• supersolid_snake@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    10 months ago

    I have some devastating news for the hindutva fascists (not Indians in general): you will never be white or part of the west. Union carbide will dump chemicals on your land, Cargill will sell your farmers one time seed, metro PCS will make racist ass commercials about your accent. The only reason they are pumping you up is so you go fight china for them. You are part of the global south, embrace it. You are one of us.

    • mughaloid@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Pakistan , India and bangladesh can never truly integrate into anti colonial and anti imperialist movement due to various reasons , specially the religious fundamentalism embedded into our culture.

      • supersolid_snake@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Pakistan can’t due to its elite (mainly its military being a complete puppet of the west and looting the country along with their civilian facade). Of course fundamentalism plays some part as the military utilizes it to a great extent, but a lot of it has to do with the country’s resources being looted and its money stored in offshore accounts.

        I can’t speak for India or Bangladesh. I will say that the caste system is a detriment to development and that is definitely a form religious fundamentalism.

        • mughaloid@lemmygrad.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Muslims in India and Bangladesh don’t have much caste system but Indian hindus have. Religious fundamentalism has played a crucial on the downfall of secularism and rationality in South Asia due to the funding of wahabi movements from Saudis and Qataris.

          • supersolid_snake@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            10 months ago

            Oh yeah, Muslim and other nations primarily were gravitating towards left wing socialism post independence but the west and their puppets made sure there was a reactionary tilt. But let’s not give colonization and compradors a bail out by blaming only religion. The Pakistan army and elites don’t have a religion problem, they have a greed problem.

            • mughaloid@lemmygrad.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Pakistan was pretty much dead when it was pronounced that it will be Islamic republic and Urdu would be the national language. Pakistan is much more diverse and beautiful than what political parties , ulema made out to be. Pakistan has baloch , punjabi , sindhi (the land of sufis and indus valley civilization) and has numerous languages but in the long term military dictatorship and religious fanaticism has prevented pakistan to become a country of unity in diversity . Yes , Indians have those problems too but in Pakistan much of regionalism was suppressed at the start and you can see the departure of bangladesh because of that.

              • supersolid_snake@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                Bangladesh got separated because bhutto and his generals were power hungry, greedy pieces of shit. It had nothing to do with religion or culture. If they had just respected the elections, all that bloodshed could have been avoided. I am not saying religion isn’t a factor but let’s stop acting like little bill mahers here.

                Edit: the bhutto family is still fucking up Pakistani politics and development with their greed.

                To add: Those compradors ousting Imran Khan in the coup had nothing at all to do with religion and culture. All the elites saw the social welfare programs and corruption being curtailed (even 1%) and they got antsy and helped America do a coup.

                • mughaloid@lemmygrad.mlOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  I am not fan of any religion and you know very well Islamic Republic of Pakistan was the foundational problem for East bengal and Pakistan itself. You can gloss over the religion part but Jinnah thought declaring Urdu as national language will bring pious Muslims closer to Islam or will have a national identity. Even now Baloch people are suppressed there. You cannot build a sound society when you declare a society will be built on a particular religion not by pragmatic and secular law. You can watch Com.Taimur Rehman of Pakistan for his ideas and thoughts.

                  • supersolid_snake@lemmygrad.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    10 months ago

                    I have watched taimur rehman stuff before. In fact when I stopped listening to him was when he said the recent coup had no US involvement on Luna Oi’s show and then the leaked memos came out that they did. He is a bhutto fan boy and that family sucks. So do the Sharifs, Zardaris, other elites and the military. Feudalist are not socialists, sorry not sorry bhutto family.

                    Is religion a particularly strong factor there? Yes, not the only one. Religious parties never win in elections there though and even trump pretended to read the Bible to kiss evangelical ass here. That’s just how it goes.

                    Did Imran Khan use religious principles to garner support for social welfare programs and speak up for the oppressed? Sure did, it’s a country full of Muslims after all. Did he give Sikhs access to their holy sites in a gesture of tolerance? Yep.

                    Did he win an election free and fair despite being pushtoon, a minority in Pakistan? Yep, and he is even further in the polls now despite tens of thousands of political arrests and military crackdowns. He even wins in Punjab province. People will put aside their differences there for a leader of good conscience, efficacy aside (even his fans admit he made mistakes, but he is a decent person).

                    Is Urdu a national language there? Yes, so is English actually. It has more English speakers than England even.

                    While I am not disagreeing with you 100%, I don’t want to condemn pakistanis as too religious/ culturally bias to have better lives. It would take more than a few families and the military stripped of their wealth and power there but it would be a great start.

                    Edit: I also wanted to make it clear that I am glad we are having this discussion as we both clearly care about the country. No animosity on my part.

      • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        That sort of attitude was ingrained into these places by the British, do you really want to just do what the British want you to do?

        • mughaloid@lemmygrad.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          its a wrong theory and ahistorical. Religious tensions was there and it will be for many years to come. Religion brings problems and anti materialism which is a false consciousness

          • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            How so? Or maybe I’m not making my point clear. The British didn’t invent these tensions, but they did exacerbate them as much as they could, and the modern situation is a result of that far more than previous tensions.

            I agree that religion is as anti-materialist as it gets, but people are religious and will fight for their religious beliefs, you can’t just make people stop being religious overnight. I can’t imagine a truly communist society having religion really, but it’s a process that takes generations of people slowly losing the need for religion in their lives, the USSR’s attempts at suppressing religion were ultimately unsuccessful and those same religious leaders would often work with enemies of the communists to undermine and overthrow them because they saw them as a threat to their power. Unfortunately it has to be done delicately because religion is such a powerful force for reaction.

            • mughaloid@lemmygrad.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              USSR was very successful in their attempts. I recently watched a video from Uzbekistan in 1970s there was neither islamic fundamentalism or closures of mosques. Don’t iterate the liberal propaganda that campaign against religion was a failure in USSR. The return happened due to the capitalism and chauvinists in every region of ex USSR states.

            • mughaloid@lemmygrad.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              10 months ago

              Bro there was saint Kabir, Meera, sufis etc. In their poems they always had written about the animosity and hatred between hindus and Muslims. British just sparked the tension in 20th century by aligning themselves with Hindus and Muslim fundamentalists. But obviously the partition was inevitable. There was either of the chauvinism, it’s Islamic supremacist or Hindus. It was just a good moment in history of India that Nehru was socialist and secular oriented. Even his colleagues were pro hindu chauvinists like Sardar Patel and etc.

      • sooper_dooper_roofer [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        This is a Gangetic problem, not an Indian problem

        South India and Maharashtra have far less fundamentalism (I’m not trying to be chauvinist here, I’ve heard this from multiple non-desis who only learned what these provinces were after visiting India)

        There’s a strange type of “exclusively punch down + religious fundamentalism” brainworm complex that peaks in Northern India, including Bengal. It resembles the right-wing rhetoric that I see from certain Latinos

        • mughaloid@lemmygrad.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          lol , no it is because in Maharashtra and in South India there was a anti vedic movement (Periyar , Ambedkar , Ligyayat , Joytiba Phule ) where religious reforms were carried out but I won’t give these states free pass . Maha is ruled by Sena type extremists and TN has considerable casteism. Its a whitewash to say south India doesn’t have religious problem.

    • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      I have some devastating news for the hindutva fascists (not Indians in general): you will never be white or part of the west.

      Remains to be seen, it is a very fluid composition