India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Tuvaluan · Post by **Tuvaluan** » 18 Jan 2015 19:52

Requests like these by the SS for POTUS are normal. They will push until they are pushed back and that is exactly what happened. Why? There is a huge bureaucracy associated with the military-industrial-security complex in the US. It is gargantuan never seen in human history.

It may also have to do with ignorance/lack of trust on the process and procedures for security details in India, though I am sure GoI has been working with the GOTUS on such things. For example, refusing to ride with the President from Rashtrapathi Bhavan to the grounds is probably because they cannot control information about the routes from point A to point B, and whether a tight lid is kept on those routes in the Indian side. People in India who may not value that information normally may find it profitable to leak that info if it involves the GOTUS.

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 18 Jan 2015 20:42

I just heard that U.S. requested no-fly zone during Obama's visit. These kind of requests are BS. India should accord the same kind of security to Obama that was provided to Modi when he visited U.S. I personally think this visit is a waste of time and money. There is nothing strategic possible with the U.S. considering the number of anti-India lobbies operating in DC. The only thing I see happening is India buying some more overpriced weapons. This could have been achieved by Obama and Modi hooking up on Skype.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 18 Jan 2015 20:46

Karan M wrote:
KLNMurthy wrote: Threatening India with loss of US strategic partnership (with the US meaning of the term) is like threatening a vegetarian that he won't be given any beef.
theres an economic threat as well in that article. brazen, petty and without real heft

Both the economic and strategic partnership threats are psyops nonsense: if India's economic need vis-a-vis the US were so one-sided, US would never have embraced PM Modi the way it did. And India's economic agenda has been proceeding even with bad Indo-pak relations.

That leaves the strategic partnership threat which is even more hilarious. India is not Ukraine or Poland clamoring to become an ally(read vassal) of the US. By strategic partnership India means that the US should see sense and work with India in security spheres India cares about and also share defense tech, the latter resulting in a huge haul of dollars and jobs for US and also a net security and strategic benefit for the US, since in the worst case from US pov it will keep a channel open with Russia and Iran.

Modi's India is driving this relationship right now; articles like this are an attempt to make Indians believe otherwise.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 18 Jan 2015 20:47

LokeshC wrote: MacaulayPutra is also an apt word. Nehru and Gandhi were groomed by the Brishits for exactly such a role. A violent freedom struggle would mean quite a lot of Brishit blood will be spilled. Hence the N G dynasty was brought up to hijack any REAL freedom struggle (which is always violent if one agrees the arguments of Fanon Frantz). They provided a smooth exit strategy for the Brishits in case the shit hits the fan, which it did thanks to Hitler.

Monday is Dr. Martin Luther King Day, a pre-eminent American, and so it is appropriate to mention this here. African Americans put up with worse sh*t and longer than any Muslim immigrants to Europe, why haven't they spawned any truly serious terrorist movements?

You can say Dr MLK was co-opted by the American White Establishment, and so on. Or you can say, the essence of the non-violent resistance is the recognition that the oppressor whom you are struggling against is capable of being civilized. Non-violent resistance by and large has no takers in Islam (only Golden Rule Muslims will take up the banner) because the Islamic civilization is the only civilization, everyone else is in jahiliya. Non-violent resistance has no meaning, because your non-Muslim or takfiri Muslim oppressor can never be civilized unless they embrace the true Islam. The only choice is to obliterate your enemy or intimidate them into conversion.

Anyway, a history of violent revolutions will show that most of them have done immense damage.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 18 Jan 2015 20:55

Karan Dixit wrote:I just heard that U.S. requested no-fly zone during Obama's visit. These kind of requests are BS. India should accord the same kind of security to Obama that was provided to Modi when he visited U.S. I personally think this visit is a waste of time and money. There is nothing strategic possible with the U.S. considering the number of anti-India lobbies operating in DC. The only thing I see happening is India buying some more overpriced weapons. This could have been achieved by Obama and Modi hooking up on Skype.

Don't overlook the domestic political dimension for Modi sarkar: his enemies have largely been deriving their oxygen from US quasi-government entities and the SD. So, snagging the POTUS for Republic Day undermines the morale of Modi's enemies. This is probably crucial to the key task of breaking them.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 18 Jan 2015 20:59

Old, but still appropriate I think.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 18 Jan 2015 21:06

A_Gupta wrote:
LokeshC wrote: MacaulayPutra is also an apt word. Nehru and Gandhi were groomed by the Brishits for exactly such a role. A violent freedom struggle would mean quite a lot of Brishit blood will be spilled. Hence the N G dynasty was brought up to hijack any REAL freedom struggle (which is always violent if one agrees the arguments of Fanon Frantz). They provided a smooth exit strategy for the Brishits in case the shit hits the fan, which it did thanks to Hitler.
Monday is Dr. Martin Luther King Day, a pre-eminent American, and so it is appropriate to mention this here. African Americans put up with worse sh*t and longer than any Muslim immigrants to Europe, why haven't they spawned any truly serious terrorist movements?

You can say Dr MLK was co-opted by the American White Establishment, and so on. Or you can say, the essence of the non-violent resistance is the recognition that the oppressor whom you are struggling against is capable of being civilized. Non-violent resistance by and large has no takers in Islam (only Golden Rule Muslims will take up the banner) because the Islamic civilization is the only civilization, everyone else is in jahiliya. Non-violent resistance has no meaning, because your non-Muslim or takfiri Muslim oppressor can never be civilized unless they embrace the true Islam. The only choice is to obliterate your enemy or intimidate them into conversion.

Anyway, a history of violent revolutions will show that most of them have done immense damage.

+1 on the damage from violent retaliation.

MLK's movement could never be emulated by Muslims in Europe, as you say, the endgame for MLK was to unite everyone in shared universal humanism, which is the essence of Satyagraha, of which MLK was a student.

For Muslims, it is the exact opposite. Their goal is such that they can only achieve it by violence and mendacity.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 18 Jan 2015 21:08

Breaking News: US has asked Amit Shah to be not present in New Delhi during Obama's trip.

Reason? They are afraid Amit would convince Obama to join BJP!!!!!!!

Okay, sorry for that joke....read that in WhatsApp onlee.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 18 Jan 2015 21:16

People are looking at this the wrong way. Do not expect much about Indo-US relations in this trip, if something worthwhile happens then so be it. The best outcome for India is not give anything to USA. The best outcome for USA, not give anything to India.

Modi stands to benefit the most. And if media reports are right, he might weave magic to spellbind Obama. US media will not care about the happenings, but Indian media and intellectuals will be watching. This is a Modi event; and it would be up to him on what and how he extracts +ves from this trip.

If it benefits Modi, then it benefits India. That is the line I am taking. If America gets something out of it, then it is good too. A good bania will go for a win-win saudha no? (Oh, except Crazywal)

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 18 Jan 2015 21:22

KLNMurthy wrote:
Karan Dixit wrote:I just heard that U.S. requested no-fly zone during Obama's visit. These kind of requests are BS. India should accord the same kind of security to Obama that was provided to Modi when he visited U.S. I personally think this visit is a waste of time and money. There is nothing strategic possible with the U.S. considering the number of anti-India lobbies operating in DC. The only thing I see happening is India buying some more overpriced weapons. This could have been achieved by Obama and Modi hooking up on Skype.
Don't overlook the domestic political dimension for Modi sarkar: his enemies have largely been deriving their oxygen from US quasi-government entities and the SD. So, snagging the POTUS for Republic Day undermines the morale of Modi's enemies. This is probably crucial to the key task of breaking them.

I am glad we can salvage some benefit out of this tamasha.

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 18 Jan 2015 21:31

SwamyG wrote:US media will not care about the happenings, but Indian media and intellectuals will be watching. This is a Modi event; and it would be up to him on what and how he extracts +ves from this trip.

Sir, 'watching' is an understatement - our media will fawn over the POTUS and everything he does while in India, accompanied with breathless coverage. The same thing happened on every other POTUS visit. As for this being a Modi event, our media will project it as otherwise - that Ombaba is driving everything, and Modi is being recalcitrant. Since our free media regurgitate everything NYT/WaPo spout, it will be easy for them.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 18 Jan 2015 21:43

^^^^
Don't worry saar, Modi and Amit were not born yesterday. They can play this game too (a.k.a create the 'correct' narration and spin).

Just remember: If it benefits Modi, it benefits India. This is good for the next few years.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 18 Jan 2015 22:59

few jokes going around , latest being US bringing in clean oxygen on potus

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Jan 2015 23:56

Oxygen generator for the POTUS,plus tankerloads full of drinking water! The WEEK mag has it that O'Bomber is looking for his "MIG" moment,emulaing the Soviets in yesteryear,by supplying to India large qtys of defence eqpt.,

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 19 Jan 2015 00:07

KLNMurthy wrote:
A_Gupta wrote:Monday is Dr. Martin Luther King Day, a pre-eminent American, and so it is appropriate to mention this here. African Americans put up with worse sh*t and longer than any Muslim immigrants to Europe, why haven't they spawned any truly serious terrorist movements?

You can say Dr MLK was co-opted by the American White Establishment,

.......snip..........

Anyway, a history of violent revolutions will show that most of them have done immense damage.
+1 on the damage from violent retaliation.

MLK's movement could never be emulated by Muslims in Europe, as you say, the endgame for MLK was to unite everyone in shared universal humanism, which is the essence of Satyagraha, of which MLK was a student.

For Muslims, it is the exact opposite. Their goal is such that they can only achieve it by violence and mendacity.

I am not going to say MLK was wrong. I have quoted him here myself. That being said, I am sure you guys are aware of some of the more violent movements that preceded MLKs movement (look up the early gun control laws).

In the late 1960s there was a real FEAR in the minds of the majority (white) that violent retaliation from blacks can rip their society apart. It is in this backdrop of fear that MLKs movement caught on steam. That he was peaceful did one thing which the violent resistance could not provide: Support of moderate (latently racist) whites.

Regardless of the position of MLK it was the changes in the white societies state of mind. They went from believing most blacks as 'Jim Crow' Blacks who are docile and submissive to believing the black brutes would start revolting and there will be a lot of blood spilled. Also Blacks fighting the WWII changed the Blacks forever. The civil rights movement has a lot to thank both the violent black movements and also WWII.

Do you guys think without the FEAR of blacks ripping the country apart violently, the white society would have shifted its musharraf from the comfortable position it occupied?

Another question: MLK did achieve a lot for the blacks. However are the blacks truly free in USofA? There is a book called "The New Jim Crow" that argues that it has not changed much. Highly recommended read for anyone interested in Black History.

Added later: Fanon Frantz argues that for an "underclass" to be truly free of the tyranny of oppression, there HAS to be violence in one form or the other. The reason for this is that the oppressing class are incapable of feeling the pain of the underclass. They see the underclass as the "other".

Thus the oppressing class will not give up their position by just "talk" or begging. They have no incentive to. Hence any REAL freedom movement is necessarily a violent event. There will be blood letting on both sides if there is violence, but the alternative is blood letting only on the oppressed side even if they can afford a slightly better position in the society.

It is happening to Blacks now due to racist law-enforcement structure. We paid the price during partition.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 19 Jan 2015 00:30

I've read the "The New Jim Crow". My mini-review:
http://arunsmusings.blogspot.com/2012/0 ... -crow.html

The short answer is that fear would lead to consolidation of whites. The civil rights movement did not succeed because of fear. Next you'll be saying that Obama was elected out of fear. Hard for you to believe, but there is progress, there were and is declining racism among whites.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 19 Jan 2015 00:41

I am sorry I dont agree with your review, especially the last paragraph. Most Indians consume Alcohol and would consume drugs if they were commonly available (look at Punjab). There is not much difference between Humans in India and Humans in USA. Addiction can be largely attributed to neurotic problems which afflicts humans across the world. We are not special in that respect, although our culture may provide outlets for such neurotiicism like meditation, a rather slow and easy lifestyle (disappearing now).

I will agree that racism is declining among whites when most whites know what is white privilege and know how to actively act against it. So far I have not seen much evidence that it is happening. White society is not a monolith and there are some sections better than the others, but it is not very encouraging.

Ombaba is a completely different phenomena, but racism does play a big part in that story. He is a token and got into power after one of the most disastrous presidencies that the US has ever seen. Even if a poodle competed against Bush it would have won (I think Jon Stewart said that).

Fear of violence would lead to consolidation of whites, but you are assuming that white society is a monolith. There will be some part of the white society who will look for compromises, which will then lead to negotiation etc.

Violence need not be complete and absolute.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 19 Jan 2015 00:46

But BO did not run against Bush, did he? He ran against McCain-Palin and then Romney-Ryan.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 19 Jan 2015 00:47

Republicans had their ratings in the dumps during GW bush, thats what I meant. The second one was largely due to republican foolishness as well (Palin, abortion, gays etc).

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 19 Jan 2015 00:48

Guys, on US warning TSP to send in its pigLeTs while Obama is in India (after that, its OK I guess), has that news been reported elsewhere or is it DDM spin?

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 19 Jan 2015 00:52

Re: Violence as a means to freedom, let me state my last here (we can take it to one of the relevant threads after this):

In short the need for violence is to shake the larger society off its pedestal of privilege. Privilege is a blinding phenomenon. People who have it dont know they have it, and are largely incapable of understanding how the lack of privilege impacts those who dont have it. Fear is the only thing that can force them to try and look into the issue and maybe understand what it is really about.

Albert Memmi is a good read in this regard (Fanon gets dense).

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 19 Jan 2015 00:54

Of course, there is this, via Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African-Am ... 80%9368%29
excerpts:

The Jim Crow system employed "terror as a means of social control,"[29] with the most organized manifestations being the Ku Klux Klan and their collaborators in local police departments. This violence played a key role in blocking the progress of the civil rights movement in the late 1950s. Some black organizations in the South began practicing armed self-defense. The first to do so openly was the Monroe, North Carolina chapter of the NAACP led by Robert F. Williams. Williams had rebuilt the chapter after its membership was terrorized out of public life by the Klan. He did so by encouraging a new, more working-class membership to arm itself thoroughly and defend against attack.[30] When Klan nightriders attacked the home of NAACP member Dr. Albert Perry in October 1957, Williams' militia exchanged gunfire with the stunned Klansmen, who quickly retreated. The following day, the city council held an emergency session and passed an ordinance banning KKK motorcades.

After the acquittal of several white men charged with sexually assaulting black women in Monroe, Williams announced to United Press International reporters that he would "meet violence with violence" as a policy.

University of North Carolina historian Walter Rucker has written that "the emergence of Robert F Williams contributed to the marked decline in anti-black racial violence in the US…After centuries of anti-black violence, African-Americans across the country began to defend their communities aggressively – employing overt force when necessary. This in turn evoked in whites real fear of black vengeance…" This opened up space for African-Americans to use nonviolent demonstration with less fear of deadly reprisal. Of the many civil rights activists who share this view, the most prominent was Rosa Parks.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 19 Jan 2015 00:57

The fear of violent retaliation from blacks played a large part in the civil rights movement been taken seriously. Oppression is a violent event, freedom from it is also largely violent. This is not a choice.

Not an easy place to be.

We had RIN "mutiny" that shook the confidence of Brishits. If the Brishits had the means they would have held on to India for much longer. Our freedom was an accident, but violence played a large part in it succeeding when it did.

Added later: Look at Portugeez eviction from Goa. The freedom movement that was internal to it was a peaceful movement that was suppressed violently until the Indian Army marched in and the shits ran off with the tail between their legs.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 19 Jan 2015 01:05

LokeshC wrote:I am sorry I dont agree with your review, especially the last paragraph. Most Indians consume Alcohol and would consume drugs if they were commonly available (look at Punjab). There is not much difference between Humans in India and Humans in USA. Addiction can be largely attributed to neurotic problems which afflicts humans across the world. We are not special in that respect, although our culture may provide outlets for such neurotiicism like meditation, a rather slow and easy lifestyle (disappearing now).

I was careful to say in the review that "I come from..." rather than "Indians come from...", or "Most Indians come from..." a culture where self-restraint is a cardinal virtue. As far as I'm aware in my jaati it still remains true.

As to the rest of the review, it is a very concise summary of the book, I'm not sure what you disagree with.

I will agree that racism is declining among whites when most whites know what is white privilege and know how to actively act against it. So far I have not seen much evidence that it is happening. White society is not a monolith and there are some sections better than the others, but it is not very encouraging.

The emergence of the Tea Party etc., is part of the step backwards in the "two steps forward, one step backward" - but you will notice that there is a marked difference between the racial attitudes of the Baby Boomers and the Millenials. The younger generation does not reliably turn out for elections and that is why the impact is less.

Ombaba is a completely different phenomena, but racism does play a big part in that story. He is a token and got into power after one of the most disastrous presidencies that the US has ever seen. Even if a poodle competed against Bush it would have won (I think Jon Stewart said that).

You forget that Obama had to win a hard-fought Democratic primary against Hillary Clinton.

Fear of violence would lead to consolidation of whites, but you are assuming that white society is a monolith. There will be some part of the white society who will look for compromises, which will then lead to negotiation etc.

Violence need not be complete and absolute.

Agreed, I just posted some material that sort of supports your point of view, namely, that fear of black retaliation led to Southern Whites toning down their customary violence, and this led to the space for a non-violent movement.

PS: note that the aforementioned Williams was never the aggressor, not even "pre-emptive self-defense" (which is what the Islamists claim they are doing).

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 19 Jan 2015 01:05

Guys, I don't know if this belongs to this thread, but I saw a program on Undy titled the role of classics in modern India. The program included Math fields medalist Manjul Bhargava (also expert in Sanskrit), former Infsys CEO Naryana Murthy's son Rohan Murthy (he did his graduate work under a prof friend of mine at Harvard who told me that he is a brilliant and simple guy), and Columbia prof, Sheldon Pollock

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/the-nd ... dia/352434

Now, here is my problem. I am nowhere close to Shri Rajiv MalhotraJi in his breath and depth of knowledge, and so if I just heard Sheldon Pollock on this show, I would have thought he is an indophile worthy of praise. However, Rajiv MalhotraJi has deep reservations about this guy, matter of fact, if I am not mistaken, his next book, after Indra's Net (I am about half way reading this book), is about Sheldon Pollock's and other western Indologists distortion of India's contribution. A_GuptaJi, AmberJi et. al, also more knowledgeable than I am

, can you gents briefly enlighten me on Pollock, and what is Rajiv MalhotraJi's gripe with Sheldon Pollock?

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 19 Jan 2015 01:08

LokeshC wrote:The fear of violent retaliation from blacks played a large part in the civil rights movement been taken seriously. Oppression is a violent event, freedom from it is also largely violent. This is not a choice.

Not an easy place to be.

We had RIN "mutiny" that shook the confidence of Brishits. If the Brishits had the means they would have held on to India for much longer. Our freedom was an accident, but violence played a large part in it succeeding when it did.

Long before the RIN mutiny, the British WW2 contingency plan in case Gandhi died in British prison or any other such inflammatory event was to withdraw from Hindu India into the areas that are now Pakistan and to hold on to that. So the fear was there before that (and that Jinnah and the Muslim League were their implicit allies is also made clear).

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 19 Jan 2015 01:12

The problem with violence is that by itself it will not succeed against a - almost always more powerful - oppressive master. There are bound to be moderates in the midst of the master society that will give (and has given) support to saner voices on the other side. Since it is OT

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 19 Jan 2015 01:14

A_Gupta wrote: Long before the RIN mutiny, the British WW2 contingency plan in case Gandhi died in British prison or any other such inflammatory event was to withdraw from Hindu India into the areas that are now Pakistan and to hold on to that. So the fear was there before that (and that Jinnah and the Muslim League were their implicit allies is also made clear).

Did not know that, thanks! I am sure that "fear" was put there by 1857 war

Re: your review. The last para sort of asks :- "Why do Americans (black or white) take drugs?". That is not the question that the book was trying to answer.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 19 Jan 2015 01:18

CRamS: I'm not sure what Rajiv Malhotra's gripe with Sheldon Pollock is; I'm awaiting his book. I think it has to do with what role Sanskrit should play in the future.

I think the real underlying issue is the lack of sufficient **recognized** Sanskritists from India (for whatever reasons India's internal recognition and promotion of Indian talent is really poor), and so the field tends to be dominated by "properly accredited" Westerners. This is clearly a shameful and unsustainable thing - would you accept someone as the intermediary between you and your mother? Yet that is what India does by not producing/recognizing the leading experts in its own heritage. (My suspicion is that the experts are there, but they are neglected and put down. Let us see if Modi Sarkar can change that.)

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 19 Jan 2015 01:21

matrimc wrote:The problem with violence is that by itself it will not succeed against a - almost always more powerful - oppressive master. There are bound to be moderates in the midst of the master society that will give (and has given) support to saner voices on the other side. Since it is OT

Since this is the US thread. Let me take the examples of Iraq (and middle east in general). Today the Body Bags arrive from ME at a much slower rate than when the war started.

If for some reason the number of Body Bags increased to say 4 - 10 per day, what will happen within the US? Everyone will say "Cut and run, cut and run". That is not because everyone cares about Iraqi children dying of hunger and violence, it is because they fear their relative in the Army will come back in a wooden box.

If they really had the stomach for tolerating 4 - 10 deaths a day, the US would be in Syria and Iran by now. If they had to the stomach to tolerate about 40 - 100 per day they might be in Ukraine fighting the Russians.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 19 Jan 2015 02:08

CRamS wrote:Guys, I don't know if this belongs to this thread, but I saw a program on Undy titled the role of classics in modern India. The program included Math fields medalist Manjul Bhargava (also expert in Sanskrit), former Infsys CEO Naryana Murthy's son Rohan Murthy (he did his graduate work under a prof friend of mine at Harvard who told me that he is a brilliant and simple guy), and Columbia prof, Sheldon Pollock

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/the-nd ... dia/352434

Now, here is my problem. I am nowhere close to Shri Rajiv MalhotraJi in his breath and depth of knowledge, and so if I just heard Sheldon Pollock on this show, I would have thought he is an indophile worthy of praise. However, Rajiv MalhotraJi has deep reservations about this guy, matter of fact, if I am not mistaken, his next book, after Indra's Net (I am about half way reading this book), is about Sheldon Pollock's and other western Indologists distortion of India's contribution. A_GuptaJi, AmberJi et. al, also more knowledgeable than I am , can you gents briefly enlighten me on Pollock, and what is Rajiv MalhotraJi's gripe with Sheldon Pollock?

WRT RM what I know - reading his books and hearing most of his speeches in jootube via cds/mo3 is -- he has done lot of research and backs with very good references- he has virtually challenged everyone at the top wrt to Indological studies. .

According to him, anyone can use Indian culture traditons and its works with due to attention given to Indian roots. he is very scathing on those who remove it.

Beauty of his attacks is he attacks living persons and not dead, provokes them to answer back. so far all have scurried with their tails betwen their legs. No not even a court libel case against RM. RM has shut the open forums of AAR forvever singlehandedly which is supposed to be the topmost body in america.
Over 20+ years he has gone to churches interfaith dialogues, talked with govt officals, educationists theologians, islamists etc.

At present he is on board for education in massachusettss and NJ to present Hindu/Indina cultiure in proper light.

considering his background, I trust him wrt pollock.

------------------------
Just google for ananya vajpayee who was coached by Sidney polock then you will undertsand him better.

https://twitter.com/rajivmessage/status ... 6271099905
This was posted in gdf

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 19 Jan 2015 02:16

LokeshC wrote: Re: your review. The last para sort of asks :- "Why do Americans (black or white) take drugs?". That is not the question that the book was trying to answer.

The "Old Jim Crow" laws put barriers to black Americans exercising their fundamental rights.

In contrast, the "New Jim Crow" is about unequal application of laws regarding behavior that society has a legitimate reason to regulate (one may argue that criminalization of narcotics is bad policy, but that is a different debate; there is no fundamental right to narcotics, except perhaps in an extreme libertarian worldview).

The easiest way not to get caught up in "New Jim Crow" (except as an innocent bystander, which does happen) is not to indulge in this criminalized behavior.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 19 Jan 2015 02:51

CRamS wrote:Guys, on US warning TSP to send in its pigLeTs while Obama is in India (after that, its OK I guess), has that news been reported elsewhere or is it DDM spin?

I why wondered the same. Both Indian express and NDTV use the word "sources". I do not know how DDM got wind of this "injunction"? So how did these 'sources' get this information? Does the DDM have 'sources' inside American security and intelligence? Or dos the 'sources' have 'sources' inside American security and intelligence institutions. Enquiring minds want to know.

Indian 'source's badi pawarful nikhli.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 19 Jan 2015 02:57

PIMPS

Manny · Post by **Manny** » 19 Jan 2015 03:45

CRamS wrote: Now, here is my problem. I am nowhere close to Shri Rajiv MalhotraJi in his breath and depth of knowledge, and so if I just heard Sheldon Pollock on this show, I would have thought he is an indophile worthy of praise. However, Rajiv MalhotraJi has deep reservations about this guy, matter of fact, if I am not mistaken, his next book, after Indra's Net (I am about half way reading this book), is about Sheldon Pollock's and other western Indologists distortion of India's contribution. A_GuptaJi, AmberJi et. al, also more knowledgeable than I am , can you gents briefly enlighten me on Pollock, and what is Rajiv MalhotraJi's gripe with Sheldon Pollock?

First its a question of trust and credibility. We all know there are "Highly" acclaimed academicians like Nassbaum and Doniger who are total douche (Bad cops). Sheldon Pollock is probably one (good cops) who would flatter (A gambit) but still part of the political ecosystem to systematically denigrate Hindus and our history. "The Good copp who softens the target for the bad cops to attack. IF not a conspiracy, it somehow seems to have worked that way in the American academia.

What I want from Pollock is his position on Nassbaum and Doniger. Pollock is part of that cabal...so why hasn't he academically argued against Nassbaum and Doniger academically? He is inside the wall by their standards..right? They keep people like Malhotra out...so Pollock when he has an opportunity to take on the "bad cops" has not..

Why is it NArayan Murty (a man with lots of money) looking for validation from some white people? He is trying to outsource this to discredited scholars? Talk about laziness.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 19 Jan 2015 03:48

LokeshC wrote:PIMPS

Scenario 1: US warns Pakistan. Pakistan leaks the ass-whipping to DDM.
Scenario 2: US warns Pakistan. US informs DDM.
Scenario 3: US warns Pakistan. US informs India. DDM get leaks from Indian officials.
Scenario 4. US warns Pakistan. RAW snoops on USA, and then leaks to DDM.
Scenario 5: US warns Pakistan. RAW snoops on Pakistan, and then leaks to DDM.
Scenario 6: DDM talking through their rear orifice.

I am no expert on espionage or diplomacy, but all scenarios look far fetched because every scenario would lead to 'probing' questions in some quarters and would alert someone. There can be even more convoluted scenarios, but then I need some chai+samosa to think about them onlee.

And in all scenarios, somebody is compromised

No system is perfect onlee.

Manny · Post by **Manny** » 19 Jan 2015 04:16

CRamS wrote:G

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/the-nd ... dia/352434

The last few seconds of that video is so pathetic.. the Indian mathematician says "These are great gifts to the world...like Latin, these Sanskrit translations and what not are gifts and that we all should be thankful for". I am paraphrasing here. It makes me cringe.

The world doesn't give a sh!t about Sanskrit nor recognizing Hindus and their contribution. There are academicians in the west which Dr. Pollack" is part of has systemically undermined Sanskrit (e.g. Nassbaum, Doniger whose job has been to join with JNU Marxists). This anti Sanskrit is so entrenched in the leftist India today..they laugh and mock when the BJP talks about teaching Indian school children Sanskrit. So this "Nobel prize" like winning Mathematician says "This is a great gift" I have to go Pfffffft!

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 19 Jan 2015 04:26

> there is no fundamental right to narcotics

Suffice it to say I vehemently disagree with that. Who is any one to impose their view of morality on somebody who wants to eat meat/vegetarian only/wants to drink alcohol/have a consenting menage a trois or whetever as long as nobody is hurt? Victimless "crimes" if they are such.

Oh by the way that is not an extreme libertarian POV.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 19 Jan 2015 04:33

Those books are very well bound, printed on very good quality paper with excellent fonts and all. The same "manu charitra" which this library is selling for $32 can be had from emesco for three $s including shipping if one can find a good distributor in India. It also has an excellent prose rendering in simpler telugu (tETa telugu) as an introduction.

Who are the people who are going to buy these books at these inflated prices?

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 19 Jan 2015 04:40

matrimc wrote:> there is no fundamental right to narcotics

Suffice it to say I vehemently disagree with that. Who is any one to impose their view of morality on somebody who wants to eat meat/vegetarian only/wants to drink alcohol/have a consenting menage a trois or whetever as long as nobody is hurt? Victimless "crimes" if they are such.

Oh by the way that is not an extreme libertarian POV.

Not a matter of morality, a matter of law. Meat/vegetarian, menage a trois, etc., do not have the deleterious effects of narcotics and alcohol, which are scientifically demonstrable. Alcohol, in most of the world, cannot be regulated effectively because of long tradition.

Moreover, these are not "victimless", again the statistics are clear.

Anyway, as I said, whether a specific form of regulation is **good policy** is another debate; but the externalities of alcohol and narcotics make it a relevant issue for the state. (See PM Modi's five reasons for the state, which I'm in agreement with: http://arunsmusings.blogspot.com/2015/0 ... stion.html )