Bjp and Hindutva are beneficiaries of academic denial of persecution of Hindus. It seems common sense that when Hindus see that there is a blanket denial of their persecution or burial of news about it, they will seek to choose an option that explicitly stands for them. If people will deny your persecution, how can you trust them with anything?. Academics should be mindful of this that this very discourse by them pushes many towards bjp. I am not surprised that many among the literate Indians have shifted to support bjp. Where congress was the default option earlier. This kind of discourse also comes with serious humanitarian costs on hindu minorities in particular in present day pakistan and bangladesh. For these thinkers, neither do hindu minorities exist, not does their suffering matter. And there is no name to the ideology that torments them. For these folks Islamic bigotry did not exist in pre Independent Indian subcontinent. And if it did, it was politics all the way, as though politics and religion are always mutually exclusive.
Even in public discourse in India, by many mainstream journalists, the bigoted jibes of “bhakt” and “gaumutra” has been normalized, it seems the elites in India have imbibed colonial prejudices to the degree that in their need to be contrarian they accept even bigotry and denial of persecution of hindus as legitimate tactics and count such people as their allies, they have no objective criteria in their minds of what constitutes bigotry towards Hindus and they dont care and people are noticing this.
If there are many qualifiers to explain away bigotry but there isnt any adequate criteria for what should constitute bigotry, one could get away with about anything.
This brings to memory a good article of scott aaronson, “The Kolmogorov option” .That science requires no martyrs , so truth will come out in the end.
And a good response to it.
where the catholic apologetics is mentioned on how scientists were held guilty of their views on non scientific things and were not strictly persecuted for their views on science.
Roger Bacon was a thirteenth century friar who made discoveries in mathematics, optics, and astronomy, and who was the first Westerner to research gunpowder. It seems (though records are unclear) that he was accused of heresy and died under house arrest. But this may have been because of his interest in weird prophecies, not because of his scientific researches.
Michael Servetus was a sixteenth-century anatomist who made some early discoveries about the circulatory and nervous system. He was arrested by Catholic authorities in France and fled to Geneva, where he was arrested by Protestant authorities, and burnt at the stake “atop a pyre of his own books”. But this was because of his heretical opinions on the Trinity, and not for any of his anatomical discoveries.
Lucilio Vanini was a philosopher/scientist/hermeticist/early heliocentrism proponent who was most notable as the first person recorded to have claimed that humans evolved from apes – though his theories and arguments were kind of confused and he probably got it right mostly by chance. City authorities arrested him for blasphemy, cut out his tongue, strangled him, and burned his body at the stake. But nobody cared about his views on evolution at the time; the exact charges are unclear but he was known to make claims like “all religious things are false”.
Pietro d’Abano was a fourteenth century philosopher and doctor who helped introduce Arabic medicine to the West. He was arrested by the Inquisition and accused of consorting with the Devil. He died before a verdict was reached, but the Inquisition finished the trial, found him guilty, and ordered his corpse burnt at the stake. But he wasn’t accused of consorting with the Devil because he was researching Arabic medicine. He was accused of consorting with the Devil because he was kind of consorting with the Devil – pretty much everyone including modern historians agree that he was super into occultism and wrote a bunch of grimoires and magical texts.
Giordano Bruno was a contemporary of Galileo’s. He also believed in heliocentrism, and promoted (originated?) the idea that the stars were other suns that might have other planets and other life-forms. He was arrested, tortured, and burned at the stake. But although his “innumerable worlds” thing was probably a strike against him, the church’s main gripe was his denial of Christ’s divinity.”
A recent example of this has been how amnesty international and press have kept quiet about rohingya massacre of hindu minorities as it was not opportune to make their case, only later was this news revealed.
A review of the book . It is important to call out such consequential lies . Does not matter who or how many. To actively deny persecution poisons the well and lets people come to the conclusion that they only have themselves to trust and no one else. And they are better off to go it alone even at the expense of others .And the fact that there have not been many Indian muslim scholars who are willing to call faults on their side even from history, irrespective of how horrible the characters have been leads people to be more suspicious of them. It is not surprising that bjp in power is not in a hurry to redress this as it can only gain from such discourse.