“In his concluding remark Dr. Swamy was clear that India was an ancient civilisation which presently had lost its identity and the significant task for Hindus was to recover that identity.” – Dr. Vijaya Rajiva
In a heated debate/discussion on NDTV the topic was ‘Muzzafarnagar: Riot of a political kind’ hosted by Vikram Chandra (Sept. 21, 2013). The expected personalities were there: Gaurav Bhatia from the Samajwadi Party, Kamal Farooqi from the same party, S. Bhadoria from the BSP, sociologist Ashis Nandy, journalist Aarti Jerath, Rita Bahuguna Joshi from the Congress and Dr. Subramanian Swamy of the BJP.
In the cacophony of arguments Dr. Swamy was the only speaker who tried to present a realistic analysis of what is to come, if the riot situation of Muzaffarnagar is not understood in its proper context.
To Rita Bahuguna’s saccharine sweet statement (with an eye on the Muslim vote bank) that Muslims have always voted for Hindu leaders, Dr. Swamy asked a realistic question: would a Hindu leader in Kashmir get the Muslim vote? After Kamal 
Farouqi’s sweet talk about how Muslims and Hindus have always lived side by side (which the young audience applauded ) Dr. Swamy turned to the same audience and asked how many of them would call for a Uniform Civil Code. The majority of hands went up to answer in the affirmative. That was encouraging. But he won’t agree, said Dr. Swamy pointedly, looking at Farooqi. There was silence from that worthy. Nor would Jerath or the others, one may add, call for a Uniform Civil Code, despite their so called ‘secularism.’
Needless to say, the Samajwadi Party and the BSP spent time accusing each other and the BJP of fomenting trouble in Uttar Pradesh, specifically Muzaffarnagar. On the odd occasion that Aarti Jerath got an opportunity above the din she manged a few swipes at the BJP (revealing her intense dislike of the BJP) and sociologist Dr. Ashish Nandy seemed to suggest that identity politics would continue in India for a long time to come, a pessimistic view of the fragmented body politic.
In the midst of these accusations and counter accusations and pessimism, Dr. Swamy underlined what was an obvious fact : should the Hindus of India unite as a voting bloc the current malaise would end.
One knows from history that the syncretic culture of India was owing primarily to the Hindu ethos which tolerated a wide variety of religious practices and ethnicities. While the Hindu rajahs ruled and practised their private religious beliefs, the population was free to engage in their own religious practices. It was after the barbarian invasions that this changed and the subject population of the country was either forcibly converted or killed off or were expected to live as second class citizens paying the jiziya tax.
In his concluding remark Dr. Swamy was clear that India was an ancient civilisation which presently had lost its identity and the significant task (obviously he was addressing the young audience, not his fellow debaters) for Hindus was to recover that identity. Fair enough.
It is a pity that the Hindu viewpoint is not allowed full expression in these television debates. And yet, the recovery of its Hindu identity would be a significant step forward, rather than a regression, as the secularites fear. This fear is partly owing to their ignorance of their Hindu past and partly owing to their ideological confusion , a confusion generated by Macaulayism and the contemporary global discourse on modernisation. It is also from a sense of complacency. Add to the mix the weepy platitudes of an A. Ghosh, the writer. The man was literally in tears in an interview with Sagarika Ghosh of CNN-IBN.
He bleated about the fact that this new Hinduism (his sinister innuendo could not be missed) was not what he had known in his childhood and growing up years. It would be interesting to know what he meant by ‘his’ Hinduism. Probably not much.
Dr. Swamy was exactly right not only in countering some of the rubbish that passed for political analysis but in addressing the audience at important moments in the program. — Haindava Keralam, 22 September 2013
» Dr Rajiva is a Political Philosopher who taught at a Canadian university.
Filed under: india | Tagged: BJP, civil rights, current events, hindu, hinduism, identity politics, INC, india, indian politics, islam in india, lok sabha election 2014, muzaffarnagar district, national identity, politics, psychological warfare, religion, secularism-nehruism, subramanian swamy, uniform civil code, values, vote bank |
BHARATA BHARATI 
I sure welcome your optimism. Before we can reorganize ourselves, we should also understand how the Hindus, as a nation, are under continuing attacks from the political forces that thrive on number game and vote bank politics. Political power grabbing is the only object of such nefarious enterprise! The Hindu nation or its national interests are always placed on the back burner. Every political group is aware, if the Hindus can restore and regain their national pride and unity, the other fragmentary units in the political arena have little chance to exist. The strategies adopted to disintegrate the Hindus include offending national ethos and subjecting the national identity to questions. The vivisection of the country on two nation theory is itself an onslaught to such a direction. Pakistan was declared an Islamic state, while, India – a name borrowed from the British – remained no man’s land. It was made a secular country. There goes the Hindu identity. Another line of action was to destroy Bharat’s history. We now have a number of histories of the divided India (the British History of India that pointed out how benevolent was the paternal care of the Imperialists, then the Islamic school of Indian history belittling the invaded, followed by the socialists view of its history, and finally the official version of the country). The partition and converting the Hindus into seculars were merely a part of a larger conspiracy to prevent the Hindus to reorganize themselves and thereby to prevent them to form themselves into a proud nation again. Dr. Swamy’s sincere efforts to motivate the Hindus deserve our attention. In the present scenario politics is the source of power that controls the country’s direction and future. Hence, the Hindus too must have a political agenda and do their best to take up the charge of themselves as a responsible nation.
LikeLike
No it is not lost, nor it can ever be lost. Rajiv Malhotra has done some pioneering work. So long as ppl like Subramanian Swamy continue to be born, we have hope. Swamy said in an interview that if the NDA forms a govt, Rajiv will have the history books re-written so that pride can be restored to the crop of Indians coming up. I sincerely hope this happens and also that the whole socialist agenda in the garb of so-called social sciences takes a beating.
LikeLike
Yes, Dr Swamy is a leader. But whom does he lead and who follows him? He leads a one-man political party (or so it appears). And it has been this way for years and years. It is very difficult to understand this Dr Swamy and his leadership!
LikeLike
To the commentators: yes indeed the time is now, or it might turn out to be never! Gandhiji did not understand historical Mohamedanism or Hinduism, but the Partition itself was owing to the machinations of the Muslims within the Congress, Nehru’s shortsightedness/eagerness for power and the marginalisation of Sardar Patel. The weakness within the Hindu samaj has now to be countered vigorously.
Dr. Swamy can be the leader and indeed is already one. But the rest of Hindu society has to wake up and quickly!
LikeLike
Both Sita Ram Goel and Ram Swarup wrote on Hindu civilizational issues and the denial or forgetfulness of Hindu civilizational identity long before Dr Swamy or Rajiv Malhotra or N.S. Rajaram began to discuss the matter. Both Swamy and Malhotra owe Sita Ram Goel a great debt, as does Rajaram. Swamy would acknowledge the debt, but so far Malhotra has not shown the strength of character to do so. Malhotra even remained silent when the Jesuit priest and Harvard professor Clooney criticised SRG and RS at one of Malhotra’s public book releases. This indicates that Hindu public intellectuals like Malhotra aren’t aware of the important Hindu tradition of publicly acknowledging the path-breaking scholars who went before them. This aside, it would benefit all interested persons to go back and review Sita Ram Goel’s writings, some of which can be found on the Voice of Dharma website. An effort is being made by Voice of India to get more of SRG’s writings on the Internet, but this project will take some time yet.
LikeLike
I find Dr. Subramaniam Swamy is the only leading politician who talks sense. We owe the recovery of the insight that we are a civilization in the international context mainly to that remarkable book ‘The Clash of Civilizations’ by Samuel Huntington.(1996).What is happening now all over the world, wherever there is a significant Muslim presence–whether as residents, refugees or immigrants–will not cause surprise to those who have read it.Mohammedanism is intrinsically expansionist (openly militant) and cannot tolerate or live with other faiths for ever or even long within its own borders. It has conquered every land where it was allowed a foothold. It is only India that resisted its power for 800 years, but got truncated in the process. In this sense, it was a victory for Mohammedanism here too- but it was entirely due to the policies of the Congress led by Gandhi (who had no true understanding of either historical Mohammedanism or genuine Hinduism, and misrepresented both) and the power-hunger of its leaders.
The strengths which enabled Hindus to stand up to the Mohammedans were systematically undermined during the British rule and by the subsequent regime.Today, Hindus face disintegration from within, too. Here lies an even greater danger. As Will Durant has shown, it is easy for barbarians to destroy an advanced civilization. But a civilization is destroyed from outside only when it gets weak from within. Perhaps the first stage here is when a people forget that they are a civilization. Among our political or social class, it is only Dr.Swamy who is aware of and draws attention to both dangers.
LikeLike
I cannot but agree with the view that the Hindu identity is already lost. We should concede that a section of Hindus themselves contributed much to make Macaulayism successful in India. We should remember that “no one can make you inferior without your consent”. The British India was partitioned through a number mischievous negotiations held among three parties, that is the Colonial rulers, the Congress party claiming to be the representative of all Indians, the Muslim League that promptly rejected the claim and the Sikhs. The Hindus were nowhere there to represent themselves. In spite of these facts the Hindu country was divided, their identity was effaced, and given a new name ‘Secularists’! The ruling power was transferred to a would be dynasty. A directionless, disunited Hindu community no longer needed enemies. First of all, we, the Hindus, must have to get united, rediscover our ancient civilization, heritage and the Sanatan Dharma, and regain our identity. No doubt that is an uphill task. But the time is now!
LikeLike