Indo-UK News & Discussion 9th Aug 2011

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 23 Dec 2012 23:40

Ajatshatru ji,
sure! Actually the takeover by "foreigners" is possibly happening at some subthemes more than in others. When I go for short lecture visits now, I do see much greater diversity among postgrads and less of the British students - in my own subareas. But I think the situation is not so bad for many other disciplines, although the chinese/Koreans may come to become prominent over the next decade, especially in biz/management/ops-research areas.

Some areas have recently been set aside for citizens onlee after a certain level - so that protects it to an extent. SHQ teaches from time to time at undergrad levels too there. Her experience is that British born students are more expecting of spoonfeeding by the "prof" than from other more "maths-nations" of Europe. They are also more likely to go for personal attacks/complains against the teacher in order to justfy their personal failings, and in general less likely to be "hardworking". But these are anecdotal, and even if I have heard this repeated privately from many of my colleagues - it will not get reflected in official assessments etc.

For example, I know this from personal interaction with students after lectures in pubs etc., that in surveys - which are then taken into account in the "league tables" among many other variables, the students would rank their institution and profs and evey other thing, because otherwise it affects their own prospects if as a result of their honest feelings, their institution gets downgraded in raknings.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 23 Dec 2012 23:46

Is it OK for patriotic people to get disgusted using British Currency? After all Queendom is printed all over it..specifics may have to be laid out on this thread to avoid hurting sensibilities and being labelled Brown Sepoys or something next. Wow a minefield here. Patriotic fatwa need to be issued it seems to mark out acceptable zones/ specifics/ necessary bare minimum knowledge markers to participate even casually on this thread without fear of getting labelled in some way. Way to go..

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 23 Dec 2012 23:49

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 4#p1381144
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 8#p1381148
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 9#p1381179

This is about the myth about meritocracy in khanate, suspect similar in ukistan also.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 24 Dec 2012 00:47

Thank you Jambudvipa for that informative and relevant post-BRF always produces a lotus in the muck.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 24 Dec 2012 00:54

perhaps BRF should also ban the guy who coins cute epithets like "B-potty"?

why the selective rage against JD ji?

jambudvipa ji's post gives some perspective for all of us. and perhaps some of us would be less enthusiastic about protecting the vaunted "Brit heritage" and reputation, after knowing what they did to us...

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 24 Dec 2012 01:04

brihaspati wrote:ekalavya ji,
I should have learned to expect by this time that you will select "facts" to try to disprove anything that seems to show any aspect of British life in negative light.

Since I have never commented on any aspect of British life anywhere on this forum prior to this exchange, you could not possibly have any cause to imagine such a thing.

brihaspati wrote: Yes, I perhaps overreacted to your jumping in with what seemed "funny" to you, but which I saw as a sign again of that general tendency which I feel is a legacy of a certain Anglophile culture imposed by educational forms - to somehow feel compelled to come to the defense of the British image.

Thank You for the first four words. To be quite frank, I am not aware of the "general tendency" that you refer to thereafter.

brihaspati wrote: What should be noted is that - the only clearly negative assessment I made, "in shambles", need not have been taken as a criticism or bashing of the "British". Many British I know personally as friends, even from the peerage level, have used the word [if you caught it - it is a word more likely to be used in a certain social educational circle in UK than in others] in private addas.

"Shambles" is a fine word. Please use it to your heart's content, with or without my approbation.

brihaspati wrote: Since then you have simply chosen to deride Starkey [why really? he is a qualified academic in his own domain!] without giving due diligence to his remarks or observations.

David Starkey of "The whites have become black" and "Caledonian Hitler" fame. He also goes around saying "Enoch was right"!

brihaspati wrote: Same has been your silence to Katherine's observations.

She's brave and she's honest. Her speech to the 2010 Tory conference was a landmark. I hope it contributes to improving British state schools.

brihaspati wrote: In all this if you choose to onlee focus on what seems or can be put up as "good", it implies you have taken my "shambles" comment as an attack on British image, and felt the need to defend it by a selective quote.

I gave a one line answer to a one line comment, and there was and there is no cause to imply anything else.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 24 Dec 2012 05:06

No comments on as to what Katherine's statements imply for the British education system - whether it supports to some degree or not what was implied by "in shambles"?

No comments on the grade inflation issue?

No comments on the so-called inequality debate?

No comments on the "discipline/physical contact/male teachers" issue?

No comments on the Times higher education report's comment about UK unis's ?

As for "expecting" : yes I should have noted the pattern earlier - for you do

"not at all expect that a leading British university would include on its faculty staff that provide qualified support for terrorism, provided that the victims are non-Western and the perpetrators are prepared to cooperate to avoid terrorist attacks in the West."

You ascribe a certain "moralism/decency/" by default to the British institutions. Anyway, I think we have differed before also on the compatibility of enjoying aspects of "British culture" such as its literature while being aware of any imperialist/genocidic aspect too directly connected to the literateurs themselves.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 24 Dec 2012 06:33

eklavya wrote:We really ought to be able to talk about modern Britain on this thread without bringing in colonialism and whether some chap is a bootlicker or such like. We owe it to ourselves and to everybody else on the forum.

Eklavya ji,

I can understand your unease at the criticism of the British (since you have hinted that you live and work in UK, please correct if I am wrong), but there is no reason to expect everybody else to refrain from criticizing the British.

British brutalities in India are part of recent history which is well documented. Why stop those who want to use this as a lever to extract whatever advantage they can from the British in business/political negotiations? Every time their politicos talk about trumped up "Indian human rights abuses" to get into the good books of their Pakistan origin vote banks, or they block Indian origin businessmen doing legitimate business in UK, or make it harder for Indian s immigrate in to UK, it is perfectly acceptable to shine light on the documented colonial brutalities.

Could you please elaborate why papering over is advantageous to India?

As for the math/education discussions, I request all the interested parties to regroup in the Indian Education thread and/or Math thread.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 24 Dec 2012 06:43

Jambudvipa wrote:Starting out with a quote from MG,the favourite of all seculars:

Jambudvipa ji, why this pot shot at Gandhiji and seculars?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 24 Dec 2012 08:13

Starkey was a PhD and a Fellow of Cambridge, where he spent teaching and researching for 8 years, and followed it by rubbing shoulders with economists and social scientists at London School of Economics for the remainder of 30 years as an academic. As far as I know, he still supervises PhD's.

I remember him making some comments about the Rochdale traffickers being a product of the foothills of the Punjab. Depends on which way we take it. Under current context - he can ony mean Pakistan.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 24 Dec 2012 08:26

brihaspati wrote: No comments on as to what Katherine's statements imply for the British education system - whether it supports to some degree or not what was implied by "in shambles"?

No comments on the grade inflation issue?

No comments on the so-called inequality debate?

No comments on the "discipline/physical contact/male teachers" issue?

No comments on the Times higher education report's comment about UK unis's ?

How come you have studiously avoided acknowledging or commenting on the Learning Curve results published by Pearson? These results show that the UK is placed 2nd in Europe and 6th globally. All the other issues you have highlighted deserve and receive a proper airing, but for an overall assessment, we are back to the league tables.

brihaspati wrote: As for "expecting" : yes I should have noted the pattern earlier - for you do

"not at all expect that a leading British university would include on its faculty staff that provide qualified support for terrorism, provided that the victims are non-Western and the perpetrators are prepared to cooperate to avoid terrorist attacks in the West."

You ascribe a certain "moralism/decency/" by default to the British institutions. Anyway, I think we have differed before also on the compatibility of enjoying aspects of "British culture" such as its literature while being aware of any imperialist/genocidic aspect too directly connected to the literateurs themselves.

So, my two liner attack on Anatol Lieven and professed enjoyment of Jane ("no mention of slavery") Austen caused you to conclude that I am an inveterate defender of all British institutions? You're down from 2.5 to 1.5 straws I'm afraid.

Anyway, I think its lazy and boring to focus on the individual rather than the argument; but I understand the malady is widespread in modern academia.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 24 Dec 2012 08:49

Well, for one thing, Pearson is a very new index - whose validation is yet to be seen. There is a great deal of skepticism about it too - hence I did not want to bring it up. Second, as an economist I hope you would squirm at the talk of measuring "intangibles"? Here is a writeup from ibtimes:

http://www.ibtimes.com/global-education ... els-903842
A new report has ranked Finland as the best educational performer on Earth. In Global Education Rankings, Asian Tigers Nip At Finland’s Heels

At first glance, the findings are a bit odd. You might expect the best performers – or the worst, for that matter – to come from the same general region. Finland in first place? That’s no surprise -- those northern European countries always seem to do well on lists like these. But the next four countries are worlds away; No. 2 is South Korea. Then comes Hong Kong-China, then Japan, and then Singapore.

With a gang of Asian powerhouses in ascendancy, Finland is looking pretty lonely at the top. As for global superpowers, the United Kingdom comes in 6th. The United States is in 17th place. Russia snagged 20th; France, 25th. And of the 40 ranked, the three worst countries were Mexico, Brazil and Indonesia.

The report, called “The Learning Curve,” was produced by the Economist Intelligence Unit, or EIU, and published by Pearson, an educational firm. It ranks countries according to various criteria, including standardized test scores, matriculation and literacy rates.

At a time of devastating recessions that have affected commerce in virtually every corner of the globe, the new data is of vital importance. It’s about much more than just rankings, which make for great talking points but miss the broader implications of the research.

“Although they may not be able to quantify it, governments in most countries recognize a link between the knowledge and skills with which young people enter the workforce and long-term economic competitiveness,” says the report. “For this reason, interest is intense in research which explores the factors that seem to lead in some countries to outstanding educational performance, and ultimately to better qualified workforces.”

Given that link, it is no surprise that, economically, Finland is doing much better than nearly all of its neighbors. Income per capita is high, exports are diverse, and heavy public spending on welfare programs has raised standards of living across the board.

Finland, which acts as a creditor nation while the euro zone struggles through its seemingly endless debt crisis, is the only EU country that still maintains a top credit rating with no imminent risk of a downgrade. (Credit agency Moody’s slapped Germany, the Netherlands and Luxembourg with a negative outlook in July.)

Finland’s government, too, is well regarded for its efficacy and transparency; it is a parliamentary republic that enjoys a strong multi-party system. The latest Democracy Index from the EIU, which lists countries according to the extent of political liberty and the functionality of their governments, ranks Finland eighth among 167 surveyed countries.

These good rankings would seem to go hand in hand with an effective educational system. But then again, other education superstars on the Pearson list aren’t doing quite that well. On the EIU Democracy Index where Finland performed so admirably, South Korea and Japan fell behind, coming in 22nd and 21st respectively. Singapore and China did even worse, ranking 81st and 141st respectively.

So if good politics are not a reliable bellwether for high-ranking educational systems, what makes Finland so special? How are the other high-ranking countries able to excel in education, even while faltering on democracy?

In short, what do Pearson’s top-ranked educational systems have in common? It’s a tough question, because Finland is pretty unique. It has long been heralded as a global leader in education reform, which it pursued with gusto during the 1970s and 1980s.

In Finland, standardized testing is frowned upon. So is homework. Students, especially young children, are encouraged to learn creatively. Teachers have a high degree of independence when it comes to curricula and assessments.

Perhaps most importantly, Finland’s socialist-leaning policies have made educational advancement accessible to virtually everyone. All schools – even universities – are funded publicly. Child healthcare and welfare services are widely available. By law, pre-schools are situated in every community.

Policies like these are easy to pull off in societies like Finland’s, where the population is small and essentially homogenous. But in the Asian countries that also made a fair showing on the “Learning Curve” list -- like China, where the population is vast, or Singapore, which has devoted itself to privatization -- an emulation of Finland’s system would be highly impractical.

To figure out what Finland and the Asian runners-up have in common, researchers for the Pearson study had to dig deep. They concluded – disappointingly, but perhaps predictably – that there is no “magic bullet” for a winning education system. After all, the two top countries’ approaches are wildly different. Finland’s laissez-faire attitude toward homework and testing would be seen as backward in South Korea, where rote memorization and long study hours are par for the course.

But the report still holds out hope for a tenuous connection.

“The two systems, though, do share some important aspects when examined closely,” it says. “One element of this is the importance assigned to teaching and the efforts put into teacher recruitment and training. [….] The practices of the two countries differ markedly, but the status which teaching achieves and the resultant high quality of instruction are similar.”
In addition, adds the report, “there are cultural parallels. The two societies are highly supportive of both the school system itself and of education in general.”

So… High status for teachers? A culture of education? And the end of the day, it seems, this comprehensive global research project has yielded conclusions that are more than a little fuzzy. Education officials keen to emulate the success of Finland and South Korea will be disappointed to find that there is no easy roadmap.

But in some ways, that’s exactly the point. General ideas like teacher appreciation may work precisely because they are vague enough to be molded to fit each country’s specific circumstances. The study lays out no simple guidelines for educational reform – but to do so would be misleading. “As the differing approaches of Finland and South Korea show, there are diverse paths to success,” explains the Pearson report, adding that further research is necessary.

“Education remains an art, and much of what engenders quality is difficult to quantify.”

See it is an artistic affair now, "difficult to quantify"! People of my narrowly focused background with some little experience of modelling or quantifying complex processes would probably immediately see the vague conclusions and failing consistency or cross-validation checks as being a direct result of vague and possibly irrelevant inventions of measures. Variables that add more randomness to the model instead of explanatory power.

member_23651 · Post by **member_23651** » 24 Dec 2012 09:25

brihaspati wrote: Rochdale traffickers being a product of the foothills of the Punjab.

That would be the most naive & ignorant comment. most of the people living in foothills Punjab/Himachal are unfortunate, in the sense no area development has taken place compared to rest of INdia, more than often not they end being Fauji or being helpers at shops. Very few people would ever go to out of India, and that too belong to minuscule upper middle class kids going out for MS/MBA .

Its a punishment they are getting for not breeding like RATS or not doing a Khali/Mao and hence of being no consequence to INdian govt, It took Central govt in India 60 years to give them token rail line.. no there were no terrain difficulties as the area is mostly flat or low height foothills. MOst of the area has severe water problems during summers. they have very poor Medical facilities. For every illness they would have to run to Jalandhar, Punjab or Chandigarh or get slaughtered by private nursing docs. For good education they have to either come Chandigarh or Jalandhar. 4-5 years back 20 -30 km stretch given to Chinese company to convert from 2 lane to 4 lane who bought their own chinese workers could not complete the road. Till the last time I visited in Jan 2011, the whole Road was kept dug up as if Runway denial bombs were lodged into it, and it was in this state since the time it was given to chinese. These people are real cannon fodder of India.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 24 Dec 2012 09:40

Punjab - is a name shared by Pakis too. Foothills on the Indian side would border undivided Punjab, not that accurately after reorganization of states in current times. Paki Punjab is closer to foothills on its side. Starkey could be asked as to which Punjab he meant. In the context of the actual gang - he would be aware of the Paki connection. We tend to think of Punjab == Indian Punjab. Outsiders, especially in UK need not think so - because Pakis use the word in their own contexts quite a lot.

Starkey's name came up because his remarks on the state of British education was dismissed and he was mocked. It just turns out that he was PhD and fellow of - wonder of wonders - a "top" uni mentioned sometime ago on this very thread, and then a don at London School of Economics where he taught and researched apparently. Thought it might be of some value to an avowed economist.

He is well known for his "slasher" comments, "abrasive" is the nicest word I have ever heard of him. His comments on the Tudors, or even Henry VIII, remain quite "harsh" by usual standards of scholarship on the monarchy.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 24 Dec 2012 10:47

devesh wrote:perhaps BRF should also ban the guy who coins cute epithets like "B-potty"?

why the selective rage against JD ji?

jambudvipa ji's post gives some perspective for all of us. and perhaps some of us would be less enthusiastic about protecting the vaunted "Brit heritage" and reputation, after knowing what they did to us...

The paki could have made it without calling people names. Everybody was cautioned and advised one post earlier. Trying to keep the flame high and stirring the pot is a paki tactic. And from behind the cover of a "patriotic" cut paste job. Typical ak fire from behind women and children.

Do you see the problem with the way this thread is going? Stick to the discussion, Everyone, without ...(see my initial post).

If people cannot restrain themselves, they will have to be restrained. We will not have a Ghulam bilour vs ttp situation here.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 24 Dec 2012 11:06

matrimc wrote:
eklavya wrote:We really ought to be able to talk about modern Britain on this thread without bringing in colonialism and whether some chap is a bootlicker or such like. We owe it to ourselves and to everybody else on the forum.
Eklavya ji,

I can understand your unease at the criticism of the British (since you have hinted that you live and work in UK, please correct if I am wrong), but there is no reason to expect everybody else to refrain from criticizing the British.

British brutalities in India are part of recent history which is well documented. Why stop those who want to use this as a lever to extract whatever advantage they can from the British in business/political negotiations? Every time their politicos talk about trumped up "Indian human rights abuses" to get into the good books of their Pakistan origin vote banks, or they block Indian origin businessmen doing legitimate business in UK, or make it harder for Indian s immigrate in to UK, it is perfectly acceptable to shine light on the documented colonial brutalities.

Could you please elaborate why papering over is advantageous to India?

As for the math/education discussions, I request all the interested parties to regroup in the Indian Education thread and/or Math thread.

matrimc, thank you for giving me an opportunity to clarify. To be absolutely clear, I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with anyone criticising Britain or the British. The British are No. 1 Champions at criticising themselves, we Indians are No. 1 champions at criticising ourselves, and so are the Americans at criticising themselves, etc etc. It is a hallmark of a healthy democratic society. We should all be free to say and write what we think, positive and negative, about any nation on the planet. But that freedom also permits an Indian to defend the British, if one so pleases. All I am saying is that if an Indian chooses to defend some element of Britain, that should not lead to attacks on their motives, their character, or their loyalty to India.

For example, if one honestly thinks that Jacques Kallis is a better batsman than Sachin Tendulkar, or that Dale Steyn is a better bowler than Zaheer Khan, one should be able to say so, without being accused of being a South African sympathiser, an apartheid supporter, or something like that. You could say "I don't think you understand the first thing about cricket" but not "what's wrong with your character".

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 24 Dec 2012 11:24

JE Menon wrote:
devesh wrote:perhaps BRF should also ban the guy who coins cute epithets like "B-potty"?

why the selective rage against JD ji?

jambudvipa ji's post gives some perspective for all of us. and perhaps some of us would be less enthusiastic about protecting the vaunted "Brit heritage" and reputation, after knowing what they did to us...
The paki could have made it without calling people names. Everybody was cautioned and advised one post earlier. Trying to keep the flame high and stirring the pot is a paki tactic. And from behind the cover of a "patriotic" cut paste job. Typical ak fire from behind women and children.

Do you see the problem with the way this thread is going? Stick to the discussion, Everyone, without ...(see my initial post).

If people cannot restrain themselves, they will have to be restrained. We will not have a Ghulam bilour vs ttp situation here.

so jambudvipa ji is a Paki?!?! waah JEM saheb, your powers of reasoning are tactically brilliant and strategically deep!

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 24 Dec 2012 11:34

brihaspati wrote:Starkey was a PhD and a Fellow of Cambridge, where he spent teaching and researching for 8 years, and followed it by rubbing shoulders with economists and social scientists at London School of Economics for the remainder of 30 years as an academic. As far as I know, he still supervises PhD's.

I remember him making some comments about the Rochdale traffickers being a product of the foothills of the Punjab. Depends on which way we take it. Under current context - he can ony mean Pakistan.

Look, Starkey is too attention-grabbing for my taste. I prefer academics who publish research and scholarly works rather than try and generate headlines and cheap publicity from TV studios. Compare Starkey to Simon Schama ... night and day. Niall Ferguson is equally annoying, although I did rather enjoy his spat with Pinko Mishra.

And on the Rochdale gang, Starkey did rather duck the issue, right? Punjabi Hindu men and Punjabi Sikh men were not involved in the trafficking, right? If a high-profile muslim woman of Pakistani origin (Lady Warsi) can point the finger at men of her own community, then why did Starkey duck the "M" word or the "P" word?

Lady Warsi: some Pakistani men think white girls are fair game

The misuse of the word "Asian" and "South Asian" already makes me feel sick with anger.

Now Starkey talks in code about "Punjab", but 95% of the audience doesn't have "decoding technology" and may now think that all Punjabi men are disgusting predatory monsters.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 24 Dec 2012 11:41

>>so jambudvipa ji is a Paki?!?! waah JEM saheb, your powers of reasoning are tactically brilliant and strategically deep!

But others can be "hidden brown sepoys" meaning traitors?

So the question again: do you see the problem with the way the thread is going?

And how do you know he is not a paki? Are you a paki too? Why are you defending him? What is your interest in this? You may be a Chinese troll getting $1 instead of .50 cents because of better engrish. Do you think anyone who says anything positive about Britain is a hidden brown sepoy or imperialist running dog (same thing really)...

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 24 Dec 2012 11:57

Starkey:
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=oj9dA6E3 ... j9dA6E3fJw

Schama:
[youtube]Z7ndvcAYlE4#/watch?v=Z7ndvcAYlE4[/youtube]

jambudvipa · Post by **jambudvipa** » 24 Dec 2012 12:52

Devesh ji..as they say sticks and stones may break my bones but JEM ji's kind words tell me a raw nerve has been touched somewhere.

Matrimc ji , about MG i did not mean sarcasm,it was only directed at the seculars who selectively quote from his writings/speeches.I have a lot of respect for MG's ideas on rural India and its resrugence.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 24 Dec 2012 13:53

yeah... seems like dhaga cool-down will do good.

The two nations that have most hurt and continue to hurt India, her interests and her people are Ukstan and its protege Pakistan. Only. IMVVHO of course and other disclaimers. So no need to be apologetic about disliking UKstan

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 24 Dec 2012 14:06

jambudvipa wrote:Another occasion and the hidden brown sepoys come out in full force.No discussion of the current relations with the UK is complete wihout a proper understanding of the "special relationship" they have with us.

So, we were talking about the state of the UK education system. Please do tell us what you know and think about the UK education system. Let us see if you have a "proper understanding" that others lack.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 24 Dec 2012 14:44

>>Devesh ji..as they say sticks and stones may break my bones but JEM ji's kind words tell me a raw nerve has been touched somewhere

Don't think that a paki provacateur like you will go unchecked. one can only have contempt for wannabe Talibs like you ever ready to tar and label others. Yes raw nerve has been touched, the one that senses for hypocritical little pakisatans spreading their insidious evil in devious ways thinking they can get away if they post only once in a while... Putting "ji" here and there is not going to cut it. No doubt wearing a red thread on forearm too... Think about it, why am I having a go only at you you paki?

If words don't hurt you, unlike me as you suggest, let's see how long you can refrain from posting on brf in reply or without labeling others. Then it wouldn't matter if you are a paki or not.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 24 Dec 2012 15:02

JEM ji,
Can we have the thread locked for a while..?
before posters begin replying to old posts probably not intended or directed at them and before Friendly fire happens ?

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 24 Dec 2012 15:12

Thought about it Lilo. But decided against because people must realize and recognize what this name calling can lead to... Only the mullah will win in the end, the loudest noise, someone will always be there to out-choot, to shout louder and longer and then cut and delete posts and censor sh1t and ban at will.. Then what? I don't think anybody wants BR to go there...

So lets see who wants to not read earlier posts and come and post crap about other posters here.

Thank you nevertheless for thinking about forum interests.

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 24 Dec 2012 15:29

The mods have their work to do on the forum and we can make it a little easier for them by keeping it civil.
---

But British bashing is here to stay on this thread whether we like it or not. The simple reason for this is that you will find fodder for that in the British press. Now I have touched on this a little earlier too - anti-India sentiment in Britain in quite prevalent it seems . It is not just some cheap rag like the DailyMail but it extends to the elite-pretends like the Guardian...across the spectrum. You will be hard pressed to find anything cheery about INdia in the media there and not one medium is exempt. A look at the comments on any of the newspapers will show that it is not just the editors/journalists/reporters but the general populace that harbors these sentiments. And I have been reading and watching their press/ TV channels for the past 5 years. So yes, it baffles me when people come in defense of UKstan - on THIS forum.

It is important to understand that the view of INdia, to a large extent, was shaped by Britain to the rest of the world. And let us be honest there - apart from caste , sati, untouchables and slums, you do not have anything there. And anyone who was traveled to different countries will know that you will be asked this question when conversations get a little longer - "are there still untouchables and widow burning?". And if you thought that was passe, you must then watch the THe Best Marigold hotel movie - produced and directed by British in 2012. A scene where one of the maids is introduced as an untouchable was quite strange - simply because it was not necessary at all for the plot but mentioned nevertheless. What do you call that intrinsic need of the Brits to bring that up? And believe me, I have been asked this quite a few times by several people from European countries ( the last one was from a Polish quy 2 weeks back ) . I usually respond by saying that the Brits want to legitimize their theiving, colonial ways by using that . And I usually do not hide my ideas about Britain to anyone and clearly state that I dislike them for what they did. To my surprise , a a few people warmed up to me after I said that.
Yes ,as JEM said , we need to keep it polite here but if people find the British bashing here unpalatable, they have an option to ignore this thread no? ( I wrote something after this but removed it after JEM#s last warning

)

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 24 Dec 2012 15:49

>>But British bashing is here to stay on this thread whether we like it or not. The simple reason for this is that you will find fodder for that in the British press

Even if there were no fodder in the British press, there are plenty of reasons to deliver occasional kicks in the vitals to uq. The "aid" drama being one example.

But this does not excuse anyone calling anyone else traitorous and the like.

We need to see all sides of a case in order to make our own case stronger. Otherwise, the next time someone brings it up at a dinner conversation, you won't have brihaspatis counter to eklavya or vice versa to refer to in your mind because eklavya/brihaspati wouldn't have made the post in the first place... And we will have to sulk home and do the damn googling ourselves.. Too little too late!!!

Moreover, I think we can all be fairly confident that just because one poster or another raises some positive element of uq that does not make the person who raised it necessarily a traitor or a "defender" of uq. We can take in posts we don't agree with without going apeshit. Lets leave that to the pakis and their fora...

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 Dec 2012 18:56

how good are the Aus univs? in any survey made by bartania agencies, ofcourse bartania scores a lot of spots in the top50, but I have noticed Aus gets quite a few spots as well, belying the small size of their population. is it some slipstream effect of bartania, some english medium of instruction bias to these surveys, or simply that fact that many countries that can afford to send forth students tend to be from asia where bartania held sway, so either they land in UK/USA or in canada/Aus?

for instance japan with a pop of 90 mil (5x that of Aus) will typically have only a few honorary names in such lists, but ultimately is a industrial and soft power giant while Aus is not.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 24 Dec 2012 19:04

Largely the ex colonials feel more comfortable sending their kids to a country where the language is known, I think. Lebanese send theirs to France a lot, though many end up In US as well due to large English speaking local population as well... Parents generally feel more comfortable that way, plus it helps that amirkhan is primary in this field and glory is reflected like nobody's business...

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 24 Dec 2012 19:22

Whole bunch of whiny nonsense deleted by admin - JE Menon

Caution.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 24 Dec 2012 20:34

eklavya wrote:
matrimc wrote: Eklavya ji,

I can understand your unease at the criticism of the British (since you have hinted that you live and work in UK, please correct if I am wrong), but there is no reason to expect everybody else to refrain from criticizing the British.

British brutalities in India are part of recent history which is well documented. Why stop those who want to use this as a lever to extract whatever advantage they can from the British in business/political negotiations? Every time their politicos talk about trumped up "Indian human rights abuses" to get into the good books of their Pakistan origin vote banks, or they block Indian origin businessmen doing legitimate business in UK, or make it harder for Indian s immigrate in to UK, it is perfectly acceptable to shine light on the documented colonial brutalities.

Could you please elaborate why papering over is advantageous to India?

As for the math/education discussions, I request all the interested parties to regroup in the Indian Education thread and/or Math thread.
matrimc, thank you for giving me an opportunity to clarify. To be absolutely clear, I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with anyone criticising Britain or the British. The British are No. 1 Champions at criticising themselves, we Indians are No. 1 champions at criticising ourselves, and so are the Americans at criticising themselves, etc etc. It is a hallmark of a healthy democratic society. We should all be free to say and write what we think, positive and negative, about any nation on the planet. But that freedom also permits an Indian to defend the British, if one so pleases. All I am saying is that if an Indian chooses to defend some element of Britain, that should not lead to attacks on their motives, their character, or their loyalty to India.

For example, if one honestly thinks that Jacques Kallis is a better batsman than Sachin Tendulkar, or that Dale Steyn is a better bowler than Zaheer Khan, one should be able to say so, without being accused of being a South African sympathiser, an apartheid supporter, or something like that. You could say "I don't think you understand the first thing about cricket" but not "what's wrong with your character".

Nice analogy. But, saar, kirket was banned with South Afrikans during Apartheid era. It was restarted only after the Apartheid ended. Correct me if I am wrong, but the present regime does of South Afrika does not proclaim pride in its Apartheid era. And there are processes to positively discriminate the victims of apartheid era. In kirket, it led to the migration of Petersen to Englistan. But, if anyone defended the apartheid regime then are the allegations of racism going to be far behind?

Let me give another analogy, kirket related: Lets say person X says that he is a fan of Javed Miandad for his character and he thinks that Miandad has more character than SRT. His opponents would obviously point out that Miandad hobnobbed with known terrorists/mafia and may very well have been a bigtime on fixing ring.... to adore or defend such a person, even purely on kirketing reasons, ignoring his off-the-pitch antics is difficult to swallow. If X continues to ignore the contrary evidence and focus on venerating Miandad, how long before he would be alleged of being a terror sympathiser?

Modern day Brits have not acknowledged or apologised for the deeds of their colonial ancestors. Further, they are proudly enjoying the colonial loots from all over the world. Moreover, their narrative of the colonial time is still more or less on the theme of 'white man's burden'. Given, this background, why should Indian cut any slack for modern day brits?

---

Ajatshatru wrote:@JohneeG

I take due note of your venting out your bottled up bitterness/frustrations of the past now by your rather long/tedious rant....but was this outburst of petulance really required?

BTW, my recollection of the past events (on that particular topic) is slightly different than yours.

Any with an iota of brains that I was commenting on the society and not the incident.
You post at that time, of course, was stand alone and had no connection with that particular incident being discussed on this thread during that time….

You come out with such howlers and still expect people to take your posts seriously? Hmm….

...duh...! You take due note?!

Whatever! Anyway, my reply to you was not long. Maybe you got impression because I quoted the previous posts. The actual reply was short and curt,"Pontificating to others is fine and dandy, but for that one needs to lead by example..."

No, it was not bottled up. The only thing I remember about you is your retarded response. So, I was quite bemused and amused that you are lecturing others, and thats why I posted my reply. I had no intention of actually replying to your original post because it was not worth replying to. Frankly, even this post of yours is unworthy of reply given your vocabulary('howler', 'petulance', 'outburst', and so on).

Anyway, you repeated the allegation, so let me clarify: My observation was triggered by that event but my observation was not on that event, but on the larger society. If you notice, I agreed with Varoon Shekhar saar. It seems you are prone to jumping the gun based on half-baked comprehension of the matter at hand and I could have understood if you misunderstood my posts. But, legal threats? Without asking for any clarification or explanation and jumping the gun?! That was retarded.

Anyway, I am done on this! My point to you in earlier post was simple, "practice what you preach... and don't preach what you didn't practice."

---

JE Menon wrote:>>Devesh ji..as they say sticks and stones may break my bones but JEM ji's kind words tell me a raw nerve has been touched somewhere

Don't think that a paki provacateur like you will go unchecked. one can only have contempt for wannabe Talibs like you ever ready to tar and label others. Yes raw nerve has been touched, the one that senses for hypocritical little pakisatans spreading their insidious evil in devious ways thinking they can get away if they post only once in a while... Putting "ji" here and there is not going to cut it. No doubt wearing a red thread on forearm too... Think about it, why am I having a go only at you you paki?

If words don't hurt you, unlike me as you suggest, let's see how long you can refrain from posting on brf in reply or without labeling others. Then it wouldn't matter if you are a paki or not.

JEM saar,
I get it that you are telling everyone not to resort to namecalling. I agree to it. But what I cannot understand is why 'Jambudwipa' is being given this special 'paki' treatment?

Is it only about 'hidden brown sepoys' comment or is there a history to this? I am asking because I am confused.

I am thinking that perhaps you are saying how it feels to be at the receiving end of name-calling. If thats the case, saar, as a mod, it does not suit you to go after a poster in this manner, even if this is a piskological game. Not meant to offend you...

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 24 Dec 2012 21:37

johneeG wrote:I am thinking that perhaps you are saying how it feels to be at the receiving end of name-calling. If thats the case, saar, as a mod, it does not suit you to go after a poster in this manner, even if this is a piskological game. Not meant to offend you...

With you on this, it's totally unbecoming of a mod.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 24 Dec 2012 22:35

Jambudwipa ji's usage of "brown sepoys" is not his first time in this dhaaga (please to check thread history) then too much offence was taken by JEM ji so atleast there exists continuity in his reaction and its nothing out of the blue. His reaction was similar when other appellations like bootlickers macualayputras (i too was an agent in using this particular term) etc only when they were insinuating such intent to other posters. Also who knows who else might have taken offence ...?? there is always the report button being pressed and quite a few fellow bfrites could have complained not in the open forum but individually. So, attributing individual intent to an action which has a good chance of equally being a result of collective angst is unfair. Lets not bring in ekalavya ji's wordings here as it only makes the discussion more complex and angst ridden.

I think all such terms like brown sepoys , Macualayputras ,bootlickers etc which have the demonstrated capacity to easily produce a dam burst of emotional reaction when construed as being targeted towards other members should be used with utmost care and especially avoided in the midst of already highly charged discussions. If really required , We can always disassemble these terms and use their lengthy statement equivalents and which then cant be construed as that much offensive while still getting the point across.
They may hold lot of propagandu value to us but lets save them for the unseen others (say twitter and other forums or in direct discussions involving britturds ) instead of our own who by their weight of their contribution in their posts and time have shown their own intent and desire to be a jingo in their own mould .

Finally Saars this is getting tedious and pointless even.... cant we atleast take up this discussion on admin actions etc under a burkha thread? say OT thread ?

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 24 Dec 2012 22:50

johneeG wrote:Lets say person X says that he is a fan of Javed Miandad for his character and he thinks that Miandad has more character than SRT.

If that person is smaller than you, suggest you punch them in the face. If they are bigger than you, hire someone bigger to do it for you.

Quite apart from the fact that Miandad's son is married to master-terrorist Dawood Ibrahim's daughter, Miandad is the very embodiment of mediocrity and cheating that is inherent to Pakistani cricket.

A simple statsguru analysis on crininfo will tell you that Miandad, who averaged 52.57 overall, averaged 45.80 away and 61.38 at home (where the Pakistani umpires did not dare give him out lbw, etc). 45.80 is the right measure of this man i.e. good, but far from great.

The great Sunil Gavaskar averaged 51.12 overall, 52.11 away and 50.16 at home. The great SRT averages 54.32 overall, 53.79 at home, and 54.74 away. The great Rahul Dravid averaged 52.31 overall, 51.35 at home, and 53.03 away. Gavaskar, Tendulkar and Dravid are true class that will shine through the ages.

All stats above relate to test cricket.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 24 Dec 2012 23:21

eklavya wrote:
johneeG wrote:Lets say person X says that he is a fan of Javed Miandad for his character and he thinks that Miandad has more character than SRT.
If that person is smaller than you, suggest you punch them in the face. If they are bigger than you, hire someone bigger to do it for you.

What if X is online only?

eklavya wrote: Quite apart from the fact that Miandad's son is married to master-terrorist Dawood Ibrahim's daughter, Miandad is the very embodiment of mediocrity and cheating that is inherent to Pakistani cricket.

A simple statsguru analysis on crininfo will tell you that Miandad, who averaged 52.57 overall, averaged 45.80 away and 61.38 at home (where the Pakistani umpires did not dare give him out lbw, etc). 45.80 is the right measure of this man i.e. good, but far from great.

The great Sunil Gavaskar averaged 51.12 overall, 52.11 away and 50.16 at home. The great SRT averages 54.32 overall, 53.79 at home, and 54.74 away. The great Rahul Dravid averaged 52.31 overall, 51.35 at home, and 53.03 away. Gavaskar, Tendulkar and Dravid are true class that will shine through the ages.

All stats above relate to test cricket.

Tests are obsolete, they will soon fade away. 20-20 and IPL will shine through the next decade, can't say about ages.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 24 Dec 2012 23:47

johneeG wrote: Modern day Brits have not acknowledged or apologised for the deeds of their colonial ancestors. Further, they are proudly enjoying the colonial loots from all over the world. Moreover, their narrative of the colonial time is still more or less on the theme of 'white man's burden'.

Modern Britain has not acknowledged that their empire was every bit as evil as the Nazis. But they are taking small steps:

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=QtjQcvGd ... tjQcvGdTOw

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 25 Dec 2012 00:30

As far as I am concerned, a formal apology is not very relevant. It is the actions that count. If a formal apology is going to bring a sense of closure to their guilt, so be it. For India, it should be business as usual. Their repentance is not a reason enough to forget. What we need is that they turn a new leaf, if not for a win-win, at least in their own self-interest. The days of their bending their former colonies to their will is long past. Since former colonies are refusing to go to them, they should come to the former colonies (which is mainly India) if they want India to treat them in a special manner. It is they who want Indian markets. There are several alternate suppliers who can fulfill India's technology needs.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 25 Dec 2012 01:23

eklavya ji,
no point in dragging this too far about Starkey - he was quoted because he is dubbed a right wing, establishment, pro-monarchy, arrogant, "imperialistic" etc as an academic. Given his Cambridge and LSE background, he should have some academic standing from your viewpoint, I hope - to see that the criticism was coming from a "loyal" side.

Of course you did not write that he "did not publish" journal articles quitely like many other academics, but because you mentioned it for others and in the context of your sentence by comaprison with his supposed other colourful modes of publishing - you will need to search in the mainstream historical journals, including the military history journals. Have a count. You might be surprised. He has published quietly too in the journals. Not many of us here subscribe to or track the history journals.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 25 Dec 2012 04:00

Repeating my post from previous page:

"This is why admins keep saying make your points without attributing labels to other posters and without name calling, patriotism gauging, questioning motives and so on... If you have a point to make, make it without that."

End of effing story. Don't whine later why targeting this chap and that chap or conduct unbecoming admin and so on. Don't support this crappy behavior by anyone from the start and encourage it or join in. Because sooner or later someone will out-mullah you. It's unfortunate it had to come to this but apparently a loud fart really is equivalent to a thousand words. Mao was right the old lech.

So enough with this issue for now. Kindly let the discussion continue peaceably.