India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 27 Jun 2011 21:30

Rangudu wrote: (a) With more affluence spreading in Indian urban middle class, it is inevitable that previously taboo moral lines will be crossed.

Morality keeps changing anyway, finding a cause and effect with affluence is a little strange in my opinion. A lot of counter examples exist in the world. Victorian era morality in a period of massive affluence for that pesky little sick island.

You and I may not like it, but it is hard to stop.

OTOH I welcome a INDIAN development of morality, discussions on what is moral etc.

The good news is that this trend is limited to a miniscule (but growing) segment of Indians, regardless of the publicity this may generate

Not a good news, I am all in favor of homogenization.

(b) Efforts to spread liberal Western views, e.g. Gay rights etc. should be distinguished from Western-funded proselytization of Indian masses.

There you go again, what is liberal about western views? In my not so humble opinion very little. OTOH they can learn quite a bit from us in terms of what liberalism really is.

I do not consider some anti-Church power play fads currently prevalent in US of A to define liberalism. We have genuine liberalism here and that is what will come to fore after many centuries of suppression instead of the estraz BS that the west pompously refers to as liberalism.

This is a threat to India and unlike the above, this is NOT inevitable as long as some actions are taken.

Collating and confusing all Western-origin influences as "white man's culture" etc. is both pathetic and dangerous.

Frankly the hoo-haa about gays is indeed white mans culture, trying to redeem themselves of their past guilt. Pretty much like hand wringing about Jews.

Hey in our world we have seen more shit from the same people who ostensibly care for the holocaust. Dont expect me to go into paroxysms of pain on the word holocaust. Sure I am one of the most pro-Jewish people sympthatic to their cause as can be. But thats on the basis of a shared pain, hardly on the same basis as self professed liberal values?

Why should I give up any kinship with Israel based on a far more shared sense of history (persecution from same sources) in favor of some fake Anglo-saxon weepy weepy stuff?

And there in lies the difference between what you are saying and what I feel.

raajneesh · Post by **raajneesh** » 27 Jun 2011 21:48

during GWB's hey-day immediately after 9/11, it was a crazed atmosphere in that part of the country. up until Iraq started going off the rocker, anybody who spoke against GWB, "conservatives," or Republican policies was met with hostile treatment. It was personally shocking for me to witness this behavior in a high school....the idea of teenagers being so *serious* was outright new to me. needless to say, it changed my own thinking.

X-posting and replying you in nukkad, please join there.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 27 Jun 2011 22:15

Ramana,

I'm quite aware of the situation in the US. It is not my case that there are no fundamentalist Christians in the US, or that there is no concerted effort at evangelical activity targeting India (I may happen to know a bit more than average about this particular issue). But my question is specific:

"Most Christians in USA are fundamentalist and consider themselves as 'proud white people'."

What is the basis of this claim? Opinion or is there some corroborating survey or something... That will be a useful bit of information to have.

If not, it does not help to fool ourselves with inaccuracies and fallacies.

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 27 Jun 2011 22:28

Acharya wrote:
Rangudu wrote:As India advances more and more, expect similar efforts, just like we have seen an increase in live-in relationships, divorces, etc. among the upper income, former middle class types in the recent past.
Advancement has nothing to do with such things. This is all bull crap

Really? So you have a magic trick to eliminate "Western" social ills from spreading in India?

The clock cannot be turned back.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 27 Jun 2011 22:36

India is not getting Westernized but Mexicanized . TV programmes are making sure mind stay near/around /below the Navel by faking the core Western values.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 27 Jun 2011 22:37

Rangudu wrote:
ramana wrote:JEM, In South which is on the rise after WWII, the majority are Baptists and they have the most vocal voice. Just a data point. After WWII, the motto "In God We Trust" was made official.
Ramana - the question is not whether the US has a more Christian (Protestant/Evangelical) identity than the nominally Christian European countries. The answer is an obvious yes. But to say that most US policies, especially foreign related, are permeated with a "We are Christian, We are White" mentality is just as poor a stereotype as to say that India=Caste etc.

Indo-American Relations: A History Christianity and Race played a huge role in the recent past.

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 27 Jun 2011 22:38

Devesh,

I live in a suburb that is but a step away from the "Deep South" areas. The overtly evengelical nature of everything is not what is in dispute. What is not right is to say that this is what drives most of US policies.

To give you an example - a cousin of mine brought a couple of White US friends to visit India with him. They were talking to another relative who was in his 50s who said he prefers not to eat in "non-Brahmin" restaurants and also will not allow servants to enter the puja room in the house. They were shocked. When they told me this, I explained to the Americans that Brahmins are vegetarians and would not enter puja areas without washing feet etc. and this is not necessarily bigotry.

Now, if they were to conflate this with the stereotype of "Brahmin elite" dominating top levels of bureaucracy and say "Upper caste bias dictates Indian policy", would they be right?

Bottomline - a non-White/non-Evangelical living in many US rural areas may feel a tangible bias, but that does not mean that "White, Christian" identity dicates US policies.

It is important that those of us who are enraged at Western stereotypes of India do not commit the same error in perception.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 27 Jun 2011 22:41

Sanku wrote:
Rangudu wrote: (a) With more affluence spreading in Indian urban middle class, it is inevitable that previously taboo moral lines will be crossed.
Morality keeps changing anyway, finding a cause and effect with affluence is a little strange in my opinion. A lot of counter examples exist in the world. Victorian era morality in a period of massive affluence for that pesky little sick island.

Sanku ji: You bring a good point. It is not rare to hear about extra-marital affairs among both the extreme poor and the extreme rich. Probably true for the middle class as well.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 27 Jun 2011 22:42

^^ that sounds like brahminism spreading to the elite massans.

Now, coming to those core aspects where we get hammered... it is just born out of necessary complications with something that should have take a scientific route to hygiene.

There are many aspects and strong correlations to superstitious living among all religions of the world., EJs are more superstitious than any one on the face of the planet.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 27 Jun 2011 23:00

Rangudu wrote:
Acharya wrote:"Rangudu">>As India advances more and more, expect similar efforts, just like we have seen an increase in live-in relationships, divorces, etc. among the upper income, former middle class types in the recent past.

Advancement has nothing to do with such things. This is all bull crap
Really? So you have a magic trick to eliminate "Western" social ills from spreading in India?

The clock cannot be turned back.

The problem is your linking advancement with becoming western.

Apparently you are not willing to concede that India can advance and not become a "meee tooooo" of west (or if it doesnt its because some parts wont advance)

A clock can advance even as society degenerates, timing moving forward does not mean that there is a cause and effect of western-ism.

SwamyG wrote:Sanku ji: You bring a good point. It is not rare to hear about extra-marital affairs among both the extreme poor and the extreme rich. Probably true for the middle class as well.

Thanks SwamyG-ji.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 27 Jun 2011 23:04

advancement has to happen all spheres.. there is no point have 20 floor high rise building with no road access or parking facility or normal utilities and supplies.

also, there is this tfta vs sdre complexity issue in every aspect of social evil desh has put itself in.

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 27 Jun 2011 23:18

Sanku,

How many newly high income young Indian men spend money on "Indian" pursuits vs. splurging on alcohol lubricated meals? How many seek to visit Western destinations or expensive beach resorts in Goa etc. vs. doing "traditional Indian" tourism?

When I grew up, my parents encouraged me to learn classical music and go to shloka classes. Today, that stuff is more common among overseas Indians than those in India.

I'm not saying this is good, but that this is reality. You cannot wish it away. Spreading affluence in an open society inevitably leads to social ills. Twenty years ago, a working woman would not likely be unmarried by her mid-20s due to cultural norms. Today, some are saying f.u. to parental pressure because of their independent financial means and greater mobility. BTW, the only countries where wealth is accompanied by old school cultural norms are like Saudi Arabia or Iran, where they use violent force to impose uniformity.

Another BTW, comparing morality among rich, middle class & poor is not what I'm doing. It is the changes to social norms when some in the middle class move up economic levels.

Seeking a swadeshi, Indic utopia is a good theoretical excercise but not a basis for policy or inter-country relations.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 27 Jun 2011 23:24

@Rangudu ^^^ +1. What's overlooked is who is going to be in charge of deciding and maintaining Indian/non-western values. Navel and below stuff can be seen in pre-TV Khajurao. Not the same thing of course, as item numbers but then who decides what is art and what is *****/un-Indian?

anjan · Post by **anjan** » 27 Jun 2011 23:24

Acharya wrote: What is your point. I dont get it.
Indians in India dont have to get involved in other countries politics. Internal politics of other countries dont matter inside India. India is a Hindu country with its long history of traditions. Why bring the debates of the west inside India. What is the reason for the leftist to bring western dialectic debates inside India.

What is wrong in opposing loony EJs in India. Why bring western religious debates inside India.

My point is simple. You seem to have 2 lines of reasoning. One, is a (EJ) line about homosexuality and moral decay which is as far as I can see(along with changes in clothing) is primarily a Victorian British holdover in the Indian context. And second you're worried the west will do a Pagan/Hindu == Gay equivalence. Seems to me that you're on the same page as the EJs on the first. So much for defending India against all western influences. And the second is a lack of character if everything we do is to be measured against a yardstick of "what will the gora sahibs say".

Acharya wrote:
Rangudu wrote:
Collating and confusing all Western-origin influences as "white man's culture" etc. is both pathetic and dangerous.
This may be necessary to defend India.

I truly don't know if I'm simply hitting Poe's Law at this point. Are you actually serious? Any culture that won't debate and accept new ideas will die.

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 27 Jun 2011 23:26

Supremacist to die in July loses at Supreme Court
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/7628638.html

A white supremacist set to die next month for killing an Indian man during a suburban Dallas shooting spree he blamed on anger over the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks has lost an appeal at the U.S. Supreme Court.

The high court refused Monday without comment to review the case of 41-year-old Mark Stroman. He's set to die in Huntsville on July 20.

Stroman said he was angry at people of Middle Eastern descent. He was convicted of gunning down Vasudev Patel, an employee at a convenience store in Mesquite.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 27 Jun 2011 23:51

Rangudu wrote:Sanku,

How many newly high income young Indian men spend money on "Indian" pursuits vs. splurging on alcohol lubricated meals? How many seek to visit Western destinations or expensive beach resorts in Goa etc. vs. doing "traditional Indian" tourism?

Come here and find out for yourself my friend. As I speak two young friends of mine are taking their parents to Dwaraka, wife and children in tow. And these are IIX types.

All the folks I know, make customary pilgrimages to Tirupati et al.

Sure some of them **also** go to goa and other places, but why shouldn't they? And whats western about that?

In my parts of the country, a alcohol lubricated good meal has pretty much not changed its shape in last 400-500? years. Sure the nature of alcohol has changed, but hey the concepts are the same.

I do not see the "doom and gloom" that you see.

When I grew up, my parents encouraged me to learn classical music and go to shloka classes. Today, that stuff is more common among overseas Indians than those in India.

That is debatable, frankly, I know people who live outside, and their children are not into any of the stuff that folks of their generation are on here.

I'm not saying this is good, but that this is reality. You cannot wish it away. Spreading affluence in an open society inevitably leads to social ills.

OTOH I am not saying its bad. I am only saying that you are confusing,

liberalism
with
Western lifestyles
with
Lifestyle choices of Indians today

They are three totally orthogonal things my friend. I know completely illiberal westerns following hedonistic choices (however very closed to ideas of other cultures) and I know DIE who are western by also illiberal.

OTOH I know truly liberated Indian men and women who are as comfortable with sexuality as with spirituality.

That is liberation my friend. Not the western either or model.

Seeking a swadeshi, Indic utopia is a good theoretical excercise but not a basis for policy or inter-country relations.

Swadeshi is utopia. That is how its defined.

Janani janmbhoomisha swargapai gariyasi

That apart, I repeat, you are making a fundamental mistake, of confusing lifestyle choices, liberal thinking and what is "Indian vs western".

India is making its own models thank you, and no western tendencies dont creep in. I see really pick of the lot young men really getting married early to good girls with great future and building their lives together.

Of course the DIE exist, and they are replenished in each generation, who cant see the difference between advancement === western values. However they are few. They are DIE. They are not India.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 27 Jun 2011 23:57

anjan wrote:
My point is simple. You seem to have 2 lines of reasoning. One, is a (EJ) line about homosexuality and moral decay which is as far as I can see(along with changes in clothing) is primarily a Victorian British holdover in the Indian context. And second you're worried the west will do a Pagan/Hindu == Gay equivalence. Seems to me that you're on the same page as the EJs on the first. So much for defending India against all western influences. And the second is a lack of character if everything we do is to be measured against a yardstick of "what will the gora sahibs say".

In the west(US) this Gay movement is counter to the church and conservative movement. So this is in the western context and so India has nothing to do with this and it is OT on the thread.

It is about the facts which the conservatives have tried to equate such gay "liberal values" to Indian traditions. This is not my opinion but what is written in the US media. Their perception we can only try to change explaining with our religion and value system. It may not work and they may want to keep their world view in that tainted view but that is reality. India should not be a whipping object of another country debate.
So what are you trying to say in your post about 2 lines of reasoning. India has nothing to do with another country s debate. This is not about me here.

Acharya wrote:
This may be necessary to defend India.
I truly don't know if I'm simply hitting Poe's Law at this point. Are you actually serious? Any culture that won't debate and accept new ideas will die.

With colonized symbols(language/laws/polity) and colonial setup still working inside India for more than 200 years and with huge dollars for conversion coming to India is there a level playing field. The EJs are not going to debate on reason and logic and they are working on their world view and also changing things on the ground (Iraq). They are fighting their crusade wars and here we are trying to find fault at protecting ourselves.

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 27 Jun 2011 23:58

Sanku,

So there's nothing much to worry about, so why fear all this gay rights hoopla? India is making its own models and western tendencies won't creep in, per you, making all of this moot.

Clearly we move in different circles.

P.S: I do hope you understand the difference between an observation of trends and an agreement with them.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 28 Jun 2011 00:01

If we talk about westernization, then we are in trouble in the sense, there are good aspects where we can learn from every nation/zone or culture.. and drop all the bad ones we have.

Instead, we are doing the reverse is what the general feeling is..

for example: yoga: how many schools in India teach yoga today?

Rangudu has a point.. and it is not about taking one negative aspect, and compare, hah! we have that too, so we are cool!

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Jun 2011 00:04

Cosmo_R wrote:@Rangudu ^^^ +1. What's overlooked is who is going to be in charge of deciding and maintaining Indian/non-western values. Navel and below stuff can be seen in pre-TV Khajurao. Not the same thing of course, as item numbers but then who decides what is art and what is *****

Good question and this is topic of another debate. The "intellectuals" "sociologists" "leftists" had a monopoly over what to learn in textbooks, what to watch, what is good for the people.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 28 Jun 2011 00:10

Rangudu wrote:Sanku,

So there's nothing much to worry about, so why fear all this gay rights hoopla? India is making its own models and western tendencies won't creep in, per you, making all of this moot.

What **fear** of gay rights hoopla? The **fear** is different, it is US and DIE looking at India to behave like them, so if we wonder if Jews really had it bad, they get into paroxysms of "genocide denial" No its not "denial" its just that we have seen so many genocides of our own so recently as 71, that we dont quite get the same reaction as those who visit genocide on some parties while pretending to be against genocides.

Further, specific to gay issue the **fear** is that a **artificial** WASP definition of "liberal" will be imposed on us, in our interactions with a Gay ambassador. Will he pull a Azharuddin type "I am not being successful because Indians are not comfortable with gay men" or will do a "I am here the white messiah, bringing the enlightened liberal values of having gay rights and if India does not make three of its ambassadors are gays, I will declare that they are Nazi's"

Please keep your (for US) definition of liberal and preaching with you. If your ambassador behaves exactly like any other ambassador without any chip on his shoulder, all the well. But if he finds people uncomfortable here, please go home, but spare us ANY and ALL lessons on
liberalization & morality.

P.S: I do hope you understand the difference between an observation of trends and an agreement with them.

Yes I do, I just disagree with the cause/effects AND the trend watch that you are making.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 28 Jun 2011 00:11

SaiK wrote: for example: yoga: how many schools in India teach yoga today?

Yoga has made a huge comeback once again over last 10 years, thanks to Baba Ramdev and others.

raajneesh · Post by **raajneesh** » 28 Jun 2011 00:20

Sorry to say this, but majority Indian liberals/elites/writers/intellectuals are meek and have issues in being assertive of their identity/history. And they think speaking english is some kind of 'advancement' of social, spiritual scale.

More than EJ, these kinds of attitudes of fake-liberalism is more dangerous to India.

These same people used to mock Yogis about 40 years back. But when westerners started recognizing scientific basis behind yogic aasnas and energy cycles, through their own research, these same liberals started yapping in same tone and started visiting Yoga centers in desh.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 28 Jun 2011 00:22

let me tell you what liberalism in India is like:

long before Whites learned to tolerate, let alone respect, homosexuals, in India hijras (transexuals) were given separate colonies and dedicated housing complexes to live in. in some cases, the British were astonished to find these hijras in govt employment with wages and salaries. this was how liberal India was when British came to India. they hated every bit of it. when they saw these things in India, they loathed Indian culture as one without morals. read Hegel's views about India, and you will realize that Colonial thought of India was: "moral-less, and without "religious" principles."

British instituted a whole host of laws and punishments to ensure that hijras would be removed from public sphere and become hated. they brain-washed Indians that if they didn't hate the hijras, then they didn't have morals. there are British reports of Brahmins going around the country vaccinating people, including castes of all people. they marveled at the logistical feat of going around such a large country with such a huge population and conducting inoculations.

i've said it before, and I'll say it again: the very fist step in British-induced deracination on India is the brainwashing of Brahmins. education was always considered a virtue in India. British exploited this and first started with English education. once English became an object of adoration, they started with wholesale propaganda. once the medium of communication is a foreign language, the "owners" of that language essentially "own" whatever you read in that language. from that point on Brahmins became the focus point of all British propaganda and deracination. even to this day, the DIE class is populated by this English-educated Brahmins who hide behind "modernism."

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 28 Jun 2011 00:27

Brahmanism has no value in India now.. so, how does that past data apply for today?

.. and I see more public/private schools in maasa are into yoga.. does this happen in desh?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Jun 2011 00:55

Why does it apply now. This book is good for this debate

http://naimisha.tripod.com/new_page_3.htm
Decolonizing the Hindu Mind: Ideological Development of Hindu Revivalism by Koenraad Elst.

‘Decolonization’

The author contends that the Hindu civilization is now in the process of coming out of a thousand years of colonization— first by Islam and then Britain. This is exactly the view of V.S. Naipaul also who noted that the first step in this is for the Hindus to regain their sense of history. This deloconization process is running into fierce resistance from residual colonial interests on two fronts— the Islamists and the ‘secularists’. In the author’s words (p 588):

“During the past millennium, India has gone through two colonizations, one by Islam and one by semi-Christian, semi-secular Europe. At the political level, the native society proved relatively victorious against both, though not without retaining a considerable residue of what they brought. The problem with that, with Hindus attached to their culture, is not that in the wake of Islamic conquests, a considerable amount of West- and Central-Asian human material enriched the Indian gene pool, nor that British rule brought immense transformation in material culture. What they see as the problem for Hindu society is that the Islamic and Western regimes brought world-views which still instill a profound contempt for and hostility to Hinduism.”

This is indeed the heart of the problem: this hatred of Hinduism not only persists long after India became free, but has also become the main agenda of the academic and even the political establishment in its attempts to make it the ruling national ideology. Transformations in material culture under the British would have taken place anyway, just as computers and the Internet are transforming society now without any colonial impulse. The problem is essentially one of ideology, not technology or economy. To continue with the author:

“The challenge facing Hindu activists is that for half a century after India’s formal Independence, Hindu society has remained under the spell of a colonial psychology in three different ways. First, power came in the hands of a westernized elite which had been estranged from the native culture, and which had established the same relationship with native culture which the British overlords used to have. If anything, its members displayed more animosity in their assertion of a non-Hindu identity for themselves and for India, apparently because they had to exorcize the remnants of Hinduness out of themselves. At the same time, they had the self-confidence, not to say arrogance, which comes with being securely in power.”

The author goes on to point out that their anti-Hindusness was opportunistic as well, which served them well politically and professionally as long as the anti-Hindu (now Christian) Nehru-Gandhis were in power. With their decline, the secularists seem to have lost much of their swagger. Their arrogance is giving way to frenzied complaints of ‘saffronization’ of national life, especially education. (How it constitutes ‘saffronizing’ history when one tries to compare Vedic and Harappan civilizations — both of which pre-date Christianity and Islam by thousands of years — they are unable to say. Do they want us to see Harappan remains as Islamic and the Vedas as derived from the Bible?) At the same time, they show their true colors when, instead of taking their case to the Indian public, they run to Europe or America to complain about their loss of influence due to ‘saffronization’.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 28 Jun 2011 00:57

SaiK:
Before throwing 'brahminism' under the bus, you probably have to explain what you think brhaminsm is in the off-topic thread; and why it has no value.

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 28 Jun 2011 01:08

Sanku,

I have no intention of doing the argumentatve Indian bit. Mind you, I'm an Indian still and please don't assume things about someone else's nationality/passport.

Devesh,

There is good and bad in all cultures, though not necessarily in the same proportions. This means that (a) one should not reflexively reject all aspects of a foreign-origin culture and (b) One should also not hide behind defensive mechanisms when otherwise legitimate criticisms or benign changes come from foreign-influenced locals

In this context, should India feel pressured to allow gay marriage or teach gay related topics to kids? Surely not unless it is due to internal evolution. But at the same time, if some people are killed for being openly gay or if government officials publish gay "target lists" (as in Uganda), then we should not feel defensive about it.

Indian culture has always been open to ideas and has absorbed some from abroad while influencing many others. To throw a hissy fit about some gay ambassador or to keep saying "White Man Evil" type useless cliches is puerile.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Jun 2011 01:13

India was exposed to foreign origin culture for more than 500 years. Now which country has gone to such experience.
Indians cannot be accused of showing hostility to foreign culture.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 28 Jun 2011 01:18

Rangudu wrote:Sanku,

I have no intention of doing the argumentatve Indian bit. Mind you, I'm an Indian still and please don't assume things about someone else's nationality/passport.

But I hope you do notice that I have not made any aspersion or allegations on the basis of your passport Sir. Mostly I like your posts and watch them with keen interest.

Its just that small bit which stuck, specifically the one I pointed out -- also as I took some pains to point out, your post was just a trigger, its just that a stream of thought expressed so often (on how India should become) by some that prompted me to make that reply.

I am quite certain we can continue having a civilized and mutually enriching exchange.

anjan · Post by **anjan** » 28 Jun 2011 01:26

Acharya wrote:In the west(US) this Gay movement is counter to the church and conservative movement. So this is in the western context and so India has nothing to do with this and it is OT on the thread.

Or you know such piddly things as "equal rights" but whatever.

It is about the facts which the conservatives have tried to equate such gay "liberal values" to Indian traditions. This is not my opinion but what is written in the US media. Their perception we can only try to change explaining with our religion and value system. It may not work and they may want to keep their world view in that tainted view but that is reality. India should not be a whipping object of another country debate.
So what are you trying to say in your post about 2 lines of reasoning. India has nothing to do with another country s debate. This is not about me here.

And I'm just wondering why you so desperately crave western approval? Why do I care what a two bit EJ frothing at the mouth thinks of me? Why should we throw our liberal values to the wind to appease (and horror "explain" ) the west?

Acharya wrote:
With colonized symbols(language/laws/polity) and colonial setup still working inside India for more than 200 years and with huge dollars for conversion coming to India is there a level playing field. The EJs are not going to debate on reason and logic and they are working on their world view and also changing things on the ground (Iraq). They are fighting their crusade wars and here we are trying to find fault at protecting ourselves.

This seems to count on people as essentially dopes with you/us on one side and the EJs on the other. If our people truly are idiots then it doesn't really matter if they convert en masse. The money situation needs to change but the power of ideas is seriously being underrated here.

GuruPrabhu · Post by **GuruPrabhu** » 28 Jun 2011 01:29

err, there has been so much posted on gay rights movement, except one simple thing: gay rights are about gay people. Period.

If you are gay you would understand. If you are not, you can still try.

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 28 Jun 2011 01:32

Acharya wrote:India was exposed to foreign origin culture for more than 500 years. Now which country has gone to such experience.
Indians cannot be accused of showing hostility to foreign culture.

Lots of countries have similar experiences. In the US, a foreign culture replaced the local one. In the Ukraine, local and Russian culture live in tense but acceptable balance.

Does India historically "allowing" foreign intrusion somehow make it a good policy to jump defensively at today's happenings? Unless you become Saudi Arabia and start beating/killing people for doing Western style things, you cannot stop some of the things happening today. At an individual level, one can take personal responsibility and teach his kids the right things but in mass scale such voluntary self-awareness do not happen in real societies.

Net net, if some Western gay group wants to round up some like minded Indians to do dharnas or parades, don't panic or start weaving this into a grand "White man conspiracy". Just let them be and politely say that such things are different in our culture.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 28 Jun 2011 01:33

Acharya, the exposure of Indian culture to foreign ones is one way process - occupation and kill the tolerant hindu culture. It was never an experience of shared ideologies or having any pleasant experiences in history so to speak. Of course, there may be exceptions to these, but not at abstraction levels.

Furthermore, I don't think we can remain in the past forever and continue on to correct a problem based on a wrong thought that the only way to revert back in kind is the way we were treated in the past. We have this inborn problem within our society in India, where you can see those reflections even in the constitution.. example: reservation & quota system... all because of past issues, and so a revenge is the only course of action.

This can be made true (actually a false move by ideologies), only within a scope, ie, India. One can't apply the same when we cross boundaries, and that is the way we would interact with others now and in the future is a wrong approach IMO.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Jun 2011 01:34

anjan wrote:
Or you know such piddly things as "equal rights" but whatever.

Another OT

And I'm just wondering why you so desperately crave western approval? Why do I care what a two bit EJ frothing at the mouth thinks of me? Why should we throw our liberal values to the wind to appease (and horror "explain" ) the west?

I dont want western approval. What gave you this perception. Why should west perception be relevant inside India.
Indian liberal values are from Hindu tolerance world view.
I want to understand where your views come from.

This seems to count on people as essentially dopes with you/us on one side and the EJs on the other. If our people truly are idiots then it doesn't really matter if they convert en masse. The money situation needs to change but the power of ideas is seriously being underrated here.

Why should foreigners show interest inside India and once western value system is discounted inside India this problem becomes less of an issue.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Jun 2011 01:41

Rangudu wrote:
Lots of countries have similar experiences. In the US, a foreign culture replaced the local one. In the Ukraine, local and Russian culture live in tense but acceptable balance.

Net net, if some Western gay group wants to round up some like minded Indians to do dharnas or parades, don't panic or start weaving this into a grand "White man conspiracy". Just let them be and politely say that such things are different in our culture.

Plz dont take it an offence or misunderstand my post.
You have correctly said that the local culture in US has been destroyed by force and that is the problem. There is nobody for the local native american culture now.
Nobody is here to panic but dont bring foreign value system into Indian debate.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 28 Jun 2011 02:03

R-man & others,

great comments, including this one

Net net, if some Western gay group wants to round up some like minded Indians to do dharnas or parades, don't panic or start weaving this into a grand "White man conspiracy". Just let them be and politely say that such things are different in our culture.

Thats precisely my fear. With DDM loaded with self-loathing deracinated pukes, my fear with this Peter dude is that these gay issues could become a key hectoring tool against India, and as is unfortunatley the case, when it comes to intolerance in India, a broad brush can be used to invent "Hindu Taliban". Otherwise, to me this gay business as GuruPrabhu says is about people, human beings. Let them do whatever they want behind closed doors, none of my goddam business, and they could show me or anybody else the middle finger. I am talking about this being yet another "human rights" issue with the collusion of DDM, further poisoning India US relations, thats all.

On white western Christian nationalism, I have to respectfully disagree with my good friend R-man. I think it is a huge potent force that guides US foreign policy. So much so that even Greek Orthodox Christianity is heresy. During the Balkan war, Serbs who practice Greek orthodox Christianity were demonized and came under heavy military bombardment, while the Croats, predominantly Roman Catholic, who were no less guilty of human rights abuses were allies. Croat leader Franjo Trudjamn was not a war criminal but Milosevic was. Please read Robert Kaplan's views on this and clash of civilizations in general. Also read a UK Prof Misha Glenny's views which were prominent at that time.

Did anybody catch Michelle Bacman's announcement that she is running for president? I heard an NPR news report is this with audio clips of her announceent and what caught me was the apocalyptiic, Biblical tone: The "end of US" is near, and she wants to "save" us from that. This notion of "saving" each and everything even when it doesn't need saving is quintessential EJ talk.

raajneesh · Post by **raajneesh** » 28 Jun 2011 02:10

Rangudu wrote:There is good and bad in all cultures, though not necessarily in the same proportions. This means that (a) one should not reflexively reject all aspects of a foreign-origin culture and (b) One should also not hide behind defensive mechanisms when otherwise legitimate criticisms or benign changes come from foreign-influenced locals

You sound like some kind of Messiah, standing in neutral waters and giving lecture to both sides, the typical India-TSP "equal-equal" onlee.

This is typical WKK attitude, to stand in neutral territory on high moral pedestal, refusing to make a choice and raging in their own moralist tirade of indulging in equal-equal, while keeping themselves open to receiving luxury, lynching fruits from both sides.

A few things -
(a) Indians have accepted more than necessary from other cultures. Show me one country on earth, which willfully, with open heart accepted or took something from India or recognized it publicly? Now, please don't start accusing me of being arrogant Hindu agent because nowadays being assertive is easily taken as being RSS agent.

(b) Noone is hiding here from criticisms but things are other way around. Foreign influenced locals themselves no have clue of their own history.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 28 Jun 2011 02:17

This is India-US strategic dhaaga guyz. Please leave some room for that topic.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 28 Jun 2011 02:24

Rangudu wrote:
Devesh,

There is good and bad in all cultures, though not necessarily in the same proportions. This means that (a) one should not reflexively reject all aspects of a foreign-origin culture and (b) One should also not hide behind defensive mechanisms when otherwise legitimate criticisms or benign changes come from foreign-influenced locals

In this context, should India feel pressured to allow gay marriage or teach gay related topics to kids? Surely not unless it is due to internal evolution. But at the same time, if some people are killed for being openly gay or if government officials publish gay "target lists" (as in Uganda), then we should not feel defensive about it.

Indian culture has always been open to ideas and has absorbed some from abroad while influencing many others. To throw a hissy fit about some gay ambassador or to keep saying "White Man Evil" type useless cliches is puerile.

I never threw any hissy fits about Peter Burleigh's appointment. it is a non-issue and should be treated as such. I only jumped into the discussion when the EJ's entered the picture. the underestimation of EJ fundamentalism in US was startling to me, and therefore shared my experiences. nothing more or less.