On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 20:21 +0530, shiv sastry wrote:
> It's just that Martha Nussbaum 
> has been shielded from this fact and believes that "right wing Hindus"
> are 
> somehow peculiar and different and do not want to live with others in
> peace 
> and harmony. How are right wing RSS/BJP Hindus different from the
> description 
> of "normal" Hindus that I have made?

i didn't see anywhere in the article anything which could give you the
impression that the author thinks the noisy worship of stones, snakes,
phallic symbols is in any way fanatical. 

what the author states or implies is fanatical appears to be:
- (state-supported or other) violence against members of another
religion
- destruction of a mosque
- an imagined unitary history of india and hinduism, sought to be
imposed on all indians without regard to freedom, democracy, the rule of
law, or "critical thinking" (e.g. rewriting textbooks with myths instead
of facts).

these are certainly things that are furthered by the "right wing Hindus"
although they may be passively shared in many respects by a large number
of other Hindus.

to the extent that the majority of hindus avoid "critical thinking", and
could thus be seen to be criticised by the author, the author implies
that such lack of critical thinking is also present elsewhere among
non-hindus, e.g. in the para excerpted below. while she doesn't mention
specifically the lack of critical thinking present in large populations
of other religions, readers are presumably aware of the creationism
movement in the US, there is no implication by the author that it is a
problem something specific to hindus.

now if you not only noisily worship stones, phallic symbols etc, but
also support violence against those who do not, and want to rewrite
textbooks to include myths, then you could feel offended by the article.
but in that case i can't say the article should not have been posted to
this list.

-rishab

---
What we see in Gujarat is not a simplistic, comforting thesis, but
something more disturbing: the fact that in a thriving democracy, many
individuals are unable to live with others who are different, on terms
of mutual respect and amity. They seek total domination as the only road
to security and pride. That is a phenomenon well known in democracies
around the world, and it has nothing to do with an alleged Muslim
monolith, and, really, very little to do with religion as such.
This case, then, informs us that we must look within, asking whether in
our own society similar forces are at work, and, if so, how we may
counteract them. Beyond that general insight, my study of the riots has
suggested four very specific lessons.

---


Reply via email to