle back their identities that have been assaulted and demonized. In order to facilitate colonial structures that perpetuate slavery.
This Indian election is an exercise in freedom.
Make it happen.
What we do takes a lot of work. So, if you like our content and value the work that we are doing, please do consider contributing to our expenses. Choose the USD equivalent amount in your own currency you are comfortable with.
An Indian-American Gujarati lady - 28 years old - stood before the Bakersfield City Council at one of the council meetings and ranted along about how the council members were such “horrible human beings” that “Jesus probably would have killed you himself.”
Not satisfied with that, she expressed hope that oppressed people might “bring the guillotine.”
She referenced an Indian holiday, Chaitra Navratri, and said that some in “the global south” believe in “violent revolution against their oppressors. I hope one day somebody brings the guillotine and kills all you mother—-.” (Source: "Activist faces 18 felony counts for allegedly threatening Bakersfield City Council" / Los Angeles Times)
15 minutes later she got up again. This time to protest against the use of metal detectors. And in her enthusiasm for obnoxious hate speech which she assumed was her right, she smugly issued them a threat.
“We’ll see you at your house. We’ll murder you.”
Her build-up to the death threat seemed quite uneventful.
Mayor Karen Goh was presiding over the meeting. Initially, she called out for the next speaker. Then she stopped and reverted to Patel to give her a reality check.
“Ms. Patel, that was a threat, what you said at the end. So the officers are going to escort you out and take care of that.”
Well, that was quick. Wasn't it?
So, what about the ubiquitous "Freedom of Speech" in the US?
Not long ago, the US Ambassador to India tried to give a lesson to Indians on how in US, the standards of "freedom of speech" are different.
He was talking about this guy Gurpatwant Pannu who gave death threats to Indian-Americans by bombing Air India flights between US and India as well as the Indian political leadership.
Riddhi Patel's case clearly shows that what is true of her "death threat speech" is not true of Pannu's speech.
You see value of the life of an American council member is far more than the life of the Indian Prime Minister or India's diplomatic staff.
That in itself is enough of an evidence that Pannu's rise is managed and orchestrated by the American government.
For, to put it delicately, Eric Garcetti's reply was elaborate case of Bull-Shit!
And, this is not new. It is an old ploy. Nixon and Kissinger did the same when they started the Khalistan movement with Jagjit Singh Chauhan and his antics.
Read all about it here.
Desh Kapoor
This is a special time for India.
It is the election time.
Let us get a few things out of the way about the Indian elections. It is an unbelievably humongous exercise.
It is the largest democratic election in Human history!
In this election, 969 million Indians will cast their votes. That is larger than the total populations of the entire European Union and the United States combined!
Election is being conducted in seven phases and the results will be announced on June 4th.
The temperatures in India are soaring at 40 Celsius. The heatwave made it very difficult for people to vote. Yet, despite that, the voter turnout was fairly robust.
Turnout despite the challenging weather notwithstanding, the first phase turnout in this election is remarkably lower than in the last general elections in 2019.
PM Modi tweeted how the ground reports available to him suggest this phase is bringing good tidings overall.
First phase, great response! Thank you to all those who have voted today.
— Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) April 19, 2024
Getting EXCELLENT feedback from today’s voting. It’s clear that people across India are voting for NDA in record numbers.
Some, however, are also suggesting that the talk of Modi's NDA alliance getting 400+ seats in this election is hurting voter turnout.
So before the next phase, the ground game needs to be improved for the BJP.
It is broadly believed that the current Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi will win the election again. By a large margin.
This is critical in how India is changing. It is fundamentally transforming before our own eyes and very few of Modi's critics are even humble enough to recognize it.
One of the best discussions on this fundamental change comes from a very unlikely source - Tavleen Singh. Modi's rabid critic.
Many things have changed in India since Narendra Modi first became prime minister. But one change that has gone almost unnoticed is that a process of real decolonisation has transpired. And because of this the old, colonised ruling class has been swept away. This is a very good thing. It should have happened long, long ago. As someone who belonged to that ruling class, I consider myself well qualified to explain why this process of decolonisation was overdue and how we failed India as its ruling class. The truth is we were an effete, hopeless bunch. We spoke no Indian language well, but this did not matter to us. We were proud of speaking English well. In our drawing rooms we sneered at those who dared enter without speaking good English. And at those whose table manners were not embellished with western refinement. In short, those who fumbled with forks and knives and preferred eating with their hands and without cutlery. When we travelled to foreign lands, we made a good pretense of being Indian, but we never cared to understand what it meant to be Indian. We pretended to know everything about India’s ancient culture and civilisation, but we knew almost nothing. In the schools and colleges we attended, we learned more about western civilisation, history, and literature than about our own, so it was not totally our fault. (Source: "Change beyond elections" / Indian Express)
Tavleen Singh then shares a critical review of the elite class in India. She highlights how they are disconnected from the broader population. From that follows their failure to understand the political and cultural shifts led by Narendra Modi.
She describes that the elites as a group entrenched in their privilege, comfortably aligned with the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty, viewing politics as an exclusive club to which they belonged. This club, dominated by discussions of democracy and secularism, represented their values and worldview.
The emergence of Narendra Modi as Prime Minister was a tectonic shift in Indian politics, challenging the status quo and the relevance of these elites.
Modi's rise signified a broader transformation reflecting a change in who held influence and power in India.
In this new India, the new power players were individuals who might not speak English fluently but resonated more authentically with the Indian majority. A complete departure from the previously dominant English-speaking elite.
Tavleen Singh asserts that the elites' previous misunderstandings of India's socio-political landscape were due to their insular view and self-referential approach.
Unlike how most elites kept characterizing it, Modi's rise was not a mere political victory.
It was indeed a cultural recalibration. A fundamental transformation where the elites were rendered irrelevant. It was a change where these elites were finally forced to confront their limitations, the wide chasm from the society at large and irrelevance.
Tavleen Singh's confession and analysis needs to be understood with the help of some sociological concepts that have emerged within the postcolonial social theory.
The change brought about by Modi that Tavleen Singh has taken pains to outline is decolonization because it challenges the underlying creation of coloniality - Mimicry.
Let us understand what Indians are still going through.
In the postcolonial theory, there is an interesting concept. It's called Mimicry.
It is defined as the dynamics of how colonized individuals tend to emulate or incorporate the cultural norms, beliefs, structures, and principles of their colonizers.
But this imitation is not mere replication. It includes subtle process of crafting an identity that is both similar to and distinct from that of the colonizer.
The copy, or the colonized, is never a perfect copy of the colonizer. He is at best a "blurred copy".
The colonized is almost the same, but not quite.
Here is a copy of the main treatise by Dr. Bhabha on this subject.
Along with Mimicry, Dr. Bhabha came up with another concept called Hybridity.
What is that?
It is mixing and merging of cultural signs and practices from different traditions - the colonizers and the colonized to create completely new identities and spaces of interaction. Spaces and mixes that happen only to dilute the traditions and cultures of the colonized. Not the colonizer.
So you see, Hybridity is inherently debilitating for colonized people.
More so because it leads to the imposition of foreign cultural elements, which can dilute or displace indigenous traditions and identities.
This fusion - often peddled as "Ganga-Jamuna Tehzeeb" in India - can lead to a loss of cultural heritage and create a sense of inferiority among colonized people as they are encouraged to adopt and value the colonizer’s culture over their own.
Also, this hybrid cultural space can generate confusion and conflict about identity, belonging, and authenticity, complicating the social cohesion and self-perception of the colonized society.
That is why, it is not an accident that one of the offshoots of the idea of the "Ganga-Jamuna Tehzeeb" is how everything worthwhile - from food to music to literature to architecture and even spirituality - is the gift of the colonizers to the native Indians, the Hindus.
Heck, in fact, the Hindus aren't even native of India at all even when their identity defined by the outsiders was always synonymous with that of India (based on the Indus River).
Why is Hybridity so dangerous?
The colonizer uses hybridity to strengthen colonization structures by incorporating elements of the colonized culture in a controlled manner, often reshaping them to fit the colonizer's worldview.
This is a deliberate strategy to legitimize the colonizer’s rule by appearing inclusive or benevolent while simultaneously undermining the authenticity and authority of the indigenous culture.
This is precisely the left-liberal agenda in India which they adopted from the British who had set it in motion when they created an extremely debilitating colonial structure to subjugate the Hindus. Something that they inherited from the Islamic invaders.
Now we come to the third concept - Ambivalence.
Ambivalence is a deliberate pretense of creating conflicting "evidence".
It is a complex mix of attraction and repulsion that colonized subjects feel toward the colonizer’s culture.
This ambivalence is crucial to both hybridity and mimicry, as it underscores the complicated relationship that results from the merging of cultures and the imitation of power structures, revealing the instability and incompleteness of colonial authority.
It is a planned exercise of a deep web that is woven around the colonized subjects.
So, let us understand this in the context of hybridity in colonial scenarios.
Ambivalence promotes mixed feelings among the colonized towards the colonizer's culture—simultaneously attracting and repelling them.
This dichotomy can lead to an internal conflict where the colonized might appreciate or even admire certain aspects of the colonizer’s culture, yet also reject it due to its oppressive implications.
And, this is great news for the colonizer because this ambivalence supports colonial power by creating confusion and division within colonized societies, making it more difficult for them to unite against the colonizer or to reject the imposed cultural changes fully.
Isn't it a brilliant strategy?
A sophisticated yet predetermined and well-understood social re-engineering mass-psychological colonial enterprise.
Just as Dr. Homi Bhabha came out with this concept, another person of Indian origin discussed this in 1967. Albeit, within the literature.
VS Naipaul's Nobel prize-winning novel - "The Mimic Men".
"The Mimic Man" by V.S. Naipaul is a novel that explores the themes of alienation and identity through the experiences of its protagonist, Ralph Singh. Singh, who is from the fictional Caribbean island of Isabella, reflects on his life and political career from his self-imposed exile in London. From a sociological standpoint, the novel delves into the complexities of postcolonial identity, the psychological impacts of colonial rule, and the struggle between personal and cultural identity in a colonized society.
Naipaul's construction of the character of Singh brings out something profound.
It highlights the challenges of constructing a personal identity in a context where the cultural and political frameworks have been heavily influenced by colonial powers.
Singh's identity is fragmented and unstable, characterized by his attempts to adopt and mimic the traits and behaviors of his colonial rulers. There seems to be no consistency between who he is fundamentally and what he wants to be.
The mimicry that he indulges in, however, does not lead to a sense of belonging or acceptance, either in his home country or in England. Instead, it deepens his sense of alienation and displacement.
Do you see how Naipaul's "Mimic Men" are closely related to the concept of Mimicry conceived by Dr. Homi Bhabha?
Particularly Bhaba's discussion of mimicry as an ambivalent and complex strategy of colonial subjugation and resistance is beautifully contextualized by Naipaul.
According to Bhabha, mimicry is a paradoxical reaction to colonial domination, where colonized individuals adopt the colonizer’s culture, language, and habits. This mimicry is both a form of resistance that can subtly undermine the authority of the colonizer and a symptom of a deep-seated identity crisis among the colonized, who feel neither fully part of their indigenous culture nor fully accepted by the colonial culture.
In many ways, in "The Mimic Man," Ralph Singh’s mimicry exemplifies Bhabha's notion that colonial mimicry is "almost the same, but not quite."
Singh attempts to replicate the manners and attitudes of the colonial British, yet this mimicry only serves to highlight his and his society’s liminal position between their original cultural identity and the imposed colonial identity. This results in a perpetual crisis of identity, characterized by a feeling of not belonging fully to either world.
So, if you look closely enough, then from a sociological perspective, Naipaul's novel and Bhabha's theory of mimicry both critically examine the existential and cultural dilemmas faced by individuals in postcolonial societies, exploring how the legacies of colonialism continue to affect personal and collective identities in complex and often problematic ways.
Colonial games in the sociological and psychological breakdown of the colonized society have many ramifications.
Let us understand these with the concepts we just introduced. We will see that the actions emanating out of these colonial strategies are ultimately leading to mass brainwashing.
A psychological breakdown at a social level that teaches the population to self-hate and question its own worth.
We have established that individuals living under colonial rule may often find themselves admiring and internalizing what they perceive as the superiority of the colonizer's culture, language, and practices.
This internalization is not a spontaneous process. It is a slow, marinating process enforced via systematic reinforcement through various channels.
Among the most influential of these channels are the education systems, which are often designed or heavily influenced by the colonizers. These systems are set up in such a way that they promote the colonizer's values, norms, and practices as not just desirable, but as the standard to aspire to.
This was initiated in India, for example, in 1835, when Thomas Babington Macaulay prepared a memorandum for Lord William Bentinck, the governor-general of India.
The memorandum interpreted parts of the Charter Act, also known as the East India Act.
Macaulay's main strategy was to question the term "learned" and to basically mock anyone with education classical Arabic and Sanskrit texts who was called a scholar! (Source: "12 Reading and Writing the Law: Macaulay in India " / Oxofrd Academic)
You see, you could only be a "learned" person if you spoke, wrote and were educated in English.
Apart from education, the media plays a significant role in this process. Media outlets, controlled or influenced by the colonizers, often present narratives that glorify the colonizer's culture while undermining or devaluing the native culture. This constant exposure to biased narratives can lead to a gradual shift in the mindset of the colonized, leading them to view the colonizer's culture as superior.
Religious conversions also play a part in promoting the colonizer’s values. As colonized individuals convert to the religion of their colonizers, they are often exposed to a new set of values and beliefs that align with the colonizer's worldview. Over time, these new religious beliefs can replace or diminish the importance of indigenous beliefs and practices, further entrenching the colonizer’s cultural influence.
The process of internalizing the colonizer's culture is a complex one, involving a range of institutional and societal influences. These influences work together to create an environment where the colonizer's values are seen as normative and desirable.
Mimicry as we know by now is a complex and multifaceted concept. It is invariably marked by a sense of deep-seated ambivalence. It refers to the phenomenon where the colonized, under the influence of the colonizer, might feel compelled to adopt and incorporate certain aspects of the colonizer’s culture, such as language, clothing, or even attitudes. However, this process of adoption has significant psychological costs.
It is naturally accompanied by a profound sense of unease, discomfort, or conflict about the potential abandonment or diminishing of their native cultural identity. This sense of loss and the tension between the colonizer's culture and the innate cultural identity can give rise to an ambivalence that is deeply entrenched in the psyche of the colonized. This ambivalence, in turn, can create a fragmented sense of self, a dichotomy where the individual struggles to reconcile their native identity with the imposed cultural norms of the colonizer.
In many instances, a colonial administration will set up systems and structures that explicitly reward and subtly encourage the act of mimicry among the colonized people. This might take the form of policies that tie the ability to access certain privileges and resources to the degree to which individuals adopt the language, customs, and cultural practices of the colonizers.
For instance, securing jobs, particularly those of high status or influence could require proficiency in the colonizer’s language and a familiarity with their societal norms. In India, this was done via the Civil Services examinations and the bureaucratic jobs.
Similarly, educational opportunities, which are critical for social mobility and personal growth, might also be largely accessible only to those who have assimilated into the colonizer's culture. That was the most critical thrust of Macaulay and his educational changes.
Finally, the perceived social status within the colonial society could also be directly influenced by the extent of one's mimicry of the colonizer's practices. Exactly what Tavleen Singh discusses and asserts was the most popular game in the elite political circles of power.
In many cases, the adoption of mimicry is really a psychological survival strategy employed by those dominated and subjected to the cultural erosion that comes with colonial rule.
This strategy is not merely about adopting the ways and mannerisms of the colonizers mindlessly, akin to brainwashing.
Rather, it is more about a conscious and deliberate adaptation to the oppressive circumstances brought about by colonialism.
This adaptation serves as a coping mechanism that allows the colonized individuals to maintain some degree of agency or control over their lives. It provides a way for these individuals to navigate the complexities and challenges of a colonized existence, thereby enabling them to retain a sense of self and identity despite the overarching power of the colonizers.
In all these challenges that colonial enterprise brings along while deeply ingraining Mimicry and Hybridity within the colonized society, the language, the perceived values, and narratives of the colonized also start to echo the prejudices of the colonizers.
A fine work of extensive brainwashing.
At this point, it would be good to understand the techniques and ways used for brainwashing.
Brainwashing is a deliberate set of techniques. It is neither random nor stumbled upon.
Brainwashing involves the use of intense manipulation techniques to change an individual's beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors.
This process can deeply affect a person’s self-perception and identity, potentially leading to self-hatred or a rejection of one’s previous identity. The mechanisms through which brainwashing can induce such feelings typically involve a combination of psychological pressures.
Isolation: A process that involves taking individuals away from their familiar environments and established social networks. This act serves the purpose of severing their access to support systems and inhibiting their exposure to diverse perspectives and alternative views. This method is typically used to limit their worldview and increase control over their thoughts and actions.
Control of Information: One effective method is to limit exposure to information that contradicts the new desired beliefs. This can be achieved by creating an environment or context where such contradictory information is scarce or non-existent. In conjunction with this, there is often a continuous and consistent exposure to new doctrines or ideologies. This constant bombardment with the new beliefs helps to rewire the mind and solidify the acceptance of the new ideas. It's a process of constantly reinforcing the new while simultaneously erasing or discrediting the old.
Induced Dependency:The process involves fostering a sense of powerlessness within the individual. This is done by systematically undermining their confidence and self-assuredness to the point where they feel they cannot function independently. In this state, the individual becomes heavily dependent on the authority of the group or its leader, seeking their validation and approval as a means of survival. They believe that their survival and well-being is intrinsically linked to the group or leader, making them more susceptible to manipulation and control.
Guilt and Shame: This approach involves the application of specific techniques that are designed to induce profound feelings of guilt and shame about one's past beliefs and actions. These beliefs and behaviors are often framed in a negative light, presented as morally incorrect or even unethical. They're portrayed as the root cause of the individual's personal suffering and, in some instances, the collective suffering of the community or society they belong to. The intention is to create a strong psychological motivation for change, though the process can be deeply challenging and emotionally intense.
Reward and Punishment: By implementing a structured system of rewards for those who conform and punishments for those who dissent, we can effectively accelerate the adoption of new beliefs. This system can act as an influential catalyst to nudge individuals toward embracing change. It can stimulate a positive environment that encourages conformity to the new set of beliefs, while simultaneously deterring dissent through a well-structured punitive system. Such a balance can be pivotal in ensuring smooth and swift transition towards new ideologies.
Demanding Purity: The process involves creating a starkly contrasting black-and-white worldview that necessitates a radical transformation of the self. This transformation is not limited to surface changes but extends deeply into the individual's sense of identity. It includes the purging of thoughts, patterns of behavior, and emotional attachments that were associated with one's previous identity. This process is not just about adopting new beliefs, but about discarding the old ones, especially those that were once considered pivotal to the individual's understanding of themselves and the world around them.
The term "brainwashing" is attributed to Edward Hunter, an American journalist who is credited with popularizing the term in the English language.
Historians generally agree that the coining of ‘brainwash’, in English, can be credited to Edward Hunter (1902-1978), an American journalist and propaganda expert. While working as a foreign correspondent in Asia during the 1950s, Hunter wrote news articles and books about the People’s Republic of China’s programme to re-educate the masses in communist ideology. His earliest reports on brainwashing (1950a, 1950b) were teasers for Hunter’s book, Brain-Washing in Red China: The Calculated Destruction of Men’s Minds (1951), which is considered the first full monograph to describe the Chinese process of ‘brainwashing’. In this early account, ‘brainwashing’ meant intensive indoctrination in Maoism and the harsh repression of alternative political ideologies. (Source: "Edward Hunter and the origins of ‘brainwashing’"/ Hidden Persuaders)
Hunter first used the term in an article for the Miami Daily News in September 1950, where he described the methods used by Mao Zedong's Red Army to indoctrinate the Chinese people and soldiers into the Communist Party. The term "brainwashing" is a direct translation of the Mandarin words "xi" (wash) and "nao" (brain).
In the article, and later in a book, Hunter described how Mao Zedong’s Red Army used terrifying ancient techniques to turn the Chinese people into mindless, Communist automatons. He called this hypnotic process “brainwashing,” a word-for-word translation from xi-nao, the Mandarin words for wash (xi) and brain (nao), and warned about the dangerous applications it could have. The process was meant to “change a mind radically so that its owner becomes a living puppet—a human robot—without the atrocity being visible from the outside.” (Source: "The True Story of Brainwashing and How It Shaped America" / Smithsonian Magazine)
Hunter's use of the term was in the context of psychological intervention and indoctrination techniques that he claimed were being perfected by certain enemy states, particularly in the context of the Korean War and the Chinese Communist Revolution. This was portrayed in the famous Hollywood masterpiece - "The Manchurian Candidate" in 1962.
The plot centers on Korean War veteran Raymond Shaw, part of a prominent political family. Shaw is brainwashed by communists after his Army platoon is captured. He returns to civilian life in the United States, where he becomes an unwitting assassin in an international communist conspiracy. The group, which includes representatives of the People’s Republic of China and the Soviet Union, plans to assassinate the presidential nominee of an American political party, with the death leading to the overthrow of the U.S. government. (Source: Wikipedia)
The prisoners of war were made to hate their own identities and nations.
When a society is infiltrated and the adversary wants to break the social structures down, then religious conversion is a rather effective tool.
Techniques of brainwashing are central to the whole process of religious conversion.
Targeting Vulnerability: Individuals who are currently experiencing personal crises, or who are going through major life transitions, tend to be the best targets and most susceptible to conversion efforts.
This vulnerability stems from the fact that during these challenging times, they might be seeking guidance, a sense of community, or perhaps answers to the difficult questions they are grappling with. These individuals may be at a low point in their lives, and the appeal of finding a welcoming community or a path that promises clarity and direction can often be quite powerful and appealing, making them particularly receptive to conversion efforts. How can a society tackle this to counter the impact?
Rebuilding Identity: The process begins with subtly destabilizing the individual's old identity using an array of brainwashing techniques that make the person question their previously held beliefs and values. This stage is crucial as it creates a ripe ground for the introduction of the new religious identity.
Once the old identity has been sufficiently destabilized, the new religious identity is offered. This new identity is presented as the only viable alternative, a beacon of hope and a pathway to redemption, acceptance, and unconditional love.
This is done so masterfully and is so intricately woven into the person's psyche that it becomes hard to distinguish the line where the old self ends and the new one begins. The presentation of this new identity is framed in such a way that to leave the faith or even to question its tenets becomes synonymous with moral failure or existential risk. It creates a scenario where the fear of losing one's newly found 'true self' acts as a deterrent to leaving the faith or questioning its principles.
Existing identities need reinforcement and resilience. So, we need to create mechanisms to:
Community and Belonging: The new religion creates a robust community bond, offering an invaluable social reinforcement mechanism. This bond is fostered and strengthened through a variety of communal practices and rituals that all members of the community partake in.
These shared experiences not only bring the community together but also serve to reinforce the shared beliefs and values that are central to the religion. These shared beliefs form the basis of the communal identity, creating a sense of unity and belonging among members.
By participating in these communal practices and upholding these shared beliefs, members of the community are able to more fully integrate into the religious community and solidify their new identity. This strong sense of community and shared identity is one of the key benefits and attractions of the new religion.
Before a person is taken into the new religious structures, he/she can be saved from imposed changes.
Perpetuating Self-Hatred: In instances where individuals relapse or start to question the new beliefs that have been introduced, various techniques such as guilt and shaming are often brought back into play.
These techniques serve to reinforce the new religious values and beliefs, aiming to make the individual internalize these new values at an even deeper level. As a result, they may find themselves rejecting their past selves, beliefs, and values more vehemently.
The process of internalizing these new values can be intense, leading to a profound transformation in the individual's mindset and worldview, often to the extent that they become almost unrecognizable from their former selves.
This is the toughest to encounter. More so because the self-hate is couched in "moral terms". Whether it is running down of certain festivals or targeting certain rituals, the language is always moralistic. So what is the way?
A certain sense of balance is needed within a community. When you see how Riddhi Patel, the character we started off with was turned against her own community, you will see the same copybook being used to convert her to another religion - the Left Anarchist.
Just see how her teachers groomed her to inculcate hate against her own community - the Hindus and Indians.
A hate that eventually manifested as violent threats to the local political elite.
How and why such grooming could happen within our societies is a topic that Hindus should ponder upon.
The problem is that most Hindus do not invest their time or resources in such endeavors. That is what the other religious bigots and leftists use to break the Hindu societies down in modern times.
What was done in medieval times via unbridled and inhuman violent ways, is sought to be accomplished via widespread and well-funded brainwashing and sociological interventions.
In recent years, these interventions - both political and religious (to demonize Hinduism and openly call for its destruction as well as the elimination of its adherents) - have become mainstream.
For example, Edward Luce, the Associate Editor of the Financial Times, uses familiar tropes to target Modi and his work.
Do you see how he never once mentions how the NGOs and foreign media houses were for years violating India's tax and foreign currency laws with a colonial swagger to go with it?
When asked to abide by the laws, they called it "persecution". Rule of Law, you see, works only one way - when the brown or the black man is at the receiving end.
It is quite common amongst the so-called "Left-Liberal" crowd to characterize self-confident Hindus with a voice, particularly PM Modi as "Hindu Nationalists".
The underlying suggestion is that Nationalist is a regressive state to be. All throughout such acts, these groups with familiar narratives, underline the supremacy of their own race, ideologies, and national character.
Nationalist becomes an abuse in their world because of a "wink-wink" association with Nazis.
They have no qualms about Western Universalism and specific lionizing of the wretched Winston Churchill who killed more Indians in 6 months through orchestrated famines on India's streets in open view than Hitler killed in 7 years in closed and walled concentration camps!
Despite the open play of inhuman genocide, the moral memo never reached the conscience of the Western world.
There is an inherent contradiction here. Do you see how contextless use of words as pejorative tends to further perpetuate a manner of colonial supremacy that the group targeted by these self-appointed moral busy-bodies have worked hard to dismantle in the quest for basic dignity and freedom?
No, Nationalism of the Western world is NOT the same as Nationalism of the once-colonized people!
One is a genocidal supremacism. The other is call for freedom.
Freedom from slavery and its elaborate structures. Mimicry, Hybridity, and practiced Ambivalence.
Modi represents that call to action for Indians in general and Hindus in particular. Hindus have been and are being targeted for not conforming to the colonial structures that have been set for them in order to "discipline them".
They have developed the gumption to speak for themselves you see.
Via the ballots.
How dare they?!
Just the voice. A once-subjugated, colonized, and demonized voice saying "I too have a right to exist as myself" and not as a Mimic man to the colonizing Western universalist agenda is a big enough crime.
To deny that Hindu of even the most fundamental dignity.
It is time to completely decolonize India and the Hindu.
It is time to establish the ethos that Narendra Modi represents. Of a non-elitist and decolonized India and the Hindu.
Most importantly, a Non-West, Self-Reliant and Confident civilizational ecosystem that can benefit humanity at large.
Mimicry is not a virtue. It is a crime against humanity. And with Modi, that needs to be dismantled.
Root and branches!
America's Justice Department and SEC have targeted India's Adani Group with a bribery case. Using Nationalistic sentiment doesn't help. Yes, law has been weaponized and India's sovereignty compromised but not how they think. A definitive guide to understanding the case.
Canadian Intelligence and political establishment have played Jekyll and Hyde games while using Khalistanis against India. The stories of omission and strategic misses are so spectacular that only collaboration can explain them.
Geostrategic engagements of Indian PM Modi and his cabinet suggest that India's actions are striking at the very root of the Deep State. That is why everyone from George Soros to his plant Donald Lu are busy planning. A deeper look.
India's ambitious Deepwater Greenfield Port at Vadhavan is set to revolutionize global trade routes and strengthen national security. How will it impact trade, security and geopolitics.
Every Sunday AM (US Time)/ PM (India time), we send out a weekly detailed newsletter. We also share other insightful notes during the week. Its free. Do sign up and share with friends!
