The contemporary demonization of "Brahmins" emerges from colonial evangelical literature where they were seen as "rivals" to the Christian priests and the obstacle in conversion.

In reality, Brahmins were respected for serving society; the honor accrued from tyaga and tapasya.

Indian society separated different roles in what could be called "deep secularism." European secularism separated Church and State. Why? Because they found when the mix was toxic. It kept Europe in dark ages. Europe arrived at this after centuries of conflict & Church control. 2/

"Secularism" is a primitive separation which Europe was forced to develop to deal with monopolistic religion. While a step forward for Europe, it is not enough for a well-functioning society.

In the current Western system, big pharma mints trillions while keeping people sick, 3/

Wealth can buy into political power (like Trump) or buy media (like Bezos). Big Pharma now buys "research journals" outright. Knowledge serves wealth, and wealth buys power. Knowledge itself is used as hand-maiden for political power and influence. Trust decreases.

4/

What if a people advanced into a deep understanding of human societies. Not only Church & State, but knowledge and State, knowledge and political power had to be kept separate. Knowledge then was not a tool of imperialism to subjugate peoples nor subservient to politics. 5/

In this "deep secularism", wealth too had to be separated. If knowledge and wealth mixed the former would be subverted for the needs of the latter. If political power and wealth mixed then political power would become a means to increase wealth rather than serve people. 6/

These were 3 main power centers which needed separation; and these power centers are there in all human societies. Some people have knowledge, others have political and military power, others have wealth, those that have neither of these serve the other three. In all societies.7/

How does one regulate these roles so that they serve the whole for a well-functioning system. That way those with knowledge pursue knowledge to benefit society, and not for wealth or power. Those with power cannot suppress knowledge or grab wealth. 8/

And those with wealth cannot simply buy out knowledge or political power?

This "deep secularism", beyond a primitive "separation of Church & state" was the aim of the social science of role separation. Not just Church & state, knowledge, power & wealth needed to be separate. 9/

The collusion & mixing of these roles leads to major problems in society. This is why even today we consider education largely a non-profit sector, even in the West. Knowledge is separated from wealth. But the vast for-profit "coaching system" shows the collapse of this idea. 10/

Varna is simply social theory. It doesn't "generate human beings" in purusha sukta, absurdly read like Biblical "generation" of "Adam and Eve". It simply says that in the body of society certain roles exist. Collusion or mixing of roles, varnasankara, creates problems. 11/

As a social theory, it can & must be tested against other social theories. There's no "religion." One can take it or leave it, come up with better theories.

Under Abrahamic colonizations, these were mapped into "religion" & under Western racism given racial interpretations. 13/

Racism is a product of the Bible, where the "children of Noah" were said to have resulted in different races, Ham was cursed to be black and thus evil. There is absolutely no equivalent in Indic thought.
There is also no concept of "birth purity" like European "royal blood." 14/

Even in the Mahabharata, there's all kinds of cross-marriages and child births going on. The entire Kuru clan emerges from all kind of non "royal" admixtures, both male and female. Satyati is a fisherwoman, married to a king. Vyasa is called upon to impregnate the queens . 15/

Heck there is even a Rakshasa that Bheema marries and a Naga that Arjuna marries. Does this sound like a society obsessed with "racial purity" in the manner of Europeans?

Varna theory allowed a bewildering array of outsiders to become a seamless part of Indian society. 16/

Also remember that varna was a social *theory*. The actual reality of society can never be mapped into a theory. This is why when the British started to map different jatis to different varnas there were thousands and thousands of letters in protest of the mapping. 17/

Take the standard narrative—"India had a "static caste system" for 5000 years (where wily Brahmins had installed themselves on the top)."

Static for 5000 years. Wow. Then everyone would be really clear about their varna right? Why the hell were they protesting the mapping? 18/

Per "caste" narrative, the wily Brahmins put themselves "on top", oppressed others for 5000 years, yet no one protested! And these oppressive Brahmins were so dumb that they were "on top" but remained poor. But so clever that they still managed to oppress everyone else. 19/

This narrative of "caste system" is your social "science" today. Wily Brahmins hypnotized everyone else to be on top.

Christians who made this theory up believed in "Satan" and "Black Magic." But what about "rationalist" "social scientists"? 20/ https://twitter.com/sankrant/status/927848818330107904?s=20

As a non-Brahmin (by jati), I see no evidence my ancestors were so dumb & weak that they were "oppressed" by Brahmins for centuries with not a protest. This is what the "caste system" story turns the so-called "low castes" into. Stupid & weak till White saviors showed up. 21/

Further, this "oppressive" civilization survived for 5000 years where every other ancient civilization perished. Serious Black Magic.

And no ancient visitor, before the British "saved" us, called the society oppressive. Rather they came from far and wide to learn from it. 22/

This thread is not to "defend" Brahmins or varna. The point is to understand ourselves on our own terms. Colonization robs us from accessing our own experience. Irrespective of social or political labels we must look at our lived experience, beyond slogans or academic dogmas. 23/

I'm not claiming no one ever oppressed anyone or everything was "perfect." Perfection is unreal. My aim is simply to understand reality.

25//

Notes:
1. I've learnt from ideas of S N Balagangadhara.
2. I made up term "deep secularism" just as a way to explain role separation.

Do you know that India was among the richest in the world? That OBCs etc had tremendous industrial knowledge and skills.

The British stole $47 trillion. From whom did they steal? Largely from OBCs. They impoverished you, then told you "Brahmins did it." https://twitter.com/vishveshwara_/status/1294233370692472836?s=20

Western Indologists largely created "knowledge" to serve imperialism. In Marxist theory knowledge serves the aims of seizing political power.

This is why they produce propaganda about Indian society, not knowledge. It is subservient to the political. https://twitter.com/Sandeepba8/status/1294261664179580930?s=20

Capitalism destroyed the planet, communism destroyed freedoms. They're both limited models that emerge from Western frameworks.

Knowledge and wealth creation can proceed independently; the open source movement is another expression of that. https://twitter.com/ATigerhut/status/1294357055235645440?s=20