Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

[Tuvaluan]

Patents do not really even further the ideals of capitalism in the free-market sense. If you really want to see absurd patents, it is in the domain of software. Amazon won a patent of "one-click shopping" where the idea was that you could buy something by just clicking on a buy button. These patents are sheer nonsense and their entire goal (as acknowledged by all corporations with deep pockets) is to keep out small players and to be used as negotiating tools between larger companies -- patents are anti-competitive and does not even support of the notion of the ideal "free market capitalism" (which is an ideal, but patents just concentrate power and money in the hands of existing players and raises barrier to entry). So the regime exists for private profit, alright, but only for the profit of a small number of players at least where these patents are worth a lot of money and patent silly ideas that are clearly not deep enough to be patentable. So even outside of the moral framework Shiv details, the patent regime is just plain regressive, and it borders on evil when it is applied to the field of medicene.

[shiv]

Can those who have eschewed their obligations to fulfill personal Artha and Kama to serve the larger good be called "Brahmins"?

Artha and kama are for everyone - but technically Brahmins are not supposed to keep wealth- but give it away. Vysyas can make and keep wealth - but there is a limit and they are supposed to give to charity.

But look at intellectual property in this way - taking clues from Hindu literature.

Deadly weapons - like the Pashupata or the Brahmastra had secrets that were not freely shared. In principle this is exactly like not sharing technology for WMD. Even seemingly "good" secrets - like how to avoid death were not given away freely simply because there were moral rules (usually Dharma) that went against powers that could be misused in work that went against humanity, life and the world. The Indian way has always called for morality to modulate or control power. Very often this morality has to be self imposed. Wherever a power of doing good could be used without general harm to society - like the power to relieve pain or cure an affliction, it was considered fine to share it with no restrictions. The Hindu way has always been to look at long term (more than one lifetime) over short term and group benefit over individual profit. Morality should not be bypassed for personal profit. The words I am writing sound like the usual lectures we Indians get about how life is to be lived - but it clearly indicates a difference in worldview compared with capitalism and the manner in which "knowledge" is used.

If a patent "protects" intellectual property, the ability to sell a patent for money makes intellectual property a trade-able commodity that can be sold to the highest bidder. Since intellectual property is a product of the intellect - it's origin can technically be pinpointed to one person - ie. one physical body and its associated intellect. Once it is given to someone else, the person who acquires it is not the originator and cannot be depended upon to keep on producing new innovations. Like a single use/use and throw object - once the owner of a patent sells a patent, the "job of protection" that the patent provides for the innovator is done. He has exchanged his IP for money and he has given up his right to sell it again to someone else - or even pass it on for free. The idea that patents allow the originators of ideas to keep innovating is rhetoric. Patents merely allow an innovator to convert his innovation into a fixed sum of money and the new owner can then profit from it as much as he can despite not being the originator of an idea. If the buyer of a patent uses the knowledge for immoral purposes that the originator of the product does not like, there is nothing that the latter can do. He has converted his knowledge into money in the bank and lost the power to use his own IP as he might want.

In other words patent laws allow the conversion of thoughts into money. Morality does not even come into the picture.

[RamaY]

Yajna/Yagna as a 'sacrifice' is an incomplete (at best) definition. Sacrifice of what is the question one should ponder.

There are hundreds of types of Yajnas performed. What is sacrificed in those yajnas for what benefit is the logical/rational/scientific question. If organic things (samidhas, ghee, herbs etc) are 'sacrificed' for associated benefits then how is different from a modern steel industry that 'sacrifices' iron-ore, lot of coal/electricity, water, other minerals and chemicals to produce steel?

Coming to leading Dharmic life style following five (Pancha) mahaYajnas (key duties) are prescribed for humans. Here Yajna means duty, not sacrifice.

Pancha Mahayajnas
Duties and responsibilities of the Hindu life has been classified into five great Yajnas or the Pancha Mahayajnas (Taittiriya Aranyaka 2.10).[9] It is imperative on the part of every householder to perform the following five yajnas:[10]

1. Brahm-yajna — study of scriptures, learning and self-development; and teaching others. This is the most important yajna.
2. Deva-yajna — worship of the divinities (devas) by pouring oblations into the sacred fire. This is done during the twilight prayers (sandhya), aupasana, and agnihotra yajnas.
3. Pitri-yajna — offering Tarpan libations in gratitude to ancestors or pitrs.
4. Manushya-yajna — feeding fellow humans.
5. Bhuta-yajna — feeding all living creatures. Cows, ants and birds are commonly fed.

Yajnas 1, 4 and 5 are done in all societies.
Deva-yajna in Hinduism is different from other faiths/religions/Atheist-ideologies. Will explain it in OT/Epics thread if there is interest.
Pitr-Yajna is unique to Hinduism (different from other faiths/religions in philosophy). I explained it here few moons ago.

[Pulikeshi]

Ok, this is just to get some sense of humor back on this thread and it is NSFW (do not click this at work):
If Gandhi took a yoga class (in the West)

LMAO at: "Beech! You do realize that is my actual religion right?"

[csaurabh]

Here is one thing I've been pondering. Is there a thing called 'Indian culture' or 'culture' that is separate from 'religion' ?
All Indian art forms have deep ties to the 'Hindu religion' . Without that background, they are relatively meaningless.
For a long period of time, anything connected to 'Hinduism' was considered to be backward/primitive or 'communal' and thus badbadbad. The cultural roots have become weak.

Next question, can an abrahamic be part of 'Indian culture' ?

If you follow Bangladeshi radio ( which can be heard over parts of Eastern India ) , they are at least trying very hard to not be Turks, Persians or Arabs ( unlike Pakistanis ). But then is there really an 'Islamic culture' out there, or just the remnants of a previously Hindu culture? They seem to have an Islamic front end and a Hindu back end, and this is not a comfortable spot to be in. Because the two ends are basically at war with each other.

At its core, Islam has no culture and in fact bans most things such as dance, music, art. It is suited for war more than anything else.

In Christian/Western context, I think 'culture' is defined as those things outside of the 'book', whereas 'religion' is defined as according to the 'book'.

We need to re evaluate this mess on our own terms. and again the problem is that, like 'religion', we have no equivalent word for 'culture'. The closest is 'sanskriti' and that has connotations of culture, religion, tradition, heritage. We use these words, but we don't know what they mean..

[ShauryaT]

Here is one thing I've been pondering. Is there a thing called 'Indian culture' or 'culture' that is separate from 'religion'

Turn it around. What if our 'religion' is our culture. Our way of life is our religion, IOW.

[shiv]

Here is one thing I've been pondering. Is there a thing called 'Indian culture' or 'culture' that is separate from 'religion' ?

<snip>

In Christian/Western context, I think 'culture' is defined as those things outside of the 'book', whereas 'religion' is defined as according to the 'book'.

The definition of religion is important here. Modern definitions have got diluted and do not carry the specific meaning that the word "religion" carried even 75 years ago - which is about "God'. God was not the most important thing in Indian culture. I am currently reading a translation of the "Sivapurana" and in this work Vishnu and Brahma are depicted as paying there respects to the almighty "Brahman" - the formless origin of everything. So even Gods for Hindus originate from where everything else originates

Religion and culture tend to get intertwined - but the rigidity of the Abrahamic religions causes changes in culture.

For Indians, religion is not a dominating part of culture - the culture dominates over all aspects of God. For Europe the Church defined culture until the reformation when culture broke free from the book - specifically Protestant culture broke free. But because the Brits got Hindus to declare every aspect of their life as "Hindu religion" and we believed it - not understanding what "religion" meant, we now have a situation where any damn Hindu thing is "communal". Wearing a bindi is communal. Wearing a saffron coloured cloth is communal. Namaste is communal. If you are Hindu you are communal.

Here is the post I made about the definitions of "religion" sourced from early dictionaries
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 6#p1782956

[Pulikeshi]

Here is one thing I've been pondering. Is there a thing called 'Indian culture' or 'culture' that is separate from 'religion'

Turn it around. What if our 'religion' is our culture. Our way of life is our religion, IOW.

That is an interesting way to look at it... but the very terms cause more confusion.
What is God, Culture and Religion in any native Indian language?

If I say Kadaval, Andavan, देव, or संस्कृति, शिष्टत्व or मत, धर्म -
none of these are equivalents the WU framework English words above...

Even more confusing even the framework and context of the English words have changed and will change.
My own two cents - we need to get beyond the tiger and deer stories of digestion -
The way forward is to
1) use original terms and not translate them
2) redefine the English words themselves to a SD framework and context.

The second option has worked unsuccessfully for words such as Secular, etc. but it is a start...

[ShauryaT]

^I agree we should use original terms. We do not have to translate these but should be able to explain. Often give in to popular terms in usage. as amongst the aam junta, I know of, Indian words sound alien to them. It is not a matter to deride but our misfortune and the level of intellectual subjugation, the type of education we receive and the general state of society - at least in the urban and NRI world, I know of.

[ShauryaT]

In other words patent laws allow the conversion of thoughts into money. Morality does not even come into the picture.

IP translates to money at some point as that is the ONLY thing that can be measured and is valued in a WU/colonized society. The question to me is not as much about morality but about balance. Where does desire end and greed starts? Is it wrong to be desirous of excessive wealth and even to display it. Perhaps not for most people. The problem is not with a desire to earn wealth and IP is just one way to do so. Balance is restored IF this person with high wealth is measured against other valued notions in society. These other non wealth values can be a valued notion only and only if society maintains them as such and the state has a back stop mechanism to protect and put a premium to these non wealth values over wealth. Wealth held in the public trust or "sarvodaya" is the Vaishya ideal. When we as a society have stopped valuing knowledge and works for the public good, why just single out the IP owner.

[shiv]

The question to me is not as much about morality but about balance. Where does desire end and greed starts? Is it wrong to be desirous of excessive wealth and even to display it.

Shaurya - I am certain that if you sit back and think for a few minutes, you can come up with a sensible answer to the question, "Where does desire end and greed start?"

The problem is that the question is not asked.

Why is it essential to ask? This enters into the realm of philosophy and about morality. Why does one not sleep with one's first degree relatives? The reason is not given to you but you are taught that it is wrong. Why does one not murder or steal from one's family?

We will need to go into a discussion of ethics and why have it. I will not head down this line except to state that Western Universalism has more or less stopped asking moral questions beyond the need for instant personal gratification.

[A_Gupta]

Observations from Manasa Tarangini:
https://manasataramgini.wordpress.com/2 ... ial-media/

[ShauryaT]

Observations from Manasa Tarangini:
https://manasataramgini.wordpress.com/2 ... ial-media/

Though arṇa and citraratha were ārya-s, Indra mercilessly slew them beyond the Sarayu river just as he had slain the dasyu-s. Thus, we have people in our own pakṣa who need to be dealt with like those rogue ārya-s.

IOW: Anyone who does not agree with me deserves to die!! Who is this person?

[ShauryaT]

An area where WU principles dominate seeking to white wash the factual and observed differences of the role of sexes, which do change as per times and needs. ANY notion that our differences are rooted in our sexuality and its practice environment is an immediate charge of being a sexist and against the "equality" cause of feminists, under the values of WU.

Please read the following and see how the minister has to dance.

In Tweets, Rajyavardhan Rathore Says He Was Misunderstood on Women Journalists

New Delhi: Union minister Rajyavardhan Singh Rathore today posted a series of tweets denying he had said on Friday that women journalists are more suited for off-field roles like news analysis instead of field reporting.

"Wrong interpretation. My wife is an ex-soldier," Mr Rathore, 45, said in one tweet. In others, he protested, "False, false, false. Totally false, Shame."

The Olympic medalist and former army officer reportedly made the comments at an interaction on Thursday at the Indian Women's Press Corps.

"When it comes to print, is mostly about analysis of or the implication of the news. And therein I think your role could be far better utilised without actually going out in the field. Not to say that you should not go out or there is a restriction on going out .... what I am saying is, in the sense of safety and security, and of course your working hours, and conditions which we all know has a degree of difficulty attached because as a mother, sister, the roles you all play, there are other responsibilities as well...," Mr Rathore, the junior minister for Information and Broadcasting, said.

On social media, Mr Rathore was criticized in comments like this: "Amazing India's MOS for I&B has such views on women reporters."

In one of his multiple tweets this morning, Mr Rathore said, "I've the highest respect for women personally & professionally. My 6 month pregnant soldier wife was on battlefield after Parl attack. "

Individualism and equality are two underlying tenets of WU. No, the idea is not to negate these values but taken on their own and to its extremes, independent of any other binding factors is a cause for selfishness to set in under the guise of freedom of choice.

Evaluating them in context of high principles of Dharma, that of Ritam, or the natural order is how SD would approach the issue. Does extreme feminism go against the natural order?

[ShauryaT]

Will our feminists and holders of WU values hold Sati as an ideal woman, as depicted in our Puraans?

Why is it only one of these four aspects of Satī’s character-profile—the last—so dominates our perception of her? Is it because historical trends have left this as the only aspect of her example Hindu women could follow—when avenues of self-selection of mates, display of physical courage and expression of will-power were closed to them. And if such is the case then is the last ideal viable in itself—without being nourished by the other three?

Satī as an Ideal Hindu Woman
Read the story in full and explore the issues.

[ShauryaT]

Court rules: Adultery no longer a crime in South Korea
The west looks at a country like South Korea, where more than a third of the population has become Christian and its values dominate with something like this being the icing on the cake. The breakdown of marriage and the family is considered the epitome of "modern" values. The dissenting judges were in a minority.

Seoul, South Korea (CNN)For 62 years, if you cheated on your husband or wife in South Korea, you could end up in prison.

Not anymore.

South Korea's Constitutional Court on Thursday overturned a law that made adultery a crime, saying it violates the East Asian nation's constitution.

"The precondition of human dignity and right to pursue happiness is for each individual to have their rights to choose their fate," the court ruled, saying that one's sex life is private. "And the rights to choose their fate includes rights to be engaged in sex and choosing the partner."

Up until then, anyone who cheated on their spouse could be charged and, if convicted, spent up to two years in prison. The same penalty also applied to "the one who fornicated with the" cheating spouse, according to the Constitutional Court's website.

But that's changing because South Korean society has changed enough "to lose many parts of (the anti-adultery law's) reason to exist," the prevailing judges said, according to a news release summarizing their decision.

The chief reason for originally enacting the adultery law was to protect women, these justices contended. The idea was that men -- who tended to be economically and socially more powerful -- took advantage of women. And if a man was charged criminally, that would give women more leverage in divorce proceedings. (In other words, a wronged wife might get more compensation after deciding to drop the charges.)

Yet 2015 isn't 1953, when the law first went into the affect, according to the judges. After all, the current president of South Korea -- Park Guen-hye -- is a woman.

"Women are active socially and economically, and women no longer apply as economically weaker," these judges wrote. "... In addition, the law cannot be viewed as (exclusively) protecting women."

Seven judges signed on to this decision, but two dissented.

The dissenting view said that legalizing adultery hurts efforts to promote family in South Korea. It points to statistics showing 40% of South Korean marriages since 2000 end in divorce. And between 2000 and 2006, at least, 47.1% of those divorces came about after one or more spouses cheated.

"Adultery and fornication go beyond a person's rights (and) intrude on other people and the community," these justices wrote. "Considering that the relationship between husband and wife is the fundamental element of a family, the country and the society should legally protect and maintain (this) relationship."

The last time the South Korean court looked at this law was 2008. Since then, according to South Korean news agency Yonhap, some 5,500 people have been indicted on adultery charges, though that doesn't mean they ended up behind bars.

It was not immediately clear what will happen to those cases, assuming they haven't been resolved already.

But at least one entity that has reason to celebrate after Thursday's ruling, Unidus, a South Korean condom maker.

It's impossible to definitively say why, but Undius' stock price did jump suddenly about 25 minutes after the decision came out. By day's end, it was up a shade under 15% from Wednesday.

[shiv]

Satī as an Ideal Hindu Woman
Read the story in full and explore the issues.

Methinks the "issue" is that self proclaimed upholders of Hindutva have been infected with Victorian and Islamic morality, and from that state of degeneracy they now talk as if women choosing husbands etc is a "western idea". In this they get support from Islamic mullas.

I think that for Hindus an important goal would be so see just how colonized Hindu minds are and since that causes cognitive dissonance and anger. For example how many Hindu men can encourage their women to stop covering their heads in front of their in laws. Covering face and head is a requirement for "female modesty". There is no "Hindu tradition" in that and it is hardly a western trait to keep female faces and heads uncovered.

[Shreeman]

A "terrorist" has become the new witch. Kafirs and unbelievers are facing the stake everywhere. Suspicion of disease, belief, or allegiance is more powerful than superstition, and results in an automatic and brutal death. It is truly the new middle ages. Can one even imagine ideals any more? Life has mutated into something else.

[shiv]

Court rules: Adultery no longer a crime in South Korea
The west looks at a country like South Korea, where more than a third of the population has become Christian and its values dominate with something like this being the icing on the cake. The breakdown of marriage and the family is considered the epitome of "modern" values. The dissenting judges were in a minority.

Shaurya the word "crime" is an interesting one. Is there a direct equivalent of the word "crime" in Sanskrit or other Indian language?

A "crime" is an offence punishable by law. That means that there can be no crime if there is no pre-existing "law" to declare that some act is a crime. Now where is adultery a "crime"? Adultery is biblical and Islamic crime. These top-down religions declared that adultery would be punished and what Korea has done is to reverse a Biblical/Islamic ruling and has become "secular"

In the Indian context, adultery is not a "crime". It is adharmic. The difference is that although adultery is not a crime in India it is considered wrong. From the western viewpoint when a former crime (adultery) is declared as no longer being a crime it is no longer against the law and is therefore legal. There is no moral guideline saying that it is wrong and therefore adultery could be encouraged by a system that suddenly gives freedom out of a pre-existing restriction.

Some of these things are very interesting and no one seems to give much thought. We Indians should be doing it. We have a unique system

[SaiK]

posting in full.. this issue is very critical to India's representation of its values vs. How the western culture impedes that with its own agenda. 'll cross post it another appropriate thread as well.

India's Daughter: We need to go beyond BBC's nauseating moralising
http://www.firstpost.com/living/indias- ... 37593.html

The government's attempts to restrain the BBC from airing a documentary on rape, built around the story of the December 2012 Delhi gangrape victim (a.k.a. Nirbhaya), are pointless. It has effectively given BBC the opportunity to get higher viewership for their film, titled "India's Daughter", whose selling point is obviously the misogynist statements of the rapists (and their lawyers) who were interviewed for it.

The government’s response allows the BBC to adopt a high moral tone on how it is holding a mirror to Indian men's mindsets. Its tone is superior and nauseating: “This harrowing documentary, made with the full support and cooperation of the victim’s parents, provides a revealing insight into the horrific crime that sent shock waves around the world and led to protests across India demanding changes in attitudes towards women.”

As Indians, we should certainly not fight shy of acknowledging our own failings as a society, much less ban such films. The restraint order by a Delhi court on the screening of the film, however valid legally, demonstrates the impotence of the Indian state, and its inability to uphold its own laws, despite legislating so many of them.

A screengrab from the documentaryA screengrab from the documentary
The reason why the BBC documentary offends us is not its essential truth, but the ignominy of an outsider pointing it out to us. I am sure enough Muslims in India would be equally offended if we made a documentary showing how Indian Islam treats its women. The outsider's critiques are always unpalatable.

At another level, the documentary also illustrates the inability of the Indian state, and its ruling elite, to understand the workings of global power manipulators using money, media and the technology of power and influence to undermine us. The western world knows how to use India's own umpteen faultlines – of caste, gender and economic inequities - to undermine the emergence of a strong state which can implement the rule of law fearlessly. The west does not want a strong state to develop in India or else its own geopolitical agenda cannot be pursued.

Before one discusses these points, let me make my stand clear on two counts: I am against any kind of ban on media documentaries or artistic work, whatever the motives of its authors or their financial backers. Also, I hold no brief whatsoever for “sick male mindsets” that are a product of centuries of misogyny and patriarchy. Our first job as a society is to speed up the process of ending patriarchy and making boys and men develop genuine respect for women on the basis of equality and a shared partnership for the benefit of society.

But we also need to understand how power equations work globally, and if we do not understand this, we are forever going to be pushed around on the basis of foreign agendas masquerading as concern for human rights. Indians often do not understand when we are fighting injustices in our own society and when we may be furthering someone else's covert agenda to undermine us.

Take the rule of law and how little we understand it. We should also understand how it will be used against us to show up our weaknesses, while the west will commit the same crimes under the veneer of their rule of law.

Here’s one illustration: Fake encounters to eliminate troublesome criminals or terrorists are illegal both in the Indian and US context. In India, fake encounters are the result of a weak state. The police resort to it in order to overcome the failings of a corrupt and excruciatingly slow legal system and inadequate resources to gather foolproof evidence against criminals and terrorists. Whether it is Punjab, Gujarat or UP, fake encounters have been the short-cuts used to eliminate people against whom we can’t find enough legal evidence to arrest and convict.

The west will use this endlessly against us, helped, in turn, by human rights activists here. But do we know that the US also conducts many such extra-legal assassinations? Do we know that President Obama has himself signed scores of death warrants of people he thinks are terrorists, including American citizens? He has converted the CIA, a spy agency, into an assassination squad, which uses snipers and drones to kill enemies of the US state (read here).

The difference is this: while we will call our killings fake encounters, the US assassinations will be couched in legalities and presidential findings. This is what I call the effective use of the technology of power, where a patently illegal act can be sanctified by using verbal and technological techniques to paint it differently in India and the US.

Take another example. The Indian media and its western counterparts have talked endlessly about the Sangh’s “ghar wapsi” programme – making us cringe with shame. But what is ghar wapsi? A religious reconversion programme that’s been badly handled in front of the media. Can a liberal state ban ghar wapsi when it cannot ban religious propaganda or conversions away from Hinduism? The media painted ghar wapsi as some kind of unmitigated evil, but did not produce even one documentary on what the evangelical organisations are upto. Did the BBC produce any such programme showing the “missionary mindset” and the harm it is doing to societal cohesion in India?

Once again, the point to underscore is this: the west knows how to use media and technology to pursue its own agendas, overt or covert. But we are unable to separate the issues in our own minds. We are poor players in the technology of power, media management and soft influence.

Now, let’s come to the BBC documentary. Consider how the author protects her own country’s laws, but how we are unable to protect ours.

First, we give a foreign reporter access to rapists - an access we would not give to our own journalists. What does this say about our kowtowing to goras? We will subvert our own laws to curry favour with them.

Second, the journalist involved, Leslee Udwin, gets signed consent letters from the rapists before filming their statements on rape. This shows that Udwin knows she has to respect the laws under which the BBC operates. But did she show equal concern for Indian laws beyond obtaining permissions from the home ministry? Did our own government get her to sign a legally valid document specifying what she can do or cannot do with the interview? There may be a general letter somewhere intended to protect a babu’s backside, but it will probably be legally unenforceable against the BBC.

The facts are that Udwin sought the home ministry's permission to interview the convicts and understand their psyche. The Times of India says Udwin promised to use the footage solely for "social purposes" and give the footage to the authorities for vetting. Apparently only the edited version was shown. But the "social purpose" documentary was then sold to the Beeb. How come the babus in the home ministry did not understand that practically anything can be done in the name of “social purpose.”

Why did the authorities let the crew circumvent procedures? APWhy did the authorities let the crew circumvent procedures? AP

The question is: When Udwin did everything to follow the law back home in the UK, why did our home ministry not do anything to protect our laws and the rights of the convicts interviewed, when the appeal process is far from over? Such damaging releases of convicts' statements can work against their appeals, still pending in the Supreme Court, as the judiciary may now feel compelled to uphold the death sentences on these "sick minds". Would the legal system in the US or UK have allowed such a prejudicial airing of a convict's views before a verdict? Would defence lawyers not be screaming mistrial and attempts to bias the judge or jury? But we happily do this without regard to the law.

The Times of India quotes feminist lawyer Indira Jaising as claiming that the broadcast of the film “would amount to violation of Article 19(2) of the Constitution, Section 153A of IPC and Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. ‘At present, the defendant's appeal against conviction and death sentence is pending before the Supreme Court; therefore, airing the documentary would amount to gross contempt of court,’” Jaising wrote to NDTV, which aired promos of the documentary containing the rapist’s statements.

Did the Indian home ministry not know the law before giving Udwin the right to interview convicted rapists? Now, by ham-handedly trying to prevent the BBC from airing it, it will even be accused of trying to curb freedom of speech, and shielding society from the plain unvarnished truth of “men with misogynist mindsets.” Two self-goals in one.

Udwin's interview to the Hindustan Times shows how well the foreign media establishment will use our own follies against us. Asked why she called the film "India's Daughter" when the title itself sounds patriarchal, she says: "Yes, but the victim was called India's Daughter by the press here and we are not allowed to name her in India."

Fair enough. But the media in India did not call Nirbhaya “India's Daughter" for the reason she cites. We called her India's Daughter because the idea evokes a strong cultural sense of protectiveness towards daughters in society, even though in actual practice we don't protect our vulnerable girls and women. When played abroad, India's Daughter will sound like an indictment of India and its society. The meaning of the title is subtly different in the Indian and western context. The west will use such documentaries to put us on the backfoot, questioning our intentions and undermining our national resolve to grow our defence or global clout, saying why not spend that money to protect your daughters?

Udwin also suggests that her efforts are unquestionable because "I am a rape victim myself." The assumption that a victim is best-placed to tell an objective story is questionable. Her own sense of anger might well have made her biased, but we can't say this without watching the film.

The BBC also says the film was done with the permission of Nirbhaya’s parents. Once again, such permissions mean little. Why would parents seeking justice for their child’s rape and murder not use any forum to air their views? How are they likely to know how the BBC will use their statements in the documentary? The BBC is a product of colonial attitude and funded by the British taxpayer. It loyalties will be to its audience, not India’s interests.

And is the problem our unwillingness to face “male mindsets” or something else? Do we not know what male mindsets are in India? Did we not create an entire commission under Justice JS Verma to look at gender justice? We even legislated a tough law that includes hanging for particularly vicious rape cases. (Read the Verma report here) We don't need to know what male attitudes are, we need to do something about them.

One reason why we have not acted against injustice as strongly as we should is the weak state, where the state finds it impossible to implement its own laws, given the pushes and pulls of a society with multiple kinds of injustice. A simple law to prescribe reservations for women in parliament is held hostage to OBC and Dalit concerns over their own dis-empowerment: attempts to tackle one injustice come up against another group’s sense of injustice.

Politicians use these faultlines to avoid implementing something that can only have a beneficial impact over the very long term. Our netas see more electoral returns in offering voters private freebies (laptops, tariff cuts) than in providing public goods (law and order, women's safety). A society split on caste or religious lines is unable to differentiate between action against criminals and actions against “our people, our caste, our religious group.” This is why a Lalu Prasad and J Jayalalithaa or Jagan Reddy, two of them convicted for corruption, continue to win elections.

Sex education, gender sensitisation and cleaning up the justice system are long-term solutions with no immediate political benefits for anybody. Effective policing and sensitive handling of rape and sexual harassment cases may possibly be the only actions that can have visible results in the short term - and these need to get first priority. But in all the anger over “male mindsets”, the inability of a weak state to take long-term corrective action is not seen as central to the issue of gender justice.

The real danger in all this breast-beating over “male mindsets” is that we won't do the important things that we need to do ensure gender justice. It is only a strong state (which is different from an authoritarian state) that can apply the rule of law and make things work. This needs a state to protect human rights, and not specific community rights, whether based on caste or gender or religion.

In the UK, for years teen girls in Rotherham were subjected to sexual abuse by Pakistani Muslim gangs, but the British police failed to act for fear of being branded “racist.” In other words, even in a society where the rule of law supposedly operates, the law could not prevent injustices to women and vulnerable girls. Udwin could well have written about these "male mindsets", but India is obviously a more enticing prospect.

The lessons we should draw from the BBC’s documentary on India’s Daughter are these: one, we have to develop a thick skin to their media machinations; two, we should focus on what we have to do to correct the injustices in our system and not be distracted by western moralising; and three, we have to develop our own sophisticated systems of giving it back to them in their own coin by developing long-term studies and capabilities to show up the west’s own hypocrisies.

Right now, they can hold a mirror to us, but we cannot do the same to them. They thus have moral power over us. We have not mastered the technology of power and media to achieve a balance.

[svenkat]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2975016/New-book-alleges-Allied-soldiers-raped-one-million-Germans-end-Second-World-War.html#ixzz3TLnbkhCE

A million women were raped by Allied soldiers in Germany in the immediate aftermath of World War II, a new books claims.
‘When The Soldiers Came,’ by historian Miriam Gebhardt, is hailed as the definitive account of the treatment meted out to the defeated women of Nazi Germany which they remained silent about for decades out of shame and humiliaton.
'At the very least 860,000 women and girls - and also men and young boys - were raped by the occupying Allied soldiers and their helpers. It happened everywhere,' begins the book.


But in fact countless women were raped, she said, with soldiers believing they could treat the as they wanted after bearing coveted gifts.
'Post-war society was hardly ready to differentiate between voluntary and forced sexual contact.
'Between women who prostituted themselves out of emergency needs and those who had become victims of rape.'
Added to the trauma of the western victims was the shame suffered by the children they bore from their attackers.
'Their fathers were, mostly, unknown, and the women received no financial help at all,' said Gebhardt.
She said in parts of southern Germany, occupied by American troops, there were often 'free nights' where soldiers were encouraged to abuse women at will for up to 48 hours at a time.
The alleged victims are 'relieved' their hardship is coming to light, she added.

[csaurabh]

I've been watching a few of Rajiv Malhotra's videos. They are very enlightening.

In one of them he talks about how Indonesians have a deep respect for Indians and have some Sanskrit names etc. Even though they are muslim, the Hindu influence is still there.

Apparently, some of the Tamil Kings ruled over large parts of SE Asia including Cambodia, Indonesia, etc. ( A fact which is conveniently omitted from history textbooks for some reason ) But this 'colonization' process did not result in slavery, genocide, cultural destruction, forced conversions, extinction of native languages or anything like that. In fact, 'Hinduism' also spread from the Sapta Sindhu region to all other parts of Bharata and more. Unless you believe in silly Aryan-Dravidian theories ( in which case, I wonder what business the Dravidians had in spreading an Aryan religion to a third party ? )

The abrahamic monotheisms cannot escape guilt of colonization, by blaming it on 'politics' or 'just human nature'.

[Pulikeshi]

Francis Fukuyama and panelists John Mearsheimer, Peter Katzenstein - Alternatives to Democracy


1. Interesting framework confusion - between the panelists
2. India is mentioned many times. Causes more confusion when simplistic formulations are peddled...
sub-text: one crazy Hindu student looses it
3. WU is bandied about, Mearsheimer tries to get down to some basic definitions, but the other panelists are in their own framework
4. Fukuyama anticipates a non-individualistic alternative, but is too hung up with the Chinese model (whatever that may be)
5. Fukuyama is chastised by a crazy Islamic fundu, about not understanding Islam and the directive to read more about it...
6. Till date there is no Indian model from anyone, so WU - what's the big deal?

[ShauryaT]

^. Fukuyama and Huntington were pitched to be largely opposites in their prognosis on the ability of various societies to adopt democracy and principles of liberalism as practiced in the west, as a model for the world. These views were first expressed in papers and then in book form culminating in their popular works of "End of History" and the "Clash of Civilizations" respectively.

Seems Fukuyama is getting closer to the views Huntington holds.

Also, Pulikeshi: You have not read about my Indic model yet?

Anyways, I will only assert there is one. Time permitting would love to expand on it and send the works to you for comments and critiques.

[Pulikeshi]

^^^ Saar will be happy to read any wisdom you have written about. If my comments are useful there is nothing more to it than happiness.

I am not sure about either Fukuyama or Huntington - Civilizations have vastly larger life-cycles than nations. They also do not clash evenly, the process has a lot of snake eating its own tail and re-emerging, as well as partial digestions and it is much harder over the vast life-cycles to predict winners or attribute extant cause.

What I am very much convinced of at this time is that the individual contract with the state will come even more increasingly into question, but it will not take the collectivism (socialism, etc.) forms that the West has dealt with and digested to an extent, it will be way more virulent... That evolution as understood by the commons in the West as 'survival of the fittest' is wrong - not because of intelligent design - but inspite of it - that 'who so ever survives was the fittest' that the judgement of fitness comes post facto and that there is no progression to a 'better' that there could be regressions that are seen at the fittest in time and context is missing from their analysis.... that there is no central agency with precognition to propose a fate, that civilizations and nations can regress and still survive because they find themselves fit in time an context. These are in my sense very much in line with Indian models of thinking... In this I bet on civilizations more than nations - as they have more complex time and context awareness than nations do... and hence my oft quote that we can only optimize for one or the other, but it is hard to save both...

[ShauryaT]

^I am about half way through on Kissenger's new work "World Order". Long story in short, He continues to believe that the anchor concept for world order would be a continued westphalian system, supplemented by some unknown system, that is yet to be defined.

To achieve a genuine world order, its components, while maintaining their own values, need to acquire a second culture that is global, structural, and juridical— a concept of order that transcends the perspective and ideals of any one region or nation. At this moment in history, this would be a modernization of the Westphalian system informed by contemporary realities.

I am still with Huntington though, that although nations will continue to work in their self interest, the defining characteristic of "order" would be to manage the conflicts not of nations but of civilizations. Anyways, there is enough churn going on and a lack of clarity amongst most western thinkers on what this future order would look like, for the current one seems like chaos to them - something they are not comfortable with. India has to rise to affirm its civilizational values and interests and the core state should defined its interests around these values.

[Agnimitra]

Francis Fukuyama and panelists John Mearsheimer, Peter Katzenstein - Alternatives to Democracy


1. Interesting framework confusion - between the panelists
2. India is mentioned many times. Causes more confusion when simplistic formulations are peddled...
sub-text: one crazy Hindu student looses it
3. WU is bandied about, Mearsheimer tries to get down to some basic definitions, but the other panelists are in their own framework
4. Fukuyama anticipates a non-individualistic alternative, but is too hung up with the Chinese model (whatever that may be)
5. Fukuyama is chastised by a crazy Islamic fundu, about not understanding Islam and the directive to read more about it...
6. Till date there is no Indian model from anyone, so WU - what's the big deal?

Thanks for posting. I found it interesting that Fukuyama believes the 'penultimate' stage (in the Marxist Hegelian series, i.e.) will be the point of balance. I believe that is basically right. However, his analysis of socio-political dynamics and human aspirations is still wanting, as he limits himself to the factors considered in the history dialectic of the Progressives/Marxists. There are many other factors, and his dismissal of the Islamic alternative, for example, is premature. In fact, the Chinese alternative can be dismissed for those reasons, byt the Islamic alternative has more power than the Chinese, IMHO.

A couple of years back I had blogged this: Can Hindutva do Yoga?
In it, I used a chart composed by someone on the basis of Indic philosophy:



There is no Indic model in Fukuyama's speech because Nehruvianism buried India. That Indic model could emerge in the next few decades or by the end of the century based on the above considerations.

[member_28638]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2975016/New-book-alleges-Allied-soldiers-raped-one-million-Germans-end-Second-World-War.html#ixzz3TLnbkhCE

A million women were raped by Allied soldiers in Germany in the immediate aftermath of World War II, a new books claims.
‘When The Soldiers Came,’ by historian Miriam Gebhardt, is hailed as the definitive account of the treatment meted out to the defeated women of Nazi Germany which they remained silent about for decades out of shame and humiliaton.
'At the very least 860,000 women and girls - and also men and young boys - were raped by the occupying Allied soldiers and their helpers. It happened everywhere,' begins the book.


But in fact countless women were raped, she said, with soldiers believing they could treat the as they wanted after bearing coveted gifts.
'Post-war society was hardly ready to differentiate between voluntary and forced sexual contact.
'Between women who prostituted themselves out of emergency needs and those who had become victims of rape.'
Added to the trauma of the western victims was the shame suffered by the children they bore from their attackers.
'Their fathers were, mostly, unknown, and the women received no financial help at all,' said Gebhardt.
She said in parts of southern Germany, occupied by American troops, there were often 'free nights' where soldiers were encouraged to abuse women at will for up to 48 hours at a time.
The alleged victims are 'relieved' their hardship is coming to light, she added.

Free Nights:
The Allies did the same thing in France to French women even though France was on their side!

[member_28638]

Free Nights:
The Allies did the same thing in France to French women even though France was on their side!

The 'Good War': New book reveals American troops committed tens of thousands of rapes on French women they were 'liberating'

Guy Walters
The Daily Mail, UK
Sat, 01 Jun 2013 11:19 UTC


Targets: Some American GIs saw French women as spoils of war according to an explosive new book
The handsome American soldier was Elisabeth's tenth client that evening. Working her trade on the top floor of a dingy apartment block in Paris, she felt that she had seen them all.

For the past four years, the men had been Germans, and now, since the city had been liberated in August, 1944, they were Americans. It made little difference.

Elisabeth held out three fingers of her hand to indicate the price of her body - three hundred francs.

'Too much,' said the soldier.

Elisabeth sighed. She had seen that before as well. Wearily, she kept the three fingers held up, almost as an insult.

There was no negotiation - three hundred was little enough as it was.

'Two hundred,' the soldier insisted.

'Non,' said Elisabeth. 'Three hundred or nothing'.

The soldier approached her, hate in his eyes. Elisabeth glowered back, starting to feel scared.

'In that case,' said the soldier, 'it will be nothing.'

The soldier then placed his huge hands around Elisabeth's neck and started to squeeze. She struggled as hard as she could, lashing out, but it was in vain.

After a minute or so she slumped down, her lifeless body falling on to the stained sheets. The soldier then calmly removed his trousers and had sex with her. For nothing.

Afterwards, he went through Elisabeth's belongings and stole her cash and jewellery. He then went round the block, found another prostitute and took her to dinner and the movies.

For the GI, it had been a swell evening. Paris was just as they said it was.

Even by the standards of war, this was a particularly grim episode. But while such barbaric murders were extremely rare, a new book reveals that the violation by American soldiers of the women whom they had been sent to Europe to free and assist was far more common than has first been thought.

It is, of course, a horrific fact of war that soldiers rape the women of the lands they conquer.

Many troops - but certainly not all - see female flesh as a justified spoil, something they deserve after fighting with the husbands, fathers and sons of the women they abuse.

Rape is also a way by which one nation signifies that it now has dominance over another.

We can have your women, rape says, and there is nothing you can do because we are in charge.

Many thousands of German women and girls, for example, were raped by Russian troops in the battle for Berlin at the end of World War II.

Until now, we in the former Allied Western nations tend to regard rape as something carried out by countries other than ourselves.

Through films such as Saving Private Ryan and The Longest Day, we are conditioned to think of the Allied troops as being above such behaviour.

However, an explosive new book published by an American academic sensationally debunks that myth.

In What Soldiers Do, Professor Mary Louise Roberts of the University of Wisconsin argues that American GIs committed rape thousands of times during the War. And, more surprisingly still, many of their victims were French.

As Professor Roberts says: 'My book seeks to debunk an old myth about the GI, thought of as a manly creature that always behaved well - the GIs were having sex anywhere and everywhere.'

In total, it is estimated that some 14,000 women were raped by American GIs in Western Europe from 1942 to 1945. In France, 152 American soldiers were tried for rape, of whom 29 were hanged.

But the statistics do not reveal the full story. There were undoubtedly thousands of rapes in France, many of which went unreported by the victims who were keen to avoid the dreadfully unfair stigma that rape carried with it during those days.

But why did the Americans rape their allies? For the average GI, France was as much an 'erotic adventure' as a military expedition, and the war was, in part, 'sold' to conscripted soldiers as an opportunity to meet attractive French women.

Many of the soldiers' fathers had been in France during World War I, and had come back with lurid tales of the supposed looseness of French women.

Image

Hotspot: The Channel port of Le Harve, pictured after a bombing raid during the war, was particularly badly affected by crime
Their sons, now off to fight in the same land, regarded France as essentially a giant brothel, with thousands of nubile French girls eager to be taken by manly GIs.

As Professor Roberts rightly observes, the average GI 'had no emotional attachment to the French people or the cause of their freedom'.

Magazines aimed at the troops such as Stars And Stripes showed pictures of cheering women during liberation parades, accompanied by headlines such as 'Here's What We're Fighting For'.

The magazine even published 'useful' French phrases, such as the translations for 'I am not married' and 'You have charming eyes'.

It was almost as if the magazine was telling the GIs: come and get it, boys.

And that's exactly what they did. Throughout the summer of 1944, from the moment they had pushed back the Germans during the D-Day landings in June, the Americans unleashed throughout northern France, in the words of Professor Roberts, a 'tsunami of male lust'.

'Normandy women launched a wave of rape accusations against American soldiers,' Roberts writes, 'threatening to destroy the erotic fantasy at the heart of the operation. The spectre of rape transformed the GI from rescuer-warrior to violent intruder'.

Particularly badly affected was the port of Le Havre. One citizen wrote to the town's mayor, Pierre Voisin, complaining of 'crimes of all kinds, committed day and night'.

The writer said that the GIs 'attacked, robbed . . . both on the street and in our houses' and were essentially 'a regime of terror, imposed by bandits in uniform'.

But the biggest problem was sex. GIs were copulating with every French woman they could get their hands on, willingly or not, and worse still, they were doing it in public.

'These things are happening in full daylight right in front of the children or other people who happen to be near,' said one civilian.

Many impromptu brothels were set up by French women desperate for money. At one house, soldiers would be lined up all the way up the staircase.

'They urinate along the walls and in the hallways,' one witness noted with disgust, 'and they attack any women who happen to live there.'

What made it worse for the French was that the Americans were the same troops who had devastated their towns through aerial bombing and artillery barrages.

Many French felt - with much justification - that their towns had been needlessly destroyed in a macho display of American firepower.

An estimated 20,000 civilians were killed in the battle for Normandy, and in Le Havre alone, 3,000 had died.

Angry officials pointed out that while thousands of French dead had been hauled from the rubble, no more than ten German bodies had been found.

With the raping and the bombing, it was therefore understandable why some French wondered whether they really had been 'liberated' after all.

The Americans, recalled one Resistance fighter, 'soured their reputation by behaving as if they were in a conquered country'. Some even regarded this 'second occupation' as being worse than the first.

'France for the Americans - as well as the Germans - is Paris and women,' observed another Frenchman, noting that there was little difference between the average GI and average Boche.

French women who worked as prostitutes even looked back on their German clients with something approaching affection. GIs, it seemed, wanted more than just sex.

'You had to keep an eye on your purse with those ********,' one woman recalled. 'It's sad to say, but I missed my Fritzes, who were gentler with women. I was not the only one to say it; all the women thought the same as me, only they did not always say it.'

Some prostitutes were even killed by GIs. In addition to Elisabeth in Paris, another was stabbed 29 times in the abdomen, while a woman called Marie was killed for refusing to be sodomised.

Rumours abounded of particularly horrific stories, including that of a girl who had been hacked to death and then had her corpse violated.

In the eyes of many GIs, French women were little more than cigarettes - something that you got with your rations and could be shared around. Unsurprisingly, venereal diseases were rampant, but the American top brass was more concerned about the health of 'our boys' and the possibility of them infecting their apple pie sweethearts back home, rather than in the health of the French women.

Clinics were overwhelmed with women suffering from VD, and many were sent to and from hospitals that had no room for them.

'An unwanted, homeless population of diseased women being shuttled from town to town,' Professor Roberts writes, 'these prostitutes compromise the legacy of the American occupation in Normandy'.

But the worst legacy was, of course, rape. Most shockingly, it also emerges that the American authorities did little about it.

Although educational leaflets entitled 'Let's Look At Rape' were distributed, they did nothing to dampen the desire of GIs to sexually assault those whom they were supposedly freeing from oppression.

However, some justice was needed to be seen to be done, but even that process was deeply flawed. Of the mere 152 men who were tried for rape, 139 of the defendants were 'coloured'.

It appears that the American Army was keen to treat black soldiers as scapegoats, and labelled them as being 'hypersexual' and therefore more likely to be rapists.

Courts martial were often little more than kangaroo courts, with men sent to the gibbet convicted on the flimsiest of evidence, and tried by officers with little or no legal training.

French victims were asked to identify their assailants from entire battalions of black soldiers, although often the rapes had been carried out in rooms that were barely lit, if at all.

In addition, another unpalatable truth is that many French women were as racist as the American officers.

Fears that some sort of 'black terror' was being unleashed on women in Normandy were carried far and wide, and it was all too easy to pin a crime on to a black soldier rather than a white one.

In addition, some French woman claimed to have been raped rather than admit that they had willingly had sex, and some prostitutes would threaten a rape accusation in order to extract more money out of a GI.

The liberation of their country was therefore a bittersweet affair for the French.

The crimes perpetrated by the Americans against the women also deeply affected French men, who felt emasculated by the Americans.

They were bigger, stronger, richer and healthier, and had not spent years being subjugated and forced to serve under the heel of the German jackboot.

Although we like to think of the men who freed Europe as members of the 'greatest generation', and that the Allies had fought a 'good war', as Professor Roberts shows, the true story is a lot more complicated and disturbing.

Even today, there will be elderly women sitting on the other side of the Channel who close their eyes when they hear the word 'liberation'.

[panduranghari]

Why is top-down system violating your rule 4? Infact, any worthwhile system will be top-down only. Bottom-up are movements which happen once in a while and influence the top. They are exceptions. But, in regular happenings, top-down hierarchy is the norm. Of course, the top needs to be in touch with the bottoms to not become a target of bottom-up revolution. In democracy, bottom-up revolution is managed through votes instead of guns. But, after the elections, it is back to top-down system. It seems to me that all functioning systems have to be top-down in hierarchy.

Can a top down system incorporate changes and still survive retaining its own essence? When does a bottom up system loose its foundation and start looking like a top down system?

[Pulikeshi]

^^^ Why are the categories only top-down vs. bottom-up : most complex systems have non-trivial network structures.
Second, information flow and context usually have a lot to do with the structure of a system.

TL;DR: The organizing principles of long lived systems need to have both the rigidity of top-down and the flexibility of bottom-up => As in a Samurai sword (see the center vs. the cutting edge) - but then this is a complex intuitive topic.
If the founding principles are nominally declarative and are based on normative ideologies, even if well intentioned, will not guarantee success as in longevity. Translated in English - 4 commandments or 10, they suffer the same end.

[member_28638]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2975016/New-book-alleges-Allied-soldiers-raped-one-million-Germans-end-Second-World-War.html#ixzz3TLnbkhCE

A million women were raped by Allied soldiers in Germany in the immediate aftermath of World War II, a new books claims.
‘When The Soldiers Came,’ by historian Miriam Gebhardt, is hailed as the definitive account of the treatment meted out to the defeated women of Nazi Germany which they remained silent about for decades out of shame and humiliaton.
'At the very least 860,000 women and girls - and also men and young boys - were raped by the occupying Allied soldiers and their helpers. It happened everywhere,' begins the book.


But in fact countless women were raped, she said, with soldiers believing they could treat the as they wanted after bearing coveted gifts.
'Post-war society was hardly ready to differentiate between voluntary and forced sexual contact.
'Between women who prostituted themselves out of emergency needs and those who had become victims of rape.'
Added to the trauma of the western victims was the shame suffered by the children they bore from their attackers.
'Their fathers were, mostly, unknown, and the women received no financial help at all,' said Gebhardt.
She said in parts of southern Germany, occupied by American troops, there were often 'free nights' where soldiers were encouraged to abuse women at will for up to 48 hours at a time.
The alleged victims are 'relieved' their hardship is coming to light, she added.

"Allied troops raped tens of thousands German ladies"

Published on Mar 31, 2015

The new view on a violence problem in post-war Germany was offered by the historian Miriam Gebhardt. After the 1945 on both sides of Berlin, as we know, one thousand German women lost honor. Also it was promoted by the allied troops fighting against Nazism in World War II. However traditionally the biggest blame for similar violations was laid on the Soviet soldiers. And in the West it is accepted to call contacts between the winner and the won as voluntary act.

In her book Gebhardt tells about what role in the history of Germany of the second half of the 40th played Yankees. According to the researcher, Americans discredited about 200 thousand German women and concede nothing to the allies at the front of violence. Data of the Bavarian priests became one of the main sources for work of the historian. Attempts to look at how Americans fought against nazis, were undertaken also earlier. So, in 2003 professor of criminalistics Robert Lilli found out that by November of the 1945th tribunals considered more than 11 thousand cases of sexual crimes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnZRWOGtq1A

[ramana]

There were also reports of marauding US soldiers on leave in Madras rampaging in the city.

[Yayavar]

greatest generation indeed...

It was odd in Normandy when I queried the locals about the gun placements and the actual landing during liberation. I was told 'dont know' .. and put it to the young locals not knowing enough or caring for their history. But it could be that they knew more of it than I assumed.

(did find the guns from then and the metal obstacles in the sea...)

[panduranghari]

^^^ Why are the categories only top-down vs. bottom-up : most complex systems have non-trivial network structures.
Second, information flow and context usually have a lot to do with the structure of a system.

TL;DR: The organizing principles of long lived systems need to have both the rigidity of top-down and the flexibility of bottom-up => As in a Samurai sword (see the center vs. the cutting edge) - but then this is a complex intuitive topic.
If the founding principles are nominally declarative and are based on normative ideologies, even if well intentioned, will not guarantee success as in longevity. Translated in English - 4 commandments or 10, they suffer the same end.

I agree that its a complex and an intuitive topic. If you have the time, please do elaborate.

[Shreeman]

Has anybody gotten around to discussing the impending new colonial age? The tinpot dictators are being shed aside for many new east xxx companies. The facade of zimbabwean style "democracies" and hashemite? royalties wont stand up to business interests much longer. How soon before we have true colonies again?

[member_28638]

Just Plain Krap
- and expensive krap too

The brakes could have used a little more intensity, and its sheer torque could have been more insistent at slow speeds, but I get it. This big boy weighs 7,300 pounds. It’ll get there when it gets there.
- The Cadillac Escalade Platinum Is the Best SUV America Makes

Like Poodleville, they don't make cars, they make krudmobiles and the emphasis is not on the engineering but the upholstery: You’ll get Nappa leather, massaging front seats, an ice cooler, and noise-canceling headphones. (Seven-inch LCD screens paired with a 9-inch screen that drops from the ceiling allow passengers to play video games on the two lower screens while a movie plays on the larger one.) Cadillac has also added the new company emblem (sans wreath), a redesigned front grille, and 22-inch wheels. Loved those chrome rims. So unapologetic.

Boeing had a similar theme, preferring to install an entertainment system rather than fix the known fault with its fuel sender gauge unit, where the wiring was corroded by the fumes from the fuel. After sitting on the runway for hours in baking heat, the plane took off and blew up in mid air.

All of those fancy featuresYet More Faux Philanthropy
- anglo/zionist gangster evil cloaked in philanthropy

The World Bank and IMF are loan-sharking operations, despite the anglo hypocrisy about "governance" of the AIIB. The IMF loan to Iceland was blocked until Iceland agreed to drop the court case against Poodleville for thieving icelandic assets by declaring Iceland a terrorist state. The IMF also demands that Ukraine seize back territory held by pro-russian rebels despite the illegal overthrowing of the democratically elected leader by the Great Satan.

One episode of The Simpsons cartoon featured Billy Gates "buying out" Homer Simpson's website. On ordering his goons to "buy him out boys!", they proceeded to smash up Homer's computer system, much as happened at the Guardian, following the Ed Snowden revelations, when angle grinders were used to smash up hard drives.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has also been found to have dubious philanthropic investments where 75% of the cash has gone to the thieved state of Amerika. Gates also promotes vaccines rather than cures because vaccines are given to a larger number of the population meaning more profits. His gangster modified mosquitoes are a totalitarian dose of snake oil whether you want it or not.

Gates' fellow "philanthropist", the Shyster of Omaha is anti-gold, unlike his father. Gold, as Greenspan informs us, protects the poorest who are most susceptible to inflation. Note that the Shyster doesn't call for a reduction in taxes on the poor but increased taxes on the wealthy.

The philanthropy is as fake as that of George Soros, Sir Geldof (related to Madoff?) and Sir Bonehead, who Jane Bussman re-assures us are both c***s and where over half of the Live Aid cash has, apparently gone to arms purchases. Poodleville's debt forgiveness is where the debt is sold to amerikan vulture funds that sue for the full amount, or Poodleville's "foreign aid", where the cash goes to poodle exporters who export their krudware as the so-called aid and the cash never leaves the thieved poodle state. One of the Millipede brothers has just promised to adopt the same scam of ring-fencing "foreign aid". It stands to reason that the gangsters who have plundered for five centuries and bray that their victims were "roasted alive" would not be happy with Bonehead and Geldof if they'd genuinely exported aid.

Just as Soros is funding the National Endowment for Democracy that interferes in other nations internal affairs and Sir Bonehead was found to have lucrative deals with major funders of amerikan wars, Gates is also found to be supporting some of the most unethical gangster corporations too: The companies include BP, responsible for the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, Anadarko Petroleum, which was recently forced to pay a $5bn environmental clean-up charge and Brazilian mining company Vale, voted the corporation with most “contempt for the environment and human rights” in the world clocking over 25,000 votes in the Public Eye annual awards.
- Revealed: Gates Foundation's $1.4bn in fossil fuel investments

It's a strange "charity" that funds some of the most lucrative corporations in the World. It's also reminiscent of another Simpsons episode, when Monty Burns became bankrupt and turned a charitable idea into a factory processing dolphin meat. In other words, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is little more than an investment fund.

including one that helped rid India of polio in 2014.

And some would say that polio was about to be eradicated anyway. This sham charity also funded Gangster Modified mosquitoes which dosed victims with a supposed anti-malarial whether you asked for it or not, as well as Gates promising vaccines for the future. Vaccines are a well-known Big Pharma snake oil scam as they're given to everyone not just the sick.

Gates was characterised by one of his co-founders of Microkrap as a nasty tyrant who would verbally assault underlings who dared to question his opinion. Rather than an innovator, Gates merely purchased DOS and gained a monopoly over the O/S for the IBM PC. Krudware includes Windows 1.0 & 2.0 which were unusable knock-offs of Apple's Mac O/S and Windows 98 which only faked multi-threading. Gates was attacked by Jeremy Paxman for peddling bug-ridden krudware. All this krudware has a known bug; the NSA backdoor that even has a Wikipedia page. Windows 10 is due for release but which , like government edicts, no one asked for. You buy a computer for its application programs not for repeated so-called upgrades, none of which ever fix the unreliable nature of Microkrap krudware. The krudware also clogs up the computer so that faster and faster hardware is required, yet nothing ever runs any faster. Servers have already migrated to Linux which is freakin' free but more efficient and secure. Because it's so krappy, Gates is offering Windows 10 upgrades for free even if you have a knock-off version of Windows.
will also cost you. The Escalade Platinum Edition starts at $91,000—a $9,000 jump over last year’s price—and the version I drove included a couple thousand dollars’ more worth of upgrades (the rims, for instance, cost $600 extra). You could compare it against things like the $81,000 Toyota Land Cruiser and $63,000 Mercedes-Benz GL-Class.

But if you want to buy an American SUV, buy this one. It’s the best we make.

Yeah and after which you'll never buy amerikan ever again as it starts to fall apart in just the first few years.

====================

Scurrilous
- all these guttersnipes have is "their" lies and they probably thieved those too

It’s no secret that China has a pollution problem and as we outlined last month, smog may indeed end up near the top of the scapegoat list when it’s time to explain why GDP growth fell woefully short of the official 7% target (a target which, thanks to a contraction-territory PMI print and a horrendous drop in rail freight looks even more unrealistic than it did before).
- Asia's Other Export Boom — "Second-Hand Smog" To California

It really takes the biscuit when the Anglo illegal immigrant, mongrel barbarians start to complain that you're polluting "their" air. The turn of phrase that "it's no secret" is merely parroting the propaganda. Another often seen phrase is the ambiguous "without question". But Bloomberg BS admits: "London's Dirty Secret: Worse Air Than Beijing" and it was the L.A. Olympics where athletes and amerikan cheats (the thieved state of Amerika has the highest number of cheats caught taking banned substances at the Olympics as well as having the World's worst drug problem) first had to wear masks to protect themselves from the pollution. The thieved state of Amerika, with its seemingly permanent trade deficit, produces far more pollution per capita using carbon based fuel thieved from the native American. It tries to keep it cheap by banning exports of crude oil, whilst defrauding the World with "worthless paper" in exchange for oil imports.

Dollar hegemony is already over, which is why the thieved state of Amerika has to export LNG. They're trying to thieve Russia's share of the gas market and China is already appeasing the Great Satan by shutting down coal plants and adopting gas. But she has already warned the amerikan gangsters that she has safe and plentiful thorium nuclear energy and solar panels will soon be as economic as carbon based energy.

--- by gork (http://bbs.chinadaily.com.cn/thread-893460-75-1.html)

[ramana]

chakra, You are in wrong thread. And while at it what's with all those colors?

[chetak]

There were also reports of marauding US soldiers on leave in Madras rampaging in the city.

this is the reason why the US now wants India to accord diplomatic status to it's armed forces personnel in India. this is now of the big points that the US is insisting on having in it's as yet unsigned agreements with India.

[chetak]

{quote="svenkat"}http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2975016/New-book-alleges-Allied-soldiers-raped-one-million-Germans-end-Second-World-War.html#ixzz3TLnbkhCE

A million women were raped by Allied soldiers in Germany in the immediate aftermath of World War II, a new books claims.
‘When The Soldiers Came,’ by historian Miriam Gebhardt, is hailed as the definitive account of the treatment meted out to the defeated women of Nazi Germany which they remained silent about for decades out of shame and humiliaton.
'At the very least 860,000 women and girls - and also men and young boys - were raped by the occupying Allied soldiers and their helpers. It happened everywhere,' begins the book.


But in fact countless women were raped, she said, with soldiers believing they could treat the as they wanted after bearing coveted gifts.
'Post-war society was hardly ready to differentiate between voluntary and forced sexual contact.
'Between women who prostituted themselves out of emergency needs and those who had become victims of rape.'
Added to the trauma of the western victims was the shame suffered by the children they bore from their attackers.
'Their fathers were, mostly, unknown, and the women received no financial help at all,' said Gebhardt.
She said in parts of southern Germany, occupied by American troops, there were often 'free nights' where soldiers were encouraged to abuse women at will for up to 48 hours at a time.
The alleged victims are 'relieved' their hardship is coming to light, she added.


{/quote}

"Allied troops raped tens of thousands German ladies"

Published on Mar 31, 2015

The new view on a violence problem in post-war Germany was offered by the historian Miriam Gebhardt. After the 1945 on both sides of Berlin, as we know, one thousand German women lost honor. Also it was promoted by the allied troops fighting against Nazism in World War II. However traditionally the biggest blame for similar violations was laid on the Soviet soldiers. And in the West it is accepted to call contacts between the winner and the won as voluntary act.

In her book Gebhardt tells about what role in the history of Germany of the second half of the 40th played Yankees. According to the researcher, Americans discredited about 200 thousand German women and concede nothing to the allies at the front of violence. Data of the Bavarian priests became one of the main sources for work of the historian. Attempts to look at how Americans fought against nazis, were undertaken also earlier. So, in 2003 professor of criminalistics Robert Lilli found out that by November of the 1945th tribunals considered more than 11 thousand cases of sexual crimes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnZRWOGtq1A

WTF??

What did they expect?? Why no mention of the horrendous rape by the germans' in occupied countries as they advanced during the early years of the war and the six odd million jews gassed by the germans??

only rape of german wimmins is important??

get over it!!!