So correct me if I am wrong but my understanding is that islamophobia in the Indian subcontinent is a continuation of discrimination against the lower castes, as a lot of Muslims there are lower caste people who converted over, right?
> Most of India's 140 million Muslims are descended from local converts. Many of them converted to Islam to escape Hindu upper-caste oppression.
The idea of a Hindu supremacist movement feels incredibly idiotic. Like even if you hate Islam, you must acknowledge that the reason these people are Muslim is they saw no other way to escape oppression under Hinduism.
Yes. Historians believe that Buddhism was the first major schism in Hindu philosophy. (Buddhism subscribes to a different karmic philosophy than Hinduism, and as such totally eschews the Hindu caste system). When Buddhism flourished in India, most of the lower caste Hindus converted to Buddhistm because it allowed them social mobility that was previously prohibited to them. Many entered into trades and professions that were earlier barred to them because of the rigidity of the Hindu caste system. Once the Hindu kings regained dominance, Buddhism started to decline in India due to lack of political patronage and persecution. Castiesm again became pervasive in India. This lead to many Buddhists converting voluntarily to Islam because Islam, like Buddhism, strongly prescribes equality irrespective of the ethnicity or previous of the convert. This allowed the former "untouchables" to retain their social mobility. This is why India, where Buddhism once flourished and was a source from where it spread to the world, has so little followers now.
The caste system is also present in Islam and Christianity ethnoreligious communities, but absent from the Buddhist communities. De facto casteism is worse in Pakistan than in much of India (especially South India where most techies come from). Though they may have converted for that reason, the Islamic community has its own caste system, and only in the Buddhist community and large tracts of Indian Hindus is the caste system non-evident or only slightly evident (e.g. Sri Lanka).
I can't afford to live where I grew up. Rich people from around the world have decided to move to the US, gentry areas, and push prices into the stratosphere. Every house on a very long block where my grandparents lived is now owned by someone originally from the continents of Asia or India. It's not a bad thing where people are from, it's the situation that creates disadvantages for people who were raised in an area originally and pushes them out to other markets.
Indian Americans were/are actually exceptional in that they tended to be more likely to be nonchalant about the Hindu-Muslim conflict compared to other Indian diaspora groups - e.g. Canada/Europe/Australia etc... were and are much more Islamophobic than in the US. But it might be symbolic of the lack of Islamophobia in the US combined with the more pro-melting-pot mentality in the US compared to other countries.
This feels like a religious slam piece that really doesn't belong on HN. But I will point out that this is ridiculous if you know a little bit about Hinduism.
It's a religion that does not recruit nor convert people and does not reject the idea of others having different religions. The idea of a "supremacist" movement within such a religion doesn't make any sense.
Members of other religions that don't hold such an egalitarian view, such as Abrahamic religions which believe in a single correct answer for God, might be inclined to have such a piece written.
your theory does not match reality, and it's a political movement. As pointed out in TFA gandhi was killed by a (fellow?) hindu nationalist in 1948 because gandhi was in favor of giving part of india to muslims
Islamophobia has always been a thing in Europe for example. Hindus and Muslims have always lived a somewhat segregated lifestyle in Indian culture as well (similar to Hispanics in the US). If you managed to merge Hindus and Muslims, you would have the European Islamophobia left over, and the Indians would be Islamophobia without the positives of Hinduism (look at the situation in the UK).
Furthermore as far as I can tell, there is still the Hindu - Muslim division in most of the western diaspora as well. You get second and third generation Indians LGBTQ who still divide themselves into Hindus and Muslims, Hindu women who will identify with the Indian right wing etc... so I do not see how the movement is "growing" when it has always been there.
This article makes many glib assumptions about RSS and Hindu nationalism. Most Americans don't understand the RSS, so its quite natural that a rabble-rousing author might pander to their antipathy of the Nazi and conflate the two organizations. However, this assumption cannot be further from the truth. The RSS was build on principles of nationalism and a one India philosophy, as opposed to the divided India "lie" perpetuated by the British rulers. The RSS considers Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Christians as brothers from another mother, as children of the same soil, as Indians.
Secondly the assumption that RSS is ruling India since 2014 is farcical and ludicrous. It's the BJP which is ruling India, and while they might have roots to the RSS politics and philosophy are two very different things. The BJP is as much aligned to RSS as much as Republicans are aligned to the gun touting midwest in US. And like the republicans the BJP has other constituents and parliamentary constraints before they can enact a law. For eg a law to privatise farmers output was quashed by farmers protest.
BJP has a soft corner for the Hindus who are continually persecuted in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan which is palpable buts whats wrong with that ? Islam is a unipolar religion with no option to cohabit as equal citizen under the same roof.
India continues to have Sharia law and allows 4 marriages per muslim man, while most islamic republic like Turkey and Pakistan have banned the practice since 1960's. Isn't the Government supposed to remove such archaic practice ? Whats wrong with that, yet successive Governments have sidestepped these matters leading to a majority Muslims, remaining poor and living in a tribal format devoid of modern education.
Thus this matter needs to be understood in context of the complexity of India.
Now coming the caste system, again disingenuous remarks are made, as regards to them leaving hinduism and joining Islam. If thats the case then why does India still have a substantial "lower" caste population? Why didn't they convert to Islam ? Perhaps they didn't get the memo despite 700 years of muslim rule in India ? These matters are far more complex than are made out to be by some whippersnappers.
India has to transform its 200 million muslims and 400 million Dalits into a modern forward looking society and some dislocation from their past practice is necessary.
