India-US News and Discussion
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 13112
- Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
- Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .
Re: India-US News and Discussion
Don't you guys think instead of drawing conclusions based on personal decisions of BJ and NH it would be perhaps more useful to observe as to what has been their take on India centric issues ? Or if they have chosen to distance themselves from such issues .
Re: India-US News and Discussion
negi, both are state politicians, and as such have had no occasion to hold forth on international matters. However, I have seen no evidence that either shies away from associating with Indians.
BTW, this is one website somewhat related to NH that nobody seems to have picked up on. Might be relevant to the religion question. http://www.faithandreligionsexpo.com/
BTW, this is one website somewhat related to NH that nobody seems to have picked up on. Might be relevant to the religion question. http://www.faithandreligionsexpo.com/
Re: India-US News and Discussion
Nandu:
Lets not duck and keep arguing in the abstract. Lets look at reality, and things in practice.
Let me give you a hypothetical analogy that any guy can relate to
. Say you go to a party that has a lot of attractive women; some of them Indian. Thinking they are from India, and SDRE like you, you approach them and try to impress them with your best traits. They are quite polite to you, but during the course of the party, you notice that these Indian women have an affinity for the TFTA guys, particulary the American/European. In all the conversations you notice they try to impress with how western they are, they make every attempt to show their western leanings, and they feel very comfortable and at home with the TFTA guys. And note all the while, they have not said anything impolite to you or about their Indian roots. But does their silence on these matters, ignoring you, but at the same time, not shying away from displaying their western procilvities not say a lot about them? Do they need to explicitly come out and say I hate SDREs, I hate India, I hate my roots etc. Their very demenaour and behavior conveys these without having to explicitly say so. This is the case with BJ/NH. Why is it so hard to grasp and accept these facts?
Lets not duck and keep arguing in the abstract. Lets look at reality, and things in practice.
Let me give you a hypothetical analogy that any guy can relate to

Re: India-US News and Discussion
"Not shies away" is a fairly weak requirement, the question is compared to the avg alternative in that region, is the personNandu wrote:negi, both are state politicians, and as such have had no occasion to hold forth on international matters. However, I have seen no evidence that either shies away from associating with Indians.
1) More friendly
2) Equally friendly
3) Less friendly
friendly == involvement with local Indians, time spent on issues specific to them (say H1B, temple construction etc), approachability
What do they really bring to the table (apart from a known tendency to leave behind the vestiges of land that they can potentially trace their origin from)
Re: India-US News and Discussion
I don't know if this is from personal experience or not, but simply not true. Not to mention the TFTA girls are also totally ok with dating SDRE men.CRamS wrote:Nandu:
Lets not duck and keep arguing in the abstract. Lets look at reality, and things in practice.
Let me give you a hypothetical analogy that any guy can relate to. Say you go to a party that has a lot of attractive women; some of them Indian. Thinking they are from India, and SDRE like you, you approach them and try to impress them with your best traits. They are quite polite to you, but during the course of the party, you notice that these Indian women have an affinity for the TFTA guys, particulary the American/European. In all the conversations you notice they try to impress with how western they are, they make every attempt to show their western leanings, and they feel very comfortable and at home with the TFTA guys. And note all the while, they have not said anything impolite to you or about their Indian roots. But does their silence on these matters, ignoring you, but at the same time, not shying away from displaying their western procilvities not say a lot about them? Do they need to explicitly come out and say I hate SDREs, I hate India, I hate my roots etc. Their very demenaour and behavior conveys these without having to explicitly say so. This is the case with BJ/NH. Why is it so hard to grasp and accept these facts?
Re: India-US News and Discussion
By the way, in Indian history we see examples where conversion happened for profit and power. Many converted to RoP during its heydays. Some even as late as 1947 to hold to their properties in TSP-land. These conversion have been treated with disdain by us. Same revulsion many feel.
Quite obviously it is not argued by anyone that they don't have a right to convert, nor is argued that conversion by itself is bad and unholy. It is to the credit of our sabhyata that we are not decrying them individually or their personal spiritual quest, where a person converts to achieve spiritual goals. (This is not a courtesy extended by the faiths originating in W. Asia.) We are only noting the cause of conversion as being related to their desire to be elected.
Also note, both BJ & NH could as easily come out and talk about their Hindu/Sikh roots and quite simply say that while they are not followers of their native faiths, the faiths themselves are respectable and valid paths. But we know they will not. NH still might, but BJ will never. They reason they will not say this voluntarily and happily is that there is an article of faith in the Xtian of West that faiths of India are of demonic origin. BJ & NH will not go to their respective churches and ask them to alter that viewpoint. That is capitulation. Some Indian magazine or internet portal should pose this question to them, if they are allowed to interview these guys.
Other than that, we don't gain anything by opposing them either. So discussin them or p1$$ing on them is counter-productive, by the way.
[During Ranjit Sinhg's rule, many Hindus, including non-Punjabis, converted to Sikhism. These conversions were not held with disdain since converting to Sikhism was (and still is, to a large degree) not considered converting to an alien antithetical faith.]
Quite obviously it is not argued by anyone that they don't have a right to convert, nor is argued that conversion by itself is bad and unholy. It is to the credit of our sabhyata that we are not decrying them individually or their personal spiritual quest, where a person converts to achieve spiritual goals. (This is not a courtesy extended by the faiths originating in W. Asia.) We are only noting the cause of conversion as being related to their desire to be elected.
Also note, both BJ & NH could as easily come out and talk about their Hindu/Sikh roots and quite simply say that while they are not followers of their native faiths, the faiths themselves are respectable and valid paths. But we know they will not. NH still might, but BJ will never. They reason they will not say this voluntarily and happily is that there is an article of faith in the Xtian of West that faiths of India are of demonic origin. BJ & NH will not go to their respective churches and ask them to alter that viewpoint. That is capitulation. Some Indian magazine or internet portal should pose this question to them, if they are allowed to interview these guys.
Other than that, we don't gain anything by opposing them either. So discussin them or p1$$ing on them is counter-productive, by the way.
[During Ranjit Sinhg's rule, many Hindus, including non-Punjabis, converted to Sikhism. These conversions were not held with disdain since converting to Sikhism was (and still is, to a large degree) not considered converting to an alien antithetical faith.]
Re: India-US News and Discussion
Carl_T:
My analogy was not to talk about the proclivities of all women; I just gave a hypothetical example which guys can relate and which does happen in practice. And it was given to show that BJ/NH, through their behavior in what they say and what they did not say, leaves us in doubt on their leanings visa vi India. If you can't get it, I give up.
My analogy was not to talk about the proclivities of all women; I just gave a hypothetical example which guys can relate and which does happen in practice. And it was given to show that BJ/NH, through their behavior in what they say and what they did not say, leaves us in doubt on their leanings visa vi India. If you can't get it, I give up.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 3532
- Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37
Re: India-US News and Discussion
Some of you may have noted already, this year Rajeev Ram is playing for US in the Wimbledon Open. Unfortunately had to play against Andy Roddick in the very first round and got eliminated.
Added later: Appears that he has been playing for US for a while now.
Added later: Appears that he has been playing for US for a while now.
Last edited by Satya_anveshi on 22 Jun 2010 03:38, edited 1 time in total.
Re: India-US News and Discussion
If you want to talk about proclivities of BJ/NH, why don't you cite examples that show their antagonism to India and Indian interests instead? There has been no discussion of their actual actions or comments regarding India or Indian interests and instead it's been about whether they are "Indic" enough, or whether they are "vocal" and "public" about their "Indicness".CRamS wrote:Carl_T:
My analogy was not to talk about the proclivities of all women; I just gave a hypothetical example which guys can relate and which does happen in practice. And it was given to show that BJ/NH, through their behavior in what they say and what they did not say, leaves us in doubt on their leanings visa vi India. If you can't get it, I give up.
Re: India-US News and Discussion
Since you addressed me directly, my answer is pretty much on the lines of Abhijit's - what they choose as far as their religion goes is not my business. I also expect them to be politicians, and do what is expedient to get ahead. Their behavior is hardly something extraordinarily new - talk to emigres from other Asian countries and you'll see similar angst about 'banana' (yellow on outside, white on inside) behavior, on the same lines of those derided as coconuts. It's happened even among white ethnicities, e.g. Italian-Americans trying to obscure their heritage in the past in similar ways. That being an overtly Italian-American businessman/politician does not have any negative connotation now came about through successive generations slowly setting that up. It was not like that in the past, as you'll know from the Godfather movies.Sanku wrote:Suraj et al--
People who are ready to ditch and disown simple things such as the religion they were born in (if it does not apply to some then obviously this point does not matter in that context) and stay away from their heritage because it inhibits their chances at "one of us" in US, how in the Gods name will they be "more" amenable to helping their fellow country men than others who dont have to worry on that count?
I'll take as many Indian-Americans in corridors of power as possible. Unlike many local level SDRE officeholders, BJ and NH are already at state governor level - a step below the federal senate. Their outward demeanour is significantly tied to the fact that they are from very socially backward states. I'm curious about exactly what people expect BJ or NH to do 'for Indians' just because they are of Indian origin. I don't expect them to, or want them to, be so parochial. Ultimately, the political system here is lubricated by money. Higher political ambitions means more financial requirements. The people of their ethnic heritage constitute a small but very economically able diaspora. The two entities will find each other useful. What's wrong if BJ can go native effectively ? When anyone sees a picture of him, the image is still that of an SDRE, at least until he does a Michael Jackson transformation

As far as women go, from personal experience, everyone has their own preferences. It's a loser's argument to claim 'she does not like me because I'm SDRE'. Fixating on why some particular person didn't like you is a waste of oxygen and neurons. If you have it together, you'll get attention from all kinds of women - white, Asian, Indian, whatever.
Re: India-US News and Discussion
SCOTUS Rules Non-Violent Assistance to Terror Groups is Still Terrorism
The case arose out of human rights advice given by a California group to Kurdish and Tamil organisations that are listed as terrorist groups in the US.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4516
- Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10
Re: India-US News and Discussion
My 2 cents: I don’t know what Indic means, so I will just use the word Hindu – because if BJ/NH were Hindu, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Shouldn’t the parameters to decide who Indian-Americans decide to support be based on the following?
a) Will they bring tangible benefits to India - trade, diplomacy, defence etc?
b) Will they bring tangible benefits to Indian-Americans - immigration, addressing grievances etc?
c) Will they serve as a role-model for Indian-Americans (irrespective of religion) to aspire for political office?
For many Hindu Indians, there is a 4th criterion
d) Will they establish a beachhead for Hindus in the American political mainstream?
There are more criteria of course - some Indian-Americans may care about positions on healthcare, war in Afghanistan etc. But for the purpose of this discussion & its relevance to India/Indians, I'd think that the above are the key factors.
Also, note that in the above criteria (a) and (b) are the end states. (c) and (d) are means to the end as well as secondary/tertiary goals.
We don’t know BJ or NH's positions on (a) or (b) because neither have held national roles nor spoken about these. Both of them will deliver (c). They may deliver (d) by inspiring other Hindu Americans to stand for office
Here is a question: if you have a white candidate (WC – no offense intended) standing against NH/BJ, will you support him/her? Let’s consider 4 scenarios:
1) WC is against (a) and (b) while BJ/NH are pro (a) & (b). No brainer. We should support BJ/NH
2) WC is against (a) and (b) while BJ/NH are also against (a) & (b). We should still support BJ/NH because they will deliver (c) & for Hindus, possibly (d). The assumption is that more of (c) is good because it translates to a higher probability of achieving (a) and (b)
3) WC is pro (a) and (b) while BJ/NH are against (a) & (b). We should support WC because (a) and (b) are our “ends”. You can argue that the long term benefits of (c) outweigh short term losses. IMO, this view would be wrong because this will set the wrong precedent that Indians will support Indian-Americans even if the latter are anti-India
4) WC is pro (a) and (b) while BJ/NH are also pro (a) & (b). We should support BJ/NH because they will deliver (c) & possibly (d).
So, rationally speaking, I don’t see how the religion of BJ/NH matters at all in this discussion. Even for Hindus, it’s only a tertiary goal (i.e. if we get a candidate who is pro-India, we will support him. If he is Indian-American, better. If he is Hindu, even better)
Shouldn’t the parameters to decide who Indian-Americans decide to support be based on the following?
a) Will they bring tangible benefits to India - trade, diplomacy, defence etc?
b) Will they bring tangible benefits to Indian-Americans - immigration, addressing grievances etc?
c) Will they serve as a role-model for Indian-Americans (irrespective of religion) to aspire for political office?
For many Hindu Indians, there is a 4th criterion
d) Will they establish a beachhead for Hindus in the American political mainstream?
There are more criteria of course - some Indian-Americans may care about positions on healthcare, war in Afghanistan etc. But for the purpose of this discussion & its relevance to India/Indians, I'd think that the above are the key factors.
Also, note that in the above criteria (a) and (b) are the end states. (c) and (d) are means to the end as well as secondary/tertiary goals.
We don’t know BJ or NH's positions on (a) or (b) because neither have held national roles nor spoken about these. Both of them will deliver (c). They may deliver (d) by inspiring other Hindu Americans to stand for office
Here is a question: if you have a white candidate (WC – no offense intended) standing against NH/BJ, will you support him/her? Let’s consider 4 scenarios:
1) WC is against (a) and (b) while BJ/NH are pro (a) & (b). No brainer. We should support BJ/NH
2) WC is against (a) and (b) while BJ/NH are also against (a) & (b). We should still support BJ/NH because they will deliver (c) & for Hindus, possibly (d). The assumption is that more of (c) is good because it translates to a higher probability of achieving (a) and (b)
3) WC is pro (a) and (b) while BJ/NH are against (a) & (b). We should support WC because (a) and (b) are our “ends”. You can argue that the long term benefits of (c) outweigh short term losses. IMO, this view would be wrong because this will set the wrong precedent that Indians will support Indian-Americans even if the latter are anti-India
4) WC is pro (a) and (b) while BJ/NH are also pro (a) & (b). We should support BJ/NH because they will deliver (c) & possibly (d).
So, rationally speaking, I don’t see how the religion of BJ/NH matters at all in this discussion. Even for Hindus, it’s only a tertiary goal (i.e. if we get a candidate who is pro-India, we will support him. If he is Indian-American, better. If he is Hindu, even better)
Re: India-US News and Discussion
Way too much pedantic piskology to give the benefit of doubt to BJ/NH, depite what they have conveyed loudly and clearly through their actions. I thought I sealed the issue with a simple example that guys can relate to, having to do with courting women, but that analogy was distorted too, so give up.
Begs the question, when can one draw conclusions about someone, short of them saying so verbatim about their proclivities. We all know that TSP Pakijabis have nothing but contempt and disdain for SDREs. Now, how did we conclude this? By their actions. But how many TSP RAPE have actually come out and explicitly said we hate SDREs? Come on guys, its the same thing with NH/BJ. Enough said.
Begs the question, when can one draw conclusions about someone, short of them saying so verbatim about their proclivities. We all know that TSP Pakijabis have nothing but contempt and disdain for SDREs. Now, how did we conclude this? By their actions. But how many TSP RAPE have actually come out and explicitly said we hate SDREs? Come on guys, its the same thing with NH/BJ. Enough said.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4516
- Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10
Re: India-US News and Discussion
My long post was not to support BJ/NH. I am ambivalent on the topic myself.
My post was only to explain a rational process to decide whether to support BJ/NH or not. And the point is that it only depends on whether they are pro-India or not. Religion doesnt seem to enter the picture.
Their actions only indicates that they dont care much for the Hindu religion. I am not aware of any data that demonstrates whether they are pro-India or anti-India.
My post was only to explain a rational process to decide whether to support BJ/NH or not. And the point is that it only depends on whether they are pro-India or not. Religion doesnt seem to enter the picture.
Their actions only indicates that they dont care much for the Hindu religion. I am not aware of any data that demonstrates whether they are pro-India or anti-India.
Re: India-US News and Discussion
"Indic" is when we Indians pretend that Egyptian pyramids were built by ancient Hindu kings - can't let African-Americans have all the fun with history.
Meanwhile, Obama's Chief of Staff Emmanuel is stepping down - Hey Rahm!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 74636.html
Meanwhile, Obama's Chief of Staff Emmanuel is stepping down - Hey Rahm!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 74636.html
Re: India-US News and Discussion
surinder wrote:.. there is an article of faith in the Xtian of West that faiths of India are of demonic origin.


Tens of millions of white Christians practice yoga meditation daily. Granted, they tend to be from the most highly educated layers and are able to filter out the Temple of Doom variety but even the hoi polloi have dreamed up something called Christian Yoga.
Check out this recent WH photo. If you download the hi res file, you'll see something interesting.
Re: India-US News and Discussion
I did, whose picture was it on that lucky charm button? Looked like an SDRE swami, but I could be wrong.Victor wrote:
Check out this recent WH photo. If you download the hi res file, you'll see something interesting.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 9664
- Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Re: India-US News and Discussion
A flourishing economic partnership
op-ed by Ambassador Timothy J. Roemer in The Economic Times June 22, 2010
http://newdelhi.usembassy.gov/amboped062210.html
op-ed by Ambassador Timothy J. Roemer in The Economic Times June 22, 2010
http://newdelhi.usembassy.gov/amboped062210.html
Re: India-US News and Discussion
linkyVictor wrote:surinder wrote:.. there is an article of faith in the Xtian of West that faiths of India are of demonic origin.![]()
![]()
Tens of millions of white Christians practice yoga meditation daily. Granted, they tend to be from the most highly educated layers and are able to filter out the Temple of Doom variety but even the hoi polloi have dreamed up something called Christian Yoga.
Check out this recent WH photo. If you download the hi res file, you'll see something interesting.
maybe its linky ......
one can see Lord Vishnu too

Re: India-US News and Discussion
Thanks for the reply Suraj; so if I understand you correctly, (and I could be wrong) you expect them to be "just like" any other politician, so what is for "us" to be happy or sad about their success or hope for more of the same?Suraj wrote:Since you addressed me directly, my answer is pretty much on the lines of Abhijit's - what they choose as far as their religion goes is not my business. I also expect them to be politicians, and do what is expedient to get ahead.Sanku wrote:Suraj et al--
As I understand you think it will give more people of Indian ethnicity a foot in the door in system.
However -- the key fact that you sidestepped, by claiming that religion is a personal choice (as is any other world view) -- is that how Indian do they remain as they fall all over themselves to be American.
Clearly a lot of brown skinned people will be important in US of A in times to come, but if they are not Indian any more than the color of their skin, what are we gaining?
In fact we lose
1) Overall capable people basically now have a different set of values than they started with -- loss of strong minds to carry forward the Indian meme
2) Presence of Trojans, we will now have tons fo Sidd**** Vardh**** ; brown skinned Americans fighting for America under the pretense of being Indian.
After all I wonder if Italians/Germans as they lost under the American forces in WW II were happy about their losses or ecstatic that the US victory was contributed to immensely by naturalized people of German and Italian origins?
As a Indian living in India, I see these types with suspicion and danger.
Just because they have a brown skin and carry physical genes of Indian origin it means NOTHING to me -- heck Pakis are still far more Indian frankly.
Indians (true Indians in India/or elsewhere worried about other Indians in India and its history and culture) should not be happy at further deracinationzation for success.
My perspective.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 321
- Joined: 19 Feb 2010 18:41
Re: India-US News and Discussion
I concur with Sankuji.What relevance do these deracinated people have to India proper? Thier only relevance will be if they are in a position to start influencing American foriegn policy on India, but I am not holding my breath for anything positive to come out of that .I understand this topic is probably intresting to our Indian-american brothers.but a better place to discuss this would be in a different thread.
OT here but my two cents:
It is a telling sign that they need to shed their identify completely and vociferously deny it everytime some Christian nutjob takes a shot at them.
For Indian-Americans maybe it shows "hope" that they can become a force in the corridors of power,but at what cost?What is wrong with our mindset that we think it acceptable for someone to shed comletely their Indic identity and make all sorts of compromises to get a footing?
OT here but my two cents:
It is a telling sign that they need to shed their identify completely and vociferously deny it everytime some Christian nutjob takes a shot at them.
For Indian-Americans maybe it shows "hope" that they can become a force in the corridors of power,but at what cost?What is wrong with our mindset that we think it acceptable for someone to shed comletely their Indic identity and make all sorts of compromises to get a footing?
Re: India-US News and Discussion
On BJ and NH:
This is something every indian should know. Especially if your confused about hinduism.
Indicness is not a religion. Hinduism(THE religion) is a british construct. Yes! Bharat was a religion-less society before the muslims arrived and this so-called hinduism that we identify ourselves with is not even ours. You will find it surprising to know that today's china is what we used to be long time ago as far as religion and societal structure is concerned.
While both india and china have remained "east", still the abrahamic invasion is very much real and happening. The "abrahams" should be feared and abhorred because they bring a system which is in-coexist-able. The belief in multiple gods is ridiculous but the belief in one single god is dangerous. ATM, both of them are in some sort of a ceasefire and are busy expanding themselves in the east before they collide with each other once again. East has so-far been "free" from the dark ages but that won't be the case in round 2.
Believe me, the invasion is so real that even the "religion-less" china has begun promoting buddhism to it's citizens as it too knows the dangers of a monotheist belief system. Every time an indian embraces islam or christianity, he/she does not convert from "hinduism to christianity/islam" but from "religion-less to a religion". That takes us even back as now we need to work harder to push these people from "Abraham > Hinduism(current structure) > Religionless bharat".
This is exactly what im trying to say. The british took practices like animal sacrifice from one region, casteism from another region etc etc and merged all these regional practices together and called it hinduism. It has nothing to do with indicness and the word "hinduism" itself is "alien" to bharat. The word "Religion" is alien to "bharat".
Indicness of bharat is not a religion. First we need to dump this british construct along with the two expansionists making inroads into the indian society. What BJ and NH have done is to promote "religion" which dharma itself abhors.
This is something every indian should know. Especially if your confused about hinduism.
Indicness is not a religion. Hinduism(THE religion) is a british construct. Yes! Bharat was a religion-less society before the muslims arrived and this so-called hinduism that we identify ourselves with is not even ours. You will find it surprising to know that today's china is what we used to be long time ago as far as religion and societal structure is concerned.
While both india and china have remained "east", still the abrahamic invasion is very much real and happening. The "abrahams" should be feared and abhorred because they bring a system which is in-coexist-able. The belief in multiple gods is ridiculous but the belief in one single god is dangerous. ATM, both of them are in some sort of a ceasefire and are busy expanding themselves in the east before they collide with each other once again. East has so-far been "free" from the dark ages but that won't be the case in round 2.
Believe me, the invasion is so real that even the "religion-less" china has begun promoting buddhism to it's citizens as it too knows the dangers of a monotheist belief system. Every time an indian embraces islam or christianity, he/she does not convert from "hinduism to christianity/islam" but from "religion-less to a religion". That takes us even back as now we need to work harder to push these people from "Abraham > Hinduism(current structure) > Religionless bharat".
This is exactly what im trying to say. The british took practices like animal sacrifice from one region, casteism from another region etc etc and merged all these regional practices together and called it hinduism. It has nothing to do with indicness and the word "hinduism" itself is "alien" to bharat. The word "Religion" is alien to "bharat".
Indicness of bharat is not a religion. First we need to dump this british construct along with the two expansionists making inroads into the indian society. What BJ and NH have done is to promote "religion" which dharma itself abhors.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 951
- Joined: 08 Nov 2007 00:51
- Location: Jeering sekular forces bhile Furiously malishing my mijjile @ Led Lips Mijjile Malish Palish Parloul
Re: India-US News and Discussion
^^^
You are confusing religion with the narrow definition that arahamic faiths follow. Hinduism is very much a religion, but it is not a binary cult like the abrahamic faiths
You are confusing religion with the narrow definition that arahamic faiths follow. Hinduism is very much a religion, but it is not a binary cult like the abrahamic faiths
Re: India-US News and Discussion
@derkonig
Yes that is what i said. Practices were merged together intentionally to form a "religion" and they called it "hinduism". Fact is, the work is incomplete. It is not yet a full fledged religion and hence creates a lot of confusion whether to call it a religion or not. It is just a british experiment. It's incomplete nature is why there is no reverend or mullah figure in it and why the hindu priests have no power to give diktats to the society and why the practices and rituals change beyond and after every 100kms and why there are no threats of burning in hell for every single heresy.
It has been this way for so long that im forced to associate my self with hinduism(a religion) when im not. Im an atheist and a follower of dharma.
Don't you get what they tried to do or did? The minute you associate yourself with a religion, you're lost.
Yes that is what i said. Practices were merged together intentionally to form a "religion" and they called it "hinduism". Fact is, the work is incomplete. It is not yet a full fledged religion and hence creates a lot of confusion whether to call it a religion or not. It is just a british experiment. It's incomplete nature is why there is no reverend or mullah figure in it and why the hindu priests have no power to give diktats to the society and why the practices and rituals change beyond and after every 100kms and why there are no threats of burning in hell for every single heresy.
It has been this way for so long that im forced to associate my self with hinduism(a religion) when im not. Im an atheist and a follower of dharma.
Don't you get what they tried to do or did? The minute you associate yourself with a religion, you're lost.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 17249
- Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
- Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/
Re: India-US News and Discussion


Re: India-US News and Discussion
haha
..nice one

Re: India-US News and Discussion
Guys, lets leave NJ/BJ aside; let them pursue their dreams. They don't have anything to do with India/Indians, and we have nothing to do with them.
A little bit on the round the clock obsession with this BP gulf oil spill, and the contrast with Bhopal.
I was laughing my ass of past several days when reporters on NPR would talk about the oil spill in a chocked voice. They will use Armageddon-like characterizations in their narratives. The obsession and exaggerations are so profuse and intense, and the self pity so shameless and inflamed, it insensitizes those of us who know about real tragedies. The real victims of a colossal tragedy, those of Bhopal, don't even exist in their pompous minds. The hounding of BP CEO is sickening when you consider that Warren Anderson, CEO of Union Carbide responsible for Bhopal is living Kushily in the Hamptons. I am not shedding any tears for UK-based BP, as far as I am concerned, its a family feud. I can only imagine the heights of demonization had it been an SDRE Indian company like Reliance that caused the leak.
Yesterday, a school gir called and said they are collecting money to "save" the gulf coast animals. Boy this word "save" is so much a part of American consciousness. Save the souls, save the animals, save the bla bla. Has it anything to do with the essential Biblical/Christian character of the society? As Swami Dayananda said, save yourself, and you save everybody else .
A little bit on the round the clock obsession with this BP gulf oil spill, and the contrast with Bhopal.
I was laughing my ass of past several days when reporters on NPR would talk about the oil spill in a chocked voice. They will use Armageddon-like characterizations in their narratives. The obsession and exaggerations are so profuse and intense, and the self pity so shameless and inflamed, it insensitizes those of us who know about real tragedies. The real victims of a colossal tragedy, those of Bhopal, don't even exist in their pompous minds. The hounding of BP CEO is sickening when you consider that Warren Anderson, CEO of Union Carbide responsible for Bhopal is living Kushily in the Hamptons. I am not shedding any tears for UK-based BP, as far as I am concerned, its a family feud. I can only imagine the heights of demonization had it been an SDRE Indian company like Reliance that caused the leak.
Yesterday, a school gir called and said they are collecting money to "save" the gulf coast animals. Boy this word "save" is so much a part of American consciousness. Save the souls, save the animals, save the bla bla. Has it anything to do with the essential Biblical/Christian character of the society? As Swami Dayananda said, save yourself, and you save everybody else .
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 17249
- Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
- Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/
Re: India-US News and Discussion

CRamS garu, that is so true. It is Dharma playing its role and giving the karmaphala to american society...
As long as a person/society sees service as saving someone-else instead of doing their dharma this nonsense will continue (sigh)... You can see the parallels between this and the discussion/debate in kandhamaal thread.
My interesting observation is - the percentage of NRIs fall for this saving "something/someone" brouhaha...
Re: India-US News and Discussion
Sanku: We will have to agree to disagree. Clearly we're talking past each other.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 6580
- Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51
Re: India-US News and Discussion
Quite true that there was never a construct such as Hinduism You will note that Sikhs for example almost never use that term. And they should know
I only use it as a shorthand for "the historical and evolving default culture of people living in India who are not described by an alternate ideology".
I only use it as a shorthand for "the historical and evolving default culture of people living in India who are not described by an alternate ideology".
Re: India-US News and Discussion
Suraj, with all due respects we are not talking past each other, but yes, I suppose we may not be able to find a meeting ground on this issue.
Re: India-US News and Discussion
Sanku ji, there is no dearth of coconuts among the NRI's. One doesn't have to 'convert' to become more American than americans. We have the likes of siddharth varadrajan carrying the proverbial bags for their american masters. my issue is with treating nh/bj any 'differently' than the sv's of the world. if for example, bj were to be a shaivite and had suddenly turned vaishnavite, would you be up in arms? obviously no, because both the paths are indic. I submit that converting to xtianity is also (almost) equally indic because our ancestors allowed it and we can't turn that clock back. today there are millions of catholics in India - whose ancestors were as hindu as you and me once upon a time. we have accepted their progeny as indians and the only yardstick we (should) use in evaluating any indians (NRI/RNI/Indian americans or whatever) is: how do they deal with those of us who have never found the 'good word'. as long as they do not actively denigrate us pagans/heathens for our beliefs, or they do not actively oppose INDIAN interests, i would rather give them a benefit of doubt.is that how Indian do they remain as they fall all over themselves to be American.
Having said that, CRS's anguish at the media falling over themselves for nh/bj is quite on the mark. but then the ddm is like that onlee.
Re: India-US News and Discussion
Abhijit, you misunderstand me, I used the example of SV, so clearly I do not hold SV in higher regard than BJ. A coconut is a coconut. The test is Indicness and Indian interests. That is all.
--------------------------
However, I think it is not valid to compare some one who was born in a particular set of circumstances and one who has gone out of his way to land in in that situation.
I also do not think that BJ et al are making this change for "spiritual reasons" -- this is very much a issue of cultural choice -- that is the "core" issue.
--------------------------
However, I think it is not valid to compare some one who was born in a particular set of circumstances and one who has gone out of his way to land in in that situation.
I also do not think that BJ et al are making this change for "spiritual reasons" -- this is very much a issue of cultural choice -- that is the "core" issue.
Re: India-US News and Discussion
Deleted spamposting on multiple threads.
Last edited by Suraj on 23 Jun 2010 00:44, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: User formally warned for forum misuse.
Reason: User formally warned for forum misuse.
Re: India-US News and Discussion
A well read guide in the Library of Congress in the nations capitol was heard saying that all the monuments reflect the history of Americans but also it "shows how we are so full of ourselves."ramana wrote:
What is the gaping intellectual vacuum in the American political space?
The true gaping intellectual vacuum in American political system is that they have not understood the true meaning of Enlgithement. They think that Englightenment is only de-monarchization i.e. ending the feudal system and its trappings which bind Church and State together. While they have freed the State from the clutches of the Church they are still working on freeing the society and people from the Church and are unable to see a society and world without the boundaries of the Church.
Its this shortcoming, which makes them unrealize the vast resources and research they have invested and acquired.
American view of the world is still from the Christian point of view but the world is much bigger than that.
Re: India-US News and Discussion
Rediff.com's George Joseph and Paresh Gandhi traveled to the American state to track the rising star of the Republican Party a day before the run-off.Abhijit wrote: Having said that, CRS's anguish at the media falling over themselves for nh/bj is quite on the mark. but then the ddm is like that onlee.
Re: India-US News and Discussion
There is deep irony that Nikki Haley, the daughter of immigrants is poised to become the Governor of a bible belt stronghold state.
Re: India-US News and Discussion
Bay area is the only area in US that a hard core Indic can become successful in Politics without hiding behind a Christian gown. The demographics with around than 10% Indians in some districts, and other Asians making up total of 20% with 30% hispanics just needs an inspiring orator with eastern wisdom and western practicality to win an election.
A lot of Asians in Bay area are Buddhists including a large no. from Chinese mainland which have natural affinity to Indic culture.
Re: India-US News and Discussion
How about BRites from bay area running for city council member or a mayor.
If any BRites wants to run for a mayor seat in bay area, propose buidling a cricket field

If any BRites wants to run for a mayor seat in bay area, propose buidling a cricket field

