Indo-UK News & Discussion 9th Aug 2011

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 10 Nov 2012 20:00

Lilo wrote:^^Eklavya ji,

from what you mentioned above, i hope my original post quoted by you should be no more of a problem.

As you hold, if bullying by students with political background is not occurring anymore in Doon , then its well and good - lets leave it at that.

PS:Show of loyality to one's "Alma mater" is good , but there is nothing to gain from mounting a defense of one's own ("are they really one's own?") in a nationalist forum (that too in the britturd section) , btw iam a product of a couple of institutions mentioned (now a proud product of only one) - so such views can change with time and one's changing perspective - and dont matter much in overall scheme of things.

Lilo, to be frank, and if one is compelled to generalise, the (uber-powerful) political kids at my time were some of the best behaved kids at school; the mean cliquey kids (and every school has them) were typically from the Delhi mid-ranking business families. All boarding schools have to deal with these issues, some deal with it more openly and better than others. I am sure your advice is well meant, but really, there is no school more nationalist than Doon.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 10 Nov 2012 20:55

eklavya ji,
I have no particular grouse against "Doon school". Three gen of ancestors on both sides schooled at similar [including the above mentioned one] pool. I have never really bonded with my school [not the above] which belonged to the same pool too. From very early on, even before reading up on non-popular history - I reacted very strongly to the authoritarianism, and the conformist clamp down. I learned how to subvert authority by challenging the school authority, which in many ways - under all its veneer of "concessions to Indian culture", still instil the British public school mechanism of extending the psychological basis of Anglo imperialism.

I was always a fiercely independent critical thinker, and the subtle cues catch my eyes. It is not just about promoting cultural elements like batik/regional language plays - say - [in fact batik is imported from Indonesia], it is about reconstructing a history and culture of India that is usually rather silent on the negative role of imperialist religions in India, a promotion of "good sides of British imperialism at a societal/reformist level" through such subtle copying of English public school practices.

Products find it very very difficult not to get into a blind admiration of English "cultural elements" - in literature and other aspects.

If the elite creme-de-la-creme politicians/biz people who will control all the strings of power in India, are all influenced by this subtle weakness and soft corner for the "British" and associated social/religious memes - that is a very effective strategy to have a basically Anglophile regime in power, a regime that will not oppose British interests to the degree it would have if it had been a product of non-English-public-school system.

I have been through exclusive school and club circuits. I resented every bit of my presence there. The Indicness was over-shouted through outward celebrations - the underlying memes/themes/daily-anushangas were far far removed from India. These were desperately trying to be mini-English societies, conscious in addition to the fact that they would not be accepted as English by the English. that makes up a pretty problematic psychological profile.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 11 Nov 2012 00:00

brihaspati,

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that products of educational institutions modelled on British institutions may not be sufficiently loyal to India. You may be right, but you may also be wrong.

For example, sometimes I wonder what the hell resides inside Ramachandra Guha's (an Old Dosco to boot!) dense head to produce rubbish like this:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a4131014-5311 ... z2BqUGFPZ7
It is true that Britain and India have a somewhat special connection. No other relationship between a former imperial power and a former colony is so suffused with affection and so free of animosity. To maintain this spirit, the British would do well to focus on culture rather than economics or military hardware. Close down Dfid’s operations in India. Do not sulk when Indian entrepreneurs buy your companies or the Indian government buys guns or rockets from elsewhere. But, please, do restore and enhance the collections of the British Council libraries, and do send your best writers and (especially) actors on tours to India.

But then, (I think) Pankaj Mishra didn't go to a 'public school', and you know how much he hates India.

You are a historian, and I am an economist. My training tells me that interests group are remarkably good at identifying and promoting their own interests. The anglicised elite (and non elite, for that matter) may read and appreciate Shakespeare and Austen, but like any school child knows, they also know: (i) The British came to India to enrich themselves, (ii) The British enriched themselves and impoverished our people, (iii) millions of Indians starved to death because of the callous British Government disregard for Indian lives, (iv) The British sought to exploit differences in Indian society (separate electorates; support for Jinnah,etc) and the cancer called Pakistan was fathered by the British, (v) the British were/are world class hypocrites, liars, and cheats.

The anglicised Indian elite is not stupid (with one or two obvious exceptions). Why is it not possible to be a thorough Indian nationalist and yet find aspects of British cultural heritage (Austen, the Rolling Stones, etc) appealing? One can enjoy Hollywood movies (especially ones with Ms Jolie) without becoming a fan of US foreign policy. One can enjoy Chinese food without wanting to gift Tawang to the Chinese. What am I missing?

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 11 Nov 2012 00:47

Eklavya ji, I think the problem is one of privileged frameworks.

"Framework" in the sense of what set of categories one uses in understanding and evaluating various facets of the two sides in any history of inter-civlizational intercourse, and how one prioritizes those categories to arrive at working assumptions that guide future behaviour, worldview and decision-making.

You, I, and many other BRF-ites are discerning enough to have developed a framework that is capable of appreciating the work of a Conan Doyle or Kipling on the one hand, while remaining aware of (and indeed prioritizing) the far more impactful aspects of the pre- and post-independence colonialism that has characterized all spheres of UK-India relations. We're capable of (and indeed, desirous of expending mental effort on) recognizing these things, seeing the whole picture, and processing all inputs in parallel while still retaining a view of the UK and its civilization that is conducive to the Indian national interest.

I would venture to say that this is much more a result of our upbringing, the history we were taught by our parents and relatives, and the history we learn from each other at fora like BR than a result of the "history", "literature" and other humanities-based curricula that we were taught in our schools. Some of us, very few, had school teachers and/or college professors who set the textbooks aside and told the unvarnished truth. But education professionals that courageous or committed are a minority; the NCERT institution gets its history from Romila Thapar and its literary Anglophilia from the same traditions that spawned Manmohan Singh, Chidambaram and others.

So the danger I believe Brihaspati and others are trying to highlight is that, on the whole, the educational system to which our schoolchildren are exposed (which then breeds the popular discourse those children engage in as adults) is biased towards a framework that privilges Anglophilia (through literature and so on) while distancing students from the narrative of very real horrors that their ancestors suffered at British hands. I think this is a legitimate concern.

I don't know that the answer is to kick out Conan Doyle or even Kipling from our classrooms, but rather, to make sure our children learn of Bappa Rawal or Rana Sanga before they learn of Brave Horatius or Young Lochinvar; to ensure that they comprehend the difference between Indian heroes (such as Baji Rao or Krishnadev Raya) against figures elevated to heroism in Western discourse (such as Sikander or Lawrence of Arabia); to determine that our children understand fully the true nature of the "civilization" which gave us Shakespeare and Dickens, before learning to appreciate the works of those writers; and most especially, to make a distinction between our historical and cultural narrative before falling prey to the privilege of an external, and often hostile, narrative.

For every one of us here who sees through the West's historiography and cultural narrative while still being capable of appreciating its art and literature, there is somewhere out there a fawning Amartya Sen or a braying Girish Karnad. Let this be the last generation of Indians who have made a career out of putting India last.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 11 Nov 2012 04:39

tour-de-force RD garu. Longtime no see, where were you? No wonder that insinuations of forum quality stagnating and all over recent months have gained steam only... welcome back and pls post more often.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 11 Nov 2012 04:56

Re: sadism and buggery in British boarding, military and other institutions:

It seems to be directly related to a certain colonial necessity that relies on asymmetric warfare, asymmetric dominance and accumulation of wealth. This requires the ability to subjugate, exploit or eliminate competitors by crushing one's own conscientious principles of equality, liberty, fraternity. 'Equality' within their own ranks meant subjugation of the individual to the will of the race, rewarded by superiority over other races.

Check out the "Ten Commandments for rogue warriors" as given by Richard Marcinko:

1. I am the War Lord and the wrathful God of Combat and I will always lead you from the front, not the rear.

2. I will treat you all alike - just like sh!t.

3. Thou shalt do nothing I will not do first, and thus will you be created Warriros in My deadly image.

4. I shall punish thy bodies because the more thou sweatest in training, the less thou bleedest in combat.

5. Indeed, if thou hurteth in thy efforts and thou suffer painful dings, then thou art Doing It Right.

6. Thou hast not to like it - thou hast just to do it.

7. Thou shalt Keep It Simple, Stupid.

8. Thou shalt never assume.

9. Verily, thou art not paid for thy methods, but for thy results, by which meaneth thou shalt kill thine enemy by any means available before he killeth you.

10. Thou shalt, in thy Warrior's Mind and Soul, always remember My ultimate and final Commandment: There Are No Rules - Thou Shalt Win at All Cost.

The fact that certain "Hobbesian" principles were drilled in and admired within Brit and other Euro colonial educational institutions can be seen from the writings of several of their famous icons. The admiration of Spartans, of Islamism, etc. is common. Even the American founding fathers wrote letters to one another during the War of Independence in which one finds lines like "Would Khalid bin Walid (whom the Prophet Muhammad dubbed the Sword of Islam) have done such a thing?" The admiration is frank, and the study of Muhammad and his companions' careers is taken for granted as required reading for the military aristocracy. But for the plebes, not so. Similarly, Napoleon was also a great admirer of Islamism, among other things. The British had definitely emerged after using piracy and other methods against the Spaniards, well before they came to India and other parts.

Moreover, one finds explicit references to buggery and other deviant practices in the so-called "occult" societies of those days in the West. There are also some references to this in Islamic Ahadith. In some infamous Western occult writings, ritual buggery is supposed to create some sort of mental breakthrough. Its pretty insane stuff.

A lot of these principles of "mental conditioning" by desensitization and "tough love", etc. seem to be based on the idea that pain is the greatest obstacle (when feared) and also the greatest motivator and can unlock the best abilities by sheer necessity. The pleasure-pain principle of the mind has been worked in that way.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 11 Nov 2012 06:02

eklavya wrote:brihaspati,

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that products of educational institutions modelled on British institutions may not be sufficiently loyal to India. You may be right, but you may also be wrong.

For example, sometimes I wonder what the hell resides inside Ramachandra Guha's (an Old Dosco to boot!) dense head to produce rubbish like this:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a4131014-5311 ... z2BqUGFPZ7
It is true that Britain and India have a somewhat special connection. No other relationship between a former imperial power and a former colony is so suffused with affection and so free of animosity. To maintain this spirit, the British would do well to focus on culture rather than economics or military hardware. Close down Dfid’s operations in India. Do not sulk when Indian entrepreneurs buy your companies or the Indian government buys guns or rockets from elsewhere. But, please, do restore and enhance the collections of the British Council libraries, and do send your best writers and (especially) actors on tours to India.

Loyalty is a much too stark word. The question is about whether they learn to question their own "tastes" and "views" they acquire from their school? It struck me after a long time, while going through this thread some pages before - to see that people take their literary tastes as shaymbhu. Real appreciation of literature is also about critical examination about why you like it. Many of us seem to be blissfully unaware as to how we were guided into "appreciating" specific authors and their "works".

That introspection : that self-analysis and awareness which would show up that our tastes developed out of a specific guidance - that subtly introduced British Raj approved authors and literature. The various guided tours, shape up a set of values and criteria and memes - against which all future views/actions will be evaluated - consciously or subconsciously. The process of becoming "aware" of Indian interests as you suggest - that happens later - is not necessarily a replacement of training set, but most of the time - an overlay. In critical points, this overlay can lead to decision paralysis or hesitation - where ruthlessness might be needed.

But then, (I think) Pankaj Mishra didn't go to a 'public school', and you know how much he hates India.

Yes - he is also a product of British imperialism - in his ideological setup, and he picked it up from the same sources, even if not through public school. Public school adds a different "value" - of certain attitudinal and practice conditioning.

You are a historian, and I am an economist.

Unfortunately I am not professionally a historian.

My training tells me that interests group are remarkably good at identifying and promoting their own interests.

That is the rational human model. An assumption, and which is typically not observable in practice in economics. The rational model is modified in practice in various ways. Since you are an economist, I am sure you are aware of the multiple selves problem in economics, for example.

The anglicised elite (and non elite, for that matter) may read and appreciate Shakespeare and Austen, but like any school child knows, they also know: (i) The British came to India to enrich themselves, (ii) The British enriched themselves and impoverished our people, (iii) millions of Indians starved to death because of the callous British Government disregard for Indian lives, (iv) The British sought to exploit differences in Indian society (separate electorates; support for Jinnah,etc) and the cancer called Pakistan was fathered by the British, (v) the British were/are world class hypocrites, liars, and cheats.

The anglicised Indian elite is not stupid (with one or two obvious exceptions). Why is it not possible to be a thorough Indian nationalist and yet find aspects of British cultural heritage (Austen, the Rolling Stones, etc) appealing? One can enjoy Hollywood movies (especially ones with Ms Jolie) without becoming a fan of US foreign policy. One can enjoy Chinese food without wanting to gift Tawang to the Chinese. What am I missing?

I hope you realize the deep trap in these two passages. If you accept the rational - self-interest pursuing man hypothesis (in the economic sense), surely finding aspects of British cultural heritage appealing - is also in self-interest? What economic self-interest is satisfied by this "appeal"? If you say no not just economic [quantifiable/utilitarian] self-interest, but personal abstract non-quantifiable self-interest - then an even more problematic question - why does this appreciation of aspects of a foreign culture that deeply hated and continues to hate almost all aspects of your identity that is not copied from them, constitute an integral part of your abstract/non-quantifiable/ personal self-interest?

Can you really appreciate the representations of a foreign culture through art, literature, music, movies - without immersing yourself in that culture? Without being from that culture? All the myriad nuances, the subtlest of shades of mood and expression, the contextual imagery built up over a lifetime of growing up ina certain culture - that leads to "appreciation"/anudhaavan, can never be there when you are appreciating British culture as an Indian. What you are appreciating is what you have been taught to appreciate - through direct or indirect cues by those who placed those materials before you - but as an outsider.

I have tried my best to live as much as possible in the societies whose language I read/write, to make my appreciation of their art as authentic as possible. Its not easy, and only doing that makes one realize how much appreciation is dependent on whether its your growing up culture or not.

Ashwin B · Post by **Ashwin B** » 11 Nov 2012 07:59

I'm hearing the term "browntrodden" for the first time. Saw it in Lakshmikanth's post here. Might be a candidate for BRF Dictionary.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Nov 2012 08:58

Today is "Remembrance Sunday",the day when Britain honours its fallen heroes in the wars to this day.The day is also remembered for the fallen soldiers of the Commonwealth,including India,who have sent millions of soldiers to fight in the European wars of the past.No one who has attended a Remembrance Day ceremony cannot be struck with the solemnity of the occasion.I was lucky to have been in Scotland to witness it a few times.

Some time ago I mentioned how the famous Brighton Pavilion (palace),in all its glorious architecture and interiors was used as a hospital for Indian soldiers of WW1 to recuperate in.There is an old film shown inside,showing the Indian soldiers during that time,recovering from their battle wounds and a clip of them being honoured by the king who presented the VC to an Indian soldier,a Gurkha if I recall correctly.I urge anyone who visits Brighton to visit the Pavilion and see for himself the great sacrifices that India made for Britain during WW1....and later on in WW2 too!

Talking of schools,my old school too has its share of WW1 and WW2 war heroes apart from heroes of the wars of Independent India.We have just honoured them in a very solemn function attended by former students including a retd. Lt.General and ace fIghter pilot of '65 and '71 amongst others.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 11 Nov 2012 11:04

Philip wrote:Today is "Remembrance Sunday",the day when Britain honours its fallen heroes in the wars to this day.The day is also remembered for the fallen soldiers of the Commonwealth,including India,who have sent millions of soldiers to fight in the European wars of the past.No one who has attended a Remembrance Day ceremony cannot be struck with the solemnity of the occasion.I was lucky to have been in Scotland to witness it a few times.

Some time ago I mentioned how the famous Brighton Pavilion (palace),in all its glorious architecture and interiors was used as a hospital for Indian soldiers of WW1 to recuperate in.There is an old film shown inside,showing the Indian soldiers during that time,recovering from their battle wounds and a clip of them being honoured by the king who presented the VC to an Indian soldier,a Gurkha if I recall correctly.I urge anyone who visits Brighton to visit the Pavilion and see for himself the great sacrifices that India made for Britain during WW1....and later on in WW2 too!

Talking of schools,my old school too has its share of WW1 and WW2 war heroes apart from heroes of the wars of Independent India.We have just honoured them in a very solemn function attended by former students including a retd. Lt.General and ace fIghter pilot of '65 and '71 amongst others.

Sirjee,

St Mark's Cathedral, Bangalore.

Remembrance Day Ceremony on Sun, the 11th Nov at 10.30 am.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Nov 2012 15:37

Uk retains a handle in english speaking world because the vast majority of foreign works sold in india like novels, magazines, nonfiction are in english and many of the publishing houses or all have a lineage to uk somewhere like thomson, penguin , oxford univ press etcc? And the people who run these outfits in india are all mostly products of missionary or other anglic elite schools, delhi univ etc.

Chinmayanand · Post by **Chinmayanand** » 11 Nov 2012 19:03

Hope , this belongs here .
--------------

BBC must reform or face uncertain future, says chairman

Britain's BBC must undergo a radical overhaul in the wake of "shoddy" journalism which led to the resignation of its chief or its future will be in doubt, the head of the state-funded broadcaster's governing body said on Sunday.

A few nuggets :

This was the revelation by rival broadcaster ITV that the late Jimmy Savile, one of the most recognizable personalities on British television in the 1960s, 70s and 80s, had sexually abused young girls, some on BBC premises.

Suggestions then surfaced of a pedophile ring inside the BBC at the time, and a cover-up. Police have launched an inquiry and detectives said they had arrested their third suspect on Sunday, a man in his 70s from Cambridgeshire in central England.

Asked if the Newsnight fiasco was just an embarrassing episode or something more fundamental, Home Secretary (interior minister) Theresa May said: "I think it's between the two.

"There is an issue about the quality of journalism which is what the BBC has been renowned for over the years, so that strikes at the heart of the BBC."

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 11 Nov 2012 20:06

The brit propaganduh corporation's shrinking influence should elicit no tears from true desi patriots, IMO. The macaulayputras are another matter. However, the slimy briturds I know will be loath to give up any propagaduh power they perceive they have. Thankfully, channels and news outlets have proliferated everywhere - from Al jazeera to times now - and have obviated the need for briturd propahgandam. Orso I hope. The brits are welcome to pay evermore in taxes to support the beeb. Good.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 11 Nov 2012 20:48

Singha wrote:Uk retains a handle in english speaking world because the vast majority of foreign works sold in india like novels, magazines, nonfiction are in english and many of the publishing houses or all have a lineage to uk somewhere like thomson, penguin , oxford univ press etcc? And the people who run these outfits in india are all mostly products of missionary or other anglic elite schools, delhi univ etc.

Last week I saw Skyfall. There were a few "dialogues" there philosophizing about the Empire and what Britain today represents. I think some in Britain crave for a smooth transition where they can live as a modern society, a country with major influence even if the empire is gone but still reminisce about the Empire deriving pride from it.

I, as a Indian, don't think they deserve this "smooth transition". I think their past should be "demonized" just as much and perhaps more, than what Nazi Germany has come to represent. There should be NO pride to be derivable from their history of enslaving Indians and selling opium to the Chinese. There past needs to be written, nay rewritten in so much abuse, that the "modern" British citizen should try to disassociate itself firmly from the morality and icons of the past. There should be no Pride.

In Skyfall, Judy Dench's M quotes Tennyson’s Ulysses:

“Tho’ much is taken, much abides; and though
We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven; that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.”

On all points, they need to be kicked in the nuts. No people should stand knowing they enslaved Indians and survived to relish the pride in it.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Nov 2012 19:31

Britain gave the world through the spread of empire the English language-the global lingua franca today.A billion Indians have at least 300 million studying English at any time,thus giving us a key tool with which to succeed internationally.Just a few days ago I was speaking to an old friend who related how his command of English won him several contracts in the US.Foreigners marvel at how well many Indians speak English.Rajaji said that it was "Saraswatis gift to India".

No matter which medium of instruction you have studied in,the fact remains that the basic truths and values of humanity come alive through education and the biggest folly (from their viewpoint) the colonial masters did was to educate the "natives",who having seen the light ,understood their fundamental rights as human beings and threw off the yoke of their oppressors.Think of how successful Gandhiji would've been without his colonial education and training at the bar in England! Having learnt their ways,he knew how to defeat them by showing them up every time they deviated from the values that they preached.Today the world is being influenced enormously by Indian ideas,religions,philosophy and culture ,expressed through the global lingua franca .

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 12 Nov 2012 19:58

Philipji,
Very true.

Babu Rajendra Prasad speaking on the night of 15th August 1947 remarked(and this from RC Majumdars magnus opus on History and Culture of Indian People Vol X) while this hard won freedom is in large measure due to our ownefforts,strivings,trials and tribulations it was also the outcome of world events and Babuji acknowledges the democratic ideals of the British race.RC Majumdar notes,this is a great truth which is not recogonised by the Indian people.

Babu Rajendra Prasad fought many bitter battles against the British and RC Majumdar,the doyen among the nationalist school of historians and himself a native of East Bengal had no particular reason to be fond of Briturds.

The political unity that British accomplished was remarkable by any standards.Again RCM mentions the huge role of British through education,political unity,modern communication in the birth and evolution of modern Indian nationalism.

And everyone would agree,we were invigorated by our contacts with the most advanced nation of that age-in science,social reform,political ideals not withstanding social engineering,christist manipulation,partition of India.Theres a Britain of Shakespeare,Newton,empiricism (as an antidote to philosophical idealism) etc and this Britain exists independent of imperial exploitation.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Nov 2012 20:11

Mein Gott! The barbarians invasion of Britain yet again! Who will save der fatherland this time,the BNP?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... dmits.html

Britain powerless to stop tens of thousands of Bulgarians and Romanians moving to UK next year,.

Theresa May admits Britain is powerless to stop tens of thousands of Eastern European immigrants from coming to live in Britain from next year, Theresa May has admitted.

By Christopher Hope, Senior Political Correspondent

11 Nov 2012

Britain is powerless to stop tens of thousands of Eastern European immigrants from coming to live in Britain from next year, Theresa May has admitted.

Five year old quotas limiting the number of people from Bulgaria and Romania who can move to live in Britain are due to expire in just over 12 months' time.

This will give 29 million Bulgarians and Romanians the right to live and work unrestricted in Britain in 2014 under European “freedom of movement” rules.

In an interview on BBC1, the Home Secretary said Britain would not be able to extend the so-called “transitional arrangements” to limit the expected influx.

Mrs May hinted that Britain might try to deny them benefits and access to the National Health Service to put them off from coming.

She told the Andrew Marr programme: “There are no further transitional controls that we can put on – the transitional controls end in December 2013.

“But that’s where the importance of looking at some of the issues about what it is that is attracting people to come here, in terms of things like our benefits system and access to the health service, is so important.”

The sudden influx could mean that the Coalition struggles to hit its target of cutting net migration - the difference between the numbers arriving and leaving - to tens of thousands by the next general election, expected in 2015.

Mrs May added that as part of a general review of free movement across the UK she will be looking at the attractions of why Romanians and Bulgarians wanted to settle in the UK.

This could lead to Bulgarians and Romanians being denied benefits or use of the health service if they came to live in the UK. However any attempt to deny benefits to European Union citizens in Britain will almost certainly be open to legal challenge in the courts.

She said: “I will be looking at what we call the pull factors, what is it that attracts people sometimes to come over here to the United Kingdom, so looking at issues about benefits, and access to the health service, and things like that.

“And then we’re doing a wider piece of work across matters relating to Europe more generally but including free movement about that balance of powers between us and the EU.”

The citizens of Romania and Bulgaria currently have restricted rights to come to Britain since they joined the European Union in 2007, but those limits end on 31 December 2013, opening the way for them to move freely.

Does the government need to do more to limit the numbers of Bulgarians and Romanians moving to UK?
No, if we want free movement within Europe we have to allow other countries to have it as wellYes, the country cannot afford tens of thousands more immigrants

Forecasters have said the removal of the restrictions could lead to a significant number of new arrivals, in the same way as when Poland and other Eastern European countries gained the same rights in 2004, with the scale likely to be increased by the economic crisis gripping the rest of Europe.

The Home Office has made no official predictions of how many more Bulgarians and Romanians will seek to enter Britain when the current limitations end, and argues that most who want to come have probably arrived already, finding work on the black market if they cannot work legally.

However, critics believe that the Government’s reluctance to issue predictions is because it grossly underestimated the numbers that came in the previous wave of migration in 2004, when citizens from eight new eastern European EU members, including Poland, were given full access to the UK job market.

This is what happened to Austria when der Fuhrer was a young man.Vienna swamped by refugees from the east threatening the cosy existence of the Germanic volk.Denied the opportunity to become an architect (soimething that was most important to Hitler throughout the war,his great designs for the fatherland-he built huge models of the new Germany with the help of Speer and despite the war never neglected his architectural dreams) and failing to become a successful artist,the fire to resurrect the German people was the result of his setbacks.He joined the army ,but felt betrayed by the German leaders who signed the treaty of Versailles and the resultant economic collapse.The rest as they say is history.What is going to happen in Britain?

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 12 Nov 2012 21:37

To say that English is key to India's success is a humiliation to a land and its people which led the world the world in gnana.

Fact: English is not key to development. Knowledge and know-how is. Examples: Japan , Korea, Taiwan, Germany, France and just about every other non-English speaking nation on earth.

Fact: An English speaking elite has managed to create a disjuncture between the masses and its rulers. Examples: Well, the Indian elite. Otherwise, you would not call them , the "elite". The disparity in language, values, thought , action and wealth cannot be bigger. That speaks of inequality which seems to have festered and grown.

Fact: English is not necessary for modern top notch governance. Example: Narendra Modi .

Fact : English is not necessary for growth. Examples: Gujarat with a non-service sector based economy.

Maybe there is some truth in Rajendra Prasad's words. But Indians are among the most magnanimous in their gratitude. And Rajendra Prasad was inheriting something from the British - so in diplomatese, he possibly was being quite charitable because there was possibly something he needed from them. It would be interesting to know what Rajendra Prasad thought of man made famines during the Raj.

We never ever seem to learn. What political unity did the British forge? A third of this land was made into a abomination called Pakistan - aided and actively abetted by the British.

Education?

At temples across the land, long before envious , uncouth and uncivilized barbarians set foot in this pristine land, kids were taught how to learn, read and write .
And India produced mathematical works even before these animals set foot here. What would one call that? Primitive , neanderthal howls and not education?

Modern Indian nationalism? Pray tell me ,my good sire, what nationalism did those in the deep Tamil heartland, disconnected from the Raj in Delhi, have ? Jungle nationalism? Or arid nationalism?
"Modern Indian nationalism" is plain ph-uckng garbage. There is nationalism. The End. There is nothing modern about it. And everyone, from Saharan africa to the arctic tribes, has a part of him that appeals to it. We owe the British nothing for that!

The only good deed that came of the British Raj was their departure. To state that Britain was a catalyst and Indians would have stood frozen in time if not for the British is laughable. And frankly it disgusts me.
In fact, our "pitrus" should hold their heads in shame in whichever world they roam now. For,the wealth of knowledge, righteous paths and the spirit of seeking knowledge they left us, seem to have been abandoned for shallow morals and British perspectives of everything. I guess we should now forget Nalanda, and show our ( servile ) gratitude for the English alphabet - forever!
History is replete with events and evidence which showed India traded with partners for long and far away. Trade brought about exchange of information and knowledge. And Knowledge and information would have been shared and will continue to do so DESPITE language.Indians were doing very well without the British thank you very much. The need to trade meant Indians had to innovate and develop products. Indian ships could travel longer and carry more people and goods during the 1500s when they traded. Does this not speak of Indian engineering ? What do we owe Britain for that? The engineering? Management? Or the ability to look back into our own history? Sorry , a scratch on the surface is all it takes to demolish these myths.

The Indian union would not have happened had it not been for the British ? That is rich sh!t! But what of the "divide and rule" policy? I do not care how the India would have been if the British hadn't come here. I do not want to indulge in mindless dreaming. But what I am interested in is what the British did when they were in India. Every metric tells me that the Indian populace was better off before they came. And worse off after they left. That is all that ph-ucking matters.

In the book 1491, by Charles Mann, the American natives described the first British who came landed there as stinking, clumsy, weak, short, diseased and dirty. ( The same, incidentally, can be said of sewer rats) . I fail to see why the British, who came to India shortly after, would have been any different. 4 centuries of looting later, the biggest loss is the Indian spirit.

I know not of you my lord. But I , for one, owe them British nothing. I stop for a second, think again and think hard..........still nothing. In fact, it is a deep seated animosity which seems to bubble up instead of gratitude. I simply cannot find in me , the urge to praise or attribute ONE GOOD THING OR ACT to someone who looted, murdered, shot , raped and killed.

Absolutely nothing personal directed against anyone.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 12 Nov 2012 22:00

Neela ji,
simply superb. +10000000000....

Completely agree with you that the greatest loss is the loss of spirit and self-respect.

The following fits the situation perfectly:

nakul wrote:
The brown sahibs do it for free while the panda have to pay 50 cents. Out cheaping the chinese

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 12 Nov 2012 22:41

svenkat wrote:Philipji,
........
The political unity that British accomplished was remarkable by any standards.Again RCM mentions the huge role of British through education,political unity,modern communication in the birth and evolution of modern Indian nationalism.

And everyone would agree,we were invigorated by our contacts with the most advanced nation of that age-in science,social reform,political ideals not withstanding social engineering,christist manipulation,partition of India.Theres a Britain of Shakespeare,Newton,empiricism (as an antidote to philosophical idealism) etc and this Britain exists independent of imperial exploitation.

svenkatji,
are you implying
>That the Marathas or Sikhs or any other SDRE stock were all inherently incapable of achieving (there is some thing wrong with bloody SDREs) political unity for Bharat and we had no choice but to wait for the advent of our Lords in white skin to achieve it for us ?
>That the collective minds of Bharat were all ossified and remained impervious to Scientific/Social reform until the advent of our White skinned Lords from the west who pried open our craniums with their "invention" of empiricism ?
>That in spite of all the "benefits" (incidental) of Colonialism, the SDREs managed to remain "not enlightened" and frittered away their hoarded gold in the purchase of unnecessary luxuries like milled cloth (to cover their half naked, slothful arses (cant these SDRE's produce anything of value.. jeez!) ) ?
>That In spite of the "social reform" of indentured labour (aka slavery) fostered by our White skinned Lords from the west, the bloody SDRE ingrates mutinied in 1857 and needlessly diminished the reformatory zeal of our overlords ?
>That in spite of the well engineered famines by our White skinned Lords from the west , the SDRE's and their holy cows didn't die in enough numbers to let their dead bones leach enough Phosphate to enable the remaining SDRE's grow sufficient food for Taxes meant to quench the overseas "social reformatory" zeal of our overlords ?

You tell me.. Sire..
Why did the (bloody,slothful) SDRE's become so penurious under the over watch of our glorious overlords in spite of Newton, Shakespeare (and his tragedies) and all other mental and social reform measures introduced under their benign dictatorship (sorry it was democracy wasnt it?)

member_22872 · Post by **member_22872** » 13 Nov 2012 00:43

svenkat ji: Please look at OIT thread or refer to any of Rajiv Malhotra's lectures.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 13 Nov 2012 00:52

^^^ The programming is pretty deep in there. Have to give it to the Briturd brutes that managed to create a machinery to spit out brit-worshipping zombies.

The need for Queen's Engleesh is the biggest sham ever propagated. What it shows is not that her old majesti-hag's Engleesh is needed for economic development. It shows that indegenous industries were never developed to the extent where the tools to be productive were developed locally (and the instruction was in a local tongue) and instead had to be done in a foreign tongue.

Assume all the operating manuals of an industry (mechanical for example) say of lathes, drills, drill bit specs, tolerance standards and the science that goes behind it was entirely in Hindi, and your customer base was also Hindi. You would have no option but to learn Hindi. There would be no need for you to learn Engleeesh. Now ofcourse there are a lot of Hindi-haters who would rather kill themselves than learn Hindi (they would prefer an alien and oppressive tongue of the turds rather than learn Hindi), in such a case why not create a local economy and local tools that have local language instruction?

The reason why Engleeesh is such an important tool is because we never built a local economy that can sustain tools that move productivity upward. The only way upward mobility was possible was to learn Engleeesh. If everyone could change the factory instruction manuals to Hindi, and also the science behind it was taught in Hindi, I am sure we would have a lot of local chaps who are highly employable and would have no need to know English. Infact they would be able to transfer their accumulated knowledge down to the younger generation much more ably and easily because they speak in the same language they use at home.

The biggest hurdle in transferring accumulated and practical knowledge through generations is that it is almost entirely done in an alien tongue. So a Hindi speaker would have to first translate his thought into English, speak it, the receiver has to receive it and convert it back to Hindi and understand. This is a waste of energy and meaning.

I dont know if I am clear enough, but the more I think about it the more the turd-tongue seems like a sham to me. Its just another way to bow way down in the memory of a past GUBOing

Jai Ho

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 13 Nov 2012 00:54

Neela ji,

Agree completely with you! English should have been kicked out of India after our Independence.

I would say, Sanskrit should have been made our sole official language at the Center. Babu Rajendra Prasad in fact sabotaged the choice of Sanskrit through a decisive vote on language policy. Not saying, he worked against India or anything of the sort, but the political elite really did not have any clear vision of Bharat. With Sanskrit we would have had the mother language of all Indian, Western and Southeast Asian languages.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 13 Nov 2012 02:08

>>If everyone could change the factory instruction manuals to Hindi, and also the science behind it was taught in Hindi,

Not Tamil, or Gujarati or Telugu or better still Malayalam? I agree it's terrible that we are all here posting in the language of the colonial power, some quite well I might add, but why aren't members who feel so strongly about it creating forums in Gujarati, Assamese, Telugu, Hindi or Malayalam; maybe even Sanskrit? We can get a pan-Indian view on "bharat rakshak" there, too. Make a start.

>>Now ofcourse there are a lot of Hindi-haters who would rather kill themselves than learn Hindi (they would prefer an alien and oppressive tongue of the turds rather than learn Hindi)

And that is one of the reasons why English remains popular, because of attitudes such as the one displayed above. On the practical level, it also helps if you want a job.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 13 Nov 2012 02:26

JE Menon wrote:
Not Tamil, or Gujarati or Telugu or better still Malayalam? I agree it's terrible that we are all here posting in the language of the colonial power, some quite well I might add, but why aren't members who feel so strongly about it creating forums in Gujarati, Assamese, Telugu, Hindi or Malayalam; maybe even Sanskrit? We can get a pan-Indian view on "bharat rakshak" there, too. Make a start.

>>Now ofcourse there are a lot of Hindi-haters who would rather kill themselves than learn Hindi (they would prefer an alien and oppressive tongue of the turds rather than learn Hindi)

And that is one of the reasons why English remains popular, because of attitudes such as the one displayed above. On the practical level, it also helps if you want a job.

Only fair you would ask (and I was expecting someone or the other would raise that

), considering the fact that I sound like a hypocrite when I use English to denounce Engleesh

. So the obvious question that needs to be asked has been asked

.

My point was not what language I use to communicate. I have a different point of view:

I use Engleesh, but I do so only when absolutely necessary, otherwise I am comfortable with Konkani and also Hindi and Malayalam (which are not my mother-tongues). I can form thoughts very coherently in Konkani and Hindi and to some extent in Malayalam.

I am not thankful to the Brits for giving me Engleesh. I use it as anyone would use a tool, I know its deficiencies, I know its problems, I am also aware that it is a method of continuing colonial control and I will do whatever I can to break it from the shackles of that control. I have no "love" for that language.

The British teaching us Engleesh is like a marauding looter who taught his victims how to use a gun. I as a victim will do everything I can to use the gun against the looter

.

My issue was with the "love" and the "gratitude" that is shown by many of the brainwashed zombies to that alien language. Which we have adopted only because it was the means of upward social mobility. Again, the reason why it was so is because a local economy with a local language was not developed enough (due to looting and restrictions of the invader) to merit a local language means of upward mobility.

Non colonized countries : China (to a large extent), Japan, Germany, Russia do not have this issue and you can see the difference.

We can ofcourse make a start, but we need to define what direction it is going to be in. In any case that direction definitely needs to avoid giving the Briturds credit for being lenient for giving us Engleeesh or by praising how gleat the pritish engleesh sounds.

That was my point, I hope I am clear now.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 13 Nov 2012 02:46

To summarize: Love English but hate the "Briturds"?
Or else be a "brit-worshipping zombie" or a "brainwashed zombie"?

I agree with your basic line, though perhaps not your turn of phrase. But, I would take a harder line. Why do we speak English at all? Why should Indians (as perhaps the largest group of English speakers now) perpetuate the language of the colonial master? I would say go the Japanese, German, Russian, etc. way. Stop speaking English and focus on Hindi (preferably no doubt) or, if there's no other option, the "vernacular". It's only a drop when one person stops, but such drops make an ocean - and all that.

Those among us who feel English is a colonial burden should stop speaking English now, and launch a campaign in favour of such a move by every Indian. Maybe even start a BRF thread to that end. Every single person who stops speaking English is one person who fights the war against the McCaulayization of the mind, and perhaps stops being a Brit-worshipping zombie (unless of course, he or she is only speaking it when absolutely necessary). Be the change you want to see.

Unfortunately, I'm totally McCaulayized so have to keep posting in English. Onlee.

negi · Post by **negi** » 13 Nov 2012 02:50

^ Hain ? The way I see it they screwed us for ~200 years , so we should screw angrezi for eternity.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 13 Nov 2012 03:03

JE Menon wrote:To summarize: Love English but hate the "Briturds"?
Or else be a "brit-worshipping zombie" or a "brainwashed zombie"?

I agree with your basic line, though perhaps not your turn of phrase. But, I would take a harder line. Why do we speak English at all? Why should Indians (as perhaps the largest group of English speakers now) perpetuate the language of the colonial master? I would say go the Japanese, German, Russian, etc. way. Stop speaking English and focus on Hindi (preferably no doubt) or, if there's no other option, the "vernacular". It's only a drop when one person stops, but such drops make an ocean - and all that.

Those among us who feel English is a colonial burden should stop speaking English now, and launch a campaign in favour of such a move by every Indian. Maybe even start a BRF thread to that end. Every single person who stops speaking English is one person who fights the war against the McCaulayization of the mind, and perhaps stops being a Brit-worshipping zombie (unless of course, he or she is only speaking it when absolutely necessary). Be the change you want to see.

Unfortunately, I'm totally McCaulayized so have to keep posting in English. Onlee.

I had to look up the phrase "turn of phrase", my Engleesh is very weak onlee

Let me phrase my thoughts in a different way that does not seem dichotomous (i.e. Love Engleesh and hate Briturds vs be a brit-worshipping zombie). Also let me change my turn of phrase to be more appealing to you, maybe seem more cultured

rather than appearing a brute

.

I am saying this: Understand what English is, i.e. in the Indian situation of trying to recover from colonial pillage it is a tool for upward mobility. Since the economic control of the society was passed on peacefully from the English to the Indians and the Indians decided to keep it there is no choice for easy social upward mobility than to use English. It is the easy way out.

Now the question is, English as a language is controlled by Britain and the colonial machinery that was behind it is still alive and kicking. Many Indians are also part of it.

The challenge is this: How to extract the Indian mind, from accepting without critique, the colonial control of English language and make them realize it is just a tool, and make them also realize the reason for its potency (which was the loot and pillage of India).

I dont know the answer. I have the diagnosis, not the cure. Your way is one solution (like they did in China ~~with the One China Policy~~). Your way would make sure that many Indians are shielded from the BS that is spouted by British press and their machinery on a regular basis. That BS is now gobbled up by uncritical Indians and is perpetrated everywhere among the DIE/semi elite circles, which results in brainwashed folks thinking English was a nectar of life given to us by the enlightened Brits. Your solution would insulate Indians from that thought. You can see the same effect if you read up vernacular media vs English media.

There maybe other ways to resolve this. But whatever I had to say was certainly not confined to the dichotomous ways of thinking that you ascribed it to be.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 13 Nov 2012 03:04

JE Menon wrote:To summarize: Love English but hate the "Briturds"?
Or else be a "brit-worshipping zombie" or a "brainwashed zombie"?

I agree with your basic line, though perhaps not your turn of phrase. But, I would take a harder line. Why do we speak English at all? Why should Indians (as perhaps the largest group of English speakers now) perpetuate the language of the colonial master? I would say go the Japanese, German, Russian, etc. way. Stop speaking English and focus on Hindi (preferably no doubt) or, if there's no other option, the "vernacular". It's only a drop when one person stops, but such drops make an ocean - and all that.

Those among us who feel English is a colonial burden should stop speaking English now, and launch a campaign in favour of such a move by every Indian. Maybe even start a BRF thread to that end. Every single person who stops speaking English is one person who fights the war against the McCaulayization of the mind, and perhaps stops being a Brit-worshipping zombie (unless of course, he or she is only speaking it when absolutely necessary). Be the change you want to see.

Unfortunately, I'm totally McCaulayized so have to keep posting in English. Onlee.

JEM ji, I agree with you that its silly to nurse a grouse against English or any other language, especially one from which we are currently deriving benefits. In fact I think the quality of English and the reading habit needs to be strengthened in our educational system. But that should go hand in hand with due attention to the mother tongues, as well as the cultivation and grooming of Sanskrit as successor pan-Indic panguage. Please take a look at this post in the Link Language thread:

Principles for a common language platform preserving diversity and hierarchy

Also wanted to point out that we already have a Sanskrit thread in GDF.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 13 Nov 2012 03:42

JE Menon wrote:To summarize: Love English but hate the "Briturds"?

I agree with your basic line, though perhaps not your turn of phrase. But, I would take a harder line. Why do we speak English at all? Why should Indians (as perhaps the largest group of English speakers now) perpetuate the language of the colonial master? I would say go the Japanese, German, Russian, etc. way. Stop speaking English and focus on Hindi (preferably no doubt) or, if there's no other option, the "vernacular". It's only a drop when one person stops, but such drops make an ocean - and all that.

Those among us who feel English is a colonial burden should stop speaking English now, and launch a campaign in favour of such a move by every Indian. Maybe even start a BRF thread to that end. Every single person who stops speaking English is one person who fights the war against the McCaulayization of the mind, and perhaps stops being a Brit-worshipping zombie (unless of course, he or she is only speaking it when absolutely necessary). Be the change you want to see.

Unfortunately, I'm totally McCaulayized so have to keep posting in English. Onlee.

JEMji,

I too want to give my own definition of Maculayputra (since it doesnt have an entry in the famed oxford dictionery yet)
so please bear with me.

Maculayputra/Macaulite/McCaulayite (linguistic angle) : A person who has a mother tongue other than english but has cultivated himself in his (often long) personal and/or professional life a manufactured interest (due to peer pressure etc) in english literature invariably at the expense of the literature of his mother tongue (note: 90% of Indic languages have a literary corpus rivaling many other "global" languages) and goes to great lengths to come across as a connoisseur of selected works of the western canon and swears to the "greatness" of those "classics".
He also converses in English regularly with people sharing his mother tongue (even his family) and brings up his kids with english as their mother tongue.

how does it sound ? of course Maculayputra has sociopolitical and economic angles for a more comprehensive definition but that is to be tackled elsewhere. Opinions are welcome.

to summarize the action points : hate English and with that feeling continue to use it functionally only to intentionally twist it and create mongrelised words jarring enough that the queen herself will beg to stop, destroy its grammer, its over complicated spelling and pronunciation, also regularly poke fun of purist english and those who still swear by it. For this we need our own dictionary for indian english (unfortunately teachers still swear by the Oxford dictionary) and of course - hate the "Briturds"

Finally start to read up primers on your mother tongue - state board high school textbooks , pedda balasikhsha (as in telugu) etc to get back the feeling again and then try to tackle some serious content and see where it takes you.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 13 Nov 2012 03:48

Lilo wrote:I too want to give my own definition of Maculayputra (since it doesnt have an entry in the famed oxford dictionery yet)

They call it a wog - westernized oriental gentleman.
Dhimmis and wogs.

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 13 Nov 2012 04:39

JE Menon wrote:
Those among us who feel English is a colonial burden should stop speaking English now, and launch a campaign in favour of such a move by every Indian. Maybe even start a BRF thread to that end. Every single person who stops speaking English is one person who fights the war against the McCaulayization of the mind, and perhaps stops being a Brit-worshipping zombie (unless of course, he or she is only speaking it when absolutely necessary). Be the change you want to see.

Unfortunately, I'm totally McCaulayized so have to keep posting in English. Onlee.

Well, maybe you are practical and realistic. You know your environment, know the basic requirements and you know that without English , you cannot possibly get anywhere. And I think this affords you the tinge of mockery and bonus shot to rub it in. All good. But I think what you said does not reveal the full picture as to why one Indian language has not replaced English. Moreover what you said it is not a new thought. Most people know what you wrote implicitly. BTW, I am not rushing headlong into a confrontation with you in a seething fit of anger , nationalism and pride. Far from it. I have given it a good rinse in my head.

I had similar ideas to Lakshmikanth's first post on this matter. See, the will to get a better life is an universal ideal that has no language barriers. Everyone of us want better lives for ourselves and our kids. Let us keep that aside for the moment. We will come back to it shortly. Did not independent India inherit a British administration with all its wheels and cogs and pins and nails. English was the first requirement there was it not? Now, what was the need to continue the language when an Indian one could have sufficed. An impovershed land with no modern industry to fit into the industrial age, it was left to government jobs and most people yearned for it because that was stable, the money was decent and was among the few jobs there were at all. And so, as every human who aspires for something better, aspired for this government job and inadvertently did his bit to preserve English. No ( and before you hold me to it ) , I am not saying that there were no benefits from the administrative service. There possibly was and it was the easiest , stable tool for the tra nsformation. But just as affirmative action, what should have been a temporary place holder took deep roots and stayed. When the government jobs required English, the forms came in English. And when private jobs came, they carried that over.
So thus the question arises -what did the GoI do to actively remove English ? It did not help when Nehru , a rich English educated man was running the show did it? When you create an ecosystem that actively promoted an English based system , people will naturally try to fit into the system to get a better life - the universal ideal.
Let us face it - we have not tried an alternate indian language hard enough. When alliances were formed between kingdoms without English in earlier times, I see no reason why English should have stayed after. Add to that a bunch of JNU types who hated everything Indian and started looking at India with Western tinted glasses. No , these were not ordinary people. These were people who wrote policy and decided stuff. Anotjer group went about demonising India in a language they learned from the colonizers. And that became the new enlightenment that Indians aspired to. And horde upon Indian horde followed. A weak ass leadership ashamed of the Indian past leading masses into a English based system. And that is what you have today. So to summarize my question to you : what has the GoI done ( even after a Soviet leader mocking us ) done to promote actively, a) an indian language as a governing language and (b) an ecosystem for the masses based on Indian languages.
It is easy to blame tamil or gujarati fanatics.But I doubt if these fanatics would have opposed an Indian language usage in Delhi - the seat of central govt.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 13 Nov 2012 04:54

Excellent perspective Neelaji

Once that job security is achieved, many Telugu people speak Telugu at work in massa, tamilians Tamil and so on... When Indians meet, Hindi becomes the best alternative.

At that point English becomes a burden.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 13 Nov 2012 05:06

^^^ Neela sir,

Thanks! You put it way better than I could

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 13 Nov 2012 05:27

GOI has done its bit to promote Indian languages. You can answer civil service exams in hindi / regional languages. Correspondence in hindi is encouraged in Class A cities. Of course in cities of the south and north-east - it is not (guess why?). Not sure whther the Indian IT sector promotes Indian languages though.
At the state level, many governments went further - the Waste Bengal commie government actually banned english up to Year 9 in their schools and WB certainly achieved great economic success

Maharashtra state government also has a strong regional focus.

Unfortunately, the symptom on BRF has been identified. This clamour for abusing the brits as a means to achieve 'self-respect' for Indians (a 'let them eat cake' type of solution IMO) - is actually an NRI problem being represented as an 'Indian' problem. I can think of many other policy solutions which will provide far more dignity and respect to Indians than such tokenism ever does. 90 % of Indians will never see a britisher in their lives - so 'abusing' them or 'spitting' on them is a non-starter. Similarly I'm sure many Indians will draw cold comfort from the fact if we go and tell them that dude the reason you are poor is because the british colonised us for over 200 years.

OTOH - many NRIs come into contact with brits and are often unable to talk about these things face to face, hence need a place to vent spleen in a place which offers them comfortable anonymity.

Finally - If it was Nehru who foisted english on India - many here should be thanking him on their bended knees instead of abusing him - because this regional language focus has been tried in India and Pakistan (before it became bakistan).

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 13 Nov 2012 06:02

arnab wrote:GOI has done its bit to promote Indian languages. You can answer civil service exams in hindi / regional languages. Correspondence in hindi is encouraged in Class A cities. Of course in cities of the south and north-east - it is not (guess why?). Not sure whther the Indian IT sector promotes Indian languages though.
At the state level, many governments went further - the Waste Bengal commie government actually banned english up to Year 9 in their schools and WB certainly achieved great economic success Maharashtra state government also has a strong regional focus.

I wonder which part of the following paragraph you did not get, it is a paraphrase of what I and others have been saying:

When we became independent, the local economy was so malnourished that the only way up was to learn Engleesh. Since the colonial structures that were used to loot India were left intact and nurtured by successive Indian govt, the only way for upward mobility was Engleesh. Then it became a network phenomena. You were the "IN" crowd if you knew Engleeesh. Too bad if you don't.

West Bengal's economic situation has many factors, I do not think you can correlate lack of Engleesh skills with it.

arnab wrote: Unfortunately, the symptom on BRF has been identified. This clamour for abusing the brits as a means to achieve 'self-respect' for Indians (a 'let them eat cake' type of solution IMO) - is actually an NRI problem being represented as an 'Indian' problem. I can think of many other policy solutions which will provide far more dignity and respect to Indians than such tokenism ever does. 90 % of Indians will never see a britisher in their lives - so 'abusing' them or 'spitting' on them is a non-starter. Similarly I'm sure many Indians will draw cold comfort from the fact if we go and tell them that dude the reason you are poor is because the british colonised us for over 200 years.

I see. So the brits never had anything to do with India then

. 90% of Indians may not see Britishers, but the Brits are the reason why India was the way it was when we got independence. The machinery of colonization is still alive, and as long as it is, you have to make people aware of it. My respect to you if you have ideas to provide dignity and self respect to Indian folks, the more hands in the project the better. However, neither self-respect nor dignity to the Indian folks is my goal

. My goal is awareness. My goal is to help question the false assumptions made my an uncritical mind. The language maybe abusive, but the goal is not to abuse. The cure is much different from the diagnosis. I am providing diagnosis. I am abusing the virus. How to cure it is something I am not sure of and I am still searching for the answers.

If you feel that I am deriving joy out of abusing the Brits, then please dont call Pakistan -- Bakistan. We dont need BENIS, PRC thread or any other thread. Those threads are full of abuses, but they also contain facts, they contain diagnosis, cure and what not. While being abusive, the threads are certainly not a way to raise our self-respect, that I am 500% sure

arnab wrote: OTOH - many NRIs come into contact with brits and are often unable to talk about these things face to face, hence need a place to vent spleen in a place which offers them comfortable anonymity.

I guess you are confusing the attack against British machinery to mean an attack against everything British -- specifically currently living brits

I have confronted the two brits that I have come across on this issue when they brought out the same old dialogue of how "uncivilized" India was. I straightened them out. I did not abuse THEM, but I did abuse the machinery that taught them watered down history. They may not have opened their eyes, but the seed of doubt has been placed. I find it much easier to convince a brit about it than many Indians. I wonder why

arnab wrote: Finally - If it was Nehru who foisted english on India - many here should be thanking him on their bended knees instead of abusing him - because this regional language focus has been tried in India and Pakistan (before it became bakistan).

Why stop at that, go to the source onlee. pliiz to kneel down and thank the Brits onlee (even if they murdered around 90 million of our people

--- but hey those are just details onlee... they gave us English! ).

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 13 Nov 2012 07:00

lakshmikanth wrote:When we became independent, the local economy was so malnourished that the only way up was to learn Engleesh. Since the colonial structures that were used to loot India were left intact and nurtured by successive Indian govt, the only way for upward mobility was Engleesh. Then it became a network phenomena. You were the "IN" crowd if you knew Engleeesh. Too bad if you don't.West Bengal's economic situation has many factors, I do not think you can correlate lack of Engleesh skills with it.

Sure – but do you remember the violent ‘anti-hindi’ phenomenon in the south and wondered why wasn’t it an “anti-english” phenomenon? Not successive Indian governments saar – english was (and is still being) used as a primary distinguisher (network phenomenon) by people even today (hence so many english teaching schools mushrooming in India today). It is a fact and railing against English – when everyone of us have used it to our advantage smacks of hypocrisy. So when you are doing your anti-english research, it would be good to do this full disclosure without taking recourse to semantics like “what to do onlee – colonial structures made it necessary” (I mean Hyderabad was ruled by the Nizam – why did they fall for English? Despite having strong regional preferences which caused Potti Sriramulu to go for a hunger strike in demand for an Andhra State?). Similarly, Bal Thackery’s grandsons went to Engleesh medium schools, even when he railed for imposition of Marathi.

Re WB: Sir every state will have multiple factors for development / underdevelopment – what you are asking for is – getting rid of oppressive ‘colonial infrastructure’, getting rid of the colonial language, getting rid of the abysmal poverty that India had, installing a ‘market friendly’ government (who by definition wouldn’t believe in social programs needed for uplifting poor), magically increasing education investment (in an indic language) and getting rid of corrupt people in government / public life (who only apparently became corrupt because of british colonialism and before that supposedly it was all hunky dory). Development is difficult. Period. More so - when you change lanes mid-stream.

I see. So the brits never had anything to do with India then . 90% of Indians may not see Britishers, but the Brits are the reason why India was the way it was when we got independence. The machinery of colonization is still alive, and as long as it is, you have to make people aware of it. My respect to you if you have ideas to provide dignity and self respect to Indian folks, the more hands in the project the better. However, neither self-respect nor dignity to the Indian folks is my goal . My goal is awareness. My goal is to help question the false assumptions made my an uncritical mind. The language maybe abusive, but the goal is not to abuse. The cure is much different from the diagnosis. I am providing diagnosis. I am abusing the virus. How to cure it is something I am not sure of and I am still searching for the answers.

Sir that is fine and I support you in your endeavours – but I worry that in your efforts to find a suitable ‘anti-biotic’ you may be killing both the good and the bad cells. It may also be a presumption on your part to assume that Indians in general are unaware of the british perfidy. Being time poor, they may not devote a significant amount of their time dwelling on it – but they do know about it.

I guess you are confusing the attack against British machinery to mean an attack against everything British -- specifically currently living brits I have confronted the two brits that I have come across on this issue when they brought out the same old dialogue of how "uncivilized" India was. I straightened them out. I did not abuse THEM, but I did abuse the machinery that taught them watered down history. They may not have opened their eyes, but the seed of doubt has been placed. I find it much easier to convince a brit about it than many Indians. I wonder why

This was an observation based on various comments raised in the thread – it was not directed at you

And just like you – I did open eyes too – respectfully and politely, to a professor of economic history – A very decent chap. I’m surprised you find it difficult to convince Indians that british rule was primarily a holocaust for India. I don't but then I also don’t try to convince them you should ‘hate them and kick them for ever so that they go down and stay down’

Why stop at that, go to the source onlee. pliiz to kneel down and thank the Brits onlee (even if they murdered around 90 million of our people --- but hey those are just details onlee... they gave us English! )

I was referring to the duplicity of certain folks when they rail about it being Nehru’s fault / britisher’s fault that they had to learn English, but are comfortable about being a part of the ‘colonial’ structure that provided them with the 'language advantage' and has apparently made them more successful than 90 per cent of Indians. To the extent that your research into british perfidy is educational – I support it; but the moment it turns prescriptive (don’t learn English because English is a phunny language) – I find it more a case of “do as I say, not as I do”

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 13 Nov 2012 07:01

just a bit of caution regarding angrezi.

some tiibits from OUT OF INDIA dhaaga--

sample this--
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 0#p1317840
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 1#p1326501
with comments by RajeshA, Niseh Oak, Shiv, and Murugesh etc.
there is a booklet by Wim Borsboom

origin of angrezi from Sanskrit.
naturally we take angrezi like duck to water.

we should have fun with angrezi. make it our own as it has been in its history.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 13 Nov 2012 08:21

eklavya wrote:Sagar, The Doon School has a great tradition of Indian classical music, see for example:
http://www.doonschool.com/images/found2.jpg
http://www.doonschool.com/the-school-an ... c-school#l

The Indian cultural activity I particularly enjoyed was batik!
http://www.doonschool.com/the-school-an ... sic-school

And, here's a weekly written entirely/mainly by the students:
http://www.doonschool.com/publications/ ... y/archives
http://www.doonschool.com/images/weekly_pdf/2325.pdf

You haven't provided anything to confirm your claim of Doon providing "deeper and broader expose to Indian culture". I can also do googling and come up with more links than you ever can (1 pitted against 1000+ branches do the math) but then I am not the one here trying to throw mud at others by making tall but actually hollow claims.

eklavya wrote:there is no school more nationalist than Doon.

Yup absolutely true, nationalism flowing in full as can be seen here in the student weekly of Doon

All said and done, I believe that the ethnic clash
was at all times, between the Bodos and the resident
Muslims, and not the Bangladeshi Muslim s, who
are tagged ‘illegal’. And I find it very improbable to
believe that the Assamese society has innocently
mistaken the Muslims as illegal infiltrators. It rather
seems as a conscious ‘mistake’ laced with communal
undertones. Nonetheless, It is wrong to say that
the Bangladeshis are still infiltrating.

Done by Hindoo fundamentalists onlee.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 13 Nov 2012 09:20

arnab wrote: I was referring to the duplicity of certain folks when they rail about it being Nehru’s fault / britisher’s fault that they had to learn English, but are comfortable about being a part of the ‘colonial’ structure that provided them with the 'language advantage' and has apparently made them more successful than 90 per cent of Indians. To the extent that your research into british perfidy is educational – I support it; but the moment it turns prescriptive (don’t learn English because English is a phunny language) – I find it more a case of “do as I say, not as I do”

I do not subscribe to this idea of throwing away the skills we have in Engleesh. I was saying WHY a skill in Engleesh results in upward social mobility as you might be keenly aware. The same knowledge in Engleesh wont give you much upward mobility in Germany or Japan or Russia or China. I was explaining why.

arnab wrote: I don't but then I also don’t try to convince them you should ‘hate them and kick them for ever so that they go down and stay down’

Depends on who "they" are. If its an average brit (as I said I know a couple), then no. But if its the Brit propagandu machinery like al-BBC, Guardian, eCONomist, the non apologetic old hag who has no plans to apologize to India etc, then yes they need to be kicked in the nuts and put down for good.