Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Harpal Bector
BRFite
Posts: 226
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Harpal Bector » 13 Oct 2014 16:57

On the broader issue of universalism and who owns it - this is a contentious debate as everyone wants to dictate the global ethic.

My response to attempts by various groups from all over the world to dominate the global ethic is simple. I accept whatever seems acceptable and discard whatever I don't agree with.

I feel the Nobel Prize committee became overwhelmed by equal-equal thinking and lost sight of the importance of giving the prize uniquely to Malala.

The committee failed it task. This was not the first year Kailash had been nominated and it would not have been the last. There was absolutely no need to combine the two awards. Kailash could have been given the prize in another year - its not like the child slavery problem he was fighting was going to go away anytime soon.

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

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

Postby shiv » 13 Oct 2014 18:46

Harpal Bector wrote:Malala is sadly neither the first nor the last. She is the girl who lived. Call it chance/will of Allah/whatever - she lived and by her own choice fights the good fight to this day. That makes her uniquely qualified for a Nobel.

It makes her uniquely qualified for recognition. If Nobel prizes are awarded for fluke events - it says something about the Nobel prize itself and in my view behoves us to examine the blind admiration that many people have for that award.

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

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

Postby Arjun » 13 Oct 2014 19:12

Harpal is focusing more on the imperativeness of the human rights challenge that the Nobel seeks to highlight, than on the quality of the solution per se. Perhaps that is the more appropriate approach.

Malala was taking on a far more dangerous human rights challenge in the form of the Taliban than anything that Satyarthi has ever undertaken.

In some sense, by handing out the Nobel to both Malala and Satyarthi - the Nobel Committee has done an equal-equal between the gruesomeness of the Talibanic Islamists on the one hand and the profit-driven carpet makers & granite quarry owners who chose to employ child labor in India, on the other. This is obviously a laughable equivalence.

The Nobel Committee drew attention to the human rights violations and lack of democracy in China with a standalone Nobel to Li Xiaobo in 2010. It would have been ideal had they focused on Islamists and the Taliban as representing the gravest threat to global human rights this year, more especially at a time when the world is witnessing a far more dangerous mutation of Islamist horror in the Middle East.

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6891
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

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

Postby habal » 13 Oct 2014 19:21

the bait here is Malala.

Any criticism directed at a young child will send the impression amongst lay folks of being petty minded and vengeful. Any discussions on merits and demerits of this award must go on these lines.

- Malala is a sweet child, and there are no objections to her getting acknowledged, our objections center around using her as a political pawn ...

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 13 Oct 2014 19:44

The West has every right to dish out their Nobel Peace Prize to any poster child they fish out of the non-Western world. Anybody getting the prize including Malala would be more than deserving of it, as even if her contribution has been nil in fighting Radical Islam, her worth is still more than a prize of little worth, with worth not being more than the money that comes with it.

I have no grudge against the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to Malala. Even Madame Jalebi deserves the prize, let alone Malala. I also don't care about the Committee trying to do Equal-Equal between India and Pakistan, as if that is possible.

My problem is only with Indians accepting the Nobel Peace Prize as worthy of any respect. It is a highly politicized and Western-interest driven award and we should learn to play it down! West should be rejected in every form as a Morality Giver and be critically analyzed as a Quality Giver!

I would like to hear the MEA Spokesman saying that India does see some merit in the Nobel Prizes for Physics, Chemistry and Medicine.

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

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

Postby shiv » 13 Oct 2014 20:32

Arjun wrote:Malala was taking on a far more dangerous human rights challenge in the form of the Taliban than anything that Satyarthi has ever undertaken.


Culturally let us look at some facts. As Hindus we resent the misrepresentation of Hindu culture by the west. The west has gone so far down the route of "individual rights" that they have discarded the right of a child to have a stable family with mother and father, which is an anathema to Hindu society. They have also taken individual rights to a level where the right of expression allows an artist to depict Jesus Christ indulging in a homosexual sex act (with a clone of himself in one picture IIRC). That is fine. That is the way the west wants it. But that is not how we in India want the depiction of our deities, Hindu or non Hindu. We just don't do that. The right of the group trumps misplaced, western dictated individual rights. We have some rights and cannot allow ourselves to be dictated about western individual rights over our group rights.The west gives us human rights lectures in this way.

Now apply the same standard to Muslims. If Muslims do not want their women to be educated, that is their problem. The west promoting something that Muslims may not want is the problem. In a land with non Islamic laws Muslims cannot rule that girls will not be educated. But in Islamic lands - let them do what they want. I don't see anyone laud or cheer Saudi women for wanting to drive cars. The Saudi Royals cannot be touched. If Saudis are not touched out of respect for their religious rights, why finger others? How come Saudi Arabia is excluded from "Universalism"?

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

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

Postby member_22733 » 13 Oct 2014 20:39

RajeshA wrote:My problem is only with Indians accepting the Nobel Peace Prize as worthy of any respect. It is a highly politicized and Western-interest driven award and we should learn to play it down! West should be rejected in every form as a Morality Giver and be critically analyzed as a Quality Giver!

I would like to hear the MEA Spokesman saying that India does see some merit in the Nobel Prizes for Physics, Chemistry and Medicine.



Precisely put!

Here is how a day would look like if India were to be free of WU:
1) Morning news, 4th page --- blah blah won Nobull price for blah blah
2) People give more respect to Bharat Ratna than to Nobel
3) Nobull price winners have to survive on something else other than felicitations and invited talks which would have now happen JUST because they are Nobull price winners. (HT, CNN-IBN i am sure will invite Malala).

In such a case, we value our own awards more than a certificate from WU.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19881
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 13 Oct 2014 21:36

A cynical crab who pulls down fellow Indians, speaketh. :p

The pride and prejudices behind the Nobel Prize- TP Sreenivasan

The announcement of the Nobel Peace Prize for India's Kailash Satyarthi and Pakistan's Malala Yousafzai during serious India-Pakistan border skirmishes led to speculation that it was meant to urge India and Pakistan to stop firing across the border and move to the negotiating table, though the decision was taken long before the present ceasefire violations by Pakistan.

The Nobel Committee is being portrayed as a peacemaker. Malala herself has dramatised the situation by inviting the prime ministers of India and Pakistan to attend the Prize ceremony in Oslo.

This is far-fetched because the award has nothing to do with India-Pakistan relations or the border conflict. India would reject any such linkage as it is likely to lead to external intervention.

Another twist to the award was added by the Nobel Committee by referring to a Hindu in India and a Muslim in Pakistan struggling together for the rights of the children, reflecting the stereotyped approach to the religions in the two countries.

Satyarthi himself has denied that his work had anything to do with his religion.

It was the European Parliament, not any Indian entity, which nominated Kailash Satyarthi for the Nobel Prize. His long list of awards have come from the US, Italy, Germany and Spain.
The reason is that Satyarthi’s struggle for the rights of the children in India was used as a part of the western agenda to impose their standards on India.

At the UN and in the US, we have been bombarded about child labour with the material and evidence given to them by Satyarthi and his organisation. Like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, Satyarthi's work has often embarrassed India by challenging the reports we have submitted to international organisations.


India has been a champion of the International Convention on the Rights of the Child and Indian representatives largely wrote it. But the formulation in it on child labour made it difficult for us to sign and ratify it.

Totally forbidding any employment of children below the age of 14 in any sector would be neither practical, nor desirable, in India.

India tried to sign the convention with a reservation on the child labour clause, but this was not acceptable to the UN. While India was exploring various ways to join the convention, we were under severe pressure from various international NGOs.

Eventually, we signed and ratified the convention on the understanding that we would implement the child labour clause in a progressive manner.

In the US, the then President Bill Clinton had also campaigned for the abolition of child labour in India, using the work of Satyarthi and others to prove that India had no concern for the plight of Indian children.

The ‘Rug Mark’, instituted by Satyarthi to identify Indian carpets which were made without child labour, resulted in the reduction of carpet exports from India.

This had become an irritant in India-US relations even when Clinton was forging new ties with India. The memories of the miserable conditions of children during the Industrial Revolution in Europe should have tempered the criticism against India.

The interventionist aspect is evident in the case of Malala as well. The stereotyped image of Islamic countries consists of denial of education to women and prevalence of terrorism. Nothing illustrates this image more than the Malala incident.

It is believed that she survived basically because she was shifted to Birmingham and received outstanding medical treatment. Pakistan is certainly embarrassed that Malala has received such international attention.

Even though Malala aspires to political leadership in Pakistan, she has not chosen to return to Pakistan. Her Nobel Prize is the second in the history of Pakistan, which makes the country feel proud, but not without a tinge of embarrassment.

The Nobel Prize for those who have many more years in social activism can cause complications in their work. Their dramatic rise in stature may impel them to be more daring. Unless they measure their steps carefully in the future, their messianic zeal may hurt rather than help their causes.

Journalist Praveen Swami went to the extent of saying that the prize is ‘ephemeral, arbitrary and ultimately banal’ and not different from beauty contests. This may be an exaggeration, but for both India and Pakistan, the Nobel Prize for Satyarthi and Malala may be a mixed blessing.

Ambassador T P Sreenivasan is a former Ambassador of India and Governor for India of the IAEA

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 13 Oct 2014 21:46

For Bharatiyas, there is another reason to reject Western Universalism, other than the fact that it is for promotion of Western political, economic and cultural interests!

Western Universalism is also a weak model!

We tend to feel awed by Western Universalism because of our Macaulayist and Dhimmi Deracination and because it looks more promising than the crypto-colonial Nehruvian Socialist and Secular Apathy hovering over India like a pall.

But just because it looks more promising than what we have been forced to tolerate, does not mean it is best suited for us or even what is best suited for humanity.

Western Universalism has also left Western Societies very vulnerable to being overrun by Islam in the next few decades. Basically West has no effective intellectual tools to deal with Islam and migrant Muslims, and moreover Individualism has ravaged the basic fiber of Western society to a level that it cannot deal with the real internal security threat, it faces.

I consider

  1. Individualism,
  2. Transactionality,
  3. Consumerism,
  4. Sensual Overload,
  5. Demographic Decline,
  6. Short-term Profit,
  7. State Monopoly in Arbitration and Social Services and
  8. Irreversible and Widening Social Inequality

as the bane of Western society. Of course Western Society has its strengths too like merit, innovation and high productivity, but in the end it is all about who is left standing!

At the moment I consider the West as a proto-Islamic society!

Ghettos full of orcs are being bred in Western cities and West is left with no other choice than to pump more Jizya into this breeding hoping that money would somehow miraculously improve the quality of the brood or the orcs would show some gratitude!

What Western Universalism does is that it is programmed to treat all the common people alike and not to differentiate or discriminate too much between its own common people and any orcs, because it tries to fit everybody within its own "Universal Values"! In order to export its system of "Universal Values" abroad and thus Westernize the world, the West has also ended up spreading those "Universal Values" at home as well, and thus is forced to view society through its lenses. It tries to look at the orcs through the same glasses! Thus it is unable to do facts based analysis of the threat, and the orcs are celebrating Western stupidity.

Moreover Church in the West itself has rendered any Western Theological Attack on Islam ineffective, with often the Church supporting Muslim efforts to plant mosques and to do Dar ul-Islam-forming of West.

My view is that Western Universalism has made West weak, after a period of monopoly on power!

Satya and Shakti are the pillars of Bharatiyata, and no way should Bharatiyas be taken in by a hollowed-out and weak Western Universalism which continues to be promoted as the manna from heaven!

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

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

Postby Harpal Bector » 13 Oct 2014 23:14

Her survival may be a fluke but I don't think her decision to continue fighting after she survived the assassination attempt is a fluke.

It is a deliberate choice on her part and we have to see that as the exceptional aspect of her contribution.

This little Pakistani girl has more strength of character than 90% of the men in her country or anywhere else for that matter.

Maybe it is obvious that a Pakistan that produces terrorists like Qasab also produces people like Malala and Aitzaz Hassan but I still think the choices that children like Malala and Aitzaz make are worthy of universal respect.

The Nobel Prize committee should be making this point - but instead it goes with equal-equal instead. That is beyond bizarre.
Last edited by Harpal Bector on 13 Oct 2014 23:29, edited 1 time in total.

K Mehta
BRFite
Posts: 966
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 02:41
Location: Bangalore

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

Postby K Mehta » 13 Oct 2014 23:23

Karan M ji,
Is that crab remark sarcasm?

Gus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8220
Joined: 07 May 2005 02:30

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

Postby Gus » 13 Oct 2014 23:51

What has malala done other than being a "spokesperson", " role model", having courage etc. I don't care to get into defining if she is nobel worthy or not - as that assumes that Nobel Peace price is worthy to begin with.

Malala wanted to go to school. Taliban shot her. Malala survived and is now living in UK where nobody shoots at her anymore and she gets to give speeches and do the rounds, foundations blah blah..the NGO industry.

Nothing has changed for her peers in Pakistan, to my knowledge. In that respect at least that edhi guy who runs ambulances is better as he did change lives on the ground.

K Mehta
BRFite
Posts: 966
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 02:41
Location: Bangalore

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

Postby K Mehta » 14 Oct 2014 00:06

That is exactly why I feel she is being propped as a future politician like Im the dim.

Anantha
BRFite
Posts: 1351
Joined: 25 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: US

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

Postby Anantha » 14 Oct 2014 05:01

TSJones wrote:A Pakistani and an Indian, united in one cause..........and receiving medals for it! Now that's just terrible.....or is it?


Similarly we hope for a day when US and Iran can sit together and have peace talks on Christianity and Islam, instead of trying to kill each other bla bla bla...

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

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

Postby shiv » 14 Oct 2014 06:02

Harpal Bector wrote:Her survival may be a fluke but I don't think her decision to continue fighting after she survived the assassination attempt is a fluke.

Bectorji, you say it was "her decision"? A child of 15 (age of Malala when she was shot) is not considered mature enough to drive a car or vote. Even today, at 17, she is too young to vote, and too young to drive a car in some countries. But Malala is considered mature enough to take a decision to fight the Taliban? That is incredible. I don't think she is old enough to make such a decision independently and she is being used. Underage children can be made to think anything by cynical adults who do not necessarily mean well. Immaturity should not be used and portrayed in this way.

Gus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8220
Joined: 07 May 2005 02:30

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

Postby Gus » 14 Oct 2014 06:09

Anantha wrote:Similarly we hope for a day when US and Iran can sit together and have peace talks on Christianity and Islam, instead of trying to kill each other bla bla bla...


or US and Cuba.. :rotfl:

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

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

Postby shiv » 14 Oct 2014 06:17

Gus wrote:
Nothing has changed for her peers in Pakistan, to my knowledge. In that respect at least that edhi guy who runs ambulances is better as he did change lives on the ground.

Edhi is an excellent example.

As far as Indians are concerned I am irritated with the unnecessary remorse and apology shown by some in the Indian media for not knowing who Satyarthi is. India has tens of millions of unrecognized people working on social causes. It takes a statement from the west to make the Indian media develop jelly legs.

What this means is that an endorsement of something by the west makes Indians cringe with embarrassment as if no one knew about it and an admonishment from the west makes Indians cringe with shame and these reactions are there for everyone to see in the media . Anything the west says makes Indians cringe because we know they are watching us and we fear what they might say - the nation behaves like a man who has spent his entire life being abused and tied in chains. So we are going overboard with shame in the media, acting as if we are a nation of child slavers and it has taken this slap on our collective wrists to make us sit up and tak :shock: e note of this Hindu social evil. It is Hindu after all. A man - a "a Hindu Indian" has received the Nobel prize, no less (wow! The Nobellll!) for being kind to children. A Hindu Indian who is kind to children deserves the Nobel.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36423
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 14 Oct 2014 06:17

US & Cuba: that would be like 33% atheist vs. 24% atheist discussions.

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

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

Postby member_22733 » 14 Oct 2014 06:24

In the days upto early 2000s there was a common saying in the western circles: DIE Indians who deal with foreigners are suckers for praise. They are especially big suckers if the praise comes from a western source. Since they have a pathological co-dependent relationship with their narcissistic masters (who have the narcissistic need for feeling superior to all of us darkies), any validation that they get from them is a BIG BIG deal. Much bigger than any validation anyone with a brown skin tone can give them. Thus we see the DIEs wailing about why we have so few Nobulls, so few Bookers etc etc.

Therefore, obviously, any form of praise becomes a potent tool in the hands of the west. It can use it to distort the power equations between our babus, politicians and media people. Hooker, Nobull, Magsaywhat etc........

It is a power we gift to the West. They just use it to their convenience.

If a Bharath Ratna and Nobull piss price share a stage or a political arena, one can tell without much thought on who the DIEs would give preference to.

chanakyaa
BRFite
Posts: 1453
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 00:09
Location: Hiding in Karakoram

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

Postby chanakyaa » 14 Oct 2014 06:41

Last couple of days updates for one of those garbage world index, Global Hunger Index (GHI) came out. As usual Indics were shown to perform poorly, not that it is meaningful or matters. But, out of curiosity, I searched for how many such garbage WU indices are manufactured and published each year...

Human Development Index (HDI)
Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI)
Gender Inequality Index (GII)
Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI)
Gender Development Index (GDI)
GLOBAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER
Global Hunger Index (GHI)
Human Poverty Index (HPI)
Global Gender Gap Index
Global Peace Index (GPI) -- Interesting that it uses word "peace" and not "war", and use "poverty" but not "wealth"

I'm sure there are more

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

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

Postby member_22733 » 14 Oct 2014 06:47

The funny thing is they are conflicting:
You increase HDI --> you increase pollution. You increase productivity --> you increase inequality (natural progression of any capitalist economy). There is no way in the world you can do better at all of this indexes at the same time. Which means, there will always be a stick to beat us with. Just a matter of choosing which one.

India is developing too fast, lets see which index is going bad: Ohhh Global polluters index India is 3rd onleeeee.
Indians are increasing consumption via productivity increase (index of productivity), lets see which index is going bad: Ohh they suck at inequality....

No matter which way they start their anal-ysis, it has to end with: Ohh, btw, Indians suck at blah blah index. (Unsaid: We are better than them there.)

Added later: More I think about it, the more it seems that the west validates itself as well. It has to just be ahead of us in one of these indexes and that way they will be happy that there is no big yeevil country like India threatening their status. The moment we threaten their status, there will be furious amount of "research" going on to ascertain that they are indeed better than us.

For ex: Brishit whining over space program. And some Massa articles on how "our mars probe" is bigger than "their mars probe", and along with an Indian American scientist going: "I dont think it will return anything not-discovered"

The biggest Khujli comes when Indians beat them in their own game. That is inevitable in the future, just a matter of time. So my prediction is: Nobulls, Hookers, Magshayshay will increase onleeee. Which is good in a way because it will be the victim of the law of diminishing returns.

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

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

Postby shiv » 14 Oct 2014 07:21

udaym wrote:Last couple of days updates for one of those garbage world index, Global Hunger Index (GHI) came out. As usual Indics were shown to perform poorly, not that it is meaningful or matters. But, out of curiosity, I searched for how many such garbage WU indices are manufactured and published each year...

Human Development Index (HDI)
Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI)
Gender Inequality Index (GII)
Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI)
Gender Development Index (GDI)
GLOBAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER
Global Hunger Index (GHI)
Human Poverty Index (HPI)
Global Gender Gap Index
Global Peace Index (GPI) -- Interesting that it uses word "peace" and not "war", and use "poverty" but not "wealth"

I'm sure there are more


We need to develop some indices as well

1. "Parental security Index" for children who can boast of having both mother and father living together at home with the child from birth to age 18

2. Family security Index: Percentage of children who have support from grandparents/uncles/aunts in after school hours if parents are busy

3. "Infant security index": Number of hours per day spent with at least one parent physically present ion the same room from age 1 month to 12 months

4. Incidence of "broken home syndrome" - child and adult behavioral problem related to broken homes

5. Underage sex versus availability of Pjornography index

6. Wealthy poverty index: Percentage of people with cellphones, laptops, tablets, internet connections or cars with no permanent home

I can make up more.

But for this we need to think of ourselves as independent people with our own values rather that see ourselves as a faulty people with inferior values. The latter is the case among a very large number of Indians - especially Hindus. Education in India has, for too long been associated with an erosion of Hindu self-esteem

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

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

Postby RamaY » 14 Oct 2014 07:54

LokeshC wrote:The funny thing is they are conflicting:
You increase HDI --> you increase pollution. You increase productivity --> you increase inequality (natural progression of any capitalist economy). There is no way in the world you can do better at all of this indexes at the same time. Which means, there will always be a stick to beat us with. Just a matter of choosing which one.

India is developing too fast, lets see which index is going bad: Ohhh Global polluters index India is 3rd onleeeee.
Indians are increasing consumption via productivity increase (index of productivity), lets see which index is going bad: Ohh they suck at inequality....

No matter which way they start their anal-ysis, it has to end with: Ohh, btw, Indians suck at blah blah index. (Unsaid: We are better than them there.)

Added later: More I think about it, the more it seems that the west validates itself as well. It has to just be ahead of us in one of these indexes and that way they will be happy that there is no big yeevil country like India threatening their status. The moment we threaten their status, there will be furious amount of "research" going on to ascertain that they are indeed better than us.

For ex: Brishit whining over space program. And some Massa articles on how "our mars probe" is bigger than "their mars probe", and along with an Indian American scientist going: "I dont think it will return anything not-discovered"

The biggest Khujli comes when Indians beat them in their own game. That is inevitable in the future, just a matter of time. So my prediction is: Nobulls, Hookers, Magshayshay will increase onleeee. Which is good in a way because it will be the victim of the law of diminishing returns.


I posted this before in a Nukkad discussion and Alternative budget scenarios thread.

India can and will grow in HDI without increasing its ecological footprint. Western civilization as we know will die in less than 150-200 years from now.

http://assets.panda.org/img/original/fig22_human_dev_and_eco_footprints.gif
Last edited by RamaY on 14 Oct 2014 09:38, edited 2 times in total.

eklavya
BRFite
Posts: 1880
Joined: 16 Nov 2004 23:57

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

Postby eklavya » 14 Oct 2014 08:14

shiv wrote:We need to develop some indices as well

1. "Parental security Index" for children who can boast of having both mother and father living together at home with the child from birth to age 18

2. Family security Index: Percentage of children who have support from grandparents/uncles/aunts in after school hours if parents are busy

3. "Infant security index": Number of hours per day spent with at least one parent physically present ion the same room from age 1 month to 12 months

4. Incidence of "broken home syndrome" - child and adult behavioral problem related to broken homes

5. Underage sex versus availability of Pjornography index

6. Wealthy poverty index: Percentage of people with cellphones, laptops, tablets, internet connections or cars with no permanent home

I can make up more.

But for this we need to think of ourselves as independent people with our own values rather that see ourselves as a faulty people with inferior values. The latter is the case among a very large number of Indians - especially Hindus. Education in India has, for too long been associated with an erosion of Hindu self-esteem


Here is an index published by the Census of India regarding the Sex Ratio in India by State/UT:

http://www.census2011.co.in/sexratio.php

Anything worthwhile here, or just another WU index to erode self-esteem? Just wondering ...

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

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

Postby shiv » 14 Oct 2014 08:21

A few months ago I noticed a few children (a couple of boys aged about 14 years) spending all day with their parents (and sometimes without parents) selling fruit from a roadside cart. These vendors, mostly from across the Tamil Nadu border 40 km away, are not "poor". They are running a business in Bangalore and it is unusual to see children doing that work here in Bangalore.

Since their location was illegal anyway the presence of children attracted my attention and I made a few videos and took some photos and called the Child help line in Bangalore.

Here is one video
http://vid1116.photobucket.com/albums/k ... 774a80.mp4

The Child helpline people took some convincing that I was not bluffing - I had to make 3 calls. Finally they did come and spoke to the parents. The children then stopped appearing. (They have reappeared now - but if they are schoolgoing they may be in the middle of holidays)

Later on I got some feedback from the Child Helpline people. They told me that if the parents are with their children and the children are simply helping their parents, nothing much can be done other than advising them on child rights.

What happens in the west is that the laws have been written in such a way that the children can be taken away into foster care. That means western governments have the money, infrastructure and power to confiscate a child from his parents and put him away where the government can implement national laws on the child while the parents may be punished - like the Indian mother in Norway arrested for "force feeding" her child the way I was fed by my mother and grandmother (from their loving hands). In India the government cannot simply take away a child from his parents unless they are committing a cognizable offence. Helping the family business is not a cognizable offence.

In the west governments have taken away the role of parenting and childcare by a web of laws. I don't think they are going a good job over many areas although we hear only the stuff that is good. When we get lectured by the west there is always an agenda and it is most often about money and how to keep money flow unidirectional toward the west. One agenda that I heard about is trade and barriers. The EU places barriers by demanding workplace standards in India like "number of toilets per worker". So India has to meet standards made in Europe to export something.

eklavya
BRFite
Posts: 1880
Joined: 16 Nov 2004 23:57

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

Postby eklavya » 14 Oct 2014 08:43

shiv wrote:In the west governments have taken away the role of parenting and childcare by a web of laws. I don't think they are going a good job over many areas although we hear only the stuff that is good.


Child abuse is a massive problem in the west; certainly judging by the coverage it receives in the press.

Its a good thing that the governments can take away children from abusive parents because that is sometimes the only way to stop the abuse. I don't know if you know about this heart-breaking case:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Baby_P

The state does have the responsibility to protect a child when its parents are not doing so / harming the child.

I don't think West vs. East is a particularly helpful way to think about this problem.

There are so many social problems in the west, whether it is drugs, violent crime, racism, child abuse, etc. I don't think its fair to characterise the coverage of these problems as somehow proclaiming the superiority of the west.

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

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

Postby shiv » 14 Oct 2014 08:45

eklavya wrote:http://www.census2011.co.in/sexratio.php

Anything worthwhile here, or just another WU index to erode self-esteem? Just wondering ...


I think you can analyse this for yourself.

Self esteem is what we make of it.

If Indians act as if the nation does not care and needs a kick up the backside from the west - that is low self esteem

A rational analysis of what is being done to address the problem and why it is occurring is the way forward. How do YOU see it?

In order to determine what the real human sex ratio should normally be, we need data from several centuries in the past. We don't have such data. We are empirically stating that the ratio should be 50:50. Not even 49:51 (which is 960 females per 1000 males). Who decides these things? And why? What is the scientific or biologic rationale rather than the mathematical rationale?

Let me point out another thing simply for the sake of debate. All mammals with male & female genes (i.e. XX and XY) can biologically only produce equal numbers of male and female offspring since sperm has 50% each of X and Y

But most animal species end up adjusting the ratio depending on circumstances so that there can be excess males or females. So the ratio of male to female is never exactly 50-50. If we accept homosexuality as a valid behavioural pattern because animals do it too, why do we worry about small sex ratio differences

Screw the ratio. Look at injustice. If girls are being discriminated against or killed that must not happen.

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

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

Postby shiv » 14 Oct 2014 08:50

eklavya wrote:
The state does have the responsibility to protect a child when its parents are not doing so / harming the child.


This is what I am disputing. You accept this as right, I don't think it is right. The state is impinging upon the rights of parents and is not always making the right choices.

it become east versus west only when west recommends one thing and criticizes east for not doing it. This is something east can do to the west as well. As long as the west does not set up competition with east and demand imposition of standards that they cannot themselves explain there will be no conflict

What is the state? How can the state say that it will care for my child? How far can the state go to say that it will care for my child better than me and my family? Unless you can go into some detail about this - simply stating that "the state" has XYZ responsibility is not credible. The responsibility is for parents. Not the state. Are these communist states or what to claim ownership of every child?

eklavya
BRFite
Posts: 1880
Joined: 16 Nov 2004 23:57

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

Postby eklavya » 14 Oct 2014 09:10

shiv wrote:A rational analysis of what is being done to address the problem and why it is occurring is the way forward. How do YOU see it?

Screw the ratio. Look at injustice. If girls are being discriminated against or killed that must not happen.


I see that the preference for a male child is borne out of the inequal staus of women in society. The skewed sex ratio index in several states tells me that there is something very wrong in the way women are considered and treated in certain parts of / communities within India. The statistics do tell a very sad story, and it is not a WU attempt to run down India's self-esteem.

eklavya
BRFite
Posts: 1880
Joined: 16 Nov 2004 23:57

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

Postby eklavya » 14 Oct 2014 09:18

shiv wrote:What is the state? How can the state say that it will care for my child? How far can the state go to say that it will care for my child better than me and my family? Unless you can go into some detail about this - simply stating that "the state" has XYZ responsibility is not credible. The responsibility is for parents. Not the state. Are these communist states or what to claim ownership of every child?


The consensus (in the West?) is that children have rights, and if parents are abusing those rights, parents lose the right to their children. The laws under which this occurs are made by democratically elected parliaments and therefore reflect the social consensus. Are the laws always applied fairly: no, they are not; we know that minorities get rough treatment from the law enforcement apparatus.

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 920
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

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

Postby symontk » 14 Oct 2014 09:25

In fact those ratios give better insight. For example, the child sex ratio captures the sex ratio at birth. In some states the ratio is totally unbalanced which is a good (or bad) indicator that many girl child births are not reported or the girl child are killed before the statistic is recorded. The argument that girl child is not discriminated falls flat there itself

The second ratio gives the over all sex ratio and so you can see the progression of a girl child to an adult and how the ratio changes. In some states, the overall sex ratio is still lower than the child sex ratio. That points to the fact that a girl child is discriminated during her life time

But I believe to actually understand and appreciate HDI more such ratios are needed. not just the ones which UN specifies

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

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

Postby shiv » 14 Oct 2014 09:26

eklavya wrote:
shiv wrote: The statistics do tell a very sad story, and it is not a WU attempt to run down India's self-esteem.

Nobody said that on here, but now that you bring up the subject, don't you think it is the west that is telling India that the ratio should be some particular figure.

It is not the ratio that is the problem. It is the discrimination. It is the discrimination that needs to be opposed. Equalization of ratios is not the issue.

I believe you can understand the difference. Let me explain for those who might not see it.

If the male-female ratio in India (the end effect) happens to become exactly the same as that in the west, it does need not necessarily mean that discrimination (the cause) has ended any more than discrimination against women has ended in the west because their ratios are more equal.

If the cause (discrimination) is not eliminated by achieving a particular end effect (male-female ratios) it means that ratios are the wrong way of measuring discrimination against females. Does an equal ratio mean women are equal? Why is everyone using male-female ratios as an index of discrimination? It indicates only one aspect of discrimination.
Last edited by shiv on 14 Oct 2014 09:34, edited 2 times in total.

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

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

Postby shiv » 14 Oct 2014 09:32

eklavya wrote:
The consensus (in the West?) is that children have rights, and if parents are abusing those rights, parents lose the right to their children. The laws under which this occurs are made by democratically elected parliaments and therefore reflect the social consensus. Are the laws always applied fairly: no, they are not; we know that minorities get rough treatment from the law enforcement apparatus.

When a parliament imposes rights on a child, the parliament is restricting the rights of parents. In the west in general group rights (familes/societies) are being systematically eroded in the name of individual rights. The state and parliament has no long term proof that it can look after children better than parents. It is merely abusing its power with no scientific data that it can do a better job. Societies and families last longer than parliaments - and I am sceptical about this social experimentation under the garb of rights, group ignorance is being passed off as democracy.

I think that western states are eroding families and it is showing in the data. There is no incentive to promote parenting, let alone good parenting. Those states and their parliaments are wrong. That is not the way forward.

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

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

Postby shiv » 14 Oct 2014 09:47

symontk wrote:In fact those ratios give better insight. For example, the child sex ratio captures the sex ratio at birth. In some states the ratio is totally unbalanced which is a good (or bad) indicator that many girl child births are not reported or the girl child are killed before the statistic is recorded. The argument that girl child is not discriminated falls flat there itself

No one is arguing that the girl child is not being discriminated against - so I don't know why you are disproving a statement that has not been made.

The question is whether equalization of male female sex ratios indicates lack of discrimination against females. Do you have a view on that?

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 920
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

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

Postby symontk » 14 Oct 2014 10:02

shiv wrote:
symontk wrote:In fact those ratios give better insight. For example, the child sex ratio captures the sex ratio at birth. In some states the ratio is totally unbalanced which is a good (or bad) indicator that many girl child births are not reported or the girl child are killed before the statistic is recorded. The argument that girl child is not discriminated falls flat there itself

No one is arguing that the girl child is not being discriminated against - so I don't know why you are disproving a statement that has not been made.

The question is whether equalization of male female sex ratios indicates lack of discrimination against females. Do you have a view on that?


There is a law in India which clearly states that doctors or technicians or nurses should not convey the sex of an unborn child even to parents. But how is this practically implemented? In most of the states if you ask an doctor you would get the right answer. Of course doctor knows that you will not kill that unborn child. But the same question evokes surprise & disbelief in my home state, Kerala because everyone is tuned to the law that one should not reveal that information

When a society as a whole decides that there shouldn't be a discrimination, there won't be. But to think that just because a law is passed, discrimination wont happen is not correct. It might facilitate but not impose. This is a small example in case of sex ratio. But there are many other opportunities to discriminate. I am not saying all is well with Kerala. There are definitely people who still believe that if you give a female a job she will resign it within few years and so they don't prefer females for critical jobs. Some go further and plan out a resignation from that female so that they can get additional donation / fee for the post

But its dying out. My family spoke to several females for a marriage need. None of females were ready to loose their jobs just to be with husband. They all agreed to marry but to stay with their jobs even thought the job was what you will consider puny or insignificant. They are only ready to travel with their husband if the job is assured at the husband's place. That is a big change I have seen in few years in Kerala. I am not sure about other states and I hope that it will come

Why I mentioned the above is because, females themselves are taking care of them and so naturally a change has come

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

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

Postby shiv » 14 Oct 2014 10:11

symontk wrote:
When a society as a whole decides that there shouldn't be a discrimination, there won't be. But to think that just because a law is passed, discrimination wont happen is not correct. It might facilitate but not impose.

The point is that male-female sex ratios are more equal in the west, but that does not mean that women do not face discrimination. But the discrimination they face is not measurable by the statistic of male-female ratios.

This question leads on to the ultimate view of any society on what role women have to play in society versus men. If women must be equal to men in most ways they must stop having children. Even then there will be physical and physiological differences - which could be corrected by giving them testosterone. That is easier than transplanting a uterus into a man

The west has already equalized women so many don't have children. The testosterone bit is an idea that I am offering as an original. You heard it here first. :D

Whether the western ideal of society (promoted by laws passed by groups of parliamentarians) is right or wrong is the first question. The next question is that if the western idea is wrong, we should not accept those ideas as part of "universalism"

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 920
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

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

Postby symontk » 14 Oct 2014 10:28

I dont understand this

I can very well understand that when Nobel peace prizes are awarded to Mother Teresa or Kailash Satyarthi, it can be a backdoor entry into India's issues

But there are states in India which have acheieved betterment inspite of adverse environment. So when some index is saying tha some state is better it shouldn't be used to belittle the significance. I am not in favour of states belittling each other on indexes. Its good to have all states to have better indexes

Lets not be crabs that pull down other fellow indians. Whether its western index or Indian index, it should be good for India. if its not lets examine why its not rather that throwing away the back with the bath water

Gus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8220
Joined: 07 May 2005 02:30

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

Postby Gus » 14 Oct 2014 10:34

female infanticide is to be condemned - yes, but it is a bit rich coming from nations like US where significant abortions take place per capita. apparently it is ok and 'a women exercising her choice' to abort child of unknown sex. Indian social conditioning of patriarchy, 'girl child = expenses' is bad etc (agreed, no defense of that from me), but massa conditioning of 'live your life, child is burden, so abort' is 'exercising choice'.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 14 Oct 2014 10:53

eklavya wrote:
shiv wrote:We need to develop some indices as well

1. "Parental security Index" for children who can boast of having both mother and father living together at home with the child from birth to age 18

2. Family security Index: Percentage of children who have support from grandparents/uncles/aunts in after school hours if parents are busy

3. "Infant security index": Number of hours per day spent with at least one parent physically present ion the same room from age 1 month to 12 months

4. Incidence of "broken home syndrome" - child and adult behavioral problem related to broken homes

5. Underage sex versus availability of Pjornography index

6. Wealthy poverty index: Percentage of people with cellphones, laptops, tablets, internet connections or cars with no permanent home

I can make up more.

But for this we need to think of ourselves as independent people with our own values rather that see ourselves as a faulty people with inferior values. The latter is the case among a very large number of Indians - especially Hindus. Education in India has, for too long been associated with an erosion of Hindu self-esteem


Here is an index published by the Census of India regarding the Sex Ratio in India by State/UT:

http://www.census2011.co.in/sexratio.php

Anything worthwhile here, or just another WU index to erode self-esteem? Just wondering ...


What are these HDI? It is an outcome of social sciences industry in the West. It is an effort by people holding useless degrees in the West to get meaningful jobs. If one wants to build up some industry, one needs to have a "sciences" associated with it, that is some theoretical basis and a whole lots of quantifiable values, which need to be captured from time to time by "qualified" people in that industry, and last but not least, the industry needs to produce some value to the country.

This social sciences industry has guaranteed itself a place in Western societies, by appropriating all social responsibility which ought to lie with society and transferring all that to the state. The state decides how much money parents need to give their children for their studies. The state decides how much support a man or woman needs to give their divorced partners.

Similarly the social sciences industry also serves the foreign affairs arms of the West, and churns out meaningless data on other countries.

eklavya wrote:
shiv wrote:A rational analysis of what is being done to address the problem and why it is occurring is the way forward. How do YOU see it?

Screw the ratio. Look at injustice. If girls are being discriminated against or killed that must not happen.


I see that the preference for a male child is borne out of the inequal staus of women in society. The skewed sex ratio index in several states tells me that there is something very wrong in the way women are considered and treated in certain parts of / communities within India. The statistics do tell a very sad story, and it is not a WU attempt to run down India's self-esteem.


Equality and Inequality are Western constructs. In India the underlying basis of gender relations has always been Respect and Responsibility.

It is West, that wishes to use the individual as the basis of its social theories, and thus comes up with a lot of "rights" and "freedoms" and goes on to put measurable values on to them. From that comes "equality" and "inequality". But from the perspective of "Respect" and "Responsibility", that is all meaningless nonsense. "Equality" and "Inequality" doesn't have any worth in India.

But using arbitrarily chosen measurable values, West can make an argument on current state in India, and then their historians go on to formulate theories on Hinduism and discrimination against women in Hinduism. These are still more theories which are pulled out of their musharrafs, packaged nicely in reports and presentations and then shoved down our throats.

India has gone through its own historical evolution. The issues in our Samaj are an outcome of OUR history. And these need to be understood in our contexts.

At the moment ISIS holds around 2500 Yezidi women as slaves to be raped and sold. Please go and ask, whether Yezidi couples would prefer to give birth to boys or to girls! May be one doesn't even need to go that far! Maybe one can simply ask Hindu couples still living in Pakistan.

From where comes this preference for boys in the states of Punjab and Haryana, and the skewed sex ratios? Why was female infanticide so wide-spread there? It is possibly a mental echo of times gone by, when raising a girl meant that she was open prey for the Mughals, or even the British "officers". Not being able to look after security of one's daughter and other women in the family is perhaps the most heart-wrenching situation for a man and his family!

Preference for boys is a consequence of that insecurity, which is still ingrained in generational memory.

But ask any Western sociologist, and he would talk about Sati with you, and you would go home cursing Hinduism for its "Inequality"!

The insecurity for Hindu women is still prevalent and the corrupt Nehruvian governance system based on continuation of colonialist mentality has done little to mitigate it.

India does not need Western indices, nor do we need Western theories, nor Western prescriptions. All Indians need is iron-clad security for Hindu women in best Hindu traditions!

P.S. I have been reading on twitter that Yezidi women have been killing plenty of ISIS Gazis!

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4277
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

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

Postby abhischekcc » 14 Oct 2014 11:03

Harpal Bector wrote:Her survival may be a fluke but I don't think her decision to continue fighting after she survived the assassination attempt is a fluke.

It is a deliberate choice on her part and we have to see that as the exceptional aspect of her contribution.

This little Pakistani girl has more strength of character than 90% of the men in her country or anywhere else for that matter.


Is this strong character the reason she chooses to live in UKstan?


Her only achievement is that she survived a bullet wound and gave a lot of speeches after that.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cyrano, milindc and 55 guests