you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Hates__PeachPeach Leftists Hate 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

American film was paving the way for transsexualism before colour TV was even a thing. An obvious example is Glen or Glenda (1953), directed by the sick degenerate 'Ed Wood'.

Cross-dressing, as a sort of precursor to transsexualism, has a far earlier history. Hollywood started that in earnest around the 1920s.

I'm not familiar with Bollywood film. The few movies I've seen don't seem subversive: they're just corny, farfetched and propagandistic, e.g. a protagonist single-handedly wiping out dozens of Pakistani soldiers, exactly like in the Western films but with the antagonists switched from the Taliban or some other group. And with far worse production quality. I don't remember the names of these films.

I know that a lot of the Indian media seem to be attacking Hinduism all of the time. That was incidentally when I realized that something was also wrong with India: it has the exact same kind of 'progressive', ethnomasochist disease. These Leftists particularly seem to have a problem with 'Hindutva' and 'Sanghis', which they seem to analogize to fascism and fascists 24/7. However, this disease seems to be making rapid inroads in Asia more generally.

Just doing a quick Google to see how this phenomenon has been developing. This here is an excellent example of what I mean, since it follows much of the same 'reasoning' as Western 'progressive' propaganda and the parallels are obvious:

Hindu supremacists have made a concerted effort over several decades to equate their manufactured term “Hindutva” with Hinduism.

This is the exact same claim made of 'White supremacists'. They are trying to misappropriate Europe's [i.e. their own] culture and history for their own ends. Hindutva are trying to misappropriate Hindu/Indian [i.e. their own] culture and history for their own ends.

From the early twentieth century onwards, they have worked hard to shield themselves from legitimate critique for their extremism by claiming to speak for a persecuted Hindu community, despite Hindus being a sizable majority in India. Most recently, they have been leveraging the language of being a religious minority in the United States to evade criticism of their supremacist ideologies.

However, the distinction between “Hindutva” and Hinduism has been stark: Hindutva is a political philosophy styled after European fascism of the early twentieth century, an ideology that privileges a cult of personality and authoritarian leadership.

Muh fascism. Sanghis are 'really' Indian Nazis.

By contrast, Hinduism is a term used to describe a wide range of religious practices and beliefs that are heterodox, and like the practices and beliefs of any major religion with hundreds of millions of followers, continuously under contestation, and often contradictory.

Apparently, the idea of a pure Hinduism or India is 'imagined'. They were always 'diverse', always 'multicultural' and so forth. So the Hindutva are just trying to go back to a time of homogeneity and purity that 'never existed'.

Notice that even if we concede that point, there is no obvious ethical reason to me why a purified Hinduism or culture is undesirable for India. There is simply the same "you're just ignorant, wrong and stupid" that we're accustomed to seeing.

Hinduism has rightly been critiqued for the deep inequities in Indian society, most importantly for the caste system.

Hinduism is bad because 'inequality' or 'racism' or whatever. The exact same things we hear from those 'progressives' who hate the West.

Hindutva refuses these critiques, as well as such syncretic faiths, and instead doubles down on using supremacist tools in the service of a toxic and genocidal unifying theory of a “Hindu Rashtra” or Hindu nation. In other words, instead of recognizing the plurality and the changes and debates within Hinduism, Hindutva demands an unquestioned allegiance to a myth-oriented, hate-mongering dogma that reifies and sanctions its violent modes of operation.

Here we see a whole bunch of familiar terms: 'toxic', 'supremacism', 'hate-mongering'. Again, no ethical argument is offered here for why a 'Hindu Rashtra' isn't desirable. I think it should very much be for Indians, because it is rather analogous to White ethnostates.

To equate Hinduism and Hindutva is to fall into the narrow, bigoted, and reductionist fiction that instrumentalizes Hinduism by erasing [its diverse practices], the debates within the fold, as well as its conversations with other faiths. If the poet A. K. Ramanujan reminds us about the importance of acknowledging “three hundred Ramayanas,” then Hindutva seeks to obliterate that complexity into a monolithic fascism.

More familiar terms: 'narrow', 'bigoted'. I'm getting the impression here that Sanghis are first and foremost being othered from even being Hindus by Leftists. The view here seems to be that Sanghis are fascists first and foremost, and Hinduism is just a useful tool for their brand of fascism. This narrative seems to ascribe a conspiratorial maliciousness to them. As though there is a sort of deliberate plot to misappropriate Hinduism for what is 'really fascism'.

It's all the same as what White ethnonationalists face. There is an unwillingness to take the Sanghis seriously: they're simply wrong full stop, and anyone who questions this consensus is probably also a fascist. They're dismissed as malicious, as misappropriating and twisting all sorts of things for their agendas, and as not having any legitimate concerns. The Leftists also are perpetually marginalized and align themselves with others who see themselves as being that way, but that perpetual marginalization never actually ends. It then ends up becoming a suicide cult, in which Hinduism and India need to be destroyed for their 'crime' of being unable to realize the Leftist ideal.

The parallels get even more explicit here, since Hindutva is compared to 'White nationalism' and Modi with Trump. Like America, in which Trump is deemed a 'fascist'; Indian Leftists also obsess with Modi being a 'fascist'. I think both are only marginally Right of centre at most.

It is important to listen to and amplify the voices of groups who are most directly affected by Hindutva: Muslims, Dalits, Adivasis, and other marginalized groups. However, as Hindus, we have a special responsibility to speak out against Hindutva.

It's the same White ally/White guilt thing. 'Good' Hindus side against Hinduism and with Communists and Muslims. To do otherwise is to be complicit with marginalization of others.

The Hindu fundamentalist community aligns perfectly with the anti-poor, anti-black, and anti-Muslim rhetoric of Donald Trump.

I honestly wonder whether there's actually a difference between White 'baizuo' or 'progressives' and Indian Leftists. They look suspiciously similar to me, and the longer I think about it the more parallels I see. For me, it is to do with liberalism as a process unfolding: this ideology is virus-like and follows the same sort of internal 'logic' everywhere (in-group = bad, out-groups = good; past = bad time that we should never revive, future = will be a utopia if we just get rid of [insert a long list of things and people here], and so forth).

I have noticed that Communism and Islam both seem to be allied in India, probably because the adherents of both view themselves as victimized minorities with a shared enemy in the Hindu majority and state.

I didn't know about The Kashmir Files (2022), but it obviously looks like the kind of film that Indian Leftists would find 'Islamophobic'.

[–]Parthings[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The left are a group of people who are most comfortable at another persons house. So when they are in India, there is very little hesitation they have before abusing Indian culture in the name of whatever social fracture they want to develop. The same with America.

The difference is between local Allies to abuse the culture. In west they have befriended Islamic group and racial minorities to abuse the fleeting majority. In India it is Hindus.

Most of the left however composed of the same majority group ie a lot of liberals in US are white and so in India are Hindu. They kill the community they come from, pimp their history… all so that they can fit in better with a badge of honor.

They define their group in ideological terms, rather that racial or religions terms. So while they are keen to criticize in-groups of race and relgion, they open flaunt their discrimination on of ideological out-groups (say for instance nationalists). Their preferred ally is any who can cry victim (whether legitimately or otherwise)!and their biggest weapon is mercy that one illicits from victimhood.

Thanks for searching for these links. The host of the website is a liberal professor in Rutgers Audrey Truscke who writes sympathetically about Islamic dictator who committed pogroms as state policy. The second website is the dhimmi (Islamic pejorative for surviving non believers ) married to a man with a particularly long nose (guess where he gets it from) who goes out to insult India and Hindus openly siding with bigoted even separatists elements of religion of peace.

I see a global left. In fact my initial opinions of America where through the lens of a global left. I wish there was a global (or atleast a collaborative) right. Would help in defeating left propaganda better.