Monday, August 13, 2018

Naipaul quotes

Swarajya magazine featured some V.S. Naipaul quotes, of which two follow:

From ‘India: A Wounded Civilization’ published in 1976:

India has been a wounded civilization because of Islamic violence: Pakistanis know this; indeed they revel in it. It is only Indian Nehruvians like Romila Thapar who pretend that Islamic rule was benevolent. We should face facts: Islamic rule in India was at least as catastrophic as the later Christian rule. The Christians created massive poverty in what was a most prosperous country; the Muslims created a terrorised civilization out of what was the most creative culture that ever existed. India was wrecked and looted, not once but repeatedly by invaders with strong religious ideas, with a hatred of the religion of the people they were conquering. People read these accounts but they do not imaginatively understand the effects of conquest by an iconoclastic religion.
The effects of conquest - the Islamic histories describing the conquest of India pretty much describe what ISIS did to the Yazidis, we don't need to exercise our imagination any more.

On Ayodhya, according to Patrick French:
For the poor of India to identify something like this, pulling down the first Mughal emperor’s tomb, is a marvellous idea. I think in years to come it will be seen as a great moment.... It would be a historical statement of India striving to regain her soul. What puzzled me and outraged me was the attitude that it was wrong, that one must not undo the [Muslim] conquest. I think it is the attitude of a slave population.
I should mention that in the early 1990s I was on the opposite side of the argument.  My interest in Indian history began as I sought to justify to myself that my side of the argument - that the Babri Masjid should be let be - was right.   As in all matters that become political, all sides in the argument made false or misleading claims.  Also, the same outcome as that did transpire could have been realized in a more civilized and more lawful way.  Given that the Left's favorite religion is Islam (not just in India) and given that they controlled the discourse in India, getting through their distortion field took a while. In the final verdict, I must say that Naipaul is right.



Comments (4)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
Naipaul also had the courage to put it down on record. The Indian Left and the Marxists - Amartya Sen & gang - have a deep-seated hatred for the Hindus. It is conceivable that the Indian Muslims, left to their own devices, would understand and accept Babri’s fate from the historical context. It is inconceivable that Amartya et al would let them.

The only reason I root for Modi these days is that he is ‘not-Amartya.’ I am delighted that Amartya has to suffer Modi in his final years.
1 reply · active 345 weeks ago
Modi has managed the Indian macroeconomy quite well, whether measured by current account deficit to GDP, central government budget deficit to GDP, government expenditure to GDP. The alternative to Modi is dynasty and crony capitalism.
I should add:I wonder if the fascist American Left (lead by the NYT) has called Naipaul’s observations “hate speech.” Likely there would have been calls for YouTube, Twitter, Facebook and Google to shut him down if he has expressed his views on social media today.
1 reply · active 346 weeks ago
Good question!

Post a new comment

Comments by