Ilaiah views

[uttermost]

Okay. Because you guys ask. 

India is poor purely because of the incompetence of the upper castes. Hindutva or Liberal, doesn't count. Both are the same trash.

In contrast to east asian countries where the elite were investing in machinery and building products and exporting, Indian elite were happy to just import stuff from abroad (since Nehru era).

Indian elite even argued for caste based education (read Rajaji who argued for it). 

This is why Hinduism is majorly responsible for India to remain a poor country. The comfort that it provided the upper caste made them become incompetent and lazy.

[chittimallu2]

2 minutes ago, uttermost said:

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?

so what if they dont have castes among them... I still dont get your point how they "evolved" because they exploited their fellowmen whereas hindus "didnt evolve" because they abolished things like untouchability, sati sahagamanam, making dalits live on the edges of villages, etc...  still waiting for an answer on this one... 

System is skewed in favour of the rich*... .there you go I fixed your rhetoric for you

Whats not to understand there? You brought the point of how there are upper class CEOs everywhere in India .... I asked a counter question and still waiting for a reply

[uttermost]

1 minute ago, dakumangalsingh said:

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 

Who created upper caste, and enabled them to maintain that status, if not the Hindu religion?

[uttermost]

Just now, chittimallu2 said:

so what if they dont have castes among them... I still dont get your point how they "evolved" because they exploited their fellowmen whereas hindus "didnt evolve" because they abolished things like untouchability, sati sahagamanam, making dalits live on the edges of villages, etc...  still waiting for an answer on this one... 

System is skewed in favour of the rich*... .there you go I fixed your rhetoric for you

Whats not to understand there? You brought the point of how there are upper class CEOs everywhere in India .... I asked a counter question and still waiting for a reply

I gave you a percentage. 90% 'rich' is upper caste. and that is not counting kammas and other shudras who have made tremendous strides in recent years.

In light of such facts, why is it wrong to blame the religion that created and still sustains caste among people?

[chittimallu2]

1 minute ago, uttermost said:

Okay. Because you guys ask. 

India is poor purely because of the incompetence of the upper castes. Hindutva or Liberal, doesn't count. Both are the same trash.

In contrast to east asian countries where the elite were investing in machinery and building products and exporting, Indian elite were happy to just import stuff from abroad (since Nehru era).

Indian elite even argued for caste based education (read Rajaji who argued for it). 

This is why Hinduism is majorly responsible for India to remain a poor country. The comfort that it provided the upper caste made them become incompetent and lazy.

I see your problem is with "upper class assholes" but not with what RM talks about, which is the hindu philosophy... give your head a wobble and then respond to whats being discussed... I know you dislike/hate "upper class assholes" but dont ruin every thread which has the tags "hindu" "india" "liberal" etc with your verbal diarrhea. I dont say this with any disrespect because you are one of my fav posters in some aspects

[dakumangalsingh]

3 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

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.

Aa point ardam aithe ee topic inni pages raadu mallu ankul same problem with my friend as well, he too argues with me the same way oka sari Christianity lekka Hinduism evolve avvatledu antadu, Dalits oppressed antadu, but at the sametime he is reaping the benefits of reservation and have a good lifestyle  on par with his American counterparts chusta rep podduna vaadiki kids ayyaka

what is he up to will he use the reservation for his kids that he now argues that shouldn't be used if a person uses it and he is well off. 

[chittimallu2]

24 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. 

 

 

1 minute ago, uttermost said:

I gave you a percentage. 90% 'rich' is upper caste. and that is not counting kammas and other shudras who have made tremendous strides in recent years.

In light of such facts, why is it wrong to blame the religion that created and still sustains caste among people?

no you didnt... again you are confusing between classes based on social (wealth) and caste... 

[uttermost]

1 minute ago, chittimallu2 said:

I see your problem is with "upper class assholes" but not with what RM talks about, which is the hindu philosophy... give your head a wobble and then respond to whats being discussed... I know you dislike/hate "upper class assholes" but dont ruin every thread which has the tags "hindu" "india" "liberal" etc with your verbal diarrhea. I dont say this with any disrespect because you are one of my fav posters in some aspects

Appreciate your acknowledgement.

But I was responding to the thread of conversation started by dakumangal, where he asked if Christianity 'evolved' and Hinduism didn't.

I'm definitely not competent in philosophy to talk about evolution of Hindu philosophy. I was only against RM trying to shift the window of acceptable conversation (sometimes out of frustration with the left) to benefit the political right in India.

I have nothing to contribute in this thread, other than defending Kancha's views as acceptable and even brave to some extent.

[uttermost]

4 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

 

no you didnt... again you are confusing between classes based on social (wealth) and caste... 

In India, they are the same. I'm from the upper caste, and specifically from the caste Kancha writes about. I agree with him.

[chittimallu2]

1 minute ago, uttermost said:

Appreciate your acknowledgement.

But I was responding to the thread of conversation started by dakumangal, where he asked if Christianity 'evolved' and Hinduism didn't.

I'm definitely not competent in philosophy to talk about evolution of Hindu philosophy. I was only against RM trying to shift the window of acceptable conversation (sometimes out of frustration with the left) to benefit the political right in India.

I have nothing to contribute in this thread, other than defending Kancha's views as acceptable and even brave to some extent.

You said you never read any of RM's books, its silly to talk about him by just reading few tweets' of his....

enduku ban ayyav inthaki

 

 

[chittimallu2]

1 minute ago, uttermost said:

In India, they are the same. I'm from the upper caste, and specifically from the caste Kancha writes about. I agree with him.

dont paint everyone with the same brush... you clearly know that is wrong

[uttermost]

16 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

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.

Its better if you are sure about what you say. I came up with the term upper caste assholes long long long after, I was called dalit epithets, worse than 'assholes'. Ofcourse, I was having fun riling up people, and no hard feelings. But I want you to understand the natural revulsion of people towards things such as 'social justice'.

Are Kammas suppressed? Is it a good argument to really equate Kammas and dalits?

I don't want to go on a reservation rant again. I've done it enough already. I'll simply say that if there were enough 'rich' dalits to fill that quota (which is less than their percentage of the population), then we can talk about it.

[uttermost]

4 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

You said you never read any of RM's books, its silly to talk about him by just reading few tweets' of his....

enduku ban ayyav inthaki

Yes. That's why I criticize RM only for that part (his association with Hindutva). 

lol ban. Some guy asked me to fire on psycopk, and I said that I don't fire on people who don't bother me, and invited him to use my id to do that himself.

That guy seems to have no patience. He could've used the id to slowly irritate psycopk, but it seems he unleashed on the first day itself, and got banned.

[chittimallu2]

1 minute ago, uttermost said:

Its better if you are sure about what you say. I came up with the term upper caste assholes long long long after, I was called dalit epithets, worse than 'assholes'. Ofcourse, I was having fun riling up people, and no hard feelings. But I want you to understand the natural revulsion of people towards things such as 'social justice'.

Are Kammas suppressed? Is it a good argument to really equate Kammas and dalits?

I don't want to go on a reservation rant again. I've done it enough already. I'll simply say that if there were enough 'rich' dalits to fill that quota (which is less than their percentage of the population), then we can talk about it.

ok maybe I dont know when you came up with that word... 

I didnt say they are suppressed.. .I used your own logic and asked if they are suppressed because someone called them names on an internet forum, just like how you said thats the typical mentality as they called you a dalit or turak... no one really has guts to call someone as "madhigoda" "maloda" or any other derogatory word in India... you will be beaten to pulp...  unless you are wealthy village man and the other dalit guy is a poor farmer who earns 100 rs a day... see where am I going? Its based on wealth class but not caste... 

Why should there be "enough" of them? Isnt one single wealthy dalit (whose ancestors were also using the same benefits and are in wealthy position, thanks to the tax payers) reaping the benefits over a very poor "upper class asshole" a wrong thing in your opinion? 

[uttermost]

15 minutes ago, dakumangalsingh said:

Aa point ardam aithe ee topic inni pages raadu mallu ankul same problem with my friend as well, he too argues with me the same way oka sari Christianity lekka Hinduism evolve avvatledu antadu, Dalits oppressed antadu, but at the sametime he is reaping the benefits of reservation and have a good lifestyle  on par with his American counterparts chusta rep podduna vaadiki kids ayyaka

what is he up to will he use the reservation for his kids that he now argues that shouldn't be used if a person uses it and he is well off. 

Christianity is as barbarous as Hinduism. In India it suffers from the same things that Hinduism suffers from - caste.

reservation shouldn't be used if a dalit is well off aa? okay accepted. what should one do to the vacant seats of that quota then? give to general category?

This kind of talk is what means you don't understand the purpose of reservation. 

As long as caste exists, reservation will.

I understand why people are against it too. But your arguments are hollow, and not acceptable to building a modern secular state.