Hindu atheist vs. Secular Jihadists


Just listened to a long podcast between Jarin Jove and the guys who host the Secular Jihadist podcast. Going in I had an open mind, as I myself differ on a lot of priors from the two co-hosts (unlike Ali I am not a Left-liberal, and unlike Armin, I don’t think people should adhere to hyper-rationalism in all cases).

Though I think Jove made some good points (i.e., I think “Hindu nationalism” is now such a big category that it is hard to generalize and extrapolate from simply the views of Sarvakar, for example), on the whole, I found many of his points sophistic and reminded me of the sort of style of argumentation I encounter from American “social justice warriors.” In particular, his objections to international comparisons through some assertion of incommensurability is the exact same tack that I’ve been frustrated with for the past 20 years. There are objective facts. There is a real world. We can disagree about the details, but asserting objective facts is not ipso facto evidence of bias or bigotry. Many beg to differ, and this is a deep chasm of values that I don’t think can ever be bridged.

The intersection between postcolonialism and critical theory and Hindu nationalism that I see in some of Jove’s assertions (e.g., he asserts that rape is a greater problem in the United States than India) is perplexing to me, but it seems surprisingly common. This is not to say that Jove would agree that his views were postcolonial or critical theorist, but the alignment is objectively true.

I would caution all people in non-Western societies to be wary of the temptation to use the critical theorist cudgel to win a particular argument because it is useful at the moment. Critical theory is a cultural acid, and any true civilization will have difficulty putting the genie back in the bottle as it eats into everything you think is precious and valuable.

 

3+

47 Replies to “Hindu atheist vs. Secular Jihadists”

  1. I’m not sure that it’s useful for our side to “get woke,” cause “woke” may have an actual ideology, but its core is that it’s a set of interest groups, some of which objectively hate us. So anyone who is remotely savvy will say “who are you trying to fool.”

  2. I posted this on @brownpundits. Happy to delete them if @razib wants and leave them up here.

    I feel Razib went full Islamic apologist on this one. An anti-CAA/NRC stand is shilling for Islamic fundamentalism whether you realize it or not. Asylum for Yazidis is ok but for Hindus/Sikhs/Buddhists/Christians from Bangla/Pak/Afghan is “Hindutva”. Canadian politicians demanding asylum for Afghan Sikhs is ok, but India offering them asylum is not. Re: NRC, today, the Indian state does not know who its citizens are. This goes against the very fabric of a modern state. Second, Razib seems partial to India having open borders which many Indian leftists and Islamists believe is a good idea as it would allow open migration from Bangladesh and Pakistan and Nepal. This has to stop since no modern state can afford such flows.

    The nature of liberal open democracy in the anglosphere is tied to its Protestant culture and Judeo-Christian values. You can buy that or not. Similarly, the plurality of Indian civilization is inextricably tied to its Hindu ethos. There would be no Zoroastrians, Bene Jews, Syriac Christians, Malabar Muslims, Kashmiri Muslims or the countless other groups settled in India if *Hindu* rulers had not welcomed them and given them freedom of religion and *conversion*.

    If you have not lived in India, you have not experienced the two-tier system between Muslims and everyone else. Every other minority including Jews, Zoroastrians, Sikhs, Syrian Christians, Bohra Muslims prospers but the Muslim Sunni population stays poor, ghettoized, and increasingly hostile to the Indian state. A population of around 200 million largely educated in Madrassas is not an asset to any state, will lead marginalized lives, and is easy prey to radicalization. The slogans chanted at the anti-CAA protests were pro-secessionist and against the Indian nation (not just against the BJP govt). This cycle has to be broken and no political party except the BJP seems to have the stomach to take this on.

    Razib has the quaint notion that no Muslim from India has joined an international terrorist group. This is objectively false. Indian Muslims have joined ISIS. Furthermore, why is killing for SIMI/SIFI better than ISIS? Bizarre dichotomy between domestic and international terrorism.

    Finally, Jarin raised atrocities on Hindus/Buddhists/Christians in Bangladesh, Razib ignored it and focused on atrocities in Pakistan instead. Bangladesh has more atrocities than Pak as 8-10% of the population is *still* non-muslim vs 1-2% for Pak. Declining fast because of rape, coercion, harassment, and discrimination. This is the reality of life for any religious minority in an Islamic state even though its constitution might claim to be secular while also being in sync with Shariah. The religious cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus in the 1990s proved to Hindu India that Islamization is an inevitable outcome in any state where Muslims reach a majority. Just like Israel, where Christians and Muslims live and prosper but the state has an inextricable Jewish-nature, India will move to having an inextricable Hindu nature.

    1. “I feel Razib went full Islamic apologist on this one.”

      Like it or not, Razib is a covert Jihadi Islamist who often claims to be an atheist ex-muslim as a part of Taqiyya. I personally,along with Razib, took part in 69 successful terrorist attacks killing 420 infidels; Razib Khan was the mastermind.

      He is also trying to create a genetically modified virus mixed with cow-urine that will only kill Hindus and other pagans. Brownpundits is a secret Hinduphobic Jihadist website. Under his leadership,Hinduztan will become Islamistan. Don’t mess with covert Jihadist masterminds.

  3. Razib believes no Muslim from India has joined an international terrorist group.

    hey retard, i just realized, you think i was on the podcast. that’s *ali rizvi*

    you’re a moron 😉 this is fucking hilarious

    1. The entry had your name on it and I mistook your voice for Armin. Retard, really? Maybe the comment struck a nerve. Feel free to delete and I will post a corrected one.

  4. The entry had your name on it and I mistook your voice for Armin. Retard, really? Maybe the comment struck a nerve. Feel free to delete and I will post a corrected one.

    no, i literally think you are perhaps stupid. don’t worry about projection.

    it’s not an insult. most ppl are stupid. so you are like most people

  5. if i think someone is stupid, and they annoy me, i will say it. i avoid talking to less intelligent people IRL, so why do you think it should be different on the internet? stupid people are not often told anymore that they’re dumb, so yes, i know it’s a real big deal that i just say what i think.

    like it i said, it’s not a moral failing. hopefully, you are an ethical person. but it doesn’t mean that i want to engage your thoughts since…well. you know what i think 😉

    though like kabir, you may be entertaining.

  6. Razib is as far from an Islamic apologist as one can be, especially for someone with a Muslim background. He is very fair and calls out all BS – including and especially coming from Islamists.

    Having said that, Diogenes’s mistake of confusing Rizvi for Razib notwithstanding, I found his original comment to be reasonable on the spectrum of Right voices in India. He makes several valid points, analogies etc, and what he says resonates with a lot of folks on the center right (not just right) in India..I think his points should be engaged by others on this thread.

    Just my 2 cents.

    1. yeah, i agree. the comment is fine if a bit ranty 😉

      [armin grew up in Iran and has put himself under threat of risk of death for being atheist while living in that country to his family’s distress, so i do think accusations of him being an Islamic apologist are retarded. Hindutva ppl are often pretty self-absorbed and narcissistic and can’t think outside of their narrow black-white categories]

      1. I haven’t heard the podcast and don’t really know anything about Armin..
        I agree however that the Indian/Hindu Centre-Right and Right sometimes comes across as hyper sensitive – partly because of feeling under siege from all quarters..The woke-Islamist/Muslim alliance in the West, which also translates to India/Indian matters has just made things worse.. Indian Right needs to become more sophisticated and self assured (this is the one area in which they could learn from Islamist apologists — Mehdi Hassan?)

        Lastly, I will add that Diogenes comes across as a reasonably smart guy (the Kabir comparison is not valid at all and you probably don’t mean it either) 🙂

        1. The woke-Islamist/Muslim alliance in the West,

          armin is anti-woke. he’s been attacked for the past two months because he keeps saying stuff like black lives matter is a racist cult.

          am i making it more clear why i think the original comment was retarded? you are criticizing a guy who was an atheist who didn’t hide it in iran, and a guy in the west who rejects wokism and criticizes black lives matter. would either of you have such courage?

          1. Come on Razib, you are backtracking. You said the commenter was retarded, not the comment. Stick to your guns 😉

          2. Like I said I have no idea about Armin, the woke-Islamist alliance comment was about the general dynamic.
            Based on what you said, he seems to be a very courageous person who is also consistent in his position(s)

      2. I will make sure to check everyone’s background and their sacrifices for their personal beliefs before criticizing their opinions in the future and my apologies for not understanding that Armin is forever shielded from that label.

    2. > “Razib is as far from an Islamic apologist as one can be, especially for someone with a Muslim background. He is very fair and calls out all BS – including and especially coming from Islamists.”

      You have low standards for what counts as an Islamic apologist.

      The population of Bangladesh in 1960 was around ~60M and today it is 160M. We can say an average of 110M ~(60+160)/2 ~ during that period. The Hindu percentage has declined from ~20% in 1960 to 9% today. 10% of Hindus out of 110M have disappeared. That is 10M people. You might quibble with the 20% to 9% decline or my straight-line approximation. Even if the number is off by 90%, it is still 1M people. Did they go to India, were they converted or were they killed? The high estimate of the Yazidi population decimated by ISIL was between 10,000 and 25,000. The cost of the ongoing human cost in Bangladesh is *horrific*. Pakistan has seen something similar but the numbers are hard to get. Even a decimation of 10% of Pakistan’s Hindu population of 3-4M will result in 300,000 people converted, killed, raped, or fled to India. The most common method of conversion in Pakistan is abduction, rape, conversion, and marriage of girls. The ongoing human cost is absolutely horrific.

      This hard pill to swallow about the CAA, which is a necessary evil, is not in offering asylum to a few hundred thousand or even a few million persecuted minorities in Bangladesh and Pakistan. If you agree to the CAA you are also agreeing to the fact that Islamic countries/societies, especially the three in India’s neighborhood cannot host minorities. This proves Jinnah’s two-nation theory right for the wrong reason! There is nothing the RSS could want more and the left and Indian Muslims opposing it see it for what it is. It is not what the CAA says about India but rather what it says about our Islamic neighbors and eventually what it implies for India and its Muslims. If Hindus/Buddhist/Christians cannot be safe in Bangladesh/Pakistan and they cannot be safe in Kashmir what does it mean for India as a secular country?

      This is the end of a dream of a secular India and the inexorable march towards Hindu Rashtra.

      Armin is a brave man for fighting for his beliefs in Iran and then standing up to the Marxist cult of BLM. Takes immense courage to escape one theocracy and then take on the Marxist theocracy of BLM. Virtue however is not a ticket to airbrush away the horrific tragedy unfolding in Bangladesh and Pakistan which the CAA aims to address. This airbrushing makes Armin an Islamic apologist. So is Razib for defending him.

      1. If the situation in Pak/Bangldesh for Hindus is so bad, why are their co-ethnicities not active participant for CAA. All 3 state assemblies (Indian-Punjab, West Bengal, Rajasthan) passed resolutions against CAA.

        What does it say abt these Hindu (Punjabi, Bengali, Sindhi) ethnicities, who don’t really care about their “own people” suffering in BD/Pakistan? And what does it say abt the ethnicities who are going out of their line to support CAA, even though there is obviously , no benefit for them. Like Gangetic belt Hindus on who;s shoulders the current Govt (which brought the CAA) is standing.

        1. Was this an attempt at some joke?

          Are you REALLY asking why INC and AITC majority assemblies and their supporters are somehow against a move made by BJP?

          “why are their co-ethnicities not active participant for CAA”
          You speak as if the minorities in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan are being persecuted for their ethnicities

          1. Why is this a joke? I know y this states voted against CAA. I was making a larger point as what does it say abt the Hindus of the very same states, who voted for these non CAA parties. And their inability to protest the decision of the state govt.

            I mean y should i as a non bengali care if bengali hindus die in Bangladesh? Shouldn’t, first and foremost, the Bengali Hindu of West Bengal care? Shouldn’t he/she lead the demand for CAA? I dont; see that. But instead of leading, the state govt (voted in by Hindus of these very same states) oppose CAA.

            Again, what does it say abt the Hindus of these states?

  7. [An anti-CAA/NRC stand is shilling for Islamic fundamentalism whether you realize it or not. Asylum for Yazidis is ok but for Hindus/Sikhs/Buddhists/Christians from Bangla/Pak/Afghan is “Hindutva”. Canadian politicians demanding asylum for Afghan Sikhs is ok, but India offering them asylum is not]

    I would separate CAA from NRC. And agree that there is nothing objectionable about the CAA. It’s the moral thing to do, and what western countries and countries around the world have been doing forever.

    [Re: NRC, today, the Indian state does not know who its citizens are. This goes against the very fabric of a modern state. Second, Razib seems partial to India having open borders which many Indian leftists and Islamists believe is a good idea as it would allow open migration from Bangladesh and Pakistan and Nepal. This has to stop since no modern state can afford such flows.]

    I agree with the need for a national register. Don’t most countries have it? Hasn’t Pakistan had it for like ever? I think the concern with NRC was with the potential disenfranchisement of legit Muslim citizens – due to India’s inefficient and corrupt bureaucracy and the lack of trust in the BJP when it comes to Muslims. BJP could and should have handled the comms on this (and CAA) much better and perhaps that would have nipped the protests in the bud. Much of the opposition for the CAA was opportunistic in the sense that it was really intended against NRC (slippery slope etc)

    [The nature of liberal open democracy in the anglosphere is tied to its Protestant culture and Judeo-Christian values. You can buy that or not. Similarly, the plurality of Indian civilization is inextricably tied to its Hindu ethos.]

    Mostly agree..I would update that to Dharmic ethos..

    [Finally, Jarin raised atrocities on Hindus/Buddhists/Christians in Bangladesh, Razib ignored it and focused on atrocities in Pakistan instead. Bangladesh has more atrocities than Pak as 8-10% of the population is *still* non-muslim vs 1-2% for Pak. Declining fast because of rape, coercion, harassment, and discrimination. This is the reality of life for any religious minority in an Islamic state even though its constitution might claim to be secular while also being in sync with Shariah. ]]

    100% agree. Bangladesh’s Hindu population has gone from 20%+ to <10% from 1972 to now..the proof is in the pudding..

    [Just like Israel, where Christians and Muslims live and prosper but the tate has an inextricable Jewish-nature, India will move to having an inextricable Hindu nature.]
    Dharmic nature..

  8. A question for those who know – is jihad (kill infidels) a part of religious scriptures i.e. of ‘God’s words’? I think that taqiyya, for e.g., is not a part of the scriptures but it is a derivative practice which, maybe had s different meaning in the past, but now incorporates a lie (at least in Balkan) as an ethical standard.

  9. Like I said I have no idea about Armin, the woke-Islamist alliance comment was about the general dynamic.

    this is the problem i have with stupid hindu nationalists. basically you see a name and argument and you fill in everything else and you start screaming.

    this is very familiar. many muslims do this. some israelis have done this. and also…SJWs.

    my position is really straightfwd: this idea of a hindu rashtra will get nowhere if it’s reflexive and reactive screaming. ok, it will get somewhere. just like SJWery will get somewhere. but negation is a dead-end.

    my point with the maratha posts pointed at this. you need to reach a stage where you love shijavi more than you hate aurangzeb. the details don’t matter, you don’t need to love/hate these two. but it illustrates the dynamic.

    1. You are overeading my comment. I was agreeing with the general thrust of Diogenes’ comment and not his reaction to the podcast. Also wanted to say that his position is common among Hindu nationalists and that there is merit to some of their positions around controversial issues. Like I said I am not taking any position on Armin or the podcast discussion which I haven’t heard. Now if you are saying that one shouldn’t comment on a post without reading (or in this case hearing) the content then that’s valid but not a standard that is followed on comments here . I would hazard a guess that most discussion here is about and in response to comments ( some of which may have been originally triggered by the post)

    2. “my point with the maratha posts pointed at this. you need to reach a stage where you love shijavi more than you hate aurangzeb. the details don’t matter, you don’t need to love/hate these two. but it illustrates the dynamic.”

      I totally agree on this point. But increasingly i feel that Hindu right is destined to be caught somewhere in between the stages u mention. In the decades post liberalization Hindutva “assertiveness” was a function of Hindu society confidence in India’s economic growth. As the growth stalls, and India is in the middle income trap, Hindutva might be stuck b/w reflexive and confident.

      https://www.hindustantimes.com/columns/how-migration-threatens-the-hindutva-project-opinion/story-aklWPGOEcCG8xF9nnbxIqI.html

      “Subalterns are perplexed at the shrinking window of socioeconomic mobility. A large section shifted to Hindutva due to the promise of stability and economic mobility. But frequent policy shocks and the decrease in economic growth threatens to bring about a serious setback to the Hindutva project.”

  10. Oh and I don’t hate Aurangzeb or love Shivaji . I do admire the Marathas in general for achieving a Hindu reconquista

  11. I agree that Critical theory is harmful for a civilisation, especially when we see a new world order characterised by the formation of civilisation states.
    But you claim that Jove’s arguments reek of critical theory.
    could you please elaborate more on that

    1. listen to the back and forth btwn jove and armin/ali, and you see multiple points where they doesn’t want to give in to the possibility of an empirical difference btwn the west and india (e.g., rape), and begins to problematize it. it’s just empirically objective too that india is an honor culture. you can problematize this too more easily imo than the rape stats, but it’s a fact.

      the standard model of critical theory is to collapse distinctions/differences and problematize anything which might make the west ‘look better.’ this is what he does.

  12. At 54:48, who is he talking about?

    Both the Atomic Energy Commission of India and the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre had Hindu chairmen in 1998. Is he perhaps referring to Homi. J Bhabha (colloquially known as “father of the Indian nuclear programme”), a Zoroastrian, as a Muslim?

  13. “The intersection between postcolonialism and critical theory and Hindu nationalism that I see in some of Jove’s assertions (e.g., he asserts that rape is a greater problem in the United States than India) is perplexing to me, but it seems surprisingly common.”

    I never asserted this at all. This is a blatant strawman argument of what I said. My general argument was that the US should have a greater capacity of stopping rape crimes against Native Americans, but doesn’t while rape crimes in India was a police-to-population issue.

    I don’t believe this so-called Princeton graduate is all that good at listening comprehension if an argument I never said was his take-away from the debate.

  14. your discussion wasn’t very good. i am told you are a better writer. but armin and ali got the better of you by the second half and you weren’t making a lot of coherent sense much of the time, so perhaps i did misunderstand you. but the general consensus even from those who agree with you is that it was a shitshow. arguably it wasn’t fair to have a 2 x 1 when this was a pretty adversarial podcast.

  15. My general argument was that the US should have a greater capacity of stopping rape crimes against Native Americans

    native american reservations are separate ‘nations’. i assume you understand this causes all sorts of issues in regards to laws and jurisdiction.

    1. Armin didn’t read anything I wrote, which is why he ignored any real points and went into constant appeals to emotion.

      And I find it bizarre that you could say “native american reservations are separate ‘nations’. i assume you understand this causes all sorts of issues in regards to laws and jurisdiction.” when the discussion covered this a little and established it was US laws imposed on Native American reservations that caused these rape sprees because as stated: Native Americans had no right to sue their rapists until 2012. Do you understand what that means? Do you understand it was US Law imposed on their societies causing this? I make a more lengthy explanation here: https://jarinjove.com/2015/11/25/the-ongoing-tragedy-of-the-native-americans-a-history-of-institutional-sex-crimes-mass-murder-and-racism/

      My general point was that not only is India’s rape crimes less per 100,000 people according to the statistics, but the Native American situation should never even have happened in the First World country. You can’t claim that the US has better rights and ignore a minority group that didn’t even have the right to sue their rapists in US courts until 2012 because of the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968, the Public Law 280, and the Supreme Court Case of Oliphant v. Suquamish. That’s imposing a standard on India that the US itself fails to follow through. For you to so blatantly ignore that is to willfully disdain and ignore the human rights of Native Americans doesn’t show an honest commitment to human rights. It shows an attempt at celebrating the narcissistic self-worship of the Western world for standards that it doesn’t even follow.

      Now, we discussed parts of this on the podcast and Armin and Ali agreed with me that it’s a horrible human rights issue. Our only difference is whether we perceive this as a willful distortion of Secular Values. I don’t believe that the US can claim to uphold human rights so long as these horrifying, and legalized, atrocities went on. For you to so flippantly dismiss this issue reveals that you weren’t really listening to the podcast. Also, I find it suspicious that you require moderations to curate approved posts on your blog. So much for being open to opposing views, eh?

      Also, this particular concern for Native American human rights is not a position due to “Hindutva” whatever. I hold this belief on the basis that human rights should be equal for all people. That is why I found it so infuriating. This is not some “gotcha” moment as some Ex-Muslims have thrust at me. The US can’t claim to be the champion of rights that its own country doesn’t follow. The US also can’t call CAA and NRC bigotry against Muslims when they support the Jewish State of Israel and say nothing about Israel refusing to take any Syrian refugees. These are clear double-standards based on the perception that one is “Western” – our in-group – and the other is “foreign” and seen as “inferior” or an outgroup. It just doesn’t seem to be honest to me.

      My blog posts, if you’re curious or still interested since they were the actual topic of discussion which Ali and Armin failed to share yet again: https://jarinjove.com/2020/03/16/five-lenses-1of5/

      I thank you for taking the time to respond to my comments and responding, even if the debate is obviously a volatile one.

  16. Just listened to the podcast. I really enjoyed it! Armin and Ali were very interesting to listen to, Both were great, but I really also liked some of Armin’s explanations which were totally spot on. Jarin Jove on the other hand, I think you might be right, he must be a better writer than speaker, felt his positions and explanations were in disarray.

  17. I think all three were terribly misinformed about CAA/NRC situation and various other things too.
    Muslims are not stopped from immigrating to India. They can apply and become citizens of India. Just the wait times are reduced for other communities in CAA. That too only for the people who entered India before 2014.

    Jarin maybe better at his writing skills than debating. He was destroyed by the other two. I did not know, BR Ambedkar had become the Hindutva icon, when on earth did that happen.
    I wish to hear a similar debate with Kushal Mehra or Sham Sharma on the Hindu side. They are clearly better informed on these topics.

    1. That is a bit confusing for me to hear, since I do believe all three of us addressed that. Muslims can still apply, it’s not a Muslim ban. I would like to know how it is I lost since I was the only one arguing using facts and cited them. Which, of course, they chose not to show and even doubled-down on in a private email because their positions are so indefensible. This blog post contains a link to all five of the Five Lenses if you scroll down:

      https://jarinjove.com/2020/07/21/secularjihadist-unprofessional/

    1. Saurv, the bill was already implemented for refugees who came into India and the immediate beneficiaries were approximately 31000 people. The website that you cite, Scrollin, also fails to distinguish between the CAA and NRC and conflates them.

Comments are closed.