झवता पण येत नाही, सोडता पण येत नाही.
हे माझ्या नाम्याची रांड,
अशी कशी ग तू? अशी कशी.
It was through ‘treaties’; modernity came to Bombay. English entrepreneurs were struggling with the monarchy and the pressure of gaining profits gave them nightmares. If an entrepreneur does not secure his profits; it was understood that the state’s laws get stricter for them. Entrepreneurs were not ruling but Britain as a state had started by giving a lot of leeway to these entrepreneurs. East India Company has used the power of its colonial mindset to colonise territories. It all started because of ‘dreaming of dominance’: it contaminated them; infected them. It was all they could think about. Their supremacy already was racist in nature, so they were delusional about their work and convinced themselves and others that they are doing the world a favour by giving it ‘modernity’. Analysing the brilliantly researched BBC show on pirates, Black Sails and my own love for the sea and fisherfolk communities made me curious to find out exactly how modernity threatened geographies, landscapes and over all geopolitics. Trafficking has always helped East India Company; buying and torturing slaves for Gold. But their plan for domination included manipulating castes also and we can see how they have used it conveniently time to time. English academics feel ashamed of what their monarchy has done to India and at the same time they were proud about introducing modernity to the subcontinent. Here, they become delusional aka progressive liberals. Present progressive liberal historians of modern India label Tilak an important leader but conveniently forget he was a Kokanastha Brahman. Tilak was outraged by Bahujans entering the “Sadans”; he asked, “What they will do there? Farming or daily wage labor?” Just after that, the Gandhi era (?) begins as per the same progressive liberal historians. They project Gandhi as a leader who denies the power of hardcore Hinduism, when in fact it was Gandhi who started the dream of Ram Rajya/Hindu Raj/Gram Raj. Both of them were known as the leaders of “The Great Unrest”. And progressive liberals academics of today are also projecting “unrest” in a similar way. Sad, indeed.
Now what is happening in the name of Indian academia is fetishism on Gandhi. But it is delusional as well as progressive liberalism. Swaraj and Gandhi’s assertion is supposedly a form of resistance against the British Raj. But Gandhi himself was a supporter of Hindu Raj yet his lifestyle was an imitation of delusional English progressives. By using polarisation as a tactic; Indian Congress and RSS have used Gandhi time to time. Deshiwaad, (read as upper caste nepotism) with all its conservative practices, and modernity are exact opposites. The sad story of India is that modernity has not been understood in its entirety by caste Hindus and Muslims (Parsis are always there) who actually gained access to it before anybody else. Eventually caste Hindus followed delusional progressive liberalism because the then time period allowed them to do so. The way an Indian academic uses English as a tool, it functions exactly as East India Company meant it to be used in colonised India. Switch to current global scenario: Brexit has happened. Britain will now use its racist consciousness against migrants and inhabitants who differ from the ‘English monarch’. Many will be affected. Our dearest NRI will also have to feel its ‘affect’ through EMIs. It is definitely going to affect the Indian progressive liberalism which is delusional already because of their ‘rhetoric of culture’. One must note that British NRIs have major shares in academia too. Language pragmatism will no longer remain ideological; instead it will be “standardised”. Victimhood advocators will conduct it as a practice in their judgement and root of the problem will not be questioned. Convenience. Getting to the root of any question requires effort and many with control over resources don’t like putting the required effort. Victimhood advocators will also give full marks to themselves as if they are value makers. Ultimately it all boils down to the autonomy of modernity which entrepreneurial Britain has given to victimhood advocators and the English-speaking class. While they are the ones who are hiding modernity by creating distinction and separation within the same class. When Godse killed Gandhi; his fetishism went on doing violence (as if the mental violence started by Gandhi himself is not clear to Progressive liberals) on Bramhins (Read: ब्राम्हणाची कैफियत, 2007); and delusional Gandhi were exposed. Victimhood is being celebrated as an art form by victims themselves. The filtered and aspiring English speakers have appropriated the same movement in the name of assertion. Similarly their autonomy is not eliminating delusional fetishism. Why? Modernity, middle class lifestyle, sanskritisation (don’t have other definition in my vocabulary), upward mobility and Bramhanical values within this fetishism is demanding “urban theology” (left and right academia are both demanding it). The fact that there is so much exploitation within that demand is ignored. That people have so tirelessly worked as per their demand without expecting return is also ignored.
Cant write #FuckPhd for this one. Started falling for PhD again and considering taking it up as work. Negotiation.