What do you think?
Rate this book
The Problem with Secularism
This book is a collection of articles about secularism and its relationship with religious communalism, mainly the Islamic variety, and takes on the Nehruvian secularism as practiced in India.
- GenresIndia
222 pages, Paperback
Published December 1, 2015
2 people are currently reading
48 people want to read
About the author
Koenraad Elst
41 books157 followersFlemish writer and orientalist (without institutional affiliation).
Koenraad Elst was an editor of the New Right Flemish nationalist journal Tekos 1992 to 1995 and also contributed to other Flemish seperatist publications like Nucleus, 't Pallieterke, Secessie and The Brussels Journal.
Koenraad Elst is one of the most well-known western writers to actively defend the Hindutva movement.
Koenraad Elst was an editor of the New Right Flemish nationalist journal Tekos 1992 to 1995 and also contributed to other Flemish seperatist publications like Nucleus, 't Pallieterke, Secessie and The Brussels Journal.
Koenraad Elst is one of the most well-known western writers to actively defend the Hindutva movement.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
June 16, 2019
Contrary to what some people might think due to the title of the book, this is not a denial or rejection of secularism itself. It is a critical analyses of what passes on as secularism in India, that is anti-Hindu prejudice. Elst picks apart the hypocracy and moral bankruptcy of the so called secularists one by one and conclusively proves that they are not secularists in the true sense but individuals highly prejudiced against Hindus carrying out their partisan agenda.
August 1, 2021
Koenraad Elst is a well-known Indologist and author of numerous books and papers on religio-political issues. He supports the Hindu nationalist groups in India and is always a target of malicious propaganda by liberal secularists. In this book, Elst examines the concept of secularism as an ideal and how it has performed in India in practice in comparison to the theoretical objective. It is a collection of articles about secularism and its relationship with religious communalism. The secularists in India are always aligned with Islamists and lend their support to the latter’s obscurantist ideas. This secularist-Islamist nexus is one of the wonders of the world and requires ever new exercises in hypocrisy on the part of the former, sometimes descending into grotesque buffoonery. This book provides replies to the searing criticism made by the liberal elite in media or academia and exposes the shallow roots of their agenda-driven study and research. The foreign media does not do any better as Elst argues that in addition to receiving factual material from Indian secularist scholars, they often blindly copy the conclusions and even judgments of their Indian collaborators en masse, without making a skeptical review. Moreover as part of a wider discussion on the religious front, this book presents the hypothesis that Islam – as a religion – is to blame for the sheer violence its adherents unleash in many parts of the globe. Consequently, we find studies on the basic tenets of Islam and the Prophet’s antics in this book.
The book makes a critical analysis of the functional subservience of Indian secularism to anti-nationals and religious bigots of non-Hindu religions. As a political framework, secularism requires that all citizens are equal before the law regardless of their religious affiliations. That is a definitional minimum. An Indian secularist would therefore first of all be found on the frontlines in the struggle for a uniform civil code. Unfortunately this is not the case because hardline Muslim interests are involved. The personal laws of all religions include discriminatory prescriptions against women and their rights. However in the case of non-Muslims, their personal codes have been reformed already and they are willing to receive a uniform code with little or no modifications from what they possess at present. But in Muslim law, we still find polygamy and preferential treatment of sons over daughters in parental property to such an extreme that in the case of an only daughter a person is forced to donate a third of his property to his brother or nephews. Divorced Muslim women are not entitled to alimony, however miserable they are. It is strange that Indian secularists support this blatant injustice on the pitiable argument that Muslims are bound to follow these by dictates of their religion. It shields from criticism even the most obscurantist beliefs if they are non-Hindu.
Another charge on which the secularists are arraigned is that of freedom of expression, which is an inalienable right in a liberal democracy. Elst proves that secularists follow this policy only in the case of criticism levelled against Hindu beliefs in India. See the lightning urgency in banning Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses in India even before other Muslim nations made such a move. There is a pressure group in favour of opinion control regarding religion and this camp is called secularist in India. The author argues that they treat any and every criticism of Islam, no matter how experience-based, no matter how factual or scholarly, no matter how humanist or liberal, as ‘hate’ and ‘fascism’ (p.45). This book examines the case of the famous painter M F Hussein as a separate chapter. Hussein was lambasted for his reprehensible style in which he depicted Hindu gods and goddesses with suggestions of bestiality. Elst makes a careful analysis of Hussein’s other works to see if that is his preferred style in depicting historical or mythological beings. Here, readers are in for a big shock. Hussein devoutly avoids portrayal of the Prophet as per Islamic traditions. He had drawn a few paintings of the Prophet’s wives and all of them are shown fully and respectably clothed, evincing reverence! The author then establishes that this double standard is actually caused by Hussein’s deep-felt hatred towards Hinduism as taught by his religion against polytheists. By making a perverted mockery of Hinduism, Hussein is in fact venting the jihadi venom he keeps in his fangs.
Elst specifically analyses the role and personality of Gandhi in making a mess out of the communal situation at the time of independence. Gandhi used his ploy of fast unto death to extract concessions from true nationalists. Ambedkar had to give in to that threat and Nehru conceded a large sum of money to Pakistan on Gandhi’s threatening to die in a fast if the money is not paid. This grave error in judgment happened when Pakistan’s armed troops were already stationed on Indian territory in Kashmir. Gandhi’s mistakes are clearly spelt out in the book which goes on to doubt whether it was his nonviolent agitation that gained freedom for India. The result is put down in an informative paragraph which runs thus: “It is simply not true that India’s independence was the fruit of Gandhian nonviolent agitation. He was close to the British in terms of culture and shared ethical values, which is why sometimes he could successfully bargain with them, but even they stood firm against his pressure when their vital interests were at stake. It is only Britain’s bankruptcy due to World War II and the emergence of the anti-colonial US and Soviet Union as the dominant world powers that forced Attlee’s government into decolonizing India. Even then, the trigger events in 1945-47 that demonstrated how the Indian people would not tolerate British rule for much longer, had to do with armed struggle rather than with nonviolence: the naval mutiny of Indian troops and the ostentatious nationwide support for the officers of Bose’s Indian National Army when they stood trial for treason in the Red Fort” (p.85).
The author pokes fun at secularists at their wild predictions on what would happen to the minorities if the BJP came to power in India. These were so extravagant without any link to truth or commonsense that they went awry once the BJP indeed came to power. India should have witnessed genocide of the minorities if you believed the prognostications of the secularists. Of course, nothing of the sort happened anywhere. Then came the Gujarat communal riots of 2002 which the secularists used effectively to blare out loud from the roof tops. Elst makes a factual study of the episode and wonders at the clever tricks of the media to downplay the provocative spark at Godhra in which 58 Hindus, mostly women and children, were burnt alive by Muslim mobs in a railway compartment. The misinformation campaign of the secular media extended to purported attacks on Christians which had nothing to do with Hindu nationalists. The incidents of Kandhamal murders and Jhabua rapes are explained in the text. In both the cases, the culprits turned out to be Christians, but the media downplayed this and allowed the initial allegations against Hindu organisations to remain with the public.
Most of the articles are written in the period 2002-2007 on journals and newspapers in India or abroad. The partiality and partisanship of the mainstream media are exposed with a touch of helplessness at the injustice of this dereliction of the media’s moral duty. It was in fact the emergence of social media that set the record straight by taking media Moguls head on and holding them accountable for the canards they spread. Since the internet was at its infancy in the period during which this book was written, there are no references to checks and balances the social media brought into the game. Elst’s style is fearless and to the point. His observations on the psychological evaluations of Koranic revelations are sure to provoke believers, but many ex-Muslims are bringing the issue up in social media these days.
The book is highly recommended.
The book makes a critical analysis of the functional subservience of Indian secularism to anti-nationals and religious bigots of non-Hindu religions. As a political framework, secularism requires that all citizens are equal before the law regardless of their religious affiliations. That is a definitional minimum. An Indian secularist would therefore first of all be found on the frontlines in the struggle for a uniform civil code. Unfortunately this is not the case because hardline Muslim interests are involved. The personal laws of all religions include discriminatory prescriptions against women and their rights. However in the case of non-Muslims, their personal codes have been reformed already and they are willing to receive a uniform code with little or no modifications from what they possess at present. But in Muslim law, we still find polygamy and preferential treatment of sons over daughters in parental property to such an extreme that in the case of an only daughter a person is forced to donate a third of his property to his brother or nephews. Divorced Muslim women are not entitled to alimony, however miserable they are. It is strange that Indian secularists support this blatant injustice on the pitiable argument that Muslims are bound to follow these by dictates of their religion. It shields from criticism even the most obscurantist beliefs if they are non-Hindu.
Another charge on which the secularists are arraigned is that of freedom of expression, which is an inalienable right in a liberal democracy. Elst proves that secularists follow this policy only in the case of criticism levelled against Hindu beliefs in India. See the lightning urgency in banning Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses in India even before other Muslim nations made such a move. There is a pressure group in favour of opinion control regarding religion and this camp is called secularist in India. The author argues that they treat any and every criticism of Islam, no matter how experience-based, no matter how factual or scholarly, no matter how humanist or liberal, as ‘hate’ and ‘fascism’ (p.45). This book examines the case of the famous painter M F Hussein as a separate chapter. Hussein was lambasted for his reprehensible style in which he depicted Hindu gods and goddesses with suggestions of bestiality. Elst makes a careful analysis of Hussein’s other works to see if that is his preferred style in depicting historical or mythological beings. Here, readers are in for a big shock. Hussein devoutly avoids portrayal of the Prophet as per Islamic traditions. He had drawn a few paintings of the Prophet’s wives and all of them are shown fully and respectably clothed, evincing reverence! The author then establishes that this double standard is actually caused by Hussein’s deep-felt hatred towards Hinduism as taught by his religion against polytheists. By making a perverted mockery of Hinduism, Hussein is in fact venting the jihadi venom he keeps in his fangs.
Elst specifically analyses the role and personality of Gandhi in making a mess out of the communal situation at the time of independence. Gandhi used his ploy of fast unto death to extract concessions from true nationalists. Ambedkar had to give in to that threat and Nehru conceded a large sum of money to Pakistan on Gandhi’s threatening to die in a fast if the money is not paid. This grave error in judgment happened when Pakistan’s armed troops were already stationed on Indian territory in Kashmir. Gandhi’s mistakes are clearly spelt out in the book which goes on to doubt whether it was his nonviolent agitation that gained freedom for India. The result is put down in an informative paragraph which runs thus: “It is simply not true that India’s independence was the fruit of Gandhian nonviolent agitation. He was close to the British in terms of culture and shared ethical values, which is why sometimes he could successfully bargain with them, but even they stood firm against his pressure when their vital interests were at stake. It is only Britain’s bankruptcy due to World War II and the emergence of the anti-colonial US and Soviet Union as the dominant world powers that forced Attlee’s government into decolonizing India. Even then, the trigger events in 1945-47 that demonstrated how the Indian people would not tolerate British rule for much longer, had to do with armed struggle rather than with nonviolence: the naval mutiny of Indian troops and the ostentatious nationwide support for the officers of Bose’s Indian National Army when they stood trial for treason in the Red Fort” (p.85).
The author pokes fun at secularists at their wild predictions on what would happen to the minorities if the BJP came to power in India. These were so extravagant without any link to truth or commonsense that they went awry once the BJP indeed came to power. India should have witnessed genocide of the minorities if you believed the prognostications of the secularists. Of course, nothing of the sort happened anywhere. Then came the Gujarat communal riots of 2002 which the secularists used effectively to blare out loud from the roof tops. Elst makes a factual study of the episode and wonders at the clever tricks of the media to downplay the provocative spark at Godhra in which 58 Hindus, mostly women and children, were burnt alive by Muslim mobs in a railway compartment. The misinformation campaign of the secular media extended to purported attacks on Christians which had nothing to do with Hindu nationalists. The incidents of Kandhamal murders and Jhabua rapes are explained in the text. In both the cases, the culprits turned out to be Christians, but the media downplayed this and allowed the initial allegations against Hindu organisations to remain with the public.
Most of the articles are written in the period 2002-2007 on journals and newspapers in India or abroad. The partiality and partisanship of the mainstream media are exposed with a touch of helplessness at the injustice of this dereliction of the media’s moral duty. It was in fact the emergence of social media that set the record straight by taking media Moguls head on and holding them accountable for the canards they spread. Since the internet was at its infancy in the period during which this book was written, there are no references to checks and balances the social media brought into the game. Elst’s style is fearless and to the point. His observations on the psychological evaluations of Koranic revelations are sure to provoke believers, but many ex-Muslims are bringing the issue up in social media these days.
The book is highly recommended.
January 6, 2025
Good book
April 6, 2022
In the Indian context, this book should be read , critically, by every Hindu and every Muslim !
Europeans too should benefit from it.
Good , but at places the author seems to have taken positions which are fixed by his ideological leanings, and not by facts ( or truth, if you please) .
Still a very good book , and pertinent to our times !
Europeans too should benefit from it.
Good , but at places the author seems to have taken positions which are fixed by his ideological leanings, and not by facts ( or truth, if you please) .
Still a very good book , and pertinent to our times !
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews