Saturday, October 23, 2010

An artilce written by a Hindu ideologist for Shri Ram Sene

Following is an article written by a Hindu ideologist for the organisation: Shri Ram Sene

Sri Ram Sene is Sri Ram Sene

It will be a blunder to ignore what organisations like Sri Ram Sene is fighting for.  There is an easy ingenuousness in calling such organisations antidemocratic or radical or fascist. It is fashionable to call such groups extreme-right groups. Such adjectives exacerbate the process of misunderstanding the implicit and suppressed voice of those who want to oppose the westernisation of Bharat.
Sri Ram Sene attacked a pub. This is antidemocratic. Sri Ram Sene decided to marry off the couples on Valentine’s Day. This is antidemocratic. Sri Ram Sene opposes rising pub culture that encourages the bonhomie fuelled by alcohol. Can this be termed antidemocratic? Sri Ram Sene opposes the celebration of Valentine Day, which is a western way of celebrating love as though this country’s legendary lovers like Radha –Krishna, Hir-Ranza, Laila Majanu, Nal-Damayanti, Bajirao-Mastani, Shah Jahan-Mumtaz are worthless for the cause of the celebration of love , and can we call this antidemocratic? There is little doubt that Shri Ram Sene’s method of opposition is antidemocratic. But can we equally certainly say that the cause that they are employing these methods for is also antidemocratic? Therefore, Sri Ram Sene is Sri Ram Sene.
In order to keep such cultural issues away from the democratic debate, the pseudo intellectuals (controlled by the global market forces) indiscriminately call such organisations antidemocratic. What kind of democracy do we want? Don’t we want a democracy that will pay its attention to the cultural issues that question whether Valentine Day is an Indian way of expressing love or whether dancing at pub is a cultured way of celebrating life? One can not say that these issues are trivial, when this democracy blatantly ignores issues of farmers and poor people. Whose democracy is this? Is this democracy of only Ambanis, Tatas, Birlas, Rajus, corrupt politicians, popular and purely commercial media and Sensex? Our democracy is rapidly becoming the democracy that is dominated only by the global market forces.
Many argue that it is the individual’s matter to decide whether he wants to celebrate the Valentine’s Day. To say that such cultural issues are individual matters is to show egregious apathy to the possibility that an Indian alternative to the western culture can emerge. This is pseudo-secularism, which is clearly visible from the fact that only when there is a strong (maybe violent in some cases) opposition to the westernisation of ‘BHARAT’, a huge outcry that the secular ‘India’ is in danger springs up. Why we want to believe that the western modernism is the only way to be modern and to be secular.
The global market forces have made us blind and pachydermically indifferent. We are unable to see how they use our own democracy for their benefits leaving us deprived of our rights to preserve our own culture. They want us to believe that the western model of progress can make us grow and prosper. They also make us realise that if their model is adopted for the development and progress, the westernisation of our democracy is inevitable. How far is to true that their model will make us achieve all inclusive growth? I do not want Paul Krugman or any other Nobel laureate in Economics to tell me that India’s economic growth is not all-inclusive. Any common Bharatiya will tell this ‘naked’ truth about our economy.
This incomplete economic development that we have had so far is based on the system and technology which is the product of the western models of development. The stories of those who have been kept away from this growth are not brought into the national debate. Which economic and cultural model has made them survive is not the matter of anybody’s concern. Which science and technology they use for their mere survival has been effectively ignored. The concern that has been raised here about avoiding calling the organisations like Sri Ram Sene is not to justify their acts, but to bring out the point that their so called extremist Hinduism needs to be understood as opposition to the one sided globalisation and to the pseudo-secular idea: the western modernism is the one and only form of modernism.  
If we continue to ignore them, and to sideline the cultural issues (in turn economic) by calling Sri Ram Sene and other such orgnisations antidemocratic indiscriminately, we will surely fall prey to the conspiracy of the westernisation of our bharatiya lokshahi.