Man, being treated by a Panda is way too funny ... though I come form the part of India (Orissa) where Pandas are common surnames, and yea Dr Panda is from the state too.
On another note, earlier last yr, I came to know about Obama being a Hanuman 'bhakt' from SM only - and yesterday, saw a piece of Indian news where they showed some Hanuman temple priests in India are conducted a puja for him on the oath day. They are too hoping that Obama visits the temple when he comes to India. Aaahmazzingly crazy... as crazy as the thought of being treated by a 'Panda'!

a different head of state is honored as “chief guest”, each year.

They invited France three times? Three times? And still the French won't learn Hindi.

I guess the name "Panda" fits perfectly in our Hindu culture with all the animal imagery of tigers (Durga Devi uses one for transport), lions (Narasimha), and bears (Jambavan), oh my. Not to mention rats (rat temple, Ganesh's vehicle), snakes (snake temples, Shiva's bling), birds (Garuda, etc) and I believe the 4 dogs that protect the Vedas are proof that all dogs go to heaven (like the title of the kids movie from a while back). But of course, Pandas still rule.

President Obama sent a very nice & letter that's flattering to Indians in India - he's an honorary Desi after all.

(In my last post, I left out the Divine Cows, horses, boars and bulls and other hooved ones. Each animal in Hinduism is supposed to symbolic. check out http://www.dycuk.org/dattatreya.html )

That would be amazing if Obama was invited to be the chief guest at India's Republic Day. I'm sure he wouldn't turn the invitation down, too.

But, uh, back to the lecture at hand. Perfection is perfected, so I'm 'a let 'em understand. From a young G's perspective...

Now, are you just trying to get my attention? You had me at "back to the lecture."

I love pandas.

I nominate this for best piece of SM political commentary, January 2009.

in 2007, it was Mr. Carla Bruni. A girl can dream…

Best Freudian slip ever! So, moley, your dreams involve a female-to-male-transformed supermodel.

Also, it's official: Obama is no Stephen Harper when it comes to Republic Day.

a happy republic day and a kung hei fat choy y'all. it's a year where your hard work and perseverance will result in froot. prez o, reportedly born in the year of the ox, also represents those traits of honesty, diligence and fortitude. so hang in there. be cool.

Panda ~ Pandit ~ Purohit

Having an award for bravery for children is the most badass award any country has.

a happy republic day and a kung hei fat choy y'all.

The Wall Street Journal had a short video on Calcutta's Chinese marking the new year:

Indian Chinese Hoping New Year as Steady as the Ox

India practices religious tolerance in name, for sure. I think the practice needs to be perfected somewhat, still.

Treated by a "panda" - hilarious...

Good to see some humor.

I am dealing with "high levels" of abusive messages as I tried to find out the truth about Zaid Hamid in Pakistan.

http://bengalunderattack.blogspot.com/2009/01/zaid-hamid-of-brasstacks-pakistan.html

6 · pingpong

Also, it's official: Obama is no Stephen Harper when it comes to Republic Day.

OMG... this one is for the ages.

"This is 2004, Mr. Harper, not 1492 - the last time a man got lost looking for India," he wrote in a letter dated Wednesday.

LOLLOL!

BTW, I had a friend last-named 'Panda' back in college in India (all those many years ago). I always pronounced it Panda too. He never corrected me. It was common friends who told me, it is not pronounced 'Panda', it is 'Puhndaah' the first syllable going rather like 'pundit', as Dizzy Desi points out in #8.

P.S. Hello port, and thank you!

India practices religious tolerance???...is he kiddin?

I vent through the rediff link and it sounds like a rather complex and risky procedure. ten blockages. grafts from arms and legs. a history of diabetes. i'm just surprised this wasnt big news. anyone know who was the person in charge when mr singh was undergoing the surgery?


that said, wish mr singh well on his recovery.

16 · khoofi said

anyone know who was the person in charge when mr singh was undergoing the surgery?

nobody was officially in charge (probably didn't want to create an alternative power center to manmohan singh, before rahul is deemed fit to ascend to the throne), but pranab mukherjee was dealing with finance.

I second the redirecting of National Bravery Awards. Someday, we will be recognized by our country for risking life and limb...

//flashback//

"Dad, I want to be a photographer!"

(All hell breaks loose)

//end flashback//

How better to celebrate the institution of India's progressive, secular values than by going out with friends for a drink, being intruded upon by right-wing Hindu activists, being called a prostitute, being slapped and molested, and having the government shuffle its feet and play defense?

That's called partying Karnataka style! Happy Republic Day!

mangalore incident: despicable.

also weirded out by this one:
http://www.mumbaimirror.com/index.aspx?Page=article§name=News%20-%20City§id=2&contentid=20090119200901190252246906371d0fc

in this case, there's not even a shuffling of feet - instead a wholesale turning of tables!
"Nevertheless, the cops referred the matter to legal experts to see if they could book Saba for hurting religious sentiments"

Panda. Good name for next Rajnikanth movie. Sivajikkappuram evan da ? Sivajikkappuram Pan da!

Thanks for the equivocation, kd. "Oh, its terrible what we allow to happen in the name of Hindu culture - but aren't the Muslims worse?" I hope that wasn't what you were trying to do, because it is cowardly not to look to your own house first. For your further information, two of the women assaulted in Mangalore were hospitalized.

thanks for hoping for me, Nizam. I hope so too.
i didn't say anything about 'worse' though - is that something you think?

i AM sad about the state of affairs. worse - i tried arguing with both sets of offenders in my mind, and lost. "thou shall not hurt someone just for your beliefs" wouldn't work because these guys believe in a universal moral framework, one that's different from one that privileges the individual.

http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/haidt07/haidt07_index.html

1 · bollywoodplusplus said

Obama being a Hanuman

I thought so. He and his vanara sena will be oversmartstupid enough to bring Dronagiri mountain to rescue the economy with Mrita Sanjivani.
On the other hand, you could be called a 'Bhajji' Singh for your statement.

Nursultan Nazarbayev, the President of Kazakhstan India is ahead in the game. Hope the gas pipeline comes thru. He can buy what Carla Bruni wants, when Sarkozy is out of power. I wonder, how BoratBarak would treat him.

17 · stand up said

16 · khoofi said

anyone know who was the person in charge when mr singh was undergoing the surgery?

nobody was officially in charge (probably didn't want to create an alternative power center to manmohan singh, before rahul is deemed fit to ascend to the throne), but pranab mukherjee was dealing with finance.

Yeah, there was total confusion. [link]. They could appointed the VP (leader of Rajya Sabha) as the acting PM, no harm in that?

Confucius sez,

"Yeah, there was total confusion. [link]."

Singh underwent bypass surgery in 1990 in Britain. He also underwent wrist surgery in 2006, prostate gland surgery and a cataract removal procedure last year, officials said.

Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani sent bouquets of flowers to the prime minister.

On a somewhat related note, regarding the US-India relationship in an Obama administration:
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/01/23/india_s_stealth_lobbying_against_holbrooke

16 · khoofi said

i'm just surprised this wasnt big news. anyone know who was the person in charge when mr singh was undergoing the surgery?

Sonia Gandhi Same as before the operation. (or after)

i'm just surprised this wasnt big news. anyone know who was the person in charge when mr singh was undergoing the surgery?

It was (still is) very big news in India.

Pranab Mukherjee was in-charge, according to the rules

23 · kd said

these guys believe in a universal moral framework, one that's different from one that privileges the individual.

well, i believe in our legal system. these guys belong in jail. one's moral framework is no mitigation for perpetrating violent crime. but i do hear what you're saying, and i don't believe you endorse these thugs.
so rob, see how your saffron friends like to party? what a diverse and merry bunch y'all are!

so rob, see how your saffron friends like to party? what a diverse and merry bunch y'all are!

Port,
While I don't normally like to air "dirty laundry" in public, I will take your bait and meet you with, err--Koenraad Elst's (self-)critical assessment of the Hindu right--yes, there are a lot of deficiencies, but that only means the future is that much brighter.
I have to confess to having discussed commonalities tonight over dinner with some right-wing Filipino's at a Korean restaurant (eats included a scallion and seafood pancake and--err--beef tongue BBQ--but, one can invoke the more ancient Vedic texts as is--err--appropriate).

:-)

32 · rob said

While I don't normally like to air "dirty laundry" in public

That's right. you like to have your henchmen in india do it to christians and muslims and anybody else they don't like because they wore short skirts or kissed in public or whatever else the offense of the day is, even as you sit comfortably in a country that is welcoming to diverse cultures and immigrants. your ability to be comfortable with bankrolling extremism shows a deep seated bigotry. you are the kind of person who would have been in the taliban if they were muslim and shoveling money to pat robertson if they were christian. but be happy. your brand of hate will likely carry the day as your people tear india's historical secularism - that you use as some sort of exhibit of tolerance - apart and reduce it to a hindu theocracy. i just hope that this destruction takes at least a couple of generations so i don't live to see it, and the people i know are able to clear out of there before then.

33 · right

LOL--I am flattered that you think I have "henchmen." It must really burn you up that my "peeps" pass the "smell test" in US politics (I am not including campus politics here), unlike, say, the Islamists or (really, in decent company, in the US--you'll know what I mean if you "know what I mean," what, what?) the Pat Robertson types. How did the "Hindu fundoos" manage to penetrate to such heights in US society and politics? Maybe b/c your underlying narrative is false? In fact--yes, yes, that would be the reason. But, go ahead, add another epicycle to your theory about how bad and dangerous Hindus are. Meanwhile, I will cackle--and plot further alliances for us.

It must really burn you up that my "peeps" pass the "smell test" in US politics

it is only a matter of time before their extremism becomes more visible. look already how modi was not even permitted to enter the u.s. this will only become more prevalent over time as the sangh increasingly runs rampant. i don't need to add epicycles because i never said anything about how bad and dangerous hindus are. i said hindutvavaadis, the radical hindu extremists whom you support, are a poison. but lie on this too, as you do with everything else, to feed your messed up world view.

Meanwhile, I will cackle--and plot further alliances for us.

of course you will. as you plot more destruction of mosques and murder and killings of missionaries and nativism. just like self interested pakistanis have all got out of pakistan, the same will happen as you reduce india to a theocracy.

How did the "Hindu fundoos" manage to penetrate to such heights in US society and politics?

i don't know whom you are referring to, but i would like you to name five (or three) vocal hindu fundoos in positions of power and responsibility in us society.

33 · right said

32 · rob said

That's right. you like to have your henchmen in india do it to christians and muslims and anybody else they don't like because they wore short skirts or kissed in public or whatever else the offense of the day is, even as you sit comfortably in a country that is welcoming to diverse cultures and immigrants. your ability to be comfortable with bankrolling extremism shows a deep seated bigotry. you are the kind of person who would have been in the taliban if they were muslim and shoveling money to pat robertson if they were christian. but be happy. your brand of hate will likely carry the day as your people tear india's historical secularism - that you use as some sort of exhibit of tolerance - apart and reduce it to a hindu theocracy. i just hope that this destruction takes at least a couple of generations so i don't live to see it, and the people i know are able to clear out of there before then.

Ha. Comments like this make me want to establish a Hindu Rashtra just out of spite.

36 · right said

How did the "Hindu fundoos" manage to penetrate to such heights in US society and politics?

i don't know whom you are referring to, but i would like you to name five (or three) vocal hindu fundoos in positions of power and responsibility in us society.

Since the definition of "fundoo" seems to be "anyone who doesn't apologize for being Hindu" I guess. . . well just about everyone outside of Hartford, Connecticut then huh?

38 · Noogie said

Since the definition of "fundoo" seems to be "anyone who doesn't apologize for being Hindu" I guess. . . well just about everyone outside of Hartford, Connecticut then huh?

you might want to call all hindus fundoos, but that is only in your sick head. are all muslim wahhabis? or taliban soldiers? sane people can tell the difference.

Comments like this make me want to establish a Hindu Rashtra just out of spite.

yes, the comments made you do it. next?

of course you will. as you plot more destruction of mosques and murder and killings of missionaries and nativism. just like self interested pakistanis have all got out of pakistan, the same will happen as you reduce india to a theocracy.

Wow Rob I didn't realize you were such a high roller.

Mogambo. . . khush hua.

LOL--I love how your cramped playbook forces you to deal with someone like me by accusing me of of advocating "murder" just b/c I don't accept your tired platitudes. Yeah, you're open-minded.

look already how modi was not even permitted to enter the u.s. this will only become more prevalent over time as the sangh increasingly runs rampant

Wow--you really misinterpret this--Modi got banned precisely b/c most Americans don't care---so his ban was an expression of special interest outcomes (hey--that's as American as apple pie too--but, look for some payback there too)--as the Sangh wises up, and communicates its ideas better (e.g., restore historical temple sites, resist Islamist intimidation) this won't work anymore for the Left/Islamist alliance. Sorry.

you might want to call all hindus fundoos, but that is only in your sick head. are all muslim wahhabis? or taliban soldiers? sane people can tell the difference.

These blog posts are just the tip of the iceberg. We plan to roll out phase II next time we meet in our secret volcano lair.

41 · rob said

Modi got banned precisely b/c most Americans don't care---so his ban was an expression of special interest outcomes

sure. the government bans people whose actions they don't care about. got it.

as the Sangh wises up, and communicates its ideas better

you think this genie will be bottled up? because reactionary forces always know when to stop, right?

you think this genie will be bottled up? because reactionary forces always know when to stop, right?

42 · Noogie said

Sane people don't usually assume anyone who points out that they're wrong must be part of a vast conspiracy.

you were the one saying that all hindus are fundoos. i was saying that was a sick thing to say. i guess that makes me a bigot then.

45 · right you were the one saying that all hindus are fundoos. i was saying that was a sick thing to say. i guess that makes me a bigot then.

Could you start to focus on "truth" and stop worrying about being a "bigot"? I mean, were the first humans to master fire (a) people who had "advanced," (with the necessary implication towards the other contemporaneous peoples) or (b) people who were "pro-fire bigots"?
Where is this playing other than at JNU?

46 · rob said

Where is this playing other than at JNU?

if it doesn't play anywhere other than jnu, maybe you can stop throwing around jnu papers as you always do to somehow claim that the prevailing view of hinduism is somehow jaundiced. i am glad you put "truth" in quotes, that about summarizes the selective readings that hindutvavaadis use to justify their paranoia and their nativism.

as for your fire analogy, are you saying that hindutva is the one true belief system and those who don't adhere to it are backward, or should be "converted" to it? sounds pretty inclusive to me.

I'm just being lazy and triumphalist about the fact that Hindutva is "safe" and "accepted" in US politics/culture/society, unlike, say, Islamism or Communism. I admit that that's intellectually lazy, though--and we need to go to work on it.

48 · rob said

I'm just being lazy and triumphalist about the fact that Hindutva is "safe" and "accepted" in US politics/culture/society

exactly like how modi was denied his visa because it was so accepted. don't worry though, your extremism will get played out in the full glare of day as communal violence in india becomes more rampant, and minorities of all stripes are at the receiving end.

49 · right exactly like how modi was denied his visa because it was so accepted. don't worry though, your extremism will get played out in the full glare of day as communal violence in india becomes more rampant, and minorities of all stripes are at the receiving end.

You badly misunderestimate [error intended] what is going on. . . Now that we have VHP-A better organized, Modi can get a visa anytime. . . . and why are you focussing on whether the US gives a visa--LOL--focus on whether our peeps or your peeps are winning--LOL--I know you want "Unkill" to continue to discriminate against Modi, but--it ain't happening, man. Unkill is giving "us" lots of "high-tech" stuff even as you write.

50 · rob said

-focus on whether our peeps or your peeps are winning--LOL--I know you want "Unkill" to continue to discriminate against Modi, but--it ain't happening, man. Unkill is giving "us" lots of "high-tech" stuff even as you write.

who are "my peeps" and who is getting lots of high-tech stuff? you still haven't answered my question about vocal Hindutvavaadis in prominent positions in US society.

and if you are talking about high-tech stuff, the us has sunk far more billions into pakistan than it has to india. that has nothing to do with the acceptability of islamism and inspite of pakistan being a supporter of terrorist forces, not only against india, but also against u.s. army forces in afghanistan.

and if you are talking about high-tech stuff, the us has sunk far more billions into pakistan than it has to india.

LOL--who is telling you this? "Unkill" is giving far better "stuff" to India than to Pakistan. What, you think "Unkill" is *that* dumb? If your victory strategy is based on that, be very, very afraid. . . .

53 · rob said

Unkill" is giving far better "stuff" to India than to Pakistan. What, you think "Unkill" is *that* dumb?

ok, whatever floats your boat. soon, you can quote whole sentences so your statements can be unfalsifiable. all while avoiding answering any of the questions... and of course, i have no idea who "we" are and what "victory" for us constitutes in your head.

my question about vocal Hindutvavaadis in prominent positions in US society.

The craziness is just you--who are insisting on labelling any Hindu who is not toeing the party-line as a Hindutvadis. But if you want people who disagree with you, take, say, any Hindu-American with net worth greater than US$10M, to start?

55 · rob said

-who are insisting on labelling any Hindu who is not toeing the party-line as a Hindutvadis

No, a Hindu who supports the VHP Hindutva ideology is a Hindutva-vaadi. I really don't see what is wrong with that description. What is the Hindu party line, btw? And I see that answers still seem hard to come by.

55 · rob said

The craziness is just you

well, good. so, maybe we can stop pretending that hindus are in mortal peril and acting with extreme prejudice against people who oppose this viewpoint, since, apparently, it's just me.

What is the Hindu party line, btw?

Easily specified--it's Yankees, Yindoos, and Yehudi--FTW! And the "specific" reasons for you disliking Americans, Hindus, and Jews are exactly the reasons why I loathe you. B/c you hate all three groups. But me, I like modernity, and the Yankees, Yindoos and Yehudis are at the forefront of it, unlike your friends (though I'd include the Japanese, Koreans, and Chinese on our YYY side). But groove on my "hatred" if you want to.

58 · rob said

Easily specified--it's Yankees, Yindoos, and Yehudi--FTW!

don't look now, but you just contradicted yourself because you just said that you are the ones not toeing the hindu party line.

And the "specific" reasons for you disliking Americans, Hindus, and Jews are exactly the reasons why I loathe you.

you got all that from my contempt for your hindutva ideology? awesome job!

34 · rob said

It must really burn you up that my "peeps" pass the "smell test" in US politics

no these guys don't pass the smell test anywhere. you can decry nussbaim all you want for yher political views, but can you dispute the actual sadistic rapes that took place?

I'm just being lazy and triumphalist about the fact that Hindutva is "safe" and "accepted" in US politics/culture/society,

58 · rob said

Easily specified--it's Yankees, Yindoos, and Yehudi--FTW! And the "specific" reasons for you disliking Americans, Hindus, and Jews are exactly the reasons why I loathe you

i don't see anything in right's comments that provides even a modicum of proof of his/her alleged hatred of "yankees, yindoos, and yehudi."

you got all that from my contempt for your hindutva ideology? awesome job!

Scoff all you want, but what % of rich, influential white people in the US dislike Hindutva? Maybe 2% at best? What % of rich, influential, white Americans dislike Islamism? Maybe 98%? If you think I'm not seizing that ground for all it's worth, well, you're not as jealous of me as you appear to be. ;-) I'm sorry, I'm Hindu and I'm not taking being put down any more, the way Hindus are supposed to be submissive (like in modern-day Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, etc.), but--sorry--no to Euros (who, these days, in fact, seem to accept me, or crazies who want to kill me--I have stayed at the Oberoi in Mumbai--now I am extremist to object to the people who showed up and would have killed me there??)

50 · rob said

Now that we have VHP-A better organized, Modi can get a visa anytime. . . .

you know what, i don't think of the US state department as a moral authority; but like noogie upthread, i will be protesting when modi petitions to be allowed into the US, just out of spite (#37).
and the JNU papers act is getting old. you need to argue about the merits of a stance. it is silly to say that since commies hold the same opinion as you, you must be wrong. well, marxist scholars hold that the sun sets in the west. just because marxists endorse/agree with a particular view doesn't make it wrong or suspect.

several non-marxist scholars and ordinary individuals have decried religious violence in india (including that perpetrated by hindus), please google and educate yourself.

62 · rob said

now I am extremist to object to the people who showed up and would have killed me there??)

no, it's ok to object to extremism. not ok to conclude that all muslims are extremists or that hindus should embrace extremism or embrace extremists belonging to other religions to fight islamic extremism.

62 · rob said

-now I am extremist to object to the people who showed up and would have killed me there??

yes, people oppose hindutva because of their bold and controversial stance against terrorists.

55 · rob said

But if you want people who disagree with you, take, say, any Hindu-American with net worth greater than US$10M, to start?

since when is net-worth an indicator of moral competence? why does the opinion of a hindu with high net-worth matter more than a hindu cab driver?
and btw, i personally know hindus with net worth >USD 10 m and they're against hindutva. but what's that got to do with anything? if an act is shown to be unlawful, it doesn't matter who endorses it or who opposes it; it remains unlawful. likewise, if wealthy people endorse or are indifferent to immoral acts, the act doesn't become any less immoral.

Port,
The point is not that on deontological grounds violence (simpliciter) is justified against Muslims--it's not. The point is that we live in the "rough" world where justice is not served (see, e.g., slaughter at VT in Mumbai). So, what to do when justice is far removed--I think you would find Rawls and me quite bloodthirsty on this point. . . .

67 · rob said

I think you would find Rawls and me quite bloodthirsty on this point. . . .

whoopsie, somebody wasn't paying attention in class the day the law of peoples was taught...

The point is not that on deontological grounds violence (simpliciter) is justified against Muslims--it's not. The point is that we live in the "rough" world where justice is not served (see, e.g., slaughter at VT in Mumbai)

I agree - the solution is to make a lesson of unrelated innocent Muslims. That'll learn 'em. Then, maybe some Muslim can come and say: "The point is not that on deontological grounds violence (simpliciter) is justified against Hindus--it's not. The point is that we live in the "rough" world where justice is not served (see, e.g., slaughter in Gujarat). The point is not that on deontological grounds violence (simpliciter) is justified against Muslims--it's not. The point is that we live in the "rough" world where justice is not served "

And then everybody can live happily ever after.

whoopsie, somebody wasn't paying attention in class the day the law of peoples was taught...

No, somebody whose mind is sufficiently open realizes that the "Law of Peoples" is BS, even though a "Theory of Justice" has an enormous amount to offer--at least to us Yindoos, plus the Yankees and the Yehudis--FTW!!

69 · rob said

No, somebody whose mind is sufficiently open realizes that the "Law of Peoples" is BS

oh good, Rawls didn't know what Rawls would do. it's a truly open mind that can come up with the opposite conclusion to Rawls and justify it as Rawls' bloodthirst. this is some pretty solid intellectual stuff here.

69 · rob said

even though a "Theory of Justice" has an enormous amount to offer

you do know that "the difference principle" is not that people should be treated differently, right? there's that itty bitty thing about min-max fairness. yep, sounds pretty bloodthirsty to me in an "open minded" reading.

unless we are talking about rawls the hun, the lesser known brother of attica...

71 · right

you do know that "the difference principle" is not that people should be treated differently, right?

LOL--yes, I know that--what I am talking about is that, for Rawls, the priority of the 1st principle of justice (which includes, inter alia., freedom of religion) does not apply if we are outside of the "circumstances of justice" (which is arguably the case back in the Desh)--this does not license the law of the jungle, of course, but it does suggest that your jokes and self-confident pronouncements are, per Rawls-soi-meme, faux!j So the joke is on you, mon ami!

72 · rob said

the priority of the 1st principle of justice (which includes, inter alia., freedom of religion) does not apply if we are outside of the "circumstances of justice"

ah, never fail to deliver, exactly what i expected - a self adjudicated liberty exception in the lawless wilds of hindustan that allows abrogation of any of the basic rights because, hey, why not?

ah, never fail to deliver, exactly what i expected - a self adjudicated liberty exception in the lawless wilds of hindustan that allows abrogation of any of the basic rights because, hey, why not?

Not b/c "hey, why not" but b/c I don't want to take the liberalism pill the point of suicide. Yes, I enjoy living in, and profit from, the Western liberal ideal--hey, me likes it a lo!! But that doesn't translate into signing my peeps up for the same "deal" when they're not going to get it and are instead going to get killed by the hard, tough, men of the, err--let us say, "western asiatic" mindset. . . .

several non-marxist scholars and ordinary individuals have decried religious violence in india (including that perpetrated by hindus), please google and educate yourself.

So did you finally read up something about Qutb complex in Delhi?. :-)

Then, maybe some Muslim can come and say: "The point is not that on deontological grounds violence (simpliciter) is justified against Hindus--it's not. The point is that we live in the "rough" world where justice is not served (see, e.g., slaughter in Gujarat)

I think they are already doing that. Every terrorist attack on unrelated Indians all over India is blamed on the Gujarat riots. Indeed, this is a "rough" world.

76 · Ponniyin Selvan said

Every terrorist attack on unrelated Indians all over India is blamed on the Gujarat riots.

yes, that is so true. everyone blamed the gujarat riots for bombay. nobody has pointed fingers at the ISI and non-state factors in pakistan, or JuD+LeT.
why do you have such an aversion from facts? who are these people that blame every attack on indians on gujarat? certainly, i haven't heard much from these people, or i would know better.
and no, i'll read what you ask me to read after you read the CBSE history books and acknowledge that south indian history was taught to students and when you get rid of your hindu and tamil persecution complex. get beyond the blame game; why is it so hard to accept that hardliners and extremists on either end are ultimately destructive?

rob, its true that public reason and unreasonable people are problematic for rawls. that said, i see none of rawls supporting your stance wrt hindu extremists. rawls likes constitutions and liberal democracies (there is little controversy in that regard), so how could he be in favor of thugs who like to beat up women in pubs for reasons that have no moral bearing on public life? his concept of 'overlapping consenus' leaves little room for any religious extremists who want to impose ideology and codes of conduct through violence.

not that rawls should be invoked as the ultimate moral arbiter (no real reublican would :)); his word is not divine revelation. besides his most significant work is an ideal theory. nonetheless, he is not on your side on this one :) right has already outlined reasons as to why that is the case.

btw, these might help to convince you:

Citizens engaged in certain political activities have a duty of civility to be able to justify their decisions on fundamental political issues by reference only to public values and public standards.

Reasonable citizens want to live in a society in which they can cooperate with their fellow citizens on terms that are acceptable to all. They are willing to propose and abide by mutually acceptable rules, given the assurance that others will also do so; and they will honor these rules even when this means some sacrifice to their own interests. Reasonable citizens want, in short, to belong to a society where political power is legitimately used.

Each reasonable citizen has his own view about God and life, right and wrong, good and bad. Each has, that is, what Rawls calls his own comprehensive doctrine. Yet because reasonable citizens are reasonable, they are unwilling to impose their own comprehensive doctrines on others who are also willing to search for mutually agreeable rules. Though each may believe that he knows the truth, none is willing to force other reasonable citizens to live by that truth, even should he belong to a majority that has the power to enforce it.

One ground for reasonable citizens to be so tolerant, Rawls says, is that they accept a particular explanation for the diversity of worldviews in their society. Reasonable citizens accept the burdens of judgment. The deepest questions of religion, philosophy, and morality are very difficult even for conscientious people to think through, and people will answer these questions in different ways because of their own particular life experiences (their upbringing, class, occupation, and so on). Reasonable citizens understand that these deep issues are ones on which people of good will can disagree, and so will be unwilling to impose their own worldviews on those who have reached different conclusions.

I think you would find Rawls and me quite bloodthirsty on this point. . . .

73 · right said

ah, never fail to deliver, exactly what i expected - a self adjudicated liberty exception in the lawless wilds of hindustan that allows abrogation of any of the basic rights because, hey, why not?

nicely said :) dear right, wanna meet me at center left?

75 · Ponniyin Selvan said

So did you finally read up something about Qutb complex in Delhi?. :-)

i'm tickled pink that you ask. but as you have established in the past -- romila thapar is the only historian that people like me read ;)

76 · Ponniyin Selvan said

I think they are already doing that. Every terrorist attack on unrelated Indians all over India is blamed on the Gujarat riots. Indeed, this is a "rough" world.

so i assume you think those people are misguided, crazy, bigoted, or just plain evil. good thing commenters for "your peeps" don't say anything remotely as wacko!

Yes, I enjoy living in, and profit from, the Western liberal ideal--hey, me likes it a lo!! But that doesn't translate into signing my peeps up for the same "deal" when they're not going to get it and are instead going to get killed by the hard, tough, men of the, err--let us say, "western asiatic" mindset. . . .

wow, rob, i missed that! so you're saying people in the desh are not smart enough to get constitutional democracy? we were doing fine until thuggish elements gained power in the 1990s. and now you insist on bankrolling them. what despotic paternalism -- indians don't get democracy anyway, and because they will be slaughtered by jehadi terrorists, it's best to let macho goons and thugs run the country? exactly the justification mill et al used to defend the british empire.

80 · portmanteau said

75 · Ponniyin Selvan said

So did you finally read up something about Qutb complex in Delhi?. :-)

i'm tickled pink that you ask. but as you have established in the past -- romila thapar is the only historian that people like me read ;)

Romila Thapar is an historian just as Bernie Madoff is a fund manager.

wow, rob, i missed that! so you're saying people in the desh are not smart enough to get constitutional democracy? we were doing fine until thuggish elements gained power in the 1990s. and now you insist on bankrolling them. what despotic paternalism -- indians don't get democracy anyway, and because they will be slaughtered by jehadi terrorists, it's best to let macho goons and thugs run the country? exactly the justification mill et al used to defend the british empire.

Are you saying that thuggish elements were not in power prior to 1990s? And more surprisingly that we were doing fine till the 1990s?
Assuming that you are not being sarcastic, I am puzzled why you think so.

besides his most significant work is an ideal theory. nonetheless, he is not on your side on this one

Let me be as precise as possible. How would Rawls deal with Islamists? The existence of same is sufficient to being operating outside of ideal theory, right? And if they're killing people then we're not in the "circumstances of justice," right? And, if so, we can drop the lexical priority of the first principle for all-considered good reasons, right (e.g., for sufficient benefits in terms of overall outcomes--he's sliding towards some crude form of utilitarianism here, when things get bad, right)? So, one gets some blood even in by following the premier liberal thinker, right?

just like the existence of the rapacious financial system in the u.s leading to widespread "destruction of property" puts us outside the "circumstances of justice" and hence makes looting, mugging and thuggery over any guy wearing a suit justifiable, or 9/11 allows lynching of sikhs and muslims and any body else who dares to walk around with a tan. i don't see why it shouldn't. rawls wouldn't have it any other way.

you know, a closed minded person might say that the real absence of the "circumstances of justice" in india are the rampant poverty and the lack of access to education and primary health, and somebody who cared about the issue might actually work towards fixing that situation. and that an agenda that justifies atrocities against minorities because "hey, why not" of a self-adjudicated exception might say something about, let's say, the selective sympathies of the observer.

Let me be as precise as possible. How would Rawls deal with Hindu extremists? The existence of same is sufficient to being operating outside of ideal theory, right? And if they're killing people then we're not in the "circumstances of justice," right? And, if so, we can drop the lexical priority of the first principle for all-considered good reasons, right (e.g., for sufficient benefits in terms of overall outcomes--he's sliding towards some crude form of utilitarianism here, when things get bad, right)? So, one gets some blood even in by following the premier liberal thinker, right?

you know, a closed minded person might say that the real absence of the "circumstances of justice" in india are the rampant poverty and the lack of access to education and primary health, and somebody who cared about the issue might actually work towards fixing that situation. and that an agenda that justifies atrocities against minorities because "hey, why not" of a self-adjudicated exception might say something about, let's say, the selective sympathies of the observer.

What I don't understand is why we talk to Hindutvadis at all rather than each other. i suppose it's the constant trap of liberals (lower case l) dealing with illiberal idiologies, but hoenstly, there's really just no defense of hindu majoritarianism as a serious priority. None of their historical claims make sense, none of their tactics are really sanctionable, and none of the self-serving defenses they offer are really at all convincing. The only thing they have to hold on to is the violence that they keep propagating, and it might be worht just ignoring them.

i suppose the other (more helpful) alternative is NVC, but I don't have the patience to do non-violent communication and extend my empathy to people who abuse logic, ideology, words in order to defend other people who abuse people. It's f@#king disgusting. I suppose it's my limitation, but honestly, I can't deal anymore.

[insert snarky comment here from next Hindutvadi commenter]

Romila Thapar is an historian just as Bernie Madoff is a fund manager.

88 · dr amonymous said

you know, a closed minded person might say that the real absence of the "circumstances of justice" in india are the rampant poverty and the lack of access to education and primary health, and somebody who cared about the issue might actually work towards fixing that situation. and that an agenda that justifies atrocities against minorities because "hey, why not" of a self-adjudicated exception might say something about, let's say, the selective sympathies of the observer.

What I don't understand is why we talk to Hindutvadis at all rather than each other. i suppose it's the constant trap of liberals (lower case l) dealing with illiberal idiologies, but hoenstly, there's really just no defense of hindu majoritarianism as a serious priority. None of their historical claims make sense, none of their tactics are really sanctionable, and none of the self-serving defenses they offer are really at all convincing. The only thing they have to hold on to is the violence that they keep propagating, and it might be worht just ignoring them.

i suppose the other (more helpful) alternative is NVC, but I don't have the patience to do non-violent communication and extend my empathy to people who abuse logic, ideology, words in order to defend other people who abuse people. It's f@#king disgusting. I suppose it's my limitation, but honestly, I can't deal anymore.

[insert snarky comment here from next Hindutvadi commenter]

No need for the snark, it's fun watching you talk to the mirror, you are comedy enough

This article iss about the Indian Republic Day and Obama's letter sent to India on that occasion as all heads of states usually do as a courtesy. And yet starting from comment #22 and then #31 all the way to #90, the thread is hijacked into this shadow boxing between the Congress and BJP brand of politics. What is wrong with you people?!!! Can you people stop being righteous than though on threads that have nothing to do with ideological battles? SM Intern, can you give a little sandbox for the internet warriors of the ideological Indian left and right to battle it out, so regular threads won't be hijacked. It gets tiresome, having to read the same old arguments trotted out in different garb in every thread that remotely relates to anything to do with the Indian nation and politics!!!

83 · jyotsana said

Romila Thapar is an historian just as Bernie Madoff is a fund manager.

lighten up, j. it's a running joke b/w me and ps. anytime i write anything about history, he claims i am talking about romila thapar. i'm hardly familiar with her work, except on the epics. she's not anywhere as kooky as elst though, who seems to have a cult following here.

85 · rob said

How would Rawls deal with Islamists?

rawls would deal with islamist extremists and hindu extremists the same way. right has responded to you; i'm going to stop talking about this, and not annoy good people like cotangent.
happy republic day to india! may our democracy withstand the idiocy and corruption of our politicians, and the hatred and bigotry of our extremists, and the apathy of our citizens.
i'm sad they've canceled beating the retreat -- the one parade i was dying to see.

84 · DizzyDesi said

Are you saying that thuggish elements were not in power prior to 1990s?

i feel like politicians had to maintain some semblance of allegiance to law and order and the constitition before the 1990s. just anecdotally, at least politicians would offer to resign if something egregious happened on their watch. say, for instance, an engineer was killed by in UP by mayawati's goons/fundraisers or stalin was caught distributing money to voters ahead of by-elections in Tirumangalam or yesterday MNS workers ransacked mumbai university property and detained the registrar -- all of these things might have resulted in an apology or offer of resignation in the past; maybe i'm wrong. nonetheless, i feel that the standards of civility in indian politics have deteriorated across all parties and states. open casteism decides who gets plum positions after elections; these things used to be more internal in the past, but now leaders unapologetically make off-color demands on record.

94 · portmanteau said

i feel like politicians had to maintain some semblance of allegiance to law and order and the constitition before the 1990s

indira gandhi's goon squads ran roughshod through the 70s and 80s. i think there is more transparency now which might just lead to more visibility of this thuggishness.

india has variants of all the standard divisiveness - casteism, religion, and regionalism. that said, while caste has always been a local lightning rod, caste became a national political issue in the 80s - with vp singh at the forefront, and religion in the late 80s through the 90s thanks to the bjp which had been escalating issues to try and gain prominence starting in the late 80s. these are both extremely poisonous factors which are flushing india down the toilet, and while casteist politics has made discrimination and separation a virtue, but i hope increasing economic opportunities will make this less of an issue as years go by. religious extremism has increasingly made intolerance a virtue, and has been demonstrated in many other countries, is something that will really destroy the fabric of indian civil society. between this nationwide cancer, and regional separatist movements, it can really shatter the very idea of india as a nation.

Modi as PM is gaining traction considering HT is an avowedly Congress mouthpiece.

So, may be in 2010, US President #44 will be the Chief Guest at India's Republic Day Parade, and the PM could be NaMo/LKA.("In dreams do begin our responsibilities.")

Before some people rise in arms about the above statement, please note that the BJP (as part of NDA) did govern India for five years, and there was not much to distinguish that Govt from the current UPA one.Both governments have been corrupt and inefficient, and did nothing to solve the perennial problems facing the country.

I was checking some statistics related to J&K this morning and saw that there has been a 40% decline in terror/army related deaths in 2008.And the new CM actually traveled in an open top jeep after his swearing in.

Inspite of 26/11, and several other terror incidents during 2008 in many cities, there have been no major communal clashes. The exceptions are Orissa and Assam, and it is clear that the political class is to blame here and not the much maligned religious fundamentalists (of any hue).

The red corridor is a myth cultivated by some sections of the media.Andhra Pradesh, considered the hot bed of Naxalism down South, has not seen any signficant Naxalite action in 2008.Strangely, the Congress Govt in AP is not claiming this 'peace' as a success.May be they don't want to jinx the situation :-)

All in all, despite the situation across the border, and increasing Chinese incursions into Arunachal Pradesh, the Indian Republic doesn't seem to be in any existential danger from external forces.Let us hope the voters tackle the internal issues by a judicious use of the ballot in 2009.

Indeed, if the current POTUS visits India during his tenure, he will be delighted with the love and affection of Indian citizens towards the US in general, and towards BO in particular.Ask the Clintons.

Doy! I wake up early for a change, and I find that a post about a surgeon panda has degenerated into a fight over Hindutva. Seriously, some perspective please! Hindutva is not worth fighting over. Chocolate is. Therefore, Hindutva is not chocolate. Or something. Maybe.

As to the whole Mangalore party thing: in liberated India you can always find a party; in conservative India, the Party finds YOU!

i feel like politicians had to maintain some semblance of allegiance to law and order and the constitition before the 1990s...nonetheless, i feel that the standards of civility in indian politics have deteriorated across all parties and states.

Yeah, I don't think this is true. You've left out the Emergency completely, Telangana, the frequent imposition of Presidents rule, the extremely paternalistic and socially conservative (on caste and class grounds) economic nature of Congress (and really every other major political party), etc. This is actually one of the most offensive things about Hindutva - that they claim they are under attack when 80% of Indian post-independence history has been about defending their intersts.

I would agree that the style of politics is probably different like some have written (Sudipta Kaviraj, Partha Chatterjee) based on the style differences of the modernist elite(s) that partly led the nationalist movement and the democratization/social movements that has happened since, but i don't know if "civility" is the right work. Maybe "some decency from lack of feeling threatened enough."

the Emergency completely, Telangana, the frequent imposition of Presidents rule, the extremely paternalistic and socially conservative (on caste and class grounds) economic nature of Congress (and really every other major political party), etc. This is actually one of the most offensive things about Hindutva - that they claim they are under attack when 80% of Indian post-independence history has been about defending their intersts.

You give a laundry list of things done by Congress, and then blame Hindutva :-)

Gawd..for your sake, I hope NDA comes to power..you will have an assured career then.

she's not anywhere as kooky as elst though, who seems to have a cult following here.

So, ok, I get it--Hindus with views = "cult." Nice.

Haha, you walked into that one! ;-)

100 · rob said

she's not anywhere as kooky as elst though, who seems to have a cult following here.

So, ok, I get it--Hindus with views = "cult." Nice.

Haha, you walked into that one! ;-)

i'm a hindu with a view too :) cult following != cult
does membership in the saffron brigade come with a complimentary primer on misinterpretation? first, you ride roughshod over rawls (no -- that's not good if non-consensual), and then you mangle my words too. like in mangalore, those girls were sitting in the bar, but the goons claimed they were prostitutes who danced naked. not that naked dancers or prostitutes should be beaten up anyway.

meanwhile, here is a panda's assistant doc talking about the surgery at some(http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/000200901281792.htm) length, for those into that sort of thing.

anna: thanks for that nice little history of the bravery awards. i never knew a kid who'd received that prize; but last year, i met a desi guy who got to shake hands with the president for doing well on his board exams. it's so apt -- considering the indian/desi obsession with marks and academics (as has been pointed out on the valentino thread).

I hope NDA comes to power..you will have an assured career then.

he.he.. Narendra Modi'ji is responsible for many flourishing careers. They should be thankful to him. :-)

73 · right said

72 · rob said

the priority of the 1st principle of justice (which includes, inter alia., freedom of religion) does not apply if we are outside of the "circumstances of justice"

ah, never fail to deliver, exactly what i expected - a self adjudicated liberty exception in the lawless wilds of hindustan that allows abrogation of any of the basic rights because, hey, why not?

I think Chris Rock can help us get Rob's point here.
Chris Rock: Now I'm not saying [O.J. Simpson] should have killed her. I'm just sayin'. . . I understand.

What would you do if you're a poor, unemployed, and frustrated Hindu who gets word that some Muslims just burned a trainload of your fellow travellers, possibly including kith or kin? I know it's easy to sit on an armchair and say you wouldn't get swept up in the fury but that's a mighty high horse you got thar.

And before someone tries to draw a parallel to Islamism, yea I get that the same forces are at work there too. But controlling riots are a law and order issue. You give them a lathi to the head and they will disperse. You make the government a credible and reliable administrator of justice and they won't even riot in the first place. (This applies to Muslims too, since some of you seem to forget that they have also been guilty of rioting.)

Controlling terrorism, on the other hand, is a different animal since it's not just a one-time deal where a huge mob of people get swept up in the emotion of a situation. It's the difference between murder and manslaughter. Both suck, but to stop them you need different strategies.

i feel that the standards of civility in indian politics have deteriorated across all parties and states. open casteism decides who gets plum positions after elections; these things used to be more internal in the past, but now leaders unapologetically make off-color demands on record.

104 · Noogie said

Chris Rock: Now I'm not saying [O.J. Simpson] should have killed her. I'm just sayin'. . . I understand.

if that's the best example you can come up with...

100 · rob said

So, ok, I get it--Hindus with views = "cult." Nice.

This might help ESL candidates understand the meaning of cult following and how it bears no relation to cult.

103 · Ponniyin Selvan said

I hope NDA comes to power..you will have an assured career then.

he.he.. Narendra Modi'ji is responsible for many flourishing careers. They should be thankful to him. :-)

yes, butchery is labor intensive.

yes, butchery is labor intensive.

Good, looks like you're one of those career'ists. :-)

108 · Ponniyin Selvan said

Good, looks like you're one of those career'ists. :-)

you would be too -- if you had those goons' guts, isn't it? luckily, nursing your persecution complex online is all you're capable of doing.

you would be too -- if you had those goons' guts, isn't it? luckily, nursing your persecution complex online is all you're capable of doing.

Hmm.. I donate to IDRF and planning to support VHP some time in the future. :-)

110 · Ponniyin Selvan said

you would be too -- if you had those goons' guts, isn't it? luckily, nursing your persecution complex online is all you're capable of doing.

Hmm.. I donate to IDRF and planning to support VHP some time in the future. :-)

right, butchery is capital intensive too.
just hope that your friends in india don't get beaten up with the lathis you financed, as they have a nice valentine's day dinner with their significant others. or when they hang out at the local bar. or hope that violence isn't visited upon adivasi communities thanks to your greenbacks (http://www.indianexpress.com/ie/daily/19990204/ige04097.html).

'Monetory' contributions from VHP supporters?. The best way to destroy the organization is to ask Indian followers to 'tithe' like some other crazy reliogions. Some of the H1Bs sent money out there, because they dont know 'beer' and 'honey', but that'll change over time. There is only one way for them to raise money from an Indian, that is to charge $20 (no more than that!) for a mantric talisman from a temple. $10 for water from Ganga(anyone know why it is salty?). $100 contribution to build another temple or to put a golden tome. $10 for devotional songs DVD, $20 for email pooja. LOL.

right, butchery is capital intensive too.

Good job, You can advance pretty fast in your career. Good luck. :-)

Portmanteau

If you are ever in Delhi, there is a little flower shop by Palika bazaar that was given to a boy who received the bravery award many years back. He had lost both his arms I believe but can’t recall the exact details.

114 · umber desi said

there is a little flower shop by Palika bazaar that was given to a boy who received the bravery award many years back.

it requires a rare and very admirable alchemy of presence of mind, courage and altruism to do what many of these children who are recipients of the bravery award do. i am always awed by the self sacrifice of these kids, many of whom even lose their lives and limbs (as umber above mentions) while saving others. anna, thanks for showcasing this aspect of the celebrations.

but last year, i met a desi guy who got to shake hands with the president for doing well on his board exams.

sounds like a loser :) did he try and impress you by telling you this the first time you met? "Hello, my mom thinks I'm gay because all I do is study. Want to pose for a photo with me? I'll help you with your homework". are you sure his name wasn't shawn valentino?

99 · Kumar said

You give a laundry list of things done by Congress, and then blame Hindutva :-)

Reading comprehension: apparently you can read, but not comprehend. I suppose that's what makes you all so charming.

:)

(that was for specially Ponniyin Selvan...my favorite slow thinker)

Reading comprehension: apparently you can read, but not comprehend. I suppose that's what makes you all so charming.

Dr.A,

Good.You are improving.See, you have actually started writing in simple setences :-)

Here, take this pass from the left.

116 · right said

are you sure his name wasn't shawn valentino?

i'd tell you; but ladies don't kiss and tell.

umber desi, i'm in delhi actually these days.

i feel like politicians had to maintain some semblance of allegiance to law and order and the constitition before the 1990s. just anecdotally, at least politicians would offer to resign if something egregious happened on their watch.

That makes sense. But I would think that the 90s were just when a lot of trends quickened.

So bascially I agree with the moral decay in the 90s, but would refrain from looking into the past for a model
The causes of what happened in the 90s and since -- The rot has always been there. For example, TN was a certainly a kleptocracy in the 80s -- MGR made bribery a normal part of doing business (and used to instruct the briber to pay Karnanudhi too!).

L.K. Advani's first post in his blog (scroll to bottom) talks about how caste was the deciding factor even in free India's very first elections.

And when you mentioned a culture of unaccountable thugs -- I grew up hearing tales of what a horrible thug Sanjay Gandhi had been. And looking at his bio shows how muchof power he was a model for every type of abuse of power we read about today.

120 · DizzyDesi said

But I would think that the 90s were just when a lot of trends quickened.

yes, i'd agree with that. no doubt about sanjay gandhi -- but at least his goondaism was couched in a rhetoric of how much good he was doing for the country (not that it lets him off the hook at all). i don't think politicians even bother with justifications anymore, and neither does the public.

Portmanteau and DD,

Interesting comments from both of you.

There is probably some correlation to these 'quickening trends' and what the country has gone through between late 80s to mid 90s:

Corruption in high political office - Bofors scandal..many facts came to light, but the alleged perpetrators went scot free.A message to politicians that 'graft is good.' And the greater the scam, the easier it is to escape.

Mandalisation of politics - We started accepting 'violence' by special interest groups (both pro-mandal and anti-mandal violence);Union ministers, and State chief ministers started taking sides and encouraging disruption of law and order by their supporters..openly flaunting the success of caste equations in electoral politics became a virtue of real politic.

Mandirisation of politics - Advani's Rath Yatra sought to play up emotions and convert it into political capital;Mob violence, violence by State police forces (Provincial Armed Constabulary in UP), inaction/collusion by Union and State govts etc etc; also, for the first time, large numbers of middle and lower middle class people across the country realised the power of disruption (of civic life)..

Arrival of cross-border terrorism in Kashmir valley, and the IPKF fiasco in Sri Lanka - ISI did in Kashmir what RAW did in Sri Lanka..terror strikes on civilians, ethnic cleansing of Pandits from the Valley, open support by TN govt and TN businessmen to LTTE terrorists..

The balance of payments crisis forcing PVNR's hand..economic liberalisation unlocking many avenues for the businessman/criminal/politician nexus, to loot the country..

Ok..we did better than many neighbours, but we also failed miserably on many accounts..while it is simplistic to blame only the Congress and/or the BJP, what is appalling is the way successive Congress/Third Front/BJP govts, did zilch to address any of these trends..instead, whoever is in power acted as 'guardians' for the opposition Netas, and did not prosecute even a single corruption case to its logical conclusion.For example, the BJP did nothing during its tenure to bring the Bofors culrpits to book ( and Vajpayee allegedly intervened with US State Dept when Rahul got caught with USD 200,000 in hard cash at JFK)..similarly Sonia kicked off her 2004 election campaign highlighting the NDA govt's corruption, but after coming to power, the UPA govt conveniently forgot all those accusations.

Even at the states level, we can see the same pattern.First, Chandra Babu Naidu or Mulayam Yadav are alleged to be corrupt, and even courts will pass verdicts against them. And then, they lose power, and in comes YSR or Mayawati..and these leaders indulge in even more corruption.The conning of the aam taxpayers continues without any end in sight.

The late H.K.Surjeet (no, I am not a fan of Mr.Surjeet..I used to hate his brand of coalition politics, but credit where it is due)used to say that corruption has increased as a direct result of thoughtless economic liberalisation.But even the Left did not push MMS & Co to probe into the NDA's alleged scams.

The loot is still on...and the violence by special interest groups are growing by the day.And the trend of selective amnesia in the media is also growing.And the public is just not bothered about corruption or violation of law and order any more.

Is there hope? Yes, there is..but we are not yet in a situation where we can keep our ideological blinkers aside and try to agree on 'what is best for the country.'

OK, was thinking about this--let's say you have 70% of the population at zero (on a line ranging from -100 to +100), and 30% at -20. Now, if you favor zero as an outcome, mightn't you sponsor some +20 groups, in the hope that the eventual compromise will be closer to zero than to -8? Hmmmmm--I would, and I think that there are plenty of historical precedents to support it. E.g., modern (post WWII) history of, say, Taiwan, S. Korea or Chile.

2 · my_dog_jagat said

They invited France three times? Three times? And still the French won't learn Hindi.

I know tons of French people studying Hindi in India right now! :D