FischerTal Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Awww .... coming from a "neutral observer" who thinks that Hinduism should rule the country and Muslims should be obliterated. :hahaha: when did i say that? again, coming to your own assumptions, but continue please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FischerTal Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 So you are not neutral. Why does he have to be neutral then ? You support modi. He doesnt. Prima facie both your positions are equal. The strength of your posision is determined by the basis of the reasons you have chosen your position. So far he's done a better job justifying his position than you have yours. He talks about why he hates modi mostly. You talk more about how modi haters are wrong and less on why you love modi. His position = better supported. I am still waiting for you to answer what exactly a 'neutral position' on Modi or any politicians mean. Can you explain yourself or not ? you should see his position on Kejriwal and then talk :clap: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 when did i say that? again' date=' coming to your own assumptions, but continue please[/quote'] The same way when I said Kejriwal is a benevolent dictator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FischerTal Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Explain how you apply it to politics. Thats the part i am trying to figure out. Just tell us what a 'neutral modi observer' constitutes. somebody who is objective in their assesment about modi's political/economic polices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FischerTal Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 The same way when I said Kejriwal is a benevolent dictator. you support Kejriwal and his stance on how government should be run, dont you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 you should see his position on Kejriwal and then talk :clap: Focus....its about Modi right now. You havnt answered my question. How do you apply 'neutral' to politics and what then is 'neutral observer of modi' ? Also, you've avoided the other question i asked- if you clearly say you support him, hence you are biassed towards Modi, why are you then caring for whether his position is neutral or not ? The validity of your position on Modi (pro or anti) is not dependent on the answer you picked but why you picked it. If my reasons for backing Modi are because i think Modi will make better speches than Churchill, then I am incorrect in supporting Modi, despite being pro-modi. Similiarly, if my reasons for being anti-modi is because modi cant speak hindi, I would be incorrect in opposing him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 So you are not neutral. Why does he have to be neutral then ? You support modi. He doesnt. Prima facie both your positions are equal. The strength of your posision is determined by the basis of the reasons you have chosen your position. So far he's done a better job justifying his position than you have yours. He talks about why he hates modi mostly. You talk more about how modi haters are wrong and less on why you love modi. His position = better supported. I am still waiting for you to answer what exactly a 'neutral position' on Modi or any politicians mean. Can you explain yourself or not ? No logic in Modi land. Everything is kaanspiracy theory by the government to prevent Modi from becoming PM. The moral righteousness of some people here is like they are the next incarnation of Jesus Christ. Also, did you observe how he answers your question? He can't give a straight answer but will ask you to look up. The moment you put him under the pump he will resort to ad hominem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 somebody who is objective in their assesment about modi's political/economic polices. Okay. Therefore, objectively, there are two answers then: you can be objectively pro-modi or objectively anti-modi. Agree or disagree ? Lets be clear on this- unless Jesus or Brahma himself were the party candidates, i am pretty sure you can objectively construct an anti or pro position out of them. Correct or not ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 somebody who is objective in their assesment about modi's political/economic polices. And Mr. Nappies, someone who is object in their assessment will praise Modi for his economic development (roads, electricty etc.) and will diss him for his his social factors success like malnutrition, IMR, MMR etc. But of course you won't understand that because the moment I say anything which is anti-Modi you will get your panties in a twist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FischerTal Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Focus....its about Modi right now. You havnt answered my question. How do you apply 'neutral' to politics and what then is 'neutral observer of modi' ? Also, you've avoided the other question i asked- if you clearly say you support him, hence you are biassed towards Modi, why are you then caring for whether his position is neutral or not ? The validity of your position on Modi (pro or anti) is not dependent on the answer you picked but why you picked it. If my reasons for backing Modi are because i think Modi will make better speches than Churchill, then I am incorrect in supporting Modi, despite being pro-modi. Similiarly, if my reasons for being anti-modi is because modi cant speak hindi, I would be incorrect in opposing him. i am asking him to stop calling himself an objective critique of modi, when he is clearly not. Nothing wrong with that. We all have bias when we analyze a situation and take a side in an argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FischerTal Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 And Mr. Nappies' date=' someone who is object in their assessment will praise Modi for his economic development (roads, electricty etc.) and will diss him for his his social factors success like malnutrition, IMR, MMR etc.[b'] But of course you won't understand that. "garb of economic development" did these words come from me or you? :giggle: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 you support Kejriwal and his stance on how government should be run' date=' dont you?[/quote'] Just that his stance to run a government is not clear and is not a benevolent dictatorship. :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FischerTal Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Okay. Therefore' date=' objectively, there are two answers then: you can be objectively pro-modi or [b']objectively anti-modi. Agree or disagree ? Lets be clear on this- unless Jesus or Brahma himself were the party candidates, i am pretty sure you can objectively construct an anti or pro position out of them. Correct or not ? thats what he is, but he denies being that, which is the crux of the argument here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sachin=GOD Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 The problem with 19-year old kids on the Internet is that they haven't come out of their diapers and have no sense of history who vent out their hormonal changes on a message board. These kids who support the fundamentalist extremist philosophy on the Internet (and by extension their support to Narendra Modi under the garb of economic development) are a disgrace to the great man Sardar Vallabhai Patel. The Sardar decried Hindu Raj as a "mad idea" and called people who want to remove Muslims from India as "worse than lunatics". Sardar backed secularism in our constitution and went against the fundamentalists of that era. It is best that the kiddies retreat back to their milk bottles and read a little bit of history first before trying to follow/criticize Sardar or Nehru or Gandhi. Easy to sit in front of a keyboard and champion for rights than be in the thick of the action when you can sh!t your pants. You are disgrace to the Iron Man of India. completely agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FischerTal Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Just that his stance to run a government is not clear and is not a benevolent dictatorship. :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: :rofl: first read his Lokpal act and then talk. :two_thumbs_up: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 i am asking him to stop calling himself an objective critique of modi' date=' when he is clearly not. Nothing wrong with that. [b']We all have bias when we analyze a situation and take a side in an argument. What types of biases can one have towards a politician ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 "garb of economic development" did these words come from me or you? :giggle: Of course, that is how the greatest dictators in the world have come into power. Hitler's Germany developed economically but it came at a price of social development. And FYI - what I wrote is endorsed by Amartya Sen and Jean Dreze. I'm sure you wouldn't be aware of one of the two. :two_thumbs_up: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 thats what he is' date=' but he denies being that, which is the crux of the argument here[/quote'] So if his position is objectively anti-modi, ie, it is rational and anti, then your criticism of it is illogical. If you concede him the position that his objection to Modi is objective, hence justifiable, then it implies that your opposition to him is unjustifiable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FischerTal Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 What types of biases can one have towards a politician ? bias towards their ideological stances ex: Hindutva, Communism, Socialism etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 :rofl: first read his Lokpal act and then talk. :two_thumbs_up: Abbey ghonchu, the Lokpal act is not written by Kejriwal alone but of course you have no knowledge about it. IF only - you ever read the draft of first acts which came out of every bill you would understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts