AHC: Hare Krishna Theocracy

Your challenge, should you choose to accept it, is to create a theocratic state where Hare Krishna is the official religions used to guide the people's spirits to salvation or whatever justification theocratics(?) use.
 
Hare Krishna Creationism

Unlike the Xtian variety, they believe that the Earth is way older than commonly assumed, but concur that mankind has been around from the beginning.

Yeah. Hinduism has generally not been pro-creationist, but Hare Krishna is the big exception in that.

In regards to the question, I could see, say, Nepal, or some other country with little religious minorities become a Hindu theocracy, but not a Hare Krishna theocracy.
 
Unfortunately I think that this is ASB. As much as I find the movement fascinating (indeed my Sid Meiers Mass Effect TL had transhumanist Hare Krishnas), it has never really been that popular and I beleive has declined majorly in popularity for the last few decades.

I do however think that what it provides is an interesting model for an earlier evangelical hinduism. So a pre 1900 POD could very well see a religion similar to the Hare Krishnas form a theocracy.
 
The Hare Krishnas were formed in the 60s in New York, which doesn't exactly give them a lot of legitimacy. I think the best bet is to have them all go somewhere to form a Jonestown-style settlement (though preferably without the final stage...)

Happily, OTL there's a strong push to form self-sufficient societies in the Hare Krishna, since getting getting back to the Earth and living a simple life in harmony with nature and stuff like that is part of their doctrine.

It seems easy to me to imagine large numbers of Hare Krishnas moving to some remote location in a poor country and setting up their own independent settlements, and maybe even getting a few tens of thousands of people there. Getting them in charge of a country is hard, though, since they're pretty pacificistic.

Maybe have them set up in one of the African states that gained independence late (Namibia? Somaliland?) and have their community be large enough that the colonial masters try to chop them off as their own small country.

Having an autonomous region within another country would be easier, though, and carries the advantage that it could probably be done somewhere more likely to allow it. In both cases in Africa, it seems likely that someone would try to end the experiment, either from desire for wealth or from anti-European sentiment.
 
The Hare Krishnas were formed in the 60s in New York, which doesn't exactly give them a lot of legitimacy.
Well yes and no.
I mean literally, ISKCON was founded in new york, but it can make it appear like just another new age cult and not a branch of Hindu tradition.
In reality, the Hare Krishna religion is not only self identified as just another branch of the Gaudiya Vaishnavite tradition (a tradition dating back to the 1400s), but Bhaktivedanta, it's founder, not only was born in India and grew up there. Whilst there, he became part of an order of Gaudiya Vaishnavites who in turn gave him his mission to spread Gaudiya Vaishnavite hinduism to the rest of the world.

So as legitimacy goes, having an indian man educated by indian preists with a tradition going back over 600 years is as legit as you can get really.


Happily, OTL there's a strong push to form self-sufficient societies in the Hare Krishna, since getting getting back to the Earth and living a simple life in harmony with nature and stuff like that is part of their doctrine.

It seems easy to me to imagine large numbers of Hare Krishnas moving to some remote location in a poor country and setting up their own independent settlements, and maybe even getting a few tens of thousands of people there. Getting them in charge of a country is hard, though, since they're pretty pacificistic.

Maybe have them set up in one of the African states that gained independence late (Namibia? Somaliland?) and have their community be large enough that the colonial masters try to chop them off as their own small country.

Having an autonomous region within another country would be easier, though, and carries the advantage that it could probably be done somewhere more likely to allow it. In both cases in Africa, it seems likely that someone would try to end the experiment, either from desire for wealth or from anti-European sentiment.
That could be a cool tl actually where the Hare Krishna movement is seen as an african religion rather than a "western" one.

Also, it isn't unusual for the Hare Krishna people to buy expensive land. I could see some billionaire converting, buying a load of boats/an oil rig/an island etc and setting up a state that way.
 
I could see, say, Nepal, or some other country with little religious minorities become a Hindu theocracy
It helps that, up until 2006, Nepal's state religion was Hinduism
Well yes and no.
I mean literally, ISKCON was founded in new york, but it can make it appear like just another new age cult and not a branch of Hindu tradition.
In reality, the Hare Krishna religion is not only self identified as just another branch of the Gaudiya Vaishnavite tradition (a tradition dating back to the 1400s), but Bhaktivedanta, it's founder, not only was born in India and grew up there. Whilst there, he became part of an order of Gaudiya Vaishnavites who in turn gave him his mission to spread Gaudiya Vaishnavite hinduism to the rest of the world.

So as legitimacy goes, having an indian man educated by indian preists with a tradition going back over 600 years is as legit as you can get really
There are Hari Krishna Temples in India now, visited primarily (at least the one I went to)by native Indians and not Westerners.
.
 
Using the example of the Bahai'i Faith's growth in various countries like Bolivia and Pacific Islands nations, get the Hare Krishna to spread extensively in the Pacific and build up significant numbers. Once they have enough people, gradually they can introduce theocratic elements into society until their variety of Hinduism is the state religion.
 
Top