All Articles, Articles by Rajiv

How new Ambedkarites are busy undermining Ambedkar and his legacy

December 23, 2022

How new Ambedkarites are busy undermining Ambedkar and his legacy

New Ambedkarites’ alignment with the new American camp of Wokeism makes them an ally of global Islam and evangelical Christianity — both of which BR Ambedkar vehemently opposed

How new Ambedkarites are busy undermining Ambedkar and his legacy

It is well known that BR Ambedkar turned to Buddhism for the upliftment of Dalits. But what is not widely understood is that he changed Buddhism in fundamental ways — away from its spiritual focus and towards a social-political focus.

To achieve this, he did away with karma theory and meditation practice, both of which are integral to the teachings of Buddha. This enabled him to differentiate it from Hinduism. He wanted to reject Hinduism because of Mohandas Gandhi’s position on caste.

But his rejection of Christianity and Islam was even more emphatic. Ambedkar was uncompromising in insisting that Indians should not adopt either Christianity or Islam because these religions were alien to the ethos and core values of Indians. He feared that they would create conflicts and cause divisions among Indians. Ambedkar also explicitly rejected communism.

Another remarkable quality in his uncompromising patriotism was that he left the US and UK after his higher education there and returned to India to pursue his nation-building ambitions. He did not like the idea of championing his reformist ideas from American or British soil or in alignment with any of their institutions.

Unfortunately, Ambedkar didn’t live long enough to fully implement his modified version of Buddhism and be able to demonstrate that this new religion would succeed in uplifting his followers. After his death, his followers lacked the creativity and leadership to advance his pioneering ideas further.

This vacuum of creative leadership has been filled by Harvard University’s poster boy, Suraj Yengde, who has proclaimed himself as Ambedkar’s successor. Yengde assumes that it is his destiny to step into Ambedkar’s shoes and complete the social transformation Ambedkar had started.

However, using his Harvard perch and alliance with Black Americans and the Woke movement, Yengde has positioned himself in ways that betray Ambedkar’s patriotism. Without support from the Harvard power nexus, he could not have become so prominent considering that he openly propagates falsehoods and frequently contradicts himself without remorse or inhibition.

Yengde is on a warpath with Hinduism, and more broadly with Indian social and cultural values, in ways that compromise India’s integrity and sovereignty. As our recent book Snakes in the Ganga has documented, Yengde calls Shankaracharya, a legendary intellectual leader of Hinduism, an “ugly head dumpster”; and he accuses him of “killing many monks”. He says that there was an “onslaught and attacks to eliminate Buddha from this land”. According to him, Hindus desecrated Buddhist temples and viharas, and “the monks were killed en masse by the invading kingdoms of the so-called invading Brahminic order”.

Without citing any shred of evidence, Yengde has said: “When the Buddha came on to the consciousness of India, he became the biggest threat to the Vedic caste system because Buddha just crumbled the house of cards of caste system. Because Buddha offered that many tribes, which were eventually declared untouchables, become part of Dhamma and because they were part of dhamma, there was a repeated assassination of the people who were identifying themselves in the pathway of dhamma. Buddha himself was subjected to several attacks, physical, spiritual.”

Yengde’s vitriolic hatred for Brahmins leads him to want to dismantle Hinduism. What he ignores is that Indian traditions, Hindu and Buddhist alike, have thrived on open and honest debates among experts. There was never any form of what is today being practiced as cancel culture. Indians of all persuasions have prided themselves by engaging in logical arguments instead of being fixated on dogma or political rivalry. The cancel culture championed at Harvard today is antithetical to the path of the Buddha and inconsistent with Ambedkar’s ideology.

Yengde’s alignment with the new American camp of Wokeism makes him an ally of global Islam and evangelical Christianity both of which Ambedkar vehemently opposed. His membership in Harvard’s elitism, and his participation in the Breaking India nexus in the United States, should concern the genuine Buddhists in India. They should pause before letting him infiltrate further and hijack one of India’s great spiritual traditions and gifts to the world.

Written by Rajiv Malhotra

View Source
Read More
All Articles, Articles by Rajiv

Rajeev Malhotra column Efforts continue divide India principle racism _ राजीव मल्होत्रा का कॉलम_ नस्लवाद के सिद्धांत से भारत को बांटने की कोशिशें जारी –

December 19, 2022

लगभग बारह वर्ष पूर्व मैंने एफ्रो -दलि त सि द्धां त का तब प्रति का र कि या था, जब वह अपनी प्रा रंभि क अवस्था में ही था । इस सि द्धां त के अनुसा र दलि त भा रत के अश्वेत
(ब्लैक) हैं और गैर-दलि त श्वेत (वा इट) हैं। ऐसा मा नकर यह सि द्धां त दा वा करता है कि भा रती य समा ज की जा ति -व्यवस्था नस्लवा द (रेसि ज़्म) के समतुल्य है। अपनी
पुस्तक ‘ब्रेकिं ग इंडि या ’ में मैंने अमेरि का से संचा लि त और आर्थि क रूप सेपो षि त इस एफ्रो -दलि त परि यो जना की का र्यप्रणा ली को समझा या था ।

यह परि यो जना अमेरि की नस्लवा द के सि द्धां त के उपयो ग द्वा रा भा रत के सामा जि क मतभेदों को भड़का कर हमा रेदेश को वि खंडि त करना चा हती है। इस पर भा रती यों
को प्रति क्रि या देनी चा हि ए कि दमन का इति हा स वा स्तवि कता में कि सी अन्य नि ष्कर्ष की ओर संकेत करता है। जि स प्रका र श्वेत अमेरि कि यों द्वा रा अश्वेतों का शो षण
कि या गया , उसी प्रका र भा रत में हिं दुओं का शो षण हजा र वर्ष तक वि देशी आक्रां ता ओं और यूरोपि यों ने उपनि वेशी करण द्वा रा कि या ।
हिं दुओं को हिं दू संस्कृति और इति हा स के बा रेमें अमेरि का के अश्वेतों को समझा कर, उनके सा थ मि लकर एक समा न आधा रभूमि खोजनी चा हि ए थी । इसा बेल
वि ल्करसन एक प्रमुख अश्वेत वि द्वा न हैं। कुछ समय पूर्व उन्हों ने एक पुस्तक लि खी जि समें एफ्रो -दलि त समुदा य को वि श्व में उत्पी ड़ि त वर्गों के केंद्रबिं दु के रूप में दर्शा या ।
‘का स्ट : दि ओरि जि न्स ऑफ अवर डि स्कंटेंट्स’ शी र्षक वा ली यह पुस्तक घो षणा करती है कि अनेक प्रका र के नस्लवा दों में का स्ट (भा रती य जा ति -वर्ण व्यवस्था के अर्थ
में) केवल एक प्रका र मा त्र नहीं है।

कास्ट तो वह रीढ़ की हड्डी है, जि स पर सम्पूर्ण रेसि ज़्म का सि द्धां त खड़ा है। उनका मा नना है कि अंग्रेज का स्ट की धा रणा को वैदि क ग्रंथों से सी खकर अमेरि का में ले
गए और फि र उसके आधा र पर उन्हों ने अमेरि का में अश्वेतों के वि रुद्ध रेसि ज़्म का ढां चा खड़ा कि या । यह पद्धति यूरोप में भी फैली , जि सके फलस्वरूप ना जि यों द्वा रा
यहूदि यों का जनसंहार (हो लो कॉ स्ट) हुआ।
इस प्रका र वि ल्करसन यह अटपटा दा वा करती हैं कि वि श्व में रेसि ज़्म का मूल का रण भा रत की जा ति -व्यवस्था है। उनके द्वा रा तर्क दि या जा ता है कि जा ति कर्म सि द्धां त
के का रण अमि ट रूप सेहिं दू धर्म के साथ जुड़ी है। मुझे भा रत के दलि तों और अमेरि का के अश्वेतों से सहा नुभूति है। लेकि न वि ल्करसन की मा न्यता से मुझे यह समस्या
है कि यह अमेरि की इति हा स के चश्मे का उपयो ग करके दलि तों सेसंबंधि त मुद्दों को देखने का प्रया स करती है।
भा रती य सामा जि क व्यवस्था का इति हा स बहुत जटि ल है और इसेऐसेएकां गी वि श्लेषण द्वा रा नहीं समझा जा सकता । यदि इस सि द्धां त की सी मा मा त्र शैक्षणि क
संस्था ओं तक ही हो ती तो भी ठी क था, किं तु वि ल्करसन के इस सि द्धां त को अमरीकी सो शल मी डि या में बड़ी लो क प्रसि द्धि मि ली है। वि ल्करसन पुलि त्ज़र पुरस्का र
वि जेता हैं और उनकी कि ता ब न्यूयॉ र्क टा इम्स की बेस्टसेलर पुस्तकों की श्रेणी में पहला स्था न प्रा प्त कर चुकी है।
ओप्रा वि नफ्रे ने भी उनकी पुस्तक का प्रचा र कि या है। यह सि द्धां त अब ब्लैक ला इव्स मैटर आंदो लन और नई वो क सो शल जस्टि स वि चा रधा रा का केंद्री य अंग बन चुका
है। इसेएक स्वतंत्र अभि व्यक्ति या सोच के रूप में मा ना जा सकता था यदि दलि तों से अश्वेतों और ब्रा ह्मणों से श्वेतों की तुलना को एक वा द-यो ग्य परि कल्पना के रूप में
प्रस्तुत कि या जा ता ।
कि न्तु इसेएक नि र्वि वा द तथ्य के रूप में प्रस्तुत कि या जा रहा है। परि णा मस्वरूप सामा जि क न्या य आंदो लन हिं दुओं से द्वेष के आंदो लन में परि वर्ति त हो चुका है। भा रत
को वि श्व-दमन के स्रो त के रूप में दर्शा या जा रहा है। इस वि चा र-सरणी का प्रति का र करना जरूरी है।

पश्चि म का सामा जि क न्या य आंदो लन हिं दुओं सेद्वेष के आंदो लन में परि वर्ति त हो चुका है। दलि तों से अश्वेतों और ब्रा ह्मणों से श्वेतों की तुलना करके भा रत को वि श्व-
दमन के स्रो त के रूप में दर्शा या जा रहा है।

(ये लेखक के अपने वि चा र हैं।)

Read More
All Articles, Articles by Rajiv

Do IITs favour Brahmins and perpetuate caste oppression?

December 16, 2022

Do IITs favour Brahmins and perpetuate caste oppression?

Harvard University professor Ajantha Subramanian has accused the IITs of perpetuating caste oppression

In her influential book The Caste of Merit: Engineering Education in India, Harvard University’s professor Ajantha Subramanian has accused the IITs of perpetuating caste oppression. The crux of her argument is that the structure of IITs favours Brahmins and upper castes and is oppressive towards the lower castes. Therefore, even if entrance examinations are open to all and there is no discrimination in how marks are awarded, they are still guilty.

She traces the oppressive structure to the period of British rule in India. Prior to that, engineering was considered a hands-on job that was suitable for lower caste people. This changed during the British period because they split the discipline into its theoretical and hands-on aspects. With Brahmins conspiring to grab the theoretical side, only the hands-on work remained for lower castes. Since Brahmins were intelligent people, this kind of stratification also served the British interest, because they could use their skills in administration. It also opened the door for Brahmins to make money as technocrats and industrialists, which was not possible in their traditional roles. Therefore, the whole arrangement was highly beneficial for Brahmins while it hurt lower castes.

This part of her thesis is substantially correct. Infinity Foundation has documented the skills of many lower caste people in its History of Indian Science and Technology book series. What Subramanian fails to uncover however is the lack of initiatives by the Indian government since independence to take corrective measures. The British system was not designed to skill the lower castes but was intended to develop a battery of clerks that would help them rule the country.

Rather than bringing a change in the education system invented by the British, successive governments have continued with it. This has resulted in a loss of skill at the hands-on level because getting an education does not help people get jobs at that level. It also does not attract people who may have an aptitude for such work simply because it doesn’t pay. On the other hand, the expansion of engineering into computer sciences has further expanded the theoretical side, creating additional opportunities for the people engaged in theory. Therefore, the flow of human capital based on skills and aptitude is blocked.

Subramanian’s contention is that the only way to correct this unfortunate circumstance is by dismantling the IITs. It doesn’t matter that these centres of excellence produce the most talented tech people that the world recognises. It also doesn’t matter to her that these institutions are lifting the value of Brand India all over the world. She cannot tolerate the success of IIT people either in India or in Silicon Valley, or the way that they are spreading their influence all over the world through their professional networking. According to her, this spread of influence is pernicious because it is an expansion of Brahmin power.

Her theory assumes that lower caste people lack merit, because of which they cannot pass the entrance exam and qualify as IIT engineers. Therefore, she declares the entrance exam itself to be a sham. It is not based on true meritocracy because it excludes certain people. She does not support changing the system to treat equally the hands-on and theoretical students, even though that would remedy her claim of bias. Nothing less than rejecting meritocracy would satisfy her.

Subramanian’s problem with the IITs and her solution are linked to the Marxist ideology that she prescribes to. Since Marxism requires you to dismantle existing structures to make way for a new one and since IITs are well-established structures, she is calling for their destruction.

Details of her thesis and our rebuttal are in the book, Snakes in the Ganga. Visit: rajivmalhotra.com.

Read More
All Articles, Articles by Rajiv

राजीव मल्होत्रा का कॉलम: भारत के अंदरूनी मामलों में पश्चिम को इतनी रुचि क्यों? | Snakes in the Ganga

October 11, 2022

सामाजिक न्याय की आड़ में पश्चिमी विद्वानों ने अपनी शोध परियोजनाओं और सम्मेलनों का मूल विषय हमारे देश और उसकी सरकार, हमारे संविधान और सत्ताधारी दल पर आक्रमण करने को बना लिया है। जब भारत ने संविधान के अनुच्छेद 370, नागरिकता संशोधन अधिनियम और नए कृषि कानून सम्बंधी परिवर्तन लाने चाहे तो ये पश्चिमी विद्वानों के लिए ऐसे मौके बन गए, जिनके द्वारा वे कुछ भारतीय लोगों की पहचान पीड़ित के रूप में दिखाकर उन्हें सरकार के विरुद्ध भड़का सकें।

कश्मीर, LGBTQ+ और अल्पसंख्यकों का दमन ऐसे मुद्दे हैं, जिन पर उनका विशेष ध्यान रहता है। कई निष्पक्ष विषय- जैसे जनस्वास्थ्य, अर्थव्यवस्था, उद्यमिता, युवा प्रशिक्षण, तकनीक के प्रसार और संचार-प्रशिक्षण का प्रयोग भी आवरण के रूप में किया जाता है। उन भारतीय लोगों को पीड़ित दिखाने की कोशिश की जाती है, जो पश्चिमी नस्लवाद के सिद्धांत ‘क्रिटिकल रेस थ्योरी’ के अनुरूप बैठते हैं।

यहां तक कि संस्कृत अध्ययन में भी मानवाधिकार वाली दृष्टि का उपयोग किया जाता है और संस्कृत में लिखे ग्रंथों पर ब्राह्मणवादी होने का आरोप लगाया जाता है। ऐसा भी आरोप लगाया जाता है कि संस्कृत ग्रंथों में दलितों और महिलाओं के दमन को प्रोत्साहित किया गया है। मिसाल के तौर पर हार्वर्ड यूनिवर्सिटी- जो ज्ञान का एक वैश्विक केंद्र है- के द्वारा काले/श्वेत लोगों के अमेरिकी इतिहास और कानूनों को भारत में लाकर उन्हें यहां के दलितों/ब्राह्मणों पर थोपने का प्रयास चल रहा है।

इस कारण भारत के विरुद्ध तथाकथित ‘पीड़ित’ समूहों की संख्या बढ़ती जा रही है। प्रत्येक समूह को भारत पर कीचड़ उछालने के लिए प्रलोभन दिया जाता है और हम बनाम वो, पीड़ित बनाम उत्पीड़क इत्यादि का चतुराईपूर्वक प्रयोग कर संघर्ष उत्पन्न करवाया जाता है। मार्क्सवाद के सिद्धांतकार तथा प्रचारक ग्राम्शी के काउंटर-हेजेमनी के विकास के सिद्धांत को उपयोग में लाते हुए कई ऐसी शोध परियोजनाएं चल रही हैं, जिनके द्वारा डेटाबेस और लेखागार विकसित किए जा रहे हैं।

पश्चिमी विद्वानों के इस्लाम और हिंदू धर्म के प्रति व्यवहार में हम प्रत्यक्ष रूप से दोहरी नीति एवं भेदभाव देख सकते हैं। इस्लाम को सदा ही पीड़ित दर्शाया जाता है, जिसके अनुयायियों को सहानुभूति की आवश्यकता है जबकि हिंदू धर्मावलम्बियों को सर्वदा उत्पीड़क, दमनकारी, नियंत्रणकारी इत्यादि के रूप में दर्शाया जाता है। कभी-कभी तो हिंदू धर्म के जड़ से उन्मूलन की बात भी की जाती है। पश्चिमी विद्वान इस्लामोफोबिया की कड़ी निंदा करते हैं, तो वही दृष्टिकोण हिंदूफोबिया के लिए भी अपनाया जाना चाहिए।

दुर्भाग्यवश, स्थिति इसके एकदम विपरीत है। कई ऐसे उदाहरण मिलते हैं, जिनसे लगता है कि वे हिंदूफोबिया को बनाए रखना चाहते हैं, उसका विरोध नहीं करना चाहते। हार्वर्ड केनेडी स्कूल के एक शिक्षक ने ट्वीट करते हुए कहा था, ‘भारत के हिंदू रोगी/भद्दे होते हैं, यह इनकी धार्मिक पुस्तकों के कारण है जो इनको इस प्रकार से प्रशिक्षित करती हैं।’

हिंदू स्टूडेंट्स काउंसिल द्वारा हार्वर्ड को भेजे गए एक अन्य पत्र में यह असंतोष व्यक्त किया गया था कि वह ऐसा गढ़ बन चुका है, जहां हिंदूफोबिया अत्यंत मुखर है और इसका समर्थन हार्वर्ड के शिक्षकगणों द्वारा कई स्थितियों में किया जाता है। यूनिवर्सिटी के समर्थन से अमेरिकी कांग्रेस ने एक बिल पास किया था, जिसमें विश्व स्तर पर इस्लामोफोबिया को दंडनीय अपराध घोषित किया गया। इस प्रकार की सुरक्षा किसी अन्य धर्म को नहीं दी गई।

इसी समय पकिस्तान ने संयुक्त राष्ट्र महासभा में ‘इस्लामोफोबिया से संघर्ष के अंतर्राष्ट्रीय दिवस’ को लेकर एक प्रस्ताव भी पेश किया। फ्रांस ने इस प्रकार के प्रस्ताव को सभी धर्मों के लिए पेश करने का समर्थन किया और भारत का भी यही विचार था, किंतु कई इस्लामिक राष्ट्रों ने केवल इस्लाम के लिए उस प्रस्ताव का समर्थन किया। अंततः 15 मार्च को अंतरराष्ट्रीय इस्लामोफोबिया के विरुद्ध संघर्ष दिवस के रूप में मनाने का निर्णय ले ही लिया गया।

इस प्रकार के डेटाबेस बनाने की कोशिशें की जा रही हैं, जो राष्ट्रीय सुरक्षा के लिए खतरा हैं। हर प्रकार की सामाजिक जानकारियों को इकट्ठा कर उनका उपयोग विरोध और असंतोष उत्पन्न करने के लिए किया जाता है।

Read More
All Articles, Articles by Rajiv

भारतीय इतिहास पर वामपंथ का प्रभुत्व

June 17, 2022

राजीव मल्होत्रा और मीनाक्षी जैन के संवाद पर आधारित लेख – राजीव मल्होत्रा द्वारा वर्णित – भाग १

इस व्याख्यान में, मैं दिल्ली विश्वविद्यालय में इतिहास और राजनीति विज्ञान की एक रीडर, मीनाक्षी जैन, के काम पर चर्चा करना चाहता हूँ। मैं मीनाक्षी जैन को दो दशकों से जानता हूँ और उन्हें भारतीय इतिहास और राजनीतिक मामलों के सबसे श्रेष्ठ विद्वानों में से एक मानता हूँ। उन्होंने शेल्डन पोलक पर दिल्ली में स्वदेशी इण्डोलोजी 2 सम्मेलन में भाग लिया था और एक उत्तम पेपर प्रस्तुत किया था। हम दोनों में एक बात उभयनिष्ठ है, कि हम दोनों ने भारत में वामपन्थी लोगों के काम की आलोचना की है, जो या तो हमसे लड़ते हैं या फिर हमें अनदेखा करते हैं या फिर हमें अजीब नामों से बुलाते हैं। मेरा अनेक वर्षों से मीनाक्षी जैन जी के साथ सम्पर्क नहीं रहा था और मैंने सोचा कि यह इस अन्तराल में हुई घटनाओं को जानने के लिए एक अच्छा समय होगा |

भारतीय शिक्षाविदों में वामपन्थी-विचारकों की पकड़, अयोध्या बाबरी मस्जिद विवाद, सती, मूर्तिभंजन के बारे में ग़लत धारणाओं और शोध के भावी स्वदेशी इण्डोलोजी क्षेत्र जैसे विषयों पर हमारी एक अद्भुत चर्चा हुई।

भारतीय शिक्षाविदों पर वामपन्थी-प्रभुत्व

वामपन्थ के युग के दौरान, जो इरफ़ान हबीब और रोमिला थापर जैसे विद्वानों के प्रभुत्व की अवधि में है, भारत के शिक्षाविदों में प्रचलित विद्वता पर चर्चा करते हुए, वो उल्लेख करती हैं कि भारतीय शिक्षाविदों पर उनकी मज़बूत पकड़ पूरी तरह से थी। वो वित्तपोषण करने वाली सभी एजेन्सियों पर पूरे नियन्त्रण का अभ्यास करते थे और जो भी छात्र शोध करना चाहते थे, उन्हें इन लोगों के तहत और इन लोगों के दृष्टिकोण से शोध करना पड़ता था। इसलिए जो व्यक्ति उन लोगों की विचारधारा या सोचने के तरीके का विरोध करता था, ऐसे किसी व्यक्ति के लिए इतिहासकार के रूप में या किसी विद्वान के रूप में कोई स्थान बनाना बहुत कठिन था। इसलिए यदि किसी भी व्यक्ति का कोई अलग या विपरीत दृष्टिकोण था या वो अपने स्वयम् के पथ को निर्धारित करना चाहता था, उसके लिए यह एक बहुत ही अकेला रास्ता था और वे बस अपने बूते पर थे।

भारतीय शिक्षाविदों के वामपन्थी-प्रभुत्व प्रारम्भ तब हुआ था जब कांग्रेस पार्टी की सरकार अल्पमत में आ गई थी। उस समय पर, कांग्रेस सरकार को गठबन्धन के साझेदारों की आवश्यकता थी और उन्होंने भारतीय कम्युनिस्ट पार्टी (सीपीआई) को चुना था। जब उनकी विचारधारात्मक स्थिति को आगे बढ़ाने का सम्बन्ध है, तब वामपन्थ सदैव बहुत कुटिल रहा है, और भारतीय इतिहास की विशिष्ट वामपन्थी कहानी को आकार देने के लिए एक औज़ार के रूप में, शिक्षा मन्त्रालय के महत्व का एहसास करते हुए, उन्होंने शिक्षा मन्त्रालय की बागड़ोर संभाली और इसे प्रोफ़ेसर नूरूल हसन को सौंपा गया जो सीपीआई के एक कार्ड धारक सदस्य थे। यह पद सँभालते ही जो पहला काम प्रोफ़ेसर नूरुल हसन ने अपने दल के साथ किया था, वह था – ऐसे सभी इतिहासकारों को ब्लॉक करना या अवैध करना, जो इतिहास को देखने के वामपन्थी लेन्स को स्वीकार नहीं करते थे। आर सी मजूमदार और यदुनाथ सरकार जैसे अनेक प्रसिद्ध गैर-वामपन्थी इतिहासकारों के योगदान को दरकिनार कर दिया गया था।

उदाहरण के लिए, यदुनाथ सरकार ने प्रशासन, कृषि और इस तरह के अन्य जैसे विभिन्न पहलुओं को स्पष्ट रूप से चित्रित करके, भारतीय इतिहास के सन्दर्भ में मुगल साम्राज्य का एक व्यापक अनुभवजन्य अध्ययन किया था। फिर भी, वामपन्थियों ने भारतीय इतिहास के इस साक्ष्य-आधारित दृष्टिकोण को छोटा करने का प्रयास किया। जदुनाथ सरकार की एक हालिया जीवनी में, यह विद्वान इस बात को देखते हुए चकित है कि इरफ़ान हबीब अपनी किताब “मुग़ल भारत की कृषि प्रणाली” में जदुनाथ सरकार का एक बार भी उल्लेख नहीं करते है। एक प्रकार से, गैर-वामपन्थी इतिहासकारों को इतिहास के पन्नों से व्यवस्थित रूप से मिटा दिया गया है, ताकि वामपन्थियों को ऐसे असुविधाजनक तथ्यों से निपटना न पड़े, जो उनकी कहानी के अनुरूप नहीं बैठते हैं।

गैर-वामपन्थी विद्वानों के लिए, अकादमिक रूप से फलना-फूलना या अपने पेपर्स या पुस्तकों को प्रकाशित करवा पाना बहुत कठिन है। कोई व्यक्ति जिस किसी प्रकाशक के पास जाता है, उन प्रकाशकों को इन पेपर्स या पुस्तकों को समीक्षकों को देना होता है, और जो लोग महत्वपूर्ण होने के लिए ज्ञात हैं, भले ही वे अच्छे विद्वान हैं या नहीं, वे इस तरह के वामपन्थी-झुकाव वाले शिक्षाविद होते हैं जो पुस्तक की बस हत्या कर देते हैं।

मीनाक्षी जी इस सरल कारण से बच गयीं कि वे किसी भी व्यक्ति से कोई संरक्षण नहीं चाहतीं थीं। वे कोई नौकरी नहीं ढूँढ रहीं थीं। उनके पास एक साधारण नौकरी थी जो उनके खर्चे निकालाने के लिए पर्याप्त थी। क्योंकि उनकी पुस्तकों को प्रकाशित करवाना इतना कठिन था, तो उन्होंने इस पर कभी समय नहीं गँवाया। वे जानतीं थीं कि उनके द्वारा लिखा प्रालेख वामपन्थी विद्वानों के पास जाएगा और वे उसे अंततः अस्वीकार ही करेंगे, इसलिए उन्होंने कभी अपनी पुस्तकें छपवाने का गंभीर प्रयास नहीं किया। उदाहरण के लिए, एक पुस्तक जिसमें मध्यकालीन अवधि में हिन्दू-मुस्लिम सम्बन्धों पर एक बहुत विस्तृत अध्ययन था, उसे एक समीक्षक के पास भेजा गया और समीक्षक ने कहा कि यह एक बहुत ही गम्भीर काम है और यह ऐसी सभी बातों का उल्लेख करता है जो इस विषय पर लिखी गई हैं, परन्तु मैं प्रकाशक को यह लिखने की सलाह देता हूँ “यह हिन्दू-मुस्लिम सम्बन्धों का एक हिन्दू दृष्टिकोण है”। इसलिए, स्वाभाविक रूप से, प्रकाशक डर गया और उन्होंने कहा, “मुझे बहुत खेद है, परन्तु मैं इसे प्रकाशित नहीं कर सकता क्योंकि यह हिन्दू दृष्टिकोण प्रस्तुत करती है”।

मीनाक्षी जी ने चार पुस्तकों के लिए चार प्रकाशकों को आज़माया और जिस-जिस व्यक्ति को प्रालेख भेजा, उनमें से हर एक ने कहा कि यह एक बहुत ही उच्च कोटि का काम है, परन्तु यह केवल एक दृष्टिकोण प्रस्तुत करता है। इसलिए इसे अस्वीकार कर दिया गया था। वास्तव में, अयोध्या पर उनका प्रालेख चार प्रकाशन गृहों द्वारा अस्वीकार कर दिया गया और यह केवल भारतीय पुरातत्वविदों (जो उस स्थल की खुदाई करने में बहुत सक्रिय रूप से सम्मिलित थे) का हस्तक्षेप था, कि अंततः इसे प्रकाशित करवाया गया।

 

भारत, जैसा उन्होंने देखा

मीनाक्षी जैन ने “भारत, जैसा उन्होंने देखा” नामक, भारत का एक तीन खण्ड का अध्ययन किया है जो मध्य आठवीं से लेकर उन्नीसवीं शताब्दी तक भारत आए विदेशी यात्रियों का एक विवरणयुक्त खाता प्रस्तुत करता है। ये यात्री दुनिया के विभिन्न भाग, जैसे यूरोप, चीन, सुदूर पूर्व और मुस्लिम देशों से आए थे। वास्तव में, उनमें से बहुत सारे अरब और साथ ही फारसी लेखक थे। इस शोध के लिए स्रोत अधिकतर ऐसे लेख थे जिनका अनुवाद अंग्रेजी में किया गया था, और जिन्हें विश्व भर के पुस्तकालयों और संस्थानों से एकत्र किया गया था।

लगभग सभी विवरणों में, यह बात स्पष्ट है कि ये यात्री भारत को बहुत उच्च सम्मान दिया करते थे। भारत में उन्होंने जो कुछ भी देखा था, वे उस बारे में विस्मय से भर जाते थे, चाहे यह आर्थिक प्राण-शक्ति, समाज में महिलाओं का स्थान या लचीले दो-आयामी जाति-वर्ण प्रणाली की वास्तविक प्रकृति था, जिसे बाद में ब्रिटिश द्वारा एक पदानुक्रमित एक-आयामी जाति व्यवस्था में ढहा दिया गया था।

भारत की उनकी पहली यात्रा पर पिएत्रो डेला वैले के रूप में जाने वाले एक इटेलियन नोबलमैन दक्षिण भारत गए थे। ईरान के शाह का साक्षात्कार करने के बाद, उन्होंने फारस से भारत की यात्रा की थी। उनके साथ एक दुभाषिया था। उन दिनों, मातृवंशीय समाज दक्षिणी क्षेत्रों में प्रचलित था, और पिएत्रो ने जाना कि जिस गाँव का उन्होंने दौरा किया था, उसकी शासक एक महिला थीं। उन्हें यह सूचित किया गया था कि उस समय वह महिला एक खेत में एक नाली की खुदाई का पर्यवेक्षण करने में व्यस्त थीं। पिएत्रों ने खेत का दौरा किया और उस महिला को एक साधारण व्यक्ति की तरह कपड़े पहने और नंगे पैर चलते पाया। परन्तु पिएत्रों यह जानकर भौचक्के रह गए कि वह महिला विभिन्न सामाजिक-आर्थिक मुद्दों के साथ पूरी तरह से परिचित थीं और उन्हें इस तरह के मामलों में ईरान के शाह की तुलना में कोई कम बोध नहीं था।

एक और बात जो विदेशी यात्रियों के लेखनों के किसी विवरणयुक्त अध्ययन से स्पष्ट है, वह भारतीय समाज में ब्राह्मणों का उच्च सम्मान है। यह किसी पदानुक्रमित जाति व्यवस्था और एक टूटे हुए बाल्कनाइज्ड समाज की मुख्यधारा की कहानी के विपरीत है, जहाँ ब्राह्मणों को तथाकथित निचली जातियों के उत्पीड़कों के रूप में चित्रित किया जाता है। 1766 के आसपास, मद्रास के एक अंग्रेजी कलेक्टर मद्रास से दूसरे गाँव तक यात्रा करना चाहते थे जो कुछ सौ मील दूर था। क्योंकि वह पूरी दूरी तक किसी घोड़े की सवारी नहीं करना चाहते थे, इसलिए उन्होंने एक पालकी पर स्वयम् को पूरी तक ले जाने के लिए पालकी के कहारों को तय किया। जब वे उस गन्तव्य पर पहुँचे, तो सड़क यात्रा के कारण पालकी के कहार मिट्टी से सने हुए थे। कलेक्टर पालकी से उतरे और उनके ध्यान में आया कि गाँव में कोई भी व्यक्ति उन पर कोई ध्यान नहीं दे रहा था। वे पालकी के कहारों को प्रणाम कर रहे थे, जो सभी ब्राह्मण थे, और भारतीय परम्पराओं और ज्ञान प्रणाली के पारम्परिक संरक्षक होने के लिए, उन्हें उच्च सम्मान दिया जाता था। कोई राजनीतिक शक्ति हुए बिना, उन्हें तत्कालीन भारतीय समाज में बहुत उच्च सम्मान दिया जाता था।

यह शोध का एक बहुत ही महत्वपूर्ण क्षेत्र है, जो कुछ आश्चर्यजनक खोजों तक ले जा सकता है जो प्रचलित समझ को चुनौती देगा और भारतीय समाज और जाति की गतिशीलता के बारे में आज हम जो सोचते हैं, उसका खण्डन करेगा। इस विषय में भारत के बारे में विदेशी यात्रियों के मूल स्रोतों से ऐसे निष्कर्षों, जो किसी भी विशिष्ट विचारधारा या विद्वानों की झूठी बातों से छाने नहीं गए है, पर एक पैनल या एक गम्भीर सम्मेलन का आयोजन करने की आवश्यकता है । मैं समझता हूँ कि यह बहुत रोचक और अद्भुत तथ्यों को सामने लाएगा।

ध्यान दें: यह लेख इस श्रृंखला का पहला भाग है और इस विडियो पर आधारित है।

Read More
All Articles, Articles by Rajiv

Dismantling Global Hindutva’ and the American nexus of Hinduphobia

August 27, 2021

Twenty-five years ago, my foundation was funding numerous academic conferences and scholarships at major American universities on topics related to Indian civilisation. That is how I discovered serious biases against Hinduism – not mere acts of ignorance but also deliberate misrepresentations and outright lies intended to harm the tradition. Ganesha’s trunk was being taught as a symbol representing “the limp phallus”. The Bhagavad Gita, one of the most popular Hindu texts worldwide, was declared “a dishonest book”. Lord Rama was deemed a male chauvinist and Sita an abused wife. And so on.

As I researched more, I discovered that there was a systemic effort to build an entire ecosystem of scholars, funders and journals geared towards producing Hinduphobic scholarship. Harvard, Columbia, and the University of Chicago were among the main academic centres implicated. Thus, I switched from being the major funding source for Hinduism studies in the American academy to becoming a serious critic of the academic establishment. I wrote detailed rebuttals in blogs and books, and there were numerous conferences to raise awareness. The arrogant American academicians had never faced this systematic takedown from an Indian in recent times. Naturally, many fights ensued, including some ugly ones.

Since then, the problem has worsened. The number of Hinduphobics (as I have referred to them) has shot up across South Asian Studies on dozens of campuses, and collaborations established between white American scholars and their Indian “sepoys”, a term I have used to refer to the Indians who have sold out to serve the white scholars. There have been virtually no opportunities for both sides to engage in mutually respectful debates to resolve issues.

Hinduism has been portrayed as a human rights nightmare, the cause of every problem in India. The claims are extreme and not nuanced: women are abused specifically because of Hinduism. Caste problems and the plight of minority religions are entirely the fault of Hinduism. All gurus are quacks and abusive. Political leaders and public intellectuals who practice or express sympathy toward Hinduism are demonized. Attempts to reclaim Hindu heritage are viciously attacked. With the help of leftwing media, think tanks, and government policymakers in various countries, legislation and adverse campaigns have been launched against the core tenets and exemplars of Hinduism. Even the grammar of Sanskrit has been declared abusive in its very structure.

While support for my rejoinders was scanty in the early years, things have changed in recent times. Hundreds of social media channels and tens of thousands of Hindus in the individual capacity have started pushing back, and a countermovement of scholars, activists, media personalities and laypeople has started to emerge. Litigation is around the corner, and both sides engage in mudslinging.

It is against this background that the recent eruption between a cabal of academics and the Hindu public can be understood. The latest episode in this drama is that a junior and ambitious professor at Rutgers University, Audrey Truschke, announced a conference with the provocative title, “Dismantling Global Hindutva,” though she is not involved publicly in an official capacity. She has made a career based on picking fights with Hindus by insulting their deities and accusing them of killing Muslims, while closing ranks with Pakistanis and anti-India activists in India. For instance, she portrays Aurangzeb as one of the noblest and most benevolent rulers who helped Hindus, whereas Hindu kings are seen as abusive. Not too long ago, she and a group of South Asian scholars developed a “Hindutva Harassment Field Manual”, which quotes sources that have called for dismantling Hinduism, disparaged Hindu traditions, and declared Hinduism as equivalent to slavery.

The conference features mostly India-based sepoys well known for their hatred for Hinduism. None of them is a scholar of religious studies, much less of Hinduism. Interestingly, most of them are not even academicians because they do not have academic posts. They work as NGO activists and political operatives. Yet, the event is being portrayed as an “academic” conference.

The conference is deliberately timed to coincide with the 20th anniversary of the 11 September attacks by Islamist terrorists against the USA. The idea is to try and portray Hinduism as the same kind of violent religious ideology as that practised by the Taliban.
The most serious aspect is that the conference organisers claim it is being sponsored by approximately 40 American and Canadian universities. This turns it into a threat to the Hindu community far more serious than any attack by a few isolated individuals wanting to vent their personal gripes.

Rutgers University, where Truschke is employed, has upwards of 5,000 Indian students, one of the largest Indian student bodies in the country. Many of these students fear being branded as terrorists or extremists merely because of their faith. In an era where American universities pull out all the stops to protect students from aggressions, the Hindu students are left to fend for themselves in campus settings that are blatantly Hinduphobic.

The Indian student body forms a large tuition-paying clientele for American universities. In 2021 alone, there were over 55,000 F1 visas issued for students from India. These students are either paying a steep price for an undergraduate degree or putting in sweat labour as graduate students. In addition, there are the Indian-American students (NRIs) at the universities who also pay hefty undergraduate tuition. Universities will have to proactively distance themselves from such conferences.

Naturally, this direct insult has mobilised the Hindu community worldwide. Donors who give millions of dollars to American universities have made phone calls expressing their concerns over this hate speech. Hindu students and their parents have woken up. Many petitions, campaigns and social media discussions have brought together tens of thousands of Hindus, many of whom had no prior knowledge of Hinduphobia. Ironically, this has brought Hindus closer far more effectively than all my efforts over the past nearly 30 years.

The rapid response by Hindus has produced results. Stanford University distanced itself from the event, issuing a notice saying, “the University is not a co-sponsor of this event, nor supports it”. The following day, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign announced, “Opinions or actions by individual faculty members or academic units do not represent the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.” A trustee of Rice University told me that the university was approached for support, but it declined. I was contacted by two university presidents wanting my input, and it appears they were upset that no due process had been followed before using their universities’ names. Clearly, they were upset at being dragged into the dirty politics in the guise of academic freedom. Many also worry about being implicated in lawsuits that are likely to follow against the organisers of the conference.

One duplicitous professor claiming to speak for Hinduism, while in reality undermining its credibility, is Anantanand Rambachan of St Olaf College, a college run by the Lutheran Church. His defence of the conference is based on his attempt to separate the term “Hindutva” from Hinduism, and to argue that the attack on Hindutva is not an attack on Hinduism. But this logic is seriously flawed. The term “Hindutva” is used to criticise all aspects of Hinduism, while claiming to be different from Hinduism. In the eyes of the public and the American media and policymakers being targeted, any distinction between these terms is blurry. Furthermore, the speakers being featured are well-known Hinduphobics with a history of making highly toxic statements against the Hindu faith practised by a billion people.

Although, this initiative has united Hindus globally, a lot remains to be done. Hindu watchdog groups need to be set up and work together with advocacy groups on a regular basis. Our globe-trotting gurus need to show leadership by making statements condemning such efforts. The external affairs ministry, ICCR and the Nehru cultural centers should put out strong statements denouncing such hate-based initiatives. Hindu business leaders who have strong connections with academia need to openly denounce such conferences, which have little to do with academia and more to do with politics.

Personally, I support freedom of speech and academic freedom, including the right to criticise any religion. But a level playing field requires that all faiths must be treated with equal intensity. One does not find similar kinds of academic assaults against Islam, for instance. In fact, the leftist-dominated humanities and social sciences on campuses go out of their way to protect Islam and condemn any criticism as Islamophobia. Moreover, academic freedom is purely one-sided, and contrarian views are not entertained by academia. I have personally invited many Hinduphobic academics for debates to no avail.

The Indian speakers involved in the conference have a track record of attacking American imperialism and capitalism and openly supporting violent armed struggles. But, when it comes to “dismantling” the majority faith of Indians, they bow before a junior white American scholar and her cabal and dish out the fabricated materials against their own heritage.

One is reminded that once upon a time, Indians used to go to their British rulers asking for help to settle scores against each other. We know what that led to. Now it is the

Americans being hoisted by Indians as the new authority that should adjudicate infighting among Indian political camps and provide a theatre to play out the Hinduphobia.

Rajiv Malhotra is a researcher, writer, speaker and public intellectual on current affairs as they relate to civilizations, cross-cultural encounters, religion and science. Views expresser are personal.

Published: August 27, 2021

Read More
AI & The Future of Power, All Articles, Articles by Rajiv

Explained: Why does India lag at least a decade behind China in AI and related technologies

June 29, 2021

India is lagging behind China in Artificial Intelligence (AI) by at least a decade and also, unique data assets are routinely given away to foreign countries because of the ignorance of her leaders. Given the lack of effective strategic planning on AI and big data, plus its dependence on American digital platforms and Chinese hardware, India might slip further toward digital colonisation. Why does India lag at least a decade behind China in AI and related technologies, despite India having been recently proclaimed as the world leader in software? How vulnerable is India to becoming a digital colony of the West and China? How do Indian industries, military and other sectors stack up in addressing the AIbased technological revolution? India’s security involves combating internal insurgencies as well as protecting long borders with hostile neighbours. This requires considerable manpower that consumes bulk of the military budget. Insufficient funds remain for indigenous R&D and technology related modernisation. India is dependent on imported weapons to defend herself. India might find herself facing Pakistani boots on the ground, weaponised by China’s AI-based technology. How seriously vulnerable is India’s national security considering it is lagging in AI?

Artificial Intelligence (AI) amplifies the human mind and ingenuity in amazing ways across virtually every domain. It is the engine driving the latest technological disruption that is shaking the foundations of society. The use of the term is not limited to a technical definition, but also includes the entire ecosystem of technologies that AI propels forward such as quantum computing, semi-conductors, nanotechnology, medical technology, brain-machine interface, robotics, aerospace, 5G and much more.

AI can be used as the umbrella term because it leverages their development and synergises them.

On the one hand, AI is the holy grail of technology; the advance that people hope will solve problems across virtually every domain of our lives. On the other, it is disrupting a number of delicate equilibriums and creating conflicts on a variety of fronts. Given the vast canvas on which AI’s impact is being felt, one needs a simple lens to discuss its complex ramifications in an accessible way. In my recent book, “Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Power: 5 Battlegrounds”, the disruptions of AI are organised into five broad areas each having multiple players with competing interests and high stakes. These battlegrounds are:–

Battle for economic development and jobs

Battle for power in the new world order

Battle for psychological control of agency and choices

Battle for the metaphysics of the self and its ethics

Battle for India’s future

In each situation, the prevailing equilibriums are being challenged, creating tensions among the parties held in balance. We are entering an epoch of disequilibrium in which a period of chaos is inevitable. Eventually, however, a new equilibrium will be established, and a new kind of world will emerge.

Battleground 1: Economic Development and Jobs

A recurrent debate surrounding AI concerns the extent of human work that could be replaced by machines over the next twenty years when compared to the new jobs created by AI. Numerous reports have addressed this issue, reaching a wide range of conclusions. Experts consider it a reasonable consensus that eventually a significant portion of blue-and white-collar jobs in most industries will become obsolete, or at least transformed to such an extent that workers will need re-education to remain viable. The percentage of vulnerable jobs will continue to increase over time. The obsolescence will be far worse in developing countries with poor standards of education.

The routine assurance given to these reasonable concerns is that when AI eliminates certain jobs, those employees forced out will move up the value chain to higher-value tasks. This simplistic and misleading answer overlooks the fact that the training and education required to advance people is not happening nearly at the same feverish rate as the adoption of AI. Those that promise the solution of re-education have not thus far put their money where their mouth is. The gap of employee qualifications will inevitably widen.

Business owners and labour have competing interests, with the former looking to optimise profits and the latter concerned about wages and employment. AI disrupts this precarious balance because it suddenly kills old jobs; it also creates new jobs, but the most lucrative new ones will be concentrated in communities with high levels of education and availability of capital. More broadly, AI will worsen the divide between the rich and poor, the haves and the have-nots and this could precipitate social instability, especially for countries such as India, where a large percentage of the population lacks the education that is vital to survive a technological tsunami.

My approach to AI’s social impact is neither haloed by utopian fantasy nor dipped in gloom. I raise some practical concerns:–

What will happen when AI makes large numbers of workers obsolete?

Who will pay for the re-education of the literally millions of displaced workers?

Will the new jobs be in places far removed from where the unemployment will hit hard?

Will society’s wealth become even more concentrated because a minuscule percentage of humans will control the powerful AI technologies?

How will the new haves and have-nots fight for resources and how might such social disequilibrium ultimately play out?

This battleground is important for industrialists and labour activists, as well as for economists and policymakers. Civic leaders, politicians, public intellectuals, and the media cannot continue to ignore the evolution of AI.

Battleground 2: Geopolitics

This is the battleground where China is using AI as its strategic weapon to leapfrog ahead of the United States (US) and achieve global domination. Both these superpowers recognise AI as the prized summit to be conquered in their race for leadership in economic, political and military affairs. While aerospace, semi-conductors, biotech and other technologies are crucial in this race, AI brings them together and catapults them to new levels. Both these countries are heavily invested in AI and between them, they control the vast majority of AI-related intellectual property, investments, market share and key resources.

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Chinese military are among those developing AI systems that multiply a single fighter plane into a squadron or mini air force of drones at the push of a button. Pilots will be able to launch drones and control their navigation remotely, forcing the enemy to deal with a multitude of aircraft instead of just one. Similarly, artificial foot soldiers will be adept at negotiating potholes, rocks, landmines, shrubs – any natural or artificial land features that create significant obstacles for the average soldier. Robotic warriors will eventually perform more effectively than human soldiers in tough terrain and climatic conditions.

Both China and the US are upgrading their weapons systems to fight wars with smart autonomous weapons, and the strategic and tactical decision-making will be supported by AI-based systems capable of analysing complex situations and taking independent action. Besides competing directly against each other, the US and China will also compete for control over satellite nations and new colonies. This results from the fact that the disruptive technology will weaken many sovereign states and destabilise fragile political equilibriums. There is a realistic scenario for the re-colonisation of the world as digital colonies.

China’s rise to power in this century must be compared with Britain’s emergence as the world power in the 1700s. Britain achieved dominance through the Industrial Revolution and China aspires to achieve it through the AI revolution. China has successfully catapulted itself from a poor country to an imperial power, asserting its influence over Africa, Latin America and parts of Asia. China has gambled its entire nation-building strategy and is taking huge risks and making bold long-term investments. No other country has bet so much of its future on AI. Given its form of government, China can gather data about its population better than other countries. In fact, its citizens are accustomed to the loss of privacy and have become convinced of the benefits to the collective good.

There is no serious resistance to surveillance in China. China is projecting its technology and financial capital to colonise other countries, most notably Pakistan and developing countries in Africa. Colonisation secures the strategic trade routes, the sources of raw materials and the captive markets for its industrial goods. In some places, China has already started using AI facial recognition to monitor populations on behalf of totalitarian regimes. Such applications are a new kind of colonisation facilitated by AI. Just as Rome used roads as a major instrument for expanding and controlling its far-flung empire, so also China is using the infrastructure of roads, railways and seaports in addition to digital highways to build its empire, as shown in the following figure from my book.

A key contributor to the consolidation of AI-based global power is the harvesting of big data from poor countries where it is easy to take advantage of ignorant and corrupt leaders. Private companies controlling this technology could become more powerful than many countries, just as the British East India Company – a private joint-stock company – became more powerful than any country of its time.

Battleground 3: Psychological Control and Agency

A troubling trend is that as machines get smarter, a growing number of humans are becoming dumber. In a sense, the public has outsourced its critical thinking, memory and agency to increasingly sophisticated digital networks. As in any outsourcing arrangement, the provider of services becomes more knowledgeable about the client’s internal affairs and the client becomes more dependent on the supplier. The quest for deep knowledge and critical thinking is fading because people are operating on autopilot rather than thinking on their own.

Google is becoming the “devta” or deity that will instantly supply all knowledge. Mastering the rituals and tricks of interacting with this digital deity is considered a mark of achievement to be proudly flaunted among peers. Cognitive skills like memory and attention span are atrophying, even as knowledge, authority and agency are being transferred from humans to machines. In effect, AI has managed to hack human psychology. Social media has confused people between knowledge, opinion and popularity; whatever is popular is assumed to be true. Individuals who lack followers, likes, shares and comments on social media often retreat into low self-esteem, depression, substance abuse or even suicide.

Machines surreptitiously model individual psychological behaviour by identifying the patterns of users’ choices and then use these models to manipulate and control their actions. The paradox is that manipulation is done under the guise of free services that are difficult to resist because they have now become an all-too normal part of our lives. Those who control the psychological models can use AI to influence human emotions and behaviour.

Some readers who cannot accept the viability of such psychological interventions need reminding that the Russians hacked the 2016 US presidential election with the use of Facebook and the British firm, Cambridge Analytica. Cognitive scientists and machine learning experts claim that no aspect of human functionality is ultimately beyond the scope of AI-based emotional analysis and manipulation. AI’s emotional engagement with people advances through a few definable stages:–

Learning about users’ emotions to build a psychological model or map of likely responses.

Establishing an emotional relationship that users learn to trust.

Offering personal, intimate advice, starting with gentle, harmless suggestions.

Substituting a mechanised form of companionship that seems human.

Manipulating human psychology by influencing users to behave according to mandates determined by the machine’s developers.

Machines can uncover our private selves to the extent of knowing us better than a spouse or close friend. Machines can penetrate us far more deeply and analyse our personal behavior microscopically and intimately. They record how we unconsciously respond to online choices and use this to develop insights into aspects of ourselves that we might not want to publicly disclose or even privately come to terms with. Besides individuals, AI researchers also model communities, cultures and subcultures. This data helps develop psychological profiles that anticipate reactions and can be used to manipulate or influence groups that have distinctive habits or tendencies.

Using emotional hooks as a bribe, machines tease out users’ motivations, both conscious and unconscious. An entire industry of AI-based artificial pleasures is emerging. The raw material required to develop machine understanding of human desires and the artificial manipulation of them is called ‘big data’. Most people happily and voluntarily give up this private data, often without realising it. Once the digital systems capture this data, they amass unprecedented power and wealth by analysing and manipulating our subconscious thoughts. People are being duped to part with their data in exchange for freebies and goodies that are disguised as services ranging from practical help for our physical health to emotional delights. The digital capitalists constantly reassure the public that data collection is for their own good using several pretexts. For instance, we are told that surveillance is a public safety service. The cameras capturing data everywhere are keeping us safe. Cookies are installed on users’ devices under the pretext that this provides more personalised experiences. Many companies use AI to spy on us and collect our private information, justifying their behaviour in the name of serving the public.

The private flow of data from consumer to machine also promotes the transfer of humans to machines. By figuring out the cognitive comfort zones for individuals, AIdriven systems can deliver emotional and psychological needs, thus gradually making people dependent on them. As machine intelligence increases, people move toward living in a world of artificially induced emotions and gratification. Eventually this trend leads to a syndrome I call ‘moronisation of the masses’. This mode of existence feeds into the business models of digital capitalism, as shown in figure below from my book.

AI technologies must be publicly debated as disruptors of the social structures that shape the world order – testing and redefining the limits of liberty, the future of democracy and the meaning of social justice. There has been insufficient open debate in which the utopian view of AI could be counterbalanced by realistic concern. While I am enthusiastic about AI’s potential, what gravely concerns me is the lack of open, thoughtful public debate on what an AI-dominated future could look like.

The asymmetric relationship between gigantic digital platform businesses – companies such as Google, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, to name a few – and their users, is of paramount importance. These companies deliver the most popular and widely-used services in the world today, designed specifically to meet the demands of a public that is hungry for social media. However, beneath the surface, the suppliers and consumers have opposing interests – in privacy, data rights, agency, intellectual property rights and free speech.

This battle is distinct from the other battles in one important respect, i.e., the suppliers of digital services understand the game and play it skillfully, while most consumers are not even aware that the interests of producers and consumers of digital media are at odds. In fact, when people are informed that they are voluntarily surrendering psychological control of their lives, they usually dismiss it as a conspiracy theory.

Battleground 4: Metaphysics

The success of AI is based on training machines to achieve intelligent behaviour; this has empowered a world view according to which life, mind and consciousness are merely biological processes running on human beings as machines. In effect, AI has helped biological materialism sneak in through the back door while the leaders of the consciousness movement have been blissfully taken off guard. What troubles me is that the digital industry empowering self-learning systems is proceeding in a direction opposite to the movements wanting to raise consciousness. In fact, this is the real clash of civilisations under way: the battle between algorithm and being.

The technical and commercial success of AI is built on the assumption that biology and mind are algorithmic machines that can be modeled, mimicked and manipulated using artificial interventions. It describes the implications of the success of materialism that detaches us from our very sense of self and being. The digital dehumanisation seems pleasant because the stimulation of pleasures and pains is being artificially managed to create a delusional life. This undermines the human concepts of free will, personal agency and the self in favour of artificially induced experiences. When the experiences become algorithmically controlled, what happens to the spiritual being that is the experiencer?

Battleground 5: India’s Future

Overpopulation, unemployment and poor education make India especially vulnerable. Many of its industries are technologically obsolete and dependent on imported technologies. India presently has a disappointing level of AI development and she needs to embark on a rapid programme to catch up. India is home to one of the largest talent pools of young brains, yet the shortsighted policies of its leaders continue to sell them out as cheap labour to make quick profits from wage arbitrage. In this way, India has squandered its software lead. While aspiring to become a world-class manufacturing base, most of India’s workforce is likely to remain immured in low-wage and low-skill tasks relative to better educated countries. India’s education system is not competitive enough to produce workers for the industries of the future. The ‘moronisation of the masses’ is making people mesmerised by theatrics, pageantry, grandstanding and personality cults for movie stars, cricketers, politicians and billionaires alike. Public forums are highly polarised and prone to sensationalism, dirty politics, and petty rivalries. A scan of daily headlines and social media shows insufficient interest in the serious issues discussed in this book. How psychologically vulnerable are the Indian masses because of the shift of their agency to the digital platforms?

India is lagging behind China in AI by at least a decade, and also, unique data assets are routinely given away to foreign countries because of the ignorance of her leaders. Given the lack of effective strategic planning on AI and big data, plus its dependence on American digital platforms and Chinese hardware, India might slip further toward digital colonisation. Why does India lag at least a decade behind China in AI and related technologies, despite India having been recently proclaimed as the world leader in software? How vulnerable is India to becoming a digital colony of the West and China? How do Indian industries, military, and other sectors stack up in addressing the AI-based technological revolution? India’s security involves combating internal insurgencies as well as protecting long borders with hostile neighbours. This requires considerable manpower that consumes bulk of the military budget. Insufficient funds remain for indigenous R&D and technology related modernisation. India is dependent on imported weapons to defend herself. India might find herself facing Pakistani boots on the ground, weaponised by China’s AI-based technology. How seriously vulnerable is India’s national security considering it is lagging in AI?

Conclusion

We live in an epoch defined by major disruptions – both predictable and unpredictable, desirable and undesirable. Clearly, AI is a major disruptive influence, one that to date has not been properly understood or even discussed, outside the circles of its experts. Artificial Intelligence has spread throughout much of society, especially since the beginning of the twenty-first century – across health, military, entertainment, education, marketing, manufacturing and just about every other sector. Even the least technologically savvy among us interacts with AI on a daily basis when we use social media via a smartphone or rely on a car’s navigation device. Whether you are a social media fanatic and diehard AI aficionado, a paranoid skeptic that barely has a social media footprint or something in between, it is impossible to escape the ubiquitous impact of AI technology.

But what if AI is like an iceberg with most of it hidden beneath the surface? And modern civilisation, like the luxury passenger ship Titanic, is on a collision course with it? Social and cultural thought leaders continue to embrace AI as a gateway to a technologicallyadvanced utopia. They are equivalent to the band that continued playing on the deck of the ship even as it was sinking. This complicity must be challenged to give the general population a glimpse into AI as a potential threat to our society’s rickety foundation.

Read More