Why I find it difficult to debate Hinditvas + liberal Zionists

It gets tiring that I have to constantly abuse Islam & Pakistan simply to avoid the allegation that I’m a double agent. Kabir actually makes a valid point; if India and Indians want to crow about their secular liberal democracy then they have to live up to those values.

Pakistan is not a secular liberal democracy nor is Iran. They are both Islamic Republics, which to varying degrees, reject the values of the Enlightenment. Now I may disagree with that and may want otherwise but this is the constitutional fiber of both countries therefore judging them on a different set of liberal Western values is not even wrong.

Before discussing Shariah or liberal democracies in the case of Irano-Pak; we would have discuss the type of government that they have chosen to have. Britain is technically a theocratic monarchy with an aristocratic upper house so it’s not necessarily that such types of government are incompatible with liberalism or democracy for that matter.

Citizenship and Nationality are the basis of Enlightenment

Now back to India and Israel, which to varying degrees claim to be liberal democracies. The fact on the ground is that Israel is a Jewish state, which is different to France being the French state. Anyone can become a Frenchman not everyone can become a Jew unless they convert to it or are born into it.

Anyone can become a Briton or an American since these nationalities now transcend ethnicity and religion. So for liberal Zionists to argue that Israel is on the same moral plane as the US or UK or any other modern Western nation simply does not hold since some part of the population is disenfranchised. Furthermore in reality being Jewish in Israel is treated as an ethnicity not a religion since one is either Jewish or Arab, not Muslim, Jewish or Christian (according to identity cards though the Druze are segregated from it).

Back to India I feel Hinditvas are up to the same tricks; they deluge with facts since they are pretending that they have the Enlightened position.

Hyper-Liberal White SJWs

It is okay to be tribalistic in fact many of the problems with the post-modern West is that tribalism is discouraged among liberal white people so instead people channel that their tribal Asabiyah into LGBTQ+, PoC, SJWs. Incidentally I have noticed the inverse between good mental health and hyper jump the shark post modern liberalism. It’s as though being upset about every single injustice (either real or invented) isn’t very good for the mind and body.

Liberal White people are following their Puritan ancestors in attempting to build a Universal Culture and the first sacrifice in that are their own tribal identities. They have failed (courtesy of China’s rise) and jumped the shark (they are becoming a minority who must cede power according to their own ideological framework) but it will be decades before we collectively realise this (we are an brown blog who are a long way from mainstream).

Anecdotally Liberal white people tend to be the most snarkiest when it comes to race because there is an unconscious assumption that they will be on top in any counter cultural movement and when they see a real challenge from PoCs, rather than tokenism, they don’t understand how to deal with that threat.

I always imagine Trump to be a bit of a Julian the Apostate figure; the last gasp of White-Right America before it cedes ground forever and the Overton Window changes completely.

Group Pride

Everyone needs to belong and everyone needs to have a little (or large) group to love. If White people were allowed to feel pride in being white they would be more magnanimous and charitable. Rather than destroying privilege it’s about cultivating noblesse oblige.

But tribalism is not rationalism so there is no rationale for loving Hinduism and Judaism above Islam or any other culture. It is only by accepting that tribalism and rationalism are incompatible and that one has to always balance between the two forces.

I would prefer the Hinditva and the Zionist to be transparent and lay their biases beforehand. That they love their cultures because they were born into it and preserving their cultural heritage takes precedence to upholding the values of the *alien*  Western Enlightenment.

But then to acknowledge that makes them closer to their Muslim “enemies” than would ever want to believe.

Rebuilding Babri Masjid is true secularism

For instance true secularism means rebuilding Babri Masjid brick for brick. If tomorrow a mob of Orthodox Jews burnt down Al-Aqsa Mosque and it lay there in ruins (they did that to the Moroccan Quarter of Jerusalem immediately in the aftermath of the capture of East Jerusalem) then one could start bringing up the Temple.

What we have learnt from any medieval or ancient reconstruction; the outcome is always Garish. The Taj Mahal could be extensively renovated in the 19th century because the structure was intact and the plans could be followed. Somnath Temple is not an architectural wonder nor would the new Ram Temple be for that matter. What is lost cannot be regained; Hebrew doesn’t sound as pleasant or mellifluous as Arabic.

As a final point one could argue that I’m being hypocritical since I’m in favour of ressurecting Sabk-I-Hind. But that resurrection would be a piece of piss since the manuscripts are all there; we have Dari and Farsi as a base and contemporary Urdu poets would have pre-existing cultural and linguistic knowledge of Persian; there must be a continuous line of Persian speaking Poets in South Asia down to the present day.