PDA

View Full Version : What do you think about Meera Nanda?



hesh86
28 June 2012, 10:15 PM
Her latest book 'The God Market' is about how and why Hinduism is growing. She seems to think the Indian government and modernism have a lot to do with this and she really denounces some of our prominent spiritual leaders. She makes her own assertions that are mostly unfounded IMO. But I wanted other people's opinions. Am I just being biased? Or is there a shred of truth to this and should I be throwing away my heritage and culture because it is supposedly stunting social welfare programs?

wundermonk
28 June 2012, 10:28 PM
Her latest book 'The God Market' is about how and why Hinduism is growing.

Is Hinduism growing? What evidence does she cite for this?


She seems to think the Indian government and modernism have a lot to do with this and she really denounces some of our prominent spiritual leaders.

Assuming Hinduism is growing, rest assured that Hinduism is anathema in our political circles. So, they have no role to play in this.

What some of our "prominent spiritual leaders" do is to basically teach Yoga and meditation. I see nothing wrong with this. Now, some of them, after tasting success and after developing a mass-following, abuse that power and usually end up in scandals. So, Hinduism should be blamed for this? How?


Or is there a shred of truth to this and should I be throwing away my heritage and culture because it is supposedly stunting social welfare programs?

Is this what she is arguing for - we should throw away our heritage and culture because it is stunting social welfare programs? What social welfare programs is she talking about - Hajj subsidy, Article 370 giving special status to J&K where non-Muslims cannot settle down, does she want affirmative action based on caste/language in the Indian cricket team? Unfortunately, in a "secular" country, the government should be completely blind towards one's caste/religion. But under the garb of secularism in India, we have social welfare programs that only reinforce these differences. Sad.

hesh86
28 June 2012, 11:08 PM
@Wundermonk,
I think it is more like Hindu nationalism is growing is what she meant. This is because of what she thinks are government funded 'promotions' of Hinduism. This is simply her own assertion and she gives close to no evidence that the government is actively promoting Hinduism. If anything, Government has complete control over temples. There is no separation of temple and state in India. The state controls everything!

She also attributes the rise of modernism and globalization to the rise of Hinduism. Maybe this is true.

Essentially, every social malaise you can think of is because of Hinduism to Meera. Right from not supporting affirmative action, the caste system and even those few who believe in pseudo-science like the Vishva Hindu Parishad and ISKCON.

You are absolutely right about the 'garb of secularism'. This is perfectly legit. Meera has even managed to convince Western scholars about having to 'confront Hinduism' as one guy put it. Pathetic really. First they take away our temples. Then they blame our religion for everything. Like one blogger said "Meera's book just falls short of calling for a public end to Hinduism". Wow. I sometimes wonder whether we need to change as Hindus. Instead of being more vocal, perhaps if we just privately practiced our religion without bringing it into politics, would that change the whining from secularists. I sometimes think not... India could end up like China or Soviet Russia with religion being all but banned from public.

sankar
28 June 2012, 11:11 PM
What do you think about Meera Nanda?a paid agent to destroy dharmic faiths.

Twilightdance
29 June 2012, 01:21 AM
a paid agent to destroy dharmic faiths.

That is just conspiracy theory mongering, something we disgruntled Hindus have caught on to as a solution for our political desperation - out of which likes of Rajeev Malhotra have made good profit.

West is not a secret enemy to India - in reality it doesn't care, as India is still insignificant in world stage (with our octogenarian, corrupt, vision-less political leaders). And if there are some christian missionaries in the west who want to harvest souls they don't need to pay for this service from likes of Meera Nanda.

I forget the name of the foreign journalist - I think it is Mark Tully? Mark Tully I think is still the BBC's India correspondent (or was he removed?) who moved in the circles of India's secular intelligentsia, fell in love with India and one of her secular-intelligent-intellectual charms (I don't think it was Meera Nanada, someone else). His autobiography (I'll find out the name of the book) has much insight into the minds of the likes of Meera Nanda, and it has much less to do with foreign conspiracy, than a pathological psychological condition from which these people suffer from. Mark Tully was secretly saffron supporter which led to his break up with his GF. He was surprised with the anti-hindu (= anti Indian culture) hate among the secular intelligentsia, and attributes it to a deep rooted prejudice (probably because of JNU education, communism, western cultural fantasy) against their own culture which may also come from insecurity.

wundermonk
29 June 2012, 03:50 AM
the anti-hindu (= anti Indian culture) hate among the secular intelligentsia, and attributes it to a deep rooted prejudice (probably because of JNU education, communism, western cultural fantasy) against their own culture which may also come from insecurity.

I do not know where it comes from but the double standards are unbelieveably puke-inducing.

The "secular" intelligentsia should be against any theocratic regime - be it Israel or Saudi Arabia. One thing amongst our "elites" is that they are only against Israel. Why not Saudi Arabia?

They like saying - Rama did not exists, where is Rama's birth certificate, etc. Hey elites - Why do not you ask the Mohammedans where is Adam/Eve's certificate? Are you afraid your throat will be slit the next day?

Until the so-called "intelligentsia" grow a pair and call for the abolition of theocratic regimes everywhere, until they mock Abrahamics about the non-existence of Adam/Eve, they open themselves to the charge of being paid agents of subversive sinister elements.

At least to prevent such a charge from sticking onto them, the "secular intelligentsia" should mock the Abrahamics mercilessly. Be an equal opportunity mocker, you "secular elite". Do not hide your tail between your legs when you have to take on the Mohammedan. Otherwise, how is your behaviour different from that of a paid agent?

Twilightdance
29 June 2012, 04:19 AM
I do not know where it comes from but the double standards are unbelieveably puke-inducing.

The "secular" intelligentsia should be against any theocratic regime - be it Israel or Saudi Arabia. One thing amongst our "elites" is that they are only against Israel. Why not Saudi Arabia?

They like saying - Rama did not exists, where is Rama's birth certificate, etc. Hey elites - Why do not you ask the Mohammedans where is Adam/Eve's certificate? Are you afraid your throat will be slit the next day?

Until the so-called "intelligentsia" grow a pair and call for the abolition of theocratic regimes everywhere, until they mock Abrahamics about the non-existence of Adam/Eve, they open themselves to the charge of being paid agents of subversive sinister elements.

At least to prevent such a charge from sticking onto them, the "secular intelligentsia" should mock the Abrahamics mercilessly. Be an equal opportunity mocker, you "secular elite". Do not hide your tail between your legs when you have to take on the Mohammedan. Otherwise, how is your behaviour different from that of a paid agent?

Agree. the secular elite & intelligentsia would not have counted for much had not the media completely been flooded by their propaganda and thoughts.

hesh86
29 June 2012, 08:48 AM
From the sense I get here, people are only rebuking the secularists because they don't make the same claims against the Abrahamic faiths. So does that mean that we are all waiting for them to protest against the authenticity of Abrahamic faiths and then suddenly become buddy-buddy with the secularists? I'm confused by this. There are plenty of western atheists/secularists who oppose Christianity and Islam. Perhaps that is why the likes of Meera Nanda focus on Indian 'problems'. The idea is that people like her think that India is as much a Hindu theocracy (or Hinduism promoting state) as Saudi Arabia is an Islamic theocracy. On this pretense, how OK is it to ban promotion of Hinduism? I am an Indian, but to all of the other Indian Hindus - how true is it that India is some sort of Hinduism favoring state?

wundermonk
29 June 2012, 09:05 AM
From the sense I get here, people are only rebuking the secularists because they don't make the same claims against the Abrahamic faiths.

No, in fact they DO. Many of our ''secularists'' rebuke Israel. Why do they do this? Jews are Abrahamics. Why do they feel it is ok to attack Israel but remain silent when it comes to Saudi Arabia? If Indian secularists focussed only on Indian problems, they should just shut their trap about Israel, no?

Dont believe me? Read this: http://cpim.org/content/israeli-military-aggression-gaza-condemned

The point is, out of all problems in India and the world, why does the Communist Party choose to even make a comment on the Israeli Palestinian conflict and that too against Israel? Why do Indian Communists not raise their voice against the fact that women are not allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia? A paid Saudi agent would behave exactly like this! Now, I am not alleging that any of our "secularists'' or Meera Nanda or the communist party is on the payrolls of the Saudi Government. But their behaviour is exactly how a paid agent would behave. So as to defuse this charge, our Communists should question the existence of Adam/Eve, mercilessly mock the Abrahamic faiths and call for the complete secularization of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Yeman, UAE, etc. You get the picture, right? Then, and only then, can there be some assurance that their concern is genuine and that they do not have a hidden agenda. Until that time, the secularists in India can be considered to be just as communal as any one else.


Perhaps that is why the likes of Meera Nanda focus on Indian 'problems'. The idea is that people like her think that India is as much a Hindu theocracy (or Hinduism promoting state) as Saudi Arabia is an Islamic theocracy. On this pretense, how OK is it to ban promotion of Hinduism? I am an Indian, but to all of the other Indian Hindus - how true is it that India is some sort of Hinduism favoring state?

Earlier you said:


This is simply her own assertion and she gives close to no evidence that the government is actively promoting Hinduism. If anything, Government has complete control over temples. There is no separation of temple and state in India. The state controls everything!

So, she does not provide any evidence. Nor have you provided any evidence that India is a Hindu theocracy. Your statement (that I have underlined) is not even well defined. What is this ''temple'' you are referring to? And, how does the Indian government promote Hinduism.

Please let me know which of the following policies of the Indian government promote Hinduism and why?

(1)Haj subsidy
(2)reservation
(3)Article 370 which gives special status to J&K...non-Muslims are not allowed to settle in the state

To counter this, provide a list of the policies of the Indian government that promote Hinduism

(1)
(2)
(3)

hesh86
29 June 2012, 09:54 AM
@wundermonk,
Thanks for the reply. As far as the paid agent suspicion goes. She is funded by the John Templeton Foundation which decides to bridge religion and science. Apparently her new book was not funded by this foundation, but it is clear that she does very little to bring an agreement between religion and science since she is against ALL religion.

Coming to the evidence, I can only direct you to the google books link, I don't have the entire book to give more examples, but from the link I have provided you get where she is going.

http://books.google.com/books?id=A3M6zct0L50C&printsec=frontcover&dq=meera+nanda+god+market&hl=en&src=bmrr&sa=X&ei=0sHtT72hCYWu6gGxicibCg&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=meera%20nanda%20god%20market&f=false

When I mean separation of temple and state I mean it in the same sense that separation of Church and State is used in the US. When I mean 'temple' I don't mean any one temple, but I mean to say religion. So separation of temple and state I mean that government does not meddle with religious affairs and vice versa. This is not the case IMO. The government has control of over 38000 temples in India, including property, payroll and where to spend the donations.

I will mention more later. I am still not sure about thinking that their concern (about India) is genuine if they call for secularization of Muslim countries. Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens have wanted this for years. Does that mean we are in the same boat as the Islamic nations?

Twilightdance
29 June 2012, 10:45 AM
The government has control of over 38000 temples in India, including property, payroll and where to spend the donations.

I think all Hindus will be greatly overjoyed if Govt stops controlling our temples to fund their own budget deficits, scams, the next Haj subsidy for minorities or pay special allowance to madrassa mullahs (like the CM of WB has promised). Hindus deserve to have the administration of the temples back with them so that funds are no misused. Kerala is perhaps the most anti Hindu state and govt there tries most to control temples most.

Of course in Meera Nanda's strange world exploitation of Hindus by secular (anti hindu) government becomes same as non-separation of church and state in american context [since she has no sense to think of an Indian context with her JNU trained brain]. Only in her world and her brain.

wundermonk
29 June 2012, 11:48 AM
Hesh,

I am unwilling to help you fish whatever you are fishing for. You said you were Indian. Do YOU also live in India? If yes, what are your thoughts on

(1)Haj subsidy
(2)reservation on the basis of caste
(3)Article 370 which gives special status to J&K...non-Muslims are not allowed to settle in the state

Would a Hindu theocratic regime have such policies in place? How do these policies help further the "Hindu" agenda, whatever that may be?

Have a nice thread.

hesh86
29 June 2012, 01:27 PM
@wundermonk,
i think that you have misunderstood me big time. Your arguments are precisely what I was looking for to show that India does NOT have a Hindu theocracy in place.

JaiMaaDurga
29 June 2012, 03:13 PM
Namaste,

Normally I try to avoid pot-stirring, and if this thread gets removed, it will
not upset me- but I found myself unable to remain silent after perusing...

Here is a graphic depiction of myself reading a 1-page example of Nanda-think (http://newhumanist.org.uk/1731/rush-hour-of-the-gods).

:coffee: ...
:headscratch:
:doh:


JAI MATA DI

hesh86
04 July 2012, 10:43 AM
@JaiMaaDurga
This is not pot-stirring. When freedom of religion is being compromised, when we are told (falsely) that believing in something is the root cause of social ills, speaking up is not wrong. I agree with you, that was the exact expression I had when I first read Meera Nanda and when I last read her also.

Sahasranama
04 July 2012, 07:32 PM
Dr. Koenraad Elst has written about Meera Nanda in ten blogposts:

http://koenraadelst.blogspot.nl/2012/05/meera-nanda-against-hinduism-and-its_10.html

This is part 10