Why Postcolonialism is an Attempt at a New Colonialization

Colonization was modeled after the previous Islamic conquest of the Middle East and the Roman Catholic conquest of Europe. When colonialism ended, it wasn’t because the colonialists had a change of heart. It was because they did not have the power to continue. Their armies were dead. Their coffers were empty. Their will was broken. But as they rebuilt their military and wealth, it was inevitable that they will get back their will to recolonize the world. Therefore, we should see the postcolonial world as a step toward a new colonization. In this post, I will discuss why the Islamic conquest of the Middle East and the Roman Catholic conquest of Europe worked and why colonization failed. We will then see how a postcolonial strategy was formed at the end of WWII to recolonize the world. Postcolonial is just a word to lull people into thinking that colonization ended although a close examination of the most common postcolonial tropes can easily show us that colonialism plans to return in insidious ways.

Global Regime Change Operations

Anyone who sees Indian political discourse even occasionally can notice a continuous barrage of Western attacks on India, ostensibly to influence Indian elections. India is a large country, and it is very hard to do all elections at once. One of the many states in India is always undergoing elections every few months. 2024 is a national election year, and Western-origin attacks on India have intensified for the last few months. These attacks question, criticize, and condemn Indian democracy, secularism, and capitalism.

Indians used to be baffled by these attacks. Most of them have now realized that they are motivated. By repeatedly launching false attacks on India, the West has destroyed its credibility. If the West says something truthful someday, it will be ignored just like the boy who cried wolf more than once.

Still, many people are perplexed about the logic of attacking other people instead of minding your own business. In this post, I will explain that logic. The logic is that democracy, secularism, and capitalism are rebranded colonialism. They don’t exist to give people freedom of religion, choice of government, or free markets. They exist so that the West can implement its long-term colonialist agenda yet again. Below is a simple outline of how capitalism, secularism, and democracy are used to push a colonialist agenda.

• Push foreign funds into India through investment channels opened by capitalism,
• Use those funds to finance social unrest among communities living peacefully,
• Call prepaid violence a ground-up flare based on caste and religious divides,
• Depict the government trying to stop the unrest as one that oppresses its citizens,
• Claim that the government is the upper class that oppresses the lower classes,
• Attribute the poverty of poor people to centuries of lower-class oppression,
• Say that the government in the North oppresses the people in the South,
• Wherever needed, embellish the argument with the Aryan Invasion Theory,
• Create a rebellion against the government similar to the French Revolution,
• Designate the rebellion as the lower classes rebelling against the upper classes,
• Portray Christianity as a classless egalitarian religious alternative to Hinduism,
• Deploy class conflict propaganda to convert poor people to Christianity,
• Exchange votes for state favors and claim that Jesus is helping the converts,
• Use altered religious demography to influence outcomes of Indian elections,
• Install converted Christians as puppet rulers controlled by Western powers,
• If something goes wrong, dump the converts and deny any involvement.

If capitalism doesn’t exist, then the West cannot push money to create unrest, spin it into narratives about caste oppression, hire intellectual prostitutes to write fake papers about an oppressive history, and lure people into conversions through monetary incentives. If secularism doesn’t exist, then the state would not permit conversions to Christianity. If democracy doesn’t exist, then elections cannot be rigged and the West cannot dream that it will one-day rule India again through converted Christians.

If you know that the West is always attempting regime changes all over the world in the name of democratic choice, religious freedom, and free markets, then you know that India is not an exception. It is the thumb rule for the West. The regime-change methods vary for different countries but the goal of regime change does not. Its long-term motivation is the Christian recolonization of the world.

The Aestheticization of Politics

Rebranding colonialism into secularism, democracy, and capitalism requires what the German-Jewish philosopher Walter Benjamin called the aestheticization of politics in 1935. It has a simple meaning—make an ugly thing look pretty. People who abhor the ugly thing can be fooled into accepting the pretty thing. It is quite possible that you have never heard of Walter Benjamin, because what he describes represents political theatre for public consumption and it is used by rulers for personal benefits.

Walter Benjamin was referring to the political theatre called German Fascism and Russian Communism. Both of these regimes came to power using the Marxist aesthetic of building an equal society free of oppressors and oppressed. It rapidly transformed into an autocratic, militant, and genocidal power. According to Marxism, as capitalism fails, the proletariat revolts against the bourgeoisie to bring societal change for the better. But the Marxist theory had, by 1935, failed both in Russia and Germany because both had successfully used the Marxist aesthetic to acquire power and then became autocratic states.

After the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, which started as a result of an economic crisis in Russia, Vladimir Lenin took charge of Russia and killed any dream of constructive change. The Bolsheviks destroyed rival political parties, banned newspapers, and imprisoned their competitors. A secret police was created to abduct, torture, and kill political opponents. But they directed the public’s attention away from politics by constructing a new system of Soviet art, literature, drama, music, and science. While the Russian Revolution did not solve any economic problem—as was expected under the Marxist predictions—people found a new sense of pride in their culture and stopped feeling bad about themselves.

Nearly an identical thing happened in Germany when Adolf Hitler was appointed the chancellor of Germany after the electoral victories of the Nazi Party which was championing socialist causes. But after coming to power, Hitler smashed Germany’s democratic institutions, transformed Germany into a war state, and started killing people he hated. He built secret police that surveilled and investigated citizens at his whim. However, Hitler successfully directed attention away from his actions toward the purity of the Aryan race and how it was destined to rule the whole world. People forgot all about their erstwhile socialist ambitions. They were happy that he was going to be their Führer doing ethnic cleansing.

Walter Benjamin called this the aestheticization of politics. The real purpose of politics, according to Marxists, was to usher in economic change. But autocratic dictators were using socialist themes to come to power, and then their political power to fulfill their personal agendas. The public did not mind because they had been given pride in their culture or identity instead of real economic change. Politics was no longer an agency of change. It was theatre to make the public feel good about itself. If the leader could fulfill their emotional needs, by giving them self-pride, then he could do whatever he wanted.

Comparing Today’s Rulers to Hitler

In the last few years, Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump, and Narendra Modi have been compared to Hitler, or called Fascists, or both, although they are not engaged in ethnic cleansing. However, Xi Jinping, who is engaged in ethnically cleansing Uighurs and Tibetans is never compared to Hitler. Most people don’t understand these comparisons because they are inversions of reality. It requires some explanation.

Left-leaning political commentators do not mean that Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump, and Narendra Modi are killing millions. They are referring to Walter Benjamin’s aestheticization of politics. If a political leader talks about national or cultural pride, they foretell the arrival of a Communist or Fascist oppressive state. They don’t use the term aestheticization of politics since all politics at present is theatre—talking about real issues but not doing anything about it. They don’t want to let the cat out of the bag by using a term for their opponent which could be used for them because it is factually truer for them than the others.

Calling someone Hitler is the code word in the left-wing inner circles to start attacking the aestheticization of politics. This generally means (a) talking about the absence of economic and social progress, (b) criticizing the money and time being wasted on cultural or national pride, and (c) painting pictures of imaginary upcoming apocalyptic scenarios involving mass genocides, religious wars, ethnic cleansing, and social oppression.

Marxists pretend to be social scientists. The job of a scientist is to observe the present and predict the future. Before Lenin and Hitler, Marxists were predicting that economic problems will lead to revolutions that will resolve the economic problems. But they were wrong. Economic problems created revolutions, and installed dictators, who did not solve the economic problems. Instead, they aestheticized politics and drove their countries toward self-destruction. After the demise of Lenin and Hitler, Marxists were heavily criticized. Their hands were soiled with the blood of millions because their revolutionary theories had brought Lenin and Hitler to power in the first place. Marxism had become a much-reviled word.

Therefore, following the work of Walter Benjamin, Marxists changed their strategy a little. They would still stir a society to create revolutions. However, if that revolution threw up a person who talked about natural or cultural pride, they will quickly refer to him as Hitler and wash their hands off the problem. In this way, nobody can blame them for creating a Lenin or Hitler even as they continue stirring a society, stoking discontent, and inciting people to revolt against the authority structures. When Marxist political activists compare some politician to Hitler, they are doing two things—(a) reviling the said politician, and (b) buying personal insurance for the future just in case he actually turns out to be a Lenin or Hitler.

Aestheticization of Colonialism

Now that it is clear how the aestheticization of politics works, we can try to understand how colonialism initially appeared in India. Unlike the Islamic invaders, British colonizers initially came as traders. Wealth earned through trade was used to purchase land. Then, private armies were raised to defend the land. That army was then used to intimidate others to sell neighboring land. When there was enough land and a sufficiently large army, small rulers were subdued. Slowly the whole country was subdued. Islamic invaders did not use aestheticization. They invaded directly making their intentions clear. British colonizers used the aesthetic of trade to enter India. Their aesthetic hid their true intentions.

In the post-colonial world, colonization has again been aestheticized. This time, the aesthetic tropes are secularism, democracy, and capitalism. Each of these three seems desirable. People accept them like they accepted colonialists as traders. Or, as Germans and Russians accepted the Marxist aesthetics of a fair and equal society. By calling colonialism by other names, you coopt those people into the process of colonization when they would have been averse to it if colonization was presented as colonization.

The Lies of Colonial Aesthetics

We have to remember that Christianity emerged out of the destruction of pagan religions. Monotheism was created to destroy other religions. When Protestants were persecuted by the Catholic state, the concept of secularism—which means separation of religion and state and tolerance for all religions in a society—was created to accommodate Protestants in a Catholic society. Secularism does not mean freedom of religion as most people think. It means freedom for Christians to enter a society, convert people to their faith, and destroy other religions. They cannot accept systems they call pagan religions. If a pagan religion and monotheism become personal choices, then monotheism doesn’t stand a chance. Therefore, secularism simply means that Christianity has the freedom to destroy a pagan society.

Likewise, capitalism does not mean free markets. It means that those who have earlier stolen wealth from one place can use that wealth to acquire goods and services in another place. This is called capital investment. When a capitalist enters a society, he pays a higher price to acquire something valuable and kills the competition. He is not worried about overpaying because his wealth comes from theft. He is spending someone else’s wealth, not his own. At this juncture, he looks like a saint giving away his wealth. But as the local competition dies due to overpayment, the sellers lose their fair-price buyers. Now the capitalist forces the sellers to underprice their goods and services. As they lose wealth, the capitalist buys their businesses and becomes a monopoly. He then sells everything at the highest possible price. Capitalism is the cycle of overpayment, underpricing, and overpricing. Stolen wealth is recycled to steal even more wealth.

Finally, democracy does not mean the opinion of the majority as most people think. The capitalist is a minority in a large population. He cannot control a society if his opinion counts only for one vote. He has to ensure that the elected politicians will do his bidding as if his opinion counts for millions of votes. Election financing is used to bring the electoral candidate under the capitalists’ control and make him do the capitalist’s bidding. The people voting in a democracy get the thrill of exercising their franchise without changing the outcomes.

Colonialism is Religious Conversion

It is said that you can cheat all people for some time, some people for all time, but not all people for all time. The aestheticization of politics therefore eventually collapses and most people see the truth. When the lies are exposed, the colonialist loses power. Colonialism ended last time because colonies came to see the colonizers as invaders. But what if the colonized people had started seeing the colonizers as their own people? If a colonizer is naturalized as the native ruler, then he can rule the colony for a long time.

We have to look at the history of religious conquests to understand this idea. Islam originated in Arabia. But its early followers invaded all of the Middle East, and converted them to Islam, destroying their old religions. Today, Iran and Iraq don’t call Arabs colonizers because they accepted the colonizer’s religion wholeheartedly. The same is true of the Roman conquest of Europe, which converted pagans to Christianity. Today, Europeans don’t call themselves colonized people, although they were colonized. That is because they wholeheartedly accepted Christianity.

Islamic and Christian colonialists in India did not see their invasions any different from the previous invasions that had successfully converted people to their religion. The invasion of India was just like the invasion of Iran and Iraq for Muslims and the invasion of England and France for Christians. Their model was simple—we invade, we conquer, we convert. Once the conversion is complete, then nobody is going to call us an invader. We would be considered their saviors and they will feel gratitude for us.

Conversion Elongates a Colonial Empire

Sustained colonization requires religion. If a colonialist invades a country, converts its people to his religion, and promises them salvation as a result of this conversion, then the invaded people will think of the invader as their spiritual master. They will never revolt against the invasion. They will rather insist that the invaders are those who saved them from eternal darkness and brought them to eternal light.

Religion is therefore essential to the colonial project. Without religious conversion, the invader will eventually be thrown out. With religious conversion, his conquest will be long-lived. Therefore, even as colonialism is rebranded as secularism, democracy, and capitalism, these can only give the colonialist a reentry into the colony. Without Christianity, the colonial project remains temporary and reversible.

Unless the invaded people see the invader as more intelligent, moral, and spiritual, they will never accept the invader’s rule. This is true of all leadership roles. The leader has to be perceived as being intellectually, morally, and spiritually superior to those he leads. Without it, he doesn’t have the confidence of the people he leads. They may obey him because they don’t have a choice. But they will be plotting against him, scheming his overthrow, and waiting for his demise. Thus, colonialism cannot succeed long-term without religious conversion. These two are inseparable and indistinguishable.

The Roles of Hard and Soft Powers

In all previous colonies, there were two parallel activities. The first was the military oppression of people. The second was the destruction of the native tradition and replacing it with a foreign culture. We can call these two hard power and soft power, respectively. A colonialist uses hard power to invade a country and then employs soft power to ensure its longevity. Everywhere, the colonialists succeeded in using hard power. In some places, they succeeded in destroying the native cultures. But their success in conversion varied. In some places, native cultures were completely wiped out, in other places, they were integrated with the colonialist’s religions, and in yet other places like India, they asserted their independence.

Most people don’t know and certainly don’t appreciate the role that India played in decolonizing the world. Romans converted the whole of Europe to Christianity in 50 years. Arabs converted the whole of the Middle East to Islam in 10 years. But Indians were struggling against Islamic colonizers for 500 years and Christian colonizers for 200 years. The wealth, power, and brutality of the colonizers were no match to the Indian resilience. This gave all other colonies hope and strength. If India had succumbed like the whole of Europe and the Middle East, then colonization would not be called colonization today. It would be called the compassionate spread of Christianity and Islam throughout the world. Indian resistance to religious colonization gave people all over the world the will to fight their oppression.

Therefore, the colonization of India started just like the Arabian invasion of Iran and Iraq or the Roman invasion of France and England. But it did not end that way because India rejected the colonizer’s religions. With the exception of a few Hindus who bootlicked the British, most Hindus considered colonizers intellectually, morally, and spiritually bankrupt. They may have looted wealth and power. But they were and they are considered uncultured, uncivilized, barbarians.

Attempts to Change the Indians

This failure of colonialism was analyzed at the end of WWII and the conclusion was that the soft power replacement was more important than the hard power acquisition. This was more important in India than anywhere else in the world because of the central role that India had played spiritually, morally, and intellectually in ending colonialism. Hard power had sufficed during the Arabian spread of Islam or the Roman spread of Christianity. But it did not work for the Indians because Indians never saw the colonizers as intellectually, morally, or spiritually superior.

Therefore, at the end of WWII, the goal of the West was to change the Indian mindset. If Indians can see the West as intellectually, morally, and spiritually superior, then the West can colonize the whole world again. If Indians can be changed, then there will be nothing but Christianity all over the world.

But how do you change the Indian mindset? Indians go to the West, take jobs, and assimilate into Western society, but rarely leave their religion and culture, which means that they never consider the West intellectually, morally, or spiritually superior. Indians stay in India, and even though they might live in the worst conditions, they don’t abandon their religion and culture, because they don’t consider anything better. How do you change a resilient culture? The answer is to use what Indians accept easily against Indians.

Corruption of Ordinary Words

Indians see good intentions in secularism, democracy, free speech, and capitalism. Since Indians have accepted many paths to God, therefore, they were secular. Since they accepted many perspectives on truth, with some being better than others established by rational debate, therefore, they accepted free speech. Since they accepted the principle that a person should sacrifice his interest when it benefits more people, therefore, they were democratic. Since they accepted the acquisition of wealth through talent and hard work, therefore, they were supporters of free-market economics.

However, the good interpretations of secularism, democracy, free speech, and capitalism are not reality. The West doesn’t follow good interpretations. It emphasizes the bad interpretations as the primary interpretations of the words. The West calls immorality a path toward God. It calls false propaganda free speech. It calls the subversion of the greater good democracy. It calls lies one of the valid perspectives on truth. It calls monopolization free market economics. Thus, the West and India have completely different understandings of the same word. When Indians accepted these words, they were thinking about their good interpretations. They did not know that the West interprets them in a bad way. When the antithesis is included in the same category as the thesis, then the result is an endless conflict between the thesis and the antithesis.

Since Indians accept that there are many paths to God, hence they can be fooled into believing that even an Abrahamic faith is a path toward God. Since Indians can accept that free speech is essential to get to the truth, therefore, they can be fooled into accepting false propaganda as free speech. Since Indians can accept that there are many perspectives on truth, hence, they can be fooled to think that a lie is also a perspective on truth. Since Indians can accept free market economics, hence, they can be fooled to think that monopolization is also a free market activity.

A person can be killed by mixing poison in their favorite food. They will gobble their favorite food and get poisoned. This happens when a poison is called food because it is edible. Most people accept the choice of food. But that choice doesn’t include poison. Food is restricted to that which nourishes the body. While poison is edible, it is not a choice of food. But the cheater deceives the innocent person by calling poison food because it is edible.

Reckless Abuse of Indian Flexibility

There are many paths to God, but every path doesn’t lead to God. There are many ways of looking at the truth, and hence many opinions are accepted as truth, but every opinion is not true. There are many valid ways of using our freedom but every arbitrary use of freedom is not a legitimate use of freedom. The plurality, flexibility, and diversity of Indians is the weapon against India because the plurality can be used to insert arbitrary paths toward God, flexibility can be used to insert arbitrary lies as truths, and diverse uses of freedom can be used to pretend that every arbitrary use of freedom is legitimate.

Christians and Muslims may talk about secularism but they don’t accept any other religion. They may talk about democracy, but they marginalize every community other than theirs. They may talk about free markets but they subvert every free market system through monopolization. Secularism, democracy, and capitalism are just for show. They have nothing to do with the reality. But those who genuinely like secularism, democracy, and capitalism can be poisoned by mixing them with their very opposites.

Secularism, democracy, and capitalism are weapons against India because the plurality, flexibility, and diversity of India can be weaponized to introduce exclusivity as yet another type of flexibility, uniformity as yet another type of diversity, and singularity as yet another type of plurality. If Indians oppose exclusivity, uniformity, and singularity then they are said to be going against their values of plurality, flexibility, and diversity. Those who have no plurality, flexibility, and diversity make Indians feel guilty about the false charges of exclusivity, uniformity, and singularity against them. Their favorite food has been poisoned. They have consumed that food to poison themselves. Now they are fighting the poisoning. But they don’t have the intellectual framework to fight it because it needs non-binary logic.

The Need for Non-Binary Logic

The truth is beautiful, but everything beautiful is not true. The truth is powerful, but everything powerful is not true. The truth is famous, but everything famous is not true. The truth is wealthy, but everything wealthy is not true. The truth is renounced, but everything renounced is not true. Beauty, power, wealth, fame, and renunciation are eternal adjectives and verbs of the truth. But they can be temporary verbs and adjectives of lies as well. When they are adjectives and verbs of lies, then they are temporary. The adjectives and verbs become eternal only when they are the adjectives and verbs of the truth.

This is non-binary logic. It permits many paths to God but doesn’t make every route a path to God. It allows the flexibility to use our freedom in many ways but doesn’t make every use of freedom a valid use of our liberty. It accepts the plurality of views about the truth but it doesn’t make a lie a perspective on truth. This sophisticated non-binary philosophy depends on personalism. Impersonalists and universalists cannot understand this philosophy. But they can abuse it very easily provided their opponents don’t know the philosophy of personalism and how it enables non-binary logic.

All food is edible, but all that is edible is not food. Even poison is edible, but that doesn’t make it food. The claim works in one direction but not in another. In binary logic, the inversion of an identity is supported. Therefore, binary logic is the method to fool people. Since this is the only logic in the West, therefore, by using logic you can arrive at erroneous conclusions. Good people can use logic to arrive at the truth and bad people can use logic to arrive at lies. Since inversions are permitted in binary logic, therefore, 50% of all logically valid claims are true and the other 50% of logically valid claims are false. Ultimately, you don’t even need logic because you can toss a coin to get the same result as binary logic. But most people don’t understand this problem. They think that binary logic is rationality when it is just a coin toss.

India’s Strengths and Weaknesses

India’s strength was its flexibility, plurality, and diversity. Islam and Christianity tried to destroy it and failed. They could not replace it with exclusivity, singularity, and uniformity. Therefore, they are now using India’s strengths of flexibility, plurality, and diversity against India. India’s strength has become its weakness. Her favorite food has been poisoned by Islam and Christianity to make India sick.

This is the Islamic and Christian strategy to recolonize India. They know that they cannot overtake India with hard power right now. They know that even if they take India by hard power, they will not be able to sustain it because once you start showing your hard power, Indians will never accept your soft power. Therefore, their primary ambition is to replace India’s culture and traditions before they try to overtake it again. Secularism, democracy, and capitalism are the Trojan Horse in the City of Troy. The enemy hides in the Trojan Horse, and enters the City of Troy, with the sole intent to kill its inhabitants.

Both Hitler and Lenin used a soft power message to rationalize and justify their hard power. The same thing has been done by Abrahamic faiths over centuries. In Christianity, the Roman emperor was the representative of God on Earth. Like God had the power to send a person to heaven or hell, similarly, obedience to the emperor meant heaven and disobedience meant hell. Most people would rebel against the emperor unless they came to see him as a far superior being—the representative of God. Likewise, in Islam, the Caliph is the representative of God on Earth. Like God has the power to send a person to heaven or hell, similarly, obedience to the Caliph means heaven and disobedience means hell. Most people will rebel against the Caliph unless they see him as the representative of God on earth.

The religious angle to colonialism is absolutely essential for the colonized people to see their rulers as messengers of God, angels of heaven, and sources of their salvation. If people accept the colonizer as ideologically, culturally, intellectually, morally, and spiritually superior, then the colonizer can assert his hard power. If the colonizer loses its ideological, cultural, intellectual, moral, and spiritual standing then he will lose his hard power. This was the inescapable lesson from the last demise of colonialism.

Progressive Loss of Soft Power

The fact is that both Christianity and Islam have now lost their soft power. Islam has lost it because of terrorism and Christianity has lost it because of its endless wars. To an extent, they have lost it mutually by Islamists raining terror on Christianity and Christianity raining terror on Islam. They don’t have a way to get back their soft power. People have been leaving Islam and Christianity for many decades now. Many of those who call themselves Muslims and Christians on paper have left Islam and Christianity emotionally. Therefore, Islam and Christianity can only retain their power by using hard power even more ferociously, which further reduces their soft power. This is the self-decimating cycle of loss of soft power leading to the loss of hard power.

When a society is collapsing from within, it wages war on others, hoping to distract attention from its internal failures to its external successes. India has two neighbors called Pakistan and China who are easy examples of this mindset. Pakistan is ruled by a military dictatorship and China by a communist dictatorship. China invades India to demoralize Tibetans who are struggling for independence from China. Pakistan invades India to demoralize Sindhis and Balochis who are struggling for independence from Pakistan. By invading other countries, a failing country silences its internal critics and empowers its internal supporters.

Every failing society tells its citizens: You don’t have a better alternative. We are the best you can get. Therefore, as Pakistan fails, it projects itself as the only nuclear-powered Islamic state that will bring about the global hegemony of Islam and collects money from other Islamic states. As China fails, it projects its command-and-control society as the better alternative to Indian secular and democratic chaos. As the West sinks into sex, drugs, and violence, and people try yoga and dharma to regain a peaceful life, Western propaganda denigrates India as a society that burns women, discriminates against weaker sections of society based on caste, endorses religious intolerance, and has weak law enforcement. Exaggerated narratives are built based on selected facts and outright lies. Indians are not the audience for this propaganda. The intended audience is Western. They are being told to not look at India as an alternative. The West is the best.

How the West Cheats Its People

Recently there was an international survey on happiness that ranked India among the least happy countries. The survey asked one question: Do you think you have achieved everything according to your potential? Most people in Western countries said yes. Most Indians in India said no. The survey concluded: The West is happy and Indians are unhappy. It neglected the fact that the top nations on their happiness index have the highest suicide, divorce, and addiction rates. It deliberately misinterpreted data to fool the intended audience.

The question arises: Why peddle such lies? The answer is: The West is the best. Don’t search for happiness in yoga and dharma. Indians are unhappy people. So yoga and dharma will not make you happy. The false propaganda relies on the fact that everyone will just read the headline and nobody will read the subtext. The question will be buried in the technical details while the conclusion will be displayed prominently. The West uses the laziness and incompetence of most people to fool them.

People living in the West don’t counter this propaganda because they think it is against India when those living in the West are the intended audience for that propaganda. By not countering this false propaganda, they are not hurting India. They are hurting the West. Factually, nobody reads New York Times or The Washington Post in India. Nobody in India cares about a Western happiness index. Indians know that they spew lies. But people in the West don’t. They trust their media, academia, government, and institutions. They are fooled by their lies, not Indians. Therefore, when people living in the West remain silent on false propaganda, they fail their countrymen and women.

Spreading lies about India is a sign of Western desperation. It is an indication that people in the West are losing trust in the Western system of science, religion, society, economics, and politics. They are looking for answers. Search engines can easily tell the leaders of a country what types of questions their countrymen and women are asking. If those questions involve dharma and yoga, India or Indians, then that is a real cause for concern for the West. The choir is no longer listening to the preacher. So the preacher has to tell the choir: Don’t look elsewhere. I am your only source of truth. Those other guys, who you think might have answers, are poor, unhappy, and barbaric people.

Basic Principles of Material Reality

There are several easy things we learn by studying Vedic texts.

• First, nothing is random. When we don’t know the cause, then we give probabilities. When we cannot even give probabilities, we call it random. But nothing is random. We just don’t know the cause and we call that ignorance randomness.
• Second, we don’t know the cause because it is a deeper level of reality. The mind is one such deeper-level reality. But there are even deeper levels of reality in the unconscious, which is in turn controlled by time. When the time arrives, something that always existed in the unconscious manifests into thought in the mind and progressively it becomes sense perceivable.
• Third, material reality is always dualistic, which means that we will never find perfect harmony, cooperation, and unity in this world. We will always find conflict, competition, and disunity. However, every duality is mutually dependent and mutually defined.
• Fourth, the different sides of duality are like two sides of the same coin. The two sides are the shallower reality and the coin is the deeper reality. But our logic is not capable of accepting the simultaneous presence of opposites.
• Fifth, we need non-binary logic to understand a coin. The head and tail are also the coin. The head and tail are inseparable. The coin is not just head or tail. Since one thing is two things, two things are not separate things, so they are neither one nor two.

When I was a small boy, one piece of entertainment that I enjoyed sometimes was a puppet show. There was a puppeteer who used to come around our home. He had two puppets—both girls—called Gulabo and Sitabo. He had funny songs about them which he used to sing loudly to attract kids like us to his show. I would take 50 paise from my mother to watch his show. The puppeteer would hold the puppets like kitchen gloves on his arms and then orchestrate them using his fingers. The show was about the many funny antics and quarrels between these two puppets.

If we analyze the situation, then the puppeteer is both puppets and yet neither puppet is the puppeteer. The two puppets are neither two separate things nor just one thing. They are neither mutually inimical nor are they friendly. We won’t understand that if we just look at the puppets. We have to know that there is a puppeteer to understand this fact. Without the puppeteer, the puppet’s actions are random. Without the puppeteer, the puppets are inimical. The puppets are the shallow reality and the puppeteer is the deeper reality. We cannot fit these realities in binary logic or mathematics or universal laws or anything else that the West calls science or religion.

The Meeting of Colonial Minds

Whenever there is a dualistic reality, there is always a deeper reality that unites it. The two sides of the duality cannot exist independently. Hence, dualism is called an illusion. It looks separate and opposed to most people because they cannot see the deeper reality. It is not opposed or dualistic. It is also one thing. There are two puppets being orchestrated by one puppeteer for a common goal of entertainment. Depending on the different goals, there seem to be many dualities. Ultimately, there is just one goal to take the person back to Kṛṣṇa.

With that grasp of duality, we can understand today’s political reality. The two arms of the colonial project are handled through the left- and right-wing political wings. The left-wing arm of colonialism focuses on strengthening secularism, democracy, and capitalism because it opens the doors for the invaders to come in. The right-wing arm of colonialism focuses on strengthening Christianity and weakening alternative traditions, civilizations, or cultures such as Hinduism. There is no hard and fast boundary between the two. They are not fundamentally opposed ideologies. They are simply two puppets in the hands of the same puppeteer working toward the same objective.

The left and right wings in the West are puppets called Gulabo and Sitabo. Even as they appear to fight with each other often, they are both orchestrated by the same puppeteer. Gulabo says: You have to strengthen secularism, democracy, and capitalism. Sitabo says: You have to strengthen Christianity. They work for the same agenda which nobody seems to understand. Everyone says: We live in a postcolonial society. They strengthen democracy, secularism, and capitalism, to advance the colonial agenda.

The battle between the West and India is also a dualism but there is a common purpose for this dualism. Indians can revive, strengthen, and awaken their civilization in the process of fighting with the West. By that, they can defeat the West, which will also wake up to the inferiority of its binary ways of thinking and accept the superior non-binary ways of thinking. Since both can benefit from the same process, therefore, the superficial thing is mutual conflict and the deeper thing is mutual assistance. But it requires Indians to awaken. Otherwise, it is simply a waste of time. The material world is created in these dualities to help both sides. But most people are unable to see the deeper reality.

The Illusion of Postcolonialism

Therefore, there are several important things to learn. First, the left and right wings are not separate things. They are just puppets in the hands of the same puppeteer. The West is using both to wage a war on India. Second, this battle between the West and India is not necessarily a bad thing. Christians and Muslims attacking Hindus is also not a bad thing, provided Hindus wake up. The attacks can force the Hindus to wake up and defeat these attacks through knowledge, and then both parties will benefit: One by victory and the other by defeat.

But if Indians keep sleeping in the illusion of a postcolonial society then they can be colonized yet again. They can keep thinking that Western left and right wings are separate things or that they have different agendas when they are two sides of the same coin. Or they can keep wondering why the West cannot get over the colonial hangover now that colonialism is over because they don’t understand that colonialism never ended. It had a temporary setback, it learned from its mistakes, and it has an elaborate plan to return. Or they can keep imagining that the modern reality is secularism, democracy, and capitalism and it is not colonization so they two are different things when colonization has been aestheticized in new forms to enable its return. There are millions of types of illusions. There is just one perfect truth.

Since most people don’t know the meanings of the words they use often and they are not interested in understanding the real meanings, therefore, here is a ready reckoner. Secularism means: Welcoming the preachers of a colonizing religion into your home. Capitalism means: Allowing colonial thieves to reinvest the previously stolen wealth to buy your home and make you a tenant. Democracy means: Helping converts in the control of colonizers to become puppet rulers of your home. Colonialism means: Forced conversion into a false ideology by which the converted worship the converter.

During colonial times, the colonies did not have secularism because the colonial masters were spreading Christianity the world over. At that time, there was no democracy because the will of the people was overruled. There was no capitalism because the colonial masters would decide what was traded, with whom it was traded, and at what price it was traded. While the West talked of secularism, capitalism, and democracy among itself, it did not apply them to the colonies. They were introduced in the colonies after the failure of colonialism.

Most people think that the West had a change of heart. It realized its mistakes, accepted its follies, and decided to reform its tendencies built over centuries. When this illusion enters our minds, then we cannot reconcile this mental illusion with observable facts of continuous attacks. Why would someone keep attacking you if they had a change of heart? The logical conclusion should be that their hearts never changed. The same hatred for others, the desire to conquer them, assert superiority over others, and then use that to garner worship from defeated minions continues.

Colonization is nothing but the desire to become God and be worshipped like God. The atheists wish to be worshipped like God after reviling God. The pretender theists want to become God under the pretext of worshipping God. Religion is a far bigger illusion than atheism. At least the atheist makes his intentions clear. The pretender theist hides his intentions. So a pretender theist is a bigger atheist. The Western duality of atheism and religion is an illusion because their religion is a worse form of atheism. Two kinds of atheists join hands to destroy the genuine theists. Most people cannot understand this simple fact. This is why it is important to tell everyone: Get over the illusion.