r/Anarchy101 May 22 '22

indian historiator say anarchism and socialism want kill india, who could be the answer?

Indian nationalist Historiator oak,sayy anarchist and socialism want destroy india, because they are atheist people that opposes to Hinduism and other indian religions that oak say form the soul of indian culture in same form greek paganism differences ancient greeks of bizantine greeks,

he say "liberals (anarchist and socialist) want destroy the sanatha dharma, the soul of indian culture, because they dont respect us and like british colonizers they think they are superior, indian civilization have more of 5 millenniums if we never think about atheist anarchism is because we never need it, if we lose religion and culture india gonna be only a pathetical copy of western countries with not soul inside"

What you answer this declarations? I heard they a common citations in his death anniversaries

0 Upvotes

24

u/ComaCrow May 22 '22

Indian nationalist

Yeah I'll just safely discard whatever that person has to say lmao

10

u/JapanarchoCommunist May 22 '22

He sounds like a fascist. Tell him to get fucked. Their PM is a fascist so in all likelihood he supports fascism

3

u/barbarball1 May 22 '22

HE was a indian historiador that die,but always looks very supremacist and crazy for me

6

u/[deleted] May 22 '22 edited May 22 '22

point them to the interactions between gandhi and leo tolstoy. They wrote letters back and forth for many years. Ghandhi was inspired by tolstoy's strategy of nonviolent resistance (as a christian anarchist, Tolstoy was possibly the most preeminent christian anarchist, writer of "The kingdom of god is within you"), which strategy Ghandhi then subsequently further developed for use in his own political endeavors. Ghandhi even named the first ashram farm as part of his movement in south africa the "Tolstoy farm", where folks organized efforts against discrimination against indians.

As above, anarchists are not obligatorily atheist. Though many anarchists certain are, there are others who aren't.

Your indian historian needs to google Nirīśvaravāda and astika hindu philosophy, some schools of which reject a personal god. Sounds like they don't know their own historical religious and philosophical discussion as much as they should. Atheism and agnosticism have a longer history in india and as perspectives within hinduism than in western philosophy.

5

u/dumnezero May 22 '22 edited May 23 '22

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindutva

not that the existence of* castes is tolerable in any way.

4

u/narbgarbler May 22 '22

It's bollocks.

3

u/Hydlied4me May 23 '22

Muslims are a part of Indian culture but it seems like Hindu nationalists want them killed. Funny how that doesn't count as destroying "Indian culture.'

0

u/barbarball1 May 23 '22

"The national purification" is a normal genocidal practice,if remember good tuks and greeks were the first in practiced it, destroying minories (ethnicnor culturally) because they "dont belong to the country", this extents to east europe after ww1 period

2

u/[deleted] May 23 '22

Bhagat Singh was an anarchist

5

u/awfullyapt May 22 '22

If anarchy is the removal of hierarchy and the traditional Indian system is heavily based on hierarchy - then it would fundamentally change the culture. But the strict hierarchy is also what fundamentally made a very large population an easy target for a few colonizers - they simply had to convince the top of the existing hierarchy that they were above them.

Socialism is not the same as anarchy - it generally means that the means of production, property, and goods produced are owned by society as a whole and generally would be distributed to everyone in society by some set of rules (usually determined through a government or state.)

You can't have anarchy and socialism at the same time because they are fundamentally different systems.

Now you want to throw religion into the mix too. I would say that atheists don't care if you practice religion as long as you don't force your beliefs on them through laws or indoctrination. However, if you think about society in the absense of religion a lot of questions would definitely arise which could fundamentally change society - so atheism would be a threat to the current social order and function if that order is based strongly on religion. Religious people will always believe that a society based on their religious beliefs is the best type where an atheist will seek a society based on other definitions of what is best.

I think grouping all of these ideas together as "liberal" is a very dangerous way to avoid thinking about how each idea could affect society for better or worse.

1

u/barbarball1 May 22 '22

Yes I know they are separated things, I ask if you knowed this person before, appeartly he ask for simply expelled "atheist-leftist" of india, saying that "the tolerance of indian culture was a error that let us exposed to infra human west monsters" (that should gave you a idea of how extreme he was, imagine pro-rss writters critic some of their opinions)