[In the interests of disclosure and in contradiction of the portion of the second rebuttal regarding Ashoka, I personally have some cynicism about the great Mauryan Emperor's change of heart.  See link.  However, these are based on similarities to the stories of the previous conversion of Ajatashatru and deal primarily with religious realpolitik and royal propaganda.  They do not delve into Doniger's broad assertions regarding Hinduisim that trip her up.]

Doniger’s biggest problem appears to be one that plagues any outsider writing about a foreign culture.  They appear to lack the cultural knowledge or reference points that would enable them to make sweeping generalizations without imprinting their inner biases or agendas.  The result can leave the native practitioner bewildered and sometimes angry.  The tendency to suck up to the Indian secular left, portions of which delight in sneering at their heritage in an attempt to garb themselves with the cloak of modernity, aggravates this situation.

It also reflects the general absence of practicing Indian Hindus in American Hinduism academia that could present an alternate point of view (assuming that liberal arts academia is willing to allow alternate viewpoints), something that could prevent the tendency to indulge in sexual Freudian psychobabble.  It plays into the concerns of cultural imperialism spawned by India’s colonial legacy.  Until these concerns are addressed this will not be the last such skirmish on the subject and blaming critics as right wing Hindu chauvinists will have diminishing returns.

Subscribe to Rashtrakut by Email

Cohen made an ambiguous disclosure about a previous battery arrest, but thinking he had no chance to win no media outlet bothered to investigate any of this until he actually won the nomination. None of his opponents or the party  establishment bothered to check Cohen’s shady background either.  Exposes like this abruptly popped up when the media realized that a candidate they failed to vet had actually won.

It is in some ways reminiscent of the 2004 Illinois Senate election when the leading (and relatively unvetted) Democratic candidate Blair Hull was torpedoed a week before the election by disclosures in his divorce file which he tried to avoid.  The Republicans failed to get the divorce file on their winning candidate Jack Ryan until after the primary, leading to a tragicomic farce in their attempts to find a replacement.  That election is notable of course because it saw the rise of one Barack Obama into national politics.

The position of Lt. Governor in Illinois is a cushy job with no responsibilities.  It was amusing to see various candidates in the recent primary promise to bring changes that they have no ability to provide.  There is a legitimate question as to why the position exists at all.  In fact, Illinois like most other states has a surfeit of elected positions.  The general public probably cannot distinguish between the function of comptroller and treasurer at the state level.  At the local level it is a mystery why certain positions like the commissioners for park districts and water districts (and in some states the position of coroner) are subject to elections rather than becoming civil service (and non-patronage) positions that allow experienced people to perform these jobs.  Then there is the issue of judicial elections, which as Justice Sandra Day O’Connor has pointed out opens up a Pandora’s box of ethical conflicts while requiring a public to vote on judges they have never heard about and about whom they generally do not bother to take the trouble to read about.

General voter disinterest in the political races at the bottom of the ticket opens the door for the Scott Lee Cohens’ to enter based largely on name recognition or the pull of the party machine.

Direct elections for many of these positions arose from the desire for more democracy in the late 19th and early 20th century.  But it also results in state executive teams that may not be pursuing the same political goals.  It can also make it harder to assign responsibility and blame for the actions of government.  The states may be better served with fewer elected positions at the top (like Governor and Attorney General) with the rest nominated subject to the approval of the legislature.  It could allow for a more coherent functioning of state governments with no doubt as to where the buck comes to a stop.

Subscribe to Rashtrakut by Email

Subscribe to Rashtrakut by Email

Subscribe to Rashtrakut by Email