Are Choices Only Substitutes?

By Chandrashekar (Chandra) Tamirisa, (On Twitter) @c_tamirisa

Flattr this

Newsweek’s Fareed Zakaria headlines in a recent issue of the magazine that Osama Bin Laden has lost the clash of civilizations. The cover story’s purpose is to relegate the self-declared nemesis of the United States to the oblivion of the rising tide of moderation in the Islamic world. Former President Bush had called him an Islamo-fascist. Now modernity is coming to Islam through the onslaught of moderation, from Harry Truman’s West, whose ambition it is to claim Jerusalem for the European descendants of Constantine the Great: a delusionary ideology.

Fareed Zakaria is an accomplished scholar. He has been exceptionally trained both in India, his country of origin, by Kushwant Singh and later at Harvard by Samuel Huntington. It was Huntington’s hypothesis in a Foreign Affairs cover story many years ago that the world is trending toward a clash of civilizations. Now, his student Zakaria, an Indian Muslim turned American, aspiring to become a public intellectual similar to Henry Kissinger and Samuel Huntington, has declared victory in a paean to his former teacher.

Zakaria, a Muslim, not of the West but as a migrant from India, must well understand the degree of social integration and tolerance in the only extant Aryan society in the world, which, for all practical purposes, can claim all of civilization to itself. Engaging in a clash of civilizations is beneath the dignity of India, but saving civilization from adolescent cultures is its obligation. India is an archetype of integration, let alone moderation to which the West must aspire in its self-interest. Without that integration, Zakaria would not be writing for Newsweek today. Samuel Huntington ought to have understood that but it is clear that he had not.

Huntington, an academic, was pontificating in a self-serving manner on the contemporary politics of history by repackaging Arnold Joseph Toynbee’s landmark analysis of history. That Huntington saw the Toynbeean historical process of the rise and fall of civilizations as a clash and not an engagement is in and of itself a perspective, not the fact. It was meant to be the foreign policy of the West after the Cold War with the purpose of extending the ethnic domination of Anglo-Americans and the Anglo-Saxon version of Greco-Roman Europe, rather than the principles it has inherited from time immemorial: from Aryan brahminism, from the Indo-European roots of European civilization. Zakaria is the beneficiary, as an Indian Muslim, of the first Vedic enlightenment. India is the last bastion of antiquity after the compromise of both Judaism and Greece by the Protestant European north.

The Huntingtonian clash of civilizations is therefore not the moderation of Islam. Islamic moderation was the Caliphate and the Ottoman Empire. It was the Mughal Empire in India before its colonization by the British, which Zakaria must know well every time he takes a stroll by the reflecting pool fashioned after the Taj Mahal, built about the same time in the east when the Mayflower had docked by the New England wilderness in the west, on the National Mall. It is to this moderation that Islam must return since it veered, as perhaps Rabindranath Tagore would have said, into the “dreary desert sands of dead habit”, after the founding of the Wahabbi Saudi Arabia, an extreme right wing faction to which Bin Laden belongs. Therefore, the response to Bin Laden’s Islamo-fascism is not Judeo-Christian saber rattling and declaring imaginary victories in imaginary wars fought by foot soldiers highly-educated in fabricated facts, for incomplete, self-serving education is a fabrication.

Zakaria’s victory in the clash of civilizations may be short lived, for the future of the House of Saud is not the victory of House of Windsor, if this is the thesis and policy Huntington was weaving, when he was counseling Washington through the Council on Foreign Relations, where Zakaria was an editor in New York after graduating with a Ph.D from Harvard’s government department. The future of the House of Saud is an Islamic constitutional monarchy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, similar to the Anglican constitutional monarchy of the United Kingdom. The future of the Aryan nation of Iran is a Shiite renaissance of Persia, similar to the Christian European renaissance of Greece and Rome. The future of Jerusalem is Jerusalem, the confluence of three major world religions ― two Abrahamic (Judaism and Islam) and one non-Abrahamic (Constantinian European Christianity) ― not the Zionist Israel.

The speculations of Harvard professors have a way of becoming fact in the United States subject to little or no intellectual scrutiny in the incestuous, group think world of former professors and former students. But the time for such scrutiny has come because it is not Bin Laden but China’s Hu Jintao who is taking Huntington’s thesis to heart.

The first step in that scrutiny is to unravel the group think by reforming secondary school education the United States. As China expands Chinese language and culture around the world, having learned well from the English favored by Huntington, the mercantilist United States run by what the ancient Aryans would call their trading classes, is drooling at the prospect of dumping European languages, Hebrew and Arabic and in favor of becoming a bedfellow of China. All 300 million Americans constitute less than a third of the Chinese population. The openness of Western democracies to China and the Chinese culture is the contemporary equivalent of British imperialism for England and the English.

The reaction of the West to the rising Chinese juggernaut is a reflection of its either/or education: either Europe or China, never mind that all the non-English speaking European immigrants to the United States since the colony of Virginia and the Mayflower were intentionally and systematically subject to Anglicization by the same either/or mindset in the name of assimilation. Now, it could end up becoming the turn of that un-nuanced Anglo-American mind to be assimilated into Chinese. The Chinese, who think and/both, could win the delusionary clash of civilizations through co-existence after ending Anglo-American domination.

A wiser American response ought to be creating national K-12 educational standards that teach the origins of civilization: Aryan (Indo-European and Sanskrit), Judaic (Hebrew), Sinic (Chinese), Greco-Roman (Greek and Latin) and Arabic along with a choice of one of the major world languages in addition to the medium of instruction in English. Chinese would be a major foreign language choice as well as placed in the context of the history of civilization itself.

Without catching them young, the clash of civilizations would be a self-fulfilling demise of the minority Europeans in the world, not that it should really matter for the rest of the world except that one would naturally expect that it should for the Europeans, whose saving is not the world’s obligation, if this is what Huntington wanted the world to believe from his perch at Harvard that was minted out of the Mayflower.


About Chandrashekar (Chandra) Tamirisa
This entry was posted in Economics, Foreign Policy, National Security and Defense, Politics, Theology, Transformations LLC and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Are Choices Only Substitutes?

  1. I just wanted to say that I found your site via Goolge and I am glad I did. Keep up the good work and I will make sure to bookmark you for when I have more free time away from the books. Thanks again!

  2. I am def. bookmarking this

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s