New York Times Spews Venom against India, Again – A Sample !


By: Shreepal Singh

Best of brains have been flocking to the U.S. for decades running into a couple of centuries now and the U. S. people by and large are the best of human beings in the world. Temperamentally, the U. S. citizens are objective in their outlook, honest in assessment of things around them and bold in making their judgments of the situations they care to look at.  It is not amazing that their country’s well known newspaper “New York Times” does regularly propagate anti-India stories, which are out of sync with reality, biased in nature and obsessive in habit. The amazing thing is how these sober people of the U. S. silently suffer such misdeeds of this newspaper. This newspaper is a giant of media and holds colossal amount of money at its disposal but still these advantages are not enough to make it withstand people’s censure. We wish to examine how this newspaper is committed to twist the objective reality and serve an agenda, which is not only against the people of India but also against the people of the U. S.

The ordinary people around the world – including the people of the U. S. and the people of India – are suffering twin pains: unbearable pressure of economic circumstances on their peaceful life; and, threat to the physical security of their life. This newspaper has no space or time for these common concerns of the ordinary people. What interests it more is to obstructs those – either in the U. S. or outside of the U. S. – who seek to address these concerns and seek an international collaboration in that work. The U. S. has seen 9/11 at World Trade Center and India has seen 11/9 at Bombay and they both – and many more around the world – know this lurking danger of terrorism to their people. But the New York Times would feel no concern on this count; it has some other priorities. While the U. S. is doing what it can do to address this concern in its own way, India too is trying its best to save its own people; but this newspaper is more interested in defaming India and India’s efforts in this direction.

New York Times is so partitioned in its biased mission that it would find no time to check with the objective data on the subject of its writings and rush to blame its target. In the case of India, this newspaper was scornful of this country before the present Prime Minister of India – Mr. Modi – assumed power in this country and prefixed its name with a wretched third world country. And, now when India is making its efforts under Modi to change things for the better for its people, this newspaper has become full of hatred and disdain for India. The editor of this newspaper – Mr. Joseph Hope – has got together a host of paid writers, who are expert in writing against India. Here we are analyzing a sample of its work – an article written by Robert F. Worth and published by it on July, 26, 2018. This article looks like it is against Swami Ramdev (a Hindu Yoga-guru) but in fact it is against the Indian State, its political leaders and the Indian people who elected these leaders. Here in this response to this article we are not concerned with nations or nationalism – either of the U. S. or India – but only with the truth.

The editorial team of this newspaper in propagating such material on the sheer strength of its money is not only unwise in its tracks but also arrogant. Such acts on its part, destroy the goodwill between the two peoples and ruffle the sentiments of the affected people pushing them to form mutually antagonistic blocks at the international level. Perhaps, the arrogance knows no limits! This newspaper, under the mistaken idea of it being the crusader of democracy in other countries, is doing a great disservice to the global peace, established international order and goodwill among the comity of nations.

The link to this article is given at the end of our response.

Robert F. Worth says:

“But the B.J.P.’s ambitions go well beyond 2019. Unlike the Congress party, the B.J.P. doesn’t just want to govern; it wants to transform the country, politically and culturally. The Indian state and its business allies have become increasingly enmeshed in Hindu religious education and promotion, funding ashrams, gurukuls  (where students apprentice themselves to a guru and study Sanskrit) and priest education. Modi’s government has also helped empower figures like Yogi Adityanath, a right-wing Hindu firebrand who has said he wants to install statues of Hindu gods in every mosque, and who last year became chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, India’s most populous state.”

Dear Worth, we challenge you – if you are of any worth to justify your name – to quote with the appropriate proof where Yogi Adityanath has said – before or after he became the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh – that “he wants to install statutes of Hindu gods in every mosque.” Even if you quote one instance of his saying so, we would admit all what you are saying here in this article; else, we would request you stop spreading canard against India and its democratically elected political figures. This is our first request to you, if you have any sense of self esteem and public responsibility.

Secondly, you say, “Unlike the Congress party, the B. J. P. doesn’t just want to govern; it wants to transform the country, politically and culturally.” You very well know, “the Congress party just governed” this country (for 70 long years) and, we dare say, you also know where this country has stood so far: a wretched third world economy, earning your scorn and disdain! Do you not want this country to transform itself, politically (dynastic rule) and culturally (corrupt)? Surely, you should! This is your hate for India, that speaks so badly against India, its people and their political representatives. Indian people are good to the core of their heart, please do not hate them; it does no good to any person of conscience.

Thirdly, you say, “The Indian state and its business allies have become increasingly enmeshed in Hindu religious education and promotion, funding ashrams, gurukuls  (where students apprentice themselves to a guru and study Sanskrit) and priest education.” This is our second challenge to you, to respect your name and worth, please cite one example – just one example – where the “Indian state” has funded an “Ashram or gurukul”. If you are able to provide such information, it would be an addition to our knowledge – and to the knowledge of the whole world; else, we again request you not to spread canard and hate against India and its people.

Fourthly, your grievance is that the Indian state’s “business allies have become increasingly enmeshed in Hindu religious education and promotion, funding ashrams, gurukuls (where students apprentice themselves to a guru and study Sanskrit) and priest education.” Dear Robert, are you so simpleton not to be aware of the fact that in the U. S. there are countless business houses who fund Christian colleges, universities, research facilities and public educational institutions? It can’t be the case with you, we hope! So, according to you, it is not bad if it is done in the U. S. by its businessmen  in the service of Christianity but it is really objectionable if the same is done by Indian businessmen in India in the service of Hinduism!

Please educate yourself: Hindus are not bad people; Hinduism is not bad in its attitude towards others; Hinduism seeks no conversion of the whole world to its own side, just as Christianity (and the other branch of Abrahamic faith) is hell-bent upon with its world-wide programs, mission and targets. And, also it may not be wrong to say that the learning and promotion of Greek and Latin languages is a commendable thing, and that likewise the learning and promotion of Sanskrit language is a good thing too. Like these two languages are ancient ones, Sanskrit too is an ancient language; and, in addition Sanskrit is the mother of the family of all Indo-European languages. You possibly cannot have any objection if these young students in this North East part of India are encouraged under Gurus to learn Sanskrit as aprentice.

You have many grievances against India and its people. You say in your article:

“Hindu nationalism rarely made headlines in the West until the 1990s, when images of communal riots and chanting B.J.P. supporters introduced many Americans to the idea that there was another, different kind of fundamentalism to worry about in South Asia. But as a political force, Hindu nationalism predates India’s independence in 1947 and reflects centuries of resentment among the subcontinent’s Hindu majority. Hindus submitted reluctantly to waves of Muslim conquest from the north starting almost a thousand years ago, and then to almost 300 years of British domination. After World War I, when the British Empire started to crack, some Hindu ideologues saw an opportunity to regain the upper hand. They began calling for an explicitly Hindu state and society, in which Muslims (and other minorities) would be tolerated only if they respected the majority culture. In one respect, it was an effort to counter political Islam, which was already gaining adherents in India and elsewhere in the early 1920s. But building a cohesive movement was not easy. Classical Hinduism is more a conglomeration of sects than a single religion; it has many ancient scriptures but no single, foundational text, like the Bible or the Quran. Its ancient caste hierarchy perpetuated divisions and did not translate easily into the unifying slogans of modern mass politics.”

Dear Robert your grievance is, “After World War I, when the British Empire started to crack, some Hindu ideologues saw an opportunity to regain the upper hand. ….. But building a cohesive (Hindu) movement was not easy. Classical Hinduism is more a conglomeration of sects than a single religion; it has many ancient scriptures but no single, foundational text, like the Bible or the Quran. Its ancient caste hierarchy perpetuated divisions and did not translate easily into the unifying slogans of modern mass politics.” You are parroting the Sheldon Pollock’s “thesis” when you say, “Classical Hinduism is more a conglomeration of sects than a single religion”, which thesis is being used as a tool for the “Break India” project. We dare say, by subscribing to this imaginative “Pollock Thesis” you definitely place yourself as the part of this “Break-India” project.

You parrot these words – without knowing their meaning. What is your knowledge of Hinduism? Is Hinduism a religion? What is a religion? How many sects are there among Hindus and what do they teach? Is there a common connecting thread in all these sects? It is a serious matter and you need a life-time to learn it. It is very easy to say that since Hinduism does not have a single book like the Bible or the Koran, it is not a religion or it is a conglomeration of sects. What is the definition of ‘religion’? With common sense, one may say it a matter of the relation of humans with God. How does the possession of a single holy book, like Bible or Koran, become the testing anvil for being declared a religion? Are you aware that the Bible and Koran have their own and exclusive God / Allah? Which one of the two is correct? Will it be decided by swords, or inquisitions, or strength of number of people converted to one’s side? Will it not be more correct to say that these two peoples possessing two books are sects, which are different from one another, while these “Hindu conglomeration of sects” do not contradict each other or fight with each other?

In case you have wish and will, you can discover for yourself that all the sects among Hindus are one on the central connecting point. Please, do not be hateful to Hindus.

You continue in your supposedly intellectual tirade against India. You said:

“In an effort to overcome these internal fissures, the early Hindu nationalists built a regimented anticolonial social movement in the 1920s, which later formed links with Italian and German fascism; the main branch was known as the RSS, from the Hindu words for “national organization of volunteers.” In place of black shirts and armbands, they wore khaki shorts and carried bamboo sticks. This association tainted them in the decades that followed, especially after so many British and Indian soldiers died fighting the Axis powers in World War II. Another serious blow came in 1948, when a Hindu nationalist zealot assassinated Mohandas Gandhi, modern India’s saintly father figure. Afterward, Nehru, Gandhi’s political heir, suppressed Hindu nationalist organizations and fostered his own countervailing conception of India as a pluralist, secular state. Although he was a Brahmin, Nehru was a passionate cosmopolitan who saw Hindu identity as narrow and tribal. He wanted India to be defined by its diversity, not by any one faith. It was an idea shaped in part by his British education at Harrow, Cambridge and the Inns of Court in London, and one shared by many of his peers. For decades after independence, India’s ruling class was mostly a “thin layer of brown Englishmen,” in the phrase of an Indian friend of mine who heard it from his grandfather, a friend of Nehru’s. They were patrician figures who rebelled successfully against the British but absorbed many of their ideas about how the country should be governed.

By the 1990s, Nehru’s Congress party had become almost synonymous with the Indian state, but his tolerant, worldly vision was starting to fray. The Hindu nationalist movement anointed the B.J.P. as its political vehicle, and the party slowly gained strength, fueled by perceptions of corruption and entitlement in the secular political elite.”

So, dear one, here comes your master stroke. You open your heart that is full of hate for Hindus. You say:

Early Hindu nationalists “later formed links with Italian and German fascism; the main branch was known as the RSS, from the Hindu words for ‘national organization of volunteers.’ In place of black shirts and armbands, they wore khaki shorts and carried bamboo sticks. This association tainted them in the decades that followed, especially after so many British and Indian soldiers died fighting the Axis powers in World War II” and if we make no mistake you mean here Subhash Chandra Bose, an iconic leader of Indian people then, both Hindus and Muslims. So, the RSS is no less in its design and mission than the Italian and German Fascism, except that the Indian variety wears khaki shorts and carried bamboo sticks in place of the Germanic ‘black shirts and armbands’!

Dear Robert, you are not naive not to know that Subhash Candra Bose was never a part of RSS (he was a Congress party member – and once its president) and that German fascism asserted Aryan supremacy by the strength of arms, war on other ‘inferior’ peoples and their subjugation to the ‘pure and Aryan’ Germans. Hitler had his ‘Mein Kampf” to guide him. Do you need to be told by us that the RSS has Gita in its hand, and not ‘Mein Kampf ‘ of Hitler? It (RSS) believes, as taught by Gita, that in every living being – including human beings – there is an ‘Atma’ (not ‘soul’, that goes to sleep after death), which has its right to do its ‘karma’ as it wills and nobody has any right to kill any person (the body that this ‘Atma’ wears like we wear cloths). This is the difference between the RSS of India and Fascism of Italy and Germany. This difference – the difference between Gita and ‘Mein Kampf’ – makes them pole apart. Surely, you could not have missed this difference. We request you not to spread canard against Hindus.

You seem to be not content with this much reviling of Indians, their faith and their state. Enough is not enough for you. You nurse a grudge against Hinduism, which you cannot resist. Your tirade continues:

“This narrative about yoga’s ancient roots has become a sacrament for Hindu nationalists, and it is echoed in the West. But it is mostly myth, an idealized origin story of the kind so many would-be nation-builders, from ancient Rome to the Zionists, have fostered about themselves. The oldest Hindu scriptures contain almost no mention of physical postures. Even the Yoga Sutras, the so-called bible of yoga, include only a few short verses suggesting comfortable postures for sitting. Many of the postures practiced in yoga today appear to have emerged in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Dozens of modern ashtanga yoga postures are similar or identical to those found in a gymnastic routine introduced to India by the British in the first decades of the 20th century and originally developed by a Danish fitness instructor named Niels Bukh, who later became notorious for his pro-Nazi sympathies. Bukh, needless to say, has been conveniently forgotten by both Indians and the yoga-loving celebrities of Hollywood.”

Your grudge is that the narrative of “yoga’s ancient roots” has become a sacrament for Hindus and even in the West. You proclaim that it is a “myth”; that the “oldest Hindu scriptures” make no mention of physical postures of yoga; that the Yoga Sutras include “only a few short verses” suggesting comfortable postures for sitting. And, then in your zeal to demolish this narrative of the olden roots of yoga, you declare, “Dozens of modern ashtanga yoga postures are similar or identical to those found in a gymnastic routine introduced to India by the British in the first decades of the 20th century and originally developed by a Danish fitness instructor Niels Bukh, who later became notorious for his pro-Nazi sympathies.” Thus, according to you the ashtanga yoga is recently sourced out of the Danish fitness instructor Niels Bukh!

When was ‘Yoga Sutra’ written? In this Sanskrit treatise, in the very first opening verse the definition of Yoga is given: Yoga is the disciplining of one’s psychological proclivities. But why discipline them? There is a purpose for that. Physical postures are the ‘means’ and not the ‘end’ in themselves; these have nothing to do with physical fitness – as you dear Robert or Niels Bukha might have thought. Physical postures are not the substance of Yoga. Yoga is something else, far removed from your imagination of physical fitness. And, it is a very old discipline; tons of old Sanskrit sacred books deal with this subject.

Robert F. Worth, as an admirer of Christian Missionaries work of conversion in India, has a great resentment against those Indians who try to re-convert the “converted Christians” to their thousands of years old faith. He says:

“The RSS has become more visible since Modi’s 2014 victory. The group and its affiliates have built hundreds of schools and job-training centers in Assam and other northeastern states in recent years. I visited several and saw unmistakable signs of the RSS ideological program. At one school, young children — some of whom had been raised Christian — recited Hindu prayers and sang songs to Lord Ram before starting their lessons, which include Sanskrit instruction.”

If children have been raised as Christians by handing them over Bible and praying to God, what is the objection of Robert F. Worth if those children are handed over a Ramayana in their other hand and compare the two to chose from? We suppose that the author knows that in this part of India in 1901, the Christian population was 00.50 % and now in 2001 it became 90%. Wow, dear Robert for you, who has objection to children praying to Rama, an incarnation of Divine, instead of God, the father of His only son Jesus Christ of Bible. If he does not know this conversion “achievement” of Christian Missiontaries in this part of India, let him visit this link and educate himself.

https://indianpeoplescongress.wordpress.com/2018/05/02/how-nehru-helped-convert-ne-to-christianity/

What is that which makes the likes of Robert F. Worth and the New York Times fear the new dispensation in India? It is not the alleged Hindu nationalism but something else. This fear of the types of Robert F. Worth and his New York Times is exposed by an American accounts professor at a seminar sponsored by CFA (Chartered Financial Accounts Association of America). The American accounts professor is talking  in this video about Modi’s clean governance and says that his commerce and diplomatic policies are superior to those of USA and that USA must fear him.

Watch the video:

 

This offending article may be read at this link:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/26/magazine/the-billionaire-yogi-behind-modis-rise.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=second-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Advertisements

Leave your reply:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: