Why can’t Indians rebel ?

According to the father of psychology Sigmund Freud,

Myth and ritual is an unconscious expression of repressed dreams of a community.

Transformation of a repressed desire into myth is not necessarily a conscious process but a social one

In the hindu myths, of Mahabharata & Ramayana and many other epics the son surrenders to the father, owes him complete obedience and shows unquestionable loyalty.

Ram leaves his kingdom on the command of his father.

Bhishma vows celibacy sacrifices everything so that his father can marry another woman.

Puru son of Yayati sacrifices his youth for his father.

Parasuram kills the mother under the orders of his father

Such stories are what we have been taught and conditioned to.

We have been conditioned over the years that, there is no greater respect to the father than absolute surrender of the son, no matter how terrible or cruel the father is.

Same way we consider absolute obedience and devotion from women. Absolute surrender / obedience of wife to husband and elders of the husband’s family

In the stories of Ramayana

Where Sita is asked to join Ram and leave the palace or when she was asked to get into the fire to prove herself.

In Mahabharata where a woman is shared between 5 men just because the mother asked them to share .

In the story of Kannagi where she forgives the husband and still obeys him despite he sleeping around with women.

To Freud religion was nothing but neurosis, and the answer to myth lay in the unconscious

On the contrary Greek mythology is full of stories in which a son is responsible for the death of his father or a father figure

Greek myths:

From the myths about the trio Zeus, Poseidon and Hades overthrowing their father Titan Kronos and
Oedipus who killed his father King Laius of Thebes and married his mother Jocasta.

One can deduce that Greek mythology is all about the Son overthrowing the father. It means the new replaces the old.

Tales in Hindu scriptures suggest a reverse-Oedipal, or Yayati, complex. In this case the father destroys the son in order to have his way.

This difference in Greek Oedipus Complex and Indian Yayati Complex has been seen by many to explain the cultural and intellectual differences between India and the West.


Why did Marx say a revolution is impossible in a country that worships monkeys and snakes ?

Why we shy away from rebellion ?

Indians shy away from rebellion. Rebellion means rejecting tradition, the past, the father.

Inspired from.



Hate crimes vs Stealing for survival

It’s wrong to equate hate crime of shambhu lal regar and the murder of tribal man madhu.

One is motivated based on hate and another on survival.

He didn’t steal money, he stole rice. He stole it because of poverty.

When I’m happy that accused in both cases are behind bars, I think of what should be done to prevent such things from reoccurring. What needs to be done is analysis of the root cause

In shambhulal regar case it’s the hate filed mind and the propaganda of the right wing but in the case of madhu it is poverty.

Hate crimes can be countered by stopping hate propaganda and it’s easy for the government to do that on the other hand poverty isn’t something that’s easy.

Poverty abolition effort should be made by the government which include land reforms and creating jobs for everyone

Though there are a lot of things people are flaunting to be number 1 state in the country the fact that poverty isn’t eliminated is explicit. Shows the Government irrespective of parties have failed to deliver basic needs to the people especially the tribals. Reoccurrence of such things can be prevented only if

If only the politicians cared enough.

Do Not Stand At My Grave And Weep

By Mary Elizabeth Frye.

Do not stand at my grave and weep
I am not there; I do not sleep.
I am a thousand winds that blow,
I am the diamond glints on snow,
I am the sun on ripened grain,
I am the gentle autumn rain.
When you awaken in the morning’s hush
I am the swift uplifting rush
Of quiet birds in circled flight.

I am the soft stars that shine at night.
Do not stand at my grave and cry,
I am not there; I did not die.

Of Wolves and sheep: Misogyny, men, and women

As common folk we tend to get manipulated easily. It’s our desperation that makes us irrational that we become gullible to the wolf in sheep’s clothing. It’s time we rise above that . My take on Shamir Reuben.

Cafe Dissensus Everyday

By Arrow

“The devil doesn’t come dressed in a red cape and pointy horns. He comes as everything you’ve ever wished for.”

Shamir Reuben, a writer and poet, who was adored by men and women alike as a man vocal against patriarchy, was accused of sexual misconduct, sexting teenage girls on private platforms. Until the allegations came out, he was angelic to his fans! But the allegations shocked them, and made them see him for what he truly is with his devilish attitude: the wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Every woman, who was harassed by him and are now vocal about it, says, “I shared it with my friends and none of them believed me.”

Why do people, in this case, women fall for the wolf? Why don’t women believe other women when they share an abuse story, especially when the man in question is famous for pro-women stance? What makes…

View original post 532 more words

The Prison Diaries : Explanation of Hegemony

Modern slaves are not in chains, they are in debt

The “prison notebooks” explain about the psychological warfare that the imperialists impose upon the colonies

Yes, most Indians go through the mindset. The attraction towards Western culture, we try to imitate them in every way possible. Wearing clothes that’s different to our climatic conditions, eating food that doesn’t suit us, buying imported cars and bikes that aren’t designed for our roads the list goes on.

If you stop for a moment and think why, which we never do one can understand this thought has been systematically influenced upon us through the media and by the society.

That’s how we are still slaves to Western imperialism. Antonio Gramsci terms it as hegemony

Today is the birthday of one of the greatest minds the world has ever seen .

The Italian Marxist theorist
Antonio Gramsci.

Jan 22 1891.

My opinion on Lakshmi and Naachiyaar

Cinema is our life with boring parts cut.

Of all the arts cinema is most important to us ~Lenin

Scenario 1:
A few days ago a short film called Lakshmi became quite popular. It’s where a woman who is tired of her husband treating her as an object of sex falls for another man who adores her, regrets her mistake when she discovers her husband also has an affair.

Scenario 2:
A teaser of the movie ‘naachiyar’ was released yesterday where she says the word ‘ thevudiya payalgal’ literally translates to bastards.

Both the films stirred up a huge controversy as the majority of the viewers seem to be entrenched in their patriarchal conditioned society for years. With this conservative mindset, they’ll readily accept the husband’s affair in “Lakshmi” but detest the woman having an affair. Same logic applies to usage of abusive language in the other movie. Both the movies does not justify the actions of the characters in anyway so far.

So where/why does the problem arise?

It’s the mindset of the people who can’t see anything beyond their conservative mind.

“Art should disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed. “

That’s exactly what the movies have done, good job team, and if you’re offended by the movies my suggestion is

  • Get off your conservative mindset and social insecurities
  • Watch movies as an art and stop dictating how any art should be.


Why thank God, When you can thank

the doctors, nurses, teachers, firemen, scientists and literally everyone who works hard to save us and make this world a better place

What’s happening in Saudi Arabia


By Simon Templar

Have you seen the ending of the 1972 movie, “The Godfather”? It brilliantly showed the bloody scenes of the “takeover” of the Mafia by Michael Corleone (Al Pacino).

One by one, all the bosses of the rival families are killed and removed until all opposition is gone and the Corleone family’s control over Mafia is complete.

Something very similar is happening right now in Saudi Arabia as I am writing these lines. In just less than two days, 49 influential Saudis have been arrested which include 11 members of the Royal family.

Among them is Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal who happens to be the richest Saudi prince and businessmen and also one of the top 50 richest and most influential businessmen in the world.

As if that was not intriguing enough, a helicopter carrying several Saudi officials, including Prince Mansour bin Muqrin Al Saud, has crashed in the kingdom’s southwest near the border with Yemen.

Prince Mansour was the son of the former crown prince of Saudi Arabia and was a very influential man in the Kingdom.

According to many, if things were normal, he would have been the future king of Saudi Arabia.

What’s going on? For that we have to go back in time, to see how the ascension to the Saudi throne has been working in the past.

The first King of Saudi Arabia was Abdulaziz ibn Al Saud. He conquered his ancestral region of Nejd (central Saudi Arabia) and Hejaz (Western Coast of Saudi Arabia that includes the two holy cities) and became the king of this newly created kingdom called Saudi Arabia.

After him one by one his sons became kings. This was a unique system in which the sons of the first king took turns one after another.

Everyone knew who will be the king and who will be the crown prince. It was a very stable system but only in a short term.

Because although the first king had a long line of sons, it had to end someday. It was inevitable that one day when all the sons of the first king will die or grow extremely old, then the question will arise that in whose family-line the kingship will be transferred?

As more time passed, more uncertainty and rivalry grew among the princes and family-lines of various former kings of Saudi Arabia.

The current official estimate of the members of the Royal house of Saud is around 15000 princelings, among them many debauche, deviant, cruel and abnormal.

In 2015, when the present King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud came to power, he was the 25th son of the first king and already 79 years old.

Like his older brothers before him, he appointed his younger brother Muqrin bin Abdulaziz as the crown prince of Saudi Arabia. It was understood that after Salman, Prince Muqrin will be king.

And it was becoming increasingly likely that after Muqrin, no son of the first king will be around or fit enough to rule the Kingdom. Hence the throne will most probably pass to Muqrin’s family and his son, Prince Mansour (now dead in a mysterious helicopter crash) will become the next king.

Everyone could see that possibility but suddenly something strange happened. Just spending four months as the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, Muqrin was removed by King Salman on the pretext of the Crown Prince’s ill health whereas The King himself is ill and senile!

The King appointed his own mercurial young son Prince Muhammad bin Salman as the crown prince of Saudi Arabia.

The writing on the wall was now clear that the transfer of kingship among the sons of the first king officially ended and the kingship will subsequently be transferred in the family-line of King Salman downwards.

But here is the problem. It was an unnatural transfer. The natural transfer was supposed to happen in Crown Prince Muqrin’s family-line, if he was allowed to rule.

There was this extremely uncomfortable, pregnant silence in the royal family but tensions were simmering under this ominous calm, in the wake of this unconventional power transfer.

Domestically, Prince Muhammad immediately started consolidating power by taking control of one institution after another.

There is hardly anything today in Saudi Arabia that can be done without his approval. His orders are that everything big or small will go through him.

But among Royalty, history teaches us that the silence of the royal family or control of national institutions is never enough to consolidate power in modern day Saudi Arabia.

Prince Muhammad also needed the approval and backing of America. Something that every Saudi King needs, specially after the Gulf crisis of 1991.

And for that purpose Prince Muhammad needed Yousef Al Otaiba , the current United Arab Emirates ambassador to the United States and a charismatic and shrewd businessman from a very influential family of UAE.

Yousef Al Otaiba is like one of those people about whom you do not hear or know very much, but they are the real power brokers in Washington and other important capitals of the world and whose influence extends far beyond their apparent job specifications.

This alliance between Prince Muhammad and Yousef became very instrumental in sponsoring Prince Muhammad in the halls of Washington. Yousef Al Otaiba not only got important connections for Prince Muhammad but was also the key man behind the May 2017 US$350 billion arms deal between US and Saudi Arabia signed by President Trump.

It was a plain and simple deal based on crystal clear interests. President Trump needed Saudi money for creating jobs, under the banner of which he fought his election campaign and also to show progress after repeated domestic failures.

Prince Muhammad on the other hand wanted to show the Royal family that now he has the needed approval of Washington for his ascension to the throne will backing.

This new friendship with powerful people in Washington gave the exact kind of dangerous confidence to Prince Muhammad, the consequences of which we subsequently saw in the Middle East.

The ruthless bombing campaign in Yemen, the standoff with Qatar and the ever-increasing belligerence towards Iran are some of the apparent consequences of Prince Muhammad’s newly found alliances.

But the influence of Yousef Al Otaiba on Prince Muhammad went a little beyond that. The recent relaxation of laws like allowing Saudi women more freedoms etc are a manifestation of that welcome influence to modernize a hypocritical and archaic society.

Yousef not only convinced Prince Muhammad to pass these laws, he also peddled these changes in Washington to show that how much “moderate” Prince Muhammad will be as the King of Saudi Arabia.

But soon the backlash came. While Prince Muhammad was busy showing his “progressive” side to the west, the influential sidelined members of Saudi Royal family and many hardline clerics of the powerful Wahabi establishment were getting restless and vocal about Prince Muhammad’s legitimacy as the next king and his methods of ruling the Kingdom.

Washington was monitoring all these developments and gave Prince Muhammad a go-ahead signal through a recent visit to Riyadh by Jared Kushner, who is the son in law of and Senior Advisor to the President Trump.

Resultantly the political purge started with these high profile arrests in the name of crackdown against corruption, alongside a dead man in a “mysterious” helicopter crash who could’ve been the next king.

And for now it seems that the Mafia style takeover of the Saudi throne is underway by a young, ruthless godfather who seeks to dominate the landscape of Middle East for a long time to come.

Modernisation, privatisation and elimination of the power of the clergy are on the agenda. Instead of doddering old semi senile octogenarians ruling over a rigid narrow repressive ultraconservative society, an energetic young man has been chosen to revamp and reshape Arabia , giving it a place among the modern countries of the world.

Pakistan too needs to wake up, its sycophantic policy of verring to the right, pandering to wahabi ideology for handouts of dollars has driven it to the lip of the abyss and certain destruction.

Now that its masters are abandoning antiquated and abnormal policies to be in sync with the world, so should this nuclear armed impoverished nation of 220 million which lost its secular soul at the alter of jihad fuelled by petro dollars.

The world has been watching silently as the capital has been held hostage by a few dozen radical islamic fundamentalists. Great unease at this sight of the nuclear armed Government being helpless in the face of a rag tag band of mullahs is felt in the west and a decision has been taken: this will not stand!

Change is inevitable, Pakistanis can choose, they can initiate it themselves and start the process of normalisation, else it shall be imposed from abroad. For too long has the eorld tolerated the basket case of South Asia…the clock has run out! Bewarned!

The Author is a geo- strategist based in Brussels