Indo-UK News & Discussion 9th Aug 2011

[Jarita]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... nks-reform

We lost our colonies, but the plunder has continued by other means. As Joseph Stiglitz shows in Globalisation and its Discontents, the capital liberalisation forced on Asian economies by the IMF permitted northern traders to loot hundreds of billions of dollars, precipitating the Asian financial crisis of 1997-98. Poorer nations have also been strong-armed into a series of amazingly one-sided treaties and commitments, such as trade-related investment measures, bilateral investment agreements and the EU's economic partnership agreements. If you have ever wondered how a small, densely populated country which produces very little supports itself, I would urge you to study these asymmetric arrangements.

[ramana]

Outsourcing unrest

The 300 year colonial adventure is over at last, which is why Britain is in political crisis.

By George Monbiot. Published in the Guardian 9th June 2009

Why now? It’s not as if this is the first time our representatives have been caught out. The history of governments in all countries is the history of scandal, as those who rise to the top are generally the most ambitious, ruthless and unscrupulous people politics can produce. Pushing their own interests to the limit, they teeter perennially on the brink of disgrace, except when they fly clean over the edge. So why does the current ballyhoo threaten to destroy not only the government but also our antediluvian political system?

The past 15 years have produced the cash-for-questions racket, the Hinduja and Ecclestone affairs, the lies and fabrications which led to the invasion of Iraq, the forced abandonment of the BAE corruption probe, the cash-for-honours caper and the cash-for-amendments scandal. By comparison to the outright subversion of the functions of government in some of these cases, the expenses scandal is small beer. Any one of them should have prompted the sweeping political reforms we are now debating. But they didn’t.

The expenses scandal, by contrast, could kill the Labour party. It might also force politicians of all parties to address our injust voting system, the unelected House of Lords, the excessive power of the executive, the legalised blackmail used by the whips and a score of further anachronisms and injustices. Why is it different?

I believe that the current political crisis has little to do with the expenses scandal, still less to do with Gordon Brown’s leadership. It arises because our economic system can no longer extract wealth from other nations. For the past 300 years, the revolutions and reforms experienced by almost all other developed countries have been averted in Britain by foreign remittances.

The social unrest which might have transformed our politics was instead outsourced to our colonies and unwilling trading partners. The rebellions in Ireland, India, China, the Caribbean, Egypt, South Africa, Malaya, Kenya, Iran and other places we subjugated were the price of political peace in Britain. Following decolonisation, our plunder of other nations was sustained by the banks. Now, for the first time in three centuries, they can no longer deliver, and we must at last confront our problems.

There will probably never be a full account of the robbery this country organised, but there are a few snapshots. In his book Capitalism and Colonial Production, Hamza Alavi estimates that the resource flow from India to Britain between 1793 and 1803 was in the order of £2m a year, the equivalent of many billions today. The economic drain from India, he notes, “has not only been a major factor in India’s impoverishment … it has also been a very significant factor in the Industrial Revolution in Britain.”(1) As Ralph Davis observes in The Industrial Revolution and British Overseas Trade, from the 1760s onwards India’s wealth “bought the national debt back from the Dutch and others … leaving Britain nearly free from overseas indebtedness when it came to face the great French wars from 1793.”(2)

In France, by contrast, as Eric Hobsbawn notes in The Age of Revolution, “the financial troubles of the monarchy brought matters to a head.” In 1788, half of France’s national expenditure was used to service its debt: “the American War and its debt broke the back of the monarchy”(3).

Even as the French were overthrowing the ancien regime, Britain’s landed classes were able to strengthen their economic power, seizing common property from the country’s poor by means of enclosure. Partly as a result of remittances from India and the Caribbean, the economy was booming and the state had the funds to ride out political crises. Later, after smashing India’s own industrial capacity, Britain forced that country to become a major export market for our manufactured goods, sustaining industrial employment here (and avoiding social unrest) long after our products and processes became uncompetitive.

Colonial plunder permitted the British state to balance its resource deficits as well. For some 200 years a river of food flowed into this country from places like Ireland, India and the Caribbean. In The Blood Never Dried, John Newsinger reveals that in 1748 Jamaica alone sent 17,400 tons of sugar to Britain; by 1815 this had risen to 73,800 tons(4). It was all produced by stolen labour.

Just as grain was sucked out of Ireland at the height of its great famine, so Britain continued to drain India of food during its catastrophic hungers. In Late Victorian Holocausts, Mike Davis shows that Indian wheat exports to the UK doubled between 1876 and 1877 as subsistence there collapsed(5). Several million Indians died of starvation. In the North Western provinces the famine was wholly engineered by British policy, as their surplus production was exported to offset poor English harvests in 1876 and 1877(6).

Britain, in other words, outsourced famine as well as social unrest. There was terrible poverty in this country in the second half of the 19th Century, but not mass starvation. The bad harvest of 1788 helped precipitate the French Revolution, but the British state avoided such hazards. Others died on our behalf.

In the late 19th Century, Davis shows, Britain’s vast deficits with the United States, Germany and its white Dominions were balanced by huge annual surpluses with India and (as a result of the opium trade) China. For a generation “the starving Indian and Chinese peasantries … braced the entire system of international settlements, allowing England’s continued financial supremacy to temporarily co-exist with its relative industrial decline.”(7) Britain’s trade surpluses with India allowed the City to become the world’s financial capital.

Its role in British colonisation was not a passive one. The bankruptcy and subsequent British takeover of Egypt in 1882 was hastened by a loan from Rothschild’s bank whose execution, Newsinger records, amounted to “fraud on a massive scale”(8). Jardine Matheson, once the biggest narco-trafficking outfit in world history (it dominated the Chinese opium trade), later formed a major investment bank, Jardine Fleming. It was taken over by JP Morgan Chase in 2000.

We lost our colonies, but the plunder has continued by other means. As Joseph Stiglitz shows in Globalisation and its Discontents, the capital liberalisation forced on Asian economies by the IMF permitted northern traders to loot hundreds of billions of dollars, precipitating the Asian financial crisis of 1997-98(9). Poorer nations have also been strong-armed into a series of amazingly one-sided treaties and commitments, such as Trade Related Investment Measures, bilateral investment agreements and the EU’s Economic Partnership Agreements(10). If you have ever wondered how a small, densely-populated country which produces very little supports itself, I would urge you to study these asymmetric arrangements.

But now, as John Lanchester demonstrates in his fascinating essay in the London Review of Books, the City could be fatally wounded(11). The nation which relied on financial services may take generations to recover from their collapse. The great British adventure – three centuries spent pillaging the labour, wealth and resources of other countries – is over. We cannot accept this, and seek gleeful revenge on a government which can no longer insulate us from reality.

-----------

X-post from Dhu in India Forum.

[Hari Seldon]

^^^ Tour-de-force by Monbiot in the above piece. Merits wider dissemination.

[JwalaMukhi]

Monibot needs to be commended to laying it out. Maybe oxphord educated who sang peans to the british raj also needs to obtain a copy of this.

So, essentially Monibot is pointing out that there is very little difference between current figure head "Queen" and the cheiftain of the Somali pirates, expect perhaps skin color, gender and age - that symbolically represents what UKstan is all about.

[Philip]

Scotland to turn away from Englamd and towards Scandanavia once Independence is obtained.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 72337.html

Bye, bye England? SNP plans closer Scandinavian ties after independence
Document reveals government wants to turn away from London if it wins referendum

Xcpts:

An independent Scotland would shift much of its attention away from the UK to become a member of the Scandinavian circle of countries, with its own army, navy and air force modelled on its Nordic neighbours, according to detailed plans being drawn up by the SNP.

Senior SNP strategists are compiling a "prospectus for independence" which they hope to use to sell the idea of separation to Scots ahead of the referendum in 2014 or 2015.

The document is not due to be published in full for another year but SNP insiders have disclosed key extracts.

They reveal that SNP leaders want an independent Scotland to look north and east in Europe for partnerships, trade and key defence relationships, rather than continuing to focus on western Europe and the Commonwealth, as the UK does now.

Senior Nationalists, including Alex Salmond, have made several trips to Scandinavia over the last couple of years, meeting ministers and officials in an attempt to pave the way for greater co-operation if Scotland becomes independent, particularly on energy. Indeed, initial plans have already been drawn up for an electricity super-grid between Scotland and Norway.

SNP strategists insist that Scotland would continue to be extremely close to the rest of the UK, which would remain its biggest trading partner, but they also believe that Scotland has more in common with its Scandinavian neighbours than the UK does and they are keen to take this relationship to a new level.

The Scandinavian approach is being driven by Angus Robertson, the SNP's defence and foreign affairs spokesman in Westminster. Mr Robertson said recently that Scotland's relationship with its Scandinavian neighbours had suffered because of a southern bias since the Act of Union in 1707.

He declared: "Our neighbours to the north and east have already made a good start and work constructively together. We need to join them and play our part. The UK has opted out of a serious approach. We should not."

As well as being used to sell the idea of an independent Scotland at home, the prospectus for independence will be the basis for negotiations with Westminster if the referendum is won. In those negotiations, Alex Salmond will demand 9 per cent (roughly Scotland's share of the UK population) of all UK assets, including defence hardware.

Under the plans being drawn up there would an independent Scottish navy based at Faslane – currently the base of the UK's Trident submarine fleet – and a Scottish air force based at Lossiemouth and Kinloss in Moray.

SNP strategists also expect an independent Scotland to be given the Royal Regiment of Scotland, whose five regular and two territorial battalions would form the backbone of a new independent army.

The Nationalists who are drawing up the prospectus have been told to make sure it is signed off before 2014, the earliest likely date for the referendum.

Scottish independence: how it would look

Trade

Closer co-operation with Sweden, Denmark and Norway on trade, energy grids and oil and gas exploration.

Defence

An independent Scottish navy based at Faslane. The Clyde facility would be transformed from its current role as the base of the UK's Trident submarine fleet to become the headquarters of the Scottish navy. The navy would be similar to those run by Norway and Denmark, with a small number of frigates, a few corvettes and patrol vessels and possibly a couple of submarines.

An independent Scottish air force based at Lossiemouth and Kinloss in Moray, centred on a squadron of Lockheed Orion P-3 maritime surveillance aircraft. These would have to be bought by the Scottish Government at a cost of £29m each.

An independent Scottish army. SNP strategists expect an independent Scotland to be given the Royal Regiment of Scotland by the Ministry of Defence. The regiment's five regular and two territorial battalions would form the new Scottish army.

Transport

The exploitation of new sea lanes from Asia over the top of Russia, which are being opened up because of global warming, and possibly establishing a major new container port in Fife to rival Rotterdam.

[Klaus]

^^^ Report does not mention any division of the North Sea energy exploration and production blocks. Wonder if it has the 9% share too or greater owing to Scotland's proximity to the areas.

Also will Scotland start charging England for overland transit of natural gas through existing pipelines?

[RajeshA]

Klaus ji,

the division would be of assets like gold, money, arms, etc. but North Sea area would be in Scotland's Exclusive Economic Zone, and England would have no rights to it, just as Scotland cannot demand a share in the price of Westminster Building or any other property in England.

It is not for nothing that Scotland is assuring that England would remain Scotland's biggest trading partner.

The English would have to pay for their crude!

[Klaus]

^^^ Hope you're proved right. It would be good comeuppance to see some of that colonial loot outgoing for payments.

[Lalmohan]

the scots looted us with as much enthusiasm as the english, so no benefit there

[Sanku]

the scots looted us with as much enthusiasm as the english, so no benefit there

The Scots, for all their pretensions, never got beyond being dumb sidekicks for the English even during the hey day of colonial rapine loot.

English kept the gravy, the scots got the crumbs.

[ramana]

Correction, the Scots got the haggis!

[anmol]

India, Still the Brightest Jewel

DECEMBER 8, 2011, 12:07 A.M. ET

A century after the Delhi Durbar, India is shining, continuing the best ideals of the British Empire.

By ANDREW ROBERTS

On Dec. 12, 1911, a century ago, the British Empire reached its apogee at the Delhi Durbar (Hindi for "court"). Half a million Indians, including all the ruling princes and nobility of the subcontinent, came to Delhi to celebrate the coronation of their new King-Emperor, George V. More than 100,000 of them assembled in the vast Coronation Park outside the city. The King-Emperor made the surprise announcement that the capital was to be transferred from Calcutta to Delhi.

"The ceremony at its culminating point exactly typified the oriental conception of the ultimate repositories of imperial power," recorded The Times of London. "The monarch sat alone, remote but beneficent, raised far above the multitude, but visible to all, clad in rich vestments, flanked by radiant emblems of authority, guarded by a glittering array of troops, the cynosure of the proudest princes of India, the central figures in what was surely the most majestic assemblage ever seen in the East." Kenneth Rose, in his biography of George V, called it "the most splendid spectacle in Indian history." In some ways, the splendid ideals of the Empire continue today in India's vibrant democracy.

The 1911 spectacle was the most magnificent of the three Delhi Durbars, but also the last. The tradition began once Queen Victoria became Empress of India.

But it stopped when King George VI accessed to the throne in 1937, when the Indian National Congress—busy fighting against imperialism—threatened a boycott.

Questions were also raised then in Westminster about the spectacle's cost. Although none could know it at the time, the Indian Empire only had a decade left, for the two world wars between the 1911 Durbar and Indian independence in 1947 would leave Britain exhausted and near-bankrupt.
But before the Empire quit, it gave India a great gift in the spring of 1944—it repelled the Japanese at India's gates at the battles of Kohima and Imphal. The victory was a tribute to the grit and determination of the Indian fighting men, who were officered in great part by Britons and led by General Sir William Slim. Had the Japanese broken through into the Indian plains between March and July 1944, the ravages they were then committing across the rest of their so-called "Greater Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere" would undoubtedly have been the fate of India too.

So what remains a century on from the Delhi Durbar, besides an obelisk in Coronation Park where the King-Emperor's dais used to be, and the fabulous 6,170-diamond Imperial Crown of India that can be seen in the Tower of London?

The first and most obvious survivor is that which lured the Elizabethan merchant adventurers of the Honourable East India Company to India in the early 17th century: trade. In the 2010-11 fiscal year, the United Kingdom was India's sixth largest trading partner, accounting for $7.14 billion of India's exports and $5.39 billion of its imports, which is set to rise.

Meanwhile, India's forefront presence in the Commonwealth and the success of David Cameron's visit in July show how the intense hostility of the India's independence movement from the 1920s to the 1940s was only ever directed against the British imperial administration, and not against the British nation itself. Today, Indian students spend $465 million in tuition fees at British colleges and universities each year, while British high-street retailers such as Marks and Spencer and Debenhams have done very well in India.

The legacies of Empire go far deeper than this, of course. The architectural splendors of Sir Edwin Lutyens's Delhi—where the Indian president lives in what was formerly the Viceregal Palace—are the expressions in stone of a confidence in the strength and potential of India.

The Oxford economist Deepak Lal, the nephew of a former mayor of Delhi and Nehru cabinet minister who was imprisoned by the British, has another answer. He argues that what he calls the Liberal Internationalist Economic Order, first provided by the British Empire, "has been essential for the working of the benign processes of globalization, which promote prosperity."

The major attributes were free trade, free mobility of capital, sound money due to the gold standard, property rights guaranteed by law, piracy-free transportation thanks to the Royal Navy, political stability, low domestic taxation and spending and "gentlemanly" capitalism run from the City of London. "Despite Marxist and nationalist cant," Mr. Lal writes, the British Empire delivered astonishing growth rates to India, which were not seen elsewhere in the world, and would not have been seen in India had it remained under the Mughals.

The Empire required a corruption-free administration to service it, which is what Britain delivered in the shape of the Indian Civil Service. The Service's highest ideals are still held sacred by some, though too few bureaucrats and politicians in Delhi today.

Britain's other great legacy to India is the English tongue, which is spoken by around 18% of Indians and serves as the global language of business, the Internet and advanced technology. Presently there are more Chinese learning English as a second language than there are people who speak it as their first, an indication of the head start that Britain gave India, albeit one which China is rapidly closing. The same can be said of the Empire's construction of railways and other massive infrastructure projects in India.

In the great race to prosperity—and thus global hegemony—presently taking place between India and China, anyone interested in the survival of a liberal-minded and tolerant civilization must be rooting for the victory of India, infused with the best traditions of Westminster-style representative institutions, over a sabre-rattling, resentful and totalitarian China. The shade of the King-Emperor is cheering India on.

Mr. Roberts, a historian, is author most recently of "The Storm of War: A New History of the Second World War" (Harper, 2011).

Mr Lal should explain following chart(source) :-

[krisna]

India, Still the Brightest Jewel
DECEMBER 8, 2011, 12:07 A.M. ET

A century after the Delhi Durbar, India is shining, continuing the best ideals of the British Empire.

By ANDREW ROBERTS

On Dec. 12, 1911, a century ago, the British Empire reached its apogee at the Delhi Durbar (Hindi for "court"). Half a million Indians, including all the ruling princes and nobility of the subcontinent, came to Delhi to celebrate the coronation of their new King-Emperor, George V. More than 100,000 of them assembled in the vast Coronation Park outside the city. The King-Emperor made the surprise announcement that the capital was to be transferred from Calcutta to Delhi.

"The ceremony at its culminating point exactly typified the oriental conception of the ultimate repositories of imperial power," recorded The Times of London. "The monarch sat alone, remote but beneficent, raised far above the multitude, but visible to all, clad in rich vestments, flanked by radiant emblems of authority, guarded by a glittering array of troops, the cynosure of the proudest princes of India, the central figures in what was surely the most majestic assemblage ever seen in the East." Kenneth Rose, in his biography of George V, called it "the most splendid spectacle in Indian history." In some ways, the splendid ideals of the Empire continue today in India's vibrant democracy.

The 1911 spectacle was the most magnificent of the three Delhi Durbars, but also the last. The tradition began once Queen Victoria became Empress of India.

But it stopped when King George VI accessed to the throne in 1937, when the Indian National Congress—busy fighting against imperialism—threatened a boycott.

Questions were also raised then in Westminster about the spectacle's cost. Although none could know it at the time, the Indian Empire only had a decade left, for the two world wars between the 1911 Durbar and Indian independence in 1947 would leave Britain exhausted and near-bankrupt.(The money was from Indians becoming more poorer to fund them)
But before the Empire quit, it gave India a great gift in the spring of 1944—it repelled the Japanese at India's gates at the battles of Kohima and Imphal. The victory was a tribute to the grit and determination of the Indian fighting men, who were officered in great part by Britons and led by General Sir William Slim. Had the Japanese broken through into the Indian plains between March and July 1944, the ravages they were then committing across the rest of their so-called "Greater Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere" would undoubtedly have been the fate of India too.(Typical BS- japanese would have kicked out brits from India "jewel in their crown" hence had to defeat them. nothing for India)

So what remains a century on from the Delhi Durbar, besides an obelisk in Coronation Park where the King-Emperor's dais used to be, and the fabulous 6,170-diamond Imperial Crown of India that can be seen in the Tower of London?

The first and most obvious survivor is that which lured the Elizabethan merchant adventurers of the Honourable East India Company to India in the early 17th century: trade.(Actually looting piracy and slavery competition with other european powers) In the 2010-11 fiscal year, the United Kingdom was India's sixth largest trading partner, accounting for $7.14 billion of India's exports and $5.39 billion of its imports, which is set to rise.

Meanwhile, India's forefront presence in the Commonwealth and the success of David Cameron's visit in July show how the intense hostility of the India's independence movement from the 1920s to the 1940s was only ever directed against the British imperial administration, and not against the British nation itself.(lucky b*st*rds because of us) Today, Indian students spend $465 million in tuition fees at British colleges and universities each year, while British high-street retailers such as Marks and Spencer and Debenhams have done very well in India.

The legacies of Empire go far deeper than this, of course. The architectural splendors of Sir Edwin Lutyens's Delhi—where the Indian president lives in what was formerly the Viceregal Palace—are the expressions in stone of a confidence in the strength and potential of India.(another BS)

The Oxford economist Deepak Lal, the nephew of a former mayor of Delhi and Nehru cabinet minister who was imprisoned by the British, has another answer. He argues that what he calls the Liberal Internationalist Economic Order, first provided by the British Empire, "has been essential for the working of the benign processes of globalization, which promote prosperity."

The major attributes were free trade, free mobility of capital, sound money due to the gold standard, property rights guaranteed by law, piracy-free transportation thanks to the Royal Navy, political stability, low domestic taxation and spending and "gentlemanly" capitalism run from the City of London. "Despite Marxist and nationalist cant," Mr. Lal writes, the British Empire delivered astonishing growth rates to India, which were not seen elsewhere in the world, and would not have been seen in India had it remained under the Mughals.(Total lie- India had nearly 20% world trade before britishers came, became less than 0.5% when brits left, with increased poverty, famines etc)

The Empire required a corruption-free administration(another lie) to service it, which is what Britain delivered in the shape of the Indian Civil Service. The Service's highest ideals are still held sacred by some, though too few bureaucrats and politicians in Delhi today.

Britain's other great legacy to India is the English tongue, which is spoken by around 18% of Indians and serves as the global language of business, the Internet and advanced technology.(oft quoted statements without any sound basis- It was wiseness of our founding fathers who contiued with english education to uplift fellow Indians- british ruled nearly 25% of world in its hey days- which country has a large english speaking population other than India. brits tutored some Indians to work as brown sahibs for them- not in a truly altruistic way) Presently there are more Chinese learning English as a second language than there are people who speak it as their first, an indication of the head start that Britain gave India, albeit one which China is rapidly closing. The same can be said of the Empire's construction of railways and other massive infrastructure projects in India.(All the railways constructed in India were from hinterland to coast and cities where rapid and large scale transport can be done for britishers- raw materials to britain and military etc- again for their own benefit- not for Indians. when brits left india- b*st*rds could not take railways with them.)

In the great race to prosperity—and thus global hegemony—presently taking place between India and China, anyone interested in the survival of a liberal-minded and tolerant civilization must be rooting for the victory of India, infused with the best traditions of Westminster-style representative institutions, over a sabre-rattling, resentful and totalitarian China. The shade of the King-Emperor is cheering India on.

Mr. Roberts, a historian, is author most recently of "The Storm of War: A New History of the Second World War" (Harper, 2011).

many lies repeated over and over again.

[sanjaykumar]

BRF owes me a new iPad. I BaRFed all over mine.

[Lalmohan]

Correction, the Scots got the haggis!

following the suppression of the jacobite rebellion, most of the younger sons of scottish gentlemen and nobles were sent off to india to found the empire - only older sons inherited any property and the english taxed the land to make it difficult to sustain many sons

[Rahul M]

a better way to look at angus maddison's data on historical world GDP.




not sure why people are so eager to give a free pass to the scots of imperial era, both scots and inglish were brutal and subhuman.

[Singha]

lutyens delhi is still run the same way - imperial , remote, off-limits, to be used and inhabited by the ruling class only. rashtrapati bhavan - what is the use of this massive structure and the cost of estate when the president can comfortably be accomodated in a 10 janpath type bungalow? make it a museum free for all or develop MIG housing janakpuri style on it.

the air of entitlement and imperial arrogance of that whole lutyens delhi area is out of place in a democracy (real one).

[rohitvats]

While it is all good to look and see, the horizontal and low density residential (and even commercial) development over large parts of Delhi translates to higher real estate cost to the rest of mango-abduls.

[RajeshA]

So many reasons for Scottish Independence!

[Manish_Sharma]

What a$$holes, Sanctimonious b@$t###rds, telling Bharatvarsh to be secular announcing themselves to be openly a christian nation. Ack thoo !!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... Bible.html

Speak up for Christianity, Cameron tells Archbishop: PM calls on the Church to defend 'values and moral code' of the Bible[/size][/color]

David Cameron last night called on the Archbishop of Canterbury to lead a return to the ‘moral code’ of the Bible.

In a highly personal speech about faith, the Prime Minister accused Dr Rowan Williams of failing to speak ‘to the whole nation’ when he criticised Government austerity policies and expressed sympathy with the summer rioters.

Mr Cameron declared Britain ‘a Christian country’ and said politicians and churchmen should not be afraid to say so.

He warned that a failure to ‘stand up and defend’ the values and morals taught by the Bible helped spark the riots and fuelled terrorism.

At Christ Church Cathedral in Oxford, where Dr Williams used to teach, Mr Cameron said the time has come for public figures to teach ‘right from wrong’, and questioned whether the Church of England has done enough to defend those values in the face of the ‘moral neutrality’ that pervades modern life.

And taking aim at the Archbishop, Mr Cameron tackled head-on his public criticisms of the Government over the last 12 months.

The speech was a bold Christmas gamble by Mr Cameron. In making a speech about religion, he did something that Tony Blair always longed to do but was talked out of by spin doctor Alastair Campbell, who flatly told him: ‘We don’t do God.’

The clash between the Government and Church is at its most acute since former Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Robert Runcie clashed with Margaret Thatcher’s government in the 1980s.

The Prime Minister appeared emboldened by his opinion poll bounce since his decision to wield the veto during the Eurozone crisis summit in Brussels last week.

Admitting that he had ‘entered the lion’s den’ by addressing an audience of churchmen, Mr Cameron said: ‘I certainly don’t object to the Archbishop of Canterbury expressing his views on politics.

‘But just as it is legitimate for religious leaders to make political comments, he shouldn’t be surprised when I respond.

‘I believe the Church of England has a unique opportunity to help shape the future of our communities. But to do so it must keep on the agenda that speaks to the whole country.’

At an event to mark the 400th anniversary of the publication of the King James Bible, he said: ‘We are a Christian country and we should not be afraid to say so.

'The Bible has helped to give Britain a set of values and morals which make Britain what it is today. Values and morals we should actively stand up and defend.

‘Whether you look at the riots last summer, the financial crash and the expenses scandal or the on-going terrorist threat from Islamist extremists around the world, one thing is clear, moral neutrality or passive tolerance just isn’t going to cut it any more.

‘Put simply, for too long we have been unwilling to distinguish right from wrong. “Live and let live” has too often become “do what you please”.

‘Bad choices have too often been defended as just different lifestyles. To be confident in saying something is wrong is not a sign of weakness, it’s a strength.’

Mr Cameron’s demands for a ‘moral code’ were directed at human rights apologists and Left-wing politicians who recoil from promoting Britain’s Christian heritage.

But they also covered the hand-wringing pronouncements of many senior churchmen, who refuse to condemn lawbreaking by rioters and show unwillingness to take on militant Islam for fear of offending Muslims.

The PM said an ‘almost fearful, passive tolerance of religious extremism’ had let Islamic extremism grow unchallenged and called for the promotion of ‘Christian values’ saying it was ‘profoundly wrong’ to believe that promoting Christianity would ‘do down other faiths’.

[vishvak]

What a$$holes, Sanctimonious b@$t###rds, telling Bharatvarsh to be secular announcing themselves to be openly a christian nation. Ack thoo !!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... Bible.html

See how extremely right wing these politicians in UK are and still bluff their way to the top of defending-human-rights-gangs.

In another country like India with sarva dharma sama bhava, such views could be lampooned and even sued. But not in UK!

Terrible for humanity, especially for minorities. I wonder if Indians in UK feel this right wing mentality in air generally.

[Varoon Shekhar]

Not sure if this is strictly speaking Indo-UK news, but sorry to hear of the passing away of Christopher Hitchens at the somewhat early age of 62. A very sane voice on the Left, who could see the dangers of Islamism and the shenanigans of Pakistan. Also quite sympathetic to the idea of India, and India's troubles with Islamist terror. RIP.

[Lalmohan]

camerons appeal to church values has more to do with trying to find a defensive point against the challenge of militant islam and political correctness than anything else

[JwalaMukhi]

Manish_Sharma wrote:

What a$$holes, Sanctimonious b@$t###rds, telling Bharatvarsh to be secular announcing themselves to be openly a christian nation. Ack thoo !!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... Bible.html

Ah, the best kept secret of eurostan is tumbling out. Maybe time for ukstanis to do a thorough review of their values. sure to find more skeletons out of the queendom's cupboard, that could rival the fiction writing of "sir aruther clarke".

Thousands of children suffered sexual abuse in Dutch Catholic institutions over the past 65 years, and church officials knew about the abuse but failed to stop it or help victims because they feared sparking scandals, according to a long-awaited report released Friday.

The number of abuse victims who spent some of their youth in church institutions probably lies somewhere between 10,000 and 20,000, according to the probe, which went back as far as 1945.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... z1golgs43z

[Haresh]

I don't have a problem with what Cameron has said about the UK being Christian nation. I say this as a non Christian infact as an atheist.

Infact I am glad he has said what he has said. It is no threat to the Indian community. The comments have been made because the islamists in the UK really do believe that they could islamacise the country without any real resistance.

The comments were aimed at all the islamic nutters in the UK.

[johneeG]

Its good that things are coming out in open in UK instead of fighting under the hijab. I hope hindus dont become collateral damage in fight against Islam and Christianity in UK.

[Lisa]

What a$$holes, Sanctimonious b@$t###rds, telling Bharatvarsh to be secular announcing themselves to be openly a christian nation. Ack thoo !!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... Bible.html

See how extremely right wing these politicians in UK are and still bluff their way to the top of defending-human-rights-gangs.

In another country like India with sarva dharma sama bhava, such views could be lampooned and even sued. But not in UK!

Terrible for humanity, especially for minorities. I wonder if Indians in UK feel this right wing mentality in air generally.

I think this opinion in addition to some others of a similar tone are
mistaken. David Cameroon is just reiterating a fact, the UK is a Christian
state.

Let me give some examples, members of the clergy are GUARANTEED
places and votes in the House of Lords and the Queen in addition of being
'queen' is also the head of the Church Of England. As part of her duties
she is also responsible for the defence of faith.

If you feel that this is unacceptable, wait till you go to Europe where some
countries levy you with a church tax! Although the UK is operationally a
very secular nation it has been and remains a constitutionally a Christian
nation. Nothing new here.

[Arjun]

Although the UK is operationally a very secular nation it has been and remains a constitutionally a Christian nation. Nothing new here.

Interesting contrast with the US - which is constitutionally secular, but operationally far more Christian than most European nations.

[Singha]

meantime there is a case ongoing against ISKCON in Russia because someone claims the gita preaches hate and spreads non-christian values.

[Lalmohan]

Its good that things are coming out in open in UK instead of fighting under the hijab. I hope hindus dont become collateral damage in fight against Islam and Christianity in UK.

no, we're past that point. diwali is now mainstream
eid is not

[Bhima]

Indian student fatally wounded in Salford street shooting

[anishns]

Brazil economy overtakes UK, says CEBR

[Singha]

mashallah, congrats to our brazilian friends. now they should act their size wrt to the malvinas and other khujli issues

step up defence spending and get a fleet of Fremm, N-subs with the french help. add a couple CVF with Rafale. and a couple Mistral.

[Philip]

The tragic murder of an Indian student has been put down to a racist hate crime by British POlice.The speed with th murdr has been acknowledged as racist is in stark contrast to the manner in which Oz dilly-dallied for months when the antri-Indian attacks were going on in some of its cities.That the police have already made arrests and are further investigating the matter as a racist attack is commendable.RIP Anuj Bidve.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... crime.html

Indian student Anuj Bidve’s murder treated as ‘hate crime’
The murder of an Indian student who was shot dead in the street in the early hours of Boxing Day is being treated as a hate crime, police have disclosed.

Xcpt:

Mr Mulligan, divisional commander for Salford, said: "We have not established a clear motive for the senseless murder of Anuj, and there is no definitive evidence pointing to it being racially motivated.

"However, we are treating this as a hate crime based on the growing perceptions within the community it was motivated by hate."

John Merry, the leader of Salford, has said that the killing “brought shame on the city”.

Yesterday police arrested a 20-year-old man over the murder, as they continued to question four others including a 16-year-old boy.

Mr Bidve, a postgraduate microelectronics student at Lancaster University, was staying in Greater Manchester with friends over the Christmas holidays.

Police said the students, who had not been drinking, were walking from their hotel towards the city centre when they saw two men on the other side of the street.

One of them, a white man in his 20s wearing a grey top, crossed the road, said a few words to Mr Bidve and opened fire before fleeing on foot. Mr Bidve later died in hospital.

[Haresh]

Jeremy Clarkson accused of racism AGAIN after toilet jibes during Top Gear Christmas special in India


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1i1Qal3y8

[lakshmikanth]

Wait, why the heck would they travel much of the world and have a Christmas special in India? Did Tata bhai forced them to do so?

Anyway, LOL @ the comments from both side only. Shiv saars piskological observations are very apt

[Prasad]

Clarkson is a loudmouth but a funny loudmouth. Polarised comments are normal for him Besides, they do specials every year. I seem to remember bolivia, japan, vietnam, france in the past. India is just another.

[ramana]

X_post form Nukkad...


http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 8#p1220508

Chetak wrote:

Received by email. A little sad, poignant and nostalgic as I had quite a few Anglo Indian Friends. I didn't know where else to post this.

This was a speech given by a Senior Anglo Indian Army Veteran at a dinner
dance in Sydney last year.

Good Evening Ladies & Gentleman. Welcome to this special evening. I'm
attempting to condense over 300 years of Anglo-Indian history in to 10
minutes.

The British Empire once held absolute power in over 52 countries. About
two-fifths of the world. But there was only one jewel in the crown -
India. The first European settlers in India were the Portuguese in 1498
about 100 years before the British. The Dutch, French and the British
followed.

They were all here for the duration. The inevitable happened and a new
mixed race community emerged. Even though the British came in peacefully as
merchants and traders they soon colonised the sub-continent of India. But
the British needed allies to protect the jewel in the crown and so began a
deliberate policy encouraging British males to marry Indian women to create
the first Anglo-Indians.

The East India Company paid 15 silver rupees for each child born to an
Indian mother and a European father, as family allowance. These children
were amalgamated into the growing Anglo-Indian community, forming a
defensive structure for the British Raj. This was a deliberate act of self
preservation by the English.

This unique hybrid individual was ethnically engineered by the occupying
British so much so that the Anglo-Indians were the only micro-minority
community ever defined in a Constitution. Article-366 of the Indian
Constitution states. An Anglo-Indian means a person whose father or any of
whose male ancestors in the male line is or was of European descent but who
is domiciled within the territory of India and is or was born within such
territory of parents habitually resident there-in and not established there
for temporary purposes only.

So you can see we were intended to be a permanent micro-minority. In 1830
British Parliament described the Anglo-Indian as those who have been
English educated, are entirely European in their habits and feelings, dress
and language. They were more "Anglo" than "Indian". Their mother-tongue was
English, they were Catholic or Anglican and their customs and traditions
were English. While most of them married within their own circle, many
continued to marry expatriate Englishmen. Very few married Indians.

Without Anglo-Indian support British rule would have collapsed.

RAILWAYS
We ran the railways, post and telegraph, police and customs, education,
export and import, shipping, tea, coffee and tobacco plantations, the coal
and gold fields. We became teachers, nurses, priests and doctors. If it had
any value the British made sure we ran it. And when it came to secretarial
duties no one could touch our Anglo-Indian girls - the best stenographers
in the world and with beauty to match.

Were we favoured? Yes, the English trusted us. After all we were blood
related. We worked hard. We became indispensable. We lived comfortably and
were protected by the British raj. Like the British we had servants to do
all our domestic work. The average Anglo-Indian home could afford at least
three full time servants - a cook, a bearer and the indispensable nanny
(ayah). Part time servants included a gardener, cleaner and laundry man
(dhobi). Of course we learned to speak Hindi to be able to argue, give
orders, bargain, accuse and terminate employment and throw in a dozen Hindi
expletives.

Imagine our horror when we were later to migrate to England, Canada and
Australia and we no longer had servants to do our domestic chores. Who can
remember looking at our first toilet brush and asking 'what do we do with
this?' We had to learn to cook, clean, garden, do the laundry and take the
garbage out and look after the kids.

CHRISTMAS CAKE
The tradition of making your own Christmas cake was a sacred Anglo-Indian
custom. Each family had a secret cake recipe, handed down from our
grandparents. About a week before Christmas the local baker was contacted.
He would turn up to your home with two very large terracotta bowls that
looked more like satellite dishes. One for the egg whites and one for
mixing. Mum would dish out the ingredients. This was all mixed together
under her watchful eye and distributed in to about dozen or so cake tins
and
labelled with your name on it. This labelling was all important. We did not
want him to return that evening with someone else's cake recipe. Heaven
forbid.

MUSIC/DANCE
Music, movies and socialising were high on the agenda. We loved a dance.
Afternoon dance jam sessions were a magnet for the teenagers where we
jived, jitterbugged, tango'd or just fox trotted.

Many a lasting liaison was forged on the dance floor and today many of us
are celebrating 40-year plus marriages. Our mums sat around gossiping and
seldom took their eyes off their darling daughters. I know I speak from
experience. I met my wife at one such event and now 44 years later I still
fancy her.

The Anglo-Indian railway and cantonment towns that sprung up around the
major cities cultivated a unique social and industrial blend with a
heartbeat. Their dances were legendary. At the drop of a hat the city
cousins would jump on a train and travel for anything up to six hours to
get to that up-country dance.

Many of our lives revolved around the biggest and best railway system in
the world. And the trains ran on time!

Today the Indian Railways transports over 5 billion passengers each year
employing more than 1.6 million personnel. Between 1853 and 1947 we built
and managed 42 rail systems. This was a legacy we can be proud of.

CONTRIBUTIONS
During World War 1 about 8000 Anglo-Indians fought in Mesopotamia, East
Africa, and in the European theatre - Eleven Anglo-Indians were awarded
Victoria Crosses.

In World War II they fought at Dunkirk and flew in the battle of Britain -
Guy Gibson of the Dam Busters was one such Anglo-Indian, and we were in
North Africa, Malaya and the fall of Singapore.

Merle Oberon and Juliet Prowse, Tony Brent, Engelbert Humperdinck, Cliff
Richards are all Anglo-Indians

The Anglo-Indians took India to Olympic hockey glory. From 1928 India won
five consecutive Olympic hockey gold medals. In fact, when India faced
Australia in the semi-finals of the 1960 Olympics in Rome, it was a unique
occasion. The captains who came face to face were both Anglo-Indians,
Leslie Claudius and Kevin Carton.

EDUCATION
English education played a major role amongst the Anglo-Indians.
Anglo-Indian schools numbered close to 300 and were prized. They stretched
from Bangalore in the south to the cooler northern hill stations of
Darjeeling in the foothills of the Himalayas. Each was modelled on the posh
English Public school system. We ran them as teachers and principals and to
this day these schools are coveted across the sub-continent.

IDENTITY DILEMMA
The Anglo-Indian has always faced an identity dilemma because of our mixed
origins. Europeans said they were Indians with some European blood; Indians
said they were Europeans with some Indian blood. The world of Anglo-India
vanished on August 15th 1947, when India became the largest independent
democracy in the world.

The British packed and went home.

Over 300,000 Anglo-Indians remained. We felt apprehensive and abandoned. So
we too packed our bags and began to migrate to Australia, Britain, Canada,
the U.S.A. and New Zealand. ! Many of you will remember the dreaded Income
Tax Clearance document you need to leave the country and further faced the
strict Indian foreign exchange regulations that allowed you only 10 pounds
each. Imagine starting life in a new country with 10 quid in your pocket.
Some had to leave behind their savings; others simply resorted to the risky
black market loosing a 30% of your savings.

IDENTITY
The Anglo-Indian identity is disappearing. We have found new lives and
merged into the mainstream. Our generation, sitting here tonight, who were
born in India, growing up in the 40s thru to 60s, are possibly the last
true Anglo-Indians.

Look around you. Where is the next generation? Most of our children were
born abroad and their connection to Anglo-India is very fragile. They have
married Aussies, English, Canadian or other Anglo-Indians born outside
India. They prefer to be regarded as English, Australian or Canadian. Our
grandchildren will assimilate and forge a new identity based on their
country of birth.

Putting aside history I believe we could regard ourselves as an exotic
cocktail that had its origins over 300 years ago. We have matured and
become a unique aromatic spirit, generously flavoured and very stimulating.

We were a force to be reckoned with.

[Advait]

I have absoulety no sympathy for the Anglo-Indians. If any "caste" ruled, oppressed and expolited India from the 1850s to 1947, it was the Anglo-Indians. And before the Briturds left, they made sure that this "caste" got special privileges, which they still do. Can't understand why we don't get rid of their special status in Constitution and Parliament. Oh, it would probably be unsickular to do so.

[chetak]

I have absoulety no sympathy for the Anglo-Indians. If any "caste" ruled, oppressed and expolited India from the 1850s to 1947, it was the Anglo-Indians. And before the Briturds left, they made sure that this "caste" got special privileges, which they still do. Can't understand why we don't get rid of their special status in Constitution and Parliament. Oh, it would probably be unsickular to do so.

The special characteristic of this community was service and that too self less service.

Post independence they felt abandoned. Most of them were of very modest means and were in the forces, railways, teachers etc.

I have always found them to be uniformly cheerful lot, content with their station in life, the teachers from this community were a specially remarkable lot. It was rare to find a crooked anglo Indian. They always preferred to play with a straight bat.

They never got many special privileges after independence ( before, I do not know) They are too small in numbers and have assimilated well within their local communities. I think that they have some nominated member of parliament or something.

I really cannot understand your ire, sirjee.