The Four Horseman of the Non-Apocalypse

for discussing science, relationships, religion or non-BK spirituality.
  • Message
  • Author
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10218
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

The Four Horseman of the Non-Apocalypse

Post12 Oct 2015

From: here

On the problems of discussing religion with religious people ...
    The Four Horseman of the Non-Apocalypse - Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennet, Harris
Harris makes an interesting illustration of a "perpetual motion machine" of faith around 17 minutes. How the problem lies in 'faith without evidence' being seen as a noble thing, and in itself evidence that there must be something to have faith in.

Dennet notes how similar it is to the mode of operation of conmen.

Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10218
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: The Four Horseman - Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennet, Harris

Post12 Oct 2015

In a different short clip, Hitchen goes on to makes a point about all monotheistic messianic religions ... and that is, they are all essentially death cults who sincerely want the destruction of civilisation. That quite clearly want us all to die, want this world to come to end, a yearning for things to be over.

He emphasises its real texts and its real spokespeople, not what the "pathetic apologists who masquerade for it" spout and how if you don't really believe in that Destruction you are not really a believer. And how we should stand against such theocracies infecting us and our societies.

He could well be talking about BKism. He calls it evil ... "ultimate wickedness and ultimate stupidity".
We are the pure and chosen few
And all the rest are damned.
There’s room enough in hell for you
We don’t want heaven crammed.

Offline
User avatar

Pink Panther

  • Posts: 1715
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2013

Re: The Four Horseman - Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennet, Harris

Post12 Oct 2015

I also watched ”The Four Horsemen” video that Edward suggested - or rather listened as I went about my work.

So many angles covered, both with antipathy and empathy for the religious view. My only criticism is they didn’t do more than touch on the difference between monotheism and other belief systems - animism, shamanism, Buddhism, Taoism etc - but I suppose that may be they are not as familiar with them, all having gown up and educated in a Western Christian culture.
Offline

edward

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 02 Oct 2015

Re: The Four Horseman of the Non-Apocalypse

Post12 Oct 2015

My only criticism is they didn’t do more than touch on the difference between monotheism and other belief systems - animism, shamanism, Buddhism, Taoism etc - but I suppose that may be they are not as familiar with them, all having gown up and educated in a Western Christian culture.

Or could it be that they are discussing the worst of the lot ? The Abrahamic religions ! There is no evidence to suggest in human civilisation that Buddhism or Hinduism have enforced their views on others by way of violence.

The views articulated by these four is undoubtedly brilliant and intellectual. It is what you take out of it. I found two aspects of this whole discussion very enlightening.
    1/ Where they discuss the fact about holding back information on evidence that would suggest a religion had the answers to the mystery of the universe. Here they mention how all the Abrahamic books were very simple and literally spoke about the time they were written in and nothing in it mentioned anything futuristic. May I present the Vedantas.

    2/ How Christopher Hitchens mentions bluntly any discussion on barbarism by the Islamic fanatics, will lead to exploring the role of Zionist in the middle-east.
I think the reason for this discussion was to provide the likes of Carnegie Foundation or Chatham House the data to formulate their strategy against Islam. It would have been easy to encourage similar discussions on mainstream media, however, the fears expressed in point 2 might have stopped this from happening and liberation of Syria was initiated.

Sorry if I have digressed from BKism, anyways the thoughts expressed in this video comprehensively cover all aspects of BKism, its strength and weaknesses.
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10218
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: The Four Horseman of the Non-Apocalypse

Post12 Oct 2015

It's OK, this is the Anything Goes forum, and it does relate back to BKism. One of the mysteries of BKism is how it adopted some of this same monotheistic, messianic nature.

I suspect that, in love with the British as much as he was, Lekhraj Kirpalani had exposure to some Jehovah Witness-type Christianity, however, I have no evidence to support that apart from the extra regard and asymmetric treatment Christ was given in the Murlis. It would be hard for anyone with any religious interests not to be aware of and impressed by its presence, there were some stunning churches in Karachi and, especially Calcutta, built during his lifetime.
Offline

edward

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 02 Oct 2015

Re: The Four Horseman of the Non-Apocalypse

Post12 Oct 2015

I suspect that, in love with the British as much as he was, Lekhraj Kirpalani had exposure to some Jehovah Witness-type Christianity, however, I have no evidence to support that apart from the extra regard and asymmetric treatment Christ was given in the Murlis. It would be hard for anyone with any religious interests not to be aware of and impressed by its presence, there were some stunning churches in Karachi and, especially Calcutta, built during his lifetime.

You hit the nail on the head. Place yourself in the shoes of Lekhraj Kirpalani in 1930s Karachi or Calcutta. The power is held by the British Raj, there are Christian evangelists promoting their propaganda, part of which is the practise of convents for nuns. It's interesting here to note that the Raj had Scottish and Irish regiments, where the men were not high enough in the ranks to bring their wives over hence they indulged in a bit of drunken escapades (read rape) to lighten the local population. This lot ended up being called Anglo-Indians and were considered kind of foreigners, hence the double foreigners (Brahmins) for the pure breed. Many of these women would end up in the nuns as a means of leading a superior life compared to their native cousins who toiled in a large Hindu extended family.

He is also exposed to the preachings of Islam especially its doomsday scenario "qayamaat". Everytime there is a Hindu Muslim problem in India, the mosques deliver the same sermon where project Islam as being in danger and the day of reckoning approaching closer.

He picks-up these discretes, along with the preachings of the Babas he meets on the banks of the Ganges where he goes to get answers from his own (Hindu) men for the chaos around him. Creates a crude cult with its poor literature (Murlis), preys upon families with girls who are less likely to get a partner (protector) in the times of Hindu-Muslim tensions. Post partition independence, they realise the ease of usurping/inherting the wealth of "children of a lesser god" and then the juggernaut rolls into a viable Ponzi scheme, goes international, attracts more crocked and devious characters who see the scope for financial leverage and here we are.

Lekhraj Kirpalani was the idol that was created to give a god like image to instill fear and dogma into these lambs.
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10218
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: The Four Horseman of the Non-Apocalypse

Post12 Oct 2015

It's a little dangerous to be too speculative without any evidence to support it, I think. Also, there's a danger is attempting to make a purely rational or intellectual conclusions about Lekhraj Kirpalani as that approach tend to ignore the very real mystic element to the start of his religion.

And why "Scottish and Irish regiments", and not English and Welsh?

If you are interested in doing your homework, there's a useful Wiki of the British in India, including a list of all the regiments, here.

We've dug up quite a bit of the cult's early history, from the mid-30s, but not so much about Lekhraj Kirpalani's own life. Have you read over it yet?

As far as the history of Anglo-Indian "kutcha butcha" (कच्चा बच्चे) go, intermarriages between British and high caste Indians was actually encouraged from the time of the East India Company. In fact, the company even offered a financial benefits to Indian mothers upon the baptism of any children from an company employee who were primarily English. Mistress were commonplace; often Parsi or Muslim as it was a bit of a taboo for Hindus. Indeed, a Commissioner of Delhi, Sir David Ochterlony, actually took thirteen Indian "wives" and fathered many children. For the "lower orders", they had an established system of "camp followers".

I think you need to be a little more cautious as it's an area which has been quite widely studied and written about. Although assaults did happen during wars, all the accounts I've read suggest that violence was the last thing that was necessary. "Bibis" was the name for them. In fact, there are many stories of great love affairs, e.g. British officers rescuing women from the funeral pyres and spending their lives with them, noblemen leaving their estate to them etc. The British left excellent records, everything from the quantities of tea to the pound and detailed diaries of their pederastry.

By Lekhraj Kirpalani's time though, British women were widespread, Annie Besant had arrived (the Karachi Theosophical Society Lodge was one of the most active in India), the civil service was being run by Anglo-Indians, and the army mostly Indian.

See: 'Sahibs' India: Vignettes from the Raj' by Pran Nevile and note also: Jeremy Paxman in the Telegraph.

St Patrick's Cathedral in Karachi, opened 1881 with a seating capacity of 2,000.

Karachi_St_Patricks_Cathedral.jpg
Offline

edward

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 02 Oct 2015

Re: The Four Horseman of the Non-Apocalypse

Post12 Oct 2015

It's a little dangerous to be too speculative without any evidence to support it, I think.

Oh, darling, you are getting a bit touchy-feely here. The evidence is provided by yourself. Weren't the English followers of the Church of England where Queen Victoria was the head of the sect and the Catholics were limited to Ireland, where again most of them were under the British rule? And which denomination does St Patrick come under, Catholics or Protestants? I happened to study in a Catholic school in India where most of my Christian classmates were sparring over being Catholics or Protestants, basically aping the Brahmin vs non-Brahmin fight within Hindus.
And why "Scottish and Irish regiments", and not English and Welsh?

Even today there are scores of Anglo-Indians living in India. In fact, such was their clout despite making up less than .0000001% of the population, they still have a seat reserved in the upper-house. Most, if not all, carry an Irish or Scottish surname. Joe Biden was recently in India and was on record in the White House mentioning, he met some of his very distant cousins living in India, they were Bidens. I believe all Black people from the West Indies and, in USA, got Scottish surnames from their owners in the 17th/18th century.
We've dug up quite a bit of the cult's early history, from the mid-30s, but not so much about Lekhraj Kirpalani's own life. Have you read over it yet?

In fact, since my last post, I have been going through this forum and was pleasantly surprised to note many of my speculations on analysing Lekhraj Kirpalani were not far from the mark. He did go to Benaras to seek answers from Hindu godmen, I did not know this before until I read it here today.
Mistresses were common; often Parsi or Muslim as it was a bit of a taboo for Hindus

In my missing post, I had mentioned about the Fabian Society, how they had managed to groom Nehru and then manipulated India's government to the benefit of UK and USA. As an Bombite, I was always surprised at the fabulous wealth of the Parsis (Nehru's daughter Indira was married to one), a community which landed in India in 1000 AD. They had no rule in India but after Independence were the biggest industrialists and largest land owners in Bombay. I have a close friend from the Tulu community in Karnataka. The Indian ex-Miss Universe Aishwarya Rai belongs to this community. I was telling him how this babe is a descendent of Tipu Sultans' progenies. Tipu was from the lineage of Turks or central Asians who were light skinned with green or blue eyes. Aishwarya has green eyes. You will find such beauties among the Maharastrian, Andhra and Tamil communities too. History shows these communities aligned with invading Moghul forces at various times to fight their own lot like Shivaji. Having said that these communities (Turk-Indian) are very distinct from the Anglo-Asians. The reason I mention this is to highlight I am well aware of "Interracial lovefest" within India.

Again, in that missing post, I had mentioned about India being a fascinating country. I am not a very religious person. As I mentioned earlier, I went to a Catholic school, graduated from an Islamic engineering college, was crazy about rock music and considered Frank Zappa as one of my favourites. I belong to a community which served the British Army and administration. My great grandfathers and their extended family had the title of Sardar (chieftain) or Kajhanji (treasurer). In fact, one of our folks was the PM on the Indian dominion when the UN was formed and Indian troops were signed to fight alongside the Allies.

My fascination lays in psychology, and this where my interest in religion extends. Many aspects of India and Indian society that we read and see, stem from the writings of the likes of Rudiyard Kipling (White man's burden) and his ilk. It will take a while for the more resourceful Indians to unearth the history of India, especially post-Islam and British Invasion, and how some within the Hindu community managed to create a caste system where they placed themselves right on top with the help of the British. Have you ever visited the Balaji temple in Tirupati? It is India's most popular Hindu temple. The entrance to the sanctum sactorum is littered with Kamasutra. This temple was built in the 300AD. You see, the British (Christians) managed to brainwash Indians into believing love making is a carnal and primitive act, invoking it by placing them in place of worship is pagan.

By the way, Freddie Mercury of Queen was a Parsi and never considered himself to be Indian.

Look, I am here to seek answers to some of the questions I am facing with my wife's behaviour. To be honest, most of the answers were known to me and, reading your posts, my observations have been vindicated. I have come to realise, like in the case of the Parsis, Nehrus et al, BK are supported by a hidden hand. They blatantly duplicitous with transparent intentions, despite of it they still exist and expand.
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10218
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: The Four Horseman of the Non-Apocalypse

Post13 Oct 2015

Quote from here: The White Mughals: Love & Betrayal in Eighteenth Century India by William Dalrymple
Victorian Evangelicals in the 1830s and 40s slowly killed off the intermingling of Indian and British ideas, religions and ways of life ... Biographies and memoirs of prominent 18th-century British Indian worthies that mentioned their Indian wives were re-edited in the mid-19th century so that the consorts were removed from later editions.

Also, from The impact of British Christian missionaries on Indian religious, social and cultural life between 1800 and 1857 and elsewhere ...
The British had prepared a scheme for the conversion of India to Christianity. They believed that Indians would find no one to help their cause and would never have the courage to raise their heads. They had appreciated that the religious differences between the rulers and their subjects would always remain hurdles in the establishment of empire and would eventually lead to a revolution. They, therefore, used every means, fair or foul and made every possible effort to destroy the native religions and society.
In such ways Christian missions were, according to historian Brian Stanley, the 'ideological arm of Western imperial aggression'. (Missionary societies spent 2 million pounds per year - equivalent to 2% of government expenditure imposing of British values).
A number of mid-Victorians thought that missionary success would hasten Christ's return and were therefore full of expectation in the founding of a transformed world through the conversion of humanity. Whether facilitating the Second Coming or serving their 'captive's need', those engaged in evangelism further embedded Britain's empire.

But, remember, Lekhraj Kirpalani wasn't born until 1884. I wonder if his criticisms of Hindus as degraded weren't Christian in roots as the evangelists shared similar opinions. So far, no one has turned up any influences such as Theosophical, Masonic, Gurdjieffian, Fabian, "Illuminati" etc behind Lekhraj Kirpalani's cult. I don't think they exist.

You're suggesting to me that you are a Sardar Sikh? It sounds like rather than be their victim, they helped lead you to liberation from religion.
edward wrote:Oh, darling, you are getting a bit touchy-feely here.

I don't understand. Touchy-feely means "openly expressing affection or other emotions, especially through physical contact".

Well, in order to discuss BK matters with your wife, you will have to tread carefully and know specifically what BKism teaches or indoctrinates first in order to avoid setting her off, or exposing weak points which she could grab on and use against you. As Pink has pointed out in his earlier posts, most BK follower's attachment for the BKs is not rational or intellectual.

For example, they say Lekhraj Kirpalani "had 12 gurus" before his "enlightenment" (enlightenment is not the word the use, nor do I think he became completely enlightened, but he had some kind of spiritual or spiritualist awakening after paying a huge sum of money to some kind of sadhu or magi (siddhi?) in Bengal. Court records show he paid 10,000 rupees in 1930s rates - I calculated the equivalent of £42,000 today (here and here) - to be "initiated" into some practise or experience and that after that he underwent considerable personality changes and gave up his business. No one appears to know who or what this, least of all the BKs who want to keep it all a mystery. Their "official" history of him is a white-washed child-like hagiography with few details designed to portray him like a saint.

Of course, "having 12 gurus" really means nothing. It just means he was a rich man (400,000 rupees in 1930s rates) and made donations which was just following social convention. There is a very big difference between just donating to a guru or temple, and actually joining and being initiated into a religious tradition. He amassed great wealth and luxuries, and invited these individuals to his large home to hold satsangs. Again we are told nothing of which lineage or tradition they belonged to.

With respect to Christianity, I always wondered if the '12 factor' was a sub-conscious reference to Jesus Christ and his disciplines. It's strange that a specific number was remember but no other details about them.

So, we have to accept that, in his middle ages at least, he was exposed to religious teachers and, as you suggest, it's reasonable to assume he picked up the some of the tricks of the trade.

The only tradition that clearly comes up in his story is his wife's family tradition, which seems to have been Vallabhacharyan Pushtimarg sect (Krishna Bhakti especially focusing on child Krishna), and that he had a thing for Narayan (whom he later believed he was to become) ... but does that mean anything more than sticking a picture on his business wall and offering food and incense to it as a good luck charm for making more money? His diary from the 1930s does not suggest great depth or complexity.

As to your Celtic mass sexual assault theory, it does not make sense that rapists would give their victims their name. And they did not keep slaves as in the West Indies or America.

The Indian Bidens, for example, were the progeny of a high ranking marriage and I'd suggest, so too were the rest. If you read the histories, you'll find many such stories, and even Westerners adopting both Hindu and Muslim practises. They are so detailed we even known of one high ranking officer undergoing circumcision in order to win the favours of a particular Mogul beauty.
Offline

edward

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 02 Oct 2015

Re: The Four Horseman of the Non-Apocalypse

Post13 Oct 2015

Also, from The impact of British Christian missionaries on Indian religious, social and cultural life between 1800 and 1857 and elsewhere

The lack of popular media focus on William Darlymple's writing, are proof of the grip Nehruvian-Fabian thinking had on Indian society, such that till the Congress was not defeated during the emergency period 1977-80, we never saw or heard about these exploits.
You're suggesting to me that you are a Sardar Sikh? It sounds like rather than be their victim, they helped lead you to liberation from religion.

Negative am not a Sikh, however, I grew up among them and love them folks. Sardar is a title used across India but predominantly in Punjab. The Sikhs were a martial race created out of Hinduism. Even today many Hindus, Sindhi's & Punjabi's offer one male child to this sect. The boy then goes on to be baptised (amritdhari) into Sikhism. They were created to fight Islam, hence many similarities in looks and books (they pray to the holy book-Gurubani).
For example, they say Lekhraj Kirpalani "had 12 gurus" before his "enlightenment"

Read above, about Sikhs and the affinity of Sindhi's to Sikhism. Sikhs claim they had 9 gurus, like in Islam where the Sunnis believe there was no other prophet after mohammed but the Shias believe the Ayatollah is a direct descendent of him. Among Sikhs there are 2 groups, the Akalis who believe there was no guru after the 9th but the Nirankaris believe it continued. Probably the Nirankaris' head at the turn of the 20th century was 12th in line from Gurunank the 1st guru.

As an "Illuminati" unadulterated by the brainwashing of BKism, when I try to analyse Lekhraj Kirpalani whilst seated on my arm chair, I try to place him at the start of the 20th century geo-political sphere. Turkey has Attaturk, the facists were running amok in Europe, the Sauds were waging war on the Jordanians in Arabia, the Raj (including Lawrence of Arabia) had a finger in every pie along with the clergy. In the WW1 and WW2, a large Indian army was conscripted to fight on behalf of the Raj, Sikhs formed the single largest majority among various religions and groups.

There was a lot of churning taking place during this time. The movement against Islam and Christianity among the Hindus was small and fragmented. Now post-1947, Nehru was busy building the constitution, republic and fighting Pakistan (1948, 1965) and China (1963). If you look at the size of the Om Mandli headed to Mount Abu around partition, it was a handful of people. Post 1950s, this lot realise they cannot be isolated on top of a mountain and have depressed catchment of refugees/migrants spread across India. They start preaching among this lot. All along plagiarising the different Hindu communities (cults, sects, ashrams) that were spreading across preying on the gullible who were seeking a means for progress in a socialist country plagued with famine, disease and rampant corruption. Religion and religious org were a means for solace through ritualistic activity keeping them busy morning and evening.

My "GUESS" is that this lot have really took off in the 1980s following the popularity of ISKCON, OSHO, Chinmaya missions in the 1970 on the back of the hippy culture.
I don't understand. Touchy-feely means "openly expressing affection or other emotions, especially through physical contact".

Obviously one cannot touch the other physically in a virtual world, its a expression the agyani's like myself use on chat rooms, to mention politely to someone "Touched" (angered) by a post.

Hey, look, I am enjoying myself posting here whilst I have the time and honestly also educating/enhancing my knowledge of the world we live in. I have no delusions of grandeur, I do admit most of my assertions are thin on substance, having said that there are adequate evidence out there to back them and thanks to you for providing some of it, i.e. St Patrick's church and Darlymple.
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10218
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: The Four Horseman of the Non-Apocalypse

Post13 Oct 2015

edward wrote:The lack of popular media focus on William Darlymple's writing, are proof of the grip nehruvian-fabian thinking had on Indian society, such that till the congress was not defeated during the emergency period 1977-80, we never saw or heard about these exploits.

I'd say it was more to do with the fact he did not write it until 2002. But there are lots of papers etc about this.

I grew up in Britain, knowledge of the pleasures of the exotic/erotic Far East were commonplace. We were educated about aggression of imperialism but not widespread sex crimes. As far as the rest of the Empire goes, the Scots and even Scottish regiments had a fairly good reputation for integrating with the natives, or behaving themselves, hence why I was so surprised by your specific allegations.
Read above, about Sikhs and the affinity of sindhi's to Sikhism. Sikhs claim they had 9 gurus,

I thought they had 10, or is that 9 plus Nanak? But this is not a matter of lineage, it was solely Lekhraj Kirpalani patronising gurus in his lifetime. They even used to brag about how wonderful he was because he paid off the gambling debts of one of the guru's followers. I cannot understand what was divine about that at all.

There are some Sikh influences to BKism, e.g. their use of "Maryadas" and, perhaps, the idea of the "Pure Ones" (Panj Piare) but when exactly this entered, I am not sure. Issues and ideas tend to arise when someone of that faith or interest entered the community, and so it might have been after BK Nirwair joined. Guru Nanak and the Granth is mentioned in the BKs Murlis (1959 to 1963) but there might have been some earlier Sikhs in the community. I don't know.

I don't know where you are but in the West, "Illuminati" usually refers to some hidden, super elite conspiracy bent on global domination, not an enlightened person. Some people have accused the BKs as being part of the "one world government" Illumanti conspiracy but I'd disagree with that. There are no puppet masters, unless you believe in other dimensions and spiritualism ... their master/masters is/are a disincarnate spirit/s.
If you look at the size of the Om Mandli headed to Mount Abu around partition, it was a handful of people. Post 1950s this lot realise they cannot be isolated on top of a mountain and have depressed catchment of refugees/migrants spread across India.

The figures we have vary from about 200 dwindling to 40 after a period of hardship (the BKs aren't sharp on accuracy). Personally, rather than any desire to share or serve, I reckon the answer is simpler. Lekhraj Kirpalani ran out of money to feed them and had no more income from families etc; Destruction did not happen in 1950 to save them as predicted ... and so they had to send people out to start reaping donations for those remaining back in Abu as they were all untrained, uneducated and unmarriageable women and had no other business.
My "GUESS" is that this lot have really took-off in the 1980s following the popularity of ISKCON, OSHO, Chinmaya missions in the 1970 on the back of the hippy culture.

Yes, fair enough. It was all Pink Panther's fault. You can blame him personally as he was off that generation of BKs (joke). I was slightly late to the start of that period but, yes, I think that is true. I had been previously influenced by ISKCON and other BKs and "students" of mine had been through Osho etc. You have to add the Maharishi (TM), Yogananda and others to that list.

BKism in the West started off with hippy or traveller types with at least an acceptance of Hinduism if not a positive attraction to the warmth and eccentricities of it, and then BKism slowly morphed to reject that, and into what it is now. Even the Indian BKs appear to be rejecting many of the Hindu elements of it and it is becoming more corproate and New Agey, probably to attract the aspirant wealthy middle classes in India who want to appear more modern/Western.

There's a strange "feedback loop" going on where the BKs came to the West and brought Westerners back to India to increase their standing in India ("Look, even white people follow us!") thereby increasing their Indian following but I think it's important to see them as alien to the rest Indians, they were Sindhis enculting Hindis. The differences were significant enough.

I only want to encourage you to be as accurate as possible because it strengthens your position when arguing against BKism or illuminating others about them. I know what they are like, and they will try and use the smallest of weakness or fault to discredit critics.

We are still finding our way and you may be able to add to our understanding.
Offline

edward

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 02 Oct 2015

Re: The Four Horseman of the Non-Apocalypse

Post13 Oct 2015

As far as the rest of the Empire goes, the Scots and even Scottish regiments had a fairly good reputation for integrating with the natives, or behaving themselves, hence why I was so surprised by your specific allegations.


General Dwyer, the man responsible for the massacre in Julianwala bagh was Scottish. Arundhati roy describes the half-casts in her book "children of a lesser god" as the products of the Raj soldiers shooting off their frustration at the nubile native virgins during overnight binging. Another popular Indian writer Mukul sharma described the Anglo-Indians in similar terms. They never were a community that were proud of their heritage (leading credence to the theory of product of "a bachelor" ), most wanted to immigrate to UK claiming to be Anglican but were never recognised as one by the Brit Admin.

I am having a WhatsApp spat with my wife as I write this. I just cannot get over her hypocracy of chasing these pseudos whilst the kids are screaming for motherly love.
Offline
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10218
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: The Four Horseman of the Non-Apocalypse

Post13 Oct 2015

edward wrote:General Dwyer, the man responsible for the massacre in Jallianwala Bagh was Scottish.

Sorry, wrong.

The General (Colonel at the end) was Indian; or at least Indian born. A child of an Indian-English family from the English West Country (Devon) who settled in India to make English beer (no Scotsman would). He joined the West Surrey Regiment, became an honorary Sikh, and died in Bristol, England.

The troops he used were Gurkhas (Nepalese) and Baluchi (Pakistani).

There are numerous sources for this but start with, 'The Butcher of Amritsar: General Reginald Dyer' by Nigel Collett.

The point I am making here is that although we will voice strong opinions here, and be quite harshly critical, our opinions and credibility are built on good research and broad, solid facts. Therefore, please don't make loose statements. Please make a little effort to ensure your statements are as accurate as possible so as not to mislead.

I'd say that we can be so critical because our critiques are well researched and grounded.

Dyer is an English name, the Scots equivalent would have been Lister. By invoking the name of the Irish you open up another door to the role of the Irish in India - from soldiers to clergymen - but I don't think they figure in Lekhraj Kirpalani's story.

There was an old say about the Empire, "The Irish fought for it, the Scots and the Welsh ran it, but the English kept the profits". But that's not quite true either though.
Offline

edward

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 02 Oct 2015

Re: The Four Horseman of the Non-Apocalypse

Post13 Oct 2015

Stand corrected. Thanks.

Return to Anything goes

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests