India Has No Right to Exist

In the India Is a Shithole piece, James Schipper suggests that India has been free of significant civil strife:

Another thing for which India deserves credit is that, despite being one of the most multinational states in the world, it has managed to avoid serious internal conflicts. In terms of national composition, India should not be compared with the US but with Europe, which is of course divided in about 40 different states.

This is not true. Kashmir has been on fire since 1968 or so. There are now 500,000 troops locking the place down, and every day, another young Kashmiri or two at least is killed.

India was born in blood and sin, like the Americas, Australia, New Zealand, Israel and various settler-colonial states.

The difference is that the Indian state, incredibly, attacked her very own people from the start of the Indian state enterprise, and has been at war with them ever since. In this sense, India is an utterly failed state like Myanmar or Indonesia, two other former colonial states who have been battling insurgencies from the start from parts of the former colony who never wanted to join the new state.

India has about as much right to exist in its current form as Myanmar does. India is a failed state. It’s has failed to properly rule or provide for its people, and tens of millions of its citizens never consented to join the new state in the first place, but were dragged in kicking and screaming amidst slaughters.

Parents who can’t raise their children get their kids taken away. India’s children are its nations and peoples, whom it can’t and won’t care for because its ruling class is negligent and doesn’t care, like a crack-addicted Mom. Hence, India has no right to rule the peoples of the Northeast, Kashmir and Punjab and the Indian state in its current form should be dissolved as surely as Israel should be.

The Northeast has been in rebellion, often armed rebellion, nearly from Day One. There have been scores of armed groups fighting the state in that region, and many are still active. Bottom line is that India has no right to rule the Northeast, and as India is a cesspool anyway, why should the NE people be forced to live in a sewer? Let them secede and negotiate their way to modernity.

There is now a huge Maoist rebellion going on the East. There are easily 100,000 Maoists, and they have millions of supporters.

There was a huge rebellion in the Punjab a while back. It’s over, but it was nasty.

There is a continuous low level conflict going on with India’s Muslims, who regularly set off horrible bomb attacks on India’s Hindu cities. The Hindus are now responding by bombing India’s Muslim cities. Further, there have been many cases of inter-religious violence, mostly pogroms of Muslims by India’s Hindus and sometime riots by put-upon Indian Muslims. These pogroms started with the birth of the Indian state and the splitting of Pakistan, and to be honest, have never stopped.

In addition, there have been hundreds of killings of Christians in the East by Hindus, including burnings of churches and entire towns, pogroms, etc. This is ongoing as I write this.

Please follow and like us:
Tweet 20

18 thoughts on “India Has No Right to Exist”

  1. Hey Robert, great idea!! With India dissolved, maybe China can stop worrying about a potential spoiler state to its south.

  2. Basically, the story of India is the story of foreign domination and conquest – usually by a numerically insignificant group of invaders lording it over untold millions of Indians.
    The rot set in during the muslim conquests of the better part of India (ie the north).This caused the fatal fracture of hindu versus muslim in India that persists today.After centuries of muslim domination and humiliation of hindus came others, and lastly the British, who merely stepped into an infrastructure left by the moghulls.

    1. Thx Freud, this is an excellent comment that seems to sum up the extreme rage of the average Indian/Hindu nationalist.

      But of course. An endless domination by the enemy and a continuous attack on one’s culture – Indian Hinduism. And the sheer humiliation of a numerically smaller group of enemies – British or Muslim – who conquered and then lorded it over vastly greater numbers of Indian Hindus. From this endless humiliation comes the near-psychotic, Nazi-like nationalist rage of Indian Hindus.

      It all makes sense. Thx for this!

      1. That actually does explain a lot. I have noticed the almost pathological insecurity of Indians in the U.S manifest itself in all kinds of ways.

    2. I’m sorry Freud, much of what you’ve said is utterly untrue.
      For starters, this entire notion of dividing Indian history into the 3 stages of -Hinduism-Muslims-Brits was a colonialist interpretation first postulated by James Stuart Mill (father of JS Mill) as pointed out by Romila Thapar. Sadly, Hindutva facists still cling to this outdated reading of India’s history to justify their hatred against Muslims and Christians today. You cannot compartmentalize India’s history and it would do you well to remember the continuity aspect of history as TS Eliot pointed out.

      This caused the fatal fracture of hindu versus muslim in India that persists today.

      This is rubbish! There never was a cohesive ‘Hindu’ identity in India, ever. The ‘Hindu’ identity was artificially created by the Brits as they homogenized thousands of India’s diverse cults under one artificial label. They did this to differentiate Non Muslim Indians from Muslim Indians in an attempt to map out India’s complex social landscape. India’s vedic religion is a pagan one and as such does not articulate a clear and coherent world view and niether does it confer upon its practitioners a clear and indivisible identity. Furthermore, India’s Hindus were far from ‘humiliated.’ This is another bogus Hindutva myth. More often than not, they got along quite well with one another and have peaceably lived side by side in the same villages for hundreds of years. India’s Muslims are very Hinduised. When the Muslim Afghan king Babur invaded India in the 15th century, his greatest threat came from the opposition of Indian Muslim King Hasan Khan Mewati (who I think was a Muslim Rajput). The Taj Mahal incorporates both Hindu as well and Muslim motifs in a perfect and harmonious symetry which reflected the Moghul’s commitment to a tolerant philosophy. The popular Bhakti movement of the 8th century saw a great deal of cooperation between Hindus, Muslims and eventually sikhs (much later) as they jointly collaborated on theology and devotion to God. The wiki page of the Bhakti movement is undoubtedly composed by a retarded Hindutwadi, so I instead present you with the more neutral information (although it has a religious tone) of this Sikh website:

      and lastly the British, who merely stepped into an infrastructure left by the moghulls.
      Again untrue. The Moghuls did not nearly have the extensive bureaucracy that the Brits had in place. Nether did they play any divide and conquer games along sectarian lines. The Brits embodied the very worst aspects of capitalism because there was nobody to oppose them. They systematically drained India’s economic capital while implementing protectionism to safeguard their own domestic industrial growth. Ironic how western elites chastise third world nations for implementing the very same protectionism today, but I digress. Hindu/Muslim relations are far more complex then the shallow and self serving rhetoric excreted by Hindutva jokers today.

  3. Seems like there’s this problem in much of Africa, except that there’s a more even balance of parties involved there?

    That is, there no hegemonic group in most African countries, just tribes fighting it out and whoever happens to be in power sends their opponents to the wall. Unfortunately for Indian minorities there more frequently happens to be a clear minority.

    A more similar situation maybe in China with its hill tribes* and Tibetans and ethnic Mongolians and Uyghurs, where there’s a clear core and peripheral people who are subordinated (at least in terms of national determination) and killed in the name of state security. Maybe this is a specious analogy though. Should China be dissolved (or do they get a pass)?

    *though they’ve fewer than Burma and thus catch less flack for it than the Bamar or even the Thais.

  4. Actually Muslim conquests of India started centuries prior to the Mughals when Afghans and Turks invaded Northern parts India in the 12th century and Muslims have been part of the Indian DNA ever since. There was a constant stream of Suffis, for example, that brought Islamic culture to India, orders sent from Iran. The number of Muslims coming into India was far far greater than the number of British that ruled India because the Muslims came in a constant stream for around 5/6 centuries.

    Also, its fair say, the Muslims had their biggest impact culturally and genetically in the part of India that is modern day Pakistan (formerly in the Northwest India region). Pakistan was of course the first area of India these invaders would have come into crossing the Afghan/Pakistan border.

  5. Dear Robert

    I know about the conflict in Kashmir and that India is not entitled to that area. Still, fewer than 2% of India’s population lives in Kashmir. The other 98% has been relatively quiescent.
    The Indian state can’t be blamed for the sectarian bloodbaths that accompanied decolonization. Since independence, there has been no major bloodletting between Sikhs, Muslims and Hindus in India. The fathers of Indian independence wanted and created a secular state. The fact that there are many religious fanatics in India can’t be blamed on the Indian state, no more than the Indian state can’t be blamed for the caste thinking of so many Indians or the Chinese Communist Party can be blamed for the widespread Chinese preference for male offspring.
    Given the religious divisions and the large number of nations in India, we can’t say that the Indian state has done so badly in terms of maintaining internal peace. India is a federal state, and it has done its best to draw its internal borders right. As much as possible, they tried to make linguistic and provincial borders coincide.
    I’m beginning to believe that you have a certain animosity toward India, which stems from your strong aversion to Hinduism. I don’t like Hinduism either, but there is more in India than reactionary Hinduism.

    Regards. James

  6. Also Robert, we musn’t forget that caste (ie race) is at the root of everything in India.
    I’m sure you don’t need me to remind you that the earliest and perhaps greatest of India’s conquerors were the Aryans ( a fully white Eurasian people kin to most Europeans), 2000 years before Christ.
    Their legacy, the caste system, is still the unwritten subtext about everything Indian.Basically, the caste system was apartheid 4000 years before the Dutch, its real meaning and intent was to preserve Aryan genetics from perceived ‘contamination’ from the aboriginal indians, who, intially at least were of a totally different genetic stock to the Aryans – they were and are related to such groups aas the Andamanese.This original Indian stock (though I’m simplifying here greatly) is the substratum to the whole Indian population and it has even seeped into most ‘Aryan’ castes after 4000 years of co-existence.
    After the Aryans came othe invaders from the north, Arabs, Persians, Turks, Mongols, Uzbeks etc.
    All of these people were physically stronger, tougher, braver and better looking than the aborigal Indian stock.This has heightened the inferiority complex.

  7. Hi Robert ,

    I had thought that you were someone who were very interested in genetics and how people moved .. but it seems u r just an average run of the mill white supremacist … how are your rantings any different from those of the rabid hindu nationalists that you deride and that too without trying to understand the any other person’s POV … All brahmins according to you are mean , nasty people who have nothing but been brutal all their lives and through the ages … That is like me saying that all American whites are slave traders … and even if India is a shithole noone is inviting you there , no one is asking you for any aid so why are you bothered..

    Whatever it is ours and we will deal with it.. We do not need to have this continuous diatribe about the ills that infest this place … Those are ours and we have done it in the past and we will do it again … You do’nt need to worry … Islamic invasions killed millions british ruled for years … but we survived … and we will …

    Also please dont denigerate something that you do not understand .. I do not know Christianity but I assume that if so many millions follow it everywhere it is sure to have many good things … Please at least assume that the millions who follow hinduism in a nation that is democracy are not all mindless zombies doing so under duress .. we are a functioning democracy not a theocracy … and we are not dumb definitely

    Personally i do not care if you know hinduism or not nor do i have any interest in getting you to like it .. Just that rabid, biased outbursts take away from the good work that you are doing ..

    Hope you understand ..

    1. I like Indian people. I hate India. I support the Maoists and various secessionists. Who would want to be part of India anyway? It’s a failed state. Let Kashmir go. Let the NE go. And God willing, the Maoists will win and rule India and give it some of the governance it deserves.

      Actually, I have Brahmin friends. I know they are not all bad people. I have nothing good to say about Hinduism due to caste. If Hinduism can’t exist without caste, the religion must go. I am actually very interested in your land, and I regard Indian culture as very wise. In fact, I practice yoga. In particular I practice something called Kundalini yoga.

      We can learn a lot from Indian wisdom. After all, the Buddha came from there too. They have an ancient culture and have had 1000’s of years of thinking about stuff to try to figure things out.

      I don’t have much good to say about India’s Muslims. It’s sickening the way they have been bombing your cities.

      But I truly despise the Hindutva. This is nothing but fascism. And Indian nationalism is malign. It’s like a poison. A truly dangerous thing, dangerous to the whole world. There is something terribly wrong with Indian nationalists. Something monstrous and frightening.

      1. Robert performing Yoga!!!

        I’d like to see this.

        Reminds me of the days when nubile young white chicks joined Ashrams and had their holy of holies duly reamed by the Yogi or the head guy.

      2. “We can learn a lot from Indian wisdom. After all, the Buddha came from there too. They have an ancient culture and have had 1000′s of years of thinking about stuff to try to figure things out”

        Thousands of years of thought…..and they still can’t get rid of that smell.

  8. India has every right to rule Kashmir when after independence voted to stay with India and since its inception Pakistan has support strife in India aligned with Britain supporting separatism and terrorism in the Indian controlled province. In 89 Pakistani trained terrorist ethnically cleansed about 300,000 ethnic Kashmiri’s (forgot what the ethnic group is called).

    Even before segregation of India into India and Pakistan these territories have always been Indian.

    A Taliban like regime controls the Pakistani controlled Kashmiri province.

    What are your thoughts on Winston Churchill?

  9. true… not sure who said this, but it still rings true: Corruption is worse than prostitution. The latter might endanger the morals of an individual, the former invariably endangers the morals of the entire country.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)