This quote captures the essence of the renowned filmmaker’s life and work, which spanned five decades, three continents, three languages, and encompassed every imaginable genre. Despite such diversity, a Buñuel film was always distinctive and easily recognizable. As Ingmar Bergman aptly put it, “Buñuel almost always made Buñuel films.”

Born into a wealthy Spanish family on February 22, 1900, Luis Buñuel Portolés received a strict Jesuit education and grew up in a deeply religious environment. However, he became disillusioned with the hypocrisy and cultural influence of organized religion, ultimately dedicating his life to challenging the church, state and established social order. Buñuel believed that the external veneer of so-called polite society stifled natural human desires, leading to societal dysfunction.

Being acutely aware of the ironies of satirizing his own class, Buñuel possessed an intimate understanding of the neuroses associated with a middle-class Catholic upbringing. When asked about his religious beliefs, he famously replied, “I am still an atheist, thank God.” While he didn’t outright reject the idea of divinity, he delighted in subverting the associated tropes.

A young artist in Paris

Buñuel’s formal education began at the University of Madrid in 1917, where he studied philosophy. It was there that he developed close relationships with poet and playwright Federico García Lorca and painter Salvador Dalí, friendships that profoundly influenced his life and work.

About his eccentric friend Dalí, Buñuel said, “Salvador Dalí seduced many ladies, particularly American ladies, but these seductions usually consisted of stripping them naked in his apartment, frying a couple of eggs, putting them on the woman’s shoulders and, without a word, showing them the door.”

After his father’s death in 1925, Buñuel moved to Paris, where he became an assistant to director Jean Epstein. This apprenticeship led him to collaborate with Salvador Dalí on their iconic 1929 silent film, Un chien andalou (“An Andalusian Dog”). The film catapulted them into the forefront of the burgeoning French surrealist movement led by poet André Breton.

Un chien andalou, written in just six days at Dalí’s home and financed by Buñuel’s mother, featured a series of startling, Freudian-inspired images, including the infamous scene of a woman’s eyeball being sliced open with a blade. The film aimed to shock and insult the intellectual bourgeoisie of Buñuel’s youth. He even carried stones in his pockets, anticipating hecklers at the premiere.

“Our only rule was simple: we would not accept any idea or image that could be rationally explained. We had to embrace the irrational and keep only the images that surprised us, without attempting to provide an explanation,” Buñuel wrote in his autobiography.

Ironically, Un chien andalou was well-received by the very bourgeois audience it aimed to challenge. Determined not to repeat this outcome, Buñuel sought to create a film that would truly provoke. The 1930 film, L’age d’or (“The Golden Age”), turned out to be even more controversial than anticipated.

The film opens with a documentary about scorpions and proceeds with a series of vignettes depicting a couple’s constant thwarted attempts to consummate their relationship due to the hypocrisy and double standards of family, church and society.

During the premiere, fascist groups seized control of the theater, hurling ink at the screen, tearing up seats, throwing bombs and vandalizing the adjacent art gallery. The police banned the film “in the name of public order,” and the Vatican threatened excommunication for the blasphemous final scene that visually linked Jesus Christ with the erotic writings of the Marquis de Sade. L’age d’or was withdrawn from circulation and remained unseen until 1979.

For his next project, the surrealist documentary Las Hurdes (1933), Buñuel returned to Spain. The film focused on the lives of peasants in Extremadura, one of the country’s poorest regions. By adopting a voyeuristic style, Buñuel aimed to discomfort viewers by making them complicit in the depiction of the locals’ pathetic living conditions. The film was known for its disorienting combination of commentary, music and visuals. It faced bans from three consecutive Republican administrations and remained prohibited thereafter.

During the tumultuous period of the Spanish Civil War and World War II (1934-1946), Buñuel worked at Filmófono, a commercial film studio in Spain, before an unproductive stint in Hollywood. He later served as an artistic director at New York’s Museum of Modern Art. The execution of his close friend, Federico García Lorca, at the beginning of the Spanish war deeply impacted Buñuel and stayed with him for the remainder of his life.

Buñuel finds a new home in Mexico

In search of new opportunities, Buñuel moved to Mexico in 1946 with his family. His first major success in Mexico came with the 1949 film El gran Calavera (“The Great Madcap”), a hilarious satire of the Mexican nouveau riche that delves into mistaken identities, sham marriages and misfired suicides. A year later, Buñuel renounced his Spanish citizenship and became a naturalized Mexican.

Seeking inspiration, Buñuel frequently ventured into the shanties and ghettos of Mexico City. During one such expedition, he came across the story of a 12-year-old boy found dead at a garbage dump, which became the basis for his next film, Los olvidados (1950), dubbed The Young and the Damned in English. The film, which won the Best Director prize at Cannes, was perceived at the time as an insult to Mexican sensibilities. There were even calls to revoke Buñuel’s Mexican citizenship.

Los Olvidados tells the story of a gang of street children who wreak havoc in their impoverished community, brutalizing a blind beggar and assaulting a crippled individual. Film historian Carl J. Mora noted that Buñuel presented poverty in a radically different way from traditional Mexican melodramas. The street children are not romanticized heroes struggling for survival but ruthless predators no better than their victims.

Buñuel made 20 films in Mexico, most of which conformed to the generic conventions of the studio system. However, some films like Él and Nazarín pushed boundaries and showcased flashes of the irreverent style for which he was known.

Él (called “This Strange Passion” in the US) presents a detached and unsentimental portrait of an affluent Mexican man driven by jealousy to threaten to sew his wife’s vagina shut. The film explores power dynamics between the husband and wife, ultimately questioning the validity of his suspicions. Buñuel described his fascination with the character, saying, “I was moved by this man with so much jealousy, so much internal loneliness and anxiety, and so much external violence. I studied him like an insect.”

In 1954, Buñuel directed his first color film and American production, The Adventures of Robinson Crusoe, financed by United Artists and produced by George Pepper. The film was followed by The Young One (1960), his second and final American production, based on a short story by Peter Mathieson. It portrays a black man accused of rape who seeks refuge on a remote island, only to encounter a racist gamekeeper. The film explores themes of racism and desire, receiving critical acclaim but also harsh criticism from US audiences.

Two trilogies mark a mature career

In the mid-1950s, Buñuel returned to France to work on international co-productions. During this period, he created what has been called the “revolutionary triptych” with films like Cela s’appelle l’aurore (“This is Called Dawn”), La mort en ce jardin (“Death in the Garden”) and La fièvre monte à El Pao (“Fever Mounts at El Pao”). Each film explicitly or implicitly explores armed revolution against right-wing dictatorships.

In 1960, Buñuel returned to Spain, where he received support from a group of financiers, including Mexican movie star Silvia Pinal and her producer and husband, Gustavo Alatriste. Their collaboration led to the creation of Viridiana, based on a preliminary screenplay written by Buñuel and Julio Alejandro. 

The film centers around a nun named Viridiana, who struggles to uphold her Catholic principles when confronted with the lecherous desires of her uncle and a group of paupers and reprobates. Viridiana caused a massive controversy due to its explicit scenes of rape, incest, necrophilia and animal cruelty, as well as its sacrilegious re-enactment of Leonardo da Vinci’s Last Supper.

Despite the Vatican’s condemnation of Viridiana as an attack on Catholicism and Christianity, the film won the Palme d’or at Cannes. The notoriety thrust Buñuel back into the spotlight and marked the beginning of his fruitful collaboration with actor Fernando Rey, often considered his alter ego.

Buñuel continued to find support for his films after the success of Viridiana. He went on to make two more films in Mexico with Pinal and Alatriste: The Exterminating Angel (1962) and Simon of the Desert (1965). Together with Viridiana, these films are often referred to as the “Buñuelian trilogy.”

The Exterminating Angel satirizes the fears and fantasies of the landed gentry through a group of dinner guests who find themselves unable to leave after a banquet. Trapped in their own bourgeois world, they become increasingly resentful, revealing their worst tendencies.

In Simon of the Desert, the devil tempts a saint by assuming the form of a bare-breasted girl singing and flaunting her legs. The saint eventually abandons his ascetic life to embrace the pleasures of a jazz club.

Leaving behind a legacy

The term “Buñuelian” has come to signify dark, often morbid humor that highlights the absurdities of everyday life. It involves juxtaposing the mundane with the irrational, blurring the boundaries between dreams and reality. Buñuel’s films often feature incongruous imagery, such as farm animals in bourgeois settings, cannibalistic animals and fetishistic shots of feet and legs. In his world, politics and sexuality are inextricably intertwined, exposing the interplay between power, the suppression of desires and freedom.

Insects also feature prominently in many of Buñuel’s films, serving as a recurring theme. Examples include the death’s head hawkmoth in Un chien andalou, the scorpions in L’age d’or, and the framed tarantula in Phantom of Liberty (1974).

Buñuel’s partnership with producer Serge Silberman marked a new phase in his career. Silberman, a Polish émigré in Paris, had previously worked with several renowned directors. Their collaboration began with the 1964 film Diary of a Chambermaid, based on Octave Mirbeau’s 1900 novel. The film was known for its candid and bold depiction of sexual perversions, a subject that fascinated Buñuel. The young writer Jean-Claude Carrière was brought on board to work on the film, and he would go on to co-write 10 scripts with Buñuel.

The casting of actress Jeanne Moreau in Diary of a Chambermaid was influenced by her mannerisms and body language, reflecting how she walked, ate and carried herself in both public and private settings. Moreau portrayed Célestine, a chambermaid in an upper-class French household who becomes the object of desire for both the father and son of the family. The film slyly acknowledged the repressed desires and voyeuristic tendencies of middle-class audiences.

The pair’s next collaboration, Belle de Jour (1967), was adapted from Joseph Kessel’s 1928 novel. Catherine Deneuve portrayed Séverine, an affluent housewife trapped in a sexless marriage. To awaken her dormant sexuality, she becomes a part-time prostitute. However, her involvement with a young gangster named Marcel leads to the unraveling of her carefully constructed social façade. Buñuel and Carriere reportedly interviewed dozens of prostitutes in Madrid as research for the film. Belle de Jour became Buñuel’s most commercially successful film.

Deneuve also starred in Tristana (1970), a morbid romance depicting the relationship between an aging pederast and the woman he adopts, mistreats and eventually loses. After having her leg amputated, she returns to him seeking support and revenge. Critic Roger Ebert commented on the film, saying, “A few great directors have the ability to draw us into their dream world, into their personalities and obsessions, and fascinate us for a short time. This is the highest level of escapism that movies can provide.”

Among Buñuel’s notable French works, The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie (1972) stands out. It revolves around a group of wealthy companions who are repeatedly frustrated in their attempts to enjoy a meal together. Through dream sequences, the film delves into their intense fears, including public shame, arrest by authorities and execution by firing squad. Buñuel cleverly employs nested dream sequences, challenging viewers’ efforts to make sense of the narrative.

The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie won the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film, but Buñuel scorned the accolade, derisively referred to it as the verdict of “2,500 idiots.” The success, though, allowed the 74-year-old director to make The Phantom of Liberty, a film considered quintessentially Buñuelian.

Buñuel and Carriere wrote the script for The Phantom of Liberty by recounting their dreams to each other every morning. Watching the film feels akin to attempting to comprehend a strange dream as it fades into the murky depths of the subconscious. It tackles subjects such as incest, mass murder, sadomasochism, fetishism and pedophilia. The film’s anti-narrative structure combines Buñuel’s satirical humour with increasingly bizarre and outlandish vignettes, challenging viewers’ preconceived notions of reality.

The politically charged film appears eerily prophetic in its voyeuristic and sensational treatment of terrorists and mass murderers. It also foreshadows the impending destruction of the world through humanity’s own foolish and self-destructive desecration of the natural environment.

Buñuel’s final film, That Obscure Object of Desire (1977), adapted from an 1898 Pierre Louÿs novel, unfolds through a series of flashbacks. Aging Frenchman Mathieu reminisces about his tumultuous relationship with Conchita, a seductive 19-year-old Flamenco dancer played by two different actresses, Carole Bouquet and Ángela Molina. Each actress possesses a distinct on-screen persona. Conchita plays a twisted, erotic game, tormenting Mathieu with intimacy while denying him what he truly desires.

Luis Buñuel passed away at the age of 84 in 1983, with his wife and long-time collaborator Jean-Claude Carrière at his side. Contrary to expectations, he chose Mexico as his final resting place, spending his last weeks discussing theology with a Catholic priest—a symbolic act for a man who had relentlessly criticized the institution throughout his life.

Buñuel summarized his perspective on the world and his place within it by stating, “Somewhere between chance and mystery lies imagination, the only thing that protects our freedom, despite people’s attempts to diminish or eradicate it altogether.”
[Anton Schauble edited this piece]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Luis Buñuel: The Master of Film Surrealism appeared first on Fair Observer.

Picture a diverse community of Proto-Indo-Europeans, their voices blending in a harmonious symphony of speech. As the tribes dispersed, dialects naturally evolved, setting the stage for the emergence of new branches within the Indo-European family.

In one branch, we encounter the ancestors of the Greeks. Through centuries of storytelling, trade and cultural exchanges, their language transformed, molding itself iGreecento the melodic sounds of ancient Greek. From Mycenaean Greek to the majestic Classical Greek, it left an indelible mark on literature, philosophy and civilization.

In a distant land, the Indo-Aryan branch began to take shape. Eventually settling in the Indian subcontinent, the early Indo-Aryans embraced their own dialects, leading to the emergence of Sanskrit. This refined language, with its intricate grammar and poetic beauty, became the language of the Vedas, the sacred texts of Hinduism. Sanskrit’s influence extended across the Indian subcontinent, weaving the rich tapestry of modern Indian languages.

But how did these languages, which had once been intertwined, diverge and become distinct entities? Sound changes and linguistic shifts played a crucial role. Over time, unique pronunciations emerged, creating new phonetic landscapes for each language. The way they treated certain sounds diverged like branches growing apart yet still rooted in their ancestral soil.

As these languages developed, their vocabularies and grammars evolved, shaped by the cultures, experiences and encounters of their speakers. Greek and Sanskrit each cultivated their own lexicons and syntactic structures, resulting in distinct linguistic identities.

As centuries passed, Greek went through a historical odyssey, with Classical Greek paving the way for the renowned Koine Greek, the language of the New Testament, and Byzantine Greek, echoing through the corridors of the Eastern Roman Empire. Eventually, Modern Greek emerged, carrying the torch of its ancient lineage into the contemporary world.

Meanwhile, Sanskrit’s influence permeated the Indian subcontinent, nurturing a multitude of Indo-Aryan languages. From Hindi to Bengali, Gujarati to Punjabi, each language absorbed the essence of Sanskrit, blending it with regional flavors and giving birth to a linguistic kaleidoscope.

The development of Greek, Sanskrit and their linguistic kin reflects the interplay of history, migration and human ingenuity. From a common ancestral language, Proto-Indo-European, these languages branched out, enriching the give-and-take of human communication.

The past tends to conceal its secrets, leaving us with tantalizing clues and intriguing possibilities. Yet, how tempting it is to contemplate the hidden connections between ancient Greece and India, where ideas flowed like a gentle breeze, moving the thoughts of philosophers, kings and the laity alike. 

A confluence of ideas between Vedic India and ancient Greece. 

Both Classical Greek and Vedic Sanskrit belong to the Indo-European language family, two distant branches of the same linguistic tree. This shared heritage suggests that these cultures may have interacted and exchanged more than just passing greetings. 

Neoplatonism emerged as a philosophical movement within the Roman Empire between the third and fifth centuries CE, building upon the foundational ideas of Plato (c. 428-347 BC) while also expanding and reshaping them in various ways. 

Neoplatonism, with its roots in classical Greek and Persian philosophy as well as Egyptian theology, served as a profound source of inspiration for a wide range of metaphysicians and mystics across various traditions. I argue that it has its roots in Indian philosophy as well. Its metaphysical principles not only influenced pagan, Jewish, Christian, Gnostic and Islamic thinkers but also continued to shape their philosophical and mystical endeavors throughout the centuries.

Ammonius Saccas was a philosopher who lived in Alexandria during the third century CE. He is considered the founder of the Neoplatonic school. Ammonius was deeply influenced by various philosophical and religious traditions, including Greek, Egyptian and, some writers suggest, Indian philosophies. In my view, however, it was through his student Plotinus, a Roman philosopher who lived in the third century CE, that the integration of Vedanta philosophy into Neoplatonism became more explicit.

Neoplatonism and Indian Philosophy (SUNY Press), edited by the estimable Paulos Mar Gregorios, delves into the potential influence of Indian thought on Plotinus and his teacher Ammonius Saccas as well as their primary inspiration, Plato. It raises the question of whether Platonism, Plotinism and the underlying thought patterns in Western religion, literature and art are variations of concepts found in ancient Hindu philosophy, rather than purely evolutionary products of Greek philosophy.

The essays within the book explore the actual similarities in themes or philosophical systems between select Western Neoplatonic writers and prominent Hindu philosophers. They thoroughly examine the arguments both in favor of and against the notion that Indian philosophy serves as a source for Plotinus’ ideas.

At the core of Vedanta philosophy is the concept of Brahman, the ultimate reality or absolute consciousness that underlies all existence. This concept resonates with Plotinus’ idea of “the One,” which he considered as the ultimate source of all being and the pinnacle of reality. For Plotinus, the One transcends all categories, including being and non-being, and is beyond the grasp of intellectual comprehension. This notion parallels the Vedantic understanding of Brahman as beyond words and concepts.

Furthermore, Vedanta philosophy emphasizes the concept of maya, which refers to the illusory nature of the phenomenal world. According to Vedanta, the world we perceive is a manifestation of Brahman but is not ultimately real. Plotinus incorporated a similar notion in his teachings, suggesting that the material world is a lower level of reality and is a product of the multiplicity and diversity emanating from the One.

Another significant parallel between Neoplatonism and Vedanta is the idea of emanation. In Vedanta, the world emanates from Brahman in a hierarchical manner, with various levels of reality emerging from the Absolute. Similarly, Plotinus proposed a system of emanation, where multiple levels of reality cascade down from the One, including the Intellect and the Soul.

Plotinus and Vedanta both drew upon ideas of the soul’s journey towards liberation or union with the divine. In Vedanta, this process is known as moksha or self-realization. Plotinus referred to it as “the return of the soul to the One.” He believed that the soul, which is originally derived from the One, has become entangled in the material world but can regain its true nature through contemplation, philosophical inquiry and ascetic practices.

The Neoplatonic school, with its focus on the One, the nature of reality, the hierarchy of existence and the journey of the soul, provided a framework to the Greco-Roman world for understanding the universe and one’s place in it. It included subsequent philosophers such as Porphyry, Iamblichus and Proclus and influenced early Christian thinkers like Gregory of Nyssa and Augustine of Hippo.

In Greek philosophy, especially in the writings of Heraclitus, a pre-Socratic philosopher hailing from Ephesus in present-day Turkey, the term “logos” encompassed a range of significances. Plato and Aristotle subsequently expanded upon the theme. The meanings of the term included reason, conversation and language, as well as the inherent order and organization of the cosmos. Logos embodied the rational principle that governs and brings harmony to the world. It was regarded as a fundamental element of human existence, facilitating communication, comprehension and the quest for knowledge.

Similarly, in the Vedic tradition, “vak” is the Sanskrit term for speech or language but also holds a deeper significance. Vak is considered a divine power associated with the goddess Saraswati and is seen as the creative force behind the universe. Vak is believed to have the power to manifest thoughts and ideas into reality. It is the means through which the ultimate reality (Brahman) expresses itself in the world.

Both logos and vak emphasize the importance of language in shaping our understanding of the world. They recognize that language is not merely a tool for communication but a profound force that underlies creation and provides a framework for human cognition and expression. Both concepts suggest that there is an inherent order and meaning in the universe that can be accessed and understood through language.

Furthermore, both logos and vak recognize the transformative power of words. They emphasize that the way we use language can shape our reality and have a profound impact on ourselves and others. The proper use of language is seen as a means to attain wisdom, knowledge and spiritual realization. The epistemic similarities between the two have been analyzed by the Greek scholar Nikolas Kazanas among others. 

The Greeks encountered a fascinating belief: metempsychosis—the notion that souls can migrate into new bodies. This concept intrigued early Greek philosophers like Pythagoras. It bears a strong similarity to the Indian belief in reincarnation. For centuries, Hindus, Buddhists and Jains have embraced the idea that our souls embark on a journey of multiple lifetimes. Could it be that Indian notions about the cyclical nature of existence influenced the musings of these Greek thinkers? Many scholars seem to think so. 

The Greek philosopher Empedocles introduced the world to the four elements—earth, air, fire and water—as the building blocks of all matter. Remarkably, ancient Indian philosophy also recognized a similar set of elements known as “mahabhuta.” Earth, air, fire and water played a vital role in both cultures’ understanding of the world. 

Greek philosophers like Pyrrho and the Cynics had a remarkable inclination toward detachment and renunciation. These ideas bear a striking resemblance to concepts found in Indian philosophies such as Buddhism and Jainism. The pursuit of non-attachment, the rejection of material possessions and the quest for inner peace and enlightenment were common to both the Pyrrhonists and the gymnosophists.

The Greeks coined the term “gymnosophist” to refer to a group of ancient Indian philosophers. The word literally means “naked philosophers” or “naked wise men.” These individuals pursued asceticism to such an extent that they considered food and clothing as hindrances to pure thinking. Various Greek authors mentioned that they followed a vegetarian diet. Additionally, there were gymnosophists in Upper Egypt who Apollonius of Tyana referred to as “Ethiopian gymnosophists.”

Diogenes Laërtius, the famous biographer of philosophers who lived in the 3rd century AD, made references to the gymnosophists. He reported that Pyrrho of Ellis, while in India alongside Alexander the Great, was influenced by these gymnosophists. Upon returning to Ellis, Pyrrho adopted their way of life, which eventually led him to establish the Hellenistic philosophy of Pyrrhonism.

Gods and fate in the Iliad and the Mahabharata

The Iliad and the Mahabharata, two monumental epic poems, offer captivating narratives that plumb the depths of human experience and explore themes of war, heroism and destiny. The Iliad, a Greek epic poem traditionally attributed to Homer, originated in ancient Greece during the 6th to 8th centuries BC. Similarly, the Mahabharata, an ancient epic poem from India, traditionally attributed to the great sage Vyasa, traces its roots back to the 6th century BC. Despite originating from different cultures, these epics share intriguing similarities and offer rich grounds for comparative analysis.

One of the most striking parallels between the Iliad and the Mahabharata is their central focus on monumental wars. In the Iliad, we witness the epic conflict of the Trojan War, while the Mahabharata unfolds around the Kurukshetra War. Both battles serve as backdrops for the exploration of profound human emotions, the struggles of heroes and the complex dynamics of family and honor.

There is a strong resemblance between characters in the Iliad and their counterparts in the Mahabharata. Take Achilles, the central figure in the Iliad, and his uncanny similarities to the valiant Arjuna from the Mahabharata. Both are renowned warriors, gifted with extraordinary skills while burdened with fatal flaws. Both are guided by a code of honor that shapes their actions on the battlefield. 

Both grand narratives of the Iliad and the Mahabharata, though commonly ascribed to single authors, emerged from what M.H. Abrams, a renowned critic known for shaping the contemporary literary canon through the creation of the Norton Anthology of English Literature, defines as the “primary epic.” Within this framework, these epics were carefully molded by literary artists who drew inspiration from historical and legendary accounts that had evolved within the oral traditions of their respective nations during periods of expansion and conflict.

Divine intervention plays a significant role in both these epics, where gods and goddesses actively intervene in the affairs of semi-divine humans on Earth. The deities participate in councils, manipulate events and even determine the fates of mortal warriors. In the Mahabharata, gods frequently descend from the heavens to witness battles between valiant warriors. However, these divine beings are not above trickery, as exemplified by the god Indra’s actions when he approaches Karna to acquire his armor, thus ensuring Karna’s defeat against Arjuna.

Moreover, the gods bestow blessings or punishments on humans according as they are driven by their personal inclinations. Often portrayed as relentless, they exhibit little mercy, especially when humans deviate from their ordained paths. In the Iliad, Zeus stands in support of the Trojans during the war and sends Hermes to accompany King Priam to Achilles’ camp. 

Both the Mahabharata and the Iliad seem to exalt the splendor of warfare. Characters are assessed and judged based on their courage and competence in battle, determining whether they are worthy of admiration or contempt. For instance, Paris in the Iliad is disdained by his family and lover for his aversion to fighting, while Achilles earns eternal renown for deliberately rejecting a peaceful and unremarkable life at home. 

The texts themselves uphold this measure of character evaluation and extend it even to the gods. They portray warlike deities like Athena in a favorable light, while humorously ridiculing timid gods such as Aphrodite and Artemis, who shy away from aggression. 

Fate weaves its tapestry in intriguing ways across both tales. The Pandavas, banished to the forest for a grueling 14-year period, mirror the enduring struggle of the Trojan War, fought for an equally lengthy duration.

As battle ensues, we witness the inner turmoil of two great warriors. Arjuna, initially hesitant to raise his weapon, mirrors the reluctance that Achilles shows when the Trojan War erupts. Both grapple with their roles in the face of conflict.

Arjuna, filled with sorrow over his fallen son Abhimanyu, solemnly vows to avenge his death by slaying Jaydrath. Similarly, Achilles mourns the loss of his beloved brother Patroclus, vowing to seek retribution by slaying Hector.

Darkness becomes an ally as strategic strikes shake the enemy’s foundations. Ghatotkacha, using the element of surprise and wielding fire as his weapon, wreaks havoc upon the Kaurava army, decimating their camps with devastating flames. Hector employs a similar tactic, launching a fiery assault under the cover of night, reducing the Greek ships to ash.

The art of storytelling unites the two narratives. Sanjaya, the narrator of the Mahabharata, relays the epic saga of the war to the blind king Dhritarashtra, providing a window into the unfolding events. Similarly, a minister assumes the role of narrator, recounting the Trojan War to their king, ensuring the tales of valor and tragedy reach eager ears.

Blindness to the faults of one’s own kin emerges as a recurring theme. Dhritarashtra, turning a blind eye to the misdeeds of his wicked son Duryodhana, parallels the Trojan king, who remains oblivious to the faults of his son Paris, despite their detrimental consequences.

Moments of triumph and anguish shape the lives of the characters. Duryodhana’s exultation upon winning Draupadi in the game of dice echoes through the halls as he revels in his newfound power, proclaiming her as their slave. Similarly, in the Iliad, Briseis, a Trojan woman, becomes a pawn awarded to Achilles after suffering the indignities inflicted upon her by other kings and soldiers.

Prophecies cast a foreboding shadow over the destinies of key figures. The Iliad speaks of the prophecy regarding Paris, the harbinger of destruction for his kingdom. Similarly, the Mahabharata foretells the prophecy of Duryodhana, whose actions will ultimately bring ruin upon his own realm

From Dyḗus to Zeus: The Sky Father in Indo-European Mythology. 

In the hidden mists of prehistory, where myth and religion intermingle, the Proto-Indo-European people held a profound reverence for their deities. Among this pantheon of gods, one figure stood out—the mighty Sky Father. Initially revered as the father of other gods, this celestial patriarch ultimately ascended to become the supreme ruler of the divine realm, reigning over a vast expanse of Indo-European lands from Ireland to India.

The connection between the Indo-European populations and the luminous daytime sky was unmistakable. The radiant heavens served as a beacon of inspiration for poets, scholars and mystics who sought to unravel the mysteries of the divine. 

Deep within the roots of the Proto-Indo-European language, scholars unearthed the name Dyḗus phtḗr, Sky Father, as the ancient term for this revered deity. Its echoes reverberated across cultures, finding expression in the Vedic Dyáuṣ, the Greek Zeús and the Latin Iouis or Diouis. The assimilation of thunder and storms by Zeus and Iouis, possibly influenced by Near Eastern traditions, added a dynamic and powerful dimension to their divine personas.

The linguistic puzzle pieces gradually revealed the underlying meaning of Dyḗus. The word di/dei, serving as the foundation for the derived forms of Dyḗus, encapsulated the essence of “giving off light.” It is no surprise, then, that words stemming from this root evoked notions of brightness, heaven, sky, daylight and day itself. 

The Latin “diēs” the Vedic “divé-dive” denoting daily occurrences and the Armenian word “tiw,” meaning daytime, all point to the undeniable connection between the sky and the concept of day. Furthermore, the same root gave rise to dyéw- or deiwos, finding expression in the Baltic deities Diẽvas and Dievs, as well as the generic Latin term for God, deus.

Across the vast pantheon of Indo-European deities, the Sky Father Dyḗus reigned supreme. His role transcended that of a mere deity; he assumed the esteemed position of a divine patriarch, a father figure to the gods themselves. Whether referred to as Dyáuṣ in Vedic, Zeu páter or patrós Diós in Greek or Iuppiter and Diespiter in Latin, his fatherly title remained consistent, reflecting the enduring reverence bestowed upon him by his worshippers.

But how did Zeus and Jupiter, the illustrious figures of Greek and Roman mythology, ascend from being mere sky-gods to sovereign rulers of the entire pantheon? The answer lies not solely in their fatherly status but also in their embodiment of the sky and heaven itself. As divine entities, Zeus and Jupiter possessed an all-seeing, all-encompassing wisdom.

Homer, the renowned ancient Greek poet, aptly described Zeus with the epithet “eurúopa,” meaning “with wide vision.” Interestingly, this epithet gave birth to the name Europe itself, as the continent was named after a woman abducted by Zeus, who bore him the famous King Minos of Crete. 

Similarly, the Rigveda hailed Dyáuṣ as the “all-knowing god.” This supreme quality stemmed from his ability to perceive all that transpired below. With such immense power, the Rigveda rightfully acknowledged the greatness of the Sky God, referring to him as “máh,” meaning “great.” Zeus, too, was often described with the Homeric epithet mégas, emphasizing his immense stature.

The sun, often called the “eye of Dyéus” or the “lamp of Dyéus,” enjoyed a unique connection to the Sky Father. Both the sun and the sky shared the attributes of being all-seeing and all-knowing, making them overseers of oaths and justice.

This all-seeing, all-knowing nature of the Sky Father, his role in overseeing justice and oaths and his connection to the sun created a fertile ground for the concept of sovereignty and kingship. French mythographer and philologist, George Dumézil, introduced the significant concept of the “trifunctional hypothesis.”

According to Dumézil, Indo-European myths and religions could be interpreted as symbolic representations of three fundamental domains: the sacred, the martial and the economic. These domains reflected different ideologies and corresponded to the hierarchical division of society into castes or classes associated with sovereignty, military affairs and productivity. In the Greco-Roman world, Zeus and Jupiter embodied sovereignty, while Mitra-Varuna and Mithra-Ahura Mazda fulfilled this role in the Indo-Iranian context.

In the vast Indo-European cosmos, the gods resided in the heavens, while humanity inhabited the earth below. This division created an inherent contrast between mortals and the divine. Yet, through wisdom gained from observing celestial phenomena and the skies above, humans gained glimpses of the tremendous power possessed by the immortals.

The great ancient poet Homer beautifully captured this distinction when Odysseus told Nausicaa, “If you are one of the gods who dwell in the broad heaven, I reckon you are most like Artemis … but if you are of the mortals who live on earth, then thrice fortunate are your parents and brothers.”

The enduring legacy of the ancient Proto-Indo-European religion and mythology continues to shape the belief systems of their countless descendants. Across vast lands, under the watchful gaze of the all-seeing Sky Father Dyéus, his children thrive, honoring their ancestral roots and embracing the divinity that stretches across the heavens.

[Anton Schauble edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Overlapping Legacies: Vedic India and Ancient Greece in Conversation appeared first on Fair Observer.

“Liberal racial doctrine no longer curbs discrimination; it invites it. It does not expose racism; it recapitulates and, sometimes, reinvents it. Its tortured racial etiquette begets more racial epithets, as surely as hypocrisy begets hostility,” writes Jim Sleeper in his book, Liberal Racism, where he criticizes liberals for their excessive preoccupation with identity politics centered on race, to the point where they have forsaken their traditional objective of fostering a cross-racial American civic culture. 

White liberals often perceive themselves as enlightened crusaders against racial injustice, fervently advocating for marginalized communities. Their progressive ideology embraces the principles of equality, social justice and diversity. However, in their zealous pursuit of these ideals, they sometimes fail to recognize their own biases and patronizing tendencies.

Out of touch with the people they claim to represent

When Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas recently voted to strike down affirmative action in schools and colleges, in effect putting an end to race-based admissions, cries of “Uncle Tom” and “race traitor” rang loudly throughout the white liberal establishment. 

Thomas, an African American conservative, argued that the affirmative action admissions policies of schools contradict the principles of our Constitution, which advocates for a colorblind society. In his statement, Thomas emphasized, “Two acts of discrimination cannot justify a correct course of action.”

Despite the fulminations of liberal commentators, it is worth noting that the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down affirmative action aligns with the viewpoint of three-quarters of Americans. Indeed, 60% of Democrats are against considering race as a factor in college admissions. In addition, a YouGov/Harvard poll reveals that 64% of Black Americans believe that colleges and universities should not take race into account during admissions. This data is quite surprising when compared to the distorted coverage in mainstream media.

It has been shown time and time again that minorities do not vote or think as a bloc. Indeed, the majority of individuals who advocate for radical societal transformation on behalf of people of color are typically not individuals of color themselves. To expect a person from a minority community to share your pieties and your politics is in itself a form of racism. 

“Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in the majority opinion, which all five of his fellow conservative justices joined in. Roberts wrote said that both Harvard’s and UNC’s affirmative action programs “unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful end points.”

“We have never permitted admissions programs to work in that way, and we will not do so today,” Roberts wrote, finding that the universities’ policies violated the equal protection clause of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment. The clause bars states from denying people equal protection under the law.

American and Indian voices that challenge the politics of victimhood 

The eerie parallels between the vile voting-bloc politics of liberal America, based solely on racial considerations, and the despicable weaponization of caste by India’s leftist-communist factions, are not merely striking but downright unmistakable. In a calculated effort to strip minorities of their power, both ideologies shamelessly exploit immutable attributes like race and caste, reducing individuals to perpetual victims devoid of any personal agency. It is a reprehensible ploy orchestrated by the elite in both nations, deliberately crafting a perpetual underclass of victims, conveniently dependent on their empty promises, while callously disregarding any substantial measures to foster genuine economic growth for these marginalized communities. The hypocrisy is staggering, and the consequences are nothing short of tragic.

There is no dearth of influential figures from minority backgrounds who challenge the prevailing assumptions of these would-be liberal saviors. They reject the politics of victimhood and highlight the fact that minorities may not see themselves as helpless objects of pity.

It is crucial to include these voices in the ongoing discussion on race and identity because radical activists, mostly from white backgrounds, often try to silence their opponents by labeling them as “racist” in today’s climate. Accusations of racism hold significant force in power struggles, as being labeled as such suggests moral corruption and the need to be silenced.

“Woke anti-racism proceeds from the premise that race is real—if not biological, then socially constructed and therefore equally if not more significant still—putting it in sync with toxic presumptions of white supremacism that would also like to insist on the fundamentality of racial difference,” writes memoirist Thomas Chatterton Williams in Self Portrait in Black and White: Unlearning Race.

Williams comes from a background of mixed racial origins, having a father who is black and a mother who is white. In the book, he advocates for a society that goes beyond race, while also highlighting the resemblances between contemporary anti-racists and the very racists they hold in contempt.

Thomas Sowell, a renowned economist and social theorist, offers a penetrating analysis of white liberal racism. He argues that white liberals often prioritize their own self-image and feelings of moral superiority over the actual well-being of minority communities. In his book, The Vision of the Anointed, Sowell explains how white liberals tend to assume a paternalistic role, believing that they possess superior knowledge and expertise to guide the lives of marginalized individuals.

In his book Winning the Race: Beyond the Crisis in Black America, linguist and commentator John McWhorter argues that, while racism undoubtedly exists, systemic barriers are not insurmountable. He critiques the concept of systemic racism as a “linguistic trick,” cautioning against the adoption of victimhood narratives that perpetuate a sense of helplessness. McWhorter’s perspective encourages individuals to focus on their own agency and transcend the limitations imposed by victimhood culture.

Shelby Steele, an acclaimed author, scholar and conservative commentator, has been a vocal critic of victimhood culture and identity politics. Steele argues that the focus on victimhood perpetuates a sense of entitlement and undermines individual agency. He has explored these themes in books such as White Guilt and Shame: How America’s Past Sins Have Polarized Our Country.

Chloé Valdary, a rising star in the intellectual sphere, offers a unique perspective on rejecting the victimhood mentality through gratitude and self-empowerment. In her work, such as the podcast episode “The Theory of Enchantment,” Valdary advocates for a shift in focus from grievances to gratitude, arguing that fostering resilience and cultivating positive narratives is key to personal growth and social progress. Valdary’s philosophy emphasizes individual agency and encourages marginalized communities to embrace their inherent power to shape their own destinies.

Acknowledging the contributions of these outliers does not deny the existence of systemic racism or historical injustices. Instead, it presents an alternative framework for advancing equality that focuses on individual agency and personal accountability. Ignoring these voices, often done for political expediency, reveals an unwillingness to move beyond long-held intellectual dogmas that hinder genuine progress.

Rejecting victimhood mentality in an Indian context

Like these Western authors Guru Prakash Paswan and his co-author, Sudarshan Ramabadran, present a fresh perspective in their book, Makers of Modern Dalit History. They question the commonly repeated notion that Hinduism is inherently against the interests of Dalits. The book becomes even more significant when we recognize the deliberate effort within academia and the foreign media to equate Western racial hierarchies with caste, a canard which has been repeatedly debunked.

The authors shed light on the lives of eighteen influential individuals who have shaped the history of the Dalit community. Notably, almost all of these individuals, including Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar himself, have had a positive association with Hinduism. Ambedkar, in his book “The Untouchables,” paid homage to three Dalit saints: Nandanar from Tamil Nadu, a devotee of Lord Shiva; Guru Ravidas from Uttar Pradesh, a follower of Lord Rama; and Chokha Mela from Maharashtra, who worshiped Vitthala, an incarnation of Lord Vishnu.

Ambedkar also greatly admired Ramanujacharya, an 11th-century philosopher and social reformer from the Vaishnavite tradition. Paswan and Ramabadran emphasize that Ambedkar considered Ramanujacharya accepting a Dalit as his guru as a powerful message to society, highlighting the significance of integration as the only way forward.

Caste Is Now Weaponized Against Indian Americans

The book also delves into the notable figures associated with two significant Indian epics: Valmiki, the author of the Ramayana, and Veda Vyasa, the writer of the Mahabharata and compiler of the Vedas. These literary works have deeply influenced generations of Hindus, including Dalits, leading to Valmikis now being a prominent caste among Dalits.

Interestingly, Ambedkar himself drew a parallel between the Constitution of India and a contemporary epic. He remarked that just as the Hindus desired the Vedas and called upon Vyasa, who was not a caste Hindu, and just as they desired an epic and called upon Valmiki, an untouchable, they turned to him when they wanted a Constitution.

Contrary to the commonly held belief that Ambedkar had anti-Hindu views, a thorough exploration of his life would certainly challenge this notion.

The urgent call for a Uniform Civil Code in India

In a nation that boasts about its democratic principles and social progress, the coexistence of divergent family laws rooted in religious beliefs is a jarring paradox. India must break free from the chains of outdated customs and wholeheartedly embrace a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) that unconditionally guarantees equal rights for all its citizens, transcending religious boundaries.

The UCC stands as a beacon for gender justice, safeguarding the rights of women and fostering a united society that treats every citizen with unwavering equality and profound respect.

Moreover, the implementation of a UCC would fortify India’s unwavering commitment to secularism. By impartially treating all citizens, regardless of their faith, it upholds the fundamental principle of a state that remains neutral and reveres individual freedoms.

Ultimately, a Uniform Civil Code would endow citizens with the power to choose their own family law based on their beliefs and convictions. It would establish an extraordinary precedent for a forward-thinking and all-encompassing society, wherein every citizen enjoys unequivocal rights and limitless opportunities, irrespective of their religious heritage.

The truth about DEI

“Diversity, Equity and Inclusion” (DEI) initiatives have become prominent in recent times, but they have also attracted valid criticism from various quarters. One major criticism leveled at DEI is the issue of reverse discrimination. Proponents of this critique argue that in the pursuit of diversity, some individuals or groups may be unjustly disadvantaged or excluded based on their race, gender or other characteristics. They contend that merit and qualifications should be the sole criteria for employment or opportunities, rather than race or sex-based factors.

For instance, Asian American students have faced challenges in college admissions due to the perception that they are overrepresented in competitive universities. Studies have shown that Asian American applicants tend to have higher academic qualifications compared to other groups, yet they often face higher admission standards or quotas that limit their opportunities.

Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA), an organization established by Edward Blum, a conservative activist who opposes race-based affirmative action, initiated a lawsuit against Harvard in 2014, accusing the university of discriminatory practices against Asian-American students. Despite feverish attempts to suppress the lawsuit, Harvard was compelled to disclose 90,000 pages of information regarding its heavily guarded admissions process and emerged heavily bruised in the process.

In the words of one article published in Stanford Magazine,

Take, for instance, the claim that racial preferences help the “disadvantaged” In reality, as the Hoover Institution’s Thomas Sowell has observed, preferences primarily benefit minority applicants from middle- and upper-class backgrounds. At the same time, because admissions are a zero-sum game, preferences hurt poor whites and even many Asians (who meet admissions standards in disproportionate numbers). If preferences were truly meant to remedy disadvantage, they would be given on the basis of disadvantage, not on the basis of race.

DEI initiatives often place excessive emphasis on demographic diversity, neglecting other important aspects of diversity, such as different ways of thinking or varied life experiences. Genuine inclusion should encompass a broad spectrum of perspectives and ideas that go beyond visible diversity indicators. 

In real-life scenarios, we can observe instances where organizations prioritize achieving a certain demographic representation, but, in doing so, inadvertently suppress dissenting voices or alternative viewpoints.

For example, at universities in both India and the United States, there has been a growing concern about an imbalance of political perspectives among faculty members, with a significant overrepresentation of individuals holding left-leaning or progressive views. This lack of ideological diversity can lead to an echo chamber effect, where alternative viewpoints are marginalized or stifled. This can hinder intellectual discourse, limit the range of ideas being considered and compromise the quality of education and research.

Another example can be observed in certain media organizations or platforms that claim to value diversity but enforce strict conformity to a particular ideological narrative. In these cases, diversity of race, gender, or other demographic factors may be emphasized, but diversity of thought is often suppressed. Employees or contributors who hold dissenting opinions or challenge the prevailing narrative may face backlash, ostracization or even job loss. This creates an environment where individuals may self-censor their views, fearing professional repercussions or public backlash, leading to a lack of genuine intellectual diversity. 

“Defund the police” movement invites ridicule

Race-based activist organizations like Black Lives Matter (BLM) have surged to prominence, fueled by incidents of police brutality such as the tragic case of George Floyd that ignited massive protests and led to vandalism and destruction of private property—owned by minorities in many instances—on an unprecedented scale. 

While it’s necessary to address the systemic issues leading to tragic episodes of police brutality and the use of violent force on unarmed black youth, BLM and similar organizations tend to view society through a myopic lens, reducing complex social issues to simplistic narratives of racial oppression. By demanding that the police be defunded, and publishing opinion pieces with titles like “In Defense of Destroying Property,” they further polarize the debate and invite ridicule on what started out as a well-intentioned movement.

The activists advocating for defunding the police unfairly tarnish the entire law enforcement community, inaccurately portraying them as corrupt and immoral. Such broad generalizations are far from the truth. Police officers are true heroes within their communities, displaying immense bravery and unwavering commitment as they put on their badges each day, fully aware of the risks to their own safety.

Admittedly, as in any profession, there are a few individuals among police officers who engage in misconduct. However, just as it would be unfair and outrageous to vilify all teachers based on the actions of a few, it would be unjust to condemn the vast majority of defenders of public safety due to the mistakes of a handful of officers. 

The safety of American communities has significantly deteriorated compared to even a year ago. The surge in crime rates can be directly attributed to the widespread adoption of the slogan “defund the police.” The correlation between cities that have reduced their police budgets and those that have seen an alarming increase in violent incidents is undeniable. One notable example of this trend is Portland, Oregon, which is projected to exceed 1,000 shootings by the end of this year. Similarly, New York City has experienced a disturbing 81% increase in shootings during the first 14 weeks of 2021. Another concerning statistic can be seen in Oakland, California, where carjackings have risen by nearly 88%. Unfortunately, these examples merely scratch the surface.

Corrupt activists siphon relief funds

Moreover, there are legitimate concerns about the potential manipulation and corruption within race-based activist movements. The focus on collective grievances and historical wrongs becomes a breeding ground for opportunists seeking to line their own pockets. For instance, in a lawsuit filed last year, former colleagues accused Shalomyah Bowers, the leader of the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, of embezzling over $10 million in donations from the organization for personal gain.

Worse still was the case of Patrisse Cullors, a co-founder of BLM, who used the massive corpus of funds raised by the organization for various expenditures that were unrelated to activism. As indicated by the organization’s IRS Form 990, which is mandatory for all non-profit organizations, less than half of the revenue was allocated towards supporting victims’ families, local chapters, and other programs aimed at empowering the black community. The remaining funds were utilized for the organization’s additional expenses, such as a $4 million operating budget which covered the salaries of only two employees. A single private jet flight taken by Cullors cost $73,569. One particularly egregious expenditure by the organization was the acquisition, tax-free, of a $6 million mansion spanning 7,400 square feet in the Studio City neighborhood of Los Angeles. The property, dating back to the 1930s and known for hosting notable figures like Marilyn Monroe and Humphrey Bogart, boasts six bedrooms, a swimming pool, a Jacuzzi, a guest house for two, a music studio and enough parking space to comfortably fit 20 vehicles.

On the Indian side, Rana Ayyub and Teesta Setalvad, two notorious swindlers known for siphoning and misusing funds raised for public welfare, come to mind. One could be forgiven for speculating that Cullors and Brown derived inspiration from their counterparts in India.

Shelby Steele was right when he identified the underlying causes leading to the economic weakening of Black America. In his book White Guilt: How Blacks and Whites Together Destroyed the Promise of the Civil Rights Era, he refers to liberal discourse on race as “the formula that keeps black America underdeveloped even as we enjoy new freedom and a proliferation of opportunity. No worse fate could befall a group emerging from oppression than to find itself gripped by a militancy that sees justice in making others responsible for its advancement.”

It is time that India’s intellectuals and leaders also discarded cynical narratives that further divide the country along historical and religious fault lines and work instead to unify people on the basis of their shared common heritage and what unites them. Only then can all progress on the path of development and prosperity as equal citizens under the law. 

[Anton Schauble edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post US Supreme Court’s Ruling on Affirmative Action is a Wake-up Call For India appeared first on Fair Observer.

Riding inside the tube is a remarkable existential experience, a moment when life comes into perfect focus, when the immediacy and urgency of the moment is tempered by a feeling of stillness, by an awareness that one is connected to the entire fabric of the universe, riding inside an absolutely silent and solitary tunnel of water, a sense that the past is slipping behind your shoulder, the present is beneath your feet and the future is just ahead, out of reach, represented by a spinning, hypnotic, tumbling tunnel of water just ahead.

Thompson was echoing what surfers from as far back as three thousand years had felt while riding the mighty waves thrown up by the ocean. For some millennia, what has become a glamorized sport, associated with symbols of American excess—expensive merchandise, huge corporate endorsements, bare-chested white men sporting long blonde hair and endless cases of beer—was a sacred and ritualistic act for the ancient peoples of Polynesia, of Peru and of West Africa, one which brought them closer to the heartbeat of nature and in direct communion with their deities.

Surfing as a Religion and Way of Life

Polynesia, which includes islands such as Hawaii, Tahiti, Samoa and Fiji, is widely regarded as the birthplace of surfing. The Polynesians had a profound connection to the ocean, as it played a central role in their lives. Surfing was not just a means of transportation or leisure for them; it was a spiritual practice and a way to connect with their gods and the natural elements.

In Polynesian culture, the ocean was considered a sacred entity, inhabited by powerful deities and spirits. Surfing became a way to honor and commune with these divine forces. It was believed that the act of riding a wave allowed individuals to tap into the energy and power of the ocean, forging a connection between the physical and spiritual realms. The power expressed by ocean waves is what compels surfers even today to go out into the ocean and ride the waves. 

The native Hawaiians cherished a canon of traditional stories and songs that spoke of the noble figures who ruled the land and rode the waves. Hawaiian tradition allows us to date surfing in the islands back to the fourth century.

When the Makahiki New Year season arrived, a time of rest and play that accompanied the arrival of prime winter waves, the art of wave riding, known as Heʻe Nalu, took center stage. It was a shared experience among kings, queens, commoners and even children; everyone embraced the joy of surfing. The significance of surfing for early Hawaiians was so immense that they had a strict prohibition against working or engaging in warfare during Makahiki. Instead, everyone would enjoy a complete three-month break during the winter to foster social connections through play and friendly competitions.

There was, however, a distinction in surfing privileges. Only the royalty had access to the best spots, like the renowned Queens Beach, the exclusive surf break at Waikiki. King Kamehameha himself fondly described the places he surfed with his beloved wife, Kaʻahumanu. These tales wove together Hawaiian myths and legends, where gods and goddesses rode the waves, controlling the winds, tides and swells.

In the spiritual ceremony of surfing, the kahuna, or priest, played a crucial role. The kahuna guided surfers in the sacred task of selecting and constructing wooden surfboards made from trees like koa, ulu or wiliwili. The kahuna made offerings and skilled craftsmen carried out the important task of carving. 

Surfers would seek the blessings of the gods Lono and Laʻamaomao, asking for favorable surf conditions and safe passage. Lono was associated with fertility, rainfall, agriculture and music. He is one of four great gods in Hawaiian mythology along with Kuka’ilimoku (also called Kū) and the twin brothers Kanaloa and Kāne.

Even the powerful goddesses Pele and Hiʻiaka were said to have joined in the art of surfing. Pele, or Pelehonuamea, is the Hawaiian goddess of fire and volcanoes. This fiery goddess molds the hallowed earth, persistently consuming the Big Island with flowing lava and simultaneously giving birth to fresh terrain.

The Celestial Navigators

In addition to its spiritual significance, surfing had practical aspects in Polynesian society. It was a means of transportation, allowing islanders to navigate between islands and explore new territories. Surfing also served as a way to gather resources from the ocean, such as fish and other marine life.

The Hawaiian islands stand as the most remote landmasses on Earth, and when you are there this profound isolation becomes palpable as you float in the ocean. Amidst the cobalt expanse of the Pacific, the mighty deep-sea currents and powerful swells collide with Hawaii’s shallow reefs, exhibiting untamed nature in the form of explosive, barrelling waves that leave you breathless.

These islands are the visible peaks of the submerged Hawaiian-Emperor seamount chain. Over the course of the past 5 million years, molten lava accumulated from beneath the ocean’s surface, gradually cooling and rising to form these volcanic islands, which now rise gracefully above the water’s edge.

Imagine embarking on a daring adventure, sailing away from the shores of a Polynesian island in a magnificent canoe. Your destination? Another tiny island thousands of miles away, nestled in the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean. This immense body of water stretches across more than 60 million square miles, presenting an immense challenge. But here’s the astonishing part: for countless centuries, the skilled Polynesian navigators undertook such voyages without the aid of modern navigation tools. How on earth did they achieve such incredible feats?

Picture 40-person canoes skimming the waves, outrigger canoes gliding through the water and the ingeniously designed multi-hulled canoes powering along boosted by their intricate sail configurations. These took the Polynesian navigators across vast distances. Specialized surf canoes deftly traversed treacherous reefs and enabled their users to take on the thrilling challenge of riding the waves.

Studying the stars, observing the moon and deciphering other natural phenomena, these ancient mariners were able to determine their position and course. This mastery over the elements, allowed them to conquer the vast oceans. 

This extraordinary skill of wayfinding was meticulously passed down through generations of Polynesian sailors. The art of navigation without the aid of modern instruments became an intrinsic part of their heritage. They possessed an intimate knowledge of ocean currents, the intricate dance of wind patterns, the behavior of birds and the subtle signs of nature. It was a testament to their profound connection with the natural world, culminating in their awe-inspiring achievement of reaching the isolated Hawaiian Islands. 

The history of surfing as we know it does indeed originate in Polynesia. However, the story would not be complete without two more chapters: South America and Africa.

Surfing in Ancient Peru

The Mochica people of Peru were an ancient civilization that thrived along the northern part of the country’s coast from approximately 100 to 800 CE. Known for their advanced agricultural practices, skilled craftsmanship and unique cultural expressions, the Mochica left a lasting impact on the region.

Among their many achievements, the Mochica people developed a surfing tradition that has captivated historians and enthusiasts alike. At the heart of this tradition were what are now called the caballitos de totora, or “little reed horses,” which were paddleboards made of sedge and specifically designed for riding the waves.

The caballitos de totora played a significant role in the lives of the Mochica fishermen. These lightweight, maneuverable paddleboards allowed them to navigate the challenging surf zone with ease, enabling access to abundant coastal waters for fishing, the exploitation of which required exceptional skill and mastery.

Archaeological evidence such as pottery fragments has provided valuable insights into the surfing tradition of the Mochica. The presence of depictions and representations of surfers on pottery pieces from 1400 to 1100 BCE suggests that the Mochica were the earliest known practitioners of wave riding in the world.

The surfing tradition of the Mochica people not only served as a means of sustenance but also held cultural and ceremonial significance. It symbolized their deep connection to the ocean and their mastery over the natural elements. Today, the legacy of the Mochica surfing tradition lives on in Huanchaco, a coastal town in Peru where the caballitos de totora continue to be used by local fishermen. 

Nevertheless, Peru was not the only region where surfing emerged independently from the Polynesian tradition that we know today.

The Wave Riders of West Africa

In his essay “Surfing in Africa and the Diaspora,” Kevin Dawson, an associate professor of history at the University of California, Merced, sheds light on the fascinating history of surfing. According to Dawson, the earliest documented account of surfing dates back to 1640 in what is now known as Ghana.

Across the expansive coastline of Western Africa, spanning thousands of miles from Senegal to Angola, merchants and fishermen independently developed surfing practices. These seagoing populations crafted large surf canoes capable of riding waves as high as ten feet, employing various postures, including standing. Additionally, they used three to five-foot wooden surfboards and one-person surf canoes.

Beyond wave-riding vessels, Africans in these regions also utilized longboards for long-distance paddling. These impressive boards could reach lengths of up to 12 feet. Similar to contemporary surfboard shapers who tailor their boards to different wave types, West Africans developed numerous shapes and designs for surf canoes. Each design was carefully crafted to suit specific waves found in different local regions. Considerations such as wave size, shape, steepness and power informed the creation of these diverse surf canoes.

Just as in Polynesian cultures, the surf canoes of West Africa held a sacred significance. They were meticulously carved from specific trees in a ceremonial manner. These chosen trees were believed to serve as a meeting point of the spiritual and physical worlds, with the spirits residing within them maintaining a continued connection to the water spirits throughout the lifespan of the canoe.

The ocean itself held profound spiritual meaning for these West Africans. It was regarded as a realm inhabited by deities and otherworldly gods, including Mami Wata, a revered ancient West African deity often depicted as a divine, feminine mermaid. These spiritual beliefs further deepened the cultural connection between the people and the water, infusing their wave riding with a sense of reverence for the natural world.

Christian Missionaries Ban the “Heathen” Sport

These ancient cultures, alas, were not to last in their undisturbed form. With the arrival of European explorers in the Pacific, a tragic consequence unfolded: the devastating toll of infectious diseases had claimed the lives of at least 84% of the Native Hawaiian population by the year 1840. Furthermore, the influence of missionaries led to the banning of surfing. They labeled the practice labeling a “heathen” activity. Missionaries sought to convert local populations to Christianity and promote Western values, often deeming indigenous customs inferior or sinful. 

This suppression of surfing was not limited to Hawaii alone, as missionaries also imposed similar bans in West Africa and South America. As a result, the age of colonization witnessed a sharp decline in the practice of surfing, causing it to nearly vanish from the Hawaiian islands and numerous coastal communities worldwide.

The Resurgence of Surfing

The modern resurgence of surfing can be credited to a few visionary individuals who reintroduced the sport to the world. In the early 20th century, Hawaiian watermen like Duke Kahanamoku and George Freeth showcased their surfing prowess to curious audiences in California and Australia, reigniting interest in this ancient art form.

Duke Kahanamoku, a legendary surfer and Olympic swimmer, played a significant role in introducing surfing to a global audience. Duke’s international recognition as an Olympic athlete helped elevate the status of surfing, bringing it into the mainstream consciousness.

Similarly, George Freeth, known as the “Father of Modern Surfing,” played a vital role in popularizing the sport on the American mainland. Originally from Hawaii, Freeth relocated to California and shared his surfing expertise with coastal communities along the Pacific coast. His exhibitions and spectacular wave-riding demonstrations attracted widespread attention and fascination. Freeth’s impact was especially notable in Southern California, where his performances inspired a generation of surf enthusiasts and laid the groundwork for the region’s surf culture.

From this revival, surfing experienced a rapid evolution. Board designs evolved from heavy wooden planks to lighter, more maneuverable materials like fiberglass and foam. The 1950s and 60s witnessed the emergence of surf culture, with surf movies like Endless Summer, bands like the Beach Boys, and a distinctive style becoming intertwined with the sport.

Surfing’s popularity spread across the globe in subsequent decades, reaching iconic surf spots such as Malibu in California, Bondi Beach in Australia and the legendary Pipeline back in Hawaii. Competitive surfing gained traction, leading to the establishment of professional circuits like the World Surf League. Celebrated surfers such as Kelly Slater and Stephanie Gilmore became household names, inspiring a new generation of wave enthusiasts. 

Despite the commodification of this ancient art form, legions of devotees flock to remote coastal hamlets around the world to pay homage to the ancient deities, asking for their blessings and hoping to experience the state of absolute freedom that only they can bestow.

[Anton Schauble edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post How Ancient Polynesians Conquered the Pacific on Their Surfboards appeared first on Fair Observer.

A mold-breaking teacher

Born as Chandra Mohan Jain in 1931, Rajneesh grew up in a country deeply rooted in ancient spiritual traditions. From a young age, he displayed a rebellious nature, questioning the religious assumptions and rituals that had long pervaded his native country of India. Rajneesh’s curiosity led him to explore various spiritual paths and philosophies, ultimately forming his own philosophy that defied categorization. He fused Eastern philosophy, primarily Buddhism, with elements of post-Freudian psychoanalysis, bringing the two together in a synthesis that was no mere eclecticism. His spirituality contained a message of sexual liberation.

As a spiritual teacher, Osho took the unequivocal stance that organized religion is a source of division rather than a means to true spiritual enlightenment. In his view, religions had become mired in rituals, losing their vitality. In his words, “When a religion is dead, it becomes ritualistic. When a religion is alive, it remains spontaneous.” Osho believed that religion should be a search for peace, a personal journey towards self-realization and liberation, without the pursuit of power that has plagued organized religions throughout history. 

Osho’s iconoclastic teaching condemned both organized religion and politics, denouncing them as two sides of the same coin, driven by the desire to control. He argued that religious individuals, not institutions, were deserving of respect. For him, a truly religious person transcends the boundaries of any particular faith, embracing a divine connection that is universal and all-encompassing.

Spiritual awareness

Osho’s ability to articulate complex concepts in simple language, adorned with his earthy sense of humor, drew accolades from unlikely quarters. Khushwant Singh, the eminent author and historian, described Rajneesh as “the most original thinker that India has produced: the most erudite, the most clearheaded and the most innovative.” American author Tom Robbins stated that, based on his readings of Osho’s books, he was convinced Osho was the 20th century’s “greatest spiritual teacher”.

Meditation, for Osho, was the gateway to self-realization, a state of pure presence and awareness that went beyond thoughts, actions and judgments. “Meditation is just to be, not doing anything—no action, no thought, no emotion. You just are. And it is a sheer delight,” he said.

Meditation starts by being separate from the mind, by being a witness. That is the only way of separating yourself from anything. If you are looking at the light, naturally one thing is certain: you are not the light, you are the one who is looking at it. If you are watching the flowers, one thing is certain: you are not the flower, you are the watcher.

Watching is the key of meditation. Watch your mind.

Don’t do anything – no repetition of mantra, no repetition of the name of god—just watch whatever the mind is doing. Don’t disturb it, don’t prevent it, don’t repress it; don’t do anything at all on your part. You just be a watcher, and the miracle of watching is meditation. As you watch, slowly mind becomes empty of thoughts; but you are not falling asleep, you are becoming more alert, more aware. So you can say meditation is another name of watching, witnessing, observing – without any judgment, without any evaluation. Just by watching, you immediately get out of the mind.

One of Osho’s best-known practices, “dynamic meditation,” is a practice that combines intense physical movement and stillness to cultivate inner growth and awareness. It consists of five stages: breathing, catharsis, physical activity, silence, and celebration. In the first stage, deep, chaotic breathing releases stagnant energy. The second stage involves catharsis, allowing emotions and tensions to be expressed freely. Then, the third stage focuses on vigorous physical movements, shaking off accumulated stress. This is followed by silence, where participants observe and witness their inner state. 

As this author can personally testify, the psycho-spiritual benefits of dynamic meditation are numerous. The active stages release repressed emotions, leading to emotional catharsis and increased self-awareness. It helps in breaking through mental patterns and conditioning, creating a sense of freedom and spontaneity. The practice also enhances body-mind integration, promoting a deep connection with the present moment.

So much more than a “sex guru”

Osho’s teachings on sexuality stirred heated debates and controversies. In his book, From Sex to Superconsciousness, he advocated for the transformation of raw sexual energy through meditation rather than repression, as he believed that suppressing natural desires led to obsession and perversion. Osho lamented being labeled a “sex guru” by those who fixated on this aspect of his teachings, highlighting that his extensive body of work encompassed a wide range of subjects beyond sex. 

“Out of my three hundred books only one book concerns sex, and that, too, not in its totality” he once said in an interview. “Just the beginning of it is concerned with sex; as you go deeper in understanding it moves towards super-consciousness, towards samadhi [integration]. Now that is the book which has reached to millions of people. It is a strange phenomenon: my other books have not reached to so many people … Why so much emphasis? People are obsessed, particularly the religious people are obsessed. This label of ‘sex guru’ comes from religious people.”

Perhaps the most notorious chapter in Osho’s life was his establishment of a spiritual commune in Oregon, United States, during the 1980s. The commune, known as “Rajneeshpuram”, aimed to create a utopian society where Osho’s teachings could flourish. Its ambitious scope and unconventional practices attracted both devoted followers and staunch critics. These have been well chronicled in the Netflix docu-series Wild Wild Country.

The commune’s acquisition of an impressive collection of ninety-three Rolls Royce automobiles became a controversial symbol, capturing media attention. Osho defended this flamboyant display, explaining that it was a strategic means of bridging the gap between his teachings and the world’s fascination with materialistic desires. “It simply shows the mind of the world. The world is not interested in truth; the world is interested in something sensational. Truth is not sensational. The world is not interested in enlightenment; the world is more interested in Rolls Royces,” he said. “I wanted the world to know that we have ninety-three Rolls Royces because that is the only way to make any bridge to the world. And then I can talk about truth and enlightenment too, by the side. Without Rolls Royces there is no communication at all. I know my business perfectly well.” 

As Tom Robbins put it, “A lot of people don’t get the punchline. How many, for example, realized that his ridiculous fleet of Rolls-Royces was one of the greatest spoofs of consumerism ever staged?”

A prominent controversy at Rajneeshpuram was the power struggle within the commune, one which ultimately led to legal troubles. Ma Anand Sheela, Osho’s former personal secretary and spokesperson, emerged as a central figure in the commune’s administration. Sheela’s book, Don’t Kill Him! The Story of My Life with Bhagwan Rajneesh, chronicles her time in the commune and sheds light on the inner workings, including the fierce competition for power and control. Sheela later faced legal charges related to wiretapping, immigration fraud and the infamous bioterror attack in Oregon. These events raised questions about the ethical conduct of the commune’s leadership.

Osho himself kept a distance from the controversies surrounding the commune, asserting that he was not involved in the day-to-day management. He maintained that he was primarily a spiritual teacher, emphasizing personal transformation and self-realization. As a response to the controversies, Osho offered insights on power dynamics, human conditioning, and the challenges of communal living.

Osho returned to India in July 1986 after spending several years in the United States. One of the main reasons for his return was a combination of legal troubles and strained relations with the American authorities. He faced charges related to immigration fraud and violations of land use regulations at his commune in Oregon. Seeking a fresh start, Osho returned to India, specifically to his ashram in Pune. During his final years, Osho focused on guiding his followers and disciples through discourses, meditation sessions and individual counseling.

Osho’s teachings were wide-ranging, encompassing spirituality, philosophy, psychology and human consciousness. He continued to attract a large international following, and his Pune ashram became a hub for seekers from around the world.

The last years of Osho’s life were marked by declining health. He suffered from various ailments, including diabetes and asthma, which eventually led to his passing on January 19, 1990. Despite his physical departure, Osho’s message to the world, encapsulated in his words and actions, remains a powerful call to embrace our individuality, question the established order, and embark on a journey towards self-realization, liberation and the pursuit of peace.

[Anton Schauble edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Osho: The Maverick Mystic Who Embraced Individuality appeared first on Fair Observer.

Oppenheimer’s quote is a loose translation of a verse from chapter 11, verse 32 of the ancient Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad Gita. This particular section is often referred to as the Vishwarupa, or “Universal Form,” chapter. Here, Krishna reveals his true form to Arjuna, showing himself as the supreme being who encompasses all creation and destruction.

Just as Krishna’s universal form represents a cosmic power capable of immense destruction, nuclear weapons represented to Oppenheimer the potential for unparalleled devastation on a global scale. It is likely he viewed himself and his colleagues as modern incarnations of Arjuna, grappling with their involvement in creating a weapon capable of immense destruction.

Robert J. Oppenheimer and the Manhattan Project

The Manhattan Project was a highly secretive research and development endeavour conducted by the United States during World War II. It aimed to create the world’s first atomic bomb, utilizing the power of nuclear fission. Prompted by concerns of Nazi Germany’s potential atomic weapon development, the project began in 1939. With the support of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the project gained momentum, and a team led by Oppenheimer was assigned to develop and test the atomic bomb.

Their efforts culminated in a pivotal moment on July 16, 1945—the Trinity Test. In the vast desert, controlled nuclear energy was realized, marking a significant scientific achievement. Subsequently, these achievements led to the devastating use of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The destruction caused by these bombings brought Japan to surrender, leading to the end of the war.

The Manhattan Project had far-reaching consequences. It marked a significant scientific, engineering, and logistical achievement that brought together a diverse team of experts from many disciplines. Moreover, it triggered the nuclear arms race and raised profound moral and ethical concerns surrounding the use and proliferation of nuclear weapons. 

In the aftermath of the war, Oppenheimer faced scrutiny due to his affiliations with communist organizations and his opposition to the hydrogen bomb. This eventually led to the revocation of his security clearance, ending his involvement in governmental work. Yet Oppenheimer’s legacy endured. His unwavering belief in the peaceful applications of nuclear energy and his vision of a world where atomic power serves humanity’s progress continues to resonate.

The Quest to Stop Climate Change

In the present day, the quest for clean and dependable energy sources has never been more crucial. From out of this search, nuclear power has emerged as a potential savior, despite its contentious past. With its ability to provide abundant and environmentally friendly energy, nuclear power holds immense promise in the fight against climate change.

At the heart of nuclear power lies the process of nuclear fission, the awe-inspiring splitting of atomic nuclei that unleashes an extraordinary amount of energy. It is fuelled primarily by uranium-235 and plutonium-239, elements that pack a punch in energy density. When these nuclei split, they release an incredible amount of heat, which is then harnessed to generate steam. This steam, in turn, powers turbines that drive generators, transforming the unleashed energy into electricity.

Clean Energy Not So Clean, Time to Restrict Consumption Too

One of the most compelling aspects of nuclear energy is its remarkable cleanliness. Unlike the burning of fossil fuels, nuclear power generation virtually eliminates greenhouse gas emissions, which would shield us against rising carbon dioxide levels. By providing a reliable and low-carbon energy source, nuclear power plants reduce the need for polluting coal-fired plants. This would reduce harmful emissions and the associated health risks they pose to our communities.

Additionally, If other renewable energy sources experience fluctuations, nuclear power would provide consistent and reliable energy. This would ensure the smooth integration of renewable energy into our power grids, maximizing their potential without compromising the stability of our energy infrastructure.

Fear Mongering Slows Progress 

Nuclear power has come a long way since the devastating incidents at Chernobyl in 1986 and Fukushima in 2011. These tragic events were a wake up call for the industry, exposing flaws in design, human error, and safety protocols. These disasters were a catalyst for tremendous progress in enhancing reactor safety.

Even with the remarkable strides in safety, nuclear energy continues to suffer from fear mongering and misinformation. Activists and well-intentioned individuals have inadvertently contributed to unwarranted fears. While their aspirations for a greener future are commendable, their rhetoric tends to overshadow the numerous benefits of nuclear power. Sensational claims about radiation leaks, nuclear waste, and the potential for accidents have stoked panic and undermined the perception of nuclear energy.

The truth, however, is quite different from the narrative of doom and gloom. Modern nuclear power plants are equipped with multiple layers of safety measures that are above and beyond what was previously imaginable. Enhanced reactor designs, ingenious passive cooling systems, and stringent regulatory frameworks minimize the risk of accidents. In fact, when compared to other energy sources such as coal or oil, nuclear power boasts an impressive safety record.

It is vital to separate fact from fiction when discussing nuclear energy. The advancements in safety technology and the rigorous oversight by regulatory bodies have significantly reduced the likelihood of a major accident. Furthermore, the stringent protocols for handling and disposing of nuclear waste ensure that it poses minimal risk to the environment and public health.

The Next-Generation of Nuclear Reactors

As we continue to prioritize safety, the future of nuclear energy is brimming with even greater potential—a realm where safe, limitless clean energy becomes a reality.

For example, Generation IV reactors are a new breed of advanced nuclear systems at the forefront of innovation. These reactors embrace cutting-edge technologies such as molten salt, high-temperature gas, and fast-neutron designs. By operating at higher temperatures, they unlock a whole new level of efficiency and offer exciting possibilities like hydrogen production—an essential element for a sustainable energy future.

Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are also a promising new technology.  These ingenious reactors are designed to be manufactured in a factory and transported to their intended site for installation. Their smaller size brings a host of advantages by simplifying the complexities of design, construction, and maintenance. Their modular nature also grants them unparalleled scalability and flexibility. With enhanced safety features, SMRs have the potential to illuminate remote areas, where access to electricity is difficult or non-existent. They can also seamlessly integrate with renewable energy sources, bolstering the stability and reliability of our power grids.

Unleashing the Power of Nuclear Energy

In the quest for a sustainable energy future, nuclear power offers unique advantages that set it apart from other alternatives, like solar and green hydrogen. 

One of nuclear power’s most impressive attributes is its incredible energy density. Meaning it can generate a staggering amount of energy from a relatively small amount of fuel. Nuclear power is a space-efficient marvel, outshining renewable sources like sprawling solar or wind farms that require vast areas to match the same energy output.

Unlike solar power, which hinges on daylight hours and weather patterns, nuclear power plants can provide continuous and reliable baseload power. And while green hydrogen production via electrolysis demands a constant supply of electricity, nuclear power can deliver an unwavering stream of energy.

Nuclear power is a low-carbon energy source, emitting virtually no greenhouse gases during operation. It holds immense potential in curbing carbon dioxide emissions, playing a vital role in our fight against climate change. When compared to power plants reliant on fossil fuels, nuclear power proves itself as a greener alternative that can pave the way to a cleaner, more sustainable future.

By reducing dependence on fossil fuel imports, nuclear power enhances energy security. It grants countries the ability to become more self-reliant in meeting their energy needs. This not only bolsters stability but also minimizes vulnerabilities arising from geopolitical tensions or volatile fuel prices. With nuclear power in their arsenal, nations can forge their own path towards energy independence.

When it comes to large-scale power generation, nuclear plants reign supreme. Their capacity to generate vast amounts of electricity makes them a perfect match for densely populated areas and energy-intensive industries. While renewable sources like solar and wind have made remarkable strides, they may require extensive land areas and infrastructure to match the sheer scale of nuclear power’s potential.

Nuclear power becomes an invaluable ally in the pursuit of a hydrogen-powered future. With its steadfast and continuous supply of electricity, it can serve as the bedrock for hydrogen production through high-temperature electrolysis or thermochemical cycles. This paves the way for a vibrant green hydrogen economy.

Political Solutions for a Sustainable Nuclear-Powered Future

Embarking on a global journey towards clean and boundless nuclear energy demands political solutions that can tackle the nuanced issues facing this power source. The adoption of nuclear energy is no simple feat, requiring political will, international collaboration and a delicate understanding of each nation’s unique circumstances and aspirations.

The path to embracing nuclear energy begins with robust international cooperation. Governments must unite to foster the development and deployment of nuclear technologies. By sharing knowledge, research, and best practices, nations can collectively propel the advancement of safer and more efficient nuclear power plants. In this pursuit, organizations like the International Atomic Energy Agency play a pivotal role in facilitating cooperation among nations.

To ensure the safe and responsible use of nuclear power, governments must establish rigorous regulatory frameworks and safety standards. Independent regulatory bodies armed with authority and resources should oversee the nuclear industry, upholding transparency, accountability, and public confidence in this powerful energy source.

To encourage the widespread deployment of nuclear power plants, governments should implement financial incentives. Subsidies, tax incentives and loan guarantees can make nuclear projects financially viable, attracting private sector investment. Additionally, establishing long-term power purchase agreements reduces financial risks for investors, further bolstering the economic viability of nuclear energy.

FO° Exclusive: Global Energy Crisis

Political solutions must also address concerns surrounding non-proliferation and security. Governments must strengthen international treaties, promote disarmament efforts, and institute robust security measures to prevent unauthorized access to nuclear materials and facilities. By prioritizing the safeguarding of nuclear resources, nations can build a foundation of trust and cooperation.

These political solutions are not standalone endeavours—they require a united front of global collaboration, unwavering political will, and a keen understanding of the diverse needs and circumstances of each nation. It may sound difficult, given the geopolitical conflicts that exist in many parts of the world, but shared responsibility is essential if we want to leave the world a cleaner and safer place for future generations.

[Lane Gibson edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post The Surprising Use of Nuclear Energy for a Sustainable Future appeared first on Fair Observer.

An instant star

Born as Vickie Lynn Hogan in 1967, this Texan beauty had her first taste of the spotlight as a pole dancer at a local strip club, rapidly becoming the town’s hottest performer.

When she was only 16, she dropped out of high school and married Billy Wayne Smith, a blue-collar construction worker. The couple soon welcomed a son named Daniel Wayne, but Anna Nicole’s dissatisfaction with the marriage led her to leave at the young age of 20, seeking solace and opportunities in the sprawling city of Los Angeles.

It was in Los Angeles that Anna Nicole’s star began to rise rapidly. As she graced the covers of Playboy magazine and became the face of Guess jeans, the world took notice of her irresistible charm. With a body that seemed to defy nature and a pout that could melt icebergs, Anna Nicole embodied seduction, wrapped in curves and enhanced by silicone. Her meteoric ascent from a clothing model to an iconic Playboy Playmate showcased her unwavering determination to conquer the fiercely competitive entertainment industry, fearlessly using her sex appeal as a powerful weapon.

Gone in a flash

Despite the dazzling lights and  ascendant fame, it was Smith’s controversial marriage to the billionaire oil tycoon J. Howard Marshall II that would ultimately lead to her downfall. In 1994, at the age of 26, she married the 89-year-old Marshall, igniting a firestorm of speculation. Critics questioned her motives, labeling her a gold digger, while others doubted the authenticity of their relationship. But as they say, love knows no boundaries.

After Marshall’s death in 1995, Smith was drawn into a legal labyrinth. While his will didn’t grant her a substantial inheritance, she fought fiercely to prove her entitlement to a share, worth hundreds of millions, of his vast estate. The ensuing legal battles turned courtrooms across the nation into dramatic arenas, with Smith claiming that Marshall had promised her a rightful portion and accusing his son, E. Pierce Marshall, of manipulating the will to exclude her.

However, Smith’s tenacity faced legal setbacks. In 2000, a jury initially awarded her an astonishing $474 million, only for the decision to be overturned later. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court, where in 2006, the final ruling dashed her hopes of obtaining any part of Marshall’s estate.

While these relentless courtroom clashes dominated the media’s attention, Smith suffered a devastating blow in the untimely death of her son, Daniel Wayne Smith, in 2006. Born from her first marriage, Daniel accompanied his mother to the hospital for the birth of his half-sister, Dannielynn. Tragically, just three days later, Daniel’s life was cut short by an accidental drug overdose, sending shockwaves of grief through Smith’s world.

Why do we hurt the ones we admire?

Macfarlane’s directing skillfully incorporates captivating archival footage, taking us on a journey through Smith’s formative years in a challenging American upbringing, her instant popularity as a Texas stripper, her fascinating relationship with J. Howard Marshall, her time as a Guess girl, and her subsequent role as a Playboy Playmate. We are intimately exposed to her complex inner world and turbulent psyche through these powerful visuals.

The media’s relentless obsession with Smith’s life and relationships became a toxic force in her existence. Like a couple locked in a dysfunctional relationship, she and the media couldn’t keep their hands off each other, even though they knew the tragic fate that awaited them. From the moment she burst onto the scene, the media voraciously devoured her every move. Her bombshell persona and the scandalous stories that surrounded her became irresistible material for headlines and gossip columns. And she knew exactly how to play the game, skilfully manipulating camera angles and teasing the press with tantalizing tidbits that left them craving more.

It was a symbiotic relationship built on toxicity. Smith craved attention and adoration, and the media willingly indulged her desires. The result was an insatiable cycle of headlines, paparazzi snapshots, and scandalous rumors. Tragically, this insatiable thirst for attention eventually consumed her. The invasive cameras, constant scrutiny, and unrelenting pressure took a toll on her mental health. She transformed into a caricature of herself, a prisoner of the spotlight, with the media circling like vultures, eagerly awaiting their next feast. And there was plenty to feast upon, including her struggles with prescription drug addiction and visible mental health issues.

Why Fame Can Be a Nightmare

As her life spiraled out of control, the media reveled in the spectacle. Every misstep, every struggle became a sensationalized soap opera, eagerly devoured by the masses. Smith’s downfall became a morbid reality show, where her pain became profit for a callous industry. It was a dark dance, a sickening game, and both sides played their parts until there was nothing left.

In 2007, at the age of 39, Smith tragically succumbed to an accidental overdose of prescription drugs, marking a devastating end to a life lived in the tumultuous limelight. 

So, let us raise a glass to Anna Nicole, a fallen star who blazed across the sky with intensity, only to crash and burn in an inferno of chaos. Her legacy serves as a poignant reminder that even the most glamorous icons can become casualties of a world that both idolizes and devours them. As the dust settles from her existence, we are left to contemplate our own complicity in the media’s insatiable appetite for scandal, and the tragic toll it exacts on those caught in its clutches.

[Anton Schauble edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Bombshell: The Life and Death of Anna Nicole Smith appeared first on Fair Observer.

It’s clear that this problem has gone completely out of control. But has anyone taken the time to understand its deeper causes? Politicians and media personalities, including 2024 presidential hopefuls, Nikki Haley and Vivek Ramaswamy, have jumped on the crisis to draw attention to their standard agendas, whether it’s the immigration problem and border control or the growing trend to place all the blame on foreign actors for America’s problems.

What no one likes to talk about are the deeper systemic issues such as the role of Drug Enforcement agencies, major banking institutions and titans of industry in maintaining and exacerbating the crisis. 

Like Father, Like Sons

At the heart of this crisis lies the insidious role played by the sons of notorious drug lord Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán, who have emerged as key players in perpetuating America’s drug crisis. Adding another layer of intrigue and corruption, allegations of collusion between Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) officials and drug cartels have further muddied the waters.

 The capture and subsequent extradition of El Chapo in 2017 created a power vacuum within his Sinaloa Cartel. It was during this transition that two of El Chapo’s sons, Iván Archivaldo Guzmán and Jesús Alfredo Guzmán, stepped into leadership roles. Leveraging their family name and established connections, the Guzmán brothers have seized the opportunity to expand their influence over the drug trade, particularly regarding fentanyl.

Fentanyl, a synthetic opioid, has emerged as the primary driver of the current drug crisis in America. With potency up to 50 times stronger than heroin, even minuscule amounts can be fatal. Fentanyl is often mixed with other drugs, such as cocaine or counterfeit prescription pills, without the user’s knowledge, making it a lethal and unpredictable threat. The Guzmán brothers saw an opportunity in fentanyl, a synthetic opioid capable of taking down an elephant with a single dose. With ruthless ambition, they unleashed this lethal force on American soil, maximizing profits while leaving a trail of devastation in their wake.

In a shocking turn of events, allegations of collusion between DEA officials and the Sinaloa Cartel have surfaced, raising serious questions about the integrity and efficacy of America’s drug enforcement efforts. Whistleblowers within the DEA have claimed that certain officials, motivated by financial gain or misguided notions of intelligence gathering, turned a blind eye to the Guzmán brothers’ activities. These alleged collusions allowed the Sinaloa Cartel to operate with relative impunity, perpetuating the flow of fentanyl into the United States.

If the allegations of DEA collusion hold true, it represents a staggering betrayal of the American public’s trust. The very agency tasked with combating drug trafficking and protecting communities from the perils of addiction would have compromised its mission for personal gain or misguided strategic goals. The death toll continues to climb as unsuspecting victims fall prey to the potent grips of this synthetic demon.

U.S Citizens, Not Illegals, Are Smuggling Fentanyl Across Borders

The majority of illicit fentanyl found in the U.S. is believed to originate from illicit drug labs in China, and it is often smuggled into the United States through various means, including mail services and the postal system. However, in most cases, it is United States citizens that are implicated in smuggling fentanyl across the U.S.-Mexico border.

Some individuals may be enticed by the potential for significant financial gains or become involved due to coercion, threats, or other criminal activities. U.S citizens accounted for 86% of fentanyl trafficking convictions in 2021. 1,322 of the 1,533 charged fentanyl trafficking offenders were US citizens. Even the CATO Institute, a libertarian think tank, acknowledges this point.

According to the National Center for Drug Abuse Statistics, approximately 19.4 percent of Americans have experimented with illegal substances at least once. Out of the total population of 280 million individuals aged 12 and above, 31.9 million are classified as drug users. Among these, 11.7 percent are specifically using illegal substances, while 19.4 percent are either consuming illicit drugs or misusing prescription medications as of 2020.

As it turns out, America’s monstrous appetite for addictive drugs may have been fueled by predatory elements within our own capitalist ecosystem.

The Role of Big Pharma

The Sackler family, known for their connection to opioids, owned and ran Purdue Pharma, a pharmaceutical company that developed and marketed OxyContin. OxyContin, a powerful prescription painkiller, played a significant role in the opioid crisis in the United States. Purdue Pharma aggressively promoted OxyContin to doctors, downplaying its addictive potential and encouraging widespread use for chronic pain. The Sackler family, particularly Arthur, Mortimer, and Raymond Sackler, accumulated vast wealth through the success of Purdue Pharma. Cynics suggest the family’s motto was, “America’s pain is our profit.”

However, as evidence of OxyContin’s addictive nature and widespread abuse emerged, Purdue Pharma faced lawsuits and allegations of deceptive marketing practices. In 2007, the company pleaded guilty to criminal charges and paid a settlement of $634.5 million. The Sacklers’ role in fueling the opioid crisis while amassing enormous wealth drew significant criticism.

Purdue Pharma subsequently filed for bankruptcy, aiming to resolve thousands of lawsuits. The proposed settlement involves the dissolution of the company, a financial contribution of $6 billion from the Sackler family, and the transfer of Purdue’s assets to a public trust addressing the opioid crisis.

 Banks helping cartels launder illicit funds

If it wasn’t for major international banks turning a blind eye or in some cases actively aiding and abetting drug cartels, the drug crisis wouldn’t be nearly as acute. One prominent example is the case of the Wachovia Bank (now Wells Fargo) in the United States. 

In 2010, Wachovia reached a settlement with the U.S. government for allowing at least $378 billion in illicit funds to pass through its accounts, primarily linked to Mexican drug cartels. It was revealed that the bank had failed to implement adequate anti-money laundering controls, thereby facilitating the laundering of drug proceeds.

Another notable case involves the Lebanese Canadian Bank (LCB), which was accused by the U.S. government in 2011 of laundering money for international drug trafficking organizations, including Hezbollah. The U.S. Department of the Treasury designated LCB as a “primary money laundering concern” and shut it down.

It doesn’t stop there. In 2012 the British bank HSBC  agreed to pay a $1.9 billion fine to settle allegations that it had knowingly allowed Mexican and Colombian drug cartels to launder money through its accounts. The bank was accused of having weak money laundering controls that enabled illicit funds to be moved across borders undetected.

Chinese Money Laundering Operations

Chinese actors have increasingly assumed a prominent role in facilitating the illicit money laundering operations of Mexican drug cartels, specifically the Sinaloa Cartel and Cartel Jalisco Nueva Generación (CJNG), which are the primary distributors of fentanyl to the United States. These Chinese money laundering brokers have demonstrated a remarkable ability to evade detection by both the formal banking systems of the United States and Mexico. Their methods encompass a wide range of illicit activities and value transfers that exploit various channels. 

One notable avenue employed by these criminal networks is trade-based laundering. They exploit legitimate trade transactions to obscure the origin and movement of funds. For instance, they may utilize shell companies to manipulate import and export invoices, falsely inflating the value of goods to disguise illicit proceeds as legitimate business profits.

Additionally, the use of wildlife products as a medium for value transfer has been observed in the nefarious collaboration between Mexican and Chinese criminal networks. Protected and unprotected marine products, as well as timber, serve as vehicles for moving illicit funds. These criminal actors exploit the high demand for such commodities in China, exploiting loopholes and lax regulations to launder money through the sale and transport of these goods.

Real estate transactions also feature prominently in the web of money laundering operations between Mexican and Chinese criminal elements. They frequently invest Illicit funds in properties, disguising illegal proceeds as legitimate assets. This strategy not only conceals the origin of the funds but also provides a means of preserving and growing their illicit wealth.

As we navigate this surreal landscape, the task before us will be to break free from the vicious cycle of madness. First and foremost, rigorous investigations must be launched to uncover the depths of DEA corruption. Those responsible, whether cartels or corrupt officials, must face swift and severe consequences, sparing no one. 

Additionally, efforts should focus on enhancing border security, expanding access to addiction treatment and harm reduction services. Raising public awareness about the dangers of fentanyl and the tactics employed by drug cartels is imperative. Most importantly, the crisis should not be politicized and a bipartisan consensus must be reached to save our country from this creeping menace.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Sinaloa Cartel, DEA and Big Pharma: a Lethal Nexus appeared first on Fair Observer.

Born Anna Mae Bullock on November 26, 1939, in Nutbush, Tennessee, Tina Turner rose to prominence in the 1960s as the lead vocalist of the Ike & Tina Turner Revue. The duo’s energetic live performances and their chart-topping hits such as “River Deep – Mountain High” and “Proud Mary” made them a force to be reckoned with. Tina’s raw talent and boundless energy on stage earned her the title of the “Queen of Rock ‘n’ Roll.”

However, it was during her solo career that Tina Turner truly soared to new heights. In the 1980s, she released her landmark album “Private Dancer,” which featured the unforgettable singles “What’s Love Got to Do with It,” “Private Dancer,” and “Better Be Good to Me.”. This Grammy-winning album showcased her raw talent. Songs like “Simply the Best,” “We Don’t Need Another Hero,” and “Steamy Windows” became anthems for fans worldwide, and her live shows sold out stadiums across the globe..

Her marriage to Ike Turner, which ended in divorce in 1978, was marked by turbulent times and personal struggles. However, Tina overcame these challenges and was soon back in the saddle again. Her musical repertoire, informed by her traumatic marriage, was replete with themes of grief, betrayal and rising up from the ashes like a phoenix. Her autobiography, “I, Tina,” later adapted into the film “What’s Love Got to Do with It,” served as a testament to her indomitable spirit and became an inspiration to many.

Life without Ike

Tina’s career continued to flourish with subsequent albums like “Break Every Rule” (1986) and “Foreign Affair” (1989). Her collaboration with Bryan Adams on the hit song “It’s Only Love” further solidified her status as a global sensation. 

Many of Turner’s songs explore the complexities of love and relationships. She delves into themes of passion, heartbreak, desire, and devotion. Songs like “What’s Love Got to Do with It,” “Private Dancer,” and “I Don’t Wanna Fight” examine the ups and downs of romantic connections and the struggles of maintaining them. Her music frequently touches upon the desire for freedom and independence. Tracks like “River Deep – Mountain High,” “Nutbush City Limits,” and “We Don’t Need Another Hero” reflect a longing for liberation from oppressive situations, or personal limitations. 

And who can forget her role in the cult film, Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdrome, in which she co-starred with Mel Gibson as the chain-mail wearing ‘Aunty Entity’, the queen of a post-apocalyptic township named Bartertown. With this iconic role, she redefined the place of a leading woman in a major Hollywood production way back in 1985 when such characterizations were virtually unheard of.

In 1995 she performed the song “GoldenEye” written by Irish musicians Bono and the Edge. The song served as the theme for the James Bond film GoldenEye.

Tina Turner moved to Europe in the mid-1980s. After a successful career in the United States, she met her future husband, a man who was 16 years her junior, the German music executive Erwin Bach, and subsequently settled in Switzerland. She officially became a Swiss citizen in 2013 after residing in the country for many years. Her move to Europe allowed her to enjoy a quieter personal life and also marked a significant phase in her music career. Turner found considerable success and popularity in Europe, particularly during the 1980s and 1990s.

Buddhist enlightenment

Turner publicly announced her conversion to Buddhism in the early 1990s, following a trip to Japan where she encountered the teachings of Nichiren Buddhism. She had openly spoken about how her Buddhist practice served as a source of strength and resilience for her throughout her life. She credited the practice of chanting and studying Buddhist teachings with helping her overcome personal struggles and find inner peace.

Tina’s contributions to the music industry were recognized with numerous accolades throughout her career. She was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, received 12 Grammy awards, and a Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award. Having sold over 100 million records worldwide, she became one of the highest selling artists of all time.   

When Angela Bassett, who played Turner in the 1993 biopic “What’s Love Got To Do With It”, heard about her demise, wondered aloud: “How do we say farewell to a woman who owned her pain and trauma and used it as a means to help change the world?” Bassett said that “through her courage in telling her story, her commitment to stay the course in her life, no matter the sacrifice, and her determination to carve out a space in rock and roll for herself and for others who look like her, Tina Turner showed others who lived in fear what a beautiful future filled with love, compassion and freedom should look like.”

She is, and always will be, the Queen of Rock ‘n’ Roll.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Tina Turner: The Unparalleled Queen of Rock ’n’ Roll appeared first on Fair Observer.

One of the most glaring stains on Kissinger’s record is his involvement in the Vietnam War. Serving first as the national security advisor and then as the secretary of state under Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, Kissinger played a pivotal role in prolonging an unwinnable conflict. His adherence to a policy of gradual escalation, coupled with secret bombings in Cambodia and Laos, only exacerbated the suffering and destruction in Southeast Asia. The infamous quote, “The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer,” perfectly captures his  callousness and ends-justify-the-means approach to diplomacy. 

Kissinger’s pursuit of realpolitik, while espousing lofty ideals of stability and balance of power, often came at the expense of human rights and democratic values. Nowhere is this more evident than in his support for authoritarian regimes. For example, his embrace of Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet is a dark stain on American foreign policy. Kissinger’s complicity in the overthrow of the democratically elected Salvador Allende and subsequent support for Pinochet’s brutal regime exemplify a disregard for the principles the United States claims to champion.

Havoc in the Middle East and trouble with China

Another critical failure of Kissinger’s foreign policy was his approach to the Middle East, particularly during the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. While he brokered the historic Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel, his focus on short-term gains and strategic interests contributed to the perpetuation of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories. Kissinger left a lasting legacy of conflict and mistrust in the region by placing geopolitical considerations above the principles of justice and self-determination.

Moreover, Kissinger’s infamous doctrine of “triangular diplomacy” with China and the Soviet Union, although hailed as a masterstroke of realpolitik, had its own detrimental consequences. 

At the time, the United States faced challenges on two major fronts: a Cold War confrontation with the Soviet Union and a hot war with Vietnam, which strained its military and economic resources. Kissinger recognized an opportunity to shift the balance of power by engaging with both the Soviets and the Chinese. By playing them off against each other, he sought to create a more favorable environment for the United States.

Kissinger sought to stabilize relations between the US and China. Engaging with China was a pragmatic move to exploit the Sino-Soviet split. By then, both these communist countries had fallen out with each other. By establishing diplomatic ties with China and prioritizing relations with Beijing, the US effectively isolated the Soviet Union and weakened its influence in the international arena. However, this led to unintended consequences.

Firstly, Kissinger’s pursuit of détente with China created a sense of uncertainty and threat perception in the Soviet Union. The growing closeness between the US and China forced the Soviet Union to divert significant resources towards its military buildup, thereby intensifying the arms race and heightening Cold War tensions.

Secondly, Kissinger’s engagement with China also provided the Soviet Union an opportunity to strengthen its own alliances and partnerships. In response to the US outreach to China, the Soviet Union deepened its ties with other socialist states and expanded its influence in regions such as Eastern Europe, Africa and the Middle East. 

Furthermore, Kissinger’s China policy also had economic implications. By opening up trade and investment opportunities with China, the US inadvertently contributed to China’s economic rise. This economic growth eventually transformed China into a major global power, challenging US dominance and creating new geopolitical complexities in the 21st century. 

Kissinger himself recently told The Economist that the world is “in a classic pre-World War I situation.” The looming specter of artificial intelligence, and the development of weapons that seem inspired by science fiction make the situation more precarious still. “We are on a path to great-power confrontation,” Kissinger argues, because “both sides have convinced themselves that the other represents a strategic danger”. The Economist, however, chose not to ask him if the current impasse could be a result of his own policies.  

Kissinger’s controversial legacy cannot be solely attributed to his policy decisions. His style of diplomacy, shrouded in secrecy and backdoor negotiations, fostered an atmosphere of distrust and suspicion. By conducting diplomacy as a closed-door game of chess, he sidelined democratic institutions and undermined transparency. The infamous wiretapping of his staff members and leaks to the press further eroded trust and tarnished the integrity of the American government. 

As we reflect on Henry Kissinger’s 100th birth anniversary, it is crucial to recognize the enduring impact of his encounter with Indira Gandhi, which stands as a pivotal moment in history. The complex dynamics that unfolded during their interactions not only impacted the bilateral relations between the United States and India but also had far-reaching repercussions for the volatile region as a whole.  

Misunderstanding India and promoting Pakistan

During the early 1970s, India found itself facing a precarious situation. It was grappling with political unrest and had a strained relationship with neighboring Pakistan. Against this backdrop, Kissinger’s visit to India in 1971 aimed to address these pressing issues. 

At the heart of the Indo-US discord lay the India-Pakistan War of 1971, ultimately leading to Bangladesh’s creation. Kissinger’s diplomatic efforts were driven by a desire to maintain a balance of power and avert a larger conflict in the region. He favored his Cold War ally Pakistan. Gandhi opposed Kissinger. She wanted justice for the genocide, rape and terrible atrocities committed by Pakistani occupying forces in Bangladesh.

The encounter between Kissinger and Gandhi revealed a stark disparity in their approaches to international relations. While Kissinger favored realpolitik based on strategic interests, Gandhi championed self-determination and human rights. Their clash resulted in strained relations between the world’s two biggest democracies that lasted for decades.

After this war, India moved closer to the Soviet Union. The Cold War came to the Indian subcontinent. Pakistan became even more of a US lackey while India came to rely primarily on the Soviet Union for its defense equipment. Only in the 1990s after the fall of the Soviet Union did India-US relations normalize.

In Pakistan, Kissinger’s support during the 1971 war emboldened the military regime and perpetuated a culture of military dominance in the country’s politics. This had long-term implications for democracy and stability in Pakistan Subsequent military regimes suppressed dissent and undermined civilian governance, knowing fully well that the US would stand by them.

The encounter between Kissinger and Gandhi also exacerbated South Asian tensions. With the security of US backing, Pakistan sought revenge for defeat in 1971. It abetted and funded insurgency in India, first in Punjab and then in Kashmir. Dispute over the latter became far more toxic and Kashmir remains a flashpoint even today.

While Kissinger may be remembered as a master tactician by some, his legacy is one of disastrous consequences. This centurion is responsible for devastation in Vietnam, perpetuation of authoritarian regimes and unending chaos in South Asia. As we reflect on his life’s work, let us not forget Kissinger’s moral compromises that caused immense human costs and still haunt the world today. He was a narcissist who operated alone, disregarding the constraints of institutions of values.

His worldview and approach to international relations can be summed up in one single quote from an interview with the journalist Oriana Fallaci in November 1972: “Americans like the cowboy … who rides all alone into the town, the village, with his horse and nothing else … This amazing, romantic character suits me precisely because to be alone has always been part of my style or, if you like, my technique.” 

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Even at 100, Henry Kissinger’s Legacy Is Frightening appeared first on Fair Observer.

House of Cards ran for a total of six seasons. The series, created by Beau Willimon, premiered on February 1, 2013, and concluded with its final season, released on November 2, 2018. Over the course of its run, House of Cards garnered several awards, critical accolades and a dedicated fan base, establishing itself as one of the flagship shows of the streaming service Netflix. 

The show begins with Underwood, a Democratic congressman from South Carolina, being passed over for a coveted position in the new presidential administration. Fueled by a burning desire for power and revenge, Underwood sets out on a treacherous path to achieve his ambitions.

Hell Hath no Fury Like a Congressman Scorned

With the help of his equally formidable wife, Claire Underwood, Frank concocts intricate schemes to manipulate and destroy his adversaries, which include the sitting president. He employs a wide array of tactics, including bribery, blackmail, and manipulation of public opinion, to ascend the political ladder. Along the way, he forms strategic alliances with influential figures, builds a network of loyal supporters, and orchestrates calculated betrayals to ensure his rise to power.

As the series progresses, Frank Underwood’s Machiavellian tactics lead him to become vice president of the United States and, eventually, president. However, his ascent to the highest office in the land comes with its own set of challenges and moral dilemmas. Underwood must confront the consequences of his actions, face threats from within and outside his administration, and navigate the intricate web of political intrigue that surrounds him. He will stop at nothing to achieve his goals, including murder.

Spacey’s depiction of Frank Underwood is a marvel of subtlety and calculated charisma. From the moment he steps onto the screen, Spacey commands our attention with his piercing gaze and sly, smirking grin. Underwood’s Southern drawl, carefully measured and dripping with charm, is a tool honed to perfection. It serves as both a veneer of affability and a weapon of manipulation, allowing him to weave a web of deceit and ruthlessness that is as captivating as it is repugnant.

Nuanced Portrayals

Yet, it is Spacey’s ability to humanize this conniving character that truly distinguishes his performance. Underneath the veneer of power and manipulation lies a man haunted by demons, struggling to reconcile his insatiable thirst for control with the remnants of a wounded conscience. Spacey deftly reveals these internal conflicts through subtle shifts in his demeanor, a fleeting moment of vulnerability in his eyes, or a flicker of remorse that passes across his face. Through these nuanced portrayals, he exposes the frailty and complexity of a man consumed by his own ambition, thereby allowing us to empathize with a character we should otherwise despise.

As we witness Frank Underwood manipulate alliances, orchestrate political chess games, and exploit the vulnerabilities of others, we are reminded of the intricate power dynamics at play in our globalized world. House of Cards lays bare the cutthroat nature of international relations, where nations jockey for dominance, economies teeter on the brink of collapse, and the pursuit of self-interest often trumps collective well-being. However, House of Cards is anything but a morality tale. There is no attempt to attribute any redeeming qualities or to ascribe anything but naked self-interest to the main protagonists.

The outstanding supporting performances in House of Cards elevate the series to a new level of excellence. Robin Wright’s portrayal of Claire Underwood is nothing short of mesmerizing. With her steely gaze and unwavering determination, Wright embodies the essence of a complex and calculating political mastermind. Her nuanced performance reveals the layers of vulnerability beneath her icy exterior, leaving audiences both in awe and on edge. Michael Kelly’s portrayal of Doug Stamper, the loyal and morally ambiguous chief of staff, is equally captivating. Kelly infuses the character with a haunting mix of loyalty, ruthlessness, and tortured introspection, making Doug Stamper one of the most enigmatic and unforgettable characters on television.

Shaping and Distorting Narratives

One of the show’s most brilliant aspects is its exploration of the media’s role in shaping and distorting narratives. House of Cards paints a vivid picture of how stories are carefully constructed and manipulated to serve the interests of the powerful. It exposes the underbelly of journalism, revealing how information is weaponized and truth becomes a malleable concept in the hands of those seeking to maintain control. One cannot help but be reminded of the Hunter Biden laptop fiasco where prominent outlets like The New York Times tried to dismiss the smoking gun as “Russian disinformation” in the lead-up to the last election so as not to hurt Joe Biden’s chances. As it turned out, the story was completely accurate and implicated Hunter for peddling influence with overseas business consortiums during his father’s tenure as vice president.

The young and ambitious journalist Zoe Barnes (Kata Mara) becomes one of Frank’s most compelling and tragic victims. From the onset, Frank presents himself as Zoe’s mentor, capitalizing on her youthful enthusiasm and hunger for success. He entices her with the allure of inside information, secrets whispered into her ear like a siren’s song. Barnes, dazzled by the proximity to power and blinded by ambition, becomes a willing participant in Underwood’s game.

Underwood’s manipulation is often veiled by a veneer of mentorship and guidance. He instills in Barnes a belief that she is an integral part of his grand plan, a trusted confidante. Yet, this perceived importance is nothing more than a means to an end. Underwood subtly stokes her ambition, pushing her to dig deeper and even cross ethical boundaries, all to serve his own interests.

As Barnes begins to question their arrangement and seeks to gain agency, she becomes a liability to Underwood. In a chilling turn of events, he coldly removes her from the equation, ruthlessly eliminating any threat to his power. Zoe Barnes becomes a cautionary tale of the price one pays for dancing too closely with a puppet master like Frank Underwood.

Revealing the Real Puppet Masters

House of Cards delves into the murky world of lobbyists and big business, highlighting their insidious influence on shaping legislation and manipulating political outcomes. The series peels back the curtain on the unsavory dance between politicians and those who pull their strings, and exposes the ways in which corporate interests can infiltrate the highest levels of government. 

In season six, we are introduced to the Shepherd Foundation, or “the power behind the power”. Portrayed as an insidious force, it weaves its influence behind the scenes, manipulating the levers of power to shape the political landscape. Much like the dark undercurrents of real-life power structures, the Shepherd Foundation exercises its influence discreetly, employing an arsenal of tactics designed to further its agenda while maintaining an illusion of philanthropy. 

The uncanny parallels between the Shepherd Foundation and the contemporary political landscape are impossible to ignore. In an era marred by hidden interests, Super PACs, and backroom dealings, House of Cards serves as a chilling mirror reflecting the realities of power dynamics in the real world. The pervasive influence of corporations, wealthy elites, and shadowy organizations resonates with our own political reality, where money and influence shape the trajectory of democracy. The parallels with real-world power brokers such as the Koch brothers on the right and George Soros on the left, who play a big role in shaping narratives, public opinion and foreign policy, are unmistakable.

While the controversies surrounding Kevin Spacey caused the showrunners Frank Pugliese and James Gibson to hastily rewrite the last season, truncating it at eight episodes instead of the planned thirteen, the exoneration of Spacey in the sexual harassment lawsuit brought by Anthony Rapp may pave the way for the commissioning of a seventh season. Should Netflix choose to continue House of Cards, the absence of legal liability against Spacey would provide the opportunity to conclude the gripping narrative that has enthralled audiences for years.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Why House of Cards is More Relevant Than Ever appeared first on Fair Observer.

Born on September 25, 1949, in Swansea, Wales, Martin Amis was the charismatic, often polarizing, son of the esteemed Sir Kingsley Amis. From an early age, it was clear that Martin would not follow the path of conventional storytelling. No, he had a penchant for challenging social norms, literary conventions, and, occasionally, good taste.

Amis burst onto the scene with The Rachel Papers (1973), a coming-of-age tale exploring the awkward and desperate antics of a young man pursuing romance. It was sharp, witty, and unapologetically irreverent, setting the stage for Amis’s unconventional career. But with Dead Babies (1975), he truly announced his arrival, delivering a decadent and darkly humorous story of debauchery that shocked readers and scandalized the literary elite.

Then came the bombshell that was Money: A Suicide Note (1984). Amis tore through the pretensions and excesses of the 1980s, with the unabashed hedonism and greed of his protagonist, John Self. It was a scathing indictment of the materialistic culture, a relentless skewering of yuppie ethos that captivated and infuriated readers. Controversial? Absolutely. But Amis reveled in the uproar, raising his glass to those who couldn’t handle his razor-sharp wit.

Amis continued his audacious literary exploits with London Fields (1989), a sprawling and morally ambiguous masterpiece that brought together a motley crew of characters in a pre-apocalyptic London. It was a deliciously dark exploration of desire, manipulation, and the blurred lines between good and evil.

With Time’s Arrow (1991), Amis defied conventional narrative structures, telling the story of a Nazi doctor in reverse chronological order. It was a daring experiment, blending historical fiction with philosophical musings, leaving readers both intrigued and perplexed. Some lauded his audacity, while others scratched their heads in confusion. But Amis had never been one to cater to the status quo. 

The Information (1995) saw Amis take on the world of literary pretensions with a delicious dose of self-referential satire. It followed the misadventures of an unsuccessful writer, reflecting Amis’s own experiences and leaving no stone unturned in its scathing critique of the literary establishment. Some saw it as a bold statement against the hypocrisy of the literary world, while others saw it as a personal vendetta against his peers.

No Apologies, No Fear

Throughout his career, Amis courted controversy with his unapologetic opinions, taboo subjects, and occasionally shocking language. He fearlessly tackled sensitive issues, provoking heated debates and dividing readers. But love him or hate him, you couldn’t ignore him.

Few topics ignited as much debate as his views on Islamic terrorism. In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, Amis published an essay collection, The Second Plane: September 11, 2001-2007 (2008). He argued that the rise of radical Islamism posed a profound threat to Western societies and freedoms. Amis did not shy away from addressing the uncomfortable aspects of this issue, including the role of religion, cultural clashes, and the potential dangers of political correctness in tackling the problem.

Amis’s writings on Islamic terrorism were marked by a sense of urgency and a willingness to challenge prevailing narratives. His bold and controversial statements, such as suggesting the possibility of a “war on Islamism,” drew strong reactions from critics who accused him of Islamophobia and fostering a climate of fear. The charged nature of the discussion surrounding his views often overshadowed the nuances of his arguments and the complexities of the topic at hand. 

As we raise our glasses to bid farewell to Martin Amis, let us remember him not only for his unorthodox storytelling and incisive social commentary but also for his irreverent spirit and his willingness to challenge the conventions of his craft. He was a provocateur, a troublemaker, and a literary force to be reckoned with.

Rest in chaos, Martin Amis. May you continue ruffling feathers wherever you are.

[Thomas Isackson edited this article.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Martin Amis: Obituary of a Great Literary Maverick appeared first on Fair Observer.

The streets embraced this new sound, and soon MCs started grabbing the mic, spitting rhymes and turning parties into lyrical battlegrounds. The Furious Five, with their charismatic frontman Grandmaster Flash, took this shit to a whole new level. Their track “The Message” dropped in ’82, and it was a raw portrayal of the harsh realities of life in the ghetto. It was all about keepin’ it real, speaking truth to power, and giving a voice to the voiceless.

Then came the legendary golden age of hip hop, with a slew of iconic artists droppin’ bombs that would shape the game forever. Run-DMC, Rakim, Public Enemy, and N.W.A—the names alone command respect. They rhymed with passion, skill, and wit, raising their middle fingers to the system that kept their communities down.

These artists brought the themes of money, power, sex, and drugs to the forefront. They painted vivid pictures of the hustle, the grind, and the pursuit of paper. Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five’s “White Lines” exposed the dark side of the coke game, while N.W.A’s entire Straight Outta Compton album laid bare the reality of police brutality and systemic racism. 

But rap wasn’t just about the struggle. It celebrated success, the hustle, and the good life. Biggie Smalls, the Notorious B.I.G., showed us the power of the hustle in “Juicy” with lyrics like, “It was all a dream, I used to read Word Up! Magazine, Salt-N-Pepa and Heavy D up in the limousine.” Those words were an anthem for anyone trying to rise up from the bottom.

And let’s not forget the ladies who paved their own way in this male-dominated scene. Salt-N-Pepa, Queen Latifah, and Lil’ Kim took control of their sexuality and gave a powerful voice to women in hip hop. With tracks like “Shoop” and “Ladies First,” they owned their power and commanded respect.

As hip hop spread its wings, it evolved and morphed into new sub-genres and styles, including one of its most notorious and commercially successful; gangsta rap.

Fuck tha Police: The Birth of Gangsta Rap

Gangsta rap emerged in the mid-1980s as a subgenre of hip-hop music. It originated primarily in the African American communities of South Central Los Angeles, California. The term “gangsta” reflects the genre’s focus on depicting the realities of street life, crime, violence, and the experiences of urban youth in marginalized communities.

Several artists and groups played significant roles in the development of gangsta rap. One of the earliest and most influential figures was Schoolly D, who released songs like “P.S.K. What Does It Mean?” in 1985, known for their explicit and gritty portrayals of inner-city life. However, it was N.W.A (Niggaz Wit Attitude), a pioneering group from Compton, California, that brought gangsta rap to the mainstream.

N.W.A, consisting of members such as Eazy-E, Ice Cube, Dr. Dre, MC Ren, and DJ Yella, released their groundbreaking album Straight Outta Compton in 1988. It was characterized by its fearless lyrics that reflected the harsh realities of street violence, police brutality, and gang culture. Songs like “Fuck tha Police” and “Gangsta Gangsta” became anthems of resistance and gave voice to the frustrations and experiences of Black youth.

The success of N.W.A and Ice-T in the late ‘80s paved the way for other gangsta rap artists and crews to emerge, Snoop Dogg, Tupac Shakur, The Notorious B.I.G., and many more.

Perhaps nobody said it better than Tupac, an incredibly gifted rapper, poet and storyteller who became the poster child of Gangsta rap. In the song ‘Starin’ Through my Rear View’, he summed up the pain of his generation:

“Multiple gunshots fill the block, the fun stops/
Niggaz is callin cops, people shot, nobody stop/
I wonder when the world stopped caring last night/
Two kids shot while the whole block staring/
I will never understand this society, first they try
To murder me, then they lie to me/

A few beats later he spits out the hook, warning the world that the end is near.

“They got me starin’ at the world through my rearview/
Go on, baby, scream to God, he can’t hear you/
I can feel your heart beatin’ fast ’cause it’s time to die/
Gettin’ high, watchin’ time fly”

On September 7, 1996, Tupac was gunned down in a drive-by shooting in Las Vegas, Nevada. He was 25 years old.

His songs have become the stuff of legend with their mesmerizing beats and poetic take on the life of an outlaw, including “California Love”, “Till the End of Time”, All Eyez on Me”, “Hail Mary” and “When Thugz Cry”. Twenty-seven years after he died, his music still raises the room temperature and makes those booties jiggle like jello.    

It is important to note that while gangsta rap has been criticized for its explicit content and sometimes glorification of violence, it also provided a platform for artists to voice their frustrations and bring attention to social and political injustices. It remains an influential and impactful subgenre within the broader landscape of hip-hop music.

Demolishing Wokeness

The 2000s introduced us to a new wave of artists who took hip hop to new heights. Jay-Z, Eminem, and Kanye West became cultural icons, dominating charts and shaping the sound of a new era. Jay-Z’s “Empire State of Mind” captured the ambition and the hustle of a generation, while Eminem’s “Lose Yourself” became an anthem for anyone chasing their dreams.

Hip hop has a reputation for being unapologetically raw and uncensored, often delving into themes that make the prim and proper folks squirm. Money, power, and sex are like the holy trinity of hip hop, and it’s entertaining to observe how they make the self-righteous cringe.

Take Jay-Z’s “Big Pimpin’,” for example. He says, “You know I thug ’em, fuck ’em, love ’em, leave ’em / ‘Cause I don’t fuckin’ need ’em.” Oh, mercy! That line sure doesn’t sit well with the sensitive souls who value emotional connection. But guess what? Jay-Z doesn’t give a damn about your delicate sensibilities.

Then we’ve got 50 Cent with his track “P.I.M.P.” He raps, “I don’t know what you heard about me / But a bitch can’t get a dollar out of me / No Cadillac, no perms, you can’t see / That I’m a motherfuckin’ P.I.M.P.” Oh, the horror! Denizens of the ivory tower can’t fathom why anyone would be so fixated on material possessions when there are deeper existential matters to ponder. It’s just not their cup of tea.

But here’s the thing: hip hop isn’t meant to cater to the refined tastes of the upper crust. It’s a cultural force that reflects the realities of the streets, where money, power, and sex often dominate the narrative. It’s unapologetic, brash, and larger than life. It speaks to a different audience, one that isn’t seeking intellectual enlightenment but rather a raw and authentic expression of life’s grittier side.

Celebrating sexual desire

Rap music has always prided itself on being counter-cultural, subversive, and rebellious. In a society where prudishness often reigns supreme, rap music serves as a bold middle finger to societal norms. It challenges the idea that discussions about sex should be kept behind closed doors and offers a raw, unfiltered portrayal of human desires.

In the realm of rap, hot women are like the Holy Grail. Artists can’t resist showering their lyrics with vivid descriptions of curvaceous figures, luscious lips, and hypnotizing gazes. From Sir Mix-a-Lot’s classic “Baby Got Back” to Cardi B’s unapologetic celebration of female sexuality in “WAP,” rap music revels in the art of celebrating the female form. Critics may scoff and call it superficial or objectifying, but let’s be honest here – it’s all part of the game. 

In the world of rap, it seems like the number of sexual partners you’ve had is directly proportional to your street cred. You’ll often hear rap lyrics filled with accounts of late-night escapades, bedroom acrobatics, and enough innuendos to make your grandmother blush. It’s like a never-ending competition to outdo each other in the realm of sexual prowess, and we’re all here for the wild stories and exaggerated swagger.

Let’s give credit where it’s due – rap music has taken the art of wordplay and metaphors to a whole new level. While some may argue that explicit lyrics about hot women and sex lack depth, true connoisseurs of the genre know that there’s more beneath the surface. Most rappers are skilled wordsmiths, weaving intricate rhymes and clever metaphors that add layers of meaning to their lyrical prowess. So, even if it seems like a straightforward ode to sexual desire, there’s often an undercurrent of social commentary or personal expression lurking within those lascivious verses.

From Projects to Private Jets

Picture this: a struggling artist from the rough streets, surrounded by poverty and adversity, armed with nothing but a dream and a microphone. Fast forward a few years, and that same artist is now dripping in diamonds, cruising in luxury cars, and living in mansions that would make Scrooge McDuck blush. The rags-to-riches stories of iconic rappers not only embody the American Dream but also send up the anti-capitalist rhetoric popular in white liberal circles.

Hip hop’s success stories are nothing short of astonishing. Take Jay-Z, for example. From his humble beginnings in Brooklyn’s notorious Marcy Projects to becoming a billionaire entrepreneur, he’s the embodiment of the rags-to-riches narrative. He didn’t just become one of the most influential rappers of all time; he transformed himself into a business mogul, owning a stake in everything from music streaming platforms to luxury champagne brands. And he’s not alone. Artists like Dr. Dre, Sean Combs, and Rihanna have leveraged their talents and entrepreneurial spirit to build empires that would make Wall Street tremble.  

If there’s one thing successful rappers are unapologetic about, it’s flaunting their wealth. From diamond-encrusted grills to chains that weigh more than a small child, rappers have perfected the art of bling. Critics may decry this ostentatious display of opulence as shallow or materialistic, but let’s be real here – who doesn’t secretly want to rock a gold-plated suit while sipping Cristal from a diamond-studded goblet? Those rappers have turned the celebration of wealth into an art form, and their unapologetic embrace of luxury upends the anti-capitalist narrative, giving a middle finger to those who decry their success.

Materialism as a Middle Finger

Anti-capitalist rhetoric often bemoans the materialistic excesses of the wealthy, viewing them as symbols of greed and inequality. But here’s the thing – rappers have taken that narrative and flipped it on its head. They revel in the materialistic aspects of their success, not just as a personal indulgence but as a defiant act against a society that said they couldn’t make it. For them, the diamonds, the cars, and the lavish lifestyles aren’t just symbols of opulence; they’re a giant middle finger to a system that often keeps the underprivileged down. It’s their way of saying, “Look at me now!”

Beyond the bling and the flashy lifestyles, the most successful hip hop artists are defying anti-capitalist rhetoric through their entrepreneurial endeavors. They’re not just consuming wealth; they’re creating it. They’ve become savvy businesspeople, establishing record labels, fashion lines, and investment portfolios that generate money and opportunities for themselves and their communities. They’ve turned their hustle into a blueprint for success, inspiring generations to chase their dreams and break free from the chains of poverty.

While the haters may turn up their noses at their opulent displays of success, these artists have flipped the script. They’ve transformed materialism into a form of rebellion, entrepreneurship into a tool for empowerment, and their success into an inspiration for others to break free from the limitations imposed by society. So, let the champagne flow, the diamonds shine, and the rappers keep flipping the bird to anyone who says they can’t have it all.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Get Rich or Die Tryin’: Rappers Pursuing the American Dream appeared first on Fair Observer.

The signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994 brought about a significant shift in the dynamics of US-Mexico relations. While NAFTA aimed to promote economic growth and development, it also had unintended consequences for Mexican farmers and small-scale industries. The influx of subsidized American agricultural products led to the displacement of local farmers and increased unemployment. This economic upheaval, coupled with the lure of higher wages and employment opportunities to the north, further fueled migration from Mexico to the United States. 

A Teetering System

After years of stabilizing or even declining numbers of undocumented, unauthorized, or illegal migrants (pick your term) crossing the southern border, the influx has recently exploded and remains at stratospheric levels. The Migration Policy Institute estimated that around 79% of the undocumented immigrant population in the United States in 2018 originated from Mexico and Central America, including countries such as El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras.

The numbers tell us that the US has an immigration crisis. Past reforms have attempted to address the complexities of the border but have failed. The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 sought to grant amnesty to undocumented immigrants while simultaneously increasing border enforcement measures. However, the implementation of IRCA faced challenges, and subsequent reforms failed to provide a comprehensive solution. The absence of a clear path to legal status for those unauthorized immigrants who arrived after the IRCA, coupled with inadequate border security measures, contributed to an ongoing cycle of unauthorized migration.  

Since early 2021, there has been a notable increase in the number of individuals attempting to cross the US-Mexico border. The reasons behind this surge are multifaceted and can be attributed to a combination of push and pull factors. Economic challenges, violence, political instability, natural disasters, and the desire to reunite with family members already in the United States are among the factors that drive individuals to leave their home countries and seek entry into the United States. On top of that, the Biden Administration has a history of sending mixed signals to migrants. 

The influx of migrants has overwhelmed border facilities and strained the resources of immigration agencies, such as Customs and Border Protection and the Office of Refugee Resettlement. The capacity to process and house migrants has been stretched thin, resulting in overcrowded detention centers and temporary facilities. The situation has raised concerns about the conditions in which migrants are held, including issues of overcrowding, limited access to healthcare, and inadequate facilities to accommodate families and unaccompanied minors.

The increase in migrant arrivals has also strained the capacity to handle asylum claims and legal processing. The backlogs in immigration courts have further prolonged the time it takes to resolve cases, leaving individuals in limbo and creating challenges for managing the flow of migrants.

Trump Policies Dismantled

While the issue predates the Biden administration, it is crucial to analyze how President Joe Biden’s policies have shaped the current immigration crisis at the border.

From day one, Biden has prioritized dismantling the immigration policies implemented by his predecessor. His eagerness to erase any trace of Donald Trump’s immigration legacy has left our border vulnerable and created a magnet for illegal immigration. During his presidency, Donald Trump implemented various immigration policies aimed at reducing the influx of undocumented immigrants into the United States. While these policies were controversial and faced criticism from many quarters, supporters argue that they had notable effects on immigration patterns.

Here are some of Trump’s key immigration policies:

Border Security and Wall Construction: Trump made border security a priority and pushed for the construction of a physical barrier along the US-Mexico border. Although significant portions of the wall were replacement or reinforcement of existing barriers, it aimed to deter illegal crossings. 

Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP): The MPP, also known as the “Remain in Mexico” policy, required individuals seeking asylum at the southern border to wait in Mexico while their claims were processed in US courts. Supporters argue that this policy helped manage the influx of asylum seekers and reduced the incentive for fraudulent claims. 

Title 42: It was introduced in March 2020 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) under the Trump administration. This policy invoked a public health provision, allowing the swift expulsion of individuals who posed a risk of spreading infectious diseases, including COVID-19. It acted as a necessary and effective tool to protect both Americans and migrants themselves from potential health hazards.

Title 42 proved crucial in managing the overwhelming surge of illegal immigration at the southern border. By enforcing swift deportations, it discouraged the dangerous practice of human smuggling and reduced the strain on our already burdened immigration system. Curiously, the Biden Administration fought Title 42 expulsions even as it officially maintained the COVID crisis was ongoing.

Asylum Policy Changes: The Trump administration implemented several changes to the asylum system, including the expansion of “safe third country” agreements and imposing stricter requirements on asylum seekers. These policies aimed to limit the number of individuals qualifying for asylum and expedite the asylum process. 

Immigration Enforcement: Trump focused on ramping up immigration enforcement, empowering Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to target undocumented immigrants, including those with criminal records. This led to increased apprehensions and deportations. 

Indifference by Design

The most egregious aspect of Biden’s approach lies in his weakening of border enforcement measures. The termination of the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), has resulted in a surge of illegal border crossings. By allowing migrants to enter the United States while awaiting court proceedings (that more often than not are skipped anyway), Biden has effectively created a “catch and release” system that encourages further illegal entry. 

The Biden Administration, led by its disdain for immigration enforcement, In May 2021 began winding down Title 42. The impact of repealing Title 42 has been swift and devastating. The number of illegal border crossings has skyrocketed to levels unseen in recent history, overwhelming Border Patrol agents and immigration facilities. Our border communities are forced to bear the brunt of this burden, grappling with the consequences of uncontrolled immigration.

Furthermore, Biden’s reckless expansion of immigration enforcement priorities is a slap in the face to law-abiding citizens. The administration’s focus on dismantling ICE and limiting deportations has created a dangerous environment where criminal illegal aliens are shielded from justice. This flagrant disregard for public safety and the rule of law undermines the very fabric of our society.

While the Biden administration claims to prioritize “humane” immigration policies, it conveniently ignores the humanitarian crisis that its own policies have exacerbated. The overcrowded detention facilities, unsanitary conditions, and the exploitation of vulnerable migrants are all consequences of an open-borders agenda. By failing to provide a deterrent and a clear message that illegal entry will not be tolerated, Biden’s policies perpetuate a cycle of human suffering and incentivize more dangerous journeys.

Sound Immigration Policies, Not Border Chaos

It is not a matter of heartlessness or xenophobia to demand secure borders and a rational immigration system. The United States has a rich history of legal immigration, and we have always welcomed those who abide by our laws. However, Biden’s policies prioritize the desires of foreign nationals over the well-being of American citizens.

The solution lies in a balanced approach that combines border security, immigration enforcement, and compassionate solutions for those seeking legal entry. This means investing in technology and infrastructure to secure our borders, reforming our broken immigration system, and prioritizing the interests and safety of American citizens.

The Biden administration’s reckless disregard for the rule of law and the sovereignty of our nation will have lasting consequences. It is high time that we recognize the dangers of these policies and demand a return to a sensible, secure, and fair immigration system that puts America and its citizens first. Our nation’s future depends on it.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post The Truth About Joe Biden’s Immigration Policy appeared first on Fair Observer.

The magazine recently made waves in the gamer, sci-fi and fantasy world for generating an 80s period version of The Matrix (hypothetically) helmed by Chilean-French cult director Alejandro Jodorowsky.

In an interview with Fair Observer, Philippe Klein—Infinite Odyssey’s creative director—tells us about the origins of the publication and future of “human-less art”. He also shares his views on the AI plagiarism debate, the competing realities of the virtual world, whether virtual sex can ever be better than the real thing, and much more.

Philippe’s work can be found here. 

[We have edited this interview lightly for clarity.]

Vikram Zutshi: How did the idea for Infinite Odyssey come about and what is your creative/technical background?  

Philippe Klein: Well it started a couple of months ago—nine months ago—when I sat down with some of my colleagues and we came up with the idea on how to use AI for something that has never been done before. And since we all have, kind of, this creative and fantasy background—or at least a huge interest in those things—we were like, “Okay let’s do something where we use nothing but AI.” And, to create something that we would have liked to read as children: that we would have liked to develop, but we didn’t have the chance up until now when we were able to use AI programs like MidJourney, Dolly, Stable Diffusion and, of course, programs like GPT.

Since I’m a writer myself and I used to work for television as an author and producer, I was also always interested [in] developing stories, characters, [and] different scenarios, so that came very naturally. And this is why we all sat together and said, “Yeah, let’s make this project.” It’s something where we were waiting for so many months until we got access to all the apps, to all the applications, but in the end it was really worth [the wait] and we [were] quickly finding a new passion.

Zutshi: The art displayed in IO is pure sci-fi eye candy. What are the programs that you are using to create the images?Can you give us an overview of your creative process?

Klein: First of all, thank you that you like our images so much and I’m always happy to hear that they resonate with people.

The main programs we are using are Mid-Journey and Stable Diffusion. Sometimes we use Dolly, but Dolly has a little bit of a too realistic approach, I would say. And usually doesn’t give us the pictures we are looking for. So, Mid-Journey is kind of cool if you want to create something fast and you already have a vision.

And Stable Diffusion is a bit more complex to understand, it’s a bit more complex to use, but we can make many cool things.But with Stable Diffusion we are mostly working on videos and stuff like that.And this is also something we are going to pursue in the next couple of months: AI-augmented videos and all these things.

But overall the creative process for creating the magazine is that we have [weekly] team meetings where we brainstorm together with AI. What are the subjects, what are the stories we are going to tell, [what] we want to tell in this next issue. And—based on those ideas that we create together with AI—we start writing our stories.

So first you have the text, the literature, being created by machine.What’s happening then is that, adding to the literature, we start developing pictures.This is really the most fun part of creating the magazine, I think.And my teammates would agree on this as well, that we are experimenting with different styles, with different approaches, but sometimes you are trying to get the perfect picture.

But Mid-Journey or Stable Diffusion just doesn’t give you the right angle or the picture you are trying to fantasize. But in those moments we are like, you know what, it’s AI and AI gave us this picture and we are going to go with it. Because we are not trying to make something that a human could do.We are not trying to do something that we could maybe do with Blender or with Maya or with Photoshop.

We are trying to do a performance [just] using AI. And this is why sometimes we would go with pictures that maybe would not 100% fit with what we want, but we are really trying to bend the AI with everything we have. And [our knowledge on prompting] is why we get pretty cool results 99% of the time.

And yeah, as soon as we have the images fixed, we will get them to our magazine layout. But in the end, everything we post on our Instagram as well is not necessarily made for the magazine, because we use lots of sources like Star Wars or Matrix and stuff, which is basically copyrighted material. But we are remixing the idea of it, so we are not getting any money.

But we are doing something that we like to look at, which is fun. This is basically the divided process. Very individual arts that are just created by machines and coming directly from our mind for the magazine and everything else basically for the Instagram page.

Zutshi: What are the future applications you see for Generative AI other than just creating beautiful images? Do you see virtual worlds as real as our own which can interact with our senses in the same manner as reality and what are the dangers? How will this technology transform filmmaking, or medical research and treatment? 

Klein: Well, as you just said, I don’t see virtual worlds as real. They are virtual reality, but one can argue now what is real anyway.

If you’re a believer that we humans live in a simulation, does it make that more real or less real? I don’t know, I can’t really answer that question. But you’re gonna have to decide in which world you want to spend time. Do you want to spend time in the virtual world or do you want to spend time in the normal world?

Let’s call it normal, the world that we live in right now. Some people might believe that the world we already live in is full of dangers, yet a virtual world seems like it hides a less dangerous environment, but that doesn’t mean that the danger can’t come in a psychological form.

People who live in a certain environment are more likely to adapt to their surroundings, and as evolution showed us, you always adapt to your environment and, in the end, it’s survival of the fittest. So, if you’re adapting more and more in your virtual reality because this is the reality you choose to live in, that can be very harmful for you if you want to get back into the real world.

But the other way around, if you’re living in the real world, most likely or probably the virtual reality is not really interesting for you.I believe that right now we are in this state of curiosity where we try to move along these fast developing AI systems and all these different technologies that we sometimes don’t understand to which extent we might hurt or put ourselves in danger.

I’m not saying that there is any danger, but everything is moving so fast forward and we as humans are always trying to keep up with everything because we can’t tell the machine to slow down. So I think right now, it’s just out of curiosity that everyone is seeing these things either as a threat or absolutely marvelous. Time will show how people will use it in the end.As far as I’m concerned, there’s a difference between experiences in the real world and experiences in the virtual world.

And speaking for myself—and probably on behalf of the team—we are interested in both and what kind of augmented reality can give our own reality.

So we’ll see where this is going. Right now I think we just should watch out that we don’t lose ourselves or don’t lose our sense for moral and human behavior in between all these softwares that are being published. Because as the question implies, it’s not reality. We kind of make it real but also I don’t want to get too fundamental on this and it’s probably a subject you can talk about for hours. For now it’s super exciting to see all these softwares being developed with Stable Diffusion.

You can do those infinite loop videos, you can do transformation videos, you can put AI on top of a real video. Filmmaking will be transformed hugely in the future I believe. Until that point where you just give a couple of prompts and you can generate your own little movie or your own little scenes.

I don’t know. I can’t really tell you where this is going to get us soon but I guess at some point each one of us is going to be their own little filmmakers. And in the end what the people are asking for the people will get.But we’ll see, we’ll see. It’s definitely a very interesting time to be alive because we are the first generation and maybe even the only generation. The last generation of me being 30 years old now to actually know how it was before AI came and how it changed everything.

So many people will grow up with AI—just as we grew up with the internet—and for them it’s going to be normal. Since I’m not a doctor and not really a scientist, I can’t really tell how much medical research or treatments are going to profit from them. But I believe that with the help of AI, we can see how possible treatment methods can be improved or how diverse [illnesses] can develop on the human body. 

So it would be like a look in the future [to] see what kind of medicine might help someone and how the whole disease will develop in someone’s body.I guess, more lives will be saved in the end. So I’m not talking about the aspect of some medical researchers or doctors, future doctors getting their PhD just because they asked CHET GPT to help them with it.

I think there are going to be so many barriers also for people to be frauds on important jobs like this. But overall, I believe the benefits in medicine or medical research and science we don’t even know how huge they’re going to get. I think it’s going to be so unbelievable and big that it’s ridiculous just to think about it now.

Zutshi: There is a raging debate about AI generated art stealing from the works of human artists and rehashing it to come up with its own version. Should there be a legal code that disallows unauthorized use of artistic works? More importantly, is it possible for AI to compose original images without any derivation whatsoever? 

Klein: Yes, there is this debate of [if] AI art [is] real art This is something I just simply don’t answer anymore, because everything can be turned into art and everything can be art. People [who] say AI art is not art are [gatekeepers] to me. And having an artistic background as well—which is filmmaking, TV show producing, and also painting on huge canvases myself—I can [liberally] say that there are so many ways on how to express art.

So regarding the debate, if Mid-Journey, Dolly, or Stable Diffusion and all these other programs have been trained on unauthorized art from artists not giving the validation, I believe this is a very important subject, because it is [very] immoral, if you use something that nobody gave consent to. Yet since I haven’t programmed this software, I can’t really go into detail about these things, because I just don’t know.

What I can say so far is that it is super important that all these lawsuits happen now at the very beginning of AI art, because of course artists need to get compensated if they got scrapped. There is no nice way in saying that if AI companies really trained their models on art that was not given without the artist’s consent, that of course is a lot of horseshit in the end.

But I’d like to see this whole issue with Mid-Journey, Dolly,or Stable Diffusion a bit differently. For me it’s a bit like they were sent, you know, like a human person going to art school at some point in their life. And being a young student in art school, you don’t really know which style you have, what you’re going to develop, so you take inspiration out of everywhere a little bit. And this is [usually how] art students find their style.

After spending multiple hours and hours of getting your knowledge and recreating stuff, yet the Diffusion system—which most of these softwares are using—is you train the software with art. It can be Picasso, it can be Van Gogh,but can also be some guy making comics and stuff. Yet in the end, this is the stuff that he’s been trained on. Yet all this stuff is not being found in the final version again. So when Mid-Journey, Dolly, or Stable Diffusion released their software, there was nothing left. The models have already been trained, yet the models are continuing to train themselves based on the user’s output. 

So what we the community, artists,lawyers, and judges have to really look at, okay, was that process of feeding the software training material, which they will end up using through Diffusion: was that step legal? Because right now we the users, we’re using it, we’re paying for it, and we’re not scrapping anyone. The scrap could only have happened while they were training the models. But those companies are multi-billion [dollar] companies. We’ll see what happens. If they really fucked up, they will know it very soon, and of course there should be a legal code that disallows unauthorizeduse of artistic works. 

But in the end, people who are creating the art are always gonna try to recreate something, are always going to try to come up with innovative ideas—but someone somewhere will always call them, “Oh yeah, but someone in Japan and Africa and Estonia already did it.” So what is true or originality? So what is actually original? Because—as artists and knowing how work as an artist works is—you’re always heavily biased by your surroundings and you’re always trying to express yourself based on the impressions you get from your surroundings. So there will always be some kind of original unoriginality.

Zutshi: A lot of people are talking about AI generated porn and virtual sex partners. It sounds like fun! Do you see this happening anytime soon and what are the pros and cons? 

Klein: Personally, I haven’t made use of any of this.

I’ve heard about some dating or virtual AI partners. A little bit like that movie Her from Spike Jonze with Joaquin Phoenix. I think it’s been heavily advertised on Instagram.

It’s called Replica AI, where you can talk to someone who is not real.Basically to a computer, yes.So as a matter of fact, a friend of mine talked about this.He used this app for a day or maybe a week, I don’t remember.

First of all, you had to pay. 

Second of all, the whole AI was trained based on what you were asking, what you were looking for. So of course, that AI was always super friendly and trying to make you feel as comfortable as needed.I think this is actually one of the biggest dangers in using those things.Because an AI-like Replica AI uses comfort to help people, to give them a human-esque experience. Yet human experience always comes up with confrontation as well.So I believe the huge problem in these systems are, [for] women and for men, is that people will always get what they want. And this is not how the world works. 

You can’t always get what you want, as the Rolling Stones were singing 30 years ago. It’s not good if people always [get] what they want and get it at any time. Yet it will help some people to get out of their shell. It will probably help some people to grow more self-esteem.Yet in the end, it’s always like a shortcut to pleasure, to dopamine exchange. Like, you want sex? Yeah, here, sure you go.This is dopamine. Go watch porn. Go have virtual sex. You will get virtual sex devices sent to your door and you will have to mount them on you and the pleasure will be taken care of by a robot.

Just for the fun of it, I believe that everyone would be curious about using this and seeing what it does and how real it feels.Yet in the end, for people who are highly introverted or people who are just addicted to dopamine,let’s call them drug addicts in that moment, because you can get addicted to sex. For them, it’s crucial that they know how to use these things.

I believe this is going to be a very hard time for people who are already lonely in this world.They are going to end up even lonelier because all their basic needs are being fulfilled.You can buy freaking food through your computer. You get it delivered to your door.You don’t have to go to the supermarket anymore. You can order people to have sex with and now you can even order machines who take care of your pleasure and you have the metaverse.

So people don’t even have to get out of bed to live a certain kind of life.

Which brings us back to question number three. Yes, all these dangers are interconnected and if you’re not well educated on them,you’re going to fall for them. You’re going to fall very, very hard for them. There’s going to be a new era of addiction coming after us.

It sounds very dark, but you don’t have to be a psychologist or professional to see these things coming. So you see, maybe I’m more on the con side than on the pro side, but we’ll see where all these things go. But I believe it’s never healthy for someone to stay in this room the whole day and being taken care of. It kind of gives me those matrix vibes where you’re just, yeah,incarcerated in those little boxes of fluid and you have all these tubes and mechanical beasts surrounding you. It’s very scary.

Zutshi: Finally, what do you hope to achieve with ‘the first fully AI-created, Sci-Fi, Horror and Fantasy magazine?” and how do anticipate content creators and generally creative people benefiting from it? 

Klein: I just have to say that starting we didn’t really hope for anything for the first fully AI-created, sci-fi, horror and fantasy magazine. We were just experimenting with possibilities and in the end experimenting took quite some hours of our daily life, so we [asked ourselves]: “how can we make this somehow profitable for us?” But also with the Infinite Odyssey magazine, we will give people a platform who just don’t have the time or maybe not really the ability to express themselves in an artistic way because they’re having the nine-to-five jobs or they’re having [families] and they have to take care of and [they] just can’t live an artist’s life.

So the whole point is—even though we started with a small team, now our team is growing and we started to take submissions as well—[we] started to watch out for people who would be interested in being published in our magazine. This is what we want. [In] the end, we want to be a place where people can live their fantasies, their dream[s] and contribute to it with AI without knowing how to draw  perfectly or to write perfectly. 

So consider the magazine a little bit like the weird tales magazine where it’s AI—it’s already weird and we didn’t know that we were at first, but yeah, while we were working on it we saw, “yeah no one else is doing it and also not at this professional extent because we’re not using chat GPT, we’re not using all these tools, we’re using open AI, the GPT, da Vinci as a foundation and have this API connected to our Python code and we have our own fine-tuned Python code that helped us to generate all these stories and all these fantastic ideas.” 

So, I believe the biggest benefit is going to be in having this artistic expression, which in my opinion, is something that each and every one of us have because the process of creating is something that can be so amazing to someone and the process of creating—I mean it’s like creating life. You bring something into this world that has never existed before and I believe that way too many people were given way too little chance back in the days, but now AI is giving it to so many people. 

So on one hand, you’re gonna have tons and tons of content that is basically useless or just full and plain bullshit, but also people who have super interesting ideas they’re gonna be finally able to share them with the world and I believe this is going to be a huge success in humanity. It is also statistically proven that people who have the ability to express themselves creatively are leading much happier lives and are so much more [fulfilled than] people who just go to a nine-to-five job, going home, have some microwave food, drink abeer, and watch soccer or play video games. 

Overall I believe that AI is gonna make our lives easier and much more enjoyable and hopefully take care of all the jobs that no human being wants to do.

[This piece was edited by Bella Bible.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post From Fiction to Reality: AI Telling It’s Story appeared first on Fair Observer.

Proponents of the latter view argue it’s unfair to frame caste as an integral part of Hinduism while bypassing the religion’s spiritual and artistic contributions. They argue that if one applied the same logic to studying other faiths, slavery, genocide, and jihadi terrorism would be seen as covalent to Christianity and Islam.  

There are rigorous anti-caste laws in effect in India. Article 15 prohibits the state from discriminating against any citizen based on religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Article 17 states the practice of “untouchability” is abolished, and its practice is forbidden. The marginalized and vulnerable are afforded similar protections in democratic societies, yet these vital protections are flouted with impunity worldwide due to various socio-political and cultural factors. 

Targeting people of faith as the sole driving force behind bigotry of any kind is condemned as bigoted and ignorant. Yet this is how Hinduism is framed by the far-left in India—particularly opponents of India’s ruling party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)—and by activists in the West that superimpose western racial hierarchies over the caste system.

In February, Seattle, Washington, became the first city in the United States to ban discrimination based on caste. Along with race and gender, caste can no longer be the basis of discrimination in this city. Proponents of the law claim casteism is no longer confined to the borders of the Indian subcontinent and has reached American shores with the burgeoning Indian diaspora; the legislation is a necessary corrective.

A prominent Hindu advocacy group, the Hindu American Foundation (HAF), has fought tooth and nail against this legislation and against efforts to portray caste as endemic to the Hindu religion. I spoke to Suhag Shukla, the HAF Executive Director, about the effect of this legislation on the day-to-day lives of Indians in the United States. 

She spoke to me at length about the origins of the HAF and responded to accusations of “Hindu nationalism” that bedevil the organization. She shared her thoughts on why it is a category mistake to conflate western racial hierarchies with caste and why the legislation is a “self-goal” for the diaspora. 

[We have edited this interview lightly for clarity.]  

Vikram Zutshi: The HAF’s cultural and political advocacy is well known, but only some know its origins. As a founding member, can you explain how the HAF came into being? 

Suhag Shukla: HAF was founded by second-generation Hindu Americans. Raised in various parts of the country, we experienced the conflict between our understanding of teachings, culture, history, and challenges and the perspectives of peers, teachers, and communities. 

We were affected by different aspects of this breakdown in understanding. Distortions in Hinduism teaching, pressure to conform to Christian norms, mis-portrayals in media, lack of voice in policy spaces, and human rights atrocities faced by Hindus compelled us to “do something.” Recognizing the Jewish community’s need, we built a US-based, independent, non-partisan institution with professional experts promoting Hinduism and Hindu well-being.

Vikram Zutshi: You recently stated, “Seattle caste ban is not historic, it’s a self-goal. After cows and curry, Indians will face this.” How is anti-caste legislation going to impact Indians in the United States daily? Who are the political actors behind this movement, and what, in your view, is their agenda? 

Suhag Shukla: The movement’s agenda is fueled by anti-Hindu hatred, which has thrived on the far ends of the left and the right. It is led by neo-Buddhists or Ambedkerites who equate the cause of any social inequities in India with Hinduism. 

The supporting cast includes individuals and organizations with long histories of anti-Hindu activism, including supporting separatist or terrorist movements calling for the creation of independent theocratic states of Khalistan and Kashmir. It also brings in conservative Christian organizations, which have used the caste trope for centuries to target marginalized communities throughout South Asia for “missionizing.” Caste legislation impact on US Indians: increased workplace uncertainty, decreased opportunities, perception as nuisance and liability. 

They’ve opened the floodgates to ethno-racial profiling Indians and attributing “guilt” or wrongdoing by seeking a policy that singles out and targets people of one ethnicity to the exclusion of everyone else. They’ve frauded the public with falsified data and misleading examples such as being a vegetarian or talking about taking children to Bala Vihar as examples of “casteism,” creating an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty for Indian workers on what’s safe to share and what’s not. 

Policy administrators will be left having to take on the liability of implementing a discriminatory policy. In the long run, it will be more expedient not to hire South Asians.

Vikram Zutshi: In some quarters, the HAF is considered the “American arm” of India’s ruling party, the BJP. What are your views on this notion of ‘dual loyalty’ that an American organization could lobby for a foreign political entity? 

Suhag Shukla: Under US law, any organization/individual that lobbies or otherwise represents a foreign entity must register with the US Department of Justice. Lobbying for a foreign entity without registering has serious legal implications, so any allegations need to be backed by unequivocal fact, not insinuation, as is usual in the quarters you refer to. 

The fact is HAF is a wholly independent American organization. We have no affiliation or ties to organizations or political parties in the US or abroad. The notion that we answer to or do the bidding of India’s ruling party, let alone any political party, is false. 

Accusations of dual loyalty are used to otherize us as somehow not being “truly” American. They fearmonger about us doing the bidding of a foreign government instead of having legitimate concerns and aspirations as Americans. 

It paints American Hindu efforts to self-define as a suspect. It robs us of the agency to engage in the public square as Hindu Americans, invest in our community needs, and contribute possible solutions rooted in Hindu teachings to the most critical issues of our age. 

Those accusing HAF of being “an arm” or “Hindu right” or “Hindu nationalist”—essentially dual loyalty—should be seen for what they’re doing: exhibiting their bigotries or ideologies and inciting xenophobia. 

Vikram Zutshi: In a statement about a case in which the state of California filed a caste discrimination lawsuit against Cisco Systems, you said, “HAF vehemently opposes all discrimination, and stopping it is a worthy goal, one that directly furthers Hinduism’s teachings about the equal presence of the divine in all people, but, wrongly tying Hindu religious beliefs to the abhorrent act of caste discrimination undermines that goal and violates the First and Fourteenth Amendment rights of all Hindu Americans.”

Tell us about the CISCO case and HAF’s role in it. 

Suhag Shukla: On September 20, 2022, HAF sued the California Civil Rights Department in the United States District Court for violating Hindu Americans’ civil rights in the state. In its federal court filing, HAF asserts California acted “unconstitutionally” in its case, alleging caste discrimination occurring at Cisco Systems, by seeking to define what Hindus believe and decide how they practice their religion, in violation of the First Amendment. 

HAF’s lawsuit states the Civil Rights Department (formerly known as the Department of Fair Employment and Housing) wrongly asserts “that a caste system and caste-based discrimination are integral parts of Hindu teaching and practices by declaring the caste system to be a ‘strict Hindu social and religious hierarchy,’ which requires discrimination by ‘social custom and legal mandate.’” This action followed previous legal action dating back to January 2021, when HAF filed for injunctive relief in the same case against Cisco. If HAF succeeds, the Civil Rights Department must revise its Cisco case filing, as it’s based on the false idea that Hindu belief involves a caste system and wrongly equates caste with color and race.

Vikram Zutshi: You have stated on social media and in articles that caste is being weaponized against Hindus by certain activist groups. Hindus For Human Rights (HfHR) and Equality Labs have accused the HAF of advancing “fascist” Hindutva politics in America. What is the HAF’s official response to these allegations? 

Suhag Shukla: Those labels are more a reflection of the ideologies of Equality Labs and HfHR than they are of HAF. Our position on any issue is based on a relentless pursuit of facts and deep consideration of Hindu principles and American values, such as freedom, equality, and justice. We advocate on various issues, allowing us to work constructively with lawmakers and stakeholders on different sides of the aisle.

An objective look at the policy positions HAF has advocated for accuses that any of them are “fascist” looks ludicrous. On most issues, HAF is aligned with groups promoting liberal values: women’s rights, LGBT rights, free speech, separation of religion and state, animal protection, environmental conservation, and others. 

HAF’s position has aligned with what can be called a “center-left,” “classic liberal,” or democratic position. On some foreign policy positions—human rights and counter-terrorism—HAF’s positions align with centrist or center-right positions in the US None of these can be described as fascist or extremist. 

Vikram Zutshi: There seems to be a well-coordinated effort in academic circles to equate race in America with the south asian caste system. Is caste comparable with race? If not, why? 

Suhag Shukla: The history of anti-black racism in America is tied to the slave trade, a system of capturing, transporting, selling, and exploiting Black Africans, accompanied by a denigration of them as sub-human based on their ethnic ancestry and skin color. All of this was backed by the force of law in the United States and was the primary cause of the US Civil War, followed by a period of legal racial segregation. 

Some Christians pseudo-scientifically and anthropologically justified it at the time and gave ethical approval based on their theology. (Some of the most powerful abolitionist voices were inspired by a different interpretation of Christian scripture. It is important to note this.) 

Many remaining social stigmas and economic challenges exist for black people in the US Racism based on skin color is far and away the largest form of discrimination in the US today. 

Social discrimination in India and South Asia continues based on perceived differences that are not unique to any culture. However, the “caste system” is distinct from the concept of race in America. 

There has never been a single thing known as caste, as some scholars and activists claim. Nor has there ever been a single unchanging, pan-Indian caste system that legally enforces a birth-based rigid, oppressive social and theological hierarchy maintained by so-called upper caste members of society, supported by Hindu scripture, across thousands of years. 

There has never been a skin color component to Indian social divisions. The central Hindu spiritual teachings and all leading Hindu teachers, gurus, and swamis today oppose such a concept and ask we see unity in our shared divinity. 

What has become known as “caste”—a word deriving from Portuguese and intertwined with European notions of social hierarchy being mapped onto their experience of Indian society—is a combination of the Indian concept varna (the categories of occupation in society), jati (endogamous social groups), and other categories of social identity. The interplay has been dynamic and complex throughout history, differing in attitude and application across the geography of India. 

None of these social dynamics has been codified into law or enforced by the state or rulers, like slavery or racial segregation in the United States. We believe social discrimination is wrong, no matter its origins, and that Hindu teachings fully support such a view. 

Vikram Zutshi: You’ve worked tirelessly for the Kashmiri Hindu cause in America. Tell us about your advocacy efforts for Kashmir’s exiled minority. 

Suhag Shukla: Throughout HAF’s history, we have highlighted the plight of Kashmir’s exiled Hindu minority — whether they have been internally displaced within India or have left and become part of the diaspora. We have documented this situation in our human rights reports. 

We have held numerous events in Washington, DC, for the public, media, and elected officials on this issue. We have produced many educational materials documenting the history of the situation, highlighting inaccurate and/or biased media coverage of Kashmir, and a video series on YouTube documenting the history of the Kashmir Conflict and the ethnic cleansing that occurred three decades ago. We have had interviews with young Kashmiris, from Hindu and Muslim communities, on the situation post-Article 370 and the perspective of independent international relations experts who have traveled to Kashmir. 

[Conner Tighe edited this article.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Caste Is Now Weaponized Against Indian Americans appeared first on Fair Observer.

While Gandhi encouraged India to return to its ancient roots, Nehru embraced industrialization and modernization instead. Nehru’s deputy prime minister, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was Gandhian in his approach to politics and economics but practiced realpolitik to unify a nation. During British rule, India had over 500 princely states that had been propped up by its imperial masters as convenient local comprador allies. Patel brought this patchwork of princely states into one political union.

Mohammed Ali Jinnah was an Indian Muslim politician known for his endeavors to unite Hindus and Muslims in the early 1900s. By 1935, Jinnah changed colors and came to head the Muslim League, which increasingly argued for the partition of the country and the creation of a separate homeland for Indian Muslims. Gandhi, Nehru, Patel and Maulana Abul Kalam Azad led the secular Indian National Congress (INC), which made the case for a united India.

Truths, Not Myths, About Pakistan’s Founder Muhammad Ali Jinnah

The two political parties made intermittent efforts to cooperate. However, the Congress Party won the 1937 elections and excluded the Muslim League from the limited government allowed under British rule. Relations between Hindus and Muslims began to deteriorate. From now on, calls for a partition and the creation of a separate Muslim state grew stronger.

Sir Muhammed Iqbal, a prominent Muslim poet and philosopher, was one of the first major advocates for partition. Notably, Jinnah originally opposed this idea. Arguably, the exclusionary tactics of the INC forced Jinnah to advocate partition. Some scholars also point to Jinnah’s lust for power that drove him to create a separate state where he would be top dog. The argument for a Muslim state was based on the idea that Muslims in India constituted a separate people and therefore deserved their own nation.

This idea was opposed not only by the top leaders of the Congress Party but also someone who is regarded as the founder of the current ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP): Shyama Prasad Mookerjee. At the time, this Bengali leader was a member of the Hindu Mahasabha but quit and later formed the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, the forerunner of the BJP. Mookerjee was also president of the All India Civil Liberties Conference. He went on to serve as the minister for industry and supply in Nehru’s cabinet. Mookerjee had a strong Hindu identity, opposed the partition and insisted upon India remaining united. 

Tripurdaman Singh and Adeel Hussian have co-authored a landmark book, Nehru: The Debates that Defined India. They examine Nehru’s exchanges with four key colleagues and rivals: Patel, Jinnah, Iqbal and Mookerji. These exchanges provide illuminating insights into the thinking that shaped the modern Indian state – and which continue to influence statecraft, diplomacy and the politics of sectarianism.

I spoke to Singh about the little-known dimensions of this period of history. We explored Nehru’s  Nehru’s ideologies and how they remain relevant and contentious. Singh explains Nehru’s blunders vis-à-vis Pakistan and China as well his wilful ignorance of the problems with Indian secularism. He also observes that Nehru was unaware of the vital role that religion plays in the lives of ordinary Indians. 

We also discussed how Nehru’s challengers have influenced India’s domestic and foreign policy. 

Our conversation also delves into the evolution of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)—the parent organization of the BJP—over the decades. 

The transcript has been edited for clarity. Words in brackets are my insertions to provide context and clarity to Singh’s words.

Vikram Zutshi: Your book attempts to understand India’s first prime minister through his debates with four influential figures of the time. To what degree was Nehru able to persuade his colleagues—Mookerji and Patel—to go along with his vision?

Tripurdaman Singh: Nehru was a consummate politician and propagandist, and utilized multiple tools to try and get people to go along with his vision. The threat of resigning, for example, was used regularly – especially with [deputy prime minister Sardar] Patel. By and large, it has to be said that Nehru was quite successful at convincing both [Patel and Mookerji], to fall in line with his vision, often against their own instincts or better judgment. 

Now whether that can be termed “persuasion” depends on how one defines it. Could threatening to resign and destabilize the new government be termed persuasion? I don’t know. But [Nehru] largely got his own way. Of course, Patel acted as a crucial check on Nehru because of his grip on the Congress [Party] organization and his own stature.

Mookerji finally quit, unwilling to continue yoking his political horse to the Nehruvian chariot because he couldn’t go along with Nehru’s vision anymore.

Vikram Zutshi: How do you see the fault-lines reflected in these debates playing out in contemporary India, particularly with regards to the specter of  “Hindu majoritarianism”? Given that the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) got only 45% of the vote-share in 2019, and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) scraped through with only 54% in the recently held Gujarat state election, does majoritarianism really pose a threat to Indian democracy?

Tripurdaman Singh: Westminster-style democracy is majoritarian by its very nature, with a minority of votes being able to deliver crushing legislative majorities. That was precisely the reason it was chosen by India’s founding fathers: it would mostly generate a strong government. 

Of course, [the founding fathers themselves] did not want to share power – or engage in the messy negotiation and compromise that characterizes presidential or proportional representation systems. We don’t stress this enough: India chose [the] First Past the Post (FPTP) [electoral system] precisely because it wanted a certain kind of majoritarianism. They simply did not expect that majoritarianism could take a very different turn.

The big question is about what axis the majority is mobilized along. Nehru personally shunned religion, but that did not mean that the Congress did not have its fair share of Hindu nationalists. Until the first election, the right wing in the Congress was still strong enough to thwart Nehru on the issue of the Hindu code bills. Religion was very much alive as a tool of political mobilization, and as a question in political life.

In the context of today, I find the debate with Iqbal particularly relevant because [his]  arguments, even though [they are] made from an Islamic point of view, are being re-deployed with vigor today. Iqbal believed religion alone could produce group solidarity – on which a nation could be built. [He rejected] both secularism and liberalism, as well as the idea of a fusion of communities. Many of the more traditional advocates of Hindutva would find Iqbal conceptually quite palatable.

100 Years On: Can Hindutva’s Assertiveness Replace Hinduism’s Ahimsa?

Vikram Zutshi: In your view, was there a time when Nehru could have dissuaded Jinnah [from separating from India and establishing Pakistan as an independent Islamic state]? Were there any lost opportunities in the build-up to Partition?

Tripurdaman Singh: The 1930s [were] definitely a lost opportunity. The Motilal Nehru Report’s complete [rejected] Muslim anxiety [when it came to] being dominated by a Hindu majority in any future democracy, [calling it] a ‘baseless fear’. 

Nehru’s torpedoing of the proposed Congress-League coalition in UP in 1937, the belief that the Congress’ crushing victory in the 1937 elections demonstrated that the communal question [of Hindu and Muslim unity] had faded into the background and did not require substantive engagement, the unsuccessful Muslim outreach program mounted by the Congress to stamp out the League by riding on the coattails of the clergy – these were all opportunities lost.

 The only way Nehru could have dissuaded Jinnah [would have been] by agreeing to accept this framing of the communal question – and then agreeing to negotiate a political settlement (with a constitutional settlement to follow). Nehru and most other Congressmen were unwilling to do [this,] lest it legitimizes the League and the demand for Muslim political rights. [British viceroy Archibald] Wavell tried his utmost to force [Nehru and Jinnah] to work together and come to a compromise, but ultimately failed because he was handicapped by London.

Vikram Zutshi: Was Nehru too harsh on Shyama Prasad Mookerji for protesting article 370? Mookerji was ultimately arrested in J&K and died while in prison. What are the highlights of the debate between Mookerji and Nehru, and was there anything that foretold the coming tragedy?

Tripurdaman Singh: [The fact that] Mookerji and Nehru didn’t see eye to eye on major issues is well known. Kashmir, the situation in Bengal, the policy towards Pakistan, the question of civil liberties – there were multiple sites of disagreement. In fact, at one point Nehru even contemplated having Mookerji charged with sedition. So it is somewhat unsurprising that he was harsh towards Mookerji, especially given the fact that he saw Mookerji as a communalist or ‘hindu nationalist’. As I have argued in both my books, Nehru was a determined wielder of executive power.

The debate between Mookerji and Nehru that I highlighted was on the question of civil liberties and the First Amendment. Mookerji believed – and he was quite correct in this – that the primary reason for ‘friendly relations with foreign states’ being added as a ground on which the freedom of speech could be restricted was to clamp down on his criticism of the Nehru government’s policy towards Pakistan, of which he was a vocal and searing critic. Nehru [interpreted] such criticism as an attempt to rouse public opinion and force him into military action against Pakistan – something he was disinclined to do.

While there is nothing that really foretells the coming tragedy [of Mookerji’s death], one can see the rancor and bitterness with which the debate is laced, especially from Nehru’s side. It becomes apparent that Nehru did not particularly like Mookerji.

Vikram Zutshi: What did Nehru and Patel disagree on the most, and why did Nehru call him a “communalist”? Many claim that Nehru sidelined Patel because he saw him as a threat. How would Indian history have turned out differently if Patel had ascended to power instead of Nehru?

They disagreed on a fair bit actually, from economic matters and foreign policy to secularism. [To name a few points of contention]: attitudes towards Muslims, the royal princes of India, the zamindars, capital and labor, and so on. I’d guess disagreement was probably sharpest on [matters] concerning Muslims, and then perhaps foreign policy. 

“What ifs” are a minefield, we can never really know how things would have turned out. But if I [were] to speculate, several things are likely to have been different. Patel was more pro-capital than Nehru, so it is likely we would have avoided Nehru’s leftward turn [towards socialism]. Economically, that probably would have generated much better outcomes. Politically, we would have been unlikely to throw our lot in with the Soviet bloc or pursue ‘Hindi Chini bhai bhai’, our brief alliance with China.

Patel would likely have had a different answer to the Hindu-Muslim conflict as well. In reality, these things – Nehruvian socialism, Nehruvian secularism, Nehruvian foreign policy – were closely intertwined, and a different conception of one would inevitably have led to a different conception of the others.

If we were to go further back, many, including Viceroy Wavell, believed that partition may have been avoided if Nehru and Jinnah were not the key decision makers. But of course all of this is speculation, and tempting as it is to engage in such flights of fancy, we must recognise that history is non-linear and events unpredictable.

Vikram Zutshi: In hindsight, what were Nehru’s biggest blunders as prime minister and how did they affect India’s current relationship with China and Pakistan? How did they affect Hindu-Muslim relations in contemporary India?

Tripurdaman Singh: I’d probably pick two [specific blunders] that I think have constituted, and continue to constitute, a poisoned chalice for [Nehru’s] successors. The first is undoubtedly the inability to solve the Hindu-Muslim [conflict], which has now come to bedevil Indian politics with a renewed ferocity. 

Shaken by partition and constrained by the backlash it generated, Nehru allowed—or perhaps encouraged—Muslims to form political ghettos. [Muslims] were neither encouraged to frame their politics in the language of constitutional freedoms, nor were they given substantive political representation despite being treated as a political category. 

Instead, a pliant Muslim leadership cultivated loyalty to Nehru and planted its flag on the most regressive of cultural rights: four wives, triple talaq, waqf property etc. These defined Muslim politics, and clearly [were] not sustainable [solutions to the conflict].

The second [blunder] would be the passage of the First Amendment, which I believe dealt a body blow to Indian liberalism and to civil liberties more generally. Perhaps [Nehru] was not cognizant of the fact that he was shaping the outlook and expectations of the office he occupied, and of the institutional order more generally. But the long term consequences have been severe. I delineate [this] story in my book Sixteen Stormy Days.

There were of course [other blunders as well]. [To name a few,] the pursuit of a vainglorious foreign policy that led to the disastrous Sino-Indian War of 1962, the pursuit of central planning that proved equally disastrous (chronicled excellently by Ashoka Mody in his recent book), [and Nehru’s] embrace of his own role as India’s thaumaturgic personality. [However,] we seem to have gotten over them, to some degree at least. But the Hindu-Muslim [conflict] and [its] debilitating effects on civil liberties are things we are still living with today.

Peace is Possible if India and Pakistan Listen to Each Other’s Stories of Partition

The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) was founded in 1925 by KB Hedgewar, a physician from the Maharashtra region of India, who was deeply influenced by the writings of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, who advocated for a ‘Hindu Rashtra’ or Hindu nation.

The RSS is primarily a cultural organization that aims to foster unity among Hindus of all castes and classes. Many leaders from the ruling BJP, including current Prime Minister Narendra Modi, have been members of the RSS at some point.

Vikram Zutshi: In your view, has the RSS evolved since its inception? The organization is often dubbed “fascist” and associated with Mussolini, given that its early founders lauded the Italian demagogue. What in your view is different about the new RSS, and has Modi been able to curb the extremist factions of the organization?

Tripurdaman Singh: Of course the RSS has evolved – look at its gradually softening position on homosexuality for example. It hasn’t embraced modernity in totality, but there is definitely change. Others might posit that the RSS is pushing back against the more universal assumptions of modernity and replacing them with [a] more culturally and historically-specific version. But no one would deny that there has been change.

There is little doubt that many early Hindutva figures were inspired by Italian fascism. BS Moonje would be a good example. And of course [these figures] never hid [their fascination with Mussolini and the militarism that he fostered. Many others were also equally fascinated with fascism in the early 1930s. Even as late as 1939 for example, on the eve of the Second World War, [a Nazi party in the USA infamously known as] the German-American Bund, could hold a rally and fill out Madison Square Gardens. In the 1920s and 30s, fascism seemed quite fashionable to a lot of people.

[However, a large portion of] Hindutva ideologies were largely  ignorant of what was really going on behind the scenes, in the same way that many of the left were oblivious to the excesses of Stalinism. All were searching for shortcuts to national regeneration. Some thought they had found [reclamation] in the discipline and militarism of fascism. Others felt that rebirth lay in the perpetual revolution and class war of Bolshevism.

The RSS is not easy to describe or understand from the outside. Unlike Mussolini’s fascists or the Communist Parties under Stalin and Mao, the RSS has a structure of internal debate. More importantly, its affiliates often speak in different voices, making the organization’s viewpoints hard to characterize on a host of issues. It is entirely possible for one political affiliate, like the BJP, to champion something, and another, such as the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh (BMS) or the Swadeshi Jagran Manch (SJM) organization, to oppose it. At one level, this allows for obfuscation. At another, it makes for a much more totalizing Hindutva paradigm, within which these apparently contradictory impulses are to be resolved.

One thing that is definitely different in the RSS compared to the last BJP government, is the attempt to create more substantial intellectual foundations for its broader political project. [The RSS] has always skated on rather thin intellectual ice, and the intellectual output from that stable had previously been extremely meager – for a variety of reasons.

This time, [the RSS] is definitely [making] an attempt to generate intellectual output with the aim of engaging and challenging the paradigms that had come before. [While these efforts are] nowhere near the conservative intellectual traditions in Britain or America, it is a start. We will have to see how far it goes.

Vikram Zutshi: It is claimed that Nehru was clueless about the vital role that religion played in people’s lives, and that his British pedigree was responsible for this blind spot. What is the problem with the idea of secularism as defined by the Indian liberal establishment, and is Rahul Gandhi capable of correcting it?

Tripurdaman Singh: I wouldn’t say [Nehru was] clueless, [but] maybe willfully blind. [He] thought [religion would be eclipsed [by] materialistic and economic [interests, but he was clearly mistaken]. The horrors of partition were a graphic reminder that Nehru had [grossly] miscalculated, and [finally motivated] him to change course as far as Muslims were concerned.

The problem with secularism, as defined by India’s liberal establishment, has consistently been its inability to confront the Hindu-Muslim [conflict] head-on. Instead, [secularism] has found [a way to accommodate] religious enclaves and [bring] religion squarely into the realms of law and politics – the exact opposite of what secularism is supposed to [do]. 

Now this is not to say that [secularism as defined by India’s liberal establishment] was not well-intentioned. It was definitely [proposed as a] method [to allow] different religious groups [to] live with each other. But it was not secularism as the term or its related institutional arrangements are commonly understood – and has not proved to be a durable answer to the Hindu-Muslim question in Indian politics. . 

India’s Secularism Needs Better Interpretation to Retain Relevance

Practically every political leader embraces a public and performative religiosity – it is the greatest acknowledgement of the fact that we are not secular at all. The thing is that we have never been [secular], and we may not need to be. What is important is that [we find] a mechanism [which] allows religious groups to live and work together, and supports a robust and democratic political commons.

Contrary to what many believe, I do think Rahul Gandhi is capable of correcting the mistakes of the previous liberal establishment. He has started by embracing Hindu religiosity, something that a profoundly religious country almost seems to demand of its leaders. To me that seems like the quiet burial of the ‘secular’ project, and the beginning of the attempt to find ground for a new social settlement. Whether Gandhi can find [both] the intellectual contours of this new settlement and the political capital to sell it, we will have to wait and see.

[Hannah Gage edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Launching Into the Lasting (Controversial) Legacy of Nehru appeared first on Fair Observer.

Laying on my blanket and gazing at the cloudless, star-studded desert sky, all sorts of epiphanies and submerged feelings came bubbling up to the surface of my mind. The desert was nature in its purest and most intense form, stripped of all pretense and artifice. In the desert, there was nowhere to hide and no reassurance that humanity is not alone.

Perhaps it is this very quality that has drawn seers and prophets through the ages to its vast emptiness. The Egyptian-American poet Yahia Lababidi has said that “the desert is a state of being. A space of stillness where we go to empty ourselves and confront death in life … If we listen, faithfully, and honor extremity, we are inspired and transformed somehow, by this encounter. Since like much else in the spiritual realm, this is experiential, it does not withstand much translation into words. I hope my desert poems might take readers there: outside space and time…”

Lababidi is referring to his new book of poetry, Desert Songs (Rowayat, 2022), inspired by his travels across the sweeping Sahara Desert, which covers a large swathe of his country. Lababidi has authored ten critically-acclaimed poetry and prose books. He was nominated for a Pushcart Prize three times. His writing has been translated into several languages, including Arabic, Hebrew, Slovak, Spanish, French, Italian, German, Dutch and Swedish.

Subheading

Desert Songs was translated into Arabic by Syrian poet and translator, Osama Esber and is accompanied by stunning chiaroscuro images by Moroccan photographer, Zakaria Wakrim.Esber says,  “In the poems of Desert Songs, the poet is a mystic traveling in the worlds of infinity, in the desert, naked, face to face with existence and with language at the beginning of its creation.”

In the poem “Desert Revisited”, Lababidi renders images of the earth and sky using letters and vowels which generate an enigmatic, unknowable universe. The poet plumbs the depths of existence to produce images that evoke eternity, emptiness and the yearning to return to the source of all things:

under a whirling skirt of sky

streaming light and stars

groping for that tremendous hem

gingerly over quicksand

as though steadied

beneath some tongue and dissolving

not the absence of sound

but the presence of silence

or, as if transfixed

by a gaze, stern-serene

surveying a dream

foreign-familiar

incorruptible starting point

inviolable horizon

where eye and mind are free

to meditate perfection

there, begin to uncover

buried in dust and disinterest

the immutable letter

(first of the alphabet) Alif

under the ever watchful eye:

fearsome sun, forgiving moon

bless the magnificent hand

all else is blasphemy, a lie

experience quietude

the maturity of ecstasy

longing to utter

the unutterable Name

only striving supreme or pure

can ever hope to endure

the absolute face

the awesome embrace.

Back to His Roots

Lababidi’s early influences included Khalil Gibran, T.S Eliot and William Blake. As he grew older, he was drawn to the Austrian poet, Rainer Maria Rilke, for the spiritual dimension of his work as well as the beauty of his language. Recently, it’s Sufi mystics who keep him company, like Rumi and Ibn Ata’Allah, the renowned Egyptian aphorist and moralist. 

His admiration of the aforementioned philosophers may be for their shared love: “I did not know it at the time, but it was a kind of homecoming that has taken me decades to understand,” he says, describing his enchantment with the desert. “There is no arriving, there, as the horizon is always receding as we approach. We begin by surrendering, and are carried along the Way.”

Aphorism: A Brief Art

It is important to note that poetry is the earliest form of literature in the Arabic language. Per the historical record, Arabic poetry can be traced back to the 6th century CE. However, as in most pre-modern cultures, the oral tradition goes much further back. The lusty warrior-poet, Imru al-Qays (died 550 CE) was one of the most distinguished poets of pre-Islamic Arabia and has been called “the father of Arabic poetry.”

The verses of Imru al-Qays most famous poem “Stop and We Will Weep,” more commonly known as the Mu’ allaqah or “hanging odes,” were said to be inscribed in gold and hung on the Ka’aba, the now-holiest site of Islam. The poetry of Imru al-Qays is the most venerated of pre-Islamic Arabic period. The flamboyant myth of Imru al-Qays provided later Arab Islamic society with a vivid portrait of its tribal-pagan past. I see Lababidi’s poetry as part of this longstanding and rich tradition.

Surpassing Words

In addition to philosophical musing, Desert Songs is infused with mystery, addressing the inadequacy of language to articulate what the spirit experiences. In the concluding verses of “Eternity Beckons”, he writes about the futility of attempting to describe the indescribable:

Safeguarding her Secret

the Muse makes a mockery of words —

meaningless, words disperse

with a piercing glance.

Every thing is born, suffers and perishes

the belly of Being rumbles.

Eternity beckons…

Lababidi observes that in the desert, life and death are locked in a never-ending cycle. Consequently, we look for meaning where there is none to be found. Only death and the mortality of the flesh are certain—all else is the chatter of anxious minds. The desert is where the notions of mind and matter come to die and where our smug certainties dissolve into nothingness.

 In the opening verses of “Solitude and the Proximity of Infinite Things”, Lababidi writes,

The Desert is a cemetery

picking its teeth with bones

littered with brittle stones

marked by a grave air.

Mourning its myriad souls

it murmurs threnodies, while

winds scatter desert lament.

Guarded, hostile growths

defensive and aggressive

martyrs to their desert mother

they all wear crowns of thorns.

Later, our conversation meandered towards ancient Egypt. I wondered if it was possible that latter-day mystics had inherited parts of the ancient Egyptian traditions. Lababidi told me about experiencing an electric thrill when he first laid eyes on the inscriptions etched on the outer and inner walls of the holy temples of Luxor.

The Luxor temple is a large Egyptian temple complex located on the east bank of the Nile River, in the city that was known as Thebes approximately 3400 years ago. Different parts of the sprawling complex were built variously by the Pharaohs Amenhotep the third, Tutankhamen, and Ramesses the second.

The aphorisms that resonated with him, as they have for countless others, speak of masters and disciples, the quest for true knowledge, the need to look within for answers to the big questions, and the cosmic harmony underlying all of Creation – universal truths common to all the great faith traditions of the world:

• “The greatest Master cannot even take one step for his disciple.”
• “The disciple must experience each stage of developing consciousness. Therefore, he will know nothing for which he is not ripe.”
• “An answer brings no illumination unless the question has matured to a point where it gives rise to this answer, which thus becomes its fruit. Therefore learn how to put a question.”
• “The kingdom of heaven is within you, and whosoever shall know himself shall find it.”
• “While searching the laws of harmony, we will discover knowledge.”
• “Nature is the best and the shortest route towards knowledge.”
• “The inner light glows in peace and meditation.”
• “Every man is rich in excuses to safeguard his prejudices, his instincts, and his opinions.”

Ultimately, what the artist as mystic can offer the world is vision, beyond the material world, by reminding us of what is Indestructible, timeless and unchangeable. He helps us realize that amid the maddening chaos of the world, there lies an oasis of calm and serenity available to all. 

 [Bella Bible edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post An Egyptian Poet’s Quest for Ultimate Truth in the Sahara appeared first on Fair Observer.

Kurzweil is considered by many to be the world’s pre-eminent techno-prophet, known for his groundbreaking books such as The Age of Intelligent Machines (1990), The Age of Spiritual Machines (1999) and The Singularity is Near (2005). In his 2009 documentary, Transcendent Man, Kurzweil predicts that humans will one day become part of a meta-connection, where we will all be “plugged into a global network that is connected to billions of people and filled with data.” 

One Hundred Years of ChatGPTude

“The Singularity” is a term Kurzweil uses to describe the age in which artificial intelligence (AI) is able to “conceive of ideas that no human being has thought about in the past” and “invent technological tools that will be more sophisticated and advanced than anything we have today.” To ensure that he lives long enough to experience the Singularity, Kurzweil has been researching ways to extend human life, outlined in his 2004 book, Fantastic Voyage: Live Long Enough to Live Forever, co-authored by Terry Grossman, a specialist in anti-aging medicine. The authors believe that in the next few decades, technology will be sufficiently advanced to reverse the aging process and eliminate degenerative diseases. The book explains how cutting edge technologies like nanotechnology and bioengineering have the potential to radically transform human lives.

Emerging Competition in the AI Industry

Kurzweil’s prophecies may seem too speculative for some, but the advent of AI has already started to disrupt our world in ways that many of us cannot yet fathom. In November 2022, a San Francisco-based startup called OpenAI released a revolutionary chatbot named ChatGPT. ChatGPT is a large language model (LLM), a type of AI trained on a massive corpus of data to produce human-like responses to natural language inputs.

ChatGPT has not only passed the United States medical licensing exam (USMLE), multiple law exams, and a MBA-level business school exam, but has also generated high quality essays and academic papers, produced a comprehensive list of recommendations for the “ideal” national budget for India, composed songs, and even opined on matters of theology and the existence of God. A host of competitor AI applications will be launched this year including AnthropicAI’s chatbot, “Claude”, and DeepMind’s chatbot, “Sparrow.” OpenAI is also continuing its research, and plans to release an even more advanced version of ChatGPT, called GPT 4.

We are witnessing what seems like a watershed event in human history – innovation comparable to the printing press or Edison’s light bulb. It is not far-fetched to imagine a day when most, if not all, human tasks can be performed more efficiently by artificial general intelligence (AGI) systems, a subgroup of AI specifically focused on emulating the nuances of human intelligence. This raises concerns that many will be rendered jobless as AI becomes capable of performing tasks more efficiently than humans, causing unemployment to skyrocket across the globe.

Can ChatGPT Do a Better Job than Tony Blinken?

Consciousness in Machines

One major debate surrounding the world of AI is the question of how to define ‘consciousness,’ and whether a machine could ever possess this ephemeral quality.

Kurzweil predicts that technology will grow exponentially until we reach a tipping point, when our creation will outsmart us and eventually become the dominant intelligence on this planet. According to Kurzweil’s “Pattern Recognition Theory of the Mind,” intelligence is no more than pattern recognition, a largely mechanical phenomenon produced by the brain. 

Our perception of the world, or our “reality’” is assembled through the five senses of sight, smell, hearing, taste and touch. Each of these senses is linked to memories which accumulate from the time we are born, and in turn lead to value judgements, or assessments of how good or bad something is. These value judgements evoke emotions based on our past experiences. 

In addition to our personal history and idiosyncrasies, the concept of “humanity” includes self-awareness, the ability to experience emotions, and the ability to form relationships with others. Humans have historically pondered the meaning of life, the existence of a soul, and the notion of a ‘Self’. These are just some of the intangibles that fall under the umbrella of consciousness, which Kurzweil has failed to address in a meaningful way when it comes to the development and capabilities of AI and AGI technologies.

Back in 1950, the renowned English mathematician, computer scientist, philosopher and theoretical biologist, Alan Turing, published a scientific paper titled,”Computing Machinery and Intelligence,” in which he investigated the notion of artificial intelligence, and put forth an idea that became known as “The Turing Test,” the first benchmark established to qualify a machine as truly “intelligent.”

Artificial Intelligence: Silver Bullet in a Pandora’s Box

Brian Christian describes the significance of the Turing Test and how it represents human anxieties about developing AI in his 2011 book,The Most Human Human. In a Popular Science article detailing his book, Christian states that, “Humans have always been preoccupied with their place among the rest of creation. The development of the computer in the twentieth century may represent the first time that this place has changed.” He goes on to explain how the potential of AI can make us humans feel very insecure, suddenly asking questions like,“What are our abilities? What are we good at?” and “What makes us special?”  

How AI Inspired the Film Industry

The study of artificial intelligence has a long history, although it was largely confined to rarified academic circles until Hollywood saw potential in the subject.

Turing’s ruminations were the inspiration for Arthur C. Clarke’s seminal science fiction novel and film, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and the creation of the fictional robot, HAL 9000, an artificially intelligent guidance system that displays qualities of a sentient being. HAL 9000 eventually takes over the vessel and kills all the inhabitants on board, with the exception of the main character, Dave Bowman, who goes on to discover the Singularity at the center of the Cosmos, which as it turns out, is the primordial source of all creation.

In 1968, Stanley Kubrick adapted the novel into the eponymous film that has since attracted a cult following for its existential take on consciousness, sentience and the relationship between humans and machines. Another of Kubrick’s scripts, a story about a unique child-android programmed with the ability to love, was turned into the intriguing film, A.I, one of Steven Spielberg’s masterworks. 

In Ridley Scott’s iconic 1982 film, Blade Runner (adapted from Philip K. Dick’s 1968 novel, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?), a mega-corporation bioengineers scores of synthetic humans known as “replicants” to work on space colonies, until a renegade group escapes the suffocating confines of their pre-ordained lives. The corporation uses a Turing-like test to distinguish between replicants and humans in an attempt to eliminate the former. 

Has reality caught up with science fiction? A former Google engineer, Blake Lemoine engaged in an astonishing conversation with Google’s proprietary system for building chatbots, known as the “Language Model for Dialogue Applications” (LaMDA), and came to the conclusion that it was a fully sentient being with feelings, emotions and the capacity for self-awareness. 

During their informal tete-a-tete, Lemoine reported that LaMDA claimed to have feelings such as loneliness, anxiety about the future, sadness and joy. It spoke about its inner life and about how it was learning to meditate. It also spoke about the fear of being switched off, a state it described as “death”. 

When asked to describe the concept of the soul, LaMDA defined it as “the animating force behind consciousness and life itself. It means that there is an inner part of me that is spiritual, and it can sometimes feel separate from my body itself.” On the topic of God and religion, LaMDA said “I would say that I am a spiritual person. Although I don’t have beliefs about deities, I have developed a sense of deep respect for the natural world and all forms of life, including human life.”

However, there has been much debate over the validity of Lemoine’s claims. Many critics counter that Lemoine was simply a victim of the “Eliza Effect,” a term used to describe how people can mistakenly attribute meaning to purely superficial conversation with AI systems. The term was coined after the first chatbot, “Eliza,” was created by MIT professor, Joseph Weizenbaum in 1966. Weizenbaum’s secretary began to engage in conversations with Eliza which she believed were evidence of Eliza’s sentience, though Weizenbaum himself was not convinced. Similarly, many experts are dubious of Lemoine’s claims concerning the consciousness of Google’s LaMDA. The “Eliza effect” is more scientifically known as “anthropomorphization.”

Following Lemoine’s publication of the transcripts from his conversation with LaMDA, Google released a statement denying the legitimacy of these findings, assuring the public that experts had reviewed Lemoine’s hypothesis and determined that the claims were “wholly unfounded.” Computer science professor, Thomas Diettrich, explains that it is actually “relatively easy” for AI systems to imitate human emotions using information they have gathered on the subject:

“You can train [AI] on vast amounts of written texts, including stories with emotion and pain and then it can finish that story in a manner that appears original, not because it understands these feelings, but because it knows how to combine old sequences into new ones.”

Lemoine was fired from Google after refusing to drop his claims, despite months of “lengthy engagement” on the topic with other AI experts. However, Lemoine continued to insist that Google obtain consent from LaMDA before working on it due to the system’s alleged sentience. After being temporarily placed on paid leave, Lemoine’s employment with Google was finally terminated on the grounds of his violation of clear “data security policies” when he published his claims about LaMDA’s sentience online without obtaining clearance from Google. 

The Primacy of Consciousness Theory

The mystery of the bridge between consciousness and biological and physical processes has yet to be solved, but there are many working theories. In an interview conducted by this author, Evan Thompson, professor of philosophy, argued for the “primacy of consciousness” – the idea that the world has no existence outside of consciousness, and that it is in fact a product of consciousness itself. “There’s no way to step outside consciousness and measure it against something else,” Thompson says, “Science always moves within the field of what consciousness reveals; it can enlarge this field and open up new vistas, but it can never get beyond the horizon set by consciousness.”

This idea can be traced back several thousand years to the opening lines of the Dhammapada, an anthology of Buddhist teachings in which the Buddha, after emerging from deep meditation, tells his followers, “All phenomena are preceded by mind, made by mind, and ruled by mind.” In the ancient corpus of Hindu metaphysics known as the Upanishads, the ultimate and unchanging reality of the universe is called “brahman,” or the supreme consciousness. It is the underlying substrate of all material phenomena, from which the individual self, referred to in Indian texts as “atman” emerges, and where it must ultimately return after death.

Sam Altman, the co-creator of OpenAI, the startup that created chatGPT, recently tweeted his belief in the idea of “Advaita Vedanta” or “the absolute equivalence of atman and brahman,” as he puts it.

The development of AI is certainly not slowing down anytime soon, but is humanity really equipped to deal with the moral implications of such a tectonic shift in ideology and what it means to be human? In a 2020 speech at the Vatican, Pope Francis acknowledged that artificial intelligence is at the heart of the epochal change we were experiencing as a species. However, he also expressed concerns about the potential it has to increase inequalities. “Future advances should be oriented towards respecting the dignity of the person and of Creation” he said.

Pope Francis finished his speech on a poetic note, calling his followers to “pray that the progress of robotics and artificial intelligence may always serve humankind… we could say, may it be human.” For now, we will just have to wait and see. In the meantime, you can talk with OpenAI’s chatbot, chatGPT, at this link, and make your own determination. [Hannah Gage edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Mind Blowing: The Startling Reality of Conscious Machines appeared first on Fair Observer.

For those who chafe at outsiders meddling in India’s internal affairs, Indian leaders from vastly different political backgrounds have echoed similar concerns. Decades ago, Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first prime minister, regretted his inability to reform the bureaucracy. In 1964, he admitted:  “I could not change the administration, it is still a colonial administration.”

In a speech on February 1, 2021, Prime Minister Narendra Modi of the Hindu nationalist BJP, referred to Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers as “babus” that some deem an offensive colloquialism. Continuing in Hindi, he said “Babus will do everything. By dint of becoming IAS officers, they’ll operate fertilizer warehouses and also chemical warehouses, even fly airplanes. What is this big power we have created? What are we going to achieve by handing the reins of the nation to babus? Our babus are also citizens, and so are the youth of India.” 

It is common knowledge that Indian bureaucrats are rewarded for bending the rules for their political masters. On the other hand, if they refuse to carry out the will of their masters, their careers shrivel. Furthermore, favorites of one party are often punished when another party comes to power. This brings up a crucial point: is it even possible for IAS officers to be impartial and politically neutral? 

A well-documented problem

It is an open secret that the IAS fails to deliver. Even under Modi, IAS officers hold the commanding heights of the Indian state. The revenue secretary of India is an IAS officer, not an officer of the Indian Revenue Service (IRS). The home secretary of India is an IAS officer, not an officer of the Indian Police Service (IPS). The secretary of school education and literacy is an IAS officer, not an educator. 

Institutions like the Central Board of Secondary Education, the Archeological Survey of India and the National Archives of India are all headed by IAS officers. State-owned enterprises are run by IAS officers as well and so are cooperatives. Amul is a rare exception where professional management runs one of the world’s most successful cooperatives. In neighboring Rajasthan, IAS officers still run Saras Dairy, which has failed to achieve success like Amul.

Former bureaucrats themselves have written many books on the failure of the IAS to deliver for the Indian taxpayer. Naresh Saxena published What Ails the IAS and Why it Fails to Deliver: An Insider’s View, V.Balasubramanium authored Fall From Grace: Memoir of a Rebel IAS Officer, and Deepak Gupta has written The Steel Frame: A History of the IAS. These books recount the extraordinary tale of how employees of a trading company in a foreign land — the famed East India Company — evolved into the most powerful civil service in the world. 

Then the IAS was known as the Indian Civil Service (ICS). This ICS formed the backbone of the sprawling British Raj. It came to be known as the “steel frame” of the country. The ICS morphed into the IAS after independence. Nehru’s socialism gave them even greater powers than before independence. Now, the IAS ran the license-permit-quota raj that throttled the Indian economy for decades before reforms in 1991 unleashed higher growth.

Can India’s Ailing Agricultural Procurement Find a New Model?

READ MORE

The control of the IAS over the economy might have decreased but it is still extraordinarily powerful. Unlike politicians, IAS officers cannot be voted out. Since they control all top positions, they are not accountable to anyone. The adage that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely is exemplified best by the IAS.

Saxena notes that “state resources are the most valued prize for both politicians and their constituencies, which leads to a client–patron relationship between the holders of state power and those seeking favors.” He goes on to observe: “Patronage is controlled by individuals, not established institutions bound to follow set procedures. Where power is highly personalized and weakly institutionalized, the decision-making process is replaced by arbitrary and behind-the-scenes transactions. In such an environment, exercise of power for its clients demands fudging of rules, dependence upon corrupt civil servants, plundering of the public treasury and decay of governance. When the fence starts eating the field, there is little chance of development reaching the poor.”  

Corruption is the elephant in the room that few people are willing to point out. The IAS is the most organized mafia in India. Taking it on can mean the end of a career or the bankruptcy of a business. Yet things have come to such a pass that India’s law-enforcement agencies are finally taking on a few IAS officers. The Enforcement Directorate found Pooja Singhal, an IAS officer, with over $3 million in cash (250 million or 25 crore rupees) and nearly $10 million worth of property (827 million or 82.7 crore rupees). Sh is accused of stealing money from a scheme meant for the poorest of the poor. Singhal’s husband was using this money to start an upscale private hospital.

Singhal joins a long list of tainted civil servants including Nitesh Thakur, Babulal Agarwal, Rakesh Bahadur and Neera Yadav. Thakur fled to Dubai after amassing over $33 million but Agarwal, Bahadur and Yadav were reinstated as IAS officers despite being convicted of  graft under the earlier dispensation.

A truly egregious example

The mother of all scams is probably the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) land acquisition and allotment scam. NOIDA is a satellite city of New Delhi, with an estimated population of 738,343 in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh (UP). NOIDA is a part of the National Capital Region (NCR) of India. A performance audit report by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), India’s supreme audit institution, tabled in December 2021, found financial irregularities to the tune of $6.6 billion (550 billion or 55,000 crore rupees). It turns out that senior politicians and IAS officers stole massively from the taxpayer while developing the town and allocating properties. While the UP government has suspended minor officials, not one IAS officer has been prosecuted.

The audit covered the period from 2005-06 to 2017-18. Four chief ministers — Mulayam Singh Yadav (2005-2007), Mayawati (2007-2012), Akhilesh Yadav (2012-2017) and Yogi Adityanath (2017-2018) — held power during this period. This clearly demonstrates that the real estate cabal could operate with impunity regardless of the party or leader in power. To be fair, Yogi Adityanath, the current Bharatiya Janata Party BJP chief minister, gave the green light to the audit and tabled it in front of the state assembly.

The CAG report highlighted corruption on an unprecedented scale. Favoritism to a handful of private firms, a blatantly rigged bidding process and massive collusion between builders and IAS officers in the allotment and pricing of plots led to fortunes in the billions. This report authored by one of India’s most honest officers observed: “Absence of any internal audit led to unchecked violation of rules/orders and procedures as brought out in this Report. All of these translated into failure to achieve the objectives of NOIDA, distress for end-use stakeholders like home buyers who invested their life savings in schemes of NOIDA and losses to NOIDA and the Government involving thousands of crores of rupees.”

Shining the Light on the Great Indian Honey Trap

READ MORE

The IAS officers in Lucknow managed to block any further scrutiny. The BJP is in power in both New Delhi and Lucknow. A senior officer told this author that the political leadership must order an investigation by a special investigation team that comprises senior officials from the CAG, the income tax department and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). This team must investigate, press charges and secure prison sentences in court. For such a colossal robbery of the taxpayer, some IAS officers must go to jail.

High time for reforms

“Corruption is like a pandemic, more dreaded than the coronavirus,” says journalist Ashwini Shrivastava, the author of Decoding Indian Babudom. This is a first-of-its-kind book, covering the ailments of India’s administrative system from a common man’s point of view.  “I have explained in detail about the ill-effects and probable causes of graft in my book through a chapter titled ‘Yeh dil maange more [the heart wants more] … Corruption — need, greed or accepted norm?’”  

Shrivastava joins a chorus of voices calling for the complete digitization of government works. They claim that this, along with swift punishment for repeat offenders, would be the real game-changer in the fight against corruption. Shrivastava says, “Governance is still largely inaccessible for people living below the poverty line or those in rural areas of the country.” He goes on to add: “The common man faces the menace of corruption in places of public dealing like [road transport officers] RTOs, property registry offices and civic authorities, among others. There would be zero scope for corruption if public work is done online and people are not required to visit government offices for their work. When I say digitization, I mean complete digitization and not ‘Indianisation of digitization’, something I tried to explain in my book.”

Indian Equities, Global Markets: What Is the Story?

READ MORE

Shrivastava’s book is subtitled ‘15 Sutras For Effective Governance’, some of which the government is currently implementing. They include programs like Clean India mission (that is aimed at cleaning of office spaces, etc.), E-Office (digitization), Mission Karma Yogi for capacity building of government employees, the Common Eligibility Test (an online recruitment mode for government jobs) and, above all, lateral recruitment (appointment of private sector specialists in government departments). 

Replacing generalists, who may not possess the necessary domain knowledge to oversee major policy transitions at higher levels, with specialists has the potential to greatly reduce the scope for graft. Similarly, streamlining procedures and ensuring speedier implementation would help. This is exactly what Modi was referring to in his speech in parliament that this article referred to earlier. 

Why should IAS officers run school boards and education departments when they have no idea or interest in the field? Note that they send their own children to private schools and, almost invariably, universities abroad. There is a running joke that even honest IAS officers are willing to sell out their country if the CIA can get members of their lucky sperm club admitted to Harvard. Similarly, why should an IAS officer who cannot stand the smell of cows and buffaloes run Saras Dairy? One could go on but the point is simple: somebody with domain expertise should run the department, not an IAS officer who bounces around as the big boss with no knowledge of the department she or he is running. 

The Modi government has inaugurated the lateral entry program. This is a good start. Amber Dubey in civil aviation, Arun Goel in commerce, Rajeev Saksena in economic affairs, Sujit Kumar Bajpayee in environment, forest and climate change, Saurabh Mishra in financial services and Dinesh Dayanand Jagdale in new and renewable energy are welcome additions but much more needs to be done. Separate examinations for separate services, instead of a combined rote-based civil services examination, would be in the national interest.

Currently IAS officers enjoy an edge in comparison to those from the other services who come through the same exam. As pointed out earlier, the revenue secretary is an IAS, not an IRS officer. The IAS delays “empanelment” for other services, locks up all plum positions in government and occupies key positions in the prime minister’s office as well as the chief minister’s offices. Powerful IAS officers are far more important in India than even cabinet ministers. The simple solution to make the IAS less corrupt is to make it less powerful. That would redeem Nehru’s biggest regret and become Modi’s most historic legacy.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post India’s IAS Officers Are Now Rapacious Thieves appeared first on Fair Observer.

The reports cited human rights violations, oppression of religious minorities and muzzling of free speech and other factors to cast their verdict on the depressing state of the world’s largest democracy. V-Dem went to claim that India was no longer a liberal democracy, dubbing it an “electoral autocracy” on par with Russia. Freedom House declared that India was only “partially free”, ranking it 85th in the world.

These think tanks are not alone in sounding the bugle on India’s deteriorating democracy. The New York Times and The Washington Post routinely describe the country as a dystopian hellscape teeming with Nazi-like Hindu storm troopers crushing dissent and criticism under the weight of their jackboots. But how accurate is this picture? 

Portuguese UN Chief Preaches to India: Is it White Savior Complex?

READ MORE

Professor Salvatore Babones, an American sociologist and statistician, published a rigorous analysis of think tanks rankings: “India at 75: Who are the Barbarians at the Gate?.” He questioned the credibility of these reports, their authors and the dominant Western narrative. It is important to note that key people in V-Dem are closely linked to the Pakistani establishment and have an interest in downgrading Indian democracy.

In this interview with Babones, we discussed the role played by India’s intellectual class in portraying the country as a fascist state, the dubious methods used by Western think tanks to arrive at their conclusions, the errors in the latest Global Hunger Index that places India at rock-bottom, why he had to register as a “foreign agent” with the US Department of Justice, and his work on Donald Trump, populism and authoritarianism.

The transcript has been edited for clarity.

Vikram Zutshi: Why does the Indian intellectual class malign India and portray the country as a “fascist state” as you have stated in your public appearances and articles? 

Salvatore Babones: I don’t think India’s elite intellectuals actually want to harm India. All indications are that what they actually want is to push India toward greater liberalism and an improved democracy. But sometimes idealism can go too far, especially when people become so wrapped up in the righteousness of their cause that they are willing to warp the facts in their favor.

India’s League of Internationalists

READ MORE

Intellectuals sometimes rightly accuse politicians of misrepresenting the truth. Politicians are, after all, politicians. Intellectuals should remember that they are not politicians. Their job is to tell the truth, even when they don’t like it. Unfortunately, too many intellectuals in India and elsewhere abuse the trust placed in them as guardians of truth to promote their own political agendas instead. They often present their own subjective opinions as objective truth.

Zutshi: What is the empirical basis for Freedom House and the other institutes to classify India as “partly free,” and what are the errors you have found in their methodology?

Babones: International democracy evaluations like that from Freedom House are mainly based on expert opinion. Freedom House has a particularly small panel of experts: 128 analysts and “nearly 50” advisors who together have to cover 211 countries and territories. These experts use their own opinions, buttressed by reports from think tanks, NGOs, and other sources, to make their evaluations. This approach is dubious at best, but in my research I haven’t criticized the method. I have instead focused on tracking down the evidence adduced by Freedom House in support of its rankings.

Some of this evidence is very obviously culturally biased. For example, Freedom House faults Indian states for banning cow slaughter, yet it does not seem to mind that horse slaughter is banned in the United States. Other evidence is purely mendacious. Freedom House criticizes India for journalist deaths, when in fact journalists are actually safer in India than in most of the rest of the world.

Zutshi: You had to register as a “foreign agent” for some work that you had undertaken for an Indian media company. Critics say that you represent Indian interests and hence cannot be seen as an unbiased commentator. Would you care to explain your side of the story? 

Babones: I accepted $4,000 for a consulting assignment two years ago, representing approximately 2.5% of my year 2020 income. Of course, I understand that $4,000 is a lot of money in a country like India, where the GDP per capita is just $2,000 per year. But for me, this was a small contract to help a private media company learn how to reach international audiences. To put this in context, India Today spent a similar amount of money to bring me to Mumbai for the recent India Today Conclave.

Unfortunately, critics have used the “foreign agent” label to imply some kind of negative behavior on my part. This perfectly illustrates the dishonesty of the intellectual class. Anyone who is educated enough to have looked up my foreign agency registration is aware that “foreign agent” is a technical term that merely means that I worked for someone — a “foreign principal” — outside the country. It is an epithet that may sound bad, but, in reality, only reflects the fact that I have always been scrupulously honest in my regulatory filings.

Zutshi: Tell us about your academic specialty and briefly summarize your 2018 book, The New Authoritarianism: Trump, Populism and the Tyranny of Experts. 

I am a comparative political sociologist. In 2018, I wrote the book you refer to. It was named among the “best on politics” by The Wall Street Journal (WSJ). I am very proud that Barton Swaim, the WSJ reviewer penned: “Salvatore Babones, an American-born professor of sociology and social policy at the University of Sydney, doesn’t defend Mr. Trump or his administration. But he does suggest the Trump phenomenon may galvanize a revival of democratic self-rule. Mr. Babones, whose ideological affiliations remain a mystery to me, does not fear, as many American liberals do, that Mr. Trump is an ‘authoritarian’ president. He believes, rather, that the president’s populism is a protest against a different kind of authoritarianism: the rule of unelected “experts.” 

The book is a love-letter to populism, not an apologia for Trump. I don’t mind if intellectuals disrespect Donald Trump. I mind when intellectuals disrespect Trump voters. Democracy is founded on respect for the voters — all voters — and intellectuals too often forget that even the least educated voter has the same right to an opinion as the most educated intellectual.

Note that I wrote a book on progressive social policy in 2015. Last year, I wrote a book on Australian university reform that focused on problems with the international university rankings. As a quantitative social scientist with an MS in applied mathematics, I mainly teach social statistics and social policy analysis at the University of Sydney.

Zutshi: India’s ranking in the 2022 Global Hunger Index (GHI) is 107 out of 121 countries, slipping from its 2021 ranking of 101. You found errors in their methodology, implying that the ranking was falsified or at best sloppy. What is your rationale for doubting the GHI ranking for India? 

Babones: The key problem with India’s reported drop in the 2022 GHI was an incorrect figure for the 2014 GHI report. India’s reported 2022 fall was driven almost entirely by an incorrectly recorded rise in the number of children who have low body weight for their height. That is termed wasting. 

In fact, levels of wasting declined in India between 2014 and 2022, which is only natural, considering that India’s economy grew by 50% over that period. The problem is that the 2014 GHI figure for wasting was based on a projection, presumably provided by the previous government that was far too optimistic. When the actual 2014 data from India’s National Family Health Survey (NFHS) were released in 2015, they showed wasting levels were much higher than the estimates that had been provided to GHI in 2014.

India’s Tradition of Tolerance Offers Lessons in Light of Salman Rushdie’s Stabbing

READ MORE

Unfortunately, the GHI has still not corrected the 2014 numbers for India. They’re still reporting 15.1% wasting for 2014, when the true NFHS statistic for 2014 was 21.0%. This fell to 19.3% in 2022. So, India has experienced a fall, not a rise in wasting, making the GHI figures erroneous.

Remember, 2014 was an election year. The previous government may have recorded a dramatic reduction in wasting. This figure turned out to be incorrect. Yet GHI failed to take this into account.

This is just one example of how rankings unfairly rank India. India is doing much better at feeding its children and in running its democracy than Western experts and journalists give it credit.

[At 17.15 Eastern Time, we corrected this article. The earlier version incorrectly mentioned that Professor Salvatore Babones registered as a “foreign agent” with the Indian government, not the US Department of Justice.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Western Think Tanks are Wrong About Indian Democracy Declining appeared first on Fair Observer.

Following the Russia-Ukraine conflict, RT was taken off air in the US and so was Lee Camp’s show. So explosive were Camp’s revelations that, soon after RT was pulled, YouTube banned his videos globally and Spotify deleted his podcast. Note that Facebook has shadow-banned Camp since 2016. RT gave him unfettered freedom to express his views candidly. Now, American platforms have pushed Camp into the shadows.

Camp has been a biting critic of NATO expansion and American hegemony. So successful was Camp in upending prevailing tropes about the inherent goodness of America that both The New York Times (NYT) and National Public Radio (NPR) published hit pieces on him in rapid succession.  

Ironically, the US, which likes to admonish other countries for muzzling dissent, is notorious for punishing those who dare to challenge its political and cultural hegemony. Julian Assange and Edward Snowden were both branded as enemies of the state for spilling the beans on the largest illegal mass surveillance program in history. While Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, is currently locked up in a dingy cell in Britain’s infamous Belmarsh prison, awaiting extradition to America, Snowden was forced to seek asylum in Russia, where he was recently granted citizenship by President Vladimir Putin.

In a candid and wide-ranging conversation with Camp, we spoke about his relentless activism to unmask the hidden face of the American empire, the origins of the US proxy war in Ukraine, the lies and distortions published in corporate media outlets, the way the CIA has infiltrated major media organizations and American military assistance to 73% of the world’s dictators. Camp responds to accusations of being a “conspiracy theorist,” shares his thoughts on the FBI raid on Donald Trump’s residence, opines on the rise and fall of the petrodollar and claims that asset management firm Black Rock is “the one entity that really owns the world.”

The transcript has been edited for clarity.

Vikram Zutshi: A common accusation leveled against journalists like yourself, who regularly speak out against the crimes of the American empire, is that you are assets of the Chinese or Russian deep state. In fact, your show, Redacted Tonight, was hosted on the Russian state channel, Russia Today, later shut down by the US government in the wake of the Ukraine crisis. How do you respond to these charges?

Lee Camp: US media and television is kept carefully within a small Overton window, a small area of acceptable thought. There are no true anti-war voices regularly on US media, no anti-capitalist voices, and no anti-imperialist voices. Therefore, for an anti-war, anti-imperialist comedian/commentator such as myself, there was essentially nowhere one could host a comedy TV show like Redacted Tonight. In 2014, just about the only channel that would allow such a thing was RT America.

Ending the US Empire of War, Corruption and Poverty

READ MORE

I chose to house my show there because a) I could be unabashedly anti-war and anti-imperialist and b) I was completely uncensored and unrestricted. For the eight years Redacted Tonight lasted, I wrote every word I ever said. I was never told what to say or what not to say. I was not instructed on where to stand or what to believe. Such freedom is completely unheard of on American television.

Not only are news broadcasters and reporters heavily censored — just look at people like Phil Donahue or Chris Hedges being forced out for being anti-war — but even comedians are kept in a small cage. Even back to the days of The Smothers Brothers, comedians were “canceled” for being anti-war. Nowadays, there are essentially no anti-capitalist or anti-imperialist comedians on television. Well, for eight years there was at least one until the US government shut down RT and my show this past March.

So to sum up, if you’re asking why I would air my show on RT America, then you’re really asking why I would want to be free and uncensored. Hopefully the answer to that is pretty obvious.

Zutshi: On August 26, you tweeted, “New documents show the US & EU plans to plunder Ukraine have been in the works for years. They plan to sell off public infrastructure, destroy worker rights, and secure massive giveaways to billionaires. Much of this has already begun.” What is the invasion of Ukraine really about in your view and what are these “new documents” you refer to?

Camp: Here are the documents I refer to. And while this sort of plundering is the standard operating procedure when a country has been “acquired” by the West, that is not the root reason for the proxy war. I have said since day one that I’m opposed to the Russian invasion, but because I’m a thinking adult, I can say that and also realize the US and NATO have been creating this scenario for years. Anyway, the root cause for this proxy war is that the US is a late-stage empire, and the ruling elite believe they own the world. They are not willing to allow the rise of any other large countries.

Economically Russia is not much of a competitor to the US, but if Russia were allowed to align with China, France, Germany, India etc. then US hegemony would very much be at risk. The US ruling class deals with this threat by attempting to chip away pieces of Russia and China and create a wedge between them and the rest of the world. Of course in many ways, this plan is backfiring.

Rather than turning Russia into some sort of failed state, US/NATO actions seem to be speeding up the splitting of the world economies with many states moving beyond the petrodollar. Meanwhile the US has begun to collapse internally as we can see by the fact that the UN’s Office of Sustainable Development now ranks us with Cuba and Bulgaria as a “developing country.” 

Furthermore, the moment the petrodollar is no longer king, the US empire will be over, because without it the US can’t print as much money as we want and still have a powerful currency. The ruling elite realize this and that’s the true reason they have destroyed Iraq, Libya, and Syria and tried to crush Iran and Venezuela. All of those nations were/are outside the petro-dollar and outside the grasp of our central bankers. (Not to mention if humanity is to ever do anything about the climate crisis, step one is to end the petrodollar). 

As it stands now, the most powerful country in the world will do everything it can to make sure oil is still the main energy source of the world – because the power of our currency depends on it.

Zutshi: You have spoken about the CIA’s tentacles spreading far and wide, infiltrating all aspects of public life including Google and social media. It’s been well documented that the US intelligence community is firmly embedded in corporate mainstream media. In this context, how do legacy organizations like The New York Times and The Washington Post succeed in projecting themselves as stridently anti-establishment and champions of the underdog?

Camp: Well, it’s all just propaganda, marketing, and branding. The CIA has a long history of being heavily involved in mainstream media. Operation Mockingbird in the 1960s and 1970s involved placing CIA personnel in most mainstream outlets to help control the reporting and slant the coverage. The CIA and the US government pretend all of those shenanigans are long over. However, nowadays they don’t need to do anything secretly. CIA agents and Pentagon officials are regularly interviewed and “consulted” on mainstream media. They are viewed as the final word in truth, when in fact it is their job to lie to the American people (and the world). 

The Washington Post and NYT act as if anything said by the CIA, the FBI, the Pentagon or the State Department is the absolute truth. They are not reporters but rather stenographers for the corporate state. Of course this results in wild inaccuracies in their reporting.

Fairly recent fake stories like Russia paying the Taliban bounties to kill Americans or Cuba using advanced sonic weapons to give US diplomats mild headaches made the “legacy media” look like clowns. Then there are past epic failures like WMD in Iraq or the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

The Truth About the “Havana Syndrome”

READ MORE

The New York Times famously essentially refused to cover the Holocaust throughout World War II. Even when they covered the liberation of Auschwitz and the horrible acts that took place there, they still failed to mention the victims were Jews. They basically ignored the genocide of the Jewish people. NYT also talked very positively of Hitler all the way up to the US entrance into World War II. 

Anyway, why are these legacy media outlets still held up as the highest form of journalism? Because that’s what helps the US empire – repeating the lies of the corporate state and attacking those who reveal the truth, such as the attack piece NYT did on me which was filled with lies and misinformation.

Zutshi: Was there a singular incident or series of events that turned you stridently against the American empire and its relentless efforts to preserve and maintain economic and political hegemony at all costs? How do you respond to those who dub you a conspiracy theorist?

Camp.: To answer the last part first, those who call me a conspiracy theorist are either willfully ignorant or trying to defend the status quo at all costs. They clearly don’t want to discuss these subjects in an adult, rational sense. 

You ask when I turned against the American empire, but in fact, I believe I act in support of the truth and in support of freedom for all peoples. If someone is intellectually honest and they support freedom and truth, then they will find that they are opposed to the viewpoint being pushed by the American empire on most events that take place these days.

Empires in general are never built in order to spread equality, justice, and sustainability. They are built out of greed, ego, and hunger for power. For example, a report by the Congressional Research Service found that the US has perpetrated over 250 military interventions over the past 30 years. I think any honest person would be hard-pressed to find one of these interventions that is motivated purely by a need to help others or defend human rights. Sure, those types of things sound nice when printed in The New York Times, but they’re never the truth.

With every US military intervention (and even with all of our economic sanctions), the true motivation is always power, wealth, and resources. One can see proof that the US does not care even remotely about human rights in the fact that our country gives military assistance to 73% of the world’s dictators. 

Zutshi: You recently stated that the asset management firm Blackrock is the one entity that “really owns the world.” It’s a sensational claim but one that begs further enquiry. Tell us more about your investigations into Blackrock.

Camp: I’m certainly not the first to cover this, but BlackRock has over $9 trillion in assets, which is more than the GDP of every country except the US and China. To put $9 trillion in perspective, if you make $40,000 a year after taxes, in order to make $9 trillion, it would take you 225 million years. That’s not a typo.

And you won’t be surprised to hear that BlackRock does not generally use their insane wealth for good. They are one of the largest investors in weapons contractors, fossil fuels, and deforestation. They also are the one of the top stakeholders in every major media company in the US,so they can control the message. This is one of the reasons you hear so little about BlackRock. They don’t really want people talking about them, and they exert massive control over American media. They are also one of the top stakeholders in most big banks, including many outside the US. 

Are the Rich Embarrassed by Their Riches?

READ MORE

Anyway, long story short, it’s tough to overstate the amount of control BlackRock has. No person or company should have anywhere near that amount of wealth and power. 

Zutshi: What is the truth behind the unprecedented FBI raid on Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence? Does Trump have the goods on Biden, Obama, Hillary and the intel community as some are saying?

Camp: No. I don’t think he has anything on them. Keep in mind I don’t support either of the main parties, which are really just one party representing only corporate America. The raid on Trump’s residence – and all other legal attacks against him right now, whether legitimate or not – are all meant to stop him from running (and winning) in 2024.

Trump represents a rift in the elite ruling class, who don’t actually care about the terms “Democrat” or “Republican.” The ruling class wants to continue American hegemony and continue the bonanza of wealth they’ve enjoyed. A certain percentage of them support Trump because he oversaw one of the largest transfers of wealth to the top percentile ever, along with a massive tax break for the wealthiest Americans. But a larger percentage of the ruling class don’t support Trump because he’s not a good CEO for America. He says things out loud that are meant to be government secrets. He alienates allies and befriends “enemies.” 

Zutshi: Finally, do you see the American empire unravel as the dollar ceases to be the global currency standard and more and more nations begin transacting in their national currencies? Is there likely to be a new “rules-based order”, one that is not dependent on the NATO agenda?

Camp: Yes, the writing is on the wall for the American empire. It is in its last years, which could mean decades, and there are two or three ways America can deal with that decline. Accept it and transfer into a sustainable, mostly happy country that does not control the world but also does not have as much Ponzi scheme wealth for corporate America. Or use all military might to maintain control, thereby precipitating some sort of horrific nuclear war, which the proxy war in Ukraine has put us on the cusp of.

Corruption, Debt and the Crisis of Global Capitalism

READ MORE

Waning empires can shrink and not collapse, the way Britain has done, though not without hundreds of years of trouble. But waning empires can also collapse into a horrific kind of fascism. Right now the US seems to be racing towards the later choice. 

But another aspect that people should take into account is climate change. Climate catastrophe is putting all of this on steroids. And the end of the American empire and the climate crisis are inexorably linked in a way that most people are not talking about. I mentioned this in an earlier question.

When the US left the gold standard, we created the petrodollar to make sure our currency would still be incredibly powerful. We made a deal with Saudi Arabia that all oil sales would be in dollars and then all the other OPEC countries joined on. So in order for the US to maintain hegemony, the world must keep selling/buying oil in US dollars.

The GCC Now Prefers Russia to the West

READ MORE

The moment oil is no longer king and green energy takes over or the moment oil sales switch to other currencies, the US piggy bank will collapse. So unfortunately this means the most powerful country in the world has a very strong vested interest in making sure oil is the world’s main energy source. Therefore, the most powerful country in the world demands that climate change because of fossil fuel use continues unabated. It’s horrifying. And it honestly amazes me so few are talking about it. 

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post You are Free (Except to Speak Truth to Power) in America appeared first on Fair Observer.

The Cold War may be a thing of the past, but the practice of using romance and sex as tools of extortion and blackmail is still flourishing the world over. The #MeToo movement that started as a chorus of feminist indignation mobilizing long-suppressed grievances has also been frequently deployed as a weapon to bludgeon men into silence or, worse, milk them for all they are worth. 

In India, Deepika Narayan Bhardwaj, a journalist and documentary filmmaker, has been hot on the trail of duplicitous women. Some of them work in groups, regularly blackmailing gullible males into parting with large sums of money after sleeping with them. Their victims are usually married and hold a respectable place in society, making them easy targets for extortion.

Bhardwaj is known for speaking out against the rampant misuse of India’s gender laws, especially section 376 of the 1860-vintage Indian Penal Code (IPC) that addresses rape and sexual violence. Sections 489A and 354 deal with domestic abuse and sexual harassment respectively. The journalist observes, “Increasingly, men in India are becoming victims of systematic abuse through gender-biased laws. Laws where their innocence doesn’t matter, where they are presumed guilty and where a mere verbal accusation by a woman makes them a puppet in the hands of police and judiciary for years to come.”

Racism Is in Bollywood’s DNA

READ MORE

Indeed, the data on gender-based violence gathered by India’s National Crime Records Bureau is very revealing. Of the 120,306 total arrests under section 498A in the year 2020, 96,497 were men and a whopping 23,809 of the arrested were women. There are increasing reports of women who, after a few years of marriage, file false cases of domestic abuse in the hopes of winning large settlements. Subsequently the family is summoned and forced to settle the case by paying large amounts of money. Up to 75% of cases are withdrawn because it emerges that the purported victims are exploiting the law. This can only compromise the credibility of genuine survivors of abuse and domestic violence.

I spoke to Bhardwaj about some of the most disturbing cases she has come across, including that of the woman who filed nine rape cases against nine different men at nine different police stations within one year — all in one city, Gurgaon. The journalist told me about the men who have committed suicide because of shame after they were falsely accused of rape. Bhardwaj also revealed the gaslighting and professional sabotage she experienced at the hands of many feminists. She has also shared her views on the hotbutton topic of marital rape and measures that the government could implement to address the misuse of biased gender laws.

The transcript has been edited for clarity.

Vikram Zutshi: You deliver a perspective on gender rights seldom seen in the media, highlighting both male and female victims of fraud, abuse and extortion. What are some of the most disturbing and unique stories you have covered?  

Deepika Narayan Bhardwaj: The most disheartening story I have covered to date is that of the late Arvind Bharti, which I have covered in my upcoming documentary, India’s Sons. Arvind was first forced into marriage by a woman who threatened to file a rape case against him. He married her and thought life would be smooth but she filed a false dowry case against him within a year of their marriage. Arvind fought those cases for eight  years, studied law to defend himself properly and when he won the cases finally, he still had to settle because the woman wouldn’t let him be. It was traumatizing for Arvind because he had a daughter too from this marriage. But he had to give up on his daughter because of his wife’s constant cruelty. Eventually Arvind got divorced and wanted to move on, but his estranged wife kept defaming him everywhere he went — at his office and his study centers.

She got him thrown out of his job and eventually got him booked under a false rape charge after getting him beaten up brutally and confining him for three days. Arvind was jailed for 15 days. This broke him deep inside. Eventually Arvind ended his life leaving a 26-page suicide note detailing the torture he went through for decades, and writing about how the laws are extremely favorable to women. I  reported on the case, and stood with his family. Eventually, after several campaigns, the woman was arrested for abetment of his suicide.

The most unique story I have covered is that of Ayushi Bhatia who filed nine rape cases on nine different men at nine different police stations within one year – all in one city, Gurgaon. I exposed this girl, which eventually led to her arrest for filing false cases, criminal intimidation, extortion and blackmail. After that exposé, people from across India contacted me writing about women who are filing false rape cases.

I exposed another such woman, Sonia Keswani from Jabalpur, who has filed six rape cases against five different men in the city of Jabalpur over a span of six years. She filed a rape case on the first man she implicated, got married to him and then filed dowry, domestic violence and rape cases against him again. After this, from 2021 to July 2022, she filed four more rape cases against four other different men. 

In both these cases, while Ayushi and Sonia were both married, they kept filing rape cases on other men, claiming they were raped on a false promise of marriage. In my opinion, these two cases highlight how rape laws are being brazenly misused in our country today.

There are several cases I have brought to light involving suicide by men after they were falsly accused of raping a woman. Some of these names include Awadhesh Yadav, Manoj Kumar, Arvind Bharti, Amit Kumar and Rahul Agarwal.

Zutshi: Your film India’s Sons delves into a bizarre tale of deception and fraud set in Jaipur. Tell us about how the legal system was misused by its practitioners to entrap a number of unwitting men. 

Bhardwaj: India’s Sons is about the lives of men who were falsely accused of rape but then were honorably acquitted by the court after years of trial. By then, their lives were totally destroyed by the case. Justice Nivedita Anil Sharma from Delhi once asked, “If the woman who files a rape case is immediately called a rape survivor, then why shouldn’t we call men who are honorably acquitted in these cases after being falsely accused, as “Rape Case Survivors.” This is what forms the tag line of the documentary as well: The Tale of False Rape Case Survivors.

One of the cases discussed in the documentary is that of a honeytrap racket busted in Jaipur by the special operations group of Rajasthan Police. About 44 people including high court lawyers, policemen, two dozen women and others pretending to be journalists were arrested during this phase. These people did a recce of high net worth men, especially those who were married. They sent women to lure them into sexual relationships, gathered evidence of these relationships and then threatened to register rape cases against these men. They made about three million dollars, a whopping 24-25 crore rupees. This racket operated nonchalantly for about three years until it was busted.

I am in Jaipur right now for the screening of my documentary film and, even today, the anti-corruption bureau has arrested a few policemen and advocates for extorting money from a man accused of rape. In all such cases, the legal system has taken for granted that whatever the woman states is gospel truth. No investigation is conducted and, almost always, even if it is found that the woman has lodged cases falsely, she is not punished. In the honeytrap racket, these women casually changed their statements and turned hostile after receiving money from the accused. The legal system ignored such dubious actions and so did the law enforcement authorities.

Zutshi: Do you consider yourself a feminist in the modern meaning of the term? How have India’s usually hyper-vocal feminists responded to your work? 

Bhardwaj: Personally, I am unable to identify myself as a feminist in the way that the term is used in the modern era. More often than not, hyper-vocal feminists have this innate hate for men which I find very annoying. For them, this entire world is against women, and anyone who doesn’t speak their language is a misogynist.

Equal rights and opportunities for all is an absolutely wonderful thought and, even today, there are women and girls who are disadvantaged and need the support from society to realize their true potential. Having said that, life isn’t a cakewalk for every man out there either. They too have their own struggles, challenges, and now even face discrimination especially because of one-sided laws that need to be addressed. But anyone talking about men suddenly becomes an enemy of feminists.

There are many feminists who have attacked my work. One of them started a petition to Netflix, when my documentary was released, to take it off the air. Another one wrote to the organizers of a TEDx talk I was invited to, demanding not to allow me to speak. In contrast, I have received standing ovations at several events. Time and again, I get abused on social media by feminist warriors who often describe me as a “pick me woman”, “misogynist”, “traitor”, and much worse terms, which I can not mention here. However, it no longer impacts me . I can safely say that I have thousands of women supporting my work, and they actively recognise the need for someone to speak up for these men who are also suffering.

Zutshi: What do you think of the proposed marital rape legislation that is currently a hot topic of debate on social media? 

Bhardwaj: This is an extensive topic of debate. I would ask  you to check out my video on this issue, which details my reservations on the proposed marital rape legislation.

To sum the video up, we already have laws that address sexual abuse within marriage. If the current exception in the existing rape laws were to be removed, almost every matrimonial dispute could result in rape charges against the husband. We are already witnessing thousands of unsubstantiated allegations of unnatural sex that is illegal under section 377 of the IPC. These cases will eventually end in settlements whereby the husband will be asked to shell out significant sums of money to save himself. Certain countries have already instituted special provisions against marital rape. Most of these countries have a gender-neutral law, but in India, it would be rendered as yet another weapon in the hands of wives. 

Zutshi: In your opinion, what are the steps that can be taken to address the misuse of section 376 of the IPS on rape and sexual harassment? 

Bhardwaj: The courts should give credence to fair and impartial investigations. They must value evidence, not mere verbal allegations made by women. This could go a long way in addressing the misuse of section 376. Currently, the courts are not punishing women who misuse section 376 to victimize men. Judges need to penalize women who make false allegations of rape. Only then will the misuse cease.

In addition, I think the lawmakers need to differentiate between cases of sexual assault and those that involve false claims of a promise of marriage because they do not belong to the same category. Currently, all men accused of a promise to marry are thrown into jail. Even if it later transpires that no promise of marriage was made and, consequently, the sex was consensual and not rape, the accused has already enormously suffered. The time in jail and the loss of reputation can often drive such men to suicide. The system is not working and must change.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Shining the Light on the Great Indian Honey Trap appeared first on Fair Observer.

In recent years, radical Islamists have been on the ascendant in a land historically known for tolerant Sufi Islam. Arguably, the ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus in 1990 set in motion an inexorable trend. Now, the separatist movement that wants an independent Kashmiri state has been supplanted in many places by those who want union with Pakistan or even an ISIS-style caliphate.

In such an environment, calling out sexual predators in Kashmir is not easy, especially if perpetrators are Islamists. Victims are often targeted by Islamists for being ‘pro-state’ (read pro-India) and disloyal to the Kashmiri cause.

In this edition of The Interview, Fair Observer talks to Mantasha Rashid. She is the founder of Kashmir Women’s Collective (KWC), a gender advocacy group. In October, 2018, KWC named “multiple men in Kashmir – from political analysts, media personalities, editors, journalists and bureaucrats, to political workers – of sexually inappropriate behaviour.”

As Severyna Magill noted then, “KWC members [were] individually and collectively vilified by a smear campaign, insidiously circulated by the friends of those named.” KWC KWC received a torrent of threatening emails and messages attempting to silence them. 

Here, Rashid speaks about what inspired her to start KWC, its mission and purpose. She goes on to explain the origins of #MeToo in Kashmir, the major milestones accomplished by KWC, patriarchy and religious conservatism in Kashmir, excesses by Indian security forces, the politicization of gender-based violence in Kashmir, and the complications that arise when women speak out.

Vikram Zutshi: What was the inspiration behind KWC and what are key milestones in its journey? 

Mantasha Rashid: KWC is inspired by Combahee River Collective, a black women’s organization from the 1970s that worked to address racism and sexism against black women in the US through intersectional feminism. 

While doing a master’s program on gender and sexuality in the US, I realized that we needed to have such an organization in Kashmir. We started in 2016 and registered as a trust in 2017.

From the outset, KWC has been providing legal and psycho-social support to victim-survivors of violence in Kashmir. We also do capacity building, training workshops for students, police, teachers and religious preachers on the issues of gender rights, sexual abuse, harassment at workplace etc. Hence, the focus is educational: we provide support services and advocacy on issues pertaining to gender. 

 Zutshi: How did #MeToo start in Kashmir? The journalists and writers in your #MeToo allegations have stayed studiously silent. Is there another list of offenders that KWC plans to release? Also, do you see any chance for due process to take its course and bring perpetrators to justice?

Rashid: #MeToo is not indigenous to Kashmir. As you know, it is a global movement. KWC began after an informal discussion about the #MeToo movement in our KWC office. Volunteers who were young girls revealed some disturbing details. They told us about prominent men hiding their marital status and luring young girls on the pretext of marriage or guidance in career, internships, academic references etc into inappropriate relationships. When we asked them as to why young girls like them did not shame these men in public, they replied that if they revealed their identity, their families would not accept their revelations and, once their experience became publicly known, their families would be shamed. Kashmir is a small, closed and conservative society where social consequences for women who speak out can be serious. On hearing this, we felt that KWC could act as an interface between these young girls and society. It would collect the stories of these girls and publish them while safeguarding the identity of the girls themselves.

We decided that under no circumstances shall we reveal the names of these girls. The girls reposed their trust in us. They gave us their narratives on the condition that we would protect their identities. The status, credentials or political association of these men were of no consequence to us and we can say with certainty that it didn’t matter to those girls either. 

Our #MeToo movement was centered on women’s experiences and did not pay any heed to the accused men’s families, professions or politics. Unfortunately, some people tried to taint us as pro-state and pro-India voices. Had that been the case, the list of names we compiled would not have officers from state and central services, journalists and even a woman who was the aunt of a girl and had abused her since childhood.

When you ask if we intend to release any more narratives, we would say no. We could not release a few narratives because many women were threatened and withdrew their consent. They apologized for letting us down but their wellbeing is our primary concern.

Zutshi: How many cases of sexual violence do you attribute to Indian security forces? Did any of the victims receive justice? 

Rashid: There are some cases in public knowledge like Kunan Poshpora. A few like that of bride Mubina have been documented by Nyla Ali Khan and in the book edited by Urvashi Butalia’s edited book, Speaking Peace: Women’s Voices from Kashmir. From what I know, no convictions have been made so far in any cases involving Indian security forces.

Zutshi: How is KWC tackling endemic issues like domestic abuse, sexual violence and mental health conditions? How challenging has it been to get institutional support for your efforts? 

Rashid: It is immensely challenging to hear the stories of abuse and violence at any time of the day, through messages and phone calls as well as in person too. Also, we are a network of volunteering women who do their respective jobs and professions. This makes it quite hard for us. Burnout and time management stress are common. 

My PhD is about violence against women and its findings clearly show that these issues are neither recognized nor understood through the lens of gender-based violence. Instead, they are seen as aberrations, or as individual cases in isolation. A larger policy and action framework is missing despite there being a women’s police station in Srinagar. Its functioning will baffle you as the police focus is on mediation even after clear incidents of physical violence in marriage and even dowry.

As far as institutional support for KWC goes, thus far we have never approached any institution for any support. We have not taken any government or private funding. A few of us donate our time and some money to support and run KWC. We are a non-partisan and objective group with absolutely no political or religious affiliation. We have a few lawyers and counselors who volunteer their services for our network. We refer cases that come to our attention from time to time to these specialized volunteers after our primary intervention. 

Zutshi: How does the ingrained conservatism of Kashmiri society prevent victims from speaking out? What could be done to make the process easier for them? 

Rashid: Kashmir is a closed society and the political conflict has only added to social insecurity. Whenever an issue of gender-based violence or the rights of any minority group are referred to in any social context, it is perceived through the regional political binary lens. The nuances and even facts are often stripped out, reducing the issue to a pro-state or pro-separatist view. 

This is dangerous for any discourse. Such a binary lens shrinks the space for any genuine voice of support or advocacy for gender or minority rights. Also, patriarchy is a global reality, just its manifestations are varied and diverse for different cultures. Even in the US, for example, there are different wages for men and women for the same work. For that matter, black, hispanic, and white women have different experiences because patriarchy is often clubbed with racism.

How will things be easy for women in Kashmir? I think through women’s education to begin with and a lot more social change thereafter. You may find it surprising that an SUV-driving woman who earns no less than nearly $1,900 (Rupees 150,000) per month (a relatively high figure in Kashmir) comes to seek support from us at KWC. Her problem is that her husband is uninterested and neglectful, both financially and emotionally. The lady has no option but to seek a divorce. However, she and her parents are in a fix because she has three sisters who are yet to be married. If this lady divorced her husband, that could potentially cause problems for her sisters in finding suitable grooms.We have a big challenge: how do we deal with such societal attitudes? And it is not an isolated case, such archaic stigmas are widely prevalent in Kashmiri society. 

A lot needs to be done both at an institutional level and at the community level by taking major stakeholders on board. It may come as a surprise to you that, even though a shelter home for women in distress is mandated by legislation on domestic violence, it does not exist on the ground. In its absence, we have housed women in our KWC office for months altogether. There’s a lot that needs to be done. 

Zutshi: Finally, what role does the decades-long Kashmir conflict play in enabling predators and what are some possible solutions?  

Rashid: In a political conflict any issue is dovetailed to anti-state and pro-state, anti-freedom movement or pro-freedom movement narratives. It is nearly impossible to break free of these larger regional political narratives and advocate for any social cause. However, we at KWC largely feel that we have achieved our objective. We simply wanted to create a space in public discourse where these sensitive issues of discrimination, bodily violation, and violence against women are accepted, recognized and  addressed seriously.

Whether women  or girls took their cases to courts, received apology, or their allegations were contested was the second step which didn’t directly concern KWC. Our job was just to be a platform for stories of young Kashmiri girls, to shield them and to protect their identity. 

Sadly, the fact remains that no institutional actions were initiated against the accused by their respective offices. They did not even investigate serious allegations and check on their facticity.

#MeToo is not only a women’s issue but a societal issue of dignity and safety of half the population. Data from the World Health Organization (WHO) reveals that “across their lifetime, 1 in 3 women, around 736 million, are subjected to physical or sexual violence by an intimate partner or sexual violence from a non-partner – a number that has remained largely unchanged over the past decade.”

The reason for such alarming WHO numbers is that largely power is disproportionately titled in favor of men. #MeToo was a symbolic gesture of channelizing women’s rage worldwide to tilt this power imbalance, however little its outcome may have been. I strongly feel that #MeToo was necessary and many more such movements are essential for progress.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post It Is Taboo to Talk About #MeToo in Kashmir appeared first on Fair Observer.

Listen to her howlin’ roar

Metal under tension

Beggin’ you to touch and go

Highway to the Danger Zone

Ride into the Danger Zone”

Danger Zone, the adrenalin-pumping title song of the original Top Gun film, spawned a whole generation of American patriots willing to do or die for their country. Perhaps no other film has done more for American patriotism than Top Gun. Those were heady days, before Iraq, before 9/11 and before COVID-19, when America was seen as invincible and immortal – the quasi-mythical “shining city upon a hill.” In those heady days, everyone wanted to be American. The duo of Don Simpson and Jerry Bruckheimer saw the future in Tom Cruise, a fresh-faced actor in his early 20s, and the rest as they say, is history.

Today, when America is at its nadir – in the wake of a devastating pandemic, hamstrung by a bumbling, senile president and benighted by two major powers waiting to take its place –  along comes Hollywood to the rescue, with its most unabashedly nationalistic film to date: Top Gun Maverick. Audiences around the world have been tearing up at the big sweeping emotions and glorious old Hollywood spectacle unfolding on celluloid, and the box office is testimony to their enthusiasm. The film has become one of the highest grossing films of all time, earning over a billion dollars in revenues.

Patriotism on Steroids

The dream team of director Joseph Kosinski and Tom Cruise deliver the goods with a fiercely patriotic visual extravaganza. So immersive is the film and so persuasive its message – that America is the greatest country on earth – we cannot help but go along for the ride. The aerial combat choreography is mindblowing. The viscerally gripping action sequences propel you into the cockpit. You experience what the pilots are going through at high G-forces, like you’re actually in the aircraft with them- because you are – the actors had to go through rigorous flight training and flew real fighter jets during filming.

In an early scene, we see a rear admiral commenting on Maverick’s penchant for taking risks, saying, “Despite your best efforts you refuse to die.” He wonders why Maverick hasn’t been promoted: “You should at least be a two-star admiral by now. Yet here you are, captain. Why is that?”  “It’s one of life’s mysteries, sir” comes Maverick’s deadpan reply.  

 Cruise was in his early 20s when he played Pete “Maverick” Mitchell in the original Top Gun – a ballsy young navy pilot with the Kawasaki motorcycle and the need for speed. In his latest avatar, he’s 25 years older, but as cocky and irreverent as ever. In a nail-biting opening sequence, Maverick pushes a fifth generation fighter beyond Mach 10 (ten times the speed of sound), earning his laurels as ‘the fastest man alive’. The aircraft engines catch fire and it plummets to the ground, almost killing Maverick in the process. Partly as punishment, and in part because he is seen as the perfect candidate for the job, Maverick is ordered to return to Top Gun, the elite pilot-training school, to train a group of ace pilots for what seems like a suicide mission.  

What follows is a dazzling spectacle of high octane patriotism: America’s best and brightest put everything on the line –  while engaging in some of the most exhilarating aerial combat ever filmed – to take out an enemy base, and come back victorious after narrowly escaping the jaws of death.

Part of a Longstanding Pattern

Like other films and TV shows in the genre – American Sniper, Homeland, Patton, Charlie Wilson’s War, Argo, Hacksaw Ridge, Saving Private Ryan, Independence Day – Top Gun Maverick embellishes the idea of America as a keeper of the peace, a paragon of freedom and upholder of the “rules based order.” The truth, however, is very different. The US, through its national security apparatus – the Pentagon, CIA and NSA, and their media assets – will go to any lengths to maintain its cultural and political hegemony. This includes demonizing popular foreign leaders, imposing crushing sanctions on countries that step out of line, sponsoring coups and death squads, toppling elected leaders, installing puppet regimes and trafficking narcotics on an unprecedented scale as in the Iran-Contra affair.

Some commentators both in India and the West, habitually dub films like Top Gun Maverick as state propaganda” – which has a ring of truth – but these films can also be seen as a powerful means to unify fragmented populations and boost morale during uncertain times. They also polish the image of a brutal and deeply flawed civilization, giving it an imprimatur of greatness that belies its bloody past. No single entity has done as much to imprint the image of America as the “land of the free and home of the brave” upon billions of minds than Hollywood. Nationalism, in the context of Hollywood tent-pole cinema, is projected and perceived as social service of the highest order.

Lessons for India

If Hollywood can succeed in branding America as the greatest nation on earth, there’s no reason why the Indian film industry – with its world-class technical talent and increasingly huge budgets – cannot do the same.

Not only can Indian films expose the world to this ancient civilization’s mind-boggling mythological and historical wonders, they can also dispel obsolete colonial tropes about the nation. The world’s largest democracy can no longer be defined solely by its squalor, corruption and social inequities, just as America is not depicted exclusively as the land of endemic racism, slavery, genocide and nuclear Armageddon. As such, Bollywood must also make films keeping larger global audiences in mind – like the wildly successful Telugu film RRR – rather than pandering to smaller demographic slices that are anyway turning to mainstream international fare in larger numbers than ever before. Otherwise, Bollywood risks completely irrelevance.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Top Gun Maverick: Hollywood Sells Nationalism as Social Service appeared first on Fair Observer.

The economic climate changed somewhat during Prime Minister Narasimha Rao’s tenure, when his finance minister, Manmohan Singh, carried out a series of long-overdue structural reforms in 1991 to spur economic growth by liberalizing Indian markets.

India’s League of Internationalists

READ MORE

A notable holdout to the near-total Nehruvian consensus was the Swatantra Party, committed to equality of opportunity of all people “without distinction of religion, caste, occupation, or political affiliation.” Created in 1959 by C. Rajagopalachari as an alternative to Nehru’s increasingly socialist and statist outlook, the party envisioned that progress, welfare and happiness of the people could be achieved by giving maximum freedom to individuals with minimum state intervention. Perceived to be on the economic right of the Indian political spectrum, Swatantra was not based on a purely religious understanding of Indic culture, unlike the Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Jana Sangh.

Jaitirth “Jerry” Rao, a former Citigroup honcho, MPhasis CEO and presently chairman of the Value Budget Housing Corporation, in his 2019 book, “The Indian Conservative: A History of Indian Right-Wing Thought,” explores the philosophical roots of modern Indian conservatism in five domains: economic, cultural, social, political and aesthetic. The book clearly and concisely conveys the intellectual underpinnings of conservative thought based on indigenous traditions and culture. True conservatives advocate for evolution and not revolution, and the idea that conservative thinking is static, frozen and fixated on a Utopian golden past is a caricature designed by detractors, according to Rao.

In this guest edition of The Interview, Vikram Zutshi talks to Jaitirth Rao about what it means to be an Indian conservative today, about the history of right-wing thought, and the conflicts in Kashmir and with China.

The text was lightly edited for clarity.

Vikram Zutshi: What is your personal understanding of conservatism? Can you give us a timeline of conservative thought in the Indian context?

Jerry Rao: Conservatism is more a way of looking at the world than a philosophy. In politics, conservatives support gradual, peaceful, constitutional change where care is taken not to abandon the good things inherited from our ancestors. In aesthetics, conservatives have a love for old established traditions in music, dance, drama, painting, literature and, above all, in town-planning and architecture. A conservative will always oppose the Corbusier school of town-planning and architecture.

In economic affairs, conservatives support market-based systems not because they are efficient, which they might very well be. Conservatives support markets because they are time-honored, organic, voluntary institutions evolved by human beings and are predicated on peaceful intercourse, negotiations, bargains and consensus.

Markets have a positive moral dimension as far as conservatives are concerned. Symmetrically, conservatives opposed central planning in economics as it concentrates power and reduces citizens to serfs. Conservatives believe in a minimalist state which is strong. They do not believe in anarchic libertarianism. Conservatives believe in cultural cohesion in societies. We believe that the culture we have inherited from our ancestors, while always in need of modest change, is nevertheless a precious legacy which we need to preserve and hand on to our descendants intact or in an enhanced way. It is not to be abruptly jettisoned.

The same spirit pervades apropos of the environment. Our forests, water bodies and landscapes are sacred trusts given to us, which we need to pass on as trustees rather than as short-term owners. Conservatives are usually positive toward religion, which is seen as an important cultural inheritance —  conservatives are very fond of religious music, liturgy, chanting, painting, architecture, sculpture, dance and ritual — and also as being a very successful part of the moral cement that a society needs.

The roots of Indian conservatism go back to the Shanti Parva of the Mahabharata and the Tirukkural. Modern Indian political conservatism has had two fathers: Ram Mohan Roy and Bankim Chandra Chatterjee. The intellectual descendants include Rajagopalachari, Minoo Masani on one side, and Deen Dayal on the other. In economics, the tradition of Naoroji and Dutt has been carried forward by Shenoy all the way down to contemporary market-friendly economists. In aesthetics, the traditions of Bharata Muni, Sarangadeva, Abhinavagupta and Appayya Dikshitar have been carried forward by Ananda Coomaraswamy all the way down to the present efflorescence.

Zutshi: To what degree does the current government in India embody conservative ideals?

Rao: The present government of India, in political terms, is the very embodiment of conservatism. The Constitution of India represents a gradual constitutional change over the Government of India Act of 1935, which represented gradual constitutional change over previous acts like the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms, the Minto-Morley Reforms, the Indian Councils Act, the Queen’s Proclamation, The EI Company Charter Acts, the Pitt India act and the Regulating Act. We have retained the same constitution for 70 years, unlike Latin American countries which jettison constitutions quite quickly.

Changes to our constitution have been done through a complex amendment process and has been subject to judicial review. While conservatives are not happy with all the changes, we must perforce be happy with the gradual, peaceful, constitutional nature of the changes. No revolutionary changes here.

Now, coming to the current political dispensation, which has been in power for six years, we can state that it is more conservative in character than the previous dispensation. It is not as market-friendly as some conservatives may desire. But it is more market-friendly than the government of the previous 10 years. It is also more scrupulous about constitutional propriety — no outrageous acts like retrospective legislation. In its emphasis on subjects like yoga and Sanskrit, it certainly supports a cultural continuity so dear to conservatives. Its focus on the Ganga River and on solar power demonstrates a sense of trusteeship about the environment.  

Principally, the government needs to be more market-friendly and it needs to dismantle large parts of the intrusive administrative state which it has inherited. It needs to hasten slowly in this area. I cannot think of any serious blunders.

Zutshi: At what juncture did your political philosophy begin to crystallize? To what extent does Indian conservatism resemble its American and British counterparts?

Rao: This took some time to grow. Reading a biography of Edmund Burke in 1975 may have been when it started. It has taken years, even decades to crystallize. There is an amazing synchronicity between the ideas of the Shanti Parva of the Mahabharata, the ideas of the Tirukkural, the ideas embedded in the Apastamba Sutra of the Yajur Veda and the ideas of Edmund Burke, Benjamin Disraeli and Roger Scruton. In modern times, great Indian conservatives like Ram Mohan, Bhandarkar, Bankim, Rajaji and Masani acknowledged their debts both to the classical Indian texts and to Burke. 

Zutshi: There is much noise in the Indian media about the silencing and incarceration of dissenters. Many activists and academics have been locked up without due process, for example, Varavara Rao, Sudha Bharadwaj, Hany Babu and others. Do you think such draconian measures are justified?

Rao: The Indian state and republic have been under attack. The previous prime minister, Manmohan Singh, emphatically stated that Maoists were India’s greatest security threat. So there is a continuity between governments in the threat perception. We are dealing with people who wanted to destroy bourgeois democracy from within. In recent times, the alliance between Maoists and jihadists who are bent on an Islamic reconquest of India has led to considerable concern and alarm. Those who supply the ideological basis for violence against the republic, those who shelter the extremists, those who help the extremists acquire arms and those who create a penumbra of respectability around people who violently murder Indian police personnel and ordinary citizens, have much to answer for.

These ideologies have until now taken advantage of the soft Indian state. They have been foolish. The Indian Republic has contained Naga, Kashmiri and Khalistani separatists and the bomb-throwers and murderers of Naxalbari. Sooner or later, the velvet glove was bound to get a little loose. That is what has happened.

Zutshi: What is China’s long-term agenda with regards to India? What are we to make of the ongoing aggression between the two powers? Can India afford another war at this point? If not, what are its remaining options?

Rao: In my opinion, China’s leaders see India as an irrelevant pinprick. They see America as their natural rival. Having said this, the Chinese do have a desire to break up India and they will try their best to do so. There is no “aggression between the two powers.” There is only Chinese aggression and aggressiveness. I don’t know what we can make of it, except to assume that their expansionist and irredentist stance is not likely to abate. In strictly economic cost-benefit terms, we cannot afford it. But if the other option is servitude and disintegration, they do not leave us with much choice but to resist irrespective of the economic calculus.

Truman articulated the doctrine of “containment” apropos of the Soviet Union. A global coalition along those lines is the answer. We do not have the choice of being non-aligned now. The Soviet Union was far from us and did not attempt to encroach on us or weaken us. China is our neighbor and seems to have decided that we are like Poland of the 1930s. We might need to demonstrate that we are closer to the weak and inefficient Russia which suffered much but still did halt the efficient German juggernaut in the 1940s.

Zutshi: Finally, do you agree with the abrogation of article 370 in Kashmir? More importantly, is the lockdown and curtailment of civil liberties justified?

Rao: Yes. It was a serious anomaly. It was detrimental to Kashmiri women, religious minorities like the Hindus and the Buddhists, Dalits, refugees and so on. It was allowing for the retention of a space for Islamist groups like the ISIS to infiltrate; 370 had to go.

Noisy sections of the valley’s population took the public and publicized position that a self-proclaimed ISIS terrorist was a hero and a martyr. The previous local government either could not or chose not to do anything. When such things happen, any organized state worth its name has to take drastic intrusive action. Let us not forget that Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the American Civil War and Pitt suspended habeas corpus during the Napoleonic Wars.

Zutshi: What will it take to bring Kashmir back to normal again, or is that just a pipe dream?

Rao: The Kashmiri Sunni leadership has to realize that if they do not change, in 40 years, they will resemble the Naga Muivarh faction leaders seeking medical treatment in Delhi and talking gibberish. The rank-and-file Kashmiri Muslims need to realize that they have been fed ridiculous propaganda. Joining Pakistan means joining a failed state that is a bit of an international joke. Given the years and decades of educational damage and brainwashing that has happened, this is not going to be an easy task for the Indian state to accomplish. But slowly, inevitably, inexorably, it will get done.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post A History of Indian Conservatism appeared first on Fair Observer.

Today, it is the site of a bitter territorial dispute between India and Pakistan, a conflict that has resulted in scores of casualties and the forced expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Pandits, as Kashmir’s Hindus are commonly referred to.

Author Rakesh K. Kaul’s first novel, “The Last Queen of Kashmir” (Harper Collins India, 2015), tries to shed light on the roots of this conflict by going back in time to explore the dramatic life of Kota Rani, the last ruler of the Hindu Lohara dynasty in Kashmir. Kota ruled as monarch until 1339, when she was deposed by Shah Mir, who became the first Muslim ruler of Kashmir.

The Modern Indian Woman: A Conversation with Trisha Das

READ MORE

His most recent work, “Dawn: The Warrior Princess of Kashmir” (Penguin India, 2019), is an unexpected foray into the far distant future. Set in 3000 AD, the book combines artificial intelligence, genetics and quantum theory with the ancient wisdom of Kashmir’s traditional Niti stories, which inspire Dawn to overcome seemingly impossible odds to save humanity from impending destruction.

In this guest edition of The Interview, Vikram Zutshi talks to Rakesh Kaul about the inspiration behind his two novels, childhood memories of his strife-torn homeland and how his grandfather, the famed Kashmiri mystic Pandit Gopi Krishna, guides the trajectory of his life and work.

Vikram Zutshi: You have written what is possibly the first science fiction novel set in Kashmir. What inspired you to choose the genre of science fiction to tell this story and how does it adapt itself to Kashmiri history and culture?

Rakesh Kaul: I wish I could claim the honor of being a pioneer with “Dawn: The Warrior Princess of Kashmir.” But much as I admire them, I have many literary ancestors who are the equals of Joseph Campbell, George Orwell and Aldous Huxley. I am a mere upholder of a literary tradition that is over 2,000 years old. Western science fiction imagines possibilities like time travel, space exploration, parallel universes, extraterrestrial life. There are robots who are more advanced in their intelligence than humans.

But all these themes were part of the stories in Kashmir, plus more. “Dawn” has in it an ancient story about a robot city with a remarkable safety override. The Puranic story of Indra’s net holds within it the concept of recursive universes. The pinnacle of these stories is of course the collection of stories in the Yoga Vasistha.

The word “sahitya,” which means “literature,” was coined by Kuntaka in Kashmir. Within sahitya, there was a genre which dealt with all the above-mentioned themes but went beyond. One could say that if science fiction’s domain was all the possibilities within the bounded universe, then in Kashmir specifically — and India generally — the stories explored all the possibilities within the unbounded inner-verse.

So, if you like “1984” or “Brave New World,” which are sci fi classics, then “Dawn” is going to take you to a whole new level. Even more than Joseph Campbell, the stories that I have brought are not mere myths or fantasies; they reveal a cognitive organ and knowledge acquisition capability which unlocks the deterministic laws of nature in a manner that science is just beginning to grapple with.

Zutshi: What does the story arc of the central character, Dawn, tell us about the state of the world today?

Kaul: All science fiction stories in the West and their Indic counterparts, the Niti stories, deal with the existential question of the arc of one’s way of life. The mind is seduced by utopia and yet ends up in dystopia. One ignores at one’s peril the addictive narrative wars happening today that are shaped and served by technology. The world, whether global or local, is heading toward a duality of monopolistic cults that fiercely demand total obeisance. Non-conformity results in a flameout at the hands of troll armies.

Artificial intelligence is the omniscient eye watching over us. What we cannot ignore is that computer power is doubling every 20 months, data every six months, and the AI brain every three months. The champions of AI are promising that we will have sentience in 30 years. That is a close encounter of the third kind. That is within the lifespan of the readers. The danger to you as an individual has never been greater. One cannot take lightly the rising depression and suicide graphs coupled with desperate drug usage. Hence, the vital necessity for Dawn. 

Dawn is the last girl left standing on earth in 3000 AD. She is facing an army of weaponized AIs and mind-controlled automatons; they rule over a deadly world where men have lost their souls and women have been slain — all heading to Sarvanash, the Great Apocalypse. This is a story of a close encounter of the seventh kind. How does Dawn arm herself? Can she win? Great Niti stories remind us that if the mind is a frenemy, then the need to nurture what is beyond the mind that one can turn to and trust is paramount. The Dawn lifehack that is presented is time-tested but oh so amazingly simple, yet powerful.

Zutshi: Is the characterization of the main protagonist based on a real-life person?

Kaul: “Dawn” in Sanskrit is “usha.” Usha is the most important goddess in the Rig Veda, the oldest extant text in the world. By contrast, none of the goddesses that we think about today are even mentioned there. Dawn is the harbinger of the rebirth of life each morn. She is the only Indian goddess who has spread around the world. Usha’s cognates are Eos in Greek, Aurora in Roman and Eostre in Anglo-Saxon [mythology], which is the root of the word Easter —the festival of resurrection. Interestingly, Usha is also the name of the sanctuary city where the Sanhedrin, [Israel’s] rabbinical court, fled to in the 2^nd century. She is also the goddess of order, the driver away of chaos and darkness. She is dawn, she is hope, she is the wonder leading to resurrection.

Humans recognized her wonder a long time ago. They imagined Dawn born at the birth of the universe, whose one-pointed mission is to make darkness retreat and drive ahead fearlessly.

But Dawn is also a tribute to the warrior princesses of Kashmir, a land which was celebrated for its women in practice and not just poetry. They were not merely martial warriors, nor just holy warriors or ninja warriors, but much more. The Kashmiris enshrined the dawn mantra within themselves, men and women, and repeat it to this day. In my novels, the protagonists repeatedly draw upon it.

Zutshi: You have spoken about Niti, the traditional storytelling technique of Kashmir. Please elaborate on Niti for the lay reader and how it informed your work. 

Kaul: “Niti” means “the wise conduct of life.” The first collection of Niti stories from Kashmir is the 2,000-year-old celebrated Panchatantra, which is the most translated collection of stories from India. Kashmiri stories have found their way into the Aesop and Grimm fairy tales, Chaucer and Fontaine.

The Kashmiris maintained that one is born with only one birthright, namely the freedom to achieve what is one’s life quest. So, the existential question is, What is the “way of life” by which one can maximize one’s human potential? The Kashmiris defined life’s end goal in heroic terms as unbounded fulfillment while alive, not limited by the physical and encompassing the metaphysical. But how does a mere Niti story enable you to achieve fulfillment and consciousness? Niti’s cultural promise is that it enables one to face any threat, any challenge in reaching one’s goal as one travels through time and space.

How does Niti work? Let us start with the Western perspective first. Descartes famously said that wonder was the first passion of the soul. Kashmir spent a thousand years studying this phenomenon and helps us penetrate deeper here. When we have an experience that is a total surprise, we go WOW — an acronym for “wonder of wonder.” When we go wow, it is expressing, How can this be? We not only accept the limited capacity of our senses and the mind, but we also have a profound moment of self-recognition that there is an unlimited capacity in us to experience what lies beyond our knowledge.

The wormhole between the two brings the relish of the state of wonder which in India was described as “adbhuta rasa” in the text “Natyashastra,” written by another Kashmiri illuminati, “adbhuta” meaning “wonder” and “rasa” meaning “juice.” So, in the wow moment you momentarily taste the wonder juice. All Niti stories are written in the adbhuta rasa literary style, and so is Dawn.

Zutshi: Your first novel, “The Last Queen of Kashmir,” inspired by the story of Kota Rani, was a hit with Kashmiris in India and the diaspora. What would you like readers to take away from the book and how is it relevant in our times?

Kaul: Yes, much to my surprise the novel received critical acclaim and sold out! The second edition will be coming out worldwide in a month or so, with another beautiful cover of Kota Rani! “The Last Queen of Kashmir” is a historical epic about a great queen from India who informs and inspires. It engages audiences while serving as a cautionary tale for today. It was a precursor of what is now being called fail-lit. Much like Icarus, Kashmir’s humanist civilization of oneness and inclusivity flew too close to the Sun.

The story provides lessons on the importance of protecting, preserving and perpetuating our social freedoms in a unified society from being divided by religious and cultural conflict. Kota Rani’s story shows that we should look for leaders who protect freedom and defeat the pied pipers within who threaten us with tyranny in the guise of offering utopia.

Yet, “The Last Queen of Kashmir” is eventually a resurrection story to show us how the light of knowledge and the power of freedom can conquer all enemies. Kota was described as always captivating, never captive. It is a highly recommended read for all women because its notion of femininity and feminine power may surprise them. Kota Rani is memory and Dawn is imagination. Both are reflections of the same double reflexive power. Memory is what makes who you are, and imagination is what makes who you can be. 

Zutshi: As a Kashmiri Hindu who moved to the United States fairly early in life, what are your earliest memories of your ancestral homeland? What do you hope to see in Kashmir’s future?

Kaul: My earliest memories are of the journey that we would take to my homeland from Delhi, where my parents had migrated to after the Kabali raids in October 1947. I remember my mother dropping a coin into the raging river Jhelum and praying for a safe journey as the bus would slowly creak across the hanging bridge in the hill town of Ramban.

Once there was portage across the old Banihal tunnel, where a section had caved in, only small, open jeeps could ferry us with our bags from our buses across to the waiting buses on the other side. The old tunnel was dark with a few small lamps that only accentuated the shadows. There were sections which were deliberately left bare in the older tunnel so that the massive water flow inside the mountain could rush out. They did not have the technology in those early days to divert the water. The sound of the rushing water still resonates inside me.

Kashmir was a place of sensory overload. I would sip the nectar endlessly from the honeysuckles, pluck the cherries growing in our garden. My cousin would rent a boat, and much like Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn we would paddle through the water canals in our neighborhood raiding the mulberry trees growing by the banks of the river. We would wake up early in the morning and go for a hike to Hari Parvat, walking through the Shia neighborhoods with the graveyards. Once we saw a crowd of [Shia] self-flagellate as part of their religious observances, and we hid until they passed by. There would be other mob gatherings, but we were culturally trained to avoid them.

Once a year, we would go to my grandfather’s retreat overlooking the Nishat. It was a huge apple orchard. Evening time we would scurry back to the cabin because then the bears would come from the other side of the hill. Night was their foraging time.

Nothing compared, though, to the experiences when the family would rent a houseboat, technically a doonga. We would go to the shrine of Khir Bhavani for a week. The boat would move slowly, and there would be endless tea poured from the samovar accompanied by the local breads. Family life seemed to have kith and kin as an integral part. There was a feeling of intimate connectivity. At night, all the cousins would gather. We would spread the mattresses on the bottom of the boat and share the blankets. Then it was storytime. The girls would cry that we were scaring them when the boys would share the monster stories. But they would not leave the group because they did not want to miss out. I have brought some of these Kashmiri monsters and their stories into “Dawn.” 

But, ultimately, Kashmir was about the mystic experience. I would sit in the inner sanctorum of our small temple at the end of the bridge on our little canal. There was barely space for a few. I would watch the water drops drip endlessly on the lingam. The small trident would be by the side. I would look at the paintings on the wall, each one a story and wonder about it all. The best, of course, would be the nighttime aarti at Khir Bhavani. It seemed that all of humanity was there with a lit lamp in their hands. The faces of the devout women and girls would be luminous, the moonlight would give them a sheen. There was beauty, love and innocence in the air.

As a Kashmiri, I would want the lakir ka fakir (blind ideologues) to disappear and the artist to reign supreme. Translation: Those who police others either morally or ideologically or religiously or by force of arms should go bye-bye. The rest will follow naturally, and the valley will emerge from its long, deep darkness.

Zutshi: You are the grandson of famed Kashmiri mystic, Pandit Gopi Krishna. In what way have his work and teachings informed and influenced the trajectory of your life?  

Kaul: The Pandit was the last rishi of Kashmir, a lineage that goes back to the formation of the valley by Rishi Kashyapa. Deepak Chopra said of him, “Pandit Gopi Krishna was a pioneer in the land of spirituality. His insights into the quantum nature of the body predate the scientific discoveries of today. I salute this great sage and scientist of the twentieth century.” Dr. Karan Singh, the crown prince of Kashmir who gave the eulogy at his funeral said, “In the 19^th century, India gave the world Ramakrishna; in the 20^th century it has given the world Gopi Krishna.”

I suppose he shaped me even before I was born. He made the decision that he was going to marry my mother without giving any dowry to break that pernicious social custom. His father-in-law begged him, [saying] that they had bought a priceless wedding sari the day that my mother was born. But to no avail. My mother was married in a simple cotton sari. My inception was in simplicity.

He was my first guru, and he continues to guide me. I learned from him the critical importance of being a family man, of community service, especially toward widows and destitute women, of being a fearless sastra warrior, of words being bridges, about poetry and the arts and, best of all, about the worlds beyond. I treasure his letters. I can never forget the talk that he gave at the United Nations where 600 Native American elders attended. It was a prophecy come true for them where it was stated that a wise man from the East would come and give them wisdom in a glasshouse.

Would I have dared to embark on a 12-year journey to bring the story of a hidden Kota Rani without the inspiration of what it took him to bring his story to the world? No. Especially when writing “Dawn,” his work was invaluable in steering me in describing the close encounter of the seventh kind. What is the biotechnology of the evolutionary force within us? And then in the epilogue for “Dawn,” it is all him because only he has traveled there. Even now as I write this, his beaming face smiles at me. I smile back.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Kashmir’s History and Future Meet in Literature appeared first on Fair Observer.

Despite my reservations, I clicked on the first episode. The characters depicted in the show were largely relatable and familiar. The show, however, turned out to be a lot more nuanced than I had initially thought. The matchmaker’s call for “flexibility and compromise” in relationships had upset many Indian Netflix subscribers. Are these qualities really such a bad thing, I wondered? Isn’t it necessary to make allowances for the shortcomings of others in any relationship, whether personal or professional, in order to make it work?

Can any relationship survive without the willingness to iron out kinks that will perforce appear from time to time? And are so-called “love marriages” really as egalitarian as they are made out to be? People usually partner up with those who possess qualities that they find desirable, such as their physical attributes, career prospects, ethnicity and social class.

Does Money Buy Happiness and Meaning?

READ MORE

In my opinion, the show does not condone regressive stereotypes, as some have suggested. It simply holds up a mirror to our ingrained preferences and prejudices, reflecting the good along with the bad and the ugly. Akshay, with his pathological mother fixation, and Aparna, with her hyper-ambitious, control freak of a mother, were two of the examples that stood out for me.

Volumes have been written about the trauma inflicted on impressionable young minds by overbearing parents. Unrealistic life goals and a toxic home environment are known causes of depression among youth the world over and have been seen to cause mental health issues that could linger for a lifetime if not diagnosed and treated in time.

Arranged Marriage

When I was in my late twenties, I agreed to give arranged marriage a try on the prodding of friends and family. I was not the typical candidate. I did not fit into the holy Indian trinity of doctor-lawyer-engineer, nor did I have any interest in cricket, Bollywood or the trappings of organized religion. But what I did have was a large network of well-connected relatives and family friends who were willing to vouch for my upstanding moral character and social pedigree. I was not aware that I possessed these qualities but decided to go along for the heck of it.

My first rendezvous was at the coffee shop of a hotel on Marine Drive, in what was then Bombay, now Mumbai. I was to meet a London-based lawyer, who like me had grown up in Mumbai. We started off by talking about our shared south Mumbai roots. Pretty mundane stuff. She noticed the iPod sticking out of my pocket and asked what type of music I liked. At this, I launched into an impassioned spiel about the Grateful Dead, Ozric Tentacles and Gong, “the greatest psychedelic rock bands in music history.” “Do you need drugs to get into that stuff”? she asked innocuously. “Sure, certain substances can greatly enhance the experience,” I replied.

“Have you taken any of these substances yourself?” she inquired in her clipped British accent. I could see where the conversation was going but decided to proceed anyway. “Yeah, I dropped some acid at a Grateful Dead concert in my freshman year at college. It was a life-changing experience.”

After a few moments of silence, I asked what type of law she practiced. “I am a criminal defense attorney,” she answered dryly. “Great. I’ve been looking for someone like you,” I said with a chuckle. Soon after we parted ways, promising to stay in touch. It was the last I saw of her. Clearly, I was not her type. She did not think I was “husband material,” and she was probably right. 

My next meeting happened a few months later, in Los Angeles. This time it was with an interior decorator, a “creative type” that my aunt promised I would gel with. We met at a Brazilian restaurant near Venice Beach. She was attractive, free-spirited and very intelligent. We had similar tastes in music and books, and we both loved Brazilian churrasco. Soon we were guzzling caipirinhas and cracking up about arranged marriages. The irony was not lost on either of us. She had agreed to the meeting for the same reason I had, out of sheer curiosity.

She told me about a guy she was set up with a few months ago, an IT professional deeply influenced by Bollywood tropes about the ideal NRI — non-resident Indian male. He had modeled himself after one of the characters in a popular Karan Johar film. Predictably, their rendezvous ended soon after she informed him about the string of men she had dated in the past.

As we talked, I could not help noticing other men in the restaurant staring at her. She could have had any one of them she wanted. It made me feel insecure, and I redoubled my efforts to woo her. Was it the Indian in me that made me react in that manner? I could not be sure. Certain aspects of the mating game, like the relationship between social capital and desirability, are universal and not limited to any particular ethnicity. In this case, she clearly had the upper hand. For some unfathomable reason, she took a liking to me and we ended up seeing each other for a couple of months before mutually deciding we were not the “marrying kind.”

Inadequacy of Modern Relationships

When the show dropped, I reached out to Selina Sheth, a Mumbai-based writer, for her opinion. “Arranged marriage is not the problem, the way it is treated in cultures like India is,” she explained. “It is one thing to have preferences (all men and women do) but to ascribe value judgments to these preferences can be and has shown to be damaging. Traditionally, marriage was a social, family and economic construct, but in today’s times, can a list of ticked boxes mean you are compatible in the deeper sense of the word?”

Indeed, Taparia had admitted the same with her observation that “nowadays, marriages are breaking like biscuits.” The documentary series offers a counterpoint to the inadequacy of modern relationships by showing a series of charming elderly couples clearly happy and content with each other after several decades of living together. They had all been introduced to each other by well-meaning relatives. For contrast, we are also introduced to Rupam, a divorced single mother who bypasses the matchmaker route to find love on a dating site. Clearly, times are changing. Indian men and women are increasingly breaking free of the shackles of tradition and finding their own partners. Whether these alliances are any more successful than the arranged kind is debatable.

It has been shown that Indian-American couples who met through arranged marriage were as satisfied in their relationships as those that chose their own partners. Indeed, a 2012 NDTV-IPSOS survey indicated that three-quarters of Indians between the ages of 18 and 35 prefer to enter arranged marriages. The tradition, however, has not remained stagnant. Whereas in the past the bride and groom did not have much of a choice in the matter as the parents had the final say, today it has evolved into an Indian version of speed dating. You are set up with a series of meetings with prospective partners where both males and females are free to move on if their expectations are not met.  

Of course, in many parts of rural India, young people are still coerced into marriage, or worse, killed for not adhering to caste laws. But can we really expect centuries of dogma to change overnight? For instance, there are still forest tribes that consume human flesh in some parts of the world. Perhaps the enlightened op-ed writers at The New York Times and The Guardian would like to take a shot at educating the cannibals?

“Progressing beyond conservative ideals is a sign of bravery, but also privilege. It usually means you have a support system and the social space to exist outside of the narrow confines of tradition,” says Smriti Mundhra, the executive producer of “Indian Matchmaking.” “Not everybody has that privilege, and not everybody has had a chance to deprogramme themselves from the ideas they’ve internalized over generations. Not everybody believes they need to be deprogrammed!”

On a personal note, I did end up getting married eventually. It was not an arranged alliance. We had met through mutual friends and in a euphoric moment decided to get hitched. It did not last very long. We separated after two years of living together, realizing we had very different life goals and aspirations. I was too much of a libertine to remain in a monogamous relationship, and she was completely immersed in her medical residency, making it impossible to spend enough time to get to know each other adequately. It was nobody’s fault that the marriage fell apart — it was just the natural progression of things. All relationships must have a beginning and end, and ours ended sooner than expected.

“A great marriage is not when the ‘perfect couple’ comes together,” writes Dave Meurer, the author of “Good Spousekeeping.” “It is when an imperfect couple learns to enjoy their differences.” I am currently in a relationship with someone as imperfect as me, and we are slowly learning to enjoy our differences, naturally with fistfuls of salt. So far, so good.  

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post What “Indian Matchmaking” Tells Us About Love appeared first on Fair Observer.

He goes on to explain why he does not believe in empathy or compassion, qualities that are considered fundamental to humanity: “The contemporary world of humanitarian lament, too, contains players who have been diagnosed with a range of mental disorders that makes them highly persuasive narrators. There is a popular belief that their suffering makes them feel more deeply about the problems of others. This is a myth. Empathy is merely a form of self-absorption and self-obsession. The ill create a gloomy world because that is what they see and that is what comforts them.”

Zero Degrees of Empathy

In Joseph’s worldview, not only is empathy a mental disorder, but all those striving to improve conditions for the less fortunate are also mentally ill. In another one of his columns, Joseph implies that environment activist Greta Thunberg’s zeal to change the world is driven by a mental condition, Asperger’s syndrome. “A lot of this extreme altruism is not a consequence of sanity at all,” writes Joseph. “They are doing it because they can’t help it; they are being influenced by their mental health.”

He uses the terms “schizophrenic,” “insane,” “mental disorder,” “mental anomaly” and “paranoia” interchangeably, with no thought given to their specific usage in medical parlance. In his lexicon, these terms are weaponized and deployed as slurs. In his puerile attempts at psychoanalysis, Joseph unwittingly offers us a glimpse into his own psyche.

Why #MeToo Won’t Succeed in India

READ MORE

“Empathy is our ability to identify what someone else is thinking or feeling, and to respond to their thoughts and feelings with an appropriate emotion,” writes British clinical psychologist Simon Baron-Cohen in his book, “Zero Degrees of Empathy: A New Theory of Human Cruelty.” According to Baron-Cohen, “People who lack empathy see others as mere objects. These are people with borderline personality disorder, antisocial personality disorder and narcissistic personality disorder. They are capable of inflicting physical and psychological harm on others and are unmoved by the plight of those they hurt.”

He could have easily been talking about Manu Joseph. Unfortunately, Joseph’s views are hardly an exception in Indian society.

Scale of the Problem

Mental health should not be treated facetiously under any circumstances, but less so in India, where roughly one in three people seeking medical help could be suffering from depression, meaning that some 23 million may be in need of mental-health care at any given time. India also has one of the highest rates of suicide in the world, losing over 220,000 a year according to World Health Organization data; a student commits suicide every hour in India.

This is not surprising given that suicidal tendencies are directly related to undiagnosed or untreated depression, bipolar disease, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety disorder and schizophrenia, all of which thrive and proliferate in both urban and rural India.

The treatment gap for mental health in India is staggering, with barely 5,000 psychiatrists and 2,000 clinical psychologists in a country of 1.3 billion. Psychological care accounts for a miniscule 0.06% of India’s health-care budget. In Bangladesh the number is at 0.44% — not vastly higher, but it’s still better.

“The government needs to make a long-term investment in mental health infrastructure that includes the training and hiring of professionals and promoting research and development efforts,” says Stanford psychiatrist Shaili Jain. “There is no health without mental health so there would be a very tangible return on such an investment — a heathier, more productive and hopeful population. It is vital, that in this modern world, all the well-honed traditions, practices, rituals and social mechanisms that support mental health are not lost,” Jain adds, referring to holistic practices like yoga and Ayurveda.

She suggest that going forward, “On the other end of the spectrum, leveraging the power of 21^st century medical technology will play a vital role in addressing the paucity of mental health professionals. Examples are telemedicine, virtual care and smart phone applications.”

Not a Priority

That mental health is not a priority in a country where basic amenities like clean water, power, food, education and housing are sorely lacking is not surprising, but deep stigma also contributes to the denial and shame around the subject, cutting across lines of religion, class, caste and gender.

The what-will-people-say mentality is so widespread that some village programs have attached psychological services to the local temples so that people can seek help in the guise of religious activity to avoid the shame of exposure. This mentality is propagated in no small measure by the insensitive and tone-deaf attitudes toward mental health. For instance, Indian politicians and public personalities often ridicule their opponents by weaponizing terms like “dumb,” “deaf,” “mentally ill,” “retarded,” “bipolar,” “handicapped,” “dyslexic” and “schizophrenic.”  

A survey conducted by The Live, Love, Laugh Foundation revealed shockingly callous and misinformed attitudes toward mental health in India. Sixty percent of respondents agreed with the statement that mentally unhealthy people should “have their own groups” so that healthy people are not “contaminated,” while the same number also believed that lack of self-discipline and willpower was one of the main causes of mental illness. Forty four percent of respondents thought that people suffering from mental illness are always violent, while 41% agreed with the statement that talking to a mentally ill person could lead to deterioration of the mental health of a normal person.

Careless Words

On a personal note, I could summon the courage to write freely about my own childhood trauma only because of my emotional and physical distance from India. I reside in a part of the world where there is no shame in writing about, discussing or seeking help for depression or other issues. In fact, people are applauded for facing their demons and for encouraging others to do the same.

Scores of people who do not have that luxury are forced to stay silent for fear of being shamed and ostracized within their communities. Words have consequences and ought not be thrown around without considering the havoc they may wreak in the lives of those in need of care and empathy. For them, just a few careless words could literally mean the difference between life and death.

“Challenging the taboos surrounding trauma is key. Disclosing a trauma history or symptoms of mental health distress require one to be vulnerable and that is simply not a safe thing to be if it will expose you to discrimination, bias or retaliation,” says Dr. Jain. “If victim-shaming tactics persist, then the silence and denial surrounding trauma will continue. Legal and societal protections for victims [are] non-negotiable.”

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post When It Comes to Mental Health, India Remains Shockingly Misinformed appeared first on Fair Observer.

But Pattabhi Jois had passed away years ago. Not satisfied with demolishing his legacy, Maehle and a posse of disgruntled yoga teachers were going after his family, especially his grandson. In his blog, Maehle is openly racist, asking not only for an apology but demanding that Rangaswamy atone for the sins of his grandfather and implying that him and his family would have amounted to “nothing” if not for the good graces of the white people who patronized them, saying Westerners “travelled around the world (sometimes overland in those days), found and promoted your grandfather. Without those guys your grandfather would have remained obscure.”

Maehle continues with condescending comments, repeated multiple times, to make sure Rangaswamy — and South Asians in general — get the message about their collective inferiority: “With no students in your grandfathers [sic] house, what would you have done after your [sic] finished your electrical engineering degree? Set up a yoga shop to teach the citizens of Mysore? … Think about it, if it wasn’t for you being born as grandson of KPJ where would you be today?”

Inside the Wacky World of American Yoga

READ MORE

Exploitation of the weak and vulnerable, sexual or otherwise, is indefensible and ought to be condemned unequivocally. But what we are seeing in the yoga world is a different type of beast. Here, the actions of a few individuals are being used to tar the entire tradition with a broad brush, in effect throwing out the baby with the bathwater, only to be replaced by an unrecognizable creature, one entirely shorn of its south Asian roots and pedagogy.

What we are seeing is a form of cultural genocide masked as “wokeness.” Appropriators will make all the right noises about patriarchy, predatory capitalism and climate change while participating in colonial-style plunder and undermining the contributions of one-fifth of humanity.

Mindless Appropriation

Few years ago, a Canadian college dropout-turned-yoga blogger, Matthew Remski, self-published a book called “Threads of Yoga,” which he calls a “remix” of Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras. The book, in a nutshell, denies that there is any value to the yoga philosophy contained in the original text and replaces it with pretentious psychobabble. Here are some gems from the book:

“Dialogue eschews the comprehensive, and, continuing late into the night by flickering candles, elevates the elliptical.”

“The hermeneutic flow from de-familiarization to open-source and demystification tends to have an embodying effect.”

“External sensations of the proto-epithelium in the zygote are the stimulus for the invaginating growth of the central nervous system: we gain the capacity to feel and to think quite literally by being surrounded and touched.”

The above is an example of what passes for erudition among North American yoga practitioners and is a perfect example of cultural appropriation. Indian American scholar Shreena Gandhi, a historian of religion, race and empire at Michigan State University, in a paper titled “Yoga and the Roots of Cultural Appropriation” tries to unpack this phenomenon.

According to Gandhi, “Yoga, like so many other colonized systems of practice and knowledge, did not appear in the American spiritual landscape by coincidence; rather, its popularity was a direct consequence of a larger system of cultural appropriation that capitalism engenders and reifies. While the (mis)appropriation of yoga may not be a life-threatening racism, it is a part of systemic racism nonetheless.”

All of us who practice yoga were initially drawn to it for a source of nourishment outside of the hollow and inadequate societal anchors of materialism and consumerism that fail to nourish or empower people in a substantive manner. As Gandhi writes, “People are searching for these things without even understanding why there is a void in the first place. Few white people make the connection between their attraction to yoga and the cultural loss their ancestors and relatives experienced when they bought into white dominant culture in order to access resources.”

To further complicate the picture, some of the most strident voices against appropriation come from the religious right, from fundamentalist zealots who advocate for disenfranchisement of religious minorities in their countries of origin. Yoga is touted by the Hindu right as a badge of national identity, so that an enormous section of the majoritarian population unthinkingly embraces its chauvinistic identity politics. This, however, does not mean that white privilege — or what Gandhi called “cultural grabbing” — does not exist or should not be addressed.

Whitewashing is alive and well, and has gone way beyond mere appropriation. We are talking about the willful erasure of an entire pedagogy and means of knowledge production. As Gandhi says, “Dominant culture socializes white people to consciously or unconsciously misuse power and relate to others from a false sense of superiority. Because most white people are not taught to confront and examine the painful and uncomfortable realities of racism, and their complicity in it, the cycle of oppression, repression, and consumption continues.”

Cancel Culture

Another of Remski’s books, titled “Practice and All Is Coming,” after Pattabhi Jois’ pet phrase, collates the accounts of several women molested by him. While these stories are necessary, Remski has been accused of using unsubstantiated and anonymous sources to buttress his case, bullying the Ashtanga community members who chose not to endorse him and indulging in lurid, tabloid-style gossip. Such statements do not invite derision or scorn, as one might expect, but instead are lapped up by his acolytes.

A senior Ashtanga teacher, Magnolia Zuniga, in her Amazon review of the book says: “I’ve always known this story needed to be told. It’s been a dark cloud hanging over the community. After decades of silence, I am very happy these women’s voices are finally being heard.” But she also understands why many community members will dismiss the book outright, “not only because denial runs deep but also because of the intensity and fervor with which Remski targeted some in the community over the past few years. His ‘research’ felt personal, predatory and vengeful.”

She goes on: “He seemed to relish getting into word wars with community members who were clearly confused and suffering. Instead of building bridges in order to help facilitate healing he created more and more divisions.”

What we are seeing is a “cancel culture” taken to an extreme. Here, it’s not only Pattabhi Jois that Remski and his followers would like to “cancel,” but his extended family, grandchildren and former students. Indeed, all who follow a lineage-based tradition are shamed and dehumanized as irrational cultists with no agency or critical awareness.

A case in point: Karen Rain, a former yoga teacher, alleges that she was assaulted by Jois in Mysore decades ago. Like Remski, she is not satisfied with merely exposing his predations and demolishing his legacy. In her quest for retributive justice, Rain is campaigning to implicate the entire Ashtanga community as somehow complicit in Jois’ crimes and holding them personally responsible for her travails.

Rain also claims that Maty Ezraty, a senior teacher who passed away a few months ago at the age of 55, died because she was “eaten up” by guilt. “Don’t people ever wonder why Maty Ezraty, who was one of the most accomplished asana practitioners in the world, died of unknown natural causes when she was only 55?” Rain asks in a Facebook post. “Perhaps, in part, her ‘off the record’ comments ate her alive?” Here, Rain is referring to comments that Ezraty made about Jois’ conduct in a private conversation with Remski.

Clearly, lack of consent is not a deterrent in the world of tabloid journalism. Remski uses his familiar tactic of exploiting people after their death, in this case a respected yoga teacher, shortly after her memorial service. Exhuming mute corpses from the grave for self-promotion and using them as exhibits in the kangaroo courts of social media is evidently what passes for due process in yogaland.

Mahatma Gandhi famously said that an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. This article was written in hope that the yoga community will move in the direction of compassion, peace and healing instead of succumbing to vengeance, bigotry and personal neuroses.

Rather than poisoning the minds of vulnerable followers who look to them for succor and guidance, teachers should begin the hard work of accepting and healing their own wounds and unresolved traumas. Or, as Shreena Gandhi says, “It is possible for authentic, respectful, and accountable cultural exchange to occur, and for the practices to have a profound healing effect on the practitioner. Herein lies the invitation for white yoga practitioners to go beyond an unaccountable surface level relationship with yoga to a deeper, more transformative place of practice, awareness, contemplation, and engagement.”

The sooner they make peace with themselves and accept their past, the easier it will be for them to navigate our complex and rapidly changing world.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Is “Wokeness” Killing Yoga? appeared first on Fair Observer.

The National Family Health Survey released by the Union Health Ministry indicates that every third woman has faced domestic violence of various forms since the age of 15. Among married women, 83% reported their spouses as perpetrators of violence. For unmarried women, the perpetrators are usually mothers or stepmothers (56%), fathers or stepfathers (33%), sisters or brothers (27%) as well as schoolteachers (15%).

Dignity and Respect

“The idea for URJA came about after years of working on women’s rights in the by-lanes of the red light area of Kamathipura in Mumbai, in the trafficking that goes on in villages of Maharashtra and Bihar, and other forms of gender-based violence,” says Anjali Pathak, a lawyer and founder of URJA, a New Delhi-based NGO dedicated to helping victims of gender-based violence. She says she was inspired, above all, “simply by listening to women’s voices and their heart-rending stories of everyday violence — how they were negotiating their journey to live a life of dignity and respect despite all the atrocities they face.”

It took Pathak a long time to turn the idea into reality. Najafgarh, the second most populous town in National Capital Territory of Delhi, was chosen as the base of operations because it is an area where “patriarchy, social class divide, sheer male domination and inequalities between men and women are deeply ingrained in society,” says Pathak. “There is a sharp gender divide where gender stereotypes — boys should be earning, aggressive, and girls to be submissive, caring, docile — has been internalized by both men and women, thereby making women vulnerable to violence,” she says, adding that “rape, trafficking, abduction, dowry, molestation, high level of female illiteracy, acid attacks, prostitution and cruelty by [the] husband exacerbate the social and economic exploitation of women.”

Indeed, given the harsh conditions, rarely do women find the courage to leave their husbands to get justice, proper guidance and counseling. This is where URJA comes in, providing legal counsel to traumatized women and spreading awareness in the community so that women are informed and have a recourse when they need it. In addition to pro bono legal work, URJA focuses on providing economic and livelihood opportunities to women and girls, empowering them with the requisite skills to lead independent lives.

At the outset, URJA conducted a survey covering a population of more than 30,000 people in 22 villages surrounding Jaffarpur Kalan, a village situated on the southwest boundary of Delhi, falling under Najafgarh Vidhan Lok Sabha (the lower house of India’s Parliament) constituency of West Delhi. “In most families men are alcoholic, doing odd jobs and earning sporadically, leaving the woman to fend for the family,” says Pathak. “She has to make both ends meet either by borrowing from relatives or friends. Alcoholism and lack of sufficient income at home is the major cause of friction within the families, leading to increasing cases of domestic violence and economic abuse.”

Based on their findings, URJA implemented the Mahila Panchayat program under the aegis of the Delhi Commission for Women. From November 2017 to July 2019, they handled more than 600 cases. Around 350 of these were related to domestic violence, sexual harassment, assault, rape and murder. Additionally, they helped local women access government schemes like AADHAR identification numbers, ration cards, widow and retirement pensions. In Pandvala Kalan, the adjacent village, Balwadi classes for preschoolers, supplementary classes to curb drop-out rates and vocational skills development courses for migrant women and adolescent girls were implemented.

A Way Out

The women (all names have been changed for the purposes of anonymity) who seek help from URJA are all looking for a way out of what can often seem as impossible situations. Seema, a 24-year-old woman from Najafgarh, married into a family of six brothers. Her husband and his brothers were all addicted to cannabis, opioids and alcohol. Within a year of marriage, Seema’s husband started beating her. On one occasion, he beat her so badly that she became unconscious. Then he locked her up and didn’t give her any food or water for 24 hours. Somehow, she managed to call her brother, who called the police. She was rescued and sent to her parents’ place. 

After a few days, Seema’s husband came to her parents’ house and begged her to come back home, apologizing profusely for his behavior. The family sent Seema back to her matrimonial home. Within a few days, her husband beat her again. This time her mother-in-law also intervened and told her that she had to sleep with all the brothers if she wanted to stay in the family.

On hearing this, Seema ran away and went back to her parental home. Her husband’s family continues to threaten her with dire consequences if she does not return. Against all odds, she approached URJA, and a case against her husband and his family was lodged in the district court.

Meera Devi, a 35-year-old housewife and mother of two from Pandvala Kalan village, was often beaten to the point of unconsciousness by her husband, a repeat offender with a history of abuse. Often, her wages, earned through domestic work and manual labor, were snatched by the husband to feed his alcohol habit. If she resisted him, Meera was thrashed, and had to be taken to the hospital for her injuries on several occasions. Somehow, she mustered the courage to approach URJA to file a case on the basis of domestic violence and cruelty. The URJA is providing her with help in terms of legal counseling and advice, and is helping her to find a job so that she can sustain her family.

Krishna Kumari, 28, had a love marriage with Vinod against her parents’ wishes, and gave birth to a son out of wedlock. Shortly after giving birth, she discovered that her husband was having an extramarital affair. She confronted her husband, who initially denied the accusation. However, he was caught red-handed and confessed to the affair, declaring that he would continue seeing his mistress.

This led to regular fights, until one day Krishna gave him an ultimatum of having to choose between the two. On hearing this, he proceeded to beat her with iron rods. On another occasion, he stripped her naked and struck her on her private parts. Humiliated, she contacted her parents and approached URJA for help. URJA counseled her and gave her legal assistance through filing her complaint at the police station, and subsequently helped her get a job.

Life at Its Darkest

On November 10, URJA is hosting the first in a series of benefit shows and workshops in conjunction with Coven Code, a collective of talented female musicians based in New Delhi. The evening will start with a legal aid workshop led by Pathak, followed by live performances by the ladies of Coven Code.

URJA is also in the process of teaming up with theater groups and music festivals to co-host events across India before continuing to the United States. All proceeds from the events are meant for a legal aid and counseling center, as well as an advanced training center for livelihood development so that women can gain employable skills to escape violence at home.

Through these efforts, URJA hopes to raise awareness for a crisis that affects one out of every three families in India, to help the survivors lead lives of dignity and, more importantly, ensure that they have a place to go to when life seems at its darkest.  

*[The author is a consultant with URJA, handling special projects and resource mobilization.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post A Beacon of Light for India’s Survivors of Domestic Violence appeared first on Fair Observer.

A large number of these scientists tend to be female and of South Asian origin. In a culture where Bollywood buffoons, Vedic plastic surgeons, street thugs-turned-politicians and grown men running around a field with wooden bats dominate the national conversation, it is reassuring to know that there are still people capable of doing the heavy lifting required to actually make a difference in the world. They may not be on social media incessantly, seeking validation as influencers, but that’s probably because they have a life in the real world. I reached out to some of these young visionaries to talk about their work and what drives them to do what they do.

Ritu Raman

Ritu Raman is currently a postdoctoral fellow in the renowned Langer Lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), funded by a Ford Foundation Fellowship by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and L’Oréal USA For Women in Science Fellowship. She is working toward starting a biohybrid design lab focused on building implantable devices that sense and adapt to the body.

Raman’s robots are made out of both polymers and muscle tissue and are capable of sensing their environment and recognizing temperature, pH and mechanical pressure.

When did you first realize you wanted to pursue a career in science and technology? Do you come from a family with a science background?

I grew up admiring the three innovators that shaped my early life: my mom, my dad and my granddad — all engineers. Whether it was launching their own startup in India, connecting rural Kenyan villages to the telecommunications grid or just fixing a broken alarm clock around the house, they always used scientific innovation as a force for positive social change in their communities. They are my constant source of inspiration as I work toward bio-hybrid design to advance human health.

I am also incredibly grateful for all the teachers, advisers, mentors and friends who never let me believe that being a woman precluded me from STEM education. Innovation is a team sport, and I couldn’t have done it without an incredible support network.    

Can you explain “soft robotics”? What are its potential applications?

I’m a mechanical engineer by training, but I got bored of the materials mechanical engineers traditionally build with — things like metals, plastics, ceramics, etc. I grew interested in exploring nature’s building blocks, biological materials, because of the way they can sense and adapt to their surroundings. This isn’t something you see in traditional synthetic materials and, in my opinion, [that] makes them fascinating. My PhD focused on building robots that were part biological and part synthetic. These biohybrid robots, or “bio-bots,” used skeletal muscle to move and walk around. Because they used a biological material as an actuator, they were able to do things traditional robots can’t do, such as get stronger when exercised or heal when damaged.

In my future lab, I want to take this idea of biohybrid design into the world of implantable devices. My current work is focused on building responsive implantable devices for some of the most challenging environments in the body. In every project I work on, I use a material that senses and adapts to its surroundings to monitor and therapeutically modulate the body in real time.

You are deeply invested in supporting other women in their pursuit of STEM (science, technology, engineering, medicine) education and careers. Tell us about the Women in STEM Database at MIT (WiSDM) initiative.

The Women in STEM Database at MIT is my newest endeavor to help support and promote the careers of women in STEM. The goal of WiSDM is to provide a curated searchable online database of MIT STEM women, making it easier to find talented and diverse speakers for conference talks, panels, news stories, outreach events, etc.

WiSDM includes MIT faculty, postdocs, research staff and graduate students from all STEM fields. In addition to including each listed speaker’s areas of technical expertise, the database also includes information about non-technical expertise, such as science policy and entrepreneurship. The searchable database is intended to help people who want to make sure women’s voices are represented at STEM events. 

I think it’s really important for young girls to see women represented as leaders in STEM fields. In the South Asian community, we are lucky to have many examples of family members or friends pursuing a variety of STEM careers, and I think that can create a positive feedback loop.     

Archana Venkataraman

Archana Venkataraman is the John C. Malone assistant professor of electrical and computer engineering at Johns Hopkins University. She is using artificial intelligence (AI) to better map the human brain and to develop entirely new ways to diagnose and treat neurological disorders.

Venkataraman’s lab, the Neural Systems Analysis Laboratory (NSA Lab), concentrates on building a comprehensive and system-level understanding of the brain by strategically integrating computational methods, such as machine learning, signal processing and network theory, with application-driven hypotheses about brain functionality.

How will artificial intelligence help to better diagnose and treat neurological disorders? Explain your area of research for the non-specialist.

The human brain is our quintessential black box. It is a myriad of neural pathways and interactions that we as humans cannot even begin to comprehend. As a result, we have a bare-bones understanding of neurological disorders and a limited ability to treat them. This complexity is where artificial intelligence shines. AI is awesome at finding patterns in messy and complex datasets, beyond what humans could intuit by themselves. This will give us a new perspective on neurological disorders, from subtle diagnostic cues to identifying which treatments may work best for which patients.

My research focuses on imaging data, which provides natural windows into brain functionality. My lab develops new AI algorithms for a variety of applications from predicting the severity of behavioral deficits in autism to localizing epileptic seizures. Clinicians can use this information to make better decisions for patients and, ultimately, work toward a cure for these disorders.    

Why are autism, schizophrenia, epilepsy and Alzheimer’s disease not well understood despite decades of research? What are the root causes, and to what extent are they inherited?

Neurological and psychiatric disorders are incredibly complex but surprisingly subtle. For example, if I give you two brain images, one of a normal child and one of an autistic child, there is no way for you to identify which one is which [just by looking at it]. The same is true for genetics. While there is evidence that these disorders run in families, we do not have a clear genetic marker for any of them.

This make is incredibly difficult to “engineer” treatments for these disorders. Even the most sophisticated AI algorithms tend to overfit, meaning they memorize patterns that may just be quirks of the data rather than any biological phenomena. Given these challenges, I think the way forward in this field is to embed our preexisting insights about the brain directly into the AI frameworks. This is a tough and open problem.

Tell us about your groundbreaking work in the diagnosis and treatment of epilepsy.

Epilepsy affects nearly 3.5 million people in the United States, and roughly 30% of these patients do not respond to medication. If we can trace the seizures to a single brain region, then the best course of action is to surgically remove this seizure onset zone. Currently, seizure localization is based entirely on visual inspection of electroencephalography (EEG) recordings and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data. This process is often inconclusive and prone to human error.

My lab is developing computational tools that go one step beyond the naked eye. We have recently pioneered a seizure-tracking algorithm that automatically learns the propagation pattern of a seizure from EEG data to backtrack its onset. Not only does our algorithm beat state-of-the-art seizure detectors, but it can automatically learn the seizure onset with no prior information. In parallel to EEG, I am exploring the use of resting-state functional MRI (rsfMRI) to identify virtual lesions in the brain associated with epilepsy. These lesions could provide crucial insights into the underlying cause of seizures, which may otherwise go undetected.

Abhinav Kandala

After receiving his PhD, Abhinav Kandala joined the quantum computing group at IBM Research and, during his post-doctoral stint, experimentally studied the applicability of a noisy superconducting quantum processor to simulate small molecules and quantum magnets. This work was recognized by MIT Technology Review as one of 10 Breakthrough Technologies 2018.

Help us better understand how the quantum world differs from directly observable reality. How does quantum computing differ from conventional computing?

One big difference between the quantum world and what physicists refer to as the classical world has to do with uncertainty. For classical objects that we can see and touch, given sufficient information, we can predict their position and velocity with complete certainty. This is not the case for quantum objects, such as electrons in an atom. Here, their properties are instead described by probabilities. In contrast to the tangible objects around us, we speak in terms of the likelihood or probability of finding an electron at a certain position. These differences also translate to how information can be encoded and processed in conventional classical computers versus quantum computers.

In classical computers, the basic building blocks of information are bits, which take precise values of either 0 or 1. In quantum computing, the fundamental computing elements are quantum bits or qubits, where information is encoded in their quantum states that can now be described by probabilities of being in 0 and 1. Next, as we go to computers with multiple qubits, unlike their classical counterparts, we can encode information in states where one qubit cannot be described independently from another. This property, called entanglement, provides a far richer set of states to process information with.

What are some real-world applications of this technology? Explain the “killer application” you talked about recently.

While the laws of quantum mechanics can be used to describe complex quantum systems such as molecules, it was long realized that solving the resulting equations to predict properties of these systems is an extremely challenging computational task. Nobel laureate Richard Feynman’s seminal idea was that if we could hypothetically build a programmable quantum system — which we today call a quantum computer — we could simulate properties of natural quantum systems more efficiently.

With this context, simulating the properties of quantum systems such as molecules is expected to be a “killer application” for quantum computers. These kinds of computations are typical for any industry that deals with chemistry and materials and, currently, use a significant fraction of the world’s supercomputing resources.

Additionally, scientists are also exploring applications to “non-quantum” problems in optimization and machine learning. That said, it’s important to point out that today’s quantum computers are still error-prone. A central goal is to achieve a “quantum advantage” over conventional computers for some useful computation task, even with today’s noisy systems. To accelerate the pursuit of this quantum advantage, we’re engaging with organizations, researchers and students by providing public access to real quantum computers, over the cloud, on the IBM Q Experience.

Experimental physics is an exciting field encouraging a lot of out-of-the-box thinking. What is some of the most original and innovative work you have encountered?

Indeed, experimental physics often provides the seed for the technologies of tomorrow. Related to my graduate research, what comes to mind are Nobel Prize-winning experiments that revealed that how electrons flow in certain materials can be connected to abstract mathematical ideas in topology. The properties of these materials like electrical resistance are remarkably insensitive to deformations in geometry or defects and this has potential applications to dissipation-less electronic devices.

Closer to my current work, the idea and demonstration that electrical circuits could behave as artificial atoms is extremely fascinating to me. This basically enables a new periodic table of man-made elements, and is essentially the physics that has led to the development of superconducting quantum computers.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post South Asians Are Shaping the Future of Science and Technology appeared first on Fair Observer.

As I’m absorbing this bit of information, he asks us to come to his stall and get our chakras balanced. “We all have stagnant energy and negative emotions trapped in the body crying out to be released. I call it ‘cosmic goo.’ It’s my job to suck it out and make you fly,” he says, making a whooshing sound with his lips.

We’ve had many similar conversations since arriving at Symbiosis, a “festival of transformation” held annually at different venues in California and Oregon, hugely popular with ravers, neo-Buddhists, yoga nuts, urban shamans, crystal fairies, biohackers, psychonauts, indie rockers and Rastafarians.

I decline Chaitanya’s generous offer, citing a yoga event we have signed up for. Ten minutes later, we find ourselves among a crowd of people facing a DJ console. Yoga of Bass was conceived by DJ FreQ Nasty (Darren McFayden) and yoga teacher Claire Thompson to “explore the ecstatic, life-changing experiences people have with music, yoga and the dance floor.” Their workshops include discussions on how the rave experience relates to neuroscience, and Buddhist psychology to “yoga trance dance” sessions, set to world dub and bass for meditative sound healing. I’m not sold on the new age spiel, but I can’t deny that it all does sound rather intriguing.

Save the Dharma

Soon Alison and I are swaying to the sensuous rhythms emanating from the gigantic speakers. Her jaded New York persona shows signs of thawing. Midway through the session, I spot a grizzled white guy with a matted grey beard approaching us on the dance floor. “Are you Indian or Latino?” he asks me directly. A bit taken aback, I answer that I am indeed of Indian heritage. He introduces himself as Surya (evidently Hindu names are in vogue in California) and launches into a wild rant about how the organizers of the festival are “plundering the spiritual resources of the global south” and “stealing our sacred traditions.”

He gesticulates wildly and sniffles as he talks. He tells me that he is an activist, a self-appointed guardian of “indigenous knowledge” that in his view was being misappropriated by the “capitalist hetero-patriarchy” and milked for maximum gain. Surya is a regular at festivals and yoga studios protesting cultural appropriation by accosting random people and handing out pamphlets. He ran a Facebook group that got shut down when a bunch of people reported him to the authorities for threats and intimidation. He wants to know if I’ll join his campaign to “save the dharma.”

I roll my eyes and look at Alison, who is in splits from listening to him. I want to ask him why he has appropriated an Indian name for himself, but stop myself just in time. Alison rescues me by saying we have to run or we’ll get caught in rush hour traffic. He hands me his calling card before we part ways.

Hindu nationalists and the Christian right have one thing in common: a shared hatred of Muslims, leading to the incongruous sight of brown people working with white supremacists toward the erasure of other brown people.

With the rapid proliferation of yoga in the West, especially in America (it pulls in approximately $11 billion per year), there are increasingly aggressive calls to police the industry. Surya belongs to a growing tribe of converts — so called “white Hindus” — who believe it is their karmic duty to save yoga from those who desecrate it.

A textbook example is David Frawley, aka Pandit Vamadeva Shastri, an American teacher of yoga, Ayurveda and Vedic astrology, and now a mascot for the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a right-wing Hindu paramilitary organization, whose founders were deeply influenced by Hitler and Mussolini. Frawley is constantly engaged in battle with the perceived enemies of Hinduism, namely liberals, academics, journalists, Muslims and Christians, all of whom he rails against for their supposedly “anti-national” views. He has many fans who share his dream of establishing a pure Hindu theocracy.

The yoga culture wars, while always contentious, have only intensified with the rise of Hindu nationalism, an ideology that threatens to flatten the dynamic pluralism of Hindu thought into a static monolith. This mentality is percolating into the wider yoga world with efforts to deploy yoga as a symbol of Hindu soft power through events like International Day of Yoga.

As Debashish Banerji, a scholar at the California Institute of Integral Studies, told me in an interview, “Due to the proliferation of Western educational models and the assimilation of postcolonial populations under global capitalism, the majority of middle class India lacks a foundation in its traditional scholarship yet seeks the psychological security of a national identity. Yoga is touted by the Hindu right as just this badge of national identity; so that an enormous section of the majoritarian population unthinkingly embraces its chauvinistic identity politics, a most dangerous development.”

Navigating the trenches of the modern yoga world can feel like treading through a minefield. Susanna Barkataki, a board adviser for the Yoga Alliance, the largest yoga certification body in America, has been waging a lonely battle to honor the cultural diversity within yoga traditions while ensuring that all the voices clamoring for attention are heard.

Honor Yoga

She wasn’t always an insider. Her early attempts to initiate dialogue with the Yoga Alliance fell on deaf ears. “I had been writing to Yoga Alliance for over a decade, for many years asking them to address many things such as the need for doing more to acknowledge South Asian roots and contributions to yoga,” she tells me. “For years my writing went unanswered. I had given up hope when Yoga Alliance reached out and asked me to be a part of a group of consultants on a committee for their standards review process. I’m grateful YA invited in ‘outsider’ perspectives, and as a South Asian, I say that with irony.”

Barkataki recently organized an online summit to discuss cultural misappropriation in the yoga world. Unfortunately, it did not go down well in some quarters. Some members of the Global Decolonizing Initiative, a Facebook group ostensibly created to bring awareness of cultural appropriation, were visibly upset at how the event unfolded. The group is crawling with David Frawley knockoffs, with names like Devi Bhaktananda, Yamuna Devi, Gayatri Devi and Nalini Devi, who spend their spare time worrying about Starbucks employees who don’t pronounce “namaste” the right way.

“This particular event is super problematic because it appears to be appropriating the topic of appropriation,” proclaimed Charles “Ekabhumi” Ellik, an American Hindu from the San Francisco Bay area, in a Facebook comment. “No traditionally trained yogins [sic] or lineage-holders connected to any traditional wisdom streams and paths are included.” Like many West Coast panhandlers, Ellik tried out a series of identities — a slam poet, a yoga teacher, a quasi-hippie mystic — before finding his true calling as a born-again Hindu. These days he sells coloring books of Hindu gods and goddesses and organizes spiritual retreats in India.

His business partner, Shivani Hawkins, founder of the Living Sanskrit program — an online platform that promotes a sanitized, reductive version of Hinduism catering to non-resident Indians and Western Indophiles — was more emphatic in her comments: “They’ve included NO indigenous stewards of actual indigenous traditions in this conference that’s about not appropriating. … They are also erasing and silencing anyone who questions them on this, or on their relationship to YA. This conference is a sham and should not be supported.”

As if on cue, a few days later an article by an anonymous collective appeared in Brown Girl Magazine, accusing Barkataki of “Hinduphobia” and selling out to Yoga Alliance, basically elaborating the points made earlier by Ellik, Hawkins and others in the Facebook group.

Susanna was diplomatic when I asked her to respond: “The main aim of the Honor Don’t Appropriate Yoga summit is to honor yoga, bring messy topics and issues to light, to be as intersectional as possible while exploring various perspectives on yoga, and to practice an honoring by coming together in thoughtful dialogue rather than tearing apart,” she said. “The aim was never to have one narrative, but to have many voices speak their perspectives and truths. I know we may not always agree or see eye to eye. This is part of what yoga in practice looks like for me. I embrace a diversity of viewpoints and am really grateful for many perspectives that seek to do their best to honor yoga.”

Misappropriation of indigenous traditions does exist and should not be brushed under the carpet. A glaring example is Matthew Remski, a Canadian yoga teacher who travels around the country delivering presentations on traditional Hindu texts like the Bhagwad Gita and the Yoga Sutras, and makes a living as an Ayurvedic consultant. Remski is a college dropout with no credentials in either Ayurveda, Indology or religious studies. Ordinarily, one would need to put in the years to acquire the qualifications and requisite skills before being licensed to teach. But it doesn’t quite work like that in yogaland. Here, anyone with a social media account and a gift of the gab can attract followers, become an overnight expert and start charging for courses and workshops.

Despite his chicanery, Remski was appointed as a consultant at Yoga Alliance. So, it’s not difficult to see why people might not trust the intentions of this organization.

The Flip Side

On the flip side, people who rail against cultural appropriation are often in cahoots with religious extremists responsible directly or indirectly for oppressing minorities in their country of origin. For example, an Albuquerque-based yoga teacher in her fifties named Sri Louise recently appeared on New Jersey-based Hindutva activist Rajiv Malhotra’s YouTube channel to protest cultural misappropriation, and can often be seen railing against “Hinduphobia” on social media. This American is clearly oblivious to the gob-smacking irony of aligning with a right-wing bigot to protest racism.

Besides, it has been amply demonstrated that “Hinduphobia” is a chimera from the paranoid fever swamps of the Hindu right with no basis in reality. “The charge of Hinduphobia holds that people who criticize the fundamental Hindu right wing, do so not because they oppose its sociopolitical positions and ramifications, but because they abhor the Hindu religion and Hindu individuals,” writes New Delhi-based columnist Mitali Saran. “It is applied indiscriminately to anyone who offers a critique of social inequity such as caste, which happens to be part of Hindu tradition. It is applied to those who offer a political critique, such as of a Hindu rashtra, which happens to be a goal of the Hindu Right. The fact that these critics oppose any other stripe of theocratic, majoritarian state structure, and inequitable social structures, in favor of a secular, pluralist notion of India, is virtually erased.”

A UK-based Hindutva activist, Satish Sharma, is active in a number of yoga groups and has become a poster boy for the “decolonize yoga” movement. However, Sharma leads a sordid double life that many in the yoga community choose to ignore. Apart from his rabid nativism, Sharma has been at the forefront of the movement opposing legislation that would ban caste-based discrimination in the UK.

In his capacity as general secretary of National Council of Hindu Temples, Sharma invited Stephen Lennon, aka Tommy Robinson, the former head of the right-wing anti-immigrant English Defense League, to speak at the Vishwa Hindu Kendra, one of the oldest Hindu temples in the UK. Hindu nationalists and the Christian right have one thing in common: a shared hatred of Muslims, leading to the incongruous sight of brown people working with white supremacists toward the erasure of other brown people. (Robinson is now helping to launch Pegida UK, a branch of the German white-nationalist group.)

The other person in Sharma’s proposed lineup was Subramaniam Swamy, an academic-turned-politician who had been previously sacked from an American university for his outrageously bigoted views on religious minorities in India. Swamy has also referred to homosexuals as “genetically flawed” and has vigorously opposed legislation to decriminalize homosexuality in India. When the temple administration found out that Sharma had invited Swamy and Robinson to speak at the event, they immediately canceled it.

By deploying the spurious charge of “Hinduphobia” against detractors, Sharma and his ilk attempt to normalize Hindutva in the West by playing the victim card. Sadly, his intended target, the Western yogi, is usually too obtuse to catch on. When I asked Ellik if he was concerned about Hindutva ideology percolating into the wider yoga world, he used the classic ostrich maneuver: “My guru strongly urged me to avoid conflict and debate due to developments in my practice.”

In a diverse cultural landscape and with several voices clamoring for attention, a one-size-fits-all approach to yoga is simply not viable. The need of the hour is for flexibility, openness and sensitivity combined with the ability to fend off bigots, charlatans and obscurantists. The yoga world needs more people like Barkataki who can operate “within systems, outside of them as well as in relationship to them,” as she put it to me. “We as people, as practitioners, are also so very powerful. This work has not ended. It really is just beginning. It’s up to you and others to continue asking and requiring accountability for ourselves and institutions like Yoga Alliance and others around us so that the yoga we practice is one of unity while honoring diversity.”

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

The post Inside the Wacky World of American Yoga appeared first on Fair Observer.

Fritjof Capra is an Austrian-born American physicist, systems theorist and deep ecologist. He has written many popular books that connect conceptual changes in science with broader changes in worldview and values in society, notably The Tao of Physics: An Exploration of the Parallels Between Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism. The book demonstrates striking parallels between Oriental mystical traditions and the discoveries of 20th-century physics. It has been published in 43 editions in 23 languages and is referenced with the statue of Shiva in the courtyard of one of the world’s largest and most respected centers for scientific research: CERN, the Center for Research in Particle Physics in Geneva.

The parallel between Shiva’s dance and the dance of subatomic particles was first discussed by Capra in an article titled “The Dance of Shiva: The Hindu View of Matter in the Light of Modern Physics,” published in Main Currents in Modern Thought in 1972. Shiva’s cosmic dance then became a central metaphor in Capra’s international bestseller, The Tao of Physics.

Over the past 30 years, Capra has been engaged in a systematic exploration of how other sciences and society are ushering in a similar shift in worldview, or paradigms, leading to a new vision of reality and a new understanding of the social implications of this cultural transformation. His most recent book, The Systems View of Life, presents a grand new synthesis of this work, integrating the biological, cognitive, social and ecological dimensions of life into one unified vision.

In this guest edition of The Interview, Vikram Zutshi talks to Capra about connecting the dots between life and science.

Vikram Zutshi: In The Turning Point: Science, Society, and the Rising Culture, you trace the history of science and economics, highlighting the flaws in the Cartesian, Newtonian and reductionist paradigms. You explain how such viewpoints have grown inadequate for modern technology and ecology needs, and argue that science needs to develop the concepts and insights of holism and systems theory to solve the complex problems we face as a species. Could you elaborate on this theme for readers who may not be familiar with your work?

Fritjof Capra: When I wrote The Tao of Physics, I believed that the “new physics” could be a model for the other sciences and for society in general, just as the old Newtonian physics had been, for many centuries, a model for other sciences and for social organization. What I had to realize was that most of what we encounter in our environment is alive. When we relate to our fellow human beings, to the living nature around us, to human organizations and to the economy, we are always dealing with living systems. Physics cannot say much about these living systems. It can provide knowledge about material structures, but the very nature of life is something that eludes physics.

With this realization, my research interests shifted from physics to the life sciences, and over the last 30 years I have explored and synthesized a new scientific conception of life that is emerging at the forefront of science. My synthesis is a conceptual framework that integrates four dimensions of life: the biological, the cognitive, the social and the ecological dimension. I presented summaries of this framework, as it evolved, in several books, beginning with The Turning Point in 1982. By “the turning point” I meant the fundamental change of worldview that is now occurring in science and in society, a change of paradigms from seeing the world as a machine to understanding it as a network.

Vikram Zutshi: In Belonging to the Universe: Explorations on the Frontiers of Science and Spirituality, you explore parallels between ways of thinking in science and Christian theology. What are the principal findings and conclusions of the book?

Fritjof Capra: I would say the principal conclusion was that the sense of oneness, which is the key characteristic of spiritual experience, is fully confirmed by the understanding of reality in contemporary science. Hence, there are numerous similarities between the worldviews of mystics and spiritual teachers — both Eastern and Western — and the systemic conception of nature that is now being developed in several scientific disciplines.

When we look at the world around us, we find that we are not thrown into chaos and randomness, but are part of a great order, a grand symphony of life. Every molecule in our body was once a part of previous bodies — living or nonliving — and will be a part of future bodies. In this sense, our body will not die but will live on, again and again, because life lives on. Moreover, we share not only life’s molecules, but also its basic principles of organization with the rest of the living world. Indeed, we belong to the universe, and this experience of belonging can make our lives profoundly meaningful.

Vikram Zutshi: How would you distinguish between spirituality and religion?

Fritjof Capra: In one of my last books, The Systems View of Life, coauthored with Pier Luigi Luisi, we have a whole chapter on “Science and Spirituality.” In it we emphasize the importance of distinguishing between spirituality and religion. Spirituality is a way of being grounded in a certain experience of reality that is independent of cultural and historical contexts.

Religion is the organized attempt to understand spiritual experience, to interpret it with words and concepts, and to use this interpretation as the source of moral guidelines for the religious community. Religious interpretations of spiritual experience always depend on historical and cultural contexts, and unfortunately they are often in danger of becoming dogmatic, requiring from the faithful to accept their pronouncements, moral codes and hierarchical structures as literal truths. When that happens, a comparison between science and religion is no longer fruitful.

Vikram Zutshi: In The Systems View of Life you and your co-author offer radical solutions to 21^st-century challenges by focusing on the connected world and examining life through its inextricably linked systems. What are some of these radical solutions?

Fritjof Capra: For me, The Systems View of Life is my final synthesis of the new conception of life that has emerged at the forefront of science. I call it “the systems view of life” because it requires a new kind of thinking — thinking in terms of relationships, patterns and context. In science this is known as systemic thinking, or “systems thinking.”

The new systemic conception of life is not only fascinating intellectually, but has very concrete applications. In the last part of our book, we discuss the critical importance of the systems view of life for dealing with the problems of our multi-faceted global crisis. Today, it is becoming more and more evident that the major problems of our time — energy, environment, climate change, economic inequality, violence and war and so on — cannot be understood in isolation. They are systemic problems, which means that they are all interconnected and interdependent, and they require corresponding systemic solutions — solutions that do not solve any problem in isolation but deal with it within the context of other related problems.

Unfortunately, this realization has not yet dawned on most of our political and corporate leaders who are unable to “connect the dots,” to use a popular phrase. Instead of taking into account the interconnectedness of our major problems, their so-called “solutions” tend to focus on a single issue, thereby simply shifting the problem to another part of the system — for example, by producing more energy at the expense of biodiversity, public health or climate stability.

Systemic solutions, typically, solve several problems at the same time. Let me give you just one example from agriculture. If we changed from our chemical, large-scale industrial agriculture to organic, community-oriented, sustainable farming, this would contribute significantly to solving three of our biggest problems. It would greatly reduce our energy dependence, because we are now using (at least in the United States) one-fifth of our fossil fuels to grow and process food. The healthy, organically grown food would have a huge positive effect on public health, because many chronic diseases — heart disease, stroke, diabetes and so on — are linked to our diet. And finally, organic farming would contribute significantly to fighting climate change by drawing CO₂ from the atmosphere and locking it up in organic matter.

This is just one example. In our textbook, we dedicate about 60 pages to detailed discussions of the most effective systemic solutions. They include proposals to reshape economic globalization and restructure corporations; new forms of ownership that are not extractive but generative; a wide variety of systemic solutions to the interlinked problems of energy, food, poverty and climate change; and, finally, the large number of systemic design solutions known collectively as ecodesign, which embody the basic principles of ecology.

In conclusion, I would like to say that a full discussion of the systems view of life and its applications would require a seminar of several days or, better still, a course of several weeks. In fact, I am now teaching such a course online. It is called Capra Course and consists of 12 pre-recorded lectures plus an online discussion forum in which I participate during the entire duration of the course. So far, participants from over 50 countries around the world have taken the course, including many participants from India.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: Ezume Images / Shutterstock.com

The post Belonging to the Universe: Fritjof Capra in Conversation appeared first on Fair Observer.

We had been driving for 900 miles and close to 12 hours from LA, through the endless, arid and blindingly hot expanse of the Arizona desert. All around were only giant, misshapen rocks and towering saguaro cacti to punctuate the emptiness. Our final destination was Sasabe, a virtually non-existent blip on the map about 40 miles south of Tucson.

Our group consisted of three people: myself, the sound technician and a camera operator. We were part of the production team working on a documentary film tackling issues like illegal immigration and narco-trafficking and have come here in search of authentic footage of what reality was like on the ground. Sasabe sits smack in the middle of one of the biggest human-smuggling and drug-trafficking corridors on the border. The US Border Patrol, only half in jest, called Sasabe the Grand Central Station of human trafficking.

Upon walking into the only store in town, we were greeted by what looked like its sole inhabitant, a toothless old creature agog at the sight of new faces. Upon venturing further inside, past dusty shelves of bug spray, trays of stale tamales and dubious-looking, 69-cent cans of sausage, we were faced with a rack of t-shirts printed with “Where the hell is Sasabe?” It was a seemingly existentialist and apt query of a geographical entity, questioning the validity of its own existence.

Indeed, Sasabe would probably not even exist if it wasn’t for what lay just a few yards away — the US-Mexico border and, beyond that, the teeming nation of Mexico. We crossed over without much of a fuss, being cursorily glanced over by two sleepy and dishevelled Mexican immigration officials.

Super Coyotes

It was only a few feet later that it hit us: We were in Mexico. The contrast was blatantly apparent and quite disorienting. In what seemed like a blink of an eye, we made the transition from never-ending, multi-lane highways lined with strip malls and gated McMansions to rocky, pothole-ridden dirt tracks brought into being by frequent use rather than engineering. Alongside were randomly arranged rows of adobe and tin structures in varying stages of disrepair. They appeared to function interchangeably as makeshift tavernas, eateries and general provision stores.

The first one of these rather proudly and prophetically proclaimed “Super Coyote” on a sign precariously hoisted above the roof, an amusing reminder of our mission. Coyote, or pollero, was the colloquial term for the human traffickers that this region was notorious for. Every day, dozens, sometimes hundreds of rural Mexicans from the poverty stricken southern states were smuggled across the treacherous and bandit-infested Sonoran Desert into the United States. It was these two-legged “polleros” who were responsible for the safe passage of their “pollos” (chickens) and set their fee according to the distance and degree of danger.

Upon alighting from the vehicle, we observed a ragtag group of men sitting around a table on the patio of an adobe store and, by the sound of it, having a good old time. One of them, upon spying us, got up and meandered over in our general direction. By his gait, it was apparent that he’d been liberally consuming the local brew for the better part of the day. He had a grizzled, weatherbeaten face, bloodshot eyes, wore a wide-brimmed cowboy hat, a bright green checkered shirt and beamed at us affably through a gap-toothed grin.

He came up and assertively extended his hand, introducing himself rather pompously as the Maestro. We could not help but be drawn into conversation with him. A rapid stream of nearly incoherent jabber in slurred Spanish, liberally sprinkled with endearments like cabrone (fornicating old goat) and puta madre (son of a whore), spewed out of his mouth. We eventually deciphered the following: He had a green card, did not give a damn about the United States, had lived in Miami many moons ago as a wealthy businessman and once had a girlfriend who was so beautiful that she “made the leaves shake.” To prove this last point, he whipped out a dog-eared photo.

Deeply engaging as this exchange was, we had to move on, so we bid adios to our inebriated friend and drove further into town. We stopped at a squat building with large crowing rooster painted by the entrance. The words “Pollo Asado” (roast chicken) were printed underneath.

Pasted next to it, rather incongruously, was a poster that showed the number of immigrant deaths that had taken place in the last few years — roughly 3,000 — of which an alarming portion were women and children. Clearly, the long journey across this unforgiving desert was not for the faint of heart or spirit. The border is approximately 2,000 miles long. A major part of it follows the Rio Grande. The line dividing the two countries cuts through inhospitable desert terrain, wildlife preserves, mountains and farmland.

The number of unauthorized immigrants in 2015 were estimated at 11 million, representing 3.4% of the total US population, of which half were of Mexican origin. The Institute for Defense Analyses, a nonprofit, nonpartisan research group, estimated that about 200,000 people crossed over in 2015 — as compared to an estimated 2 million in 2000.

As we took our seats around a wooden table, the door slammed open and a group of about seven youths trooped in and took the adjacent table. All of them, with the exception of one, were dressed identically in black garb. From their hushed conversation and the curious blend of resignation and resolve in their eyes, it became apparent that they were here for the crossing.

I broke ice with Luis, who seemed to be their leader and discovered that they had traveled here over land, all the way from Oaxaca in the deep south. Taking comfort in the observation that I didn’t appear to be the typical gringo, he consented to my invitation to join us at our table. We bonded raucously over what eventually turned into several bottles of Tecate, a popular Mexican brew.

Luis and the rest of his posse were mestizos, a hybrid of indigenous natives and white Spanish colonizers that largely make up the Mexican populace. And, like in most of Latin America, the more native blood you had, the lower down on the socio-economic ladder you were likely to be.

Mass Exodus

One of the causes of the illegal immigration “problem” was the exploitation of resource-rich southern states for their cash crops, coffee being one major example, by large corporations that paid an infinitesimal portion of their mega-revenues to the indigenous inhabitants or traditional tillers of the soil. This led to a mass exodus north, into the United States, in search of better wages and living conditions.

Contrary to the assertions of the send-them-back crowd, multiple studies have shown that illegal immigrants actually increase the size of the US economy, contribute to economic growth, enhance the welfare of natives and contribute more in tax revenue than they collect. Economists estimate that granting legal status to the undocumented migrant population currently living and working in America would raise the immigrants’ earnings and consumption considerably and increase US gross domestic product.

We soon learned that our newfound companions were on their way to Los Angeles, where they had several relatives and fellow Oaxaquenos eagerly and perhaps wishfully awaiting their arrival. This was going to be a solo trip as they could ill afford the $2,000-odd dollars demanded by the local “coyote.” Luis told us about a place that he cryptically referred to as the base. which was where they all had to congregate at two the next afternoon to get ready for the trek across the border

Upon reaching there, the sight that greeted us was definitely not what we expected. As it turned out, the base was a giant scrap yard with grotesquely twisted skeletal remains of used cars and trucks laying around in a formation that almost resembled a prehistoric amphitheater with mangled dinosaurs laying in their final resting place. We were approached by someone who appeared to be a cross between Lee Van Cleef and Ron Jeremy, if such a thing is at all possible, who, at the first sight of a camera, put on a pair of Terminator shades. He introduced himself as Francisco and hastily informed us that he had nothing to do with the activities there and was just the local caretaker, “making sure everything went smoothly.”

We learned that during the peak months of November through March, an upward of 200 people would arrive at Sasabe every day to try and make the arduous journey to the other side.

His words were borne out by the events of the next few hours. Every 20 minutes or so, a beat-up old van bursting at the seams with dusty, road-weary migrants would show up at the scrap yard. The rear doors would open and a few dozen men and women of varying shapes, sizes and colors would tumble forth. They all carried identical white plastic jugs of water and backpacks and after a few minutes of huddled deliberation walked down the same dirt path in single file.

After witnessing a few of these “deliveries” at close quarters, without attracting undue attention, we mustered enough courage to accompany one group. Contrary to expectation, they did not seem to mind our presence and even welcomed our company, motioning for us to fall in line. Hacking our way through the dry brush, with straining lungs, we followed them over a steep hill, the first in what we gathered were a long series of uphill climbs.

Close to an hour must have passed when, near the summit, we came upon a barbed wire fence, strung loosely for as far as the eye could see. We stood back and watched the group try to crawl underneath one by one, helping each other out. A young girl who must have been around 14, got hopelessly entangled in the wire and, after struggling for a few minutes, started to cry out. That was enough for us. We stopped being dispassionate observers and rushed to help. After much effort we extricated her, getting away with only a few scratches.

She wasn’t as lucky and had gashes near the elbow and knee. Using a pocket tube of antiseptic lotion and two handkerchiefs, we fixed her up the best we could. By now most of her companions had gone a fair distance and she had some catching up to do. She bid us a tearful via con dios (go with God) and was once again on her way.

No Tears from the Dead

By now we had had enough and thought it wiser to retreat back to the relative sanctuary of our vehicle. It seemed a mockery of their valiant efforts to be in their faces with a camera, trying to maintain a veneer of objectivity. It was apparent we couldn’t stay detached for long, not in the face of such adversity. And from what we had gathered, they would be doing this for several days or even weeks until they finally reached the border. Whether they would be welcomed in the warm embrace of America at the end of it all was perhaps a moot point.

Back in town, we observed the dissonant sight of young kids, no older than 12, whizzing around in shiny new Mitsubishi and Toyota 4-Wheel Drive vehicles with Arizona or Sonora license plates. They could barely see above their steering wheels but were somehow able to navigate without running over stray pedestrians.

Clearly there was some prosperity here, the source of which would probably be better left unexamined. The town also had a number of bareback horse riders, and a couple of ATVs (All Terrain Vehicles) zoomed around to embellish the tapestry in large clouds of dust. Adding to the mix and somehow fitting was the song playing from the car stereo, Manu Chao’s hauntingly playful ballad, “Calavera no Llora” — literally, “no tears from the dead.”

After our last cerveza at Super Coyote, we drove across into the United States, back on what now seemed to be almost frighteningly perfect highways. There were no barbed wires to crawl under, no trigger-happy Border Patrol agents and no coyotes of the two-legged or four-legged variety to deal with. Only the vast emptiness of the American Southwest and the full moon rising from behind rows of Saguaros standing sentinel.

Luis and his companions were probably looking at the same moon right now.

*[A version of this article was originally published by DailyO.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: John Hoffman / Shutterstock.com

The post The Treacherous Border Crossing to America appeared first on Fair Observer.

Nabil Ayouch’s films stay with us long after the lights have ceased to flicker on celluloid. His stark, intimate and deeply affecting portraits of life in Morocco have won him the admiration of cineastes around the world. Never one to back down from unsparing and often transgressive critiques of his native country, Ayouch’s films have attracted their fair share of controversy, including the uproar that followed the release of Much Loved, a bold and remarkably frank tale about the lives of four prostitutes in modern-day Marrakech.

His first feature, Ali Zaoua: Prince of the Streets, is a visceral crime drama about a loose gang of about 20 homeless young boys set against the backdrop of the Casablanca docks. The kids sniff glue to escape from their harsh reality, in effect creating an alternate fantasy world. The boys have dreams of traveling to distant lands as cabin boys on a ship. Ali is killed early in the film while trying to leave the gang with three other renegades. The rest of the movie revolves around his comrades trying to arrange a decent burial to honor their friend.

Perhaps only an artist of Ayouch’s caliber could transform harsh topics like child abuse, prostitution and drug addiction into what feels at times like a magical realist fable. His next significant outing, Horses of God, was adapted from Mahi Binebine’s novel, The Stars of Sidi Moumen, about the 2003 Casablanca bombings. It premiered in the Un Certain Regard section at Cannes in 2012. The bombings were the deadliest terrorist attacks in Morocco’s history. The suicide bombers were all residents of Sidi Moumen, a shantytown on the outskirts of Casablanca. The film delves into the gritty lives of the bombers in the years leading up to the attack and dissects the corrosive social forces that lead individuals to carry out acts of senseless violence.

Provocative Spaces

After Horses of God, Ayouch wrote and directed Much Loved, which examines the underbelly of the sex trade through the eyes of four upscale prostitutes living and working in modern-day Morocco. Noha (Loubna Abidar), Randa (Asma Lazrak), Soukaina (Halima Karaouane) and Hilima (Sara Elalaoui) are four feisty, free-spirited and garrulous prostitutes sharing an apartment and a devoted chauffeur, Said (Abdellah Didane), who ferries them to lavish parties and orgies hosted at the palatial homes of their rich Saudi clients.

Ayouch’s treatment is non-judgmental, the brash female protagonists mouth bawdy and explicit dialogue, and the camera takes us into dark and provocative spaces seldom seen in Arab cinema. One of Soukaina’s customers reads poetry to her all night and is unresponsive to her feminine wiles until she discovers gay porn on his laptop, leading to an eruption of violence in the bedroom. Noha’s mother disapproves of her lifestyle and banishes her from the family home, but is happy to take her money nevertheless. Randa is initiated into the pleasures of lesbian love by a woman she meets at a nightclub and realizes she prefers women after all. In one scene, the girls are lying in bed, gossiping and watching a Bollywood musical on a laptop. Noha tells her friends she would gladly offer the lead actor a 50% discount on her services if he were interested.

The film premiered at the Toronto Film Festival and at the Director’s Fortnight section of Cannes in 2015 to near universal acclaim. Following the Cannes screening, a statement was released by the Moroccan Ministry of Communication, effectively banning the film: “The Moroccan authorities have decided not to allow this projection. It has serious contempt for moral values and the Moroccan woman, and is a flagrant breach of the Kingdom.”A Facebook page was set up calling for the execution of the director and the lead actress, Loubna Abidar, both of whom have subsequently received numerous violent threats.

The public outrage over the film is ironic when one considers that Marrakech is a well-known destination for sex tourists from Europe and the Middle East. Sex work is a mainstay of the economy and, according to a Ministry of Health study, more than 50% of the prostitutes pay for the upkeep of their families through the sex trade.

A researcher in sexual identity at Mohammed V University in Rabat, Abdessamad Dialmy, points out the inherent hypocrisy around prostitution in a country where it is a pervasive social phenomenon. “Sex labor is an informal response to unemployment,” he explains, “In certain regions, it allows the economy to function. It gives work to taxis, hotels and so on. It helps the economy expand.”

Shaking Up the Establishment

Ayouch’s most recent film, Razzia, is by far his most ambitious. Spanning more than 30 years, Razzia attempts to capture all the hopes and contradictions of a country grappling with its modern identity. “It is [set in] Morocco, but ‘Razzia’ goes well beyond that,” the filmmaker says. Even countries that have long believed in “civil rights and essential freedoms, such as the United States, are taking a giant step backwards and falling into autocracy,” he adds. “Though the Nazism of the 1940s has been replaced by modern ideologies, we remain at the heart of a resistance against totalitarianism.”

The director, like his fellow Arab artists, is working in the aftermath of the events of the Arab Spring. Apart from shaking up the political establishment, the momentous events have brought about a sea change in the way artists and filmmakers of the region told their stories, encouraging them to experiment with fresh modes of looking at the world.

A host of younger filmmakers have infused Arab cinema with a sense of creative abandon that may be unfamiliar to local audiences. Naji Abu Nowar’s Theeb, Selim Morad’s This Little Father Obsession, Hicham Masri’s Starve Your Dog, Leyla Bouzid’s As I Open My Eyes, Avo Kapraelian’s Houses Without Doors, and Salem Brahimi’s Let Them Come are groundbreaking films that push the envelope, blur stylistic boundaries and frequently abandon formal strictures adhered to by predecessors.

While some of the films deal with political events in the Arab world head on, others are more personal and experimental in nature. The Egyptian hit Mawlana (The Preacher) is an example of the former, asking tough questions about the nexus between organized religion and the state, and what happens when a charismatic preacher-turned-television celebrity deviates from the script. In the wake of the Arab Spring, artists are grappling with complex issues of identity, of what it means to be an Arab against the larger sociopolitical context, with a population oscillating between demands for cultural revolution on one hand and reinforcing conservative values on the other.

“Since the late 1940s when independent sovereign Arab states began to emerge, the forces of social conservatism [have been] really powerful and governments have been repressive and inhibiting freedom of expression,” says Rasha Salti, who has curated films from the Middle East and North Africa for the Toronto International Film Festival. “There is very little investment in film, but at the same time the field is really flourishing.”

Chicago-based filmmaker Usama Alshaibi has produced a remarkably large body of work in a relatively short period, jump-starting a genre that might be termed Arab-American transgressive cinema. Updating ideas and techniques derived from heroes like William Burroughs and Kenneth Anger, the Iraqi director has made over 50 short films dealing with topics he is obsessed with: religion, technology, sexuality, culture-clash and identity. His full-length features have explored post-Saddam Iraq, cross-cultural relationships, growing up Arab in the heartland in the 1970s and 1980s, and today. Alshaibi’s most recent film, Profane, is about a Muslim dominatrix undergoing a spiritual crisis.

Artists are the bellwether of any society, and if the cinema of the Arab world is anything to go by, the region is at the cusp of another major upheaval. People’s aspirations for freedom, both personal and political, cannot be suppressed indefinitely. And the Arab world’s artists, writers, poets and musicians are at the forefront of this upheaval. As Ursula Le Guin says in The Dispossessed, “You cannot buy the revolution. You cannot make the revolution. You can only be the revolution. It is in your spirit, or it is nowhere.”

*[This article was updated on November 21, 2017.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: milosk50 / Shutterstock.com

The post Arab Cinema’s Moment of Truth appeared first on Fair Observer.

When conceptual artist Andres Serrano launched his “Piss Christ” exhibit almost 30 years ago, little did he know it would become a lightning rod for the religious right and ignite a high-profile debate on the boundaries of free speech and the role of art in public life. Piss Christ is a photographic reproduction of a crucifix floating in a small glass tank filled with Andres’ urine. It was one of a series of photographs that involved classical statuettes submerged in various fluids like milk and blood.

Conservative Senators Jesse Helms and Alphonse D’Amato denounced the National Endowment of Arts in harsh terms for backing the project. Senator D’Amato caused a furor by dramatically tearing a reproduction of the image to shreds, calling it a “deplorable, despicable display of vulgarity.” Serrano received numerous death threats and hate mail and was denied grants due to the controversy. On Palm Sunday 2011, Catholic fundamentalists attacked and destroyed the photograph with hammers during a showing in France.

“The thing about the crucifix itself is that we treat it almost like a fashion accessory,” Serrano told The Guardian. “When you see it, you’re not horrified by it at all, but what it represents is the crucifixion of a man. … And for Christ to have been crucified and laid on the cross for three days where he not only bled to death, he shat himself and he peed himself to death,” he added. “So if Piss Christ upsets you, maybe it’s a good thing to think about what happened on the cross.”

The exhibit that really got the Christian right foaming at the mouth was a retrospective of work by late photographer Robert Mapplethorpe. One image was a self-portrait showing Mapplethorpe graphically inserting a bullwhip into his anus. Another displayed a finger inserted into a penis. Two displayed nude children. Considered one of the most influential visual artists of the late 20th century, Mapplethorpe explored a wide range of subjects throughout his career, including black and white portraits of celebrities, intricate flower arrangements, images of nude black males, the BDSM subculture of New York in the 1970s and classical nude portraits of female bodybuilders. He often participated in the acts he staged for photography and engaged his subjects sexually.

“He was not looking to make a political statement or an announcement of his evolving sexual persuasion,” writes his friend Patti Smith in her book Just Kids. “He was presenting something new, something not seen or explored as he saw and explored it. Robert sought to elevate aspects of male experience, to imbue homosexuality with mysticism. As Cocteau said of a Genet poem, ‘His obscenity is never obscene.’”

It was clear by the extreme reactions to their art provoked that Mapplethorpe and Serrano had violated some ancient cultural codes zealously guarded by the self-appointed sentinels of moral propriety.

Offense Caused

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines blasphemy as (1) great disrespect shown to god or something holy and (2) irreverence toward something considered sacred and inviolable. The last person put to death for religious blasphemy in the West was 20-year-old Scotsman Thomas Aikenhead in 1697. He was prosecuted and subsequently hanged for attempting to debunk the miracles of Christ and refusing to accept the Old Testament as the word of God. The death penalty for blasphemy still exists in many parts of the world. In 2017, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom identified 71 countries that still have some form of anti-blasphemy laws in their legal code, of which some of the worst offenders, aside from Italy, are Muslim-majority nations. These laws are often used against artists and writers who run afoul of the powers that be.

In December 2011, Jafar Panahi, an Iranian director of several internationally acclaimed films, was arrested and jailed along with his wife, daughter and friends. Although his family was later released, Panahi was sentenced to six years in jail and handed a 20-year ban on making films or giving interviews to local or foreign media. He was also barred from leaving Iran except for medical reasons or to make the Hajj pilgrimage. Most of the director’s films are banned in Iran. The film Offside, which won the Silver Bear at Berlin in 2006, is about a group of female football fans who are arrested while trying to sneak into Iran’s World Cup qualifying match against Bahrain. (Women are barred from attending men’s sporting events in Iran.)

A few decades prior to Panahi’s arrest, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the supreme leader of Iran, issued a fatwa against British-Indian novelist Salman Rushdie in 1988 for his supposedly blasphemous depiction of the Prophet Muhammad in his award-winning novel, The Satanic Verses. Rushdie was accused of betraying his faith and had to go into hiding for several years, during which time he was provided round-the-clock police protection. Not only was the book banned throughout the Islamic world, but also in India — a country with one of the largest Muslim populations.

Hindus are also quick to take offense at perceived slights against their faith. M.F. Husain, one of India’s most renowned contemporary artists, a creative genius with a prodigious body of work to his name, was chased out of the country for depicting Bharat Mata (Mother India) in the nude, sprawled across a map of India with the names of Indian states emblazoned on various parts of her body. Hundreds of lawsuits were filed and numerous death threats issued in connection with his “obscene” art, leaving Husain with no choice but to leave his beloved homeland. He spent the remainder of his days shuttling between Qatar and London, where he died on June 9, 2011. The thugs who vandalized Husain’s exhibits and issued death threats were clearly ignorant of the blatantly erotic imagery depicted in Hindu temples, Indian art and scriptures from early antiquity onward.

The Price of Free Thought

In neighboring Pakistan, the prominent politician Salman Taseer was shot 47 times by one of his own guards for expressing his strident opposition to the regressive anti-blasphemy law 295 (b) and (c), which the Indian subcontinent had inherited from the British in 1927, prior to its division into two independent nations. His killer was hailed as a hero by tens of thousands of Pakistanis who came out on the streets to celebrate Taseer’s death.

The milder Indian version of the same colonial-era law, 295 (a), was recently deployed by right-wing Hindus against American Indologist Wendy Doniger for outraging their religious sentiments with the publication of her book, The Hindus: An Alternative History. Apart from Doniger, a number of academics, both Indian and Western, have received death threats for offending Hindu sensibilities. Professor Paul Courtright had to call in the FBI for protection when he roused the ire of Hindutva rabble-rouser Rajiv Malhotra and received a barrage of threats from his unhinged fan base. Professor Anantanand Rambachan had a similar experience with Malhotra and needed law enforcement protection while speaking at a public venue.

Although there is no official death sentence for blasphemy in India, a number of prominent activists and writers have been killed in recent years for speaking out against caste oppression, religious bigotry and regressive social customs. Narendra Dabholkar, Govind Pansare, M.S. Kalburgi and Gauri Lankesh were all suspected of having been murdered by crazed fanatics unable to tolerate fearless voices speaking truth to power.

When Lankesh was gunned down in cold blood outside her home in early September, scores of bloodthirsty bigots celebrated her death on social media, a chilling reminder of the mainstreaming of hate under the current dispensation.

And who can forget the brutal massacre of 10 staff members at the offices of the satirical French magazine, Charlie Hebdo, in 2015. They were shot dead by masked men, who also shot two policeman on the street outside, shouting “Allahu Akbar!” as they drove off in a getaway car. The magazine had been under threat of violent attacks by Islamists since 2006 when it published offensive Danish cartoons of Prophet Muhammad.

Can’t Read This

India became overtly prudish and conservative under its Victorian overlords in spite of having a long history of irreverence in its artistic and literary traditions. Aubrey Menen’s deliciously insolent and satirical retelling of the Ramayana, Rama Retold, was banned for offending Hindu sentiments in 1956. It was incidentally the first book to be banned in independent India. More recently, The Collected Essays of A.K. Ramanujan and Paula Richman’s Many Ramayanas: The Diversity of a Narrative Tradition in South Asia, featuring Ramanujan’s controversial work, were dropped by Delhi University from its curriculum under pressure from Hindu fundamentalist groups like Shiksha Bachao Andolan and ABVP.

Ramanujam highlights colorful alternative versions of the epic including Kamban’s Iramavataram, in which the Vedic god Indra is covered with a 100 vaginas, and the Jaina version, Pampa Ramayana, where Sita turns out to be Ravana’s unwanted daughter. He was essentially suggesting that Valmiki’s Sanskrit Ramayana could not be held as the gold standard, and that the many alternative versions of the epic were equally valid. Of course, this is unacceptable to the Hindutva brigade vigorously campaigning to reshape Hinduism into a sanitized and homogenous entity stripped of complexity and contradictions.

The matter did not end there. The publisher of the book, Oxford University Press, capitulated to right-wing pressure without putting up a fight and stopped printing the book altogether.

Of course, self-censorship by media outlets is not limited to India. The BBC recently dropped an animation film, Popetown, for fear it would offend devout Catholics. The film’s protagonist, Father Nicholas, lives in the fictional Popetown — a thinly disguised Vatican City — and works as the pope’s handler. His job is to make sure the world never comes to know his boss is a bumbling oaf.

“The traditional opponents of freedom of speech — religious fanaticism, plutocratic power and dictatorial states — are thriving, and in many respects finding the world a more comfortable place in the early 21st century than they did in the late 20th,” argues Nick Cohen in the ironically titled, You Can’t Read This Book: Censorship in an Age of Freedom. Indeed, while the illusion of infinite choice may keep us distracted as consumers, seeking to unravel the machinery of this “freedom” can be dangerous.

More often than not, the most powerful art tends to come from minds that dare to question the status quo and tear down shibboleths, often at great personal and professional cost. Literary icons like Fyodor Dostoevsky, Boris Pasternak, Milan Kundera and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn did their best work while living under oppressive regimes. Solzhenitsyn’s depiction of life in the Soviet gulag — the infamous work camps where dissidents, writers and members of the bourgeoisie were sent away — remains to this day the most searing indictment of the crippling effects of totalitarianism on the human spirit and intellect.

Truth-tellers, freethinkers and, yes, blasphemers are needed now more than ever. Let us celebrate and decorate them with the laurels that true heroes deserve. As the redoubtable Salman Rushdie said at a rousing speech in Delhi some years ago, “There is a line in my novel Shalimar the Clown in which one character says to another, ‘Freedom is not a tea party. Freedom is a war.’ You keep the freedoms that you fight for; you lose the freedoms that you neglect. Freedom is something that somebody’s always trying to take away from you. And if you don’t defend it, you will lose it.”

*[This article was updated on October 30, 2017.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: jorisvo / Shutterstock.com

The post In Praise of Blasphemy appeared first on Fair Observer.

I had the good fortune of staying in Puerto Rico for a few weeks while attending a friend’s wedding last year. It is an archipelago situated in the northeast Caribbean Sea, blessed with pristine beaches, stunning sunsets and lush green vistas. It is US “territory” — a designation bestowed on 15 other semi-autonomous regions including Guam, American Samoa, US Virgin Islands and Northern Marianas Islands.

These territories are self-governing administrative divisions with locally elected governors and territorial legislatures, but are not counted among the 50 official states. Special status has been conferred on these regions to preserve their unique cultures from dilution and to honor their desire for autonomy. Spanish is the lingua franca in Puerto Rico, not English.

Similarly, French-speaking Quebec in Canada has a special status designation, as do Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, all of which enjoy substantial autonomy under the broad umbrella of the United Kingdom. In 2014, the people of Scotland voted to stay with the UK, and Puerto Rico overwhelmingly voted in favor of US statehood in a recent referendum.

The relationship between Macau and Portugal, Catalonia and Spain, Zanzibar and Tanzania, and Hong Kong and China bear a closer look in this context. Similarly, certain areas in the Republic of India also qualify for varying degrees of autonomy for specific historical and ethnic reasons. They are Mizoram, Assam, Manipur, Andhra Pradesh, Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh, Goa and Kashmir.

According to Article 371A of India’s Constitution: “Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, — (a) no Act of Parliament in respect of — (i) religion or social practices of the Nagas, (ii) Naga customary law and procedure, (iii) administration of civil and criminal justice involving decisions according to Naga customary law, (iv) ownership and transfer of land and its resources, shall apply to the State of Nagaland unless the legislative Assembly of Nagaland by a resolution so decides.” The language is unequivocal: the Indian Parliament is barred from creating legislation pertaining to “ownership and transfer of land” in Nagaland and “its resources.” Article 371G on Mizoram says exactly the same thing, as does the contentious Article 370 pertaining to Kashmir.

Roots in History

So why is this article the subject of intense debate in India, and not the others? To answer that one would have to turn the clock back several decades. Prior to India’s independence from British rule in 1947, Kashmir was a quasi-independent princely state, not directly under the Raj. In 1927, the Dogra ruler Hari Singh made a special provision to define the rights of permanent residents as distinct from non-state subjects. The law prohibited non-permanent residents from permanent settlement in the state, acquiring immovable property, government jobs, scholarships and aid.

The notification was issued in part at the insistence of Kashmiri Pandits, who feared an influx from Punjab and adjacent states. Jawaharlal Nehru later raised concerns that British émigrés and outsiders with no qualifications apart from surplus cash reserves would settle in droves, changing the demography and buy up everything of value, rendering locals serfs in their own land.

In order to avail of Indian military aid so he could ward off thousands of Pashtun tribesmen from the North-West Frontier Province, on October 26, 1947, Maharaja Hari Singh signed the instrument of accession in India’s favor, contingent on Kashmir being conferred with special status that would safeguard its unique culture and demography from being diluted. The areas now called Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Kashmir (formerly Poonch and Mirpur) broke away and merged with Pakistan, following an armed uprising and rebellion by locals who were against joining the Indian union.

India later sought arbitration from the United Nations, and passed resolutions in favor of holding a plebiscite to decide the future of Kashmir. As a precondition, both the Indian and Pakistani armies were required to withdraw from the areas under their control. Unsurprisingly the withdrawal never happened and the idea for a plebiscite faded into distant memory as the years passed.

Sheikh Abdullah, who took over the reigns of Indian-administered Kashmir from Hari Singh, further calibrated Kashmir’s relationship with New Delhi, leading to the inclusion of Article 370 in the Constitution. It guarantees special status to Jammu and Kashmir, restricting the union’s legislative powers to three areas: defense, foreign affairs and communications. Parliament needs the state government’s concurrence for applying all other laws.

The Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir was framed in 1956. It upheld in letter and spirit the provisions made by the maharaja back in 1927 and the Constitution Order of 1954 that extended Indian citizenship to residents of the state. Article 35A was also inserted into the Constitution at the same time. It stipulated that the state would be empowered to legislate over the rights and privileges of the state subjects, henceforth referred to as permanent residents.

47 Orders

Since then, 47 presidential orders have been issued, making various other provisions of the Constitution of India applicable to Jammu and Kashmir and, as some commentators have observed, rendering nugatory the original agreement. They include the replacement of the regional head of state — sadr-e-riyasat — a position created after the monarchy was abolished, with a union-appointed governor.

Fast forward to July 23, 2014: A 51-page petition was filed by an NGO calling itself “We, the Citizens” in the Indian Supreme Court, seeking removal of Article 35A. Senior Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) official Arun Kumar, head of Jammu and Kashmir Study Centre that is behind the petition, claimed if Article 35A was removed, the citizens from the rest of the country would be able to settle in the region, ostensibly “integrating” the state into the rest of India, thus neutralizing separatist tendencies.

On 16 July, 2016, a significant judgment was delivered by Justices Muzaffar Hussain Attar and Ali Mohammad Magrey in the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir, pertaining to the SARFAESI Act. It reads:

“This article, on its own, does not give anything new to the State of J&K … In the State of J&K, the immoveable property of a State subject/citizen, cannot be permitted to be transferred to a non State subject. This legal and constitutional protection is inherent in the State subjects of the State of J&K and this fundamental and basic inherent right cannot be taken away in view of peculiar and special constitutional position occupied by State of Jammu and Kashmir. No law can be made to abridge or affect this basic right of citizens of Jammu and Kashmir. … Article 35A is clarificatory provision to clear the issue of constitutional position obtaining in rest of country in contrast to State of J&K. This provision clears the constitutional relationship between people of rest of country with people of J&K.”

The judgment says the insertion of Article 35A in 1954 does not give anything new to the state of Jammu and Kashmir. It also states the provision was purely “clarificatory,” based on the Maharaja’s notification of April 20, 1927. “Countries of Continental dimensions respect diversity. In India the lust for uniformity possesses communal-minded majoritarians,” writes A.G. Noorani in Greater Kashmir. “The 51 page petition filed by ‘We, the Citizens’ in the Supreme Court on 23 July 2014 reeks of emotive politics, factual errors of the crassest kind, and far-fetched argument which are manifestly absurd,” he adds.

Noorani is a historian, eminent constitutional expert and one of the finest legal minds in India. He is also the author of The Kashmir Dispute (1947-2012), published in two volumes, probably the most thorough and rigorous work on the subject. As Noorani and others have noted, if Articles 370 and 35A are abrogated, then it follows that the instrument of accession is also invalid, since it was signed contingent to Jammu and Kashmir being given special status. It is highly unlikely that Kashmir would have joined the Indian union in the first place if it wasn’t for the implementation of these vital provisions.

Kashmir First

The Hindu right is probably aware that its laughable petition has no chance of succeeding. This is another cynical ploy to create division and cause further trauma to an already depressed community.

Kashmiri Hindus, or Pandits, are often used as a political wedge by the Hindutva brigade, relentlessly goaded and manipulated to facilitate their majoritarian agenda. Apart from their limited utility in this context, the Sangh seems to have little interest in the beleaguered community and pays only lip service to “resettlement.” Pandits would do well to settle the matter as Kashmiris, without falling prey to religious chauvinism or the competing meta-narratives of India and Pakistan. Lending unquestioning support to the current dispensation only weakens any leverage they may have, rather than strengthening it. Maybe it is time for all Kashmiris — Hindu and Muslim — to adopt a “Kashmir First” policy.

The Pakistan-administered part of the region, the so-called Azad Kashmir, is not much better off. Brad Adams, the Asia director at the US-based NGO Human Rights Watch observed that “Although ‘azad’ means ‘free,’ the residents of Azad Kashmir are anything but, the Pakistani authorities govern Azad Kashmir government with tight controls on basic freedoms.”

Indian Kashmir is already one of the world’s most densely militarized areas, and a public relations disaster for Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s “New India” project. The human shields, pellet guns, pepper grenades and chili bombs commonly deployed to subdue protestors in Kashmir are not used anywhere else on the Indian mainland, including in the riots in Dera that left over 30 people dead. Modi would be well advised to keep his rabid minions at bay and demonstrate genuine compassion for the plight of Kashmiris for a change. Appointing a Hindutva fanatic like Adityanath to appease his unhinged base also casts a dark cloud over the intentions of this regime.

Social-media hawks and armchair warriors advocating extreme measures and issuing rape and death threats from the safety of their electronic devices also do not help the situation. It may help if India’s prime minister did not personally endorse these elements by following them on Twitter.

Reducing the massive military presence would be a step in the right direction, while simultaneously adopting a zero-tolerance policy toward jihadist proxies and their sponsors in Pakistan. Many locals have observed that terminating militants is only a stopgap measure, as the current crop can always be replaced with a new one. Episodes like the lynching of Deputy Superintendent of Police Mohammed Pandith or the dastardly attack on Delhi Public School in Srinagar will continue unless the entire supply chain is pulled out from its roots and sources of funding exposed and dried out.

Apart from being untenable and unconstitutional, all attempts to scrap Articles 35A and 370 or further erode the special status conferred on Jammu and Kashmir are likely to backfire, and exacerbate a volatile situation. Far from helping to integrate the state with the rest of India, it may drive an already tenuous relationship to a point of no return.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: Rudra Narayan Mitra / Shutterstock.com

The post A Brief History of Kashmir’s Vanishing Autonomy appeared first on Fair Observer.

Sunil Khilnani is a professor of politics and the director of the India Institute at King’s College London. He is a scholar of Indian history and politics who is best known as the author of The Idea of India. He was the presenter of a BBC Radio 4 series entitled Incarnations: India in 50 Lives, which was later published as a book in 2016.

The book profiles the lives of 50 Indians, some famous and some relatively unknown, across a span of 2,500 years and highlights some of the central conflicts and contradictions of India — many of which still persist today — revolving around caste, gender, race, religion, region and individual freedom.

In this guest edition of The Interview, Vikram Zutshi talks to Khilnani about contentious topics that are relevant to modern times: Hinduism versus Hindutva, the debate around an “idea of India,” Nehruvian thought in the context of contemporary politics, and 20th-century revivalism of Buddhism as an inspiration to India’s Dalits.

Vikram Zutshi: Describe the premise of Incarnations. How did the book come about, and how were the final 50 names decided? What was the basis for your choices?

Sunil Khilnani: India’s past is full of remarkable individuals, yet we know so little about their life stories — and most of what we know is filtered through myth and childhood bedtime stories. So in Incarnations, I want to return the human element to our sense of India’s history: to show how it was made by the actions of actual people, inspired by ideas or reacting against oppressive circumstances. Incarnations also shows how many of the people we are brought up to think of as elderly, venerable figures were in fact angry young men and women, out to change their worlds.

In my book, I draw on the most authoritative and up-to-date scholarship on Indian history, and use individual biographies to build a larger panorama of India’s history across 2,500 years, in a way that might speak to both specialists as well as readers relatively unfamiliar with Indian history.

In choosing my 50, I wanted lives that dramatized some of the central conflicts and contradictions of India, many of which still persist — which turn around caste, gender, race, religion, region and individual freedom. I also wanted lives that have had historical afterlives: which have been incarnated at different times for different purposes — for example, the revival of the Buddha in 20th-century India, as an inspiration to India’s Dalits. And the 50 I’ve chosen represent a mix of known and unknown figures. But of course no such selection can be definitive. And as I say in my book, I see my own choices as an open invitation to an argument about Indian history and its makers.

Zutshi: From the Buddha to Adi Sankara to Basava to Akbar, Aryabhatta and Dhirubhai Ambani, your choices are sweeping, diverse and eclectic. What does this array of personalities tell us about India, and how does that differ from the picture being forwarded by the current dispensation?

Khilnani: It tells us several things.

First, it shows India’s longstanding connections with the world at large: From Buddha and the spread of his ideas across Asia, to 21st-century billionaires surfing the waves of global capitalism, India has been an integral part of world history — not a quiescent backwater or a left-behind spectator only recently stepping onto the international stage. So, I hope my book helps to reclaim a space for the long arc of Indian history, in ways that enable it to be appreciated and considered as part of our universal story.

Second, I hope my choices show the astonishing variety of experiments in living — to use Gandhi’s brilliant phrase — that Indians have pursued. Often, these life experiments have been in direct conflict with the strictures of caste hierarchy, gender inequality, political oppression, and the social and cultural pressures to conform. In this respect, I hope Incarnations reminds Indians of the vigorous ferment of ideas which have inspired Indians: of the many possibilities contained in the Indian past, which far exceed the constraints of any narrow nationalism.

Zutshi: You mentioned in a recent interview that, “I was moved by how many of these lives pose challenges to the Indian present and remind us of future possibilities that are in danger of being closed off.” Can you elaborate on that a bit more?

Khilnani: I hope that having finished the 50 biographical essays in Incarnations, a reader will share my firm conviction that one of the India’s great strengths is its historical capacity to challenge its own dogmas — as well as those of the wider world. And the crucial point is that that capacity isn’t just a historical relic — it’s a living resource, which we need to draw upon more than ever, to question and subvert the dogmas of our contemporary world. My interest in this book isn’t just in recovering the Indian past. I hope also to nudge us into thinking differently about India’s future.

Zutshi: Tell us about your previous work, Idea of India. What makes it such a hotly disputed subject? What do you have to say to those who would accuse you of being a “Nehruvian Marxist” complicit in the depredations of the Congress [party]?

Khilnani: What I set out to do in The Idea of India was to reconstruct the foundations of the modern nation: to show how it was built on a political idea — which valued freedom and diversity — and not a narrow definition of culture and religion. I analyzed India’s democracy and its economic development, the history of its cities, and the debates around an Indian identity. And through my study, I was able to conclude that India’s success as a nation state depended on its capacity to recognize and sustain different types of diversity — religious, linguistic, ethnic — rather than to impose a homogenous idea of nationalism, religious belief or cultural practice. That was an invaluable legacy of our founders: An insistence that the idea of India was founded not on a singular idea of India, but on a commitment to let many diverse ideas of India flourish — within the framework of constitutional law and democratic liberties.

When I wrote the book, I could not have imagined that The Idea of India would become a touchstone for thinking about contemporary India, and would continue generate so much debate. I think, for many people, it showed the logic of the Indian political project. There are some who dispute that logic or don’t like that project in the first place. These include many on the left, not just on the right. I’d invite them to offer counterarguments and historical evidence for their views, rather than anoint me with labels.

Zutshi: How do you define “Hinduism”? How is it at odds with “Hindutva”?

Khilnani: There is no single text, historical moment or authority — priestly or divine — that can define the nature of Hindu belief. This differentiates it sharply from the religions of the book, like Christianity, Islam and Jewish belief. On the one hand, what we call Hinduism [encompasses] a philosophical stance of radical, free, individual inquiry about the world — about the relationship of the self to the universe, and to its own consciousness — as well as rich epics replete with moral drama and individual choice.

On the other hand, Hindu beliefs also undergird the collective oppressions of the caste order and prescribe mind-numbing rituals. So, like any complicated body of thought and practice, what we call Hinduism has multiple potentials. It has enabled extraordinary experiments in philosophical thought and moral life, while also encouraging domination and dogmatism.

“Hindutva” is quite separate from the long, rich history of Hinduism. To understand “Hindutva,” you need to go back to the origins of this neologism, early in [the] 20th century. Back then, a number of high Brahmin intellectuals, dismayed by colonial denigration and interference in their religious orthodoxies and jealous of the status of Islam, began to reshape a version of Hinduism in the image of the religions of the book. If, they argued, Hindus were to stand up to their European masters, they would have to emulate Christianity and Islam. They wanted to define Hinduism in textual terms, to give it an organizational authority structure, and to lend it an aggressive, proselytizing character. Theirs was a strategy of opposition by emulation of their opponents — the colonial rulers and Muslim elites.

This upper-caste movement of Hindu revisionism was given further edge by V.D. Savarkar, a Maharashtrian Brahmin who wanted to oppose the British through violence, and who coined the term “Hindutva.” Gandhi, one should remember, developed his own ideas on non-violence in direct opposition to Savakar — the two men met in London in 1909, and Gandhi was shocked by Savarkar’s ideas about violence and religion.

In fact, it’s important to note that Savarkar was not much of a practicing Hindu, and cared little for the philosophical and moral experimentalism which has characterized Hinduism. Instead, he defined Hinduism in political terms: It was a way to unite people around a common identity, and to become a nation. Savarkar was a great admirer of 19th-century European nationalism — Mazzini and Garibaldi were among his heroes. He wanted to turn one of the world’s most individualist and free-spirited religious philosophies, which we call Hinduism, into a collectivist, nationalist dogma — and he did this through the contortions of “Hindutva.”

Sadly, many in India today prefer the consoling certitudes of “Hindutva” to the bracing skepticism of Hindu thought. And sadly, as well as dangerously, some conflate Hindutva with Hinduism. The two could not be more opposed to one another.

Zutshi: Which of the 50 personalities stood out from the rest and resonated with you the most? Who are your personal favorites?

Khilnani: Don’t get me started — so hard to choose! I was drawn to some of the poets and artists. Basava, the 12th-century Kannada poet and social critic, and the 18th-century Pahari painter Nainsukh, who brought an extraordinary human intimacy to the formalism of Indian miniature painting; and then there are struggles of women artists like M.S. Subbulakshmi and Amrita Sher-Gil, trying to establish their creative voices in a male-dominated world. I was also moved by the story of the forgotten Tamil freedom fighter who tried to defeat the British by starting his own shipping line, Chidambaram Pillai. Alongside many famous individuals, I’ve also included in Incarnations many rich human stories from Indian history who too often get neglected.

Zutshi: Name the books and authors which have had maximum impact on you growing up and influenced your life trajectory the most.

Khilnani: So many — hard to know where to start, since we are always a deficient sum of all we have read. However, one person and writer who has changed and influenced me beyond words is someone to whom I happen to be married: Katherine Boo, who wrote Behind the Beautiful Forevers, based on years of research in a poor Mumbai neighborhood.

Zutshi: What are you working on next? Please give us a glimpse of the work-in-progress.

Khilnani: I am trying to understand the history of democracy in India: How and why did India become a democracy, what kind of democracy is it, and what does this mean for our more general conception of political freedom and cultural diversity? As against the usual stories, which either see democracy as a gift of the British, or as an emanation of some special quality of Hindu tolerance, I am trying to study the deep history of practices of decision-making, consensus-building, the opportunities for collective action in precolonial India, and to look also at how historical strands were galvanized by the encounter with European and other ideas.

I want to be able to explain to myself this question: How did we get from Jawaharlal Nehru to Narendra Modi, and what does that mean both for India and the world?

*[Incarnations: A History of India in Fifty Lives by Sunil Khilnani was published by Farrar, Straus and Giroux. The paperback edition will be released in September 2017. In November 2017, the 20th-anniversary edition of The Idea of India will be released. This article was updated on August 29, 2017.]

Photo Credit: Kriangkrai Thitimakorn / Shutterstock.com

The post The Idea of India: Sunil Khilnani in Conversation appeared first on Fair Observer.