Is India actually way poorer than Africa?

[Toppler]

I'd say yes http://cozay.com/forum/f2/india-is-far-poorer-than-africa-in-intensity-t2294/ .

If not this article, then the child malnutrition rate proves it.

[erupt]

It's hard to compare India to a whole continent with 52 countries.

That said, the masses in all of Africa and India, too, of course, are in desperate need of social restructure.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

India is a big place, as is Africa, so saying "India is poorer than Africa" is a broad generalization. I think it largely depends on the province in India, or the country in Africa, in question, or the metric you are using to judge. For instance, many African countries have a higher child mortality rate or lower life expectancy. Some parts of India are much poorer than others, like Bihar which is one of the poorest places in the world (where many migrant workers in India come from).

This is telling: there are some countries higher, some lower in africa:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UN_Human_Development_Report_2010_1.PNG
however, the problem is that grouping India as a country doesn't show internal differences, where certain parts of the country have much greater poverty problems than others.

But largely speaking, Id say it doesnt matter which, precisely, is "poorer", they are both really, really poor.


It's hard to compare India to a whole continent with 52 countries.


India actually has more people than Africa, and for all practical purposes is also its "own continent". It's just also one country. As I indicated in the rest of my post, I'd go the next step and break India up into its constituent provinces and use that as a mode of comparison.

[Queercommie Girl]

I would add that the majority of the rural masses in China aren't really significantly better than their counterparts in India either. The so-called "economic miracle" of Dengist China has largely only benefited a few large cities along the eastern and especially south-eastern coast.

[Dimmu]

The most pathetic thing of this is that the Indian state is spending shitloads of money on military and a space race..

[Gorilla]

I would add that the majority of the rural masses in China aren't really significantly better than their counterparts in India either. The so-called "economic miracle" of Dengist China has largely only benefited a few large cities along the eastern and especially south-eastern coast.

While that's entirely true, it's impossible to underestimate how terrible India is. This chart shows the prevalence of nutritional deficiencies worldwide (from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malnutrition)):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/Nutritional_deficiencies_world_map_-_DALY_-_WHO2002.svg

You'll notice that India is as bad as DR-Congo, Sudan and Central African Republic. I mean, god damn. If you get graded as bad as Congo on anything it pretty much means your whole country is built on a lie. The US and China are about equal to each other which speaks very badly of both countries.

[RedScare]

The most pathetic thing of this is that the Indian state is spending shitloads of money on military and a space race..
That's the thing that really gets me. A nuclear arsenal and moon probes with literally hundreds of million of people living in dire poverty. Absolutely disgusting.

[dez]

I get the impression south asia is poorer and africa less socially structured.

[Queercommie Girl]

That's the thing that really gets me. A nuclear arsenal and moon probes with literally hundreds of million of people living in dire poverty. Absolutely disgusting.

That's class society for you. Slavery, feudalism, capitalism, essentially all the same.

[Queercommie Girl]

While that's entirely true, it's impossible to underestimate how terrible India is. This chart shows the prevalence of nutritional deficiencies worldwide (from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malnutrition)):

You'll notice that India is as bad as DR-Congo, Sudan and Central African Republic. I mean, god damn. If you get graded as bad as Congo on anything it pretty much means your whole country is built on a lie. The US and China are about equal to each other which speaks very badly of both countries.

Yes, I agree India is generally worse than China.

[Tomhet]

Doesn't India have the biggest divide of rich-poor in the world?

[t.shonku]

India far poorer than Africa, new measure shows



July 15, 2010 12:00AM



MORE of the world's poor live in eight Indian states than in the 26 poorest African countries, according to a new UN-backed measure of poverty.

The Multidimensional Poverty Index looks beyond income at a wider range of household-level deprivation factors, including services, which could then be used to help target development resources. Its findings throw up stark statistics compared with regular poverty measures.
The study found that half of the world's MPI poor people live in South Asia, and just over a quarter in Africa.
There are 421 million MPI-poor people in eight Indian states alone - Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal - while there are 410 million in the 26 poorest African countries combined.
Madhya Pradesh state, with a population of 70 million, had almost identical poverty levels as the wartorn Democratic Republic of Congo, which is home to 62 million people.

The researchers said the extent of poverty in India had often been overlooked by figures comparing percentages of poor people in countries as a whole rather than sheer numbers.
According to the index, 64.5 per cent of people in sub-Saharan Africa are MPI-poor. In South Asia, 55 per cent of people are MPI-poor. Both figures are higher than those considered extreme income-poor - living on less than $US1.25 per day.
The new index was created by the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative at Oxford University, and the Human Development Report Office of the UN Development Program.
"Our measure identifies the most vulnerable households and groups and enables us to understand exactly which deprivations afflict their lives," said OPHI director Sabina Alkire. "The new measure can help governments and development agencies wishing to target aid more effectively to those specific communities."
The MPI will be used in the forthcoming 20th anniversary edition of the UNDP Human Development Report. It supplants the Human Poverty Index, which has been used since 1997.
The index uses 10 major variables, including access to good cooking fuel, schooling, electricity, nutrition and sanitation.
It takes into account that people living in MPI poverty may not necessarily be income poor: only two-thirds of Niger's people are income poor, whereas 93 per cent are poor by the MPI, it found.
It showed that "multi-dimensional poverty" varies a lot within countries. In Delhi, 15 per cent are MPI-poor, compared with 81 per cent in Bihar.
AFP

Link to the article
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/india-far-poorer-than-africa-new-measure-shows/story-e6frg6so-1225891801078









Interesting article

[Gorilla]

Doesn't India have the biggest divide of rich-poor in the world?

The usual way to measure that is the Gini coefficient (higher is worse) though that's a measure of income, not wealth inequality. By that standard India is a little under .4, better than both India and the US at .46. I think the worst is Namibia in the 70s.

The other one is R/P 10%, the ratio of the average income of the top 10% to the average income of the bottom 10%. INdia isn't spectacularly bad on that number either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality

But, that obv. doesn't tell the whole story. Two of the big things it leaves out are 'income' in the form of food directly consumed by subsistence farmers, and also social wage from infrastructure, non-monetary food and medical benefits etc.

Whatever the conventional measures fail to take into account, India is clearly punching above its weight in the misery department.

[pranabjyoti]

It (India) really is poorer than Africa in one sense. Africa is a continent that is backward (by capitalist sense), but the basic social structure of Africa (the way we know it) is basically tribal i.e. primitive communism. While India, like other Asian countries, still have feudal remains and as per which income disparity is very much normal. So a common European and African will react against sharp income disparity but an Indian can still be apathetic. From his/her childhood, he/she has been taught that THIS IS THE NORMAL WAY OF LIFE.

[Toppler]

I would add that the majority of the rural masses in China aren't really significantly better than their counterparts in India either. The so-called "economic miracle" of Dengist China has largely only benefited a few large cities along the eastern and especially south-eastern coast.

Compared to India, they are way better off.
The child malnutrition rate in India is 50 percents, in China it is 5 percents.
And there was not mass hunger since the 1980s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_of_living_in_China .

[Toppler]

It (India) really is poorer than Africa in one sense. Africa is a continent that is backward (by capitalist sense), but the basic social structure of Africa (the way we know it) is basically tribal i.e. primitive communism. While India, like other Asian countries, still have feudal remains and as per which income disparity is very much normal. So a common European and African will react against sharp income disparity but an Indian can still be apathetic. From his/her childhood, he/she has been taught that THIS IS THE NORMAL WAY OF LIFE.

You hit it on the head there. Disgustingly through, I had a discussion about poverty in the world with my cousin and I mentioned the horrible situation in India, and she said "It is their culture. You cannot force them to abandon it, they are poor by choice because they think they'll get their reward in the afterlife".

I cannot fucking express how angry that made me. It is so fucking sick and wrong on so many goddamn levels.

But yes, culture of poverty is probably most prevalent in South Asia (not just India but Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan are ever worse).

And it makes me want to vomit. The people in post-communist countries are perhaps the most culturally sensitive to any percieved deprivation or inequality. That is why many of us think ourselves to be poor here in Slovakia while we actually have less nutritional deficiencies and poverty/inequality than the US. South Asia is the opposite extreme - the poor don't even know they can live any other way, the "middle class" and the rich think India is a developed country despite 90 percents of people suffering deprivation worse than what a prisoner in a forced labour camp experiences. There is a difference between poor, and not living a human existence. The vast majority of India is not living a human existence.

It is appearent at the first sight. In Africa, you at least have some areas that are quite nice. In every picture of India, rural, urban, whatever, you see the sloppiness, dirt and general squalor attacking your senses.
It looks worse than the nuclear-bombed wasteland in Fallout 3. It is not as much of a "developing country" as some sort of squalor Hell. The average developing country is way, way, way, way fucking better than India, in fact countries like Brazil look like France by comparision. The poverty in, say, Brazil is mostly limited to faraway rural regions and favelas. And those favelas, unlike India, don't have rivers of tuberculosis infected shit flowing through them, it fact they seem like luxury apartments compared to any Indian slum.

[Jose Gracchus]

I would add that the majority of the rural masses in China aren't really significantly better than their counterparts in India either. The so-called "economic miracle" of Dengist China has largely only benefited a few large cities along the eastern and especially south-eastern coast.

I would say probably much of the whole corpus of modern mainstream "development" literature is based, essentially, on shady statistics and trying to avoid mentioning the undesirables who have no function to capitalist profits. Aggregating entire nations into GDP and even GDP/capita is an infamous trick. The malapportionment of development and industrialization is hardly ever addressed anywhere. I mean you cannot even talk about material conditions in America, where I would say one could almost say the entire political history of the U.S. is one of contradiction between the distinct economies and property relations that existed between North and South and their consequences.

As I have become further aware of the conditions of South Asia, and rural South Asia in particular, it becomes clear that whatever my more technical and general political misgivings are about Maoist politics, that the people need desperately a Maoist victory.

[Toppler]

Still I would say the conditions in China are way, way, way better than in India, And I mean it by nutritional status etc. It is not some stats, I was in China. Mostly the rich cities, but I watched the countryside from the train, and it looked like Heaven even compared to the best Indian states. Hell, even the best Indian states have malnutrition affecting more than 20 percents of the population. The cruel reality is, India is starvation country. It is way hungrier than any country at its income level would usually be. I've talked with people who've been both to India and China, and they say it cannot be compared.

It says a lot that more people starve to death in a decade in India than in China during the GLP 1958-1961 famine. Basically, India is GLP*8. It is hard to compare South Asia with any other world region without insulting the region in question. As Robert Linsday says, he apologizes to any actual shitholes, because he didn't want to compare them with India.

"Chindia" is a myth. One is a prosperous middle income country, the other has more starvation than Africa.

Also, cultural relativism is evil. I learned it today by listening to the disgusting remark from by cousin. The "poverty is their culture and they live in it voluntary" is a more evil thought than most tenets of fascism. How can anybody think anyone can actually want poverty, which in case of India involves starving kids. If my cousin wasn't pregnant I'd probably punch her out of sheer disgust.

[Jose Gracchus]

And of course, female malnutrition and small child malnutrition leads to permanent physical harm and deficits. An instantaneous victory for socialism would not be able to repair the people due to literal physical damage done to them by the Indian social system, for a generation due to the endemic extreme malnutrition apportioned among the most vulnerable sectors, extreme disease. We're not even scratching, as you said, deeply vicious and evil cultural norms that indoctrinate people openly with the belief they deserve this.

[Omsk]

Still I would say the conditions in China are way, way, way better than in India, And I mean it by nutritional status etc.

Also, cultural relativism is evil. I learned it today by listening to the disgusting remark from by cousin. The "poverty is their culture and they do it voluntary" is a more evil thought than most tenets of fascism.
The conditions in China are good, Production of grain, the source of about 75 percent of the calories in the Chinese diet, grew at an average rate of 2.7 percent a year between 1952 and 1979, while population growth averaged almost 2 percent a year. Total grain output per capita grew from 288 kilograms a year in 1952 to 319 kilograms in 1978, an increase of only 11 percent in 26 years. In 1984, however, a remarkably good harvest produced 396 kilograms of grain per capita, an increase of 24 percent in only 6 years. In 1985 grain output fell below the peak level of 1984, to 365 kilograms per person, and recovered only partially in 1986 to 369 kilograms per capita.How ever,numbers don't count for much,what matter is,that the Chinese people are firmly on their feet.And they know they will soon over-come their problems.While the Indians are in deep problems,and the problems wont go away by themselves.
But still,the working class is miss-treated,and its influence undermined,by the western capitalists.
However,the Chinese are a hard working people,and im sure they will over-come all the problems that come with such governments.(fake socialism)

However,the main guilt of the bad situation in India and basically all of the countries of the far east - Is imperialism.

The imperialist swines fought long and hard to maintain control over the people,to turn them into slaves,but they failed,and utimally the free people prevailed,and we now have a free Vietnam,free China,etc etc.
But the damage they did is horrific,especially in India:
People forget the horrible famines that ocoured in imperialist controlled India,the many million of Indian people who died because of imperialist incompetance and stupidity,and their evil.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine_in_India

1630-1631: there was a famine in Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
1770: Indian territory ruled by the British East India Company experienced the first Bengal famine of 1770. An estimated 10 million people died.
1780-1790s: millions died of famine in Bengal, Benares, Jammu, Bombay and Madras.
1800-1825: 1 million Indians died of famine
1850-1875: 5 millions died of famine in Bengal, Orissa, Rajastan and Bihar
1875-1902: 26 million Indians died of famine (1876-1878: 10 millions)
1905-1906: famine raged in areas with the population of 3,3 million.
1906-1907: famine captured areas with the population of 13 million
1907-1908: famine captured areas populated by 49,6 million Indians.
In 1943, India experienced the second Bengal famine of 1943. Over 3 million people died.


Cultural relativism is horrible indeed,it is commonly used by the imperialists.Relativism is the bad faith of the conqueror, who has become secure enough to become a tourist.

[Sir Comradical]

Many parts of Africa are poor because they've been plagued by war but also because the productive forces of these countries are underdeveloped. However in India people go hungry even though the productive forces exist do do away with their hunger. That's the obscenity of it all.

[L.A.P.]

Some parts of India are much poorer than others, like Bihar which is one of the poorest places in the world (where many migrant workers in India come from).

Bihari represent!:thumbup:

[Toppler]

Many parts of Africa are poor because they've been plagued by war but also because the productive forces of these countries are underdeveloped. However in India people go hungry even though the productive forces exist do do away with their hunger. That's the obscenity of it all.

Yes, it is.

Compare the poverty levels of Moldova and India, 2 countries with similiar DGP per capita = roughly same productive forces per persons.

Moldova is the poorest country in Europe, but hunger is basically unknown, 2.4 percents of people live on less than 1.25 percents (a tiny amount compared to the 75 percents of India living on less than 50 cents a day) and 11.5 percents on less than 2 dollars a day (as opposed to pretty much everybody who is not upper caste in India). Moldova has about the same poverty rate as Mexico, which has a 4-5x higher GDP per capita. This is why I am proud of Central and Eastern Europe - the poverty levels here are way lower and the incomes way higher than any other countries with a similiar GDP per capita. The average Moldovan earns cca 15x as much as the average Indian despite their countries having roughly the same GDP per capita. And the GDPs per capita are way higher than Moldova's in most post-communist countries. That is why we in Slovakia have the GDP per capita a bit higher than Mexico's while having almost zero absolute poverty rate and the relative poverty level around 20 percents, which is decent for any capitalist state. There is a difference between states developed under communism and suffering an economical upheveal in the 1990s and third world countries - one are basically like the UK or France if they've undergone a recession 15 years ago around 2x as big as the Great Depression, the others (actual third worls) have never developed.

Meanwhile China was able to fully feed the vast majority their people in the 1980s with a GDP PPP per capita around 3-4x lower than modern India's. The fact that like 65 percent of Indians have TVs yet a half has malnourished kids and there are more mobile phones than toilets there. It is a truly fucked up and monstrous culture. I am getting sick from just thinking about it. If there is a hell, the rulers of India need to roast in it. For. Eternity.

[dez]

Doesn't India have the biggest divide of rich-poor in the world?

That would be Namibia.

http://www.photius.com/rankings/economy/distribution_of_family_income_gini_index_2011_0.ht ml


Brazil topped it roughly until 2006, and now its 10th place.
Took very small income decentralization policies to improve the situation a lot.


There's a strong rich and poor divide, but at the same time we have model public health system and campaigns, despite underfunding and understaff.

Mmiddle class until some years ago simply didn't start working on starter jobs, like mcdonalds, clerks and such, because it simply didn't pay. Most people that can afford college usually landed on internships or competitive jobs straight out of college / from college. Changing a wee bit now, college is becoming more accessible and jobs are starting to pay more, comparatively. If im not mistakened a doctor used to make 48 times more than a janitor.

[Toppler]

Thats brazil

The divide in Brazil has actually declined to almost USA levels now (Brazil's Gini Index 49.3 vs. USA's 45) and it is becoming a middle class nation http://www.economist.com/node/12208726 and the most unequal country is Namibia with the South Africa in the second place. SA has poverty rates almost like India with a GDP per capita like early 2000s Slovakia. A fucking shame.

A lot of the "third world" actually does not need rapid economical growth, but redistribution of wealth. As many low GDP per capita post-communist nations like Moldova prove, you can reduce extreme poverty to near zero, it just needs an almost entirely equal income distribution. The same thing explains why China has provided enough food outside the GLP famine every year after the establishment of the PRC despite having GDP per capita on the level of poor African countries until the 1990s.

[Queercommie Girl]

I agree with what people said about "cultural relativism" in general, but actually I would reject "cultural essentialism" as well. I think there is nothing wrong with "Indian culture" intrinsically. There is no reason why there wouldn't be, hypothetically, a socialist state which is also very much "Indian" culturally, just like socialist China (despite the deformations) is still "Chinese".

[Toppler]

I agree with what people said about "cultural relativism" in general, but actually I would reject "cultural essentialism" as well. I think there is nothing wrong with "Indian culture" intrinsically. There is no reason why there wouldn't be, hypothetically, a socialist state which is also very much "Indian" culturally, just like socialist China (despite the deformations) is still "Chinese".

Yeah.

I am talking about the malignant aspects of culture, those invented by the rich to enslave the poor, the rope thrown from the burgeois to the poor to hang themselves, as Robert Linsday puts it. Those need to be ellimated.

Of course I am not talking about Westernization in cultural terms. Just curing the cancer that has enveloped Indian culture. Every culture has a malignant burgeois element that is made to manipulate the poor by the rich, but the strenght of this element varies. The European, African and Far Eastern culture have relatively little of this compared to Hindiusm which is basically an invented religion to brutalize the vast majority of South Asian people. There is a lot of beautiful in Indian culture, but every enslaving element from each culture should be cut out.

[dez]

The divide in Brazil has actually declined to almost USA levels now (Brazil's Gini Index 49.3 vs. USA's 45) and it is becoming a middle class nation http://www.economist.com/node/12208726 and the most unequal country is Namibia with the South Africa in the second place. SA has poverty rates almost like India with a GDP per capita like early 2000s Slovakia. A fucking shame.

A lot of the "third world" actually does not need rapid economical growth, but redistribution of wealth. As many low GDP per capita post-communist nations like Moldova prove, you can reduce extreme poverty to near zero, it just needs an almost entirely equal income distribution. The same thing explains why China has provided enough food outside the GLP famine every year after the establishment of the PRC despite having GDP per capita on the level of poor African countries until the 1990s.


You posted as I was editting my post.
Using the CIA GINI, yeah, thats the rank, and given that they use 2005 stats its probably even better now, but brazil is still fairly unequal.

Check the post I editted.

[Toppler]

but brazil is still fairly unequal.

Yeah. So is the USA. Capitalist states are not going to be anything else, with a few exceptions (social democratic states and post-communist states - which were de-povertized and equalized under socialism and now are slowly going back to capitalist norms).

This is why we are socialists.

[dez]

Yeah. So is the USA. Capitalist states are not going to be anything else, with a few exceptions (social democratic states and post-communist states - which were de-povertized and equalized under socialism and now are slowly going back to capitalist norms).

This is why we are socialists.

Don't think brazil is a fully capitalist country, I see it as an oligarchy/kleptocracy with market economy. And by fairly I mean fairly, people in slums are beggining to be inserted in consumerist culture (getting cable for the first time, in 48m2 houses for families of 6).

[Toppler]

Don't think brazil is a fully capitalist country, I see it as an oligarchy/kleptocracy with market economy. And by fairly I mean fairly, people in slums are beggining to be inserted in consumerist culture (getting cable for the first time, in 48m2 houses for families of 6).

It is a fully capitalist country. What else it is, feudal? Any country that functions under the capitalist mode of production is capitalist, Norway to Congo. There is no such thing as "partially capitalist". Regulated capitalism is generally way better than the unregulated sort through. If anything Brazil is probably more capitalist than the USA as there are even less checks and balances to regulate the capitalist system. A fully "free market" system would probably be an oligarchy/kleptocracy.

[Toppler]

Also, China vs. India proves that even through state capitalism is far from great, it works way better than Mad Max style semi-feudal aristocracy disguised as democracy.

[Toppler]

To be not misunderstood, I am not saying USA is like Brazil, only that Brazil is only little more unequal than USA today, of course in Brazil this inequality is more jarring as it has a lower income overall.

USA's horrible inequality when compared to most developed and many developing countries is masked by its immense wealth, which means that even through the poor have much, much, much less than the rich, they still have enough to be kept calm, unlike in Latin America. It is still appearant through. The fact that ghettos exist in a country with a GDP PPP per capita of more than 47000 USD is shameful.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

The European, African and Far Eastern culture have relatively little of this compared to Hindiusm which is basically an invented religion to brutalize the vast majority of South Asian people.

That's a huge oversimplification. Hinduism is a broad term that refers to many cultural aspects from Indian history, including the caste system. But there are many Hindus who rejected the caste system or who argued that it was unenlightened and materialistic.

[Toppler]

That's a huge oversimplification. Hinduism is a broad term that refers to many cultural aspects from Indian history, including the caste system. But there are many Hindus who rejected the caste system or who argued that it was unenlightened and materialistic.

Point taken. But I think you people know what I meant by "Hinduism"...

[dez]

It is a fully capitalist country. What else it is, feudal? Any country that functions under the capitalist mode of production is capitalist, Norway to Congo. There is no such thing as "partially capitalist". Regulated capitalism is generally way better than the unregulated sort through. If anything Brazil is probably more capitalist than the USA as there are even less checks and balances to regulate the capitalist system. A fully "free market" system would probably be an oligarchy/kleptocracy.

Some people, specially trotskyists, make that claim. I don't agree with it, in a good deal because brazil never experienced anything like feudalism. No serfdom, no 3 estate system.



The economy is fairly different, same goes for people's behavior. People don't eat out (much less restaurants, and prices more expensive), they don't have access to a range of commodities as wide as in other countries (even middle class) and costs of basic items are prohibitive, people have to struggle much harder to make ends meet (having a job usually doesn't mean shit in terms of paying bills). You don't have as much of this "make money" mentality, although people do want goods (and can't afford them).


Its not that brazil is a regulated capitalist country, there are attempts to do it, its literally a banana republic that is on the process of diversifying its economy. Most production is large scale, big companies rule most of the market (while most jobs are on the service sector), that means there are cartels defining prices of quite a few goods, and people simply have to take it. Cars, for an example. Usually a working class person has to work for years (cost of the cheapest car is between 30 to 40 minimum wages) and get indebted (interests are much harsher... People simply can't live off paying debt. They just go bankrupt, lose a few rights for five years and then start over again) to have the possibility of purchasing one. Its associated with sexuality, and brazilians are obsessed with sex, so cars are an obsession as well.
To illustrate what I mean, a guy built his own car out of metal, wood and a motorcycle engine, and still dreams about purchasing his own car (any that works would probably do):
http://g1.globo.com/carros/noticia/2011/03/ex-mendigo-constroi-carro-com-martelo-e-talhadeira-na-paraiba.html

Buying and selling goods isn't that much of a part of our realities, its something that is beggining to materialize (we never had a proper bourgeoise. Large companies and the agricultural oligarchy were foreign and preceded even the organization of our society).

[pranabjyoti]

And I want to add one point in the debate. Basically, Indians and Indian mentality are now becoming a threat to world proletariat and workers around the world. Basically, to Indian mentality, everything is something closely resembling the feudal master-slave relation and as per them, the industrialists/capitalists "feeds" the workers and they must be grateful for that to the "master". Opposing the "master" by strike, even arguing with him/her is some kind of sin and sinner must be punished. Now they are spreading around the world with this kind of poisonous mentality and doing immense harm to workers.
Bustards like Bush and Botha (ruler of apartheid South Africa) were fond of Indians very much. Mr. Bush often presents Indians to others as what a "minority" community should be.

[Robocommie]

And I want to add one point in the debate. Basically, Indians and Indian mentality are now becoming a threat to world proletariat and workers around the world. Basically, to Indian mentality, everything is something closely resembling the feudal master-slave relation and as per them, the industrialists/capitalists "feeds" the workers and they must be grateful for that to the "master". Opposing the "master" by strike, even arguing with him/her is some kind of sin and sinner must be punished. Now they are spreading around the world with this kind of poisonous mentality and doing immense harm to workers.esents Indians to others as what a "minority" community should be.

See, you love to go on about this stuff, about the backwards mentality of Indian workers and how fucked up Indian workers are, and what a danger Indian workers pose to the global proletariat, but if someone from outside of India were to say this, I'd have a hard time seeing this as anything but racist, essentialist bullshit.

[Nehru]

And I want to add one point in the debate. Basically, Indians and Indian mentality are now becoming a threat to world proletariat and workers around the world. Basically, to Indian mentality, everything is something closely resembling the feudal master-slave relation and as per them, the industrialists/capitalists "feeds" the workers and they must be grateful for that to the "master". Opposing the "master" by strike, even arguing with him/her is some kind of sin and sinner must be punished. Now they are spreading around the world with this kind of poisonous mentality and doing immense harm to workers.
Bustards like Bush and Botha (ruler of apartheid South Africa) were fond of Indians very much. Mr. Bush often presents Indians to others as what a "minority" community should be.

Absolutely right, but I'd like to add that this is a South Asian problem and not just restricted to India.

[Nehru]

See, you love to go on about this stuff, about the backwards mentality of Indian workers and how fucked up Indian workers are, and what a danger Indian workers pose to the global proletariat, but if someone from outside of India were to say this, I'd have a hard time seeing this as anything but racist, essentialist bullshit.

He is right because South Asia is essentially feudalist, and the master-slave mentality pervades almost every sphere of relationship, not just workers-boss. It is there in teacher-student, celebrity-common man, rich-poor, father-son ... every kind of relationship. It is the norm. Equality is frowned upon, as Pranab says, and the status quo is maintained. This will be impossible for people outside SA to understand.

[Robocommie]

He is right because South Asia is essentially feudalist, and the master-slave mentality pervades almost every sphere of relationship, not just workers-boss. It is there in teacher-student, celebrity-common man, rich-poor, father-son ... every kind of relationship. It is the norm. Equality is frowned upon, as Pranab says, and the status quo is maintained. This will be impossible for people outside SA to understand.

Well, I won't claim to be truly familiar with SA or India, so I can't really comment any further. I will say though, that I don't much care for this idea that Indian immigrants are making things harder for the global proletariat, to me that line of thinking doesn't seem likely to result in anything but the propping up of first world anti-immigrant nationalists.

I do want to note bemusedly though, that as a Trot, here your agreements with Pranab will end. ;)

[red cat]

This whole theory of Indian workers being submissive in nature is absolute nonsense. The Indian working class today leads the largest revolutionary movement of all times. Apart from the main revolutionary movement, there are many examples of workers attacking their bosses. We have studied an example of spontaneous annihilation by Indian workers in a thread here only a few weeks back.

The "workers" being referred to as submissive to the capitalist system are actually that part of the Indian population that works outside of India or in the elite portion of the service sector. Those who have jobs in this elite sector almost always take a reactionary stand in social matters, because they often come from rich families, are relatively much better off than the vast majority of Indians, their job consists of technically helping the superstructures of big companies; and for these reasons they somewhat equate themselves with their bosses. Very surprisingly, they oppose strikes etc. as a matter of principles, and always support reactionary and even racist policies of the government like eviction of tribals etc. So Maoists do not classify them as the working class, even though surplus value is extracted from them and they do not take part in the decision-making process. According to their social role, they are actually the elite portion of the petite-bourgeoisie, and the revolutionary faction within them is very small. They are expected to join the revolutionary movement as a class only after the revolutionary waves damage imperialist and comprador capital to an extent which results in massive job-cuts or wage-decrements in their fields. One classic example of this is the elite portion of the IT sector. There are around fifty thousand IT professionals who fall into this category.

Apart from this, there are true proletarians who work in foreign countries. For example, manual labourers who go to work to the gulf or Indonesia and Malaysia. In these countries there are no big revolutionary movements, and they face certain amount of cultural chauvinism and even racism from the local population. In this situation, what do our comrades expect from them? Should these few scattered workers start new CPs and begin revolutions wherever they work, or should the native proletariat take the lead and organize them ? Which one sounds more practical ?

[pranabjyoti]

See, you love to go on about this stuff, about the backwards mentality of Indian workers and how fucked up Indian workers are, and what a danger Indian workers pose to the global proletariat, but if someone from outside of India were to say this, I'd have a hard time seeing this as anything but racist, essentialist bullshit.
But the problem is that it has been spoken by someone from inside India and who had spent all his life till this day inside India and among Indians. People outside are rarely aware of this facet of India and some have some kind of peculiar "noble" ideas about India. I want to act as an eye-opener to them, you (and others) may be bored about that but I am sorry.

[Toppler]

Organ, what are you describe is that Brazil is not a fully consumerist society. It has nothing to do with capitalism. Brazil is capitalist regardless of if its people eat out regularly or not. Most of the world is capitalist and most of the world is poor. And Brazil is better off than most of the developing world.

[t.shonku]

And I want to add one point in the debate. Basically, Indians and Indian mentality are now becoming a threat to world proletariat and workers around the world. Basically, to Indian mentality, everything is something closely resembling the feudal master-slave relation and as per them, the industrialists/capitalists "feeds" the workers and they must be grateful for that to the "master". Opposing the "master" by strike, even arguing with him/her is some kind of sin and sinner must be punished. Now they are spreading around the world with this kind of poisonous mentality and doing immense harm to workers.
Bustards like Bush and Botha (ruler of apartheid South Africa) were fond of Indians very much. Mr. Bush often presents Indians to others as what a "minority" community should be.

I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH COMRADE PRANABJYOTI !



It’s indeed the case in India ! The feudal system in India has existed in India for thousands of year all it has done is to adapt and survive from time to time, today the so called democracy that you see in India is the same feudalism but in a different cover. The roots of feudalism have been spread deep down


The brainwashing of the working class in India is carried out by various reactionary entities ranging from corporate media , corrupt religious leader , film industry, even reactionary elements in education systems are playing there part too.



The working class is blackmailed to believe that raising voice against the capitalist factory owners is like “biting the hand that feeds you” , strikers are labeled as anti-progress element and are demonized and potrayed by media as the enemy of other peace full workers , and they are also potrayed as people responsible for factory lockouts .While in reality the truth is something else. Not only that protesting against land grab by industrialists are also potrayed as anti-progress and anyone who joins such protest movement is labeled as anti-progress and enemy of state and draconian laws are slapped on their face.



All those great Indian progress that you see and hear these days are nothing but a big bag of lies , the only way India is doing those is by sucking everything from poor rural populace and depositing them in coffers of corporates. And also by making factory workers in urban areas work until they die, ( commonwealth game in India is a recent example of such) factory workers in Ghaziabad live in slums and eat a bread and a cup of tea for whole day while nearby New Delhi basks in glory and the corporates eat kababs . And if you protest you will be thrown into jail under draconian laws like UNPA.

[pranabjyoti]

And if you protest you will be thrown into jail under draconian laws like UNPA.
Correction:UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act). It's actually "democratic" Indian version of "democratic" US Patriot Act. I hope readers know what it is.

[t.shonku]

I Some parts of India are much poorer than others, like Bihar which is one of the poorest places in the world (where many migrant workers in India come from).







Bihar is not the only state with feudal problems and oppression and Biharis are not the only peoples with problems, I agree that condition in Bihar is very bad but if you look a little closely you will find that whole India faces the same type of problems one way or the other in some form or the other. Let us look at Amlasol in West Midnapore during the early 2000s the CPI(Marxist) government of West Bengal state deliberately caused food shortages for the tribals living there and caused massive starvation the condition became so worse that the peoples were forced to eat leaves of tree. Now let us look at Mumbai , while the world thinks Mumbai as a shiny city but remember that the Dharavi slums there hosts a huge amount of poor urban populace who live in sub-human condition. Now let us take a look at New Delhi , while Delhi can boast all it want but in reality Ghaziabad which is adjacent to Delhi is full of slums that houses workers who live in sub-human type condition . Now let us look at another city Calcutta while this city has in it shiny places exclusively built for rich people like Salt Lake and New Alipore but remember even Calcutta has a very huge poor urban populace living in slums dotted all over the city. Have you ever visited Muslim neibhourhoods in Calcutta ? Most of those places look like ghetto from 1940s Jewish ghettos



That is why always saying that Bihar is the only poor place and Biharis are the only oppressed mass is a wrong concept, oppression exists in every corner and every inch of India , in cities , in forest , in paddy fields , everywhere …… because the whole India is ruled by a bunch of modern day feudal lords with means of production in their hand and a large supply of armed forces.



By the way Bihar also has highly rich land lords who are mainly high castes these dudes live in palace styled houses, if I am not wrong people call them Thakurs and stuff like that, anyways these dudes suck up life and blood out of poor Dalits


Thoughts should be given to liberate all , we should not confine our self in discussing about a single region or a single caste or a single tribe we must try to talk about the liberation as a whole, every one needs to be saved from the evil feudal system , no one should be left out . Hindus, Muslim, Dalits and Tribes all have to unite as a single working class fighting force and overthrow the feudal empire. Let us not divide the working class on basis of region, religion or caste . All working class should unite and form a People’s Army.

[t.shonku]

Correction:UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act). It's actually "democratic" Indian version of "democratic" US Patriot Act. I hope readers know what it is.



Sorry for my spelling mistake, yes you are right it is UAPA


India government calls itself democratic yet it considers protests , posting posters and talking about human rights "Un-Lawful" and books protesters on UAPA law (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act)


Yes you are right this UAPA is Indian version of US's Patriot act, what else can we except from this Indian rulers who are nothing more than America's puppets.

[Nehru]

I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH COMRADE PRANABJYOTI !

It’s indeed the case in India !

This is the case throughout South Asia. Sri Lanka, Pakistan etc. are no better, and I'd say they're much, much worse. This feudalist master-slave mentality is not just a religious (caste) problem restricted to Hindus; it's now become a cultural problem affecting even non-Hindus such as Muslims, Christians, and the rest throughout South Asia.

[Toppler]

Yeah, but isn't the abject poverty in Sri Lanka almost nonexistent compared to the rest of South Asia? From the outside it seems to be the best state in South Asia.

[t.shonku]

This is the case throughout South Asia. Sri Lanka, Pakistan etc. are no better, and I'd say they're much, much worse. This feudalist master-slave mentality is not just a religious (caste) problem restricted to Hindus; it's now become a cultural problem affecting even non-Hindus such as Muslims, Christians, and the rest throughout South Asia.


India’s Hindu corporate feudal state is much more powerful and sophisticated than it’s neighbours . The feudal system in India has adapted and evolved with time and this makes them that much more formidable force to reckon with, they have access to means of production, they have a strong armed force when compared to most of its neighbours whose armies are a bunch of tin-pots , moreover India has huge support from west , this is exactly the reason why CNN and BBC is busy reporting about killings by Gaddafi in Libya, they are busy reporting about killings of Tamils in Sri Lanka by Lankan troops ( no offense meant , I know you are Tamil) but when Indian soldiers commit genocide in Chhattisgarh by killing tribal Adivasis when they rape women and chop off fingers of an infant CNN and BBC keeps quiet , when tribals get killed in hand of Indian troops and women get raped on a day to day basis in Lalgarh the western media keeps mum, when Kashmiri protestors are shot dead CNN downplays , when Dalit women are paraded naked in India’s streets raped and then killed the BBC and CNN keeps mum , but CNN is very active in accusing Mr Assange of wikileaks on grounds of sexual crimes ( there are doubts on whether he did it). What does this all prove????????? This proves that all tough oppressive feudalism exists in South Asia but in case of India it is very sophisticated and due to western backing the horror stories in India never surfaces , that doesn’t mean that India is in any way less than it’s neighbours in oppressive politics in many respect it outweighs them.

[t.shonku]

The article posted below will give you an idea about how powerful and influential India's feudal ruling class is, they follow a expansionist policy which aims at engulfing the whole southern Asia and bring it under their influence.So people here who are drawing an easy analogy between India and rest of it's neighbours should remember that India's feudalism is very sophisticated and powerful combined with help from west and Russians it is a force to reckon with.




RAW : An Instrument of Indian Imperialism

Isha Khan Dhaka, Bangladesh

The Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), created in 1968, has assumed a significant status in the formulation of India's domestic and foreign policies, particularly the later. Working directly under the Prime Minister, it has over the years become and effective instrument of India's national power. In consonance with Kautilya's precepts, RAW's doctrine is based on the principle of waging a continuousseries of battles of intrigues and secret wars.
RAW, ever since its creation, has always been a vital, though unobtrusive, actor in Indian policy-making apparatus. But it is the massive international dimensions of RAW operations that merit a closer examination. To the credit of this organization, it has in very short span of time mastered the art of spy warfare. Credit must go to Indira Gandhi who in the late 1970s gave it a changed and much more dynamic role. To suit her much publicized Indira Doctrine, (actually India Doctrine) Mrs. Gandhi specifically asked RAW to create a powerful organ within the organization which could undertake covert operations in neighboring countries. It is this capability that makes RAW a more fearsome agency than its superior KGB, CIA, MI-6, BND and the Mossad.
Its internal role is confined only in monitoring events having bearing on the external threat. RAW's boss works directly under the Prime Minister. An Additional Secretary to the Government of India, under the Director RAW, is responsible for the Office of Special Operations (OSO), intelligence collected from different countries, internal security (under the Director General of Security), the electronic/technical section and general administration. The Additional Secretary as well as the Director General of Security isalso under the Director of RAW. DG Security has two important sections: the Aviation Research Center (ARC) and the Special Services Bureau (SSB). The joint Director has specified desks with different regional divisions/areas (countries):
Area one. Pakistan: Area two, China and South East Asia: Area three, the Middle East and Africa: and Area four, other countries. Aviation Research Center (ARC) is responsible for interception, monitoring and jamming of target country's communication systems. It has the most sophisticated electronic equipment and also a substantial number of aircraft equipped with state-of- the art eavesdropping devices. ARC was strengthened in mid-1987 by the addition of three new aircraft, the Gulf Stream-3. These aircraft can reportedly fly at an altitude of 52,000 ft and has an operating range of 5000 kms. ARC also controls a number of radar stations located close to India's borders. Its aircraft also carry out oblique reconnaissance, along the border with
Bangladesh, China, Nepal and Pakistan.
RAW having been given a virtual carte blanche to conduct destabilization operations in neighboring countries inimical to India to seriously undertook restructuring of its organization accordingly. RAW was given a list of seven countries (Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan, Pakistan and Maldives) whom India considered its principal regional protagonists. It very soon systematically and
brilliantly crafted covert operations in all these countries to coerce, destabilize and subvert them in consonance with the foreign policy objectives of the Indian Government.
RAW's operations against the regional countries were conducted with great professional skill and expertise. Central to the operations was the establishment of a huge network inside the target countries. It used and targeted political dissent, ethnic divisions, economic backwardness and criminal elements within these states to foment subversion, terrorism and sabotage. Having thus created the conducive environments, RAW stage-managed future events in these countries in such a way that military intervention appears a natural concomitant of the events. In most cases, RAW's hand remained hidden, but more often that not target countries soon began unearthing those "hidden hand". A brief expose of RAW's operations in neighboring countries would reveal the full expanse of its regional ambitions to suit India Doctrine ( Open Secrets. India's Intelligence Unveiled by M K Dhar. Manas Publications, New Delhi, 2005).
Bangladesh
Indian intelligence agencies were involved in erstwhile East Pakistan,now Bangladesh since early 1960s. Its operatives were in touch with Sheikh Mujib for quite some time. Sheikh Mujib went to Agartala in 1965. The famous Agartala case was unearthed in 1967. In fact, the main purpose of raising RAW in 1968 was to organise covert operations in Bangladesh. As early as in 1968, RAW was given a green signal to begin mobilising all its resources for the impending surgical intervention in erstwhile East Pakistan. When in July 1971 General Manekshaw told Prime Minister Indira Gandhi that the army would not be ready till December to intervene in Bangladesh, she quickly turned to RAW for help. RAW was ready. Its officers used Bengali refugees to set up Mukti Bahini. Using this outfit as a cover, Indian military sneakeddeep into Bangladesh. The story of Mukti Bahini and RAW's role in its creation and training is now well-known. RAW never concealed its Bangladesh operations. Interested readers may have details in Asoka Raina's Inside RAW: the story of India's secret service published by Vikas Publishing House of New Delhi.
The creation of Bangladesh was masterminded by RAW in complicity with KGB under the covert clauses of Indo-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Co-operation (adopted as 25-year Indo-Bangladesh Treaty of Friendship and Co-operation in 1972).RAW retained a keen interest in Bangladesh even after its independence. Mr. Subramaniam Swamy, Janata Dal MP, a close associate of Morarji Desai said that Rameswar Nath Kao, former Chief of RAW, and Shankaran Nair upset about Sheikh Mujib's assassination chalked a plot to kill General Ziaur Rahman. However, when Morarji Desai came into power in 1977 he was indignant at RAW's role in Bangladesh and ordered operations in Bangladesh to be called off; but by then RAW had already gone too far. General Zia continued to be in power for quite some time but he was assassinated after Indira Gandhi returned to power, though she denied her involvement in his assassination ( Weekly Sunday, Calcutta,18 September, 1988 ).
RAW was involved in training of Chakma tribals and Shanti Bahini who carry out subversive activities in Bangladesh. It has also unleashed a well-organized plan of psychological warfare, creation of polarisation among the armed forces, propaganda by false allegations of use of Bangladesh territory by ISI, creation of dissension's among the political parties and religious sects, control of media, denial of river waters, and propping up a host of disputes in order to keep Bangladesh under a constant political and socio-economic pressure ( "RAW and Bangladesh" by Mohammad Zainal Abedin, November 1995, RAW In Bangladesh: Portrait of an Aggressive Intelligence, by Abu Rushd, Dhaka).

Sikkim and Bhutan
Sikkim was the easiest and most docile prey for RAW. Indira Gandhi annexed the Kingdom of Sikkim in mid-1970s, to be an integral part of India. The deposed King Chogyal Tenzig Wangehuck was closely followed by RAW's agents until his death in 1992.
Bhutan, like Nepal and Sikkim, is a land-locked country, totally dependent on India. RAW has developed links with members of the royal family as well as top bureaucrats to implements its policies. It has cultivated its agents amongst Nepalese settlers and is in a position to create difficulties for the Government of Bhutan. In fact, the King of Bhutan has been reduced to the position of merely acquiescing into New Delhi's decisions and go by its dictates in the international arena.
Sri Lanka
Post- independence Sri Lanka, inspire of having a multi-sectoral population was a peaceful country till 1971 and was following independent foreign policy. During 1971 Indo-Pakistan war despite of heavy pressure from India, Sri Lanka allowed Pakistan's civil and military aircraft and ships to stage through its air and sea ports with unhindered re-fueling facilities. It also had permitted Israel to
establish a nominal presence of its intelligence training set up. It permitted the installation of high powered transmitter by Voice of America (VOA) on its territory, which was resented by India.
It was because of these 'irritants' in the Indo-Sri Lanka relations that Mrs Indira Gandhi planned to bring Sri Lanka into the fold of the so-called Indira Doctrine (India Doctrine) Kao was told by Gandhi to repeat their Bangladesh success. RAW went looking for militants it could train to destabilize the regime. Camps were set up in Tamil Nadu and old RAW guerrillas trainers were dug out of retirement. RAW began arming the Tamil Tigers and training them at centers such as Gunda and Gorakhpur. As a sequel to this ploy, Sri Lanka was forced into Indianpower-web when Indo-Sri Lanka Accord of 1987 was singed and Indian Peace-Keeping-Force (IPKF) landed in Sri Lanka.
The Ministry of External Affairs was also upset at RAW's role in Sri Lanka as they felt that RAW was still continuing negotiations with the Tamil Tiger leader Parabhakran in contravention to the Indian government's foreign policy. According to R Swaminathan, (former Special Secretary of RAW) it was this outfit which was used as the intermediary between Rajib Gandhi and Tamil leader Parabhakaran. The former Indian High Commissioner in Sri Lanka, J.N. Dixit even accused RAW of having given Rs. five corore to the LTTE. At a later stage, RAW built up the EPRLF and ENDLF to fight against the LTTE which turned the situation in Sri Lanka highly volatile and uncertain later on.(Rohan Gunaratna and J N Dixit ).
Maldives
Under a well-orchestrated RAW plan, on November 30 1988 a 300 to 400-strong well trained force of mercenaries, armed with automatic weapons, initially said to be of unknown origin, infiltrated in boats and stormed the capital of Maldives. They resorted to indiscriminate shooting and took high-level government officials as hostages. At the Presidential Palace, the small contingent of loyal national guards offered stiff resistance, which enabled President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom to shift to a safe place from where he issued urgent appeals for help from India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Britain and the United States.
The Indian Prime Ministe Rajiv Gandhi reacted promptly and about 1600 combat troops belonging to 50 Independent Para-Brigade in conjunction with Indian Naval units landed at Male under the code-name Operation Cactus. A number of IAF transport aircraft, escorted by fighters, were used for landing personnel, heavy equipment and supplies. Within hours of landing, the Indian troops flushed out the attackers form the streets and hideouts. Some of them surrendered to Indian troops, and many were captured by Indian Naval units while trying to escape along with their hostages in a Maldivian ship, Progress Light. Most of the 30 hostages including Ahmed Majtaba, Maldives Minister of Transport, were released. The Indian Government announced the success of the Operation Cactus and complimented the armed forces for a good job done.
The Indian Defense Minister while addressing IAF personnel at Bangalore claimed that the country's prestige has gone high because of the peace-keeping role played by the Indian forces in Maldives. The International Community in general and the South Asian states in particular, however, viewed with suspicious the over-all concept and motives of the operation. The western media described it as a display of newly-acquired military muscle by India and its growing role as a regional police. Although the apparent identification of the two Maldivian nationals could be a sufficient reason, at its face value, to link it with the previous such attempts by the mercenaries, yet other converging factors, indicative of involvement of external hand, could hardly be ignored. Sailing of the mercenaries from Manar and Kankasanturai in Sri Lanka, which were in complete control of IPKF, and the timing and speed of the Indian intervention proved their involvement beyond any doubt.
Nepal
Ever since the partition of the sub-continent India has been openly meddling in Nepal's internal affairs by contriving internal strife and conflicts through RAW to destabilize the successive legitimate governments and prop up puppet regimes which would be more amenable Indian machinations. Armed insurrections were sponsored and abetted by RAW and later requests for military assistance to control these were managed through pro-India leaders. India has been aiding and inciting the Nepalese dissidents to collaborate with the Nepali Congress. For this they were supplied arms whenever the King or the Nepalese Government appeared to be drifting away from the Indian dictates and impinging on Indian hegemonic designs in the region. In fact, under the garb of the so-called democratization measures, the

Maoists were actively encouraged to collect arms to resort to open rebellion against the legitimate Nepalese governments. The contrived rebellions provided India an opportunity to intervene militarily in Nepal, ostensibly to control the insurrections which were masterminded by the RAW itself. It was an active replay of the Indian performance in Sri Lanka and Maldives a few years earlier. RAW is particularly aiding the people of the Indian-origin and has been providing them with arms and ammunition. RAW has also infiltrated the ethnic Nepali refugees whohave been extradited by Bhutan and have taken refuge in the eastern Nepal. RAW can exploit its links with these refugees in either thatare against the Indian interest. Besides the Nepalese economy istotally controlled by the Indian money lenders, financiers andbusiness mafia ( RAW's Machination In South Asia by Shastra Dutta Pant, Kathmandu, 2003).
Afghanistan
Since December 1979, throughout Afghan War, KGB, KHAD (WAD) (former Afghan intelligence outfit) and RAW stepped up their efforts to concentrate on influencing and covert exploitation of the tribes on both sides of the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. There was intimate co-ordination between the three intelligence agencies not only in Afghanistan but in destabilization of Pakistan through subversion and sabotage plan related to Afghan refugees and mujahideen, the tribal belt and inside Pakistan. They jointly organized spotting and recruitment of hostile tribesmen and their training in guerrilla warfare, infiltration, subversion, sabotage and establishment of saboteur force/terrorist organizations in the pro-Afghan tribes of Pakistan in order to carry out bomb explosions in Afghan refugee camps
in NWFP and Baluchistan to threaten and pressurize them to return to Afghanistan. They also carried out bomb blasts in populated areas deep inside Pakistan to create panic and hatred in the minds of locals against Afghan refugee mujahideen for pressurizing Pakistan to change its policies on Afghanistan.
Pakistan
Pakistan's size, strength and potential have always overawed the Indians. It, therefore, always considers her main opponent in her expansionist doctrine. India's animosity towards Pakistan is psychologically and ideologically deep-rooted and unassailable. India's war with Pakistan in 1965 over Kashmir and in 1971 which resulted in the dismemberment of Pakistan and creation of Bangladesh are just two examples.
Raw considers Sindh as Pakistan's soft under-belly. It has, therefore, made it the prime target for sabotage and subversion. RAW has enrolled and extensive network of agents and anti-government elements, and is convinced that with a little push restless Sindh will revolt. Taking fullest advantage of the agitation in Sindh in 1983 and the ethnic riots, which have continued till today, RAW has deeply penetrated and cultivated dissidents and secessionists, thereby creating hard-liners unlikely to allow peace to return to Sindh. Raw is also involved similarly in Balochistan.
RAW is also being blamed for confusing the ground situation is Kashmir so as to keep the world attention away from the gross human rights violations by India in India occupied Kashmir. ISI being almost 20 years older than RAW and having acquired much higher standard of efficiency in its functioning , has become the prime target of RAW's designs, ISI is considered to be a stumbling block in RAW's operations, and has, therefore, been made a target of all kinds of massive misinformation and propaganda campaign. The tirade against ISI continues unabated. The idea is to keep ISI on the defensive by fictionalising and alleging its hand is supporting Kashmiri Mujahideen and Sikhs in Punjab. RAW'S fixation against ISI has taken the shape of ISI-phobia, as in India everyone traces down the origin of all happenings and shortcomings to the ISI . Be it an abduction at Banglaore or a student's kidnapping at Cochin, be it a bank robbery at Calcutta or a financial scandal in Bombay, be it a bomb blast at Bombay or Bangladesh, they find an ISI hand in it (RAW :GLOBAL AND REGIONAL AMBITIONS" Edited by Rashid Ahmad Khan and Muhammad Saleem, Published by Islamabad Policy Research Institute, Asia Printers, Islamabad, 2005).
RAW over the years has admirably fulfilled its tasks of destabilising target states through unbridled export of terrorism. The India Doctrine spelt out a difficult and onerous role for RAW. It goes to its credit that it has accomplished its assigned objectives due to the endemic weakness in the state apparatus of those nations and failure of their leaders.

[Gorilla]

When workers in a given country have a submissive "mentality" there is usually a reason for it.

In Japan, for instance, workers are supposed to be submissive to bosses because of something essential in Japanese character. LOL. Anybody who thinks that has not read any Japanese history before the Occupation - the island was once the home of extraordinarily violent labor actions, with active communist backing.

To the extent the stereotype is true at all, it has to do with a company-union system established violently under fascism and then again under US occupation, a police force that is able to legally detain anyone basically as long as they want for no particular reason, omnipresence of yakuza intimidation in everyday life, etc.

It's not "mentality". It's an active system of violence and intimidation against workers.

I would guess something similar is true in India too. I don't know as much about conditions on the ground, but I'd guess brutal, corrupt police and the ubiquity of Hindu chauvinist organizations, which to my eyes seem functionally indistinguishable from mafias, are a big part of it.

[t.shonku]

I would guess something similar is true in India too. I don't know as much about conditions on the ground, but I'd guess brutal, corrupt police and the ubiquity of Hindu chauvinist organizations, which to my eyes seem functionally indistinguishable from mafias, are a big part of it.


:thumbup1: Absolutely agree with you in this case. Hindu nationalist reactionaries are the biggest bully around and are helped out by the Hindu dominated society and the government as a whole moreover the Army and Police is not only corrupt but also a bunch of Hindu fundamentalists , recent involvement of Indian Army in bomb blasts in Mosques and it's nexus with hindu nationalist reactionaries like RSS,VHP etc etc is prove of that

[Vargha Poralli]

See, you love to go on about this stuff, about the backwards mentality of Indian workers and how fucked up Indian workers are, and what a danger Indian workers pose to the global proletariat, but if someone from outside of India were to say this, I'd have a hard time seeing this as anything but racist, essentialist bullshit.

Well from his name I assume he is from India. He might not be a racist essentiallist but a typical Indian middle class Left dominated by Stalnism.

I would like him to explain If the workers in India are so backward and obedient to their masters why there are even news about strikes in Indian in last decade alone.

1. Mumbai Motormen Strike 2010 (http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-05-04/mumbai/28301444_1_motormen-western-railway-trains)

2. BEST Employees Strike 2007 (http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/004200704191122.htm)

3.Strike at Hyundai Plant 2010 (http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2010-06-08/news/27577714_1_labour-woes-largest-car-exporter-hyundai-motor-india-md)

4. Strike at Nokia Plant 2010 (http://profit.ndtv.com/news/show/nokia-workers-at-chennai-plant-go-on-strike-82058)

5. Hero Honda Plant Strike - 2006 (http://www.indianexpress.com/news/hero-honda-workers-strike-production-halted/2238/)

6. Transport workers strike in TN 2001 (http://www.hindu.com/fline/fl1824/18240400.htm)

7. Government Staff strike 2003 TN (http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/jul/02tn.htm)

I can't list out every such worker actions happened in India as it would be time consuming and many such events would be available only in regional news which don't have much Internet presence.

AT the same time I would also like to point out 2 historical incidents Bombay Textile strikes of 1982 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Bombay_Textile_Strike) and 1974 Railways strike (http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1819/18190750.htm) which were breaken by Indian government with an Iron Fist. George fernandes who was Union leader during the railways strike described the Indian States response to it as " We have prepared for a strike but we have not prepared for a civil war". So much brutality was used by Security forces to break the strike that Indian Armed forces where ordered to operate the trains to keep up essentail supplies.

I assume that he is just an Middle class radical who has no connection with actual working class activities in India. It is typical of Indian Middle Class to hold out actaully toling workers and farmers in contempt. That is the reason you can see instead of these activities they hold up Naxalites fighting from jungles. The former does not appear to be daring and adventorus as the latter.

----------------------

Yeah, but isn't the abject poverty in Sri Lanka almost nonexistent compared to the rest of South Asia? From the outside it seems to be the best state in South Asia.

Yeah . Who cares about the recent ongoing democide of the Tamil people and repression of protests against it.

-----------------------------

As for the topic yes section of India is worse than that of Africa. What else do you expect from a capitalist state where the ruling class is concerned about increase of profits alone ?

Add to the fact that entire African continent has 23% of world population while India alone(excluding other countries in the Subcontinet) has 17% of world population. And Indian agriculture depends heavily on Seasonal rainfal in most parts of the country and is susceptible to climate change. Recent food inflation is causing simmering discontent in India which is slowly but surely eroding away the faith of People in the Indian State.

It is also bullshit that Indian state does not worry about these things. Indian government to preserve its existence subsidises a lot of products - food included. But we as communists must know that these are not solutions but just short term adjustments to presense capitalism.


These woes will not be solved by the Capitalist Indian State which is obvious fact.

[t.shonku]

Kindly go through the followings threads in this forum to get a better understanding of Indian society


Spring thunder on India's bosom -2



http://www.revleft.com/vb/spring-thunder-indias-t132890/index.html





2.Conditions of Dalit in India

http://www.revleft.com/vb/conditions-dalit-india-t151081/index.html

[pranabjyoti]

When workers in a given country have a submissive "mentality" there is usually a reason for it.

In Japan, for instance, workers are supposed to be submissive to bosses because of something essential in Japanese character. LOL. Anybody who thinks that has not read any Japanese history before the Occupation - the island was once the home of extraordinarily violent labor actions, with active communist backing.

To the extent the stereotype is true at all, it has to do with a company-union system established violently under fascism and then again under US occupation, a police force that is able to legally detain anyone basically as long as they want for no particular reason, omnipresence of yakuza intimidation in everyday life, etc.

It's not "mentality". It's an active system of violence and intimidation against workers.

I would guess something similar is true in India too. I don't know as much about conditions on the ground, but I'd guess brutal, corrupt police and the ubiquity of Hindu chauvinist organizations, which to my eyes seem functionally indistinguishable from mafias, are a big part of it.
You are right upto a level. But, there is a problem in this theory. Companies all over the world always try to make workers submissive to them. But, how did the Japanese companies succeeded upto such a level? Moreover, even Europe had experienced fascist occupation, but how much that occupation made the workers of Europe "submissive"? Don't you think that the deep rooted feudal legacy of Japan made it possible?
I want to inform you that problem isn't in the mentality of workers but rather on the rest of the population. Japan, like other Asian countries, have a feudal legacy and that helped very much in making the Japanese workers submissive to the authority. That's true about the rest of the Asian countries too.

[pranabjyoti]

Well from his name I assume he is from India. He might not be a racist essentiallist but a typical Indian middle class Left dominated by Stalnism.

I would like him to explain If the workers in India are so backward and obedient to their masters why there are even news about strikes in Indian in last decade alone.

1. Mumbai Motormen Strike 2010 (http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-05-04/mumbai/28301444_1_motormen-western-railway-trains)

2. BEST Employees Strike 2007 (http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/004200704191122.htm)

3.Strike at Hyundai Plant 2010 (http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2010-06-08/news/27577714_1_labour-woes-largest-car-exporter-hyundai-motor-india-md)

4. Strike at Nokia Plant 2010 (http://profit.ndtv.com/news/show/nokia-workers-at-chennai-plant-go-on-strike-82058)

5. Hero Honda Plant Strike - 2006 (http://www.indianexpress.com/news/hero-honda-workers-strike-production-halted/2238/)

6. Transport workers strike in TN 2001 (http://www.hindu.com/fline/fl1824/18240400.htm)

7. Government Staff strike 2003 TN (http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/jul/02tn.htm)

I can't list out every such worker actions happened in India as it would be time consuming and many such events would be available only in regional news which don't have much Internet presence.

AT the same time I would also like to point out 2 historical incidents Bombay Textile strikes of 1982 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Bombay_Textile_Strike) and 1974 Railways strike (http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1819/18190750.htm) which were breaken by Indian government with an Iron Fist. George fernandes who was Union leader during the railways strike described the Indian States response to it as " We have prepared for a strike but we have not prepared for a civil war". So much brutality was used by Security forces to break the strike that Indian Armed forces where ordered to operate the trains to keep up essentail supplies.

I assume that he is just an Middle class radical who has no connection with actual working class activities in India. It is typical of Indian Middle Class to hold out actaully toling workers and farmers in contempt. That is the reason you can see instead of these activities they hold up Naxalites fighting from jungles. The former does not appear to be daring and adventorus as the latter.

----------------------


Yeah . Who cares about the recent ongoing democide of the Tamil people and repression of protests against it.

-----------------------------

As for the topic yes section of India is worse than that of Africa. What else do you expect from a capitalist state where the ruling class is concerned about increase of profits alone ?

Add to the fact that entire African continent has 23% of world population while India alone(excluding other countries in the Subcontinet) has 17% of world population. And Indian agriculture depends heavily on Seasonal rainfal in most parts of the country and is susceptible to climate change. Recent food inflation is causing simmering discontent in India which is slowly but surely eroding away the faith of People in the Indian State.

It is also bullshit that Indian state does not worry about these things. Indian government to preserve its existence subsidises a lot of products - food included. But we as communists must know that these are not solutions but just short term adjustments to presense capitalism.


These woes will not be solved by the Capitalist Indian State which is obvious fact.
Hello Mr. Prol,
Just inform me about a few facts. How long those strikes had continued and what was the mentality of nearby who aren't workers towards the strikers and about the strike? You too are an Indian and I am sure you know the answer well.

[t.shonku]

India 'world's biggest arms buyer'


Report says New Delhi is pushing to modernise its military in a bid to counter China and gain international clout.


Last Modified: 14 Mar 2011 08:03 GMT


India has overtaken China to become the world's largest importer of weapons, according to a Swedish think-tank that monitors global arms sales.
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute report said India was pushing ahead with plans to modernise its military in an effort to counter China's influence and gain international clout.
India's defence budget for the coming year is 1.5 trillion rupees ($32.5bn), a 40 per cent increase from two years ago. It imports more than 70 per cent of its weapons.
The report said the vast majority of those imports – 82 per cent – come from Russia, which has long been India's supplier of choice.
"The kind of purchases that India is buying, no country in the world buys. What is in the pipeline is huge"
Rahul Bedi, analyst, Jane's Defence Weekly
Its investment comes amid rising concerns about China's regional power and its designs over vital Indian Ocean shipping lanes, which New Delhi sees as part of its sphere of influence.
The government is reportedly spending billions of dollars on fighter jets and aircraft carriers to modernise its air force and navy.
Siemon Wezeman, a senior fellow at the institute, said on Monday China dropped to second place with six per cent of global imports as it continued to build up its domestic arms industry, something India has so far failed to do.
"Just from what they have already ordered, we know that in the coming few years India will be the top importer," he added.
Weapons club
On the dealers' side, the United States remains the largest arms exporter, followed by Russia and Germany, according to the report.
The Swedish institute measures arms transactions over a five-year period to take into account the long time lag between orders and delivery of arms.
There are lingering tensions over unresolved border issues between India and China, which led to war in 1962.
India also remains in its traditional faceoff with neighbouring Pakistan, with which it has fought three wars.
"India has ambitions to become first a continental and [then] a regional power," Rahul Bedi, a South Asia analyst with London-based Jane's Defence Weekly, told The Associated Press. "To become a big boy, you need to project your power."
India is expected to spend $80bn over the next decade to upgrade its military.
Besides Russia, other countries pushing for a chunk of the lucrative market include Britain, the United States and France who have finalised deals worth billions of dollars for trainer and fighter jets, transport aircraft, an aircraft carrier and submarines.
"The kind of purchases that India is buying, no country in the world buys," added Bedi of Jane's Defence Weekly. "What is in the pipeline is huge."

Link

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2011/03/201131464110211223.html








All tough Indian government doesn't have enough money to build hospitals and schools in rural areas, doesn't have enough money to feed poor but when it comes to buying weapons to follow it's expansionist policies it always have money.

[Vargha Poralli]

Hello Mr. Prol,
Just inform me about a few facts. How long those strikes had continued and what was the mentality of nearby who aren't workers towards the strikers and about the strike? You too are an Indian and I am sure you know the answer well.



The points were against your arguments that workers in India are submissive towards our bosses.

Obviously Middle class professionals and pettybourgeoisie shopkeepes would curse such strikes and whine about their loss of productivity. Do we have to be concerned about them ?

Some strikes I have mentioned above are successfull and some strikes are heavy handedly repressed. The exsistence of laws like ESMA testimonies the fighting mentality of Indian working class. Else why the Indian state needs such laws in case as you suggest Indian working class is submissive towards our bosses ?

[pranabjyoti]

The points were against your arguments that workers in India are submissive towards our bosses.

Obviously Middle class professionals and pettybourgeoisie shopkeepes would curse such strikes and whine about their loss of productivity. Do we have to be concerned about them ?

Some strikes I have mentioned above are successfull and some strikes are heavy handedly repressed. The exsistence of laws like ESMA testimonies the fighting mentality of Indian working class. Else why the Indian state needs such laws in case as you suggest Indian working class is submissive towards our bosses ?
I don't understand what do you mean by "successful". At present, the power of Indian capitalists over workers are so overwhelming the way treat workers shows that chance of "real" success is slim.
Actually existence of laws like ESMA proves that the Indian workers aren't much vocal.

[Toppler]

Again, I had an another argument with a family acquitance... she said how good food they have in India ... I said it is worth shit when 60 percent of children are malnourished... she said "but they are so spiritual!", when I said the worth of a state is determined by the verage person's condition her friend said "But you cannot do that! There is far too many of them!" and then my dad said to her "Don't argue with him, he hates his opponents".

Yes, I do hate. I do hate fucking white middle class liberals who think child hunger and extreme poverty is "spiritual" or some bullshit like that. I don't blame authoritarian communists for putting them in labour camps. A person who thinks keeping people in a state of hunger is ok needs to experience it. They'd immediately shut their fucking mouth about "spirituality".

It tells something about burgeois "morality" when hating someone for their depraved opinion is bad, but approving child hunger isn't.

Rot in hell, all cappies. Even Wikipedia admits that during the worst famine under communism, the GLP famine in China, the starvation prevalence was about as serious as every day and every year in India and pre-revolutionary China http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine . The GLP famine lasted 4 years. In your poor cappie states, people starve at the same rate ALL THE FUCKING TIME Rot in fucking hell. I thought gulags were cruel for you. They were not nearly as cruel as your crimes against humanity.

Cappies love talking about the "great chinese famine". They are good at misleading middle class kids who think people in China lived just like they do before that and the evil commies brought them starvation. You want to know how many people were starving in the "good capitalist China" before in "non famine years"? The same as in Maoist China during the 4 years of famine. You want to know how often pre-revolutionary China had a famine? Nearly every year, in some province http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines
Between 108 BC and 1911 AD there were no fewer than 1,828 major famines in China, or one nearly every year in one or another province; however, the famines varied greatly in severity.

Communism never starved the people. There were never any famines in the Eastern Bloc, and both USSR and China experienced 4 famines total. Pre-revolutionary Russia had a major famine every 15 years, plus the "no famine" conditions were about as bad as Maoist China during the 4 year famine. China had a famine somewhere EVERY YEAR and the "non-famine" conditions were as bad as the 4 year famine under Maao.

Middle class dipshits probably think that pre-industrial peasants under feudalism/capitalism lived in some rustic harmony or whatever. You middle class shits ever wondered about why Lenin and Stalin are so beloved in Russia? There were 3 short, major famines under them (except the famine during WW2, but that had nothing to do with them, if a country is invaded by genocidal hordes, it is going to starve, regardless of the leader, all countries devastated by Nazis starved during WW2). There were thousands of famines under Tsarism. Even under the best leaders possible, famines would still happen in eraly socialist China and Russia, because these countries were famished all the time before. In the more developed from the start Eastern Bloc, no famines happened. My grandpa remember they already had every sort of food during the 1950s. The ate sausages, cake, fruit etc. And the schools gave fish oil to students to undo the effects of wartime malnutrition. All this while West Germans still ate oat porridge. Czechoslovakia was the 8th country in the world when it came to caloric supply per capita in 1988 http://elections.thinkaboutit.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/offley1991foodthefacts.gif . Bulgaria was the 4th. I wonder why if communism = starvation, then why the fuck people ate 3600 calories a day.

All the bullshit about "communist starvation" is just capitalists projecting their own properties into us. Capitalism starves people quickier than hundred Treblinkas. Of course, a person from an European or North American suburbs wouldn't know that. It is not happening in their countries, so they assume capitalism means luxury. Wrong. Capitalism is a vampire system.

[pranabjyoti]

Again, I had an another argument with a family acquitance... she said how good food they have in India ... I said it is worth shit when 60 percent of children are malnourished... she said "but they are so spiritual!", when I said the worth of a state is determined by the verage person's condition her friend said "But you cannot do that! There is far too many of them!" and then my dad said to her "Don't argue with him, he hates his opponents".

Yes, I do hate. I do hate fucking white middle class liberals who think child hunger and extreme poverty is "spiritual" or some bullshit like that. I don't blame authoritarian communists for putting them in labour camps. A person who thinks keeping people in a state of hunger is ok needs to experience it. They'd immediately shut their fucking mouth about "spirituality".

It tells something about burgeois "morality" when hating someone for their depraved opinion is bad, but approving child hunger isn't.

Rot in hell, all cappies. Even Wikipedia admits that during the worst famine under communism, the GLP famine in China, the starvation prevalence was about as serious as every day and every year in India and pre-revolutionary China http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine . The GLP famine lasted 4 years. In your poor cappie states, people starve at the same rate ALL THE FUCKING TIME Rot in fucking hell. I thought gulags were cruel for you. They were not nearly as cruel as your crimes against humanity.

Cappies love talking about the "great chinese famine". They are good at misleading middle class kids who think people in China lived just like they do before that and the evil commies brought them starvation. You want to know how many people were starving in the "good capitalist China" before in "non famine years"? The same as in Maoist China during the 4 years of famine. You want to know how often pre-revolutionary China had a famine? Nearly every year, in some province http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines .

Communism never starved the people. There were never any famines in the Eastern Bloc, and both USSR and China experienced 4 famines total. Pre-revolutionary Russia had a major famine every 15 years, plus the "no famine" conditions were about as bad as Maoist China during the 4 year famine. China had a famine somewhere EVERY YEAR and the "non-famine" conditions were as bad as the 4 year famine under Maao.

Middle class dipshits probably think that pre-industrial peasants under feudalism/capitalism lived in some rustic harmony or whatever. You middle class shits ever wondered about why Lenin and Stalin are so beloved in Russia? There were 3 short, major famines under them (except the famine during WW2, but that had nothing to do with them, if a country is invaded by genocidal hordes, it is going to starve, regardless of the leader, all countries devastated by Nazis starved during WW2). There were thousands of famines under Tsarism. Even under the best leaders possible, famines would still happen in eraly socialist China and Russia, because these countries were famished all the time before. In the more developed from the start Eastern Bloc, no famines happened. My grandpa remember they already had every sort of food during the 1950s. The ate sausages, cake, fruit etc. And the schools gave fish oil to students to undo the effects of wartime malnutrition. All this while West Germans still ate oat porridge. Czechoslovakia was the 8th country in the world when it came to caloric supply per capita in 1988 http://elections.thinkaboutit.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/offley1991foodthefacts.gif . Bulgaria was the 4th. I wonder why if communism = starvation, then why the fuck people ate 3600 calories a day.

All the bullshit about "communist starvation" is just capitalists projecting their own properties into us. Capitalism starves people quickier than hundred Treblinkas. Of course, a person from an European or North American suburbs wouldn't know that. It is not happening in their countries, so they assume capitalism means luxury. Wrong. Capitalism is a vampire system.
Want to add something in this regard. So far, probably India is loosing people due to malnutrition in every 4-5 years than China have lost during the "famine" of GLP. The places of India, where Adivasi (aboriginal) people living, may help anybody to have some idea about what famine can possibly. Ant egg are their staple source of protein and meat or fish are in the same level of luxury as foreign trip to any first world citizen.
Comrade, kindly give the "Indian" a hard kick in ass on my behalf and tell him that an Indian friend of your requested you to do so. If he ever come to India, I will give him some more "prizes" for preaching the "greatness" of his homeland.

[Toppler]

Hi comrade, you misunderstood the message a bit, the friend is not Indian, he just knows somebody who's been to India and admires the country.

Fortunately I also know somebody who's been to India, even to rural areas, and he says that he couldn't bear to look at how many hungry children were there. He also knows somebody who has been to India for "spirituality" and got some weird disease that put him into a coma that took years to recover from.

Anyways, I admire Indians like you. Intelligent and willing to admit the truth about the present state of South Asia and India in particular. It could be a great civilization again, but it needs to be rid off the perverse mixture of feudalism and capitalism first, and the culture of poverty that results from the fact that under British rule, people's life expectancy was around 20-25 years (true, most of this came from insane child mortality).

Anyways, the GLP famine lasted 4 years. India starves just as many people in 4 years. What does it mean? It means that the present state of India is like the GLP famine, except it lasts like 500 years and shows no sign of stopping.

[pranabjyoti]

Anyways, the GLP famine lasted 4 years. India starves just as many people in 4 years. What does it mean? It means that the present state of India is like the GLP famine, except it lasts like 500 years and shows no sign of stopping.
Actually, I just want to mean that probably 1/4th or more number of people are dying in India in every year in comparison to how many died (as per pro-imperialist statistics) in China on each year of the GLP.

[TwoSevensClash]

Hi comrade, you misunderstood the message a bit, the friend is not Indian, he just knows somebody who's been to India and admires the country.

Fortunately I also know somebody who's been to India, even to rural areas, and he says that he couldn't bear to look at how many hungry children were there. He also knows somebody who has been to India for "spirituality" and got some weird disease that put him into a coma that took years to recover from.

.
I had diarrhea for a month after I got back lol The poverty is mind boggling. People doing farm work with a cow pulling the plow and using camels and horses to transport stuff miles away. I was actually stupid enough to believe only the Amish still did that. Big eye opener.