Ilaiah views

[chittimallu2]

2 minutes ago, uttermost said:

RM is at best a cultural historian, whereas KI is a sociologist by training. My definition of a scholar is someone who has published extensively in his line of work, and has been peer reviewed. KI makes the cut, RM doesn't.

Five published books, that should count to his "someone who has published extensively in his line of work"

Its true that the social academia is heavily left leaning, and someone like RM may have no chance. But prof. Balagangadhara does. He also explores cultural history with a scientific perspective. I mentioned Prof. B, just to make the distinction that I don't brush aside all right wing theoreticians. KI will always be taken more seriously than RM, other than in Hindutva circles.

Dont know about balagangadhara... KI is already being considered a buffoon in AP/Tg right now and half of those arent even arsed about hindutva agenda

I haven't read RM, or KI. But I've been to couple RM's lectures at my university 10yrs ago. I was impressionable then, and was definitely persuaded by his arguments about 'outsider' attacks.

I have perused RM's twitter feed, where he picks up fights with all and sundry (I don't hold it against him), but I'm not impressed with the unscientific arguments he makes. 

From the perspective of western academia, RM writes and sounds like a cultural apologist, not a neutral observer of fact. Him not getting on a high horse is precisely one of the ways modern propagandists do it. 

He is not an apologist if you ask me as I have read two of his books... he defends without attacking anyone's opinions... the only thing I didnt like about him is why he doesnt do the same with islamic scholars' comments on hinduism (maybe there arent any who commented? I dont know). He mostly draws comparisons and differences between hinduism and christianity and how christians used their propaganda in India

Simple question to you:

what do you treasure more? cultural/national sovereignty or individual liberty? KI gives voice to those whose individual liberty has been traditionally crushed by oppressive forces.

RM apologises for the oppression, but wants the oppressed to move past it.

That's why RM will probably make a good scholar if he choses genetics, where he can prove his cultural theories by deceit, but as a social scholar, he falls flat. He takes the side of the oppressors.

What liberty is ilaiah trying to give by saying vysyas should give/donate his wealth to daliths? didnt read his book but based on the interviews about that book, thats what he is saying

welcome back

[chittimallu2]

1 minute ago, uttermost said:

If Hinduism evolved with times, India wouldn't be poor. Your friend is right and wrong.

Its not christianity that evolved with times, its the protestant faith that did. 

what? how is the evolvement of hindusim linked to poverty... there are tons of protestant dominant countries that are poor... your point?

[chittimallu2]

3 minutes ago, uttermost said:

If Hinduism evolved with times, India wouldn't be poor. Your friend is right and wrong.

Its not christianity that evolved with times, its the protestant faith that did. 

example... dalits or harijans who were considered untouchables are no longer untouchables... they are walking into temples now... isnt that evolving?  Dont give me an example from a village in bihar where upper caste people beat a dalit black and blue for entering temple now... thats not legal and not encouraged to do by anyone.. the law is against it... majority of hindus are against it.... 

That is just one example, there are many

[uttermost]

Finally, everyone has a choice to make.

Do you like yourself, or your country/group more? I know several people like to juggle both as if both are conjoined (meaning you are a product of your culture), but there's a bit of hypocrisy when taking that approach.

As long as you are blind to your own hypocrisy, enjoy.

Personally, I prefer my individual freedom compared to my group identity, and will never let a group dictate what I should feel or do. 

I may let individuals calibrate my degree of freedom based on how much I like them. But never groups.

Kancha is one of those individuals who has made the right moral choice, at great personal cost. I admire him a lot. Even though I've never read him.

[Android_Halwa]

same smell....doubt ae ledu...!

pakka manode.. erstwhile @narsi alias @lazybugger...

doubt ae ledu...entry adirindi vaya...sensational topic..same stand..no change..!

[uttermost]

4 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

what? how is the evolvement of hindusim linked to poverty... there are tons of protestant dominant countries that are poor... your point?

I am not sure whether I should reply to you or not. But let me bite the bullet.

Yes. many protestant countries are poor, but by and large protestant flexibility towards exploitation of fellowmen is one of the main reasons for prosperity of European nations and the US. That's why I said protestant 'evolved', but not in a way that can be identified as moral according to their own scriptures.

Hinduism is definitely linked to poverty. Hinduism has built up super structures with caste that a regular person cannot overcome. Publicly listed company CEOs are 85% upper caste (not including shudras like Kammas). I can point you to the research article if you want to. I'm too lazy otherwise.

Kancha illustrates this well in his book (the one that raked up the controversy). Kancha speaks about the stingy nature of upper castes, and how money doesn't rotate, depriving economy of its resources. 

 

[batman]

10 minutes ago, Android_Halwa said:

same smell....doubt ae ledu...!

pakka manode.. erstwhile @narsi alias @lazybugger...

doubt ae ledu...entry adirindi vaya...sensational topic..same stand..no change..!

i get the same shyte smell too from whatever he says

[dakumangalsingh]

1 minute ago, uttermost said:

I am not sure whether I should reply to you or not. But let me bite the bullet.

Yes. many protestant countries are poor, but by and large protestant flexibility towards exploitation of fellowmen is one of the main reasons for prosperity of European nations and the US. That's why I said protestant 'evolved', but not in a way that can be identified as moral according to their own scriptures.

Hinduism is definitely linked to poverty. Hinduism has built up super structures with caste that a regular person cannot overcome. Publicly listed company CEOs are 85% upper caste (not including shudras like Kammas). I can point you to the research article if you want to. I'm too lazy otherwise.

Kancha illustrates this well in his book (the one that raked up the controversy). Kancha speaks about the stingy nature of upper castes, and how money doesn't rotate, depriving economy of its resources. 

 

There you go, the reason for india being poor. Basically we try to dwell in future but we never see the future nor enjoy the present.

 

[chittimallu2]

7 minutes ago, uttermost said:

I am not sure whether I should reply to you or not. But let me bite the bullet.

Yes. many protestant countries are poor, but by and large protestant flexibility towards exploitation of fellowmen is one of the main reasons for prosperity of European nations and the US. That's why I said protestant 'evolved', but not in a way that can be identified as moral according to their own scriptures.

Hinduism is definitely linked to poverty. Hinduism has built up super structures with caste that a regular person cannot overcome. Publicly listed company CEOs are 85% upper caste (not including shudras like Kammas). I can point you to the research article if you want to. I'm too lazy otherwise.

Kancha illustrates this well in his book (the one that raked up the controversy). Kancha speaks about the stingy nature of upper castes, and how money doesn't rotate, depriving economy of its resources. 

 

Why are you moving the goal posts now?  You call their exploitation of fellow men as "evolving" by protestants... but you say hindus built a structure that a regular person cannot overcome despite all the reservations provided? makes absolutely zero sense... 

publicly listed companies are personal properties in a way despite public holding the shares... not every person needs to be involved in the decision a company makes so appointing a CEO is absolutely their pick and has nothing to do with hinduism or the caste system... 

SInce there are quite a few indians in top positions abroad, can you name how many dalit Indian CEOs are in the US or any other country? Clearly these countries arent suffering from the caste system you bang about and there isnt any "upper caste assholes" to suppress them... 

[uttermost]

26 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

example... dalits or harijans who were considered untouchables are no longer untouchables... they are walking into temples now... isnt that evolving?  Dont give me an example from a village in bihar where upper caste people beat a dalit black and blue for entering temple now... thats not legal and not encouraged to do by anyone.. the law is against it... majority of hindus are against it.... 

That is just one example, there are many

is proof of this 'evolution' enough for you? perhaps. because you and I are not touched by the daily humiliations these groups have to face. Even the most accomplished among these groups are not spared the humiliation.

Take for example this db. Did you know that I wrote extensively supporting Hindutva when I started off? I was probably the first guy in this db, who supported Modi unequivocally, and enthusiastically.

What do people think of me now? I'm sure the first thing that comes to their mind is 'dalit' or 'thurak', when they want to address me. All this because I tried to counter the narrative that dalits are 'stealing' jobs (lets not talk about 'thuraks' because its not important to this conversation).

This is the majority discourse in India. that dalits are 'stealing'. Ofcourse it has evovled from outright untouchability, to simple bullying and murdering because they are coming up.

I understand that it is part of upheavals in a society. The society cannot change overnight or even over several decades into a moral society. And that's why its important not to be a supporter of an oppressor group like RM. And that's why I support KI.

People like RM provide the tools to drag the conversation from social justice centric to cultural centric which helps the upper caste feel good about their 'country'. Never mind that their fellowmen (and a lot of times, they themselves) use aggressive bullying tactics against the weaker sections.

[dakumangalsingh]

1 minute ago, chittimallu2 said:

Why are you moving the goal posts now?  You can their exploitation of fellow men as "evolving" by protestants... but you say hindus built a structure that a regular person cannot overcome despite all the reservations provided? makes absolutely zero sense... 

publicly listed companies are personal properties in a way despite public holding the shares... not every person needs to be involved in the decision a company makes so appointing a CEO is absolutely their pick and has nothing to do with hinduism or the caste system... 

SInce there are quite a few indians in top positions abroad, can you name how many dalit Indian CEOs are in the US or any other country? Clearly these countries arent suffering from the caste system you bang about and there isnt any "upper caste assholes" to suppress them... 

Vallu upper caste ceos nenu voppukunta because they are upper caste they have all the resources to their disposal thus making them possible to move abroad and succeed.

@chittimallu bhayya Dalits ke pass naav hi nahi hai so that they could  go abroad and become ceos 

bottomline enti ante dalits were/are suppressed hence they aren't become ceos.

[uttermost]

1 minute ago, chittimallu2 said:

Why are you moving the goal posts now?  You call their exploitation of fellow men as "evolving" by protestants... but you say hindus built a structure that a regular person cannot overcome despite all the reservations provided? makes absolutely zero sense... 

publicly listed companies are personal properties in a way despite public holding the shares... not every person needs to be involved in the decision a company makes so appointing a CEO is absolutely their pick and has nothing to do with hinduism or the caste system... 

SInce there are quite a few indians in top positions abroad, can you name how many dalit Indian CEOs are in the US or any other country? Clearly these countries arent suffering from the caste system you bang about and there isnt any "upper caste assholes" to suppress them... 

Its very simple. Protestants don't have castes among them. They perhaps have class, which they assuage by taxing the wealthy atrociously. Check out tax rates in western countries (barring US) and India

Publicly listed companies (or any company) carry a certain amount debt that came from collective resources that belong to the 'nation' as you call it. It's not like everybody's given 1 crore loan to show what they can do with it. The overwhelming presence of Brahmins and Banias as CEOs of these companies point to an institutional advantage to them. System may not be against dalits there, but skewed in favour of Brahmins and Banias, which is what Kancha is saying.

I don't understand your argument about dalit CEOs in other countries. overwhelming majority of dalits are living on less than sustenance wages, and you want to ask why dalits are not becoming CEOs elsewhere?

[uttermost]

10 minutes ago, dakumangalsingh said:

There you go, the reason for india being poor. Basically we try to dwell in future but we never see the future nor enjoy the present.

 

You please enjoy your present man. All of India is not at your level to enjoy it.

[chittimallu2]

2 minutes ago, uttermost said:

is proof this evolution enough for you? perhaps. because you and I are not touched by the daily humiliations these groups have to face. Even the most accomplished among these groups are not spared the humiliation.

Take for example this db. Did you know that I wrote extensively supporting Hindutva when I started off? I was probably the first guy in this db, who supported Modi unequivocally, and enthusiastically.

What do people think of me now? I'm sure the first thing that comes to their mind is 'dalit' or 'thurak', when they want to address me. All this because I tried to counter the narrative that dalits are 'stealing' jobs (lets not talk about 'thuraks' because its not important to this conversation).

This is the majority discourse in India. that dalits are 'stealing'. Ofcourse it has evovled from outright untouchability, to simple bullying and murdering because they are coming up.

I understand that it is part of upheavals in a society. The society cannot change overnight or even over several decades into a moral society. And that's why its important not to be a supporter of an oppressor group like RM. And that's why I support KI.

People like RM provide the tools to drag the conversation from social justice centric to cultural centric which helps the upper caste feel good about their 'country'. Never mind that their fellowmen (and a lot of times, they themselves) use aggressive bullying tactics against the weaker sections.

I said thats just one example... never called thats the only proof of evolution.. 

nee post lu nenu chaala chesa... I wouldnt think you would have just "countered the narrative" pretty sure you said upper class assholes or something similar... anduke ninnu ala ani untaru... I have seen many call kammas as commodes in this DB now what? should them kammas go and bang on about how they are being "suppressed" ?  Many people are against reservations despite many "dalit" families being well off and can afford while there are "upper class assholes" standing on streets with a begging bowl... the problem is not the caste, its the social stature they are in... no one bats an eye if a poor dalit gets fee waiver, benefits from the govt but its only the richer "suppressed dalits" that are on some sort of tax payers' funded support that irks everyone.

[dakumangalsingh]

Just now, uttermost said:

You please enjoy your present man. All of India is not at your level to enjoy it.

You seem confusing you mix up religion and poverty. Again you said it's because most of the india is poor because religion is not evolving. Then in later post you said upper castes keep money don't rotate