[lit-ideas] Re: India's fondness for America
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 11:12:55 -0800
Good note, Andreas. Right, in talking about any Liberal-Democratic nation
it is incorrect by definition to assume that nation speaks with one voice.
And yet the nature of language is such that we tend to do that anyway.
After I posted my first note on India, a lurker sent me a note saying he had
just returned from India and he saw no evidence while he was there (he spent
most of his time in Dandi) that America was wildly popular. I accept that
in Dandi America is not wildly popular, but one needs to consider who Daniel
Twining is and the nature of his article. He is a former advisor to Senator
John McCain, a fellow of the German Marshall fund of the U.S. based in
Oxford and New Delhi, and the Fulbright/Oxford Scholar at the University of
Oxford. I take that brief bio to imply that aside from being young, Twining
is privy to statistical and general information about India. Insofar as
generalizations can be made, he is in a position to be aware of them, and
that is what I see in his article.
Similar statements could be made about the U.S. We have many different
voices in the U.S. but tend to think we can generalize if a majority shares
a particular opinion. It is the nature of Liberal Democracies. They are
never going to speak with a single reactionary voice like the RSS or the
John Birch Society would like them to.
Nevertheless there are many reasons for the U.S. & India to grow more
closely together. Their stance against Militant Islam is one of them, but I
think India is more worried about China. In the past we decided we would be
better off siding with China than India, but that seems to be changing.
Favoring India over China is consistent with acting upon our Liberal
Democratic principles. During Nixon's administration, he and Kissenger
could apply realpolitik and embrace China, but realpolitik leaves a bad
taste in the current administrations collective mouth; whereas India is
already a Liberal Democracy. We don't need to export Liberal Democracy to
India, it already is one. All we need to do is embrace them as the Bush
administration is attempting to do. Now as to a precise definition of
"them," and how warm the embrace is at this point, who knows?
Lawrence
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Andreas Ramos
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 9:46 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: India's fondness for America
> The above article is about India and is entitled, "The New Great Game, Why
the Bush
> administration has embraced India," by Daniel Twining.
There's two sides to this: India and Bush. Bush is desperate for
anti-Islamic allies. India
has been in a irrational religious war with Pakistan for 50 years. So Bush
gave India
nuclear technology. This is very foolish and dangerous.
India is mostly moderate. However, in the last 20 years, a new political
movement has
arisen: it is Hindu chauvinist (the "Hindutva" movement, or "Hinduism",
loosely stated). The
BJP is their major political party, which is led by the RSS, a smaller,
extremist party. The
RSS is as close to the Nazi Party as one can find: it is racist, chauvinist,
and violent.
They use mass demonstrations to excite the population and they incite riots
and pogroms in
which the followers, incl. the city police, hunt down and kill thousands of
Muslims,
literally hacking or burning entire villages to death.
Into this volatile situation, Bush walked in and handed out nuclear weapons
technology. If
Bush doesn't even know the difference between Shiite and Sunni, I certainly
don't think he
knows anything about Indian history or politics. From these Indians' point
of view, Bush is
a useful idiot. They can manipulate him by playing the Islamo-terrorist
card.
> Late in the article one finds, "The United States is strangely popular in
India. Polling
> regularly shows Indians to be among the most pro-American people anywhere
-- sometimes
> registering warmer sentiments towards the United States than Americans
themselves do."
This is true. Many of the Indians whom I know are very enthusiastic about
Bush. They praise
his his courage, his truthfulness, his leadership, and his intelligence (not
even Lawrence
would go that far).
Why are Indians so pro-Bush? First of all, let's distinguish: which Indians?
India has three
times the population of Europe; there are 1,600 languages; the Hindu have
300 million gods
and goddesses; India has had a Christian population from the days of Christ
(one of Jesus'
disciples came to India) and thus India has been Christian longer than
Europe; the Indian
Christian population is larger than the entire population of England and
France; for more
than 600 years, India was Muslim; and India's secular and atheist tradition
is far older and
much deeper than the West's secularism (in the 1600s, people were burnt at
the stake for
atheism, and no politician in Congress dares to declare themself to be
atheist.)
So... which India? What I've learned about India is that there is no India.
India is vastly
more complex than Europe, to a degree we can barely even grasp. One example:
the calendar.
Today is the 22nd of December, 2006, here in Palo Alto, in New York, and
Berlin. We have one
calendar. Oh, such a simplistic little society! India has multiple
calendars. Not just two.
Or three. Or ten. They have 30 calendars. Try to think of the circumstances
that gave growth
to thirty calendars, and consider the implications of so many calendars.
So, which Indians? The Indians you see in the USA are mostly Hindu
chauvinists and strongly
pro-BJP. These BJP Indians praise Bush to the point of embarassment. Why? He
is a useful
tool in their pogrom against Muslims. Pakistan's Islamic extremists are in
Kashmir, trying
to stir up trouble. They regularly attack Indian troops. Kashmir terrorists
set off bombs in
India. The RSS and BJP use these incidents to stir up emotions against
Pakistan. They nearly
started a nuclear war a few years ago (nuclear-armed jets moved onto the
runways). This is a
highly-tense area, with violent racial hatreds and suspicions.
The majority of Indians are moderate and tolerate. (Actually, most Indians
are socialist.
There, Lawrence, you have finally found your One True Enemy. Indians are
Leftists.) The
BJP's "India Rising" movement is very popular among the groups that are
successful in
technology and finance, namely, the ones that you see in the USA. There are
a number of
complex reasons and backgrounds for this, which I won't write about, but the
point is: the
Indians who support Bush are doing this as part of other more complex
reasons. They are
using him.
India is on the move. These "India Rising" Indians have an enthusiasm and
confidence about
the future that I don't see anywhere in the USA, not even among the most
extremist US
neocons. India and China will surpass the USA in the next ten-twenty years
in terms of
education, wealth, and technology.
yrs,
andreas
www.andreas.com
Other related posts:
