On patriarchy and shotgun marriages

In a recent post on female sexual preferences, Jim writes about the need for shotgun marriages, when a boy “abducts” an unmarried, un-betrothed girl and takes her virginity and how fathers of such girls should be pressurized into accepting such marriages, and if they don’t, should be socially shamed.

I have a somewhat different take on this, as from my comment on JB:

Shotgun marriages should be seen as the last resort and an unfortunate compromise in any healthy patriarchy. Because girls should almost always be betrothed very early, preferably by the time the girl is 13 and before they really get the opportunity to see the world outside and start to “cruise” for alpha.

“Abduction” is not really abduction in 99.99% cases. It’s mostly the girl running away with the boy, in fact, in some cases even explicitly demanding she be abducted. When girl’s father lodges a police complaint against the boy for kidnapping, the girl usually says she came voluntarily with the boy! This happens too often. Modern “shotgun marriages” have become a way for girls to get their own way by undermining father’s authority.

In Indian movies of 80s 90s and even in 2000s there was a common thread. Rich girl – poor boy “love” story. Of course, the “rich” was usually a euphemism for upper caste and “poor” almost always meant lower caste. The boy was usually a wastrel / thug low-life (of course depicted in a positive light as a man with a heart of gold and his criminal activities usually justified as being for some noble cause, since he’s the hero of the movie) and the rich girl lusts after him after seeing him perform “criminal” acts and getting away with it. Of course, boy spurns girl initially and later accepts her at one point when she literally begs that he kidnap her and marry her, since her father will not accept the match and is arranging her to be married into her own station. The conflict between upper caste and lower caste was woven into this – such movies were made usually with the payload of undermining patriarchy and caste at the same time.

Now, of course, that is why even up to my grandfather’s generation, marriages were arranged very early, and a girl not being betrothed after 14 years was seen as undesirable.

If a girl’s father chooses not to arrange his daughter’s marriage early, of course, he should be responsible for the consequences that follow and a father who encourages his girl to study higher for career and become a whore should absolutely not be supported by society. But in a functional patriarchy such situations should be very rare.

My conclusion is that, the undermining of patriarchy starts with such “compromises” and ends up with outright female emancipation, with the State actually playing the role of the abductor and forcing parents to accept obviously wrong life choices of their daughters in the name of “freedom”.

Advertisement

Merchants never rule

One of the common debates that often come up in modern Right wing circles is the notion that Capitalists are evilzzz and are the principal drivers of political events and the narrative, as the shadowy bosses of the political class behind the scenes. This is both a left-wing attack and also a Prole “Right-wing” attack since Merchants are soft targets in any social hierarchy: they tend to be vulnerably wealthy and wealth gives the illusion of power without actual power.

But from a Varnashrama point of view, it is clear that having money does not give power. Power is the ability to merely open your palm and receive money. Priests, by definition, shun Mammon. Yet why do Priests in power receive money from merchants voluntarily? Well, it’s the “Tithe”, the quasi-official Church-tax of the modern political class. When the political elite (principally Priests in a democracy) gets funding from big business, big business is not in any way or manner influencing the Priests. On the other hand the receipt of Tithe shows the power and position of Priests vis-à-vis Merchants in the hierarchy. Every time a Merchant digs into his pocket to pay a Priest, the Merchant reinforces his own subordinate status to the Priest. While small Merchants are extremely low status, bigger Merchants fare little better in terms of political power.

Note that this phenomenon should not be confused with taxation. A “tax” is that which is levied by a Kshatriya Ruler on his subjects with a reciprocal promise of maintaining public order and development/maintenance of national infrastructure, which is to the direct benefit of all, especially Merchants. A Priest on the other hand gives absolutely no reciprocal promise for receiving “funding” from a Merchant. In fact, the Merchant signals his own holiness and allegiance to the Priesthood by giving money. In other words, a no-strings-attached tribute to the State Elite. By paying Tithe the Big Merchant merely gets minor status rewards and protection from committing inconsequential crimes (i.e. crimes that don’t affect the Priesthood’s power and status) from time to time, but never in a manner to overshadow the actual Priests in power. Note that these rewards are not a “right” that the Merchant can claim as one accrued on payment of Tithe, but handed out at the pleasure of the Priest, subject to his own arbitrary whim and fancy. Merchants who keep close to power give the appearance and illusion of power, but can be “cancelled” at any time by a ruling-class Priestly attack. It is the natural power dynamic and how Priests keep Merchants in line.

This is clear from the manner in which ruling Priests attack Merchants who tend to fall even slightly out of line from the State Religion and direct the anger of the Proles at the Merchants for “robbing them and keeping them poor.” Such Merchants are then forced to publicly fall at the Priest’s feet seeking apology. In a Communist State, of course, Merchants are cancelled completely and all Mercantile activity is taken over by a wing of the State, with the usual predictable fall-outs.

Dharmic Individualism vs atomic isolation

In the previous topic, there was a discussion about Aryan Individualism, which I wanted to expand into its own topic. Modern society, particularly in the West, has completely misinterpreted and subverted the meaning of “individualism” particularly the traditional individualism of Aryan society.

The key of Dharmic individualism is acceptance of one’s individual dharma, which is actually a part of the greater dharma. The individual dharma is distinct (which is what gives it the individualism) and yet seamlessly blends into the overall cosmic dharma. Our ancestors figured out this in the form of Varnashrama wherein individual dharma was broadly categorized to four types of personalities: Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaisya and Shudra. Within each varna, there are plenty of variations, right down to the specific individual’s temperament and capabilities. Therefore, it is wrong to conclude that acceptance of the individual dharma will lead to loss of freedom and compliance to herd behaviour. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Every artist is uniquely gifted, every warrior has a different choice of weapon to specialize in, every intellectual has his own area of study, every carpenter has his favourite tool and technique, every businessman has the choice of goods/services to deal in and so on. When each of these individuals accept their place in the overall dharma, they form a natural tribe based on family, kinship, ethnicity and ultimately nation, respectful of each other’s role and contributing to the overall development of society in healthy competition.

When one realizes and accepts one’s place in the overall scheme of things, there is natural happiness and fulfilment, as the individual dharma guides one to achieve his life purpose. In modern times, we have lost this knowledge and therefore rejected the Dharmic individualism that is innate in every higher being. Thus modern man denies and rejects his own nature and then becomes unhappy and unfulfilled, searching frantically for a new identity to fill the emptiness. This results in atomization and isolation from reality, not individualism. Falling fertility levels especially among elites is a result of an increasing rejection of the natural dharma, a result of spritual emptiness.

When one’s role in the greater dharma is not fulfilled however big or small, one is empty regardless of material prosperity. This void is precisely what is filled by adharma, creating artificial identities and tribes to replace the natural Dharmic ones and turning man against man, turning from cooperation to defection, resulting in social decay and eventual self-destruction.

Modern Democracy is the Electoral Theocracy of the Faith of Egalitarianism

Google (through Oxford dictionary) tells me that democracy is “a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.”

But modern “democracy” is most demonstrably not a mere system of government; Electoral Parliamentary, Republic and Presidential systems are. Democracy comes with it several unquestionable axioms on the nature of humanity that render it effectively a Government based on a belief system. Hence, a theocracy, with elections as the established ritual to worship the “will of the people”. I use the term Egalitarianism as a shorthand to cover all the prevailing beliefs of democracy. So democracy is the entire package: as for example, when the Adharmic Empire champions democracy in Afghanistan, it’s obvious that they’re not championing for the establishment of electoral process to appoint the Mullahs and the Supreme Leader of the Taliban. If viewed from this angle, things make sense as to why democracy has to be literally imposed through the barrel of a gun in other Theocracies. This also explains why Theocracies of the peaceful religion are irredeemably hostile to Democracy.

Freedom of speech and expression are supposed to be universal under democracy, but observe how that freedom is limited to the boundaries of the underlying beliefs. You can also believe in any God, so long as that God doesn’t contradict or challenge the Democratic God*. Today of course, this is more obvious in the way right-wing speech is being censored on social media and the manner in which “Woke” and “Cancel” culture operate without any apparent contradiction to democratic values. Merely observing and speaking about natural inequalities between races, cultures, male and female, or even about the biological basis of sex, is enough to deem you an enemy of democracy and an evil Nazi, whereas earlier it was not so. But this merely shows us that the permissible limits of what is allowed in democracy has merely shrunk from what it used to be as the Woke and Progressive cult has holiness spiraled and subverted the earlier “Liberal-Left” faction and became the dominant faction of the democratic religion. Naturally the political players only occupy the permissible spaces, and so the elites who get elected into power are merely on different points within the allowable spectrum. The Constitution is the Holy Book and elections and voting are therefore holy rituals of democracy.

It therefore goes without saying that being Theocracy, Democracy tolerates dissent only if it is not heretical to its fundamental beliefs or threatens its premises. So that today you have absolute freedom of expression to celebrate and espouse woke causes, celebrate diversity, multiculturalism, egalitarianism, victimhood of the {{{oppressed race/caste/religion}}}, LGBTQWERTY etc. but speaking out against any of these fundamental beliefs renders you liable for cancellation, un-personing, loss of job, loss of status and even criminal prosecution. Just as in a Theocracy of the Peaceful Religion, you have absolute freedom of speech and expression to espouse holy war against the infidels but even mildly questioning the Holy One will lead to dire consequences.

[ * ] An important point to consider is that since the Democratic Gods are non-Dharmic paper tigers being the creation of a “Constitution” and subject to arbitrary human interpretation at different points of time, when seriously challenged by followers of hostile Gods that are not paper tigers (particularly the Peaceful God), Democracy coyly averts its eyes and allows the mob to run riot while pretending that it’s not happening, while piously and self-righteously clamping down even harder on dissent elsewhere to prove that it is not under threat.

The genie will not go back into the bottle

The First Sister of the Peacefully Religious Theocratic Republic of Paschim Bangla had appealed to the peacefully religious protestors to wage their holy war be peaceful elsewhere but it appears that they haven’t paid heed to Her Holiness. But that’s to be expected. Note that the Indian English media is careful to call it “protests” and not “communal riots” in the fashion of the Cathedral media covering the aftermath of the martyrdom of St George Floyd. Now thats surely Progress isn’t it?

Old-school Leftists who ignite fires to warm their political ambitions are always “unable” to understand how the fire they expected to remain passively in the fireplace has become a conflagration they cannot control, despite repeated experiences. But in the case of the First Sister, I am willing to give the benefit of doubt that she indeed desired a very large conflagration, just not in her own backyard.

As I have observed before, Adharma is unrestrained. Non-delusional dharmics of course know that there can never be peace with the peaceful religion unless either side ends up resting in eternal peace.

The most moderate response would be to impose Rashtrapati Rajya in the state and sent in the troops to restore order. But realistically nothing of the sort will happen of course.

The 3 Ds of Prog attack – Demonization, Demoralization and Denigration

To defend against and defeat our enemies, we need to understand their tactics. The above are common tactics of adharmics in general, more particularly used by Progressives these days, and frequently used in debates against not only Hindus, but any established traditional social structure, in order to defeat and destroy it.

What does each of these achieve?

• Demonization – makes the target question their own moral standing and lowers their defences.
• Demoralization – obviously to lower the target’s morale for a fight.
• Denigration – lowers the status of the target.

Note that none of the above attacks target your intellect for rational responses.

Demonization is easy to understand. It is when the Prog talks about “oppressive Brahminical Patriarchy” and how the upper castes completely dominated and oppressed and other backward communities and practised other evils. Topics like “Sati” and “Untouchability” are frequently raked up in such debates. A lot of disinformation is used to prove points and effectively is a tool to divide and conquer, by pitting “oppressor” against the “oppressed” and demanding reparations for such alleged past “sins.” It keeps on the boil a continuous conflict which Progs exploit to destroy existing structures. Defending directly against the demonization attack is very time-consuming and energy draining, because honest, good faith rebuttals are ignored and the attack pursued with renewed vigour nevertheless. Demonization is used as a weapon to make well-meaning but otherwise credulous folk to question their own moral code, and against Hindus, it makes us question our Dharma and our culture. Since Progs are self-hating, they want you to hate yourself as well.

Demoralization is more subtle but a clear tactic to lower the resistance of the Prog’s target of attack. One obvious tactic used by Progs is to emphasize how Hindus were subjugated and never able to defeat the desert cult until the British saved us from the Mughals, so how thankful we must be to the British for “modernizing and educating” the Hindu. Of course, this is a blatant lie, which even the best of us fall for in the heat of the moment (Hat tip to regular commenter SomeDude who pointed it out to me on another forum). This map of the Maratha Empire circa 1759 shows the utter falsity of such propaganda. Hindus were definitely able to not just fight back against the adharmic desert cult, but even establish a large empire in a relatively short time.

Demoralization is a subtle weapon, because even Hindus apparently sympathetic to Hindu causes use it as a justification for explaining the present state of India, missing out a lot of historical facts in the process. Hostile entryists use demoralization to lower the resistance of the institution for further attacks.

Denigration is an excellent tool for lowering the status of the enemy and is again a common Prog tactic to wear down its enemies. Whereas demonization can often be countered with a Chad Meme – “Yes, we are like that, what can you do about it?”, denigration is designed to hit you where it hurts the most. Half-truths are excellent propaganda because the payload is hidden in the part that is untrue and you need to unpack the attack completely to repudiate it. The meme of “street shitting Indians” is a very easy and low cost denigration, because the facts of open defecation cannot be easily denied (despite street shitting being largely a thing of the past, following Modi’s efforts at Swachch Bharat since 2014), and yet explaining the cause is rather hard work and takes immense energy and effort. Again, this Prog attack works because it is based on “facts” but with payload. Unfortunately it is such an effective tool that even Western Right-wing commentators fall for it and unwittingly use it against us.

Progs, being adharmic, of course use tools of adharma very naturally and for us Dharmics to guard against such attacks is imperative. We need our own memes which can take out and neutralize the payload of Prog attack without much effort instead of responding in good faith to such.

Apologies to some of my regular commenters

For some odd reason, WordPress.com has been putting some of the comments from my regular readers in the spam section. I rarely check the spam section because it used to catch only regular bot-spam. I was surprised to find genuine comments in the spam filter and I immediately approved them.

I will investigate the issue and ensure that I regularly check the spam folder from here on. Unfortunately WordPress.com being a hosted blog provider, my options in respect of spam filtering in their free service is limited to what is provided on the dashboard.

On the topic of space colonization

I find the fascination of some sections of the Western Dissident Right with space colonization a very interesting phenomenon. Elon Musk is literally worshipped as the “Star Prophet” by some sections of Dissident Right. Here are some of my observations on this topic (commented on another forum) and my questions to the space colony fans out there. In short: Is human life in space, even if technologically feasible, really desirable?

On the topic of space colonization, I find it fascinating, but at the same time I wonder whether human beings can ever adopt to an environment other than the one found on our natural environment on Earth.

Imagining life in a space colony or even an inhospitable planet just seem so depressing. Living in what would be essentially a glass bowl surrounded by the infinite expanse of black void that is space and in an environment constantly supplied the required oxygen by artificial means.

Can you think of life without the majestic mountains and hills around and feeling the cool breeze on your face and the sun shine on your backs? Can you imagine a life of not being able to visit the seaside and stare into the vast expanse of the ocean and listen to the waves pounding the shores and feeling the salty spray? Can you imagine a life where you cannot take a long drive through the countryside of familiar and unfamiliar landscapes with your girl by your side? Can you imagine life without the earthly seasons and the variations they bring as we know them? Can you imagine a life without being able to stand in your garden or terrace of your house and feel the life of flora and fauna around you?

Even on the practical aspects, do you think we are adapted to survive without healthy exposure to sun (without all the harmful radiation that is filtered by our atmosphere). Already we see that people living in cities and indoors tend to become weak and sickly. Isn’t life in space rather unthinkable from that aspect? Can we thrive without the healthy day-night cycle that Earth’s natural rotation gives us now?

Is it within mankind’s reach to attempt to even re-create in Space a mock-up of the natural environment found on Earth that God, by whichever name you call Him, has given us?

In short, despite technology giving us the means of survival in space, does living for any long period of time in an artificial and sterile environment of technology even desirable for us?

Mapping the Western Right from a varnashrama lens

Over the last couple of years, I’ve been reading a whole lot of Western Right wing, especially what is broadly known as the “Dissident Right” and I’ve been overwhelmed by the sheer variety of topics and opinions that constitute this political sphere. Then suddenly I had this inspiration that everything can be viewed and simplified from the lens of Dharma. So this topic.

Obviously I’m making a generalized and simplified map of the Western Dissident Right and there is a lot of overlap between the different groups, but this is something I thought I’d try just to see if I can put it from the perspective of the lens of varnashrama.

Brahmin Dissident Right

This is the intellectual dissident Right, which consists of what is broadly known as “Neoreaction/NRx.” What defines this faction: mapping and theory of Leftism (including the concept of holiness spiraling etc), understanding the hierarchical nature of society, concept of “Gnon” and natural law, the theory of the “Cathedral” and how only the elites matter in re political power and the masses are just NPCs. Though some aspects deal with religion, this is not discussed in terms of the spiritual aspects of religion but mostly as a social technology. Though race, religious and cultural differences are discussed, those are again treated as part of the bigger/broader picture.

Mostly analysis and theory, there are a lot of differences even within this faction, however that is far too out of scope for this topic.

The Brahmin Dissident Right is mostly contemptuous of the other factions of the Right, but acknowledge their existence. However, there is some overlap between the Brahmin Dissident Right and the Kshatriya/Vaisya Right factions.

Kshatriya Faction

This is the Guns-rights/right to bear arms crowd along with the faction that thinks that Secession/Civil War is a good way to settle the differences with the ideological Left. Mostly the Kshatriya faction wants a “citizen militia”, both for protection against State-sponsored violence/thuggery and a military solution to the issue, treating War as a good way to achieve resolution. The Kshatriya faction overlaps a bit with the Brahmin faction in terms of focus, but hates the excessive theorizing and philosophical discussions over the topic.

The Kshatriya Right focuses on the technological aspect of military power and is also a bit blind-sided by loyalty to the Warrior caste, thinking that a powerful military leader can and should easily overthrow the rotten political elite class in power in a coup and restore social order. However, the Brahmin Dissident Right is skeptical of such a military leader in existence, besides insisting that mere military victory does not suffice and long term stability requires a State Religion backed by the Divine Monarch/virtuous elite for legitimacy.

Vaisya “Capitalists“

This group is mostly focused on property rights and private property and sovereign enforcement of those rights. I would say, mostly former libertarians who have evolved into Dissident Right fit into this group. They focus their anger on the Economic Left, though they also recognize the other aspects of Leftism. They are angry with regulation, taxation, Human Resources and general Government (the ruling Brahmin elite) interference in business. Enforced “diversity” in hiring is a pet peeve of the Vaisya faction.

There is a lot of overlap between the Brahmin and Vaisya Dissident faction and indeed many Dissident Right wingers seem to address economic issues as well as social issues.

Shudra “Nazis”

This is the faction that mostly focuses on the demographic change brought by uncontrolled immigration of foreigners, both from an economic and cultural point of view. What the Brahmin faction calls “proles”, the working class White man and his family is the most affected by immigration and loss of jobs to immigrants, the taking over of his neighbourhoods by “diversity” and the threat to the existence of the White race as a result. This “Nazi” faction mostly ignore caste differences and focus on the racial aspects (Shudras of whatever race, being at the lowest end of the caste ladder, prefer to ignore their lowly caste status within their race and focus on other aspects). The anger of this right faction is correctly acknowledged by the other groups, but lack of memetic sovereignty means that they are susceptible to entryists from the Left, even Feds. This faction also treats religion (mainly Christianity) with reverence and emotion, rather than the cold intellectual treatment of the Brahmin Right.

The Shudra Right believes in mass protests and direct action. However, without proper elite Brahmin guidance backed by the might of Kshatriya leadership, such mass movements are bound to fail. The Brahmin and especially the Kshatriya factions treat the Shudra Right as a good source for recruitment of foot soldiers of their respective movements and as not of much use as a stand-alone faction.

Conclusion

I feel that the above mapping of the Western Right makes sense. Varnashrama clarifies many aspects of human society and the motivations of different groups. Again, this is just a simplified and general view of the Western Right, and I acknowledge that there is a lot of overlap between the different factions. However, this mapping helps in determining the thought-processes, motivations and conclusions of each type of Right-wing movement.

Non-dharmic non-concept: Meritocracy

There are some ideas adopted by the modern Right that are essentially based on false premises: meritocracy being one of them. Two of the tempting, but superficial, arguments of the proponents of meritocracy is that, “if only we ditched affirmative action and returned to meritocracy, everything would be just fine” and “if only we had virtuous and higher standards of merit, everything would fall into place”.

The false premise of meritocracy is that, everybody can be objectively tested against a standard academic measure which is decided by a committee of priestly elite and that, in fact, merit is something that can be determined objectively in an open-to-all competition. Worse, it gives false hopes to the non-priestly castes that they can, given the opportunity, compete with the priestly caste and emerge better than them at their own game.

There are several problems with that. In fact, “meritocracy” like “liberalism” and other modern ideologies, is not just defective, but actually designed for failure and subversion by the Left.

First, meritocracy is an academic (read priestly) idea, and the assumption is that everybody can be measured against an academic standard. This is blatantly false. It is obvious that academic standards can only be applied to priestly caste occupations and that priestly/academic talents are the preserve of the Brahmin elite. Again, when you measure people of other varnas against priestly standards, they are bound to fail miserably, leading to immense disaffection among those who bought into it. This leads the Left to (rightly) proclaim that meritocracy is bad, and (wrongly, falsely and maliciously) concluding that the solution to fix it is affirmative action and lower the standards until everybody can be a priest and that the real priestly elite are excluded from actual priestly positions.

The Dharmic Right position is that meritocracy is a false idol, a false concept. The solution is varnashrama, where Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas and Shudras perform their respective dharmic roles in society and are judged purely on the standards and measures of success of their own varna. Meritocracy falsely promised that given equal opportunity and a common objective standard of measure, everybody can compete on an equal footing in all professions/occupations. When meritocracy inevitably fails since the priestly elite are naturally better at priestly/academic occupations, leading to disaffection among the rest, the Left immediately jumps in to conclude that it’s not the natural variation in intellect/capability between the different varnas but purely due to evil mind-rays of the Brahminical elite who suppress the rest and that the solution to that is affirmative action (in Indian context, the Reservation quota system).

This has led to an education system that floods society with (imperfecty) priestly trained “elites” who are in fact totally unsuited for any kind of job. This leads to a shortage of properly trained, skilled craftsmen and workers, astute businessmen and capable warriors. The lowering of priestly standards, to accommodate ‘merit’ further exacerbates the situation. Unemployment (because the priestly-trained inevitably deem it below their station to perform the roles of other varnas) and rampant disaffection/social turmoil results. For example Engineering is best learned on the shop floor, not in priestly-led universities, yet, most “Engineers” today are priestly-trained and deem it below their station to get employed in a job which involves manual skilled work and gets their hands dirty.

Acknowledging the social structure of Dharmic varnashrama is fundamental to accepting the different intellectual, spiritual and physical capabilities of people of different tendencies and also to judge them as per the fair standards of their own varna. People should be encouraged to follow their heriditary profession, unless they are otherwise so obviously good at another that they shine through anyway. A Warrior cannot be held to the academic standard of the Priest. A businessman descended from several generations of Vaisyas cannot be expected to be proficient in advanced Differential Calculus. A Shudra cannot be expected to be a heroic warrior or a leader of men. A Brahmin would be an utter failure at business and cannot be expected to drive a company to make profits and satisfy the shareholders.

It is to be noted that while much of the in-born tendencies come down to birth and ancestry, this is not necessarily so. I do acknowledge that in rare cases, geniuses do rise from the lowest born and shift from their birth varna to another which best aligns with their talents. And we also do also see the higher-born revert to the lowest varna due to lack of talent in their birth varna. But these are exceptions, not the rule.

The modern non-concept of meritocracy subverted varnashrama leading to ancestral curse, and in turn is subverted by Leftist affirmative action as is the case when the non-dharmic is inevitably consumed by adharma.