Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 11 Dec 2009 02:07

I know it feels alarming to see subdividions. But historically India goes through these processes of alternate cycles of "extreme diversity" and "extreme unification/homogenization/centralization". In between there is almost inevitably a partial loss of territory and political/military retreat.

Typically diversification begins to happen, when the centralizing/homogenizing identity becomes "weak" or non-aggresive, or there is no such "identity". The opportunity is taken up by regional or local elite who clearly realize their impotence in controlling larger areas. They use some strand of pre-existing local identity to separate their immediate society out of the "Indian" context (in the sense that the mirco overrides the macro as an identity). This then helps them gain power almost equal to that of a "central" entity - especially when such central entities are forced/chooses to recognize their power.

Almost inevitably the distinct periods of partially or wholly successful foreign invasions in India come after the subcontinent had allowed itself to be divided up into regional powers. The Persians, Greeks, Kushans, Huns, and the Turko-Afghans, or the Europeans.

But these extreme cycles of regional and other diversification, weakening/passivity of centralizing identities, are also precursors of the reverse trend.

There is a limit to "diversification" - sooner or later it divides up the whole of society into such small units that the soicety begins to believe in the local-elite propaganda of local distinctions - that it is no longer a society after all. That hides the basic weakness of countless small groups who do not have an overriding common identity so strong that it immediately glues them into unity and action when the need arises. The fact that outsiders almost always are unable to differentiate between "Indians", shows that in "outsider" eyes the commonalities appear obvious and overwhelming compared to any overt claims by Indians of their superlative tiny to tinier "subidentities".

It takes the ineffectiveness, the divisiveness and the defencelessness of small subidentities in the face of identities which boldy maintain their exclusivity and take pride in their "otherness" or "foriegnness" of origins/identification - to begin the counter process of homogenization and unification.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 11 Dec 2009 03:11

PPle are seeing this as a preclude to 1)Harit Pradesh/ 2) Concessions to the Hurriyat

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Dec 2009 03:21

You think APHC's Geelani will go on hunger strike?

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 11 Dec 2009 03:32

Ramana
That is not a joke right, because this is a godawful situation the Congress head honchos have got India into given externalities. We need to keep the country stable for the time being

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 11 Dec 2009 03:33

That will not be too bad a thing to happen! At least we can make the beginning of a turnaround. Every tall claimant and shrill voice in defence of "Indian constitutional secularism" will be exposed. It will be great fun to see the "judicial activism" and the "constitutionalists" of all shades and colours, including those maintained in rashtryia positions and those who have been dorectly or indirectly elected by "conscious" Indians - attempts at justifying such "states".

Sanku-ji is of course going to be quite most unhappy with my remarks. Apologies. But without exposure of real motives, and shortsightedness, how do we expect the emotional smokescreen that maintains the attachment between the electorate and pretentious leadership - to be dispersed?

Have we not already speculated on a managed intensification of the so-called "Kashmir crisis"? Something that makes it amenable to claiming a Northern Ireland type model solution. How far that solution will actually work out in India's favour is at least a matter for media propaganda initially.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 11 Dec 2009 03:34

Brihaspati,
I doubt if anything with remove the smokescreen.. A few nationalists who know the truth will have to get the job done

The Kashmir situation is so puzzling because it appears as though internal forces are keeping it alive. The congress is keeping it alive

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 11 Dec 2009 03:51

No, it cannot be entirely becuase of the Congress. Remember the two places where JLN allowed sending in troops to secure the place from "Pakistani" Jihadis? J&K and Hyderabad. The same JLN who did nothing - absolutely nothing to prevent the trauma on Bengal and Punjab - rather asked the trauma to be seen as "necessary birth pangs" of a female nation - with, (what any patriot should have felt) supreme arrogance and callousness.

No, Congress leaders gave a lot of importance to consolidating territorial hold over regions they felt were crucial to their concept of "nation" and gave a fib for regions which they did not feel close to, psychologically.

The trend towards accommodation of Jihadi demands about J&K and perhaps the longer term moves on Andhra, comes clearly from an understanding of international pressure and the political perception in their eyes of the importance of "Islamism" electorally in the northern plains.

The general trends of manipulation by bargaining between potential foreign "superpowers" and threatening ideologies, on the one hand, and the "native" populations on the other - is a classic of Indian "mercantile mentality" political elite. They think that they have built up too much "assets" - political/economic/esteem to risk it through a confrontation.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 11 Dec 2009 03:54

brihaspati wrote:The trend towards accommodation of Jihadi demands about J&K and perhaps the longer term moves on Andhra, comes clearly from an understanding of international pressure and the political perception in their eyes of the importance of "Islamism" electorally in the northern plains.

The general trends of manipulation by bargaining between potential foreign "superpowers" and threatening ideologies, on the one hand, and the "native" populations on the other - is a classic of Indian "mercantile mentality" political elite. They think that they have built up too much "assets" - political/economic/esteem to risk it through a confrontation.

A little more specificity would help my cold addled brain.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 11 Dec 2009 04:01

brihaspati wrote:
The general trends of manipulation by bargaining between potential foreign "superpowers" and threatening ideologies, on the one hand, and the "native" populations on the other - is a classic of Indian "mercantile mentality" political elite.

This is British colonial rule over the natives. Put one set of natives against the other

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 11 Dec 2009 04:25

I think we have discussed many times the international alignment of forces that will favour giving up greater control over the J&K region to TSP. There are three fources that want this for different reasons but all coincide in their objective.

TSP wants it for many times and much discussed reasons : TSP's basic structure depends on mainatining the old semi-feudal relations of power. It means Islamism to be promoted as the justifier of concentrating military/political/theological powers in a single authority. Lacking any identifiable historical or cultural continuity as a seat of Islamic empire, TSP therefore needs to paint itself as the mantle holder of a neo-caliphate. To gain some degree of legitimacy for such an epithet it has to occupy Delhi and the northern plains. To associate the Sultanate and Mughal rule in the minds of the Islamic world.

To maintain the semi-feudal hold, and Islamism as the supporting framework, TSP cannot allow a crucial aspect of modernization that is key to modern development. This is a relatively open, unrestricted by religious dogma, of the practice of science and scientific query in academics and research. Any such educational framework is dangerous for Islamism as it makes the human mind also question the dogma. Iranian and BD clergy suffer from such relaxations.

In the absence of such modernization in the economy, the best bet for TSP is to gain more productive land for agriculture and women from non-Muslims to maintian or attain demographic superiority. Thus gaining the fertile river plains are crucial to any possibility for glory and expansion of TSP.

Gaining J&K secures the KKH supply lines from PRC, separates India from access to CAR and makes it more difficult for a land corridor utilizable by Russia militarily to come to India's aid. It also gives a good vantage point to launch future moves on Delhi and the rest of northern India.

For PRC, gaining of J&K by TSP means also de-facto gaining of the area by PRC. Which secures at least one access point into the troublesome regions of the Uyghurs and the Tibetans. Moreover a tactical gain of being better able to threaten the northern plains if India resists PRC plans to dismember India. It also means securing advance posts towards the AFG-USA zone. One further step in PRC plans to push back USA from Asia.

For USA, making India concede on J&K is a less costly option than allow the forever demanding enfant-terrible TSP to lean over to PRC completely. At least TSP would be happy and use more of its Jihadis towards India and from "Kashmir" while USA can carry out its longer term face saving consolidation-withdrawal programme in AFG.

TSP can gain from both PRC and USA by throwing up tantrums that it can always go to the better paying customer.

As for internal "mercantile mentality" - this is an old model of mine. I had proposed looking at the "ruling elite" mentality as coming from a section which considers itself superior by birth (or made to believe so by their immediate family from childhood etc). Such individuals cannot identify withose among their own birth society who are "inferior" and further cannot rely in them for "power". So foreign "powers" who have shown their ruthlessness appear more attractive as an option to gain favour with and hope to continue in power by comrpomising with them.

The tactic relies on hinting that the "leadership" could choose to rouse the "birth society" rabble (the trick is to say - "look I am all in favour of you - we are the moderates - if you do not help us to stay on in power - the more radicals will capture the nations heart and then it will be much more difficult for you to have influence") against the "foreigners" - so that the "foreign power" supports the "leadership" in return for concessions. On the other hand, the trick is to hint to the "natives" that if the "natives" do not support the "leaders" then it will be impossible for the leaders to negotiate "protection" with the "foreigners".

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 11 Dec 2009 04:28

Brihaspati,
There are other players in the loop - namely India and Russia. It will be catastrophic for India to lose J&K (esp. now when I believe we have more negotiating leverage than ever before)
For Russia, it means US and client state have won. They also have a conflict with China.
Not sure if this is as simple.
India needs to play this very cleverly. Don't see an astute leader like PVNR

To be honest I dont buy the US wanting to pacify TSp bit. TSP is the cats paw the US uses to contain India. They know, that nothing will mollify political jihad and eventually they will come back to bite them in the butt. At the same time they cannot allow the quagmire in AFPAK allow India too much leverage and strength. India has to be nipped in the bud and contained. Hence this pressure.
India can play this game beautifully if required with more territory at the end. But for that you need political will and love for nation. The current leadership does not show those traits.
Damn, I should be PM

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 11 Dec 2009 04:32

Russia and Putin could have had their hands tied up if USA and PRC coincide in their tactical moves. The compromises and understandings started with the nuke-sub disaster and it aftermath. It is a complicated web of mutual dependence. Do not assume that a Soviet style repeat of potential "threat" to neutralize US moves as in '71, as automatic.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 11 Dec 2009 04:59

YSR's death might very well lead to unravelling of congress party.
If I were an external force, I would want that

V_Raman · Post by **V_Raman** » 11 Dec 2009 05:31

i dont think telangana twist was expected neither was YSR's death. this might actually be the twist that saves india in the long run.

the central govt for india must be a coalition of regional power bases with a central security blanket. that is the only long term viable solution for territorial integrity.

if the situation warrants action across the whole spectrum, then it will happen as it happened with economic reforms.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 11 Dec 2009 12:36

it was further evidence of an inability to distinguish between legitimate history, conspiracy theory, mythology, bazaar gossip and plain banality.

It is so apt for many threads with pretensions to 'intellectality'.

Such a gem!

From Swapan Dasgupta's middle in the Telegraph of today (11 Dec 2009)

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 11 Dec 2009 13:23

Jarita wrote:YSR's death might very well lead to unravelling of congress party.
If I were an external force, I would want that

Touche'
It is the external parties we should be worried about

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 11 Dec 2009 19:19

it was further evidence of an inability to distinguish between legitimate history, conspiracy theory, mythology, bazaar gossip and plain banality.

When Swapan DasGupta writes that, he is himself showing lack of awareness of the nature of history. Almost all of history is reinterpretation of someone's narrative - someones' version of what is claimed to have happened. In that sense, the boundary lines between "legitimate history", "conspiracy theory", "mythology", "bazaar gossip" and "plain banality" is always blurred.

All of the exclamations of how Turko-Afghans tortured, massacred, raped and looted Indians - in their volumes of chronicles - are declared by "official" Indian historians (except the likes of K.S.Lal) as "propaganda" and falsehoods - myths and "bazaar gossip" of "Hindu" trauma.

Historical interpretation, so far has had a lot to do with political agenda and perspective of the interpreter. It is a pity that we sometimes think of using such casual and unthinking comments - to paint schools of thought we do not like - (or which perhaps do not suit our hidden political leanings) as "intellectually pretentious".

I think, if whole threads on BRF are dubbed "intellectually pretentious", then concrete reasons and arguments with examples should be given as to why such a thread is "intellectually pretentious". If looking at the past to look at the future is intellectually pretentious, then for example : was Churchill being intellectually pretentious when he was saying "The farther backward you can look, the farther forward you can see"?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 11 Dec 2009 20:31

It is really positive trend that increasing clamour for further subdivisions are now coming up. Each such subdivision is demanding entitlement based on some subidentity. I wonder why all the self-declared non-politically motivated, pro-diversity strong voices find no fault with idenity based claims that are of recent historical (and even then of dubious) origins.

When a pan-Indian, pan-subcontinent identity based on long term identities pre-dating the Islamic or European invasions are brought up - these very same voices do everything possible to paint such claims as revivalists of the worst order. Revivalists who are seeking a "fascist" reinvention of an identity which really did not exist in the ancient past and are only of recent origin. Therefore all such identity based claims for entitlement or predominance should be trashed.

However when new idenities are invented based on historical constructions that are themselves subject to similar arguments - to claim statehood - there is no clamour of "integrity" of the country and nation being threatened. The emperors of diversity are naked and without clothes. Their essential political agenda is an anti-national agenda of dividing and promoting myriad subidentities. Their act coincides with what anti-nationals like elements of PRC or in the "west" who have claimed in the past that - India is no nation, it is a geographical region.

It is time to identify and reject such voices. We should cease to think of them as part or representative of our nation. Anyone who supports subidentity promotions, is a potential enemy of the nation. Their actions, knowingly or unknowingly helps enemies of the nation in their target to dismember India. They shoudl cease to exist for us. We should socially boycott them, not vote for them, not attend their talks or meetings, not read their articles or watch their shows or buy their books and print media which publishes them. We should do the same for those who maintain contacts with them. We have to make a fundamental decision mentally to reject them and their positions once and for all.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 12 Dec 2009 10:25

Acharya wrote:
Jarita wrote:YSR's death might very well lead to unravelling of congress party.
If I were an external force, I would want that
Touche'
It is the external parties we should be worried about

In a perverted way, much as I dislike the congress high command, there is a need for the congress party to be together and strong till we have a nationalist, clear thinking alternative. BJP is not the alternative - they made too many gaffes and mistakes that are still costing the country and some where we are beginning to see impact now.
Congress has it's tentacles into all aspects of the country and also has checks and balances despite that horrible dynasty.
YSR was a strong leader (again one I dont like but..) under whom the state would have stayed together and over time the telangana demand would have frittered away.
Somehow YSRs death seems too much of a coincidence. Something has broken. At one pt I thought it might be beneficial and now I feel it was like that piece of wool one pulls to unravel the sweater. His death has a lot to do with Telangana.
There is an attempt to do to Andhra what was done in the NE for obvious reasons.
Our leaders need to very vigilent and if brute force is required to keep the country together for the next 3-4 years, so be it.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 12 Dec 2009 12:19

I could not find the Indic thread and so I am posting here.

One has observed on this forum waxing of eloquence on the Indic aspects that is said to foundation India’s oneness. It is also stated that the aberration in this Indic philosophy is the onslaught of the Abrahamic religions and their influence disrupting this oneness historically and by what is known on the forum as EJ.

There is also a school of thought that the majority of the peoples of and communities that constitute political India are as disparate as chalk and cheese except for a common religion (or a way of life if you will) and that too the religious practices are not as common as is made out to be. Some ascribe that political India is but the creation of the British imperialists, the villain of the piece being Dalhousie and his infamous Doctrine of Lapse with Mountbatten delivering the coup de grace by leaving no option for the Princely States which were not part of British India.

If Indic values governed what is called India as of today, then one wonders as to why was it not historically the India that is of today if there was commonality in Indic values and ethos. If Indic values are what govern the Indians, then Ramakrishnan, the Nobel Prize winner in Chemistry should not have got peeved that Indians had clogged his email with unnecessary congratulatory emails and prevented him from doing work!! Nor should the Indic stalwart, Rajnath Singh flaunt BBC as the authority to back up his thrashing the Liberhan report! They should have shown Indic values nor use non Indic authority to back up their claims, more so when there were adequate reasons to thrash the Report.

If Indic is the foundation and common denominator that bind India and its oneness (maybe one could leave out the Abrahamic class if one so desires) then one wonders why the clamour including violence to establish separatism as people as is found in the demand for Telegana, Gorkhaland, Bundelkhand, Vidarbha, Poorvanchal, Harit Pradesh, Kamatapur, Mithilanchal, Saurashtra, Coorg and Santhal Pargana.

One cannot claim that it is the handiwork of politicians since there are mass movements that indicate the popular support for such States.

One is forced to wonder as to how this Indic aspect that is so eloquently discoursed as the sole binding factor right from the start of history is not displayed by the Indic people i.e. the Indians. Even those who claim deep connections with their Indic past and are the flagbearers of Indic values i.e. the BJP are also in the fray to divide the Indic people further with smaller States and the RSS is magnificent in its silence!

Where is this Indicism?

A Search for the Lost Chord.

Extraordinary that an Abrahamic leader YSR kept the Andhra flock together!

Fact is stranger than Fiction!

gandharva · Post by **gandharva** » 12 Dec 2009 12:29

RayC, Yours vision will result into Indians like Pankaj Mishra. Just read this piece from him.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... as-realism

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 12 Dec 2009 12:36

gandharva wrote:RayC, Yours vision will result into Indians like Pankaj Mishra. Just read this piece from him.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... as-realism

Whatever.

Not that I see a connection!

But how about addressing the issues of the post?

It is not my vision. It is my bewilderment!

My vision is One India beyond boundaries!

In Search for the Lost Chord!

gandharva · Post by **gandharva** » 12 Dec 2009 12:44

Whatever.

Not that I see a connection!

But how about addressing the issues of the post?

It is not my vision. It is my bewilderment!

A Search for the Lost Chord!

You passed the judgement without reading it. Read then you will see the connection. And your indic thread is in General discussion forum.
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... =24&t=5294

Let us not derail this thread.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 12 Dec 2009 12:49

gandharva wrote:
Whatever.

Not that I see a connection!

But how about addressing the issues of the post?

It is not my vision. It is my bewilderment!

A Search for the Lost Chord!
You passed the judgement without reading it. Read then you will see the connection. And your indic thread is in General discussion forum.
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... =24&t=5294

Let us not derail this thread.

I have read it and it does not appeal. He is entitled to his view as you are to yours. It need not be that I have to agree.

You make the mistake in what you claim derailment just because it does not suit you. One must have the goodness to also accept divergent views.

The very fact that we are splitting and displaying subnationalism is what is dangerous for the future strategic thrusts that will allow us ascendancy in this subcontinent as also against China.

It is pertinent!

Do be good enough to read some the posts which without using the Indic word is alluding to its supposedly binding factor!

gandharva · Post by **gandharva** » 12 Dec 2009 13:00

I have read it and it does not appeal. He is entitled to his view as you are to yours. It need not be that I have to agree.

You make the mistake in what you claim derailment just because it does not suit you. One must have the goodness to also accept divergent views.

The very fact that we are splitting and displaying subnationalism is what is dangerous for the future strategic thrusts that will allow us ascendancy in this subcontinent as also against China.

It is pertinent!

What i meant was that "Indic" issues can be discussed in Indic thread. You yourself said the reason for your latest post was due to non traceability of Indic thread. Of course matters relevant to the title of the thread can be discussed here.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 12 Dec 2009 13:04

gandharva wrote:[

What i meant was that "Indic" issues can be discussed in Indic thread. You yourself said the reason for your latest post was due to non traceability of Indic thread. Of course matters relevant to the title of the thread can be discussed here.

I appreciate what you say, but then do read other posts and show the same sentiment!

I would be obliged.

Maybe I am not deft in dodging and camouflage and so it is easy to go for my jugular!

No more from me!

Go ahead and enjoy your discussion!

As I have said many a time, the division that is being sown in our society mortifies me and our adversaries are making capital of it.

They are nibbling away at our borders, they are destroying our societal fibre with terrorism and we consider that it is not our concern, excepting paying lip service. Look at Mumbai. Look what is happening in Telegana. Visit the NE.

"Blessent mon cœur d'une langueur monotone" (wound my heart with a monotonous langour).

Time to unite.

I echo the thought of Jarita.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 12 Dec 2009 18:58

Even if the Congress remains strong and unified, it will not be able to stop the centrifugal forces it has unleashed over the space of the last 60 years. The Congress has systematically weakened the cultural nationalism that fueled the essential drive towards freedom from the British. Initially such a cultural nationalism, which out of necessity looked for inspiration and memes from the majority belief system in the subcontinent, was used by the elite as an instrument for political mobilization. But once this power was obtained, they needed to ensure that this power continued in the only way they have traditionally understood - personal power maintained through bloodlines and dependent coteries.

To ensure this they needed to destroy the legitimacy and acceptance of the very "cultural nationalism" they once rode to personal power. If such an independent cultural nationalism existed, the majority of society would have an independent ideological framework to identify with as national focus, and evaluate leadership also on similar criteria. The best possible scenario for ensuring dynastic and coterie rule, is therefore to destroy such alternative national focus. In the absence of independent values, identity, criteria, the nation will be forced to look and wait for the honey dripping from the lips of the existing scion of the dynasty. Indian version of secularism, with its stringent and persistent attacks only on a single belief system for ideological delegitimization - is actually a cover for this essentially political agenda.

The major tactic in this has been the reconstruction of the "cultural nationalism" as non-existent, "artificial" and concocted. Simultaneously to show that a common cultural national identity does not exist, Congress also has allowed (or like in the MQM of Hyderabad - has given really inexplicable allowances which coincide with political exigencies) any and every possible claims of subidentity to be recognized and publicized. This has meant recognition of special, invented, Constitutional categories in perpetuity. Or new states. New categories of reservations. Whatever subidentity can be promoted to give the impression of a disparate collection rather than an unified "whole".

The more Congress spreads its "tentacles", greater will be the subdivisions - for only increasing subdivisions can hold out the hope of continued dependence of the "ruled" on the single "ruler" as the illusion of "national focal point of unity". (Or the coterie controls the strings pretending they are being forced to act on the orders of the "leader").

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 12 Dec 2009 19:11

Do not look at forces which allow growth in numbers of subidentities within a "nation" - with hope and trust. These are people only out to secure their personal power - and when push comes to shove, we cannot rely on them not to compromise at the cost of the nation just to preserve themselves in power.

It is common but a dangerous error to grab the hand of the very person who has already destroyed alternatives to himself. It is crucial to mentally detach from these real forces of subdivision. De-integrate from them so that the re-integration of the nation can take place. Deseat them and remove them from the regards and expectation we have placed them in our minds. That is the first step. Only when the society no longer feels the compulsion to identify with the apparatus of personal power as the sole arbiter and national focus of unity - will the incomplete journey of the subcontinent towards freedom and self-respect be restarted.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 12 Dec 2009 20:53

^^^ In theory what you say is right. However, I don't believe the time is right for India right now. We need to develop a strong alternative that can look ahead and make decisions based on totality and not just some western concepts of right wing, capialism, libetarianism etc.
I find most BJP wallas to be copy cats of what they perceive to be an established western concept. They have bought into the concept of right defined for them completely. There is little original thought.
You see that with the younger generation that supports BJP too. They will through words like Friedman and Libertarian around without regard for what truely applies to Indian culture.
This has enabled the mistakes BJP made during their tenure.
A BJP with original thought tailored to Indian situation, long term national interest, with strong leaders would be the right party. I don't see it

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 12 Dec 2009 23:47

I cannot have faith in the current crop and setup of the Congress - because of its transformation into "apparatus of state power dependent on apparatus of personal power" model. However this does not mean that all of the Congress following, or activists are beyond redemption. Moreover just because I do not have faith in the Congress, does not necessarily imply that I rely on the BJP to provide the appropriate national focus. Both parties can contribute in the future to a new arrangement of forces. The key is the formation of a core that has long term expansive and unifying/homogenizing agenda for the subcontinent. But just because such a core does not yet formally exist does not imply that I have to support the dynastic version of Congress in its destructive continuation.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 13 Dec 2009 06:57

There is a massive thrust to create new identies and divisions in India. Starting with AIT, this has accelerated in the last 30 years in India
- Dalit
- Punjab Terrorism - Sikh Sep
-....
-
-
- Now we are hearing abt the Hindu-Buddhist stuff through Vir Sanghvi and Harsh Mandar (attempt to create a false history)

Who is doing this? Is there a "destroy India" group sitting somewhere whose main job is to manufacture nonsense, pull out insignificant tracts from our history and make complete exagerrated fiction out of them (it is conceivable that one king might have broken a stupa), create new identities and them orchestrate a strategy to implement all of this.
Seriously, this is too much and cannot be a coincidence.
This is completely distracting us and sucking up our resources.
Offence is the best form of defence. We need to start highlighting differences in their lands and geographies of interest too

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 14 Dec 2009 05:58

To take the battle into "opponents" regions, will bring too much of historical and current details of foreign lands and peoples - that will be beyond the attentions span and relevance for the general Indian public subjected to "Sangvi" type bombardment in the media. The technical details of conflicts and splits and competitions and involvement in politics among the Buddhists - is also a topic that will never be given the space needed to expose or highlight it in the same media.

The counter move is to start a process of exploration of one's own cultural roots, history, and interconnections or commonalities with other parts of India. Food, cookings tyles and ingredients, language origins and loan-words and influences, fundamental social rituals and rites - birth, marriage and death, philosophical and spiritual icons and motif and memes, and public festivals and celebrations.

If we begin to celebrate festivals of "other", distant parts of India, that we feel has some commonality - in the ancient past or origins or has other basic, Indian similarities, and involve members of such communities who happen to reside locally - we may find surprising patterns of similarities or overlaps. Looking at the social and cultural rituals of other parts also does the same.

Maybe, one day a new Chaitanya, or Madhavacharya, or Nanak will sing in a new flood that will sweep the majority of people into a new common identity and awareness.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 16 Dec 2009 03:06

Thailand impound NK plane with military hardware claiming to deliver to SL

THAILAND
Officials study plane with weapons cache
Thai authorities on Monday sought to unravel the mystery of the ultimate destination of a plane that landed in Bangkok with a huge cache of weapons from North Korea, exported in defiance of a U.N. embargo on arms from the communist state.

Military analysts said the arms were likely destined for African rebel groups or a rogue regime such as Myanmar.
Thai officials impounded the Ilyushin Il-76 transport plane Saturday and said they discovered 35 tons of explosives, rocket-propelled grenades, components for surface-to-air missiles and other armaments.
The plane's manifest had described the cargo as oil-drilling equipment. The crew said the plane was supposed to deliver its cargo to Sri Lanka.

There are obviously many curiosities here. The first question is why would SL be overtly referred to as the destination for delivery and that too under "oil-drilling"? Is SL still a conduit for arms and hardware that includes possibly "missile" components? Even if it all goes back subsequently to Myanmar or Africa through other couriers (surface transport) such networks were typically supposed to be minded by the LTTE if anyone from SL. Given the possible connections of NK with PRC, and PRC arms supply to the SL gov, is it a continuation of older supply practice? Does SL have a new missile or other capability programme on board? Or is the connection further afield into AFPAK? But then such supplies would be easier to send through KKH. Or is it under greater surveillance in the northern areas and more vulnerable from US pressure there?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 18 Dec 2009 21:21

I could be mistaken, but Yechury appears to be in Copenhagen. Keeping the pressure on the Indian delegation perhaps? His ingenuous pointer towards an image of a "new global paradigm of four countries coming together - India, China, Brazil, and South Africa" is significant not because of the reality of such an alignment, but as a reflection of Left-Centre mindset.

Is it possible that with the passing away of MMS era, the core dynastic basis and coterie of the Congress centre, feels it necessary to align away a bit from the USA? Or that they have analyzed the situation or been convinced by others, that it is better to patch up a bit with PRC rather than rely too much on a possibly waning power represented by the USA?

I have a nagging suspicion that both MB and the Left in WB is being used to shape and tame each other up so that the Cingress can eventually appear to be the better option. The relations between the Left core and the Congress core need not be as cold as they might appear. Yechury's presence at Copenhagen is perhaps also a pointer to the bridge being sought with China. That could change equations slightly and temporarily on the WB front. MB has a cooler head now than 20 years before, so she might not turn the "enfant terrible" stunts, but interesting developments possible as the state gradually moves towards the election year.

MB, will not be able to stay on with the Congress for a long time after coming to power. She appears to be destined the Nitish way. Which however does not bode good for Islamist designs on the WB-BD frontier.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 19 Dec 2009 14:08

The process of centripetal aggregation instituted and implemented initially by Sardar Patel, despite the setbacks offered by linguistic reorganization of states, reached its perihelion in 1985 with the ascension of Rajiv Gandhi. That was the last time that the electorate handed a genuine mandate to any political party. Faced for the first time with the possibility of secession by an Indian state, people across the country rallied behind an untested leader whose sole value was that of a unifying emblem.

The counter process of centrifugal disaggregation had already begun to creep in around the edges, first with the linguistic reorganization of states, and later with the emergence of regional parties in the South, mainly the Dravidians in TN and Telugu Desam in Andhra Pradesh. The Maharashtra movement and the division of Punjab were other pointers in this direction. However, it was after the ouster of Rajiv Gandhi by V.P. Singh that the process of disaggregation and regionalism became the prominent trend. Even in the Gangetic heartland, the Yadav chieftains established regional principates who allied themselves with first one, and then another central power opportunistically.

The tendency to dissagregation was coupled with an erosion of the "national" party as a political concept. The Janata Dal-BJP combine fell apart, the Janata Dal splintered, and finally even the Congress was riven into regional entities such as the Tamil Manila Congress, Trinamool Congress, and Karnataka Congress Party. Only on the ideological left and right did some semblance of pan-Indian political organization endure; and on the left, the communists could at most aspire to be kingmakers. The mainstream itself seemed to have been chopped into myriad regionalist entities.

With this development came the era of coalition politics. "Third Front", "NDA" and "UPA" governments were the order of the day from the middle of the last decade through the end of the present one. Disaggregation continued as new regional states splintered off from existing ones: Uttarakhand, Jharkhand, Chattisgarh.

Today there is a conscious, concerted effort in process by the second UPA administration to reverse the process in favour of centripetal aggregation once again. The "Dynasty" has been restored. Piece by piece, state-level political entities seen as "regionalist" are being either co-opted or subverted, the TDP being a case in point.

If you look at the emergence of "Naxalite" militancy, it fits a pattern that corresponds to the watersheds of "regionalism". Look at the Red Corridor and you will see that it overlaps the new states of Jharkhand and Chattisgarh; the eastern part of Maharashtra, which had always been a headache to that state's inconveniently ambitious satrap Sharad Pawar; UP and Bihar, lost to regionalist strongmen in the wake of the Rajiv Gandhi government; West Bengal, where the CPI(M) is for all practical purposes running a regional principate; and Andhra Pradesh, the fount of the original Telugu Desam.

What does "Naxalite" militancy by well-armed militias ultimately achieve? Does it not increase the degree to which State governments become dependent on the Centre, and vulnerable to dismissal by Presidential Ordinance should the law-and-order situation in their States be deemed "untenable"? It's an old, old trick... remember Bhindranwale vs. the Akalis, Pirabharakaran vs. the TULF/EPRLF/TELO.

One might argue that the reinstatement of a centripetal order is a good thing, one that might eventually lead to a government capable of formulating a national vision and gaining the mandate to implement that vision.

The problem today is that the Centre itself relies too much on the support of those whom Brihaspati has described as being of the "Mercantile" mentality. Quite literally... the MMS/Sonia regime has successfully persuaded the new urban elite and business classes to invest in the "stability" represented by its continuance in power. (Ironically the BJP, which opened the floodgates whereby those classes garnered their new-found wealth, failed abysmally to co-opt them... thanks to its own lack of vision).

But as we know, a power elite backed by the "Mercantiles" alone is worse than a house of cards, because the "Mercantiles" are short-term opportunists and by their very nature inimical to the formulation and implementation of a strategic vision. Indeed, the malady spreads upwards; and the central leadership itself becomes tainted with "Mercantilism" to an even greater extent than before, afflicted by its disparaging contempt for the electorate's right to information, by its myopic opportunism, by its narcissistic conceit of knowing better what's best for the nation than the nation itself.

So our government stumbles around maintaining a veil of opacity against the people it represents, thereby blinding even itself to all but the most immediate goals of short-term profiteering and keeping the chair warm for Yuvraj. Hello, East India Company!

I submit that there is an alternative. Indians do tend to be afflicted by the "Mercantile" mentality most easily; to our peril, as history has shown. But I believe there exists an alternative archetype that, despite the depredations of invaders and the collaboration of "Mercantiles" for centuries, has fostered the continuance of our civilization more or less unscathed. At least thus far.

Let us call this archetype the "Cultivator" mentality. I don't mean that they should literally be farmers, any more than the "Mercantiles" are necessarily shopkeepers; but the fundamental ways they differ from the "Mercantiles" involve having very deep ties to the land; a commitment to the nurturance of existing assets and the creation of new ones; a belief in the generation of value by the tending of their ancestral bounty and the exercise of their own skills rather than the wanton exploitation of resources and the skimming of trade profits; a devotion to the idea that what is possessed now must be built upon and bettered for the good of generations to come rather than squandered or betrayed for the profits of next week.

When the Turko-Afghans first invaded our subcontinent, many of the kingdoms that fell soonest, or betrayed each other, were afflicted by the "Mercantile" mentality. Those who held out longest were "Cultivators", such as some Rajput kingdoms, or states where the "Cultivator" mindset encompassed and subordinated the "Mercantile", such as Vijayanagara. When resistance to the Mughal rule came, it was from "Cultivators" who were literally farmers and animal herders, in Marathwada and the Punjab.

With success and decadence, kingdoms founded by "Cultivators" eventually fell prey, as they always do, to "Mercantile" interests... leading to their inevitable enervation.

M.K. Gandhi realized that when the time came to oust the British, it could not be achieved by a Congress party that was to a large extent "Mercantile", but required his leadership in the role of a "Cultivator" archetype that he took great pains to validate by deliberately discarding all the trappings that the masses associated with "Mercantilism".

Coming back to the point of my post, the effect of this neo-centripetal aggregation that the present GOI has undertaken, has been not only to "Mercantilise" the centre of power but also to marginalize the "Cultivators" into petty satrapies. For, when overwhelmed and defeated, the "Cultivator" does not seek to expand but rather withdraws into the small ideological and literal territory that he feels sure he can defend for his children.

"Mercantilism", given its proper place to flourish, is not entirely a bad thing. Look at the British Empire, after all, founded by a "nation of shopkeepers". "Mercantilism" is virile, rapacious and expansionist to the core. Ideally its place to flourish should be beyond the borders of one's own nation. The hallowed ground of the urheimat itself, must be handed to the Cultivators to preserve.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 19 Dec 2009 19:29

Rudradev ji,
a very significant thought. Would you like to cross post and join in the discussion on the nationa agenda thread with the same post? I have been trying to have a discussion on the land/land-use question, with my tentative outline proposals for having jointly owned community land trusts. I believe, that what you are saying politically is something that belongs to the same group of ideas as I have tried to say on the economic side.

We cannot completely ignore those voices which speak in terms of sustainable lifestyles based on the land and its cumulative knowledge. I see this as going back to our civilizational roots, not just as an exercise in flights of romantic fancy. But also an urgent task to consolidate and rediscover the nation and its identity. Every resurgence to national consolidation and revival needs a political constituency, and must be part of a comprehensive mass movement that incorporates ideological, cultural, economic, and political re-alignments.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 19 Dec 2009 20:57

The issue is not regionalism and sub nationalism, it is merely that the money is not being spread even

If the progress is to be out there in a certain area and certain areas whose the resources are left barren to power India, there will be problems.

People are no longer stupid.

Remainder is intellectual banter!

One has to visit West Midnapore or Jharkhand to understand the woes!

No wonder divisive forces of all kind rule supreme!

The issue is why Poverty when the wealth is in their land that engines India!

Why should India enjoy, when they wallow in poverty and indignities?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 19 Dec 2009 22:29

RayC wrote
The issue is not regionalism and sub nationalism, it is merely that the money is not being spread even
If the progress is to be out there in a certain area and certain areas whose the resources are left barren to power India, there will be problems.
People are no longer stupid.
Remainder is intellectual banter!
One has to visit West Midnapore or Jharkhand to understand the woes!
No wonder divisive forces of all kind rule supreme!
The issue is why Poverty when the wealth is in their land that engines India!
Why should India enjoy, when they wallow in poverty and indignities?

Would you care to expand on these points?

There has been a long line of argument which puts each and every "regionalism/subregionalism/separatism/communalism" as being sourced from "economic deprivation" compared to "other" regions. It is an old pseudo-Marxian fallacy. Those who are fretting that resources from their own land is being used to fuel growth in other parts, never ask themselves what they themselves would have/should have done with those resources in the first place. Why did those resources lie fallow until others came in who could utilize those resources lying idle and could create value out of them?

I have intimate connections with Jharkhand and the West Midnapore area. Our grand insistence on "diversity" which reduces to opportunist and selective intervention as well as non-itervention in the pre-existing social life of subgroups - meant modern education could not be "forced" upon "indifferent" social groups. Then the so-called progressives, yes including the centre-left jumped in to obstruct educational ventures (unless carried out by missionaries of a certain denomination) on the excuse that - if poverty could not be eradicated, edcuation attempts could not be successful (absenteeism/truancy because of economic needs for child labour). Moreover, the few allowed ventures by the missionaries, did not really equip students of these social groups to derive skills necessary to take advantage of changing economic scenario and technology.

The rare few who attained such qualifications typically moved out of the region and their community networks - probably because of social difficulties given their much higher educational and professional status.

If the rashtra does not plan for compulsory exposure of all citizens to up-to-date educational processes that keeps the skills level up in step with rapidly changing technologies and new forms of economic interaction, some social subgroups will always be left behind in the skills department. As modern economic processes and technology become more and more knowledge intensive, it is futile for residents to take advantage of how the resources of even their own area is being utilized. For they - themselves would not be able to create the same value out of those resources.

This is the necessary compromise that every region has to make if it has not invested or allowed /pressurized the rashtra to invest in knowledge base dissemination.

There is logic apparently on both sides. But the fact of the compromise comes out of this fact of life. Try to protect your older lifestyle with its corrsponding knowledge base, then do not aspire for the products or consumption levels others make with their knowledge base. If you cannot create value out of resources in your own area, you will have to bargain for a share of the value created by others out of your resource, but you cannot demand that the entire product be handed over to you. The surplus was created by others with their skills. Normal market phenomena will determine that you will have to give up on that "whole for me" demand.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 20 Dec 2009 11:03

Social exclusion is often the effect of a process of discrimination or ‘othering’ on the basis of cultural, social and/or racial identity. Such discrimination can generate powerful exclusionary processes. It can be systematic and intentional - resulting from policies which are embedded in the formal institutions of the state.

I would not know much about Marxist fallacy. My take is a little different. To my mind regionalism and sub-nationalism is not politically motivated and as I see it, is beyond the political divide; at least within the hearts of those affected, even though they are taking the help of political and anti national forces, which is a wrong approach.

Let’s analyse. I too am aware of Jharkhand, Chattisgarh, Midnapore. In Jharkhand, you have greater experience if one goes by your posts.

As I see it, why the locals have not cared about economic exploitation of their area by themselves was because they did not have the wealth to do so, apart from possibly because of their culture, which is totally laid back. Mines cannot be excavated without big money. They have also not been fired up by ‘modern’ ideas of economic enhancement brought through ‘modern’ education. True, the missionaries have brought in education, but I daresay, they are very ‘enlightened’ to equip all with the fire of modern existence and desire to enhancement. I am not too sure if such schools have equipped their students on national and social issues, as say, the Kendriya Vidyalayas do! I know what the KVs do since I was a Chairman of quite a few of them.

The tribal people, as you would be well aware, are laid back. They have very little needs (or they had very little needs would be more appropriate to state). Their land was bountiful to meet their basic needs and they yearned for nothing more! They lived their life peacefully and satisfied. Then came industrialisation. Minerals etc were required. The virgin tribal had plenty. You have asked why they should complain if others come in? Good point. Others had the organisation and finances. Exploiting the mineral resources require big money. The tribal had none being uneducated and never having amassed wealth to compete with the conglomerates who came in to exploit the resources. The tribal people found that they were being ‘displaced’. In addition, the labour of these ‘outside’ entrepreneurs was also ‘outsiders’. In the bargain, there was/ is the feeling of being ‘swamped’. This lead to the surfacing of their sub-national identity. I am sure no matter how ‘nationalist’ one is, one cannot forget his roots and culture even if he is more than willing to make compromises for national progress! I am proud to be an Indian first, but if my Bengali identity was to be sacrificed, it would be very heart wrenching. Honestly speaking, I would not know where I will turn! See the Redrawing of the States thread and others and you will see how very intelligent and educated people can go afire over their sub-national identities, and surprisingly, they (those of Telengana and remainder Andhra) speak the same language! So, it does show how sub-nationalism is a potent force, which is latent when all is well!

The progress of India is essential for all Indians.

Take the case of the Marwaris and why are they businessmen? It is because their land could not support the population, was barren and wasted. Compare the Rajasthani food with the variety of Bengali food! Hence they moved out and because of deprivation, their psyche, because of circumstances, got nurtured towards business. Take the issue of Tibetans. Their Buddhist way of life did only demand a lifestyle of simple living with high thinking. In fact, I am told that Tibetans take it that damaging the landscape is a sin! However, with industrialisation, it became essential to ensure that raw materials are found and exploited for the economic good of the national population. Hence, ‘outsiders’ came in, since they had the organisation and finances to do the same while the local because of their laidback cultures and lack of education, could not compete and their areas were taken over by these non local entrepreneurs. With the advent of such entrepreneurs, came labour which was not laidback and locals were not employed ( I don’t remember which thread it was, but there is a tirade against the Bihari labour emigrating out of their State) . A new culture was thus superimposed on the local culture and because of their financial clout started to replace the local culture as the dominant culture. Hence, the anger of the local grew and it led to their coalescing their sub-nationalism.

I will give an example where bountiful food makes a people appear lazy. In Bengal, there is a saying throw a dead man, and he will come alive. I had a Punjabi General who was critical and complaining about Bengal. He said compare Bengal to Punjab. In Punjab they are hard working and a Bengali chucks a fishline in a pond wastes time to get one fish! True.

During an exercise (wargame) he emerged outside his Caravan (vehicle) which was AC half hour late for his Orders. He complained how hot it was to cover up his delay. I asked him how come as a Punjabi hardworking that he was or he thought he was, come so late? And that he should not blame Bengalis and instead see reality. The heat and humidity kills, but if food is available without having to fight for it, then who cares? And that we are not interested in mansions or Rolls Royce cars either! We are happy with what we have! Mistake me not. I am not stereotyping Punjabis. I have many a Punjabi and Sikh friends. It is just that this type of racial arrogance also adds to the rise of sub-nationalism. I darsay the other Bengalis think highly of the Midnaporis or each region thinking high of the other! I am sure you would have heard of the Nokkikantopur chaps and all that!

While I do not wish to bring in the religion angle, missionaries spread education and that it true, but of course, they had other agendas too. But let’s leave the religious issues alone. In so far as Marxists or Communists are concerned, yes, they obstruct the upliftment of the population so the population remains poor and they can use the ‘poor’ card for votes. Education brings emancipation and so they fear educating the people with quality education. That is why in Bengal, the regional chauvinism was used to make it wear a halo wherein only Bengali was taught and thereby ensuring that Bengalis could not compete for All India posts and hence, even if they were brilliant scholars, they remained unemployed since there was no surfeit of jobs in Bengal!

Indeed, the Nation requires to ensure educational upliftment for all, urban and rural. And it has to focus on the future job requirement. It cannot be a free for all where in the qualifications and skill do not match the job market leaving second raters taking jobs in first rate decision making slots!

“Whole for me” is not the answer and the cry of the ilk of Raj T. One has to ensure that those with merit help to build the Nation and its economic base. Merit Sans Frontiers .

Last issue I have is that if I cannot give a decent life for my family and myself, what is my existence? My past will not ensure my future.

If ambling through life through poverty or as a beggar but high on my glorious royal past could be bliss and yet be able to live, then why study and get a job? The past helps but that much and no more without pondering over the lost glories and blaming others. The past is a motivating factor to build upon.

I have not understood why we live on the past and not strive for the future. The present and the future is what will help us and our future generations.

I am told the descendants of the Nawab of Oudh and of Hyderabad live as total destitute. Beggars, if I may say! Has their past helped them to live. I believe they live in shanties of Calcutta or Kolkata, if you will! A riches to rag story, but deep and rich in the glorious past!

What good does it to their lives to think they are from people who were rulers in their own rights?

Culture and civilisation is important, but they cannot decide the present is what I feel!

That is what makes me wonder. If these 'greats' can not have a pleasant present, how can their past help?

People who talk about their civilisation, should also understand Himmesh Reshamiyya is popular to our cultural wizards! One cannot sing and breathe at the same time, if one uses his nose as a be all and end all of existence!

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 20 Dec 2009 19:27

First, past is not blanketly applied without analysis for appropriateness. Past is important to find patterns of situations/attitudes/behaviours that help us understand how certain ideologies, community leaderships will tend to utilize given situations - in the future. It is criminal to neglect the lessons of history, or claim that history was relevant once - but is not going to be important for future lessons and therefore never to be revisited.

On the other hand no one is taking the opposite view that we should live back in the past with respect to everything without discrimination. That is the view of Jihadi Islam. That society should be taken back to 7th century deserts of Arabia because the ideology only can be maintained or justified in that histroical context.

We have to take the middle road, of neither totally rejecting history and we must keep on revisiting history to get a pattern of how past experiences can indicate future scenarios. Nor should we mimic Islamists or certain schools within Christian and Judaic religious thoughts, that wants to take society back to a particular period and place in history - as otherwise their ideology becomes meaningless in any other context.

I have been fighting missionaries of both Islamist and Christian traditions from an early age - specifically in their subtle obstruction to members of their community or more so in the case of tribals they hope to convert, to go for modern skill-base education and higher education. Two specific reasons ultimately always emerged - too much higher education,e specially in the science and technology or medicine dept, somehow makes such students less docile to blind submission to theologians. Second, that a higher qualification would make them economically independent and not suitable for "missionary" work.

So I have reasons to be dead-set against specific religious group leaders and their theologians in all their activities. Every time I have tried to introduce elements of modernization through education/higher education/ economic self-reliance and joining the productivity/"capitalist" road - I have come up against obstacles put forward using such religious control.

I would support any authoritarian regime that would withdraw rashtryia protection for such obstacles under the excuse of "diversity". I would support any authoritarian regime that makes it compulsory for all citizens, irrespective of any consideration of origins, to be subjected to a intensive educational process that is constantly upgrading itself to keep up with changing economy and technology. A weak, pandering form of "democracy" that perpetuates "status quo" to facilitate theologians as well as protectors of "ways of life" for "indigenous" populations - simply so that certain elite groups can use such constituencies for personal power and esteem - is not the tool for necessary social transitions.

Much better is a more reactive, authoritarian form of democracy - that ha sno hesitation in intervening into situations because it feels the people involved as its own - as family, and hence if needed, to be subject to "tough love" - just as any family would do for a member in trouble or who is wayward.