[diabloo]

Nobody blames British for ruling India.

In fact after 12th century onwards northern & central parts of India (it wasn't 'India' - it just a region) was ruled by Afghans, then Turks and later British.

The difference was, while Afghans & Turks settled in India, British didn't. This proved a tragedy from the point of view of development of India as a country.

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Yep. diabloo is right: India was very, very rich before the brits turned up.

What else do you think they came for?

[RedMM340]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Yep. diabloo is right: India was very, very rich before the brits turned up.

What else do you think they came for?

I'm not so sure about how India's wealth was distributed, and my guess (open to correction, of course) is that there was a pretty small wealthy class that was very, very wealthy.

I'm also open to the idea that, if there was a gift that Britain gave to india, it was the gift of unity itself --- and look how they gave it; in a cack-handed way that cost the lives of, what, millions? Frankly, I'm surprised sometimes that you guys ever gave us guys visas ever again, let alone made some of us very welcome.

It seems, too, though this is something I've only just begun to learn about, that the caste system even, in its inhuman and inflexible form that suits some, especially some politicians, was engineered by the Brits.

Just one thing, Diabloo...Not so sure about this. The East India Company did not arrive with an army, that came later; it arrived as businessmen who came to trade, and who did they trade with? form alliances with? Your Kings and princes, who lost out.

That is something I want India never to forget, especially when dealing with corporate America and 'globalisation' (which actually means American colonialism). USA can make the Brits of 200 years ago look like a bunch of bumbling amateurs; it won't be content with sucking the blood out of India; it'll grind the bones!

Well, I'm joining the ranting game now! But hey, I really was shocked to read, a few months ago, that kids are leaving Indian schools now believing that British rule was good for India. No! No! No!


Agentsmith2. Oh dear, you came here from the Singur thread, where there is some people seem to be expressing somewhat oppressive political ideas. It's a good forum, really!

Point... Much of the world considers "a woman's right to choice", ie her right to abort a pregnancy, to be an absolute right.

So what about the personal right to abort a pregnancy because it is a girl?

I have to admit that, whilst I support the Indian law of not disclosing the sex of an unborn child, I cannot reconcile this with the above right.

This skewing is something that, as per the above, certain Indian communities seem to be doing very well for themselves.

Thad,

First of all, I really appreciate your candor as a Brit. Believe me that I am not a Brit or Western nation basher. But as a proud Indian, I want to be fair to myself and Indian history.

A agree that the distribution of wealth prior to the British was not ideal. But this is a problem that all societies face. Just look how uneven the current state of affairs is in the U.S.

The caste system, dowry, sati, etc., were magnified and positioned as evidence of the evils of hindu society and proof that Hinduism is an demonic institution. This was just another example of psych ops by the Brits to convince the Hindustanis that their British masters were there to save them. Max Muller was a Brit employee who mis-interpreted Hindu scripture to mislead and mis-inform Indians about their past glory and achievements.

The same goes for the 2 nation theory. This was a British masterstroke to further divide India along religious lines.

As far as abortion rights go, the last thing needed in this country is the ridiculous debate in western (read christian) countries about pro choice or pro life. It is a woman's choice. No individual or government or religious institution should have any say in the matter, thus deriving political mileage from taking stands on this polarizing issue. We absolutely do not need the Catholic Church's view on the this matter.

[opendro]

Originally Posted by diabloo

Britishers abolished caste system? News to me.
When British came to India, Indian economy was was 10 times as big as Europe.

I would still insist that British introduced education for everyone, not only for the pundits and royal people. That gave a whole lot of change to our society. In fact, in some princely states, British used to bargain with princes to establish a school!! That was our plight.

I would also insist that our people were much more suppressed and poor. What use was the wealth for us?

It is built into our culture even today that we are not supposed to obey the law, passed by representatives elected by us. That is the kind of people we are.

Well, I'm not very pessimistic person. I have hope. And I know we could still have changed a lot ourselves without British. But there wouldn't have been India without British, no denying in that. Well, does that deserve a credit? I don't know honestly. But being too petriotic blindly, praising ourselves too much and bashing western world and British blindly is wrong. Believe me, I follow the WESTERN WORLD CULTURE much LESS than ANYBODY here. I can say that without knowing everyone individually. And I don't have to be an RSS to do that. That was my point. People here even have ways to say "whatever your name is". That is heights, I say. Sorry, another unnecessary post after my last full stop. That is it. I'm done.

[agentsmith2]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Point... Much of the world considers "a woman's right to choice", ie her right to abort a pregnancy, to be an absolute right.

So what about the personal right to abort a pregnancy because it is a girl?

Not really. This issue has been addressed legally here in India. You are free to terminate the pregnancy before the 20th week. Beyond that, not. Right is defined within the ambit of a legal system.

Sexual selection occurs quite late in the pregnancy. Medical opinions vary.

Female Infanticide is also a function of education and geo-economic parameters like per-capita income, caste or local-community rules. Female children are unwanted because of dowry customs which a family might perceive as an economic burden. Under good education and equal opportunities, it has been observed that females support their community better than their male counterpart.

In the Chinese infanticides however, the one-child policy ensures female child doesn't get a chance at all. In India, female infanticide is mostly observed in families with no male offspring. There's a huge difference between the two.

As an aside - No mother would willingly terminate her daughter child only on the basis of sex. For more on female infanticide: Gendercide Watch: Female Infanticide

[agentsmith2]

Originally Posted by opendro

It is built into our culture even today that we are not supposed to obey the law, passed by representatives elected by us. That is the kind of people we are.

Not built into our culture. We follow rules as long as we understand them. We don't understand road signs - and road rules - because we are a predominantly rural civilization.

To give you an example: our crime rate is lower than the lowest in America. Our police ratio is small - very small - about 100 police officers per million, if I'm not wrong. This is insane when compared to 100 per 10k in US to maintain law and order. But I digress.

I follow the WESTERN WORLD CULTURE much LESS than ANYBODY here.

Yessir, got that. Going by your understanding of english grammar, I would heartily agree with your statement. <Insert obligatory smiley here>

[opendro]

Originally Posted by agentsmith2

Not built into our culture. We follow rules as long as we understand them. We don't understand road signs - and road rules - because we are a predominantly rural civilization.

I don't agree. We all know that red signal means "stop". But hardly anybody follows unless there is a cop or if there are flood of vehicles coming from the green side. We all know that we need driving license to drive a vehicle. And we see so many kids riding two wheelers with another two in the back. It is built into our culture that tradition (even if it is bad) comes first and then law.

Sorry. It is going more and more off topic. But I can mention so many examples where people just follows what is prevalent, rather than stick to rules, even if they know the rules.

[supremeBaleno]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

That is something I want India never to forget, especially when dealing with corporate America and 'globalisation' (which actually means American colonialism).

Gotta agree with this one hundred percent.

[condor]

opendro : But hardly anybody follows unless there is a cop .... It is built into our culture that tradition (even if it is bad) comes first and then law..

Sorry. Are you speaking of the same culture that has more than enough knowledge, science, art & spirituality - that all you need to do it is to follow it, and you could even attain Nirvana ?

We have it all with us, my friend. But today the average man on the street is so caught up in his day to day survival battle that, he has forgotten everything else. He is so caught up in it that he is not even willing to recognize that the root of most problems we are seeing today is that we are the cause of the scarcity of all that we want (not need).

[aerohit]

China plans to produce the world's fastest conventional train

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7591608.stmCHINA

CHINA BULLET TRAIN



INDIA TRAIN


During 1950s, CHINA - INDIA has same level of Trains

Look at the difference after 50 Years.

[supremeBaleno]

Hey aerohit, you missed the point. Their trains travel only on land tracks. Ours is amphibious - does water too.

[girlieonwheels]

I cannot say what would be the best solution to the population problem in our country; I guess it will be a combination of "many" different effective solutions. These can be making people more aware by education, providing incentives to people who have less children, as well as providing incentives to the over-all state for less population, and may be imposing taxes based on the number of children you have, or more.
I am not too sure.

But I certainly believe that this problem is triggered because people do not think about life seriously.

For the poor, they don’t have time to think about life because they are too busy earning for food. For them more children mean more earning members, which in turn will result in more food (which is acceptable). The government should help them financially.

For the educated and non-thinkers the sole aim in life is to follow the foot prints of our ancestors – progeny. They don’t really know if they want children or not, or they don’t really understand the responsibility that comes with having children. But they have children because that’s what every one else does. For them the word “social-responsibility” is an unknown term (this is not acceptable). For this lot, the government should have taxes based on their number of children. May be they can force people to adopt children, and make sure these children are treated well. Or may be they can ask them to financially help a child if they have a lot of money. This will happen only if our government is stern and ready for the authoritarianism (Which I doubt).

Then there is this educated and thinking lot. These people understand the term “social-responsibility” and also understand what having babies means. Now these people as I have observed mostly have babies because of the social pressures. I would say it’s because our Asian families are too “family oriented”, and having children means extending family. They often scum to the pressure of older family members to have babies even if they don’t want too (this is partially acceptable). For them we should try and condition our society to make it more responsible. This can be done with the help of media.

FYI – We have many international celebrities who have adopted children from all over the world, but I don’t see many Indian celebrities doing that except Sushmita Sen.

[condor]

agentsmith2 : India's forest cover is 24% aimed to reach 35% in the current five year plan

How I wish. How I wish we had a goood forest covering even 20% of our land area.

Just take an ariel survey of these "forests". And also go and track the mining industry. The forests are disappearing faster than you can blink. Bihar & that belt, Karnataka ..

agentsmith2 : Population is a boon ..
diabloo : By some estimates, the world can handle upto 3 times the current population.

Guys who think this way, wake up. That's all I can say.

diabloo : ... population isn't the problem.
RedMM340 : First of all, India does not have a population problem..

Neither does the rest of the world. We all have a different problem with something called resources. Resources that support that population, Resources around which this population has built it's life.

But then you are right in a way. Population is not the problem. It's the size of that population that's the problem.

girlieonwheels : or the educated and non-thinkers the sole aim in life is to follow the foot prints of our ancestors – progeny.

But they have children because that’s what every one else does.

Now these people as I have observed mostly have babies because of the social pressures.

@GoW, I definitely agree with you. Marriage in India is in a way, just a "logical" step in life, with another "logical" step following it by having kids. A person must marry, and after marriage, a person must have kids. Anybody who doesnt do either is plain crazy.

ibm_jennifer : Believe me or not, Me and My wife decided not to have any babies(!!!). Population is not the main reason, but one of.

Salute !

[speedzak]

My god!
All the while I thought every human loves to have a child atleast. Be it in marriage or not.

Making babies for pleasure is ignorance, I agree. But to wish and have a child with the intention of making this world a nice place to live in, I think we should be happy with that. Can't we?
Or should we salute everybody who decides to have no children and kick those who wants to have? Sorry guys! To have children or not is a personal decision and not something which should be discouraged nor encouraged in my opinion.

Now, Kerala government is offering 1k for every third child born in a family. No! Nothing for the 1st two. This is not necessary in my opinion.

I also think that the nature can adopt to the growing population. That's how it is designed to be. If there're some problems in resources not available etc.. our scientists/researchers will come up with alternatives. World won't just get packed up with humans I'm sure. Especially with the amount of killings/deaths happening in all levels of human life. Be it in the womb, lap, cradle, school, college, office, road, street etc.. We are humans and I'm sure we will survive in this earth which was after all made for us. Rather than conserving other creatures in sacrifice of humans, we should think otherwise.

My 2, 3, 4, 5 cents!

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by speedzak

Or should we salute everybody who decides to have no children and kick those who wants to have? Sorry guys! To have children or not is a personal decision and not something which should be discouraged nor encouraged in my opinion.

Of course, there's a basic instinct, but humans have learnt to live with and manage that instinct.

We should educate people to make it a personal decision (worldwide, not just India).

All too often it is not a personal decision at all: it is the result of peer pressure, parent pressure, in-law pressure, relative pressure.

The success of manhood is measured by fathering; a woman who does not, or cannot, have children is considered a failure.

When we overcome these terrible attitudes, then it really can be a personal decision.

[bblost]

Originally Posted by speedzak

I also think that the nature can adopt to the growing population. That's how it is designed to be.

Exactly.
The only unknown thing here is what happens to the Humans.
No one can tell exactly how Nature will adapt.