What did Smriti Irani do now?

This post begins with a hat tip to reader Abhishekkrishna84, who brought this to my attention.

What happens when there is a news item that combines the two top targets of liberal hatred?

(1) The Indian Army, with its record of sending peaceful Pakistanis to hell..

(2) Smriti Irani, the challenger to Shehzada from Amethi in 2019

Well, this happens:

(http://www.dailyo.in/politics/bharat-mata-smriti-irani-indian-army-raksha-bandhan-partition/story/1/12378.html)

Read this:

” in so far as the nation is performed through patriarchal violence, it is. Indeed, the systematic normalisation of employing the signifier of Raksha Bandhan as a promise of the nation’s cherished men to protect their sisters is not nearly as trivial as many consider – it captures the lived experience of nationalism, as also the phallocentric economy invariably implicit in the idea of nation….”

What is even more funny is that the article is not written by a mature Mameluk, but a fledgling one. Watch and learn, Sanghis:

This is how you nurture a young parasite, teach him the buzzwords like “patriarchal” and “phallocentric” and how to use them in long sentences that were never intended to actually mean anything. This is how you raise a successful secular to scavenge for scraps in the halls of Lutyens Delhi.

“The phallocentric economy“, eh? Just in case you don’t know what that means, it means an economy built around the penis. You might think they are talking about Delhi’s red light areas or their equivalents in TV studios, but no! This young student is simply paraphrasing this question about “Hindu males”, just in a manner dignified enough to avoid becoming the target  of an internet meme..

The next few sentences are to be experienced, rather than read:

“History today projects the national movement, or the struggle for India’s independence from centuries of colonial exploitation, as a unified development, as a discourse which brought together even the most vulnerable sections of Indian society to somehow forego their experience of domination by and through the elites who claimed to represent them….It is only recently that historians and intellectuals have begun to ask the uncomfortable question: could the lived experience of the nation be radically different for the subaltern?”

I pulled out a dictionary so that you don’t have to. Yesterday, Angshukanta Chakraborty taught us that “Ek Bharat, Shreshta Bharat” is all about “quasi-fascist uniformism”. Today we wake up to find that the freedom struggle was quasi-fascist and uniformist as well because it did not reflect the “experience of domination” of “vulnerable sections”. And historians now have to view the freedom struggle through the lens of class struggle rather than anti-colonialism…

You know, young man, you could have just said “History is the continuous unfolding of class struggle”. But then, we could all have smelled your Marxism right away…and that’s not good for anybody, is it?

“All one can assert here is that women also took part in the nationalist struggle, but one cannot identify any autonomous subjectivity of women and from that standpoint question the manner in which the hegemonic claims of nationalist culture were themselves fashioned.”

Your Class 5 English teacher must be so proud….

“Clearly, in the phraseology of Simone de Beauvoir, men constitute the “transcendent Subject“, and women, the “immanent Other“. Both the subject and the other are masculine mainstays of a phallocentric economy that achieves its objective through the exclusion and marginalisation of the feminine altogether…”

See, THIS is what college is really for. In school, you merely learn to use the dictionary as an essential tool in writing. You open the dictionary to a random page, pick out the longest word and then make an opaque sentence containing it. But it is only in college that you learn to use fantasy words like “transcendent subject” and “immanent other” that were never intended to actually mean anything.

“The dialectic of nationalism, if one does listen to the zealous chorus of its performance, routinely posits the female body as a site of patriarchal violence, as a political instrument to negotiate enmity, and finally, as a destructible surface to build masculinist discourse.”

OMG! After hearing a sentence that long, the other side ought to just throw up its hands in surrender.

Translation into English:

(1) Freedom struggle was about one elite (Hindu males) vs another (British imperial).

(2) In this battle of elites, the “vulnerable sections” are used as cannon fodder.

We got it, man. You are saying that history is the unfolding of class struggle. Did you really have to present in entirety the essay that you wrote for your “Introduction to Marxist indoctrination” class at St. Stephens?

Here’s your problem. This age old Marxist drivel has been done before. Done to death. Repeated ad nauseum. But of course, in the stunted economy of Marxist ideology, mere repetition is the highest virtue. Flights of ornate language, like the one you see above, are intended to make the rotting corpse of Marxist thought smell slightly better. But, come on, young man…those big words that you use are as dead as your ideology …and did you really think that those dead flowers could fight the smell of the decaying dead body of Marxism?

It is here that the snake oil of fantasy terms like “transcendent subject” and “immanent object” are sprayed onto the corpse. Not to improve its smell, but merely to cause a distraction, forcing the reader to linger for a moment on the possible meanings of such expansive terms…

“It is, I believe, only in this context that one can truly begin to place Smriti Irani and the semiotics of gendered nationalism, particularly Hindu(tva) nationalism….In so far as a woman partakes in the national experiment as a mother, wife, or sister, she is the “pure” Hindu woman to be respected, sometimes even revered, and most importantly, to be protected….Similarly, she can seamlessly transition from motherhood to sisterhood, as the soldiers’ sister who procures from their valour the promise of being protected in the name of the patriarchal nation.”

Ah, finally coming to the point! So many words…damn! Let me explain the accusation, again in English: the accusation is that in the “national experiment”, a woman is respected/protected/revered only as long as she sticks to her role as a mother, wife or sister. OMG! Look, the patriarchal nation is still using the female form, her body as an instrument to “negotiate enmity” with other nations…what a shame!

Notice the word “national experiment” and go have a huge laugh. No, seriously, this is how Marxists talk. The nation is still an “experiment” in their eyes.  They regard this experiment with curious condescending eyes, confident that it will crumble. (Tip: see what I did there, young man? It’s called “alliteration”. Look it up).  Unlike the proven success of the Communist method, right ? ? ? No, seriously, this is how Marxists talk, reassuring each other about the “final crisis” of capitalism that will soon arrive. Just like Jesus promising to return. Just like Muslims waiting for the final imam or something… The religions are all the same my friends: Christianity, Islam and Communism.

Now let me tell you this, little Mameluk. In this national “experiment” (1947-2016) that has now outlasted the Soviet Union (1922-1991), the same person can take many forms: mother, sister and fighter! How did you forget fighter…the fighter who took on the entrenched privilege of the Shehzada from Amethi? And in this seamless transition between roles, allowing every citizen to choose her/his identity, lies the secret to the success of the national “experiment”. The reason the Commies failed is because they forbade this seamless transition and forced everyone to fill the exact same role of “comrade”.

Think about it. And when you are done, try to see if you can make a seamless transition to reality. And to shorter sentences… Can we negotiate our ideological enmity in shorter sentences, please? By using long sentences, you are really employing a form of “disproportionate force”. And as your coming essay in DailyO on the Israel-Palestine conflict will surely say, that’s nothing less than a war crime… Thanks!

Friends, please stay connected with this blog on the FB page:

https://www.facebook.com/Dynastycrooks-859306900864294/