Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Neo-Cons Sneaking In

This North-South global compact … would consign … despotisms to the obscurity which the old “salt empires” of the Tortuga and Turks islands, critical to … Royal Navy, were reduced once we had overcome our saline dependency. Posted by Shri Brendan Simms (Reader in the History of International Relations at the Centre of International Studies at the University of Cambridge)

Meet The Neo-Cons

The Social Affairs Unit is a what is called these days a neo-con think tank. Unfortunately, it is neither neo or a think - but is definitely a con.

And the blog of one of their stars is published at their site. Shri Brendan Simms, a reader in History, I am sure, knows that what he is saying is wrong.

In this post, (linked above) Simms is proposing certain actions that “would consign the Middle Eastern despotisms to the obscurity which the old “salt empires” of the Tortuga and Turks islands, critical to the eighteenth-century Royal Navy, were reduced once we had overcome our saline dependency.”

Oil Prices - Western Democracies Are Being Held To Ransom

Simms has various problems in life. He starts with his “western capitalist democracies find themselves held to ransom.” Is Simms getting this feeling because of the price that the Middle East is charging for oil. I know the feeling, believe me! We have been through that. It is the similar feeling that we in India, (and developing countries) used to get while negotiating for food purchases (called aid) after the Bengal Famine and while rebuilding collapsed agriculture economies in post colonial India.

All that OPEC wants is a market driven price. Any problems? Why does the West not explore and drill for oil along their huge off shore areas and kill their dependence on oil. If the Oil producers are wary of the dollar price due to depreciating dollar, who can you blame.

If the West wants to ‘helicopter Ben’ wants to print more dollars, who will pay the price ? The rest of this gullible world? Does Simms think, that oil rich countries will ship out limited oil resources with the same speed that Bernanke prints money - or helicopter drop dollars?

The Saudi Wealth

Simms feels bad that the Saudis “could buy General Motors with just six days of production.” At least, in this scenario, the Saudis are buying US companies with US currency as per the valuation done by US stock markets. It is not based on slave labour, which is what the British operated in the Turks and Tortugas - in the Caribbean.

Millions of captured Black Africans toiled (and died) in the Caribbean, to create wealth and luxury for Britain - the comfort of which he now uses to “consign the Middle Eastern despotisms to the obscurity … of Tortuga and Turks islands, were reduced once we had overcome our … dependency”

What Were The Turks & Caicos Islands

These were slave islands - and part of the Caribbean group of islands which were used by the British Navy to run their slave colonies. To call these ‘despotisms’ is right - but these were British slave despotisms.

While the ’sugar colonies’ are well known - Haiti, Cuba, Demerra, Trinidad and other West Indian Islands, and the millions of slaves that were imported and subsequently died. Similarly, millions of local Native Red Indian populations were wiped out. And of course, once their usefulness, was over, the European powers walked away.

Of course, some of these islands have become colonies, of the USA, Britain and the people there continue to serve the interests of these western nations. Haiti, Cuba, Granada have been made an example of by Britain and USA, for trying to make a country of themselves. A lot of such places would be quite happy without the British attention they received - and subsequent ruin that they faced.

Privateers, slave traders and pirates were licensed to operate from these islands, by the British Government to loot - and kill.

Come To The Middle East Despots

Gertrude Margaret Lowthian BellAfter the WW1, the victorious allies carved up the entire Ottoman Empire - which stretched from the Middle East to Central Asia to the Eastern Europe.

Out of the Ottaman Empire, Iraq was carved up and King Faysal was put on the throne. A British amatuer Gertrude Margaret Lowthian Bell made the selection of the King Of Iraq. This new King did not even know his kingdom - and he was taken around by his new makers. Similarly, an amateur like TE Lawrence (never mind the propaganda) was used to determine the fate of the Middle East.
TE Lawrence

WW1 resulted in the Balfour Declaration, which promised a Jewish homeland, to be carved out of the Ottaman Empire. Saudi Arabia was similarly made up.

Thus the entire Middle East was put on shaky political ground. Exploitative commercial contracts favoring Anglo Saxon bloc of countries were signed with these puppet governments - and the rest of the story is being played out for the last 90 years. Hobbyists decided fates of million of people.

So, these Middle Eastern despots, Mr.Simms are a creation of Western Foreign Policy - of which you claim a College Readership.

Western Investments

“West invest blood and treasure to make the Middle East a better place” out of the milk of human kindness Mr.Simms? All investments that the west has made is by the loot from Canada, Australia, Africa - and of course, India. Even if we out of magnamity, call old accounts quits, current investments have been made for reasons of commercial self interest. Sell your Western assets, Mr.Simms. Possibly, it is equivalent to one hours oil production for the Saudis - and they will buy you guys out.

Regarding the blood in the Middle East, it is the poor Arabs, Palestinians, Iraqis, Kurds, Afghans, Pakistanis who are spilling it. Western blood (whatever little) is being spilt for brazen extortion. The Middle East has become a quagmire after the West has decided to intervene.

Saudi foreign policy - Export of extremist Islamist ideology

And what is the foreign policy of the West Mr.Simms. Instability in Africa, Middle East. Every terror hotspot is a creation of the West - and specifically, America. And amongst others, we in India, pay a price for this. When you demonise Islam, they pay a price.

Partnerships With The West?

What partnerships are you talking about. The kind that you has with the Turks and Tortugas? The kind that you had when the West put incompetent Emirs and Shaikhs on the various thrones of the Middle East - and now want to ‘consign to obscurity.’ After they helped you to weaken your Cold War enemy. After they have given you 60 years of luxury - with cheap oil.

Why Wont You Accept Criticism

Now these are the points that I made on your blog, Mr. Simms - 2 weeks ago. Why the hesitation in publishing those comments.

The Great Unease

The Great Unease

Global consumer optimism surveys routinely show anxiety, unease, dread in Europe and USA. This sense of unease should be absent considering the prosperity levels, the best health-care systems, a welfare state, guaranteed unemployment benefits, their technology, their currency and their democracy.

The Indians and Chinese routinely are more optimistic - which should not happen considering the low income levels. Fancy theory apart, to my mind, it is the ’sword fatigue’ in response to constant exposure by Western Governments (to which they are exposed) which causes this low optimism.


Between 1800-1950, Western powers killed (directly or otherwise) more than 50 million people in America (the Red Indians), Africa (the Blacks), Asia (Indians, Chinese, Arabs). This led to a situation that every other person in the West had participated in murder or massacre. Soviet Russia on one side, Hitler on the other and to that add Gandhiji’s resolute opposition to colonialism - and you have a inflammable situation.

The deluge of blood and murder caused moral anxiety and was a matter of ethical dilemma amongst common folks. The pressure valve for this was popular fiction. Identifying murderers became a form of proxy, vicarious entertainment for ordinary folks. Enter the super detectives, who pick out the murderer from a room full of ordinary people.

Murder in Popular Image

A trend started by Edgar Allan Poe, whose first detective novel, Murders In Rue Morgue (1841) soon became an avalanche. Writers like Agatha Christie (Hercule Poirot, Miss Marple solving murders happening by the second), Georges Simenon (and his Inspector Maigret investigating brutal crimes), Ngaio Marsh (Roderick Alleyn), GK Chesterton (Father Brown), Raymond Chandler (Sam Spade and Phillip Marlowe) dealt with murder. Alfred Hitchcock made horror thrillers in similar themes.

Agatha Christie’s book filmed as Ten Little Indians, based on the book, initially released (the book) in Britian as Ten Little Niggers (later renamed as Then There None) gives the game away. Agatha Christie probably presaged the White desire to ensure that there should be none of the Red Indians left to tell the tale.

The Mystery of the Dying Detective

After de-colonisation, as mass murder went underground, the detective-murder mystery books genre faded. This category was replaced by a new theme - the axis of corporation-government international conspiracies.

Conspiracy Theory - Full Steam Ahead

The new category of popular fiction are represented by Ian Fleming, Arthur Hailey, Frederick Forsyth, Irving Wallace, Robert Ludlum, Graham Greene, John Le Carre, et al. More and more contrived, each conspiracy theory writer has been ‘inspired’ by real life incidents.

While Ludlum’s international-conspiracy-plot-CIA-FBI-KGB series have worn thin, the spookiness of Le Carre’s Absolute Friends and Constant Gardner still work as novel representing the West.

Western Twins - Anxiety and Paranoia

To develop this understanding further, there are two classes of films that I wish to draw attention to.

Malignant Nature

Jaws (the shark that eats humans), Jurassic Park (mad scientists, conspiring technicians let loose man eating dinos) Gremlins and Poltergiest (things that go bump in the night). This paranoid fear of nature (and natural laws) seems to be a result of the subterranean knowledge of the way in which ecological damage and pollution is happening. These films produced /directed by Steven Spielberg (who is incomparable because as Time Magazine says, “No one else has put together a more popular body of work”)

Vindictive Humans

The other is the thinly disguised hate and prejudice films against the poor and the victimised. ‘Aliens’ needs just one small change for the films idea to become clear. Instead of LV-426, Nostromo the space ship, receives a distress call from some country in South America or Africa (or India, if you prefer). The meaning is clear when you see the movie while conscious of the fact that alien is is the word the US Government uses for people from other countries.

What Does This Mean

A US commentator Robert Putnam says that “… We don’t trust each other as much as we used to. Trust in other people has fallen from 58 percent in 1960 to 35 percent in the mid-1990s. Our less trusting atmosphere has led us to recoil from civic life and social ties. We belong to fewer voluntary organizations, vote less often, volunteer less, and give a smaller share of our gross national product to charity (Putnam, 1995a, 1995b; Knack, 1992; 1986; Uslaner, 1993, 96-97). People who trust others are more likely to participate in almost all of these activities, so the decline in trust is strongly linked to the fall in civic engagement (Putnam, 1995a; Brehm and Rahn, 1997; Uslaner, 1997) …

After This Blog

I tried searching the internet for some related data - supporting, contradictory, supplemental or complementary. One writer, Franco Moretti did half the job in book Signs Taken for Wonders: On the Sociology of Literary Forms By Franco Moretti. In his entire book he does not use the words like slavery, racism, genocide, bigotry even once. The 19th century, which was based on Western bigotry, White racism, Black slavery, and Assorted genocides is unrecognised in Moretti’s books.

Feeling squeamish, Franco?

Running or hiding?

Saturday, February 23, 2008

The Carving Of The Middle East

Iran Iraq CartoonThis cartoon which I saw on a blog, captures the entire charade about Iraq, Iran and the Middle East.

After WW1

Arthur James Balfour, Author of the Balfour Declaration

After the war, the victorious allies carved up the entire Ottoman Empire - which stretched from the Middle East to Central Asia to the Eastern Europe.

Out of the Ottaman Empire, Iraq was carved up and King Faysal was put on the throne. A British amateur Gertrude Margaret Lowthian Bell made the selection of the King Of Iraq. Gertrude Margaret Lowthian BellThis new King did not even know his kingdom - and he was taken around by his new makers. Similarly, an amateur like TE Lawrence (never mind the propaganda) was used to determine the fate of the Middle East.

WW1 resulted in the Balfour Declaration, which promised a Jewish homeland, to be carved out of the Ottoman Empire. Saudi Arabia was similarly made up.

Thus the entire Middle East was put on shaky political ground. Exploitative commercial contracts favoring Anglo Saxon bloc of countries were signed with these puppet governments - and the rest of the story is being played out for the last 90 years.TE Lawrence Of 'Arabia'

Turkey decided to go West - with Mustafa Kemal Ataturk mandating that all Turks must cut of their beards. Out of the fog of war came the the Russian Communists - which again the Anglo Saxon world tried to blame the rest of the world for.

The Western Leadership

Midway through WW1, by 1916, the heads of the Allied powers - Britain, France, and Russia had a change of government. Each of new governments had different agendas and ideas about the Middle East - in which the only interest that was not represented was that of the Middle East itself.

Britain, under Prime Minister, David Lloyd George could look at Middle East as the dominant super power of the period could - as imperial fodder. Georges Clemenceau, the French Premier, was diffident about colonial expansion pragmatically viewing French resources and capability in overextended and vulnerable to Germans.

The unforeseen elements were the Russians. The Communist leaders pulled out of the war. Russia was replaced by their future Cold War rival, United States into the war on the side of the Allies. American economic interests demanded opening of markets, closed to America by colonial powers. Woodrow Wilson (couched as his personal beliefs in self-determination) wanted 'independence' for the Middle East - for the US corporations to manipulate the Middle East, which they promptly did.

Leaders of the Middle East

One example was Emir Hussein. He could make the British believe that Emir Hussein could raise a force of a quarter million Arabs. He could deliver 3000-4000. Shaikh Faisal was another. Muhammed Sharif al-Faruqi was the third.

The Demonisation StartsIslamic Demonisation

After these destabilising decisions were taken, the Anglo Saxon world has been put their propaganda machine to work overtime. Demonising communism and now Islam. Without taking the responsibility for their own actions - and further interventions, creating further instability. Like the demonisation of the Jews before and the Red Indians after, this too is having disastrous effects - in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan. And this process of demonization is a matter of concern to the rest of the world.

Is India getting co-opted in this demonization?

Gandhiji - And The Middle East Carving

Gandhiji saw this problem 90 years ago - and his support of the Khilafat movement was prescient. Today when some Indians join in this demonization, it is matter of ignorance - and a threat.

Start Of World War I

What triggered WW1 - common knowledge. The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand. How did so many other countries get involved? The Russian Tsar (related to the British Royal House and based on the support of) Britain, the Anglo Saxon Bloc and the French, supported political Serbian assassins, of Archduke Ferdinand of the Austro Hungarian Empire - and that started the World War I. Not some harmless gun shot that seemed to have triggered it off as victorious Anglo Saxon historians would have us believe.

The Assassination Team

WW1- Colour Pictures

The assasination plot included Gavrillio Princip, the actual 19-years old killer, Mehmed Mehmedbasic (a carpenter, unsure of his success, finally didnt do anything), 17 year old Vaso Cubrilovic, Nedelko Cabrinovic, all of 20 years old, Cvetko Popovic, an 18-year old student, 24-year old Danilo Ilic, the main organizer of the plot and Trifko Grabez, a 19-year old.

The name of the group was Black Hand, a circle of radicals in the army around Dimitrijevic-Apis, the man who led the murder of the Serbian royal couple in 1903. The other ring leader was Vojislav Tankosić organized the murders of Queen Draga's brother's; Dimitrijević Apis and Tankosić in 1913-1914 figure prominently in the plot to assassinate Franz Ferdinand.

What Would Happen Today

Would the US take no action if a mad assassin (imagine if he is Islamic) were to assassinate the US President-Elect. And what would the US do if (say, the) Governments of Russian or the China (or for that matter, India) were to support the assassins. Well a Balkan assassin did kill the Crown Prince (equivalent to the US President-Elect). The Russians, the Anglo Saxon Bloc and the French supported the assassins. What would happen if a Pakistani based terrorist group were to kill Prince Harry?

The Alliances Of WW1

French Colour Photos - WW1On one side were the Austro-Hungarian Empire ruled by the Habsburgs (whose heir apparent was killed), The Ottoman Empire (out of Turkey), which could obviously not support assassins of royalty - and Germany.

Britain immediately started aggressive posturing against Turkey (the Ottomans). On July 29, 1914, Churchill, then Lord Of Admiralty, seized two Dreadnought ships being built for the Ottomans in British shipyards for the Turkish navy. The Germans needed allies and to woo the Ottomans, presented them with two ships. Britain, France and Russia declared war on Turkey on October 31, 1914.

Supporting the assassins was the alliance of Russia, France, Britain, (and later) America, and sundry other European countries. With this act of brinkmanship, they took the world through the agony of a huge war, the price of which is being paid even today. The Middle East problems, the rise of Communism all came out of the World War I.

© with respective copyright holders. Copyright details embedded in the links.

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

India - The Second History

For most Western historians (and also Indians), only the Core North India, is Indian history, society and culture. This is the history which British propagated and showed India as a defeated civilisation. Invaded, pillaged and dominated. Inferior and poor. Technologically backward. This is the history that is taught in schools and exists in popular imagery.

Despite its many fallacies, this view is being perpetuated by propaganda interests of the Anglo-Saxon bloc and the (various versions of) Congress party which has been the ruling party for the most of post-colonial India.

Along the Dakshinapatha दिक्षणपथ

There is another part to that history - which today influences and touches half the world. This history is full of wealth, military successes and a spread which taken India deeper than any other civilisation in the world. While the previous history was along the uttarapath, this story lies along the दिक्षणपथ dakshinapatha.

Its starts at Kerala, a highway across Nagpur Jhansi, Gwalior, Delhi Kashmir and ends in modern Iran. This history and geography is loosely dominated by the Dravidian segment of India.

Colonial historians dismissed Dravidian history as subordinate and lesser than Aryan on the basis of the Aryan Invasion Theory. Now that the Aryan Invasion /Migration Theory does not have a leg to stand on, the contribution by the Dravidians along the dakshinapatha दिक्षणपथ becomes more important.

Where It All Started

The oldest Indian language, not based on Sanskrit, is Tamil. There is 3000 year old history that Tamil language has, which makes it one the oldest, living language. Related languages are in use even today in Pakistan, where the Brahui tribe speaks a related version of the Tamil language. The Brahuis have marriage preferences which are similar to South Indians (cousins preferred in marriage) - rather than North Indians.

How did Tamil land up in Baluchistan? And thereby hangs a tale.

Elamite Bas Relief CarvingThe Elamites

The people of Elam (yes in Tamil, Eelam means homeland), were the first to civilise the Iranian Peninsula in the 2700 BC period. They were contemporaries of the Egyptians, the Mittanis and the Hittites. The Elamites were a significant people till the 800BC in Persia (modern day Iran).

The Elamites concluded a major treaty with the Akkadian King King Naram-sin (Naram to Narain and Sin is the moon goddess, Chandra; possibly Narayan Chandra). Akkadian language is itself implicated in being in cahoots with Sanskrit and Indus Valley languages - and the creation ans spread of most modern languages except Sino languages.

Elamite Goddess FigurineThe Elamites, Mittanis and Hittites ruled an area stretching from Iran to Iraq up to modern Turkey. Numerous kings have Indian names - like Shutruk (Shatrughna), Shushinak (Sheshnag - the eternal serpent on whom Vishnu rests) Siwe /Sive (Shiva-pal seems to be his name - Dravidians have a significant Shaivite following even today).

One of the most prominent rulers of Babylon was Nebuchadnezzar (as spelt in English). Replace ‘b’ with ‘d’ and you are very close the Tamil name of Neduncheziyan (Nedunchedianuru) - a current and modern Tamil name. Interestingly, Neduncheziyan is more famous as the fabled erring Pandyan King in the Tamil classic - Silappadhikaaram. Neduncheziyan mistaken justice, brings him grief and finally death. Neduncheziyan is overshadowed by the other King, Cheran Senguttuvan’s fame in the Tamil classic, written by Jain Saint, Elangovadigal.

The goddess figurine seems to show parallel preferences between Elamite concept of female beauty and today’s Kodambakkam.


This was a famous city from which ancient Egypt, Babylon, Sumeria and other Middle East countries imported gold, sandalwood, ivory, gems, (wild animals and birds(peacocks, monkeys). This now seems to be a corruption of the Tamil kingdom of Oviyar. Oviyar were one of the ruling tribes of South India and Sri Lanka. Ophir (as the Greeks called it and the West knows it) was a kingdom in South India and Lanka - a legend in its own time. Ships sailed from Sopara (modern Nallasoppara) and Lothal.

The Satavahanas

Immediately after the decline of Mauryan power in the Deccan, rose the Satavahanas. Based in the Godavari and Krishna river region, their origin isAmravati Stupa Sculpture is disputed between being Andhras or Marathas. Many of Sakas and Yavanas were taken onto Satavahana administration. Indianised Sakas and Yavanas, (Dharmadeva, Agnivarma or Rishabhadatta) from the Central Asia-Iran-Afghan region, were tribes and peoples conquered by Alexander and subsequently available as mercenaries. The spread of Buddhism gained strength during this reign - which we will see became a significant feature of Dravidian spread. The Amravati stupa, was built during this period.

Satakarni I (C. 180-170 B.C) was one of the early Satavahana rulers. He expanded to western Malwa (a Sungas territory) and clashed with the powerful Kalinga ruler Kharavela. He performed performing Aswamedhas thus announcing his suzerainty - desides celebrating a Rajasuya. His queen was a Marathi princess Naganika and a Naneghat inscription describes him as ” Lord of Dakshinapatha, wielder of the unchecked wheel of Sovereignty”.

Hala (C. 19-24 A.D) the seventeenth Satavahana ruler compiled Saptasati in Prakrit, married a Sri Lankan princess, (described in Prakrit work) Lilavati. Gautamiputra Shri Yagna Satakarni (C. 78-102 A.D.), in an inscription at Nasik, took pride in calling himself `Destroyer of Shaka(Scythians), Yavana (Greeks) and Pahalava’ - Pahalava referring to the Pahlavi dynasty of Parthian area of Iran. More than 13000 coins were found from his reign - now famous as the Jogalthembi hoard.

The Chalukyas - 5th Century to 12th Century

Vijnaneshwara who accomplished renown by inscribing Mitakshara- a book on Hindu law in the court of Chalukya Vikramaditya VI. Somesvara III was a magnificent intellectual and king who amassed an encyclopedia of all arts and sciences called Manasollasa.

The Maritime Saga

So, these Indians from South were involved in Middle East administration and were a major maritime power till the 17th century. Indonesia, Philipines, Malaysia, Thailand, Cambodia were at various times ruled by these Dravidian rulers.

The world’s largest religious complex is the Hindu temple of Angkor Vat - in Cambodia.

Simultaneously, trade introduced Islam and Christianity into India in Kerala, Bengal and Kashmir - before any invasions. The demographic change in Indian religious due to invasions was magnified by colonial historians to create animosity.

More coming up in the next 1 week.

As can be seen, North and South Indians were different language and practices but saw themselves as apart of Bharatvarsha - i.e India. Unlike what European historians would like us to believe. Lot of the material is available as links in this post also.

Andy Mukherjee’s Poverty

Andy Mukherjee - On The American Stimulus Package

Andy Mukherjee, on Wednesday, February 13, 2008, in his syndicated column used his Andy MukherjeeAsian background with devastating effect. Devastating to his (at least, partly Indian) background.

He writes, "the stimulus package that has been put together to keep the U.S. economy from tipping into a recession”.

Just what is the problem with that. In the current economic thinking, all Governments are expected to create these ’stimulus’ package.

Andy Still Talks Of Aid

He further writes, “At $168 billion, the largesse is almost three-fifths more generous …
than the record $107 billion that 22 rich nations together gave out as official foreign aid in 2005 …” (ellipsis mine)

I thought every country has a right and as per current acceptable political philosophy, it is the bounden duty of Governments to be generous to their citizens. What exactly is the objection that Andy has to the US Government’s ‘largesse’ and ‘munificence’, (his words) I am unclear about on that till now.

Which planet is Andy on? Since he is writing a business and finance columns, is he aware (I hope he is) of the large body of research that shows how aid has in fact creates problems - and doesn’t solve any. The notorious PL-480 was abandoned because it elongated the cycle of food scarcity.

Low self esteem, Andy?

He advises,”Middle-class Asians ought to turn green with envy at the “home bias” implicit in the munificence of President George W. Bush’s administration.”

So what does Andy expect - Uncle Sam should be more liberal to Asians than to Americans? Does he expect Americans to earn and be taxed for the benefit of Asians? And just why does he think that Asians (at least Indians) will turn green with envy.

I am sure that Asia wishes to compete with the largest, best, competitive economies - but surely there is no envy involved (exceptions apart). I am also sure (unlike Andy) that, in time, we will create a level playing field (more important and more on that later) and Americans will want to be born in Asia (and most probably, India).

Andy’s Cheques by mail programme

Unlike the 111 million US households that will enjoy some tax rebate, there won’t be any cheques in the mailbox for the Asian workers.

And who exactly does Andy think, is going to send cheques by mail to Asians? Americans? Just why will Americans do that? How does Andy think Americans will fund this Andy’s ‘cheques by mail’ programme? Does Andy think that 60-80 million working Americans can suport 3 billion Asians?

And why does Andy think that Asians will queue up to take this charity? Just why is Andy’s opinion of Asians so low? Is is it because of his own low self esteem?

Asians Are Funding the US Stimulus Plan

Asia lost last year (my estimate) more than US$300 billion dollars due to the monetary policy of the USA. Deliberate, well thought out monetary policy by the USA Government. The truth my dear Andy, is that American lifestyle is being maintained due to Asian stupidity. The Chinese, Japanese, Indian, and other ASEAN countries have lent the USA - which is in the hock by over US$2 trillion dollars. They will lose US$ 300 billion for the privilege of lending US$2 trillion to the USA.

What? Asians Fund The USA …

Why? Because the system is fixed. Go back to Bretton Woods! The Anglo Saxon Bloc controlled 80% of the world’s gold production and reserves. Hence, only they could underpin their currency with gold- which the world accepted. It is separate story that they defrauded the world - and the system unravelled within a short 20 years.

And the world has been paying a price for that moment of folly.

What Does Asia Need

Asians need to create a new financial system. That is what Asia needs - and that is what US has been sabotaging for years now.

And a case for that is what I would have expected from you Andy - or is that too much too ask for!

Sonia Gandhi - Return That Medal

What Should Sonia Gandhi Do

Sonia Gandhi should return the Order Of Leopold Medal. If she is an Indian. If she respects India and its values. Values that her mother-in-law, her grand-father-in-law and her Nehru-Gandhi family stood for and gave their lives for.

What Does That Medal Mean

That medal, Sonia, smells! It smells of blood. Of decaying flesh. I am sure you dont wantIs This Rather Dubious Medal such a smelly peice of metal. I am sure the moment you reject this piece of trash, 10 better medals will come your way. Medals which are worth more and will mean something better. With the medal will come, the clamoring spirits and ghosts of 1 crore murdered Congolese who will haunt you.

Give up that medal, Sonia. Just like you gave up the Prime Ministerial position.

It will prove that you are like your mother in law. She gave it all up by calling for election in 1977. And yet , 3 years later, she won it all back. She was a brave lady. She could have been prejudiced against the Sikhs. But, her need to trust was greater than the importance of her security. She could have been blind to the Bangladesh problem. It took courage and steel to take on an ally of the US. She could have (but did not) cosied up to the USA like the SEATO and CENTO nations did - and paying a price for that now.

The History Of King Leopold-II

“Dr.Livingstone, I presume!” and that is how Henry Stanley made his name and the life of Congolese miserable. Based on this incident, he was given a contract by King Leopold-II to establish “trading posts along the Congo River. In time, like with other colonial possessions, with a mix of fraud, guile, deceit, force, massacre and other such ‘civilised’ by ‘Christian’ civilisers, Congo was also made into a colony. By King Leopold-II of Belgium, in his personal capacity.

King Leopold King Leopold (current king’s predecessor 3 times away) was murderer. Plain and simple.

You see what happened was that in 1871, King Leopold decided that he needed to get respect. So he called for the Brussels Conference. Plans were hatched. His colleague, Otto Von Bismarck, of Germany got into the act and called for the Berlin conference.

Based on Dr.Livingstone’s propaganda, it was decided there that Europe will directly enslave the Africans - instead of the the Arabs. At that time 90%of Africa was was free. In the next 20 years, 90% of Africa was colonialised.

King Leopold’s personally owned the Belgian Congo territory. His personal army-men and his personal agents killed more than 1 crore people. When hardly any Congolese were left, he sold Belgian Congo to his own country for GBP3.8 million. His greed and the Belgian attempts to white wash those dark deeds is what you are becoming party to.

The Election Commission Notice

The Election Commission and its notice are another issue - which I am not commenting on or worried about. TN Seshan gave the Election Commission real fangs and they can make life difficult. But the Congolese are a different matter. Yesterday it was the Congolese. Who will it be tomorrow? What can one say about tomorrow? But the greed and inhumanity of the European colonialists is something we can be sure of.

Monday, February 18, 2008

Slavery & Oppression - In The West and In India

The Moral Offensive

In 1901, Dadabhai Naoroji published his famous research - "Poverty and Un-British rule in India". Before that, his 1876 paper, "Poverty In India" traced the rise of poverty in India due to colonialism. This laid the background for India's Independence and shaped the strategy of Swadesh and Satyagraha. Fifty years later we were a Republic of the kind the world had never seen.

But ...

This moral offensive continued for the next hundred years - provoking Nixon's reaction during the Bangladesh War. "The Indians put on their sanctimonious peace Gandhi-like, Christ-like attitude," Nixon told former U S president George Bush Sr., then the USA ambassador to the United Nations on December 8, 1971. Nixon declared, "We can't let these goddamn, sanctimonious Indians get away with this. They've pissed on us on Vietnam for five years."

Harry & Kill - Lord Irwin's Peace Pact

The use of reverse-propaganda (a European tool) by the Congress against the British was singularly successful - and put the Colonial administration on the moral defensive. The British Colonial administration worn out by the "harry and kill" moral offensive of the Congress made peace. The British Viceroy, Lord Irwin brought some sembalance of propriety in colonial administration thereafter. Military war thereafter became less important.

The British response to that was 'divide et impera'. In the dying years of the Raj, the colonial administration put up issue of 'untouchability' and caste 'oppression'. Untouchability, the caste system, social prejudices remained significant issues in post colonial India - and it continues to be a much debated and a divisive issue. Harijans, Dalits, manuvadis are terms and names used freely.

How much of this is real - and how much a foisted petard?

Oppression - And Its Many Avatars

Oppression is eternal. Nature is not perfect. Human beings can be and are immoral. For any society to disclaim oppression is to claim human moral perfection by all its members. Social discrimination by the advantaged happens. Rich exploit the the poor. Majority oppression (maybe the poor) against a (rich) minority happens. Systems get "fixed". The important thing is how these issues morph and then subsequently are addressed.

To get some understanding on the oppression issue, a comparative examination may give a better perspective.

Wipe out of the Red Indian Population in North America

In 1492, when Columbus landed in the West Indies, the native American population was 3 million (in the what is currently USA) and more than 10 million in the Americas - and they spoke a 600 languages. 300 years later, they had become tourist attractions. The entire Anglo Saxon race was against the very existence of the native Red Indian.

The British and the independent Americans were equally brutal with the Red Indians. During the French and Indian Wars, Britain waged a biological warfare against the Red Indians by distributing small pox infected blankets to Red Indians. 70 years later, Andrew Jackson delayed (some say withheld) small pox medical supplies and vaccines from Red Indians.

During the American War of Independence, George Washington, on May 31, 1779 Washington sent his official Instructions to Major General John Sullivan:

Sir: The expedition you are appointed to command is to be directed against the hostile tribes of the six nations of Indians, with their associates and adherents. The immediate objects are the total destruction and devastation of their settlements and the capture of as many prisoners of every age and sex as possible...whence parties should be detached to lay waste all the settlements around, with instruction to do it in the most effectual manner; that the country may not be merely overrun but destroyed...

Reminiscent of George Bush threatening the world , either you are for us or against us , George Washington, made a similar remark more than 200 years ago. George Washington wrote to the President of the Continental Congress in 1776: In my opinion it will be impossible to keep them [Indians] in a state of Neutrality, they must, and no doubt soon will take an active part either for, or against us...

Thomas Jefferson view of the native Red Indians was equally dismissive. He (King George III) has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions... (Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of Independence, 1776).

Treaty after treaty was made with Red Indians - which were broken time and again. The whites coveted everything that the Red Indian had - but mostly, his life. This "land of the free" by all possible (and some impossible) means was soon made land free of the "natives and savages".

The US President, Andrew Jackson started by (December 8, 1829) posing as a Red Indian sympathiser. He proclaimed "By persuasion and force they (Red Indians) have been made to retire from river to river and from mountain to mountain, ... tribes have become extinct ... Surrounded by the whites ... which by destroying the resources ... doom him to weakness and decay ... That this fate surely awaits them if they remain within the limits of the states ... Humanity and national honor demand that every effort should be made to avert so great a calamity." (parts excised for brevity and ellipsis inserted; bold letters mine). His solution - remove the Red Indians.

In 1830, 40 years after George Washington became the President, the "land of the free", a law was passed to make the land free of the native Cherokee (Red Indian) population. The vast prairie lands were expropriated - and the Cherokee Indians were marched out by the US army. This march, Trail Of Tears, signalled the break of treaty by white Anglo Saxons. Land West of the Mississippi were to belong to the Eastern Indians ‘in perpetuity.'

The Red Indians resisted removal and forcible transfers. Their resistance was brutally crushed. By December 4, 1832, Andrew Jackson was saying, "After a harassing warfare, prolonged by the nature of the country and by the difficulty of procuring subsistence, the Indians were entirely defeated, and the disaffected band dispersed or destroyed. The result has been creditable to the troops engaged in the service. Severe as is the lesson to the Indians, it was rendered necessary by their unprovoked aggressions, and it is to be hoped that its impression will be permanent and salutary." (bold letters mine)

Gen. Winfield Scott was sent in May 1938, (with an army) to deliver the ultimatum to the Cherokees. Move or we will make you. At your cost.

President Woodrow Wilson echoes the ideology behind the alleged "genocide" - "The experience of Liberia and Haiti show that the African race are devoid of any capacity for political organisation... there is an inherent tendency to revert to savagery and to cast aside the shackles of civilisation which are irksome to their physical nature. Our industries have expanded to such a point that they will burst their jackets... Our domestic markets no longer suffice; we need foreign markets. "In the matter of Chinese and Japanese coolie immigration, I stand for the national policy of exclusion... We cannot allow a homogeneous population of a people who do not blend with the Caucasian race."

Just like Romani Gypsy and Australian aboriginal children were taken away from their parents, Red Indian children were also removed. In different continents, at different times, similar tactics were used by Europeans and the Anglo Saxons in the colonies.


In 1788, the estimated Aboriginal population was 7,50,000. By 1911, the survivors, were estimated at 31,000. Prior to the Anglo Saxon settlement, "Australia was an ‘empty land‘ because its inhabitants did not count as human". Today, the Anglo Saxon race prides itself for the building of Australia. Australia was a British colony and till date the Queen (or King) of Britain is the head of State for Australia.

Churchill, the British Prime Minister during WW2, one time Chancellor Of The Exchequer, had his views on Arabs, Indians, Aborigines, Red Indians - "I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race has come in and taken their place."

Churchill similarly had highly enlightened views on Arabs - "The Arabs are a backwards people who eat nothing but Camel dung."

One of the main causes of deaths was public health. In India, in the early 19th century, an estimated 25 million died due the cholera epidemic - as the colonial Government did not bother (to give them the benefit of any doubt). In Northern Ireland, during the Irish Famine, the then British Prime Minster with held supplies and essential aid from starving Irishmen. In USA, the Government delayed allocations to fight small pox, 20 years after similar actions for the whites. Similarly from the Australian aborigines.

From 1860-1960

Little changed in 100 years after the American Civil War - except the matter of 25 million missing Blacks. At the start of the Civil War, the White Population of North and South was 22 million. And Blacks was 5 million. By 1960, the White population had grown by nearly 800%, to 160 million. The Black population in the meantime had grown by only 400% - from 5 million to 20 million.

What happened to the missing 400% of Black population growth? Apologists (and defenders) use white immigration to explain away some of the difference. But that further compounds the problem - because there was also about 1 million of Black immigration from Haiti, Jamaica, Africa and other countries. Nett, nett - there are about 20-25 million Blacks missing - due to deprivation, poor health care and indifference.

Mortality amongst Blacks due to AIDS is higher than for Whites - 60,000 higher Black deaths every year. The New England Journal Of Medicine states."Among patients infected with HIV, blacks were significantly less likely than whites to have received antiretroviral therapy or PCP prophylaxis when they were first referred to an HIV clinic".

But rights and equality is something else

Black emancipation in the USA is a 1970s phenomenon, 30+ years ago event - and not 200 years ago as this article in New York Times seems to make out.

It took non-violent protests (Martin Luther King, inspired by Gandhiji) and violent threats (Malcolm X) for some kind of real emancipation and equity to come in. In the Cold War scenario, under international media glare, during the Little Rock School stand-off, Eisenhower (a Southerner himself) reacted. Reluctantly,in 1954, he sent in the National Guard to Little Rock, Arkansas for some kind of de-segregation. The Mayor of Little Rock, Arkansas closed down the school rather than de-segregate. The eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation during the Kennedy years produced the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Demonise, Genocide and Apologise

Now that there are a few Red Indians and aborigines left (they serve as tourist attractions), there is the ritual of regret and apology about their role in the genocidal past. Since, the "Jewish Problem" was solved by Hitler (there are hardly 1 million Jews left in Europe and 5 million in USA), the West and USA has no problems, anymore with the Jews.

In fact, Jews today serve a useful purpose to the West. After the Anglo-Saxon led alliance broke up the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East, the Israelis are the Western cat's paw. They have been suborned to the job of keeping a lid on the simmering oil rich, Middle East, and keeping it in check. What is the real cost to the USA- an inflated arms bill. What does it cost Israel - millions of precious Jewish lives, lost in the fight to keep the Anglo Saxons in luxury.

The demonisation (Shakespeare joined in with his anti-Semitic Merchant Of Venice) of the Jews has now been replaced by demonisation of Islam. Without taking responsibility for the destabilisation of the Islamic World by the liquidation of the Ottoman Empire after WW1 - perpetrated by Anglo Saxon countries and the French.

The Greatest Suffering

The Blacks in the USA and Europe have seen some justice - as they were an important constituency in the Cold War. USA propaganda was on the verge of losing Africa to Soviet Russia. The Jews have been very persistent and they have not let the world forget - or the perpetrators rest in peace.

The forgotten lot is that that of the Romani Gypsies. This one segment based in Europe and USA continues to remain on the fringes and discriminated. They have been hunted (like forest animals), their children kidnapped (to end their race and social system), they have been gassed (by Hitler along with the Jews), they have been galley slaves, In fact there was a time when they could be killed, if found alive!

The History Of King Leopold-II & Congo

"Dr.Livingstone, I presume!" and that is how Henry Stanley made his name and the life of Congolese miserable. Based on this incident, he was given a contract by King Leopold-II to establish "trading posts along the Congo River". In time, like with other colonial possessions, with a mix of fraud, guile, deceit, force, massacre and other such ‘civilised' norms by ‘Christian' civilisers, Congo was also made into a colony. By King Leopold-II of Belgium, in his personal capacity.

King Leopold King Leopold (current king's predecessor 3 times away) was murderer. Plain and simple.

What happened was that in 1871, King Leopold decided that he needed to get respect. So he called for the Brussels Conference. Plans were hatched. His colleague, Otto Von Bismarck, of Germany got into the act and called for the Berlin conference.

Based on Dr.Livingstone's propaganda, it was decided there that Europe will directly enslave the Africans - instead of the the Arabs. At that time 90%of Africa was was free. In the next 20 years, 90% of Africa was colonialised.

King Leopold's personally owned the Belgian Congo territory. His personal army-men and his personal agents killed more than 1 crore people. When hardly any Congolese were left, he sold Belgian Congo to his own country for GBP3.8 million. Congo was a major producer of rubber - and the King's agents kidnapped African families - and released them against collections of natural rubber from African forests.

To understand oppression better, we also need to look at the genesis of the various religions across the world.

The Desert Religions

Judaism, Christianity, Islam were all born within 500 miles of each other and share a common culture and history. Judaism can be said to have been born when Moses led the Hebrew slaves from the Pharoah (across the Red Sea) to freedom. This possibly happened around 500 BC at the latest to 1500 BC at the earliest. His earliest followers were the Hebrews and they were a significant part of the Middle Eastern history all through till today.

The next major religious reformer in the Middle East was Jesus Christ. For the first 300 years, Roman slaves were the major believers in his teachings. Emperor Constantine earned the loyalty of his Christian troops and won the war for Roman throne by his win over Maxentius at Milvan Bridge. Prior to Maxentius, for the previous 30-40 years, Christians had been persecuted by "rule of four' Tetrarchy reformists in Rome, headed by Diocletan. Hence, the Christian slave soldiers of Constantine were eager for victory - as the persecution under Maxentius would have been worse.

Liberated slaves were the founders and rulers of Islamic dynasties, (in India, the Slave dynasty - builders of Qutub minar). Thus all the three "desert religions" were first adopted by the slaves and only after gaining significant numbers of adherents, these religions became mainstream and commenced aggressive proselytising and conversions.

Whats Going On Here

Oppression of a different nature existed in India. Instead of economic slavery (trade in human beings) as it existed in the "desert bloc", it was social oppression that needed remedies in the "ahimsa bloc".

The first major reformer in India were the "ahimsa twins" - Gautama Buddha and Vardhamana Mahavira.Both of these were princes of royal blood - Prince Siddharth and Prince Mahavira.

Their first adherents were the rulers and their methods of proselytising was also aimed at the ruling class. Ashoka The Great sent missions with his daughter Sanghamitra to Sri Lanka - where Buddhism was established.

Guru Nanak Dev came from from the upper caste family and his focus was to end fueding on the basis of caste and creed. His first converts were from upper class families cutting across religions - and hence the opposition from some of the Mughal Kings.

Gandhiji was from the upper caste and the first item on his reform agenda was end to the "bhangis" carrying faecal refuse on their heads. His initial focus was social reform and less of anti-British activities.

Half the world today follows Indic religions and culture. The other half follows the “desert religions”. The development trajectories of these two halves has been significantly different. The motivations, behavioural and acceptable civilisational norms for these blocs are different - and mostly opposite.

Same difference?

Based on the above most notorious cases of oppression, there are some clear markers for to 'real oppression'.

Declining Populations

In all the cases above, Jews in Europe, Black population in the Africa and USA, the Gypsies across USA and Europe, the aborigines in Australia, The Red Indians in America, or the Belgian Congo, the 'marker' for oppression was the decline in population. And we are not talking about about a few percentage points here and there (which can be explained by many factors) but by multiples.

State Oppression versus Social Discrimination

In all these cases, these genocides were legalised - in USA with the Dredd Scott case. In Europe, anti-Gypsy laws existed till 1973 in Switzerland and other countries. The Red Indians and Aborigines were dispossessed in connivance with the State and enabling legislation. There were laws in Europe and Australia which allowed people to kidnap children of the oppressed and take them away from their parents.

Economic Rationale

All these cases of oppression are marked by a clear economic motive. Cotton plantations in the USA needed black slaves,West needed natural rubber from Congo, Red Indian landVilfredo Paretowas needed by the West, Gypsy and Aboriginal children were kidnapped by declining European and Australian populations. Europeans historically envied Jewish business success.

How much of the division of labour in Indian society was co-ercive, extractive or enforced - and how much is explained by Pareto's Law of Social Disequilibrium?

Majority Oppression Or Military Might

In all these cases, the majority oppressed the minority - or massacred them till the oppressed became a minority. Military might was used for oppressive purposes - like King Leopold-II in Congo, till such time, the oppressed became numerically weak.

Does this hold true for India?

What about Harijan massacres incidents. Two aspects - these massacres are not approved or condoned by law. Massacres and death of Red Indians, Aborigines, Jews, Gypsies were approved by law (yes, that is right! Click on links and other posts to get more info on that). There are equally massacres by the 'oppressed' in UP, Bihar, Rajasthan, J&K, MP - which shows a failure of the 'over-burdened' State rather than oppression.

The Oppressed Make The Laws In India

At the time of Indian Independence, the 'oppressors' (the 'ruling' Brahmin Hindus) gave the role of Constitution writing to the leader of the 'oppressed' - Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar. No 'oppressed' class has been 'given' such a position and responsibility in any country of the world - ever. No 'oppressor' lets the 'oppressed' write the laws.

And for the record, let me state, BR Ambedkar was NOT given that position - he earned it.

The Oppressed Population Grows Faster than the Oppressors

The population of the 'oppressed' is growing at a faster rate than the 'oppressors'. Thus the 'oppression' of the majority in India is resulting in a faster growth for the oppressed. A first in the history of oppression.

Reservations Of Opportunities

The US affirmative action (a dilution of the Indian reservation system) was a persuasive system - whereas India is the only country where the 'minority' oppressors are supporting a enforced, legally mandated system of reservations for the 'oppressed' majority. The whole world is fighting to steal, rob, snatch, kill and maim for opportunities -but in India the 'oppressors' are giving away opportunities.Thus we can see that there is no 'oppression' in any sense of the word in India.

What happens in India is social discrimination - which is a non-legal, historic, social bias and prejudice. That hurts - and that mode of behaviour is something that needs to be modified. By any stretch of the definition, in India it is not oppression as practiced anywhere in the world.

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

The Indian Voter

The Indian Republic has spawned the most unique democracy in the modern history. Eminent cultures and nations, when faced with 20th century Anglo-Saxon power of industry, colonial exploitation, global financial manipulation tried 'copycat' versions of European nations. Prime examples of those were Russia, Turkey and China.

Russia - Westernising Since Peter The Great

Peter the Great, (of the Naryshkin family) co-ruler of Russia, (along with Ivan of the Miloslavsky family) ruled from 1682-1725. For more than 40 years, his agenda was to create Russia in the Western mould. His travels to Germany, Britain, Sweden (before becoming a Tsar) shaped this agenda. One of the first things he did after becoming a Tsar was to ask his boyars (Russian nobility) to shave their beards! Catherine The Great continued this during her reign from 1762-1796. For the next 125 years, Russia vacillated between a medieval country and modern western country.

Now, the imprisoned oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky takes pains, who at one time nursed political ambitions, earnestly says,“...I’m convinced that Russia is a European country, it’s a country with democratic traditions ...".

China - Mao & Sun

In the 20th century, one of the first countries to become a ‘copycat’ states was China. China, led by Sun Yat Sen, (original name Sun Wen and started calling himself Yat-sen; Chinese call him Sun Zhongshan), was the first major power in Asia which tried going down the western path. Sun Yat Sen decided to westernise and make China into a Republican democracy.

Chinese were made to cut their queue - pleated hair braids. This diktat was enforced in 20 days time. Sun Yatsen and later Mao Ze Dong made the Chinese change their dress styles too. The effect of this westernisation - an enduring sense of followers. The Chinese add a western name to their Chinese one - Michael Tang, Bruce Lee, Jerry Yang, Tommy Tang, Tommy Chi. In Hong Kong and Macao, white tourists are royalty. Chinese companies routinely parade White, Western investors - and the Chinese investors follow. Western marriage ceremony, Chinese couples think, is very romantic. The Christian Church wedding is common in China.

Not that Indians are too far behind - consider Steve Sanghi, Paul Parmar, or the best of them all Bobby Jindal.

Ataturk’s Turkey

Turkey - led by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was the next ‘copycat’ attempt at westernisation. After WW2, the victorious allied powers dismantled the Ottoman Empire. Turkey was reduced to a rump state. Atatürk (much like Hamid Karzai) was ‘installed’ by Western powers.

Thereafter, Turkey has lurched from crisis to another. Post WW2, it has been mostly ruled by military dictatorships. From being a arbiter in Europe, it has become a supplicant, begging for entry into EU. Instead of the queue in China, - it was beards in Turkey. Atatürk enforced a new dress code on the hapless Turks - and the traditional fez was banned. Stop wearing the fez or else …

Japan - Democracy By LDP

Although Japan never 'westernised' in the manner of the Russia, China or Turkey, Japan's democracy is an external construct. After the Japanese surrender in WW2, Supreme Commander of Allied Powers, Douglas MacArthur ruled over Japan. A translator's mistake started the Japanese to work on a new constitution. MacArthur rejected the draft submitted, saying it was "nothing more than a rewording of the old Meiji constitution." MacArthur put his own staff on the job - and supervised the writing of the Japanese Constitution. A new draft was written in the next 10 days.

From 1955, when the LDP was formed, it remained in power for the next 38 years. In 1993, for the first time, a non LDP Government was formed - The Shinseito (Japan Renewal Party) came to power. Compare that with India's first change which occured within 26 years.

After a change in the ruling party, the Japanese miracle ended. A 10 year economic slump followed.

Indian Democracy

The Indian Voter is a very unique specimen. Forged out a feudal-colonial regime, he was coached by Gandhiji. Time and again the Indian Voter has voted in a very perceptive manner - rationally and without emotion.

1956 Election

In the very second General Elections of 1956, two leftist parties, gained 19.33% of popular vote, formed the world's first elected Communist Government.

Nehru, a legend in his own life, venerated and loved by the people he ruled, was given a warning. Perform or else.

Nehru thereafter went down the socialist road. Possibly, looking at the 'ship-to-mouth' economy, the socialist road was the humane answer. To a society coming out of the nightmare of colonial exploitation, the State as a parens patriae was a plausibility - as most voters were too poor and unable to take care of themselves.

The Left parties were given an opportunity. The Leftists did not live up to their promise. Apart from regional mandates, the Left were not given any major opportunity.

1969 Election

Indira Gandhi had sacked Morarji Desai as the Finance Minister over his obstinacy - on the Gold Control Act, bank nationalisation, etc. It was also rumoured that he was in CIA pay - a plausible allegation, as the rickety structure of Bretton Woods was propped up by the Indian ban on gold imports by Morarji Desai. Other disgruntled Congress party members had split from the Congress to form the Congress(O).

The voter saw through the disgruntlement on one and Indira Gandhi's imperious ways were beginning to show on the other. The Indian Voter gave her a razor thin majority - and the Congress(O) sulked as a major opposition party. The Indian Voter did not have any appetite for the negative agenda of Congress (O).

1971 Election

Indira Gandhi after a dramatic war in Bangladesh War (the largest PoW capture in the history of modern warfare by any country) and with an electrifying slogan - Garibi Hatao, called for elections. This decisiveness and a weak opposition won her the election.

Indian Muslim Women Voting

1977 Election

Within 26 years after the first election in 1952, India changed its favorite political party. Post 1975 Emergency, India after being ruled by diktat, chose to remove Indira Gandhi. Opposition parties, for the first time in free India, gave the Indian Voter a clean choice. And the voter decided. The Indian Voter chose change.

Indira Gandhi was voted out.

1980 Election

A chastened Indira Gandhi was voted back to power. A vengeful opposition party was sent into the wilderness. India took it first steps towards liberalisation. New industrial capacities for cars and scooters were approved. The economy slowly started getting unshackled.

Cartoon On Indian Elections1984 Election

After Indira Gandhi's assassination, Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide victory - on a so-called sympathy wave. But the Indian Voter simultaneously voted for a different party for the local, state level Government. So, there was a national Government led by Rajiv Gandhi and the opposition party won the election in Haryana!

Who Is the Indian Voter

Electronic Votinf MachinesHe is poor. He is not the rich Indian. He typically should be swayed by promises and subsidies. But he can be a very perceptive. He has never given the negative agenda of the Leftists a major opportunity.

He is illiterate. He votes with his "heart" or his "caste". He does not understand the "issues". But he did not buy the India Shining story that the BJP, a 'Hindu fundamentalist' party was peddling. Similarly, I doubt if they will back Manmohan Singh's attempt to 'sit at the high table in the global comity of nations."A Poor Indian Woman Voting

This democracy was a home grown democracy, written, managed and nurtured by Indians. There will be many challenges ahead.

Unlike many, I do not believe, this is the end of the road for Anglo Saxon Super-power status - and the Chindia-India-Asia century is not near. But the Indian Voter will live up to the challenge. India's indigenous democracy is not the 'copycat' that others countries tried.