Angrezon ke Pille The pro-British imperialism ‘Hindu’ Taliban: rss, its parivaar and associates



Download 1.04 Mb.
Page1/12
Date26.03.2017
Size1.04 Mb.
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12
Angrezon ke Pille

The pro-British imperialism ‘Hindu’ Taliban: RSS, its parivaar and associates

Sanjeev Sabhlok

Preliminary Draft 2 November 2014

Happy to receive input at sabhlok@gmail.com



NOTE: IF YOU ARE USING THE VERSION AVAILABLE AT http://sanjeev.sabhlokcity.com/Misc/Pro-British-rule-RSS.doc

PLEASE SWITCH TO THIS ONE WHICH IS UP TO DATE: https://onedrive.live.com/download?resid=CDF444DE552B7D7B!8143&authkey=!AGNbkK9oPYeUXeg&ithint=file%2cdoc


In this ‘booklet’ is intended to help me summarise my findings about RSS and affiliates. I’ve mainly compiled information from this blog post of 2009 which was updated from time to time. I’m going to freeze that post and any further information will be directly incorporated into this booklet.

Please send me any relevant information you may come across at sabhlok@gmail.com. Note that these continue to be my preliminary views, which I’ll continue to refine as I find more time.

Contents


1. Introduction 1

1.1 Two nation theory demolished 1

1.2 One India with a liberal constitution 1

2. PRO-BRITISH RULE RSS 2

2.1 RSS RIDICULED the 1857 mutiny 2

2.2 RSS DID NOT WANT THE BRITISH TO LEAVE INDIA 2

2.3 RSS wrote NOT ONE WORD criticising British Rule 3

2.4 RSS denigrated Bhagat Singh and Chandrashekhar Azad 4

2.5 RSS deliberately did NOTHING in the 1942 Quit India movement 4

3. The thoughts of key thinkers/ leaders of the Hindu Taliban movement 6

3.1 VD Savarkar 1883-1966 6

3.1.1 Savarkar’s works 6

3.1.2 Promoter of two-nation theory 6

3.1.3 Hate monger unmatched 7

3.1.4 India is reserved for Hindus, he insisted 7

3.1.5 Promoter of rape of Muslim women 7

3.1.6 Promoter of Nazi ‘soutions’ 8

3.1.7 Involved in the murder of Gandhi 8

3.1.8 Noorani’s assessment 9

3.2 KB Hedgewar (1889-1940) [Doctorji] 10

3.2.1 Vicious words towards Muslims 11

3.3 Nathuram Godse, killer of Gandhi 12

3.3.1 Nathuram’s extreme bigotry and falsehoods 14

3.4 Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar (1906-1973) [Guruji] 15

3.4.1 We, or our Nationhood Defined 15

3.4.1.1 Gowalkar recommended the Nazi final solution for the Muslims 19

3.4.2 A Bunch of Thoughts 19

3.4.2.1 Vicious depiction of Muslims as “rioters, rapists, perpetrators of orgies” 20

3.4.2.2 Only power and strength matters, not the means 20

3.4.3 A man without ANY trace of morality 21

3.4.4 My VERY negative opinion about Golwalkar 21

3.5 Mohan Bhagwat involved in terror attacks 24

3.6 Srikanth Joshi, RSS leader 24

3.7 Swami Aseemanand, RSS leader and killer of numerous innocent Muslims 24

3.8 Kalyan Singh, RSS Baudhik Pramukh, defending the Babri demolition 42

3.9 Narendra Modi, RSS 42

4. RSS foundational links with Nazi fasicm 43

4.1 Gowalkar recommended the Nazi final solution for the Muslims 43

4.2 Links to Nazism and Fascism 43

5. The four pillars of the Hindu Taliban 47

5.1 Hindus are Aryans, and indeed, are the original Aryans 48

5.2 Hinduism, which is marked by heterogeneity, must be standardised through the Hindu Dharm Shastra 49

5.3 Hindu youth must be organised on the lines of the Italian fascists 51

5.4 Hitler was a great Hindu (even possibly an avatar of Vishnu!) 53

6. Views of others condemning the bigoted RSS 56

6.1 Vallabhbhai Patel 56

6.1.1 Letter addressed to Dr. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee 56

6.1.2 Letter addressed to Sarsangh Chalak of the R.S.S. 57

6.1.3 BJP, please don’t take Sardar Patel’s name! He detested your founding organsation: Hindu Mahasabha. 57

6.2 Noorani 58

7. Role in post-partition massacres of Muslims 67

7.1 MASSIVE PRE-PLANNING (typical of all subsequent riots), proven by India’s first Home Secretary 67

7.2 Avenging the killings in Noakhali 68

7.3 Jammu 68

8. Role of RSS in killing Gandhi – and its continuing support for his killing (and wish that Nehru had been killed, as well) 70

8.1 Godse’s brother clearly identifies RSS 70

8.2 Sardar Patel notes that RSS distributed sweets upon Gandhi’s assassination 70

8.3 RSS leader supports Gandhi killing 70

8.4 Widespread awareness of RSS’s complicity 70

9. Role in post-indepedence communal riots 72

9.1 Provocations 72

9.2 Judicial commissions 72

9.2.1 Some information I had compiled 72

9.2.2 Raghubir Dayal Commission of enquiry and the Madan Commission 72

9.3 Other credible sources 72

9.3.1 Aligarh riots, Tellicherry riots 72

9.3.2 Kota riots 73

9.3.3 Bartaan riots 73

9.3.4 Orissa 73

9.3.5 Orissa 2008 74

9.3.6 Malappuram 2007 74

9.3.7 Orissa: Hindtuva’s violent history by Angana Chatterji 74

9.3.8 Orissa: Review of Angana Chatterji’s book by Subhash Gatade 78

9.3.9 Ajmer blast case 79

10. Direct role in demolishing Babri Masjid 80

10.1 Direct role 80

10.2 RSS infuriated by 14 MLAs who condemned the Ayodhya demolition 82

11. Propagation of bigotry and false knowledge 83

11.1 Allegedly all Indians are Hindu – but never the Muslims 83

11.2 Strong discouragement of free thought 83

11.3 Bigotry being propagaged in villages across India 83

11.4 The Batra fiasco (Dina Nath Batra, national executive of the RSS education wing, Vidya Bharat) 84

11.5 Modi’s Ganesha plastic surgery debacle 84

11.6 India: Under Modi, RSS outfits want a hindutva laced education system 84

11.7 Surajit Dasgupta’s FB post 85

12. Attempt to impose Hindi on everyone in India 86

13. Internecine killings between CPM and RSS 87

14. Affiliate organisation: Bajrang Dal 88

14.1 Bajrang Dal hate speeches against Muslims 88

15. Affiliate organisations: VHP 89

15.1 Pravin Togadia, destroying paintings is NOT permitted under Indian law to protest Pakistani killings 89

16. Anti-liberty stance: wolf in sheep’s clothing 91

17. Message for RSS from Sudeep Shetty 92

18. Some genuine improvements in RSS 94

18.1 One good news on the subject of casteism 94

18.2 Good news on the communal front 94

18.3 My blog post congratulating RSS on rejecting caste 95

18.4 My further blog post evaluating the evidence 98

19. But still some support for caste? - unclear 101

19.1 Shantanu Bhagwat’s view 101

20. Comments on “R.S.S.: A Vision in Action” edited by H.V. Seshadri 102

20.1 What is good about RSS 102

20.2 What is well intentioned about RSS but divisive 102

20.3 The actual core of the RSS: preventing conversions 103

21. References 106

21.1 Books 106




  1. Introduction


This is work in progress. Sometime in 2009 I spent some time researching the RSS. I also studied this issue while writing DOF.

I am now (for my own ready reference) compiling my notes a booklet, a task that will continue as I find time.


    1. Two nation theory demolished


First, let me say that the very idea of a ‘two nations’ is nonsense on stilts. The fact that India is driven by many identities meant that the ‘two nations’ split instantly into three:

“East Pakistanis intensely identified themselves as Bengalis and “Bengaliness” represented their culture not religion.” [Source]


    1. One India with a liberal constitution


I also vigorously differ from views that believe the partition was good. There was no reason why Hindus and Muslims (and atheists, etc.) could not have lived together in a LIBERAL UNITED INDIA. That is still a possibility, but not with bigoted RSS on the ascendant. [Source – my FB blog post]
  1. PRO-BRITISH RULE RSS


What has put me off PERMANENTLY AND TOTALLY from RSS is that it actively SUPPORTED the British. Not one word against them, and all its criticism for the freedom fighters and martyrs. This is it.

RSS is over.

They were the pille (puppies) of the British.

    1. RSS RIDICULED the 1857 mutiny


The RSS "guru" Golwalkar ridiculing the 1857 Mutiny:

The last Mughal ruler of India, Bahadur Zafar, had emerged as the rallying point and symbol of the Great War of Independence of 1857. Golwalkar wrote thus while making fun of him: “In 1857, the so-called last emperor of India had given the clarion call – Gazio mein bu rahegi jub talak eeman ki/takhte London tak chalegi tegh Hindustan ki (Till the warriors remain faithful to their task/Indian swords will reach London.) But ultimately what happened? Everybody knows that”.30 [ The Freedom Movement & The RSS: A Story of Betrayal, by Shamsul Islam]


    1. RSS DID NOT WANT THE BRITISH TO LEAVE INDIA


Modi's RSS ACTIVELY DID NOT WANT THE BRITISH TO LEAVE:

During the course of a speech at Indore in 1960 he said, “Many people worked with the inspiration to free the country by throwing the British out. After formal departure of the British this inspiration slackened. In fact there was no need to have this much inspiration. We should remember that in our pledge we have talked of the freedom of the country through defending religion and culture.These is no mention of departure of the British in that”. As late as March 1947 when the British had decided to go away from India, Guruji while addressing the annual day function of the RSS at Delhi, declared that leaders with narrow vision were trying to opposed the state power of the British

While narrating an incident in the course of his speech he got more original on the issue: “Once a respectable senior gentleman came to our shakha (the drill). He had brought a new message for the volunteers of the RSS. When given an opportunity to address the volunteers of the shakha, he spoke in a very impressive tone, ‘Now do only one work. Catch hold of the British, bash them and throw them out. Whatever happens we will see late on’. He said this much and sat down. Behind this ideology is a feeling of anger and sorrow towards state power and reactionary tendency based on hatred. The evil with today’s political sentimentalism is that its basis is reaction, sorrow and anger, and opposition to the victors forgetting friendliness. Somebody went to the extent of saying that, ‘it is through opposition that national life builds up and only through it power of organization appears’. And if a question is put before them that what is the basis of the opposition? Then the reason is told that we are being exploited economically. We get fewer jobs in armed forces, government offices. Freedom is required so that lot of wealth is gotten, there is no shortage of employment and food and water. In other words ‘freedom is freedom from poverty’ in other words if get rich we will be free. If a dog procures lots of fresh bread then it is sufficient. Their ideal is that India should become dog of a rich person, and face no shortage of food water and shelter”.26

The RSS was not even willing to regard colonial domination as an injustice. In a speech of June 8, 1942, Golwalkar had declared: “Sangh does not want to blame anybody else for the present degraded state of the society. When the people start blaming others, then there is weakness in them. It is futile to blame the strong for the injustice done to the weak… Sangh does not want to waste its invaluable time in abusing or criticizing other. If we know that large fish eat the smaller ones, it is outright madness to blame the big fish. Law of nature whether good or bad is true all the time. This rule does not change by terming it unjust”.27

[Shri Guruji Samagra Darshan, Vol. I, p. 109, cited in The Freedom Movement & The RSS: A Story of Betrayal, by Shamsul Islam]

    1. RSS wrote NOT ONE WORD criticising British Rule


Which organisation (now in power) wrote NOT ONE WORD criticising British rule from its inception to 1947?

You guessed it! Modi's RSS, which is living off the work of Gandhi and other freedom fighers.



"there is not a single line challenging, exposing, criticizing or confronting the inhuman rule of the British masters in the entire literature of the RSS from 1925 to 1947[The Freedom Movement & The RSS: A Story of Betrayal, by Shamsul Islam]

Indeed:


Golwalkar’s Super Hindu Race seemed to have no antagonism towards the British rulers who in fact were foreigners in the real sense of the term and who had given only misery, hunger, poverty, and death to multitudes of Indians, the vast majority of whom were Hindus. [ibid]

This is also something I've noticed in my readings on Golwalkar and Savarkar.


    1. RSS denigrated Bhagat Singh and Chandrashekhar Azad


Which organisation (now in power) denigrated Bhagat Singh and Chandrashekhar Azad?

You bet. It is Modi's RSS – a parasitical FALSEHOOD-BASED organisation that is trying to even take over the Gandhi jayanti after having DISTRIBUTED SWEETS UPON HIS MUREDER.

There is ample proof in the documents of the RSS which conclusively establishes the fact that RSS denounced movements led by revolutionaries like Bhagat Singh, Chandrashekhar Azad and their associates. Not only that, they hated even the reformist and moderate movements conducted by leaders like Gandhiji against the British rulers.

Here is a passage from Bunch of Thoughts decrying the whole tradition of martyrs: “There is no doubt that such men who embrace martyrdom are great heroes and their philosophy too is pre-eminently manly. They are far above the average men who meekly submit to fate and remain in fear and inaction. All the same, such persons are not held up as ideals in our society. We have not looked upon their martyrdom as the highest point of greatness to which men should aspire. For, after all, they failed in achieving their ideal, and failure implies some fatal flaw in them”.14 Could there be a statement more insulting and denigrating to the martyrs than this?  [The Freedom Movement & The RSS: A Story of Betrayal, by Shamsul Islam]


    1. RSS deliberately did NOTHING in the 1942 Quit India movement


After RSS doing NOTHING (EVER) against the British, who said during Quit India 1942 “the Sangh decided not to do anything directly”?

Golwalkar.

Modi's RSS IS A SOLELY ANTI-MUSLIM ORGANISATION.

It never did ONE bit to support the struggle against the British. [See this]. Instead it KILLED the greatest leader of the freedom struggle: Gandhi. It not only celebrated the killing of Gandhi by distributing sweets, it continues to praise Nathuram Godse and recentlywondered why Godse didn't kill NEHRU, instead.

99.999999 per cent of its violent activities are directed at Muslims, and Hindus who want a peaceful, united India.

"In 1942 also there was a strong sentiment in the hearts of many. At that time too the routine work of Sangh continued. Sangh decided not to do anything directly". [Golwalkar, in Shri Guruji Samagra Darshan, Vol. IV, Nagpur, n.d., p. 41, cited in The Freedom Movement & The RSS: A Story of Betrayal, by Shamsul Islam]

NOTHING. NOT ONE IOTA OF WORK THE RSS OR HINDU MAHASABHA DID AGAINST THE BRITISH. ALL THEIR EFFORTS WERE TOWARDS DIVIDING THE COUNTRY AND HATING THE MUSLIMS.

He specifically said that RSS was NOT anti-British:

Guru Golwalkar in fact made it clear that the variety of nationalism which the RSS espoused had no anti-British or anti-imperialist content whatsoever: “The theories of territorial nationalism and of common danger, which formed the basis for our concept of nation, had deprived us of the positive and inspiring content of our real Hindu Nationhood and made many of the ‘freedom movements’ virtually anti-British movements. Anti-Britishism was equated with patriotism and nationalism. This reactionary view has had disastrous effects upon the entire course of the freedom movement, its leaders and the common people” [M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts, Bangalore, 1996, p. 138, cited in The Freedom Movement & The RSS: A Story of Betrayal, by Shamsul Islam]

  1. The thoughts of key thinkers/ leaders of the Hindu Taliban movement

    1. VD Savarkar 1883-1966


Although not an RSS member, Savarkar and his Hindu Mahasabha were very closlely affiliated with members of the parivaar. Two thousand RSS workers gave his funeral procession a guard of honour. [Source]

More on Savarkar: http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl1915/19151160.htm

Savarkar was an EXTREME RELIGIOUS BIGOT. Almost every word he wrote insisted on religious DISTINCTIONS among the people of India. He muddled up the idea of a nation with religion. Liberty and constitutional principles were entirely foreign to his mental make up. His vicious writings continue to influence India, with the current ruling party BJP being his greatest fan.

      1. Savarkar’s works


I’ve compiled these here.
      1. Promoter of two-nation theory


“When Savarkar propounded his two-nation theory—the first to explicitly do so in South Asia—it was a clear sixteen years before the Muslim League embraced the idea of the Hindus and the Muslims as two distinctive nations” [The Demonic and the Seductive in Religious Nationalism: Vinayak Damodar Savarkar and the Rites of Exorcism in Secularizing South Asia by Ashis Nandy, February 2009]

Savarkar’s Hindu Mahasabha was the first major organisation to promote a two-nation theory (See also details in my manuscript DOF).

Extracts below:

19th Session – at Karnavati – 1937

‘Let us bravely face unpleasant facts as they are. India cannot be assumed today to be a unitarian and homogeneous nation, but on the contrary there are two nations in the main; the Hindus and the Moslems, in India.’

Note: This was at the 1937 session of the Hindu Mahasabha, being the FIRST PUBLIC DECLARATION IN INDIA BY A MAJOR ORGANISATION OF THE DEMAND FOR TWO NATIONS IN INDIA

Further: “ there are two antagonistic nations living side by side in India” (PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS - AKHIL BHARATIYA HINDU MAHASABHA 1937)

Later, in 21st Session Calcutta-1939

‘in India we Hindus are marked out as an abiding Nation by ourselves. Not only we own a common Fatherland, a Territorial unity, but what is scarely found anywhere else in the world we have a common holyland which is identified with our common Fatherland.’


      1. Hate monger unmatched


V.D. Savarkar (1942). Hindutva: Who is a Hindu?  Poona City: S.R. Date. Page 32: “Hatred separates as well as unites.” (Referring to the “need” to hate Muslims)

“In a public speech in 1925, Savarkar said that Indians had to learn to eschew soft values like ‘humility, self-surrender and forgiveness’ and cultivate ‘sturdy habits of hatred, retaliation, vindictiveness’.” [The Demonic and the Seductive in Religious Nationalism: Vinayak Damodar Savarkar and the Rites of Exorcism in Secularizing South Asia by Ashis Nandy, February 2009]


      1. India is reserved for Hindus, he insisted


He was a man dripping with hatred for Muslims, Jews and Christians. In his "Presidential" address at the Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha in Nagpur in 1938, he said:

With every sympathy with the Jews outside India, the Hindus must therefore, oppose the present Congressite proposal of inviting or allowing any new Jewish colony to settle in India. India must be a Hindu land, reserved for the Hindus.

So far as the Moslem minority is concerned, I have already dealt with it at length. In short we must watch it in all its actions with the greatest distrust possible. Not only while we are engaged in our struggle for liberating India but even after India is free we must look upon them as suspicious friends and take great care to see that the Northern Frontiers of India are well guarded by staunch and powerful Hindu forces to avoid the possible danger of the Indian Moslem going over to the alien Moslem nations across the Indus and betraying our Hindusthan to our non-Hindu foes. [Source]

“an Indian Moslem if he is a real Moslem-and they are intensely religious as a people-cannot faithfully bear loyalty to India as a country” [PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS - AKHIL BHARATIYA HINDU MAHASABHA 1938]

Also, “our state must raise a mighty force exclusively constituted by Hindus alone, must open arms and munitions factories exclusively manned by Hindus alone…”(Samagra Savarkar Wangmaya Writings of Swatantrya Veer V.D. Savarkar (Poona, 1964) (cited, Politics of Violence, p.185)

      1. Promoter of rape of Muslim women


“In 1965 at the age of 82, Savarkar wrote in the wake of the India-Pakistan war that took place that year: ‘Pakistan’s barbaric acts such as kidnapping and raping Indian women would not be stopped unless Pakistan was given tit for tat.’” [The Demonic and the Seductive in Religious Nationalism: Vinayak Damodar Savarkar and the Rites of Exorcism in Secularizing South Asia by Ashis Nandy, February 2009]

This was not an isolated example: 

To spite admirers who might think this to be an aberration, in 1965 at the age of 82, Savarkar wrote in the wake of the India-Pakistan war that took place that year: ‘Pakistan’s barbaric acts such as kidnapping and raping Indian women would not be stopped unless Pakistan was given tit for tat.’ [Source]

      1. Promoter of Nazi ‘soutions’


“A nation is formed by a majority living therein. What did the Jews do in Germany? They being in minority were driven out from Germany" [cited in Maria Casolari, Hindutva's foreign tie-up in the 1930s: Archival evidence, Economic and Political Weekly, January 22, 2000]
      1. Involved in the murder of Gandhi


“If only Savarkar’s bodyguard and his secretary had testified against him in court, he would have been convicted for Gandhi’s murder” [Savarkar and Gandhi’s murder, by A.G. Noorani.

“In the first week of January 1948, Karkare and a Punjabi refugee boy came to see Savarkar and they both had an interview with Savarkar for about half an hour or 45 minutes. Neither of them came to see Savarkar again. Apte and Godse came to see Savarkar about the middle of January 1948, late at night. The statements of both these witnesses show that both Apte and Godse were frequent visitors of Savarkar at Bombay and at conferences and at every meeting they are shown to have been with Savarkar. …. This evidence also shows that Karkare was also well known to Savarkar and was also a frequent visitor. Badge also used to visit Savarkar. Dr Parchure also visited him. All this shows that people who were subsequently involved in the murder of Mahatma Gandhi were all congregating sometime or the other at Savarkar Sadan and sometimes had long interviews with Savarkar. It is significant that Karkare and Madanlal visited Savarkar before they left for Delhi and Apte and Godse visited him both before the bomb was thrown and also before the murder was committed and on each occasion they had long interviews. It is specially to be noticed that Godse and Apte were with him at public meetings held at various places in the years 1946, 1947 and 1948.”

Had the bodyguard and the secretary but testified in court, Savarkar would have been convicted.

      1. Noorani’s assessment


From a review of his book Savarkar and Hindutva .

Savarkar and Hindutva throws fascinating new light on V D Savarkar, the main ideologue of the idea of Hindutva – his worldview and the love-hate relationships he shared with the RSS in general and specifically with M S Golwalkar, the second sarsangchalak, or supreme chief, of the RSS. Revered as a fighter for Indian independence by the right, and reviled as a fascist ideologue by the left and secular forces, Savarkar has long been a controversial figure.

Noorani succeeds in bringing to the fore the tremendous gap between the precepts and practice of the Hindutva icon. On the one hand, Savarkar ‘mourned’ the lack of unity and bravery shown by Hindus in history; yet on the other, he had no qualms in exhibiting cowardice in times of adversity. For instance, Noorani writes, in November 1913 Savarkar swore that he was ready to “serve the government in any capacity they like” in return for the colonial regime commuting his life sentence. Likewise, several decades later, he was ready to eschew politics completely when he was arrested for his alleged role in Gandhi’s assassination.

As for that allegation of involvement, Noorani discusses the J L Kapur Commission, set up in 1966 to revisit Savarkar’s role in the conspiracy to assassinate Gandhi. That Savarkar had died a few years before the Commission finalised its report demonstrates the weakness of the prosecution that, in 1948, had allowed Savarkar to go free despite his clear role in Gandhi’s murder.

Although Noorani discusses the tensions between Savarkar and the RSS, the point seems to warrant a far more detailed analysis. Few people know that Savarkar castigated the RSS in no uncertain terms on multiple occasions, and that the RSS responded in kind. On one such occasion, Savarkar said, “The epitaph for the RSS volunteer will be that he was born, he joined the RSS and died without accomplishing anything.” Of course, that did not stop Savarkar and the RSS from joining hands to pay obeisance to the British in 1942 during the ‘Quit India’ movement, even as thousands of government employees resigned en masse. During this time, while the RSS preferred not to join the overwhelming anti-British campaign, instead concentrating on its ‘cultural’ agenda, Savarkar went one step further: undertaking a tour of India, he exhorted Hindu youth to join the British military, with the call Militarise the Hindus, Hindu-ise the nation!

During the early years of this decade, the Sangh Parivar suddenly ‘re-discovered’ Savarkar after a tactical silence around this controversial figure. In fact, in 2002, L K Advani, then the BJP’s foremost exponent of Hindutva, mustered enough courage to laud Savarkar as a national hero. Noorani suggests this was another attempt on the part of the Sangh “to displace Gandhi from his position as a symbol of Indian nationalism”. The chasm between these two figures is indeed yawning, yet both have had huge impacts on the fabric of modern India. While building a case for the unifying potential of Hindutva, Savarkar never questioned the caste system and its attendant violence, nor the manner in which Hinduism, in Noorani’s words, “fashions and romanticises caste unity through regulating caste hierarchy to bolster power, even as class, culture and gender interrupt the verticality of caste.” Yet the ascendance of Hindu hegemony has trivialised the idea of secular reform within the Indian polity, and ensured that Hindutva-isation is not noted as a threat to mainland national security – the ban on the RSS on a few occasions notwithstanding.





    1. Download 1.04 Mb.

      Share with your friends:
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12




The database is protected by copyright ©sckool.org 2020
send message

    Main page