Gaurav's law of Intellectual Anisotropy

 A man's genius in one field is inversely proportional to his chutiyap in completely unrelated field.

Enlightenment's fatal conceit

 Enlightenment's (Liberalism/Rationality) fatal conceit is to believe pursuit of reason inevitably leads to being good, whereas in reality being good is a constant choice. Being good is neither inevitable nor irrevocable, being good is a matter of constant choice, a constant struggle

Performance Hindutva

 Modi practices what can be called "Performative Hindutva", it entails endless photo ops performing pujas at temples and teerth, and dropping baits in speeches. What it doesnt entail is enduring change in policy, institutions and culture to strengthen Dharma.

Sangh and Ideology

How to understand Sangh's ideology? Answer is tricky, Sangh doesnt have any ideology, if by ideology we mean set of ideas accepted after deliberation.
Sangh has intellectual vacuum, in absence of any robust intellectual anchor, Sangh is actually influenced by two competing instincts.
 First is a vague sense of cultural nationalism. Sangh derives its sense of cultural nationalism not from any deliberate thought but by popular sentiments and ressentiment , in this way Sangh lags rather than leads the masses.
The other is a vague sense of reform, here as well Sangh doesnt derive its sense of reform from any deliberative process but by current cultural/political fads, fads which are determined by cultural elites which are overwhelmingly liberals.
Thus, ironically, Sangh follows liberal fashion with a lag, this explains Sangh stand on Kanayadaan, fire crackers and (initial) stand on Sabarimala

Addendum: There is an additional aspect which contributes to ideological incoherence of Sangh. 

Sangh is basically a scouts organisation where emphasis is on discipline and conformity, whereas disagreement and dissension are fundamental to intellectual activity. Hence Sangh's distrust and discouragement of intellectual activity. 

A Wing Named "Sue"

There is a Johnny Cash song "Boy Named Sue". The song is about a boy who is named "Sue" by his absconding father, and as a result he has to face mockery throughout his youth. Boy, justifiably enraged swears vengenance on his father, but when he finally meets him, his father explains that he named him "Sue", so that he will grow tough and survive in the world without his father.

Now it is highly doubtful that Modi has actually heard of this song, but the way incipient RW has been cold shouldered in the last 7 years, it seems Modi has actually derived his philosophy from fugitive father. I do not know the exact reason for this treatment, though I have read Modi is not willing to create patronage network, without which any worthwhile ecosystem cant be created.

At any rate upshot of this is that RW ecosystem is forced to be "Aatmanirbhar", relying on its own resources or that it can raise for survival. Whether this will make right wing tough in the long run is anyone's guess.

Why Culture Matters

On the ideological right (broadly defined), there is a tension between economic right  (ER) and cultural right (CR). ERs insist that focus of politics and policy should only be economics, and cultural issues are either distraction in practice or outside the domain of government in theory. 

This position has roots in materialistic view of society. This view posits that aim and basis of human society is acquisition of material goods for sensual pleasure. Further, ER argues, this can be best achieved if human society is arranged on basis of voluntary materialistic transactions. 

CR contests both the premises. CR insists that aim of human society must be located in human nature, and to reduce human nature only to material and sensual is a mistake, which neglects commitarian, ethical and spirtual dimensions of human nature. 

Even more important, material goods being scarce, framing society solely in terms of material pursuit, sets, in economic parlance, a zero sum game, which is unstable on its own. For stability, zero sum game need external scaffolding, which is provided by cultural norms.

Therefore, either premises of Economic rights are flawed, and cultural issues must be assigned priority in politics and policy, along with purely economic issues.

 

 

Sangh is Dangerous To Hindus

 Latest statements by Mohan Bhagwat have once again raised heckles of Internet Hindus. Bhagwat said, " DNA of all Indians is the same and that those indulging in lynching are against Hindutva", further, he claimed "“If a Hindu says that no Muslim should live here, then the person is not Hindu",  “Hindu-Muslim unity is misleading as they are not different, but one. DNA of all Indians are the same, irrespective of religion,” “We are in a democracy. There cannot be a dominance of Hindus or Muslims. There can only be the dominance of Indians.” 

That Mohan Bhagwat is misguided is to put it very kindly. Any Hindu who is even cursorily familiar with religious scriptures or history of Islam knows that theological supremacism is intrinsic to religion and complete annihilation of unbelievers very ingrained part of its creed. 

That Sangh which claims to be vanguard of Hindus is so much ignorant of even basic history of Hindu genocide at hands of Islamic zealots is a matter of grave concern.


Very frankly, Sangh is deluded, we can always interrogate causes of its delusion. For my part, I place cause of this delusion on intellectual incoherence of Sangh owing to what can be best termed as "Ascetic Arrogance".

Whatever be the cause, delusion of Hindu vanguard in presence of potentially fatal civilizational challenges is extremely dangerous to Hindus