Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby brihaspati » 27 Aug 2009 02:44

I have had good practice with best possible baitors in the world - commies. Power or money in a hand, shows how long the hand has had experience of using it - those who have not had it for long usually misuse it, and throw it around conspicuously. There are too many Chankyans around - alas no candidate for a Chandragupta Maurya.

Let us converge to a common programme. Both of thought/ideology as well as plan of action. We "trust" in our "keepers". :mrgreen: But that does not mean we cannot plan for backups, just in case the "keepers" fall and fail.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54516
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby ramana » 27 Aug 2009 02:47

You know my family watches a lot of Indian TV serials. What strikes me is there are many Sitas(bahus), and many Tatakis(Saases) and Ravanas(villians) but hardly any Rams on modern TV or natyas. All are dhimmied substitutes.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby brihaspati » 27 Aug 2009 03:18

My intuition says, we easily can have a core from quite a committed group here. If only we can stop getting at each others ankles yapping like foot-beagles. There could be certain attitudes here that persist in personal animosities and needlessly draws away from and fractures the formation of such a consensus. Can there be a discussion on this in Indrapuri up in the clouds to muzzle such devatas ? Especially Narada-likes, the mischief-maker from devaloka (whoever that might be) who comes and starts quarrels and battles between mere humans in "martya"? This for me is like a deja-vu.

In the bigger world, this is what always holds back the formation of an iron or steel core of the Bharatyia nationhood. We do not take steps to muzzle the foot-beagles in time. Typically my experience says that such people in the end do not provide any solid statesmanship, or visionary leadership. Their focus is on personal rivalries and egos and they therefore cannot have a wider vision.

It is important to have as many committed nationalists as possible in a single homogeneous block. It may so happen that most of them source their nationalist commitments based on some concept of "Bharatyia" or shared cultural identity with the majority of "India". That should not be taken as a disqualifier, and efforts mounted to scuttle any consolidation because it is feared to sterngthen the majority "identity". We simply may not have the luxury of having enough time in hoping for an alternative conglomerate identity - yet to be accepted by all concerned - as the supposed unifying factor.

sukhdeo
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 02:02

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby sukhdeo » 27 Aug 2009 09:14

brihaspati wrote:I have had good practice with best possible baitors in the world - commies. Power or money in a hand, shows how long the hand has had experience of using it - those who have not had it for long usually misuse it, and throw it around conspicuously. There are too many Chankyans around - alas no candidate for a Chandragupta Maurya.

Let us converge to a common programme. Both of thought/ideology as well as plan of action. We "trust" in our "keepers". :mrgreen: But that does not mean we cannot plan for backups, just in case the "keepers" fall and fail.


1) By how long the hand has had experience using it, you mean "Lord of the Flies" ?

2) About Chanakya and Chandragupta, was it Chanakya who played Chandragupta or Chandragupta who played Chanakya ? Chandragupta got at least 4 generations worth of rule for his descendents, what exactly did Chanakya get ? To be sure, he did get a more exalted place in history, but that is an intangible, and Chandragupta didnt do too shabbily either, in history.

3) The question is, core group. Core group has to have a commited bunch of people. But commited to what ? Just saying commited to a "great bharat" is not good enough. Even the two bit neta or the greediest businessman in India is commited to a "great bharat", only their idea of a great bharat is where they can continue to steal. As long as they can steal, they will keep sloganeering and chanting "mera bharat mahan". You have to get at least one step below in details to make sure that when you say, Brihispati, "great bharat", and I say, "great bharat", we both mean the same thing. So, we have to define the common set of values that we will all share and put into effect, if and when we have the power to do so. The core group has to agree to this common set of values. When Rajesh says, let us lie or cheat or do whatever it takes to get into power, he is talking tactics not shared values. And we all will find that once we articulate a common set of values, the tactics will also have to conform to those, they cant be the tactics of the thugs. Besides, lying and cheating can only be a losing tactic for the likes of us, as we are just "wannabe" liers and cheaters, we can never outcompete the originals in that. The originals are psychotic sociopaths, and I am being kind, and we can never better a neta or a babu or a businessman operating India at lying and cheating. We will lose all the time. Our strength will be the common set of values. I propose those common set of values to be hard work, smart work, team work, institution building, honest work, reward in proportion to work, strong disincentive to be "clever", strong disincentive for taking short cuts, strong disincentives to lie and cheat. It is when the moral converges with strength, of convictions and resources and when they both converge with courage, and when the three of those converge with singularity of purpose (arjun style, keeping the eye on the fish) will we come up with great strategy and great tactics and then I would actually feel sorry for our enemies.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby RajeshA » 27 Aug 2009 14:06

sukhdeo wrote:3) The question is, core group. Core group has to have a commited bunch of people. But commited to what ? Just saying commited to a "great bharat" is not good enough. Even the two bit neta or the greediest businessman in India is commited to a "great bharat", only their idea of a great bharat is where they can continue to steal. As long as they can steal, they will keep sloganeering and chanting "mera bharat mahan". You have to get at least one step below in details to make sure that when you say, Brihispati, "great bharat", and I say, "great bharat", we both mean the same thing. So, we have to define the common set of values that we will all share and put into effect, if and when we have the power to do so.


Yes, the vision has to be aligned.

sukhdeo wrote:The core group has to agree to this common set of values. When Rajesh says, let us lie or cheat or do whatever it takes to get into power, he is talking tactics not shared values. And we all will find that once we articulate a common set of values, the tactics will also have to conform to those, they cant be the tactics of the thugs.


Idealism is when your values dictate your road.
Strategy is when your values dictate your aim.

sukhdeo wrote:Besides, lying and cheating can only be a losing tactic for the likes of us, as we are just "wannabe" liers and cheaters, we can never outcompete the originals in that. The originals are psychotic sociopaths, and I am being kind, and we can never better a neta or a babu or a businessman operating India at lying and cheating. We will lose all the time.

sukhdeo ji,
a word of caution here. You seem to be ascribing to me, that I favor 'lying' and 'cheating' as tactics. I may have mentioned these tactics in multiple contexts, but I am not quite so sure, which context/post you are referring to.

The context here is important. Let's assume, you mean the use of these tactics to get power.

One needs to understand, that whatever be your political mission, there will be many stake-holders with a stake in an alternate structure and direction, who will try to stop you in your tracks. They will be well-established, well-connected, and knowledgeable about the workings of the system. They will also have no qualms about using every tactic in the book of dirty-tricks. They control the media. They will form the resistance. You can try to take them on head long, in which case you will either fail miserably, or they will break up the cohesion of your 'core' group, or it will take you an eternity to reach the top of the mountain, by which time all that you may hold dear may not be there to save.

The only effective way is to decrease the resistance to the rise of 'core' group which favors the nationalist agenda. You can do it in three ways: -
a) You sabotage the effectiveness of the resistance
b) You do not to invite a reaction of resistance
c) You make yourself so strong that 'resistance is futile'

Sabotage of the effectiveness can only happen if some people having allegiance to the 'core' group infiltrate the current power holders, who may not have the national interest uppermost in their minds, or whose idea of national interest is less than informed. That means, the 'core' group would need adherents in all the current political parties, in the INC, BJP, the regional parties, and even amongst the Communists.
  • The infiltrators would have to give inputs to their respective parties, which misrepresents the threat of the 'core group' to them,
  • they will have to bring up issues, which makes their parties unable to act, unable to resist the 'core group' by diverting the attention of the parties;
  • they will make other groups look far more dangerous, so that they even make common cause with the 'core group';
  • they will pass on vital information regarding the inner decision making and tactics back to the 'core group';
  • they will help in calming down feathers, should a situation arise of open hostility between their party and the 'core group';
  • they will facilitate temporary or issue-based cooperation between their parties and the 'core group'.

Secondly you will also have to ensure, that not too many forces are inclined on stopping you, that not too many forces see you as a threat; that not too many forces think of you as a threat to the system. So to that effect, all in the 'core group' should act as the run-of-the-mill politicians, with no ideals, with no values, with no interest in national interest, at least not in the company of other politicians. You would also have to let it be known that you are corruptible. Your grudge with the other politicians would not be about their corruption, but about you not getting your share. It is in this context that I stated
RajeshA wrote:Hide your Dharma behind Corruption.
Hide your Corruption behind 'Dharma'.
RajeshA wrote:'Lying' is used to cover up some behavior, which one does not deem desirable to be understood in its intended context.


Thirdly one would have to build up a 'Core Group' around which other groupings can arise - political parties, religious institutions, charities, ngos, citizen interest groups, lobbies, associations, networks, businesses.

sukhdeo wrote:Our strength will be the common set of values. I propose those common set of values to be hard work, smart work, team work, institution building, honest work, reward in proportion to work, strong disincentive to be "clever", strong disincentive for taking short cuts, strong disincentives to lie and cheat. It is when the moral converges with strength, of convictions and resources and when they both converge with courage, and when the three of those converge with singularity of purpose (arjun style, keeping the eye on the fish) will we come up with great strategy and great tactics and then I would actually feel sorry for our enemies.


Well said, sukhdeo.

I am confronted with an age-old dilemma.
The end justifies the means!
The road to hell is paved with good intentions!
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely!


In critique of my own words, I would say that there is a danger of the line separating the actor from character of fading or disappearing altogether.

As I see the world, I would say that this world is a very shrewd Devil, and no man can withstand the pressures of frustration, ego, pride, ambition, temptation, blackmail, threats all the time. There will always be those, who will try to exploit human weaknesses in you, as an individual or as a group. The more one acts as a Vishwamitra, the more Indra would be tempted to send a Menaka.

That is why I suggest, be Vishwamitra, but don't act like one. Even as you, as Arjun, have your eyes fixed on the eye of the fish, you should wear dark-glasses, so nobody knows where you are looking. It is far easier for you to fail if you expect 100% righteousness from yourself, but if you expect only 95% righteousness, you will mostly succeed in retaining it.

It is all about overcoming the resistance, and getting your way!

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby brihaspati » 27 Aug 2009 14:25

yes a critical issue - the "dilemma". I can relate to this. One of the main points of friction between me and the "left bosses". I was uncompromising on the "monetary" issues. But I was told many times "these are very poor comrades. If you are too strict with them, not allow them to a single bit for their own use, you cannot hold them to the party". Ironically, after having almost continuous such fights over the year, I would still be placed in charge of funds.

I was absolutely unbending against this sort of financial jugglery and other compromises on using purely lumpen elements, who even though appearing spectacularly effective, for me indicated a loss of "base" over the longer term. For me the ends do not necessarily justify the means. But I still wonder, had I compromised, would it have been better for "Bharat" in my own small way? But I would become just a cog in that great wheel of the machine to dupe Bharatyias for ever with a new dream which was and remains dishonest to the core!

The organizations solution was to remove me from each of the lower committees and push me away to a "higher" committee so that I would not be breathing on the lower-comm's necks, and I would be increasingly separated from the grassroots. Yes, tactically, with the core we are hoping for - all such compromises better be with the non-core elements - inside, absolutely no compromises.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby RajeshA » 27 Aug 2009 14:50

brihaspati wrote:Yes, tactically, with the core we are hoping for - all such compromises better be with the non-core elements - inside, absolutely no compromises.
Because inside every organ has to work in sync, every organ ought to have full trust in the other, that the other would fulfill its function, would behave in an expected way. Only then can an organism, a party, a group function effectively.

As for the outsiders, the non-core elements ...

Ever wondered why in India, Gods have so many heads, so many faces, so many avatars, even as they have one Dharma? :)

sukhdeo
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 02:02

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby sukhdeo » 27 Aug 2009 18:27

The problem with compromises is that once you start making them, you get into a habit which you never can come out of. When you compromise your values, for whatever tactical reason, the danger is, that unless your entire core group consists of individuals with the character of Lord Krishna, anything short of it, is bound to doom the group. Indians love Lord Krishna, because they interpret his adopting "unethical" tactics to give each Indian a license to be promiscuous (I dont mean in a sexual sense, but in an ethical sense) all the time and they love it. To follow Lord Rama would be some much harder. But in truth, there is very little difference between Lord Krishna and Lord Rama. Lord Krishna only used "unethical" tactics at the most .1% of the time, on an exceptional basis and even there he was able to get away without polluting his entire character and cause, because he was presumably a God. But Indians love to emphasize only the .1% and not the 99.9% of Lord Krishna's life which was ethical to the core, full of tragedy and difficulty, tremendous courage and grace under fire, tremendously giving and generous, unbending commitment to Dharma, everlasting commitment to his people(Yadavas) and friends, very hard working, ability to come up from scratch and amazing ability to forgive, not to mention perseverence and resilience(Dwarika was rebuilt countless times, due to natural disasters etc). All these qualities are good qualities to emulate and perhaps can become the values of our core group.

Just as Indians dont emphasize the positive 99.9% of Lord Krishna, if you adopt any tactics, which even hint of being of unethical nature, even the strongest amongst us within the core group will take that as a license to be unethical all the time, regardless of whether it is "inside" or "outside", because after all, we are Indians. In fact, because we are Indians, we are more likely to use unethical tactics on the "inside", as it will be easier to cheat each other than the "outsider" who is well fortifide and well defended and who will not allow anyone to take advantage of him, whether he be a neta, babu, businessman outsider or a Islamist, Western prosylithizing outsider. Look around you. Indians like water always take the path of least resistance and therefore always are unethical with the weak and amongst each other, while staying subservient to the "outsider". Thats why we commit fratricide and suicide all the time and even manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Therefore, I suggest we go the straight forward way. Have good values, practice them and we will find strength. Take the example of Gandhi. I am not advocating Gandhian values. But look at this life. He was at least perceived to be not a hypocrite. If he preached sacrifice, he lived like a pauper. If he preached against caste, he cleaned his own toilets. The image he had was that of a man who had high values and who practiced it. There was no sunlight between values and how he lived. At least that was the perception. He never seemingly condoned unethical practices, even in adversity. Yet he came from nowhere to become the most powerful man in India. His power eminated from the fact that Indians who were sick of hypocrites, saying one thing, doing another, found someone who had some semblance of consistency between his values and actions. That is the power we need to tap, not necessary to practice what Gandhi practised, but our own values that we come up with which may be more suited for the needs of today and the future. But the consistency and lack of hypocracy has to be visible and eminate from the core group.

Even in practical terms, once unethical practices come to be perfected and accepted within our core group to advance a just cause, even a great cause, because the battle is long and intergenerational, people will not be able to sustain the strain of constantly differentiating between tactics to be used against outsiders and tactics to be used inside and ultimately crack and use them on the inside, thus sabotaging our own cause and leading us to defeat.

Lastly, as evidence on the ground, I present India. Look at India after independence. We have tried "unethics" for 65 years. Look where that has led us. Let us try something different now.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby RajeshA » 27 Aug 2009 19:02

sukhdeo ji,

I can't contradict you on your plea to live by one's values. How can only criticize anybody for doing that?

For the tactics that I have been espousing, a man does need an incorruptible core, clarity of mission, balance of demeanor, and moral flexibility of action. And basically I have no confidence, that one can find individuals with those qualities. I don't consider myself to be anywhere near this ideal. And yes, I do consider it an ideal. I think, it is far difficult for a straight man to play crooked, then for a straight man to play straight. What I ask of the 'core' is far more difficult to find, is far more challenging. That is why, I am myself unsure of the viability of such a 'core group'.

But I am also sure, that straightness is something, that has been dangerous for Bharat as a Civilization. The true spirit of Dharma demands a fortitude of soul, that only some achieve, and these are not able to carry the vast masses, who are found wanting. Such a spirit does not just demand obeisance but rather demands individual enlightenment. Goodness is a tactic whose success depends on the cooperation of a vast majority. Gandhi showed that it can be successful, but his experiment showed that his ideas could not cross the high walls of Islam's Otherness. Partial success can carry a big defeat on its shoulders.

There is little meeting ground, when this philosophical core of any 'core group' is not clarified - Are the tactics going to be based on absolute values or are they going to be based on contextual logic?

This conflict between the idealists and pragmatists is always the weak link for any group!

Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4152
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Atri » 27 Aug 2009 19:28

What might be the damage to Unkil's Af-Pak policy if Bhaarat decides to test the Bums today?

Can Unkil afford delay in TSP's demise and disintegration? :)

On the contrary, if devguru's hypothesis turns out to be true and if Unkil really wants to get the hell out of that place, they must have presumed that PRC will fill in the vacuum.

If Unkil plans to stay on Af-Pak for 20-30 years more, and is forcing Bhaarat to sign the treaties, then the threat of Bum-test should suffice. This news process will accelerate the disintegration of TSP.

If it is in Unkil's mind to leave Af-Pak, then Bhaarat will do the actual testing asap.


JMT

sukhdeo
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 02:02

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby sukhdeo » 27 Aug 2009 19:37

This conflict though difficult and enduring, can be resolvable. Look at successful societies around the world and in history and you will find that as long as these societies were and have been able to resolve this conflict satisfactorily, they were and have been successful. Societies that were not able to resolve this conflict between good and evil, and were paralyzed into inaction or worst societies which allowed evil to dominate, like India for the last 1500 years or so, always die.

The question is not whether we will be able to resolve this issue in India, we must and we have to, in order to survive. It is an existential issue and I believe that we can resolve it. If I didnt believe in that, than we all might as well be dead. It may be a leap of faith, but I do have to believe. Have faith in our Indianness, have faith in the goodness within us Indians, have faith in the humanity of us Indians, although there has been scant evidence of all these in the past 1500 years and even more scant in the last 50 years. Because, if we as Indians achieve everything, and stay devoid of goodness, then at core we are not Indians, we are not even human beings, we are just some rich "blobs" of flesh, not worthy of anything.

By the way, this discussion of how we resolve the issue of a core group, the core values and core strategy and tactics, as far as I am concerned is the only issue worth discussing on this forum or anywhere else. All the other issues, whether they relate to the intricacies of Hindu philosophy, or our foreign and defence policies, economic policies etc are all secondary and are natural outcomes of how we resolve our core issue. They dont mean a damn, in the context of a flawed core and the results show it. Why do you think, a people who inherited such fantastic philosophical and theological heritage such as ours (with Vedas, our other scriptures, Geeta etc), can have such baseness and evil amongst us ? How is it that having the best engineers in the world, from IIT and other places and best managers (from IIM and other places), we cannot build one highway in India we can be proud of or one water works, or one world class manufactured and natively engineered product ? It is simply because everything is meaningless without a strong core of values and it shows in our highways and our manufactured products, just as examples.

Rajesh, on Gandhi, I am not arguing that whatever he did was good or that he succeeded or failed in his ultimate objective. The only thing about Gandhi that is interesting to me and deserves further study and has been under studied, is how he actually gained power in India, without seemingly using violent means and even monetary means. What made people follow him in such large numbers ? What he did with that power or how he used is subsequently, is not important to me at all, just like rehashing of partition, or whether Jinnah was good or bad or Nehru or any of those pygmies.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Sanku » 27 Aug 2009 20:08

sukhdeo wrote: Look at successful societies around the world and in history .


I do not know of successful societies in the world which have been able to resolve such issues between good and evil.

Can you please illustrate with examples? (And please dont quote Ram rajya)

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby harbans » 27 Aug 2009 20:16

Indians love Lord Krishna, because they interpret his adopting "unethical" tactics to give each Indian a license to be promiscuous (I dont mean in a sexual sense, but in an ethical sense) all the time and they love it.

Look at successful societies around the world and in history and you will find that as long as these societies were and have been able to resolve this conflict satisfactorily, they were and have been successful.

All the other issues, whether they relate to the intricacies of Hindu philosophy, or our foreign and defence policies, economic policies etc are all secondary and are natural outcomes of how we resolve our core issue. They dont mean a damn, in the context of a flawed core and the results show it. Why do you think, a people who inherited such fantastic philosophical and theological heritage such as ours (with Vedas, our other scriptures, Geeta etc), can have such baseness and evil amongst us ? How is it that having the best engineers in the world, from IIT and other places and best managers (from IIM and other places), we cannot build one highway in India we can be proud of or one water works, or one world class manufactured and natively engineered product ? It is simply because everything is meaningless without a strong core of values and it shows in our highways and our manufactured products, just as examples.

You're misinterpreting everything and everybody here.. You are insuinating everyone here. All our ethos and values.

So instead of me or anyone spending an hour refuting you, why don't you Sukhdeo ji tell us..what is wrong with us? You had Iranians in our dorm laughing at a Khominei cleric..when Khominei was around...wow! I had too lots of Iranians my batch. And i know they were s..hit scared to laugh around at Khominei's clerics like you claim. Where did do your Univ BTW?

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby RajeshA » 27 Aug 2009 20:40

sukhdeo ji,

In my PoV, the conflict is not between good and evil. Such a conflict is for scriptures.

The conflict is about power, survival, values of the own collective, differences of assessment. Everything can be given a narrative. There is a narrative of the losers and there is a narrative of the victors. There is a narrative of the conquerors and there are the bones of the extinct. There is an endless debate on values based on assumptions, benefits and indoctrinations. There are always differences of assessment because each human sees only a tiny fraction of reality. So conflict will endure, and everybody will take a side because the mind and the world allows only so many choices.

I have to take a stand for my values. You have to take a stand for your values.

In my PoV, there are
- values for the expression of the own
- values for the expansion of the own
- values for the survival of the own

and they are by no means the same. Dharma is only useful for the Expression of the own, for the collective, for the self. Expansion and Survival requires a different set of values and tools.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby brihaspati » 27 Aug 2009 20:45

The issues about core leadership perhaps belongs to the leadership thread. I myself have perhaps helped in this slight derailing. But the issue is important for any organized effort and should be explored more. If possible please consider continuing in the leadership thread.

sukhdeo
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 02:02

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby sukhdeo » 27 Aug 2009 20:50

harbans wrote:Indians love Lord Krishna, because they interpret his adopting "unethical" tactics to give each Indian a license to be promiscuous (I dont mean in a sexual sense, but in an ethical sense) all the time and they love it.

Look at successful societies around the world and in history and you will find that as long as these societies were and have been able to resolve this conflict satisfactorily, they were and have been successful.

All the other issues, whether they relate to the intricacies of Hindu philosophy, or our foreign and defence policies, economic policies etc are all secondary and are natural outcomes of how we resolve our core issue. They dont mean a damn, in the context of a flawed core and the results show it. Why do you think, a people who inherited such fantastic philosophical and theological heritage such as ours (with Vedas, our other scriptures, Geeta etc), can have such baseness and evil amongst us ? How is it that having the best engineers in the world, from IIT and other places and best managers (from IIM and other places), we cannot build one highway in India we can be proud of or one water works, or one world class manufactured and natively engineered product ? It is simply because everything is meaningless without a strong core of values and it shows in our highways and our manufactured products, just as examples.

You're misinterpreting everything and everybody here.. You are insuinating everyone here. All our ethos and values.

So instead of me or anyone spending an hour refuting you, why don't you Sukhdeo ji tell us..what is wrong with us? You had Iranians in our dorm laughing at a Khominei cleric..when Khominei was around...wow! I had too lots of Iranians my batch. And i know they were s..hit scared to laugh around at Khominei's clerics like you claim. Where did do your Univ BTW?



What exactly is your objection ? That I am insinuating that ALL Indians and all our values are flawed. I am not and I think you know it, because you have read my post. You ignored the fact that I said that I have to have faith in our Indianness. What did I mean ? I couldnt have faith in our Indianness, if ALL our people and ALL our values are flawed.

What I AM saying is that just like in slum dynamics in India or anywhere for that matter, there is no law. There are only strongmen and goons. These strongmen and goons are less than 1% of the population of the slum, yet they control the slum and are able to impose their will. There are all kinds of evil that exists in the slum. Does that mean that all people in the slum are bad ? No, only 1%. But in order for this evil to succeed the other 98% (lets say there are the 1% that resist), have to be complicit in some way, at least passively. It is the responsibility of these 98% to not allow the 1% bad from dominating, but instead of actively and straight forwardly resisting, they try to accomodate and make a place for themselves in the scheme of things envisaged by the 1% of goons. The cycle gets worse and worse to where there are more accomodations made as the time passes the 98% also become slowly willing accomplices and criminals, just to survive.

Such is the condition in India today. 99% of Indians are now forced to break the laws of the country (whatever the reason, justifiable or not), to survive. At the very least there is bribery involved or some tax cheating involved (sales tax, if not income tax), but the important thing here is not acts of law breaking, but simply the staggering number of law breakers, where even those who are the pillars of the society, the middle class, the lower middle class, has been forced into this situation by the 1% goons. Can you honestly say, Harbans, that most Indians today are not forced to break the law in order to survive ? How people rationalize this is by devaluing the law and saying that the laws are bad, which they are, because they are also made or perpetrated by the 1%, but the fact is that no matter how societally acceptable it has become, most people are breaking the law, rather than revolting to change the bad laws, revolting to overthrow the 1% goons.

When anyone such as myself points this out, there is hostility from most people in the society, because most people have accomodated and I am challenging their accomodation and getting them out of their comfort zone. People are terrified that if they are called on what they are doing and somehow the mirror is shown to them, they will be forced to act (as most people are decent deep inside and are not able to stand being shown the mirror) and so they will be forced to act against their instinct to accomodate and they will then suffer, be even martyred.

When you expressed hostility to me, Harbans, I sensed that fear, that your conscience would be forced to be awakened against your natural instinct of survival without making waves and you will have to fight, out of decency buried deep inside your heart.

Regards Iran, I think you are plain wrong, with due apologies. Even at the height of the revolution, even among some of the educated people supporting the revolution, there was this light hearted almost contempt for the extreme religious clerics. These guys were so sick of the Shah at that time though, that they grudgingly supported any alternative that came along. A lot of these so called "backers" of the revolution were in subsequent years purged, exiled or even executed, as they started opposing the clerics more openly in the 90s and early this decade. You may have run into some die hard Ayatollah fans or an unusually terrified bunch. By the way, I was in doing my undergrad from a university in the US during 79-82 period.
Last edited by sukhdeo on 27 Aug 2009 21:06, edited 1 time in total.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Sanku » 27 Aug 2009 20:59

Sukhdeo, it is impossible to see what your thesis is. If it is that there are issues with India -- yes obviously. If it is that there is good in the rest of the world -- yes obviously.

The primary reason of what you look at has hostility is not hostility, it is a lack of comprehension of what you are saying, since it makes no sense what so ever.

It would be good to put down your central point in 2-3 lines so that can serve as a starting point.

sukhdeo
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 02:02

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby sukhdeo » 27 Aug 2009 21:01

Sanku wrote:Sukhdeo, it is impossible to see what your thesis is. If it is that there are issues with India -- yes obviously. If it is that there is good in the rest of the world -- yes obviously.

The primary reason of what you look at has hostility is not hostility, it is a lack of comprehension of what you are saying, since it makes no sense what so ever.

It would be good to put down your central point in 2-3 lines so that can serve as a starting point.



Do read all my posts just on this page of this thread. Then if you ask me specifically for clarifications, I will make them. In general, I thought I was quite clear and logical, but if you find any logical inconsistencies, please point them out and I will try to respond as best as I can.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby harbans » 27 Aug 2009 21:01

Can you honestly say, Harbans, that most Indians today are not forced to break the law in order to survive ? How people rationalize this is by devaluing the law and saying that the laws are bad, which they are, because they are also made or perpetrated by the 1%, but the fact is that no matter how societally acceptable it has become, most people are breaking the law, rather than revolting to change the bad laws, revolting to overthrow the 1% goons.

What I AM saying is that just like in slum dynamics in India or anywhere for that matter, there is no law.

Rubbish. Goons don't run India. India is not an illegal slum. Your analog is flawed.

99% of Indians are now forced to break the laws of the country


Figure right out of your Musharaff.

When you expressed hostility to me, Harbans, I sensed that fear, that your conscience would be forced to be awakened against your natural instinct of survival without making waves and you will have to fight, out of decency buried deep inside your heart.


Rubbish again. My conscience is much more clearer than the clarity you display in the verbosity of your posts.

Rajesh ji: He's basically trying to say you're propagating 'Smartass tactics' based on deciet as is usual in India, as opposed to his (he's the 1% pure non law breaking guy arond) strategy of straightening India up. Krishna is full of deciet, India is unlawful and goons run the show..one of the most sober Mods like Ramana likes banning people..he's got a chip with India and it's value system itself. He's hiding that behind his verbosity.
Last edited by harbans on 27 Aug 2009 21:09, edited 2 times in total.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Sanku » 27 Aug 2009 21:02

sukhdeo wrote:Do read all my posts just on this page of this thread. Then if you ask me specifically for clarifications, I will make them. In general, I thought I was quite clear and logical, but if you find any logical inconsistencies, please point them out and I will try to respond as best as I can.


Sounds like a rant to me frankly, and judging by other response you have been getting no one else seems to understand it either.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby RajeshA » 27 Aug 2009 21:04

On 'core group' issues please discuss in the 'Strategic Leadership for the future of India' Thread

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

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby svinayak » 27 Aug 2009 21:04

sukhdeo wrote: When you compromise your values, for whatever tactical reason, the danger is, that unless your entire core group consists of individuals with the character of Lord Krishna, anything short of it, is bound to doom the group. Indians love Lord Krishna, because they interpret his adopting "unethical" tactics to give each Indian a license to be promiscuous (I dont mean in a sexual sense, but in an ethical sense) all the time and they love it. To follow Lord Rama would be some much harder.

Are you a Hindu or a practicing Hindu

sukhdeo
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 02:02

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby sukhdeo » 27 Aug 2009 21:11

harbans wrote:Can you honestly say, Harbans, that most Indians today are not forced to break the law in order to survive ? How people rationalize this is by devaluing the law and saying that the laws are bad, which they are, because they are also made or perpetrated by the 1%, but the fact is that no matter how societally acceptable it has become, most people are breaking the law, rather than revolting to change the bad laws, revolting to overthrow the 1% goons.

What I AM saying is that just like in slum dynamics in India or anywhere for that matter, there is no law.

Rubbish. Goons don't run India. India is not an illegal slum. Your analog is flawed.

99% of Indians are now forced to break the laws of the country


Figure right out of your Musharaff.

When you expressed hostility to me, Harbans, I sensed that fear, that your conscience would be forced to be awakened against your natural instinct of survival without making waves and you will have to fight, out of decency buried deep inside your heart.


Rubbish again. My conscience is much more clearer than the clarity you display in the verbosity of your posts.



Yeah you and I disagree on these points. I do believe that

1) India is run by goons

2) 99% of Indians are forced to break the law to survive.

I will accept your assertion about your conscience, as it is your conscience, not mine.

I will also accept that I may not be a very good writer and thus may be difficult to understand for some, but I think, judging from your hostility, that you understand me better than you let on. But that is not important.

I will be happy to have a non personal attack debate with you on the two issues that we disagree on. That India is run by goons and that 99% of Indians are forced to break the law to survive. Just name the place (thread).

sukhdeo
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 02:02

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby sukhdeo » 27 Aug 2009 21:14

Sanku wrote:
sukhdeo wrote:Do read all my posts just on this page of this thread. Then if you ask me specifically for clarifications, I will make them. In general, I thought I was quite clear and logical, but if you find any logical inconsistencies, please point them out and I will try to respond as best as I can.


Sounds like a rant to me frankly, and judging by other response you have been getting no one else seems to understand it either.


Then just stay out of it and ignore it. There are thousands of posts that you will understand "better" on this forum, go read them.

sukhdeo
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 02:02

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby sukhdeo » 27 Aug 2009 21:16

Acharya wrote:
sukhdeo wrote: When you compromise your values, for whatever tactical reason, the danger is, that unless your entire core group consists of individuals with the character of Lord Krishna, anything short of it, is bound to doom the group. Indians love Lord Krishna, because they interpret his adopting "unethical" tactics to give each Indian a license to be promiscuous (I dont mean in a sexual sense, but in an ethical sense) all the time and they love it. To follow Lord Rama would be some much harder.

Are you a Hindu or a practicing Hindu


Are you ? and since you opened yourself up to this question by asking me that, forgive me for asking, but are you a "True Hindu" ? and do you practice "True Hinduism" ?

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby harbans » 27 Aug 2009 21:19

1) India is run by goons

2) 99% of Indians are forced to break the law to survive.


Prove it. Don't just quote it. Give statistics. Give examples. Don't quote and run and hide behind verbosity and proclaimed 'hostility'.

I will also accept that I may not be a very good writer and thus may be difficult to understand for some, but I think, judging from your hostility, that you understand me better than you let on.


I think i understand you. Never to the point type of person. Assumed 'intellectualism' hiding behind verbosity, because you have an agenda, and it reveals a lot of hatred of Indian ethos and where India stands. So what are you? Amongst the 99% corrupt Indians? Or the 1% honest?

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

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby svinayak » 27 Aug 2009 21:20

sukhdeo wrote:
Are you ? and since you opened yourself up to this question by asking me that, forgive me for asking, but are you a "True Hindu" ? and do you practice "True Hinduism" ?

I am. So now can you answer the question since your interpretation on Krishna raised the flag.

sukhdeo
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 02:02

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby sukhdeo » 27 Aug 2009 21:20

The problem with compromises is that once you start making them, you get into a habit which you never can come out of. When you compromise your values, for whatever tactical reason, the danger is, that unless your entire core group consists of individuals with the character of Lord Krishna, anything short of it, is bound to doom the group. Indians love Lord Krishna, because they interpret his adopting "unethical" tactics to give each Indian a license to be promiscuous (I dont mean in a sexual sense, but in an ethical sense) all the time and they love it. To follow Lord Rama would be some much harder. But in truth, there is very little difference between Lord Krishna and Lord Rama. Lord Krishna only used "unethical" tactics at the most .1% of the time, on an exceptional basis and even there he was able to get away without polluting his entire character and cause, because he was presumably a God. But Indians love to emphasize only the .1% and not the 99.9% of Lord Krishna's life which was ethical to the core, full of tragedy and difficulty, tremendous courage and grace under fire, tremendously giving and generous, unbending commitment to Dharma, everlasting commitment to his people(Yadavas) and friends, very hard working, ability to come up from scratch and amazing ability to forgive, not to mention perseverence and resilience(Dwarika was rebuilt countless times, due to natural disasters etc). All these qualities are good qualities to emulate and perhaps can become the values of our core group.

Just as Indians dont emphasize the positive 99.9% of Lord Krishna, if you adopt any tactics, which even hint of being of unethical nature, even the strongest amongst us within the core group will take that as a license to be unethical all the time, regardless of whether it is "inside" or "outside", because after all, we are Indians. In fact, because we are Indians, we are more likely to use unethical tactics on the "inside", as it will be easier to cheat each other than the "outsider" who is well fortifide and well defended and who will not allow anyone to take advantage of him, whether he be a neta, babu, businessman outsider or a Islamist, Western prosylithizing outsider. Look around you. Indians like water always take the path of least resistance and therefore always are unethical with the weak and amongst each other, while staying subservient to the "outsider". Thats why we commit fratricide and suicide all the time and even manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Therefore, I suggest we go the straight forward way. Have good values, practice them and we will find strength. Take the example of Gandhi. I am not advocating Gandhian values. But look at this life. He was at least perceived to be not a hypocrite. If he preached sacrifice, he lived like a pauper. If he preached against caste, he cleaned his own toilets. The image he had was that of a man who had high values and who practiced it. There was no sunlight between values and how he lived. At least that was the perception. He never seemingly condoned unethical practices, even in adversity. Yet he came from nowhere to become the most powerful man in India. His power eminated from the fact that Indians who were sick of hypocrites, saying one thing, doing another, found someone who had some semblance of consistency between his values and actions. That is the power we need to tap, not necessary to practice what Gandhi practised, but our own values that we come up with which may be more suited for the needs of today and the future. But the consistency and lack of hypocracy has to be visible and eminate from the core group.

Even in practical terms, once unethical practices come to be perfected and accepted within our core group to advance a just cause, even a great cause, because the battle is long and intergenerational, people will not be able to sustain the strain of constantly differentiating between tactics to be used against outsiders and tactics to be used inside and ultimately crack and use them on the inside, thus sabotaging our own cause and leading us to defeat.

Lastly, as evidence on the ground, I present India. Look at India after independence. We have tried "unethics" for 65 years. Look where that has led us. Let us try something different now.


Acharya,

To answer your question about whether I am a Hindu, let me say that whether I am a Hindu or not, can a non Hindu or a non Indic to be more precise, write what I wrote above in the quote ?

You conveniently only quoted the first part of my quote on Lord Kishna. You left out the next lines, which only a "Krishna Bhagat" can write.

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

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby svinayak » 27 Aug 2009 21:23

sukhdeo wrote:
Acharya,

To answer your question about whether I am a Hindu, let me say that whether I am a Hindu or not, can a non Hindu or a non Indic to be more precise, write what I wrote above in the quote ?

You conveniently only quoted the first part of my quote on Lord Kishna. You left out the next lines, which only a "Krishna Bhagat" can write.

Sorry does not work like that. Since you are new here it will help to post with clarity and in simple terms. Giving links and quotes also helps since others have already done the debate and discussion in the web world.
Unless you are already here under a different ID and posting with a new ID now
Last edited by svinayak on 27 Aug 2009 21:26, edited 1 time in total.

sukhdeo
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 02:02

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby sukhdeo » 27 Aug 2009 21:24

Rajesh and Brihispati,

You need to come to my defence. My posts on this page are a direct respone and in continuation of the conversation about the core group and core values of the core group. I think you guys completely understand my posts because this was a conversation between us three. If you do, then please explain to others the context of what we are talking about, as they are finding my posts very difficult to follow.

If on the other hand, even if you guys dont understand, let me know as well, as I can try and modify my writing style. :D

sukhdeo
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 02:02

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby sukhdeo » 27 Aug 2009 21:27

Acharya wrote:
sukhdeo wrote:
Acharya,

To answer your question about whether I am a Hindu, let me say that whether I am a Hindu or not, can a non Hindu or a non Indic to be more precise, write what I wrote above in the quote ?

You conveniently only quoted the first part of my quote on Lord Kishna. You left out the next lines, which only a "Krishna Bhagat" can write.

Sorry does not work like that. Since you are new here it will help to post with clarity and in simple terms. Giving links and quotes also helps since others have already done the debate and discussion in the web world.



Sorry, in my mind it doesnt work as you suggest. What I am is not important. Only my thoughts. They should stand on their own merit, regardless of who I am. If they dont, please criticise, without getting to who I am. I only put my thoughts at stake here, not who I am. My thoughts are open to criticism and debate, not who I am. Who I am is non negotiable as far as I am concerned and not important for anyone else. One human being is not important in the whole scheme of things, only his thoughts and his deeds are.

Please feel free to disagree or criticize what I write regardless of who I am. By the way, I did answer your question. You will agree with me that only a Krishna bhagat will write what I wrote, because there is a myth in our culture that Lord Rama was a more perfect God than Lord Krishna. I "almost" dont think so, but not for the reason that he was more practical or more prone to do unethical things, but because in my mind he was more "perfect" than most people believe and more ethical and very akin to perfection in Lord Rama.
Last edited by sukhdeo on 27 Aug 2009 21:30, edited 1 time in total.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby brihaspati » 27 Aug 2009 21:29

Please, we are not here to discuss the differences between a "Hindu" and a practising "Hindu". That can perhaps happen in one of the threads in GDF.

What Sukhdeoji is perhaps trying to say, is that he is not comfortable with the "tactical flexibility" that most of the time starts with good intentions but usually degenerate to unabashed corruption. I understand and sympathize with his feelings, from first hand experience. I have seen it right before my eyes, for some of the best years of my life - from 16-26, both in the "Right" as well as the "Left".

But I think this will happen anyway with any organized effort if it is imply aimed at regular "maintenance". On the other hand a movement that is essentially revolutionary in character, (revolutions are not proprietary to only the "communists") can get by without corruption, even if indulging in tactical compromises, as long as it maintains the primary overwhelming rush for profound changes in society, ideology and rashtryia system. This perhaps will not last long over many generations - in fact will probably degenerate within 1-2 generations, necessitating another revolutinary thrust.

May I request all to understand the sincerity behind Sukhdeoji's outbursts and look towards identifying the common sentiment that we all share with him. If we can recognize certain commonalities in our purposes, can we agree to be less harsh on each other and see where we can use that commonality to greater effectiveness?

added : Sukhdeoji, posted this before I saw your request. :)
Last edited by brihaspati on 27 Aug 2009 21:32, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby svinayak » 27 Aug 2009 21:31

sukhdeo wrote:
Sorry, in my mind it doesnt work as you suggest. What I am is not important. Only my thoughts. They should stand on their own merit, regardless of who I am. If they dont, please criticise, without getting to who I am. I only put my thoughts at stake here, not who I am. My thoughts are open to criticism and debate, not who I am. Who I am is non negotiable as far as I am concerned and not important for anyone else. One human being is not important in the whole scheme of things, only his thoughts and his deeds are.

If nobody knows who you are and you are commenting on my Dharma then there is a problem. It is upto to you to clarify from where you come from, to analyse the dharma. If it is not a serious discussion and your posts are just out of some random thinking then you can say that.

sukhdeo
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 02:02

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby sukhdeo » 27 Aug 2009 21:32

Thank you Brihispati. We will continue this on the leadership thread.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby harbans » 27 Aug 2009 21:34

What Sukhdeoji is perhaps trying to say, is that he is not comfortable with the "tactical flexibility"

He's saying much more than that obviously. As far as 'tactical flexibilit' goes, no one is breakin the Geneva convention here. He's just making blanket statements all round without contributing to substance. That itself does not help.

May I request all to understand the sincerity behind Sukhdeoji's outbursts and look towards identifying the common sentiment that we all share with him.


Sure, if we see that sincerity. No evidence of it though. Only evidence of hate for the Indian ethos. Call a Paki here and he will tell you too how you can improve India so much..giving prety much the same examples as he's doled out so far..
Last edited by harbans on 27 Aug 2009 21:37, edited 1 time in total.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby brihaspati » 27 Aug 2009 21:41

Chiron wrote
What might be the damage to Unkil's Af-Pak policy if Bhaarat decides to test the Bums today?
Can Unkil afford delay in TSP's demise and disintegration? :)
On the contrary, if devguru's hypothesis turns out to be true and if Unkil really wants to get the hell out of that place, they must have presumed that PRC will fill in the vacuum.
If Unkil plans to stay on Af-Pak for 20-30 years more, and is forcing Bhaarat to sign the treaties, then the threat of Bum-test should suffice. This news process will accelerate the disintegration of TSP.
If it is in Unkil's mind to leave Af-Pak, then Bhaarat will do the actual testing asap.


USA may think of taking the type of approach it thinks works with the Saudis. It can maintain military presence but put up an unpopular and relatively weak civilian regime which will remain dependent on US military support. But they will encourage the Islamization of the regime along the lines of the Saudi arrangement. This can buy them some time, but withdrawal seems to be on the cards.

shaardula
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2591
Joined: 17 Apr 2006 20:02

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby shaardula » 27 Aug 2009 21:45

random aside. ramana a glimpse at sanskritization in progress.
http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?234999

i cant quote his exact post now, but shiv has spoken about how OBC was taking ownership. i remember bcoz by father said the exact same thing. also, UR ananthamurthy had long time ago predicted this. i can also give you a popular example. when the popular thespian rajkumar died, he was sent off in very very sanskritized way that was conspicuously way out of norm for his community. what is amazing is this sanskritization is going on without conflict and persistently. ofcourse as r. ganesh points in andhra, this has happened without much ado also. non brahmin communities like reddys etc have completely owned/usurped sanskrit for example(why even vara vara writes sanskritic prose in telugu). of course the reddy's are not really the same as kurubas, but nevertheless ...

i point this out, because i think if left to its own devices this how it would have panned out. but history ko kon Taal sakta hein? and our people went into a shell.

in all this, evolution in KE is perhaps complete and precedes that in KA and AP. but all these evolutions are diametrically opposite to that of TN. But in KE, , where they have reached a saturation level, what B keeps saying about the intransigence of islam seems to be working out. and to be honest, i am only concerned because some of this mallu "enlightenment" is spilling out into mysore and bhatkal. way too many mallu mullahs and way too much influence of NDF-wale mallus of the madani(comibatore-wale) types in KA.

ps. B, lets keep aside our disagreement about approach-e-JLN for the moment. what do you think of the above development? (been around for a while now, but lets call it a development and play along) . i think it reinforces entitlement and thus makes it that much harder for somebody to surmount the "indic".
Last edited by shaardula on 27 Aug 2009 22:02, edited 4 times in total.

shaardula
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2591
Joined: 17 Apr 2006 20:02

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby shaardula » 27 Aug 2009 22:10

before swamy revolts. i am totally convinced that the classical linguistics of tamil is different from that of tamil. ditto all dravidian languages. our native grammars are different. thats like duh! the question is not that of grammar by itself, but that of the evolution of the people. irrespective of the agenda, i am totally against negating evolution of peoples in search of some uber-purity.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Sanku » 27 Aug 2009 22:20

shaardula wrote:i am totally against negating evolution of peoples in search of some uber-purity.


There is no contradiction. There is a root and then evolution and there is cross fertilization. A common root does not take away anything neither is cross fertilization impure.

Meanwhile -- what is considered OBC is a modern fad -- many of these guys were Rulers, warriors and Kshatriya's, the Brits came and turned them all into OBCs (Ramana's quote) with external pressures gone Indic society is returning to its old dynamics.

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

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby svinayak » 27 Aug 2009 23:03

Sanku wrote: i am totally against negating evolution of peoples in search of some uber-purity.

There is no contradiction. There is a root and then evolution and there is cross fertilization. A common root does not take away anything neither is cross fertilization impure.

Meanwhile -- what is considered OBC is a modern fad -- many of these guys were Rulers, warriors and Kshatriya's, the Brits came and turned them all into OBCs (Ramana's quote) with external pressures gone Indic society is returning to its old dynamics.

Perfectly correct. The problem is manufactured terms such as OBC and manufactured class differences using these colonial British constructed social classes. These social engineering taking all these history is the biggest problem.
Awareness of this trickery is important for Indians.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests