Thank god for India’s transition to majoritarianism


The Kashi Vishwanath Corridor was inaugurated today with well-deserved pomp and show. A symbol of the Hindu pride that Bhavya Kashi and the divinity associated with it has preserved. Prime Minister Narendra Modi said prayers in the Kal Bhairav ​​Temple in Varanasi on Monday morning. In the Kashi Vishwanath Temple, the Prime Minister Lord Shiva offered prayers. A Hindu nation led by a democratically elected proud Hindu working for everyone for the first time, including the Hindu people.

Unexpectedly, the liberal cabal was unhappy. Seasoned NDTV propagandist, Sreenivasan Jain, who whitewashed bombings by Muslim terrorists, took to Twitter and pondered India’s relegation to majority rule by rulers who had taken their oaths on a “secular constitution”.

“We have normalized the change of the Indian state to majoritarianism so easily that it is easy to forget that it is a multi-camera government. Event attended by officials who have taken an oath on a secular constitution, ”he tweeted.

Other elephant-like dodos weren’t far behind.

Former Congressional troll and current TMC foot soldier Saket Gokhale tweeted another silly guess.

Both dingbats were wrong, of course, and extremely insincere. The second dingbat, Saket Gokhale, just lied. The BBC has aired several programs from Westminster Abbey and Canterbury in its history. In fact, Britain is an officially Christian nation. For Saket Gokhale, the political shill to rent, it is not surprising to quote a Christian nation to shame a Hindu nation, as Gokhale would just as well praise IS in its hatred of Modi and Hindus.

We must also face the question of majoritarianism as raised by Dingbat 1. When liberal affiliates speak of majoritarianism, they usually imply that it is something out of the ordinary, almost akin to a theocratic dictatorship. In essence, they are signaling to the rest of the world that India has become an ochlocracy and, therefore, is being ruled by the will of a crowd of mad, religious lunatics walking around with sticks and a Bhagwa flag.

Ochlocracy means a system in which the will of the mob overrides the law of the land. One of the most prominent examples we saw was the Salem Witch Trials in Colonial Massachusetts. Other examples are, of course, the Haun’s Mill massacre, in which Christians massacred dozens of Mormons because they did not like their religious beliefs. Western history is littered with examples of the ochlocracy where the majority religious madmen demanded immediate justice and their will overruled the law of the land.

With those parts of the modern “His Majesty the Royal Mob” who want to call India majority rule, they are essentially telling the western world that the rule of law in India is failing and we are being overrun by Hindu fanatics who are turning the country into a graveyard of mutilated ones Minority bodies. Forget the fact that ochlocracy was creation and the curse of the West, never India. Forget the fact that western countries are deeply Christian even today, so much so that even their favorite President Joe Biden took an oath when he laid his hand on an oversized ancient Bible – India, the only standing ancient polytheistic civilization , is to be ashamed.

Majoritarianism in itself is nothing out of the ordinary. It essentially means that the majority population elects a government to run the country. There is nothing wrong with that. But when people like Sreenivasan Jain speak of “majoritarianism” they are implying that India is a country that has succumbed to mob rule and a system that disregards the interests of its minorities to ensure the will of the Hindus retains the upper hand.

First, we have to be aware that there are majority rules in western countries too. Since 1921 and the presidency of Warren G. Harding, all presidents of the United States have been Christian. They could have come from different Christian denominations, namely Episcopal, Latin, Baptist, Methodist, etc., but they were Christians. In Great Britain the Prime Ministers belonged to either different Christian or Jewish faiths. In most of the countries with a majority of Abrahamic religions there are heads of state who are also of an Abrahamic religion, even then an Islamic nation is almost never ruled by a Christian prime minister or president or any other Christian nation is ruled by a Muslim Prime Minister or President governs.

Is that bigotry? Not at all. Every nation and its people have the right to choose their representative. Even if the nation were constitutionally “secular”, people would choose a leader who they believe will look after their interests. It’s only natural.

Then why does it annoy our brown sahibs made in India? Why do they hurt when Prime Minister Modi reaffirms his faith, much like their favorite President Joe Biden did when he swore on the Bible in a “liberal” nation?

It is certainly not because they are against majoritarianism. It’s simply because they go against the interests and will of the majority – especially the Hindus. They have no qualms as the white man chooses heads of state who correspond to their beliefs. You have no problem with the Muslim world doing this. However, India is said to be catapulting to Abrahamic faiths that prefer to breathe polytheists once and for all.

Of course, if you read this you would be lamenting that not all Muslims are bad and that the mere idea that Hindus would be comfortable choosing another Dharmic Hindu means that India is an ochlocracy that has not taken the will of the minority will be considered. The fact that Hindus choose to even remotely maintain their Dharma is like constitutional sacrilege.

So what is the system that they expect from us? What Sreenivasan Jain clearly implies is that the Hindus of this country have no right to democracy because he believes that the majority of the unwashed masses do not conform to the will of the elite (people like him). They want a secular nation where the Hindu abandons their gods to pay homage to their definition of a “secular” state because the will of a violent minority, which they love to gloss over, will be fulfilled when Hindus do so. And what happens when the will of a violent minority prevails? The sauce from people like Jain goes on unabated.

What he does not recognize, or at least does not want to recognize, is that the ochlocracy thrives in India when the majority does not rule. What is closer to ochocracy, we have to ask ourselves? Mobs who take to the streets to shout “Gustakh-e-Rasool ki saza sar tan se juda” and then respond to these threats as they did to Kamlesh Tiwari or Hindus worshiping in an ancient temple who was built thousands of years ago in a civilized land that was Hindus? What is the epitome of ochlocracy – Hindus say that the civilized land should worship its gods and Hindu civilization or Muslim mobs that run on the sidelines kick the monument to those who protect our nation because of what happened to the Rohingya- Muslims in Myanmar happened and burn? Trains full of Hindus, a nation held hostage by street violence, the country’s capital burned for no refuge for persecuted Hindus, and so on.

Any example that is taken indicates that elements like Sreenivasan Jain would prefer an ochlocracy to democracy because they see violent minority rule to fulfill their political ambitions rather than a peaceful majority recapturing their civilization through the democratic process .

They want our civilization, for which our ancestors fought, to be sacrificed on the altar of a mythical “secularism” where the will of the minority is the massacre of the majority. They are angry today because after 2013, as the 2014 elections showed, Hindus asserted themselves and decided that their troubled Hindu minority would no longer be able to sacrifice their heads at the feet of the mobs who like to gloss over them.

The will of the minority does not always correspond to the national interests and / or the interests of the majority population of a nation. For example, although Jains are not the preferred, “special” minority, minority status would mean that if a certain ambassador went to South Africa and said they were against the Pokhran Tests, or if he helped South Africa plan, the NAM- Forum in Durban to take a stand against India’s nuclear power status, they acted in the interests of the nation.

Riots, street veto, burning trains and living Hindus by the “special minority” are probably not the “democracy” one should strive for.

In the interests of the nation and in the interests of an ancient civilization, one must thank the gods that the majority has finally awakened to protect civilization from barbaric cults and those who wash away their barbarity by calling them “Chhota Mota” aggressions.

Yes. Majoritarianism won today. She won in 2014. She won again in 2019. And she will continue to win at the will of the gods.


About Author

Comments are closed.