Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1513
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Pulikeshi » 11 Oct 2014 08:04

nageshks wrote:Almost as a Pavlovian reflex, we react with shock, and mistrust to any friendly overture from the west, because of a bitter experience that such gift-bearing-Greeks are best treated with suspicion, until we are satisfied that there is no harm intended. Such suspicion is warranted. But is it really western universalist agenda?


Perhaps because there are other experiences to rely upon to see the equal-equal game for what it is:

Sitting Bull wrote:What treaty that the whites have kept has the red man broken? Not one. What treaty that the white man ever made with us have they kept? Not one. When I was a boy the Sioux owned the world; the sun rose and set on their land; they sent ten thousand men to battle. Where are the warriors today? Who slew them? Where are our lands? Who owns them? What white man can say I ever stole his land or a penny of his money? Yet, they say I am a thief. What white woman, however lonely, was ever captive or insulted by me? Who has ever come to me hungry and unfed? Who has ever seen me beat my wives or abuse my children? What law have I broken? Is it wrong for me to love my own? Is it wicked for me because my skin is red? Because I am Lakota, because I was born where my father dies, because I would die for my people and my country?

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1513
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Pulikeshi » 11 Oct 2014 08:11

A_Gupta wrote:They are not setting the agenda for people who actually do things any more than the MSM is setting e.g., Modi's agenda. Whatever you think of Kailash Satyarthi, and while I wish him a long and healthy life, chances are that his greatest achievements are behind him; and thus the Nobel committee did not set his agenda, either.


In some sense the Nobel twerps care neither for Malala nor Kailash, they care about the equal-equal politics...
When a award becomes a political tool - as in Knighthood or Dame of olde for creating dummy Royalty to further political causes, it should be questioned...
My ignorance perhaps, I did not know anything about Kailash and still do not... I actually don't have an opinion on him or his work, in that sense I am similar to the Nobel committee.
So, yes, some a*holes stink more than others! :mrgreen:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 11 Oct 2014 08:37

nageshks wrote: But is it really western universalist agenda?

LOL. Good question

The post linked below brought the subject into this thread. Perhaps it could have stayed off.
viewtopic.php?p=1731126#p1731126

But like I said earlier - Western Universalism and the Nobel prize are linked only by the awe and respect we Indians have for that prize.

We have awe and respect for the west, and hence we fear western universalism when it grates against our sensibilities

We have awe and respect for the Nobel prize and we squirm and protest when something about the prize grates.

I can't speak for others but I can say why this prize announcement irritated me initially. The Nobel prize system has built up trust by giving prizes in science to people who have spent lifetimes doing seminal work. That is what creates the awe of the Nobel prize and awardees in my mind. Here we have the committee giving the prize to a girl who was shot in the head by the west's prime enemy, the Taliban. This girl deserves the equivalent of India's Republic day "Child Hero" award. Not an award that is usually given for a lifetime of work. Clearly this award is now being positioned as a candy bar that people should aspire for by doing some work that pleases western sensibilities. I cannot claim that getting shot in the head is pleasing to western sensibility, but fighting the Taliban does that. But for me - arming and suporting Pakistan seems to be as pleasing to western sensibility as fighting the Taliban. So wtf?

Satyarthi is an unfortunate victim. Malala's status has been raised by clubbing his prize along with one for her. I may not know him and I do know a dozen other deserving Indians - but OK I can accept that someone nominated him and a jury declared that he had a lot going for him. The Norwegian jury must have received an equal number of votes to give Malala a shared Nobel (assuming the process is actually democratic and not politcally driven).

I have already mentioned the late Dr Kurien who gave milk to million of protein starved Indian while giving employment to small time cattle herders.

Dr Bindeshwar Pathak is the man behind "sulabh international" - responsible for building and maintaining thousands of toilets in India.

All these people have put in a lifetime of work and have touched millions in areas where everyone is cussing India. But Malala?

Satyarthi could have been left out altogether and neither he nor anyone esle would have worried, given the number of people doing good work. Clubbing it with a political awardee like Malala is in my view a bit of an insult. Malala is a case of courage, not sustained heroism, the latter was built up with western support and medical care and she is already a celebrity. Satyarthi's work has been devalued somewhat by balancing it off against a girl whose main claim to fame is that she wanted to go to school and was picked up by the west from among millions of other similarly aspiring girls by an accidental series of events.

It is uncharitable to say that a girl who was shot for going to school is not deserving of accolades. Fine. Give her the Nobel prize. But why then club it with someone else and dilute her fame? The Nobel prizes for science are awarded to people who do related game-changing work. The only relationships between Malala and Satyarthi are
    Indian subcontinent
    Female literacy
    Slavery
    Religious extremism

This is a sort of "general idea" of what a person living next to the arctic circle thinks about India. And I don't think it's fair. Satyarthi's prize has linked India with the Taliban, in a sense that even Satyarthi would probably not like.

Shanmukh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2987
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Shanmukh » 11 Oct 2014 09:01

Shiv-ji,
Thanks for your perspective. From my own perspective, I have, for several years now, regarded Nobel Peace Prize and Nobel Literature Prize with utmost contempt. Having read quite a few of the Nobel Literature prize winners, I can assure you that it is not the literary merit of the authors that gets the winners the prize. Forget the plot and the artistic portrayals, some of the works wouldn't even pass a grammar test. As an prime example, if you can, please read the original Dr. Zhivago (which was incomplete, full of grammar mistakes, and pretty incomprehensible) in Russian which got the Nobel prize. Let me just say, the far more beautiful Quiet Flows the Don (which, while full of Communist Propaganda, is beautiful as an artistic piece, and most importantly, grammatically correct) would never get the prize.

Similarly, take the case of Shimon Peres and Yassar Arafat getting the Nobel Peace Prize together (if there is one man who had the blood of hundreds of innocents on his hands, and who, according to the president of Sudan, personally issued orders to execute the Belgian and American diplomats in the Saudi Arabian embassy in Khartoum, it is Yassar Arafat). It was a greater insult and equal-equal done by the west between the Israelis and the Palestinians than any that had been done to that date.

I have no idea about Liu Xiaobo, so maybe someone else can educate us whether he really deserved his prize.

Today, the West has done it to India, by doing an equal-equal in a subtle way with a Taliban victim. Satyarthi himself seems to be a pawn in their games. This does not necessarily make him bad or sold out, but just someone to be watched with caution, lest he turn out to be a turncoat (even that, mainly, because we seem to have very little solid info on him). But that apart, I don't see what the hullabaloo is all about. We have a thousand known enemies, sold out to the West, already within India. This man may be yet another one. If anything, the West needs to be thanked for alerting us to a potential western agent. That is all there is to be said about it. The prize itself is a matter of contemptuous indifference.
Last edited by Shanmukh on 11 Oct 2014 09:08, edited 1 time in total.

member_22733
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3788
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby member_22733 » 11 Oct 2014 09:06

I have been explaining myself a lot today :) and let me do that again here, please forgive my transgressions.
Long time ago, I used to be a dedicated reader of Times of India. I used to get confused whenever they yapped about yindoo terror and angry when there were rants about casteism this and casteism that, all the while getting ashamed at it. After a while I realized that I was getting taken for a ride. Then I used to get angry at them for everything (truth or otherwise) that they posted.

Now I still read TOI, but it is more in the attitude of: "What have the bumbling idiots come up with today?!"

That is my attitude towards NoBull prize. I know they are run on agenda and purely on agenda. In such a case, when suddenly they prop some Indian dude and do an "==" to Malala, my "agenda radar" emits a big blip. I went through his autobiographical page and was not very encouraged. I am still not convinced, but I am reading the material that A_Gupta has posted. In that material, there are a couple of things that stand out to me that make my case about the effects of banning child labor and I will post them on an appropriate thread later.

I am coming at it not from a position of anger or confusion, but from seeing through an obviously white-manish narrative-setting action from the Nobull committee. I am past that stage of getting angry at it. But yes, I did react instinctively that this person must be of some value to the west. I still believe it is the case and nothing I have read (from the links that were posted here) suggests otherwise. All my posts were made with the attitude of "aha: this person must be important in some way for the agenda setting industry of the west". If he is not one, the west has made a mistake or I am wrong about the west. They were a reaction to a smell of "propagandu", nothing else.
Last edited by member_22733 on 11 Oct 2014 09:10, edited 2 times in total.

Satya_anveshi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3532
Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Satya_anveshi » 11 Oct 2014 09:07

IMHO, We now have successor to Mother Teresa in Mr. Kailash Satyarth. There seems to be a need for a local light house providing direction and focus for the conversion activities. A record and a milestone has been achieved in that regard from West's perspective.

svenkat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4725
Joined: 19 May 2009 17:23

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby svenkat » 11 Oct 2014 09:13

shivji,
I do not see any irony in my post.

Historically,the vast majority of brahmanas lived in villages.To the best of my knowledge,there were no toilets in brahmana agraharams in TN.I think that was the case in rest of India too.Yet,today brahmanas are a highly urbanised community and the more affluent/'sophisticated' avoid Indian squat toilets.Western Universalism values which have been internalised by indians now seek same comforts.It has nothing to do with whether brahmanas are superior,inferior or equal.And people of upper classes of all castes seek comforts/privacy.

My point is this.People follow the values of the peers.Educated hindus see westerners as peers in many aspects including life styles/living standards.All this has environmental caosts.But human beings do seek comforts/material pleasures.Just as it is wrong to impose toilets on those are comfortable to excrete in the open,its wrong to ignore the other view.My whole take,theres no absolute universalism,yet humans have sought universalisms even in India.Western Universalism is the world view of the 'premier group' of the world.As Indians and hindus,we need to see them for what they are-the worldview emanating from the western experience.Rejection/acceptance comes later depending on cost/benefit analysis for Indian situation.

Its dissappointing to see a dikgaj like you bring in the 'error of the tamil brahmin clerk' who misspelt your family name.What has that got to do with my posts?And have I allowed tamizh politics to influence my posts?

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6890
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby habal » 11 Oct 2014 09:19

my personal feeling here is that western agenda, especially european agenda with respect to India-Pakistan is that they want to subsume the identity of Pakistan's Islamism and Indian nationalism to create a big region of South Asia. This is not specifically an American agenda but a European old-money agenda.

it sounds weird, but it dovetails with their west asian agenda of removing regional leaders and regional identities under the pretext of ISIS.

since Islamism cannot work in subcontinent, since it meets lots of resistance, they are working upon other plans and creating false heroes or demigods who can push their agenda. This is plan B.

Satya_anveshi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3532
Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Satya_anveshi » 11 Oct 2014 09:24

shiv wrote:But like I said earlier - Western Universalism and the Nobel prize are linked only by the awe and respect we Indians have for that prize.

I observed a very unique trite among Indians (especially among elder Indians - limited to my experiences) that they take all written things very seriously. If one approaches them in person and makes nonsensical claims they are much more willing to discount those claims than if they read the same claims in writing.
There is some bias to trust the writings and give benefit of doubt to the author than when the party is speaking in their presence.

Indians treat literature (like Smritis, Shrutis, MahaKavyas, Granths, and Kadambaris etc) with UTMOST respect. This immense respect could not be unplugged when reading western trash and ended up f'ing up thought process and simply giving respect to undeserved or where none warranted.

I often face this difficulty of "I read that..." all propagandu sheet thrown at me.

svenkat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4725
Joined: 19 May 2009 17:23

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby svenkat » 11 Oct 2014 09:29

The 'ideal Indian view' is to know facts and then take decisions.

This is to be contrasted with 'western universalism' wherein western interests are identified and then facts and principles are adjusted.Western softpower flows from its military/technology/resource strengths.Universalism is an appendage part of its information war.

My 'outburst' against 'western universalism' started by giving examples of toilets wherein we have to reconcile different interests.While the whietys universalism identifies enemies,manipulates and demonises them.This has existed elsewhere but whiteys have perfected this fine art.This is something we need to adapt and use it in our own situation.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 11 Oct 2014 09:30

svenkat wrote:Its dissappointing to see a dikgaj like you bring in the 'error of the tamil brahmin clerk' who misspelt your family name.What has that got to do with my posts?And have I allowed tamizh politics to influence my posts?

For me personally, it is an indicator of how British influence spread inwards from Tamil Nadu and Calcutta, the first ports that the British, with their powerful navy, settled in, in their competition for colonies against the Portuguese and french. Sociologically a class of bureaucrats and loyal civil servants of the British empire came first from Madras presidency and Bengal. It is those brahmanas who gained wealth and stature under the British who were the first to adopt western style toilets that you referred to in your post. That was what set me off. The Brits employed the Brahmins even as they dissed the whole class of Brahmins as racist slavers.

"Dravidian" Tamil politics is in part an offshoot of the social model that the British constructed. Of course some of the Brahmans who ingratiated themselves to the Brits are among the Tambrams of today settled in various parts of India. The anti-Brahmin movement in Tamil Nadu I believe has roots in these social changes. These things are a cause of social strife in India which I think needs to be parsed by an accurate record of how it came about.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 11 Oct 2014 09:39

Satya_anveshi wrote:
Indians treat literature (like Smritis, Shrutis, MahaKavyas, Granths, and Kadambaris etc) with UTMOST respect. This immense respect could not be unplugged when reading western trash and ended up f'ing up thought process and simply giving respect to undeserved or where none warranted.

+1

The power of the written word.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 11 Oct 2014 09:40

svenkat wrote:The 'ideal Indian view' is to know facts and then take decisions.

This is to be contrasted with 'western universalism' wherein western interests are identified and then facts and principles are adjusted.Western softpower flows from its military/technology/resource strengths.Universalism is an appendage part of its information war.

My 'outburst' against 'western universalism' started by giving examples of toilets wherein we have to reconcile different interests.While the whietys universalism identifies enemies,manipulates and demonises them.This has existed elsewhere but whiteys have perfected this fine art.This is something we need to adapt and use it in our own situation.

venkat your meaning is much more clear in this post than that one.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 11 Oct 2014 09:50

nageshks wrote:Today, the West has done it to India, by doing an equal-equal in a subtle way with a Taliban victim.

Well put. The clubbing of the prize, to me, indicates a weird mental picture that those Northern Atlantic people have about India - a modern day evolution of the old of snake charmers, elephants and fakirs on beds of nails. An area of religious fundamentalists enslaving and violating children while a few lonely people are carrying the "good fight" forward. This is an unfair picture of India and I don't really give a damn what they might think of Pakistan.

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6890
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby habal » 11 Oct 2014 10:10

clubbing of a taliban victim with an Indian social worker is a snub to BJP's Hindu nationalism and Pakistan's military-led Islamist nationalism by the European elite. It is their way of saying that these diverse agenda are coming in way of our plans for the region and the world.

There will be constant soft-power used against Modi by the Europeans. An IED is always around the corner.

India perhaps needs to do a Pakistan on Europe and take away their high moral ground. Something like make a big fuss over demanding back the stolen wealth from the Queen. Now considering how the British mind behaves and how they are extremely reluctant to part with anything they stole during their heydays, & their national character is a piracy led 'losers weepers finders keepers'. We can use this stick for a long time to come.

Shanmukh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2987
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Shanmukh » 11 Oct 2014 10:24

shiv wrote:Well put. The clubbing of the prize, to me, indicates a weird mental picture that those Northern Atlantic people have about India - a modern day evolution of the old of snake charmers, elephants and fakirs on beds of nails. An area of religious fundamentalists enslaving and violating children while a few lonely people are carrying the "good fight" forward. This is an unfair picture of India and I don't really give a damn what they might think of Pakistan.


It is not just the North Atlantic people. It exists throughout non-Russian Europe-particularly Eastern Europe. I had not observed it much, but the recent Mars Mission was an eye-opener for me. People whom I had counted personal friends were outraged that India would succeed in her very first attempt. There was a `These dark scum can't really be ahead of us white people, can they? Why - they have no toilets even, are just rapists, who attack any woman, particularly a white woman, on sight, so how could these barbarians be good at science?' feeling to their reaction. I have the feeling that they all desperately believe the bad press about India because the truth would be too disconcerting to them otherwise. Well, in all honestly, I don't think it matters much what they believe. But good press about India (or even Asia) is not going to sell because Europe sees itself sliding into a quagmire and the envy and hatred for Asia (and Russia, also, by the way) is coming to the fore.

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1513
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Pulikeshi » 11 Oct 2014 11:15

The Roma in Oslo

Gypsies in Norway
(Shiv esp for you - what no toilets in Norway?)

No one to support our brethren?

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16003
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby RajeshA » 11 Oct 2014 12:27

A_Gupta wrote:
RajeshA wrote:Any recognition for work of Kailash Satyarthi should come from Indians & Government of India. This Nobel Peace Prize is only a Western gimmick to portray India as a hell hole!

We, Indians, need to get over our awe and wonder, our sense of fulfillment and pride, over the Nobel Peace Prize. Throw it in the dust bin!


Well, if I have learned my lesson from Pradhan Mantriji correctly, it doesn't matter what Westerns think of India. The only thing that matters is help/indifference/hindrance. The only measures are then are these:

For India to progress, innumerable people will have to spend huge sweat and effort, most of whom will never get any public recognition. But the goal is not to get public recognition. Recognition is at most a means to an end, not an end in itself. You saw some pictures of ISRO employees when the Mars Mission succeeded. For each person you saw the picture of, there are a thousand people behind them that you will never see. Does it matter? Should it matter?

1. Are Kailash Satyarthi and his organization doing work that is good for India? (My answer: yes)


To be honest, I really don't know much about the work he is doing. His work may be genuine. His work may indeed have helped thousands. I don't know. Perhaps in time one would know more about his network, infrastructure, NGO connections, foreign support.

One angle to observe is certainly whether he is a genuine selfless do-gooder or a morality mascot parachuted and propped up by the West. No harm in putting him under observation.

BTW other than the fact that Arvind Kejriwal also won the Magsaysay, he also sat around with Hindu leaders like Baba Ramdev. So one has to check how the duck quacks and walks.

What one cannot deny is that this Nobel Peace Prize for Kailash Satyarthi is about giving the Indian poor a West-selected hero!

A_Gupta wrote:2. Is the Nobel Prize something that will help his work? (My answer: yes)


Perhaps the question to ask is whether a Nobel Prize for him would hinder other do-gooders in their work! More on this later.

A_Gupta wrote:3. Does the Nobel Prize possibly inflict some PR/echandee damage on India? (My answer: depends on the perspective of the observer. For some India is a land of many unsung heroes, some of whom are noticed on occasion; for others it will be India is a hellhole. Secondly, none of this deflects us from our purposes - it would be stupid of us to allow it to deflect us.)


I am not making any insinuations here, so I hope you don't take it wrongly.

Often we Indians try to put some value on our loss, and the same thing we try to do regarding echandee! We think in a way the Noble people are calling us barbarians, or perhaps just backward, but on the other they are also giving some publicity to an important issue about which no political leader in India bothers about, and moreover through this this cause would get more publicity and perhaps something would move. It increases our awareness about the issue. And in the end what is important to us, is really that these evils in society are taken head on. So in a way how we see it is really dependent on where we put more value.

So even if it is considered a net loss, it can't be more than minimal! That is our thought process.

However I am afraid that in this bookkeeping we lose sight of the real soft power dynamic. We lose sight of influence and financial flows here and ultimately we lose sight of the ideological and loyalty divisions that are created within our own country.

Let's say from a "cynical" PoV, the aims of the West in India are:

1) Make the Indian elite suckers for Western cultural norms.
2) Make the Indian poor alienated from the Indian elite, culturally, politically and ideologically. Perhaps convert. Create revolutionary pockets.
3) Harness the resources of the dimwitted Indian Elite for its own causes.
4) Impress on Western public to finance charities targeted at India.
5) Establish Western Supremacy as the ultimate Morality and Quality Giver for its own people as well as for Indians.

So can we measure the cost of this Nobel Peace Prize for Kailash Satyarthi in how much money and men would be flowing to Western charities and West-backed NGOs in India, which could have theoretically flowed to say RSS-backed organizations? How many Indians in India, NRIs and others would rather decide to route their support through Western-backed funds and charities for noble causes in India? After all this is a fight for "hearts and minds"!

Moreover can one measure the cost of Indians accepting West as the Morality and Quality Giver, thus bowing to its soft-power? That has much wider influence on our thinking, on what products we buy, what films we see, what companies we prefer.

Who is to say, that "child labor" issue would not be used by the West against India in future trade negotiations and import bans against Indian products to arm-twist us?! May be Nobel Peace Prize Committee just gave Western Trade Representatives another club to beat us with!

The direct hit to Brand India may be perceived as minimal - "echandee loss"! However perception is relative! This Nobel Peace Prize raises Brand West much higher than Brand India in the eyes of Indians, and thus the loss should not be measured always in absolute terms but in relative terms.

On the other hand, one can also just say "Bindas yaar, don't make a mountain of a molehill" and we can forget all this khujli!

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6890
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby habal » 11 Oct 2014 13:49

there are only two types of nations in the world today:

1. Nations who are already functioning in the new Global System or who are clearly and firmly going in that direction -- the "Functioning Core"

2. Nations who are not now functioning in the Global System and are not likely to do so in the foreseeable future, unless they are kicked into it by U.S. or European troops, or by the threat of invasion. These nations are called the "Non-Integrating Gap".

The strategy being followed by the United States and the European Union is to "shrink the gap".

Using this strategy, the Elite also plan to sweep all entrenched dictators away so that Supernations 7 and 9 can be formed.


- Club of Rome

Image

Overthrowing Other Dictatorships Throughout Supernation #7

In Spring, 2011, Western Intelligent services engineered an internal dissident movement within Tunisia, Morocco, Libya, Egypt, and Syria. Dictators were overthrown in each nation, except in Syria, where President Assad is hanging tough, as of this publication.

Once Assad is neutralized in Syria, this entire region will be ready to start forming a single government, parliament, judicial system, and currency. Regional government, Supernation #7, will be ready to begin forming.


South and Southeast Asia, Nation #9

Officially known as ASEAN, this supernation is beginning to reach the point where it can become one, with a single currency, and government. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations ( ASEAN) is a political and economic organisation of ten countries located in Southeast Asia. Members now are Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Brunei, Burma (Myanmar), Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam. This current supernation has over 600 million people and a Gross National Product of $2.13 Trillion.
But, this supernation is about to get much larger. If you examine the Club of Rome Map, you will see that both Pakistan and India are planned to be part of Supernation #9, known as ASEAN.

India is now preparing to also join ASEAN. In mid-May, 2014, India held a nationwide election, in which the old Ghandi Family party was soundly defeated. For the first time in many decades, India had a new Prime Minister from a new party with a new outlook. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is a pro-business Hindu who realizes that the best way to lead India back into financial prosperity is to join India to ASEAN. The current ASEAN nations are already a financial powerhouse; adding India as the Club of Rome envisioned so many years ago will initially help India far more than the current ASEAN nations.

ASEAN – without India -- covers a land area of 4.46 million km², which is 3% of the total land area of Earth, and has a population of approximately 600 million people, which is 8.8% of the world's population. Adding India will increase the population by 1.2 billion people, swelling the population of the new ASEAN to nearly 2 billion people!

The sea area of ASEAN is about three times larger than its land counterpart. In 2012, its combined nominal GDP had grown to more than US$ 2.3 trillion. Adding India’s GDP of $5.5 trillion will absolutely make the new ASEAN a gigantic supernation, with a GDP of $7.8 trillion, passing Japan as the #3 economy in the entire world.

ASEAN plans to be fully integrated into one Supernation by the end of 2015. Her leaders seem to be of one mind and of one determination to meet this deadline.


the nations in the non-integrating gap

Image

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby RamaY » 11 Oct 2014 14:47

Habal wrote:Image


From Bharatiya perspective
Super-nation 7 is actually part of Super-nation 8
Super-Nation 4 is part of Super-nations 8 and 9
Super-Nation 2 is part of Super-nation 5

That is our Sapta Dwipa!
Image

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby vishvak » 11 Oct 2014 14:50

At base level we should be only worried about akhand Bharat and other schemes must be considered ignorant and useless. We should have an alternative view.

Dump WU if WU doesn't confirm to this.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby RamaY » 11 Oct 2014 14:55

Yes. That Akhand Bharat includes today's Australia.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby vishvak » 11 Oct 2014 15:06

In Denmark, there is a 'festival' where hundreds of dolphins and sharks are killed every year.
Notice in the pic below:
1) Mechanized boats floating on blood red water.
2) Modern aerodynamic swimming costumes to swim on bloody waters.
Image

Can such violent people of Europe determine peace prize while going on with barbarism under name of 'festival'?
link

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby svinayak » 11 Oct 2014 16:19

Pulikeshi wrote:
A_Gupta wrote:They are not setting the agenda for people who actually do things any more than the MSM is setting e.g., Modi's agenda. Whatever you think of Kailash Satyarthi, and while I wish him a long and healthy life, chances are that his greatest achievements are behind him; and thus the Nobel committee did not set his agenda, either.


In some sense the Nobel twerps care neither for Malala nor Kailash, they care about the equal-equal politics...
When a award becomes a political tool - as in Knighthood or Dame of olde for creating dummy Royalty to further political causes, it should be questioned...
My ignorance perhaps, I did not know anything about Kailash and still do not... I actually don't have an opinion on him or his work, in that sense I am similar to the Nobel committee.
So, yes, some a*holes stink more than others! :mrgreen:



Check the usual source and the narrative and language
This is what they wanted attention with this language.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/11/world ... pe=article

Kailash Satyarthi’s Nobel Peace Prize Caps Decades of Fighting Child Slavery in India




A few years later, Mr. Satyarthi was studying engineering at college when Indira Gandhi declared a state of emergency, cracking down on civil liberties and suspending elections. Already a Marxist, he mobilized students against the government and spent much of the period avoiding arrest warrants, said Prabhat Kumar, a longtime friend and fellow activist.



Other organization have other motive in supporting him.
ILO will not make such topics of PRC prison labor and other exploitation since profit is made of PRC goods. Cheap Indian goods will be competitor to MNCs
Simon Steyne, a longtime friend and colleague of Mr. Satyarthi’s, said reducing child labor was ultimately the responsibility of governments and lawmakers. “I don’t think Kailash would say, ‘We are going to go out and rescue the other 168 million,’ ” Mr. Steyne said. But he added that his friend was driven by a sense of moral urgency and a ground-level network of informants who continually provide reports of exploitation.

Continue reading the main storyContinue reading the main storyContinue reading the main story
“If there is intelligence that there are children being physically trafficked on a train, they will get raid and rescue workers together at a station,” said Mr. Steyne, an official at the International Labor Organization. “And when the train stops, they’ll board the train and rescue the children.”
Last edited by svinayak on 11 Oct 2014 16:29, edited 1 time in total.

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6890
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby habal » 11 Oct 2014 16:27

if you see that map of non-integrating states, Nepal has been left inside. Remember how King Birendra and his entire family was assasinated in 2001 and the map shows uptil 2003, which was then quite recent.

Coming to present, TSPA is trying to fight this group, who have decided to undermine TSPA in order to integrate Pakistan with India to form supernation 9, and TSPA are trying to oppose this move since years. Nobel to Malala is a warning to them from this group. Malala with Satyarthi is their vision of joint play for future. If TSPA continues to oppose, it will become history and a rump state run by civilians will do whatever asked, this is the implied threat.

http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n2363.cfm
Last edited by habal on 11 Oct 2014 16:33, edited 1 time in total.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby svinayak » 11 Oct 2014 16:31

habal wrote:if you see that map of non-integrating states, Nepal has been left inside. Remember how King Birendra and his entire family was assasinated in 2001 and the map shows uptil 2003, which was then quite recent.

Coming to present, TSPA is trying to fight this group, who have decided to undermine TSPA in order to integrate Pakistan with India to form supernation 9, and TSPA are trying to oppose this move since years. Nobel to Malala is a warning to them from this group. Malala with Satyarthi is their vision of joint play for future. If TSPA continues to oppose, it will become history and a rump state run by civilians will do whatever asked, this is the implied threat.

Please can you also post the link

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby svinayak » 11 Oct 2014 16:39

habal wrote:if you see that map of non-integrating states, Nepal has been left inside. Remember how King Birendra and his entire family was assasinated in 2001 and the map shows uptil 2003, which was then quite recent.

Coming to present, TSPA is trying to fight this group, who have decided to undermine TSPA in order to integrate Pakistan with India to form supernation 9, and TSPA are trying to oppose this move since years. Nobel to Malala is a warning to them from this group. Malala with Satyarthi is their vision of joint play for future. If TSPA continues to oppose, it will become history and a rump state run by civilians will do whatever asked, this is the implied threat.

http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n2363.cfm


Check the info about India
http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1833.cfm
The Pentagon's New Map", by Thomas P.M. Barnett.

The author is a professor of the U.S. Naval War College and a Senior Strategic Researcher.

According to Illuminist thinking, there are only two types of nations in the world today:

1. Nations who are already functioning in the new Global System or who are clearly and firmly going in that direction -- the "Functioning Core"

2. Nations who are not now functioning in the Global System and are not likely to do so in the foreseeable future, unless they are kicked into it by U.S. or European troops, or by the threat of invasion. These nations are called the "Non-Integrating Gap".

Harpal Bector
BRFite
Posts: 226
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Harpal Bector » 11 Oct 2014 17:26

In a global economy where products and services travel at great speed between the ends of the earth - universal values are critical.

Ending child slavery is definitely high on the list of shared universal values.

An equally powerful universal concept is making sure that only those that truly deserve it are awarded a prize. This is the concept of the "just" reward.

With Malala's name on the Nobel Prize ballot, there is no way anyone else's contributions can measure up to her.

Even if we assume that Meghna Barhee's reports are not an accurate reflection of Kailash's integrity, the plain fact remains that his contributions to ending child slavery in India are nowhere near Malala's contributions to the global struggle for women's educational rights.

The "India-Pakistan equal equal" way of thinking has a very limited utility in terms of actually combating real world problems in either India or Pakistan. This is a subtle fact that causes much grief to professionals in the conflict resolution arena. It is very easy to misapply this way of thinking and get something that simply does not work for India or Pakistan.

Right now it looks like someone misapplied the notion of "equal equal" and interfered with what should have been a Nobel Prize exclusively given to Malala.

The net effect of this dual award has been to degrade Malala's stature in Pakistan. Pakistanis are saying "Look - Malala didn't deserve the prize - that is why the prize is shared with a random Indian guy who no one in India knows..."

Similarly in India - people are saying - "That Kailash guy didn't deserve it, the only reason he got it is because they didn't want to upset Pakistanis too much by giving it to Malala exclusively and putting Pakistanis terrible record on women's rights into a sharp focus."

This is the exact opposite effect of what any rational human being would desire.

Harpal Bector
BRFite
Posts: 226
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Harpal Bector » 11 Oct 2014 17:44

The Barnett Map is not a Pentagon viewpoint. Those are simply Barnett's views.

The problem with the Barnett Map is that it is not based on hard data and it offers very fuzzy notions of what constitutes a response to an ill-defined problem.

It is correct to say that in today's networked world, national boundaries mean very little. So clearly some other form of thinking is necessary. In the US some people find it very challenging to think globally without getting into this "us-v/s-them" cycle. Barnett has attempted to define an "us" and "them" so as to ease the process of global thinking in certain sections of the US.

It is easy to see the utility of this kind of thinking for people who have to plan and prepare for future conflicts. They need to have some sense of where the next problem might come from. So viewed in that lens,
Barnett's work is largely a piece of psywar - and the target is certain people in the US itself.

The main problem I have with this work is that there is no metric for evaluating its effectiveness as a psywar tool. In the early part of the century, Barnett did the rounds in most of the countries he felt were "us" and he kept away from every country that he called "them". The response in places like India was best described as "mild amusement". It must have felt like an echo of the past when the US would send anti-communist elements of the Christian priest variety to Europe and Asia in a bid to point out the unchristian nature of Marxist ideas.

I don't think he picked up many adherents in India - probably because the Indians felt somewhat surprised to see their count on the "us" side of the border. After all, after 1998 - the general feeling was India was in the "them" side of the border.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby A_Gupta » 11 Oct 2014 18:30

The best I can tell, Barnett got his 15 minutes of fame in 2004, and has faded away since.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby A_Gupta » 11 Oct 2014 18:32

By 2008, Kailash Satyarthi had been nominated for the Nobel Prize twice already, it would seem.
This from July 2008:
http://www.nclnet.org/in_washington_adv ... bor_issues

By Paula Osborn, NCL Public Policy Intern Around the world, more than 200 million children toil in abusive child labor. Last week, members of the Child Labor Coalition (CLC), which is coordinated by the National Consumers League, met to discuss the progress being made to ameliorate the problem.

Kailash Satyarthi, the Chair for the Global March against Child Labor and the President of the Global Campaign for Education, who, at great danger to himself, rescues bonded child laborers in India, and Ambassador-at-Large Mark Lagon who is the Director of the Trafficking in Persons Office for the U.S. State Department were the main speakers. A diverse group of CLC members and interested individuals attended, including representatives from the International Labor Organization (ILO), the National Education Association (NEA), Rugmark, the Association of Farmworker Opportunity Programs (AFOP), and a dozen or so organizations. Federal officials from the State Department and the Department of Labor also attended.

Satyarthi, who has twice been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize, told the CLC that the elimination of child labor cannot occur without universal education, which he called a “fundamental human right.” Although we are making progress, there is still a long way to go, said Satyarthi.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby A_Gupta » 11 Oct 2014 18:37

Viveka: the ability to discriminate between the real and the unreal.

Any writing that includes, e.g., "Illuminist", should raise a BS red alert. It doesn't mean reject it outright, but it does mean please look at it very hard before believing it.

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6890
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby habal » 11 Oct 2014 18:38

It's not Barnett's map, it's the Club of Rome map

The Ten Kingdoms - The ten regions originated with the Club of Rome “think tank”, and was established by the United Nations. The Club of Rome was given the task of uniting Europe, and dividing the world into manageable blocks. Here's a map of the world, divided into the ten economic regions, which the United Nations and the Club of Rome call “The Ten Kingdoms”. From Gary Kah’s En Route to Global Occupation, page 40: “The Club of Rome had its beginnings in April of 1968…The Club of Rome has been charged with the task of overseeing the regionalization and unification of the entire world;


and what makes it relevant is that most of the 'manufactured dissent' viz Arab Spring, Orange revolution, Egypt, Syria, Libya, Tunisia, Yemen, Ukraine etc movements in the world have taken place within it's prescribed outline.

One has to apply their own reason to check 'what if' something is not entirely incorrect rather than adopting the intellectually lazy and politically convenient conspiratorial tags. So what is the framework used to dismiss a possibility ? Most folks do not have any.
Last edited by habal on 11 Oct 2014 18:43, edited 1 time in total.

svenkat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4725
Joined: 19 May 2009 17:23

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby svenkat » 11 Oct 2014 18:39

OT:
shivji,
I think your analysis of tambrahms,dravidian movement,British world views is not complete,though theres truth in what you say and the incomplete analysis that you make is true in some/same respect to Khatris,bhadralok in bengal and the westernised brahmanas of western MH.But since thats OT,we will discuss it in some other thread.

And western toilets are now preferred by those who have got used to it independent of caste/region.

svenkat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4725
Joined: 19 May 2009 17:23

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby svenkat » 11 Oct 2014 18:47

Harpal Bector wrote:In a global economy where products and services travel at great speed between the ends of the earth - universal values are critical.



Bectorji,
why dont you list 'your' universal values or if you think the 'western value system' is universal,whats the obstacles in India to achieving that value system.

And whats really the contribution of malala.She wanted to go to school.Thats nice.And unfortunately for her,she was brutally shot.Whats the value system by which you think she deserves the award more than someone who has spent a life time on combating child labour.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby A_Gupta » 11 Oct 2014 19:02

You know that there is a whole industry of American conspiracy theorists who say that the UN wants to make all Americans move into a small set of cities and leave the rest of the land empty? There are similarly N other UN conspiracies against the US, N is some significant number. Why would you take the rants of such people seriously?

I mean, why don't we simply accept that Obama is a Kenyan Muslim Socialist, there is plenty of "respectable" Republican opinion including Senators and Congressmen who say that?

I challenge the whole premise here:

The Ten Kingdoms - The ten regions originated with the Club of Rome “think tank”, and was established by the United Nations. The Club of Rome was given the task of uniting Europe, and dividing the world into manageable blocks. Here's a map of the world, divided into the ten economic regions, which the United Nations and the Club of Rome call “The Ten Kingdoms”. From Gary Kah’s En Route to Global Occupation, page 40: “The Club of Rome had its beginnings in April of 1968…The Club of Rome has been charged with the task of overseeing the regionalization and unification of the entire world;


I mean, get your conspiracy theory right. The Club of Rome was founded by the Morgenthau group, not by the United Nations.
http://conspiracywiki.com/articles/new- ... b-of-rome/

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby A_Gupta » 11 Oct 2014 19:07

Since you're worried about who sets the agenda for India, see how cleverly the Nobel Committee has done so, etc., etc.,
http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.co ... satyarthi/

As I write these lines, a colleague comes in and tells me about his previous organization, where there was a reporter who used to often quote Kailash Satyarthi and his Bachpaan bachao Andolan. He adds: but we banned the reporter from writing on this matter; we felt there was a surfeit of Satyarthi and his movement. Everybody was getting bored.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16003
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby RajeshA » 11 Oct 2014 19:14

My Tweet

If you think Kailash Satyarthi should accept Nobel Peace Prize only after Norway puts a stop to barbaric practice of whaling, please Retweet


Image

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6890
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby habal » 11 Oct 2014 20:04

>>>>You know that there is a whole industry of American conspiracy theorists who say that the UN wants to make all Americans move into a small set of cities and leave the rest of the land empty? There are similarly N other UN conspiracies against the US, N is some significant number. Why would you take the rants of such people seriously?

I mean, why don't we simply accept that Obama is a Kenyan Muslim Socialist, there is plenty of "respectable" Republican opinion including Senators and Congressmen who say that? [/quote]

these are soundbytes endorsed by certain groups to confuse and obfuscate the real scenarios. Again, I ask where is the framework that goes to determining what is right and what is cover-up, just look at past events in history and it becomes clear which model is being followed. Nobody can spoon-feed, only when the framework is clear can the dots be connected.

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby member_20317 » 11 Oct 2014 20:21

A_Gupta wrote:The best I can tell, Barnett got his 15 minutes of fame in 2004, and has faded away since.


Barnett is not the issue. The issue is that some crackpot like Barnett can actually take birth. And before you know it there would be elaborate thesis on what and who is against whom. Then there would be pro bono work on how Indians must take the help of the Greatest Democracy to keep alive. Indians being off course jahaliya (put your favorite english word here). All this when everybody can see what/who is against us, Indians. And thereafter, man, what have you - Umrikhans and their sidekicks in the UN drawing out battlelines so a clutch of economically dependent entities can then go ahead and do the propaganduing. Off course this will all be accomplished with some new set of values to rally the new Ummah around. Soon you will have holy prizes like the Nobels being awarded around the new set of values.

Either Barnett is an exception, an aberration, a mutant. Else he is the subset of a rule. Can't be both. So take your pick.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: asif.a, KJo, madhu and 96 guests