The Indian Government

[Jan Ardena]

In keeping with their Vedic system, they can't touch these "untouchables" or deal with them. Religion is an important part of government ruling at time, but Americans don't understand that basic concept.

I doubt these powers are religious (spiritual), otherwise they would not begrudge the poor (untouchables), their human rights. It is the duty of the
ruling class to protect its citizens, by order of relgion.

Realistically, every intelligent human understands the concept, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

jan.

 

[Jan Ardena]

A little late for that, isn't it?

Or, to be more specific, the problem has existed for a long time, and even if there was a reasonably proper science to have made the point centuries ago, it is doubtful the leaders would have listened. Oscar Wilde suggested that the solution is to create conditions under which poverty is impossible. A monumental undertaking in theory, if not downright impossible even at present. Even presuming there is such a solution, it will take quite a while to accomplish, and convincing the world to try a difficult proposition.

What do you think, is the root cause of this problem?

jan.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Britain dug a pretty deep pit for India to dig out of.

And they are only a generation or two this side of a civil war.

India is sort of getting around to things, with major improvements here and there, but their caste problem is about where Jim Crow was in 1900 in the US, if not worse, and they don't have the luxury of a frontier or "homestead" land. My neighbor tells me the trees lining the road through his town had metal tags with numbers on them identifying the owner of their wood rights.

So they can paddle like mad and make only slow, incremental, invisible progress.

If you suddenly became the emporer of the world, and you wanted to
stop this problem, what would you do?

jan.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Signal,

In the same manner they forget about God and kill cows?

Do you believe these conditions are the result of the abandonment of
religious principles?

jan.

 

[wynn]

Do you believe these conditions are the result of the abandonment of
religious principles?

I think so.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Syzygys,

For the same reason why any other country doesn't do it. It costs money paid by the rich or middle class and the benefits would be returned to the poor who are most likely non-voters, thus no representation.

Such an endeavour could be of benefit to the rich and middle classes, don't you think?

Also a point could be made that with better living standards they might muliply even more returning to the same level, thus this is a never ending cycle that feeds itself...

I don't know of any affluent, educated society with problems like these.
Do you?

jan.

 

[Baron Max]

Baron Max, History is littered with individuals who make great changes. ....

Name a few of those great individuals who didn't use force and power against some other people in order to make those great changes for their own people?

Name a few, Jan, that didn't use force to make those changes that you seem to think are so great.

I will admit that, in later societies, western societies in particular, there are more such individuals. But you must remember that in those societies, the cops use force to keep the people as peaceful as possible. So, in effect, it's almost the same thing ......force and power is what makes changes, Jan, not happy little dreams.

Baron Max

 

[Baron Max]

Syzygys: "For the same reason why any other country doesn't do it. It costs money paid by the rich or middle class and the benefits would be returned to the poor who are most likely non-voters, thus no representation."

Such an endeavour could be of benefit to the rich and middle classes, don't you think?

But it's a benefit that's in the far, far future ...if at all. Investments, Jan, must always have some clear concept of a viable return on those investments. Otherwise, it's not such a good investment.

What you (or whoever) is suggesting is only a slim possibility that the lower class will even respond and become valued members of society. A major gamble ....probably not worth investing.

Now, Jan, if you could sweeten the pot of that investment.....? But let's face it, they're only low class, poor people ....what the hell do they matter to anyone in the middle or upper classes?

Baron Max

 

[Syzygys]

Syzygys,
Such an endeavour could be of benefit to the rich and middle classes, don't you think?

In what way? Maybe it could, but I can find negatives about such a move like if we rise them up too much we create our own competition. People should understand that there will ALWAYS be poverty and hunger, no matter what we do. People are like rats in the lab, if you keep feeding them and provide for them they just keep multiply and you have to keep feeding them and such...

I don't know of any affluent, educated society with problems like these.

Come on, almost every society has slumps although maybe not on such a large scale as in India. I just saw a report on Brazilian slumps where the city is building a concrete wall to divide the poor from the not so poor.

Even in America, Detroit and other used to be carmaker cities have huge slump-like areas with burned out houses and crimerates skyhigh. Also as a result of the current recession we are having tentcities going up, like back in the 30s....

 

[Jan Ardena]

Baron Max,

Name a few of those great individuals who didn't use force and power against some other people in order to make those great changes for their own people?

Name a few, Jan, that didn't use force to make those changes that you seem to think are so great.

I'm not talking about great heroes or leaders, just people who by example
set new precedents, and/or trends, that may inspire others.
It may take time, but what is the alternative?

But you must remember that in those societies, the cops use force to keep the people as peaceful as possible.

You seem to think that change can only be brought about by force, which
is probably why you fail to grasp my point.
The force you speak of is oftentimes implemented to stop change that does
not fit with the current agenda, and is almost always against the everyday
people.

So, in effect, it's almost the same thing ......force and power is what makes changes, Jan, not happy little dreams.

To say you are a man of relatively mature years, your ideals appear
quite naiive.
We are talking about human lives, and welfare here, about affording them
the basic human needs, in places where it can easily be done without the
need for future drastic and desparate action, not happy clappy little dreams.

Maybe you prefer nightmares.

jan.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Syzygys,

Maybe it could, but I can find negatives about such a move like if we rise them up too much we create our own competition.

Why is that negative?
These are human beings who live in terrible conditions.

People should understand that there will ALWAYS be poverty and hunger, no matter what we do.

This isn't about poverty, it is about inhumaness.
There are people in the UK who live in poverty, but they still
have access to the basic human needs.

People are like rats in the lab, if you keep feeding them and provide for them they just keep multiply and you have to keep feeding them and such...

So why do you think you should be fed and provided for?

Come on, almost every society has slumps although maybe not on such a large scale as in India. I just saw a report on Brazilian slumps where the city is building a concrete wall to divide the poor from the not so poor.

So why don't governments do something?
This is my question.
What is the alternative?

jan.

 

[Baron Max]

I'm not talking about great heroes or leaders, just people who by example, set new precedents, and/or trends, that may inspire others. It may take time, but what is the alternative?

The alternative? Leave things as they are and don't rock the boat. If people want to live in the ghettos and slums, producing tons of babies that they can't feed, then so be it.

Oh, you're gonna' say something silly and idealistic about that word "want", aren't you? Lucy, if you didn't "want" to be somewhere, would you stay there? Any of those people could just walk out of the ghetto if they wanted to. Into what, you ask? Ahh, into something different to the ghetto. I don't expect, for example, that a ghetto/slum kid could just walk out and instantly become the king of the nation. No, that's crazy, but he can become something different to the ghetto dweller if he wanted.

You seem to think that change can only be brought about by force, which is probably why you fail to grasp my point.
The force you speak of is oftentimes implemented to stop change that does
not fit with the current agenda, and is almost always against the everyday
people.

And you seem to misunderstand the term "force", but you're not alone. Jan, people always talk about Gandhi as an example of "peaceful revolution". Hey, Jan, how would you like to be trying to stand up against the little old guy wearin' the bedsheet .....with hundreds of gazillions of Indians marching behind him? Force? Oh, yeah, hundreds of gazillions of them!! Now that's force, Jan, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

To say you are a man of relatively mature years, your ideals appear quite naiive.

65 years old, Jan. But I'm not naiive. I spent a large part of my life seeing the world through the same rose-colored glasses that y'all see through. But as the years rolled by, I realized that nothing was changing ....yet everyone was talking about this utopian world or society, etc. And that continued for years, all talk, little or no action. Just talk, just nice words to make us all seem like we actually want to do something ...but it's just talk and no action.

We are talking about human lives, and welfare here, about affording them the basic human needs, in places where it can easily be done without the need for future drastic and desparate action, not happy clappy little dreams.

What makes humans so special, Jan? I mean, other than just saying it? Or is that all there is to it? If enough people say that humans are special, then they are? And do all people have exactly the same value? For example, is your mother equal in value to that of a convicted murderer? Is the rich man in India who shares his wealth with others equal in value to the poor man in the ghetto who has no wealth at all and can't share with anyone?

Humans are special? But some are more special than others? What's the measuring stick for human value, Jan? Just idealistic words? Or the reality of the ghetto/slums versus the highrise penthouse in Manhattan?

Baron Max

 

[Forceman]

I'm talking about Hinduism

I doubt these powers are religious (spiritual), otherwise they would not begrudge the poor (untouchables), their human rights. It is the duty of the
ruling class to protect its citizens, by order of relgion.

Realistically, every intelligent human understands the concept, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

jan.

Apparently you don't understand Hinduism that well...

(Ever heard of theocracies, absolute monarchies, divine rule; you know, rulers influenced by their deities, such as the ancient Greeks and their supreme god Zeus?

 

[Syzygys]

Why is that negative?

If you lose your job because of increased competition, that is a negative in my book.

These are human beings who live in terrible conditions.

Yes. So? People have always lived in terrible conditions and always will, no matter what. We could transfer all wealth to the needy (world socialism) and everybody would be riding a bicycle but sooner or later we would still overpopulate and there will be another 100s of millions in terrible circumstances.

This isn't about poverty, it is about inhumaness.

It is about MONEY, who pays for it.

So why do you think you should be fed and provided for?

When did I say I should be?

So why don't governments do something?

I already explained it, you just don't listen....

By the way under Communist rule in the Eastern block there was less suffering, homelessness and terrible conditions, but that lasted on ly a few decades, although the argument could be made that the return of capitalism casued the renewed suffering....Also a major difference was that in the Eastern block the people weren't overpopulating like crazy. They were in China and you can see the result, that even in state communism, the state simply can not provide UNLIMITED for the population if its just keep growing.

There are horrible living conditions in China too....

 

[wynn]

So why don't governments do something?
This is my question.
What is the alternative?

The spread of leprosy, new strains of resistant TB, AIDS, cholera, typhus, rabies ...
Slums are where these diseases can flourish, and eventually everyone, rich or poor, will be affected by them.

It is in everyone's interest to minimize the conditions in which such diseases can flourish. There are cures for some of them, but it is still more economical to prevent than to cure - although the pharmacy industry disagrees.

 

[Syzygys]

Brazilian slums:

Valparaiso, Chile slum:

Detroit,USA ghetto:

 

[Baron Max]

Brazilian slums: ........(others)...

If you want to be dramatic, as well as show the vastness of slums, show an aerial view of Mexico City. The slums go on forever, and they're among the worst in the world, including those in India and Bangladesh.

I'd post something, but I'm not so good with a computer as y'all are. I'm too old to learn new tricks.

But I agree with you ....even if we gave everyone in the slums millions of dollars and homes, it would only be one generation, maybe two, that slums would appear again and grow out of all proportion ....just like they are now.

Baron Max

 

[Jan Ardena]

Baron Max,

The alternative? Leave things as they are and don't rock the boat.

Leaving things as they are will only create more problems for everyone.

Oh, you're gonna' say somsething silly and idealistic about that word "want", aren't you?

There's nothing idealistic about questioning the motive of a government
who seems reluctant to afford its citizens the very basic necessities of life.
Especially when it has the means.

Lucy, if you didn't "want" to be somewhere, would you stay there?

Lucy?

Any of those people could just walk out of the ghetto if they wanted to.

Into what, you ask?

Ahh,.....

into something different to the ghetto. [?]

I don't expect, for example, that a ghetto/slum kid could just walk out and instantly become the king of the nation.

No,...

....that's crazy,

...but he can become something different to the ghetto dweller if he wanted.

I'm not talking about coming out of the ghetto, or becoming a rich person.
I'm talking about having access to basic needs, to bring their existence up
to a basic human level.

65 years old, Jan. But I'm not naiive. I spent a large part of my life seeing the world through the same rose-colored glasses that y'all see through.

Examples please?

But as the years rolled by, I realized that nothing was changing ....yet everyone was talking about this utopian world or society, etc.

This is why I think you appear naiive.
There has been nothing but change, a change which is due to
ideas of a utopian world or society.
My inquiry has nothing to do with creating utopia, or any kind of idealism.
It has everything to do with the natural order of things.
There are poor people? That is understandable, but must they live in such obviously wretched conditions brought about by utopian ideas and ideals, when it is not necessary?

And that continued for years, all talk, little or no action. Just talk, just nice words to make us all seem like we actually want to do something ...but it's just talk and no action.

What makes humans so special, Jan?

This question makes no sense, unles for you humans aren't special, and their lives are worth no more than ants, and cattle. If that is the case, then
there really is no point in continuing this discussion.
But, undoubtedly, humans are unique on this planet, which makes them special IMO, not that that is any reason to be disrepectful to other forms of life.

And do all people have exactly the same value?

What would you regard as valuable?

For example, is your mother equal in value to that of a convicted murderer?

In what sense?
You see you have to remember you are asking me in human terms, and as such there are different levels of valuation. It is not as simple as you would like it to be.

Is the rich man in India who shares his wealth with others equal in value to the poor man in the ghetto who has no wealth at all and can't share with anyone?

Where is the comparison?

What's the measuring stick for human value, Jan?

You tell me, then we'll go about evaluating.
An old chipped-up teapot from the poundshop may not have any use, but it
may have value, and that value is dependant upon circumstances.

jan.

 

[Syzygys]

My point was as I expressed it earlier, that there is no reason to single the Indian government out. Most countries have poor areas with terrible living conditions or just plain homeless people with no living conditions at all.

My other point was that there WILL ALWAYS be population living under terrible conditions. We could help them but not unconditionally. For the help in return we could and should ask for something, let's say for a stop in further multiplication.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Apparently you don't understand Hinduism that well...

(Ever heard of theocracies, absolute monarchies, divine rule; you know, rulers influenced by their deities, such as the ancient Greeks and their supreme god Zeus?

Okay, so how does this all tie in with the point of this thread?

jan.