Representative restoration image generated because no original image was embedded in the supplied HTML.
The job of the media around the world is to report truth and promote awareness against malpractices and injustices so as to grow the society as a whole. But Indian media is filled with the vilest scum on the planet and they try to deflect issues of rape and sexual harassment done by their fellow presstitute cronies.
Look at the tweet of Sagarika Ghose, the queen bimbo of Indian journalism, on what she thinks about her fellow media presstitute Tejpal being involved in rape and sexual harassment:
[Sagarika Ghose tweet suggesting Tejpal should not be targeted for rape and sexual assault because many more such incidents happen in the world]
— Sagarika Ghose (@sagarikaghose)
She thinks that Tejpal should not be targeted for his rape and sexual assault against women just because there are many more happening in the world. How do these people justify such a stance? Should every rape allegation be downplayed and women be allowed to be raped just because it happens everywhere? Is this what these presstitutes think is empowering and protecting women? It is through instances like these when normal patriotic Indians get to know about the true nature of these parasites in India. Their outrage against rape and assaults against women is not for protecting women of India but rather to promote self-hatred among Indians.
Anyone who has seen the massive propaganda against India and Indian society for the past three years would have seen massive debates on rape culture in Indian society and how it is Indian men who are the vilest in the world — all thanks to the coolies of Christian missionaries in media. They paint a picture of how Indians are all rapists and that Indian culture is inherently evil and misogynist, even though this is completely contrary to the data at hand which shows that India is one of the safest countries for women in the world with respect to rape, with one of the lowest rapes per capita in the world. They do this to promote Indophobia — self-hatred among Indians — so that they will feel ashamed of themselves and their own culture. Once they feel ashamed enough, anything from misleading conversions to sprouting of civil war in India by the likes of John Dayal with his foreign funds can be justified.
The shallowness of Indian media on selective coverage can be seen by their complete silence when a convicted paedophile bishop was reinstated by the Church as a bishop in South India, while it was massively reported even in the western media.
So long as Indian society is under the influence of these coolies of anti-India Christian missionaries and vile rapists, even 1000s of Narendra Modis can’t save India.
The liberalization of world trade under WTO has made the policy of tariff barriers redundant. Countries are no longer allowed to impose discriminatory taxes on imports to help domestic manufacturers or favour specific countries or regions.
Given the inability of countries to support their home industries through direct tariffs, there has been a rapid increase in use of non-tariff measures (NTM). Some NTMs are instruments of commercial policy, while others are justified through non-trade objectives such as environmental protection or food safety.
One of the early examples cited is a blanket restriction on Ayurvedic medicines in the US and Europe based on safety rules and minimum years of documented use.
The article also discusses US restrictions on Mexican tuna based on dolphin-protection rules and the requirement of a Dolphin-Safe label.
These examples show how countries can invoke domestic standards to discriminate against imports. NTMs require careful planning but can still restrict the free movement of goods.
Technical Barriers to Trade and Sanitary and Phytosanitary standards may erode the competitive advantage of developing countries in labour-intensive and agricultural exports.
The article argues that the West has promoted free trade through global bodies such as the WTO while simultaneously developing indirect mechanisms to protect domestic industries.
The last article in this series discussed the anti-poor arguments used by the Indian left to oppose GMO adoption, but similar paranoia is also present on the Indian right wing. This article will show why the paranoia of the Right wingers against GMOs is unwarranted.
Given that majority of the materials on the internet and that larger media is very biased against GMOs, it is not surprising that many on the right wing in India have also digested this propaganda. GMO crops seem to have done the seemingly impossible task of uniting the pro-Hindu, pro-development, pro-progress camp of Modi/BJP supporters with the pro-intellectual dishonesty, pro-poverty, anti-science, pro-misery communists of India. While props can be given for the non partisan nature of their opposition to GMO crops, it still doesn’t make their stance any less wrong. The most important problem against the GMO crops the Right wing in India has is that it is not a Swadesi product and they have been brainwashed into believing that GMO crops are bad for the country as it is being introduced by foreign corporations. This is not true and as explained in the previous article, GMO is not about Monsanto and a Swadeshi GMO company can equally rise up and serve the market. The only condition for this it that GMO companies are allowed to spring up in India. Eventually, Indians would absorb the technology and set up their own GMO tech conglomerates pretty quickly, just like they did with Micromax, Hero motor corp etc.
Second but most important allegation the naturalists in the right wing camp have against the GMO crops is that it is unnatural and hence is unsafe and bad. But this is scientifically inaccurate and reeks of mysticism the right wing is usually associated with. Despite the massive efforts by the online RW intellectual community to wash away the negative connotation that right wing is anti-science, these vocal minorities within right wing are desperate to prove them wrong. Their opposition to GMO crops is eerily similar to the bible thumping idiots of the western countries who oppose Stem cell research because “how dare the unwashed masses play with God’s creation?” and how “only god engineered natural products are good and man made products are bad”. This stance of the vocal minority of the RW opposition to GMO crops is not even valid if one looks at the history of agriculture. None of the crops which are cultivated in the world are ” pure “, like the naturalists in the anti-GMO camo believe.
Just like how humans domesticated dogs, pigs and cattle from wild wolves and boars, the present day agricultural crops are domesticated versions of wild cereals. Dogs and wolves belong to the same species-Canis Lupus but no one would think that they are the same species by looking at them nor would anyone think that dogs were genetically selected(engineered) variety of wolves. This is because many humans today are used to the idea of dogs being around them and have no idea that the dogs we see today are carefully selected pro-human wolf breeds when humans first started their primitive societies. While wolves were natural enemies of man and hence actively avoided man and fought him, certain wolves were much less anti-human and followed him around as the remains of man’s hunt was an easy source of food for them. Such breeds of wolves were taken up by men and carefully bred for their pro-human characteristic in such a way that after thousands of generations, such wolves became dogs and natural allies of man. This was a two way relationship as humans were good at killing prey while dogs were good at spotting prey and thus the relationship gave survival advantage to both and hence both prospered. The point being, even Man’s best friend is a product of genetic selection over a vast period time and if we go by the naturalist argument that humans should not use genetic selection or engineering, we should get rid of dogs, cereal, pulses etc because most of the cereals we use are products of careful selection and hence unnatural.
And technically speaking, natural does not equate to good nor does artificial equate to bad. This is a fundamentalist stance on issues with no basis on reality. For instance, humans neither have the furs to survive in the Arctic nor the uric acid adaptation that reptiles have to survive the deserts but humans have colonised both regions of the world. The way they did it is not by chanting naturalist mantra and hoping that cold or heat does not get us but by using the tools we have to engineer our safe spots and create our own shelters. This is what humans do to survive and this is what made them the dominant species on the planet. If humans ancestors were as dogmatic and fundamentalist in their natural-artificial debate, they would not have even left the caves. Actually they would not have even made it to the caves from the trees. So its pretty hypocritical, to write, think and believe about how GMO crops are anti-natural and hence bad, while living in a house built by man using artificial engineering, growing crops which were selected by man for their value and not really natural by any means, using computers and mobiles which are not natural and still complain that GMO crops are bad because they are not natural.
Another problem with this natural-unnatural argument is that there are many poisons in the world which are natural from snake poisons to poisonous plants like fox glove, datura etc. Since the naturalistic argument against GMOs is that it is artificial and hence it is bad, doesn’t that mean we should only look to things which are natural? Does that mean that only naturally occurring goods should be used? Is that even a valid argument to make from iphones and PCs? Or for that matter, is there any reason to think natural substances like foxglove, datura , scorpion sting, snake poison can be consumed without any deleterious effect?
This type of argument has become distressingly common these days with massive propaganda for organic foods and against the use of fertilizers and pesticides. There is no evidence to suggest that organic food is better for health than ones produced by fertilizers and pesticides even though the organic food is supposed to be glorious natural phenomena. What’s worse these people associate any chemical with bad and throw out big chemical names around as if it is bad. One should remember how easy it is to be manipulated into believing something is bad by looking the Dihydrogen Monoxide hoax where an Australian member of Parliament recommended action against dihydrogen monoxide, which causes cancer, kills 100% of the people who consume it and is present in almost all of the food items consumed today, only for the dihydrogen monoxide to turn out to be chemical name of “water”.
The propaganda against the GMO crops and the allegations of poisoning the soil by fertilizers is not any different. The fertilizers used today have lead to an increase in yields and there is no evidence to link their use to any human ailment today. It is unscientific and retarded to say that since urea is bad for human health, using urea to raise crops is bad for human health as well. Plants take up urea as it has nitrogen and use them to fix nitrogen easier than they otherwise could and hence give a better and faster yield. By the time humans consume it, the urea inside plants is not really urea but rather proteins and other compounds where the nitrogen in urea is fixed. Since humans, at least the normal ones, are not going to consume loads and loads of soil per se and only eat the food grown on the soil, they are not going to be poisoned by the urea used to fertilize the plants. This is a huge topic in and of itself and is better left for its own article but the point is any such paranoia should be viewed with suspicion. This is not to say all chemicals are good either, as DDT used for insecticide had some negative effects but then again, it had proven health consequences and was subsequently banned giving valid argument. The use or restriction of use of the chemicals should be fact and research based and not based on the paranoid delusions driven by half-baked theories.
Another problem the typical right winger has with GMO crops is that it is is using genetic manipulations per se and hence it is bad. This is again a paranoid stand which is driven by ignorance more than anything else. The truth of the matter is, genetic engineering is not per se bad and has been in application outside GMO crops for a very long time now, including for mass public consumption without the public even knowing it and it is pathetic to even point this out. For instance, many people in India (and indeed the rest of the world ) don’t know that the life saving hormone insulin used today is actually produced by recombinant DNA technology. In the past the insulin came from dead pigs and cows but now, modern advances in genetics have made it so that pure insulin is manufactured from genetic engineering. The previous bovine or swine insulin had tremendous health risks and numerous problems including evnentual development of tolerance against it. But, by using recombinant DNA technology, the genes for insulin production are spliced into the DNA of bacteria and then such bacteria is allowed to grow in artificial medium and when the genes of insulin production gets translated, insulin is produced which is then harvested from bacterial cultures. So the average insulin user in the world is using bacterial products, from genetic engineering to stay alive. If we are to go by the paranoia against genetic engineering, we should ban recombinant human insulin as well because any kind of genetic engineering is bad.
The example of insulin is but only a small benefit of potential genetic engineering. Some of the most promising aspects of genetic engineering are cure for cancer and genetic diseases like haemophilia, Huntington’s chorea, Thalassemia etc. Curing such diseases involve repairing the DNA defects in genetic diseases with proper DNA so that the child does not have to die early due to lack of proper gene. One of the methods to do it is by the use of DNA agents for transferring DNA into the cells of the diseased infant. Since cells number in trillions, the feasible ways to do it is limited and one of the methods is to use viruses to infect the diseased cells and hence deliver the repaired DNA to them. The viruses in question are Adeno virus, which causes cancer in some cases, Retro virus- the same virus family which causes AIDS, bacteriophages which cause certain bacteria to be virulent etc. Should such genetic research be stopped because it uses such dangerous vectors, because the average spectator has no idea that the viruses are used only after their generic material for causing diseases are already spliced out and hence are harmless?
So the blind fear-mongering that genetic engineering per se is bad and causes destruction is just stupidity and ignorance passing off as caution. While it is true that nobody should be forced to use products they don’t like or want, it is dangerous to prevent people, who do want a new product, from getting it just because of the ignorance and arrogance of the group which doesn’t want to use it. The fear-mongering is sometimes so bad that they throw around unscientific accusations that the GMO crops will end up being mixed with normal crops. This is not scientifically accurate. There has been no demonstrable study which shows that it is possible. It is in some ways inconsistent with the leftist claim that GMO crops cannot be cultivated without the seeds given by corporations, because if the GMO crops can’t grow by themselves, how are they going to pollinate and pollute normal crops? So some people are going to always oppose GMO clutching to one of the sides of this argument-if GMO seeds are not recultivable they would cite that corporations are exploiting farmers. On the other hand, if firms allow regermination of seeds, they will cry about how GMO crops are cross-pollinating other normal crops. As you can see, you can never win an argument against such people who want to win in both cases.
Also, another very important aspect which people have almost missed in the GMO debate is the progress on genetic research. Profits from GMO industry will feed back again into general genetic research and thus improving the whole field over time. This would help in finding cures for many of the currently untreatable diseases. By saying no to GMO we are not only restricting access of technology to poor farmers, who might have no problem in adopting it, but are also jeopardizing future research on very important issues. The Bible retards can continue blocking “Stem cell” and other genetic research citing creationism but this should not stop the rational Indians to not understand the benefits of this technology.
Many Indians don’t know that India has the largest area under cultivation for any country in the world(see above table), while also having the largest time window for cultivation but its food production does not reflect this abundance. The biggest reason for low per hectare yields of Indian agriculture is the lack of farm modernity. Since most farmers are marginal in India and have very small land holdings, their ability to use high yield techniques is very limited since many modern techniques have high initial cost associated with them. So the introduction of GMO crops can help offset at least some of the negatives with Indian agriculture today. Some GMO crops can be genetically modified to use less water and withstand droughts which can help in expanding the areas under cultivation in India, to even places which would otherwise be non-cultivable. GMO crops can be genetically engineered to produce Vitamin A or other such micro-nutrients within them which can help in preventing vitamin deficiency and the resulting blindnesses in poor Indian children. When the country is malnourished to the tune of 50%, it is a cruel joke to prevent potential technologies which would increase the yield and quality of agriculture. If the uninformed middle class and top elites and scaremongering lunatics on the left are so threatened by things they don’t know, they are free to not adopt GMO crops and can actively avoid them by demanding to label GMO products explicitly like the current green vegetarian mark on food packets. But they should stop burdening the already impoverished, malnourished poor children of India, who would stand to benefit immensely from food fortification and better quality food produced by GMO crops, just for the sake of their ideology and paranoia.
The recent decision by the Government to allow GMO crops to be manufactured and researched in India has predictably angered the brainless leftist communist zombies in the country. The left opposes GMO under the garb of opposing corporatisation of the farming industry in the west and the socialist zombies in India, lacking the brain of their own as usual, have copied the western template to build momentum against GMO here in India. However, it is frightening to see that even the right wing Indians, who are usually more rational and make informed choices, also seem to have taken up and internalised the propaganda against GMO crops and oppose it out of paranoia against the western products and labelled GMO as part of Videshi colonisation. The overwhelming majority of the materials on the internet is against the use of GMO crops and is usually based on half-educated, paranoid and pseudo-scientific drivel with no basis of reality whatsoever. Read about some of the common misconceptions about GMO here.
Why the left opposes GMO?
The most important reason the communist zombies oppose the introduction of GMO crops is that it is just another form of foreign imperialism and as per their intellectual leanings, any form of foreign investment, except those that directly fund the communist anti-development elements in the country like Naxals, anti-Kudandkulam protesters, anti-Narmada Dam protesters etc, is bad for the country whether or not such position reflects reality. Of course, much like any socialist stance on pretty much any topic, this does not reflect reality and one can clearly see the lies when logically analysing the issue.
Next and equally baseless allegation that the left makes against GMO is that it will lead to destruction of alternative non-GMO crops and GMO corporations will monopolize the crop and seed market. This is again far removed from reality because the ultimate decision on what seed to use is again going to lie with the farmers. This myth is so prevalent today that it goes completely unchallenged in most TV debates and commentaries on this issue. But this is simply not true as having IPR does not mean people are forced to use a product if it is not beneficial. No matter how many GMO crops are introduced into the market, the ultimate decision on whether or not to use them is going to be with farmers and not the corporate heads of the GMO crops. No one has the power to force GMO crops on the farmers as Indian markets are still fairly free and the government democratic and neither is run by reality denying socialist zombies to force farmers into using the crops they really don’t want to grow themselves. Yes, advertisements can entice farmers to adopt a new technology but they won’t stick with the new technology unless it benefits them more compared to the older variety of crops.
So how will it work on the ground? If the farmers in India find that the extra yields from GMO crops are very good and give high profits clearly offsetting the extra initial down payment in the form of buying GMO seeds, then they will plant GMO crops in larger numbers next crop cycle and the word of mouth would result in even larger numbers of farmers adopting GMO crops to increase their yields. If the GMO crops prove to be nothing but hot air and do not lead to increase in yield to justify the higher cost of GMO seeds, then the farmers would just stop buying the high cost seeds and go back to the traditional seeds for cultivation, because they are smart and have a brain unlike the socialist zombies who lack common sense. So, the destruction of alternate and better non-GMO varieties by GMO crops hardly makes any sense.
As such, without any government or socialist intervention, the GMO crops would find their place in the society and market through simple profit and loss arithmetic. The best example for such adoption is Gujarat. When rest of India decided to say no to BT cotton, ably brainwashed by the anti-GMO activists about the evils of corporate BT seeds, the then Gujarat government under the then CM and current PM Modi openly adopted BT cotton. It was one of the reasons why a semi-desert state like Gujarat was so successful in out producing Maharashtra, the traditional leader in cotton production.
The worst allegation by the communist intellectuals against GMO crops is that it is anti-poor. This is particularly pathetic allegation to make because by denying a chance to cultivate GMO crops, which have the potential to even be engineered to fight poor rainfall and poor irrigation, the leftists deny the right of poor farmers to cultivate right crop varieties that suit their climatic and soil condition to maximise their profits. It is disgusting to see that the same fake intellectuals go on mainstream TV and claim as champions of farmers after denying their right to modern technology in the name of opposing corporations. Normal people should ask themselves is allowing poor farmers to starve and condemning them to perpetual poverty by denying them access to modern technology , one of which is GMO crops, really a good thing for India and poor Indian farmers, all because of the buzzword of anti-corporatisation created by the braindead communist elite?
Another claim against GMO crops is that these crops come with associated intellectual property rights(IPR)and will be bad for Indian farmers and industry. One can look at the evidence from past where Indian markets allowed foreign players to operate and see if this statement holds any water. For example, when motor bikes were introduced in India by Suzuki, Kawasaki, Honda etc, did it lead to monopoly by any of them? Now the bike industry is filled with Indian manufacturers like TVS, Bajaj motors, Hero as well and they have taken a sizeable share of the market and eliminated the threat of any western monopoly. Or take the case of mobile phones in the Indian market. When the smart phones were introduced in Indian market, the only manufacturers of them were Korean and Japanese companies and one or two American companies but today Micromax has risen up as a valid competitor to these foreign companies, along with several other desi alternatives, again crushing the argument that opening of the market to foreign corporations will lead to monopoly. Or take the case of TV sets some 20 years back before liberalisation of Indian markets. The inky TV sets in India manufactured by Solitaire were awful in quality. Compare how liberalising the markets in the consumer goods led to widespread fall in price of TV sets along with less monopoly and better quality available for the average Indian consumer.
The important point to note here is that none of the Indian companies like Hero, Bajaj, Mocromax, Dish TV etc would have been able to become world class like they are now without actually exposing them to open market and global economy and competition. Another very important example to note is the effect that open markets have had on Indian Pharma industry and how it has grown so big that it is giving American companies nightmares on just hearing the world Indian Pharma, which was not possible before 1991. The same will be the case with GMO crops too, and opening the markets to them will help tremendously in creation of Swadesi GMO corporations and if India plays its cards right, India will become an unquestioned leader of the GMO market in the future, specially given the fact that many ideological stunted clowns around the world have taken an opposition to GMO based on paranoia and hence Indians will face little competition whatsoever in the next big future of the agriculture industry.
The same IPR argument is sometimes twisted by quoting the market power of evil Monsanto which will crush the poor farmers due to high prices it will charge for GMO seeds. Suddenly with the mention of Monsanto, the leftists manage to divert the argument from market based solution to fight against one evil capitalist firm called Monsanto. But market power depends on how open the field is for competition. Given above examples, there is no reason to believe that Indian firms cannot compete with foreigners given that the GMO industry is still in nascent stage and has to see a lot of development. The Pharma industry again serves a good example on how India can move ahead on GMO policy. GoI defied IPR on crucial drugs and helped Indian firms to manufacture cheap generics. The same template can be applied to GMO during early phases till Indian firms grow enough to challenge the western competitors and can produce cheap varieties suited for Indian markets. There is no reason to believe that with a well developed and competitive indigenous GMO market, Indian farmers would not be able to get a better deal than they are getting currently.
a1
Source: GM plants-Questions and answers, The Royal Society
Many Indians don’t know that India has the largest area under cultivation for any country in the world(see above table), while also having the largest time window for cultivation but its food production does not reflect this abundance. The biggest reason for low per hectare yields of Indian agriculture is the lack of farm modernity. Since most farmers are marginal in India and have very small land holdings, their ability to use high yield techniques is very limited since many modern techniques have high initial cost associated with them. So the introduction of GMO crops can help offset at least some of the negatives with Indian agriculture today. Some GMO crops can be genetically modified to use less water and withstand droughts which can help in expanding the areas under cultivation in India, to even places which would otherwise be non-cultivable. GMO crops can be genetically engineered to produce Vitamin A or other such micro-nutrients within them which can help in preventing vitamin deficiency and the resulting blindnesses in poor Indian children. When the country is malnourished to the tune of 50%, it is a cruel joke to prevent potential technologies which would increase the yield and quality of agriculture. If the uninformed middle class and top elites and scaremongering lunatics on the left are so threatened by things they don’t know, they are free to not adopt GMO crops and can actively avoid them by demanding to label GMO products explicitly like the current green vegetarian mark on food packets. But they should stop burdening the already impoverished, malnourished poor children of India, who would stand to benefit immensely from food fortification and better quality food produced by GMO crops, just for the sake of their ideology and paranoia.
The next article in this series will counter the anti-GMO propaganda digested by those on the Indian Right.
Many Hindus on the right wing spectrum often blame the socialists and Marxists in India for being coolies of Russians and Soviet Union but for some reason they remain oblivious to the role played by west in creating and destabilising India using its coolies here and the Indian Americans. Has anyone wondered why most of the destructive memes which make it to Indian discourse like liberalism, secularism, feminism, MRA etc have their origin in the west?
The truth is, most of the destructive politics of India are actually supported by the west and not Russia alone as many American fanboys would like Hindus to believe. In fact, almost all the daughters and sons of the leaders of Communist parties and Congress do their studies and have properties outside India. And unsurprisingly they all choose US or western Europe rather than their darling Russia for these activities because they know deep down how pathetic a socialist styled government and economy like Russia really looks like.
Many Indian Americans carefully support US agenda rather than India and actively help in maligning India’s image and sabotaging its interest. Most of the destructive ideologies have a strong backing in the west from the Indian Americans, who have completely internalized the leftist rhetoric themselves. For instance, Hindu Americans overwhelmingly support the leftists, who are the biggest anti-India force in the US. They are far more likely to identify with left wing politics than any other Asian demographics even though they form the richest immigrant group in US. They are also more than happy to jump on the bandwagon of the anti-white men gang in the west without thinking twice even though their position as being a better off group compared to whites would make their stance very hypocritical and ironic.
They are also big supporters of the feminist movement in the USA. Without any context they copy the same template of blaming white men in the west and use it in India to blame Hindu upper caste men especially Brahmins and cry about upper caste male privilege. But unlike the western whites who oppressed rest of the world during the colonial era, Hindu men never had any power in their own country for the past 200 years. It is intellectual dishonesty to apply the same model to them. Even their feminist meme in India is no different and is just a carbon copy of the ideology developed by their intellectually stunted sisters in the west.
The recent case of support for the various land lease programs for the USA by these coolies should be another issue which should raise red flags for any true Hindu patriot and the extend to which the infestation by brown coolies run inside Indian political space. These people shamelessly push the western narrative and US agenda over India. Apparently, they don’t seem to see that the biggest supporter of Pakistan is still the USA and that USA is the reason India hasn’t punished Pakistan till today. Any rational Hindu should see this as a red flag when they see Pakistan being used as condom by the Americans and they still peddle that India become a client state of the US citing some grand strategy. Of course, while it is prudent to use US for getting high tech and weaponry if it is in our advantage, it should not come at the cost of autonomy and sovereignty as is the case with many policies which these coolies advocate.
Most of the right wing intelligentsia today seem to be reformed former white coolies now coming off as turncoats. The list is long. While these people at least claim to have reformed, the coolies working for New York Times and Washington Post keep peddling the western narratives for their jobs and bread. These people pimp their motherland and their own community for the bread crumbs their white masters throw at them and for advancing quickly in their careers. They bark when their masters ask them to bark and bite when asked to bite without using their own brain. While legitimate criticism should be welcomed from any person, agenda driven nonsense to break India should not be tolerated and almost all of these vile pimps do nothing more than useless propaganda.
For instance, the coverage of rapes in India by both the Indian American coolies writing for left wing western media like New York Times and Guardian and the evangelist right wing western media like Washington Post should give ample evidence on the nature of their bias and reporting. If indeed the western filth and their brown coolies are really interested in saving women from rapes, should they not look at their own homes and societies where the rapes are 1000% more than India in per capita terms? The truth is that they are just playing their part of being brown coolies pushing the agenda of their white masters.
These brown coolies care so much about their careers and fame that they can sell their culture and support British even for glorifying poverty in movies. They wholeheartedly support such initiatives rather than pointing out the irony and hypocrisy of British, who are the very cause of this poverty in India. Look at how they celebrated a third grade film like Slumdog millionaire where it caricatured Indians as rapist, casteist, racist and fascists and how it took a western program like ‘Who wants to be a millionaire’ to save the native poverty ridden unwashed Indian boy from slums.
While Non-Aligned Movement(NAM) was a big failure and India ended up embracing USSR on most policies, this time India should not fall into the same trap. The brown coolies want India to be a side-kick of US, which should be avoided at all costs. The way forward is to give issue based support and milk the system rather than fall for irrational love for any country. This would only be possible when India stops wholesale import of destructive western ideologies sold under the garb of modernity. India and Indians need their own set of policies based on what’s good and suitable for them, not what is prescribed for them by the decaying, dying, single mother ridden putrid west. India should be the head of its own Indosphere like how it was 1000 years back, not a client of the American thugs like the brown coolies are advocating now.
The myth of “Peaceful Indian Muslim” is carefully nurtured and sustained by the fake secularism practised in India. Whenever there is an attempt by anyone to uncover this veil, there are liberals who come up with fancy theories like Islamophobia to prevent the enlightenment of Muslim masses. What can be more sad than even a well-read, intelligent person feeling that telling this truth amounts to “making Muslims feel persecuted.” Well, if a person holds wrong ideas he needs to be confronted one day or the other. Would you also say that arresting rapists is incorrect because it amounts to singling them out? As a civilized society there is a red line that no one is allowed to cross. Gloating over the massacre of kafirs is not a civilized idea to espouse, and people need to confront those who do it instead of finding excuses.
Unless Indian history textbooks tell their students about the atrocities perpetuated by Muslims on Dharmics, they will continue to look at that atrocious period as their “glorious past” — and the more they romanticize it, the more difficult they will find it to come to terms with contemporary realities. It is THIS dissonance which leads to terrorism. The killing of Hindus by Muslim invaders was not a glorious act and those who romanticize it are not civilized people.
So how to fight against this ideological terrorism? The answer is education — and not just school education but political education of the masses. The idea should be propagated on all information channels until it becomes common parlance. The reason Muslims take to terrorism is because they feel they lived a glorious past where they could kill Hindus, in contrast to the lacklustre life they are living now where they have to abide by the rules of the land instead of being rulers. Unless there is a concerted effort to challenge and defeat this idea, India will always face an existential threat from Muslims. Admission of Muslim atrocities should become the mainstream quintessential Indian thought. There are so many museums in Germany and Japan depicting the atrocities committed by their ancestors on innocent people. Every year Hollywood comes out with half a dozen movies showing how bad the Holocaust was. This is the template that India should follow. There should be museums depicting the atrocities instead of making Bollywood movies and books that eulogize Akbar and Tipu Sultan.
What ordinary Indians want is not something extraordinary. They simply want closure similar to the one that Germans and Japanese got when they admitted their mistakes. You can sing a thousand songs in the praise of moderate Indian Muslims, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating.
The very fact that Hindus aren’t allowed to claim Ram Mandir is a testimony to the fact that Indian Muslims don’t adhere to a more evolved and tolerant form of Islam. Ram Janmabhoomi is to Hindus what Mecca is to Muslims — there can be no negotiation on this. Hindus have already forgotten the demolition of 40,000 temples by Muslims, but if they cannot budge on even one temple then there is no chance for reconciliation. If a case is being made that Indian Muslims are more reconciliatory in nature, where is the evidence?
Celebrating that Indian Muslims are better than the rest of their ilk is a relative and subjective benchmark. From time to time we must ask ourselves whether this “relatively good” is “good enough.” A woman journalist in Mumbai was hounded into exile by the same peaceful Muslims for reposting the Charlie Hebdo cartoon while reporting about it. Now, this act might be committed by a group of 5,000 people but the thought process is not an outlier. Same goes for the thousands — 15,000 people — who thronged the funeral of their “martyr” Yakoob Memon.
The deeper you go into the rabbit hole of Muslim extremist nexus, sooner or later you will realize that it is mainstream Islam — not a fringe, not a sect, not a twisted individual — but mainstream Islam which is responsible for all problems. One can draw artificial lines to separate them into moderates and extremists virtually speaking, but the crux of the matter is that until you are willing to admit that an ideology which at its core preaches that “everyone who disagrees with us is an enemy,” this problem will never be solved.
Like the Afghan intel chief Amarullah Saleh once said: “You will keep killing the guys in the outer circle for years and patting yourself on the back but the problem won’t be solved until you have the resolve to confront the guys in the inner circle who are running the show.” He was taunting the US for killing low-level commanders in Afghanistan but not confronting Saudi Arabia. Fake seculars are doing the same by drawing a dichotomy between gun-wielding terrorists and non-gun-wielding “peaceful chaps.” Terrorism is not about weapons — it is about ideology.
Being ruthless and killing people is not the recommended path. It is actually the “head in the sand” syndrome of fake liberals which will lead India into a civil war by not acknowledging the problem. A better way is to give closure on the atrocity issue. Include lessons of anti-Hindu atrocities in history books so that both Hindus and Muslims become aware of it and have a sense of national context instead of building their own personal victimhood narratives. Muslims claim that the Babri incident was wrong, but don’t want to concede that their co-religionist invaders captured and destroyed Hindu temples. This intellectual subversion is unacceptable. There is a need to have a frank discussion where people can put everything on the table so that everyone knows each other’s history and empathizes with the other before pointing fingers.
The more the rights of Hindus the state curtails, the more Hindu anger it will fuel — the eruption of which will lead to incidents of violence, which will lead to further radicalization and polarization on both sides. The constitution mentions secularism; it is about time that Hindus taste it too. Hindus have only been smelling it from afar while Muslims relished the entire cake of secularism.
To put it in short: India needs to take concrete steps to trash the Hindu narrative and Muslim narrative and adopt a common and reconciliatory national narrative which is acceptable to both parties — only then can people find closure and achieve peace. Otherwise these issues will keep flaring up.
There is a beautiful thesis about the fundamental difference between India and Pakistan which can be summarized in one line: “the story of Pakistan is the story of the state of Pakistan, and the story of India is the story of the people of India.” It holds true for the modus operandi of all Muslim states. The moment its citizens ask for some human rights or even basic things like water and schools, the state says “the nation is under threat and you are asking for things? You are not a true Muslim!” That is how Muslim states keep the dreams of their population suppressed. The very definition of a “true Muslim” has been fundamentally crafted in such a way that the individual is supposed to selflessly sacrifice for the survival of the Ummah dream — and because of this feudal definition, the individual will never have any rights for himself. This feudal system will eventually collapse, no doubt about it. But will the Indian state ever tell this real story to Indian Muslims and aid them in bursting this bubble?
It is unfortunate that in India important news on economics are usually hidden deep inside the regular newspapers and crucial laws are passed without much debate. One of the recent such news was the decision of Modi government to increase the minimum wage for contract workers to Rs. 10,000.
The article criticizes the government for not clearly explaining how the Rs 10,000 figure was determined and for invoking the Supreme Court as justification for economic policy.
The case against minimum wages goes as follows
1) Minimum wages reduce employment among unskilled workers
2) Therefore minimum wages hurt people whom it is actually supposed to help
In a surplus labour economy like India, when government imposes laws like minimum wage it makes firms less competitive by increasing their wage bill.
The article compares apparel wages in India and Bangladesh, arguing that higher labour costs have contributed to Bangladesh’s stronger export performance.
It argues that minimum wage laws help current job holders but reduce entry-level employment and discourage the formation of new firms.
The article cites research by Maloney and Mendez on Colombia, claiming that employment declined most sharply among workers earning below the minimum wage, while higher-paid workers were also affected when firms closed.
Given this evidence, the article argues that India should avoid imposing a uniform wage floor that may push workers into unemployment or into the informal sector.
How to draw maritime boundaries is as much a long standing legal battle on paper as it is in real water and has an interesting history. I’ll give you the gist of the current issues especially in the wake of a rising China and its growing list of maritime disputes.
As per international law, every nation can claim territorial water and an Exclusive Economic Zone. There is a legal provision that allows a country to have its EEZ extended by making a formal application to the international body, which in turn recognizes it as such.
In case of India, we have territorial waters plus a 200-mile EEZ and applied for an extended economic zone. We continue to treat that total area as our de facto zone of control, which the US disagrees with and deliberately runs warships through just to make a point.
Legally, the US has the right to challenge India in extended waters since an extended economic zone is not the same as territorial waters and it cannot be considered an intrusion or an act of war. But legality is not the only relevant benchmark because the current global order derives its legality from laws written by victors of the Second World War.
There are many nuances and technicalities within these guidelines, including submerged continental reefs and archipelago baselines. Because ocean beds are uneven and the dichotomy between land and sea is not always well defined, maritime borders are often disputed.
The same game is being played out in the South China Sea where China is treating the continental shelf as de facto land and then extending their argument from there to claim full sovereignty over disputed areas. Since claims over territorial waters extend themselves into Air Defence Identification Zone protocols, it impacts the control of airspace as well.
The US allowed a large overlapping claim to arise between China and Japan by encouraging Japan to redefine territorial claims over Senkaku Islands. The article argues that this provoked China to open another front in the South China Sea.
Essentially all territorial water disputes until now followed the theme of “this land belongs to us therefore the adjacent waters belong to us”. The paradigm shift that China has brought to this equation is: this water belongs to us, therefore the land belongs to us, therefore more water belongs to us.
Cutting long story short, ‘Freedom of Navigation’ is to capitalism what ‘Freedom of Religion’ is to Christianity. The former is meant to extend western capitalist hegemony and the latter is meant to extend Christian hegemony.
This ‘challenging’ business has got more to do with geopolitics than legality. The framework for these laws was laid when the US was a rising global power, and the US weakened and subverted international forums once it became the apex power. Now that the world is moving from a unipolar to a multipolar one, the US is again strengthening these laws to make it difficult for new powers to rise.
Consider the ranges and speeds of missiles these days: 200 miles is only a stone’s throw away. Yet, a warship parked just beyond this distance is technically considered to be in international waters, disregarding the fact that it can hit vital targets in seconds. This is gunboat diplomacy.
Maritime security, or security and geopolitics in general, has always been given step-motherly treatment by Indian politicians, despite the fact that the fate of our civilization hangs from it. No other civilization shuns their responsibilities like we do. In light of all the vultures who have an eye on India’s maritime interests, let’s Shun No Varuna, or as the Navy likes to say it: शन्नो वरुणः.
It’s not uncommon to find agitated Hindu nationalists lamenting their government’s stance on all the conflicts that Israel finds itself in. Albeit, very little of this love is based on cold hard strategic thinking and most of it is based on emotional anecdotes. “Iseraal halped India when Kargil dood, read histry bro”, they say. So, let’s do just that.
We aren’t morally beholden to tow the Israeli line on any policy issue out of gratitude for weapons they sell to us, for which we pay the full price. We are a sovereign nation and do what’s best for us. Besides, Jews aren’t some otherworldly saints who have descended upon humanity to talk about marshmallows and bunnies. The Jews are no less hostile to Dharmics than other Abrahamics.
Before we even begin dismantling the security narrative built around Israel being best friend of India(actually Hindus), the bleeding heart Hindus will learn a lot by looking at the famous names of Jews who are bent upon destroying Hinduism from inside. Since they lie at the fountainhead of monotheism, it is no surprise that Jews fill the rank and files of breaking India forces and provide the intellectual armour against Hindu traditions and practices.The Jews believe that they are chosen people and share the same hatred for pagan Hindus like the latter monotheistic derivatives of Christianity and Islam.
Many Hindu nationalists become very attached to Israel for no reason at all and seem to defend Jews no matter what. They seem to have internalized the propaganda by the leading Jewish sympathisers in India like Subramanian Swamy and other US fanboys as if Jews are eternal friends of Hindus. But is there any evidence to suggest that Jews are friends of Hindus? Any empirical analysis around the subject shows no evidence for the same. In fact, if anything Jews have been as negative to Hindus and India as their Abrahamic cousins – Muslims and Christians. Israeli cafe in India said to only serve white customers
Many Hindus think that since Jews don’t evangelize like the other Abrahamics and because they have suffered under Christians and Muslims just like Hindus, they have an emotional attachment to Jews. This is stupid logic, since by the same logic, British and Mughals fought with each other and hence only a mad man can think that either of them were allies of Hindus. In fact, any unbiased look at evidence of Jewish behaviour against Hindus will show the same negative impact of Jews on Hindus just like their Abrahamic cousins. For instance, almost all of the Hinduphobic Indology, which lays the ideological foundation for most of the Breaking India forces have Jews at their heart. One just has to look at the venom against Hindus and Hinduism spread by Wendy Doninger, Christopher Minkowski, Yigal Bronner or the attempts by Andrey Truschke to white wash the atrocities of Aurangzeb as if it never happened. Imagine the outrage it will cause if a Hindu scholar of Jewish studies released a book saying Hitler never killed Jews and how he is misunderstood. But the point many Hindus miss here is that this is because of the basic polytheism of Hindus vs the monotheism of the Abrahamics, in which Jews lie at the core. Even the Israeli help for our country wasn’t really help but just mutual interest in containing the Islamic enemies which both have and for business reasons and not direct friendship. This is no different than Christian Byzantine empire helping the Islamic forces in Arabia to take out the pagan Persian empire. If not for the existential threat Israel faces from Muslims countries in its neighbourhood, it actually has no reason to befriend India and Hindus other than for business. So it is important for Hindus to drop this unusual and irrational and largely undeserved love they have for Jews and look at the situation from a proper geopolitical perspective and decide objectively the best course of action for Hindus and India.
Given this background, now lets try to understand Modi decided to not visit Israel. This is done with great forethought, not out of some Nehruvian idea of a hipster worldview. Modi was scheduled to visit Israel, making him the first Indian PM, but then suddenly India downgraded the level of diplomatic engagement from PM to MEA, now Sushma Swaraj is going. This change was a result of some hard thinking by India’s security cabinet. It is in our interest that Israel remain under some kind of existential threat from other nations, so that India can retain an elevated position of importance in the eyes of Israel. An Israel that is under no pressure has no obligation to play nice with India, and they might as well start blackmailing us with threats of selling weapons technology to Pakistan, like Russia and France does. The fact that Israel remains under siege impedes them from taking any measures that might alienate India. This status quo favours us.
Israel needs India because the constantly looming threat of India keeps Pakistan from forging any meaningful military alliance with Israel’s enemy, Turkey. It is this threat that makes Israel less likely to double cross us. If the threat from Turkey didn’t exist, Israel would be blackmailing us right now. It is in our interest that the Palestine conflict keeps boiling with no resolution in sight. We encourage both sides (Israel and OPEC) to indulge in a competitive bidding to stay in the good books of India since India is a big strategic buyer for both of them. We maintain an ambiguous stance on Palestine so that both Israel and OPEC keep offering us their respective strategic resources (weapons and oil) at competitive rates in exchange for our diplomatic support for their respective causes in the international forums. If the Palestine conflict is solved, then Israel has nothing to stop it from playing a wider global role and there is a fear that they might start playing the same game that the US plays with us vis-a-vis weapons sales to Pakistan.
Even our so called friend Russia threatened to sell weapons to Pakistan when the recent talks didn’t go as planned and our all weather friend Israel wouldn’t mind even one bit to carry out a false flag terrorist attack in India to ignite a war between India and Pakistan in the hope of selling weapons to India or to keep Pakistan army busy with India while Israel fights a war with Turkey.
That is what makes the situation volatile for us. There should be absolutely no doubt that when Israel decides to go to war with Turkey (or Iran), it will try to provoke a war between India and Pakistan to keep Pakistan engaged in a regional war with India and prevent Pakistan from entering a war to support Turkey (or to prevent India from helping Iran). Last time when Israel was attacked by Arab forces, Pakistani pilots were all over Israeli airspace and shooting them down.
An Israel under siege is good for India. Therefore it is in our interest to shrewdly keep the Palestine pot boiling by supporting both sides as and when it is expedient upon us.
Israeli presence in the Middle East even (especially) with the Palestine turmoil helps our overall security environment. The Palestine issue is a moral flashpoint for Sunni nations like Turkey. If the Palestine issue didn’t exist, Turkey and Israel would have no casus-belli to antagonize each other. If the looming existential threat of a large scale war with Israel didn’t exist, Turkey wouldn’t seek broader military ties with Pakistan and subsequently Israel wouldn’t share military knowhow with India to keep Pakistan tied down. This organic symbiotic relationship makes sure that Israel remains under our fold without having to bribe them or honeytrap them. If the Palestine issue is solved, we lose the favorable status quo and Israel might then start meddling in our affairs to make military sales. They played a devastating role during the LTTE period as well. We can’t guarantee that global security environment wouldn’t deteriorate to those incredible lows again. When that happens, it would be hard to rely exclusively on our economic relationship as a weapons buyer to fend off Israel without having our finger on the Palestine issue. The potential threat of India siding with Turkey on the Palestine issue would amply deter Israel if the security scene in our backyard worsens. For us to be able to exercise that option, the Palestine issue needs to be kept alive.
Let the conflict rage, it is the Muslims who are dying in disproportionate numbers anyway. Besides, what real costs do we incur by simply providing moral and diplomatic support? None. This is a cheap investment with very high returns for us. It would be stupid to give up the Palestinian cause for some cheap sense of right wing thrill.
Besides, Israel is no saint either. Israel itself has switched loyalties multiple times in the past few decades. Now many people know that Israel used to be good friends with Iran up until the 70’s. They even had a joint weapons development program called Project Flower. Guess what the objectives of the program were? To counter Indian nuclear program. Yes, you heard it right.
Israel took Irani oil, money, gave them old weapon and passed details to Iraq/US who later attacked Iran. Iran helps arm Palestine as a payback for Israel backstabbing them for nuclear project. Israel is no saint. It’s not our fight. One also needs to take a look at how Israel’s relations with their other allies have progressed after Israel’s objectives were served. France and Israel were the best of the friends. It is even rumoured (well known) that it was France which supplied nuclear technology and centrifuge technology to Israel in early 60’s and where does Israel-France relation stand today when Israel doesn’t need France any more? Incidentally Israel, France and Britain had made common cause during the Suez Crisis, which was rolled back by US military intervention against the alliance and Israel’s relation with all the involved parties is fraught with distrust and animosity today, including the US. India would face the same fate if we wear our hearts on our sleeve.
Israel today is close allies with Saudi Arabia, which as we all know isn’t exactly India’s best buddy. That has never deterred Israel from cultivating deep military and intelligence ties with the Saudi kingdom, without feeling guilty of offending India. But when India allies itself with Iran to look after its own interests, then it offends the Zionists?
Say what you may about Arab nations, one cannot deny the fact that India gets upwards of 50 Billion USD in remittances from our expats living there. Not to mention the safety and security of the expats themselves, all ~8 million of them, a confrontation with either the Arab states or Iran is not in India’s best interest and yet, Israel wouldn’t bat an eye lid to draw India into a conflict if it serves their interest. They won’t hesitate from tying up with Pakistan and use their soil to wage a covert war against Iran if their revenues from weapon sales to India take a nose dive. There is also the possibility of a greater Israel-Saudi-Pakistan alliance against Iran, which would isolate India and put all our interests at risk, so one needs to think it through before blindly supporting Israel’s position on Palestine simply to spite Indian Muslims in online debates. The diplomatic support India gives to the already dead Palestinian cause is simply flowery lip service and does not require India to commit any of its resources nor does it cost anything. The dividends that it yields in return, in terms of co-operation from Arab states and Iran alike are massive.
So all the bleeding heart Hindus who feel the compulsive obligation to speak up on behalf of Israel in discussions and rename their online profiles into Hindu Zionists should think t̶w̶i̶c̶e̶, or rather just once, before aligning themselves with the star of David. India needs to take strategic decisions in cold blood without any regard for misplaced emotions like “Hindu-Jew Bhai Bhai”.
Schrodinger’s cat- the classic thought experiment in Physics about indeterminacy of cat being alive or dead is being played out in reality in Indian intellectual space on everyday level and the mental gymnastics displayed by some of the so called public intellectuals is of such Olympic quality that one is confused whether they are really intellectuals or not. If Indian gymnasts had shown this flexibility instead of these intellectuals, India would have definitely topped the Olympics table.
The problem is that there are far more Nehruvian and Marxist zombies masquerading as intellectuals than there are real intellectuals. For every true intellectual, the media clique has manufactured many more fake intellectuals to serve their own goals. For eg. Rana Ayub and her other media friends are hardly intellectual but they are part of a well oiled oligarchic ecosystem which ‘real intellectuals’ are beneficiaries of.
People have been consciously reticent to name names when it comes to Islamic terrorism, in a country which has been so severely plagued by it but one Dadri happens and it doesn’t take time for terms like Hindu Taliban to fly off from Marxist pie-holes while the ‘intellectual’ jury is still out on whether using the term Muslim Taliban is appropriate or not.
The scarcity of intellectuals on the left has reached to such glorious level that they now have to borrow fascist Advani to make arguments in defence of the cottage industry of Marxist liberalism in India.
If you aren’t convinced that the intellectual class of India has been a dishonest lot, if not incompetent, you only need to contemplate why, despite it having been explicitly mentioned in the constitution that the nation shall strive for national integration and a uniform civil code, not a single intellectual in the history of India has spoken up for its implementation?
The fact is that people have figured out that the holy grail of intellectualism in India is to abuse the majority community since it is the non-violent of the lot, and win laurels for themselves.
If a billion Hindus have learnt to cultivate the thick skin to digest labels like Hindu Taliban for something they were not culpable for, in the interest of FoE, isn’t it damning that these self-professed Marxist intellectuals who wear FoE on their sleeves can’t grow out of their persecution complex and learn to take some well deserved criticism?
सदियों की ठंढी-बुझी राख सुगबुगा उठी, मिट्टी सोने का ताज पहन इठलाती है; दो राह,समय के रथ का घर्घर-नाद सुनो, सिंहासन खाली करो कि जनता आती है।
