1. As the new century dawned @media_hhr were doing protests on the streets, selling Voice of India books, books by Sita Ram Goel, Ram Swarup and @Koenraad_Elst outside 10 downing street, selling £5000 of books, and books in libraries.
2. Hindu Human Rights (HHR) were also doing campus talks, getting apology from Cavalli for descrating Hindu imagery, stopping Harrods from selling underwear with Hindu gos, Minelli shoes from selling footwear with Hindu gods.
3. HHR was highlighting #Hinduphobia in parliament as far back as 2003. HHR almost got the BBC to take off material that supported Aryan invasion myth. All this without any donations, just grassroots voluntary time, effort and expense. So what went wrong?
4. Seeing success of HHR the RSS affiliated groups such as @nhsf_uk grew envious and greedy. They were joined by new outsits Hindu Forum and Hindu Council. Together they told BBC, MPs and others that HHR unemployed youth, street thugs, drug dealers, lumpen proletariat.
5. The self-appointed Hindu leaders denounced HHR's efforts as being secret machinations of Christian missionaries (because we had western Hindus with us) and love jihad grooming (because HHR attracted female volunteers). The result is 2 decades on things have gone backwards.
6. That explains the anger against @HinduAmerican and similar bodies. Just like Hindu Forum and Hindu Council they panhandle for donations. But if you are getting money like this then it is right and proper to ask for results.
7. Instead of writing some mealy mouthed letter to a senator, do a protest outside Rutgers and getting Audrey removed. But no. That would spoil the image of Hindus in America as law-abiding model minority. Well fat lot of good that did when you failed in that court case!
8. On the other hand Hindus were doing street activism over 20 years ago, and it worked until sabotaged
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1. HAF failed because they avoid grass roots activism. As with HFB, HCUK and a number of other groups based in UK, this USA self-appointed Hindu group regards street work as beneath them. That is why such types find it easier to just collect money and write the odd letter.
2. Writing letters did not get India independence. Nor did refusal to buy salt. It was activism: Savarkar, Madanlal Dhingra, Bhagat Singh, Rajguru, Sikhdev, Tilak, Kartar Singh Sarabha, Udham Singh, Subhas Chandra Bose. It was after the army and navy mutinies that UK decolonised.
3. Activism shows you mean business. Without it you think Islamic, missionary and Marxist lobbies are all powerful. They are not and can be taken on and ripped to pieces. The reason why so many 'Hindus' join leftist groups is because of activism. Not sitting around pontificating
1. In 1603 Tokugawa Ieyasu established his shogunate ending two centuries of anarchy in Japan. Hence he formalised a rigid caste system and especially the untouchable status of the eta.
2. They were subject to new disabilities including being forced to wear distinctive attire, not being allowed to carry umbrellas unless it was raining, being prohibited from crossing the entrance to an ippan household, restriction to unclean occupations,
3. a ban from going out after dark, and barred from entry to ippan shrines and temples. They also had to live in segregated communities and only marry within their own caste.
1. Ambedkar undertook mass conversion to Buddhism to escape the 'Hindu' caste system. But how realistic was this? Until late into the nineteenth century, Sinhalese women of lower castes were forbidden from covering their bodies above the waist. Intercaste marriage was forbidden.
2. The British recognised caste distinctions in official documents and initially supported the system. In order to retain high caste Sinhalese children in schools, Christian missionaries forced other children to stand or sit on lower benches.
3. By the end of the nineteenth century the British rulers of Ceylon used the dominant Goyigama caste against the rising aspirations of the English educated Karava, Salagama and Durava castes.
1. Old Norse society had rigid hierarchical divisions and slavery was also fundamental to the economy of the Viking Age. Slaves were viewed as physically and morally degenerate, farmers as industrious and robust, and the nobility as athletic and warlike.
2. But the backbone of Viking society comprised the bóndis or land-owning freemen who had the right to bear arms. Some of these farmers owned large tracts of land and employed others of their same class, but of more humble means, as agricultural workers.
3. At the bottom of the social scale was the thrall or slave, who belonged absolutely to his master. Viking law allowed the thrall to be beaten to death because slaves were treated and regarded as little more than animals.
1. Sad fact is that @HinduAmerican only took the court case because they themsleves were directly implicated. They have ignored many similar cases where Hindus got attacked and @SuhagAShukla has yet to retract her anti-Brahmin comments that certain peopel are making excuses for.
2. This is the same import of Indian politics we see in UK. What counts is knot ability, knowledge or skills. The litmus test is hown loyal you are to the 'tribe': this can be political party or some other outfit. Dissent is not tolerated.
3. HAF and other orgnisations were warned about how caste would be weaponised. So what ddi they do? Ignore it as usual. While in Australia similar outfit won without begging for donations in case involving misuse of swastika. Diametric opposite principles.
1. Bertrand Russell provoked the wrath of the Left for daring to criticise communism and the USSR based on the conditions he had actually witnessed.
2. In 1920 the atheist and philosopher spent five weeks in the USSR as as part of a Labour Party delegation to this new workers’ paradise. The honeymoon was of short duration.
3. He was shocked by the masses of starving peasants and Lenin’s ghoulish laugh boasting of peasants hanging kulaks. Russell was also disturbed on how Bolshevism was taking on the guise of a new official religion. It had its own elaborate dogmas and inspired scriptures.