• Bleach: The Thousand-Year Blood War - Part 3: The Conflict is expected to arrive in 2024. Until then, check out the latest news from the Bleach Anime Section: HERE! ~ The BA staff.

Politics and Culture

Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
1,270
Points
4,041
That being said is my perspective on the issue, but I'll respond first to you The Outlier


What you seem to be referencing here in regards to your country (you didn't specify which) is what's known as the brain drain on available future talent and human resources, no?

Perhaps what's needed is indeed a modern Marshall Plan, in order to rebuild proper infrastructure and better finance conditions within your country. Especially if those conditions were a result of past U.S. interventionism. We also need to establish fair trade (not free) with countries like these, so parasitic multi-national corporations do not exploit developing countries, leading to a lot of the issues that you've touched on.

This may be counter-intuitive to what you're asking, but you can't expect to rebuild the issues of your country without the right kind of proper investment into its people which could inspire them to want to be there in the first place. I do get the anti-globalism sentiment in regards to exploitation and leading to a lack of people willing to improve things there, opting for a better life elsewhere. But, there is a better way of going about it than burning bridges on Trump's or the far right's false populism. Your country sounds like it may need an actual populist movement of some kind in order to put capital in the hands of the people, rather than in those who won't invest to fix the lives of your citizens.

If there is something I'm not understanding about your country due to ignorance, then please, educate me on the issue and clarify. :) I'd like to know about a solution, so that U.S. foreign policy can be more readily intelligent & respectable to the issues of other countries.

I agree with what you said that what's causing the environment that people wanting to leave the country. There are several different things, but my stance is that if people in my country stay and form a resistance or a collective force, then at least this cycle of going out and leaving space for others(like Chinese businessmen filling the space) would stop and something could be done pragmatically about it. This would then persuade the elite or establishment to do something about it and it would help the people getting their duly worthy rights which they don't see it here and which make them leave.

You asked about my country. So first I should give a little bio. I'm born and living in Pakistan. The tribe which I belong to were a group of settlers who came somewhere from the Western direction. I don't want to mention the name of my tribe since I don't want myself to be associated by it for personal reasons. It's not that it's bad to mention or anything like that, it's just my personal taste about it because I don't like additional attributes(tribe's name as well as ethnicity) written after my name which is a very cultural thing supposed here. They first settled in area along Afghanistan and Iran border many centuries back from what I heard from different people like my grandmother friends(this could be taken as a grain of salt because a sister tribe might have existed there too). In short, they came from Western side. Then later, they made their way into Soon Valley which is the valley my ancestors belong to. I'm the first one in my family who was born in an urban city. My parents, grandparents and their grandparents and so on, they all were born in that valley.

From the thinking which have been established in my mind from many years of experiencing different things here and which could change in the future depending upon the situations, but as of right now, I personally think there is no cure for subcontinent's miseries and mess. This region is bound to be doomed sooner or later. In other words, it would implode.

Let me first share a very small portion of history as an observer. It's different to what textbook histories are written or taught in schools here. I'm not saying that history isn't right; it's just a different perspective and people from my region should be exposed to different perspectives so that they have broader sense of sane judgement in correcting the future course. I won't go way far back in centuries ending up in Indus Valley Civilization, but relatively recent.

After world war, Britain began to lose money as war with the Germany had depleted their finances. A colonized subcontinent was being seen as a burden to rule. I share some of these perspectives regarding Britain's colonization in the subcontinent:

The negatives:

---> We the people of subcontinent were either incompetent in our defense mentality that outsider forces invaded, ruled and sucked the resources out OR we can't coexist with each other until an outsider force ruled us. It's the story of tribes who would fight with each other unless a superior outside force rule them. When the outsider force would go away, we would then again fight with each other. This theory of mine is only applicable after the 7th century(Muslim conquests towards East).

---> Tribal issues of land, power, culture leading back to many centuries has made us uncivilized. We forgot science in that process and how to harness the resources for whole of our people. More importantly, we simply don't know how to rule over our people politically and how to manage them.

---> The population time-bomb...It was there at that time, and it's here right now waiting for imploding. By world regions, South Asia has the biggest population and the basic problems remain the same and growing. It's quantity over quality of life making living a cheap breathing.

The positives:

---> Britain built institutes, infrastructure, justice system, military and political system.

I do believe in this idea that the more we have institutes about different aspects of life, then with the passage of time, the extreme tribal behaviours could be lessened by changing people behaviour to mould things in a different way. In short, those behaviours could be accommodated and diluted over time. The problem is that persons run the shows instead of institutes functioning as a whole in their spirit. The acts of persons behaving superior over the institutes make them weak. Then, the people working under those institutes look up to the persons as some sort of tribal leader who has an agenda. The chain reaction goes from upper to lower. They value the worth of a single person versus the worth of whole institute and there seems to be no way to change that because there is a hypocrisy in the intent.

Theoretically, a proper functioning democracy should have solved that, but if there is a hypocrisy in the intent, I doubt that implementing democracy would bring any fruits. Sure, it would take lots and lots of years, perhaps centuries to achieve that with democracy by slowly diluting the process.

Coming back to history, Britain's control over the subcontinent was fading away. There were uprisings and people here wanted to rule over their own people in the name of freedom which is not a bad idea, but the philosophy which was obtained for achieving that was indeed a bad one. In short, the idea of two nation theory. A new problem started. People began to question their identity in the country or the countries which were going to be formed within the subcontinent.

When the Islamic conquests happened towards the East, and when they reached to certain areas of subcontinent, many locals were got attracted by the scripture and many had gotten fear instilled in their hearts. Let's say this for the sake of this post, it was the 'sword effect'. Invaders with swords. Many settlers and invadors from different regions also came(for instance Genghis Khan, Ghaznavi etc) and there was a mixture of different races and languages.

To counter the 'sword effect', some people instead of countering sword with sword, began to approach people in a very different way which was unprecedented. Something which didn't exist in this region at all w.r.t. Muslim conquests. To counter fire with fire, they countered fire with water. I'm talking about Sufism. In Wikipedia article of it, many things are written about it which are not true. But anyways, different perspectives do exist about it.

To sum up Sufism from my perspective w.r.t. subcontinent, I would refer a Bleach analogy. Consider Ichigo's inner-world and the interactions he faces. But let's say in order to achieve the highest level within the inner-world, he would have to give the real life sword a good bye for good. That would be the condition to achieve the desired intent within his inner world and achieving the level. My opinion on it is that there is no single way or definition that should exist about it since it's more about experience than the philosophy itself. It's just my perspective which I shared.

Now coming back to Britain, the independence movements were exploding. The pressure of political movements for independence forcing Britain to get out from subcontinent became clear. A democratic secular whole of subcontinent or something else too.

From North, Britain feared that Soviet expansion would come down towards the subcontinent which was in the South. A democratic secular subcontinent collided with Britain interests or more precisely, it collided with the Muslim political parties which would want a separate homeland because some leaders feared that with 1:1 voting, the representation of them would never be properly possible for them within a Hindu-dominated democracy.

Fast forward, two countries were carved out in 1947. Elections decided the fate. PK and IND were formed based on the results of elections. The subcontinent was divided. Different interests were collided with each other w.r.t. different things. For example, Britain before dividing subcontinent theorized that military of the Western part(PK) of subcontinent would never let the Soviet expansion towards the warm waters. This theory was gotten testified and proved to be correct. The fall of Soviet Union happened and the same military(PK) which Britain made, did the job with local mujaheddins which are now called global terrorists. Now, was it really the victory of the locals or was the Soviet left with its own intent, that's another thing to ponder.

But one thing Britain, US and other think-tanks could not foresee was the aftermath of the fall of Soviet Union would have consequences which might not be controlled. The cost was huge from ideological perspective, economical, political, religious and most importantly, regional. A new wave of hatred has been embedded in different cultures. 9/11 is one such example and this could be just the trailer for what is yet to come(as feared by some intelligence group members). In future, there is a visible threat of nuclear proliferation and a new wave of suicidal nuclear attacks. There is another theory which I read that nuclear proliferation has already happened and it's only a matter of time when there would be executable answers from hidden rogue people. It might be the phase of just planning and execution would come timely.

I read a book(Army of None) in which author had argued about what makes a weapon dangerous. It wasn't intelligence, nor innovation. It was autonomy.

The 'sword-effect' lives but in an evolved way in the form of self-destruction of mortal body(blowing it up) achieving a strategic goal. I would suggest "Strategic Depth" w.r.t. "Great Game" on internet to further get details in regards to my region because these topics are huge. Sufism got nearly died after the New World Order. In my opinion it's the only antidote that could address this so-called radical Islamic terrorism. But nowadays, Sufism has been only left in Shrines of the dead ones who were their pioneers. Nevertheless, it could still be revived and could be mainstreamed.

What I mentioned at the beginning that the people of subcontinent would fight as soon as a greater force over them would go out. As soon as the Britain left, the first war broke out in the same year in which two countries were born and the fight occurred over a piece of land whose fate couldn't get decided. The area of Kashmir. Almost half of the land was gotten by PK in the war, half gotten by IND at the time of ceasefire made by UN. (There are some portions of it which are occupied by China too) That mess have not been sorted out to this day. This alone shows the immaturity of the political consciousness here.

-------
The core or the root of the terminology of what constitutes a 'First Pakistani' and what constitutes a 'First Indian' as an identity is this (as understood by me/my perspective only):

1) First Pakistani is the first person who gave up polytheism and joined monotheism in subcontinent OR was monotheistic to begin with(if monotheism came before polytheism...like chicken and egg which came before thingy)

(There is another twisted perspective of "1)" which is totally wrong that the first invader who brought monotheism in the subcontinent either with a sword or with a heart is the First Pakistani. No, that invader would either be an Arab Muslim or an Uzbek Muslim or any other for example or simply Muslim too, but not Pakistani. A standalone Monotheism consciousness without the the sword or invasion could exist too on its own in the subcontinent which also nullifies this perspective. There is another misconception I keep reading from the majority of people that the First Muslim of the subcontinent should be the First Pakistani. But there is no consensus among Muslims about the definition of a Muslim. Since there is no consensus, that doesn't have any weight and no conclusion can be done. The word Muslim itself means submitter(to one god) and that is the consensus within the core aspect of being the Muslim and that is what a Muslim should believe in one god only(monotheism)).


2) First Indian is the first person from Indus River.

3) First Pakistani can happen to be the First Indian ONLY from the First Indian perspective if the different settlers from other lands settled here are excluded except Indus River people.

3) First Indian cannot be First Pakistani from First Pakistani perspective.

(Just like Hindutva and being Indian mean two different things, being a Muslim and being a Pakistani mean two different things.)

I believe both theories could be merged in some way in the future, but some events would have to play the role.
---------------------------

I can agree with what you said about populism, but only to some extent which is that if the leadership manages to change the trends for the betterment and not for the sake of pleasing everyone. We have our PM now who is arguably the most popular celebrity that have come out since the creation of the country. But would it work? I doubt it because populism for the sake of new popularity trends would make it worse in the end.

I witnessed the era of Musharraf while I was growing up and experienced life in it. It's my personal opinion that era was the best in our country considering how difficult the security situation of the country had become. There was almost daily a bomb blast in urban centers and no one could do anything about it because public lacked the will to choose the path. Besides lacking the will, there was utter confusion what ideology to be chosen for that. Should it be PK first(slogan of Musharraf) or should it be Islam fist, that was the short point, but Musharraf put the idea of PK first. It was perceived as mixed opinion. The true urbanites and left-minded people welcomed that, but villagers and rural centers disregarded it. From what I saw, there were hooligans and hysteria within the society and it was engineered by intelligentsia. Perhaps it was a bit too early for them to digest the idea, but people's lifestyle improved right before my eyes despite the mess. A new middle-class emerged from poverty.

I would blame so-called lawyers movement(w.r.t. Musharraf) which brainwashed people and did a dirty politics for their vested agenda just to restore a highly corrupt chief justice who was doing dirty politics and now in these years they realize that were only fooled by intelligentsia and were pawns.

So far, Khan is failing miserably, and I have no doubt in my mind that he would eventually fail because there is a societal collapse. Khan wants to please everybody including the persons the world calls terrorists. This would not work. I agree with the dictator Musharraf that militarily defeating was more viable option which he adopted in his 9 years tenure. I also feel that Trump-Khan alliance in Afghanistan would fail too. Musharraf did things which he said and he was very direct towards the things he said and what he did. He didn't back away from the stance he had. Khan takes U-turns. lies and tries to please or accommodate different factions of society, but in the end, when the dust would settle, no one would be happy with him. He would only repeat the story of a father, a son and a donkey who could not please anyone from Aesop's tales.

The stuff happening in Afghanistan w.r.t. the region is a reverse reflection of her past regimes. Their armies trampled the lands here and tried to conquer the subcontinent several times and that's historical fact. But that should not be the justification of what is being done morally wrong to them now. A wrong policy is a wrong one and it doesn't have to justified from past blunders or history.

I understand the policies of the US could seem very unjust but Britian has to be blamed more for that. And even more, the real blame should fall to past AFG regimes which never let printing press, loud speakers, or a railway to have them served for their people there as they were considered inventions of 'infidels' and this mentality under the wrong context of freedom, it fell so behind the world due to its past mistakes. The remnants of this mentality in the form of political accommodation now enjoys social media. They would play with the sentiments of people and systematically instill hatred, extremism, and radicalization in their minds. This creates a sympathy factor for them.

Sometimes it feels like US tries to clear the mess UK created in the past, but it creates more problems than a visible solution. Simply put, the initial Soviet study done of AFG has somewhat proven to be true now. The study said that if one bomber is destroyed, three end up popping more.

The war created refugees. AFG refugees here are in millions living yet their officials or government have not officially recognized PK as a country nor its western border called Durand Line. This is a problem of the ego.

The idea of pan-Islamism has failed. Ever since the discovery of oil in middle-east, their oligarchy exported their hegemony under the brand wahhabism towards East, funded huge number of mosques where parents admitted their children who didn't have the capacity to raise them. Although that brand had played its role for overthrowing of the caliphate in the past, their bringing of ideology towards East created big problems especially in my country. People in my country don't realize, but soon they would that it was only an Arab hegemony disguised in that brand. It protected their interests and did a great job, but at the cost of blood of innocents. All the so-called infrastructure happening, there are blood and bones of innocent which paid the price.

Our military establishment did their dirty bidding for the past 72 years and now they should realize they have become nothing more than their stooges. Islamic Military Counter Terrorism Coalition is nothing more than a threat against Iran. Once the world go beyond oil-driven economy, KSA might fall into crises and might eventually collapse in its current form if the Theory of Relative Money is accepted. Iran would make use of the situation and would want to establish its foothold and this is very important. Independent Iran is very crucial to balance Arab hegemony no matter how the entire world views it differently and hypocritically.

As a person living in the region, I'm not a fan of CPEC(China-PK Economic Corridor). Those Western countries which are criticizing it calling it a debt trap, they are true about it theoretically but they don't have any alternative thing to offer w.r.t. the region here. Merely blaming or criticizing without any practical backup is useless. If they have good plans, they should bring it to the table as well for a fair deal. Overall, I hope this project fails quick in its early process because our future generations would fall in permanent debt trap.

Here are the flaws which I see in the project:

---> Chinese and Urdu have no communication link. This in my opinion is the biggest flaw. Both are entirely different civilizations. PK and IND who are supposed to be enemies have better communication link because both sides of the people are better able to understand and communicate verbally despite the written script difference.

---> China has a burden of its own too. This project (CPEC) would put extra burden on the local industries and they would eventually die out. So I don't think this project would generate any money from our region to which it could be utilized to its own people. It would only do quick infrastructure big projects based on loans and then what?

---> PK is already on the verge of bankruptcy. It has already debts to pay to WB and IMF. Loans from China would make situation worse and would add further debts to reach new heights.

---> When the local industry would be in strain due to it, it would create an effect of people not wanting to create new industries in the first place. This would make local economy dry.

--> EIC(East India Company) did have the same kind of scenario and then colonization happened through that. There is a fear of colonization in the new modern form with this project. It would create the dependency syndrome to reach new heights.

I have lots of more stuff to talk about and the post has become a little big and there are lots of things I missed. So I think I should end here with a summary note (TL;DR):

  • Subcontinent is on the path to implode.
  • The population of subcontinent is booming to unprecedented levels and the idea of two major nation states is failing. The management problems cannot be justified in the current standards.
  • Environment problems(which I wasn't able to discuss in the post) are gone to the level where a massive amount of money is needed to sort it out. The entire region could turn into civil war if the future water crises is not managed.
  • Islamic conquests towards East influenced the local cultures and tribes. Different cultures incorporated different values of it. There was a fear generated with swords within different cultures and there was a movement which tried to balance and neutralized the sword effect.
  • It's been slowly recognized by the masses in the first quarter of 21st century that the Islamic conquests proved beneficial to the Arabs. One could now say that it was Arab conquests for hegemony.
  • The infrastructure which Arab world has build, it's superficial and there is no mechanism which justifies its merit. The conquests created a gap from different centuries which is being filled in the 21st century by the terrorists elements from various regions and sides.
  • Iran should exist to neutralize Arab hegemony and balance. In fact, there should be Iran-like at least 3 countries to further generate a force, but one is enough if Russia backs her up.
  • Britain's division of subcontinent was poorly handled and hasty. If the institutes are not strengthened and are not made to be stronger than individuals, it would be devastating for the region and the justification of imperialism in the name of responsibility would completely fail. This would make Britain a great evil in the whole spectrum of events and some view it already.
  • US interests in the region aren't clearly defined. They change with the events and time quickly. It's like it's handling the job as a part-timer. It should completely describe the goals and objectives.
  • The fall of Soviet Union has happened but the cost is huge. The world powers are failing to control the aftermath of it. US might lose its superpower status in the process and it's already happening. That gap of competition is being filled by China, but that's also an illusion. The real benefactor would be Russia for obvious geopolitical reasons.
  • If there is to be peace ensured, the idea of destruction over construction should be countered with a supreme ideology. So far, no such ideology exists on a political level.
  • It's not the intelligence which could be dangerous. It's autonomy. From the book "The Army of None", the Pentagon author gives convincing ideas of how being dumb but fully autonomous is more dangerous than being intelligent but semi-autonomous. He gives the example of mines. Mine is a dumb device, but being autonomous, it's dangerous.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
1,270
Points
4,041
I read an interesting article today:

In the article, it was written that suits used to be a symbol of power, control and authority, but nowadays, they are becoming a symbol of powerlessness.
 
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
1,270
Points
4,041
I wanted to discuss some things which I found interesting in the reply B. Haddrell did to another member in another thread:

When I want pure realism I watch the news. But even when you do this, also the news is not showing everything.

Some news channels show more than others but in general, you won't see beheadings and the bloody gory details of bombings like torn off limbs and mangled bodies also showing the faces. I don't want to see it and I don't need to see it. I believe it is voyeuristic, like when atrocities are filmed by a bystander, uploaded online and a huge amount of people watch it until it is removed for good. It is in bad taste and also shows a lack of respect for the victims. The news usually blurs out faces of victims, as it should be.

I believe that news agencies have an agenda especially in my region. If, for example, some politician has said something, the news headlines would completely change the perspective of it and readers could be mislead. This is why I say that one should get a first source information. For example, if the prime minister of my country has said something, one should directly view the source such as s Tweet or a video so that the context can be completely understood. The news media try to twist the narrative so that it would sell it to their readers who don't care to view the actual source.

Then, there is an element of hypocrisy and alignments. Alignments are fine but hypocrisy isn't. One could align to left or right of the politics or center, but hypocrisy is something else. News media often portray worse form of hypocrisy.

About the gore, I think it should be a choice in the internet media. Censorship to TV media is fine because there are lots of people viewing it, for example, in a cafe eating food and one could lose the apatite or could get some real bad stress thinking how bad the world has turned up and people come to home from work and get more stress about things happening. People could get demoralized easily by consuming themselves to realistic gore on television which serves nothing but sensationalism...However on the internet, one should have a choice to view the source explicit or otherwise because one have a freedom to view it as one would really want and it should be a choice....However on TV media, it's another story...

As an example, after September 11, terrorists attacks in my country became increased...There wasn't a day when a local news would report a bomb blast and some x number of people died...There was barely any censorship to TV media and TV made full views of explicit gore, bodies into pieces after the blast...What happened was over the years, people became desensitized of seeing the gore again and again...The breaking news wasn't that 10 people died because it became a norm. The breaking news would be 60+ people died and in the same way, the threshold kept on increasing because people had become desensitized seeing body parts and aftermath. I was little at that time when those things were happening. Then there came a point that 100+ people dying would be considered a breaking news and any number less than that would be a normal day. This is all to say that TV media exposing people to gore doesn't bring any fruit...Instead, people are desensitized and lose the meaning and effect of the gore...The terrorists would like general public seeing body parts because it becomes a glorification of their acts...Even if the act is suicidal in nature, there are perpetrators behind it which want the public to go crazy about it and news media to show the full gore so that a sensationalism effect is bestowed...It makes them glorified for their acts...

However, internet media should have the freedom and choice given to viewers....I view internet as a library of things, so one should have a freedom to watch a news video source with gore or otherwise. It should be up to the readers, but TV should have a censorship because it's a family-oriented social medium.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
6,774
Reaction score
1,671
Points
5,541
Thank you for this very interesting reply, The Outlier. I watch a lot of news, also from different sources. The BBC (British news) is very careful. They often warn viewers that what is coming next might be upsetting to some. They show recordings of crimes, also from bystanders, but cut off at the point just before the victim dies. For my taste, they warn a bit too often but on the other hand, this way viewers have the choice if they want to watch or if they want to allow also younger children to watch. I understand.

I understand your feelings and sometimes I felt the same. With me and also my daughter, it is mainly one news pattern: mass shootings or shootings in general in the USA. As shocking as these news are, my first thought is usually "another one". The usual discussion about US gun laws comes up again, the usual regrets and both of us know, also this shooting won't make any difference. There will be another one and it won't be long. Such news first of all trigger frustration and sadness in me, not so much horror.

What touches me more than mass horror is individual stories. As wrong as it is, I think this saying has some truth in it: I looked up the source - Joseph Stalin said "A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic". The most powerful news stories combined both.

I believe there should be a limit to freedom of speech. It is very much against US values but I come from Germany where attitudes are very different. Preaching hate which includes ISIS videos of beheadings and other violence are removed and against the law. Some youngsters watched such videos and ran away, joining ISIS or became so-called Jihadi brides. What to do with these people and their children after ISIS fell is a problem. If possible, Britain withdraws the British citizenship from these people and does what it possible to prevent their return. Only a few children who ended up as orphans were allowed in.
 
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
1,270
Points
4,041
I often encounter this sentiment from many people in real life and online regarding a certain point of view against China and India with reference to statecraft. To simplify it, many people think democracy in India has failed or failing. I want to share some thoughts regarding this sentiment.

I have my own peculiar views regarding bloodline monarchy and monarchal elements. I consider French revolution to be one of the greatest achievements by humanity if not the greatest. I do not buy this notion that democracy in India has failed or failing. I want to elaborate on this.

First of all, when people try to compare China and India in terms of economic data, yes, China has the lead. Instead of commenting deep about China's internal affairs and their statecraft, my aim of this post is to justify democracy with reference to India.

People get impressed with China's economic boom and when they see India, they try to put the blame on democracy in India. I have listened to people like Jayant Bhandari and I don't have anything against their viewpoint. What I am about to present is my own viewpoint based on my own observation.

When I think of democracy, I don't see it as rule of the people, for the people, by the people. What I see is the antithesis of monarchy. Yes, there could be monarchal elements inside a democratic process also which I consider it totally illegal, but aside from that, a democracy in my mind is a government of anyone who would not transfer the power to their bloodline and the faces would get changed. If within a democratic process, a family or a person is able to transfer the power to their bloodline, then it's not a democracy in my opinion. It's a monarchy disguised as democracy.

Having this viewpoint about democracy, it also requires right people for the right jobs. If there are not right people for the right jobs, then there would be imbalance in the flow of things being done at state level. This imbalance is then reflected in mismanagement of things, and this is the part where general public perceives democracy to be a failure of some sort. What they do not realize is that it's not a full-fledged applicable democracy which would incorporate a system to make sure who are the right people for the right tasks. I don't want to go deep into parliamentary vs presidential forms. What I want to elaborate is the essence of democracy.

The essence of democracy lies not in the voting quantity, but rather how people are genuinely involved in the participation. It's not about the end goal but the journey and experience towards goal. It's more about causes than goals. It's more about mistakes and improving instead of achieving perfection and utopia. Imagine a hypothetical non-democratic society which does not know who their government is, but they do know there is someone who is taking care of them. Someone more intelligent than them. But merely relying on intellect to run things on a state level disregard collective emotional intelligence and psyche of the masses. Democracies have problems, but there also solutions towards those problems and those solutions need not to be implemented by force with draconian attitudes.

Coming back to India and people's comments about the democracy, I simply in 2021 can't fathom the idea of why people would want to serve monarchy by disregarding democratic norms just because it's failing to achieve an economic goal. I looked into definition of corruption, and this is what I got: "dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving bribery". But my conception of corruption is different. For me, corruption is short-term superficial goals for personal benefits. And when it comes to the matter of personalism, monarchial tendencies serve this evil purpose well. Those who are supporting monarchial tendencies in India, they are looking at short-term superficial goals.

I asked a certain person, "Would you prefer to live under a rich monarchy that would give you the lifestyle of your highest desire or would you prefer to live under a democracy in which there would be struggling economy?" The person instantly replied to me that he would live under a monarchy because that would promise him a good lifestyle. People think of short-term benefits just like that reply of that person. When people say: "climate change does not affect me", it's a corruption. Why it's corruption? It's because it's short-term thinking for a personal benefit. The person does not care whatever the hell happens to someone else. As long as the climate change does not affect his home, he's good with it because it's serving his personalism for short-term benefits.

So, this is the state of direct rich monarchies in the world like in many middle eastern countries and other monarchial tendencies in democracy like family politics. Their entire politics play around this notion of keeping people happy for short-term. Imagine there is a huge wave coming to you at a beach and you know you might have some time to run away so that you don't get the wrath of it or at least try to escape from it, but a person with his talking convinces you and say: "let's dance together!". That person would fulfil the criteria of a lunatic for his short-term happiness. But since short-term corrupted politics is portrayed to the masses like that dance only with the exception that masses don't know the huge wave is coming behind them.

What India is passing through right now or what every struggling democracy in the world is passing through, it's a spider trying to climb the web. A spider tries to walk on the wall initially, then falls down, but it tries again and again until it gets success. It's much better if India has its flaws come out early in a democratic system and repeating this system would make societies learn from their mistakes. This chance of doing mistakes in democracy makes it stronger for the future because the states and republics see that their societies have faced these things and triumphed.

Some people relate the repetition of mistakes with this quote, "Insanity is doing the same thing again and again but expecting different results". People try to tie this quote with the system of democracy without realizing that democracy is not a static system, but it's evolving. If it was a static system, this quote would have suited it. Democracy inherently should have checks and balances, and elasticity to make changes for the better. If it's not, it's not a democracy...

In short, keeping view of the above thoughts, I make a conclusion:

----> Democracy in India is like a spider trying to climb a wall. It would fall repeatedly until it gets the success.

----> Spider falling again and again would give the spider experience to deal with toughness. It's better to have problems coming out early and addressing them than the problems arising late where a non-democratic system is not able to deal with them resulting in overtaking of monarchy.

----> Corruption is short-term superficial sugar-coating for the sake of personal benefits. A fraction of those personal benefits is shared in masses so that people would think their lives have become better, but little do they know how it would impact the upcoming generations because of the short-term satisfactions.

----> Humanity have fought against the monarchies for thousands of years. It would be a really bad idea to welcome the thoughts of having monarchal tendencies in politics.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
1,270
Points
4,041

Japanese former PM has been shot while giving campaign speech. I think world in general is going crazy and people are losing sanity. I didn't expect this kind of thing coming from Japan, but this might trigger something bad in other countries as well.

==================

In my country, there should be a new definition of craziness, or a new term should be invented for that. People are getting crazy with each passing day. So, what I want to say is that there would be similar or worse news that's going to come within two months which I am predicting given the current situation here.

GHQ here has lost its integrity. There is extreme disharmony among masses. Climate change would eventually destroy or weaken GHQ and it deserves it. I have zero sympathy with people here who are supporting dynasties within democracy here. When they complain about the system screwing them, I feel no empathy because they are the same people that support them. I almost feel people now love getting screwed by supporting the same people who are screwing them for the last 40 years in dynastical parties.

When it comes to solution, people would never organize themselves here and would blame GHQ. I know GHQ is pure manifestation of evil, but they are organized unlike blamers. People are sticking to the superficial short-term objectives which would eventually destroy their future generations in the fragile process. Analysts are theorizing the possibility of a civil war here. Personally, I am ready for a civil war mentally and have this notion in my mind that it can happen anytime, and this mighty military would not be able to handle it if the current situation goes more out of control here. At least it would give a direction to this zombie-land instead of extreme discord which has bankrupted this society to its worse levels.

If people are hellbent on having spiritual fanaticism with the cult of 7th century families and worshipping them as pinnacle of morality and life's guidance for themselves and for the next generations, then it's an abyss except it would not be bottomless. There would be spikes down there exactly like MK's well which would pierce everyone falling.

I was watching a documentary of National Geographic in which the narrator was saying that climate change was deadly, horrific, and might be manageable, but it would not eliminate humanity as there would likely be few survivors. The far deadlier force that can cause 100% extinction of humanity is "politics" when it becomes unmanageable, and I agree with it.

==================
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
6,774
Reaction score
1,671
Points
5,541
That Shinzo Abe, former Japanese Prime Minister, has been assassinated saddens me a lot. My daughter and me were both shocked, mainly because such an attack is not something we expected to happen in Japan. They showed pictures of the gun the killer used in the news - it was hand made. This shows how strict gun control is in Japan and it was also mentioned in the news.

My daughter said, she would have expected such an attack in the USA. If someone had shot Biden, she would not be surprised also in view of the attack on January 6 on the Capitol. But this, that is definitely unexpected.

Right now, the death of Shinzo Abe is headline news in Britain and for a brief time it overtook the chaos that has been taken place in Britain for a while now, centering around now former Prime Minister Boris Johnson. The climax came yesterday: 54 resignations and one sacking until Johnson finally resigned. Now he wants to stay for a few more months until a successor has been found.

It is a problem all over the world: Everything is getting more expensive. We are also struggling although not as badly as other households. But if my brother in Germany would be unable and unwilling to pay for the electricity and gas bills we get, we would be in deep trouble!

Climate change, rising bills, unemployment and violence in so many parts of the world, it causes tensions not only when looking at governments but also in everyday life. There is a rising problem with domestic violence, drugs, alcohol abuse in Britain and not just here. We have enough to eat but also because of the war in Ukraine and desertification, so many people are fighting for survival. Immigation has been a problem for a long time. It will get much worse.

What can we do? At least we can support what is right and just. This is sometimes a matter of debate but the general idea is important. We help each other within our family and within our friends, support can come in many forms. What me must not do is despair and giving up. Life is difficult but it is important and worth it to move forward.
 
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
1,270
Points
4,041
I didn't expect something like that coming from Japan. I was anticipating this in my country. I don't watch TV as I quit it in 2016, but based on livestreaming of some local channels on the internet, it was not a headline news here. The headline news was the pilgrimage going on.

Whatever the political ideology is, violence is never the answer. It only gains short-term objectives in an unethical way, but it breeds further consequences. Guns should not be available to people publicly like hot cakes. One thing my country shares bad similarity with US is the obsession with guns. All my tribal relatives in my village have lots of guns. 80% of the population have cricket bats and guns in their homes. Many people don't even tell or share, but I know they exist.

My country is unofficially bankrupt or at least borderline bankrupt. But these assumptions are based on recorded economy. A substantial portion of economy is not documented, so we would never get true facts. I consider myself lucky that I can go back to my village home in my ancestors' valley if the situation would call for it (like urban warfare happening).

About inflation, many people here have misplaced priorities. So many people spend on things based on peer pressure of the society. For example, people here spend their whole fortune in lavish thee-day wedding ceremonies which is just for show off. The ceremony would beat the lavishness of a royal family of a 20th century. I mean if someone has good money, by all means they should spend on whatever they like, but people who don't have good money shouldn't. People just follow blind trends. Many people would spend a good chunk of money on annual pilgrimage and then would complain about not having enough money left for the remaining year. Our country's import bill of tea is the highest in the world. People here consume so much tea like I know personally many people who drink tea every hour like water even in this hot weather.

There is a global energy crisis going on. I consider myself so blessed to have a house here in this gated community of private housing. The whole land is totally independent and is not dependent on government at all. I am so thankful to our CEO for managing and creating this area and developing it. Our area doesn't take electricity from government. It produces its own electricity and distributes to the houses. Same with water too. Our CEO is now planning to shift our whole gated city to alternate energy because of the global energy crises. He was talking about shifting to solar. I think it would be a good idea.

The Russia-Ukraine war would have worldwide effects on food supply. Ukraine is like a bread-creator of the world and it's terrible what's going on there. My country is agricultural, thanks to the British Empire which planned a great canal irrigation system here. That's one good thing coming out from colonization. But I fear climate change might affect it. For example, mangoes which have come this year are less compared to last year because of less rain. Still, they are abundant, but future is uncertain.

I, however, don't have a plan to go to any other country like my siblings have done. I have an extreme phobia of airplane travelling. Planes scare me a lot. Once I escaped from the airport to back home panicking and quitting my booked local flight. I love my motorbike journeys and I love the food here. I can't sacrifice these things. I have recently joined a political party and have become a member of it. My application form was accepted. Who knows maybe in future, I might become a politician if I am fortunate enough to become an old person and contributive enough, but right now, I am just observing things from a distance. I want to know closely how things work behind the scenes.

I hope the current energy crises lessens and hope there is world peace. This crisis is leading to intensify climate change further like more coal dependence for instance.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
1,270
Points
4,041

Unprecedented scenes are coming from Sri Lanka. Their president has supposedly fled, and protestors have stormed the presidential area. Some took swimming in the presidential pool; some went inside the kitchens and bedrooms; others went to the gym for workout.




FXOUkocWAAEKn6X

Their PM has agreed to resign:

While making this post, there is a news of protestors entering in PM house as well.

I think this is a domino-effect coming towards other countries as well. A World Bank personnel was saying the same.


There are many psychological elements to study from this event.
 
Last edited:

Ra

Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
3,799
Reaction score
873
Points
1,641
That Shinzo Abe, former Japanese Prime Minister, has been assassinated saddens me a lot. My daughter and me were both shocked, mainly because such an attack is not something we expected to happen in Japan. They showed pictures of the gun the killer used in the news - it was hand made. This shows how strict gun control is in Japan and it was also mentioned in the news.

My daughter said, she would have expected such an attack in the USA. If someone had shot Biden, she would not be surprised also in view of the attack on January 6 on the Capitol. But this, that is definitely unexpected.

Right now, the death of Shinzo Abe is headline news in Britain and for a brief time it overtook the chaos that has been taken place in Britain for a while now, centering around now former Prime Minister Boris Johnson. The climax came yesterday: 54 resignations and one sacking until Johnson finally resigned. Now he wants to stay for a few more months until a successor has been found.

It is a problem all over the world: Everything is getting more expensive. We are also struggling although not as badly as other households. But if my brother in Germany would be unable and unwilling to pay for the electricity and gas bills we get, we would be in deep trouble!

Climate change, rising bills, unemployment and violence in so many parts of the world, it causes tensions not only when looking at governments but also in everyday life. There is a rising problem with domestic violence, drugs, alcohol abuse in Britain and not just here. We have enough to eat but also because of the war in Ukraine and desertification, so many people are fighting for survival. Immigation has been a problem for a long time. It will get much worse.

What can we do? At least we can support what is right and just. This is sometimes a matter of debate but the general idea is important. We help each other within our family and within our friends, support can come in many forms. What me must not do is despair and giving up. Life is difficult but it is important and worth it to move forward.
I think political violence in developed nations is generally quite shocking. Political assassination even more so. America seems to be a somewhat of an outlier compared to countries like Japan, England, Australia, etc. when it comes to political beliefs, zealousness, etc. Japan has a lot of political apathy as well, and this apathy stems from various sources: lack of compulsory voting, being unable to vote due to working commitments and the length of one's work, the LDP being propped up by majority of people who actually go and vote, and the LDP having essentially no strong opposition. This is what probably makes Abe's murder even more shocking for Japanese people, and by extension the rest of the world.
 
Top