Indo-UK News & Discussion 9th Aug 2011

Haresh · Post by **Haresh** » 03 Jul 2012 21:47

and the lefty, islamist al guardian continues in it's defence of all things islam.

And this article is by a lefty trendy sikh as well!!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... f-comments

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 03 Jul 2012 21:57

Haresh wrote:and the lefty, islamist al guardian continues in it's defence of all things islam.

And this article is by a lefty trendy sikh as well!!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... f-comments

Once the criminals and criminality are generalized and not pointed out, it would be time to make the most of it. After all, who does not want to politicize this and be secular in UK, other than those affected directly?

jiteshn · Post by **jiteshn** » 03 Jul 2012 23:46

Here's something you don't see being published in the toilet paper everyday (via dailmail)

‘UK teen girls heaviest drinkers’

The UK department of health report, based on the European School Survey project of 2007, showed that 55% of girls in Britain consumed five or more drinks at least once a month.

The figure makes them the most likely to binge drink in Europe, followed by those in Portugal, Malta and Estonia. The report also showed that binge drinking among British boys is also high at 52%, but this is surpassed by 62% in Malta, and 60% in Latvia.

Here's an idea:

You know how the UK likes to count the number of toilets per person in india. We should send a team to the UK to count the number of teenage pregnancies and bewdas per 1000 people in englishistan. Also take a count of the infidelity/whoring out rates. It will make a good headline.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 04 Jul 2012 00:14

jiteshn wrote:You know how the UK likes to count the number of toilets per person in india. We should send a team to the UK to count the number of teenage pregnancies and bewdas per 1000 people in englishistan. Also take a count of the infidelity/whoring out rates. It will make a good headline.

If you want to strike them where it hurts, write an article about how badly dressed the teenage girls are! And don't forget to comment profusely about obesity among teenage girls and a combination of the two - obesity and badly dressed.

One can also introduce the "Easy" Meter for various Western countries!

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 04 Jul 2012 02:01

need more than that, british papers have articles every second day about drinking, bad behaviour and obesity and a whole manner of social ills, the proles have taken over...

member_23626 · Post by **member_23626** » 04 Jul 2012 02:07

Lalmohan wrote:need more than that, british papers have articles every second day about drinking, bad behaviour and obesity and a whole manner of social ills, the proles have taken over...

Still, when lowly yindoos say that it's more insulting. I would also pitch for documentaries showing the plight of Indians. Nothing will incite these jokers more than how racist they are... we should definitely interview the victims of racism- whether it is in job, social life, portryal in media etc.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 04 Jul 2012 02:10

sridhar, you said you were in the US right? these issues vis a vis the indian community in the uk have all been dealt with 20 years ago. indians are in a different place now than they used to be - it may not be perfect, but it is very very different. the US is about 10 years behind, and if you want to see what it was like for indians in the uk 2 decades ago, just look at australia today

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 04 Jul 2012 12:49

A very cheap and biased opinion piece by a London-based author on Radcliffe Line.

Peacocks at Sunset | Opinion page at NYT

India should always remember that

One could argue that this split in the pro-independence camp was not only to London’s tactical advantage, but also at least partly of its making.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Jul 2012 17:16

Sridhar.E wrote:The top most positions in convent schools in India are held by whites I have personally met them and talked to them.. plus the "donations" nowadays is upwards of 2 lakhs-7 lakhs. Hindus more or less are funding their own destruction. Also, there were other hopless countries too.. I have rarely seen them act like Indians of that era.

The tendency to see CT in every nook and cranny is pretty nauseating, to say the least.

How may children have the Convent Schools in India managed to convert into christian or inculcate the christian ways? Have you come across any practice to induce some sort of 'hatred' for Hinduism among the kids in these schools?

As of today, convent schools are a real minority in a growing sea of schools by various corporate entities. A convent school needs to keep pace with the times in order get students and compete with other schools...just look around yourself and see the number of schools established by various corporate and 'trusts'. In today's India, children go to a Convent School only if it is good - with good defined as value proposition appealing to different sections of the society. So, Indians are simply looking for their better future by sending kids to Convent Schools, if they have to.

Amartya Sen is actually perfectly right in his opinion - a christian school is a fate accompli in a christian society....with most of their students from the Christian society. While I have not been to England - my assumption is such a school will have more emphasis on Christianity in one way or the other and someone passing out of these schools should be 'normal' in operative sense (for most of the schools in this domain - there are bound to be extremes). Compare the situation to the Islamic Schools - what do you think they would be teaching? And what would be the world view of the student coming out of these schools? Do we really need well educated yahoos in our midst?

To me, Amartya Sen makes complete sense. This is talking the political correctness to a new level.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Jul 2012 17:36

RamaY wrote: Indian missionary schools should be banned - outright. They are extension of colonial rule along with IAS system, Police and intelligence system.

Care to tell me why this should be done? And how are they an 'extension' of colonial rule?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 04 Jul 2012 17:56

all schools in the UK are required to have morning prayer and assembly - most schools do this with a christian flavour reflecting the majority community (only 2% of whom are regular church goers), some don't have any christian element at all whilst the christian schools make it more specifically christian. all schools are required to teach a multi-faith course as part of the pupil's awareness of faith. hinduism, sikhism, buddhism and islam all get taught in some depth formally in the class room from a relatively early age. indian festivals like baisakhi, holi and diwali are taught (yes, taught) and celebrated (even if from an illustrative perspective) in the vast majority of uk schools and more so in areas with a large indian population. almost all mango brits are aware of diwali and many town councils actively promote or celebrate it. the mayor of london typically hosts diwali and eid festivals in trafalgar square. in christian run schools in the uk - with the specific purpose of being a faith school, there are additional religious classes and services - but often these are optional. I have known people who have been to xtian schools in the UK and have not thought about it being special. i know many indians who have been to convents and have remained totally untouched by the process (religiously).

for the mango brits, religion is only important during major lifestages - christening, marriage, death - otherwise, religion is really not a very prominent part of anyone's life anymore. it was quite different in the victorian era, when they looked similar to talibs and the american evangelicals do today

brits, like most other europeans have lost interest in organised religion. the US has not as yet reached that stage, and may never do

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 04 Jul 2012 17:57

rohitvats wrote:
RamaY wrote: Indian missionary schools should be banned - outright. They are extension of colonial rule along with IAS system, Police and intelligence system.
Care to tell me why this should be done? And how are they an 'extension' of colonial rule?

I dont speak for RamaY but here is what I have observed first hand:

1. Christians are given first right to their resources. They are given admissions first and only the remaining seats are alloted to other children.

2. They brainwash children from a young age. They teach young Christians that historically Christians have been the only people who have done good in the world. The non Christians have brought pain and misery.

3. They are forced to attend Sunday school whether they want to do it or not. The same priests who run the church are also invited to teach in schools. So a Christian child has no choice but to attend church regularly.

4. Having been exposed to so much propoganda at a young age, most grow up to beleive that Christianity is all about goodness & kindness.

5. Ejism and all that have a very strong positive image in minds of people. Hence, the greater tolerance shown towards conversion in India.

Personal anecdote:
A friend of mine was refused admission in a school for not being a Christian. He was granted admission when he embraced Christianity.

member_19686 · Post by **member_19686** » 04 Jul 2012 17:59

rohitvats wrote:
Sridhar.E wrote:The top most positions in convent schools in India are held by whites I have personally met them and talked to them.. plus the "donations" nowadays is upwards of 2 lakhs-7 lakhs. Hindus more or less are funding their own destruction. Also, there were other hopless countries too.. I have rarely seen them act like Indians of that era.
The tendency to see CT in every nook and cranny is pretty nauseating, to say the least.

How may children have the Convent Schools in India managed to convert into christian or inculcate the christian ways? Have you come across any practice to induce some sort of 'hatred' for Hinduism among the kids in these schools?

As of today, convent schools are a real minority in a growing sea of schools by various corporate entities. A convent school needs to keep pace with the times in order get students and compete with other schools...just look around yourself and see the number of schools established by various corporate and 'trusts'. In today's India, children go to a Convent School only if it is good - with good defined as value proposition appealing to different sections of the society. So, Indians are simply looking for their better future by sending kids to Convent Schools, if they have to.

Amartya Sen is actually perfectly right in his opinion - a christian school is a fate accompli in a christian society....with most of their students from the Christian society. While I have not been to England - my assumption is such a school will have more emphasis on Christianity in one way or the other and someone passing out of these schools should be 'normal' in operative sense (for most of the schools in this domain - there are bound to be extremes). Compare the situation to the Islamic Schools - what do you think they would be teaching? And what would be the world view of the student coming out of these schools? Do we really need well educated yahoos in our midst?

To me, Amartya Sen makes complete sense. This is talking the political correctness to a new level.

Shouldn't a Hindu school be a fait accompli in a Hindu society then?

Or is that not secular enough for you?

For gunga dins its perfectly ok to suggest that non Xtian schools be banned in the UK but preach to Hindus how convent schools are perfectly ok in India, to me the double standards of such are gunga dins are pretty nauseating to say the least.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Jul 2012 18:10

nakul wrote: Care to tell me why this should be done? And how are they an 'extension' of colonial rule?

I dont speak for RamaY but here is what I have observed first hand:

1. Christians are given first right to their resources. They are given admissions first and only the remaining seats are alloted to other children. Which is the prerogative of these schools as they are minority institutions. Having said that, what percentage of students in a convent are from Christian background to effect the prospects of larger community? Funny thing is, you deplore the institution of Convents and yet, talk about them giving preferential treatment to Christians?

2. They brainwash children from a young age. They teach young Christians that historically Christians have been the only people who have done good in the world. The non Christians have brought pain and misery.
Can you please show an example of this? When and where is this done? And is it a widespread practice across all the schools or restricted to something you came across? Another thing - is anyone forcing Christian families to send their children to these schools or is it because they get preferential treatment and financial assistance? If Christian families already don't believe this, I don't see how can you make a student believe in all this - these sessions could be another of those boring lectures one must bear through.

3. They are forced to attend Sunday school whether they want to do it or not. The same priests who run the church are also invited to teach in schools. So a Christian child has no choice but to attend church regularly.
No choice? Why does he/she not have choice unless as I asked earlier, the parents are into some sort of arrangement with family in terms of financial assistance.

4. Having been exposed to so much propoganda at a young age, most grow up to beleive that Christianity is all about goodness & kindness.Is it only this propaganda or the background in homes as well which leads to this world view?

5. Ejism and all that have a very strong positive image in minds of people. Hence, the greater tolerance shown towards conversion in India.Since when has studying in convent schools become synonymous with Ejism?

Personal anecdote:
A friend of mine was refused admission in a school for not being a Christian. He was granted admission when he embraced Christianity.So, is the weakness of your friend the fault of the Convent School and its administration? This has to be a most bizzare logic that I've come across.[/quote]

member_23626 · Post by **member_23626** » 04 Jul 2012 18:15

rohitvats wrote:
nakul wrote: Care to tell me why this should be done? And how are they an 'extension' of colonial rule?
I dont speak for RamaY but here is what I have observed first hand:

1. Christians are given first right to their resources. They are given admissions first and only the remaining seats are alloted to other children. Which is the prerogative of these schools as they are minority institutions. Having said that, what percentage of students in a convent are from Christian background to effect the prospects of larger community? Funny thing is, you deplore the institution of Convents and yet, talk about them giving preferential treatment to Christians?

2. They brainwash children from a young age. They teach young Christians that historically Christians have been the only people who have done good in the world. The non Christians have brought pain and misery.
Can you please show an example of this? When and where is this done? And is it a widespread practice across all the schools or restricted to something you came across? Another thing - is anyone forcing Christian families to send their children to these schools or is it because they get preferential treatment and financial assistance? If Christian families already don't believe this, I don't see how can you make a student believe in all this - these sessions could be another of those boring lectures one must bear through.

3. They are forced to attend Sunday school whether they want to do it or not. The same priests who run the church are also invited to teach in schools. So a Christian child has no choice but to attend church regularly.
No choice? Why does he/she not have choice unless as I asked earlier, the parents are into some sort of arrangement with family in terms of financial assistance.

4. Having been exposed to so much propoganda at a young age, most grow up to beleive that Christianity is all about goodness & kindness.Is it only this propaganda or the background in homes as well which leads to this world view?

5. Ejism and all that have a very strong positive image in minds of people. Hence, the greater tolerance shown towards conversion in India.Since when has studying in convent schools become synonymous with Ejism?

Personal anecdote:
A friend of mine was refused admission in a school for not being a Christian. He was granted admission when he embraced Christianity.So, is the weakness of your friend the fault of the Convent School and its administration? This has to be a most bizzare logic that I've come across.

[/quote]

The level of gungadinism is mind boggling ... rohitji wait for some time, will answer your questions in detail..

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Jul 2012 18:16

Surasena wrote: Shouldn't a Hindu school be a fait accompli in a Hindu society then?

Or is that not secular enough for you?

For gunga dins its perfectly ok to suggest that non Xtian schools be banned in the UK but preach to Hindus how convent schools are perfectly ok in India, to me the double standards of such are gunga dins are pretty nauseating to say the least.

Well, please don't hide the stupidity of your argument behind words like secularism...now, use your brains and answer this: Does anything prevents someone to start another Banaras Hindu University or Hindu Schools in India?

As for Gungadins...well, no one needs a certificate from morons like you about his/her credentials...your stupidity is quite evident from the content of your posts.

member_19686 · Post by **member_19686** » 04 Jul 2012 18:18

[quote="rohitvats"][quote="Surasena"]
Hello Gungadin,

rest of the post deleted by mod.

member_19686 · Post by **member_19686** » 04 Jul 2012 18:21

deleted by mod

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Jul 2012 18:22

Sridhar.E wrote:The level of gungadinism is mind boggling ... rohitji wait for some time, will answer your questions in detail..

Whatever gives you the authority to pass certificate on people in this manner? Or you the high lord of what defines as patriotism here?

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 04 Jul 2012 18:25

Surasena wrote:If Modi said:Hindu schools "are perfectly acceptable" but other faith schools "are a big mistake and should be scrapped if the Government wants to encourage a unifying Indian identity,"

Our ~~resident gungadin~~ p-secs will get ~~his~~ their panties in a twist about how this is not secular & how Hindu "fascism" is rearing its ugly head

+ 1

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Jul 2012 18:26

Surasena wrote:
Hello Gungadin,

You said Amartya Sen was completely right.

What Amartya Sen said was that non Xtian schools should be scrapped in the UK.

By the same logic shouldn't non Hindu schools be scrapped in India?

Or is that too hard to understand for your pea brain?

Who said anything about anyone preventing sending kids to BHU?

Don't bring in irrelevant comparisons.

MODS - IS SUCH NAME CALLING THE NEW ACCEPTED STANDARD ON BRF?

The only reason I'm not replying to your post is because I want a definite answer on this free usage of words like "Gungadins"...rest assured I'll get back to you on this.

member_19686 · Post by **member_19686** » 04 Jul 2012 18:30

rohitvats wrote:
Surasena wrote:
Hello Gungadin,

You said Amartya Sen was completely right.

What Amartya Sen said was that non Xtian schools should be scrapped in the UK.

By the same logic shouldn't non Hindu schools be scrapped in India?

Or is that too hard to understand for your pea brain?

Who said anything about anyone preventing sending kids to BHU?

Don't bring in irrelevant comparisons.

MODS - IS SUCH NAME CALLING THE NEW ACCEPTED STANDARD ON BRF?

The only reason I'm not replying to your post is because I want a definite answer on this free usage of words like "Gungadins"...rest assured I'll get back to you on this.

Sure you will lol.

You & your double standards in favor of Xtians just got exposed.

There is nothing to "get back" here, save yourself from further embarrassment.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 04 Jul 2012 18:35

rohitvats wrote:To me, Amartya Sen makes complete sense.

Wow!!! Do you even know Amartya Sen's record...this guy has been seeing Hindutva shadows everywhere in India for the past decade...and you don't see the contradiction that he has now given up his 'secular' facade and actively supports a Christian faith initiative over any other type of school?? Glad the 'secularism' fraud was exposed.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 04 Jul 2012 18:36

rohitvats wrote:Which is the prerogative of these schools as they are minority institutions. Having said that, what percentage of students in a convent are from Christian background to effect the prospects of larger community? Funny thing is, you deplore the institution of Convents and yet, talk about them giving preferential treatment to Christians?

Do they need to discriminate between 3 yr olds on the basis of their religion?

rohitvats wrote:Can you please show an example of this? When and where is this done? And is it a widespread practice across all the schools or restricted to something you came across? Another thing - is anyone forcing Christian families to send their children to these schools or is it because they get preferential treatment and financial assistance? If Christian families already don't believe this, I don't see how can you make a student believe in all this - these sessions could be another of those boring lectures one must bear through.

Its part of the cirriculum. If you want to pass and make it to the next grade, you have to memorise and vomit this in the exam. Compulsory for Roman Catholics in my school. Children are very vulnerable at a young age. If you tell them that x is good & y is bad, they tend to believe it more than their parents. You can't expect kids to make distinction between evil & infidel. The distinction is something that even adults fail to make. How is it different from the brainwashing done in madrasahs?

rohitvats wrote:No choice? Why does he/she not have choice unless as I asked earlier, the parents are into some sort of arrangement with family in terms of financial assistance.

No choice because the priest who conducts mass in Church on Sundays teaches the Bible in school on weekdays. How can you expect an 8 yr old to stand up to an adult priest all alone and answer why he was not present in Church?

rohitvats wrote:Is it only this propaganda or the background in homes as well which leads to this world view?

Its the binar world view common to all Abrahamic religions. If its Christian, its good; anything non Christian is not as good as a Christian. Replace Christian with any other religion and the meaning stays the same.

Since we are on Bharat Rakshak, you are quite familiar with BBC & CNN spouting that the non western world is evil and how America & Britain is bringing civilization to the barbarians. One can visit the Aryan Invasion Theory to know more about this phenomenon. How do these stupid beliefs go unchallenged in the west is because they are taught to believe that they (Christians) are the best and those who don't follow their rights & beliefs are dumb or downright evil. The foundation for such a thought process is laid at a very young age.

rohitvats wrote:Since when has studying in convent schools become synonymous with Ejism?

They are to EJism what Sufis are to Wahabbi Islam. They soften the image & improve the public image. They are the carrots given to converts as their children are ensured good schooling. Apart from money & other benefits that are offered to natives to lure them into conversion.

rohitvats wrote:So, is the weakness of your friend the fault of the Convent School and its administration? This has to be a most bizzare logic that I've come across

Simply put, they were trading his Buddhist heritage for a good education. Since many Indics are unaware of their heritage, it seems a like a good deal. But I expect you to know better.

member_19686 · Post by **member_19686** » 04 Jul 2012 18:39

Arjun wrote:
rohitvats wrote:To me, Amartya Sen makes complete sense.
Wow!!! Do you even know Amartya Sen's record...this guy has been seeing Hindutva shadows everywhere in India for the past decade...and you don't see the contradiction that he has now given up his 'secular' facade and actively supports a Christian faith initiative over any other type of school?? Glad the 'secularism' fraud was exposed.

+ 1.

Though:

1) He said this 6 years ago not now.

2) He was not just actively supporting Xtianity but asking that other faith schools be scrapped & said that for a unifying British identity, Xtianity should be promoted.

But the same people who lecture Hindus about "secularism" day in & day out apparently don't see anything wrong with this.

That tells you all you need to know about them & their secular idols like this Amartya Sen fellow.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 04 Jul 2012 18:42

Whatever the reason, calling names degrades the level of discussion!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Jul 2012 18:43

rohitvats wrote:
Surasena wrote:
Hello Gungadin,

You said Amartya Sen was completely right.

What Amartya Sen said was that non Xtian schools should be scrapped in the UK.

By the same logic shouldn't non Hindu schools be scrapped in India?

Or is that too hard to understand for your pea brain?

Who said anything about anyone preventing sending kids to BHU?

Don't bring in irrelevant comparisons.

MODS - IS SUCH NAME CALLING THE NEW ACCEPTED STANDARD ON BRF?

The only reason I'm not replying to your post is because I want a definite answer on this free usage of words like "Gungadins"...rest assured I'll get back to you on this.

If you had not quoted that message I would not have seen it. The forum software allows certain messages to be hidden at my pleasure, but your messages are not hidden and will not be hidden for my eyes.

member_23626 · Post by **member_23626** » 04 Jul 2012 18:46

rohitvats wrote:
Sridhar.E wrote:The level of gungadinism is mind boggling ... rohitji wait for some time, will answer your questions in detail..
Whatever gives you the authority to pass certificate on people in this manner? Or you the high lord of what defines as patriotism here?

What does patriotism has to do here? and what gives you the authority to say that xtian schools must exist and others shouldn't? By the way gungadins == useful idiots as Mao called them, who would go over the top to prove their secularism and ethics and would rather undermine their own culutr and beliefs than call a spade, a spade.Don't know what so difficult to understand here? If you still don't get what I'm saying, here it is in clear words:

"A No-bell prize whiner, who preaches secularism and a need to have a "liberal" (aka hindu bashing) society, goes 180* opposite of their preaching and becomes an EJ preacher preaching that xtian schools are something that have been gifted to us by heaven and nobody should teach their children their own culture. I guess, you won't have a problem if he says tomorrow that Hindus should start going to church as all those idols and decorations are nothing compared to the god gifted church and it's holy child loving pastors"

member_23626 · Post by **member_23626** » 04 Jul 2012 18:46

rohitvats wrote:
Sridhar.E wrote:The level of gungadinism is mind boggling ... rohitji wait for some time, will answer your questions in detail..
Whatever gives you the authority to pass certificate on people in this manner? Or you the high lord of what defines as patriotism here?

What does patriotism has to do here? and what gives you the authority to say that xtian schools must exist and others shouldn't? By the way gungadins == useful idiots as Mao called them, who would go over the top to prove their secularism and ethics and would rather undermine their own culutr and beliefs than call a spade, a spade.Don't know what so difficult to understand here? If you still don't get what I'm saying, here it is in clear words:

"A No-bell prize whiner, who preaches secularism and a need to have a "liberal" (aka hindu bashing) society, goes 180* opposite of their preaching and becomes an EJ preacher preaching that xtian schools are something that have been gifted to us by heaven and nobody should teach their children their own culture. I guess, you won't have a problem if he says tomorrow that Hindus should start going to church as all those idols and decorations are nothing compared to the god gifted church and it's holy child loving pastors"

member_23629 · Post by **member_23629** » 04 Jul 2012 18:59

These leftist / liberals like Amartya Sen or Rajdeep Sardesai or Pranoy Roy or even Manmohan Singh, etc. are all a result of the colonial experience. (There were no leftist liberals in India during the 1857 war.) These people side with the cultural and racial institutions of White Christians and identify with them because their entire identity is dependent on wisdom recieved from the West. Without Western patronage, they are non-entities, since cultural Hindus or Muslims have no use for them or their worldview (which is nothing but repackaged Euro-centrism).

Their worldview is useful only for the Whites to the extent that it promotes Western culture and interests and clashes with native nationalists of other races. These so-called liberals from India know this and try to make themselves as useful to the Whites as they can. That is why they will keep making statements like that of Amartya Sen or even that of Manmohan Singh about India benefitting hugely from being ruled by the British Raj, to ingratiate themelsves with the Whites for their rewards. These people are in a parasitic relationship with the Whites -- notice the awards and scholarships they get from the West (fulbright scholar, etc.) or how Western businessmen help run their TV channels (CNN-IBN) or promote their careers in the US / British universities (Amartya Sen's Cambridge stint; Manmohan Singh's IMF stint) -- without Western patronage these people would be orphans.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Jul 2012 19:05

nakul wrote:Do they need to discriminate between 3 yr olds on the basis of their religion?

Well, we're being sentimental where none is required. The mass entry into most schools is at KG level and age is more often than not 3 years. So, if Convents are being selective about admission based on religion, this is where they will be.

Its part of the cirriculum. If you want to pass and make it to the next grade, you have to memorise and vomit this in the exam. Compulsory for Roman Catholics in my school. Children are very vulnerable at a young age. If you tell them that x is good & y is bad, they tend to believe it more than their parents. You can't expect kids to make distinction between evil & infidel. The distinction is something that even adults fail to make. How is it different from the brainwashing done in madrasahs?

Well, sir, I've studied in Convents across the country (Dad was army officer, you see) and I've not come across these subjects to my Christian friends. As for your experience, part of the problem with this indoctrination about X being good and Y being bad is answered in your reply below. I will touch upon it there.

No choice because the priest who conducts mass in Church on Sundays teaches the Bible in school on weekdays. How can you expect an 8 yr old to stand up to an adult priest all alone and answer why he was not present in Church?

As I said, the malaise is a bit deeper than students only studying in Convent Schools. IMO, this stems from the kind of influence the Priest (or Church) has over the Christian families and the financial benefit which accrues to most of them. I know for a fact that students from financially weaker background got aid from the School. I don't think families of such students (mostly) themselves are averse to their children getting this kind of education or world view. My point is very simple - children do not need to attend a Convent School to being exposed to such teachings

Its the binar world view common to all Abrahamic religions. If its Christian, its good; anything non Christian is not as good as a Christian. Replace Christian with any other religion and the meaning stays the same.

That sir, is my central argument. W/O there being acceptance for this kind of special education for Christian students, I doubt it would exist in the first place. Parents might actually be happy to see their children put through such lectures as part of the school curriculum which otherwise they might not be able to enforce.

Since we are on Bharat Rakshak, you are quite familiar with BBC & CNN spouting that the non western world is evil and how America & Britain is bringing civilization to the barbarians. One can visit the Aryan Invasion Theory to know more about this phenomenon. How do these stupid beliefs go unchallenged in the west is because they are taught to believe that they (Christians) are the best and those who don't follow their rights & beliefs are dumb or downright evil. The foundation for such a thought process is laid at a very young age.

Agreed.

They are to EJism what Sufis are to Wahabbi Islam. They soften the image & improve the public image. They are the carrots given to converts as their children are ensured good schooling. Apart from money & other benefits that are offered to natives to lure them into conversion.
While I do know for fact that Convents offer free education as one of the perks for converts, I think the impact of this factor is not likely to be significant. For a simple reason that there are just so many Convents around. And most of them being of certain caliber, even they cannot take students enmasse w/o running the risk of getting wrath of parents of other students.
But yes, the Convets do provide a softer image to the activities of Ejism - "we're into education and charity healthcare argument"

Simply put, they were trading his Buddhist heritage for a good education. Since many Indics are unaware of their heritage, it seems a like a good deal. But I expect you to know better.
That Sir, is the crux of the problem and our greatest malaise...the identity is so feeble that people feel convenient to give it up.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Jul 2012 19:17

Arjun wrote:
rohitvats wrote:To me, Amartya Sen makes complete sense.
Wow!!! Do you even know Amartya Sen's record...this guy has been seeing Hindutva shadows everywhere in India for the past decade...and you don't see the contradiction that he has now given up his 'secular' facade and actively supports a Christian faith initiative over any other type of school?? Glad the 'secularism' fraud was exposed.

Does any part of my post comments on the words and actions of Amartya Sen with respect to Hinduism or India? Or does it defend any such words or acts of his? Have I commented anywhere on his past positions or preaching? I think not.

My comment and post was with respect to only this very point made by him about banning other faith based schools. IMO, he has shied away from calling Islam based schools but that is what I infer - because that is what will only cause outrage in British Left Media and political parties.

Now, coming to contradiction and secularism fraud being exposed - please be my guest and call him all you want. But how does my supporting just one of his many POVs makes ME complicit in all that he has done or said? I support this POV because I don't want faith based school - in England or in India.

Now, you'll turn around and point to my defending the existence of Convent Schools as being contrary to the above opinion expressed by me about faith based schools. My argument is pretty simple - the Convents are too much integrated into the Indian system (despite their flaws)...IMO, these schools do more good than bad. And as I pointed out earlier, even these schools are struggling to hold their own against new corporate schools with advanced teaching pedagogy. Parents aspire to send their children to these new schools than convents - new schools have all that these convents had and then much more.

I hope that clears the air.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 04 Jul 2012 19:26

Well put Rohit. I went to convent school but I am a staunch Hindu, who believes that Hinduism is a philosophy of life.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 04 Jul 2012 19:28

Well, I basically cannot understand how a democratic country believing in fundamental rights can prohibit its citizens or residents from learning religion, whichever religion.

Right to Practice and Propagation of Religion is a fundamental right. If Amartya Sen is saying this, he really doesn't know much about civilized and modern society.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Jul 2012 19:29

Sridhar.E wrote:What does patriotism has to do here? and what gives you the authority to say that xtian schools must exist and others shouldn't?

I hope you understand that Amartya Sen was talking about policies with respect to UK and not India? And If I understand correctly, he was hinting at Islam based schools; had it being Hindu Schools, he might well not have felt the requirement of being guarded. As for authority -- I gave a opinion on a topic relevant to UK like every one does on this thread. What is the need to bring India and "Gungadin" arguments here? Does any part of what AS said have impact on the developments in India? Or is he preaching to Indian government? What is wrong with agreeing to this particular POV of AS notwithstanding what I think about him as an economist or person?

By the way gungadins == useful idiots as Mao called them, who would go over the top to prove their secularism and ethics and would rather undermine their own culutr and beliefs than call a spade, a spade.Don't know what so difficult to understand here?
And how does commenting on developments in UK make one a Gungadin? Are you transposing my POV on "faith based schools" in UK to Indian context? Because, if you're not, being an Indian, how do I qualify as Gungadin? And which part of my post gave an indication that I'm supporting any such arguments for India?

If you still don't get what I'm saying, here it is in clear words:

"A No-bell prize whiner, who preaches secularism and a need to have a "liberal" (aka hindu bashing) society, goes 180* opposite of their preaching and becomes an EJ preacher preaching that xtian schools are something that have been gifted to us by heaven and nobody should teach their children their own culture. I guess, you won't have a problem if he says tomorrow that Hindus should start going to church as all those idols and decorations are nothing compared to the god gifted church and it's holy child loving pastors"
What has the fancy English above got to do with ME agreeing to his POV on faith based schools in ENGLAND? Or, just because I agree to one opinion held by AS, I automatically fit the definition of Gungadin as posted by you above?

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 04 Jul 2012 19:33

No need to call me "sir." Not much time has passed since I left school.

rohitvats wrote:Well, we're being sentimental where none is required. The mass entry into most schools is at KG level and age is more often than not 3 years. So, if Convents are being selective about admission based on religion, this is where they will be.

Well, I wonder whether you have seen the circus that the parents have to go through for securing admissions. Some parents would be more than happy to convert their children to Christianity if that helps them get a good start in life. With this starts the whole mentality of trading long term benefits for short term ones. I wonder whats wrong with Arundhoti Roy or Barkha Dutt if they can trade some words for more "career growth" and "popularity." Surely, its worth getting a Pulitzer or a Nobel, if the cost is the sentiments of a few fundie Hindus, those holding India back into the dark ages.

Personal Anecdote:
First time I heard of attacks on Christians by Bajrang Dal was from my teacher. IIRC, we had a protest of some sorts against it. I felt Bajrang Dal was a bunch of goons for attacking helpless nuns. Then the media's push of Bajrang Dal==RSS==VHP didn't help either. Made me feel bad about the Hindu identity.

rohitvats wrote:As I said, the malaise is a bit deeper than students only studying in Convent Schools. IMO, this stems from the kind of influence the Priest (or Church) has over the Christian families and the financial benefit which accrues to most of them. I know for a fact that students from financially weaker background got aid from the School. I don't think families of such students (mostly) themselves are averse to their children getting this kind of education or world view. My point is very simple - children do not need to attend a Convent School to being exposed to such teachings

All RCC students had to take religious studies which meant that they were to come face to face with the priest at least once a week. Since he was the same person who would also be in CHurch on SUndays, there was simply no escape. If the children were not in Convent schools, they could miss the sermons and no one would go after them. The system is rigged nicely so that every child has to attend church until s/he is out of school. If you still don't get it, try taking up a subject you don't like and study it regularly for 12 yrs. Hope you get the idea.

rohitvats wrote:That sir, is my central argument. W/O there being acceptance for this kind of special education for Christian students, I doubt it would exist in the first place. Parents might actually be happy to see their children put through such lectures as part of the school curriculum which otherwise they might not be able to enforce.

These parents are just like most Muslims. Most muslims don't support terrorists but they don't do anything to stop them fearing the backlash to themselves and their family. Parents of school going children would not want to go against the Church for trivial matters.

rohitvats wrote:While I do know for fact that Convents offer free education as one of the perks for converts, I think the impact of this factor is not likely to be significant. For a simple reason that there are just so many Convents around. And most of them being of certain caliber, even they cannot take students enmasse w/o running the risk of getting wrath of parents of other students.
But yes, the Convets do provide a softer image to the activities of Ejism - "we're into education and charity healthcare argument"

You know that why the education levels among Christians are very high. Because there is little incentive to not send your kid to school. Though there is nothing wrong in education, Christianity is synonymous with education. Just like English == well educated, West == scientific. Subtle memes that ensures we treat ourselves with contempt. To make the list complete, Hindu == caste.

rohitvats wrote:That Sir, is the crux of the problem and our greatest malaise...the identity is so feeble that people feel convenient to give it up.

The whole system ensures that the focus is not the perprator but the victim. This debate between two people who hold the same views would otherwise not happened. How deep the malaise goes is something we have not reached into yet.

Did you know that Mother Teresa was an EJ?

member_19686 · Post by **member_19686** » 04 Jul 2012 19:35

rohitvats wrote:
Does any part of my post comments on the words and actions of Amartya Sen with respect to Hinduism or India? Or does it defend any such words or acts of his? Have I commented anywhere on his past positions or preaching? I think not.

My comment and post was with respect to only this very point made by him about banning other faith based schools. IMO, he has shied away from calling Islam based schools but that is what I infer - because that is what will only cause outrage in British Left Media and political parties.

Now, coming to contradiction and secularism fraud being exposed - please be my guest and call him all you want. But how does my supporting just one of his many POVs makes ME complicit in all that he has done or said? I support this POV because I don't want faith based school - in England or in India.

Now, you'll turn around and point to my defending the existence of Convent Schools as being contrary to the above opinion expressed by me about faith based schools. My argument is pretty simple - the Convents are too much integrated into the Indian system (despite their flaws)...IMO, these schools do more good than bad. And as I pointed out earlier, even these schools are struggling to hold their own against new corporate schools with advanced teaching pedagogy. Parents aspire to send their children to these new schools than convents - new schools have all that these convents had and then much more.

I hope that clears the air.

So he has shied away from calling out Islam & you have "inferred"?

If Amartya Sen was clear, there would be no need for inferences or putting words into his mouth.

How do you know he was also not including Hindu schools when he explicitly said non Xtian schools should be scrapped?

Especially when considering his rants day in & day about Hindutva and secularism.

Your "opinion" that's the key word here, everyone has an opinion but facts are something else.

In the opinion of many Muslims, Hindus, and Sikhs their schools in the UK (which you never even visited by your own admission) do more good than bad.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 04 Jul 2012 19:36

Rohitvats ji, I don't think you know enough about Amartya Sen's history & the attitude that Amartya and his girlfriend, Martha Nussbaum have towards Hinduism and Hindutva....And he most definitely is NOT hinting at just Islam when he says non -Christian faith-based schools are not acceptable. Martha Nussbaum at one point made a claim something on the lines of 'more than Islamic terrorists its Hindu terrorists that we need to be worried about."

Somebody who knows Amartya Sen's history would immediately have seen this particular statement of his as the heights of hypocrisy. I completely agree with Surasena's feelings on the issue - though I can't say I agree with the name-calling.

Also - I am not sure I understand what your final stand is on faith based schools - whatever it is one has to be consistent. If all faith-based schools are unacceptable - then Christian schools should obviously be closed down as well.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Jul 2012 19:53

nakul wrote: Well, I wonder whether you have seen the circus that the parents have to go through for securing admissions. Some parents would be more than happy to convert their children to Christianity if that helps them get a good start in life. With this starts the whole mentality of trading long term benefits for short term ones. I wonder whats wrong with Arundhoti Roy or Barkha Dutt if they can trade some words for more "career growth" and "popularity." Surely, its worth getting a Pulitzer or a Nobel, if the cost is the sentiments of a few fundie Hindus, those holding India back into the dark ages.

Well, I would not call the faith of people as so finicky to simply give way because of admission criterion. Yes, some do but to see this admission criterion as a tactic employed would be going too far. Mostly, those from economically weaker section and SC/ST/OBC in true sense are more vulnerable. Otherwise, with the kind of fees charged by these schools, families from well to do background only approach these schools.

Coming to BD and RS, well, they are a product of a deeper flaw in our education system - one that has been controlled deftly by the Congress. Please read the book "Eminent Historians" by Arun Shourie for interesting details.

Personal Anecdote:

First time I heard of attacks on Christians by Bajrang Dal was from my teacher. IIRC, we had a protest of some sorts against it. I felt Bajrang Dal was a bunch of goons for attacking helpless nuns. Then the media's push of Bajrang Dal==RSS==VHP didn't help either. Made me feel bad about the Hindu identity.

And one also remembers the impromptu closure of convent schools for one day in Bangalore on the same line....but it did draw the howl of protests from the parents and government. But as said earlier, wait for another 5-6 years, these schools will loose their clout.

All RCC students had to take religious studies which meant that they were to come face to face with the priest at least once a week. Since he was the same person who would also be in CHurch on SUndays, there was simply no escape. If the children were not in Convent schools, they could miss the sermons and no one would go after them. The system is rigged nicely so that every child has to attend church until s/he is out of school. If you still don't get it, try taking up a subject you don't like and study it regularly for 12 yrs. Hope you get the idea.

My central point here is simple - I would not need to study a subject I did not like and had an option to give up if I was not forced to by my parents. It stems from the intricate web of relationship between church and Christians.

These parents are just like most Muslims. Most muslims don't support terrorists but they don't do anything to stop them fearing the backlash to themselves and their family. Parents of school going children would not want to go against the Church for trivial matters.

There you said it. It is the institution of Church and power it has which is at play here...

You know that why the education levels among Christians are very high. Because there is little incentive to not send your kid to school. Though there is nothing wrong in education, Christianity is synonymous with education. Just like English == well educated, West == scientific. Subtle memes that ensures we treat ourselves with contempt. To make the list complete, Hindu == caste.
Well, how do I connect the above to the Convent Schools in India argument we started with? That aside, everyone had their good time, we'll have ours. Children are taught Gyatri mantra in wife's Day Care Center...and people come asking for more.

The whole system ensures that the focus is not the perprator but the victim. This debate between two people who hold the same views would otherwise not happened. How deep the malaise goes is something we have not reached into yet.
Agreed. But to color everything aspect in Black and White is not correct.

Did you know that Mother Teresa was an EJ?Yes, I do.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Jul 2012 20:07

Arjun wrote:Rohitvats ji, I don't think you know enough about Amartya Sen's history & the attitude that Amartya and his girlfriend, Martha Nussbaum have towards Hinduism and Hindutva....And he most definitely is NOT hinting at just Islam when he says non -Christian faith-based schools are not acceptable. Martha Nussbaum at one point made a claim something on the lines of 'more than Islamic terrorists its Hindu terrorists that we need to be worried about."

Arre mere bhai.....what is the fuss about here? I made my point very clear...please read carefully..IN MY OPINION, he said this because he was referring to Islamic Schools. If by your own admission above, he has not be charitable about calling Hinduism names, do you think he would have been indirect about it? That is how I interpreted it. I support his POV because I think he refers to Islamic Schools. My argument is limited to this point only. Whether Britain allows other faith based Schools to flourish is Britain's problem and prerogative. The question that everyone needs to ask is what prompted this comment from him? Is it because of proliferation of Hindu Schools (which he loathes) or Islamic Schools?

Somebody who knows Amartya Sen's history would immediately have seen this particular statement of his as the heights of hypocrisy.

Yes, it is being hypocrite, all right. But IMO, if he refers to Islamic schools, I agree. May be he said the right thing for the first time.

Also - I am not sure I understand what your final stand is on faith based schools - whatever it is one has to be consistent. If all faith-based schools are unacceptable - then Christian schools should obviously be closed down as well.

I will answer this - but do answer one simple question? Which country are you referring to?
(A) England - it is Britain's prerogative to decide on this. I have no stand on this. As Lalmohan said, Christianity based schools are part and parcel of that society - if Britain wants to permit other faith based schools, well, good for them. If not, it is their decision. If I understand correctly, their constitution does not automatically grant such rights as in India.
(B) India - Yes, I want all faiths to be able to have their schools.