Representative restoration image generated because no original image was embedded in the supplied HTML.
The Lost River: On the trail of the Saraswati — Michel Danino
What are the characteristics of a good book? It should keep you hooked and should have an element of mystery to be revealed at the end. The first quality is ensured because Michel Danino has made a good effort in putting a lot of information about the mighty river and Indus Valley Civilization (IVC). In addition, the fluidity in his writing style makes it an easy read. Since this topic has great consequences for the debate on Aryan Invasion/Migration Theory, Danino has reserved that discussion for the end — which keeps the mystery element alive till the last chapter of the book. Given the vastness of the Aryan Invasion debate, we will not keep this article as a simple book review but add our analysis about how the Saraswati river forms an essential part in this jigsaw puzzle.
One of the biggest misconceptions that this book clears up is that the association of the Ghaggar-Hakra system with ancient Saraswati is not a recent discovery based on new evidences from satellite imagery. What the recent satellite pictures do is further corroborate the presence of the paleo-channel of Saraswati as predicted by other fields like geology, linguistics and archaeology much before these satellite images became available. Danino builds a compelling story by adding pieces of small discoveries about Saraswati that started in the early 19th century after the first surveys of Rajasthan and Punjab were conducted by the British Raj.
The first section of the book deals with the work of past two centuries that has gone into the understanding of this river as we know it today. The readers are taken on this exceptional journey which begins by following the first explorations done by Colonel James Tod, who was deputed in Rajputana in 1812. The narration follows by recounting stories of some amateurs and other professional surveyors who bumped into the mighty Saraswati in one or another way — sometimes based on rural folk traditions or other times through hard archaeological and geological discovery. This understanding about Saraswati becomes perfectly clear after the advent of modern satellite imagery and Danino does a perfect job in summarizing the findings from these recent studies.
The story about the lost Saraswati becomes more interesting after the discovery of IVC settlements along the now dried-up Ghaggar channel in the dry and arid regions of the Thar desert, thus establishing the relationship between the IVC and the mighty river of the Vedas. This relationship is explored in further detail in the second part of the book, which takes a deep look at the IVC settlements along the Ghaggar. Surprisingly, the number of settlements along the lost river is much higher than those along the banks of the Indus river. Danino thus makes a good case for renaming IVC as Indus-Saraswati Civilization, as the current name reflects the partial knowledge that we had at the beginning of the 20th century. This is definitely a suggestion which will not go down easily among the current generation of leftist historians in academia.
The third section of the book is definitely the most interesting part for the readers who have closely followed the debate on Aryan Invasion Theory. Here again, Danino makes convincing arguments to connect the old IVC with the latter Vedic civilization. The evidences for this connection range from materialistic matters like weight measurements and arts to spiritual traditions like yoga. No surprise, the proponents of Aryan Invasion theory have wilfully disregarded all this evidence and are happy to concede that there was a big 800–1000 year gap — often called the dark age — between the last IVC period and the early Vedic civilization.
Where does this book leave us then? Following Occam’s razor, one has to go for the simplest explanation: that the mighty Saraswati once flowed through India and hence captured the imagination of all the Vedic poets. Why else would they recount the location of the river as in the NadiStuti verse, or later talk about its slow disappearance as in repeated references in latter Vedas, Mahabharat and other Vedic texts? On the other hand, one really needs to do a lot of mental gymnastics to claim that the mythic Saraswati river is the Helmand river in current Afghanistan.
Once it is accepted beyond doubt that the current Ghaggar system was the mythical Saraswati as mentioned in the Vedas, it will have a great impact on the study of Indology. Not only will it completely discredit the whole Aryan Invasion/Migration theory, it will also require fresh research to put correct dates on the Vedic texts as well as the IVC. A new survey into geology will help put a precise date on the disappearance of Saraswati which in turn will help arrive at correct dates for the Vedas and other Hindu texts. The disappearance of a big river like Saraswati — which sustained the whole IVC — forms a credible case for the slow deterioration and disappearance of the mighty IVC, negating the need for any invasion or migration to be the primary reason. Also, this implies continuity of the Indic civilization, as its centre slowly moved from the banks of Saraswati to the banks of the now-revered Ganga. The only missing part in this whole story is the Indus script, which is not yet deciphered, but will complete our understanding of this great puzzle.
Verdict: A compelling, well-researched read that builds a powerful case for the Ghaggar-Saraswati identification and its implications for the Aryan Invasion debate. Essential reading for anyone interested in the origins of Indian civilization.
Editorial illustration for “Shabrimala to Shani temple- tale of anti-Hindu feminists”.
Feminism is a good concept in theory but in practice it is just another Marxist tool to destroy cultures around the world. Since the Mohammedans will not listen to banning females from praying alongside men, or clad them in burqa, or giving divorce by saying triple talaq — nor will the Christians declare a female as the next Pope — the next best target for beloved feminists are Hindus. Since they are a fragmented lot and do not organize nationwide protests, they form an easy target.
For all its ills that modern feminism poses, the recent outrage is one more addition to the attempts where they are using state and mob power to push reforms down the throat of commoners. Whether forceful entry into a specific temple can be disguised as a Hindu reform is another important point to ponder. These outrages are nothing but part of a global agenda to destroy native customs and cultures under the guise of modernity and liberalism. The Jallikattu ban also falls under this category and is well analysed by us here. Let’s go into the details of why this recent outrage by a few women has been over the top and unjustified.
The most pertinent point is that a temple is not public property where people can party or drink alcohol (except in the Bhairav temple!). A random stranger cannot barge into your house because it is private property. People are allowed to form organizations and restrict their membership as well as determine the use of their premises. Similarly a temple, like any such organization or society, is formed by its local devotees who have the sole right to decide entry criteria.
Hinduism is not a religion driven by canon like Islam or Christianity and does not prescribe do’s and don’ts to everyone. All regions have their local customs which need to be respected and if needed reformed by the locals — and cannot be imposed by the champagne-sipping elites in Delhi circles. Women not only enter temples but engage in various religious activities in Hinduism, and so specific traditions guided by local mythology (like in the case of Sabarimala or Shani temple) should not be over-emphasized or blown out of proportion. In this particular case, women are allowed to enter the temple but cannot touch the main deity stone because Lord Shani is a celibate Brahmachari. Logic follows that if you are a believer you would follow and respect this tradition — otherwise why would you want to enter a specific temple where you are not invited, since you can always choose another one? The vandalism by these activists only proves that this was an organised protest to gain political mileage.
Given points 1 and 2 above, it is no longer difficult to understand why entry restrictions by these temples are not similar to discrimination against Dalits in pre-independence India — a point frequently raised by self-proclaimed reformists who like to equate these issues. While Dalits were systematically discriminated against in many of their village temples, it is not the case with women. Just as some temples or rituals are open to men, there are many other temples and rituals which only allow women — like Attukal temple or Navratri Puja, where only girls are worshipped. So there is no reason for Indians to blindly ape the fake equality notions from the west and kill their traditions.
Given the flexibility provided by Hinduism, these women who are opposing this particular temple tradition could have proved their case much more easily by building their own temple and worshipping Lord Shani. It would have been the most natural and Dharmic way to take this debate forward, but instead they created a ruckus to generate cheap publicity. Since reform was not part of the agenda, they have achieved what they wanted — another controversy.
The fact of the matter is that most of these self-proclaimed liberals and feminists engaged in such protests are the most illiberal kind and treat everyone else who does not toe their line as primates. They are just trying to fulfil a “brown men’s agenda” like the famous “white men’s agenda” of the past. Unfortunately, most Hindus do not understand the designs of the international cabal that is working to deconstruct each and every Hindu tradition and alienate them from their roots under the garb of modernity, feminism, or other famous cultural memes. Since most western social disciplines draw heavily from Judeo-Christian theology, like their cousin monotheistic cults, they want to force everyone to follow the same norms around the world. All these issues — from Jallikattu to the Shani temple — should be seen under this light and recognized as an assault on freedom of religion. Whether Hindus will be able to thwart these attempts against cultural genocide is something that will depend on how they perform in this war of memes.
Editorial illustration for “What Net Neutrality Ayatollahs won’t tell you about FreeBasics”.
Net neutrality has been a hot topic for debate in India since Mark Zuckerberg decided to launch Free Basics in India. In case you were sleeping and just woke up, this debate is about saving the internet from the whims and fancies of big corporate players like Facebook, which plans to offer free but limited internet in India through Free Basics. Without going too much back and forth, let’s look at the arguments put forth by the main protagonists against Free Basics and see how weak they are. The list of arguments below is taken from the blog savetheinternet.in.
Claim 1
There are other successful models for providing free Internet access to people, without giving a competitive advantage to Facebook. Free Basics is the worst of our options.
Rebuttal
No one has stopped other firms from offering these models. If they are really better than FB, let the consumers decide. If one type of banana is bad and rotten, does it need government intervention to restrict people from eating it? Wouldn’t the free market ensure that if Free Basics is really the worst product, it will be thrown out of the market?
Claim 2
Facebook doesn’t pay for Free Basics, telecom operators do. By encouraging people to choose Free Basics, Facebook reduces the propensity to bring down data costs for paid Internet access.
Rebuttal
This is a one-sided argument. When buying a new product, people often choose limited services so they can try and make up their mind — like a limited cable TV subscription that can be later upgraded. Similarly, new users who get hooked to the internet will not be satisfied with a limited package of Free Basics, thus demanding the full internet package in the future.
Claim 3
Free Basics isn’t about bringing people online. It’s about keeping Facebook and its partners free, while everything else remains paid. Free Basics is a violation of Net Neutrality.
Rebuttal
It is proof by redundancy. First, define net neutrality as an inviolable concept and then by default anything that violates it becomes non-halal.
Claim 4
Internet access is growing rapidly in India. We’ve added 100 million users in 2015. Almost all the connections added in India the last 1 year are NOT because of Free Basics.
Rebuttal
How is this even relevant to the debate? Just because India added 100 million users in 2015 does not mean there are no other users to be added any more. The subscription base cannot be used to determine whether a new product should be launched or not.
Claim 5
Free Basics is not an open platform. Facebook defines the technical guidelines for Free Basics and reserves the right to change them.
Rebuttal
Facebook is offering a limited service for free and should be free to choose the technical guidelines. Android is free but Google still enforces technical guidelines for future developers. This is just one way to harmonize the products offered under Free Basics.
Claim 6
The only source of info on Facebook’s Free Basics is Facebook, and it misleads people.
Rebuttal
This is another bizarre argument. Since when did Amul start advertising for Mother Dairy’s milk products? The above fact is not even true, given that so much info about Free Basics is provided on the savetheinternet.in website itself. Review columns on newspapers and websites exist for the precise reason that they help in dissecting the noise from real value.
Claim 7
Facebook gets access to all the usage data of all sites on Free Basics and gives data to the NSA. This is a security issue for India.
Rebuttal
This is a worthwhile issue to debate — and Facebook can be asked to have its servers in India. But how is this argument related to the holy grail of “net neutrality”? Even without Facebook offering Free Basics, the current servers of Facebook are located in the US and open for abuse by the NSA.
Claim 8
Research has shown that people prefer to use the open web for a shorter duration over a limited set of sites for a longer duration.
Rebuttal
Well, if that is what people prefer to do rather than pay, why do the Gods of net neutrality find it indigestible? Eating hamburgers is bad for health and is proved beyond doubt, but should we have campaigns to outright ban them?
Claim 9
Facebook says that Free Basics doesn’t have ads, but does not say that it will never have ads.
Rebuttal
So if Facebook agrees to never put ads on Free Basics, will it somehow become kosher? Even currently, the entire internet is littered with ads — does that make it less useful? People who do not prefer ads either opt out or reduce consumption of internet sites which have too many ads. This would be true even for Free Basics.
Claim 10
Facebook has shown people as saying they support Free Basics when they haven’t.
Rebuttal
This can be challenged in the court of law if savetheinternet.in really thinks it is a criminal offence. But again, this argument has nothing to do with the net neutrality debate. How Facebook got those signatures is immaterial to allowing Facebook to offer another internet service in the market.
As can be seen from above, none of the arguments put forth by the opponents of Free Basics can withstand basic logical reasoning. But it is no wonder that years of socialist brainwashing in India has created deep distrust for the market economy while giving a free pass for indiscriminate government intervention that has time and again failed the common citizen. The only thing that interventions like this can achieve is setting bad precedents that would allow the hounding of any new customer service in the future by online petitioning. It will also open the possibility for incumbent firms to hire specialist agencies to create a stir against new rival firms, killing the creative destruction mechanism which forms the bedrock of any well-functioning market economy.
Another important argument that is completely missed in the whole debate is that the biggest threat to free speech and the open internet is from governments around the world — not from big corporations. Frequent banning of websites in different countries is a testament to this abuse of power. Using government to kill Free Basics, the net neutrality activists are only playing into the hands of government which will use this precedent in the future to censor negative opinion by passing ad-hoc laws. The only thing that net neutrality activists should defend is freedom of choice as well as freedom to innovate. As long as these basic principles are followed, the best product will win over the consumer market without the need to endorse the bigger evil — unchecked state power.
Editorial illustration for “From fall of Olympics to Jallikattu ban”.
The Abrahamic war on Paganism has been perfected over the centuries and the recent ban on Jallikattu is a direct consequence of this old and perfected missionary tactic. One of the essential stages during the spread of Abrahamic religions over the world has been the destruction of paganism from Europe to Latin America to Africa. And the best way to kill paganism is to strike at its root by disconnecting the natives from their roots — turning sons against father, society and native religion. The cookbook of turning people against their forefathers has been refined over the centuries by these imperialistic religions. But how do you disconnect people from their roots?
The best way to achieve this objective is to chop down on native social traditions ranging from festivals, feasts, sacrifice and every social activity which defines the local society. Sometimes this objective was achieved in an overt fashion as exemplified by Mohammed destroying the idols of Arabic pagan Gods on his return to Mecca. With this single masterstroke, Mohammed completely disconnected the Mecca residents from their traditional culture which revolved around their pagan deities. Without common identity, customs and rituals to bind them, the old pagan society crumbled under Islamic barbarity in Arabia. If the sword was not powerful enough to censor ritualism, other machinations were deployed to achieve this objective.
But Islam only picked up these techniques later, much after Christianity had used them for several hundred years and was already a prominent religion. So it is important to look at the methods used by early Christians to destroy pagan societies and see whether the Jallikattu ban follows the old Church template. The only difference being that now western governments use secular institutions like NGOs and think-tanks to denounce native practices and de-link people from their traditions. Such societies then become easy fodder for proselytization attempts by the Church.
The suppression of Olympic games by the Church
The ancient Olympic games were the most important part of Greek identity but in 380 AD, when Emperor Theodosius I announced Christianity to be the official state religion of the Roman Empire, the Olympic games became the first victim of zealous Christian clergy. In 391 AD and 392 AD, Theodosius I further issued edicts to outlaw the pagan practices of sacrifice, libations, garlands, and divination throughout his territory. This would prove to be the final nail for the Olympics — celebrated in honour of Greek God Zeus — and other sports in their outwardly pagan forms. Finally in 426 AD, Emperor Theodosius II finished the work started by his grandfather and burned down the Temple of Zeus and other Olympia buildings including the great stadium of Olympia.
The burning down of the Temple of Zeus was the last step in establishing the supremacy of the monotheistic Christian God. But as mentioned above, the work to discredit pagan beliefs began much earlier as the Church actively used state power to ban different pagan practices. In 392 AD, Theodosius prohibited circus games on Sunday so that people would not be distracted from Sunday mass. The gradual decline of Gladiatorial fights under Constantine I, Constantine II, and complete closure under Honorius in 404 AD also happened under the influence of the Christian council as Roman kings restricted their soldiers from participating in these events and decreased the frequency of these events.
All these actions paved the way for removal of the statue of Zeus from Olympia. This statue was one of the primary attractions of the city and the Olympic games were discontinued soon after these events. No surprise that Olympia became a Christian town by the 5th century with its buildings falling into ruin or taken over by the Church.
The accommodations for the athletes and guests were at this point no longer used for their original purpose. Blocks from the gymnasium gate and perhaps from the palaestra too, and statue bases from the nymphaion were reused in the church.
— Sofie Remijsen, The End of Greek Athletics in Late Antiquity
The template thus used by the Church was very simple — look down upon all native traditions and either ridicule them to stop them covertly, or use the power of the state and mob and suppress them overtly. A gripping account of the destruction of ancient pagan culture and along with it the scientific temper was the subject of the movie “Agora” released in 2009:
[Embedded: Agora (2009) — trailer or clip on destruction of pagan culture] — contextual restoration.
But it was not all easy for the Church as the pagans did fight back for some time. There was a brief period between Constantine II and Valentinian where Julian the Apostate did his best to revive paganism by reviving games and festivals — but the poor fellow failed because the Church had become deeply entrenched in the Roman power structure and society by then. Paganism lost hold on Greek minds as they became victims of rational philosophy, escapist mystery cults and the reforming zeal of Christians who stamped out the pagan sacrifices, idolatry and rituals.
The suppression of sports and rituals in India
The targeting of Akali Nihangs and decline of Sikh martial traditions under the British Raj also followed the same template. Gatka, which was predominantly a battle art, was turned into performance art as the British hanged and imprisoned the Ustads and hunted down the Nihangs out of Punjab. This was done with such clinical precision that not only Sikhs forgot and gave up their traditional practices but also became one of the most loyal servants of the British.
The British made other similar attempts and banned Ayudh Puja as well as most other martial arts traditions like Silambam and Kalaripayat. Although these decisions had the objective to protect British colonialism in India, one should not miss the cultural aspect — the British had a deep desire to “civilise” the local Satan worshippers.
The recent fashion to rid Hinduism of its original pagan form while absorbing Hindu spirituality in the name of secularising Yoga, Advaita etc. should also be seen under this light. Once these philosophies are de-linked from their Hindu roots by banning the outward pagan rituals, the task of luring people into monotheistic creeds or hedonistic consumerism becomes much simpler.
The forces behind these bans
The current attempts to ban Jallikattu should be seen as a continuation of past attempts to suppress local traditions in pagan societies. The only thing that has changed is the players in the game. Instead of overt participation of the Church, now we have NGOs and other pressure groups who want to subvert local traditions. No surprise that in almost all cases, the customs and rituals under the scanner have an association with Hinduism — the last citadel of global paganism.
Most Hindu traditions are local in nature and closely related with local social life. This makes them easy targets as it is difficult to rally support from other Hindus in case of suppression by the state. Given the past success of proselytization attempts post destruction and vilification of native pagan traditions, one should expect that these attempts will only increase in the future in India — sometimes under the garb of animal protection and other times to promote equality, gender or otherwise. The recent judgements against temple elephants, Dahi Handi during Mumbai Gokulashtami celebrations, or the Sabarimala and Shani Shingnapur worship traditions are the disjointed pieces of this puzzle that one needs to put together to understand the big picture.
In this whole drama, the most worrying aspect is the fact that most of these decisions have come from the Supreme Court which has no mandate to interfere selectively and pass judgements against some local traditions while closing their eyes on other more reprehensible social practices. This probably gives a sense of infiltration of the deep state or current liberal memes in Indian judiciary. Also, the hurry shown by the SC to entertain such PILs, when many other important cases are pending, only leads to further distrust in the institution.
To counter this propaganda — and given the hold of Marxist thought in popular parlance in India — there is an active need on the part of Hindus to thwart any such attempts against local traditions. Given the presence of social media, it is much easier to identify and target the hypocrisy of individuals who want to ban Jallikattu while enjoying a piece of steak for dinner. But it is not enough, as Hindus usually try to brush off the strength of the enemy by citing that they have survived this onslaught for more than 2000 years. A cursory look at the epitaphs of various pagan societies from around the world should be enough to ring an alarm bell that they are not special and many other civilizations have been destroyed using similar techniques. So every attempt to ban and ridicule local rituals and traditions, no matter how small, should be thwarted at every level of society.
References:
Christianity and the Roman Games — Richard F. Devoe
The End of Greek Athletics in Late Antiquity — Sofie Remijsen
The Fall of the Ancient Olympics: The Theodosian Code
Editorial illustration for “Third battle of Panipat- Did Abdali win or Marathas lose?”.
Today is the 255th anniversary of the third battle of Panipat, which was fought between the Afghans and the Marathas in 1761. There is a plethora of information available on the third battle of Panipat, down to the exact dispositions of the men and officers. This has been the most analysed battle in the ancient to medieval era in India. Thus this story can be recounted in exact detail.
The roots of the expedition lay in Afghan king Ahmad Shah Abdali’s repeated invasions of India. In 1757, he invaded again at the invitation of Najib Khan Rohilla, the leader of the Afghans who had settled in the Katehr region of UP. Because these Afghans had come from Roh in Afghanistan, Katehr’s name was changed to Rohilkhand — needless to say that the name has not yet been changed by the ‘secular’ governments that regularly trample upon the rights of Hindus.
The 1757 invasion of Abdali was a particularly brutal invasion. Not only was Delhi looted, but the Mughal princesses were forced into the bed of Abdali and his son. Mathura was sacked and the Yamuna was turned red for several miles with the bodies of dead people. Eventually the pile of dead corpses became infected and diseases broke out in Abdali’s army, which finally prompted him to retreat back to Afghanistan.
How it started
The Wazir of Delhi, Imad-ul-Mulk had kept a force of Marathas in his pay under Antaji Mankeshwar. They had been borrowed from the Peshwa. These gave a good account of themselves as they killed two thousand Afghan soldiers, but had to retreat as they were numbering only four thousand and were outnumbered.
The Indian Afghans under Najib Khan Rohilla now dominated not only Delhi, Haryana and the region between the Ganga and Yamuna, but also Rohilkhand. The Wazir Imad-ul-Mulk realised that only the Marathas could deliver Delhi from this menace and invited them to Delhi with a powerful force.
Marathas conquer Delhi and Punjab
The Peshwa sent his brother Raghunathrao (popularly called Raghoba) with a powerful force into North India. Raghoba immediately captured Delhi and Najib Khan became a prisoner in his hands. This was the right moment to kill Najib as he was one who was inviting Abdali and could invite again. Besides, he had the blood of innocent people of Mathura on his hands.
But Najib paid Malhar Rao Holkar, the Maratha ruler of Malwa, huge bribes to save his life. Malhar Rao prevailed upon Raghoba to spare Najib and thus Najib was set free! This was the greatest mistake of Raghoba as the treacherous Najib was to invite Abdali again.
Now Raghoba made a surprising decision and invaded Punjab, which was Abdali’s territory. His forces conquered Lahore and then advanced on to Attock on the Indus, which was considered by Hindus to be the boundary of India. Abdali’s son Taimur, the Afghan governor of Punjab, was defeated and fled. According to the historian Grant Duff:
The Deccan horse had slaked their thirst in the waters of the Indus!
— Grant Duff, History of Mahrattas
In the Maratha capital Pune, there was wild jubilation and the Peshwa talked about capturing Kabul and Kandahar, and ambassadors were sent by Iran on hearing this news. But this actually made Abdali the deadly enemy of Marathas, for Punjab was the breadbasket of his empire, which was otherwise made of arid regions like Afghanistan and Baluchistan.
Having captured Punjab, Raghoba however could not face the biting cold of Lahore as winter came and decamped back to the Deccan with the majority of his army, leaving only 15,000 troops behind. Sabaji Scindia was sent as governor, who went even further and captured Peshawar and garrisoned it with 10,000 men. But the total troops that remained in the province numbered only 32,000 — hardly enough to face Abdali in full force. The Marathas had created enemies in India without destroying them — like the Nizam of Hyderabad, Najib Khan, Hyder Ali of Mysore and others — so troops were needed to garrison other parts of the empire. In hindsight Raghoba’s expedition to capture Punjab must be called a mad expedition.
Abdali was ready for a policy of live and let live — his ambassadors made it clear that he was ready to accept Maratha domination over Delhi, Haryana and western UP, if they gave up Punjab. But the Maratha ambition was boundless and they rejected it. Marathas also made the mistake of not properly taking the help of the Sikhs, who were natural allies for them.
Abdali invades India again — Battle of Barari Ghat
Najib Khan Rohilla had already been making calls to Abdali that Islam in India was in danger. Abdali assembled a force of 60,000 storm troopers — one of the finest cavalry in all Asia, all battle-hardened troops and especially cruel, ferocious and merciless. With this force he advanced from Kandahar along the Indus to Peshawar. Looking at the size and ferocity of his force, the Maratha garrison had to flee.
As Abdali advanced to Sirhind, the news reached Dattaji Scindia, the Maratha Governor of Delhi. Dattaji had been besieging Najib at Shukartal but with Abdali invading India, he was now faced with a superior force of Afghans and Rohillas — more than 1 lakh men. He had about 50,000 men with him, clearly insufficient. The only choice was to retreat, but Dattaji was a proud man.
As Abdali and Najib linked up on the eastern side of the Yamuna, Dattaji prepared on the west bank to fight. It was at Barari Ghat that the battle took place. Dattaji was right in the forefront — a serious mistake, as ideally a general should be at the back to guide his troops. He was shot by Rohilla troops who had muskets, and killed. Immediately panic seized his army and they began to flee.
The Afghans found the body of Dattaji. Najib’s minister Qutub Shah cut his head and took it away as a trophy — and the Marathas had to cremate his headless body. Later the Marathas would take revenge on Qutub Shah for this perfidy.
Maratha expedition to Panipat
The news of Dattaji’s death fell like a thunderbolt on the Marathas when it reached Pune. Great preparations were made for war. The Peshwa’s cousin Sadashivraobhau was selected as commander, for he had recently won a splendid victory over the Nizam at Udgir. He was a great believer in the European style of warfare using long-range muskets handled by well-drilled infantry troops.
The core of the army was 9,000 Gardis with 200 heavy cannon. But this style of warfare went completely against the Maratha style of mobile warfare on horses. The Peshwa added to this army a vast retinue of servants, dancing girls, wives of soldiers and camp-followers totalling more than 200,000 people — totally changing the Maratha style of making war with only light cavalry. This was to have disastrous results.
The fighting men totalled 85,000. Scindias of Gwalior, Holkars of Indore and Gaikwads of Baroda all added lustre to the galaxy of generals. Considering the vast numbers, the army moved slowly and by the time it reached across the Chambal river, the rainy season was at hand.
Arrogance of the Bhau — the friendless Marathas in north India
Once the Marathas had crossed the Chambal, Bhau sent ambassadors to all princes in north India to join him. Only the Jat Raja of Bharatpur joined him temporarily. The ruler of Awadh, Nawab Shuja-ud-Daula joined Abdali. So did the Pathans of Farrukabad. No Hindu was willing to join the Marathas.
The reason was not far to seek. Everyone knew that if the Marathas won at Panipat, they would become the rulers of India — meaning the destruction of everyone, Muslim or Hindu. On the other hand, if Abdali won, not only would they be free of the Maratha menace but Abdali himself would go back. The Afghans did not have the staying power of the Marathas and were not about to create an empire in India. So everyone would survive in the event of an Afghan win. The Maratha behaviour of looting even Hindus had not endeared them to the Hindus.
At Delhi, a war council was held in which both Malhar Rao Holkar and Jat Raja Suraj Mal gave sound advice to Bhau. They asked that the heavy baggage, women and camp-followers should be sent southwards, as it would prove a major impediment. In the event of defeat they could run away on light horses and escape to fight another day.
But Bhau rejected this advice! He insulted Malhar Rao by calling him a shepherd and insulted Jat Raja Suraj Mal by calling him a mere Zamindar. Thus Bhau resolved to take the women and camp followers into the zone of battle. Suraj Mal was so incensed that he abandoned the Marathas and went back to his domains. Malhar Rao secretly began talks with Najib Khan to save his own skin — and Najib agreed not to fight Malhar if he also did not attack Najib.
Afghans deliver the masterstroke of the war
From Delhi, Bhau moved northwards. He captured Kunjpura — a base of Abdali’s communications with Afghanistan — by bombardment, putting the entire Afghan garrison to death and finding Qutub Shah, who had cut off Dattaji’s head, and torturing him to death.
Abdali was stunned by the capture of Kunjpura but could not cross the flooded Yamuna. The Marathas enjoyed the huge foodstuffs found there and celebrated Dussehra — forgetting their main task and wasting time in praying.
Bhau made a serious mistake in not keeping strong patrols on the Yamuna. After desperate searching, a shallow crossing was found and the Afghan army crossed. They lost some 500 men to drowning but were finally across. This was truly the masterstroke of the war — Abdali was now south of the Marathas and in a position to cut off their way to the south. The Marathas were now trapped. Their supply line was cut. The Afghans were supplied food and provisions by Najib and allies. On the other hand the Marathas began to starve.
As they moved south, they found their way blocked by the Afghan hordes south of a super-unlucky place which had already seen the defeat of Indian armies twice before. This was Panipat — and this was going to be the third battle fought there.
The rival armies at Panipat
The two armies encamped at Panipat. The Marathas built ditches around their camp and ramparts with cannon at regular intervals. The first few weeks were dominated by the Marathas — their artillery kept firing cannon shells which fell onto the Afghans. Abdali had to move his camp farther south and out of range. The Marathas launched raids onto the Afghan camp.
In the dead of night, 5,000 Rohillas slipped through a weak point into the Maratha camp and started slaughtering them. The Gardi musketeers opened fire and killed more than 3,000 Rohillas — the rest fled. But Bhau’s personal friend Balwant Rao Mehendale was killed, filling Bhau with gloom.
From this point the Afghans dominated the plains between the two armies. All supplies to the Marathas were stopped and starvation began. A large force carrying treasure for the Bhau accidentally went into the Afghan camp in the dark and was annihilated. The vast retinue of servants, women and camp-followers quickly finished the remaining food at Panipat. Animals began to die for want of forage.
At last all men felt so weak that they gathered around Bhau’s tent clamouring for a fight to save their honour. Bhau agreed. Next morning the Marathas marched out with their faces pasted with saffron, as defenders of Hinduism. The date was 14 January 1761.
The battle of Panipat — phases I, II and III
The Marathas opened the action by firing their cannons, but the rapid movement of the Afghans meant that by the time the cannon were elevated and fired, the Afghans were ahead of the position on which they were aimed. The cannonballs fell harmlessly behind the Afghan troops. The cannons, which had proven decisive against static targets at Delhi and Kunjpura, proved useless on the fluid battlefield.
Bhau’s Gardi musketeers on his left then opened fire on the Rohillas and Afghans in front of them. The Gardis worked with clock-like precision — one line fired while the next reloaded. The Afghans on the right began to be decimated; between 8,000 to 9,000 of them lost their lives. The Afghan right seemed to be collapsing. Ibrahim Khan Gardi, their brilliant commander — a Pathan who had earlier rejected Afghan bribes and appeals to common religion, saying “my loyalty lies to the land which I have made my home, not from which I come” — led them magnificently.
However, jealousy grew among the cavalry of Damaji Gaikwad and Vitthal Shivdev posted to the Gardis’ right. They saw the battle being won by the Gardis while traditional Maratha cavalry did nothing. So they charged the Afghan lines before the Afghans had been fully decimated — bringing them within range of the short-range Afghan muskets. The entire charging force was cut to pieces at point-blank range. And since the horse-borne Marathas were now between the Afghans and the Gardis, the Gardis had to stop firing so as not to hit their own comrades.
Meanwhile, in the center the famed Huzrat cavalry scattered the Afghans and charged them, scattering thousands. For the Marathas, this was their golden opportunity. The Afghan right was turned and the center had melted. Considerable gaps had opened in the Afghan lines through which they could safely pass to the south, to safety and food!
But how could they! If they escaped to the south, they would have to leave behind the multitude of women, old and infirm people and servants — those who depended on them for safety. Could a Maratha soldier show his face in Maharashtra if he came back leaving these people to the tender mercies of the rapist Afghans? No. The Marathas after this charge had to return back to their original positions.
Abdali immediately sent his reserves and military police — numbering 10,000 — behind the fleeing Afghans with orders to browbeat them back. The situation was explained to them: they were in a far-off country and if defeated had nowhere to run. Finally they were brought back and re-divided into two groups, one to the centre and one to the right.
The Afghan troops back in position saw that the Gardi troops were now alone without cavalry escort — their protectors having been slaughtered by their own foolish assault. The Gardis were charged in full force. They fought as best as they could but were slaughtered to every single man. Ibrahim Khan Gardi himself was captured. But they and their gallant commander had honoured themselves on the battlefield by taking on a numerically superior force and nearly decimating it.
On the Maratha right, Malhar Rao Holkar had deliberately taken position opposite Najib Khan Rohilla — his secret friend. At a pre-arranged signal, Malhar Rao left his position and escaped from the battlefield. Najib did not attack him. This suddenly exposed the flank of the Scindia troops to his immediate left, who were attacked from the side and cut to pieces. Jankoji Scindia had to run to safety. The Maratha right wing was turned toward the center.
Abdali ordered his Zamburaks — swivel-cannons fitted on camels, more mobile than the static Maratha cannons — to attack. Then he ordered his Iranian troops with distinctive red headgear to attack the Maratha flank. A titanic battle developed. Both sides fought with swords, spears, battle axes and even daggers for more than two hours.
The Peshwa’s son Vishwasrao, the 17-year-old nominal commander, fought like a true warrior by the side of his uncle. When he mounted an elephant to bolster his forces, he was shot dead by an Afghan musket — exactly as Dattaji Scindia had been killed.
At this point, Bhau lost his head and forgot his duty as a general. He knew he could not show his face in Pune to Vishwasrao’s mother. He ordered his bodyguards, numbering hundreds, to accompany him as he plunged into the Afghan lines. Word spread among the Marathas that he had died. Many began to flee. The Afghans hounded them mercilessly. As they fled into the town of Panipat, they were chased and savagely massacred.
Some 75,000 of the 85,000 fighting men lost their lives — in all 2 lakh Marathas lost their lives. In Maharashtra not a single home was left which did not have to mourn the loss of a member. It was verily the doomsday of the Maratha people.
The news reached Shrimant Peshwa Nanasaheb, son of Bajirao, when he was at Sironj. An enigmatic letter came saying:
Two pearls have been lost, so have been 27 gold mohurs and the count of the copper lost is beyond count!
Needless to say, the gold were the sardars and the pearls were Bhau and Vishwasrao. Shocked by the news, the Peshwa breathed his last.
Abdali was not able to hold on to Punjab for which he had fought such an epic battle. The Sikhs took advantage of his weakened condition due to the losses at Panipat and wrested it from him in the coming years. But in Bengal, the race of white men were raising a Union Jack and were smiling at their good fortune.
References:
1. Advanced study in the history of modern India — J.L. Mehta
2. Fall of the Mughal Empire, Volume 2 — Jadunath Sarkar
Editorial illustration for “Why dalits should stay away from suicidal leftist politics”.
The recent suicide of Rohit Vemula, a student at Hyderabad University, has taken the country by storm. The popular narration peddled by the media is that the poor student was pushed to commit suicide due to discriminatory action by the university administration in response to political vandalism exhibited by Vemula and his peers associated with Ambedkar Students Association (ASA). To summarize, Vemula and five other students were expelled from the university after beating up another fellow student and later the punishment was reduced to expulsion from hostel. Since then, these students were protesting against university action and probably under stress. Post suicide, the ASA, media and other political parties are trying to bring in a Dalit angle to this incident by complaining that students were given harsh punishment due to their Dalit identity — a fact which is debatable.
In the following paragraphs, we will not be dissecting this particular incident but talk specifically about how Ambedkar would have been pained by his name being used by anti-national and anti-Dalit organizations like ASA and Ambedkar Periyar Study Circle (APSC). More importantly, we will throw some light on how Dalit politics is hijacked by anti-national leftists and Marxists in India and why Dalits and specifically SC/ST and OBC students should stay away from the politics of such organizations. Under the garb of Dalit identity, these organizations headed by upper caste Hindus (check yourself that top leaders of left parties like CPI(M) etc. are almost always Brahmins or upper castes) want to exploit the fault lines present in Hindu society to further their own agenda and trap poor Dalit students in ugly college level politics.
First, let me ask a few questions about history to get started. Who was the prominent Hindu leader in favour of partition of India before Congress succumbed under Jinnah’s pressure? Who was the prominent leader who wanted proper population exchange at the time of partition and thought without total population exchange Hindus will get a bad deal? Who was the leader who recognised the true destructive nature of Islam that we fail to acknowledge even today after seeing events like Malda and Muzzafarnagar? The answer to all the above questions is Ambedkar. Among the idealists and other crazy national leaders, Ambedkar was one of the few rational thinkers and realists in 1947.
Post-independence, Ambedkar has been digested by the left and his legacy has been reduced to a Dalit thinker. This has been done because Ambedkar’s views were vehemently against Abrahamics (both Islam and Christianity) and state control of the economy. These other identities of Ambedkar have been carefully suppressed by the leftist intelligentsia — and this is one of the reasons that most celebrated Dalit intellectuals today, who are promoted by the media and universities like JNU, demand government control of the economy and side with Abrahamics wherever possible.
Ambedkar’s opinion about Islam is as hard-hitting today as it was 70 years ago. In his book on partition of India, he wrote:
According to Muslim Canon Law the world is divided into two camps, Dar-ul-Islam (abode of Islam) and Dar-ul-Harb (abode of war). A country is Dar-ul-Islam when it is ruled by Muslims. A country is Dar-ul-Harb when Muslims only reside in it but are not rulers of it. That being the Canon Law of the Muslims, India cannot be the common motherland of the Hindus and the Musalmans. It can be the land of the Musalmans — but it cannot be the land of the Hindus and the Musalmans living as equals…
— B.R. Ambedkar, The Partition of India
No surprise that in the last few years of his life, when Ambedkar lost hope of reforming Hindus, he chose to convert to Buddhism — another Dharmic religion — instead of joining the fold of Abrahamics. Ambedkar had written and clearly presented evidence that caste and other evil Hindu practices were equally present in Islam and Christian converts, and so conversion to these cults served no purpose. On top of that, these religions separate the individual from his roots by carefully planting the seeds of extra-territorial allegiance towards Mecca and Rome. So Ambedkar perfectly envisaged that conversion to Abrahamic cults would lead to destruction of Indic civilization.
Looking at the above views of Ambedkar, it is no surprise that the Marxist cabal reduced Ambedkar to a mere Dalit icon. Ambedkar’s image has been used to fuel anti-caste sentiment and promote hatred towards Hinduism rather than reduce casteism from Indian society. Rather than promoting native Dalit intellectual and Dalit entrepreneurship associations like DICCI, Dalits are sold the narrative of victimhood by anti-national rabble-rousers like ASA and APSC and their parent organizations which often follow Marxist ideology.
These parent organizations are usually headed by upper caste elites who want to exploit the fault lines in Hinduism and align with Muslims and Christians to maintain their hegemony. They do not have the best interest of Dalits but use them as mere pawns and cannon fodder in this political game. Does it come as a surprise that in 40 years that CPI ruled Bengal, the CPI Politburo had no Dalit members? Does it come as a surprise that for every Kancha Ilaiah, there are hundreds of Rajdeep Sardesai-style upper caste anti-nationals? When the shit hits the fan, Dalits will always be the first victims and at the receiving end of Muslim atrocities as evidenced from daily events in West Bengal. Given this scenario, Dalits should reject this poison sold by snake oil salesmen in the media and intelligentsia.
Given the analysis above, we can now analyse the current suicide as part of a bigger narrative being built in different parts of India to exploit Dalit identity. This suicide can be traced back to the protest held by these Dalit students against the hanging of Yakub Menon, a proven terrorist. It should not come as a surprise that these Dalits had been brainwashed to such an extent that their protest reflected the anti-territorial affinities usually shown only by hardcore Abrahamics or anti-national apologists.
So, what is the way forward for Dalits? Dalit students should try to stay away from politics and focus on their education, as the free market is their best bet to fight caste discrimination and reform Hindu society. For the politically motivated ones who want to enter student politics, they should realise that leftist jholachaps have little to offer them except false victimhood. They need to realise that a stronger and united India is more in the interest of Dalits than the current generation of upper caste rulers and intelligentsia, who want to consolidate power by playing divide and rule. Only when Dalits realise and neutralise this nefarious design can they claim the legacy of Ambedkar and fulfil his dream of creating a strong and just India.
Contextual editorial illustration for the restored article.
It is disgusting to watch news and look at the way presstitutes are handling the suicide of a terrorist-sympathising anti-national college hooligan just because he belongs to a lower caste. Rohit Vemula and his fellow leftist hooligans had organised a protest inside the campus in support of the terrorist Yakub Menon, who was responsible for bombing more than 200 people in the Mumbai terrorist attacks. When some students in his college wrote on Facebook exposing these anti-national students, he and his fellow leftist hooligans beat up those students. The students who were the actual victims of the hooliganism of this guy and his fellow thugs complained to the college management about this misbehaviour. Taking strict action, the college management then suspended this group of thugs for goondaism inside college premises.
But for obvious reasons the media presstitutes have chosen to completely ignore the sequence of events that led to the suicide of this anti-national thug and are now painting a false picture of a poor Dalit student getting uneven treatment by an upper caste university management — because telling the truth would not help their anti-national agenda. What’s worse is that they are now trying to pin the blame of suicide on the Vice Chancellor of the university, who in all fairness was more than generous in handling this issue. This reasoning is ridiculous but then again did we ever expect sane arguments from the leftist anti-nationals?
Firstly, it is difficult to force anyone to commit suicide. Trying to push the narrative that this anti-national thug was forced into suicide by the VC is just ridiculous. The only people who could have vested interest in Rohit’s suicide are his other fellow suspended comrades or the Ambedkar Students Association (ASA) — the organization behind the protest in support of Yakub Menon. They are the ones who are now getting cheap publicity by this episode. This sequence of events is similar to the suicide that was staged at Kejriwal’s rally a year ago. Secondly, the guy in question is not innocent by any means and his punishment was not out of proportion to what he did. In fact, the management was lenient when he was left with just expulsion from hostel instead of expelling him and his fellow hooligans from college outright.
Supporting terrorism and indulging in hooliganism is not innocence. Being a Dalit does not give leeway to engage in anti-national activities nor does it give anyone any right to indulge in rowdyism inside college. In fact what the VC did was actually very mild compared to what this anti-national deserved — he and his fellow anti-nationals should have been expelled from college instead of being expelled just from the hostel for beating up other students. But no, for some reason his Dalit identity is given as an excuse for his anti-national activities and the media presstitutes want us to overlook this misbehaviour.
This is unacceptable behaviour from the media as well as the students now engaged in protest. And as usual, all the anti-national politicians from Kejriwal to Rahul Gandhi are ganging up to visit this thug’s funeral and turn him into some sort of hero. As a society, how does it make sense to turn an anti-national rowdy into a hero post suicide? And where were these Dalit-saving brigades including Rahul Gandhi and Kejriwal when Dalit houses and shops were burnt in Malda and Dalit Hindus were forced out of their homes?
We will go further and say that the students who are currently protesting against the VC for his action against the anti-national Rohit Vemula are just supporting an anti-national unlawful rowdy masquerading as a student. Such students should be strictly punished — with suspension and expulsion if necessary — so that such anti-national politics are not condoned in the future. Our government should make it very clear that no one has any right to indulge in any anti-national activity and caste identity does not give a free pass for such behaviour.
Any leniency on the students protesting in favour of the anti-national rowdy will only set a bad precedent for such anti-national goondaist activities inside the universities and will lead to further worsening of law and order and the academic environment. The government needs to nip this nuisance in its bud. We don’t want all our universities to turn into anti-national factories like JNU. One JNU is more than enough to fulfil our suicidal tendency of supporting anti-national ideologies.
Originally published January 19, 2016 on Yuga Parivartan.
Contextual editorial illustration for the restored article.
In the backdrop of the Pathankot attack, it becomes important to think about Pakistan’s nuclear program because Pakistan’s nuclear bluff stops India from taking any concrete actions against it. Nukes have pretty little tactical benefit apart from killing civilians — which can also be contained once the nuclear threat is not a surprise. The pertinent question in the Indo-Pak equation is to find out how big Pakistan’s nuclear threat really is, or whether it is just a bluff under which the Pakistan military can avoid an overt Indian response.
In the first part of this article, we will summarize how the devastating effects of nuclear weapons are exaggerated in the regular media. In the second part, we will specifically talk about Pakistan’s nuclear program and show that Pakistan neither has the requisite delivery vehicles nor enough warheads to cause enough destruction to change the tide of a war.
The first and foremost important point to consider is that the nuclear bomb can neither deliver nor guarantee victory or stalemate in any war — and specifically in an Indo-Pak war. Just like in a battle not all fired bullets deliver the head of the enemy, similarly a nuclear strike will achieve very few of its intended target goals. One of the biggest misconceptions is related to the destructive power of modern bombs as compared to the smaller bombs used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. William H. Hessler put this succinctly:
A more powerful bomb is now in production. It will release more energy and therefore work destruction over a larger area. But the area does not increase in proportion to the augmented power of the bomb. In military terms, which are not the same as scientific terms, the more powerful the bomb, the less efficient it is. For most military purposes ten bombs, each with one tenth of the power of the Nagasaki bomb, would be more effective than was the one Nagasaki bomb.
— William H. Hessler
[Image: Impact of Pak’s 45Kt warhead if detonated in Delhi] Impact of Pakistan’s 45Kt warhead in Delhi — restored contextual visual.
So a more powerful bomb will be more destructive but destruction will not increase linearly. The below picture shows the impact of the largest Pakistani warhead if detonated in New Delhi. No doubt, Delhi has a high population density and this will bring high civilian deaths. But we need to consider three very important points that would decrease civilian deaths in case of a nuclear exchange:
1) Pakistan would try to hit strategic military locations
Pakistan cannot expect to stop the war just by nuking Indian cities. It will in fact bring massive nuclear retaliation from India and nuclear escalation. In this MAD scenario, Pakistan can only hope to achieve some stalemate by targeting strategic military locations. This is the reason that Pakistan came up with the fancy name of tactical battlefield weapons to directly target the advancing Indian Army. While this might help achieve some military objectives, it reduces the number of warheads that Pakistan can launch towards high-density Indian cities.
2) Not all nuclear launches will be a surprise
One of the other reasons that lead to high civilian casualty is the simple arithmetic used to extrapolate destruction. Since Tokyo was four times more densely populated than Hiroshima, it would have resulted in four times the number of deaths if the bomb was dropped there. But this does not take into account that people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were caught unaware, while in Tokyo — due to frequent bombing raids — people were well prepared and could hide. If nuclear weapons lose their surprise value, it gives enough time for civilians and local government to move people out of high-density areas or hide in underground tunnels. The ill-effects of nuclear radiation will still be around for some time, but after a period of 72 hours people can move around and perform their jobs in the destroyed area. A single nuke in a city does not cause the end of civilization — as one can see if they visit Hiroshima or Nagasaki today.
3) India will retaliate and stop many of these weapons
This is the third most important aspect — whether the enemy is able to launch all its bombs and land them in your country. India does not have a fully developed BMD shield, but that does not mean we cannot intercept incoming Pakistani missiles or fighter jets. Also, a massive retaliation from India can completely cripple Pakistan’s delivery capability. On top of that, Pakistan has not yet achieved complete nuclear triad and so they do not have any submarines lurking in the Indian Ocean to take down Indian cities once Pakistan is completely annihilated.
The term MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) was coined in reference to the rivalry between US and USSR when both had more than 5,000 nuclear warheads and perfect delivery vehicles. This is not the case in the Indo-Pak rivalry. Pakistan’s arsenal is estimated at around 120 warheads according to current estimates. So we won’t face MAD in an Indo-Pak war but the annihilation of Pakistan if it resorts to nuclear exchange. Even in the worst case scenario, only a few Pakistani nukes will be able to breach Indian defence.
Now, regarding Pakistan’s nuclear program specifically: Pakistan uses yellowcake centrifuge method which takes around 3–5 years for building a 30 kiloton warhead. Since it has negligible to insignificant fissile material reserves, a sustained nuclear exchange is unlikely in case of war. Pakistan’s nuclear program is almost totally dependent on China and others for fuel and accessories, which hampers its capability to build a huge arsenal.
Unlike India, Pakistan has a first-use policy when forced into a conventional war. Pakistan’s two main delivery systems are Tapedong scud-type missiles from North Korean cruise missiles and the Nasr. But Pakistan does not have proven miniaturization of nuclear warheads to allow it to mate warheads on small cruise missiles. Also, the short range of missiles like Nasr restricts their use apart from being used as tactical battlefield nukes.
Looking forward, two things are going to happen: Pakistan’s arsenal will grow with help from China, and its delivery mechanism will improve as it tries to achieve nuclear triad. Point one does not matter as long as they do not have delivery systems and India has well-functioning BMD and air-superiority fighters. To counter the second, we will have to invest more in developing state-of-the-art BMD. But the threat will not be completely eliminated as Pakistan develops a bigger arsenal and poses a bigger security risk.
Based on these factors, it is better to de-nuclearize Pakistan now rather than wait for an opportune moment in the future. India missed a perfect opportunity to escalate the war in Kargil and call out Pakistan’s nuclear bluff — as it would have exposed Pakistan’s low arsenal and deficient delivery mechanism and possibly killed the program in its infancy. With Chinese support to Pakistan growing each day, the bluff will turn into a real nightmare at some point in the future unless India adopts a course-correcting measure now: use the next terrorist attack as a pretext for overt war on Pakistan and use it to de-nuclearize it.
Originally published January 15, 2016 on Yuga Parivartan.
Editorial illustration for “Why freedom of speech (FoS) is important for Hindus?”.
Although the last two Parliament sessions have been a washout for the most important bills, one bill got passed by stealth and did not get much media coverage as it should have. It was the SC/ST act, and it has significant consequences for Freedom of Speech in India. The new offences added to the act include garlanding with footwear, compelling to dispose or carry human or animal carcasses, abusing SCs or STs by caste name in public, attempting to promote feelings of ill-will against SCs or STs, disrespecting any deceased person held in high esteem, and imposing or threatening a social or economic boycott.
Although the law can be thought of as being in good spirit — i.e. preventing criticism of Ambedkar or Kanshi Ram — criticism by one person can be seen as disrespect by another. It’s all a slippery slope from here. Right now the government is throwing people behind bars for calling Mohammed gay due to the threat to social harmony, as shown in the arrest of Kamlesh Tiwari. We see this law would be used as a template to bring other similar laws to further stifle criticism of any form. India is a basket case when it comes to Freedom of Speech. Curbing of free speech is one of the only few times when all parties in India come together.
FoS for one might be hate speech for another. It is a very subjective issue and it leads to only two outcomes — either we have free speech or we don’t. Even in the case of free speech, people have the chance to go to court and file defamation cases if they feel their reputation has been falsely maligned. So in that sense the right is not absolute as character-assassination is not allowed and has an economic penalty. But it cannot and should not apply to historical figures — i.e. dead leaders or prophets. These guys should be open to ridicule as that allows free scrutiny of their actions and puts history in the right perspective.
Now coming to the question of why it is especially important for Hindus to demand absolute freedom of speech in India — and more so, for its interaction with Islam. It will allow people to engage in criticism of Islam which has only been done in closed quarters till now. We already have a hate speech law and we should not be surprised if it gets further modified in the future, putting anyone in jail for criticising the prophet. Those who have read history carefully will know that Islam has been critical of Freedom of Speech for a very long time. The genesis of current hate speech law lies in the riots that followed after the publishing of ‘Rangeela Rasool’ by Arya Samaj in 1927 and the subsequent killing of the book’s publisher. The colonial British government then obliged the Muslims by enacting Section 295(A) and putting further restrictions on free speech. The current demands for the death of Kamlesh Tiwari can be understood better in this historical backdrop.
But why should Hindus stand for Freedom of Speech? It has been part of our culture to debate and no individual — not even the Gods — has been free from our criticism. Also, it forms the core of any modern society and allows bad ideas to be debated and booted out. This same Freedom of Speech is the most important weapon in anyone’s arsenal to expose Islam. Islam is based on absolutes and thus any substantial criticism of the prophet or Quran will bring down the whole religion like a pack of cards. This is the reason that Islam fears Freedom of Speech more than anything else and has an inbuilt mechanism to deal with transgressions — e.g. death for apostasy and ridiculing Mohammed.
Moreover, Freedom of Speech provides Hindus with one more advantage in the context of the western onslaught — it challenges subversive claims. It has been an old Indian tradition to debate and discuss, keep the useful, weed out the useless. When we forcefully close the lid on something deemed offensive, though we may feel jubilant, we foolishly also give our ‘offender’ the upper hand — they then claim victimhood and thus attention, while we get labelled with those choicest of terms like ‘intolerant’, ‘fascists’, etc. The goal should be to challenge claims which are found preposterous, and demolish them with solid proofs and arguments, thereby also exposing the deviousness behind such attempts.
So, should Hindus take offence when Hussain draws naked paintings of Hindu Goddesses? Or take it as a passing rite under Freedom of Speech? We think that Hindus should let it pass as a random event as one painting is not going to define Hinduism nor will it undermine the whole society. In fact it only exposes the vile minds of people who engage in such acts. But this should only be allowed when there is absolute Freedom of Speech — not under a regime where all faux-pas against Hinduism are given a free pass while a single valid criticism against Islam is censored. Since Islam has more to lose from Freedom of Speech, you should not be surprised if you see a few Muslims supporting a ban on cow slaughter in exchange for a ban on discussions regarding regressive practices in Islam.
You would not find any Hindus today who would support Sati or quote Manu Smriti on how to run the society. This implies Hindus are not stuck in the past and are happy to correct their historical mistakes. So, Hindus are not bound to extend their support to people who are still clinging to a 7th century handbook and help suppress Freedom of Speech in this country.
To summarize, laws are not formed in a vacuum and set precedents for future laws. Hindus should be careful against all such small giveaways which will be used as a template to curb Freedom of Speech in the future. Also, since Freedom of Speech is the best weapon to expose the shallowness of Islam, it should be used as the first defence against fanatics.
Editorial illustration for “The Hypocritical West”.
After being crowned with the title of rape capital of the world, recently India also got the title of land of intolerance. Following the Dadri incident, there was widespread reporting on growing intolerance in India both in domestic and international media and how Hindus have become intolerant in a year since they elected BJP to power at the national level. Since Dadri — which was an isolated incident in a country of 1.2 billion people — was used to define Hindu society and India by the west, let us analyse what standard they follow in their own backyard. To summarize, western media and their leaders are just a bunch of hypocrites and hardly the role model to sermonize others. In the next few paragraphs we will list the scale of intolerance afflicting the west which has no parallels in India. First, we will look at beacon of morality i.e. western Europe and then look at current developments in the US.
Let’s first look at France, the country which banned Hijab a few years ago. Recently, there was a massive anti-Muslim rally in the French province of Corsica. Here, the “tolerant protesters” vandalised mosques and attacked Muslims. But western media ran this story for three days before forgetting that such an incident ever happened. There was no constant whining of intolerance and racism by far right wing etc. in the media, nor was there 24/7 news coverage for the victims (Corsican Muslims) for 3 months. There was no advice against Islamophobia nor any sermons on religious tolerance to the French by any major leader like Obama did to Indians when he visited India. The above attack should be seen in the broader context of the emergence of Front National — the conservative far right wing party in France — which won approximately one-third of the votes in the recent municipal elections.
The UK is not far behind and recently passed a law to officially monitor the Muslims and mosques of the UK. There was no call for an intolerance debate, no constant blitz on growing far right in UK or call from other countries to restrict the visa for the UK’s Prime Minister. The news ran for two days before the media there conveniently found other pressing issues to focus on rather than discuss this official spying of 5% of their own population.
In Cologne, following the sexual assaults on German women by immigrant Muslims on New Year’s eve, their mayor advised women to stay away from strangers and blamed the victims for the horrors they faced. But even here, their media was quick to categorize this as a bad opinion of just one woman — somehow, when one or two random Indian rapists think women ought to be blamed for rape, it becomes the opinion of the entire nation and feminists from the UK come to India to make documentaries on Indian women while they have a rape rate which is 20 times worse than India. Even more hypocritical is the negligence on the part of big media organizations in Europe as they took more than a week to report the Cologne attacks when it became impossible to suppress this news.
The developments from across the Atlantic are not less hypocritical either. Recently, Donald Trump, the leading Republican presidential nominee, called for a total ban on Muslims entering their country, even though Muslims form less than 1% of their population. Ever since he announced such a proposal he has been gaining popularity in the polls and has now built a huge momentum around his ban-Muslims statement. This rhetoric has been taken to the point where he chose this statement to lead his election ad campaign. He has been criticised by the media to a large extent, but again no one wants to blame American Christian society and instead try to blame it on the lone man Trump — even though it is pretty clear from the polls and surveys that more than 50% of Americans view Muslims unfavourably and an equal number want them banned. Yet Obama for some reason has more reason to sermonize India on tolerance than tend to the growing intolerance and racism in his own country as evidenced by the Black Lives Matter movement.
If these incidents are any indication, it is pretty clear that most of the westerners are rank hypocrites who have no morals other than their own best interests at heart. A good example is the way they treat themselves let alone outsiders like Indians. The UK — the same country which passed a legal resolution to officially spy on their Muslims — has no problem contemplating a ban on Donald Trump for his anti-Muslim comments. This is also the reason why Obama thinks that India needs lessons on intolerance when their own government has unofficially sanctioned racial profiling under the garb of security and when their own presidential election front-runner asks for a blanket ban on Muslim entry to the USA.
India recognised Christmas as an official holiday when the Christian population was less than 1%. Contrast it with the western world which has a Hindu population of more than 1% today and yet no country in the west has recognised Diwali as an official holiday. For these people, tolerance and freedom of religion are just excuses which they use for spreading their own religion and culture. Modi government and Hindus became “intolerant” after the Modi government banned foreign NGOs involved in subverting Hindus and converting them to Christianity and stalling development projects. They use freedom of religion and this fake tolerance debate as a tool to further their agenda — nothing more than cultural and ideological imperialism.
So it’s high time Indians stopped seeking western approval for their actions on what is best for them. It is time for India to pay them back in their own currency and make documentaries on intolerance in UK or Sweden, the rape capital of the world. But there is also a lesson to be learnt from these hypocritical standards of the west — protect national interest at all cost and subvert other nations through information war. Islam is seen as a problem in all these nations, which led to the current surveillance law in the UK. India should also actively seek to fight this Islamic menace and not shy away from hard questions and laws, instead of going soft on fanatics to polish its tolerant image in the eyes of the western ayatollahs — who, as shown above, perfectly fit the description of the emperor without clothes.
![[Image: Impact of Pak's 45Kt warhead if detonated in Delhi] Impact of Pakistan's 45Kt warhead in Delhi](/YP_MEDIA:02-are-nukes-over-rated-in-indo-pak-equation-media-1.jpg)
