Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

[shiv]

symontk, please read this 31 page paper. Many views in this paper reflect what I think

Here is an interesting paper from Harvard on morality and law - which goes far beyond my summary above. However the paper does not reach any conclusions - it just examines theoretical scenarios. Still, a useful reference point for those who are interested
http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/shav ... ev_227.pdf

[shiv]

Just received this, haven't read it, but looks very promising.
http://www.indiafacts.co.in/imagining-j ... n-history/

Promising?

It's great. Will post excerpts and comments in due course.

The lady is a clear thinker in an abstract topic that tends to get muddied by superficial and angry objections by people who simply do not like their world-views shaken. In academia that problem seem to be as prevalent as it can be on this thread.

When cognitive dissonance strikes it strikes hard and the illogical argumentative constructs offered are an interesting insight on their own.

[Gus]

err...people are not aware of the single parent epidemic in massa..

http://www.npr.org/2014/10/16/354625221 ... iage-maybe

Decades ago, an "oops" pregnancy might have meant a rush to the altar. But when Michelle Sheridan got pregnant three years ago, the topic of marriage never came up with her boyfriend, Phillip Underwood, whom she lives with in Frederick, Md.

If anything, it was the opposite.

"It changes the dynamic of the household," she says. "I had a friend who put off her marriage. Got pregnant, and she's like, 'Let's just wait, 'cause we don't know if we're going to be able to make it through this.' "

That attitude reflects a sea change in family life: For the generation under age 35, nearly half of all births are now outside marriage.

Like so many children of the 1980s and '90s — the decades when the nation hit its highest divorce rate — both Sheridan and Underwood are also wary about the institution of marriage.

Underwood says when he was a baby — or when his mom was still pregnant, he isn't sure — "my dad left for a loaf of bread and never came back."

I differ with Shiv a little on what is the main reason for this..it is not just 'individualism'...it is that it is just harder to do it nowadays. It used to be the case that you get out of college in early 20s, get into workforce immediately, get out of all debts, get settled into career, and late 20s or early 30s you have enough money and a career, that you want to marry and raise a family, buy a house etc.

nowadays, young people are saddled with huge college tuition debts and are having longer time getting into a career, that everything is pushed out and the timelines and checkpoints of previous generations is all out of whack now. Of course it is all related to the overall social climate etc..

If this trend continues, I see a future where in lower income, men run away from families (as is happening for a while now), and in middle income - there is no money to get into marriage, and in upper groups - women will just choose to have a kid from sperm bank instead of marriage. Already some companies are offering to freeze eggs, so women can work longer before opting for kids. All this will severely reduce marriage numbers and living together numbers. And the unfortunate thing is, the only people crying hoarse about this - the social and religious conservatives of America - also tend to be batshit crazy about most other stuff.

[shiv]

I differ with Shiv a little on what is the main reason for this..it is not just 'individualism'...it is that it is just harder to do it nowadays. It used to be the case that you get out of college in early 20s, get into workforce immediately, get out of all debts, get settled into career, and late 20s or early 30s you have enough money and a career, that you want to marry and raise a family, buy a house etc.

nowadays, young people are saddled with huge college tuition debts and are having longer time getting into a career, that everything is pushed out and the timelines and checkpoints of previous generations is all out of whack now. Of course it is all related to the overall social climate etc..

If this trend continues, I see a future where in lower income, men run away from families (as is happening for a while now), and in middle income - there is no money to get into marriage, and in upper groups - women will just choose to have a kid from sperm bank instead of marriage. Already some companies are offering to freeze eggs, so women can work longer before opting for kids. All this will severely reduce marriage numbers and living together numbers. And the unfortunate thing is, the only people crying hoarse about this - the social and religious conservatives of America - also tend to be batshit crazy about most other stuff.

I don't think our views are that different. I have no disagreement with what you say. But let me draw a link between what you have written and what I have been saying - because I see them as stemming from the same set of causes. Of course people may not agree with my viewpoint but unless I state it no one will know.

I agree that people are saddled with huge education debts and this is a disincentive to early marriage and settling down that may mean more debts. But it is important to look at the female viewpoint here. Marriage is a two way affair and even if a man is ready to settle down what is happening to womankind in America is informative.

American women are more independent, better paid and more in charge of their own lives than ever before. Many understand that their lifestyle and freedom will be restricted by a marriage like bond and are happy with temporary no-commitment relationships. They also realize that having a child puts a much bigger financial and lifestyle burden on them and more women are choosing not to have children rather than become a single parent.

Many men too are happy with the temporary companionship and one night stands they get. Family and long term relationships are expensive and do not allow them to enjoy the freedom and financial power to do many things that are grossly restricted by having children

The message that seems to be coming out of America is clear. Individual freedom has a lot to offer. More wealth, more time and less commitment to relationships (like parenting) that take away individual freedom (or wealth). The western system encourages this and is happy to push individual freedom as preferable over the bondage, poverty and group misery offered by religion derived morality like marriage and commitment.

I see this as wrong. In fact I see this as a rejection of Christian values in the west. What I am saying is that what religions have said about morality and duties to family (and the loss of freedom and "bondage and poverty" of family) are not absurd. They are necessary for society. Those same values have existed in all societies and all religions and cultural systems - all of whom have had far more time to preserve societies for several thousand years through war, famine, genocide and changes of political system. What is happening in America (as the west in general) is a social experiment that is just a few decades old and the idea that it is the ideal way forward is, in my view wrong. If it is being pushed as an example of a universal way of going forward I wholly disagree.

This is not a lesson that we (India) must take from the west even if it is promoted as a universal ideal.

[Pulikeshi]

And the unfortunate thing is, the only people crying hoarse about this - the social and religious conservatives of America - also tend to be batshit crazy about most other stuff.

This is really the key, their strategy is shrill and ineffective... and it really is a sad to see that instead for becoming inclusive and finding strategies to better society, they have taken to judgements and 'othering'

Several theories have been floated... some are pretty crazy, take it with a pinch of salt -
Marriage became a contract instead of a spiritual bond between two people - ironically some Catholics married to Jew in the US have lamented their differences in how they view marriage, the former as a bond and latter a contract. That slavery caused marriage structure to breakdown among African-Americans (AA), and with the Caucasians later adopting AA culture and mores, marriage as an institution got diluted. Of course 'no fault divorce' is a direct cause. The moving away from Christianity and further the proliferation of denominations (denominization?) perhaps caused challenges - related the mixing of ethnicities (have heard interesting stories from couple of older generation folks on challenges with a Anglo marrying a Italian or French American for example...) The rise of generic protestant Churches with no common ethnic or other grouping, except for common belief caused some of the challenges as well. That is, the support mechanism for marriages in the West is all adhoc. <sarc on - Finally educating women is the biggest problem as my grandmother would say (she was well educated herself ) /sarc off>
There are no meddling Uncles/Aunties and pressure release mechanisms that one in India takes for granted. The extended family concept as in the Indian idea, provides variously a therapy, pressure release and arbitration mechanism.

Notice in contrast, with SD a lot of rituals exists that reinforce family - may be less so now in practice - but there is a festival for husbands, brothers, a time for wives to go back to their family for a visit, a festival for sisters, one for Uncles, one for Aunts, the list goes on... each of these are tied to consumer spending, and each of these encourage local entrepreneurship as specific artifacts are required for these rituals. Notice, while I have nothing against Valentines Day, I will pick on it as an example - just giving someone you love a card or a flower(s), it would be better if local rather than internationally centralized cards makers and flower growers were involved in these practices... I am not suggesting this to be isolationist, but to encourage local groupings, interdependent groups that self organize, etc. there is always a place for international centralized commerce, but it is not the only model. The key is society as a whole has to institute these practices to encourage and sustain groups, families, marriage, etc. The idea that everything that must be done, must be done to expand individual options is flawed!

Just random thoughts as usual, criticisms are welcome.

[symontk]

Here is an interesting paper from Harvard on morality and law - which goes far beyond my summary above. However the paper does not reach any conclusions - it just examines theoretical scenarios. Still, a useful reference point for those who are interested
http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/shav ... ev_227.pdf

It is evident that both law and morality serve to channel our behavior. Law accom-
plishes this primarily through the threat of sanctions if we disobey legal rules. Moral-
ity too involves incentives: bad acts may result in guilt and disapprobation, and good
acts may result in virtuous feelings and praise. These two very different avenues of
effect on our actions are examined in this article from an instrumental perspective.

But that paper doesn't talk about Universalism. it would be a stretch to do so

[shiv]

But that paper doesn't talk about Universalism. it would be a stretch to do so

So? I do not recall saying that i was linking a paper about universalism. Do you believe that links should lead to what is your mind? The paper reflects what is in my mind about morality and laws.

[symontk]

So? I do not recall saying that i was linking a paper about universalism. Do you believe that links should lead to what is your mind?

My mistake, you are happy now?

[shiv]

So? I do not recall saying that i was linking a paper about universalism. Do you believe that links should lead to what is your mind?

My mistake, you are happy now?

My happiness or lack thereof should be of no concern to you.

[symontk]

Do you believe that links should lead to what is your mind?

As you mentioned in an earlier post, that paper doesn't lead to any conclusions. Your argument was that there are morals not covered by law and so the societies especially American societies are degenerating for which you havent given any example. Since the paper was written for American audience, it should have mentioned the same

[shiv]

Since the paper was written for American audience, it should have mentioned the same

What the paper "should" say is not something you or I can decide. Why do you seem to believe that links should hold exact references to what you are thinking in your mind? The paper says what the author wants to say. i say what i want to say.

But the author recognizes a difference between morality and law - which is something you failed to see after my explanation. As the author says, morality seeks to change behaviour before a mistake is made. Laws kick in only after a mistake is made. Each has a separate role.

Perhaps, if you took the trouble to read the paper, you might understand the difference.

[symontk]

I don't disagree with what you told now, but to what you told earlier

there are morals not covered by law and so the societies especially American societies are degenerating

[shiv]

Your argument was that there are morals not covered by law

My argument was not, as you say above, that "morals are not covered by law". My argument was that morality is usually protected by law, but no longer so in America in key areas that I believe are leading to degeneration of American society.

I will repeat details and examples of why I think so when I make sure you are not trolling me. You have obviously not bothered to read much of what was discussed in this thread earlier - so I need to make sure that you are actually interested in this discussion and not in point scoring, checking on my happiness levels or reaching conclusions that I am accusing Americans of racism as you seem to have done so far.

This was my statement made earlier.

Laws in society are usually designed to punish criminal acts that are not prevented by traditions of morality or dharma. Laws and morality are both needed in society. if one discards morality and says laws are enough - that is a formula that permits people to be immoral first and worry about punishment later. And then if the laws don't even protect morality - you have a society that is heading towards degeneracy. I see American society heading that way.

[symontk]

I am still uncomfortable with your statement "laws don't even protect morality". Anyway its finemaybe you didn't intend that.

It seems you are riled up. I didnt join the discussion for point scoring. I became interested in the discussion when there were suggestions that all indexes were a conspiracy against India. The discussion was turning to a pakistani web forum level where all ills were blamed on US. Posters were worried about India's image and not towards actual ground realities

Next came Sathyarthi's Nobel prize and literally "all chaddis were twisted" if I borrow the forum vocabulary. It is one thing to accuse Pakistan of all these behaviours and then turn back do the same thing in India

Anyway since the morality and law questions are settled, can we restart the sex ratio dialogue? (I was joking)

Be happy. (Oh! I can't say that)

Too much restricted space

[Arjun]

Symontk, Can you enumerate the indices that portray India in a poor light and are not directly linked to its current state of economic development ? Perhaps sex ratio is one - are there others that you can think of ?

On the other hand, there are also notable social indices that turn out far better than what one would expect considering the country's economic ranking.

I think it would be useful to understand the overall point that you are trying to convey, if indeed there is one.

[eklavya]

As of 2013, India had a higher under-5 morality rate than all of its neighbours except Pakistan:

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.DYN.MORT

Afghanistan: 97
Pakistan: 86
India: 53
Myanmar: 51
Bangladesh: 41
Nepal: 40
Bhutan: 36
China: 13
Maldives: 10
Sri Lanka: 10

Myanmar, Bangladesh and Nepal all have a per capita income that is significantly lower than India.

There are significant variations across the states. The factors that affect infant and child mortality are complex and not merely related to economic development:

Infant and child mortality in India

This NIMS/ICMR/UNICEF report suggests that factors affecting infant and child morality are:
- Maternal education: children born to mothers with at least 8 years of schooling have more chance of survival
- Children born to adolescent mothers are at more risk
- Children born less than 2 years after the previous delivery are at greater risk
- Children born to malnourished, anaemic and obese mothers are at more risk
- Deliveries attended by healthcare professionals are lower risk
- Children born in ST/SC families are at higher risk
- Mortality among lower standard of living index families has declined the most
- Children whose families have access to safe drinking water source are at lower risk

It is wrong to assume that reports like the one above are trying to paint India in a bad light. They are examining a major development issue with complex causes, some of which are significantly social/cultural (women's education), a question of political/social priorities (access to healthcare workers; access to clean drinking water); and not just economic (the resources available to the State).

[symontk]

Symontk, Can you enumerate the indices that portray India in a poor light and are not directly linked to its current state of economic development ? Perhaps sex ratio is one - are there others that you can think of ?

On the other hand, there are also notable social indices that turn out far better than what one would expect considering the country's economic ranking.

I think it would be useful to understand the overall point that you are trying to convey, if indeed there is one.

Most of them show India in poor light, except may be (its a big maybe) democratic and press indices. But that wasn't my point. I am worried that the initial reactions to indices is like they are "gutter inspectors" and we can improve after some time (that time seems very far away even now, we have been saying this starting from Gandhi himself). When someone do good job in these areas lets learn to applaud them instead of seeing conspiracy everywhere

[Arjun]

It is wrong to assume that reports like the one above are trying to paint India in a bad light. They are examining a major development issue with complex causes, some of which are significantly social/cultural (women's education), a question of political/social priorities (access to healthcare workers; access to clean drinking water); and not just economic (the resources available to the State).

I don't think anybody on this thread has any issues whatsoever with data.

Yes India does have a problem with Under-5 child mortality. There has been a fair amount of research into this and the consensus is that the issue is linked with open defecation. Again, the ratios are skewed by the SC and ST numbers which certainly need urgent focus.

So, Sex Ratio, Access to Toilets and Under-5 Mortality seem to be three indices that are worse than what our per capita income would suggest. The last two, like I mentioned, are probably linked.

[A_Gupta]

To me, the ultimate idiocy is when we don't pay attention to real problems that we have, until it becomes a cause in the west.

To me having a problem is not something make me blush if the impetus to fix the problem is coming from within the country.

[JwalaMukhi]

Looks like we are missing "know your India" thread. Because it seems panties are getting into a wad, when western universalism is being discussed, one still feels the need to learn about India in this thread. Thought there was already a thread - "know your India" for that.

[member_22733]

To me, the ultimate idiocy is when we don't pay attention to real problems that we have, until it becomes a cause in the west.

To me having a problem is not something make me blush if the impetus to fix the problem is coming from within the country.

+1000. Western indices were developed after the west developed. The path they took to get where they are today may not be applicable to our situation, and neither would some of the technology that got them there. Shivji has outlined this problem in the medical field a few posts ago.

We should set our own consensus based indices. Swacha Bharat is an excellent example. The whole thing is entirel by Indians, from Indians and for Indians. It will get a lot of minds thinking on what could be done to solve it and make it better with the tools available within India.

If we were trying to match the west, we would have imported technology that worked for the west. While it may do the job, it may not be the perfect fit for our own unique situation. Even if it is, the production and knowledge of that technology has already been monopolized by the west.

The west uses its indices for many things, and one of the things it does do is to set agendas for 'others'. This is done not out of concern or charity, this is done because they can sell their solutions run by their people and entirely controlled by them.

There is no point competing with the west or running the race the west has set us. The only thing a self-respecting nation can do is to run its own race and compete with themselves.

In such an India, indices alien to India would not even be discussed or given attention. Neither would frivolous awards like NoBull piss . We would be absorbed by the goals we have set ourselves and how to solve them.

[Karan M]

If one asked many if the individuals living in India to complain about how bad things are fhere, they could fill half this thread and then some about the stupidity that has affected them. It is worse when our so called ancients were probably more aware of many basics of life than we are. But one finds it particularly loathsome when many of the same jokers who reduced our once advanced civilization to this mess, now come and point to it after interfereing in our affairs to the extent they still perpetuate the damage they caused. It is that rank hypocrisy to which one objects. The african american community doesnt need the KKK and its descendants to tell them how to fix their affairs.

[Arjun]

Most of them show India in poor light except may be (its a big maybe) democratic and press indices.

No, most don't show India as being worse than what would be suggested by our per capita income. Please educate yourself on the relationship between HDI and GDP.

Three that do, as mentioned in my previous post - are Sex Ratio, Access to Toilets & Under-5 child mortality.

Democracy and press indices are definitely in the Plus column. As are Cultural diversity, Per capita meat consumption & Divorce Rate.

But that wasn't my point. I am worried that the initial reactions to indices is like they are "gutter inspectors" and we can improve after some time (that time seems very far away even now, we have been saying this starting from Gandhi himself). When someone do good job in these areas lets learn to applaud them instead of seeing conspiracy everywhere

I don't think anybody here has disputed the need to improve on parameters like sex ratio & access to toilets.

Applying your same sentiment to the West though -unfortunately, we don't yet see the same openness to "applaud" India on parameters where India is ahead.

We also need a lot more data on caste-wise and region-wise breakdown of performance on these same parameters for more actionable insights and for ensuring that the ones who are doing well within India are adequately recognized.

[member_22733]

Democracy and press indices are definitely in the Plus column. As are Cultural diversity, Per capita meat consumption & Divorce Rate.

We also need a lot more data on caste-wise and region-wise breakdown of performance on these same parameters for more actionable insights and for ensuring that the ones who are doing well within India are adequately recognized.

This is an important point. The "caste and community" based surveys that the west sanctions in India and Indian villages are primarily focused on Daleeets, which is then conveniently used by the church planters and assorted crony soul-harvesters. That data is also taken as gospel by our DIE Macaulay-santanams.

While there is no denying that Dalits do suffer in India, it is only a partial picture of the reality. It maybe that there are other communities that are suffering equally hard, but we have no way to analyse. Again, this highlights the need for such things generated within India, by Indians and more importantly FOR Indians.

[member_22733]

The african american community doesnt need the KKK and its descendants to tell them how to fix their affairs.

The "white" belief in the US is that non-whites cannot take care of themselves, and hence need to be punished more harshly to make them behave.

This is what happened in Jim Crow era where Blacks were lynched for crimes as small as whistling at a woman (Emmett Till), to now where a black kid is shot to death for carrying a drink and a pack of skittles or playing "loud" music (Trayvon Martin, Jordan Davis etc)

This is a hangover from the colonial/slavery era where whites were technologically superior to most of the other countries. It will take a couple of centuries to revert back, which is a nano-second in scale of human history.

[A_Gupta]

Just another reminder of the work ahead of us, from Balu.
http://www.hipkapi.com/2011/03/02/god-d ... angadhara/

[shiv]

This NIMS/ICMR/UNICEF report suggests that factors affecting infant and child morality are:
- Maternal education: children born to mothers with at least 8 years of schooling have more chance of survival
- Children born to adolescent mothers are at more risk
- Children born less than 2 years after the previous delivery are at greater risk
- Children born to malnourished, anaemic and obese mothers are at more risk
- Deliveries attended by healthcare professionals are lower risk
- Children born in ST/SC families are at higher risk
- Mortality among lower standard of living index families has declined the most
- Children whose families have access to safe drinking water source are at lower risk

It is wrong to assume that reports like the one above are trying to paint India in a bad light.

But they are used to paint India in a bad light by people who suggest the wrong or nonsensical solutions.

Let me list out India bashing solutions that are prescribed for India:

India has high maternal and child mortality therefore

• Do not have a space program
• Spend less on defence (it is OK for someone else to arm Pakistan, but we need to spend less on defence)
• The Hindu caste system is the problem. Hindu reform. Oppose Hindutva which is oppressive
• India's nuclear race with Pakistan is responsible

None of these "recommendations", which we are not supposed to object to will make any difference to maternal and child mortality. Those are simply India bashing points using the metric of child and maternal mortality. Anyone who objects to these unrelated recommendations is labelled as a right wing jingo/hindutva vadi who is responsible for Indian backwardness, child and maternal mortality, lack of toilets, caste system etc

The list quoted at top has several redundant points which fluff up the list unnecessarily. Many headings call for the same solutions or are part of the same problem worded differently. Let me expand on that to state what is necessary

1.Maternal education:
Will maternal education improve child mortality? Yes only if the mother is educated about birth spacing (contraception), clean water and the need to seek medical attention under certain circumstances and such medical attention is available. Lack of education is a "contributory factor" not a "causative factor" in such mortality.

2. Children born to adolescent mothers are at more risk:
Absolutely. This means that India as a society should discourage underage pregnancies. Stopping child marriage is is an obvious step. But after that should we adopt or reject other norms of western universalism by encouraging teenage sex in the name of "sexual freedom and human rights" along with a proliferation of pjornography as part of freedom of expression and freedom of information? Note that India is not described as being free enough because we do not allow western freedoms. India is anti freedom.

3. Children born less than 2 years after the previous delivery are at greater risk:
Redundant point - this has already come in point no 1 with regard to maternal education. Education about birth spacing and contraception

4.Children born to malnourished, anaemic and obese mothers are at more risk:
The reasons for malnourishment among mothers are most frequently multiple births, lack of ante-natal care (calcium and Iron supplements), poverty (large family). Correction lies in building infrastructure to provide such basic care to every nook and cranny of the country and maternal education

5. Deliveries attended by healthcare professionals are lower risk:
Solutions Maternal education, healthcare infrastructure - already mentioned

6.Children born in ST/SC families are at higher risk: Is the solution as follows: "It is the Hindu caste system. Conversion to Christianity/Islam would end all this because this is a Hindu problem". No it is not. Maternal education and infrastructure are the answers here as well. SC and ST people are a class of Indians who have had the least education and most poverty. Absence of education and poverty have been blamed on the caste system. Changing religion by conversion does not solve this problem. This is definitely a metric that is used to bash India.

7.Mortality among lower standard of living index families has declined the most: The explanation from the medical viewpoint is simple. Does anyone know it?

8. Children whose families have access to safe drinking water source are at lower risk: Yet another redundant point - which comes under education and infrastructure.

[shiv]

It is pure sophistry to argue that India's development parameters are repeatedly quoted in the media under various headings because of great goodwill felt towards India and a genuine altruistic motive to see all Indians happy, healthy, fat and rich

Can lack of toilets, high maternal and child mortality and social inequity in India be remedied by
1. Pulling back troops from Pakistan border
2. Winding down India's nuclear and space programs
3. "Improving" press freedom and allowing certain types of literature and media to be freely available in India
4. "Improving" human rights by emulating the west in sexual freedoms
5. Signing WTO deal and allowing free imports of agricultural products and genetically modified seeds
6. Signing CTBT and FMCT
7. Allowing access to foreign NGOs to study and investigate whatever they want
8. Avoiding the production of cars or weapons before all social parameters reach Denmark levels?

If Indian social and developmental problems cannot be solved by these recommendations, why are these recommendations suggested along with a simultaneous listing of Indian developmental problems as if there is something linking them? Unless there is a clear cause-effect relationship between Indian social and development issues and the recommendations made, why are the recommendations being linked to social problems?

Why am I being told that I am paranoid and that what I am seeing is pure love and goodwill? Exactly who is stupid here?

[chanakyaa]

Posting links to old BBC documentary "The Century of the Self", which I'm sure many BRFites are already familiar with. On #41, someone posted link to only a first part, so adding other 3 parts. This series is about how those in power have used Freud's theories to try and control the dangerous crowd in an age of mass democracy.

The Century of the Self - Part 1
The Century of the Self - Part 2
The Century of the Self - Part 3
The Century of the Self - Part 4

[shiv]

Posting links to old BBC documentary "The Century of the Self", which I'm sure many BRFites are already familiar with. On #41, someone posted link to only a first part, so adding other 3 parts. This series is about how those in power have used Freud's theories to try and control the dangerous crowd in an age of mass democracy.

The Century of the Self - Part 1
The Century of the Self - Part 2
The Century of the Self - Part 3
The Century of the Self - Part 4

Thanks. 2 down., 2 to go Mind blowing stuff.

What is disquieting is that the leaders and people of America today are people who have been manipulated to think in a particular way and believe in a particular set of things by vested interests and do not behave "normally" as people in an wholly unmodified and unmanipulated society might do.

[eklavya]

It is pure sophistry to argue that India's development parameters are repeatedly quoted in the media under various headings because of great goodwill felt towards India and a genuine altruistic motive to see all Indians happy, healthy, fat and rich

The people/organisations that prepare the development parameters do not do so with the objective of running India down.

The development parameters are informative to guide policy choices made by state and central governments.

A good parent would want a proper medical diagnosis so that they can treat their sick child. If some b*st*rd wants to say that "your child is sick because you are a bad parent", then they can go to hell. I still want the right diagnosis to treat my child, and I care 2 hoots what anyone else thinks.

In other words, just because India haters aim to use the same figures to make nonsensical and idiotic arguments does not mean that the development parameters are useless or that the people/organisations that pepare them are anti-India.

[shiv]

It is pure sophistry to argue that India's development parameters are repeatedly quoted in the media under various headings because of great goodwill felt towards India and a genuine altruistic motive to see all Indians happy, healthy, fat and rich

The people/organisations that prepare the development parameters do not do so with the objective of running India down.

The development parameters are informative to guide policy choices made by state and central governments.

A good parent would want a proper medical diagnosis so that they can treat their sick child. If some b*st*rd wants to say that "your child is sick because you are a bad parent", then they can go to hell. I still want the right diagnosis to treat my child, and I care 2 hoots what anyone else thinks.

In other words, just because India haters aim to use the same figures to make nonsensical and idiotic arguments does not mean that the development parameters are useless or that the people/organisations that pepare them are anti-India.

Absolutely no disagreement with what you have said. But people find it difficult to see where I am coming from because maybe they think I have some decency inside me. I am not a nice person. My objective is not as civilized as you (rightly) say - ie " If some b*st*rd wants to say that "your child is sick because you are a bad parent", then they can go to hell.". My objective is to point out how those b@5#rds use such info and turn it back on them by picking up lousy info about them and smearing them.

The reason I do this is that I see this as a valid tactic of "othering" people and believe that some gorups need to be treated exactly that way. In my view - India and Hindus in general have been particularly targeted o be at the receiving end because of post-colonial bitterness among those who were forced to give up empire in Britain, the alliance of Islam+Pakistan with the west in the cold war and the rise of the US. These things have led to a continuous assault on India that has taken a toll of Indian self esteem.

[eklavya]

^^^^^
OK, we are in agreement. Always happy to knee a b*st*rd in the groin; but my selfish focus is on my own betterment. My self-esteem is vested in achieving the targets I have set for myself.

[shiv]

Posting links to old BBC documentary "The Century of the Self", which I'm sure many BRFites are already familiar with. On #41, someone posted link to only a first part, so adding other 3 parts. This series is about how those in power have used Freud's theories to try and control the dangerous crowd in an age of mass democracy.

The Century of the Self - Part 1
The Century of the Self - Part 2
The Century of the Self - Part 3
The Century of the Self - Part 4

Having watched the first one earlier, I watched the last 3 yesterday earning me the accusation that I spent all of Sunday in front of a computer screen.

Fascinating stuff and I must summarize what the videos document because they are very relevant to this thread and a few others - and in the way people in the west deal with each other and others. I have always said that the west has been playing games with society - but I never realized that mental games have been played since the 1930s and 40s. This video documentary says how that came about.

It started with Sigmund Freud. Freud studied Europeans in the 20s in the midst of mayhem and wars and concluded that all humans were irrational beings - with mad instincts under the surface which would make them commit horrible bestial acts if those unconscious irrational feelings were not kept in check by forcing people to follow some rules in society. People had to be controlled and made to conform so that the inner animal would not run free and create havoc. Freud's nephew Edward Bernays and his daughter Anna Freud continued his work in America

Edward Bernays is a key player. Edward Bernays learned everything that his uncle Sigmund Freud had said. He migrated to the US and popularized psychiatry and made it big - but even bigger than that is that he is the father of "public relations". He was employed by the US govt during the war for propaganda purposes - and it was his idea after the war to use propaganda to make people buy things. He felt that the word "propaganda" did not sound good - it was too much like Goebbels, so he coined the term "Public Relations". What Bernays did was fantastic. He took groups of people and put them in front of psychiatrists and got them analysed for that "hidden inner self" having thoughts, emotions and desired that they did not express in the open. After figuring out what people wanted, they were noted and tabulated and advertisements created to cater to those hidden feelings. Bernays did not ask people to display or change those inner feelings. He merely used them to get them to buy things, so corporate businesses making consumer goods used him to send sales skywards and he became a millionaire.

For example Bernays asked 1000 doctors whether they thought a good breakfast was essential and most said yes. So Bernays told people in ads that doctors recommend a heavy breakfast and made bacon popular as a breakfast food. Another company was unable to sell its cake mix. Bernays got psychiatrists to analyse groups of target women to find out why they were unwilling to use this instant cake mix and found that they felt guilt that they did not have to do any work. So all that Bernays did was to add the instruction "Add an egg" and sales soared. By adding an egg and making the woman do some work, she felt better about it and the cake mix company and Bernays laughed all the way to the bank.

Bernays was even used by a banana importing company to get the CIA to help topple a democratic government in Guatemala - which was then a banana republic. The documentary has a fantastic scene of a nearly 100 year old Bernay coming on to a David Letterman show in which Letterman asks him "Doctor, what's this all about?" And Bernays says "Well it's about the fact that people will believe me better if you call me doctor"

Bernays changed the relationship that American people had with corporates and government and showed how people could be controlled. But in the meantime Freud's theories started taking a beating. A man called Reich said that people should not suppress their inner feelings and should come out and express their "inner self" in the open (We, today, should be able to recognize this expression easily!). Reich's career was undermined and destroyed by a jealous Anna Freud but his theories were taken up by others - and so by the time of the flower power and hippie generation and the Vietnam war people were all going about "expressing their inner self". Amazingly this was all achieved by an oversupply of psychiatrists in America who were very powerful people influencing the lives of rock stars, Hollywood personalities and politicians. Everyone was made to "need" a psychiatrist.

The idea of people expressing their individuality and individual "inner self" was intensely disliked by corporate America who found that they were unable to sell large numbers of production line goods that looked and felt the same to people who were saying "I am different and I don't want what others want". They they employed group sessions (techniques used by Bernays) and questionnaires to get into the minds of consumers and eventually managed to create different product lines to suit different tastes and different people expressing their different "inner self". Satisfying the individual need, rather than group needs became the order of the day.

Still later, Reagan, Thatcher, Clinton and Grodon Brown (UK) all used techniques to to find out individual thoughts and fancies-of-the-day of individuals voters to target them and win their votes rather than stick to any traditional party policy. Right now even the polity in the US and UK are pushing for satisfaction of individual needs rather than national policy or strategy.

My comments:

Society in the US and UK have been messed with badly. The documentary explains many of the things we have been seeing in the media and around us in the last 3-4 decades. Paid media, advertorials. the rise of "Individualism" and the inner self. Rampant consumerism and the dominance of corporates over good politics. The complete lack of guilt or remorse in US/UK populations despite massive damage caused to other societies described as "evil" as long as domestic individual needs are fed. Breakdown of family and rampant abuse of government power and the creation of classes of people roughly divided on ethnic lines.

It is the leaders of these societies, with their deep links to corporations and businesses who are pushing western universalism on others. And many aspects of western universalism bring with them good bijness for some corporates based in the home countries of the west - who have a hold on their politicians.

Western Universalism is hardly the benign, philanthropic, altruistic, kind and humane system that it is made out to be. It is the face of a rapine religion in a new avatar. Watch out.

[shiv]

The fourth documentary above has an interesting story about Clinton's re -election campaign at a time when he was down and out. He employed a guy (who is interviewed in the documentary) who sent out questionnaires to swing voters which essentially did a psychological profile of the person - asking about his likes, dislikes, wants etc. There was only one political question - asking if the person was a likely swing voter.

Thousands of profiles of swing voters were put in a database to see if they had something in common and when a common skein was discovered Clinton promised what those people wanted in his next speech. It was resoundingly successful. It has been used by other politicans as well - including a call center in Denver (or some place) that would call thousands of voters to ask what they wanted. This was touted as "promoting democracy" but in actual fact it was only telling the candidate what the voter wanted him to say if he wanted that vote. There is nothing there for the future of society - just individual sops for individual greed. No one is asked to sacrifice things for the good of a country or the world - the only thing is that vote on that day.

We spend so much time cursing Indian democracy and praising the way "democracy" is being pushed on other countries as part of WU. But there is a problem. This democracy is just people control like communism or a theocracy.

[Agnimitra]

^^ shiv ji,

This mode of idea of the "self" determines whether it is a source of selfish narcissism, batshit crazy perversion, or something sublime. Its the difference between a Virochana, an Indra, etc.

What Vedanta calls the antaryaami paramaatman, Freudian psychiatry calls the polymorphous pervert.

When democracy is based on psychiatric manipulation of material passions, it just becomes a case of demon-crazy. But if it is based on a fundamental sattvik culture of yoga, then something good is possible.

[shiv]

^^ shiv ji,

This idea of the "self" determines whether it is a source of selfish narcissism, batshit crazy perversion, or something sublime. Its the difference between a Virochana, and Indra, etc.

What Vedanta calls the antaryaami paramaatman, Freudian psychiatry calls the polymorphous pervert.

When democracy is based on psychiatric manipulation of material passions, it just becomes a case of demon-crazy. But if it is based on a fundamental sattvik culture of yoga, then something good is possible.

There is a reason why I used the term "modern western psychology". That is because there is an Indian view on psychology and much of the inner workings of the mind have been codified and well recognized in Indian works. Only, because of Macaulayism and low self esteem we do not acknowledge it and fail to recognize it when it hits us in the face.

In fact if you look at Indian behaviour on a road, it appears chaotic but every vehicle from lorry and bus, to car, autorickshaw and handcart are all moving purposefully albeit slowly, and not necessarily along pre-fixed lanes - with very little road rage. This is an example of "being oneself" or "individualism" without any demand for conformity. Indian rules for clothing and appearance again are an example of that. Worship and language are obvious examples

[shiv]

While there is no denying that Dalits do suffer in India,

The name "Dalit" is a politically loaded word - meaning "crushed" and has been deliberately introduced into common vocabulary and it is used interchangeably with "untouchable" to smear India and Hindus. I believe we need to make a conscious effort to use the official, if unromantic, term for the underprivileged groups - which is SC/ST (Scheduled castes and tribes). Even "harijans" introduced by Gandhi is OK. Dalit is politically a loaded term, designed to induce anger or self contempt among Hindus - as if we are all responsible for crushing other Indians.

[csaurabh]

My classmate who is now a small time entrepreneur remarked to me that people are so obsessed with 'naukri' and 'chakri', without realizing that these derive from 'naukar' and 'chakor'.

We view ourself from an external lens, superimposing WU on top of our own beliefs. I think the Indian concept of employment and employee is fundamentally different from that of multi national Western Corporates. And Indian entrepreneurship and corporates is something that needs to be studied further ( more on this later ).

The interesting thing is that this is not a new phenomenon brought about by outsourcing companies. Our education and upbringing has WU by means of the British colonial system deeply imposed upon us. In the older generation, you will find a lot of deference and respect for the white man 'Saheb'.

[RajeshA]

We spend so much time cursing Indian democracy and praising the way "democracy" is being pushed on other countries as part of WU. But there is a problem. This democracy is just people control like communism or a theocracy.

shiv saar,

Living in Europe, one gets to understand at close range how a Westerner is really put in a small ideological-economic box with lots of pictures painted on the inside showing beautiful scenes of endless possibilities, freedom, feel-good narratives, sensual pleasure, political correctness, consumerist indulgence, and so on!

However despite all that, there are underlying interests of the Western elite, which cannot be shaken by the system or anybody who opposes the system. Those underlying interests is the freedom for the Western Elite to use the global stage to pursue their economic interests without any obstruction, which includes transferring their production lines which brings down their costs, increasing their wealth, dealing with Chinese manufacturers and money-lenders, submitting to Saudi-driven Islamic interests, etc.

Today there is no one in Europe, who is willing to start an honest debate about Islam or its founder, because despite various laws on freedom of opinion, such a debate would not be supported by the media and a vast army of left-liberals would descend upon anybody who dares to start such a debate - racist, Islamophobic, politically-incorrect, Nazi, and other missiles would be sent your way. Your job may become untenable.

Similarly nobody in Europe is asking why some big European companies - Auto manufacturers, Airbus, and other big exporters have sold off Europe's future to China and all of its manufacturing ability for low-value goods, which is in fact the biggest employment provider,. "Globalization" is hurting Europe's poorer countries. Not every country in Europe can produce high quality and high value goods like Germany, nor can they produce anything else, because much of all else would be manufactured in places like China and imported to Europe. This is a process which will gain more momentum in time to come.

The mind of people in Western societies is deliberately kept in a state of high sensual load, high distraction, high intoxication, high indulgence, high egoism for a very good reason.