In future private companies will provide our essential services and will have full right to promote their own agendas as a ‘private entity’and at the same time withhold services i.e. providing water to people they don’t like as a ‘private entity’! Oh wait it’s already happening, except with our freedom of speech.
Dubious argument by a biased political deviant.
Firstly using the word brahmanical itself implicates the brahmins and by extension one specific religion.
Secondly, the absurdity of a foreigner – a clueless virtue signaling one at that, co-opting ignorant and negative stereotypes about Hinduism as is their modus operandi has exposed the slavish mindset and hollow intellectualism of the supposedly progressive causes.
Finally, to stand against only brahmanical patriarchy implies that these reprobates have no qualms about Islamic patriarchy or Catholic patriarchy or Chinese patriarchy or any other patriarchy which affect more women in India more directly and severely than the mythical brahmanical patriarchy as was evidenced by the triple talaq issue, the nuns case in kerala and the issue of FGM in India.
One of the worst casteist articles I have seen in recent times. Coming from a DMK member, it is hardly surprising. Abuse HIndus, Brahmins, it is alright. It is secular. If Brahmins hit back, it is casteist, right-wing assault on freedom of expression. How hypocritic can you people get? Shame to The Print for publishing such article. Deliery of judgment has been misused for abusing a community which is not politically significant.
In future private companies will provide our essential services and will have full right to promote their own agendas as a ‘private entity’and at the same time withhold services i.e. providing water to people they don’t like as a ‘private entity’! Oh wait it’s already happening, except with our freedom of speech.
Dubious argument by a biased political deviant.
Firstly using the word brahmanical itself implicates the brahmins and by extension one specific religion.
Secondly, the absurdity of a foreigner – a clueless virtue signaling one at that, co-opting ignorant and negative stereotypes about Hinduism as is their modus operandi has exposed the slavish mindset and hollow intellectualism of the supposedly progressive causes.
Finally, to stand against only brahmanical patriarchy implies that these reprobates have no qualms about Islamic patriarchy or Catholic patriarchy or Chinese patriarchy or any other patriarchy which affect more women in India more directly and severely than the mythical brahmanical patriarchy as was evidenced by the triple talaq issue, the nuns case in kerala and the issue of FGM in India.
DNK is a Christian Party, financed mostly by evangelical dollars from abroad.
I fear the future of Tamil Nadu Hindus.
Would the author’s “progressive stance” remained the same if the poster had read “Islamic Patriarchy” instead?
One of the worst casteist articles I have seen in recent times. Coming from a DMK member, it is hardly surprising. Abuse HIndus, Brahmins, it is alright. It is secular. If Brahmins hit back, it is casteist, right-wing assault on freedom of expression. How hypocritic can you people get? Shame to The Print for publishing such article. Deliery of judgment has been misused for abusing a community which is not politically significant.