I am starting this topic to tie together discussions on two other topics (and take it beyond distracting race relationships); 'Young, Gifted & Black in the BKWSU ...' and 'Africa: Before Slavery'.
We started with a discussion of the place of Black and darker skinned (lower caste) individuals within Brahma Kumarism but having reading some of the sources that arose, such as Dr Walter Rodney's, it has clarified my views of Brahma Kumarism as a form of imperialism based, literally on slavery ... albeit done in a "nice" way.
Let's call it "Angelic slavery" or "Avyakt Imperialism", to use the BK terms.
I am hearing other authors about the impact of imperialism/colonialism on Africa (and, of course, we have to include Christian, Arab Muslim and Bantu in the equation, not just "White"). It strikes me from looking at it, all sorts of imperialism have similar a strategy. The game is all about knocking the head off local pyramidical power structures and replacing it with oneself as the king or emperor.
Even within Europe, the Greeks did to the Thebans, the Romans did it to everyone, I am presuming the Egyptians were actually one of the originators of the strategy of conquest and, latterly, I am reminded how the Maharish of TM™ fame described his ambitions in exactly the same way (he beat the BKs to the West).
Note well how wrapped up in the language and structure of imperialism early to mid-BKism is, and how it's core attitudes towards other/indigenous races still is to this day ... a "membership less structure within which followers have no rights, are financially exploited and act as unpaid labour, generally always with a Sindi/Indian zone or centre-in-charge.
A model adopted by a worldly-wise Sindi entrepreneur largely directly from the British ... right down to the employment of Patels (Gujeratis) as submissive administrators to be shipped around their empire.
From a British point of view, there are many who see the treatment of Gaeldom, or the Celtic societies, as the first “laboratory for the empire”. In short, what they did and learned from doing to the Gaels, the indigenous natives of the British Isles, they then practised on the indigenous natives of other continents, most noticeably Africa and the Americas.
Consequently, although the head count might have been higher, the cultural devastation was similar.
And religion, or rather pseudo-religion, was the tool of control.
As late as the 1850s, The Scotsman newspaper published an article about how “Collective emigration is, therefore, the removal of a diseased and damaged part of our population. It is a relief to the rest of the population to be rid of this part” with officials demanding “a national effort ... in order to rid the land of “the surviving Irish and Scotch Celts”, the exodus allowing the settlement of a "racially superior people of Teutonic stock ... less foreign to us than the Irish or Scotch Celt”.
Here we can relate the tools of such imperialism back to Brahma Kumarism ... and there are many connections between English colonial Imperialism in India and Brahma Kumarism ... for example, from an essay by an Irish commentator on the subject,
Let's paraphrase that and apply to BK Imperialism ... and "BK Imperialism" is no joke, it is their self-confessed ambition.
In truth, what is the best "education" you can get out of BKism ... to become a seller of snake oil to corporate executives?
In the case of the English, pseudoscientific racist ideas supported a belief that the Celtic “race” was inferior to the Anglo Saxon “race”, in exactly the same way it then did to Africans and native American. And treated them the same.
In the case of the Brahma Kumarism, pseudo-spiritual casteist ideas support a belief that their Brahmin “race” is superior to non-BK Shudra “race” ("crow race" in the old days) in exactly the same way. Indeed, in their early days, they were afraid to throw racist mud back at White people too ("cats" being equally derogatory) after they and their royalty reject "God" Lekhraj Kirpalani.
Extending the Imperial model for BKism, it's even noted these days how local peoples "prove to be essential determinants of imperial success or failure". Far from being mere victims, some peoples find ways to profit from imperial manoeuvrings through employment, profiting as allies, or directing the interests and energies of imperial powers against their traditional enemies. Indeed, Lekhraj Kirpalani did in his own professional life thereby acquiring the riches he used to fund his cult.
Lekhraj Kirpalani made a fortune from exploit native labour across India, Asia and perhaps even Africa buying rough materials from mining industries and selling them at a huge profit to the British and Indian aristocracies (is it ever noted that he did anything for the welfare of the workers in those gem stone mines ... some of the most dangerous and exploitive in the world?).
Therefore, I question how "enlightened" liberal White folk - and quite recently enslaved and exploited Black folk who have had to struggle within living memory for civil rights - can actually go along with Brahma Kumarism as it still drags its empire along on the foundations of slavery ... all those unpaid "chapati rollers", personal care attendants, and house servants.
Are they not nothing more than the "house niggers" of the plantations of old ... their lives perhaps not as harsh as the "field niggers", their surroundings rich, their clothing fine ... but are they still not slaves without rights?
They perform exactly the same functions on the large BK plantations and in large BK merchant houses in wealthy cities as they did in the America.
In fairness, I think this might be more of a retrospective criticism of BKism. A criticism of their core, their history and foundations rather how they are evolving around the comfortable edges, especially in the wealthy West. But I suspect it still goes on much the same in India, and I would not like anyone to be fooled to think how BKism has evolved within the West is how the majority of it is in India.
BK apologists prefer to pose their slaves as being like monks or nuns. The truth of that is another question to address ... at least in India, you might end up a centre-in-charge supported by donations. In the West, you have to pay for the privilege to be enslaved, and to work for them for free (there's not such a strong system of religious donations to support most centres and center-in-charges, never mind their retired servants).
I had to look up simulacrum and enervate. They mean,
We started with a discussion of the place of Black and darker skinned (lower caste) individuals within Brahma Kumarism but having reading some of the sources that arose, such as Dr Walter Rodney's, it has clarified my views of Brahma Kumarism as a form of imperialism based, literally on slavery ... albeit done in a "nice" way.
Let's call it "Angelic slavery" or "Avyakt Imperialism", to use the BK terms.
I am hearing other authors about the impact of imperialism/colonialism on Africa (and, of course, we have to include Christian, Arab Muslim and Bantu in the equation, not just "White"). It strikes me from looking at it, all sorts of imperialism have similar a strategy. The game is all about knocking the head off local pyramidical power structures and replacing it with oneself as the king or emperor.
Even within Europe, the Greeks did to the Thebans, the Romans did it to everyone, I am presuming the Egyptians were actually one of the originators of the strategy of conquest and, latterly, I am reminded how the Maharish of TM™ fame described his ambitions in exactly the same way (he beat the BKs to the West).
Note well how wrapped up in the language and structure of imperialism early to mid-BKism is, and how it's core attitudes towards other/indigenous races still is to this day ... a "membership less structure within which followers have no rights, are financially exploited and act as unpaid labour, generally always with a Sindi/Indian zone or centre-in-charge.
A model adopted by a worldly-wise Sindi entrepreneur largely directly from the British ... right down to the employment of Patels (Gujeratis) as submissive administrators to be shipped around their empire.
From a British point of view, there are many who see the treatment of Gaeldom, or the Celtic societies, as the first “laboratory for the empire”. In short, what they did and learned from doing to the Gaels, the indigenous natives of the British Isles, they then practised on the indigenous natives of other continents, most noticeably Africa and the Americas.
Consequently, although the head count might have been higher, the cultural devastation was similar.
And religion, or rather pseudo-religion, was the tool of control.
As late as the 1850s, The Scotsman newspaper published an article about how “Collective emigration is, therefore, the removal of a diseased and damaged part of our population. It is a relief to the rest of the population to be rid of this part” with officials demanding “a national effort ... in order to rid the land of “the surviving Irish and Scotch Celts”, the exodus allowing the settlement of a "racially superior people of Teutonic stock ... less foreign to us than the Irish or Scotch Celt”.
Here we can relate the tools of such imperialism back to Brahma Kumarism ... and there are many connections between English colonial Imperialism in India and Brahma Kumarism ... for example, from an essay by an Irish commentator on the subject,
The English have established the simulacrum* of an education system. But its object is the precise contrary of the object of an education system. Education should foster; this education is meant to repress. Education should inspire; this education is meant to tame. Education should harden; this education is meant to enervate. The English are too wise a people to attempt to educate the Irish, in any worthy sense.
Let's paraphrase that and apply to BK Imperialism ... and "BK Imperialism" is no joke, it is their self-confessed ambition.
The Brahma Kumaris have established the simulacrum of an education system. But its object is the precise contrary of the object of an education system.Education should foster; this education is meant to repress.
The Brahma Kumaris are too worldly-wise a people to attempt to educate their following, in any worthy sense.
Education should inspire; this education is meant to tame.
Education should harden; this education is meant to enervate.
In truth, what is the best "education" you can get out of BKism ... to become a seller of snake oil to corporate executives?
In the case of the English, pseudoscientific racist ideas supported a belief that the Celtic “race” was inferior to the Anglo Saxon “race”, in exactly the same way it then did to Africans and native American. And treated them the same.
In the case of the Brahma Kumarism, pseudo-spiritual casteist ideas support a belief that their Brahmin “race” is superior to non-BK Shudra “race” ("crow race" in the old days) in exactly the same way. Indeed, in their early days, they were afraid to throw racist mud back at White people too ("cats" being equally derogatory) after they and their royalty reject "God" Lekhraj Kirpalani.
Extending the Imperial model for BKism, it's even noted these days how local peoples "prove to be essential determinants of imperial success or failure". Far from being mere victims, some peoples find ways to profit from imperial manoeuvrings through employment, profiting as allies, or directing the interests and energies of imperial powers against their traditional enemies. Indeed, Lekhraj Kirpalani did in his own professional life thereby acquiring the riches he used to fund his cult.
Lekhraj Kirpalani made a fortune from exploit native labour across India, Asia and perhaps even Africa buying rough materials from mining industries and selling them at a huge profit to the British and Indian aristocracies (is it ever noted that he did anything for the welfare of the workers in those gem stone mines ... some of the most dangerous and exploitive in the world?).
Therefore, I question how "enlightened" liberal White folk - and quite recently enslaved and exploited Black folk who have had to struggle within living memory for civil rights - can actually go along with Brahma Kumarism as it still drags its empire along on the foundations of slavery ... all those unpaid "chapati rollers", personal care attendants, and house servants.
Are they not nothing more than the "house niggers" of the plantations of old ... their lives perhaps not as harsh as the "field niggers", their surroundings rich, their clothing fine ... but are they still not slaves without rights?
They perform exactly the same functions on the large BK plantations and in large BK merchant houses in wealthy cities as they did in the America.
In fairness, I think this might be more of a retrospective criticism of BKism. A criticism of their core, their history and foundations rather how they are evolving around the comfortable edges, especially in the wealthy West. But I suspect it still goes on much the same in India, and I would not like anyone to be fooled to think how BKism has evolved within the West is how the majority of it is in India.
BK apologists prefer to pose their slaves as being like monks or nuns. The truth of that is another question to address ... at least in India, you might end up a centre-in-charge supported by donations. In the West, you have to pay for the privilege to be enslaved, and to work for them for free (there's not such a strong system of religious donations to support most centres and center-in-charges, never mind their retired servants).
I had to look up simulacrum and enervate. They mean,
- * Simulacrum
an image or representation of someone or something, an unsatisfactory imitation or substitute.
* Enervate
make someone feel drained of energy or vitality.