One of the problems with "city dwellers" of modern India is that they perhaps begin to fall victim to their own propaganda - that somehow they have climbed up from the low, low existence out there in the dirty villages and rural towns - and just by being in the city - now belong to an elevated existence completely disjunct from the greater Indian existence. The model is the picture postcard and hollywood or Pathe versions of US or British life. Hence we need to have the city dog-free, cow-free, slum-free, chota-log free - because those things do not appear in BBC pics of Londonistan.
Sorry, I don't buy that.
City dwellers don't expect to live alongside free-roaming animals. That's why it is called a 'city', not a 'village' (an indian village to be specific), a zoo, or an animal farm.
It has nothing to do with Indian culture.
There has to be separation between animals and humans in non-agricultural urban settlements.
It is logical
to expect that you won't have to steer around a cow or dog blocking and causing a traffic jam on MG road simply because cows/dogs have absolutely no business
being on a city main road.
It is abnormal behavior for a grazing animal to naturally live in a location where there is only asphalt, and zero grass
Just as it is illogical for a human to go sleep in a wild
monkey colony or in a den of wolves.To reiterate, it is for the animals' own benefit as well as for the humans.
Oh, US and Oiropean cities may have problems with stray dogs (definitely they don't have cows or large animals roaming the downtown streets in large numbers) but I seriously doubt if it is as widespread as in Indian cities. I don't recall having seen more than a stray or two in my 6 years in the US. I have seen only one in Singapore in the last 6 years.
That said, cities like New York are
said to have large populations of strays, but do at least attempt to tackle the menace. It's been more than a decade since I've visited any Oiropean city 'properly', so I don't have first hand info, but I haven't heard from a single Indian traveler/resident in these cities that stray animals pose a big problem
like in India. Not one.
Let me stick my neck out further and say, even if
Londonistan/Zurich/DC have problems with strays, why should Indian city dwellers suffer too? Why is it that 'the goras have strays, so for Mumbai/B'lore too it is okay onlee'.
That said, not all western cities are all TFTA and clean and efficient. American cities in particular have many nasty areas..heck Baltimore and Detroit are major
dumps. And these are portrayed fully as such in American movies. Same thing with the projects and slums in Chicago, LA, New Orleans etc. Detroit in particular is probably the single most dangerous and decayed major city I've ever visited.
I am sure you can find such cities in Oirope too, especially in the former Sov Block nations.
But we shouldn't benchmark with these cities which are vastly different from ours in most aspects. We need to look towards cities that have high population densities yet have managed their urban services/sanitation/infrastructure reasonably well. Eg. Tokyo, Singapore, Seoul, Hong Kong etc.
I will address the "no control of the dog/cow problem" issue in more appropriate threads. But in this thread, just will say that you need to really visit and stay up in Londonistan as well as other well-known cities and navigate the backwaters of city-life before you denounce the Indian cities on canine/bovine issues. Dog poo litters most side streets - unless it is a real, real, upmarket area with lots of sensitive skins and noses.
Visit France - oh, do -please do! Parts of Italiy and Greece. Welcome to dog-poo streets.
Boss, in Indian cities, it is not only the animal-poo that is a problem.
It is deadly combination of open drains/sewers, lack of proper sidewalks, dangerous mixing of pedestrian + vehicular traffic, tons of garbage and rubble (like piles of *%$ing stones that lie unmoved for months), incomplete and unlabeled dangerous infrastructural work sites, exposed overhead electrical wires, insane chaotic and unruly traffic, massive pollution, free-roaming animals, animal pool, and huge overcrowding that causes such misery. It is this attack on multiple fronts that raises the 'problem' by a few orders of magnitude from 'dog-poo' on oiropean sidewalks to 'major PITA on all fronts'.
Theoretical == with problems in oiropean cities may make one feel good, but the ground reality between the two cases is vastly different.
As I pointed out - the real objection was not about showing this. It was about not showing similar stuff that happens right under BBC's nose and much closer to home in Europe. WE DONT SEE SIMILAR FULL HD VIDEOS FOR THESE HOME OR CLOSE TO HOME TURF FROM THESE SELFDEPRECATORS.
Oh, the BBC are paki-style two-faced scum, there is no doubt about that.
And they will never openly portray themselves in a bad light compared to the 'thurrdworlders'; the reasons are well known to peearreff denizens. You're preaching to the choir here.
As already said, I don't think that Top gear episode was offensive, but even so, if someone wants to use it as a reason to get these clowns banned permanently from india, I am 399% in support onlee. So we are all on the same page here.
But let the urban problems discussion be not directly linked to it, since it seems to have taken a life of its own. I think we'll also need to move off this thread since its going OT.