The Dubious Term Called Westernization - VII

I have argued before that any knowledge if it has to be learnt or a person has to use his/her brain then that knowledge is individualistic. It can't get any identity. However, this simple logic seems to elude Hindutvites. Unfortunately, India produces too many of them and they are set to mess up Indian education system(though unsure what we have is worthy of preserving) since now they are in power.

I was thinking about this phenomenon among many non-Christians world over. Can we come up with a solution which when not diluting the modern scientific knowledge also ensures that it doesn't instill a sense of alienation or inferiority complex among rationally challenged non-Christians?

The greatest danger of dumbing down of the education is in the field of social sciences. However, it's the achievements of some Europeans in physical sciences that has created alienation or inferiority complex among right wingers. One can find the evidence of that in Muslim preacher Dr, Zakir Naik's claim that, "the West is true when it comes to science and technology but we are true when it comes to religion".

The people behind development of knowledge and the regions where they got support and help to promote it aren't very important when it comes to imparting that knowledge to completely different set of people and regions where such people in the past and knowledge were either actively suppressed or never encouraged.So, we can create fictitious names and regions. Albert Einstein can be some Ramesh from Gujarat or some Saranya from Tamil Nadu depending upon the regions. Of course, caste and religious sensibilities have to be accounted for.

 I believe respecting a scientist or a philosopher is just an extension of patriarchal or feudal thinking or its internalization. We can take inspiration from Gandhi's words, "One shouldn't hate sinners but the sins". It's a brilliant non-hierarchical and in turn non-patriarchal thinking. Extending that we can say, "One should never respect/love/worship saints/scientists/thinkers but respect/emulate their deeds".

So with this we can address identity question of most of the physical and social science fields. However, there still is a problem with the study of history. I would think history should be only available as a research field. Anyway, majority don't learn anything in history classes and is very evident in the way  it's being easily twisted. So, remove history from school curriculum.

These studies should be taught in a way that they should show how the scientific Indian (or vernacular) school of thought has triumphed over other Indian schools of thought.

Eventually, students would know the truth. However, normal people who aren't bothered about 'westernization' may not care at all. But it would be tough for people with right wing disposition to suddenly reject everything that they thought was part of their identity throughout. 

The Dubious Term Called Westernization - VI

Gandhi over enthusiastically embraced some of the Europeans' views on national identity , vegetarian fadism and non-violence to further his own notion of Indian identity. One such view was from Chesterton.

When I see... the views of Indian nationalists, I get bored and feel dubious about them. What they want is not very Indian and not very national... Suppose an Indian said: 'I wish India had always been free from white men and all their works. Everythign has its own faults and we perfer our own.. I prefer dying in battle to dying in [a Western] hospital.. If you (the British) do not like our way of living, we never asked you to. Go, and leave us with it.'
            Supposing an Indian said that, I should call him an Indian nationalist. He would be an authentic Indian... But the Indian nationalists whose works I have read and go on saying: 'Give me a ballot box. Give me the judge's wig. I have a natural right or be Prime Minister. My soul is starved if I am excluded from the editorship of the Daily Mail.' Even the most sympathetic person may say in reply: 'What you say is very fine, my good Indian, but it is we who invented these things.'

 The problem with Gandhi and Chesterton was that both make a fundamental mistake of creating a national homogenous identities bordering on racial identity. This identity has its own unique characteristics. This is absurd. In this case ,Gandhi's intellectualism doesn't look better than Anna Hazare's.

The 'we' in Chesterton's doesn't even apply to all people that he would identify with. If the inventions are so unique then they don't even have to bother about others claiming it because the others would have natural disability to own them. Now, since that is not the case, it is obvious that the ideas can spread across human groups. And we also can see that the dominant cultural strain can suppress these ideas in certain regions. However, it would be fallacy that few people in other region would not have thought about those 'inventions' in the first place.

So, Gandhi's quest for an Indian identity was flawed from the beginning.

Reference:
1. Mohandas, by Rajmohan Gandhi

The Dubious Term Called Westernization - V

I have never accepted that the foundation of Israel had any logic. But I have the same notion about Pakistan. I do recognize two key differences between the Jews and the Indian(negative identity but there was no alternative identity...post-hoc creations not withstanding) Muslims who respectively supported the Zionist movement and the Two-nation theory. The former experienced actual persecution the latter imaginary. Then of course the questions of the lands they claimed. However, the philosophy or the ideology behind both these creations were flawed. And here I don't recognize any other views.

But the unfortunate events in Gaza have raised many troubling questions in me. I'm a secondary citizen in any region that is controlled by movements based on purity and pollution of food and bed and identity discrimination. As an individual I'm only comfortable under atheist or secular or communist movements. It's tough for me to understand from my own default subhuman identity(in those societies) the human rights of people who support such despicable ideologies. How do I view the situation in Palestine.

Palestinians have too many alternatives. They have a secular party(I'm under no illusion that these are more secular than our right wing parties...but still), they also have a communist party. Why would they choose a fundamentalist party? However, Maju gave few reasons for the unpopularity of secular parties.

According to Maju, apart from the fundamentalist party all other parties are deep neck in corruption.

This fact is particularly pertinent here, I feel.

The Palestinian question is not a resolved issue. Corruption in such situations only plays in the hands of enemy. So why on earth secular parties controlled by generally highly educated members of the society do not see this but a fundamentalist party (with not so educated cadres) realizes it?

The obvious and probably the cliched observation would be, the corruption here is the indication of wavering identity which lowers one's ego. I would think there is a latent feeling among the seculars that since they are secular they are actually "low breed Westerners". In other words, the passion against an identity with which they feel they have certain kind of affinity may dilute the intensity. But because of identity discrimination the religious party does not have such troubling questions and hence comfortable with its identity.

This obviously raises the question what if there was no identity discrimination. Then the Islamists should show their true colours. In my opinion, they should not be consistently non-corrupt. I find a proof in Afghanistan. My reading of Afghan wars tells me wars between various Islamic groups were decided more with exchange of money than with exchange of fire.

But since "Westernization" is so recognizable word and "way of life" can Islamists be blind to it (as many of them appear to be educated)? The answer could be found in Indian Islamic preacher Dr. Zakir Naik's inane and incoherent defense of Islam. At one place he argues Europe and America are true when it comes to "Science and Technology" and Muslims are true when it comes to religion. No, it's not magnanimity on part of Dr. Naik to appreciate the Europe's achievement (I'm sure he isn't bothered about his identity as an Indian..far less understands it... or identities around the world). His blind belief in his true religion stems from his obvious understanding of the achievements of Europe and America in Science and Technology. He completely believes in stereotypical Westerners. Other identities just don't count. It is in the power of Islam's identity discrimination that he finds his solace.

The problem is already addressed in my previous posts.
- All types of knowledge can appear in every isolated human society. It's the dominant ideology that determines how a society shapes up.
- Sometimes it's just dumb luck that determines which ideology is chosen. I believe, West Asian literate culture mixed with tribal equality in European lands.
- But no ideology is an absolute identity of a particular society.
- In fact, these identities have forcefully suppressed other ideologies. And some of these lost ideologies could have become successful in other societies.
- In many regions a big chunk of the population even had a humiliating life because of the dominant ideology of the land. However, identity quest just overlooks this aspect.
- Many of the terms related to identity were coined by Europeans at certain points of time. That need not be carried forward as they aren't consistent or logical and more importantly aren't supported by genetic studies.
- I would think every one should identify himself/herself with multiple set of ideologies and probably with a regional identity that is devoid of any character. The latter is required because there is no single all accepting assimilating identity.

Where does that put me in the case of Palestine? Well, I'm still a subhuman in that society. I just don't have any questions to answer.

The Dubious Term Called Westernization - IV

The following figure (Via Quetzalcoatl Anthropology forum) clearly demonstrates the West Asian(pre-Semitic or Semitic) contribution to Greek genepool. Greeks have been hailed as founders of "Western Civilization". Considering their genetic make up(autosomal but we can also take into account high J2a among Greeks which is also responsible for Semitic Introgression in Hindu thoughts).




At K=6 Greeks are similar to Jews who are close to Middle Eastern population. The so-called Western civilization got its ideas from Middle Eastern population. Similarly, every society can get ideas from other societies and develop its own identity just like West which has never been called Asian civilization or people have been called Asianized. They escaped from the ignominy as there were none to record that history. So people commit a fallacy if they call people who get ideas from Europe, Westernized.

The Dubious Term Called Westernization - III

Neo-pagan movement:
I do not know how relevant this movement is in Indian context. I believe some Hindu organisations try to portray Hinduism along Saiva, Vaisnava , Saktya lines to give it a monotheistic touch. I think this is an attempt to appeal sensibilities of Abrahmic religionists. But ground reality is that majority Hindus at present are Pagans though in the past these divisions might have made sense for certain sections.

But I have come across in e-groups an attempt to revive once wide spread local god worship traditions in the name of neo-Paganism. Probably, it is trying to make these gods mainstream as they have become minor deities in the present day Hinduism. But they should first lay down proper fundamentals/constitution for their movement.

What I found disturbing was the gross generalizations by the members of these movements. I get an impression that this neo-Pagan movement is against Individualism. They are discovering the cultural heritage of "Orientals"(India and China)! Okay, now I call this cultural heritage "Herdism" as against "Individualism". Let us get few facts right here.

Herdists and Individualists are/were there in every society. In some societies Herdists could control the power and in some societies Individualists did it. Now, consider the opposite views in those societies. A Herdist society true to its nature would suppress all other views and thoughts. However, an Individualist society would have no restrictions on Herdists. If we observe the societies which are now considered Individualist then noticeable expression of Herd mentality once in a while is not uncommon. But in a Herdist society the Individualist glory is almost nil.

With this background, I am afraid neo-Paganist movement has got its philosophical base wrong. Some of them gloat that vast majority of Hindus have native cultural alternative to "Anglo-Saxon" Individualism. This kind of generalizations depress me and I consider them evil. The need of the hour is many among that vast majority of Hindus need to feel comfortable and assured(probably, feel legitimate) about their Individualism.

Debates and generalizations:
I think statements in the debates by the participants that have a tone "let's admit it, Indians..." is invalid. Many a time they talk about practices that are vulgur, un-ethical etc... This tone always forgets that many have to follow that out of sheer helplessness in the face of overwhelming presence of Herdists. Probably, there are three kinds of people. Individualists, Herdists and the commoners.

The dubious term called Westernization - II

"Indians are argumentative by nature," Professor N.D. Siddharthan of Delhi University told the BBC. "That makes them better at creative industries like software development."

Link


Simpleton. Naive. Ignorant. Let people not find a national character in a country which celebrates "unity in diversity".

The dubious term called Westernization - I

Westernization is an absurd term.

- Many of the the cutlural aspects attributed to West had their beginnings elsewhere or had independent origins in non-European countries.
- The adoption or acculturation of these cultural aspects in mainstream by non-European countries make a generalization that those societies, prior to that, cultivated their own cultural aspects. This is not only wrong when it comes to majority of the population but also humiliating for those people in many countries. The west was fortunate that it escaped from its own culture in the lines of India, China etc...
- Westernization is an evil and cunning term.
- Non-European who thinks s/he is "Westernized" or who opposes something what s/he calls "Westernization" are both wrong and nonsensical.