One Afternoon

harimau #82 [``...Not only Josef Stalin and Zia ul-Haq but even Abraham Lincoln would be envious...``]

I`m glad you brought `Uncle Lincum` on the same level as Uncle Joe (Zina-n-Faq really doesn`t count so we can ignore and flush him down the toilet of history). A case can be argued that even though Uncle Joe was a far more evil as a man and as a leader in his immediate impact, but if viewed through the telescope of history the worldwide impact of Old Abe runs deeper and is more destructive in the long run.

Stalin`s net destructive impact to the immediate populations of his time was great indeed. But those effects are fading fast. On the other hand the consequences of Lincoln`s evil deed are only now gathering steam. If Lincoln had lost the election to McClellen, the Civil War would have ended in a `cease-fire` and the Masson-Dixon Line would effectively have become the `Line of Control.` That would have prevented the federal government from becoming omnipotent and the two Americas would have eventually kissed and made up a loose confederation. The cause of individual and local Liberty would have been well served and central governmental authority would not have grown to be the monster that it has become.

As for your comments on the coming record-breaking election fraud through touch screen electronic voting machines is concerned I am 100% in agreement. Love the stalin quote
about who counts the votes that matters.

As far as Kashmir, Nagaland, Tibet, Khalistan, Pakhtoonistan, Tamil Nadu, Palestine, Kurdistan, Zapatistas etc, etc, etc, are concerned, frankly they are all mass tragedies for the local mothers, daughters, wives and sisters and I have neither the time, energy nor inclination to bleed any more tears over them. Nothing you or I can say has not already been beaten to death, so I don`t even want to go there. Suffice it to say that in my world view ALL governments, everywhere, are nothing more than legalized mafia organizations that possess means of coersion and aggression. The only difference is one of degree, some are worse than others. There are no good ones. The only ``good`` government is no government. Since that is not possible therefore I have modified my motto to, ``the weaker and smaller a government, the less evil it is.``

Ref SR #76

{harimau #69 [``... a combination of political maneuverings as well as police force, this was quashed and today Tamil Nadu is not trying...``]

[``...same can be said of the Khalistan movement. ...``]


I am sure, Josef Stalin and Zia ul-Haq will both be envious of the achievement.}

Not only Josef Stalin and Zia ul-Haq but even Abraham Lincoln would be envious. After all, the Civil War in the US claimed 600,000 lives and we in India are an order of magnitude lower than that figure. And as a proportion of population, I am sure we would be two orders of magnitude lower than Lincoln.


{[``... the armed conflicts taking place in Kashmir, and a few of the Northeastern states including Nagaland. ... etc., would have remained quiet but for Chinese and Burmese intervention in the form of arms and training and Kashmir but for Pakistani interference. ...``]

Hummm.... So its the Chinese, the Burmese and the Pakis. I see.}

You think that the Kashmiris manufacture RDX, detonators, Claymore mines and Kalashnikovs somewhere in the exurbs of Srinagar? And the Nagas are presumably doing the same in the hills around Kohima?

No matter what the Pak press says, and no matter what the West has to say about India being the only democracy in South Asia and the bulwark against Chinese totalitarianism, one must analyze the question in terms of geopoilitics: would Nagaland or the Kashmir Valley be better off as independent entities or under Indian protection? In the case of Nagaland, we all know what happened to Tibet, about which I haven`t seen one word from any Pakistani. As to the Kashmiris, there is no way India is going to cede the highlands to an independent entity which wil be effectively under the thumb of Pakistan, China, the US or all three.

It is easy to say that Indian democracy is flawed and not as good as those in Canada, Western Europe or the US. But at least, our Prime Minister is not appointed by our Supreme Court on the specious pretext that there is no more time to count the votes when the court itself was the cause of the delay. Nor are our electronic voting machines sold with the promise that the company selling them is committed to the re-election of the sitting president. The fact that these electronic machines deliver different states to different parties is proof that our voting machines reflect the will of the voters. Even Kashmiris and Nagas (at least those who brave the bullets to vote) agree that not only do they have the right to vote but -- even more critically -- their votes are counted right.

PS. I heard Stalin being quoted by Mike Savage when the last US presidential election remained undecided: It is not who votes that counts; it is who counts the votes that counts.

re:#79 by dost-mittar
Thanks for the post. You are right about Telecom. And about Vajpayee`s contribution in creating an infrastructure of highways. India today is where US was in the 30s when Roosevelt started building the highways. Will India reach the same level of prosperity that US did years later? Only time will tell.
Sridhar

dost-mittar #79 [``...success ... in India is ... wouldn`t have happened if the govt. had not gotten out of the people`s way ... The govt. has played its part simply by ending the license-quota-raaj system. ... [In] telecommunication revolution ... govt. played ... role of a facilitator... opened up this sector to private companies ... govt. let them renegotiate their contracts ... even when ... losing potential revenues. That single step let the private telecom companies to become profitable; the ensuing competition has resulted in India having the cheapest mobile telephone rates anywhere in the world...``]

My friend, you speak the truth. This is exactly supporting what I say. All the credit you give government is in doing LESS of what it does. It only because of things government stopped doing that helped. So basically if the governemt did anything good it was only to undo itself. Credit surely goes to top leadership, not to government machinery. It was only by clipping the wings of the government that things got better.

...SR

SR#75, sridhar#78:
SR is both right and wrong. The success we are seeing today in India is largely, if not entirely, due to entrepreneurship of its people. But that success wouldn`t have happened if the govt. had not gotten out of the people`s way in the first place. The govt. has played its part simply by ending the license-quota-raaj system.
But there is more. The current success is due in no small measure to the telecommunication revolution in India. The govt. here has played a very useful role of a facilitator. When they opened up this sector to private companies, they bid themselves too high and were making huge losses. Against strong opposition, the govt. let them renegotiate their contracts on more favourable terms even when it was accused of losing potential revenues. That single step let the private telecom companies to become profitable; the ensuing competition has resulted in India having the cheapest mobile telephone rates anywhere in the world.
And the govt. is finally doing what a govt. is supposed to do - build infrastructure. I suspect Vajpayee might go down in history as the new Sher Shah Suri of India.

re:#75 by SR
``The success we presently witness in Bharat is not because of the central government, but inspite of it. ``
I would largely agree with that statement but with some caveats. For eg in case of IT, it did start as a private enterprise in India and the Govt did hinder progress initially but once it took off, GOI has done everything possible to encourage it. Some newer areas like Biotechnology could not have taken off without the govt support. So, it is kind of a mixed bag.
But, in general it is a good idea for govt to stay away from business. As Margaret Thatcher once put it: Govt has no business of being in ``business``.
Sridhar

Re: Dost-Mittar # 74

Yaar, at one point I would have agreed with you, but since the GOP took over America, some one needs to apply the anti-trust laws on the GOP itself, because it is the single largest monopoly of corporate greed in America.

What India and Pakistan need is not economics helping politics or politics helping economics, but an inspired act of God, which instills some common sense in the chest thumping nationalistically challenged neanderthals. It is hard to realize that there is so much common sense in an average Indian and a Pakistani, but you throw a political bone to them and label it ``Kashmir`` and they fight each and tear each other just to gnaw at that old bone.

In my college fraternity, we had a guy from India and other me, there was another guy from Pakistan. When we would be bored and there were no girls around, we would get drunk and make them face each other and yell ``kashmir`` and step back and watch the curses fly! I kid you not! They would literally go for the jugular! LOL It is almost Pavolvian!

Ciao

harimau #69 [``... a combination of political maneuverings as well as police force, this was quashed and today Tamil Nadu is not trying...``]

[``...same can be said of the Khalistan movement. ...``]


I am sure, Josef Stalin and Zia ul-Haq will both be envious of the achievement.


[``... the armed conflicts taking place in Kashmir, and a few of the Northeastern states including Nagaland. ... etc., would have remained quiet but for Chinese and Burmese intervention in the form of arms and training and Kashmir but for Pakistani interference. ...``]

Hummm.... So its the Chinese, the Burmese and the Pakis. I see.

There was a story in the British paper Guardian about a Kashmiri man who had been arrested because he beat up his daughters. The poor slob very genuinely believed that it was the interference by the Godless sinners of the society outside home that put his daughters up to no good and that there were no problems in his model-of-paradise home. Perhaps he was right also. And if he could have also slapped them silly and shut them up, the girls may not be asking for any independence either.

...SR

rsridhar #70 [``...Why bring in the whole of South Asian countries here, when the problem is mainly Pakistan? ... India has a responsible democracy... It certainly is not imperialistic, colonial or exploitative... Problems of India are huge and are not going away any time soon. But the fact India has a booming trade with ASEAN, CHINA, Srilanka and even Bangladesh says something. What is missing here? ...``]

The success we presently witness in Bharat is not because of the central government, but inspite of it. The creative genius of the enterprising people in the private sector is the secret, not the bureaucrats in New Delhi. The good fortune was that the central government in New Delhi, relative to the whole country, never got as powerful as the central government in Islamabad did relative to its country. It also did not hurt that Bharat had the good fortune, early on, of having leaders like Pundit Nehru and Lal Bhadur Shastri who actually had a genuine desire to serve the country. Apart from that the nature of the bureaucracy is the same. It fortunate that the Bharati bureaucrat has been contained in that he cannot do as much damage as he might have been able to do.

In short, the credit only goes to the hardworking people and not the government machine.

harimau #69 [``...I don`t think the Indian government is viewed by any Indian as an ``imperialistic, colonial and exploitative`` one, ...``]

You know what, as you`ll obviously also agree, that is exactly how that cervicus rouge, Buba Americanus views his government too.

...SR

Free and Fair Trade:
Free trade becomes fair trade if no one is able to exercise a monopoly power. The monopoly power of some western countries ended with colonialism; indeed, France and for a long time, Britain actually gave preferential treatment to their ex-colonials instead of hurting them.
I cannot think to any country which now has a monopoly or monopsony power in the international market. The closest is the OPEC cartel of oil producing countries but they too have been able to exercise ony limited power because of the tendency of member countries to cheat and exceed their quotas whenever production quotas are lowered.
This is true also on domestic front. The USA may be the most capiatlistic country but it is also the one that most zealously implements its anti-trust regime. Even the most powerful Bell couldn`t escapte its reach and Microsoft too had to make important concessions to avoid a break-up.
For India-Pakistan, the best reason for opening trade is not economics but politics. Once vested trade interests are developed, there will be powerful lobby groups for peace in both countries. It is not surprising therefore that Ambani is most anxious for peace between the two countries, because it is likely to benefit most from any proposed gas pipeline from Iran through Pakistan; and now Pakistan is likely to be an important client of Ambani`s Reliance if it succeeds in aquiring Flag company, a carrier of bandwidth across Europe and Asia.

[``...why the shift to England, after so many years in USA? ...``]

After all these years I no longer feel good about being in the USSA. I feel like a jew living in Germany and the year is 1929. It has not happened yet but, with some imagination, one can see the nasty brown stuff heading towards the fan in slow motion. We don`t want our little kids to grow up in this country. The social upheavel that could very likely hit this country over the next decade is nasty enough that I don`t want to stick around to find out whether or not it turns out to be as bad as I fear. If my net worth was over $25 million, I would have been better off staying. For the rest of us who are below that `threshold` and have `terrorist sounding names`, life is only going to get harder and harder. The smug professional who is in the $200-250K bracket will not fare that much better than the $75-100K worker, when (not IF) the poopoo finally touches the spinning blades on the ceiling. That, of course, is just my opinion and we must all live our lives according to our best lights. I put my money where my mouth is. Ultimately, no one really knows the future.

England, though by no means a model of paradise, is a passable compromise. It was at the bottom of the list of five places we had short-listed (Canada: Vancouver/Montreal, Central America: Panama City/San Jose, Dubai, and Thailand: Chang Mai). It was the most expensive and second worse weather wise of the places on our short list, but in the end `family reasons` were the trump factor.

My mother is old and frail and my sister and brother are not getting any younger either. They all live in London along with many more cousins and other relatives, not to mention half a dozen old friends from childhood. So three hours north in rural Derbyshire is where we are going to. Close enough to family yet a comfortable distance to where I don`t need to be rude and refuse every wedding invitation that comes along twice a month.

It was my close call with eternity earlier this year that has made me realize that one should be closer to loved one whenever possible. If there are phones and broad band available, location does not matter to me. Fortunately, I don`t have any career job or a brick and mortar business that ties me to any particular location, so the risk/benefit ratio of making such a huge move is not so terrible. It was for this particular reason that back in April we moved to a rented house and sold the one I`d lived in for 17 years. Now its time to leave town and get a bit further away from the fascists. So there you have it my friend, you asked for it. Just because I am paranoid, doesn`t mean that they will not actually come and get me.

...SR

SR 68: Please check business and tech section in unplugged, if you have time.

Also, this maybe too personal a question, but why the shift to England, after so many years in USA?

re:#68 by SR
``The whole `warefare state` appratus of the South Asian central mafias (a.k.a. : governments) is imperialistic, colonial and exploitative of the populations. The sooner these central mafias weaken and break down the better for the general populations.``
You need to substitute the word ``Paksitan`` where it says ``South Asian central mafias`` and you will be right.
Why bring in the whole of South Asian countries here, when the problem is mainly Pakistan?
India has a responsible democracy (responsible to its people`s aspirations but may not be to the liking of Pakis). It certainly is not imperialistic, colonial or exploitative. YOu seem to live in a different mindset. Problems of India are huge and are not going away any time soon. But the fact India has a booming trade with ASEAN, CHINA, Srilanka and even Bangladesh says something. What is missing here? Only Pakis refuse to place trade before their ``kashimiri obsesstion``. Only in Pakistan has the poverty actually risen in the 90s. You do the calculations.
Sridhar

re:#69 by harimau
Good post.
Sridhar

Ref SR #68

About 15 years after Independence, there were secessionist tendencies in Tamil Nadu which were further exacerbated by the attempt to impose Hindi as the official language. One could consider this either as a grievance articulated as an extreme demand or as an independence movement. Through a combination of political maneuverings as well as police force, this was quashed and today Tamil Nadu is not trying to achieve independence no matter what the Pakistanis wish.

The same can be said of the Khalistan movement.

What causes glee in the hearts of Pakistanis is the armed conflicts taking place in Kashmir, and a few of the Northeastern states including Nagaland. If one looks at the ``civilized`` population of India, there is no attempt at further dividing India. Nagaland, etc., would have remained quiet but for Chinese and Burmese intervention in the form of arms and training and Kashmir but for Pakistani interference.

I don`t think the Indian government is viewed by any Indian as an ``imperialistic, colonial and exploitative`` one, unless that Indian has been schooled in the Naxalite School of Maoism, and I grant you a couple of thousand such persons exist. But the vast majority of the people in India do not consider their government to be an exploitative government; in fact, the first attempt by people in India to redress any perceived wrong is to petition the government to intervene, even if it is a dispute between workers and a private company.

Political maturity has come slowly but steadily to the Indian polity. You can see Sri Lanka struggling not with a tribal minority (as India is doing in its Northeast) but the educated ``cream of society`` in its fight with its Tamil minority because of the government`s inability to correct perceived wrongs. Thus it is not just the literacy rate (Sri Lanka`s is higher than India`s by about 20 percentage points) that determines political maturity. Bangladesh is slowly becoming used to peaceful transitions of governments though its literacy rate is less than that of India, demonstrating that building democratic institutions takes time but they do bear fruit in the subcontinent`s soil.

Regarding your statement about ``a mutually shared monetary unit and unhindered exchange of goods, services and labor throughout South Asia can only work for the betterment of the collective societies and against the narrow interests of the entrenched powers that be``, this is precisely what India is today. Compared to the minuscule number of South Indians you could find in New Delhi or Calcutta in the 1950s, today you find Indians of all stripes and hues in those cities. Similarly, I have run across Gujaratis, Marwaris, Punjabis (including Sikhs) or Maharashtrians living in the South and speaking very good Tamil, something that would have been as rare as a snowflake in Saudi Arabia just a couple of decades back. As to free exchange of goods, I suggest that you wander around Connaught Place in New Delhi where you can see all the hundreds of Indian tribes selling their wares.

As economic circumstances (and US oil companies) force Bangladesh into the recognition that it HAS to sell natural gas to India, you will find better economic integration between India and Bangladesh. India has already offered and put in place a free trade agreement with Sri Lanka that offers Sri Lanka disproportionately greater export of duty free goods to India.

The real problem is only Pakistan. Pakistan is a schizophrenic country: she doesn`t know what she is and what she wants. All she can do is play spoilsport. While Kashmir may be a legitimate grievance in Pakistani eyes, India is not going to budge on it. India`s defense spending as a part of its GDP is far lower than that of Pakistan`s so it is only Pakistan that is suffering from its policy of confrontation. Pakistan needs to put Kashmir not on the back burner but into cold storage and concentrate on developing her economy. No, she doesn`t HAVE to integrate her economy with India`s if she doesn`t want to but she needs to plug into a larger trading bloc and if the Pak economists think that the bedouins of Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman and Qatar are the right business partners, I have no problem with that.

The tigers of Southeast Asia (Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Taiwan) put their economy first and political expressions a distant second and they improved their people`s economic circumstances tremendously. China started late but has done the same. In India, political expression has been given the first place and while it might have cost us tremendously in terms of our economy, it has helped us evolve a cohesive country. Pakistan lost out not in the year 2003 but on Aug 14, 1947.

ferozk

Once again, I want to thank you for inviting people to think along positive and constructive lines by writing this piece. I wanted to put just a quick word in so as not to leave the impression that the discussion was not valuable or worthy enough to merit further input after the initial response. The `free` vs `fair` trade debate could have taken a lot more space than it did. As I am attempting to tie up 23 years of loose ends within a few weeks so as to shift to England before Thnaksgiving, my interactivity is intermittent at best. However, I`ve been reading and following this discussion with interest.

The whole `warefare state` appratus of the South Asian central mafias (a.k.a. : governments) is imperialistic, colonial and exploitative of the populations. The sooner these central mafias weaken and break down the better for the general populations. A mutually shared monetary unit and unhindered exchange of goods, services and labor throughout South Asia can only work for the betterment of the collective societies and against the narrow interests of the entrenched powers that be. Their interest is served by preserving the absurd status quo.

The British and the French, after all, battled and killed each other for over seven hundred years before common sense finally prevailed. So there may still be some more time to pass before clearer vision is bestowed upon ignoramus indicus. But still, as John Lennon would have said: ``Imagine.....``....

...SR