To be fair, free speech was always a *very tenuous concept* in the west. Punishing people for their *thoughts* was the norm. The church was the choice instrument for torturing people for rebellious thoughts, same as the mullahs do in Islam. Inquisitors and mullahs were the norm.
It was the temporary changes in the elite order in the late 1700s and early 1800s that caused a massive change, but it is now returning to the feudal order, which is native to both the west and Islam. In contrast, the dharmic world was always a bastion of free speech.
Churchmen and the barons lived in castles, to protect themselves, not only from the enemy, but also from their peasantry [the flock, in their own terms!]. In total contrast, the dharmic teachers lived among the people, without any need for such security against their ow people.
All this concept of the gated apartments/societies were very European concepts from their feudal days. And Communism and Fascism did not invent anything in the field of social oppression. They simply copied the practices of the church and extended them.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Shanmukh

Shanmukh Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @maidros78

26 Jan
Major Brahma Singh has written in his book on the history of Jammu and Kashmir army that when Sikhs tried to invade Jammu after the death of Sher Singh, neither could really bring themselves to fight the other wholeheartedly. And now we have a bunch of Sikhs storming Red Fort...
The bonds between the Sikhs and the Dogras were so close that raising arms against the other was excruciating, even if done on orders. Similarly, Dogras and Sikhs fought to the last man and the last round for each other when fighting in Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir in 1947.
There are umpteen examples of Dogra officers of Jammu and Kashmir army risking everything to save Sikh civilians, and Sikh soldiers refusing to leave behind their Hindu civilian brethren. How does one forget one's comrades in arms, people who fought oppression for generations?
Read 7 tweets
25 Jan
A little commonsense thing that has always eluded our political commentators. There is a Hindu votebase in EVERY single state, from TN to J&K, from Gujarat to Manipur. Is it sufficient to give victory on its own to a party? Often no. But it is a sufficient base to build on.
This is what BJP has done. They have taken over the Hindu base in every state [which comes to 10-20% of the vote] and on this base, they have built up their other voters. Every single party has only ~10-20% core vote only. Rest are all attracted by benefits. So, they rule now.
In the past, there were regional parties [TDP in Telangana, AGP in Assam, JD in Karnataka, etc] that took the Hindu vote, but systematically, BJP wiped them out, making themselves the sole beneficiaries of Hindu vote. This gives them a greater advantage than minority vote often.
Read 5 tweets
25 Jan
1) All in all, by claiming that Raama has no resonance in Bengal, @AITCofficial is making a huge mistake. From the Krittibasi Raamayana, to the 1991 vote [BJP vote rose to 12% in 1991 from 1.6% in 1989] based on just the Raama wave, there is a resonance to Raama in Bengal.
2) In 1991, BJP had no cadre in Bengal and no issue other than the Raama temple. If there were no resonance to Raama, there would certainly not have been a sharp rise in BJP vote share. More importantly, more than just the Raama temple, it was a resonance to a Hindu issue.
3) In fact, Bengal was one of the few states that gave BJP 10% rise in vote share due to Raama wave [others were Karnataka, Goa, Telangana, UP, Rajasthan, and Gujarat]. So, I am surprised that @AITCofficial has forgotten its own electoral history. Bengal is a very Hindu state.
Read 8 tweets
23 Jan
For all those trying to armtwist Vedas into meaning that slaughter of cows was allowed [which, BTW, is based on extremely specious and flawed reasoning], do you also accept slaughter of humans in sacrifices? There are a few such cases - King Somaka, Shunashyepa, etc, no?
Even in the Vedas, the verses which can be armtwisted into allowing cow slaughter are extremely rare. OTOH, those emphasising protection of cows are galore. It is like asking if Jihad is external or internal. There are a few places in the Koran which says that Jihad is internal.
But how do people understand Jihad? We are seeing the results everywhere.

Same way with the Vedas. While some seculars want to armtwist the Vedas into meaning what they want to mean, the clear understanding among the believers is that they enjoin protection of cows, only.
Read 4 tweets
22 Jan
In most cases, as one learns a language, one begins to appreciate the culture and develop a sympathy for the group in question. One even develops an emotional link to the language. Particularly true when the language in question is dharmic, but not completely limited to it.
However, there is one major exception. Languages imposed in schools don't seem to have any emotional attachment. This is a pity because schools should have created a bond between the students and their subjects. However, this doesn't seem to be the case at all for me.
I wonder if this is due to the difference between learning something by choice and something by compulsion. Learning Russian made me sympathetic to Russia [sadly, our RW has not granted me KGB/FSB job, or a Russian wife], but learning English hasn't made me sympathetic to UK/US.
Read 5 tweets
6 Jan
A few suggestions to @virendrarathore on his book, `Prithviraj Chauhan: A light on the mist of history' which, BTW, I recommend to all who have a serious interest in history.

The history presented there is solid and attempts to rationalise the various sources, which diverge.
The book is aimed more at the scholar, and takes a very in depth approach to the history of Prithviraja.

The positives: It focusses on rationalising the history, by putting together the various sources. It also has a focus on Indic sources, which is an excellent thing.
The negative: There is one serious problem. It assumes a lot of knowledge on the part of the reader. This book is not easy for someone who has only a general idea of Prithviraja and his times to read. It would benefit from some additional supplementary material.
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!