Thursday, July 09, 2015

Random Thoughts - Hinduism and Hindutva

The way right-wing and liberal differences are unraveling in India, the worrying and scary part is we are probably becoming a highly divided society. Because of the right-wing rule, many of the "sensitive" topics are becoming commonplace. In those arguments, conservatives get into the 'Otto' mode.

Otto: You pompous, stuck-up, snot-nosed, English, giant, twerp, scumbag, fuck-face, dickhead, asshole.
Archie: How very interesting. You're a true vulgarian, aren't you?
Otto: You are the vulgarian, you fuck.

A simple example;
A: Some libberral fascists think that Yoga shouldn't be taught.
B: Well, fascism is about imposing and controlling things or having general intolerance about dissenting voices. So, imposing Yoga is fascism. How opposing such imposition could be termed fascism?
A: No, you are a libberral fascist.

It appears as if a right-wing strategy to employ anti right-wing terminologies purely as abusive terms against liberals without any meaning or context.

Then if you try to reason with them to show the absurdities of such usage, they get into either
- whining mode;
A: Alright, you libberrals are always right...
- combative mode;
A: Alright let's see who is going to be proved right...
the Otto mode.

And here emerges the scary picture.

One can argue that both right-wingers and liberals have strong beliefs. However, it's the emotional nature of the arguments for right-wingers' self-righteous beliefs that makes any argument highly incompatible leaving bad taste among all parties.

And most worryingly, this is dividing people who should be natural allies because of their social situations and standings.

Thursday, June 11, 2015

The Just Individual - vi

Recently Ireland held a referendum on same-sex marriage. I had mixed feelings about it. I was happy to see that majority endorsed it but at the same time I was troubled that a question of justice was put to the masses.

In most part of the world, the question of justice has changed from a majority desire to minority desire. In olden hierarchical days, with the rule of privileged minority, majority indeed suffered relatively. Feudals suffered because of the king, the middle class suffered because of the feudals and king and the working class suffered because of everyone. Therefore, justice was indeed part of the majority desire. However, this has changed with the advent of democracy.

Now the question of justice is mostly applicable to minorities of any identities. In such situations only people well versed with justice should decide upon it. I do understand our legal professionals could be found wanting when it comes to segregating justice from morality, however, I still believe it should be left to them and not to the majority population.

Saturday, April 18, 2015

OBCs and Affirmative Action - III

I came across the following words at ESPNcricinfo.
With an unbeaten 222 in his debut Test innings, Jacques Rudolph vindicated those who believed he had been a victim of reverse discrimination in South Africa.

Now, I've hardly seen 'reverse discrimination' used in mainstream media. What discrimination are we talking about here exactly?

- Stereotyping an entire group
- Denying education to them
- Monopolising the land
- Claiming sexual privileges over their women

If reverse discrimination is true then we would have been talking on these points and not on individual isolated cases. In Jacques Rudolph's case, since Europeans have colonized so many countries, even he could have had a very successful career and life in other countries. In fact, it's true for any individuals in any society.

The phrase wouldn't have been used had they understood the implications of it. However, the sense of entitlement is so great in their privileged self that they can hardly ponder over it.

Tuesday, April 14, 2015

Random Thoughts - Love_Lust

I don't agree with these homosexuals in heterosexual union opposing gay marriages. However, I do understand that it's possible to have a stable married life between homosexuals and heterosexuals. For one thing, unlike love, lust doesn't require another person for fulfillment. So, if a person is homosexual-heteroamoural, they can still have happy married life with an x-sexual and heteroamoural person.

Via Pharyngula

Monday, April 13, 2015

How to use "Karma"?

If anybody understands 'Karma' in Indian caste system then they would be reasonably aware that it's an inhuman concept to justify the hereditary caste identities and can only be used negatively.

Good usage:
This comment at Salon:
I am now quite sure that the trolls are going to proclaim that this is impossible, and that any research against their notion that fat people are lazy and gluttonous must be wrong. Because they are so smug and self-satisfied in their not-fat bodies. I just hope Karma is a real thing and they pay for their attitudes in their next life.

Bad usage:
Satya Nadella of Microsoft:
 But take Nadella’s word for it: Good things come to women who don’t ask.“That might be one of the initial ‘super powers’ that, quite frankly, women [who] don’t ask for a raise have,” he added. “It’s good karma. It will come back.”

Thursday, March 26, 2015

About baba and pilla

I was going through the BBC article on the origin of the word 'king'.
The Anglo-Saxon "cyning" from cyn or kin, and -ing meaning "son of" evokes images of long-gone tribes choosing as leader a favoured son who is mystically representative of their common identity.
I suppose somewhat similar idea is behind pan-India term 'babu' and Dravidian term 'pilla/pillai' which were the titles of high officials ( but pilla is now mostly associated with certain castes in Tamil and Malayalam regions). However, baba denotes affectionate term for son and pilla for child in general in Dravidian lands.

It appears both terms are of Indo-European origin. So, probably assimilated IE speakers in Dravidian lands brought with them the Proto-IE idea of a favoured son.


Sunday, March 22, 2015

Random Thoughts - Israel's right-wing

By reaping benefits of his warning , "the Arabs are voting in droves", I suppose Benjamin Netanyahu has clearly illustrated that the Israel's first-world right-wing has now degenerated into third-world right-wing. However, they are far more dangerous because of their economic and technological advancement.

Sunday, March 08, 2015

Random Thoughts - Love_Lust

I think this woman is Asexual-Heteroamoural.

So the present list includes:
Heterosexual-Heteroamoural -> Anna Karenina (Fictional, Anna Karenina), Max Weber
Heterosexual-Homoamoural -> Nick Carraway (Fictional, The Great Gatsby), Tom Daley
Heterosexual-Inamoural -> Emma Bovary (Fictional, Madame Bovary)
Homosexual-Homoamoural ->  Uncle Frank (Fictional, Little Miss Sunshine)
Homosexual-Heteroamoural -> Francis Bacon, Freddie Mercury, Chirlane McCray
Homosexual-Inamoural -> ?
Asexual-Heteroamoural-> Emy, a French woman
Asexual-Homoamoural -> ? 
Asexual-Inamoural -> ?

Saturday, February 21, 2015

Our matrilineal future - I

Today I was introduced to Marilyn vos Savant because of this article. I went through the Wikipedia article on her. The following paragraph caught my eye.

She says one should keep premarital surnames, with sons taking their fathers’ and daughters their mothers’.
This has been my position (even thought I might have wrongly termed it as 'ambiliny') too. I might have already written about it (but couldn't find it).

But in a patriarchal society a girl taking up her mother's surname need not necessarily mean it's matrilineal. I believe women in patriarchal societies need to come up with their own surnames which can be inherited afterwards.

Similar is the case with matrilineal society where men have to come up with their own surnames to pass it to the next generation.

However, I also endorse complete matrilineal inheritance for variety of reasons. Generally, in majority regions female lineages are far more autochthonous than male lineages. So, I would say children should take up matrilineal identity in terms of surname, religion and culture.

Sunday, February 08, 2015

Reading - Economics, A Primer for India

I'm reading 'Economics, A Primer for India' by G. Omkarnath of Hyderabad Central University. The author makes a point in the preface that considering the failures of most of the economic theories in present day society there is no point in teaching any theory as a dogma. Instead, the approach should be to familiarize the student with the economics of the native country and understand the processes involved. However, at one place the author says,

People meet their material needs through their command over a range of goods (eg. rice, cloth, cooking oil and television sets) and services(eg. bus rides, haircuts, doctors, schools and maid servants).

Let's consider services like doctors and maid servants. A doctor him/herself can get services of other doctors. What about 'maid servants'? Would they work as servants if they can afford to have their own maid servants? So, doctors and maid servants can't be grouped together. And if we consider maid servants as 'people with needs', then they themselves can't be part of services as they can't avail that service for themselves.

There are two types of families who keep 'maid' servants. A middle class family where both spouses work and a rich family. However, a middle class family can only keep a servant when there is a huge economic disparity in a society and many women are forced to take up such jobs. For example, many Brazilian middle class families unlike their parental generation can't afford to keep maid servants owing to improving living standards of poor in that country.

In a nutshell,  a maid servant in  a middle class family basically represents failure of the society. So, I would suppose a student should have a clear view that a command over a service like 'maid servant' isn't equal to other materialist services. It doesn't consider her materialist need as a person.