Bijou Drains
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I had no intention of returning to this discussion, but I felt I really had no option but to express my concern and shock that a member of the party would be placing articles on the SPGB forum from such right wing hate promoting media sources as those placed above. As forum members may be aware there is a massive campaign of anti Muslim and Hindu Nationalism going on in India at the moment, orchestrated by Modi and the Hindu Nationalist BJB. This had had dire consequences for many Muslims with lynching and other attacks on Muslim families. Part of the Goebbels style approach is to create false stories about Muslims and them attacking inocent families to provoke anti Muslim feeling and attacks on other religios groups within India. The following story in the Guardian gives a little flavour of this:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/20/mobs-killing-muslims-india-narendra-modi-bjp
And more from Couner Currents.
The source of one of the links “Opindia” has written articles claiming that Hindu children are being sacrificed in Muslim ceremonies (similar Blood Libel and WIlliam of Norwich, etc. have long formed the basis of anti semetic propaganda). Stop Funding Hate a British social media campaign, urged organisations to withdraw their advertising from OpIndia in May 2020 after the website published an article asserting that businesses should be able to declare that they do not hire Muslims. The head of the campaign, Richard Wilson, said that “OpIndia is becoming internationally notorious for its hateful and discriminatory coverage” and that the campaign has “rarely seen such overt advocacy of discrimination on religious grounds“.
Another of the sources quoted The Times of India, is noted for its practice of accepting paid news stories from politicians and also was caught on camera as part of an undercover sting operation agreeing to promote Hindutva content through the group’s many media properties for a proposed spend of ₹500 crore, some of which the client said could only be paid with black money.
For those who are not aware of it Hidutva has been described by the The Indian “Marxist” economist and political commentatoPrabhat Patnaik as “almost fascist in the classical sense“. He states that Hindutva movement is based on “class support, methods and programme“. According to Patnaik, Hindutva has the following fascist ingredients: “an attempt to create a unified homogeneous majority under the concept of “the Hindus”; a sense of grievance against past injustice; a sense of cultural superiority; an interpretation of history according to this grievance and superiority; a rejection of rational arguments against this interpretation; and an appeal to the majority based on Race and Masculinity.”
Mutual Aid I know you have your views on animal “rights” but are these really the people you want to ally yourself with???? If so you should think shame!
I would hate to think what our comrades in India would think of such postings.
Genuine question, L Bird (congratulations on the Championship by the way), when you say “Even Engels recognised that ‘matter’ was a social product.”, do you mean that Engles recognised the concept and cognitive understandings of matter were a social product and an interplay between the idealist (idea of matter) and the materialist (whatever it was that gave rise to the idea)
A beef ban sounds good to me, Bijou.
Let’s hope the beef capitalists are always kept frustrated in India and don’t ever get the horrendous mass murder of millions of cows
So the Hindus are fine, you can insight mass murder, pogroms, religious oppression and nationalism, as long as you don’t hurt the lickle fwuffy bunnies.
Well your entitled to your opinion, I’m off to gut a pheasant.
The caste system, which was an Aryan imposition on Hinduism and not native.
It was contained in the Vedic texts, how far back do you want to go????
I think the clue to your feelings about Hinduism is “Hinduism is standing in the way of the beef capitalists”
(Irony alert) Yup, I can clearly see the link to the Quakers, right bunch of violent murderous bastards, that lot.
“The elitism is often that practised by party members, who look down their noses on the masses who are as they are now, today, their beliefs, cultures, customs, religions. Such members talk about Leninist elitism, yet disdain everything that doesn’t fit with their Marxism, yet knowing very little about anything else. Millennia of Hinduism’s existence and development and diversity for a start!”
You accuse others of being elitists who look down their noses, yet here you are looking down your nose at those who “know very little about anything else”. Bit of the kettle calling the pot a dirty arse. Also making the presumption that others know very little about anything else is a pretty dangerous path to go off on, you often find that the others know far more than you credit them with.
And many Hindus, as I say above, don’t worship anyone, just revere life,
Some information about the Hindu Caste System from a Hindu website:
The Hindu caste system is unique in the world, but resembles in some ways Plato’s ideal society of philosophers, warriors and commoners. A caste is a division of society based on occupation and family lineage. Hindu caste system recognized four distinct classes or divisions among people based on these criteria and enforced it through a rigid code of conduct that was specific to each class and rooted in the dharmashastras (law books) of the later Vedic period. The four main castes recognized by traditional Hindu society based primarily on hereditary occupation are mentioned below.
- Brahmins. They are the priestly class, who are entitled to study the Vedas, perform rites and rituals for themselves and for others and obliged to observe the sacraments. They are the middle men between gods and men. The act as temple priests and invoke gods on behalf of others. They are expected to show exemplary behavior and spend their lives in the pursuit of divine knowledge and preservation of the traditions. According to Manu, the law maker, a Brahmin was an incarnation of dharma (sacred tradition), born to serve and protect the dharma. He belonged to the excellent of the human race, endowed with intelligence and knowledge to attain Brahman. He was the highest on earth, the lord of all created beings. Whatever that existed in the world was the property of a Brahmana and he was entitled to all.
- Kshatriyas. They are the warrior class, who are commanded (by tradition) to protect the people, bestow gifts to the Brahmins, offer sacrifices to gods and ancestors, study the Vedas, dispense justice, and abstain themselves from sensual pleasures. Manu laid down that it was a king’s duty to protect his kingdom and his people. He had something in himself of the gods such Indra, Vayu, Yama, Surya, Varuna, Moon and Kubera. A king should not be despised even if he was an infant. His authority should not be questioned except when he ignored his duties in supporting and protecting Brahmins. The king had the right to punish, but he must be fair in his punishment. It was king’s responsibility to protect the caste system and the social order and lavish the priests with generous gifts at every opportunity.
- Vaisyas: They are the merchant and peasant classes, who are expected to tend cattle, offer sacrifices, study the Vedas, trade, lend money and cultivate the land. They had the right to perform and participate in certain Vedic rituals but they were not allowed to marry women of higher castes.
- Shudras : The are the labor class, whose only duty is to serve the other three castes. They were not required to observe any Vedic rituals or samskaras except a few. They were not allowed to study the Vedas or even hear the sacred chants. They were not allowed to eat food in the company of higher castes or marry their women.
- Chandalas : The lowest of the Shudras were called chandalas or the impure ones. They were treated as untouchables because of their gory religious practices, penchant for sacrifices, magical rites and unclean habits. In ancient times they were not allowed to enter a village or city during day time or walk in the same street where men of other castes walked. Even their shadow was considered impure and their very sight as a bad omen. So they lived mostly on the fringes of society, unknown and uncared for, following some esoteric religion of their own and working mostly in the graveyards and cremation grounds or as hunters, butchers and professional cleaners of human waste.
A clear demonstration of the class based nature of Hinduism
I presume our comrades in India have enough trouble dealing with the fallout of religion in the sub continent without members adding comfort to religious practices
There again, this, apart from the support of class rule (joining national armies) does not necessarily imply Bijou’s conclusion.
Socialists too believe in self-defence.
So what you are saying is that what I have said, apart from the bit about class rule, doesn’t support my conclusion. So, just to be clear, seeing as I clearly used the example of Jain’s supporting class rule as the keystone of my argument, that what you are saying is that apart from the key piece of evidence I used, my evidence does not support my conclusion. This must mean that the key piece of evidence I used does, therefore, support my argument. I’ve got to say that in teerms of a counter argument, that’s not the strongest I’ve ever come across. If I were you I wouldn’t consider a carreer as a barrister.
Also I never said that I was a pacifist, I am quite happy to get stuck in if necessary, and to be honest probably sometimes when it’s probably not . My conclusion was based on countering your assertion that:
The only religion I believe has never terrorised anyone is Jainism.
It is clear that like all religions they are motiviated by ensuring that the best interests of their “spiritual leaders” and usually work in the interests of which ever section of the ruling class they think best placed to keep them in a position of power over their devotees. If you can explain to me how you can become a monarch with generals and soldiers without terrorising somebody I will be all ears. The conclusions I have come to stand, i.e. that your belief that the Jains have never terrorised anyone is wrong and also that the Jains, like all of the other religions I have encountered, are full of shit.
The only religion I believe has never terrorised anyone is Jainism.
The Jain scholar Jinadattasuri wrote during a time of Muslim destruction of temples and persecution that “anybody engaged in a religious activity who was forced to fight and kill somebody would not lose any spiritual merit but instead attain deliverance“.
So the ususal “place in heaven offer” for the faithful who obey their spiritual leaders in order to keep the spiritual leaders in ongoing indolence.
Jains agree with Hindus that violence in self-defence can be justified,and they agree that a soldier who kills enemies in combat is performing a legitimate duty. Jain communities accepted the use of military power for their defence, there were Jain monarchs, military commanders, and soldiers.
So again a religion which is essentially a load more hypocritical bollocks
And many Hindus, as I say above, don’t worship anyone, just revere life, as atomists and materialists. With them, religion is as it was for the Romans: scrupulousness.
Of course, there are the violent and ignorant too, but they are not typical of the immense majority
I suppose (irony alert) you mean that apart from the Hyderabad masacre of 1948 when up to 40,000 Muslims were killed by Hindus, the Neillie Masacre of nearly 4,000 muslims by Hindus in 1983, the 1984 Anti Sikh riots where 8,000 were killed and the 1,000s of others killed in Hindu masacres, the cattle herders who are regularly assasinated, and the ongoing growth or right wing Hindu nationalism, etc. etc. Hinduism is a religion to be admired as non violent.
Well at least the Civil War is finally over 99 years to the day after it first started!
I do think it odd that the Green Party took nearly 8 hours to count 2,000 votes? that’s a rate of just over 4 a minute and a reported 76% in favour.
It’s especially strange seeing as a reported 80% of the 195 Northern Irish Green Party members who voted, voted against forming a government.
That would mean that 39 Northern members voted in favour of coalition and 156 against. That would mean of the 1805 Southern members 1,520 voted for and only 285 against. Strange that there should be such a difference of opinion between Northern and Southern members????? Perhaps there were a Mr and Mrs Shenanigan were at the count?
When you lift from the bottom, everybody rises. Instead of “trickle-down,” we start with the bottom up.
I think views like this are at the root of the identity politics falacy. If we lift someone up, then someone will necessarily fall down o replace them. If we equalise the chances of getting financial riches under a capitalist system we therefore must by definition equalise the chances of getting financial poverty. In a system based up on competition we can’t all be winners, there needs to be losers. I don’t object to fairness and equality of opportunity, but even if all of the equality legislation in place and proposed was put in place and worked, all it would mean is that instead of having a disproportionate number of BAME people in abject poverty, there would be a fully ethnically proportional mix of people in abject poverty.
I’d rather work to get rid of the cause of abject poverty, capitalism, than attempt to find a fair version of capitalism.
The same argument that used to be used in Northern Ireland applies, if you’re a protestant worker you get to live in a better quality slum than a catholic worker. If your a white worker, you get to live in a better quality slum than a black worker
Well that’s another contributer to your thread you have lost due to your humourless, self righteous attitude.
Self-righteousnessSelf-righteousness is a feeling or display of moral superiority derived from a sense that one’s beliefs, actions, or affiliations are of greater virtue than those of the average person. Self-righteous individuals are often intolerant of the opinions and behaviours of others.In contrastFrom the Cambridge dictionary:Vulgar:not in the style preferred by the upper classes of society😈Btw, i’ve relayed, Bijou, your vulgar retort to the beautiful quote of Anatole France to my friends as an example of my Marxist forum experience when the subject is nonhuman animals.
<hr />
Which translates as “I’ve told the teacher on you!”.
I think you would find you had better responses to your point of view if you tried a less sanctimonious, holier than thou and humourless approach to your postings. As my mother used to say, “you’ll catch more flies with sugar than you will with vinegar, son”
“When Barrington got round to the back of the platform, he found the man with the scarred face standing alone and gloomily silent in the shadow. Barrington gave him one of the Socialist leaflets, which he took, and after glancing at it, put it in his coat pocket without making any remark.
‘I hope you’ll excuse me for asking, but were you not formerly a Socialist?’ said Barrington.
Even in the semi-darkness Barrington saw the other man flush deeply and then become very pale, and the unsightly scar upon his forehead showed with ghastly distinctiveness.
‘I am still a Socialist: no man who has once been a Socialist can ever cease to be one.’
‘You seem to have accomplished that impossibility, to judge by the work you are at present engaged in. You must have changed your opinions since you were here last.’
‘No one who has been a Socialist can ever cease to be one. It is impossible for a man who has once acquired knowledge ever to relinquish it. A Socialist is one who understands the causes of the misery and degradation we see all around us; who knows the only remedy, and knows that that remedy–the state of society that will be called Socialism–must eventually be adopted; is the only alternative to the extermination of the majority of the working people; but it does not follow that everyone who has sense enough to acquire that amount of knowledge, must, in addition, be willing to sacrifice himself in order to help to bring that state of society into being.”
