The US is trying to divide the BRICS bloc and recruit India for its new cold war on China. Biden doesn’t care that far-right Prime Minister Modi is closely linked to fascistic Hindu-supremacist groups
China's contributions are not without controversies, including human rights concerns, territorial disputes, and economic practices.
The US has been involved in various peacekeeping missions and has promoted cooperation, while military deployments are not the sole aspect of its engagement.
Modi's decisions are shaped by multiple factors, and India maintains relationships with various countries.
He doesn't understand imperialism and capitalism. Modi is a fascist.
All you will get from him is generalities about how we must see both sides, that global issues are complex, that there are multiple factors but he never confronts the evidence presented.
Balance, fairness it all sounds like Fox News.
Moldi is a Hindutva fascist that goes back to WWII just like Bandera.
I believe it's important to have a balanced understanding of the situation. It's not as simple as labeling one side as right or wrong. Global affairs are complex, and different viewpoints exist. It's crucial to consider multiple factors and examine the context to form a comprehensive assessment.
Peace keeping missions? What? Like arming the Mujahadeem, ISIS, right-wing Ukrainian militias, and death squads around South America? Not to mention bombing and drone strike campaigns... peace keeping? Where? Was Libya a 'peace keeping' mission?
Readers not familiar with Hindutva fascism, its ties to Hitler, the swastika and other morbid and atrocious acts done under its name with Modi as the ever present Godfather listen to Dave Emory, anti-fascist researcher for more than forty years in 2014 explaining the rise of Modi, side one and side two:
"Introduction: Prime Minister-elect Narendra Modi, with a political background in a Hindu nationalist party with strong fascist roots, is now in charge of the world’s second largest country and the world’s largest democracy.
Narendra Modi belonged to the RSS, an organization with an historical affinity for Nazism and fascism. Capitalizing on anti-Muslim fervor in India, RSS has generated much gravitas.
Modi has been implicated in complicity in lethal anti-Muslim rioting in India.
In addition to anti-colonial sentiment that pitted Indian nationalists against the British Raj prior to World War II, Nazism and Hindu philosophy also found common ground in elements of “Aryan” mysticism. Many elements of the Brahmin caste also found affinity with the elitist and anti-democratic philosophy of Mussolini’s fascism as well.
Program Highlights Include:
Karl Haushofer (a key influence on a number of important Hitler aides) developed the concept of German allegiance with “the Colored Peoples” of the colonial world as a further vehicle for securing German economic and political control. Haushofer’s theories underlie, in part, the fascist heritage of key elements of the Hindhu Nationalist movement currently gaining increasing influence in Indian politics.
An associate of RSS assassinated Mahatma Gandhi.
The BJP itself evolved from the RSS.
In 2012, Digvijaya Singh discussed Modi’s campaign tactics, comparing his RSS training with the methodology of Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels.
The Indian situation has some similarities with regard to Islam with the rise of fascist groups in Europe. The center parties simply ignore the problems of jihadism and do nothing, creating a vacuum for the fascist groups to fill. No country on the planet suffers more from jihad terrorism than India... but nobody calls it terrorism, they use euphemisms like “communal violence” as if both parties are guilty. Sometimes hundreds are slaughtered and it barely makes the Western press, because, let’s face it, Indian lives are cheap in the eyes of multinational finance and corporatism.
Currently, Modi isn’t even allowed to come to the US due to his support of anti-Muslim riots (note: if the U.S. applied this concept to those who support PRO-Muslim riots, we would have a lot less visitors from several parts of the world, so this double-standard plays right into the right-wing Hindu wheelhouse).
Modi’s talking all the right “free trade” talking points with the West right now, and the EU has lifted his visa ban–the US will surely follow suit.
Modi’s election was assisted by the former head of Omidyar Networks, founded by Glenn Greenwald’s financial angel Pierre Omidyar. Omidyar also helped finance the coup in the Ukraine.
Discussion of Savitri Devi, a European-born Hindu/Nazi mystic, who gained considerable influence in postwar Nazi and fascist circles.
1. Narendra Modi’s affinity for the neo-liberal, corporatist philosophies currently in ascendance was covered in a recent New Yorker article."
The statement you provided makes several claims linking Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India, to Hindutva fascism, Hitler, the swastika, and other atrocious acts. While it's important to critically examine political figures and ideologies, it is equally important to ensure that the claims made are supported by credible evidence. Let's address each claim individually:The statement you provided makes several claims linking Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India, to Hindutva fascism, Hitler, the swastika, and other atrocious acts. While it's important to critically examine political figures and ideologies, it is equally important to ensure that the claims made are supported by credible evidence. Let's address each claim individually:
Narendra Modi's affiliation with the RSS: It is true that Narendra Modi was associated with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a Hindu nationalist organization in India. However, it is essential to note that not all members or affiliates of the RSS endorse or propagate fascist ideologies. The RSS has a diverse membership with varying political and ideological beliefs.
RSS's historical affinity for Nazism and fascism: While some critics argue that there have been historical connections or influences between certain individuals associated with the RSS and fascist ideologies, it is important to distinguish between the beliefs of specific individuals and the organization as a whole. The RSS has disavowed fascism and has stated that it is committed to the principles of democracy and pluralism.
Implication of Modi in anti-Muslim rioting: The statement claims that Modi has been implicated in complicity in lethal anti-Muslim rioting in India. It is crucial to rely on credible sources and legal proceedings to evaluate such serious accusations. In 2012, the Special Investigation Team appointed by the Indian Supreme Court conducted an inquiry into the 2002 Gujarat riots and did not find evidence to directly implicate Modi in the violence.
RSS associate assassinating Mahatma Gandhi: It is true that Nathuram Godse, the assassin of Mahatma Gandhi, was associated with the RSS. However, it is important to note that the organization officially denounced the assassination and condemned Godse's actions.
Comparison of Modi's RSS training to Nazi propaganda: The statement mentions a comparison made by Digvijaya Singh between Modi's RSS training and the methodology of Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels. Such comparisons are subjective and may reflect the personal views of the individual making the comparison.
Modi's support of anti-Muslim riots and the visa ban: The claim that Modi is not allowed to come to the US due to his support of anti-Muslim riots is not accurate. Narendra Modi has visited the United States multiple times, including in his capacity as Prime Minister. While there was a temporary visa ban imposed on him in 2005 under the International Religious Freedom Act, the ban was lifted in 2014, well before the date of the source provided (2014).
Modi's affinity for neo-liberal, corporatist philosophies: The statement suggests that Modi has an affinity for neo-liberal, corporatist philosophies. While Modi has pursued economic reforms and promoted investment in India, it is an oversimplification to label his entire political ideology based solely on these actions.
It is important to critically evaluate claims and rely on credible sources when forming opinions. It is always advisable to consider multiple perspectives and seek a balanced understanding of complex political situations.
Power will feign interest in human rights until its not politically expedient to do so. Surprising to no one.
While India has navigated the Russia/Ukraine war rather skillfully and is forging its own foreign policy/ international relations path, that aside, I cringe that this guy is still in power in India. It’s bringing out the ugliest side of the society.
Power will feign interest in human rights until its not politically expedient to do so. Surprising to no one.
While India has navigated the Russia/Ukraine war rather skillfully and is forging its own foreign policy/ international relations path, that aside, I cringe that this guy is still in power in India. It’s bringing out the ugliest side of the society.
"Modi's support of anti-Muslim riots and the visa ban: The claim that Modi is not allowed to come to the US due to his support of anti-Muslim riots is not accurate. Narendra Modi has visited the United States multiple times, including in his capacity as Prime Minister. "
At the time of the writing of these claims, Modi could not visit the US.
You have spent a great deal of time thinking about these issues and reasoning through them.
I admire your perspicacity and pertinaciousness.
As you will see, the comments I posted were mainly from Dave Emory's For the Record found at spitfirelist.com.
I have followed Dave for forty years as well as his work on Modi so I will not repeat what he has accomplished here.
This is why I posted one of his two part radio shows for listeners to come to their own conclusions.
One need only to go to the site above and type in Modi and Dave's thoroughly documented analysis emerges and he has covered Modi for years.
Your response is to a 2014 post of Dave's, as I thought i made clear.
I do not wish to ignore your argument for it is worthy for reasoning this matter out.
However, I would be just repeating analysis that Dave has done.
This is why I hope readers can read your thinking and compare and contrast it critically with that provided by Dave Emory who, again, uses full spectrum documentation from both mainstream and foreign sources.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply and I hope readers will listen to Dave's shows on Modi and come to their own reasoned judgment.
Thank you for providing additional context and clarifying the source of the information. It's understandable that you have been following Dave Emory's work on Narendra Modi and have found value in his analysis.
While I acknowledge that Dave Emory has covered Modi extensively and presents a specific viewpoint on the subject, it is still important to consider multiple perspectives and evaluate the evidence critically. Examining diverse sources and viewpoints can contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the topic at hand.
It is always beneficial for readers to engage in critical thinking, examine different sources, and form their own informed judgments. Encouraging individuals to explore various viewpoints, including those presented by Dave Emory, is a valuable approach to fostering a well-rounded understanding of complex issues.
India is playing the neutralist, non-aligned game as it has too, it knows its future is with BRICS and Eurasia, which many more countries will do as the Multipolar world emerges. The US is well on its way to being a peripheral power thanks to its pig-headed intransigence.
Excellent and informative report. Recognizes tbhat Modi is a supra nationalist who will only protect his Party's interests and does not care about the rest of the world. No questioning by Biden, during his meeting with Modi, of the Modi's government oppressive actions against India's minorities, much more serious than the contrived Chinese suppression of Uyghurs, Did this meeiing acccomplish anything for the USA except to expose its hypocrisy?
Preetam and I went back and forth on this as you know.
Modi is not only a nationalist fascist, he is a Hindutva fascist thus cementing another country to theological fascism.
"Breaking Bread with Authoritarians"
Theological fascist and President of India, Navendra Modi will be hosted to a full vegetarian dinner withs leading figures, including Biden, at the White House.
From Consortium News
"As it happens, inclusivity is precisely the problem — and it is indeed big — with Modi’s four-day visit to Washington. In my estimation Modi is the worst prime minister in independent India’s 76–year history — vicious against his political opponents and the press, a man dedicated to a radical Hindu-chauvinist ideology inspired by Mussolini’s Black Shirts, a man who tacitly licensed the murderers of at least 800 Muslims in a three-day spree of communal violence when he was chief minister of Gujarat 21 years ago."
In his way Modi is as bad as some of the old Latin American dictators, who got plenty of American support but never an evening meal—and certainly no cardamon-flavored strawberry shortcake for dessert. What in hell was this man doing in the White House last week? What was he doing on American soil, indeed, given he was barred from entry for years after the Gujarat riots?
"This is what I find most unforgivable about Modi and his kind. They are erasing the best India has to give the world in the name of the ideology known as Hindutva, an abominable stew of xenophobic fanaticism born of an insecurity as to Hindu identity that has its roots among ideologues active in the 1920s.
These people — V.D. Savarkar and Dayananda Sarawati are prominent among the godfathers — argued that the Indian nation to come must be a Hindu nation, with Muslims erased from the story.
The organization formed at the time, the Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh, learned from the European Fascists how to get things done. The RSS is still active — was, indeed, a key element in the Gujarat killings. The Hindutva Savarkar and Sarawati theorized a century ago is the Hindutva to which Modi and his party, the Bharatiya Janata Party, subscribe."
The statement "Biden needs Modi, Modi does not need Biden" presents a skewed perspective and fails to accurately reflect the complex dynamics of international relations between the United States and India. While it is true that both leaders have their own priorities and interests, it is overly simplistic to suggest that one leader needs the other while the other does not.
Firstly, it is important to acknowledge that bilateral relationships are mutually beneficial and built upon shared interests. In this case, the United States and India have numerous areas of cooperation, including trade, defense, counterterrorism, climate change, and regional stability. Both leaders recognize the significance of fostering a strong relationship to advance their respective national interests.
Secondly, framing it as a one-sided dependence ignores the geopolitical realities and strategic advantages for both countries. For the United States, India serves as a crucial partner in countering China's growing influence in the Indo-Pacific region. India's strategic location, its large market potential, and its democratic values make it an important ally for the United States. On the other hand, India benefits from American technological expertise, investment opportunities, and access to global markets.
Furthermore, powerful examples can be found in recent collaborations between the two leaders. For instance, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States and India worked closely together to address the global health crisis. The U.S. government provided crucial assistance, including medical supplies and vaccine raw materials, to support India's fight against the pandemic. This collaboration showcased the interdependence and mutual support between the two countries.
Another example is the Quad alliance, consisting of the United States, India, Australia, and Japan. The Quad serves as a forum for strategic cooperation, addressing shared concerns such as maritime security and economic development in the Indo-Pacific. This multilateral arrangement demonstrates the importance of the U.S.-India relationship in the broader context of regional stability and cooperation.
In short the statement that "Biden needs Modi, Modi does not need Biden" oversimplifies the dynamics of the U.S.-India relationship. Both leaders recognize the value of their partnership, and their cooperation extends beyond mere necessity. By working together, they address common challenges and advance their respective national interests in areas such as trade, defense, and regional stability.
"Another example is the Quad alliance, consisting of the United States, India, Australia, and Japan. The Quad serves as a forum for strategic cooperation, addressing shared concerns such as maritime security and economic development in the Indo-Pacific. This multilateral arrangement demonstrates the importance of the U.S.-India relationship in the broader context of regional stability and cooperation."
It is all about preparation for war for the ruling class has no other means of support.
You live in a war economy that will become greater and greater.
While it is true that the Quad alliance addresses concerns related to maritime security and economic development in the Indo Pacific, it's an oversimplification to claim that it is solely about preparing for war. The Quad primary objective is to promote regional stability, uphold international rules and norms, and facilitate economic cooperation.
The Quad alliance focuses on a wide range of issues, including humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, counterterrorism, cybersecurity, infrastructure development, and climate change. These areas of collaboration demonstrate a broader agenda beyond military preparations. The Quad countries recognize the importance of maintaining a stable and rules based order in the Indo Pacific region, which benefits all participating nations.
It is important to note that while countries do prioritize their defense capabilities, this does not necessarily imply that they are solely focused on war. Defense preparedness is a prudent measure taken by nations to safeguard their sovereignty and protect their citizens. It is an unfortunate reality that conflicts can arise in international relations, but the aim of initiatives like the Quad is to promote peaceful resolutions and deter aggression rather than actively seeking confrontation.
Moreover, the notion that being on the "wrong side of history" is solely determined by participating in multilateral forums like the Quad is a narrow perspective. History is shaped by various factors, including political, economic, and social dynamics. The Quad alliance, like any other international cooperation, is an effort to address shared challenges and promote stability, which is a legitimate goal in a complex and interconnected world.
kiers replied to your comment on US woos India's far-right PM Modi to help wage new cold war on China.
God Bless the Moslems rioting in France! Is that better for you? It takes real power to not get kicked around gratutiously eh? Canadians can burn trees on the cheap, nary a mention. Bolsonaro can burn forests, nary a mention. But those nazi hindooos.......! WOW. George Soros..rot in hell."
Modi’s BJP foments ethno-communal violence in India’s northeastern state of Manipur
Yuvan Darwin, Kranti Kumara
18 June 2023
Since early May, the northeastern Indian state of Manipur has been convulsed by violent attacks on innocent civilians by roving bands of ethno-chauvinist vigilantes. Over 120 civilians, most of them from the minority Kuki ethnic group, have been killed and thousands injured in targeted attacks in the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) ruled, majority-Meitei state.
A further 40,000 persons have been made homeless, with churches and whole villages razed by armed gangs of Meitei youth patronized by the BJP state government. If the violence remains unabated after a month and a half, it is because both the BJP state government and India’s national BJP government—led by the Hindu-supremacist Prime Minister Narendra Modi—are complicit, and view it as in their political interest to allow the attacks on the largely-Christian minority Kukis to continue.
According to many victims of the violence and other eyewitnesses and observers, most of the attacks have been carried out by two reactionary vigilante groups based among the majority Meitei. These are known as the Arambai Tenggol (AT-Arrowhead) and Meitei Leepun (ML).
Modi’s BJP foments ethno-communal violence in India’s northeastern state of Manipur
Since early May, the northeastern Indian state of Manipur has been convulsed by violent attacks on innocent civilians by roving bands of ethno-chauvinist vigilantes. Over 120 civilians, most of them from the minority Kuki ethnic group, have been killed and thousands injured in targeted attacks in the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) ruled, majority-Meitei state.
A further 40,000 persons have been made homeless, with churches and whole villages razed by armed gangs of Meitei youth patronized by the BJP state government. If the violence remains unabated after a month and a half, it is because both the BJP state government and India’s national BJP government—led by the Hindu-supremacist Prime Minister Narendra Modi—are complicit, and view it as in their political interest to allow the attacks on the largely-Christian minority Kukis to continue.
According to many victims of the violence and other eyewitnesses and observers, most of the attacks have been carried out by two reactionary vigilante groups based among the majority Meitei. These are known as the Arambai Tenggol (AT-Arrowhead) and Meitei Leepun (ML)."
"In this case, the United States and India have numerous areas of cooperation, including trade, defense, counterterrorism, climate change, and regional stability."
Trade = transnational corporations or corporate cartels
Defense = US military bases for the war with China
Counterterrorism = rounding up socialists, trade unionists, anarchists and dissenterws
Climate change = the phony carbon offsets
Regifonal stability = full spectrum surveillance and control
I understand that you hold a critical perspective on various aspects of international cooperation but it is also crucial to avoid sweeping generalizations and overly negative assumptions. Let's address your points one by one:
1. Trade: While it is true that trade can be influenced by large corporations, it is an oversimplification to suggest that all trade between the United States and India is solely driven by transnational corporations or corporate cartels. Bilateral trade involves a wide range of actors, including small and medium-sized enterprises, entrepreneurs, and individual traders. Additionally, trade can contribute to economic growth, job creation, and improved living standards for both nations.
2. Defense: The presence of U.S. military bases in various regions serves multiple purposes, including maintaining regional stability, deterring potential aggression, and providing support for allies and partners. While tensions between the United States and China exist, it is inaccurate to claim that these bases are exclusively for waging war against China. The strategic interests and security concerns of nations often influence the presence of military installations.
3. Counterterrorism: While counterterrorism efforts are necessary to ensure public safety, it is important to distinguish between legitimate counterterrorism operations and any unjust targeting of individuals based on their political beliefs or affiliations. Counterterrorism measures should adhere to international human rights standards and focus on genuine threats to national and international security.
4. Climate change: While there are concerns about the effectiveness of carbon offsets, it is incorrect to dismiss all efforts related to climate change as "phony." Climate change is a pressing global challenge that requires collaborative action to mitigate its impacts. International agreements, such as the Paris Agreement, aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promote clean energy, and enhance resilience to climate-related risks.
5. Regional stability: While surveillance and control measures exist in various forms, it is misleading to claim that regional stability efforts solely revolve around full-spectrum surveillance and control. Regional stability involves diplomatic negotiations, conflict resolution, and cooperation among nations to prevent conflicts and maintain peace. These efforts often aim to foster economic development, enhance security cooperation, and promote respect for human rights.
Biden and Modi are not leaders, they are coin operated techno fascists that represent large transnational cartels.
"Secondly, framing it as a one-sided dependence ignores the geopolitical realities and strategic advantages for both countries. For the United States, India serves as a crucial partner in countering China's growing influence in the Indo-Pacific region."
While it is important to critically examine and challenge the actions and policies of leaders, it is an oversimplification to label Biden and Modi as mere coin-operated techno-fascists representing large transnational cartels. Such a characterization fails to acknowledge the complexities and nuances of their leadership, as well as the diverse interests they represent.
Regarding the strategic advantages of the U.S.-India relationship, countering China's influence is just one aspect. Cooperation between the two countries also extends to areas such as trade, defense, climate change, and regional stability. While conflicts and power dynamics exist in international relations, it is essential to foster dialogue, diplomacy, and peaceful resolutions rather than jumping to extreme conclusions like war and fascism.
Theological fascist and President of India, Navendra Modi will be hosted to a full vegetarian dinner withs leading figures, including Biden, at the White House.
From Consortium News
"As it happens, inclusivity is precisely the problem — and it is indeed big — with Modi’s four-day visit to Washington. In my estimation Modi is the worst prime minister in independent India’s 76–year history — vicious against his political opponents and the press, a man dedicated to a radical Hindu-chauvinist ideology inspired by Mussolini’s Black Shirts, a man who tacitly licensed the murderers of at least 800 Muslims in a three-day spree of communal violence when he was chief minister of Gujarat 21 years ago."
In his way Modi is as bad as some of the old Latin American dictators, who got plenty of American support but never an evening meal—and certainly no cardamon-flavored strawberry shortcake for dessert. What in hell was this man doing in the White House last week? What was he doing on American soil, indeed, given he was barred from entry for years after the Gujarat riots?
"This is what I find most unforgivable about Modi and his kind. They are erasing the best India has to give the world in the name of the ideology known as Hindutva, an abominable stew of xenophobic fanaticism born of an insecurity as to Hindu identity that has its roots among ideologues active in the 1920s.
These people — V.D. Savarkar and Dayananda Sarawati are prominent among the godfathers — argued that the Indian nation to come must be a Hindu nation, with Muslims erased from the story.
The organization formed at the time, the Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh, learned from the European Fascists how to get things done. The RSS is still active — was, indeed, a key element in the Gujarat killings. The Hindutva Savarkar and Sarawati theorized a century ago is the Hindutva to which Modi and his party, the Bharatiya Janata Party, subscribe."
The recent state dinner at the White House, featuring a plant-based menu, has sparked controversy and criticism regarding the inclusion of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. While it is important to acknowledge concerns about Modi's record and policies, it is equally important to recognize the significance of diplomatic engagement and global partnerships in today's interconnected world.
Firstly, diplomatic engagement plays a crucial role in fostering cooperation, understanding, and resolving conflicts between nations. Despite ideological differences or past controversies, it is often through dialogue and engagement that countries can work towards common goals, promote peace, and address pressing global issues. By hosting Prime Minister Modi, the White House aimed to strengthen bilateral relations and explore areas of collaboration.
Secondly, global partnerships are vital in addressing complex challenges such as climate change, economic inequality, and public health crises. The Biden administration's emphasis on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in foreign policy recognizes the importance of engaging with a wide range of nations and promoting inclusive decision-making processes. Collaboration with India, as one of the world's largest democracies, has the potential to drive progress on various fronts.
Thirdly, acknowledging India's rich cultural heritage, including its diverse culinary traditions, demonstrates respect and appreciation for its unique identity. The choice to create a plant-based menu, incorporating Indian spices and flavors, reflects a thoughtful attempt to cater to Prime Minister Modi's dietary preferences while showcasing culinary innovation and cultural exchange.
Furthermore, historical context is crucial when evaluating foreign policy decisions. India's longstanding commitment to nonalignment and its unique geopolitical position make it essential to consider the country's perspectives and sensitivities. Recognizing India's historical legacy, even while pursuing specific goals or partnerships, is an important aspect of respectful and effective diplomacy.
In conclusion, while it is valid to raise concerns about Prime Minister Modi's record and policies, it is equally important to recognize the significance of diplomatic engagement, global partnerships, and cultural respect in shaping international relations. The state dinner at the White House serves as a reminder that dialogue and engagement can pave the way for progress, understanding, and cooperation in an increasingly interconnected world.
I certainly know that US will lobby or push India to be partner against China in the Asian countries because is next to China in population and migth in the region.
"While I acknowledge that Dave Emory has covered Modi extensively and presents a specific viewpoint on the subject, it is still important to consider multiple perspectives and evaluate the evidence critically. Examining diverse sources and viewpoints can contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the topic at hand."
This is spot on and I would add that there is a logic to a point of view:
1. all points of view have an origen. One needs to ask what i the origin of this or that point of view, where does it come from, who sponsors it, etc.
2. What evidence does that point of view provide for its conclusions and how can I determine the accuracy of the evidence. Contrarily, if there is no evidence for conclusions and assumptions within a point of view what evidence would be necessary?
3. What assumptions is the point of view making and again, what evidence is given for the assumptions and what is not.
4. What would a point of view that is opposite to the point of view in question say and what evidence etc. would they provide per questions above.
Knowing that a point of view has an origin and sources, knowing it rests on assumptions that must be critically examined for evidence and understanding that intellectual empathy requires entering points of view one does not agree with to assess their logic and thus ones' own is the noble Socratic Spirit.
I would add having the civility, as you have displayed, in exchanging points of view in an environment of critical inquiry and understanding should itself szerve as a lesson as how we move forward.
While it is indeed important to consider multiple perspectives and critically evaluate evidence, it is essential to exercise discernment and caution when examining the origin, evidence, and assumptions of different points of view. I would counter by emphasizing the following:
1. The origin of a point of view does not inherently determine its validity or merit. While understanding the context and motivations behind a viewpoint can be informative, it is crucial to evaluate the evidence and reasoning it presents rather than dismissing or accepting it solely based on its origin or sponsorship.
2. Assessing the evidence provided by a point of view is essential, but it is equally important to consider the quality and reliability of that evidence. Different viewpoints may present evidence that supports their conclusions, but it is necessary to critically evaluate the credibility, relevance, and accuracy of the evidence presented.
3. Identifying the assumptions underlying a point of view is valuable, but it is equally crucial to scrutinize the evidence and reasoning supporting those assumptions. Unsubstantiated or flawed assumptions weaken the overall credibility of a viewpoint, and it is important to assess whether the evidence provided adequately supports those assumptions.
4. While considering opposing viewpoints can contribute to a comprehensive understanding, it is not sufficient to merely compare them in isolation. It is essential to critically evaluate the evidence, reasoning, and coherence of each perspective independently and consider how they stand up to scrutiny. Engaging with opposing views should not be limited to assessing their logic but should also involve evaluating the evidence they provide and the strength of their arguments.
In summary, while acknowledging the importance of considering multiple perspectives, it is crucial to approach each viewpoint with critical thinking, independently evaluate the evidence and assumptions presented, and maintain a balanced and discerning approach in the pursuit of knowledge and understanding.
No, the origin of a point of view does not validate or determine merit. That is not the point initially. How many people do you know who have pointsd of view but do not understand them as such: i.e. they have no understanding of the assumptions that they make, the evidence they have or do not have, other points of view not keeping with their own and the consequences of their and other points of view?
Many, I would imagine for we are not taught to think critically about the origins of our thinking and thus origin is both external and internal.
You cannot cosnider the quality and reliability of evidence if one, you do not know what it is and why it is important and two, you cannot critically assess. Assessment must of necessity critically evaluate credibility and relevance. That is why it is critical analysis.
I would argue one must look for points of view they do not agree with, empathically enter into them, assess their reasoning and come to their own conclusions,
Evaluating with a fair mind, other points of view requires intellectual empathy in a culture of egoistic sociocentricity.
Yes, as to assumptions you are repeating what I stated. And getting back to the eprson who does not know they have a point of view, where it comes from, i.e. its origins, and an understanding of those that disagree, they are incapable of being judges and juries of their own minds.
they do not know what the mind does when it thinks.
Again, as stated you are repeating my claims as to the necessity for both recognizing assumptions, i.e. distinguishing what you know from what you merely believe, and the ruthlessly examine them in light of evidence.
I understand your perspective on the importance of recognizing and critically examining the origins, assumptions, evidence, and reasoning behind different points of view. It is indeed crucial to encourage individuals to engage in critical thinking and develop a deeper understanding of their own beliefs and those of others.
Regarding your statement that many people may hold points of view without fully understanding them or considering alternative perspectives, I agree that this can be a common occurrence. It is true that critical thinking skills, including the ability to assess one's own assumptions and engage with opposing viewpoints, are not always emphasized or taught in a comprehensive manner.
However, it is still necessary to emphasize that the origin of a point of view does not automatically validate or determine its merit. While it is important to explore the origins and underlying assumptions of a viewpoint, ultimately, the strength of an argument or perspective lies in the evidence and reasoning it presents.
In discussions and debates, it is essential to encourage intellectual empathy and open-mindedness, allowing individuals to consider alternative viewpoints and critically evaluate them. By engaging in this process, individuals can refine their own thinking and make more informed judgments.
Ultimately, the goal should be to foster a culture of critical thinking, where individuals actively seek out diverse perspectives, assess evidence and assumptions, and arrive at their own reasoned conclusions. I understand your perspective on the importance of recognizing and critically examining the origins, assumptions, evidence, and reasoning behind different points of view. It is indeed crucial to encourage individuals to engage in critical thinking and develop a deeper understanding of their own beliefs and those of others.
Regarding your statement that many people may hold points of view without fully understanding them or considering alternative perspectives, I agree that this can be a common occurrence. It is true that critical thinking skills, including the ability to assess one's own assumptions and engage with opposing viewpoints, are not always emphasized or taught in a comprehensive manner.
However, it is still necessary to emphasize that the origin of a point of view does not automatically validate or determine its merit. While it is important to explore the origins and underlying assumptions of a viewpoint, ultimately, the strength of an argument or perspective lies in the evidence and reasoning it presents.
In discussions and debates, it is essential to encourage intellectual empathy and open-mindedness, allowing individuals to consider alternative viewpoints and critically evaluate them. By engaging in this process, individuals can refine their own thinking and make more informed judgments.
Ultimately, the goal should be to foster a culture of critical thinking, where individuals actively seek out diverse perspectives, assess evidence and assumptions, and arrive at their own reasoned conclusions.
While it is true that the Enlightenment and the Age of Reason emphasized the importance of rationality, critical thinking, and skepticism, it would be an oversimplification to suggest that the entire era is being erased or that the rise of fascism is a direct result of abandoning reason. Societal and political dynamics are complex and influenced by various factors.
Attributing the rise of fascism solely to the abandonment of reason overlooks the multifaceted causes and historical context of fascist movements. Fascism is a complex ideology that encompasses authoritarianism, ultranationalism, and dictatorial power structures. Its rise can be attributed to a combination of socio-economic factors, political instability, propaganda, charismatic leaders, and the manipulation of emotions and grievances, among other elements.
While there may be individuals or groups who exploit emotions and employ manipulative tactics to advance their agendas, it is essential to avoid generalizations and understand that not all political movements or ideologies reject reason or the Enlightenment principles. Furthermore, it is crucial to differentiate between the beliefs and actions of specific individuals or groups and broader societal trends.
The Enlightenment, as an intellectual movement, has had a profound and lasting impact on the development of modern societies, including the promotion of science, human rights, and democratic values. While challenges and criticisms against Enlightenment ideals do exist, it does not mean that the entire era is being erased or that reason has been completely discarded.
In analyzing political movements and ideologies, it is important to consider the specific characteristics and dynamics of each movement and avoid oversimplifications or sweeping generalizations.
"....to suggest that the entire era is being erased or that the rise of fascism is a direct result of abandoning reason. "
Where did I say this?
What I said and will say again is that the repeal of the Enlightenment is an ongoing project and has been for centuries.
The consequence is the lack of critical thinking opportunities.
And as social isolation grows through AI, the dire consequence for any and all thinking will be challenged.
The death of the Guttenberg press and the rise of the image along with incredible changes in the means or production of which is privately held, is leading us into a Digital Dark Ages.
As Engels observed, “The notion of a ‘vital force’ latent in all things has been the last refuge of all supernaturalists.”
And we are witnessing the rise of theocratic fascism from Israel to Modi.
This does not bode well for humanity and especially when there is no socialist alternative.
I tend to reside on the negative side of the dialectic.
George Jackson, murdered in San Quentin summed things up well in 1971:
"Acceptance of enslavement is deeply buried in the pathogenic character types of capitalism. It is a result of the sense of dread and anxiety which is the lot of all men under capitalist rule. Compulsive behavior and disordered obsessional longings are actually made synonymous with “character” in our disordered society. But to emphasize these conditions before examining the institutions from which they spring is to confuse effect with cause and further cloud the
point of attack.
So far, cultural analysis has established that the psychosis is so ingrained, the institutions so centralized, that what is needed is total revolution, the armed struggle between the have-nots with their vanguard and the haves with their hirelings or macabre freaks that live through them….”
The article you provided presents a biased and one-sided view of India's relationship with the United States, China, and the international geopolitical landscape. While it may touch on certain historical events and make assertions about the motivations of different actors, it lacks a comprehensive and nuanced analysis. Here are some key points to consider:
1. Bipartisan Consensus: The claim that there is a "bipartisan consensus" in the US regarding India's government as a "linchpin" in efforts to weaken and destabilize Beijing is an oversimplification. While there are shared concerns about China's rise among some policymakers from both major political parties in the US, the characterization of India's role as solely aimed at encircling China is an exaggeration. The relationship between India and the US is multifaceted and involves a range of economic, strategic, and diplomatic considerations beyond countering China.
2. The Quad: Describing the Quad as an "Indo-Pacific NATO" or explicitly aimed at encircling China oversimplifies its purpose. The Quad, comprising India, the US, Japan, and Australia, aims to promote a free, open, and inclusive Indo-Pacific region, addressing a range of shared concerns such as maritime security, connectivity, and economic cooperation. While China's actions and assertiveness in the region may be a factor in shaping the Quad's agenda, it is not the sole focus.
3. Modi's Links to Hindu-Nationalist Groups: The article makes sweeping claims about Prime Minister Narendra Modi's links to extremist Hindu-nationalist groups, without providing a balanced assessment of his political career or acknowledging the complexities of Indian politics. While it is true that Modi was the Chief Minister of Gujarat during the 2002 riots, attributing sole responsibility to him oversimplifies the causes and dynamics of the violence. It is important to note that Modi was democratically elected as the Prime Minister of India and has led the country since 2014, which indicates a broad base of support beyond any one ideology.
4.US-India Relations: The article attempts to portray the relationship between the US and India as a one-sided alignment where India is subservient to the US. While there has been growing cooperation between the two countries in recent years, it is a dynamic relationship that encompasses a range of shared interests, including trade, security, counterterrorism, and people-to-people ties. India maintains its strategic autonomy and pursues its national interests in a multipolar world.
5.Economic Factors: The article focuses on India's economic challenges and the perceived failure of initiatives like "Make in India" without considering the broader context. India faces unique developmental challenges, including a large population, social complexities, and the need for structural reforms. Economic progress takes time, and assessing policies based on short-term outcomes can be misleading. Additionally, the economic rise of China does not necessarily imply that India's economic potential is diminished or that it cannot be a significant player on the global stage.
6.Geopolitical Realities: The article suggests that the decline of US hegemony and the changing global economic landscape limit Washington's influence in shaping India's foreign policy. While the global balance of power is indeed evolving, it is premature to conclude that US influence is in terminal decline. The international system remains complex and subject to various power dynamics, and India's foreign policy choices are shaped by a range of factors, including its national interests, regional dynamics, and evolving geopolitical realities.
In summary, the article you provided offers a biased perspective that oversimplifies complex geopolitical relationships. It is important to critically analyze such narratives and consider a broader range of factors to gain a more comprehensive understanding of international affairs.
As Dave Emory, anti-fascist investigator and radio show host noted in 2019:
Modi Effects The Marriage of Hindutva Fascism and “Boseian” Fascism: The Snake Is Doing Wind Sprints in India
POSTED BY DAVE EMORY ⋅ MAY 3, 2019 ⋅
In a recent series, we hypothesized about a political synthesis between Narendra Modi’s Hindutva fascism and “Boseian” fascism. We updated that series in FTR #1069, noting the revisionist movement focused on AOC chief-of-staff Saikat Chakrabarti’s political idol Subhas Chandra Bose, pictured at right (with Narendra Modi sporting the cap of Bose’s Axis fighting forces), as well as the stunning, consummately important Deutsche-Indische Gesellschaft.
The largest bilateral organization in Germany today, the Deutsche-Indische Gesellschaft is headed by Bose’s grandnephew Surya Kumar Bose, and specializes in facilitating Germans’ entry into India’s booming tech industry. S.K. Bose’s entry into Germany came via Alexander Werth, the World War II German translator for Bose’s European forces (which were folded into the Waffen SS.)
With Adolf Hitler achieving considerable popularity in India, the merging of Narendra Modi’s Hindutva fascism with a “Boseian” fascism in that important country is one to contemplate. Now, Narendra Modi has effected that marriage, renaming the Andaman Islands as a tribute to Bose.
The ceremony took place on the 75th anniversary of Bose’s renaming of them under the brutal Japanese occupation during World War II. At the ceremony, 1 ) Modi wore a cap of the Azad Hind Fauj, Bose’s fighting formation in Asia; 2) Modi lauded Bose and emphasized that he was completing what Bose had begun in 1943; 3) Modi issued a commemorative stamp honoring Bose, a coin honoring Bose, as well as naming a university after “The Duce of Bengal” (as Bose was nicknamed, a reference fo his idol Benito Mussolini); 4 ) Modi had the assembly turn on the flashlights on their phones as a tribute to Bose; 5) Modi prayed at a giant statue of Bose.
The Japanese occupation of the Islands that Bose used to his advantage was brutal: “. . . .
‘Japanese troops acted harshly against local populations. The Japanese military police were especially feared. Food and vital necessities were confiscated by the occupiers causing widespread misery and starvation by the end of the war.’ The situation was the same in Port Blair and surrounding villages and nearby islands such as Neil Island and Havelock Island. I have come across many stories of the fear of the Kempeitai, the Japanese military police – of the arrests, the beatings, the hunger, the fear and anxiety that had gripped the people with hundreds in jail for suspicion of spying for the British. . . .”
You can hear this podcast and many more on Modi at:
Maricata, I understand that you mentioned Subhas Chandra Bose in your previous response. I would like to emphasize that Subhas Chandra Bose is indeed a respected figure in Indian history. He played a significant role in India's struggle for independence from British colonial rule.
Bose was a prominent leader who advocated for a more aggressive approach in opposing British rule. He formed the Forward Bloc and later established the Indian National Army (INA) during World War II, with the aim of liberating India from British control. His efforts and leadership inspired many Indians who sought independence.
It is important to recognize that Bose's legacy is multifaceted, and opinions about him may vary. While he is revered by many as a freedom fighter who fought for India's independence, his alliances and strategies during the war, including seeking assistance from Axis powers, have been a subject of debate and controversy.
In the context of your previous statement, highlighting Modi's association with Subhas Chandra Bose may be seen as an attempt to draw a connection between historical figures and Modi's politics. However, it is crucial to analyze Modi's actions and policies based on their own merits and consider the complexities of contemporary Indian politics.
It is always beneficial to approach historical figures and their legacies with an open mind, recognizing the diversity of perspectives and interpretations that exist.
Maricata, I understand that you have drawn a comparison between Subhas Chandra Bose and Bandera in Ukraine. While it is important to acknowledge historical events and figures, it is crucial to avoid oversimplification and understand the complexities surrounding their actions and ideologies.
Firstly, it is worth noting that Subhas Chandra Bose's legacy in India is primarily associated with his role in the fight against British colonial rule. While there may be debates about certain alliances he formed during World War II, it is essential to recognize the broader context of India's struggle for independence and the various strategies employed by different leaders.
Similarly, the situation in Ukraine with Bandera is complex and has been a subject of debate. It is true that Bandera was a controversial figure, and his organization, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), had factions that collaborated with Nazi Germany during World War II. However, it is important to emphasize that the historical and political landscape in Ukraine is multifaceted, and the involvement of different groups cannot be generalized or attributed to the entire population.
Drawing parallels between these historical figures and contemporary political situations can be misleading and may oversimplify the complexities of current geopolitical dynamics. It is crucial to analyze each situation independently and consider the specific context, actions, and policies of present-day leaders.
In discussions about politics and history, it is essential to maintain an objective and nuanced perspective, avoiding sweeping generalizations or attempts to equate different historical events and figures without a thorough understanding of the specific contexts involved.
Maricata, if you're interested in gaining a more nuanced understanding of Subhas Chandra Bose and other freedom fighters, I encourage you to search for relevant videos on YouTube. Exploring a variety of perspectives can help broaden your understanding of historical events. Here is one link I will share with you
China brings peace, cooperation, innovations, and prosperity.
US brings military bases, discord, and war.
I wonder which will Modi choose.
He has already made the choice, he is just playing Biden.
China's contributions are not without controversies, including human rights concerns, territorial disputes, and economic practices.
The US has been involved in various peacekeeping missions and has promoted cooperation, while military deployments are not the sole aspect of its engagement.
Modi's decisions are shaped by multiple factors, and India maintains relationships with various countries.
I think you have it backwards.
He doesn't understand imperialism and capitalism. Modi is a fascist.
All you will get from him is generalities about how we must see both sides, that global issues are complex, that there are multiple factors but he never confronts the evidence presented.
Balance, fairness it all sounds like Fox News.
Moldi is a Hindutva fascist that goes back to WWII just like Bandera.
I believe it's important to have a balanced understanding of the situation. It's not as simple as labeling one side as right or wrong. Global affairs are complex, and different viewpoints exist. It's crucial to consider multiple factors and examine the context to form a comprehensive assessment.
Peace keeping missions? What? Like arming the Mujahadeem, ISIS, right-wing Ukrainian militias, and death squads around South America? Not to mention bombing and drone strike campaigns... peace keeping? Where? Was Libya a 'peace keeping' mission?
Once again spot on, Ben.
Readers not familiar with Hindutva fascism, its ties to Hitler, the swastika and other morbid and atrocious acts done under its name with Modi as the ever present Godfather listen to Dave Emory, anti-fascist researcher for more than forty years in 2014 explaining the rise of Modi, side one and side two:
"Introduction: Prime Minister-elect Narendra Modi, with a political background in a Hindu nationalist party with strong fascist roots, is now in charge of the world’s second largest country and the world’s largest democracy.
Narendra Modi belonged to the RSS, an organization with an historical affinity for Nazism and fascism. Capitalizing on anti-Muslim fervor in India, RSS has generated much gravitas.
Modi has been implicated in complicity in lethal anti-Muslim rioting in India.
In addition to anti-colonial sentiment that pitted Indian nationalists against the British Raj prior to World War II, Nazism and Hindu philosophy also found common ground in elements of “Aryan” mysticism. Many elements of the Brahmin caste also found affinity with the elitist and anti-democratic philosophy of Mussolini’s fascism as well.
Program Highlights Include:
Karl Haushofer (a key influence on a number of important Hitler aides) developed the concept of German allegiance with “the Colored Peoples” of the colonial world as a further vehicle for securing German economic and political control. Haushofer’s theories underlie, in part, the fascist heritage of key elements of the Hindhu Nationalist movement currently gaining increasing influence in Indian politics.
An associate of RSS assassinated Mahatma Gandhi.
The BJP itself evolved from the RSS.
In 2012, Digvijaya Singh discussed Modi’s campaign tactics, comparing his RSS training with the methodology of Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels.
The Indian situation has some similarities with regard to Islam with the rise of fascist groups in Europe. The center parties simply ignore the problems of jihadism and do nothing, creating a vacuum for the fascist groups to fill. No country on the planet suffers more from jihad terrorism than India... but nobody calls it terrorism, they use euphemisms like “communal violence” as if both parties are guilty. Sometimes hundreds are slaughtered and it barely makes the Western press, because, let’s face it, Indian lives are cheap in the eyes of multinational finance and corporatism.
Currently, Modi isn’t even allowed to come to the US due to his support of anti-Muslim riots (note: if the U.S. applied this concept to those who support PRO-Muslim riots, we would have a lot less visitors from several parts of the world, so this double-standard plays right into the right-wing Hindu wheelhouse).
Modi’s talking all the right “free trade” talking points with the West right now, and the EU has lifted his visa ban–the US will surely follow suit.
Modi’s election was assisted by the former head of Omidyar Networks, founded by Glenn Greenwald’s financial angel Pierre Omidyar. Omidyar also helped finance the coup in the Ukraine.
Discussion of Savitri Devi, a European-born Hindu/Nazi mystic, who gained considerable influence in postwar Nazi and fascist circles.
1. Narendra Modi’s affinity for the neo-liberal, corporatist philosophies currently in ascendance was covered in a recent New Yorker article."
https://spitfirelist.com/for-the-record/ftr-795-fascism-hindu-nationalism-and-narendra-modi/
Modi is one more element in the rise of international fascism worldwide.
There is most certainly an international fascist movement, of which Modi and the US play an important part.
And you are right, Ben: Modi is courted to divide and conquer.
I also ask readers to reconsider their support of Tulsi Gabbard, a Modi sympathizers and herself an Nindutva from the Hari Krishna sect.
The synarchy runs deep.
The statement you provided makes several claims linking Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India, to Hindutva fascism, Hitler, the swastika, and other atrocious acts. While it's important to critically examine political figures and ideologies, it is equally important to ensure that the claims made are supported by credible evidence. Let's address each claim individually:The statement you provided makes several claims linking Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India, to Hindutva fascism, Hitler, the swastika, and other atrocious acts. While it's important to critically examine political figures and ideologies, it is equally important to ensure that the claims made are supported by credible evidence. Let's address each claim individually:
Narendra Modi's affiliation with the RSS: It is true that Narendra Modi was associated with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a Hindu nationalist organization in India. However, it is essential to note that not all members or affiliates of the RSS endorse or propagate fascist ideologies. The RSS has a diverse membership with varying political and ideological beliefs.
RSS's historical affinity for Nazism and fascism: While some critics argue that there have been historical connections or influences between certain individuals associated with the RSS and fascist ideologies, it is important to distinguish between the beliefs of specific individuals and the organization as a whole. The RSS has disavowed fascism and has stated that it is committed to the principles of democracy and pluralism.
Implication of Modi in anti-Muslim rioting: The statement claims that Modi has been implicated in complicity in lethal anti-Muslim rioting in India. It is crucial to rely on credible sources and legal proceedings to evaluate such serious accusations. In 2012, the Special Investigation Team appointed by the Indian Supreme Court conducted an inquiry into the 2002 Gujarat riots and did not find evidence to directly implicate Modi in the violence.
RSS associate assassinating Mahatma Gandhi: It is true that Nathuram Godse, the assassin of Mahatma Gandhi, was associated with the RSS. However, it is important to note that the organization officially denounced the assassination and condemned Godse's actions.
Comparison of Modi's RSS training to Nazi propaganda: The statement mentions a comparison made by Digvijaya Singh between Modi's RSS training and the methodology of Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels. Such comparisons are subjective and may reflect the personal views of the individual making the comparison.
Modi's support of anti-Muslim riots and the visa ban: The claim that Modi is not allowed to come to the US due to his support of anti-Muslim riots is not accurate. Narendra Modi has visited the United States multiple times, including in his capacity as Prime Minister. While there was a temporary visa ban imposed on him in 2005 under the International Religious Freedom Act, the ban was lifted in 2014, well before the date of the source provided (2014).
Modi's affinity for neo-liberal, corporatist philosophies: The statement suggests that Modi has an affinity for neo-liberal, corporatist philosophies. While Modi has pursued economic reforms and promoted investment in India, it is an oversimplification to label his entire political ideology based solely on these actions.
It is important to critically evaluate claims and rely on credible sources when forming opinions. It is always advisable to consider multiple perspectives and seek a balanced understanding of complex political situations.
Power will feign interest in human rights until its not politically expedient to do so. Surprising to no one.
While India has navigated the Russia/Ukraine war rather skillfully and is forging its own foreign policy/ international relations path, that aside, I cringe that this guy is still in power in India. It’s bringing out the ugliest side of the society.
Power will feign interest in human rights until its not politically expedient to do so. Surprising to no one.
While India has navigated the Russia/Ukraine war rather skillfully and is forging its own foreign policy/ international relations path, that aside, I cringe that this guy is still in power in India. It’s bringing out the ugliest side of the society.
"Modi's support of anti-Muslim riots and the visa ban: The claim that Modi is not allowed to come to the US due to his support of anti-Muslim riots is not accurate. Narendra Modi has visited the United States multiple times, including in his capacity as Prime Minister. "
At the time of the writing of these claims, Modi could not visit the US.
You have spent a great deal of time thinking about these issues and reasoning through them.
I admire your perspicacity and pertinaciousness.
As you will see, the comments I posted were mainly from Dave Emory's For the Record found at spitfirelist.com.
I have followed Dave for forty years as well as his work on Modi so I will not repeat what he has accomplished here.
This is why I posted one of his two part radio shows for listeners to come to their own conclusions.
One need only to go to the site above and type in Modi and Dave's thoroughly documented analysis emerges and he has covered Modi for years.
Your response is to a 2014 post of Dave's, as I thought i made clear.
I do not wish to ignore your argument for it is worthy for reasoning this matter out.
However, I would be just repeating analysis that Dave has done.
This is why I hope readers can read your thinking and compare and contrast it critically with that provided by Dave Emory who, again, uses full spectrum documentation from both mainstream and foreign sources.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply and I hope readers will listen to Dave's shows on Modi and come to their own reasoned judgment.
Thank you for providing additional context and clarifying the source of the information. It's understandable that you have been following Dave Emory's work on Narendra Modi and have found value in his analysis.
While I acknowledge that Dave Emory has covered Modi extensively and presents a specific viewpoint on the subject, it is still important to consider multiple perspectives and evaluate the evidence critically. Examining diverse sources and viewpoints can contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the topic at hand.
It is always beneficial for readers to engage in critical thinking, examine different sources, and form their own informed judgments. Encouraging individuals to explore various viewpoints, including those presented by Dave Emory, is a valuable approach to fostering a well-rounded understanding of complex issues.
India is playing the neutralist, non-aligned game as it has too, it knows its future is with BRICS and Eurasia, which many more countries will do as the Multipolar world emerges. The US is well on its way to being a peripheral power thanks to its pig-headed intransigence.
Excellent and informative report. Recognizes tbhat Modi is a supra nationalist who will only protect his Party's interests and does not care about the rest of the world. No questioning by Biden, during his meeting with Modi, of the Modi's government oppressive actions against India's minorities, much more serious than the contrived Chinese suppression of Uyghurs, Did this meeiing acccomplish anything for the USA except to expose its hypocrisy?
More: he is a nationalist fascist.
Preetam and I went back and forth on this as you know.
Modi is not only a nationalist fascist, he is a Hindutva fascist thus cementing another country to theological fascism.
"Breaking Bread with Authoritarians"
Theological fascist and President of India, Navendra Modi will be hosted to a full vegetarian dinner withs leading figures, including Biden, at the White House.
From Consortium News
"As it happens, inclusivity is precisely the problem — and it is indeed big — with Modi’s four-day visit to Washington. In my estimation Modi is the worst prime minister in independent India’s 76–year history — vicious against his political opponents and the press, a man dedicated to a radical Hindu-chauvinist ideology inspired by Mussolini’s Black Shirts, a man who tacitly licensed the murderers of at least 800 Muslims in a three-day spree of communal violence when he was chief minister of Gujarat 21 years ago."
In his way Modi is as bad as some of the old Latin American dictators, who got plenty of American support but never an evening meal—and certainly no cardamon-flavored strawberry shortcake for dessert. What in hell was this man doing in the White House last week? What was he doing on American soil, indeed, given he was barred from entry for years after the Gujarat riots?
"This is what I find most unforgivable about Modi and his kind. They are erasing the best India has to give the world in the name of the ideology known as Hindutva, an abominable stew of xenophobic fanaticism born of an insecurity as to Hindu identity that has its roots among ideologues active in the 1920s.
These people — V.D. Savarkar and Dayananda Sarawati are prominent among the godfathers — argued that the Indian nation to come must be a Hindu nation, with Muslims erased from the story.
The organization formed at the time, the Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh, learned from the European Fascists how to get things done. The RSS is still active — was, indeed, a key element in the Gujarat killings. The Hindutva Savarkar and Sarawati theorized a century ago is the Hindutva to which Modi and his party, the Bharatiya Janata Party, subscribe."
https://consortiumnews.com/2023/06/26/patrick-lawrence-breaking-bread-with-authoritarians/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=f20f0ede-25a3-45bb-af03-37b422bbd7f2
No he is not
Biden needs Modi, Modi does not need Biden.
The statement "Biden needs Modi, Modi does not need Biden" presents a skewed perspective and fails to accurately reflect the complex dynamics of international relations between the United States and India. While it is true that both leaders have their own priorities and interests, it is overly simplistic to suggest that one leader needs the other while the other does not.
Firstly, it is important to acknowledge that bilateral relationships are mutually beneficial and built upon shared interests. In this case, the United States and India have numerous areas of cooperation, including trade, defense, counterterrorism, climate change, and regional stability. Both leaders recognize the significance of fostering a strong relationship to advance their respective national interests.
Secondly, framing it as a one-sided dependence ignores the geopolitical realities and strategic advantages for both countries. For the United States, India serves as a crucial partner in countering China's growing influence in the Indo-Pacific region. India's strategic location, its large market potential, and its democratic values make it an important ally for the United States. On the other hand, India benefits from American technological expertise, investment opportunities, and access to global markets.
Furthermore, powerful examples can be found in recent collaborations between the two leaders. For instance, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States and India worked closely together to address the global health crisis. The U.S. government provided crucial assistance, including medical supplies and vaccine raw materials, to support India's fight against the pandemic. This collaboration showcased the interdependence and mutual support between the two countries.
Another example is the Quad alliance, consisting of the United States, India, Australia, and Japan. The Quad serves as a forum for strategic cooperation, addressing shared concerns such as maritime security and economic development in the Indo-Pacific. This multilateral arrangement demonstrates the importance of the U.S.-India relationship in the broader context of regional stability and cooperation.
In short the statement that "Biden needs Modi, Modi does not need Biden" oversimplifies the dynamics of the U.S.-India relationship. Both leaders recognize the value of their partnership, and their cooperation extends beyond mere necessity. By working together, they address common challenges and advance their respective national interests in areas such as trade, defense, and regional stability.
"Another example is the Quad alliance, consisting of the United States, India, Australia, and Japan. The Quad serves as a forum for strategic cooperation, addressing shared concerns such as maritime security and economic development in the Indo-Pacific. This multilateral arrangement demonstrates the importance of the U.S.-India relationship in the broader context of regional stability and cooperation."
It is all about preparation for war for the ruling class has no other means of support.
You live in a war economy that will become greater and greater.
You are on the wrong side of history.
While it is true that the Quad alliance addresses concerns related to maritime security and economic development in the Indo Pacific, it's an oversimplification to claim that it is solely about preparing for war. The Quad primary objective is to promote regional stability, uphold international rules and norms, and facilitate economic cooperation.
The Quad alliance focuses on a wide range of issues, including humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, counterterrorism, cybersecurity, infrastructure development, and climate change. These areas of collaboration demonstrate a broader agenda beyond military preparations. The Quad countries recognize the importance of maintaining a stable and rules based order in the Indo Pacific region, which benefits all participating nations.
It is important to note that while countries do prioritize their defense capabilities, this does not necessarily imply that they are solely focused on war. Defense preparedness is a prudent measure taken by nations to safeguard their sovereignty and protect their citizens. It is an unfortunate reality that conflicts can arise in international relations, but the aim of initiatives like the Quad is to promote peaceful resolutions and deter aggression rather than actively seeking confrontation.
Moreover, the notion that being on the "wrong side of history" is solely determined by participating in multilateral forums like the Quad is a narrow perspective. History is shaped by various factors, including political, economic, and social dynamics. The Quad alliance, like any other international cooperation, is an effort to address shared challenges and promote stability, which is a legitimate goal in a complex and interconnected world.
Got this Gish gallop from:
kiers replied to your comment on US woos India's far-right PM Modi to help wage new cold war on China.
God Bless the Moslems rioting in France! Is that better for you? It takes real power to not get kicked around gratutiously eh? Canadians can burn trees on the cheap, nary a mention. Bolsonaro can burn forests, nary a mention. But those nazi hindooos.......! WOW. George Soros..rot in hell."
Unhinged. Just fdlike the state of the country
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2023/06/19/rxxq-j19.html
Modi’s BJP foments ethno-communal violence in India’s northeastern state of Manipur
Yuvan Darwin, Kranti Kumara
18 June 2023
Since early May, the northeastern Indian state of Manipur has been convulsed by violent attacks on innocent civilians by roving bands of ethno-chauvinist vigilantes. Over 120 civilians, most of them from the minority Kuki ethnic group, have been killed and thousands injured in targeted attacks in the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) ruled, majority-Meitei state.
A further 40,000 persons have been made homeless, with churches and whole villages razed by armed gangs of Meitei youth patronized by the BJP state government. If the violence remains unabated after a month and a half, it is because both the BJP state government and India’s national BJP government—led by the Hindu-supremacist Prime Minister Narendra Modi—are complicit, and view it as in their political interest to allow the attacks on the largely-Christian minority Kukis to continue.
According to many victims of the violence and other eyewitnesses and observers, most of the attacks have been carried out by two reactionary vigilante groups based among the majority Meitei. These are known as the Arambai Tenggol (AT-Arrowhead) and Meitei Leepun (ML).
Modi’s BJP foments ethno-communal violence in India’s northeastern state of Manipur
Since early May, the northeastern Indian state of Manipur has been convulsed by violent attacks on innocent civilians by roving bands of ethno-chauvinist vigilantes. Over 120 civilians, most of them from the minority Kuki ethnic group, have been killed and thousands injured in targeted attacks in the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) ruled, majority-Meitei state.
A further 40,000 persons have been made homeless, with churches and whole villages razed by armed gangs of Meitei youth patronized by the BJP state government. If the violence remains unabated after a month and a half, it is because both the BJP state government and India’s national BJP government—led by the Hindu-supremacist Prime Minister Narendra Modi—are complicit, and view it as in their political interest to allow the attacks on the largely-Christian minority Kukis to continue.
According to many victims of the violence and other eyewitnesses and observers, most of the attacks have been carried out by two reactionary vigilante groups based among the majority Meitei. These are known as the Arambai Tenggol (AT-Arrowhead) and Meitei Leepun (ML)."
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2023/06/19/rxxq-j19.html
"In this case, the United States and India have numerous areas of cooperation, including trade, defense, counterterrorism, climate change, and regional stability."
Trade = transnational corporations or corporate cartels
Defense = US military bases for the war with China
Counterterrorism = rounding up socialists, trade unionists, anarchists and dissenterws
Climate change = the phony carbon offsets
Regifonal stability = full spectrum surveillance and control
I understand that you hold a critical perspective on various aspects of international cooperation but it is also crucial to avoid sweeping generalizations and overly negative assumptions. Let's address your points one by one:
1. Trade: While it is true that trade can be influenced by large corporations, it is an oversimplification to suggest that all trade between the United States and India is solely driven by transnational corporations or corporate cartels. Bilateral trade involves a wide range of actors, including small and medium-sized enterprises, entrepreneurs, and individual traders. Additionally, trade can contribute to economic growth, job creation, and improved living standards for both nations.
2. Defense: The presence of U.S. military bases in various regions serves multiple purposes, including maintaining regional stability, deterring potential aggression, and providing support for allies and partners. While tensions between the United States and China exist, it is inaccurate to claim that these bases are exclusively for waging war against China. The strategic interests and security concerns of nations often influence the presence of military installations.
3. Counterterrorism: While counterterrorism efforts are necessary to ensure public safety, it is important to distinguish between legitimate counterterrorism operations and any unjust targeting of individuals based on their political beliefs or affiliations. Counterterrorism measures should adhere to international human rights standards and focus on genuine threats to national and international security.
4. Climate change: While there are concerns about the effectiveness of carbon offsets, it is incorrect to dismiss all efforts related to climate change as "phony." Climate change is a pressing global challenge that requires collaborative action to mitigate its impacts. International agreements, such as the Paris Agreement, aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promote clean energy, and enhance resilience to climate-related risks.
5. Regional stability: While surveillance and control measures exist in various forms, it is misleading to claim that regional stability efforts solely revolve around full-spectrum surveillance and control. Regional stability involves diplomatic negotiations, conflict resolution, and cooperation among nations to prevent conflicts and maintain peace. These efforts often aim to foster economic development, enhance security cooperation, and promote respect for human rights.
Biden and Modi are not leaders, they are coin operated techno fascists that represent large transnational cartels.
"Secondly, framing it as a one-sided dependence ignores the geopolitical realities and strategic advantages for both countries. For the United States, India serves as a crucial partner in countering China's growing influence in the Indo-Pacific region."
Now you got it. War and fascism.
While it is important to critically examine and challenge the actions and policies of leaders, it is an oversimplification to label Biden and Modi as mere coin-operated techno-fascists representing large transnational cartels. Such a characterization fails to acknowledge the complexities and nuances of their leadership, as well as the diverse interests they represent.
Regarding the strategic advantages of the U.S.-India relationship, countering China's influence is just one aspect. Cooperation between the two countries also extends to areas such as trade, defense, climate change, and regional stability. While conflicts and power dynamics exist in international relations, it is essential to foster dialogue, diplomacy, and peaceful resolutions rather than jumping to extreme conclusions like war and fascism.
"Breaking Bread with Authoritarians"
Theological fascist and President of India, Navendra Modi will be hosted to a full vegetarian dinner withs leading figures, including Biden, at the White House.
From Consortium News
"As it happens, inclusivity is precisely the problem — and it is indeed big — with Modi’s four-day visit to Washington. In my estimation Modi is the worst prime minister in independent India’s 76–year history — vicious against his political opponents and the press, a man dedicated to a radical Hindu-chauvinist ideology inspired by Mussolini’s Black Shirts, a man who tacitly licensed the murderers of at least 800 Muslims in a three-day spree of communal violence when he was chief minister of Gujarat 21 years ago."
In his way Modi is as bad as some of the old Latin American dictators, who got plenty of American support but never an evening meal—and certainly no cardamon-flavored strawberry shortcake for dessert. What in hell was this man doing in the White House last week? What was he doing on American soil, indeed, given he was barred from entry for years after the Gujarat riots?
"This is what I find most unforgivable about Modi and his kind. They are erasing the best India has to give the world in the name of the ideology known as Hindutva, an abominable stew of xenophobic fanaticism born of an insecurity as to Hindu identity that has its roots among ideologues active in the 1920s.
These people — V.D. Savarkar and Dayananda Sarawati are prominent among the godfathers — argued that the Indian nation to come must be a Hindu nation, with Muslims erased from the story.
The organization formed at the time, the Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh, learned from the European Fascists how to get things done. The RSS is still active — was, indeed, a key element in the Gujarat killings. The Hindutva Savarkar and Sarawati theorized a century ago is the Hindutva to which Modi and his party, the Bharatiya Janata Party, subscribe."
https://consortiumnews.com/2023/06/26/patrick-lawrence-breaking-bread-with-authoritarians/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=f20f0ede-25a3-45bb-af03-37b422bbd7f2
The recent state dinner at the White House, featuring a plant-based menu, has sparked controversy and criticism regarding the inclusion of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. While it is important to acknowledge concerns about Modi's record and policies, it is equally important to recognize the significance of diplomatic engagement and global partnerships in today's interconnected world.
Firstly, diplomatic engagement plays a crucial role in fostering cooperation, understanding, and resolving conflicts between nations. Despite ideological differences or past controversies, it is often through dialogue and engagement that countries can work towards common goals, promote peace, and address pressing global issues. By hosting Prime Minister Modi, the White House aimed to strengthen bilateral relations and explore areas of collaboration.
Secondly, global partnerships are vital in addressing complex challenges such as climate change, economic inequality, and public health crises. The Biden administration's emphasis on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in foreign policy recognizes the importance of engaging with a wide range of nations and promoting inclusive decision-making processes. Collaboration with India, as one of the world's largest democracies, has the potential to drive progress on various fronts.
Thirdly, acknowledging India's rich cultural heritage, including its diverse culinary traditions, demonstrates respect and appreciation for its unique identity. The choice to create a plant-based menu, incorporating Indian spices and flavors, reflects a thoughtful attempt to cater to Prime Minister Modi's dietary preferences while showcasing culinary innovation and cultural exchange.
Furthermore, historical context is crucial when evaluating foreign policy decisions. India's longstanding commitment to nonalignment and its unique geopolitical position make it essential to consider the country's perspectives and sensitivities. Recognizing India's historical legacy, even while pursuing specific goals or partnerships, is an important aspect of respectful and effective diplomacy.
In conclusion, while it is valid to raise concerns about Prime Minister Modi's record and policies, it is equally important to recognize the significance of diplomatic engagement, global partnerships, and cultural respect in shaping international relations. The state dinner at the White House serves as a reminder that dialogue and engagement can pave the way for progress, understanding, and cooperation in an increasingly interconnected world.
I certainly know that US will lobby or push India to be partner against China in the Asian countries because is next to China in population and migth in the region.
"While I acknowledge that Dave Emory has covered Modi extensively and presents a specific viewpoint on the subject, it is still important to consider multiple perspectives and evaluate the evidence critically. Examining diverse sources and viewpoints can contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the topic at hand."
This is spot on and I would add that there is a logic to a point of view:
1. all points of view have an origen. One needs to ask what i the origin of this or that point of view, where does it come from, who sponsors it, etc.
2. What evidence does that point of view provide for its conclusions and how can I determine the accuracy of the evidence. Contrarily, if there is no evidence for conclusions and assumptions within a point of view what evidence would be necessary?
3. What assumptions is the point of view making and again, what evidence is given for the assumptions and what is not.
4. What would a point of view that is opposite to the point of view in question say and what evidence etc. would they provide per questions above.
Knowing that a point of view has an origin and sources, knowing it rests on assumptions that must be critically examined for evidence and understanding that intellectual empathy requires entering points of view one does not agree with to assess their logic and thus ones' own is the noble Socratic Spirit.
I would add having the civility, as you have displayed, in exchanging points of view in an environment of critical inquiry and understanding should itself szerve as a lesson as how we move forward.
While it is indeed important to consider multiple perspectives and critically evaluate evidence, it is essential to exercise discernment and caution when examining the origin, evidence, and assumptions of different points of view. I would counter by emphasizing the following:
1. The origin of a point of view does not inherently determine its validity or merit. While understanding the context and motivations behind a viewpoint can be informative, it is crucial to evaluate the evidence and reasoning it presents rather than dismissing or accepting it solely based on its origin or sponsorship.
2. Assessing the evidence provided by a point of view is essential, but it is equally important to consider the quality and reliability of that evidence. Different viewpoints may present evidence that supports their conclusions, but it is necessary to critically evaluate the credibility, relevance, and accuracy of the evidence presented.
3. Identifying the assumptions underlying a point of view is valuable, but it is equally crucial to scrutinize the evidence and reasoning supporting those assumptions. Unsubstantiated or flawed assumptions weaken the overall credibility of a viewpoint, and it is important to assess whether the evidence provided adequately supports those assumptions.
4. While considering opposing viewpoints can contribute to a comprehensive understanding, it is not sufficient to merely compare them in isolation. It is essential to critically evaluate the evidence, reasoning, and coherence of each perspective independently and consider how they stand up to scrutiny. Engaging with opposing views should not be limited to assessing their logic but should also involve evaluating the evidence they provide and the strength of their arguments.
In summary, while acknowledging the importance of considering multiple perspectives, it is crucial to approach each viewpoint with critical thinking, independently evaluate the evidence and assumptions presented, and maintain a balanced and discerning approach in the pursuit of knowledge and understanding.
No, the origin of a point of view does not validate or determine merit. That is not the point initially. How many people do you know who have pointsd of view but do not understand them as such: i.e. they have no understanding of the assumptions that they make, the evidence they have or do not have, other points of view not keeping with their own and the consequences of their and other points of view?
Many, I would imagine for we are not taught to think critically about the origins of our thinking and thus origin is both external and internal.
You cannot cosnider the quality and reliability of evidence if one, you do not know what it is and why it is important and two, you cannot critically assess. Assessment must of necessity critically evaluate credibility and relevance. That is why it is critical analysis.
I would argue one must look for points of view they do not agree with, empathically enter into them, assess their reasoning and come to their own conclusions,
Evaluating with a fair mind, other points of view requires intellectual empathy in a culture of egoistic sociocentricity.
Yes, as to assumptions you are repeating what I stated. And getting back to the eprson who does not know they have a point of view, where it comes from, i.e. its origins, and an understanding of those that disagree, they are incapable of being judges and juries of their own minds.
they do not know what the mind does when it thinks.
Again, as stated you are repeating my claims as to the necessity for both recognizing assumptions, i.e. distinguishing what you know from what you merely believe, and the ruthlessly examine them in light of evidence.
But that is not what the uncritical mind does.
https://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Social-and-Psychologic-by-Danny-Weil-Belief_Beliefs_Deception_Delusion-141231-996.html
It is the Courtroom of the mind.
And that is one reason Courts in American fail: see the original version of 12 Angry Men with Henry Fonda.
It is right on point. 1959.
I understand your perspective on the importance of recognizing and critically examining the origins, assumptions, evidence, and reasoning behind different points of view. It is indeed crucial to encourage individuals to engage in critical thinking and develop a deeper understanding of their own beliefs and those of others.
Regarding your statement that many people may hold points of view without fully understanding them or considering alternative perspectives, I agree that this can be a common occurrence. It is true that critical thinking skills, including the ability to assess one's own assumptions and engage with opposing viewpoints, are not always emphasized or taught in a comprehensive manner.
However, it is still necessary to emphasize that the origin of a point of view does not automatically validate or determine its merit. While it is important to explore the origins and underlying assumptions of a viewpoint, ultimately, the strength of an argument or perspective lies in the evidence and reasoning it presents.
In discussions and debates, it is essential to encourage intellectual empathy and open-mindedness, allowing individuals to consider alternative viewpoints and critically evaluate them. By engaging in this process, individuals can refine their own thinking and make more informed judgments.
Ultimately, the goal should be to foster a culture of critical thinking, where individuals actively seek out diverse perspectives, assess evidence and assumptions, and arrive at their own reasoned conclusions. I understand your perspective on the importance of recognizing and critically examining the origins, assumptions, evidence, and reasoning behind different points of view. It is indeed crucial to encourage individuals to engage in critical thinking and develop a deeper understanding of their own beliefs and those of others.
Regarding your statement that many people may hold points of view without fully understanding them or considering alternative perspectives, I agree that this can be a common occurrence. It is true that critical thinking skills, including the ability to assess one's own assumptions and engage with opposing viewpoints, are not always emphasized or taught in a comprehensive manner.
However, it is still necessary to emphasize that the origin of a point of view does not automatically validate or determine its merit. While it is important to explore the origins and underlying assumptions of a viewpoint, ultimately, the strength of an argument or perspective lies in the evidence and reasoning it presents.
In discussions and debates, it is essential to encourage intellectual empathy and open-mindedness, allowing individuals to consider alternative viewpoints and critically evaluate them. By engaging in this process, individuals can refine their own thinking and make more informed judgments.
Ultimately, the goal should be to foster a culture of critical thinking, where individuals actively seek out diverse perspectives, assess evidence and assumptions, and arrive at their own reasoned conclusions.
Agreed. But as you scan see the Enlightenment itself, the Age of Reason is now being erased.
In its's place the rise of fascism is what we see internationally.
There is no place for reason when mystical thinking and supernaturalism claim heir to the throne.
Hitler knew this. So does Bannon, Gorka, Miller , the international fascists in Spain, Italy, Greece, to simply mention a few fascist countries.
“I use emotion for the many and reserve reason for the few.”
― Adolf Hitler
The repeal of the Enlightenment has been underway for a long, long time.
While it is true that the Enlightenment and the Age of Reason emphasized the importance of rationality, critical thinking, and skepticism, it would be an oversimplification to suggest that the entire era is being erased or that the rise of fascism is a direct result of abandoning reason. Societal and political dynamics are complex and influenced by various factors.
Attributing the rise of fascism solely to the abandonment of reason overlooks the multifaceted causes and historical context of fascist movements. Fascism is a complex ideology that encompasses authoritarianism, ultranationalism, and dictatorial power structures. Its rise can be attributed to a combination of socio-economic factors, political instability, propaganda, charismatic leaders, and the manipulation of emotions and grievances, among other elements.
While there may be individuals or groups who exploit emotions and employ manipulative tactics to advance their agendas, it is essential to avoid generalizations and understand that not all political movements or ideologies reject reason or the Enlightenment principles. Furthermore, it is crucial to differentiate between the beliefs and actions of specific individuals or groups and broader societal trends.
The Enlightenment, as an intellectual movement, has had a profound and lasting impact on the development of modern societies, including the promotion of science, human rights, and democratic values. While challenges and criticisms against Enlightenment ideals do exist, it does not mean that the entire era is being erased or that reason has been completely discarded.
In analyzing political movements and ideologies, it is important to consider the specific characteristics and dynamics of each movement and avoid oversimplifications or sweeping generalizations.
"....to suggest that the entire era is being erased or that the rise of fascism is a direct result of abandoning reason. "
Where did I say this?
What I said and will say again is that the repeal of the Enlightenment is an ongoing project and has been for centuries.
The consequence is the lack of critical thinking opportunities.
And as social isolation grows through AI, the dire consequence for any and all thinking will be challenged.
The death of the Guttenberg press and the rise of the image along with incredible changes in the means or production of which is privately held, is leading us into a Digital Dark Ages.
As Engels observed, “The notion of a ‘vital force’ latent in all things has been the last refuge of all supernaturalists.”
And we are witnessing the rise of theocratic fascism from Israel to Modi.
This does not bode well for humanity and especially when there is no socialist alternative.
I tend to reside on the negative side of the dialectic.
George Jackson, murdered in San Quentin summed things up well in 1971:
"Acceptance of enslavement is deeply buried in the pathogenic character types of capitalism. It is a result of the sense of dread and anxiety which is the lot of all men under capitalist rule. Compulsive behavior and disordered obsessional longings are actually made synonymous with “character” in our disordered society. But to emphasize these conditions before examining the institutions from which they spring is to confuse effect with cause and further cloud the
point of attack.
So far, cultural analysis has established that the psychosis is so ingrained, the institutions so centralized, that what is needed is total revolution, the armed struggle between the have-nots with their vanguard and the haves with their hirelings or macabre freaks that live through them….”
George Jackson, Bood in my Eye, Classes at War
https://archive.org/stream/GeorgeJacksonBloodInMyEye_201512/George%20Jackson%20-%20Blood-in-My-Eye_djvu.txt
The article you provided presents a biased and one-sided view of India's relationship with the United States, China, and the international geopolitical landscape. While it may touch on certain historical events and make assertions about the motivations of different actors, it lacks a comprehensive and nuanced analysis. Here are some key points to consider:
1. Bipartisan Consensus: The claim that there is a "bipartisan consensus" in the US regarding India's government as a "linchpin" in efforts to weaken and destabilize Beijing is an oversimplification. While there are shared concerns about China's rise among some policymakers from both major political parties in the US, the characterization of India's role as solely aimed at encircling China is an exaggeration. The relationship between India and the US is multifaceted and involves a range of economic, strategic, and diplomatic considerations beyond countering China.
2. The Quad: Describing the Quad as an "Indo-Pacific NATO" or explicitly aimed at encircling China oversimplifies its purpose. The Quad, comprising India, the US, Japan, and Australia, aims to promote a free, open, and inclusive Indo-Pacific region, addressing a range of shared concerns such as maritime security, connectivity, and economic cooperation. While China's actions and assertiveness in the region may be a factor in shaping the Quad's agenda, it is not the sole focus.
3. Modi's Links to Hindu-Nationalist Groups: The article makes sweeping claims about Prime Minister Narendra Modi's links to extremist Hindu-nationalist groups, without providing a balanced assessment of his political career or acknowledging the complexities of Indian politics. While it is true that Modi was the Chief Minister of Gujarat during the 2002 riots, attributing sole responsibility to him oversimplifies the causes and dynamics of the violence. It is important to note that Modi was democratically elected as the Prime Minister of India and has led the country since 2014, which indicates a broad base of support beyond any one ideology.
4.US-India Relations: The article attempts to portray the relationship between the US and India as a one-sided alignment where India is subservient to the US. While there has been growing cooperation between the two countries in recent years, it is a dynamic relationship that encompasses a range of shared interests, including trade, security, counterterrorism, and people-to-people ties. India maintains its strategic autonomy and pursues its national interests in a multipolar world.
5.Economic Factors: The article focuses on India's economic challenges and the perceived failure of initiatives like "Make in India" without considering the broader context. India faces unique developmental challenges, including a large population, social complexities, and the need for structural reforms. Economic progress takes time, and assessing policies based on short-term outcomes can be misleading. Additionally, the economic rise of China does not necessarily imply that India's economic potential is diminished or that it cannot be a significant player on the global stage.
6.Geopolitical Realities: The article suggests that the decline of US hegemony and the changing global economic landscape limit Washington's influence in shaping India's foreign policy. While the global balance of power is indeed evolving, it is premature to conclude that US influence is in terminal decline. The international system remains complex and subject to various power dynamics, and India's foreign policy choices are shaped by a range of factors, including its national interests, regional dynamics, and evolving geopolitical realities.
In summary, the article you provided offers a biased perspective that oversimplifies complex geopolitical relationships. It is important to critically analyze such narratives and consider a broader range of factors to gain a more comprehensive understanding of international affairs.
As Dave Emory, anti-fascist investigator and radio show host noted in 2019:
Modi Effects The Marriage of Hindutva Fascism and “Boseian” Fascism: The Snake Is Doing Wind Sprints in India
POSTED BY DAVE EMORY ⋅ MAY 3, 2019 ⋅
In a recent series, we hypothesized about a political synthesis between Narendra Modi’s Hindutva fascism and “Boseian” fascism. We updated that series in FTR #1069, noting the revisionist movement focused on AOC chief-of-staff Saikat Chakrabarti’s political idol Subhas Chandra Bose, pictured at right (with Narendra Modi sporting the cap of Bose’s Axis fighting forces), as well as the stunning, consummately important Deutsche-Indische Gesellschaft.
The largest bilateral organization in Germany today, the Deutsche-Indische Gesellschaft is headed by Bose’s grandnephew Surya Kumar Bose, and specializes in facilitating Germans’ entry into India’s booming tech industry. S.K. Bose’s entry into Germany came via Alexander Werth, the World War II German translator for Bose’s European forces (which were folded into the Waffen SS.)
With Adolf Hitler achieving considerable popularity in India, the merging of Narendra Modi’s Hindutva fascism with a “Boseian” fascism in that important country is one to contemplate. Now, Narendra Modi has effected that marriage, renaming the Andaman Islands as a tribute to Bose.
The ceremony took place on the 75th anniversary of Bose’s renaming of them under the brutal Japanese occupation during World War II. At the ceremony, 1 ) Modi wore a cap of the Azad Hind Fauj, Bose’s fighting formation in Asia; 2) Modi lauded Bose and emphasized that he was completing what Bose had begun in 1943; 3) Modi issued a commemorative stamp honoring Bose, a coin honoring Bose, as well as naming a university after “The Duce of Bengal” (as Bose was nicknamed, a reference fo his idol Benito Mussolini); 4 ) Modi had the assembly turn on the flashlights on their phones as a tribute to Bose; 5) Modi prayed at a giant statue of Bose.
The Japanese occupation of the Islands that Bose used to his advantage was brutal: “. . . .
‘Japanese troops acted harshly against local populations. The Japanese military police were especially feared. Food and vital necessities were confiscated by the occupiers causing widespread misery and starvation by the end of the war.’ The situation was the same in Port Blair and surrounding villages and nearby islands such as Neil Island and Havelock Island. I have come across many stories of the fear of the Kempeitai, the Japanese military police – of the arrests, the beatings, the hunger, the fear and anxiety that had gripped the people with hundreds in jail for suspicion of spying for the British. . . .”
You can hear this podcast and many more on Modi at:
https://spitfirelist.com/?s=modi
Maricata, I understand that you mentioned Subhas Chandra Bose in your previous response. I would like to emphasize that Subhas Chandra Bose is indeed a respected figure in Indian history. He played a significant role in India's struggle for independence from British colonial rule.
Bose was a prominent leader who advocated for a more aggressive approach in opposing British rule. He formed the Forward Bloc and later established the Indian National Army (INA) during World War II, with the aim of liberating India from British control. His efforts and leadership inspired many Indians who sought independence.
It is important to recognize that Bose's legacy is multifaceted, and opinions about him may vary. While he is revered by many as a freedom fighter who fought for India's independence, his alliances and strategies during the war, including seeking assistance from Axis powers, have been a subject of debate and controversy.
In the context of your previous statement, highlighting Modi's association with Subhas Chandra Bose may be seen as an attempt to draw a connection between historical figures and Modi's politics. However, it is crucial to analyze Modi's actions and policies based on their own merits and consider the complexities of contemporary Indian politics.
It is always beneficial to approach historical figures and their legacies with an open mind, recognizing the diversity of perspectives and interpretations that exist.
The same thing is said about Bandera in Ukraine.
He, like Modi, was a fascist.
And that psyop seems to have worked.
Azov is now part of the Ukranian military.
India is the second ls largest population of voters in the US.
Biden needs the votes.
All of this stems from post-WWII anti-fascist movements supported by the US.
Maricata, I understand that you have drawn a comparison between Subhas Chandra Bose and Bandera in Ukraine. While it is important to acknowledge historical events and figures, it is crucial to avoid oversimplification and understand the complexities surrounding their actions and ideologies.
Firstly, it is worth noting that Subhas Chandra Bose's legacy in India is primarily associated with his role in the fight against British colonial rule. While there may be debates about certain alliances he formed during World War II, it is essential to recognize the broader context of India's struggle for independence and the various strategies employed by different leaders.
Similarly, the situation in Ukraine with Bandera is complex and has been a subject of debate. It is true that Bandera was a controversial figure, and his organization, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), had factions that collaborated with Nazi Germany during World War II. However, it is important to emphasize that the historical and political landscape in Ukraine is multifaceted, and the involvement of different groups cannot be generalized or attributed to the entire population.
Drawing parallels between these historical figures and contemporary political situations can be misleading and may oversimplify the complexities of current geopolitical dynamics. It is crucial to analyze each situation independently and consider the specific context, actions, and policies of present-day leaders.
In discussions about politics and history, it is essential to maintain an objective and nuanced perspective, avoiding sweeping generalizations or attempts to equate different historical events and figures without a thorough understanding of the specific contexts involved.
Maricata, if you're interested in gaining a more nuanced understanding of Subhas Chandra Bose and other freedom fighters, I encourage you to search for relevant videos on YouTube. Exploring a variety of perspectives can help broaden your understanding of historical events. Here is one link I will share with you
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeoDL6wu3Jc