Slashdot Mirror

You may want to stop drinking the Ghandi koolaid brought to you by Western Civilisation. From what I can tell (which is probably very biased as well), Ghandi isn't seen in some parts of India (Tamil Nadu, in my experience) as the great saviour of the nation as he is hailed by the media in the rest of the world.

He was someone who looked down on a number of castes, was an incredible imperialist, and hence very loyal to the British Empire. He didn't fight apartheid in South Africa because he believed the Whites were wrong, he fought it because he believed "clean Indians" were above "uncivilized races".

http://www.raceandhistory.com/historicalviews/ghandi.htm
http://www.trinicenter.com/WorldNews/ghandi5.htm
http://www.trinicenter.com/oops/gandhi2.html

Also, from Velu Annamalai's recommended readings regarding Gandhi:

Ambedkar, B.R. What Congress and Gandhi Have Done to the Untouchables. Bombay: Thacker, 1945.
Annamalai, Velu. Sergeant-Major M.K. Gandhi. Bangalore: Dalit Sahitya Akadiy, 1995.
Assisi, Francis. "Gandhi's Links with South Africa Examined." India West, 28 Sep 1990: 45.
Assisi, Francis. "Mahatma Gandhi's Links with SA Blacks Questioned." News India, 28 Sep 1990: 1.
Assisi, Francis. "Two New Books on Gandhiji." India West, 28 Sep 1990: 45.
Das, Nani Gopal. Was Gandhiji a Mahatma? Calcutta: Dipali Book House, 1988.
Edwards, Michael. The Myth of the Mahatma. London: Constable, 1986.
Gandhi, Mohandas K. Untouchability. Edited by Bharatan Kumarappa. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House, 1954.
Grenier, Richard. The Gandhi Nobody Knows. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1983.
Grenier, Richard. "The Gandhi Nobody Knows." Commentary (Mar 1983): 59-72.
Huq, Fazlul. Gandhi: Saint or Sinner? Foreword by V.T. Rajshekar. Bangalore: Dalit Sahitya Akadiy, 1991.
Kapur, Sudarshan. Raising Up a Prophet: The African-American Encounter with Gandhi. Boston: Beacon Press, 1992.
Rajshekar, V.T. Hinduism, Fascism and Gandhism: A Guide to Every Intelligent Indian. Bangalore: Dalit Sahitya Akadiy, 1984.
Rajshekar, V.T. Why Godse Killed Gandhi? Bangalore: Dalit Sahitya Akadiy, 1986.
Rajshekar, V.T. Clash of Two Values: Mahatma Gandhi and Babasaheb Ambedkar (The Verdict of History). Bangalore: Dalit Sahitya Akadiy, 1989.

You may want to stop drinking the Ghandi koolaid brought to you by Western Civilisation. From what I can tell (which is probably very biased as well), Ghandi isn't seen in some parts of India (Tamil Nadu, in my experience) as the great saviour of the nation as he is hailed by the media in the rest of the world.

He was someone who looked down on a number of castes, was an incredible imperialist, and hence very loyal to the British Empire. He didn't fight apartheid in South Africa because he believed the Whites were wrong, he fought it because he believed "clean Indians" were above "uncivilized races".

http://www.raceandhistory.com/historicalviews/ghandi.htm
http://www.trinicenter.com/WorldNews/ghandi5.htm
http://www.trinicenter.com/oops/gandhi2.html

Also, from Velu Annamalai's recommended readings regarding Gandhi:

Ambedkar, B.R. What Congress and Gandhi Have Done to the Untouchables. Bombay: Thacker, 1945.
Annamalai, Velu. Sergeant-Major M.K. Gandhi. Bangalore: Dalit Sahitya Akadiy, 1995.
Assisi, Francis. "Gandhi's Links with South Africa Examined." India West, 28 Sep 1990: 45.
Assisi, Francis. "Mahatma Gandhi's Links with SA Blacks Questioned." News India, 28 Sep 1990: 1.
Assisi, Francis. "Two New Books on Gandhiji." India West, 28 Sep 1990: 45.
Das, Nani Gopal. Was Gandhiji a Mahatma? Calcutta: Dipali Book House, 1988.
Edwards, Michael. The Myth of the Mahatma. London: Constable, 1986.
Gandhi, Mohandas K. Untouchability. Edited by Bharatan Kumarappa. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House, 1954.
Grenier, Richard. The Gandhi Nobody Knows. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1983.
Grenier, Richard. "The Gandhi Nobody Knows." Commentary (Mar 1983): 59-72.
Huq, Fazlul. Gandhi: Saint or Sinner? Foreword by V.T. Rajshekar. Bangalore: Dalit Sahitya Akadiy, 1991.
Kapur, Sudarshan. Raising Up a Prophet: The African-American Encounter with Gandhi. Boston: Beacon Press, 1992.
Rajshekar, V.T. Hinduism, Fascism and Gandhism: A Guide to Every Intelligent Indian. Bangalore: Dalit Sahitya Akadiy, 1984.
Rajshekar, V.T. Why Godse Killed Gandhi? Bangalore: Dalit Sahitya Akadiy, 1986.
Rajshekar, V.T. Clash of Two Values: Mahatma Gandhi and Babasaheb Ambedkar (The Verdict of History). Bangalore: Dalit Sahitya Akadiy, 1989.

Re those "splitinfinitive" taggers: Split infinitives are perfectly legal in English. Yes, in American English as well. And if they are used to change the emphasis in a phrase, they often are very useful too. They can even allow for improved clarity. So just stop to stupidly impose latin grammar rules and conventions on another language. By the way: Ending sentences with prepositions is generally OK as well.

We can thank the niggers and their contributions to the English language for all of the above. In every country in which they are found and with every language they speak, they never speak the language correctly (with the possible exception of Swahili). It's always some kind of pidgin form, and that's despite multiple generations born and raised within that country. If you put one rotten apple in an entire basket full of good apples, the good apples do not transform the rotten apple; rather, the single rotten apple corrupts all of the good apples. This is the niggers' contribution to the English language and has resulted in the lowering of standards everywhere, because after all, we'd hate to offend anyone.

There are people who are idiots and don't think things through. That's why they think someone would say what I just said out of hatred. I can desire that we stop lowering the fucking standards and I can be honest about why they were lowered without hating anyone. Just because you can't fathom that doesn't make it automatically false. So why do I use the word "niggers?" To distinguish the people I am talking about from the black people who give a shit, at least enough not to allow this to happen to them. The problem is the media doesn't have an obsession with fine, upstanding, law-abiding people who happen to be black. It has a love affair with fifth-street gangsta thug-wannabe niggers who abuse women and kill each other for money so they can buy crack, because that's just so cool, right?

Re those "splitinfinitive" taggers: Split infinitives are perfectly legal in English.
Yes, in American English as well.

And if they are used to change the emphasis in a phrase, they often are very useful too. They can even allow for improved clarity.
So just stop to stupidly impose latin grammar rules and conventions on another language.

By the way: Ending sentences with prepositions is generally OK as well.

very reasonable thing to do, you don't let suspects know they're being tailed

Your ludicrous racist bullshit (I bet you didn't know that there were WHITE terrorists too, and some of them don't even try to use their religion as an excuse!) aside, just remember that the hundreds of thousands of people who got NSL'd, did so WITHOUT OVERSIGHT. There was no "probable cause", there was no warrant, there was nothing but your tax money going into a giant sucking hole. We already had an article here on telcos disconnecting wiretaps because of FBI agents "forgetting" to pay for them (where did the money go? Without oversight, do the feds even know?)

"Hmmm it seems that a lot of these terrorists are muslims ... how strange" (hate speech)

Not hate speech, it just marks you as a retard, unfit to defend our country against the likes of Timothy McVeigh and others.

Ghandi's racism stems from his use of the word "nigger" to refer to Africans.

http://www.trinicenter.com/WorldNews/ghandi.htm

And I don't think Christ would support anything since he's a fictional character.

If they're convinced that they don't want to do any violence (say like Gandhi) I'm not too concerned, he doesn't seem like a real dangerous fellow.

Gandhi was actually pretty much a racist, and a potentially violent one at that. Don't believe the white-washed Disney version of history people give you about Gandhi. His views about africans are probably more extreme and hateful than David Duke.

http://www.trinicenter.com/WorldNews/ghandi4.htm

Whistleblowers who wish to truthfully disclose government corruption

Right, because most whistleblower like this nut bag from former US-Iraq Intelligence, this world is so much better keeping insane liberal media junkies with daily fix.

A fascist society is singular: the state / party opinion is the truth (tm) and those that disagree will be punished, the severity of which will be determined according to the priorities on topics to which dissenting opinion has been voiced. To make it short, a bias is okay as long as everybody gets to have theirs.

I still have arguments , but OK - we see each other positions, and I think they are clear to others. But I would add

I have read interesting article recently http://eqi.org/forgas.htm I think to clarify things it is OK to get a bit to harder to the arguments, if last leads to more understanding.

That is - personally for me making more accents is not just plainly believe in what I say, but rather reveal by associated emotions some other thoughts.

as there is interesting topic why fascist or communist theories appear and how societies accept them.

and there is interesting note - both fascism and communism were build as humanity theories - fascist ( Hitler theory) was intended to save and develop German nation. Communism was about to make everyone happy (except of capitalists).

And I hope I voiced one thing - I suspect that thinking on good it is possible to exaggerate it and make it not good at all. After all in societies there are those force means which exist in societies so that state functioned ( see for example articles here on slashdot on screening in US airports) could be extended. So I think - keeping thinking on good ( without avoiding dangerous pitfalls in those thinkings) could develop harm.

So - it is better that members of societies think 'wider' really taking into account not only logical arguments but also paying attention on if the logical arguments are context correct.

And I think ( after reading articles I mention) - modern western societies are still not prevented from slowly moving to fascism. And the mean - is not just peaceful acceptance of someone's opinion ( as the last seems could inadvertently lead to destructive ideas)- but the mean is more education, teaching those who thinks only on logical arguments to think on context avoiding pushing ideas which are context incoherent. So when people would be more educated ( by means which new technologies provide) then there would be better. while current thins like described here

"Article 1 - Culture and cognition" "Article 2 - How Culture Molds Habits of Thought" [trinicenter.com]

coupled with that - purely logical conclusions could lead to development of fascist and communist ideologies ( BTW - both theories came from Germany) I think that to trying to avoid inherited problems in thinking of western people would be a good help to the world. As I really think that at some point modern ' humanity' could come to fascism-like dictatorships.

And there are no proven arguments that 'a plural society' is stably to moving into something awful. So there is need to make some improvements to the overall good ( for my eyes) structure of western society and ideology - but which should have some more internal means to fight moves into dictatorships.

Also read this link URL:http://www.zircondesigns.com/Support/incompete nce.PDF

Maybe my links and thinking on those internal problems in western societies - tending to think 'purely logically' not providing feedback to idiots on their stupidity ( being 'correct' in respect to pure insanity of some members of society) could lead to thinking that there are not only problems in past but there is need to avoid building fascism or communist ( any totalitarian theory) in future. And for that it is a good idea to look on existing problems around than looking them in someone's opinions on Stalin attitude to Jews ( esp if they have some basis for be

The idea that your language determines the way you see the world (the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis) has been around for many decades

It would be intresting to know what others think on related stories - the effect of culture on the way one thinks.

"Article 1 - Culture and cognition"

and another such article (intially from NY Times)

"Article 2 - How Culture Molds Habits of Thought"

That's a point, but that's not the real reason.

Iraq decided back in November 2000 to start selling oil in Euros instead of Dollars, and the bad side for America is that it did succeed.

This war was fought to prevent other countries from doing the same. Like Venezuela who felt under a coup (a US funded coup) just after trying to exchange oil with services instead of dollars.

The thing is that if OPEC starts to accept Euros for oil purchases the US will economically collapse because of its huge debt (way worse than Argentina when it did collapse).

Full explanation and documents to prove this point of view.

This has never been discussed in any major US media. Weird.

Also, from what I hear, the weather is wonderful, the people are all friendly, the help shit diamonds

Yes, I'm signing up now for a great job!