@PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew Hindu nationalism should not have a negative connotation. It’s not exclusivist because Hinduism isn’t a religion - rather, it’s a way of life, and the term “Hindu” refer broadly to the people around and east of the Sindhu. This transcends the modern construct of religions.

@Kate_SdE @PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew For “Hindus” - a broad-brush stroke for a people whose culture is underpinned by a knowledge system that provides logical structure for adopters of a plethora of philosophies, “Hindu nationalism” by definition, is inclusive and pluralistic. It gives space to everyone.
@Kate_SdE @PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew If Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Samkhya, Yoga, Purva-Mimamsa, Buddhist and Jain philosophies are studied in comparison with Abrahamic faiths, India’s unique Carl Popper Paradox comes to light. The imposition of a western matrix of secularism on a pluralistic culture has done much harm.
@Kate_SdE @PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew Because the traditions are rooted in universalist philosophies, India gladly hosts followers of non-proselytizing faiths. Supremacist theocratic ideologies find little resonance with the people of the land. To understand “Hindu nationalism,” one has to study Indic philosophy.
@Kate_SdE @PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew Equally, it is important to view history objectively, know the excesses of supremacist invaders/colonizers, and importantly, understand the asymmetries created by the “secular” state which structurally disadvantage the vastly heterogeneous so-called “Hindu” majority.
@Kate_SdE @PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew Purging neocolonialism doesn’t sit will with those who would like to see Indian democracy and electoral outcomes follow Western “liberal” orthodoxies. Due to its culture, India has and always will be liberal, and Hindu nationalism is a tool to iron out disempowering asymmetries.
@Kate_SdE @PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew Note “Hindu majoritarianism” - a term that feeds the “Hindu nationalist” narrative Western research/media, is an oxymoron. Assumptions based on the homogenization of cultures, philosophies and traditions of the people from around and east of the Sindhu, leads to flawed analysis.
@Kate_SdE @PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew When a state of 1.4 billion is realigning itself with pluralism from selective secularism, extrapolating cherry picked incidents into broad narratives is not a robust form of analysis. Digging deeper into doctrines, history and statistics is better when modeling 1.4 billion.
@Kate_SdE @PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew Moreover, India is a civilizational state which has adopted democracy, so an assessment of it must be more rigorous and nuanced than it would be for a small, relatively new nation. The complexities are often overlooked for headlines, creating a structural dissonance.

More from Religion

🌿𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒓𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝒂 𝑺𝒕𝒂𝒓 : 𝑫𝒉𝒓𝒖𝒗𝒂 & 𝑽𝒊𝒔𝒉𝒏𝒖

Once upon a time there was a Raja named Uttānapāda born of Svayambhuva Manu,1st man on earth.He had 2 beautiful wives - Suniti & Suruchi & two sons were born of them Dhruva & Uttama respectively.
#talesofkrishna https://t.co/E85MTPkF9W


Now Suniti was the daughter of a tribal chief while Suruchi was the daughter of a rich king. Hence Suruchi was always favored the most by Raja while Suniti was ignored. But while Suniti was gentle & kind hearted by nature Suruchi was venomous inside.
#KrishnaLeela


The story is of a time when ideally the eldest son of the king becomes the heir to the throne. Hence the sinhasan of the Raja belonged to Dhruva.This is why Suruchi who was the 2nd wife nourished poison in her heart for Dhruva as she knew her son will never get the throne.


One day when Dhruva was just 5 years old he went on to sit on his father's lap. Suruchi, the jealous queen, got enraged and shoved him away from Raja as she never wanted Raja to shower Dhruva with his fatherly affection.


Dhruva protested questioning his step mother "why can't i sit on my own father's lap?" A furious Suruchi berated him saying "only God can allow him that privilege. Go ask him"
If you have a spiritual practice, this would be a good time to double down on it.

If you don’t have a spiritual practice, this wouldn’t be the worst time to start one.

1/x


Thread on why


Do yr spiritual practice. Even when you don't feel like it.

“Hardly does our head begin to ache than we stop going to choir, which won’t kill us either. We stay away 1 day bc our head ached, another bc it was just now aching & 3 more so that it won’t ache again.” Teresa of Avila

Ok: a spiritual practice. Something that you do regularly, and if you do it with the right intention, can transform your relationship to yourself, other people, the world and your place in it and (if this resonates with you) the divine.

Prayer. Meditation. But also: making art. Walks in nature. Going running, for some people. I wrote a whole entire book on parenting as a spiritual practice. Intention matters.

You don’t have to be religious to have one.

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?