Desicritics Comments on Millennium Development Goals Through the Lens of India's Caste System

Comment by Sanjay

Sat, 25 Aug 2007 10:46:10 EDT

mbjesq, let's not apply the standards you've cited in a selective way -- let's do that for everybody. http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=179e43f0-525c-4645-9251-b421f2c46ac8&MatchID1=4512&TeamID1=9&TeamID2=3&MatchType1=2&SeriesID1=1127&PrimaryID=4512&Headline=12-hr+shutdown+in+Nandigram+to+protest+death Hey, if the Indian Communists are killing people in an attempt to make way for industrial plants built by the private sector, then what kind of communists are they? One could say that any and all socialism is the result of some self-interested decision of the moment. How does one then find the "real socialists"? This reminds me of how Islamic activists always dissociate themselves from the legacy of Islamic regimes. "Those weren't TRUE ISLAM" they like to sniff. "Unlike the previous groups, we are looking for TRUE ISLAM. This time we'll seek a TRULY ISLAMIC revolution" Pfft. Despite theirs and your rhetoric about the "true Islam" or the "true socialism" where do you see any laudable examples of these? If you're simply chasing rainbows and fictitious leprauchauns or unicorns, then what good are these beliefs? mbjesq bleats: Ohh, you misunderstaaannnnd, those people weren't REAL SOCIALISM. If they had been REAL SOCIALISTS theirs would have been a legacy of utopiaaaaaa. Give me a break. Unless you can cite some tangible example of the "real socialism" to actually differentiate from the "fake" ones (who are conveniently identified as fake only after their inevitable failure), then your empirical reasoning sucks rocks. "Real socialism" -- my foot!

Comment by mbjesq

Sat, 25 Aug 2007 05:02:14 EDT

Sanjay: As for whether confiscatory nationalization of some (or even most) industry (but not of all means of production) is a sufficient condition for the diagnosis of socialism: this barely seems worthy of debate. Your equation focuses, selectively, on certain means of production and disregards the lack of collectivism in totalitarian corporatism. You don't like socialism and you don't like Nazis or Fascists. Fine. You don't like any of these because of state ownership of industry. Also fine. But the fact that the three may share one common feature does not mean that you can conflate socialism with corporatism. The Nazis and Italian Fascists were certainly clear about what was what; and there were sound strategic reasons both regimes persecuted socialists. The overarching collectivism of socialism and the element of entitlement had no place in those political economies. I have no clue what role "over-building of the state" (which is a subjective measure, I assume) plays in your argument. As for the "parroting of fanatical garbage": see my original point No. 1. We don't really disagree, though I would probably express it differently. As for whether Madhu is the "shallow robot hate-machine" you claim she is: I'm sensing a little self-reflexive projection here. The hatred-to-substantive-argumentation ratio in your commentary is so out-of-whack I can draw no other conclusion. mbj www.memestream.org

Comment by Sanjay

Sat, 25 Aug 2007 03:13:02 EDT

mbj, Socialism is itself a mythical utopianism, which is unrealizable. Depending on which particular activist you talk to, you'll see them selectively disavowing Hitler, Stalin, Mao, or even DPRK and GDR. The fact is that Nazi ideology was indeed socialist. They nationalized industries, confiscated assets, and over-built the state. By what definition would they not have been socialist? If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, acts like a duck and calls itself a duck, then your empty assertions to the contrary won't really amount to much. Likewise, mbj, here's a tip: the language used by India's left-wing and islamo-fascist totalitarians is indeed dishonest. Therefore recognize that Madhu Chandra is parroting fanatical garbage like the shallow robot hate-machine she is.

Comment by mbjesq

Sat, 25 Aug 2007 01:20:02 EDT

Chandra: Too brilliant! What my scheme lacks in practicality, however, it makes up for in delicious, perverse irony. Jacobs's Razor: The more subversive alternative is bound to be more fun. mbj www.memestream.org

Comment by mbjesq

Sat, 25 Aug 2007 01:10:33 EDT

Sanjay: In the first sentence you call me a liar. By the end of your comment you are ambivalent as to whether I'm a liar or a fool. I just wish you had prattled on long enough to make me sound virtuous. Things seemed to be tending in a positive direction for me. Alas, it was not to be. Mussolini was indeed an editor of the Socialist paper "Avanti!", and was a full-fledged Socialist party functionary -- until 1914, when his interventionist views got him expelled from the party and he resigned from the paper. It was at that point he joined the Fascio. It was only following the war, in 1919, that he organized the Fasci Italiani di Combattimento, which would become the National Fascist Party. The avowed purpose of the Fasciti Blackshirts was to terrorize socialists, communists, and anarchists. Which socialism did Mussolini practice? The freezing out of his Socialist rivals in the Fascist ascension of power in 1922? His strikebreaking as payback for the support of wealthy agronomists and industrialists in 1922? His support of the monarchy, which eventually installed him as Prime Minister? His likely role in the murder, and confirmed role in the cover up of the Socialist minister who attempted to annul election results in 1924? His staunchly anti-communist (if somewhat incoherent) "Third Way" totalitarian economic theory? His support for Franco in Spain? And what are we to make of the fact that he was ultimately assassinated by a Socialist? Do you really believe that Nazi antisemitism was a result of anti-elitist, socialism? It was scapegoating, pure and simple. It failed to win Hitler election during the economic revitalization in the Weimar Republic, but worked for him during the subsequent depression. In fact, he described it as a fight against "Jewish Marxism", when he was not speaking of the need to eradicate non-German blood from the country or ranting about the eternal battle for world domination between "Aryans" and Jews. Here's a tip, Sanjay: the language used by politicians, particularly totalitarians, is often ironic if not outright dishonest. Also: concepts like "socialism" have specific meaning, notwithstanding broader historical uses of the term. Inform yourself before deciding that the label fits; otherwise you are a perfect dupe for totalitarian propoganda. mbj www.memestream.org

Comment by Chandra

Sat, 25 Aug 2007 01:05:11 EDT

MBJ I have an even better plan. Anybody who can provide solid evidence of corruption against a Govt official can lay claim of half that wealth. On the other hand the convicted will be stripped of all his wealth and sent into life imprisonment rgds

Comment by Sanjay

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 23:54:19 EDT

mbj, you're concocting history, of course. Not only did the Nazis call themselves socialists and refer to their similarity with the communists, but Italy's Mussolini -- the founder of fascism -- was a correspondent of Lenin's, as well as the editor of Avanti, the leading socialist newspaper in Europe. The Nazis were socialists, their policies were socialists, and their anti-semitism was inextricably wedded to the fact that they considered the Jews to be exploitive money-grubbing elites. You sir, are either lying, or extremely ignorant.

Comment by mbjesq

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:13:27 EDT

Yes, Chandra, the kleptocracy is in fine fiddle. I remember tromping around Sikkim in 2002, when I came across a magnificent villa in a spectacular walled compound. Its opulence stood in such stark relief when compared against the general poverty, squalor, and decrepit infrastructure of the rest of the state. When I returned to town, I inquired about the place, and was told it was the home of the Minister of the Department of Social Justice, Empowerment, and Welfare. Naturally. I have been pondering a plan: for the citizens to create a privately-financed investment fund to pay large, well-directed bribes to key government officials to influence them to act in the public interest. Think of it as a cross between tax revenue and mad-money (a 1960's term for the emergency walk-away cash women would take on dates to keep their suitors somewhat in check). mbj www.memestream.org

Comment by Chandra

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 17:43:38 EDT

MBJ The problem with our development focus is primarily in the the way it is executed. Yesterday I read a report that of Rs 800 Cr that was planned for the flagship NREG program, about Rs 650 Cr was embezzled by Govt staff and local elected reps. rgds

Comment by mbjesq

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 17:17:19 EDT

Three comments: 1. I agree that Madhu's figures bear no conceivable relation to any reliable data I have seen. This is sad to see so much argumentation laid upon such a vapid foundation. 2. The question of the implementation of the MDGs is an interesting and important question, well beyond Madhu's attempt to tie the issue to the continuing role of caste. It is not hard to predict that 2015 will come-and-go in India, and probably every other important target country, without a single objective being approached, much less met. There are many reasons for this, but I'll name just two. To start, the force behind India's politics seem to be veering from the familiar divide-and-conquer populism, to which we have grown nauseatingly accustomed (but which keep the 60 year old rural development and poverty alleviation agendas nominally, albeit ineffectually on-message), toward the money-driven influence more familiar in the American experience of representative democracy. If this trend is real, and continues, "India Shining" trickle-down mythology will drive the political agenda to an extent not yet seen or imagined, and development goals will suffer accordingly. The other factor hindering progress toward the MDGs is the mind-boggling self-absorption and ineptitude of the UN Millennial Campaign (which is charged with promoting the MDGs) and UN Mission in India. (Write me if you want details, which might otherwise offend the no-personal-attacks rule of the DesiCritics comment policy, even though I can also point to a (very) few competent, effective individuals in those organizations.) 3. Sanjay, if we leave aside the early, and pretty much unsuccessful, efforts by the Nazis to recruit from the working class, they didn't even give lip-service to socialism, as that term is commonly understood. The Nationalsozialisten were socialists in the same way that the Deutsche Demokratische Republik was democratic, to use another example from Germany: in name alone. The Italian fascists were rabidly anti-communist as well as anti-capitalist, citing state supremacy as "the third way." In short, your characterizations are every bit as accurate as Madhu's statistics. Why do you think that red-baiting is any more attractive or compelling than Shylock-baiting? mbj www.memestream.org

Comment by Chandra

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 00:05:36 EDT

Sanjay Dalit voice has stopped offline operations. rgds

Comment by Sanjay

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 22:50:17 EDT

Madhu Chandra is obviously a rabid fanatic. She seeks to reverse-extrapolate causal mechanisms from broad statistical data. That's preposterous poppycock. Only rabidly fanatical Shylock-baiters like Madhu and Dalit Voice are willing to stoop to such lows. And that's what this is really about -- Shylock-baiting. History shows that Socialist propaganda is most potent and toxic when mixed with Shylock-baiting, and that's why socialists always inevitably veer into their Shylock-bashing fantasies. They claim that any and all economic progress or lack of it is entirely the responsibility of the Shylocks ("upper castes" in India's case). Therefore if someone is poor, it is claimed as an automatic sign of Shylockian "oppression". If someone doesn't go to school, it's because the Shylocks kept them out. If someone didn't pass their exams, it's because the Shylocks sought to make them fail. If someone is unemployed, it's because the Shylocks are preventing them from being hired. If someone doesn't have something to eat, it's because the Shylocks are keeping food out of their mouths. Etc, etc, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. This rabid conspiracy-theorizing is the product of warped, myopic, inward-looking and hate-infested thinking. It is the result of a detachment from reality. It is an attempt to offload personal responsibility for personal economic growth onto a scapegoat. And that scapegoat is the Shylock. When taken to its ultimate conclusion, the Shylock-baiting results in things like the Holocaust, in which the warped national socialists of Germany decided that the only way to end the Shylock's evil exploitive ways was to exterminate them. Remember: Nazi = Nationalsozialistische Arbeiterpartei = National SOCIALIST WORKERS Party Hitler and Mussolini were SOCIALISTS who sought to end the "humiliation" of their people by the Shylocks and the imperialists. You can see where their kind of thinking ultimately led them. Madhu and Dalit Voice are headed down that same path.

Comment by Man singh

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 19:21:43 EDT

Data of Madhu seems to be fabricated. backward casts that comprise of yadav, Gurjar, Jaat, Kurmi Lodhi etc are landlords. How come they possess only 9% assets in the country. Majority of Brahmins are landless and live unbder exteremely poor conditions thogh blamed for all ills of India by gangs of mao marx macauley and Mohammed. Truth is that it's not cast system that blocked India's developement, its landlordism the real culprit. Gaddars and namakharams who associated with foreign invaders were appointed as landlords by muslim invaders. these landlords exploited opreessed all landless communities of the society irrepspective of cast. I am surprised to see how crooked landlords and theor associates are putting all blames of their crimes against humanity on head of poor landless Brahmins. Brahmins are traditionally begging community. They got little prominence during British rule as being educated lot, British frefered them to make clerks. these Clerks purchased some lands here n there by money theyr earned. But even educated class of India under inflrunce of propganda of gangs of ma marx macauley and mohammed belives tendency to hang brahmins for the crimes of landlords to be true. I call upon all educated class of India to challenge such false notions. look around some sulabh shochlayas and check who is cleaing toilets? you will be surporised to not that huge number of Brahmin youth are doing that. let's stop demonising the victims and protecting the culprits(landlord mainly OBC's). please open your eyes and see the truth. dalit Voice propgamnda of Christians to find more converts under mas of dalit welfare.

Comment by Chandra

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 10:42:16 EDT

Madhu The figures you quoted dont come with a source. I just quoted NSSO figures. If you have a different source of information, am willing to accept. As far as your statement about tribals is concerned. They make up for 8% of the population. Even assuming that half of them are christians, the minority population would reduce to 15%. Excluding tribals from christian population will make christians the richest economic group in India. The magazine you quote- Dalit Voice is very interesting. Here is some data by the DV - 85% of the people living in India are not Hindu - About 85% of India's 1,200 million population is facing Brahminical persecution. - Dalits have been India's only revolutionary people - DV is Anti-semitic - Here is a comment from the DV: "Chamars in UP strengthened their roots and the Brahmins came to them begging for protection. And the kind-hearted Chamars agreed to protect Brahmins on the condition they cease to be hate-mongers"

Comment by Madhu Chandra

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 10:20:13 EDT

Figures are usely rejected because it really show how micro minority they are. Assets includes property, employment, decision making body, media, etc. Please minus tribal christian population from minority. They are included in ST communities.

Comment by Chandra

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 02:01:12 EDT

Madhu Your figures donot fit in with data I have from NSSO surveys. No other surveys match the samples and depth of data. To start with...so called 'upper caste' contribute to 35% of the hindu population and 28% of National Population...not 15% Income ownership is close to 60% of hindu income or about 48% of national income.... To summarise - 28% of upper caste own 48% of National income... MDG data indicate a huge gap between SCs/ STs and the other castes... Your contention that caste system is responsible for their poverty is very difficult to prove. Problems with rural infra and urban overcrowding are responsible... Minorities make up for about 19% of population and not 10.5%. Amongst minorities the income of christians and sikhs is higher than their contribution to national population rgds