Last updateThu, 10 Aug 2017 9am

Justifying Terror: The Useful Idiots Of Islamism

There is an old habit in the media and intellectual space to project terrorists less as murderers and more as ordinary people who were just dealt a traumatic past.

Not only is this a grave insult to the innocents who lose their lives, and their families, but also a shocking leeway to one of the biggest threats to world peace today.

Islamic terrorism has been one of the biggest threats to world peace in recent times. In 2017 alone, there have been over 500 Islamic terror attacks in the world and more than 3,700 people have died as a result, and the counter is still ticking.

Yet, there are very few people in the world who have the courage to acknowledge the elephant in the room. Theresa May is a rare world leader who has dared to call Islamic terror ‘evil’ in no uncertain terms. However, the media and intellectuals are busy drumming up creative excuses to justify jihad. According to some, terrorism is only caused by economic factors. When terrorists kill innocent people, they are doing it because they are unemployed, poor and have had a traumatic childhood. By carefully avoiding the qualifier ‘Islamic’ to describe the terror attacks, these intellectuals are actually helping further the cause of Islamic fundamentalism.

Many people have used the term ‘Useful Idiots of Islamism’ to describe such apologists of Islamic Terrorism. It is said that Lenin had first coined the term ‘useful idiots’ to scornfully describe the Western apologists of communist violence. The term aptly describes the modern-day apologists of Islamic terror, who seek to simplify the brutalities of terror attacks by reducing them to economic crimes.


Ten Habits of Highly Successful Indian Liberal Intellectuals

Ten Habits of Highly Successful

1) Every time you come across an article, blog post or anything that has the word ‘Hindu’ in it, describe the post as ‘vile and disgusting’, regardless of the actual context. Express your hatred for Hinduism constantly and diligently, in ways that can be subtle or obvious depending upon the context. However, do not forget to mention in the same breath that you ‘respect’ Hindus.

2) Always ask, ‘But but but, what about 2002?’ in any TV panel discussion, even if the topic of discussion is about the sexual life of the Gorillas of upper Congo. Remember the golden rule. All communal riots are equal, but 2002 riots are more equal than others.

3) Write a blog about Modi. Make liberal use of words like ‘vile monster’, ‘butcher’, ‘autocrat,’ ‘Nazi,’ ‘Hiter,’  ‘kristalnacht’ and ‘1933’.  Attend anti-Modi seminars at the India International Centre and talk passionately about ‘malnutrition in Gujarat’ over a laden plate of canapés and glasses of free champagne.

4) Occasionally, throw a scrap of carefully constructed praise at the ’ tolerant spirit of secular Hindus’ and pander to their egos. This is very essential if you want to present yourself as a ‘liberal humanist’.

5) Learn to do nimble spiritual somersaults depending upon the context. Sometimes, you might refer to yourself as an agnostic, at other times, you can call yourself an atheist, but always mention that you are ‘spiritual, not religious’ – whatever that means!


Britain betrays its Hindus, Jains and Sikhs

Britain betrays its Hindus

Britain’s Hindus, Sikhs and Jains, its peaceful Dharmic communities, are faced with the worst historic setback they have ever suffered on British soil. The threat of anti-caste judicial activism in Britain and the wider world beyond is now almost certain to become a dreaded reality. Predictably, the incumbent Conservative government, which had pretended sympathy over the threat of an ill-conceived anti caste law for electoral reasons, is readying to betray them. And what it has done, in usual inimitable style, is to create a smokescreen to mislead the affected communities with a false sense of security. It has initiated a sham consultation to review the desirability of such legal provisions against alleged caste discrimination. But behind the scenes the government and its agents are engaged in a sordid approach to community leaders in order to persuade them to accept a legal regime that would be profoundly detrimental to the interests of the community.

The consultation document is so shoddily crafted it implies a lack of respect for the affected communities. It contains casual inconsistencies and missteps. Worst of all, the government seems to have reached a decision already on what the outcome of the consultation will be, in advance of it. It bespeaks withering disregard for people of Indian origin while British ministers serenade gullible Indians about the merits of free trade with the UK. The consultation document artificially differentiates two aspects of the singular assault against Dharmic communities as supposed alternatives. The first is legislative sanction to create a civil offence of caste discrimination. The second is to allow the courts to continue deciding, as they are already doing, alleged caste discrimination complaints by covering them under existing provisions on racial bigotry.


Why I am scared of liberals

Legendary newsman Walter Cronkite once said “I think being a liberal, in the true sense, is being non-doctrinaire, non-dogmatic, non-committed to a cause – but examining each case on its merits.” And that was the kind of liberalism I fell in love with during my college days. Twenty odd years later, I have managed to take positions on various issues facing our society today, and almost without exception, I have found myself at odds with those who call themselves liberals. I have steadily moved from identifying myself as liberal to being alarmed at some of their stands, to complete disillusionment relatively rapidly in the last five years or so.